USEF Equitation and H/J Judging

[MHM]

Sometimes if there are multiple horses who have a rail in the same class, the judge will give the first one a 45, then the next one a 46, the next a 47, etc., etc.

[Mander]

Why would they do that?

[MHM]

So they don’t give anyone the same score. Or they could give the first one a 45, the next a 42 if it’s a worse round than the 45, the next a 47 if it’s better than the 45, etc., etc.

No ties. Ties are bad.

[Mander]

Giving a 42 or a 47 if it’s a better/worse round seems reasonable. Obviously most of the time someone with a rail down won’t be placing anyways, but it seems unfair that between two “equal” rounds, one person would score higher just because they happened to go later in the class.

Not that I want to make a mountain out of a mole-hill, but for sake of discussion re: making scoring more objective/fairer, just adding 1 for each subsequent horse to knock a rail, all just to avoid a tie, doesn’t seem like the right approach.

[Rel6]

I don’t think anyone is saying they are arbitrarily giving out scores to avoid ties (although I understand how it could have been interpreted that way), more that the first knocked rail would get a 45 and then any worse rounds after with a knocked rail would score lower/any better rounds after with a knocked rail would score higher (however slightly).

There were some knocked rails at derby finals, and with the live scoring you could tell that some judges just gave those rounds a 45 every time, and others didn’t.

[Raymundo]

To add on to your examples, it may not be arbitrary, but judges will definitely add a .5 or .25 to a number to shoehorn a horse into a spot. The scores aren’t informative the way they are in dressage. It’s more an overall impression and some judges are more stringent than others in giving out the big numbers. And, while we have sometimes benefitted from the judge’s discretion, it can be hard to decipher when you see 2 riders have the same rail in a medal and one scores the winning round and the other out of the ribbons, but neither gets a 45 or 50. Equitation has always allowed for judges to decide if it’s horse or rider error, but there are a lot of judges out there who will score it 45 automatically anyway so you never really know.

[MHM]

@Raymundo

And, while we have sometimes benefitted from the judge’s discretion, it can be hard to decipher when you see 2 riders have the same rail in a medal and one scores the winning round and the other out of the ribbons, but neither gets a 45 or 50. Equitation has always allowed for judges to decide if it’s horse or rider error, but there are a lot of judges out there who will score it 45 automatically anyway so you never really know.

Actually…

The guidelines used to be more vague for a rail down in the equitation, but several years back, the rules were updated so that each rail is a deduction of four points off whatever score the rider would have gotten. So a rider who has a fantastic trip and was going to get an 85 might end up with an 81 after a rail down. That could still get a good ribbon in many classes.

A different rider could have the same rail down, but was only on track to score a 78 in the first place, and would end up with a 74 after the four point deduction, which would be less likely to get a ribbon in many classes.

A rail down in the hunters is still usually scored around a 45.

From the USEF rule book:

[hillary_again]

Yes, this is totally true. My point: I’d rather have the judge’s subjective opinion give me a score than be in the dark. I’d like to have the transparency (and maybe satisfaction) that I got a 78, and just missed ___, than nothing, and be guessing. I don’t think this mystery of judging is helping the situation with competitors being angry (or whatever they are expressing).

[Raymundo]

Thank you! Missed that update.

[SillyHorse]

@BLBGP

Those interested in this discussion might enjoy this fascinating This American Life episode titled “No Fair!”. In particular, this segment related to sports:

Writer Michael Lewis takes us inside the world of NBA refereeing. He explains how protests about unfair calls have increased in recent years. However, at the same time, hard evidence suggests referees have only gotten better and better at making good calls. Lewis says this is actually indicative of a larger trend in America — people distrusting authorities, judges and referees of all kinds. This story is a version of the first episode of his new podcast [Against the Rules]. (32 minutes) https://www.thisamericanlife.org/672/no-fair

I heard that airing of TAL. It was fascinating.

[spotlights]

I’ve experienced both sides of this. In one round last summer I thought I laid it down and got an 84, which is a great score for me! I had hoped to win with that but I ended up 4th in that class. Hopes of winning to 4th was a pretty far drop! Had I not known the score I would have taken that 4th hard. Instead, I was thrilled. Top 4 were separated by less than 3 points, so I knew that we all had great rounds; I celebrated with my competition on that day.

I’d rather place in the middle of the pack on my best day than win because someone had their worst. I’ve been out of the ribbons at DIHP with an 80 and walked away feeling proud of my ride.

That being said, I’ve also had days completely ruined by scores. I’ve had rounds I thought were decent scored in low 70s. That hurts. Made me want to completely avoid WCHR shows.

After thinking the spectrum of those experiences, I have to agree that I’d prefer all scores to be announced. Better to get (simple) feedback on your round, maybe grow a little thicker skin on low scores, and enjoy the process more than celebrate the results.

[JenEM]

And herein lies the one issue with numerical scoring, because it’s always going to be objective. Heck, even in dressage, those “objective” scores aren’t so objective–I’ve ridden two tests at shows under different judges that felt equal quality-wise and might end up with a 5-6% score difference because of how different judges score.

That numerical score is nothing more than a ranking, in most cases. You should know what a good round feels like, and be happy with it, regardless of whether it scored a 72 or an 82–because two different judges might score the same round differently. And a 82 at Local A may not be an 82 at Capital Challenge–and almost certainly would leave you with a different ribbon. We’ve absolutely seen that in scoring at both big derbies, and at big dressage shows too. It might make things clearer for some competitors, but you also can’t let that be the be-all and end all of the experience.

As someone who has learner judged, and done some local judging, I will say that I think a lot (most?) of judges are assigning rounds numerical scores, even if they’re not announcing them, but then may go back and decide after watching a few rounds that the first 75 was really a 75.5 etc. to help them sort things out.

[wanderlust]

I think there is an issue at the top of the sport too. Derbies, which were supposed to highlight more pace and a brilliant way of going/jumping, is now a glorified division of the regular 4’ hunters and are won by the horses who crawl around on a 16’ step with big name trainers on their back. When we watched the hunter derby finals, we joked about the “Hunt Tosh” bonus, where anything he was sitting on scored at least 4 points higher than it actually deserved.

[kenyarider]

I have no comment on the “hunt tosh” bonus but I will say that I also hate the huge step that is so slow that the grass grows 1/2 inch from beginning of round to the end! Pick it up folks, for the love of . . . .

[173north]

@wanderlust

Derbies, which were supposed to highlight more pace and a brilliant way of going/jumping, is now a glorified division of the regular 4’ hunters

It worked for a while! And then something changed.

Rumba in 2009: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaKaLwvIOCg&t=93s

Brunello in 2013: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzfGmWWlPzA

Cannon Creek in 2022, video not from finals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrxF9Swk5JI

All lovely horses but quite an evolution.

[wanderlust]

@173north

Cannon Creek in 2022, video not from finals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrxF9Swk5JI

This is exactly the one I was thinking about… and he looks a ton more “huntery” and jumps a lot better in this vid than he did at the derby finals.

[vxf111]

What changed, in part, was the courses got easier and more like traditional hunter courses. When the derby first started there were actual unique challenges like opening a gate and truly UNUSUAL jumps. Now it’s basically just another hunter class.

[Rel6]

And when you see something more unique it causes a ton of problems because they aren’t use to it, which can lead to softer course design in the future. The night class at WEF this year had a v-shaped in and out where you could choose the one stride end or the two stride end. I thought that was more unique, and a lot really struggled. There was another more unusual looking in and out in a big hunter class recently (can’t remember which, maybe the handy round of derby finals? but it was zig zaggy log rails) and there were a bunch of stops.

[OverandOnward]

@Rel6

The night class at WEF this year had a v-shaped in and out where you could choose the one stride end or the two stride end. I thought that was more unique, and a lot really struggled.

Oh dear. Hope it is not the case that my high-school ragtag band of backcountry hunt-seat riders could ride better than these top-class hunter competitors. We had that one regularly in ‘handy hunter’ and it was no big deal. Everyone rode it fine. And we weren’t exactly top-class.

[Mardi1]

@wanderlust

When we watched the hunter derby finals, we joked about the “Hunt Tosh” bonus, where anything he was sitting on scored at least 4 points higher than it actually deserved.

The same was said for an U.S. dressage Olympian at a national show. As he rode down center line at the beginning of his GP test, it wasn’t straight and the horse didn’t halt completely. After the class, when the judge was on a lunch break, the judge was asked why the rider received such a high score when he entered the ring to start his test. The reply was “Because it was (so and so).”