Gaits - your opinion

[STF]

Do you feel gaits are being judged fairly?

PS - you can pick more than one! LOL

Love to hear your thoughts on this.

[Leena]

Actually in my region, the gaits are judged fairly.

I always look a bette rider on a horse with a very good gait !

[Daydream Believer]

Voted both yes and no as it depends on the judge to a great degree.

[Sancudo]

I voted yes-

I have a horse with a very good canter and a phenomenal trot- but a sometimes pacey walk.

They have not hesitated to give me a 5 or 6 on gaits when he gets uptight and the walk gets pacey.

When it is good, he gets 8s.

[Ja Da Dee]

I voted yes, my horse is a 6 mover, 7 if I ride him very well. That is generally where we score.

[dkcbr]

I love the poll wording! :lol:

[J-Lu]

I voted for numbers 1 and 2. I do think the quality of the gaits is preserved in judging, and I've seen impure gaits get rightly nailed. BUT, I think that purity of gaits takes a back seat to joint articulation. There are some hugely articulating horses who barely track up in the extended trot or stayed out behind in collected movement but pull high scores. So I voted for option 1.5 . :)

[kahjul]

I voted yes, but I have seen some very well bred, very over the top moving horses that just can't be competed against. These horses score so much higher than the rest of their class its amazing. I haven't seen their written test scores, but watching their rides, I have seen them 'blow up', swap leads on a diagonal that was supposed to be a trot lengthening, and otherwise show significant disobediences, they have still scored considerably higher than obedient, if not flashy horses in the same class.
Someone said to me (I have to agree, but hopefully it will be taken in the lightness it was meant and not offend) that alot of the recent breeding is resulting in horses built somewhat like german shephards. So much front end, both in size and movement, without enough behind to create upper level horses. But these horses to tend to win on the line as youngsters and through 2nd level. I'm not knocking rare individuals-every sport has it's share of Micheal Jordans-but they are rare. Just something I've thought.

[pintopiaffe]

BUT, I think that purity of gaits takes a back seat to joint articulation. There are some hugely articulating horses who barely track up in the extended trot or stayed out behind in collected movement but pull high scores.

:yes: what she said.

[Kcisawesome]

I am pretty darn happy with the way I have been judged on gaits. (In eventing)

My Tb mare got scored maybe 5-6 when she a trappy sewing machine trot (from tenseness) and had a decent canter and a lovly yet disconnected walk.

Now with a relaxed trot that isn't flashy(At all), a great canter and a getting-better walk she gets 7-8.

My mother's horse with big beautiful legs and PERFECT gaits conformation-wise, but not entirely great dressage otherwise always got 7s.

The newer OTTB with flashy gaits and natural dressge (natural usage of his hindquarters and uphillness) has gotten scored well in gaits (7 in 2 low lvl tests)

The arab with potentially good gaits but who currently is tense in her back and moves tight and stiffly gets 5-6s

So yes, I agree with what I have been scored on gaits.

[xQHDQ]

I have scribed a bit and the judges have always evaluated the gaits against the standard.

Bad gaits have been marked down as being "rushed" "hurried" = not moving through the back. The difference between the great movers and the good movers seems to be suspension. If both horses move through their backs but one has naturally more suspension - that's the one that will score higher.

[ideayoda]

The rushing/tense part (and its effects) are marked (down) under impulsion. Gaits (purity) and freedom are marked under the gaits score. I see their honest evaluation given more appropriate scores nationally.

[Eclectic Horseman]

I think that the question begs the answer. Yes, I think that horses are being judged correctly on gaits. Meaning, that one category in the collective scores labelled GAITS.

What I think raises concern about fairness is that horses are often being given higher marks for EVERY movement because they have better gaits. I'm not sure how a jusdge would separate the gaits from the technical aspect of each movement being scored, but it does seem to be a concern. Horses with expensive gaits are being rewarded not just in the collective score for "gaits" but also in each and every movement. :confused:

[eqsiu]

Correct gaits will always score well. Flashy correct gaits will score better. So yes, the flash gets a higher score, but if the basic gait is screwed up the score won't be there either.

[dkcbr]

Horses with expensive gaits are being rewarded not just in the collective score for "gaits" but also in each and every movement.

Love that Freudian slip in there! :)

[angel]

I did not vote. What I think is true is that in the lower levels gaits are judged fairly well. When you get into problems is in the upper levels with that toe-flipping going on. The toe-flip is actually an impure gait, but it seems to be rewarded with the "whow" factor.

[fish]

I think that the question begs the answer. Yes, I think that horses are being judged correctly on gaits. Meaning, that one category in the collective scores labelled GAITS.

What I think raises concern about fairness is that horses are often being given higher marks for EVERY movement because they have better gaits. I'm not sure how a jusdge would separate the gaits from the technical aspect of each movement being scored, but it does seem to be a concern. Horses with expensive gaits are being rewarded not just in the collective score for "gaits" but also in each and every movement. :confused:

Read the directives. A lot of them say "quality of trot," "quality of canter," i.e., the gaits are supposed to be included in the score for the movement. IMO, any movement in which the quality of the gait is lost is not a movement well done. After all, the movements are exercises which are supposed to improve the horses' gaits, not diminish them.

[petitefilly]

Judges are human. Judges see what is in front of them. Judges will score a horse with better gaits higher than a horse with poorer gaits. Judges have no choice. Judges see the quality and must reward it. You are not judged solely on your ride, you are judged on appearance as well. Appearances do matter, and a great appearance has a great horse under him or her. Great horses have good, better, and the best gaits. Lame, yes, but it's what IMHO is the truth.

[fish]

Judges are human. Judges see what is in front of them. Judges will score a horse with better gaits higher than a horse with poorer gaits. Judges have no choice. Judges see the quality and must reward it. You are not judged solely on your ride, you are judged on appearance as well. Appearances do matter, and a great appearance has a great horse under him or her. Great horses have good, better, and the best gaits. Lame, yes, but it's what IMHO is the truth.

How is this "lame," and what does it have to do with judges being "human"? Dressage is, after all, the gymnastic training of the horse-- i.e. its goal is to improve athleticism, which is, more than anything, reflected in quality gaits, or, to use the old rule book "harmony, lightness, and freedom of MOVEMENT [emphasis mine]." This being the case, it is the judges' JOB to reward the best movement, so the horse who moves with lightness, agility, etc., despite an occasional disobedience SHOULD score well above those who perform like stiff, wooden automatons. This is not the result of some "elitist establishment" taking over dressage, but the nature of dressage itself as an ATHLETIC discipline which quite properly prizes superior athletes. There's nothing new about this: the Greeks, Chinese, etc., were already distinguishing between-- and fighting battles over-- fine and not so fine horses thousands of years ago

There's a saying out there: "what nature gives, you don't have to train." When a judge evaluates a ride, I think it's unreasonable to expect (or even want) him or her to determine what qualities of the ride have been the result of training and which came naturally with the horse. Some horses are born with better gaits, some with more tractable temperaments, some with both. The more of these nice things come with the horse, the more of a "leg up" we have in our training. Regardless of the extent of that "leg up," the quality of our training will still be reflected in our horses' gaits. Bad riding/training can and will diminish and eventually cripple even the finest horse while good training can often amount to physical therapy which brings good movement back. This is why George Williams said that when he wants to know how well he's ridden a test, he looks at the score for gaits, not "rider position...."

I see nothing wrong with any of this. I think it's the beauty-- and the essence-- of dressage.

[Eclectic Horseman]

Read the directives. A lot of them say "quality of trot," "quality of canter," i.e., the gaits are supposed to be included in the score for the movement. IMO, any movement in which the quality of the gait is lost is not a movement well done. After all, the movements are exercises which are supposed to improve the horses' gaits, not diminish them.

I understand this, but it is also frequently said that one cannot create fabulous gaits---after all, this is what people pay the big bucks for.

So it seems to me that any statements about the "guality" of the gait in a particular movement should be secondary to the correctness of the movement--unless, of course, the gait is impure. In other words, a poorly performed pirouette should not get a higher score than an accurate, well performed pirouette simply because the first horse is a better mover.

Otherwise, horses with spectacular gaits get rewarded three times for each movement. Once for the movement and again in the collective scores where the coefficient is applied.

[grayarabpony]

I understand this, but it is also frequently said that one cannot create fabulous gaits---after all, this is what people pay the big bucks for.



People need to learn how to ride dressage if they can't take a good mover and get a fabulous mover.

[Sandy M]

So it seems to me that any statements about the "guality" of the gait in a particular movement should be secondary to the correctness of the movement--unless, of course, the gait is impure. In other words, a poorly performed pirouette should not get a higher score than an accurate, well performed pirouette simply because the first horse is a better mover.

Otherwise, horses with spectacular gaits get rewarded three times for each movement. Once for the movement and again in the collective scores where the coefficient is applied.


Exactly. I would say that most "gait" judging is pretty fair. My retiree had three "pure" gaits, but he was a flat, TB type mover with minimal suspension. I had to work hard for what little suspension I could creat in his gaits, but if we had it "together" he'd get a 7 and on one rare occasion, an 8 (still can't quite figure that one out!). But he was always steady in the bridle, extremely obedient, bending correctly, etc. If an equally well-schooled correct horse out-scored me because he was a brilliant mover, I had no problem. It was when my horse and I put in a good, accurate, correct test and got vastly outscored by a fantastic mover that was on-and-off the bit, toe-flipping in front but not through the back or engaged behind, disobedient, etc. that I got.... annoyed.

[fish]

I understand this, but it is also frequently said that one cannot create fabulous gaits---after all, this is what people pay the big bucks for.

So it seems to me that any statements about the "guality" of the gait in a particular movement should be secondary to the correctness of the movement--unless, of course, the gait is impure. In other words, a poorly performed pirouette should not get a higher score than an accurate, well performed pirouette simply because the first horse is a better mover.

Otherwise, horses with spectacular gaits get rewarded three times for each movement. Once for the movement and again in the collective scores where the coefficient is applied.

Collective marks, are, as the name implies, summaries-- and gaits is only one of them. The beautifully "submissive" horse gets "rewarded three times for each movement" in which s/he displays that quality just as the horse with spectacular gaits gets rewarded for that gift. It seems to me that the collective marks are designed to make sure that the occasional uncharacteristic slips/losses of quality/obedience do not result in scores which are overall too harsh-- or become too high because of occasional flashes of brilliance or accidental moments of correctness either. In the meantime, I would think that the recent increase in the coefficient for rider should have the effect so many riders clearly desire-- i.e., that of giving special weight to what the rider does with the equine talent (or lack thereof) s/he sits on.

[Eclectic Horseman]

Collective marks, are, as the name implies, summaries-- and gaits is only one of them. The beautifully "submissive" horse gets "rewarded three times for each movement" in which s/he displays that quality just as the horse with spectacular gaits gets rewarded for that gift. It seems to me that the collective marks are designed to make sure that the occasional uncharacteristic slips/losses of quality/obedience do not result in scores which are overall too harsh-- or become too high because of occasional flashes of brilliance or accidental moments of correctness either. In the meantime, I would think that the recent increase in the coefficient for rider should have the effect so many riders clearly desire-- i.e., that of giving special weight to what the rider does with the equine talent (or lack thereof) s/he sits on.

I don't recall any movements in which "submissiveness" or "rider's position and correct application of the aids" are also mentioned in the directives for the movement. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember that.

I think that you are right (if I remember correctly) that sometimes the quality of the gait is mentioned in the directives for some individual movements, and if so, I can understand why this might be applied to reward (or punish) a horse on his gaits 3 times for the same movement. But I think that this is the only thing for which a collective score is given that is also marked up or down in the individual movement. Personally, I think that it creates a strong over emphasis on gaits, but if that is what is actually intended, so be it.

[fish]

I don't recall any movements in which "submissiveness" or "rider's position and correct application of the aids" are also mentioned in the directives for the movement. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember that.



Submissiveness, impulsion, and rider correctness & effectiveness are judged and rewarded under countless other directives such as correctness of the figure/angle, accuracy of transitions, etc. and do not therefore require separate mention. As we all know, it is impossible to negotiate an accurate circle without a submissive horse and correct, effective aids, but one can easily ride a very good circle without demonstrating a quality gait.

[fish]

I don't recall any movements in which "submissiveness" or "rider's position and correct application of the aids" are also mentioned in the directives for the movement. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember that.



Submissiveness, impulsion, and rider correctness & effectiveness are judged and rewarded under countless other directives such as correctness of the figure/angle, accuracy of transitions, etc. and do not therefore require separate mention. As we all know, it is impossible to negotiate an accurate circle without a submissive horse and correct, effective aids, but it is possible to ride an accurate circle without demonstrating a quality gait.

[fish]

I don't recall any movements in which "submissiveness" or "rider's position and correct application of the aids" are also mentioned in the directives for the movement. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember that.



Submissiveness, impulsion, and rider correctness & effectiveness are judged and rewarded under countless other directives such as correctness of the figure/angle, accuracy of transitions, etc. and do not therefore require separate ones. As we all know, it is impossible to negotiate an accurate circle without a submissive horse and correct, effective aids, but it is possible to ride an accurate circle without demonstrating a quality gait.