How many TOP judges are/were also TOP riders?

[ASB Stars]

and, do you think that this matters? Does it give them a better understanding? More empathy?

The example who comes immediately to mind for me is Hilda Gurney- Olympian, and World Class judge- she is tough, but fair.

Who else is, or isn't?

[CatOnLap]

I think it is possible to be a good judge without necessarily being a top rider. But I do think it helps to have ridden extensively at the FEI level if you are going to judge that level. There have been some systematic "mistakes '' made by judges in the past regarding the horse's balance and engagement which I do not think would be made by someone who had ridden succesfully at these levels.

[dressuursport]

Anne Gribbons "O"
Michael Poulin "I"
Gary Rockwell "O"
(and of course Hilda Gurney "I")

Heather Mason is a very talented and successful rider "S"
Charlotte Bredahl "S"

[NeverTime]

Don't forget Jessica Ransehousen
(who, it appears, has stepped in to serve as interim chef d'equipe, according to COTH.)

[ASB Stars]

That is a nice list!:yes:

It just occured to me this AM, when I was thinking about it, how few of these judges really went out, and showed at the upper levels- in a BIG way. Although, I believe that the judging qualifications do require at least a certain level of attainment, for each level in judging- do they not?

[slc2]

You've been given a list of people who have shown 'in a big way' at the FEI level, but it really sounds like you still feel many haven't, in fact it actually sounds like you're really pressing that this is a serious problem.

The people who judge at FEI and have NOT shown and trained at that level extensively are the exceptions. There are a few of them.

However, many of the people you see today who are FEI judges ended their really active riding career twenty or more years ago, so you may feel they have not 'paid their dues' simply because you aren't familiar with their past activities. Many of them have spent decades as judges; becoming an upper level judge really seems like a full time job.

I'm not sure at all that one has to have become famous as a rider to be a good FEI judge. Linda Zang, for example, never won the Olympics or the World Championships, but she's an incredible FEI judge, in demand all over the world.

[ASB Stars]

Try very hard not to make assumptions, Obi Wan. I was bringing the FEI judges in to clinic at the Equestrian Center I ran, twenty years ago. Names like Hotz....never assume.

[slc2]

I'm not Obi Wanning (a new COHism), I'm responding specifically to what you're saying and your response to the responses you got. You were given a list of people who competed and showed very successfully in a big way, some on multiple Olympic teams, and your response was that very few of the FEI judges have experience excelling.

Why you are saying that if you're so familiar with the background and history of these judges twenty plus years ago, then I'm really unsure of why you hold the opinion you hold. You don't have to change your opinion for me to be satisfied, I just actually can't figure out where you're coming from.

It's a difference of opinion, bottom line. I'm of the opinion that most of the experienced FEI judges have long histories of training and competing, and that those without that experience are the exception. You're saying the opposite, that may of them DON'T have experience.

Further, I feel that judging is a learned skill and something that someone who has not become famous as a rider, excelled internationally, can indeed learn to do very, very well.

What I find puzzling is that it's going like this....you: 'many fei judges aren't sufficiently experienced via competition'....others: 'well let's see, here's a list of very successful competitors now judges' you: 'still same - many are not sufficiently experienced thru excelling at competition'.

I don't actually believe someone needs to have excelled internationally to become a top quality FEI judge. I gave the example of Linda Zang.

Thing is, it seems to me, no matter what anyone responds to your statements with, you will come back with the same thing: 'fei judges, the majority, did not excell at competition, this is a bad thing'.

If you feel that judges MUST have excelled at international competition, MUST have become famous and well known, MUST have won the Olympics or the World Championships (or placed in the top ten of similar competitions multiple times, say) in order to be a really top notch FEI judge, then that is something we also are of different opinions about.

How I think of it:

Judging is a trained, learned skill. A person's riding, training, competing experience has something to do with how good of a judge they can be, but it is not the whole story.

[oldbag]

I'm from England, so I don't know many of your judges are riders.

I competed seriously from the early sixties to 2000. As I got older I knew that most of the judges had never even won a novice (level one) test. Some of them had never even ridden. ALL implied that they had!:no:

The best judges are the ones who have trained and ridden some horses to GP level. Obviously there are exceptions on both sides.

[DressageGeek "Ribbon Ho"]

Perhaps I didn't read for comprehension, but my response to the OP is that I would imagine that seriously competing at the highest levels OR becoming an FEI-level judge is extremely time consuming and costly, and to do both is prohibitively expensive. Since most competitors do not show at FEI level, I think most judges certainly have sufficient empathy and understanding. I have ridden under most of the judges the OP mentioned, as well as others, and every single one was very supportive of lower level riders.

I didn't think the OP was looking down on any judge for not having competed in the Olympics.

[slc2]

She said they have not excelled at the top levels, winning the Olympics is a possibility of what she might have in mind...I listed a number of possibilities, to try and get a better idea of what she means by excelling.

oldbag, the judges you were so deprecating of, who never won a novice test, were these licensed British FEI judges, or local riding teachers called in to judge schooling shows?

If they had not ever entered novice tests, had they just skipped novice tests, or were they not capable of winning, let alone entering, a novice test?

Which British FEI judges? Jenny Loriston Clarke? Who? Who are all these terrible British judges, oldbag?

[dressuursport]

Although, I believe that the judging qualifications do require at least a certain level of attainment, for each level in judging- do they not?

"r" requires scores at Fourth Level.
"S" requires scores at Grand Prix.
I'm drawing a blank on "R", sorry.

This means situations like oldbag describes in England, theoretically should not happen here in the US, although there are some judges who got their scores on schoolies and their riding/training proficiency at the level required is questionable, and some judges in the US who have been judges since back when the criteria was.......much different!


I'm from England, so I don't know many of your judges are riders.

I competed seriously from the early sixties to 2000. As I got older I knew that most of the judges had never even won a novice (level one) test. Some of them had never even ridden. ALL implied that they had!:no:

The best judges are the ones who have trained and ridden some horses to GP level. Obviously there are exceptions on both sides.

[DressageGeek "Ribbon Ho"]

When did the criteria change? Just curious.

[slc2]

Some judges were 'grandfathered' in to lower level judging during various other rules. At this point the requirements to become an fei level judge are quite rigorous.

[ASB Stars]

I didn't think the OP was looking down on any judge for not having competed in the Olympics.

Thanks! I'm not!

I have heard it both ways- sometimes, those who have competed, but not WON, on the international stage, and then judge, have an ax to grind- other times, perhaps they are more understanding of the difficulty, and sacrifice.

So, I was wondering what others thought, and who came to mind. Obviously, ALL of the FEI judges will have had to have competed, although, if memory serves, there were some who were grandfathered, many moons ago.

[austin]

She is a bronze medalist. now in her 60s (?) she can still outride most of us (IMHO).

She recently had surgery, but normally when she gives her great clinics, she gets on many of the horses.

[freestyle2music]

Where is this myth coming from.

The best judges I know never rode a dressage horse at FEI level, some even not above traininglevel.

Theo

[ToN Farm]

Some people with clout in the USEF/USDF must think it's important for a judge to have competition experience, otherwise, these new requirements would not have been introduced.

[ASB Stars]

Where is this myth coming from.

The best judges I know never rode a dressage horse at FEI level, some even not above traininglevel.

Theo

Interesting point- what were the qualifications when they attained their current credentials?

[Dressage Art]

I knew that most of the judges had never even won a novice (level one) test. Some of them had never even ridden. ALL implied that they had!:no:

In US we also have many judges that never ridden above 2nd level and now they are judging GP.

USDF is only about 40 years old. The time when US didn't have any dressage judges is not so far away. Every federation starts somewhere. USEF required I think a dozen (?) of recommendation letters and you can be a judge. When you get to judge a certain amount of shows - you can progress up the judge’s ladder.

One definitely can develop an eye and judge something that they didn't do themselves. Kind of like art/film/literature critics, most of them can't even paint/write/act, yet it is widely accepted that they can critique artists/films/literature

Of course it is the best to be judged by somebody who went thru the ropes themselves and preferably not on schoolmasters, but trained horses themselves. We just simply don’t have enough of them for now.

PS: it never sees to amaze me how some imply that they did this and that, but yet no scores, photos, or videos to show. Can't stand posers.

[Dressage Art]

Does it give them a better understanding? More empathy? In my personal experience, it actually gives them less empathy. The higher the rider showed the better horses she/he is used to and better riders as well. Since their eye is used so much to great horses/riders, to judge an average horse can be tough. At times those tend to be the toughest judges. They can struggle/unable to give 8&+ to an avarage horse, but only to an International caliber horses. It can be difficult to bring their expectations down.

[merrygoround]

As Theo says many judges have actually competed at the upper levels. And some of the most vocal of that group have never successfully trained to the FEI levels.

[sporthorsept]

In my personal experience, it actually gives them less empathy. The higher the rider showed the better horses she/he is used to and better riders as well. Since their eye is used so much to great horses/riders, to judge an average horse can be tough. At times those tend to be the toughest judges. They can struggle/unable to give 8&+ to an avarage horse, but only to an International caliber horses. It can be difficult to bring their expectations down.

I find this untrue in my experience and observation - especially when we're talking about those riders who competed years ago - remember in the US the fancy warmblood is a relative newcomer. Many of those judges listed earlier got to GP on non-traditional breeds and on gaits that would not get an 8 then or now...

I think an active rider sitting behind C has more awareness of what it takes to do a good job - and I know there are wonderful judges who no longer ride whose opinions are generally spot on. A clear and consistent standard is what needs to be upheld, not lowering expectations of what should be presented.

[slc2]

Agree. Also quite possible that the 'average horse' is less correctly trained, moving less freely, less supple, less obedient, less through. Something makes the 'average' horse 'average', actually maybe he should not score as high as the 'international calibre' horse and the judge has some sense afterall.

Judge bashing is so popular. People seem to think that if only for the biased, crazy, corrupt, misguided, ignorant, blind, unfair, nepotism-based judges, they would be scoring 100%'s. We can now add that most of them couldn't ride a novice test to the fact that they have become judges without ever riding in the FEI classes. How DO they do it, these evil incompetent judges?

[ASB Stars]

I suppose that I do think that they should have had to at least compete at the level that they are judging at- even if it is not at the International level. I think that it is one of those "those who can, do, and those who can't...*judge*" things.

But, I really wonder if being at the very top, competitively, makes a judge better, or worse, or doesn't matter. Hence, my original post.

[FriesianX]

Virtually ALL the judges in the US who are judging upper levels (S,I,O) HAVE ridden, competed, and trained to the Grand Prix levels. While it is true that few are/were Olympic riders, is that really a criteria we expect of our judges? If so, we aren't going to have many judges to pick from. Becoming a judge in the US is NOT an easy path - it requires a lot of education - both formal and "on the job" - and it requires the recommendations from other judges to move up the ranks. And they participate in ongoing education as well - many are no longer riding - welcome to the world of aging, what you see now is NOT what they could do 20 years ago - but they are still learning.

If you talk to an S judge, most will tell you it took 20 years or more to make it where they are, and they are not yet O or I!

I can't speak for Theo's country - their judge selection process is obviously different, but in the U.S., any time I ride up centerline (in a rated show), and halt and salute at X, I know I'm saluting to someone who EARNED their judging stripes.

Buying a single schoolmaster and riding at GP does not earn you the right to judge. In fact, for many, just passing the "L" program is a hurdle that requires too much effort - having seen several of those programs now, I can tell you that the people who did have the "purchased gold medal scores" dropped out of the program before ever testing.

I do agree that there is some inconsistency in the judging - one judge's 7 may be another judge's 8, but as long as the individual judges are consistent in their OWN scoring methodology, that is something we have to live with. I don't think there is a way to assign an absolutely rigid consistent system - unless we use a computer with a computer generated image of perfection and grades of perfection that is mapped onto each horse and rider as they complete their test - and the computer assigns the scores :eek: Until that happens (and I hope I don't live to see it, in most cases, I relish the human factor in dressage judging because I DO have great respect for those judges), yes, there will be some inconsistencies.

But I also see a lot of judge bashing that is really a defensive mechanism because the rider really wasn't doing the horse any favors - and they can blame a) the horse, b) the rider, or c) the judge. It is easiest to blame the judge - you don't have to live with that person, and you don't pay to feed them every day ;)

I will admit, it is tougher when you ride a non-brilliant moving horse - and I think that is my only complaint with our sport - we have put too much emphasis on brilliant gaits, instead of just pure and free gaits - I'd like to see the importance of the gait score re-evaluated (like I matter all that much:winkgrin:), and a higher emphasis back on submission. I do think the increase in the rider score is an important first step toward admitting the rider is part of the picture! BUT - we can't blame the judges for that - they are told that gaits are of primary importance, and without brilliant gaits, most scores are capped by the quality of the gaits.

As for international competitor judges being tougher - I don't actually find that to be true, I find some judges just have a higher standard than others - at all judging levels. Some judges start with a 7 and work up or down from there, others start with a 6, and work up or down. I've sat and scribed with many judges, and that seems to me to be the biggest difference. And of course, they all have their own "pet peeves" that cost riders more points - one may HATE horses who are behind the vertical, another may find it a minor annoyance, but is much more bothered by lateral walks; or hollow back in transitions; or wagging head; or short necks; or really wide hands for stretch movements; or riders who spur, spur, spur; or, well, you get the picture;)

[FriesianX]

But, I really wonder if being at the very top, competitively, makes a judge better, or worse, or doesn't matter. Hence, my original post.


What do you consider being at the top? Olympic Rider? The problem with that is we wouldn't have any judges! How many Olympians are there alive at this time? Not many. And of them, how many who have the TIME and DESIRE to judge - it doesn't pay well. And - in some cases, they have a fabulous ability to RIDE and FEEL, but not the skill to judge - it is a different skill. So now we've limited it to maybe 6 people in the U.S.?

A judge must be able to evaluate QUICKLY what they see and communicate it consistently and concisely - and not as a trainer, but as a judge (big difference). The movements come quick - there is not time to say, "wait, if you would lengthen the reins and hug the horse a bit more with your legs, you might find the canter quality improves" - a good trainer might go through that, the judge says "canter needs jump", on to next movement, "short in neck", on to next movment, "losing rhythm", etc.

Again, I think if you looked at the resume of each of our I, O, and even S judges, you will see they've competed on multiple horses at the GP level. Maybe not all at WEG, or Olympics, but all have a strong history of competing and training at the levels they judge.

[freestyle2music]

Agree. Also quite possible that the 'average horse' is less correctly trained, moving less freely, less supple, less obedient, less through. Something makes the 'average' horse 'average', actually maybe he should not score as high as the 'international calibre' horse and the judge has some sense afterall.

Judge bashing is so popular. People seem to think that if only for the biased, crazy, corrupt, misguided, ignorant, blind, unfair, nepotism-based judges, they would be scoring 100%'s. We can now add that most of them couldn't ride a novice test to the fact that they have become judges without ever riding in the FEI classes. How DO they do it, these evil incompetent judges?

Look at TOB and see what they think about the fact that Sven Rothenberger has decided to become a judge. :confused:

He is already condemned before he has giving one score !

Theo

[CatOnLap]

The requirements for judging in Canada appear rather low in some ways.
The application for the ''r'' (recorded) judge only requires 3 scores over 60% at 2nd level, a judging learners clinic and having judged 4 non recognized shows in the past 2 years.
The B( basic) judge level requires 3 scores at 3rd, for ''M'' level, 3 scores over 58% at 4th.

However, the requirement for "S'' does require 3 scores over 58% at I-2, and among other lower level judging experience, they only have to have shadow judged 3 GP classes with at least 3 competitors each. So, 9 tests. Not to take away from the achievment, but most competitions here are not judged by S judges, even at the higher levels

I just scanned our provincial judges' directory- in the whole province of over 4 million people, there are only 3 S and 3 M judges listed. The rest, about 2 dozen, are small r's, or basics, so the majority are third level riders and below. And they are judging the higher levels, since it is almost impossible to get higher level judges here for smaller competitions.

This is a good article on judging requirements:
http://chronofhorse.com/Issues/072007/008-015.pdf

[ceffyl]

Stephen Clarke - to me he is the fairest and most honest judge around. Also the most naturally gifted rider. His early mentor the late great Geoffrey Hattan used to praise Stephen's feeling for balance and rhythm. Having known Stephen from his childhood his talents as a rider were obvious from an early age.

Jenny L-C is a wonderful trainer. She is firm but kind, that is why she has had so much success out of somewhat difficult stallions. It was interesting to listen to her comments on the riding standards and the way of going of many of the horses at Beijing. There is a connection way back there to J L-C and Stephen from their show ring years (now how many people remember that?) - OLDBAG?

[FriesianX]

Look at TOB and see what they think about the fact that Sven Rothenberger has decided to become a judge. :confused:

He is already condemned before he has giving one score !

Theo

I saw that too :confused:

[Dressage Art]

I think an active rider sitting behind C has more awareness of what it takes to do a good job - and I know there are wonderful judges who no longer ride whose opinions are generally spot on. A clear and consistent standard is what needs to be upheld, not lowering expectations of what should be presented.
Absolutely. In my personal opinion, judges who trained all kinds of horses to GP and STILL continue to teach lower levels students, off breeds horses = can make the best judges: sympathetic, yet accurate it their evaluations.

[Equi88]

Kay Meredith. GP rider and trainer. "S" judge.

[freestyle2music]

Absolutely. In my personal opinion, judges who trained all kinds of horses to GP and STILL continue to teach lower levels students, off breeds horses = can make the best judges: sympathetic, yet accurate it their evaluations.

I absolutely disagree with this statement. Many of these judges have started a judge course out of frustration, and are mostly very biased.

Yesterday I was at the finals of the Dutch National Indoor Championships, the 35 finalists has gone through manyyyyy selections. The winner of the finals scored 64% while no 26 scored 62.4%. The average scores of the same riders during the selections was 7% higher. Is it that bad with the Dutch National Riders ? . NO, at the finals we had some frustrated judges who had turned the highest score 10 into a 7. And did I tell you that this were judges who had been around the block, but never could get as far as < Fei-level.

Another huge (very general) problem is that these judges scored the first riders around 63% and this didn't leave them much space.

Like Johan Hinneman always says "you have good riding and bad riding", I would say "you have good judging and you have bad judging" . But this has nothing to do with having been in the saddle yourself.

Theo

[canyonoak]

I agree with Theo. I do not think that time in the saddle makes one generous, sympathetic or really helps the decision making process.

I do think there are judges, like Stephen Clarke, Uwe Mechlem, Sandy Phillips ,Gen. Burton
and Hilda Gurney, who have ridden through international Grand Prix and who have the qualities that makes them top judges.

There are other judges with the same credentials who, IMHO have no business being judges.


Sympathy and generosity are in short supply, both in and out of the judge's booth.