PDA

View Full Version : Opinions about this scenario-or rules that apply to it?



HER
Sep. 28, 2009, 12:51 PM
I observed this situation this weekend and after asking a few UL riders what they thought I thought I would see what the COTHs think. I wasn't sure what the normal protocol was in this situation or if any rules were violated.
I was watching dressage in an OBN class. They were running 15 min behind in this ring. A girl entered, started the A test when it was supposed to be the B test, and got rung. She went over to the judge and argued that it was the A test. (this show had the full tests printed in the program, in the packet). The judge assured her that it was the B test. The girl did not know the B test. So the scribe came out with a scoresheet, handed it to the girl, and she spent 5-10 minutes standing in the ring learning the B test. Then she exited the ring, reentered, and rode a lovely B test with another error. The riders who went after her ended up going 30 min after their published times. Out of curiosity I checked her placing through the weekend. Even with 6 error points she was 3rd out of about 20 after dressage and finished the weekend in 5th.
Is it common protocol to allow a rider to learn the test at an event? (recognized)? If you don't know your course in stadium or cross-country you end up with a TE. Is dressage not the same, or is it at the judges discretion?
Also, after starting a test, you are eliminated in dressage when all 4 feet leave the arena so technically wouldn't she have been eliminated when she left the arena to restart her test?
When watching OBN I assume that either the rider or horse have some experience. We did learn later that it was a first trial for both of them. Then again, many people have a first trial and still know their dressage tests.

GotSpots
Sep. 28, 2009, 12:56 PM
Seriously? It's beginner novice. I'd say, wow, what a nice judge, pity they didn't let the rider or two after her go while she was learning her test (so the delay wasn't quite as long), and gee, what a nice warm-fuzzy about the sport, particularly at such an introductory level.

Necessary, no. But seems to me it's the right answer. For a kid who is learning about the sport, there's no reason to be snarky about it (as the comment about how she ended up scoring seems to read). Sure, the judge could have eliminated her - and at a higher level, s/he might well have. But what a better result the way it was handled - kid feels embarrassed but got through the issue, kid's coach (if there is one) will know better next time, and no real harm done. To eliminate the kid and send her packing right then and there will do little to encourage her to come back next time.

Janet
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:09 PM
At the judge's discretion.

EV 134.17, if the judge ocnsiders "learning the wrong test" to be "unusiual circumstances".

Generous judge. Perfectly legal.

HER
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:15 PM
I thought it was a great intro to the sport too and by no means was trying to be snarky-just giving all the information.
Just wondering if there were rules or protocols that applied to this- becuase I'm sure most of us have been eliminated at some point or another for not knowing the rules clearly.
At the show our consensus was that maybe she should have come back at the end of the division after she had learned the test. Some of the horses afterwards seemed a little burnt out from being in warm up too long.
Has anyone else been in this situation?

rabicon
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:18 PM
I think it was nice of the judge. About her placing 3rd, either her horse was just really nice or the other horses were not so much. Thats dressage. I've placed 1st before with 2 errors before on my boy, so it does happen.

bornfreenowexpensive
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:25 PM
I Some of the horses afterwards seemed a little burnt out from being in warm up too long.


That's a problem with those riders. FIRST thing I do when I walk into the warm up is check in with the ring steward and ask if the ring is on time. If the ring is ahead, I know to get moving in my warm up...if it is behind, it depends on how long it is behind but I adjust my warm up.

Knowing how to warm up your horse....and that the rings do not always run on time...it part of the skill. I'm always riding with one eye on the ring to keep track as to timing and usually find out which two or three horses are ahead of me.

I've had that happen at training level. Rider learned the wrong test. They let her watch two rides and then do her test. I can't remember if they TE'd her....but I do remember that they let her jump.

OverandOnward
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:25 PM
At a dressage show recently where I was a steward a rider at her first show was very mixed up about which of 3 rings she belonged in, and didn't communicate well to get that information. The rings were not within sight or sound of each other. Didn't respond to pages (didn't hear them?) At her ride time the missing rider was belled in and eliminated. She finally got to the correct ring about 20 minutes later, she and her horse very flustered and upset, saying she had been going back and forth from ring to ring. After discussion with the officials she was given the last ride of the day and allowed to do her test without penalty.

IMO holding up the entire show while the BN rider learned her test was inexcusable. In BN there is probably no harm in allowing a rider to recover from such a mistake. But I think it would have been more fair to either move her to the last ride of the day or else into a scratch time, so as to have less impact on all the other riders who are tiring themselves and their horses in warm-up. She would have learned the lesson and not too harshly.

The delay of unknown time impacts every rider in the warm-up after her. They did not know "we have a 10 minute delay" to adjust their warm-up routine. They did not know what to plan for. That is not fair to their being able to give their best ride, as she was given a chance to give her best. BN riders should not be treated with less respect and consideration than higher level riders. If more consideration to the impact on the warm-up riders would have been given at higher levels, it should have been the same at BN.

Janet
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:30 PM
From a logistics perspective, it would make more sense to tell her to "come back later'.

But, since she HAD STARTED the test, the rules don't permit that. But they DO permit the judge to allow her to restart the test.

As far as I can see (and someone let me know if I missed something), the rules only allowed the judge two options- E for "too many errors," or restart because of "unusual circumstances".

LLDM
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:37 PM
It's times like this that make me wish for a "TE-BATC" rule. That would be a "Technical Elimination - But Allowed To Continue" type rule.

I think that this judge's solution was kind to the rider, but really rather unfair to the rest of the division (who all managed to show up knowing their dressage tests). And it rather smacks of the whole "dumbing down" problem many here have talked about.

On the other hand, I am all for supporting newbies. But they have to learn the rules". And letting them slide completely, as this judge did, only sets them up for the hard lesson down the road.

If they had been TE-BATC - then they would have no had a prayer of placing, but gotten the experience they needed and paid for. I think it would have been more fair to the others too. And that is likely what would have happened if this had been at an un-recognized HT around here.

SCFarm

OverandOnward
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:39 PM
That's a problem with those riders. FIRST thing I do when I walk into the warm up is check in with the ring steward and ask if the ring is on time. If the ring is ahead, I know to get moving in my warm up...if it is behind, it depends on how long it is behind but I adjust my warm up.

Knowing how to warm up your horse....and that the rings do not always run on time...it part of the skill. I'm always riding with one eye on the ring to keep track as to timing and usually find out which two or three horses are ahead of me.

I've had that happen at training level. Rider learned the wrong test. They let her watch two rides and then do her test. I can't remember if they TE'd her....but I do remember that they let her jump.
I agree that warm-up is a learned skill on the part of the rider.

I also learned the hard way that no matter how sure I am I know which test, I check again and again. And in the w-u ring I glance over at the real ring to be sure the test ridden is the one I think it is. And I've learned to keep both tests on small paper folded in my pocket - that's as much a part of my gear as the helmet. Mistakes happen in the flurry or prepping for an event. :winkgrin:

Sometimes it's a problem with the riders. Sometimes it's a problem with the warm-up and ring stewards who do not communicate that information, even though they know it. Yes the rider should check in and ask that question. And the steward should know the answer and give it accurately. They should not be nodding and smiling without a single clue as to the answer - I've had that happen more than once. If the timing changes, the steward should let the warm-up ring know "we have a brief delay and will be 5 minutes behind."

I once was in a warm-up ring for 5-8 minutes when I was called to ride my test. I asked in surprise what time it was - it was 30 minutes before my ride time. I informed them that I did not have to ride early. They should have let me know I had that option. This is but one example of indifferent stewarding I've personally experienced at events. More often the stewards were excellent about informing the riders and letting everyone know they were 1, 2 and 3 away.

I have ridden in too many rings where the stewards either didn't know to update the warm-up riders about time changes ... or didn't care. It's hard to tell sometimes. I've ridden in warm-up rings were they did not call on-deck and in-the-hole, even on request. It's frustrating to work and spend to compete, approach it very seriously and purposefully, and then be treated indifferently by those who are in the best position to give critical information before the performance.

Blugal
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:39 PM
My very first event at the Canadian version of OBN, I was told by the warm-up steward that I could "go in the ring". I'd been circling the arena for a while, and thought I'd missed hearing the bell. So in I went.

I was immediately eliminated for entering before the bell. The judge let me ride my test and I was allowed to do the rest of the competition as an E'd rider.

When I told the organizer about this, years later, she was appalled and said if she'd known this, she would have spoken to the judge and tried to get the E removed. Or in the extreme case, she would have liked to have known the judge's name so she could have used this scenario in her future hiring decisions.

Now one thing's for sure - I always make sure I hear the bell and I never take an opinion from a volunteer/official without accepting my own responsibility for the consequences. However, it was a good thing I was already hooked on eventing at that point - as starting my first event in tears in front of my grandparents wasn't exactly the best introduction to the sport!

Beam Me Up
Sep. 28, 2009, 01:41 PM
I do understand being annoyed that a single competitor is tying up the ring and making it late (though in this case it sounds as though only 15 of those 30 min were her fault).

I agree though that I'd hate to see a BN kid miss the whole weekend over that. Hopefully a lesson not only to her but to her trainer/parent/whoever's in charge.

Once (pre-internet) I went to a HT in Canada (I was from the US, the show was advertised in the Area 1 section of the Omnibus) and the organizer sent me back the dressage test to learn. I realized it was the wrong one when I saw the girl ahead of me go (not sure if the actual test had been listed in the US Omnibus listing--it was more like "come on over to Canada for N-P). One of the organizers came out and actually read the test for me while I went. (And I still had 2 errors, as it was a windy day, a static-y loudspeaker, and her accented pronunciation of some of the letters threw me).

Anyway, it was a great weekend, I was last in dressage but had great jumping phases, and am grateful to have been allowed to continue.

Catalina
Sep. 28, 2009, 02:14 PM
My second Novice ever (three years ago), I went down the center line, turned left, went across the diagonal and heard the bell. :eek: I had learned the wrong test and I had NO idea what the other test was. The judge tried telling me the first couple of movements, but I had never even looked at test B because I had done A two weeks before. I was clueless and left the arena. E. I was not given an option to look at the test and learn it or anything. I pleaded with the TD and was allowed to jump. I totally learned my lesson from that and, like OverandOnward, I check which test it is a million times and make sure that I always watch one or two rides so I am sure I am doing the right one.
I was mad at myself for memorizing the wrong test and I in no way, shape or form thought that I should be allowed to learn the new one and then come back :no:. Sounds like an unfair advantage to me. There are a lot of rules in this sport and many of us have learned some of them the hard way; it sucks, but you come back better next time.

secretariat
Sep. 28, 2009, 02:59 PM
I strongly believe that the only time a beginner novice should ever be eliminated is for dangerous riding. Give'em 10 or 50 or 5000 penalty points so they're not competitive with those who do the whole enchilada, but continue. If they can't remember the test, 100 points is OK. If they can't get over the jump, 3 refusals = 100 points and go on to the next. If they can ride safely, let them ride.

Hilary
Sep. 28, 2009, 03:41 PM
I'm surprised they allowed her to tie up the ring while she relearned, rather than fitting her in later but I like when the judge allows for that.

I was scribing a couple of years ago and someone forgot her test. The judge told her she could go learn it and come back. Now, he didn't give a specific time but he meant sometime during her division.

Circumstance being what it is, we could see some of the stabling from the judge's booth and he suddenly says to me "hey, isn't that the rider who didn't know her test? What's she doing!??"

Well, she was over at her stall hosing off her horse! He then says "I meant she could have a few minutes to figure out the test, not go after her horse has had a bath and lunch!"

We dispatched someone to go tell her that she had to ride at the end of her division, and she was still kind of frazzled, but managed to finish.

dsedler
Sep. 29, 2009, 03:39 PM
I strongly believe that the only time a beginner novice should ever be eliminated is for dangerous riding. Give'em 10 or 50 or 5000 penalty points so they're not competitive with those who do the whole enchilada, but continue. If they can't remember the test, 100 points is OK. If they can't get over the jump, 3 refusals = 100 points and go on to the next. If they can ride safely, let them ride.

But, can you imagine the liability this would bring? If the rider or horse is so unprepared that they can't make it in 3 tries over the first fence, then you let them skip it, they approach the next fence, horse refuses again and rider falls off, breaking her neck. The organizers would be sued so fast they wouldn't know what hit them. The argument being, that the rider should not have been allowed to continue if they couldn't get over that first fence. IT may not have been dangerous riding, just one of those freak accidents, but it wouldn't have happened if the rider had not been allowed to continue.

I remember jump judging, there would be some times when we would get a rider that was having an excellent ride, everything going great for them, when they skip a fence. They were eliminated, but we usually let them continue and told them they were eliminated after they finished. Now, due to the liability, we are told to stop them as soon as possible. Sucks, but when people these days have no personal responsibility, that is what you are going to get.

SevenDogs
Sep. 29, 2009, 03:54 PM
As a regular BN/N competitor, I would not deny this rider her chance. She made a mistake, the judge was generous, and rings sometimes run late. I find it interesting that the OP made a point of showing that she ended up well in the standings. I hate the idea of focusing on ribbons and placing than so much that the spirit of the sport and sportmanship falls by the wayside.

To me sportsmanship and true competition means that I don't want to succeed by seeing my competitors eliminated for technical reasons. I come to a show to actually match my riding to theirs -- not their ability to read the omnibus. We all make mistakes from time to time and I hope my competitors get a second chance over something like this. True competitors welcome true competition.

mjrtango93
Sep. 29, 2009, 04:02 PM
So about 13 years ago this happened to a friend of mine. She was in junior training rider, which apparently had a different test then open training and senior training rider. She learned test A, like the other divisions had, not realizing hers was Test B. She had no clue what the other test was, the judge handed her a score sheet, and told her to tell the steward she was to come back in 2 riders, prepared or not. She sat just at the edge of the warm up learning her test, then went back in. The judge scored her very fairly and ended up giving her 2 errors of course even though she did in fact execute it properly when she back. The judge just said it wasn't fair to the others to give her no penatly when others in the division had prepared correctly, but didn't feel elimination was called for since it was confusing which test the division was supposed to do (she wasn't the only JTR that messed up). We all agreed with her and thought it was more then fair.

Lisa Cook
Sep. 29, 2009, 04:07 PM
To me sportsmanship and true competition means that I don't want to succeed by seeing my competitors eliminated for technical reasons. I come to a show to actually match my riding to theirs -- not their ability to read the omnibus. We all make mistakes from time to time and I hope my competitors get a second chance over something like this. True competitors welcome true competition.

At the area championships a couple of years ago I finished one spot out of the ribbons, the victory gallop and all the fun of placing in the championships. In the stadium jumping warmup, I saw a rider who was ahead of me in the standings jump a warmup fence backwards from how it was flagged. Her coach was appalled and immediately told her what she had done and she warmed up correctly after that. I was the only other person who saw it. For one partial split moment of a second I thought about reporting it to the TD, and I hate to even admit that it flashed through my mind. But that wouldn't have been right...I would never want to move up in the standings because of technical error by a competitor. And I've never mentioned it...until today.

SevenDogs
Sep. 29, 2009, 04:10 PM
At the area championships a couple of years ago I finished one spot out of the ribbons, the victory gallop and all the fun of placing in the championships. In the stadium jumping warmup, I saw a rider who was ahead of me in the standings jump a warmup fence backwards from how it was flagged. Her coach was appalled and immediately told her what she had done and she warmed up correctly after that. I was the only other person who saw it. For one partial split moment of a second I thought about reporting it to the TD, and I hate to even admit that it flashed through my mind. But that wouldn't have been right...I would never want to move up in the standings because of technical error by a competitor. And I've never mentioned it...until today.

Character isn't defined by the thoughts that cross your mind (thankfully for all of us!) ... but by what you do with those thoughts. Congratulations on yours! :yes:

OverandOnward
Sep. 29, 2009, 09:58 PM
I strongly believe that the only time a beginner novice should ever be eliminated is for dangerous riding. Give'em 10 or 50 or 5000 penalty points so they're not competitive with those who do the whole enchilada, but continue. If they can't remember the test, 100 points is OK. If they can't get over the jump, 3 refusals = 100 points and go on to the next. If they can ride safely, let them ride.


But, can you imagine the liability this would bring? If the rider or horse is so unprepared that they can't make it in 3 tries over the first fence, then you let them skip it, they approach the next fence, horse refuses again and rider falls off, breaking her neck. The organizers would be sued so fast they wouldn't know what hit them. The argument being, that the rider should not have been allowed to continue if they couldn't get over that first fence. IT may not have been dangerous riding, just one of those freak accidents, but it wouldn't have happened if the rider had not been allowed to continue.

I remember jump judging, there would be some times when we would get a rider that was having an excellent ride, everything going great for them, when they skip a fence. They were eliminated, but we usually let them continue and told them they were eliminated after they finished. Now, due to the liability, we are told to stop them as soon as possible. Sucks, but when people these days have no personal responsibility, that is what you are going to get.

To me the question is - why could the rider not get over in 3 tries? If it is truly an unprepared rider and/or horse, that is one thing. If it is due to a visual that is un-nerving the horse (and maybe the rider) and is not present elsewhere on course, I would very much like to see them continue. (e.g. ditch, goofy decoration, etc.) Riding the course in competition is a learning experience that can't be duplicated in another setting. And allowing an E to finish follows the values of making the ride more important than the ribbons.

I completely sympathize that - especially in this day and age - event officials would rather not take the responsibility of making that call. And in some cases it could be a non-rider jump judge is the only official to witness to the difficulties.

OverandOnward
Sep. 29, 2009, 10:02 PM
It's times like this that make me wish for a "TE-BATC" rule. That would be a "Technical Elimination - But Allowed To Continue" type rule.
...
If they had been TE-BATC - then they would have no had a prayer of placing, but gotten the experience they needed and paid for. I think it would have been more fair to the others too. And that is likely what would have happened if this had been at an un-recognized HT around here.

SCFarm

I am all for this TE-BATC! Where do I sign up my support? :winkgrin:

It is also consistent with the ride being more important than the ribbons. TE's may build character, but they don't develop riding skills or the sport, imo.

TE-BATC could even be limited to particular TE's - like missing a jump. IMO after crossing the finish is time enough for a rider to find out about that DUH! moment. Although there is probably less chance of rider argument if they are pulled up right away and it is obvious to them.

OverandOnward
Sep. 29, 2009, 10:16 PM
...
Now one thing's for sure - I always make sure I hear the bell and I never take an opinion from a volunteer/official without accepting my own responsibility for the consequences. However, it was a good thing I was already hooked on eventing at that point - as starting my first event in tears in front of my grandparents wasn't exactly the best introduction to the sport!

The bolded is so true, especially of the possibly-less-trained steward volunteers. A friend at one of her first events had a dressage ring steward send her in to circle the arena, pre-bell, while the previous rider was still riding her test. That's elimination, but my friend did not know that. There were two spectators, myself and someone's dad, and we nearly turned ourselves inside out trying to yell quietly and gesticulate frantically to bring her back. My poor friend saw us and was so confused ... thank goodness she decided to trot over and whisper loudly that she was supposed to be circling the arena, the ring steward said so ...

Discussion with ring steward, it turned out ok. But had it not turned out ok I wonder if my friend would have been held responsible for knowing that rule in spite of the ring steward's error. Although we might hope that the general mercifulness around BN would come through, there are officials and judges who seem to believe everyone who makes a mistake needs a hard learning experience or two. At a later event she was eliminated for a very trivial reason (most people agreed,) even though it was BN.

fooler
Sep. 30, 2009, 04:43 PM
The rule noted by Janet is fairly recent and was done in response to officials attempting to be as consistant and fair as possible with all competitors. I would have preferred that the judge send the competitor out of the arena to learn the test and return either after 2-3 rides or at the end of the division.
The officials I spoke with tended to be more generous with the BN/N and even T competitors. Figure by Prelim one should have a good idea of what is going on.

As far as delays - that has always been an issue. Be it due to competitor confusion, slow judging, delays sending competitors from warm-up, or the sun and stars were not properly aligned. I had an absolutely horrid Prel dressage when I went up for dressage warm-up about 30 minutes before my assigned time, then found out they were at least an hour behind. By the time I entered at A, the mare decided to give me the finger - during. the.entire.test! :( FYI this was back in the 90's in the large arena and old scoring. My score was something like 70-80 points :eek: Sometimes everything is great, somethings it isn't.

retreadeventer
Sep. 30, 2009, 04:50 PM
I think that is an misuse of the "unusual circumstances" rule.

Stands blowing over, loose horse running thru your ring, a tractor drag grabbing the chain and tearing the ring up as you enter, electrical power outage or transformer on a pole blowing up over your head during your test, judge's book blowing out of the booth under your horse's feet, shrubbery falling over into the ring and blowing across it in front of your horse, a sponsor's banner coming loose and swinging wildly in and out of the ring, etc. is an unusual circumstance that warrants a do-over. That's only fair, not only to you but to your fellow competitors who had a quiet and distraction-free arena to ride in.

Not memorizing the correct test is an error on the part of the rider, not an unforseen, natural, accidental circumstance. That is not fair to the other riders in her division and should have been protested. A judge's decision is final, but certainly it could have been noted on the TD report or show report had it been protested, despite the outcome.

Rules are for everyone, not just so one person can have a nice time. How nice was it for the riders placed below her who knew the test? Wouldn't it have been nice for one of them to get a free restart? Speaking as someone who did indeed have the transformer blow up over her head during a dressage test one time!!! And who did not get a restart!!!

fooler
Sep. 30, 2009, 05:50 PM
I think that is an misuse of the "unusual circumstances" rule.

Stands blowing over, loose horse running thru your ring, a tractor drag grabbing the chain and tearing the ring up as you enter, electrical power outage or transformer on a pole blowing up over your head during your test, judge's book blowing out of the booth under your horse's feet, shrubbery falling over into the ring and blowing across it in front of your horse, a sponsor's banner coming loose and swinging wildly in and out of the ring, etc. is an unusual circumstance that warrants a do-over. That's only fair, not only to you but to your fellow competitors who had a quiet and distraction-free arena to ride in.

Not memorizing the correct test is an error on the part of the rider, not an unforseen, natural, accidental circumstance. That is not fair to the other riders in her division and should have been protested. A judge's decision is final, but certainly it could have been noted on the TD report or show report had it been protested, despite the outcome.

Rules are for everyone, not just so one person can have a nice time. How nice was it for the riders placed below her who knew the test? Wouldn't it have been nice for one of them to get a free restart? Speaking as someone who did indeed have the transformer blow up over her head during a dressage test one time!!! And who did not get a restart!!!

I too came along in the time period where if you learned the wrong test it was too bad, so sad, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
We do live in different times and this rule was an attempt to allow for entry/lower level competitors to have a 'good' experience without being totally unfair to everyone else.
As with any attempt to keep ALL happy - some are less happy than others.
No attempt to be snarky - I am asking if you have a better way to phrase the rule so that it can be applied more fairly to all.

sch1star
Sep. 30, 2009, 06:06 PM
I wonder if she knew she could have been eliminated, had the judge not been so generous.

Personally, I like the warm and fuzzy. But it assumes the party in question is generally the sort to go home thinking, "I will never, ever do *that* again!" and not the sort to come back, make the same mistake, then b*tch and moan that "last time I was allowed to go back and start over!"

I hear it a lot especially wrt xc. Some poor jump judge gets flamed because the competitor got to dance around at the water/ditch without penalty for the previous whatever number of events, and fully expects to be able to do so again.

whbar158
Sep. 30, 2009, 06:42 PM
I think the OP pointed out the placings because most of the time when you go off course/do the wrong pattern you are eliminated unless things are posted incorrectly. I do think (baring there is time) that BN/N should be allowed to continue and finish the event but not be eligible for ribbons. So that they still get the experience, but will remember not to make that mistake again. Things happen. I had a mare and we were doing maiden at a HT and she decided it was time to go back to the barn when she saw another horse heading that way, I was eliminated from XC but allowed to do my stadium (I would have loved to finish my XC but the mare was NOT going into the next field!)

Thames Pirate
Oct. 5, 2009, 09:44 AM
I have seen a similar situation where 3 kids learned the wrong BN test. They asked if they could just go at the end of the division or if they still had to go at their ride times. They were told to go at the end, which they did. Afterwards they were informed that their rides would be considered HC. They were good sports about the whole thing, but all three said they could have learned the test well enough by their times if they had been told that in advance. I thought that was rather low, but they did let the kids finish.

Thames Pirate
Oct. 5, 2009, 09:58 AM
To add--I rode a very green baby this weekend. It was his first HT, though he's done a few schooling shows. Coming out of the startbox he had a bit of a meltdown, which resulted in circling, backing, and otherwise mucking around before the first fence and two stops there. Fine--he legitimately balked at it twice before going over. Then he started to figure out his job. I nursed him over fences 2 and 3, and we took the option at the ditch. By now he's figuring out his job, looking for the fences and cantering along merrily. We get to fence 10, which was a water crossing with a narrow bridge. It had a tricky approach that meant horses were a bit surprised by the whole thing. He had a baby moment and legitimately (and not surprisingly) balked. His subsequent tantrum of backing, circling, etc. lasted about a minute, at which time he took a few steps forward, then started up again for 10 more seconds. That was our fourth refusal on course, and I can see why the judge scored it that way. Then the baby decided it was all good, and as we turned up the path toward the barn it was obvious he would have gone--all the spectators groaned with me. We were not given permission to continue or to SJ. I was not upset--I understand the rule, and I didn't think it was unfair. It WAS disappointing, though. I was so proud of him other than that, so it wasn't a blown weekend--just a downer not to be able to SJ the next day.

On a bragging note, he did get a 7 on his final halt--in spite of the fact that the judge mistakenly rang the bell as we were halting AND the spooky flowers. The only 4 was the buck/wrong lead/swapping in front/then swapping behind canter depart, so I was pretty happy for my tense little baby!

Bobthehorse
Oct. 5, 2009, 10:52 AM
Would it not have been easier and faster to have someone call the test for her?

Janet
Oct. 5, 2009, 11:22 AM
Would it not have been easier and faster to have someone call the test for her?
Not legal for eventing.

SPF10
Oct. 5, 2009, 11:46 AM
I remember jump judging, there would be some times when we would get a rider that was having an excellent ride, everything going great for them, when they skip a fence. They were eliminated, but we usually let them continue and told them they were eliminated after they finished. Now, due to the liability, we are told to stop them as soon as possible. Sucks, but when people these days have no personal responsibility, that is what you are going to get.


Fortunately not ALL venues do this, at Fairhill just this spring (unrecog. BN) my daughter was in this exact scenrio and allowed to finish the XC course, of which I am very grateful, she needed to do it as a confidence builder after a fall (during another HT earlier in the year), they finished in grand style and then were told they were TE'd, but you still couldn't get the smile offer her face with a stiff brush:lol:! I feel it has really helped her retain her desire to event.

rhymeswithfizz
Oct. 5, 2009, 11:57 PM
Something similar happened to me many years ago when I was going training. My local omnibus printed the test to ride as Training B, but the USEA omnibus printed it (correctly) as Training A. The packets passed out in the morning also listed the test as Training A. But in the chaos, I never noticed the packet, and I had learned B and been practicing it for months, as it was my first training level excursion since my youth.

Rode into the ring, turned right, promptly got the bell. I KNEW the test said to go right. I knew it inside and out. I freaked out when the judge told me I was doing the wrong test because I didn't know Training A, I'd never even looked at it. I swore up and down that the local omnibus said it was test B - judge was skeptical - but *luckily* I had actually brought the omnibus with me or it was the big E for me as this was a recognized USEA event (or USCTA as it was then). A friend ran to the truck and got it and we showed the judge. The judge, bless her, handed me a copy of Training A and told me I had two rides to learn it. I sat there on my horse while two other riders went ahead of me and I crammed like never before, went in and squeaked it out with one error at the halt-salute (couldn't remember at X or after X!).

nomeolvides
Oct. 6, 2009, 02:06 AM
I strongly believe that the only time a beginner novice should ever be eliminated is for dangerous riding. Give'em 10 or 50 or 5000 penalty points so they're not competitive with those who do the whole enchilada, but continue. If they can't remember the test, 100 points is OK. If they can't get over the jump, 3 refusals = 100 points and go on to the next. If they can ride safely, let them ride.
I disagree, it is a competition not schooling. There could be riders out there for hours :eek: :D

Equa
Oct. 6, 2009, 02:56 AM
This happened to my daughter, last week. She was riding in your equivalent to Preliminary (Novice? 1*?) and she was in a "foreign" country, with a whole different system of numbering national tests. The judge gave her a copy of the test to learn and let her ride after a couple of horses. It wouldn't happen at an FEI event, but it should be at the judge's discretion at a national event, even at levels above the most beginner. The reason? Well, riders compete at events for many reasons. Some, like my daughter, are also looking for qualifying runs. And the costs of doing so are high: entry fees, stabling, transport etc. If a rider makes a simple mistake, which does not impact on safety, and which does not impact on other competitors, then they should be allowed to continue without penalty.