POOR JUDGING AT DEVON [Archive]

clearound

Jun. 2, 2004, 07:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Silver Bells:
I am outraged at the poor judging exhibited by the hunter judges this week at Devon. Of course others may call it politics, paybacks, favortism, or just a bad opinion. Whatever the case, I cannot understand how a performance can be rewarded for cross cantering, swaps, hard rubs, and inconsistent pace.
The grumbling of many can be heard throughout the showgrounds. I guess I should be used to this aspect of horse showing, but I keep thinking/hoping it will change. Maybe I set my expectations too high... who knows...
Anyway, my horse had stage fright, and was distracted by the umbrellas and inclement weather. He'll try again next year....
What are some other thoughts on this topic? Did anyone else notice some poor decisions in the pinning? Did anyone think the judges did a good job? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

First, Silver Bells you have every right to express your opinion about the judges on this or any other public forum relating to the "hunter/jumper" world. If we can't have a discussion here about the politics of judging where can we have it.

Second, I agree with you regarding the judging at Devon. When the professional division began on Monday, I thought this year may be different. I thought the judging was fair and consistent. However, as the week progressed, it seemed as though the judges picked who they wanted to be champion or reserve in certain divisions and pinned them accordingly. This is not said to take away from any horse that won. All the horses at Devon are winners or else they wouldn't be there. Its just that in one class I watched yesterday and the same today, it could not have been more blatant - even though there were 7 or 8 excellent trips, some of the excellent trips were either pinned lower or not pinned over horses that had numerous HARD rubs, numerous swaps, three-legged jumps.

As one very well respected horseperson said to me today, it was as if the judges stayed up all last night counting points so that they would know where to pin the horses.

Katie - I wish I could be a judge. However, in order to keep my horse in the style that he has become accostomed to, I need to work for a living. The AHSA (or whatever they are this month) has not made it easy to be a judge - learner for 1 year with no one picking up the expenses but moi, and then your little r and then you can get your big R.

noname

Jun. 2, 2004, 07:08 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Katie:
Complaining about judging is like armchair football. If you don't like what you see, go get your judge's card and do it better. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you know, i would usually agree with you on this but do you know how difficult a process it is to get a judges card? it takes a lot of time, money, and connections to say the least. for example, i think even to be considered to start the program you have to have 10 (?) letters of recommendation from judges, trainers, etc..

hiltonheadgirl

Jun. 2, 2004, 07:31 PM

I think that judges need to be made more accountable!!! Lets not let things deteriate as they did in ice skating before some one speaks up! We are all knowledgable and when you see a round that had some major faults pin over a round that did not it is frustrating!!!! Judges are paid!!!!! If a judge shows favoritism we should as consumers boycott the show and show management that hires them.
Power to the People!!!!

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA

Jun. 2, 2004, 07:32 PM

Well said Katie!!!!! If everyone who complained sat down and got their judges card, well it would be very interesting to see how they would muck out. I for one would never want to judge the leadline at Devon. Its a nightmare. Plus you know, some of our trips in the ring are stellar, or so we think. Then others aren't and we get used..So there you are.

ThirdCharm

Jun. 2, 2004, 07:41 PM

My friends in the AQHA tell me a judge can get reviewed and reprimanded if it can be proved that they are rewarding peanut-rolling, 'troping', dead-looking horses, etc. in violation of the stated standard for the classes. It's a sad, sad day when the AQHA is showing up the USEF in enforcing correct standards over politics.

JenniferS

ESG

Jun. 2, 2004, 08:45 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by clearound:
Katie - I wish I could be a judge. However, in order to keep my horse in the style that he has become accostomed to, I need to work for a living. The AHSA (or whatever they are this month) has not made it easy to be a judge - learner for 1 year with no one picking up the expenses but moi, and then your little r and then you can get your big R. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, that's if you can even get them to send you the info to register for the L program (or whatever it is for hunter judges). My husband has been trying without success for six months now to get someone from USEF to send him the requirements and clinic/workshop schedules for getting his judge's license, and NO ONE is cooperating. They make it so damned hard just to get the info, it's no wonder there's a shortage of good judges. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

sanctuary

Jun. 2, 2004, 08:56 PM

From what I saw on Monday, I thought the judges pinned rather fairly. I picked many of the same top 6 that they did. The Reg. Workings, I saw a little more of a discrepency, but in the Greens, we agreed on a lot.

I don't know how it all panned out over the rest of the week though. It's sad to say that it does happen way too often. It's unfortunate that judges who are not political are too far and too few between.

Dakotawyatt

Jun. 2, 2004, 09:03 PM

I definitely feel SB has the right to voice an opinion. In fact, NOT saying something in light of blatant sketchy judging feels like some sort of "well, this is just the way things are done here" sort of thing.

Just because it's Devon doesn't mean something shouldn't be mentioned about it. We ALL know judging discrepancies occur from the schooling shows to the A shows, it's someone's right to point it out. And a judge actually pinning a hunter that cross cantered or had a blatantly uneven round over one that was correct and consistent is crazy!

Back to your arguments. I wasn't there and I don't know who won what, just supporting the right to voice opinions.

Silver Bells

Jun. 3, 2004, 05:49 AM

First off, I am in no way bashing a specific horse. Every horse entered deserves to be there. I am merely stating that the inconsistencies in the judging are too numerous to point out. It's a shame that poor judging rears it's ugly head at Devon.
As CLEAROUND points out, if these judges are actually calculating points for champion and reserve etc, and pinning for that purpose, that's a disgrace!

JUSTTHEMOM

Jun. 3, 2004, 05:51 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Figure Of Eight:
Politics are all too common in Hunters everywhere from schooling shows to 4H to the biggest "A" shows. It's just the way it tends to be. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was thinking the same thing about 4-h when I read this. ANYthing that is judged, is bound to cause some chatter. Olympic sports, Professional ball, art. Etc. We hear so much grumbling at our 4-h fair when the exhibits open, THIS wasn't judged right and THAT wasn't judged right. But we all have different opinions and see things differently. We have to know, going in, if there is a judge or referee, there will be controversy. At our house, we just try to keep the second guessing within our own family. I spent 20 minutes the other night at 4-h trying to watch my daughter train her dog, but instead had to listen to another Mom complaing how her child was "robbed" in every category last year.

JTM

Ragdoll

Jun. 3, 2004, 05:57 AM

I wasn't there but I do know there was a bit of controversy over the pony breeding which is confirmed by reviewing the results on www.ryegate.com (http://www.ryegate.com). The pony that placed 2nd in the yearling colts and gelding class was awarded Champion Colt/Gelding OVER the pony that beat him in the original class... So essentially the 2nd place pony beat the 1st place pony in the championship class, doesn't normally happen that way!

Flash44

Jun. 3, 2004, 06:36 AM

Judges ARE held accountable for their results at horse shows. You only have 1, occasionally 2, judges for a class, so we all know the final opinion of the judge. They even announce the score of the round in some classes.

In skating, you have multiple judges and their scores were anonymous for a while. With the changes in recent years, the blatant politics is more obvious, so the judges are less likely to score dishonestly.

In some instances in AQHA, the classes are video taped, and can be reviewed by the organization if dishonest judging is suspected.

Duffy

Jun. 3, 2004, 06:59 AM

Ragdoll, those kind of results happen more than you think. Remember that it is a show, when in hand or under saddle. Sometimes the participants are not "on" in one class, yet are in another one.

MBS

Jun. 3, 2004, 07:02 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by WHISKEY POPPA:
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sleepy.gifAfter the 20 point spread at the Legacy Cup for the same round,some of these judges should spend more time at their clinics.Just a thought!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately they don't accomplish MUCH at their clinics. My trainer is a Judge and went to the FL clinic. I asked her if she thought anything would change and she said No and she is not wasting her time going to anymore. She is a 3rd generation equestrian and I respect her opinion more than I can say and I asked her to give me some details. Basically there is NO consistancy. What is worse a horse missing a lead change or a horse not getting the right strides down the line. Should you penalize a First year horse for the same mistake you would a Regular Working horse??? These things were NEVER discussed. She has been Judging for over 30 years and she is pretty disgusted with the Lack of Knowledge, the Politics etc.

Janet

Jun. 3, 2004, 07:11 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Hey, that's if you can even get them to send you the info to register for the L program (or whatever it is for hunter judges). My husband has been trying without success for six months now to get someone from USEF to send him the requirements and clinic/workshop schedules for getting his judge's license, and NO ONE is cooperating. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You might have better luck geting information about the "L program" from the USDF, since they are teh ones that run that program.

Scarlet 1

Jun. 3, 2004, 08:52 AM

I watched both the leadline classes at Devon. They had 51 in the under 4 and 50 in the 4-5. Essentially when the ponies were nose to tail on the rail, it filled the entire Dixon oval (I still always want to say Wanamaker). They judged both classes in about 15 minutes (which they had to or there would have been carnage with the kids and the ponies). I don't know how they even began to do it, I was barely able to see all of the riders in those 15 minutes. There were a lot of combos that were clearly not going to be in the ribbons, but there were probably twenty in each class that were legitimate contendors for a ribbon. Since they are only walking and are so young, among the good ones there are not a lot of differentiaters in their eq, so it really came down to what combination was more appealing to the judges.

The Kennedy's kid and pony (a very cute paint)were dressed up for the jumpers with a figure eight noseband and everything. I thought it was adorable and very unique.

Agent86

Jun. 3, 2004, 08:57 AM

If you don't like the judging of the hunters-- switch to jumpers--or ANY of the FEI disciplines-- you definately know what your placing is!

This is NOT to say that FEI disciplines are without politics--

But, I do not understand why everyone gets so uptight with the hunters-- we are really the only country who "cares" about show hunters. There is no way to move "up" levels (IE- Jumpers, Eventing, Dressage...) if you are stuck in the Ammy-owners, you're stuck. No where to move up.

Flame suit on!

MBS

Jun. 3, 2004, 09:09 AM

I am not going to flame you and I agree we are the only country that cares about show hunters but is it too much to ask for FAIR judging with some consistancy in what the judges are looking for? I have worked for an Olympic Medalist and I love the jumpers but I am a weekend warrior and don;t want to get killed in the jumpers and I enjoy showing in the hunters.

Enough

Jun. 3, 2004, 09:19 AM

Well Said Katie! Everyone can say that at least once in their riding career they thought they rode their best but the ribbon didn't show it. Well guess what, that can happen to anyone, anytime, anywhere. Including at Devon. The horses and riders that compete at Devon are supposed to be some of the best in the country, so like someone pointed out before "they are all winners." Therefore there may be 6 horses that could be pinned first depending on who is judging, that's not playing favorites, that's having different taste. Some judges will value certain attributes more than others. I'm not going to say that politics might not play some role, but I believe that when it does it isn't intentional. In an industry like ours you can't help but like and/or dislike some people. Horse Show judges are humans, no matter how hard they try some personal prejudice may enter into their decision (whether consciously or not). The same is true in everything in life from job promotions to trials by jury. Basically the point is that we shouldn't sit here and complain over "politics." The hunter judges weren't chosen randomly out of a hat, a great deal of careful thought and consideration was put into the decision. They were obviously chosen because others in the industry value their knowledge and their opinions. If a mistake was made in the judging, remember they are humans. It could be something as simple as they were writing and missed something, or it could be that they value different attributes than you, or it could be that on some level we will never be able to have humans judge anything in life without some minimal level of personal prejudice.

Coreene

Jun. 3, 2004, 09:38 AM

Bummer about the leadline. Every leadline class I've seen, they were all equal first place.

clearound

Jun. 3, 2004, 09:44 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Enough: ... I'm not going to say that politics might not play some role, but I believe that when it does it isn't intentional....If a mistake was made in the judging, remember they are humans. It could be something as simple as they were writing and missed something. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

First, politics is always intentional. It is a conscious decision to pick one over the other because of something other than merit.

Second, it was pretty hard yesterday not to have heard and seen four hard rubs by one horse in the 4 foot division.

Linny

Jun. 3, 2004, 09:49 AM

I think most of us accept that there are times when our best isn't ever going to be good enough. I'm not at Devon because I don't belong there. However, we have all seen times when the "big horse" makes a mistake and still gets the blue.
If superhunter, lets call her "Braless" is expected to win, she may be able to actually have a mistake and still win. The judge knows that overall "Braless" is a better horse than my entrant "Full Support," who is generally just a notch below but from a less well known barn. Let's say that today however "Braless" loses her footing a bit and bobbles a lead change, maybe as a result she tips a rail. "Full Support" is flawless. If "Braless" outpins me, I have a right to be angry. I have to assume that the judge, knowing that "Braless" IS the better horse, that "Full Support" can never beat her.
In racing they have an expression "that's why they run the race." Sometimes the BEST horse doesn't win. It's the best horse that day that wins.

monalisa

Jun. 3, 2004, 09:58 AM

We all have days when we should have been in the ribbons but weren't. But I agree, everyone has a right to voice an opinion. I was not at Devon this year, but at other AA shows this year I have seen what amounts to poor judging - such as a horse almost pulling a rail but still winning a class of 20 horses. When we pay tons of money to attend these shows, we as exhibitors should expect good judging. There is nothing wrong with that. But we should not complain if we are not willing to do something about it. You can report poor judging to the association through the horse show office. I have done it once.

Silver Bells

Jun. 3, 2004, 10:12 AM

In essence, those of us who opted to show at Devon this year, paid hefty entry fees for these 2 judges/humans to give their opinion. In return, they are being paid for their efforts as well.
I guess I will come prepared to supply glasses and hearing aids to these judges if I ever decide to exhibit in front of them in the future.

Go-Go

Jun. 3, 2004, 10:27 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by MountainDew:
who judged? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hunters/Eq/Pony Breeding:
James Clapperton
Susie Schoellkopf
Carol Hoffman
Bill Moroney
Thom Brede
Randy Roy

Silver Bells

Jun. 3, 2004, 10:36 AM

Mon to Wed this week: James Clapperton & Susie Schoellkopf

Eddina Monsoon

Jun. 3, 2004, 11:06 AM

And there's your sign.

RugBug

Jun. 3, 2004, 11:28 AM

You know, I was just re-reading a PH article by Geoff Teal on how to fix hunter judging. One of his main points was that judges need to view each class with a blank slate. There should be no expectation of what a certain horse or horse/rider combination is like or what they can do. Classes should be judged as they are played out. Judges need to be sure they aren't subconsciously starting from a higher score based on past performances. Each horse should have an equal chance of winning before the class starts...and that just isn't the case.

dropitlikeitshot

Jun. 3, 2004, 11:49 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Figure Of Eight:
By the way- They have leadline at Devon? Why? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif Best. Question. EVER.

I'm sorry, but what's the point of that? I mean come on, all the judging in the hunter ring is politics. We know it. We have to accept it. We need to get over it. Complaining about it on a public board isn't going to change it.

RugBug

Jun. 3, 2004, 12:04 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Avantgarde:
I mean come on, all the judging in the hunter ring is politics. We know it. We have to accept it. We need to get over it. Complaining about it on a public board isn't going to change it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You'd be surprised at what complaining on this board can do. Many things have happened, due in part, to threads on this board.

As a matter of fact, I often read a major horse publication thinking how we talked about those very same topics on COTH a few months back. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

keke414

Jun. 3, 2004, 01:18 PM

I agree with the above. Criticism can have a postive effect on a situation, if it is well-founded, well-reasoned, and there is enough of it. If show managers, show committees, and USEF honchos know that some people are not showing, or avoiding certain shows or judges, due to questionable judging, they will quickly connect the dots and realize they are losing $$ and prestige because of it. If they have any sense they will try to improve the situation.

17hTBmare

Jun. 3, 2004, 02:43 PM

Who was the judge that Kip Rosenthal wouldn't show under?

WHISKEY POPPA

Jun. 3, 2004, 02:47 PM

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gifUnfortunately the hunter busines is a multimillion $$$$$ business,that centers around the Judges Opinion. Maybe the judges could all check their cell phones in when they arrive, and pick them up when they leave.Just a thought.

Proud Aunt

Jun. 3, 2004, 04:30 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Scarlet 1:
I watched both the leadline classes at Devon. They had 51 in the under 4 and 50 in the 4-5. Essentially when the ponies were nose to tail on the rail, it filled the entire Dixon oval (I still always want to say Wanamaker). They judged both classes in about 15 minutes (which they had to or there would have been carnage with the kids and the ponies). I don't know how they even began to do it, I was barely able to see all of the riders in those 15 minutes. There were a lot of combos that were clearly not going to be in the ribbons, but there were probably twenty in each class that were legitimate contendors for a ribbon. Since they are only walking and are so young, among the good ones there are not a lot of differentiaters in their eq, so it really came down to what combination was more appealing to the judges.

The Kennedy's kid and pony (a very cute paint)were dressed up for the jumpers with a figure eight noseband and everything. I thought it was adorable and very unique. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Moonriver

Jun. 3, 2004, 04:38 PM

Years ago a BNT told me that:
1.judges should pin quality - not necessarily the best trip.
2. if there is a big name horse in the class, the judge would look foolish if he did not place that horse at the top.

i believe it all comes down to money.The most $ buys the fanciest horse & the trainer who is well connected. Occasionally the unknown trainer/horse surfaces... JMHO

Proud Aunt

Jun. 3, 2004, 04:41 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Proud Aunt:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Scarlet 1:
I watched both the leadline classes at Devon. They had 51 in the under 4 and 50 in the 4-5. Essentially when the ponies were nose to tail on the rail, it filled the entire Dixon oval (I still always want to say Wanamaker). They judged both classes in about 15 minutes (which they had to or there would have been carnage with the kids and the ponies). I don't know how they even began to do it, I was barely able to see all of the riders in those 15 minutes. There were a lot of combos that were clearly not going to be in the ribbons, but there were probably twenty in each class that were legitimate contendors for a ribbon. Since they are only walking and are so young, among the good ones there are not a lot of differentiaters in their eq, so it really came down to what combination was more appealing to the judges.

The Kennedy's kid and pony (a very cute paint)were dressed up for the jumpers with a figure eight noseband and everything. I thought it was adorable and very unique. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank You for noticing how cute Will and Panda were dressed. Will enjoys going to horse shows to be with his mom and dad. He is not about winning. He actually was hopeing for a green ribbon, becuase he liked to color! All the kids that got on thier ponies and showed up at Devon are winners. It has to be a very traumatizing event for a child to be packed in that ring with 50 other ponies and 50 other people. It did not matter to my family what ribbon Will got. What mattered was that he had a blast nad he wanted to do it bressed as a jumper. Complaining about leadline pinning is silly. I am not just saying that becuase Will Kennedy did well. I am saying that becuase it reflects on the parents and their sportsmanship. Will was more worried about the color of the lollypop he got then where he placed. And, for who lead him, he is a close family friend and asked to lead him. There was no stragety involved at all. The bottom line is that leadline should be a fun low stress activity for a child just starting out.

Snowbird

Jun. 3, 2004, 04:45 PM

I don't remember which breed it is, or if they even still do it but a while back there was a policy that at each show each exhibitor was charged $10.00 to file a report on the judging. At the end of the show if they completed the report they got their $10.00 returned to them.

I remember noticing how anxious the Judges were to be courteous, fair and make the the exhibitors understand the why behind any choices.

hideyourheart03

Jun. 3, 2004, 05:12 PM

I was not at Devon, nor do I do the big 'A' show circuit but any of these things can be seen ANYWHERE. Case in point: at the 4H show 2 weekends ago, the judge was a BO on the local circuit that I used to show on. My old barn (which still does this local circuit) was at this show with multiple horses that regularly compete on this circuit. The judge DID pin these horses higher and in my division (with a total of 4 flats) these horses won 3 of the flats. Bias? In some ways I think so. In others, I do personally know these horses and think they might have deserved these ribbons. But I did not get to see the competition (as I was focusing on my horse) so I dont know which is really true. Its all about what certain judges see in certain horses and about what certain judges like in a horse (ex: some Hunter judges like big WBs while others like more petite TBs). But I do agree, it IS about the reputation and names behind the horses too.

One thing that I noticed though (but as I was NOT there to watch ANY of the trips I really dont know if this is correctly deserved or part of the "poor judging"): Really, is it possible that one horse and rider can win ALL of the classes in the First Year Green divison? Now granted Sandy is an AMAZING rider and Im not taking anything away from her or the horse's talents (as I have never seen the horse go) but in SUCH a highly competitive division as the First Years are, is it? Just a question for thought.

With that said, there will be bias at EVERY show that anyone will ever go to, whether that be Hunter, Eq, Dressage, or Arabian. And there will be bias in EVERY sport that you will ever see, though in some sports (such as riding) this bias will be more evident than in others.

Silver Bells

Jun. 3, 2004, 05:29 PM

Interestingly enough, No one has stated the judges did a good, fair, and impartial job...
I hope the show mamagement realizes the impact poor juding has on exhibitors, trainers, and spectators.

blondy

Jun. 3, 2004, 05:41 PM

The reason that I pointed out the leadline was b/c there is very little "showing". The kids all looked the same walking around. There was no question of movement, distances, jumping style, clean changes, soft even pace, or any of the other million things that go into a great course. There was just one element; the person leading the pony. The politics is much more obvious in the lead line b/c the judges can't hide behind missing that swap, or not hearing the rub.
Let me ask you this, why hire the expensive BNT to lead the pony if it does not make a difference? Surely you do not need the best hunter rider to lead a pony around.

WWCountry

Jun. 3, 2004, 05:43 PM

On the flip side, you are paying for the judge's "opinion". If you don't want it, don't show. I was at Devon for several days and observed what everyone is refering to as poor judging (in the Dixon Oval--didn't watch ponies).
Why not just say you disagree with the judging?
Susie Schoellkoph is a pillar in our industry and I have always respected her for her honesty and straightforwardness. To say she and Jim Clapperton stayed up all nite counting points is ridiculous. If you want to believe these people are "political", then I believe every judge is. So, why bother?

WWCountry

Jun. 3, 2004, 05:54 PM

And one more thing, leadline (especially at shows like Devon) is a beauty contest. Everyone knows it, it's no secret. Cute kid, cute pony, knowldegeable handler=ribbon. You don't show in leadline at Devon for a ribbon, it's all about the pictures!

SED

Jun. 3, 2004, 06:10 PM

I have no comment on Devon judging -- my daughter should just be so lucky to qualify.

But this thread raises an interesting question, and I would love the judges out there to respond. (I know we have some -- you've posted on other threads in the past!) In your honest opinion, take the following situation: two horses show. Horse #1 is a superior mover and jumper compared to horse #2, but has a mistake over 1 or maybe 2 fences, e.g. a rub, late lead change, etc., while the other horse is a also a great mover/jumper but not quite as good as horse #1. But horse #2 does not have a mistake. Which would you pin higher?

The reason I ask is not to determine a "bad" or "good" judging result, but truly to try to understand since it impacts the ability of many to place in better company when they have a good round and their competition does not. If a judge honestly believes that the better horse should place even with that error, I would like to know that since it definately affects how you approach the sport. Which errors are "acceptable" in such a situation, and which would truly cause even a better horse to place lower?

Any takers?

smudge

Jun. 3, 2004, 06:10 PM

I was at Devon Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday and watched as the judges obviously played favorites and helped their friends achieve their Devon dreams of being Champion, etc. Don't get me wrong, EVERY horse that got into Devon for one of the professional divisions is a winner and absoulutely has to be a winner to qualify. But my problem is when I see 3 or 4 fabulous trips with 3 or 4 very nice horses and very well known riders go completely un-noticed and then see some other well known riders (apparantly the "right" well known riders) on nice horses make BIG mistakes or jump in POOR form, and place above the other good trips without ANY flaws...then I know something is fishy.

No matter what anyone here says, [I think] the judges ABSOLUTELY decided who they wanted to be champion/reserve and even grand hunter champion from the START. Maybe they did not stay up all night counting points, but they definately thought long and hard about it. They did not even judge the conformation classes on conformation. For example, and only for example (I have no ties to this horse at all, just one that many will be able to relate to), I know that In Disguise WON the model in the Reg. Confs...then in the hack they lined him up 4th. The three horses ahead of him all placed 4th, 5th and 6th in the model...yet the judges completely forgot that conformation classes are judged 25% on CONFORMATION and did not move him up. Never have I seen the model winner, who in fact is a very good mover lined up and not moved up one or two spots. It just doesn't make sense. Its not like In Discuise poped a huge splint over night or suddenly had uneven feet. In fact, I did not see the judges move one horse up in the conformation classes (although I did not see all the green conf.'s to speak accurately) after the jogs, which I find to be very very strange. I can probably count on one hand the number of times I have seen judges NOT move a horse up in after the jog, especially if they did well in the model.

I know my example is just one example, but the judging was blatantly BIASED. Don't get me wrong, the horses that won were very nice horses. But it was very obvious that the judges were playing favorites with their friends and it should not be happening at Devon. Judges are supposed to be UNBIASED. We all know politics exist, and there is nothing we can do about them. But at Devon, they do not need to be so blatant.

Del

Jun. 3, 2004, 06:11 PM

As a thought, and we do it here alot at the big shows....maybe for the breeding divisions at AA shows, like Devon, the show committees need to start bringing some overseas judges in to judge those classes??
Bring in some 'independance'.
I notice with horror that thes large shows have all 'local' judges, from the same state and all....of course they're gonna know the faces on the end of the leads!!

Has this been done or considered before at all??

WWCountry

Jun. 3, 2004, 06:24 PM

Smudge--You must have missed the Green Conf Stake for there was a lot of moving around after the jog. As for your example of In Disguise, I think I missed your point. You commented that they didn't move him up in the hack. He was still Champion. So if the judges were trying to arrange points for a particular trainer/rider/horse, they certainly weren't helping him. And anyone who follows the hunters knows you wouldn't bet against In Disguise as the winner. If your intimating that they didn't want him to be champion, that's just plain silly.

blondy

Jun. 3, 2004, 07:11 PM

It is so sad to think that you work hard, blood sweat, tears. And for not, b/c the ribbons are pre-ordained by the judges.
I will be staying away from these judges after watching this year. And sending a letter to the USAEq as well.

Katie

Jun. 3, 2004, 07:14 PM

Don't forget, the spectator NEVER has the same view as the judge. He/She may have seen something you didn't, or vice versa. Maybe the horse(s) you guys saw that should have won did something you couldn't see...

Also, LOTS of horses line up differently in conformation classes. Sometimes a horse just doesn't stand up well, so his flaws are more apparent. Then there's the one that does stand well and gets moved up over the "star".

frizby

Jun. 3, 2004, 07:14 PM

You need to get your judges card and hopefully from your comments you don't already have one. If you think that any judge can calculate "the points", you are giving them way too much credit. If you have your judges card, you would know that when exhibitors are your friends, you are way more critical of them and their students. You do know the horses better and their faults. You know the riders faults and preferences also.Do you realize the hours judges work?? They are human and yes, they will make errors. They can see from where they are sitting and they have 2 eyes. Are you sitting behind them and being critcal? Or are you at the ingate?? Those are 2 differnt horse shows...Different judges are hired for each show for different opinions. It is your choice to show at these shows or not. Stop wasting time being critical and poor sports and get your own judges card!

DiZzyLiZzy

Jun. 3, 2004, 07:30 PM

So so so OT, *but*... everyone who knows me knows this story (I tend to randomly bring it up... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif): When I was 5, I did leadline at Devon. There were 74 kids in my class... and I got *8th* http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif (that ribbon, along with my number is framed, btw) lol sorry - I just couldn't help myself http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

As for the original topic, I heard from a friend who went to watch, that the judging was somewhat on the poor side (just what I've heard)...

Beezer

Jun. 3, 2004, 08:07 PM

frizby, as other posters on the thread have already pointed out, saying "oh just get your own damned judge's card and shut up about it already" is much, much easier to say than to do.

Think the politics IN the ring are bad? They all begin OUTSIDE the ring, when the would-be judges are trying to muster support to get their cards.

Fix the problem outside, and you'll fix the problem inside. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

And, no, I don't have a card, and no, I have never tried and don't want to try to get one. I just know how the game is played from talking to judges I have the utmost respect for and hearing the reasons they have not yet been able to change that r into an R.

adhock

Jun. 3, 2004, 08:33 PM

Flame suit is on...By the time you qualify for Devon, you KNOW the judges and the way they judge. It is the place of "Champions" and Champion status is earned over more than one show. There are people who keep records/lists and choose not to show when certain judges are judging. That is their choice. How can anyone claim to be surprised because there are always patterns and they show up long before Devon or Indoors? You pay your money and you take your chance. I think that every year, there is controversy. One year in the pony ring, one of the judges pinned a model winner with splints and a sway back--but the judge had sold the pony one year prior and claimed to the buyer that it to be "the model winner" and she didn't lie! That's this business and by the time you get to Devon, you should have figured it out. That being said, I think that most judges try to be objective, but they are humans and subject to influences, friends, prejudices and pressures. A good friend told me once that his toughest judging job had been the Devon Leadline, where he'd been thoroughly chastised, berated, and punished by his BNT friends who had clients in the class--he has never judged Devon since! It is the ultimate fish bowl.

I think that anyone on this board is entitled to express an opinion and do so without persecution as long as they do not do harm to or intentionally hurt another person. There are few safe havens to express concerns, criticisms, and dreams in this "sport" because judgment, politics and retribution are everywhere--even Devon. We choose to participate on these boards, but no one forces you to enter Devon, and the judges are named well in advance in the prize list. If you go, suck it up or stay home.

Hasty

Jun. 4, 2004, 04:37 AM

I agree that the judging was a bit "off" this year. I was there mon-wed but did not watch many trips but some of the trips I watched seemed to go unnoticed by the judges. It's sad, but true, politics play a large part in judge's decisions.

camohn

Jun. 4, 2004, 05:12 AM

semi off topic.......is on the AQHA thing not Devon....but last month's AQHA Journal had a very interesting article on how AQHA hunter judging differs from open hunter judging.

*stellar*

Jun. 4, 2004, 05:15 AM

Randy Roy has always stated that Leadline is the hardest to judge. Not enough criteriea to judge on jsut he beauty contest. And they are all beautiful! So how do you choose? Unless you can say what you would pin a lead line class on, then you have no realy right to say that the juding was off. In that class atleast.

Madeline

Jun. 4, 2004, 05:18 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Avantgarde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Figure Of Eight:
By the way- They have leadline at Devon? Why? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif Best. Question. EVER.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't have any trouble with the presence of a leadline at Devon, but do they still actuallyjudge it? Why?

When my mother and I were presented with the problem of judging leadline our sole criterion became "Pin the mother who looks most likely to do serious personal injury to the judge." A cute kid on a cute pony with a cute older sibling leading didn't have a chance...

frizby

Jun. 4, 2004, 05:36 AM

Beezer, Please! Unfortunately you want your judges card on a platter of sorts. yes it is hard to get one. That is the point, the are trying to get qualified people in there instead of applying and recieving one like it used to be. this is a sport judged on opinion like dog shows too. Any time there is an animal involved ,there is your opinion involved. That's why there is a horse for everyone and a trainer for everyone. It is all about opinion and choice. Good luck in your misery of trying to get everyone to agree with the judging at any horseshow. This will happen when there is only one entry!!

pwynnnorman

Jun. 4, 2004, 05:43 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Interestingly enough, No one has stated the judges did a good, fair, and impartial job...
I hope the show mamagement realizes the impact poor juding has on exhibitors, trainers, and spectators. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, not just show management, right? The NICE thing about what happens today is that people no longer keep quiet about it and they DO name names. (Anyone remember way-back-when on this board when naming names, even judges, was a big controversy itself?)

I hope this thread goes to ten pages. The fact is that until judging DOES become less subjective in hunters, the IMPRESSION of bias and politics is going to continue to mar the sport. And the more people talk about it (right OR wrong), the more uncomfortable (I hope) influential people (and anyone who really does judge with bias or via politics) will get.

And maybe then questions like the scenario one person posed (which horse should win: the better horse with mistakes or the lesser one with a flawless roung) WON'T need to be asked.

Judges are teachers, after all. They set the tone and the technique of competition. It is irresponsible of them, as a group, to be political and/or inconsistent for whatever reasons. It's unfair to exhibitors. Saying you pay for their opinion is a fair statement, but if you're paying for it, shouldn't that opinion should be WORTH something?

An opinion is worth nothing if a.) it is based on something other than sound judgement and b.) IF IT IS NOT RESPECTED (because people suspect politics and bias).

Here's an example of my own: my horse recently got a 10, a perfect score, in dressage at one event. The first thing I asked his rider was "Who was the judge?" And that's EVENTING! But dressage is subjective, so I didn't exactly jump for joy about that score. When things get really bad with this issue (in any sport), the winners don't get the respect they are deserve because the judging isn't respected either--look, I did it with MY OWN HORSE!

And that's sad.

frizby

Jun. 4, 2004, 05:57 AM

Those 4 judges have trained and been around top horses for the past 20+ years. I don't think they would intentionally try to manipulate the results.management is trying to get the best people for the job.

Jezebel

Jun. 4, 2004, 06:08 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by frizby:
You need to get your judges card and hopefully from your comments you don't already have one. If you think that any judge can calculate "the points", you are giving them way too much credit. If you have your judges card, you would know that when exhibitors are your friends, you are way more critical of them and their students. You do know the horses better and their faults. You know the riders faults and preferences also.Do you realize the hours judges work?? They are human and yes, they will make errors. They can see from where they are sitting and they have 2 eyes. Are you sitting behind them and being critcal? Or are you at the ingate?? Those are 2 differnt horse shows...Different judges are hired for each show for different opinions. It is your choice to show at these shows or not. Stop wasting time being critical and poor sports and get your own judges card! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh please, are you telling us that politics don't come into play in the Hunter ring??

Dana

Jun. 4, 2004, 06:09 AM

I think that the way hunter shows are judged just lends itself to the thought that they are totaly political. I know that "politics" is present in any judged event; I'm not that naive. But, I think that the hunter shows could do a few small things to step back from that image.

One of my biggest gripes since I've been hanging out at these shows is that the judges at multiple-judged shows normally sit together or are connected by radio to the other judges. Bad mistake IMHO.

I'd like to see all the multiple-judged shows just start a new, simple procedure. Judges will sit opposite from each other. Each judge will either have someone who will radio their score to the announcer stand from a radio that is inaccessible to the judge or they will have seperate radios on seperate channels so the judge cannot hear what the other judge has done. The scores will be tallied and averaged at the announcers' stand.

What's the point of hiring two judges then letting them sit together and discuss the score for the round. With the way it works now, you might as well save the money and just hire one judge! Make each of them responsible for their own scores, and I think a lot of the "appearance" of favoritism will go away.

Just my thoughts....

Dana

horsesRus827

Jun. 4, 2004, 06:52 AM

one word for you.. jumpers http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

HorseeHunter

Jun. 4, 2004, 06:54 AM

unfourtuenly this is what happens in this sport since pinnings are selectively choosen and are dependent upon different people who have different views.everyone in this sport has earned or not earned ribbons they deserved because of how the judging is set up

FsD

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:09 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by HorseeHunter:
unfourtuenly this is what happens in this sport since pinnings are selectively choosen and are dependent upon different people who have different views.everyone in this sport has earned or not earned ribbons they deserved because of how the judging is set up <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said......Those who chose Hunters or Eq must expect this!!!

We were there and watched some of the eq & hunters, and yes it's true, the populars pinned over the ones who deserved it...... http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/cry.gif

Midge

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:09 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Hasty:
but some of the trips I watched seemed to go unnoticed by the judges. It's sad, but true, politics play a large part in judge's decisions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hasty, I am not picking on you specifically, but generally picking on your comment, this part in particular.

I agree that the judging was a bit "off" this year. I was there mon-wed but did not watch many trips

If you don't watch the whole class, from the same perpective as the judge, there is almost no way to comment on the judging. Before I become a judge, I did my share of bitching about the judging. Once I was paid to park my butt in the judges box, my entire perspective changed. It is HARD work and as parminch said, most of the time you are not judging, you are scoring. The number of times I watched a horse canter to the last line thinking, 'Come on, baby. Just stay the same. The class is yours. Come on.' Literally BEGGING someone, ANYONE to have a good trip.

Here's another situation I have encountered. I often sit down and watch somewhat closely at Harrisburg. One year, I was watching and keeping casual track in my head and found my jog order and theirs didn't match up all that closely, so the next day, I sat down with a card and kept track. Suddenly, our results were much more similar. Usually, if I don't actually agree with the results, I can understand how the judge got there.

Last week, I did a warm-up class in a pro division. I had one small mistake. Many people later asked me what I got in that class and were suprised when I said 'nothing'. However, my mistakes was probably all but invisible from the ingate end of the ring, where most of the spectators were, but was quite visible from the judges position.

As far as the politics goes, it happens just often enough for people to use it as an excuse. The number of times I hear trainers explain away bad ribbons with political judging is shocking to me. They haven't watched the whole class. How could they possibly know?

I also think exhibitors compare their trips to their previous outings, not to the other exhibitors in thier class. You may lay down the trip of your life, but it still doesn't make you the winner.

MBS

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:15 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by frizby:
Beezer, Please! Unfortunately you want your judges card on a platter of sorts. yes it is hard to get one. That is the point, the are trying to get qualified people in there instead of applying and recieving one like it used to be. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

TOTALLY DISAGREE- They make it almost impossible for qualified people to get their judges license. You have to be able to afford to go without working, pay for your own travel and You have to Know the RIGHT people. A friend of mine who is a BNT asked me and a couple of other people that have worked "in the trenches for years" (ie grooms for Olympic Riders, Vet Techs etc.) why we don;t go for our license. She said most of the grooms and barn managres know how to judge. I used to sit at the hunter ring in Palm Beach and judge the classes that the hunters that I took care of were in and I was pretty consistant with what was pinning (Back when the judging at Palm Beach was good) . I said I cannot afford to take the time off from work, I don't know enought Big R judges that would let me learner Judge with them and it was sooo difficult.

I think they need to screen applicants yes, but the process has to change or they will run out of good judges SOON> It looks like it is already happening

Ghazzu

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:17 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dana:

...I'd like to see all the multiple-judged shows just start a new, simple procedure. Judges will sit opposite from each other. Each judge will either have someone who will radio their score to the announcer stand from a radio that is inaccessible to the judge or they will have seperate radios on seperate channels so the judge cannot hear what the other judge has done. The scores will be tallied and averaged at the announcers' stand.

What's the point of hiring two judges then letting them sit together and discuss the score for the round. With the way it works now, you might as well save the money and just hire one judge! Make each of them responsible for their own scores, and I think a lot of the "appearance" of favoritism will go away.

Dana <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I like it. It would also provide two different perspecitves based on location--what one judge might miss, the other might be more likely to see (good or bad).

cookie-monster

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:19 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> It's a sad, sad day when the AQHA is showing up the USEF in enforcing correct standards over politics.

JenniferS <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think it's sad at all, I show in AQHA shows and am proud to be a member of the association! Surely politics is going to play a part in ANY judged event to some exent. But at least AQHA addresses this type of issue, along with others, and makes efforts to see things are done according to the rules and for the benefit of the horses and members.

For example, judges at the Congress & World shows are under very strict supervision. And I'm not talking just about their judging abilities--they are literally escorted everywhere, not allowed to converse with anyone and any notes or paper they had while judging are taken from them as soon as the class is over. At the youth world, I know they weren't even allowed to hear how the other judges placed the classes. Not alot of room for any monkey business there.

Think about if last year's defending world champion comes in the following year and falls on his face or is limping. Those judges are scared to death to miss anything because if one does and he/she puts that horse first while the others give it the gate, that's not a good thing. And, of course, they have no communication with each other to "get things all in order with each other" or "which BNT are you going with" kind of thing. Even at the weekend shows, muliple judges do not communicate with each other during judging.

I don't think the USEF is being "shown up", I just think AQHA to be more member-friendly and more in tune to their members and more likely to address an issue that needs to be fixed, such as overly political judging, especially at the bigger shows. My guess is it will take alot of USEF members to complain and, more importantly, propose rule changes in order for USEF (including members at large and show managements) to buck some of their "traditions".

BTW, I wasn't at Devon, but would liked to have been!

Moonriver

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:22 AM

I'm with Horsesrus827- & some of my friends have made the move....

2Dogs

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:39 AM

OH cookie-monster, wouldn't that be interesting. Judges not allowed to fraternize!! Oh my goodness, all those free dinners I see when I do get to a big show - judges courted every which way with the trainers and owners. Woowooo -
if only I had a quarter horse -

Erin

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:48 AM

Just a quick aside to an otherwise very interesting -- and so far, civil! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif -- discussion... please be careful not to say anything that could be construed as an actual statement of fact when making these kinds of "allegations."

You're welcome to say that it's your opinion that the judging at Devon was terrible, but don't say, for example, that you KNOW that the judges conspired with God to MAKE BigNameHorse have a rub so that OtherBigNameHorse would win...

Ridiculous example, of course. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif But I just want to caution everybody to be careful with their comments without pointing fingers at anyone in particular.

cookie-monster

Jun. 4, 2004, 08:20 AM

2Dogs

I can't decide if you're making fun of me or not... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Parminch

Jun. 4, 2004, 08:27 AM

WOW!!! I replied on the spinoff thread but obviously it does not have a controversial enough title to be read.
Every year we hear the same old song about the judging at Devon or the judging at indoors. It is a gathering of the best qualified horses and riders at one place in one ring.
I am very sure that there have been some classes that have not been judged as the majority thought they should have a couple of times at those shows but for the most part those horse shows are judged by highly competent people who have more than paid their dues with time and money and effort and judging a lot of bad horse shows in order to get to judge that caliber of horse show. I do not know anyone who holds their judges card today who does not care what the majority of the people think about their judging. However the majority of the people watching and talking are not qualified to make a statement about the judging because they have not sat and watched every trip of the class from the same vantage point as the judges. I cannot tell you how many times when sitting with other judges from different vantage points we gave very different scores........were we wrong? No. When we discussed it after the class (which I know some of you think they would never do but yes, they want to know why their score was so different) it always was a jump that someone did not see from the angle to see a mistake or a corner that someone did not have clear vision of. People say they want the judges to sit apart for the fairest judging of a class but I can guarentee you that those same people will be the ones squawking the loudest when someones score is a little off or a lot off because of the different vantage point.
And to think that because people talk to others at the show, they will pin it differently is obsurd. Yes, I judged the Congress and yes I did get hauled around with gaurds so that I did not talk to anyone but did I judge the horse show any differently.........NO.
As I said on the other thread... People think they want a uniform judging system with certain faults always being worse than others... In that case you will not be judging you will be keeping score.
Judges sit in the stands hoping for a class that they get to reallly judge that they get to say ..I like x better than y because. Most of the time you are keeping track of who makes the fewest mistakes. The hardest part about judging is trying to figure out how much the quality horse can do and still win over a lesser quality horse with fewer mistakes. Until you sit with your judges card in hand, you may not be able to comprehend that fully. Judges are not trying to win for a horse or beat a horse ...they are trying to separate quality from quantity and keep in their minds an order of preference of small, minor mistakes and larger ones. In the end, is an opinion. And contrary to popular beleif on this bb it is not out to get the little quy and ignore some horses over others because friendships.
The horse business is a small community. Everyone lives and works in the community and therefore they get to know each other. Some people are more respected than others for their talents as riders, judges, working with young horses but when they walk into the ring at a show like Devon they are going to be judged according to the way they preform that day in that class. There are too many horse shows and too many judges to lose one's reputation by cheating. Mistakes.... maybe .. blatent cheating....no.
The people who say they cannot get their judges card. Yes you can, just like I did and hundreds of others did. We went to clinics, learner judged, spent a lot of money doing it and made a little in return. If you want to be part of the solution, stop being part of the problem and go apply for your card. Nobody knew me from Adam when I applied and I still got enough letters and got my card after a process of learning and judged some really terrible horse shows and then judged some of the best horse shows. It was not about who I was, or who I knew, but whether I did my job to the best of my ability and then others spread the word and I got more and more jobs. ( until I decided to retire) I had plenty of friends showing where I judged but I called it the way I saw it. Sometimes they did not agree with my decision, but they always said "I know you had a reason and I respect that". That is what we have to remember, If you are showing in front of someone that you respect.. you must accept their judgement. If you are showing in front of someone you do not respect.... do not again. And if you do show in front of someone you do not respect more than once.... shame on you.

pcwertb

Jun. 4, 2004, 08:35 AM

Dana and Ghazzu:

Big dressage shows have judges sit at multiple letters (E, C, B) and often M & H as well. They don't get to converse with each other, and it DOES help to keep the scoring more consistant. They also sometimes have discrepencies, as judges from the side see a different thing then from the front, but in general you won't see more than a 20 point spread (which translates to a few percentage points, typically).

That is not to say that the judges don't discuss over lunch the point spread or lack thereof. They usually hope that 3 of the 5 have the same order for pinning 1, 2, 3 unless the points are really close.

It would be nice if the hunters would do something similar.

Enough

Jun. 4, 2004, 08:43 AM

PARMINCH - Thank you for putting into words everything that I was thinking. I've been trying to bite my tounge, luckily I did because you said it perfectly. One thing I wanted to point out that you said is what you said about judging quality from quantity <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So many people are saying how some lesser known horses have nice rounds and don't get noticed, while BNH have a mistake and still place. That's because these BNH have Big Name's for a reason, they're top of the line! They can make a mistake and beat a lesser quality horse that has had a perfect round. They are after all hunters, and the one that is higher quality is supposed to win. So if the BNH's mistake (i.e. rub, late change, etc) does not so significantly take away from its overall quality then it will beat the lesser quality horse. For example, my horse will never beat a horse like Strapless, she just can't compete with that kind of quality. That's the reality of Hunters, and a reality we should be willing to live with if you are going to participate in this part of the horse show world (and if you don't want to accept it, go to the jumpers).

KMZ

Jun. 4, 2004, 09:06 AM

Wow this thread is very interesting, we were at Devon on Monday, and thought the judging pretty much on the money, The day was crappy, alot of horse's had problems with the umbrella's and some very top riders had problems with their mounts, which was surprising considering the championships they have won, but it just goes to show that on any give day, you or your mount can be off or on it's game.

That said, a year or two ago I was speaking with a friend who is a judge, and was told that a certain BNT was going to be champion at one of the Indoors because "they've had a hard year"
This was pre-determined months in advance, so now you tell me are there politics involved? Yes this was "gossip" and no I was not in attendance to see if it was true.

Blinky

Jun. 4, 2004, 09:16 AM

I have to disagree with this. Pinning the “quality” horse over the lesser quality horse to me is pre-conceived placings. Each horse should be judged on each individual round then compared to the other individual rounds in that class. If the “quality” horse has a rub or late change then they should pin behind a so-called lesser quality horse (for lack of a better term because I hate using that phrase) with the perfect round. If Hunters are judged the way you describe then we are leading it further down the path of an elistet sport. Why? Because those with more money will have the more” quality” horses.

My horse wouldn’t beat Strapless either if both had good rounds. But I see no reason to think mine shouldn’t if Strapless had an off day and mine didn’t. Otherwise why should we show?

MsHunter

Jun. 4, 2004, 09:21 AM

Well said Parminch. I for one practice what you stated in the last statement. I forego the points and just don't attend if I know I do not respect the opinion of the person judging. I can only think of a handful of people that fall into this category for me personally, and ONLY in regards to the line, NOT the performance, which to me is a much less subjective discipline to judge.

I was TOTALLY impressed with the hunter breeding judging at Devon. I wasn't fortunate to take all my horses (I had the Devon curse occur in the barn the night before) and could only take one. I didn't get a prize, but I didn't deserve one, my horse left his manners at home http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif.

It was completely enjoyable watching Thom Brede evaluate the horses put in front of him that day and I ALWAYS walk away learning something from watching him officiate. He is a master of the HB game (IMHO)!

I can't even imagine the pressure of judging a show like Devon !!

Midge

Jun. 4, 2004, 09:25 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by MBS:TOTALLY DISAGREE- They make it almost impossible for qualified people to get their judges license. You have to be able to afford to go without working, pay for your own travel and You have to Know the RIGHT people. A friend of mine who is a BNT asked me and a couple of other people that have worked "in the trenches for years" (ie grooms for Olympic Riders, Vet Techs etc.) why we don;t go for our license. She said most of the grooms and barn managres know how to judge. I used to sit at the hunter ring in Palm Beach and judge the classes that the hunters that I took care of were in and I was pretty consistant with what was pinning (Back when the judging at Palm Beach was good) . I said I cannot afford to take the time off from work, I don't know enought Big R judges that would let me learner Judge with them and it was sooo difficult.

I think they need to screen applicants yes, but the process has to change or they will run out of good judges SOON> It looks like it is already happening <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, you don't get paid to go to college either. I hated the whole money part especially because I work at horse shows. So, not only was I paying my way, but I was passing up the opportunity to make money. As far as knowing enough judges, I had to pick my learner shows by my show schedule. I was calling complete strangers and not once was I turned down as a learner judge by a judge or a show manager.

Saddlebag

Jun. 4, 2004, 09:27 AM

Hail Hail to Parminch and Enough! I am a judge, and I also a, a pro who competes. Let me tell you that dumping on the Judges and punctuating sentences with the "P" word, (OK, I will say it...Politics) makes me CRAZY. I judge quite a bit, and my observation is that most judges try really hard to be fair and get the right horses into the jog order. Judging Hunters and Hunter Eq. is about selecting the best competitors in THAT class. It is NOT about training, and it is NOT about scoring in light of an absolute set of criteria. The 73 score I throw out in the AO Hunters at an "AA" show reflects a totally different round than the 73 I use at a local schooling show in the Amateur classes. Why? Because at the "AA" show, quality is the name of the game, and yes, the best and fanciest horse with a minor error can and should beat the less fancy one with an unblemished round. However, at the schooling show, I believe that rideability and safety are the most important qualities, and should be rewarded.

In Hunter classes, the exhibitors are paying for a person's opinion...and for judges to differ slightly on the relative importance of minor errors ( a rough change versus a flat bascule...whatever)is just fine with me, and is what makes the game interesting. Judges debate these things all the time. If judging became scoring, then the same horses (and trust me, it would be the ones from the BNT barns, as they have the best horses, the best riders and the best training and management in most cases)would win all the time, and nobody would want to show.

And...to implement all those controls and maintain a militia to keep the judges from cheating is an insult, and would cost a fortune that would ultimately be extracted from the wallets of the exhibitors! Is that what you all want?

OK...now that my bile is up, I think I will go outside and torture my horses and clients. Isn't that what folks accuse all the trainers of doing?

Ghazzu

Jun. 4, 2004, 09:28 AM

Midge

Jun. 4, 2004, 09:31 AM

Blinky, I won't presume to speak for Parminch, but I will tell you how it would work for me.

The first thing a horse has to be when it walks into the ring is be a hunter. It has to look, move and jump like a hunter. If this horse lays down the perfect trip, it gets a 100. A lesser horse (and it is a lesser horse) lays down it's perfect trip and gets an 89. So, I ding the 100 7 points for a mistake, it's a 93. It still beats the 89.

Parminch

Jun. 4, 2004, 10:08 AM

Blinky, before I started judging, I thought the same thing, however, once I started judging, I started realizing that some horses cannot beat other horses unless the better horse has a major fault or several minor faults. There is a fine line that you as the judge must understand. I agree, if the not as good horse never had a chance of winning what would be the point? But, on the other hand, there is nothing more frustrating than having a great horse and jogging behind not such good horses because the great one shook his head in a corner or was a step late with a change.
I can remember asking my husband who had won when he was off judging.... and saying "that one would never win if I were judging"...well guess what it did plenty of times because you have to judge what is in that class and how they go that day.
I do not think that before I started judging I really looked at it that way. You must realize that the great horse starts out ahead (if he doesn't what is the point of having a great one?) and must be beaten. That quality thing is the intangible that so many learning judges have to sort out. If you are judging a class that has all quality horses and all go great..you get to judge. (I can count on my two hands the classes I did that had that happen. When the sixth place horse is a score high enough to win most classes....in over ten years of judging) It is thrilling and makes you so proud to have been able to watch and score. However, most of the time you are keeping score and you have to decide whether X horse (who is a great mover, jumper and type) but swapped in front of a jump...beats or is second to Y horse that is an okay jumper, good mover and good type. And you have to decide this in a matter of seconds with the next of 40 horses walking in the ring who is an okay mover, great jumper and a little courser type than you would prefer to see. It all comes down to opinion and being able to sort and bookeep your opinions.

Hexel

Jun. 4, 2004, 10:22 AM

Parminch. Thank You for sharing the other side of judging. It has opened my eyes and enabled me to look at it in a broader sense. It certainly is not an easy job. I for one would never want to judge the leadline at Devon. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

2Dogs

Jun. 4, 2004, 10:29 AM

Oh cookie-monster - not making fun at all. I wish there was a little less fraternizing. I am very impressed with the AQHA - truly wish I could have a chnce once to go to the Worlds.

Mel0309

Jun. 4, 2004, 11:46 AM

Another thing AQHA doesn't do that I wish the hunters would "adopt" from them is calling the names of rider and horse (and sometimes trainer) while the horse is on course. While some horses and riders would be obvious I think it is more fair all around.

MBS

Jun. 4, 2004, 12:20 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Midge:
Well, you don't get paid to go to college either. I hated the whole money part especially because I work at horse shows. So, not only was I paying my way, but I was passing up the opportunity to make money. As far as knowing enough judges, I had to pick my learner shows by my show schedule. I was calling complete strangers and not once was I turned down as a learner judge by a judge or a show manager. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think you can compare Going to College with getting a judges card from an organization that is in NEED of good judges.

Snowbird

Jun. 4, 2004, 12:21 PM

I have been watching this thread develop and am astonished by the concern for Bad Judging! Back 5 years ago we had proposed a rule change that would have dealt with the issue and it died from a lack of attention. Last year I proposed Licensed Officials Clinics on a Rolling Schedule for each Zone in the country that could then be audited by trainers and parents as well as riders to uderstand and join in the discussion of the rules regarding judging. It too died from a lack of attention.

The fact is the specifications for a Hunter Class over fences are "Performance" over fences except where noted comformation is not a factor, nowhere is pretty or fancy a factor. Those are weak and wiggly excuses to hide politics. If we want the classes pinned by the price of the horse there is no need to go to the show. We can send in an entry fee and a copy of the Bill of Sale and may the best forger win.

Our founding fathers set two criteria for judging a hunter class, performance and soundness. It did not say a little unsound unless drugged into soundness, it does not say sound as in the mentally sound, it was leg sound.

The idea was to see a horse or pony that looked suitably fit to go on a hunt field even if it never actually saw one. The fences had to be safely jumped. The only argument we ever had was whether or not it was more dangerous to be too deep to the fence or to take it from too long a spot. If a horse played in the corners it didn't matter if it met the fence safely. Life was simple and life was good we built a sport and an industry along with with some good friendships.

There are possible solutions available but it will require that you do more than call names and complain. You need to endorse suggestions made, you need to be willing to send emails. Snail mail is no longer necessary, just identify your self and your USEF membership number.

I find it a great pity and injustice that what will suffer is not the judges who you all accuse of being political, in not awarding ribbons fairly and calculating points as a token of cronyism but a historical landmark in our history like the Devon Horse Show. That show will receive irreparable damage. So shame on the judges if they did what you say, and shame on the winners who claimed prizes they didn't deserve.

What I find depressing is this need to tear down our icons for the sake of what new and shiny for today. It takes integrity and moral fiber to properly prepare the horse without abusing it. My suggestion would be that Devon simply have an auction on Ebay for it's ribbons and they go the highest bidders. Perhaps that is the wave of the future in competition.

I think it is pathetic if anyone accepted a piece of rayon in exchange for their honor and their ability to perform. So, let's not just blame the judges, let's also blame the corrupting professionals who use their celebrity status to win what they don't earn.

Midge

Jun. 4, 2004, 12:45 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by MBS:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Midge:
Well, you don't get paid to go to college either. I hated the whole money part especially because I work at horse shows. So, not only was I paying my way, but I was passing up the opportunity to make money. As far as knowing enough judges, I had to pick my learner shows by my show schedule. I was calling complete strangers and not once was I turned down as a learner judge by a judge or a show manager. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think you can compare Going to College with getting a judges card from an organization that is in NEED of good judges. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Why not? You are learning a skill which you can later sell. There is a dearth of nurses, but one cannot go to nursing school for free.

Blinky

Jun. 4, 2004, 12:51 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> But, on the other hand, there is nothing more frustrating than having a great horse and jogging behind not such good horses because the great one shook his head in a corner or was a step late with a change.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are we all not to be judged by the same standards?

SED

Jun. 4, 2004, 12:52 PM

I think this thread is finally beginning to come together and be useful, and I thank Parminch, Blinky and Midge for their rational and measured comments. To me, the combination of their posts clarifies the source of frustration for many exhibitors.

If I understand correctly, the difficult thing for a Judge is knowing how to compare a superior "hunter-type" who has minor error(s) with the "good but not as superior" type without one. It IS a judgment call, although if one reads the books -- like Judging Hunters and Hunt Seat Equitation -- it should be a little more clear cut than that.

The problem I suspect comes in the definition of "minor errors". My guess is that what some people consider politics (and it IS politics) is when a judge might be more "forgiving" of such minor errors when the rider/trainer/owners is powerful in the hunter world, and less forgiving when that is not the case. I know I would be tempted to think that way, considering the crap I would likely have to deal with if I wasn't. The comments about having to make that "call" in a split instant was especially illuminating.

My problem is that I have a hard time believing that by the time one gets to Devon there is so much difference in "quality" that mistakes in a round don't really impact placing that much. Maybe in a lower rated show the differences would be more apparent.

I DO think it is extremely important to the viability of the sport that even in A shows a good hunter-type with a mistake-free round can at least occasionally beat a better-type horse who makes mistakes (and I don't just mean a pole down, but late changes, chips, etc). Otherwise I agree with Blinky that the sport is too elitist. There also has to be some recognition by judges that their audiences - including exhibitors - can see and understand the mistakes, but that the subjectivity of "hunter type" is a little more flexible, and therefore judges need to be careful in placing it over mistakes.

I'm not saying that a more typey hunter with a minor mistake shouldn't win over a theoretically less quality horse. Only that it is an area where there IS room for abuse and even unintentional influence based on improper criteria, and therefore the sport could benefit from at least some more consistent training/guidelines/diversity among judges.

Thanks again to the judges for sharing their perspectives.

MBS

Jun. 4, 2004, 01:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Midge:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by MBS:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Midge:
Well, you don't get paid to go to college either. I hated the whole money part especially because I work at horse shows. So, not only was I paying my way, but I was passing up the opportunity to make money. As far as knowing enough judges, I had to pick my learner shows by my show schedule. I was calling complete strangers and not once was I turned down as a learner judge by a judge or a show manager. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think you can compare Going to College with getting a judges card from an organization that is in NEED of good judges. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Why not? You are learning a skill which you can later sell. There is a dearth of nurses, but one cannot go to nursing school for free. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Midge where have you been Lately. Yes you can go to Nursing school for Free. Because of the shortage of Nurses there are Numerous hospitals that will pay your tutition if you work for that hospital for 2 years when you are finished. And I don't think you can make nearly as much Judging a horse show as you can as an RN.

Our sport is in need of some New Judges and they make it so difficult there is a shortage of people going for judges cards.

Janet

Jun. 4, 2004, 01:15 PM

OK, I am confused by terminology. Several people have said that the "better quality horse", the "fancier horse" or just the "better horse" that has a minor error should win over the "less quality", "less fancy" "lesser" horse that doesn't make an error.

What does this mean?

The rule book says (iirc) they are judged on "performance, manners, and way of going" Nothing about "quality", etc.

I am assuming "quality" does NOT mean "bloodlines", or "$$$paid", or "won HOTY last year" but what DOES it mean?

Does it mean the "horse consistently jumped rounder, with its knees more even"? Or what?

Silver Bells

Jun. 4, 2004, 01:23 PM

Everyone has made some valid points. The bottom line is that there are some lousy judges out there. I realize that this problem occurs at all levels of horse showing.
I have been competing at Devon off and on for almost 30 years. I look forward to Spring knowing Devon is soon to come. After all Devon is "Where Champions Meet". Those of us who have horse showed, have spent countless hours and dollars to qualify for this event. The thrill of Devon and competing there makes it all worthwhile.
In my opinion, the judging was better today. The amateurs were great to watch. Everyone was having fun. However, I left there today hoping that the Devon Horse Show management realizes how unhappy so many exhibitors were with the judging. I personally expressed my opinion to the management staff. I hope they also realize how many stayed away knowing ahead of time, what I found out too late!

LLDM

Jun. 4, 2004, 01:25 PM

You know I think it would help the hunters a great deal to go to a two score system (like ice skating) eventually. If you a seperate technical scores for errors/mistakes from quality scores, such as jumping style and quality of movement it would go a long way to make the hunters more understandable to everyone. It would also clear up a lot of the politics vs. preferences issues that are currently inherent in the judging system.

SCFarm

Molly99

Jun. 4, 2004, 01:28 PM

Janet,

Maybe if you replace quality with brillance, it would make more sense to you.

For me, each horse has a max ability when it enters the ring. Each horses is different, some horses, while the jump each jump with even knees, they just barely make it over and then race down the lines, this is not perfect to me and that type of trip would never have the chance at 100.

So, for me it is VERY possible for a horse to have had the trip of their life and still be beat by a horse that had minor errors. The second horse, simply was a better jumper, fancier style, etc. You are judging their performance of the day, but that doesn't mean that a minor error by a FABULOUS jumper should be placed after a an errorless trip by a middle of the road jumper.

I think many people would be surprised to realize that the scoring they seem to want already happens in most cases and that the end result would be about the same in the majority of cases.

On a side note, someone mentioned if it really it possible for the first year horse to win all the classes. That particular horse won all the classes one week at WEF so it doesn't seem that strange to me here.

WHISKEY POPPA

Jun. 4, 2004, 01:32 PM

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gifIt looked like the junior division was missing some Champions that are normally big players.

Bumpkin

Jun. 4, 2004, 01:37 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Janet:
OK, I am confused by terminology. Several people have said that the "better quality horse", the "fancier horse" or just the "better horse" that has a minor error should win over the "less quality", "less fancy" "lesser" horse that doesn't make an error.

What does this mean?

The rule book says (iirc) they are judged on "performance, manners, and way of going" Nothing about "quality", etc.

I am assuming "quality" does NOT mean "bloodlines", or "$$$paid", or "won HOTY last year" but what DOES it mean?

Does it mean the "horse consistently jumped rounder, with its knees more even"? Or what? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Janet...LOL, it just may mean, "$$$$Spent", "BNT", "won HOTY last year" or "Bloodlines".

frizby

Jun. 4, 2004, 01:38 PM

Jezebel-get your card and sit in their box and then lets see what you have to say

MsHunter

Jun. 4, 2004, 01:44 PM

Ok I am going to say some of what I heard, and yes I did watch but I am not going to give my opinions, as Parminch said, if you didn't watch each round and judge the whole class you really can't know the outcome.

Also, someone expressed some concern about the confs and the movement of those horses. We must bear in mind you NEED to know the scores of the horses when they enter the ring to be judged for conf. If there is a 15 point split on a round say a 90 and a 75, they may NOT move at all, vs a 90 and an 89 for the trips then you will see movement if one has really crooked legs, or bad feet, splints etc. Again, I didn't watch enough to understand, I really just wanted to see Popeye K and I did and that made me happy http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif!

I think what I heard grumbling about was the rubs. Rubs at the first jump, hard rubs.

Rubs, rubs, rubs and how the rubs fared out.

I am not a judge, I don't have a card, but if I did, I'd still have to put the horse that had a hard rub at one jump that jumped all the others BRILLIANTLY over a horse that came in the ring and marched around and did nothing for me.

Maybe I'd never get a card with that attitude though.

parminch your knowledge is invaluable, can you give us your thoughts on rubs in comparison to the other errors?

Parminch

Jun. 4, 2004, 02:22 PM

Ms. Hunter.... I think that question is one of the problems with people understanding the judging of hunters....which do I prefer? How bad would I hurt the horse that rubbed the first fence? the last fence? four light rubs? one hard rub? As you know...
*** There is no answer to that question that is wrong or right... it is the judges opinion in relationship to the class that they are judging at that time.*****
Horse X might rub the first jump in the first class hard and be third, and that same Horse X might rub one jumps lightly in the second class at the same show (so with the same competition) and be fifth. It depends on the other horses in the class and how they went.
I have always wondered if people who talk about the rubs so much and worry about the judges who use horses that rub so much do so because that is so black and white. Those people might not be able to see other subtle mistakes, but they know when a horse rubs, for sure.
My only other comment about rubs at Devon would be.. (and I was not there so this is just a speculation from other years there) they use the safety cups in the hunters too, which make a lot more noise when rubbed, and that is a very spooky ring (especially when cold and rainy) and horses are looking at so many other things around the ring that they tend to have a lot of rubs. The jumps are with a lot of substance and also they lines are set to gallop usually, all which make the rub more likely.
Devon: It is "Where champions Meet" for sure, and they are all champions and deserve to be, but it takes a really special horse to go great at Devon IMHO!

HSM

Jun. 4, 2004, 03:09 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Molly99:
You are judging their performance of the day, but that doesn't mean that a minor error by a FABULOUS jumper should be placed after a an errorless trip by a middle of the road jumper.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was not at Devon, but I have to ask: are there any "middle-of-the-road jumpers" who make it there?

For Parminch (since you are answering questions http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ) : how about 2 rounds: one horse kicks out on course and is then hit hard (several times) with the bat by the rider and proceeds to do the rest of the course with its ears pinned way back; the second horse is slightly deep to a couple of jumps but otherwise has a smooth pleasant round? In an A-rated hunter division.

Parminch

Jun. 4, 2004, 03:25 PM

HSM, I do not want to presume to have all of the answers ( it happened to finally be a rainy day in NC) but I get crazy when I read about what people perceive as political judging when they were not there and did not see any much less all of the horses go.
However, if the scenerio happened that you described then the competitors should and no doubt will fill out evaluation forms and the LOC committee will investigate.
One is a major fault with a score in the 40-50 range and one is a minor fault that could score anywhere from 60-80 depending on how "slightly deep" he was and how he kept his form from that distance and how the rest of the horses went. I really hesitate to say anything because I was not there and did not see any of it, but I cannot imagine that would go unnoticed at any show much less Devon. If you had horses showing and saw it, I certainly hope you filled out a judges evaluation form.

HSM

Jun. 4, 2004, 03:40 PM

Thanks for the reply Parminch. To clarify: this was NOT at Devon (we were not there I'm afraid) but was at large A-rated show. I appreciate your response. It is always helpful to hear from those who are educated on these things. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

wtywmn4

Jun. 4, 2004, 03:40 PM

Why is it that when things don't go the way we think, it's politics? But when you get used, and deep in your heart know the trip wasn't very good, it's okay? Judging is an opinion, given on that round. The prize list came out for Devon, you had to qualify with "x" amount of points. You knew who was going to be there judging. Why all the bru ha ha? I personally know judges who like my horse, and those who don't. Its their preference. I don't show under the ones who don't like my horse. Its as simple as that!

JusJumpIt

Jun. 4, 2004, 03:53 PM

Judging will always be the result of that one humans likes and dislikes. Although there are guidelines to follow, a judge is still a human and will bring their own taste to the judges stand. What many people do not realize is that, what a person sees from the in-gate, may not be what the judge sees from the Judges Stand. What you see from up in the stands, may not be what the view from "eye-level" is. A judge has to look away to mark their cards, they may miss the split second that horse stepped off his lead behind while they were writing on their cards. Every judge has a different view on what they are looking for. Some will reward the quality of the horses jump in the professional classes, and pay more attention to manners in the junior or amateur classes. A few judges may not count strides, and instead allow a horse to win that kept one, steady, flowing stride down the lines, even if it was not the "correct" number. The USEF has a precedure in place for exhibitors to use when they question the way a judge has placed their horse. Most judges are honest, fair and have a lifetime of training, showing, riding and judging. A judge that is truly "bad" or "dis-honest" will not be asked back to judge, and will have a hard time having their card re-newed. Keep in mind the next time you watch a class, what you are seeing from the in gate may be very different from what the judge along the side is watching. Unless you are able to watch the entire class, it is hard to decide where your horse fit in the placings. Keep in mind that each judge has things they think are more or less important. A judge may "forgive" a rub, or a step late lead change in a professional class if the horse is an excellent jumper, and may forgive a less than brilliant form, over good manners in a Junior or Amateur class. It is very educational to attend a "judges clinic" even if you are not going to apply for your learners card. You have to "Walk a mile in their shoes" to fully understand how difficult it is to sit and judge 50 or 60 great hunter trips, and only select 8 or 9. While most judges today are very good at what they do, they can't leave the human at home when they come to judge.

lauriep

Jun. 4, 2004, 03:53 PM

Saddlebag, and Parminch (as usual), have really nailed the issue. The "quality" they refer to is an intangible, having to do with MANY things like type, movement, soundness, BRILLIANCE, jumping, and more. It is something you know when you see it, and it absolutely should count for something against an average horse. It takes more to be a great "show hunter" (and that is what they are now, as opposed to 30-50 years ago when they were also field hunters) than jumping eight jumps satisfactorily.

And I for one think it is good and healthy to have different judges weigh different faults more heavily than others. It gives you more options if you have a specific problem such as late changes to be able to show under judges that don't consider that a big deal. And who would ever decide which faults ARE the bigger deal to standardize the scoring? I doubt you would ever get a consensus on many things.

Subjectivity will always leave the door open for people to cry "politics," but in reality, it is much more often used as an excuse than it is true.

Mardi

Jun. 4, 2004, 04:03 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by pcwertb:
Dana and Ghazzu:

Big dressage shows have judges sit at multiple letters (E, C, B) and often M & H as well. They don't get to converse with each other, and it DOES help to keep the scoring more consistant. They also sometimes have discrepencies, as judges from the side see a different thing then from the front, but in general you won't see more than a 20 point spread (which translates to a few percentage points, typically).

It would be nice if the hunters would do something similar. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fairly new at dressage shows is the instant scoring....each score from each judge on each segment of the test is shown on the scoreboard as the ride is happening. EVERYONE can immediatly see how the ride is being scored. The rider and spectators know the total score before rider leaves the ring. It's fun to watch, and educational.

I would enjoy watching something like that at hunter shows... ...I know it's subjective, but perhaps there would be a way to show the ride's total score after the round is completed.... it would take some of the secrecy away. Just an idea to play with.

Jezebel

Jun. 4, 2004, 04:17 PM

wtywmn4

Jun. 4, 2004, 04:31 PM

Mardi, that is already done. Shows that are WCHR rated will have numbers thrown for every round in the rated Hunter divisions. Also both the Ariat & Marshall and Sterling Equitation classes have numbers thrown as well. This means a person who is judging these, can possibly be throwing numbers for 175-250 rounds. That is alot of book keeping for many people.

Hasty

Jun. 4, 2004, 05:07 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Midge:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Hasty:
but some of the trips I watched seemed to go unnoticed by the judges. It's sad, but true, politics play a large part in judge's decisions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hasty, I am not picking on you specifically, but generally picking on your comment, this part in particular.

_I agree that the judging was a bit "off" this year. I was there mon-wed but did not watch many trips _

If you don't watch the whole class, from the same perpective as the judge, there is almost no way to comment on the judging. Before I become a judge, I did my share of bitching about the judging. Once I was paid to park my butt in the judges box, my entire perspective changed. It is HARD work and as parminch said, most of the time you are not judging, you are scoring. The number of times I watched a horse canter to the last line thinking, 'Come on, baby. Just stay the same. The class is yours. Come on.' Literally BEGGING someone, ANYONE to have a good trip.

Here's another situation I have encountered. I often sit down and watch somewhat closely at Harrisburg. One year, I was watching and keeping casual track in my head and found my jog order and theirs didn't match up all that closely, so the next day, I sat down with a card and kept track. Suddenly, our results were much more similar. Usually, if I don't actually agree with the results, I can understand how the judge got there.

Last week, I did a warm-up class in a pro division. I had one small mistake. Many people later asked me what I got in that class and were suprised when I said 'nothing'. However, my mistakes was probably all but invisible from the ingate end of the ring, where most of the spectators were, but was quite visible from the judges position.

As far as the politics goes, it happens just often enough for people to use it as an excuse. The number of times I hear trainers explain away bad ribbons with political judging is shocking to me. They haven't watched the whole class. How could they possibly know?

I also think exhibitors compare their trips to their previous outings, not to the other exhibitors in thier class. You may lay down the trip of your life, but it still doesn't make you the winner. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Midge I understand where you are coming from. And no I did not watch every single class. But the classes I did watch in their entirety I did see some odd things. You are exactly right, if you don't watch the whole class its hard to say that a trip was great and deserved a ribbon. I just meant I did not watch every single class.

Bea

Jun. 4, 2004, 05:49 PM

I'm finding this discussion very interesting. Does each horse get an announced score as they leave the ring at the end of their round? Can anyone tell by this question that I don't show hunters? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

2Dogs

Jun. 4, 2004, 06:10 PM

I think of judging hunters akin to the work I do in the Insurance Industry - flame suit on, but it is good "ol boys network" with a few women thrown in. When the "judged" world is so closely tied to the active life styles of the "judges" ,then there is an inherent conflict of interest. Judges are horse people who sell horses. train horses and have a business interest in the effects thereof. Snowbird suggested that we all contribute to a solution. Frankly, I am not sure there are enough people of financial consequence who care to see the system change.
I for one understand that, when I decide to show in the hunters, I take my chances. I choose to show because I cannot resist the challenge. I do not show hunters often anymore because I am now just too old to want to deal with all the of the intrigue and I don't have the dollars to crank it up with a BNT. But the gripes about bad judging have been around since I got back in the show ring in 1991. I am sure there were gripes before that time. Do you really think that people will boycott Devon next year if the same judges are hired?

Katie

Jun. 4, 2004, 06:15 PM

What I find ironic about this discussion is that the debate a year back was over the "brilliant" jumper with a little play in the corner versus the LTD quiet horse. In that discussion, people were complaining that the BNH that was dead quiet was winning everything over the stylish jumper. Am I remembering correctly?

I also seem to remember that most wanted the rules changed to have "brilliance" count more that quietness.

So, which do you want - A judge who likes a special horse that has a rub or a dead quiet, boring jumper that makes no obvious mistakes?

JusJumpIt

Jun. 4, 2004, 06:40 PM

Judging hunters is a hard job to do well. Getting a Judges Card, building your reputation, and gaining enough expierence to be asked to the bigger shows, takes years of hard work, not to mention the cost to get your card in the first place. Judges are fair, honest and know their stuff, they have years of training, showing, riding and judging under their belts. That said, they are human, and bring with them the things they like or dis-like. Every judge is a little different, some judges will forgive a rub, or a little "play" in the corner for a horse with excellent jumping form in a professional class. The same judge might forgive a lesser quality jump, for a horse with good manners in a Junior or childrens class. The other thing to consider is what you see from the in-gate, may be different than what a judge sees sitting at eye level on the side of the ring. A judge has to glance down to make notes, they might miss a late lead change or a horse that swaps out for a stride. You have to watch each and every trip in a class to be able to decide where the horses fit in the placings. Although I am sure every now and then a "bad" judge gets through the system and get a card, the USEF has a system in place for exhibitors to question a judges decision's. Even at a show, an exhibitor can ask the judge a question about a placing, if they follow the correct procedure to do so. Part of learning to ride well and do well at shows, is learning to always ride at your best, and be happy when you know you have done so. Even if on that day the Judge does not agree with you. If you always make your goal to ride the best you can, and let your mistakes help teach you, your scores will improve, and over time the pink and green's will turn into blues and red's, no matter who the judge. Good Luck

shrew

Jun. 4, 2004, 06:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Saddlebag:
The 73 score I throw out in the AO Hunters at an "AA" show reflects a totally different round than the 73 I use at a local schooling show in the Amateur classes. Why? Because at the "AA" show, quality is the name of the game, and yes, the best and fanciest horse with a minor error can and should beat the less fancy one with an unblemished round. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But what about the fancy horse with a big error? Does he STILL win? Does he get placed because you (you speaking genarically) KNOW he's the fancier horse?

Cookie Monster- It's sad that other associations haven't followed the AQHA' example.

blissful

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:00 PM

I find myself in a state of deep depression this Sunday evening. The dust has settled in the show ring and the results, once again have been dismal. Although my horses went beautifully and my students rode extremely well ,the judging failed to recognize this. Perhaps you’re thinking that this sounds too much like a plea for sympathy? I do not want to feel sorry for myself, I want things to change so that injustices in our sport cease to occur. Its time our association came up with a way to monitor and reprimand bad judges. My idea is to allow any trainer who has trained a national champion or ridden or trained a champion at Devon, Harrisburg, Washington, or New York get awarded a master trainer certificate. If at a Double A horse show , six master trainers find that upon completion of a competition, it
has been scored unfairly, that judge receives a black mark on their card. Should a judge receive 3 black marks, that judge losses there ability to judge a Double A horse show. Exhibitors spend far too much money to get judging that lacks objectivity. It is time we implement a system to regulate the behavior of the people that determine the results in our sport.

shrew

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:30 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by frizby:
Jezebel-get your card and sit in their box and then lets see what you have to say <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
you've been preaching about not judging until you have your card and you've been there. But shouldn't it go both ways?
Unless you've been there and know you can't say they AREN'T being political and you can't say they are. You can just say "I don't think that was judge right." or "I think that was judged perfectly." I think that old saying "Before you take the splinter out of anothers eye, take the log out od your own." can apply to everyone here.

wtywmn4

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:36 PM

Oh boy blissful, that is opening a major can of worms. You're one of the big 6, what about small time trainer who has just as many nice horses. The pinning may not be in your favor, but small time trainer likes it. You think after all the time, years and work a judge has put in you have the right to pull their card? Sounding like the NRCA. Ask them how hard it is to find judges. What changes they implemented to do it. What you are asking is to allow "x" number of people to be allowed to show. Shows will be even worse. Politics? Helloo? Thats a kin to a real fixed ticket. Sorry, I'm not flaming you, but gee, that is not a fixer what so ever. That will make people feel sure its politics as usual.

shrew

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:37 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by blissful:
I find myself in a state of deep depression this Sunday evening. The dust has settled in the show ring and the results, once again have been dismal. Although my horses went beautifully and my students rode extremely well ,the judging failed to recognize this. Perhaps you’re thinking that this sounds too much like a plea for sympathy? I do not want to feel sorry for myself, I want things to change so that injustices in our sport cease to occur. Its time our association came up with a way to monitor and reprimand bad judges. My idea is to allow any trainer who has trained a national champion or ridden or trained a champion at Devon, Harrisburg, Washington, or New York get awarded a master trainer certificate. If at a Double A horse show , six master trainers find that upon completion of a competition, it
has been scored unfairly, that judge receives a black mark on their card. Should a judge receive 3 black marks, that judge losses there ability to judge a Double A horse show. Exhibitors spend far too much money to get judging that lacks objectivity. It is time we implement a system to regulate the behavior of the people that determine the results in our sport. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Problem- Those trainers are the ones that are "buddies" with the judges.

blissful

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:43 PM

Heard a rumor one of the the judges jr. weekend gave alot of lessons this winter in a barn that won many many awards.Anyone Know if this is true?

Snowbird

Jun. 4, 2004, 07:47 PM

Blissful you are right that is the proper context for competition. I agree with you and the reason it is not so is that the 98% Silent Majority do not talk back at the right times and places.

Spend the effort that you all spend complaining on proposing logical changes and specifics so that the playing field is level and not skewed because someone paid more or is more important and well known. A trip should not be judged on the previous performances of the professionals other horses.

I probably hire more judges per year than anyone, but I have never asked a judge for a favor in any pinning even at my own shows. And, I can tell you that any judge who would comply if I did ask would never judge for me again.

My point is it not just the judges to blame, it's also the professionals that expect favored treatment. How? Well if the judge does not comply then those very important people call show management if that judge is hired and say they will not attend or they will not exhibit if said judge is in their ring.

Mel0309

Jun. 4, 2004, 08:09 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by 2Dogs:
Do you really think that people will boycott Devon next year if the same judges are hired? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I bet the high ribbon winners this year wouldn't http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif But didn't someone say that some did this year for that exact reason??

HorseeHunter

Jun. 4, 2004, 08:52 PM

although i havent read most of the threads here but i know a lot of people complained about why the jaynes and missy clark were no shows but perahps now is it understood why they decided not to come?

playing cards

Jun. 4, 2004, 09:11 PM

Well, I am a very optimistic person, and like to see the best side of people, so I mostly agree with those that resist that judging in the hunters is political.

However, several years ago, I was at one of the winter circuits. Our barn had a horse showing that didn't get better than low ribbons in his division. He was a nice horse who won locally, but he was not the winner at a place like that. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

I was very surprised when in week four he was all of a sudden champion. He didn't go that great, and he was back to low ribbons in the last weeks. When I asked the person who I worked for about it, the response was "well, that judge sold us the horse." http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

One of the judges at Devon Mon-Wed is that same person. And so, I think there are two things that can be added to this thread.

1) I have had first hand experience of one of these judges being political in judging.

2) I think everyone's got it wrong about judges not having confidence and therefore pinning the BNT horse. With some judges at least, better follow the MONEY trail....

trotncanter06

Jun. 4, 2004, 09:41 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by hiltonheadgirl:
I think that judges need to be made more accountable!!! Lets not let things deteriate as they did in ice skating before some one speaks up! We are all knowledgable and when you see a round that had some major faults pin over a round that did not it is frustrating!!!! Judges are paid!!!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are right on, hiltonheadgirl. As competitors and trainers it is our responsibility to reveal corruption in our sport when we see it. While boycotting certain shows may not always be possible, filing complaints with the show management could be effective.

JennLS

Jun. 4, 2004, 10:11 PM

While I understand that people are frustrated and valid points have been raised, I don't think its necessarily fair to criticize the judges. That's the first thing everyone jumps to when the results aren't the way they wanted them... Who WOULD want to judge nowadays? Judges at the big shows have worked hard to get themselves in a position to be asked to judge those shows and proven themselves as fair judges of quality. A bad judge from the first doesn't *usually* end up judging the big shows... they have to earn respect first. We're human: and people are not without bias and everyone has their own taste. I wasn't there and didn't see the rounds, but I think its fair to say that at a show like Devon that you have to qualify for, the quality of horses there is unbelievable. And each and every rider goes to the ring with hopes of winning the class. As owners, riders, trainers, whatever its frustrating for that not to happen esp. after time and money. I guess my thing is that I prefer to hear, "My horse and ride went perfect, but the other horse was fancier, so oh well!"

A disclaimer: I wasn't at Devon and didn't see the rounds or judging, so maybe there really was bias and politics at play there. I'm just speaking about the tendency of people to jump on the judges and find fault with them always, instead of looking at themselves and thinking about what they can do to improve before the next show.

annierun31

Jun. 5, 2004, 07:14 AM

I heard the eq. divisions were down in entries 30%.Sounds like jayne and clark werent the only ones to stay home!

Sswor

Jun. 5, 2004, 07:15 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> i know a lot of people complained about why the jaynes and missy clark were no shows <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OMG, you said the "J" word. Are they EVERYWHERE??? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif

Smiles

Jun. 5, 2004, 07:26 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Sswor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> i know a lot of people complained about why the jaynes and missy clark were no shows <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OMG, you said the "J" word. Are they EVERYWHERE??? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No they're showing at ledges and lamplight. I think they wanted to stay close to home because Charlie was graduating.

MsHunter

Jun. 5, 2004, 09:01 AM

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif First a disclaimer. I do not know and am not friends with the judges who officiated the pro hunter divisions Mon-Wed. I however breed horses to get to the ring, so I felt it is always in my best interest to attend WPB at least one week, Devon and indoors and watch trips, see new stallions go, see what is being rewarded at the top end of the sport.

I KNOW the judges HAD to have had a hard time judging the beginning of the week. The weather wasn't wonderful, people kept opening up their umbrellas as horses came down the lines, horses were rubbing, swapping, stopping, rubbing, gaping mouths, etc. Most handled it anyway, but most likely not the way they would in better conditions. I actually took the time to watch every single trip and stand right underneath where the judges sat.

I guess I will never get my card, as I had it the same way they did 1-4 or 5, it got fuzzy for me after that without taking good notes.

The horses that jumped spectacular held the top spots for sure. I only watched on Monday as well..

I think their job was hard to begin with judging the best of the best, but secondly even harder with the weather playing a major impact on the performance of the horses.

JMHO.

Silver Bells

Jun. 5, 2004, 02:51 PM

Ms Hunter, Monday was probably the most consistent day of judging throughout the show. In my opinion, when this duo who judged liked a horse, they liked a horse! As the week went on, it got pretty bad. We all have to take off the rose colored glasses and call it for what it was... poor judging! I sat beside the judges, behind the judges, and I still can't understand their decisions. Neither could a dozen or so around me.
Now that Devon has come to an end, I hope this topic continues on, change is definitely needed. The managers of Devon need to realize the negative impact this problem caused.

Mom

Jun. 5, 2004, 04:17 PM

Silver Bells: I think this is the email for Peter Doubleday, manager:
peter5419@aol.com
I was there, I watched every single trip in one division, and thought it was abominable. Kudos to Missy for taking a stand.

barnie

Jun. 5, 2004, 06:33 PM

ok...holding my nose, closing my eyes and jumping in http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif...hunters are very subjective. Is everyone listening? Not that there aren't general guidlines, but as has been discussed already, it is judging, not scoring. And shock of shock, judges have different opinions. They have been hired to give their opinions...not to agree w/yours. (Sucks doesn't it!) And yes, they could teach/sell a horse to/be friends of someone they judge.(within the rules) In fact, they probably are. What kills me is that so many people can't understand the fact that just because someone doesn't agree w/you or you can't understand their decision doesn't mean they are cheating or a "bad" judge. I have only judged small shows at which, by the way,I feel like I did a very good/honest job http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif and I can't imagine what it would be like to judge Devon. As Parminch and several others that have actually judged w/some regularity have said, it is a tough job and judges really want to do what they think is an honest and creditable job...that is if they want more shows to call! Think of this... what if I sold "k" a horse that I honestly liked and thought was a great horse. Would it then be a stretch if I judged it a year or so later and still liked it and thought it was a nice horse? I guess it is a lot earier to think you have been cheated then to admit you have been out ridden or that your horse simply wasn't good enough(at least on that day!)

Katie

Jun. 6, 2004, 05:21 AM

Very well said, barnie!

MsHunter

Jun. 6, 2004, 05:36 AM

Silver Bells, I am glad to know that at least the day I watched that people seem to agree that day wasn't the one in question.

I have my own issues from one of the shows just prior to Devon http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

buryinghill2

Jun. 6, 2004, 05:38 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Silver Bells:
Ms Hunter, Monday was probably the most consistent day of judging throughout the show. In my opinion, when this duo who judged liked a horse, they liked a horse! As the week went on, it got pretty bad. We all have to take off the rose colored glasses and call it for what it was... poor judging! I sat beside the judges, behind the judges, and I still can't understand their decisions. Neither could a dozen or so around me.
Now that Devon has come to an end, I hope this topic continues on, change is definitely needed. The managers of Devon need to realize the negative impact this problem caused. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Negative impact on who? People who show at Devon go there knowing that politics will play a role in the final results. It's like that all year. Judging hunters at that level is a balancing act between judging what you see, and an always present degree of politics. Right or wrong, it's just the way it is. So where is the negative impact? Missy Clark might have chosen to speak with her wallet if she truly had an issue with the judging, but one trainer staying home won't hurt Devon.
There might be more complaining back at the barn, but that's the full extent of it. It's no different than any other show all year long. There is always complaining about the judging! Some of it is justified, some is not.
Devon will not feel any financial backlash because of a judging controversy. It's not like this hasn't happened before!

Ata

Jun. 6, 2004, 06:04 AM

I think that rather than complain to us, which is good because these are all problems that we deal with, we should complain to higher authoritys. How can someone say it's bad taste to complain about judges and that 'that's just the way it is'. That way is wrong and it is also wrong to sit back and do nothing.

Silver Bells

Jun. 6, 2004, 06:35 AM

I beg to differ. Devon definitely felt a financial backlash this year. There were many major players absent, and for the first time I saw an abundance of empty stalls. Call it politics, dislike of judging choices, or whatever. Disgruntled exhibitors and spectators cannot have a positive impact.
Besides, rumor has it, that the Devon board is trying to coax Gene Mische into getting involved in the future. What does that tell you.... just food for thought.

buryinghill1

Jun. 7, 2004, 05:29 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Silver Bells:
I beg to differ. Devon definitely felt a financial backlash this year. There were many major players absent, and for the first time I saw an abundance of empty stalls. Call it politics, dislike of judging choices, or whatever. Disgruntled exhibitors and spectators cannot have a positive impact.
Besides, rumor has it, that the Devon board is trying to coax Gene Mische into getting involved in the future. What does that tell you.... just food for thought. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

record attendance. thats the money
burger sales
ice cream
vendors
sponsorship
follow the money...

the horses bring in the spectators
not money
they're big losers for a spectator-based show

do y'all remember who won when Ralph judged at devon? payback...
it's said the leadline is the most politically judged event of all!
missy, i hope you had a great time at Saugerties http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

as for SJI, never... they have better things to do... like Lake Placid which is WAY oversold (again) and WEF...
yes, Devon needs some housecleaning (just look at the lack of saddlebreds!) and new blood...

wtywmn4

Jun. 7, 2004, 05:47 AM

As usual, right on the money buryinghill1. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif Hopefully after more than one year of this, they will house clean.

kansaschester

Jun. 7, 2004, 08:32 AM

As an exhibitor and a spectator, I think it would be helpful to standardize the relative severity of various faults assuming the quality of the horses are equal. Is a late change worse than a hard rub, etc. If these technicalities are sorted out (understanding that there is a certain premium for quality), the whole judging process would be easier to follow by both exhibitors and spectators alike.

Chsnt Mare

Jun. 7, 2004, 10:53 AM

I think that the judges should always sit away from each other with no communication during the horse show. Place one judge on one side of the ring and one of the other. Make them call in their scores and then someone else can tally them up. It can't stop the favortism or keep them from discussing certain horses, trainers, or riders prior to the horse show, but at least they can't compare scores while the show is taking place.

J. Turner

Jun. 7, 2004, 01:33 PM

Why do they bother to have the park classes at Devon? The top horses (from the ones I've seen in Saddle & Bridle) don't come. Is it a tribute to Mrs. Wheeler since she was involved in that world as well as the hunter world?

Didn't Devon used to hold the stake hunter classes in the evening?

Re: politics. I think it is naive to think it doesn't happen. Someone mentioned skating. If it can happen at the Olympic level of skating (proven) then why wouldn't it happen in horses? Heck, it's less regulated than skating and plenty of money involved. I'm not saying it's rampant, but I can see how it would happen. Politics happen everywhere - look at the NCAA problems. I've been asked to pass football players at the high school level. The thing that I don't understand is why it's a faux pas to mention it. In the media at large, getting the dirt out is a challenge and the best story. Do you equestrian journalists ever ask the riders/trainers about questionable calls? I don't think any reporter would shy away from asking an NBA coach about a bad foul call, or Nancy Kerrigan about Oksana Baiul's scores, or Joe Torre about a particular umpire's strike zone. Why can't we see more questions asked in the articles we read? These should not be off limits. BTW, I can write, so if anyone wants to hire me as a freelancer, I'm more than happy to ask the hard questions.

All one can ask of a home plate ump is that he's consistent in his strike zone. In skating, judges have the artistic score to put in their own opinion on style - soft and balletic or more athletic and tougher (ie - Michelle Kwan vs. Irina Slutskaya). Consistency is the key. I understand the concept of a nicer horse placing with an error. Michelle (and others at the top) has consistently beat a second flight skater with a fall on lutz-toe combo, depending on whether it interrupts the flow of the program, because of her overall quality. But just the same, Eastern block politics still occur, if you choose to listen to Dick Button, who is not one to "button" his lip. In the last worlds there wasn't a representative from North America on the judging panel.

Not that smaller shows aren't important, but at the top level, there is no reason that a money trail shouldn't be followed on sufficient suspicion at the level of qualifying shows or A shows. There's too much money and heart involved.

Drifter

Jun. 7, 2004, 03:44 PM

I've been following this thread since Devon and I guess I will speak up since I have to agree that judging in general is questionable a lot of the time. I watched most of the Big Eq @ Devon and it was predictable. There were long distances, late changes, swaps, twists down lines- that got top spots. I also saw beautiful trips by some lesser named jr. riders get nothing at all or a low call back. It seems to never change. It is discouraging for a lot of us out here, and I wonder why do we keep doing this? There are a lot out there that work equally as hard, put heart and soul and $$ into it , but never get heard much. Sorry to seem down about it, been doing this for a long time. Kind of losing faith in the system. Things don't seem to change. Maybe this forum will have some impact on the industry and judges. One can only hope.
Funny thing about Devon leadline and politics. I do agree. Still my favorite class to watch though. The outfits, the kids, the ponies. Cute!! Years ago, my daughter did this class and I lead her! We had done it before, so I knew
how the game was played, but we were just there for fun and the Devon blue!!! (light blue that is). I figured with me leading and those BNT's around me, there was no chance of a "real" ribbon. Well, she got Second!!!!The girl who got first was on the Small Pony Champion from the next ring, but we got Second!!! We were thrilled! Perhaps the hope of a legitimate real ribbon has kept us coming back!!!!!

Janet

Jun. 18, 2004, 07:03 AM

Earlier I said,<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>OK, I am confused by terminology. Several people have said that the "better quality horse", the "fancier horse" or just the "better horse" that has a minor error should win over the "less quality", "less fancy" "lesser" horse that doesn't make an error.

What does this mean? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The commentary in today's (online) issue of COTH answers my question. NAd more. Nice article.
The Open Numerical System Is More Than Just Numbers (http://www.chronofhorse.com/bw_rounds/04/bill_jun18.html)

867-5309

Jun. 18, 2004, 07:52 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by J. Turner:
Why do they bother to have the park classes at Devon? The top horses (from the ones I've seen in Saddle & Bridle) don't come. Is it a tribute to Mrs. Wheeler since she was involved in that world as well as the hunter world?
. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1) Park is a division with ASB's- like A/O or 1st yr greens, Park does not define all ASB performance divisions.

2) Actually most ASB participants at Devon are the top horses in the country, and/or locals from PA/VA/NJ. The KY folks come up for the owners who enjoy the tradition of Devon- multi-generation ASB enthusiasts- Wheeler, Robson, etc

We were going to bring a young horse (we have ASBs) this year and couldn't do it- thank god we didn't go, I had my son the day of the class! It is hard for us to leave 16 training horses standing around to take 1 or 2 two a multi day show, which is why it was hard for us to do Devon this year too. There are not enough divisions to get us there with the 8-10 we need to justify taking the whole week off.

Bumpkin

Jun. 18, 2004, 08:54 AM

Where are the results to Devon posted?

HorseeHunter

Jun. 18, 2004, 09:03 AM

on ryegate.com

odilon

Jul. 2, 2004, 02:58 PM

Did anybody read the article on numerical system of the 18 Th. of June issue?
You'll see why they do what ever they want.
People like the one that wrote the article should have their cards revoke. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sleepy.gif I'm surprized that no one piked that up

Snowbird

Jul. 2, 2004, 05:10 PM

I haven't had time to read the article but I heard about it. Who is the author?

pwynnnorman

Jul. 2, 2004, 05:18 PM

Moroney, Snowbird!

I gotta repeat this since the thread I started died fast.

From AQHA:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>“We are committed to seeing that this class is judged by the above-mentioned rules. The only way exhibitors can compete on an equitable playing field is when they know they are being judged according to the written rules.” <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This Devon controversy AGAIN shows this! Look, folks, how the HECK do you know who to show under and who not to and what the HECK does that HAVE TO DO WITH SPORT.

SPORT, PEOPLE, SPORT!!!

Geezum, don't you get it, folks? No, you can't eliminate subjectivity, but chosen who to show under and who NOT to judge under? Have ANY of you who go that route even put one thought to what it MEANS? To whom it effects? To the ramifications when it comes to trainers and show schedules and awards and all that?

Folks, it is NOT a desireable thing to have to factor in bias in ANY endeavor, sport or otherwise--but especially "sport." Gosh, some of you act like it IS desireable. Yes, it's inescapable, but the way some of you seem to actually condone it. Geesh! What makes you (and, I know, I've said this before...) think this particular sport is so special that negative characterstics that other sports WORK on minimizing are actually acceptable in this one?

I strongly suspect it is only acceptable to those who LIKE being dependent on trainers, every step of the way. If you think about the ramifications of your "chose who to show under" laissez faire attitude...well, can you see that far into it? Can you? Can you look beyond the quick an casual and see the long term effects, folks?

Ugh. Just TRY to explain this ridiculous situation and some of these views of it to people outside the industry. Just try!

Snowbird

Jul. 2, 2004, 05:22 PM

How exciting the Moroney view strikes again and he has been annointed to be our Monarch. All Hail the king!

Wynn haven't you figured that out under the Moroney system you go where the guy is who sold you the horse or who's friends with the judge.

What fair play in judging another radical concept. Pity the poor judges who are honest, no VIP's want to show under them they might not win.

Scarlet 1

Jul. 2, 2004, 05:26 PM

Snowbird, If you were not so shrill and clearly biased you would probably get more people to listen to you.

Snowbird

Jul. 2, 2004, 05:31 PM

Sorry Scarlet I am over tired and over worked and out of patience tonight. So you'll have to forgive a cranky old lady for being shrill.

Yes! I am clearly biased and very proud of it. I see no benefit in being unbiased when it comes to my rights, my freedom and a fair service for my dollar.

Tonight I am not in a mood to be tolerant and look the other way at things that are just plain wrong. So if you wish please write it off to an attack of senility.

pwynnnorman

Jul. 2, 2004, 05:38 PM

Actually, Vikki, one of these days I'm going to do THE definitive statistical analysis of show results that will be utterly shocking. Of course, those who think statistics can be manipulated with discount it, but there are ways to calculate the probability that something that occurs is due to specific factors or due to chance. The higher the statistics, the more likely the results are NOT due to chance.

I have noticed in reading results, especially on the various newer winter circuits, "clusters" of successes (not of individual victors, but of, well, shall we just call it "related" winners) that simply cannot be random (i.e. due to mere chance). Of course, some trainer could just suddenly have gotten into a groove such that his/her childrens hunter, A/A and a pony or two ALL are hot as hot can be and collect the championships or reserves...but it's really weird how often that tends to happen.

Chances are, it isn't all that noticed because who has so much time on their hands to read ALL of the show results write ups, week in and week out. I haven't, not lately. But I did at one point and the frequency of these clustered results really, really made me wonder.

I could be dead wrong--or the "relatedness" of the results might indeed be due to being "hot" (or other factors, like poor turnout, weak competition, etc.) at this show or that show so that one trainer gets multiple (the triple or quadruple ones are the ones I couldn't help but notice) championships/reserves...but, anyway, how could an inquiring mind NOT wonder?

bubblese

Jul. 2, 2004, 05:56 PM

One can think of it like gymnastics. A more difficult routine starts with a starting value of 10 and then mistakes are taken off of that. A less difficult routine starts with a lower starting value, so even if they are perfect they might not beat the more difficult routine.

So a top horse starts a round with 100, while a nice horse might start with 90. Hence the one starting with 100 might rub a rail and put them at 91 and the 90 horse might be perfect, but still lose.

Just like people, every horse has a different level of ability and training. It is just the way it works. I would love to be a CEO of a company and make tons of money, but I don't have the ability and training to do so.

odilon

Jul. 2, 2004, 06:45 PM

Happy that the old girls came by http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
The system stinks and there is no other way to put it. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
I can not believe that the Chronicle let this man post this piece of http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif article on judging hunters

PERFORMANCE is the main criteria for judging hunters. Good technical sound round.That's what makes a good class.
Not a high class whatever thing that doesn't stick it together but still get's the score because of his reputation.
Everybody has is bad rounds espacially the good ones. That doesn't give them the right to be in the top. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Snowbird

Jul. 2, 2004, 07:15 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>People like the one that wrote the article should have their cards revoke. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just a reminder in future days that this was not me and it is a quote. We have frequently talked about the criteria for licensing judges. I for one was totally opposed to the fast tracking of anyone because they happen to know the right people who are all so wise and all knowing.

The Chronicle like everyone else is entitled to an error every so often. I think when they endorsed USHJA they made a big one.I suspect however that under the freedom of speach amendment they would accept an article from any of you so inclined for their Horsemen's Forum. I for one will not bite the hand that gives us this BB on which we can entertain ourselves.

I for one believe that there is nothing wrong with being opinionated as long as all points of view can be heard equally. I would not personally determine who is a good judge except with my checkbook when I hire them, or my wallet when they are judging somewhere else.

I do object to self serving self appointed experts who think they should make the decisions that control the value of my investment or my livlihood. But, I blame all of you for your silence and in that way you acquiese and accept mediocrity as quality.

You need to make your opinions known to the people that have the vote while we have none. I hope that if the NHJA and it's democracy is accepted that we will have the Judge's Clinics on a rotating basis in every zone so that the trainers, the parents of competitors and the riders can all attend and learn exactly what are the standards under which we are being judged.

I see nothing in our specifications that permit it to be a beauty contest and it is a performance discipline.

Katie

Jul. 3, 2004, 04:27 AM

Wow... more whining.

The article written on the open numerical system makes perfect sense. For years, trainers have been trying to explain to me why my older horse didn't get better ribbons. She'd walk in the ring and because she wasn't fancy (i.e. great mover, tons of presence), she'd have to PROVE that she could win. My new horse is just as talented as she is over the jumps (both are beautifully stylish), but when he walks in the ring he turns heads. The judges usually WANT to pin him high. Because I make my share of mistakes, he only ribbons about 50% of the time. For example, if he makes a slight error like a spook or tail swish, he might get a low ribbon over a horse that jumps poorly or moves like an eggbeater. (Of course we're talking in classes where more than just a handful put in prize-worthy rounds).

This makes me feel like the system works. If I put in a perfect round, I will be rewarded as such. If I make a mistake, I will be downgraded. We've complained for years that we're tired of producing robotic horses that don't have the spark. Now that judges are basing their scores on brilliance, you guys are complaining. What would you rather have?

And Odilon - your comment was rude and uncalled for. Obviously you must have a personal vendetta against this gentleman.

Snowbird

Jul. 3, 2004, 05:56 AM

Well Katie perhaps the rest of the competitors are not so clever as you. Wouldn't it be really nice if we all got to go to the clinics so the everyone understood why the concept is better.

I think any system might work if it is consistent and all the judges use the same system and then post their cards so we all know what we did wrong or right.

odilon

Jul. 3, 2004, 06:12 AM

It always surprize me when adults beleive's in the http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif of their trainer.
Poor judging is a fact of life now because of this kind of dialogue over the Quality or "brillance" of a horse.
These experts are ask to judge a PERFORMANCE Not to give reward on something that didn't even do it's course yet but fell in love with.
If they do so they should be accountable of their actions.
This article should be brought in front of the judge commite. It's bias, it is not based on good basic horsmanship.
They work from a score card and that should be the only reference point to the judge.They don't have a space for presence or brillance on it. If it should play a determine part of it then the judge card should be different.
These are the basic A.B,C of it. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

QueenMother

Jul. 3, 2004, 06:21 AM

Consider who you're quoting, Snowbird. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Snowbird

Jul. 3, 2004, 07:04 AM

Just wanted to keep the record clear! Things have a way of identity transferral. I try, perhaps not always successfully all the time to stay away from chastising people but rather the system under which they were trained, licensed, approved or function.

I think everyone has a right to be heard and the more diverse the opinions the better. Otherwise things fester under the surface and become much worse than they are.

pwynnnorman

Jul. 3, 2004, 08:47 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> The judges usually WANT to pin him high. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But, in a way, Katie, that's EXACTLY the problem. Walk in on a plain horse and what? The judges DON'T want to pin it high, so either you go out and shell out for the most fancy (ergo, expensive) horse you can afford...or you may as well not even walk into the ring?

Imagine, if you will, the small-time trainer with GREAT TALENT. He/she can put together magnificent horses--and they even jump BRILLIANTLY. But they aren't fancy--good movers, but not the super fancy ones that it takes super rich clients to have in your barn.

In the system you describe (which I'm NOT saying IS the actual system, but is close), that trainer may as well not bother aspire to reach the top of the sport--not until he/she finds a way to get richer clients.

That sucks and that's why OTHER organization's (like the AQHA) WORK ON LEVELING THE FIELD...and maybe, just maybe, why "our" organization--which is run almost exclusively by those with very wealthy clients--doesn't.

Granted, you did say that your horse pins down when you err, which is why I said I'm not sure your initial statement reflects the actual system in place...but, sadly, that's the IMPRESSION that everyone has (and I've said before, the problem is, IMO, more a matter of impression that fact, since without real research to identify the pervasiveness of the problem, there's no way to really say, one way or another).

Standardizing (and publicizing) at least SOME of the judging criteria would insure that EVERYONE KNOWS and can folow them--even spectators in the stands...say, wouldn't it be GREAT if it were possible to write up a little blurb in the big shows' programs that described the standard penalties applied to VISIBLE errors on course (which they DO DO in reining, BTW).

No one is saying that rounds must be judged mechanically. No one is saying that judges shouldn't have some subjective input. What is sought is ENOUGH standardization such that EVERYONE can be "in the know" at any show (instead of having to know what judge prefers what, which only trainers who show, show, show really CAN know...y'know?..Joe Smoe going to three big shows a year sure can't, can he?...

...And can be judged enough on TALENT (not funding) to at least be able to aspire to compete at the top levels--like jumpers, BTW. I--and I think quite a few others--believe that a fancy horse should indeed lose to the plainer horse if it has any VISIBLE technical errors--or if the fancy horse doesn't jump as brilliantly (the dead heads). Why? Because that's understandable to ALL and unmistakable to ALL (not just those "in the know").

xegeba

Jul. 3, 2004, 09:32 AM

Confused here,pwynn http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif Are you saying that in the Hunters... a bad mover, sloppy jumper, bad attitude horse that goes around with no technical faults, should pin over the brilliant mover, awesome jumper, lovely attitude horse that had a bad rub or a late change? I really am asking a sincere question, so I can better understand what the argument is really all about.

Palisades

Jul. 3, 2004, 05:08 PM

I second what was said above- not too long ago, there were a LOT of complaints about robotic horses winning over those who are of much higher quality but swish a tail or have a rub. On the drugging threads, everyone railed against a system that forced people to lunge the spark out of their horses and cried about the need for change in judging standards. Now, a lot of the same people are complaining that a really quality horse with a slight error is beating a lesser quality horse that lays down a technically accurate trip.

Make up your minds, people- either you want brilliance rewarded, or you want consistency rewarded, but don't blame the judges for having to choose one or the other.

Ruby G. Weber

Jul. 3, 2004, 06:34 PM

Well said, Pallisades.

Hunters are judged, just as dressage and figure skating and gymnastics are, with certain standards. A rail down, a missed change, leaving a shoulder behind are all faults that would eliminate even Winged Pegasus from the jog.

Yet we must accept a certain amount of subjectivity. Just as the Supreme Court Judges may differ on certain issues, hunter judges find some faults more offensive than others. (I for one, did not agree with the awarding of the first 100 score (or perfect score) as I did not think the horse deserving.)

If a horse with "the look" trots into the show ring demonstrating movement most can only envy, why shouldn't said horse be 10 or 15 points ahead before it jumps the first jump? If the horse trots from the top of it's shoulder, good chance it's going to use it's front in a classical manner. If that horse has a long, low, sweeping gallop, propelling itself with it's hind legs, good chance it's going to walk the lines.

Most judges at the level of shows such as Devon have trained or ridden or somehow been associated with a major winner. (That is certainly true of the two who officiated in the regular hunter divisions at Devon this year.) In other words, they know a good one when they see it. They are more likely to pin their "type" over another type.

Without a doubt there are some bad apples in the bunch, that's unavoidable. In my experience, judges who are not knowledgeable enough or who do play favorites don't end up judging much or for very long.

One last point. No one can do much complaining until they have walked in their shoes. Sit in the judges' box and look at things from their persepective before you throw stones.

P.S.
No, I don't have my card.

LLDM

Jul. 3, 2004, 07:07 PM

Why can't we have it both ways? Go watch a the WEG Grand Prix dressage rides. Thise horses are amazing movers, incredibly gifted, but they must still be near perfect to win. Will a single small mistake put one out of the running? SOMETIMES it will. Is it perfect, no. But everyone can see how and why the rides were judged as they were.

And yes, sometimes it just comes down to "more brilliance". But anyone who cares to can see the scores. All of them.

Yes, I want it all. And I think the hunters are up to it. But it won't happen unless we ask for it. I'm asking.

SCFarm

Palisades

Jul. 3, 2004, 07:26 PM

If you want it all, LLDM, then perhaps it's time to focus on the people producing and training the horses, not the judges. They can only reward what they see in front of them, and they aren't always given the whole package from 10 horses in every class.

xegeba

Jul. 3, 2004, 07:48 PM

Can we compare a Dressage test to a Hunter Round?

OLD A/O

Jul. 3, 2004, 08:18 PM

The showing of hunters is basically you are, as a rider or owner, offering your horse to be judged by another person. You must remember each time your horse walks into the ring you are asking the judge what do you think of this horse and his perfomance this time in the ring. There are no points for knees around his ears or points for anything else -it is the whole picture that they are judging. I do not care what everyone else says the rider in the hunter ring is important to. If you seem to have to make major adjustments or you as a rider makes a mistake that the horse covers up for you - you will not win.

Let me add this little footnote: I rode for a short time at the same barn as Susie Schoellkop did ( she is about 5 years older than I am). I have alway known her as a very honest and direct person. You may have not liked what she said but you could always go to the bank on it. I have also shown in front of her since we have each gone our own ways and she was always a very good and fair judge.

Other

Jul. 3, 2004, 08:26 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by xegeba:
Can we compare a Dressage test to a Hunter Round? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know if "we" as a collective unit can, but I certainly can NOT.

In a dressage test, there are specific tasks that are to be performed at pretty much every second (and location) of the ring. A variety of questions are asked-asked specifically and directly.

In the hunters, there are 8 jumps, with set distances between most. Your task is to jump them and get the steps (which shouldn't be a challenge on a well prepared horse). Everything else is up to your own finesse. As you will.

Until we start handing out course diagrams that say, "Enter at ingate at working walk, trot for 180 degrees of a 20 meter circle then proceed to canter at spooky pink flower pots, continue to fence one, land and get lead change 2 strides before turning corner at hot dog stand bla bla bla..." it's hard for me to compare.

xegeba

Jul. 3, 2004, 08:38 PM

So Apples and Oranges, Other? How many people does it take to make a "WE". IMHO... The Hunter ring is a four-legged beauty contest. Not too terribly difficult stuff being asked, but terribly difficult to make it look easy. This takes TWO atheletes.

Saddlebag

Jul. 4, 2004, 01:59 AM

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif Why Why Whyis it so difficult to accept the notion that Hunters are judged,not scored.Hunter classes are judged on the quality of the performance and the quality of the horse. Those of you who want to equate a hunter round to a dressage ride, are way off base. Dressage is scored by evaluating a horse's state of training, against an ideal for that training level. Hunters are judged by evaluating the horses in any given class against each other and in relation to a standard of performance and quality. How complicated is that? The point is to reward a good jumping, elegant moving, quality horse who appears to be a pleasant enjoyable and safe ride. Such an animal, when ridden well enough to execute a smooth round, will and shouldprevail over a clunker unless the quality horse commits an error or errors sufficient to negate it's innate superiority. Depending on the differences in quality among a group of horses in a class, and assuming that the clunker lays down a technically flawless trip, (which rarely happens to any horse, no matter how fancy)that horse's position in the jog order will depend on the severity and number of any MINOR errors made by the fancier horses.If there is a huge difference in quality between the horses, the fancier ones can beat the clunker with one or two such minor errors. If all the horses in a class are more evenly matched in terms of quality, then the slightly fancier horse does not enjoy such a wide margin for error. How hard is thatfor people to understand?

Sure...the bigger your bankroll, the easier it is to get a quality horse. But the price of the horses' is not part of the class specs. You would be amazed at the number of very successful hunters who were "discovered" in a field in the boonies, purchased for a pittance and then with the benefit of a good training program and decent riding, became famous.

I would love to hear less whining about supposed inequities of the system and imagined corruption by the judges, and see more Jrs. and Amateurs (and their trainers) seeking out these "hidden gems" and then learning how to train and ride them well enough to be contenders. Lots of exhibitors do it that way and everybody cheers when they win! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

And remember...the trainers who shriek the loudest about a rotten system and bad judging, are often the ones who are the worst horseman with the sleaziest ethics...and usually are clueless as well!

Tackpud

Jul. 4, 2004, 03:40 AM

Saddlebag - excellent post! (where is the hand clapping graemlin when I need it.) That is completely the point - judging versus scoring. When I walk in the ring I am asking the judge's opinion of my horse that trip, that day. I"m paying for it and I'm getting it. That's all - nothing more, nothing less. I may not always agree, but that's what I'm paying for and it's my choice to go to the show or stay home.

wtywmn4

Jul. 4, 2004, 04:41 AM

Well said Saddlebag! Those horses are out there, and they still can be found. Its taking the time, and enjoying the process of developing them, this is what it's all about. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

odilon

Jul. 4, 2004, 05:03 AM

I for one just hope for a change, I want more clarity, and more respect to the exhibitor.

A couple of years ago at the poney finals up in Virginia, the score board would put up the points of each pony besides the three judges. I remember how one judge was so out of line, and unconsistant compared to the two others. That Judge was reprimended and it was the last year they had that scoring at the pony finals, now they put the cumulative score.

My point his that if you are an official you should be responsable,and like at this year Wimbleton if you are out of line you should be kicked out.
A judge should be suspended as are the exhibitors for not following the rules. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

QueenMother

Jul. 4, 2004, 05:09 AM

I know I'm going to regret asking this, odilon, but how should the judges show "more respect to the exhibitor?" and what rules are you suggesting that the judges are not following and therefore they should be suspended?

Boberry

Jul. 4, 2004, 07:13 AM

I found it to be a benefit to sit with a judge for a day or help volunteer at a show. Although not always required there is a score card. A good book that breaks this down is Anna Jane White-Mullin's -Judging Hunters and Hunter Seat Equitation. Hunters are scored and I think most judges do a great job. I think it would be nice if all judges cards were posted like the dressage scores so we could all learn from our judged performances. We could also see the reasoning for the class winners. I agree with Odilon. Judges should be held accountable for their scores and following the rules. We pay for it, shouldn't we get it in writing? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

odilon

Jul. 4, 2004, 08:03 AM

This is just a few ideas:

I think that with all the video taping going around the shows. It could be a reference.
That would be a way to randomly check on judges.

Exhibitors have at the show office forms to fill up when they have concern on the judges.Or any official at the show.

I think that if an official cumulates to many report forms, that official should be brought in front of his pears for review.

That is showing respect to the exhibitors.

Exhibitors are the first one to be suspended or find. Officials should be to. They should be accountable of their actions when officiating. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Molly99

Jul. 4, 2004, 09:05 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by odilon:
I for one just hope for a change, I want more clarity, and more respect to the exhibitor.

A couple of years ago at the poney finals up in Virginia, the score board would put up the points of each pony besides the three judges. I remember how one judge was so out of line, and unconsistant compared to the two others. That Judge was reprimended and it was the last year they had that scoring at the pony finals, now they put the cumulative score.

My point his that if you are an official you should be responsable,and like at this year Wimbleton if you are out of line you should be kicked out.
A judge should be suspended as are the exhibitors for not following the rules. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, they have always scored pony finals. And the individual scores for each judge are available. Whether they are displayed on the socreboard would depend on the scoreboard they are using. Not all have the software to deal with that type of scoring.

KY two years ago listed each judges score.

And unless you are privy to the conversation, how do you KNOW the judge was reprimanded?

QueenMother

Jul. 4, 2004, 09:14 AM

That videotaping suggestion -- you mean to check whether the judge is sleeping (which I agree is not respectful of the exhibitors) or whether you, odilon, would judge a class differently than the judge? Maybe your mom's videotape of you would be helpful to the judge or the judge's "pears". (Of course, you would have to make sure that your mom or all the other random videotapers video all the rounds from exactly the spot where the judge is sitting) -- or maybe you'd like to have an official checking-up-on-the-judge videographer paid by the show (i.e., paid by the exhibitors) and then a checking-up-on-the-judge judge (also paid for by the exhibitors) to look at every video of every round to make sure that you approve of the placings?

This is a subjective sport. If all it took to win was getting to your spots for every jump, getting your strides, and getting your lead changes, then we could judge it like leadline -- everyone who is technically correct would get a blue ribbon.

Complaint forms in the show office? Let's hire someone to make sure (I guess the same person or persons who have reviewed all of your mom's videotapes of all of the rounds) that the complaints are legitimate, and not sour grapes whining about placement. How many complaints should an official "cumulate" before going before his (or her) "pears"? Should your complaint be enough?

Who says officials are not "accountable of (sic) their actions when officiating?" You want to see the judges card? Complain about your ribbon? Report a judge that is sleeping, talking on the cell phone? Go to the steward.

odilon

Jul. 4, 2004, 09:47 AM

These were suggestions to bring in more clarity to a situation.

It shouldn't be based on subjectivity but PERFRORMANCE

The said judge himself told me that he was reprimanded.

About the cards, please it's a miss mash of scribbles. No way to put them in reference to an other judges card.

I feel that it should be more clear to everybody involved. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

PineTreeFarm

Jul. 4, 2004, 10:11 AM

Perhaps if the rule book better reflected the current trends or realties in judging it would be easier for all to understand.
Examples from the rule book:
Types of obstacles. This section still refers to chicken coops,aiken, hedge and simulation of obstacles found in the hunting field.
Performance: An even hunting pace.
Faults: Some faults are listed as either Major or Minor faults depending on the judges opinion.These are things like missing a lead change, spooking
Some faults are listed as 'may or may not' be considered as faults. This category includes light rubs, late changes, swapping leads.

The COTH article which was mentioned explains clearly how the author judges and uses numerical scoring. The only problem is (at least to me) his method uses a determination of the 'quality' of the horse to arrive at a score range the horse is capable of achieving. Part of the 'quality factor' seems to be how attractive the horse is and he is not necessarily discussing conformation classes. 'Quality' is not addressed in the rules. The article goes on to say that an 'A' quality horse with minor mistakes will still beat a 'B' quality horse with a 'technically great' round.

I don't think comparisons to other sports where a degree of difficulty is used in part to determine a score are appropriate as everyone is performing the same course or 'routine' in a Hunter class.

If the article reflects how the majority of classes are scored, OK, but the rules should reflect this. If there is confusion or disagreement amongst exhibitors how can we expect spectators to have a clue what is happening in a class?

Riggs

Jul. 4, 2004, 10:11 AM

Ok, I have read through every single thread on here, and it seems to me that there are three things to note:

1. As usual, judging horses appears to be like everything else in the horse world and that old saw - 'two horse people, three opinions' and it is the difference in opinions that often gets people's ire up. That and 'Is it Opinion or is it Bias? Then, why not remove the 'opinion' aspect of it? Read on.

2. Until some ruling association realizes the money that the hunter discipline puts into the equine world and that the owners (as opposed to the trainers) are the ones to be concerned about, little will be done to change anything. Not sure how to do that since the trainers seem to have a bigger voice than the owners who fund the whole thing.

3. That if every 'infraction' (e.g. swapping, head shaking, rubs, rhythm, etc etc) had a deduction associated with it and all of these points were posted just like in dressage, that would take away the frustration for both the judges and the competitors and resolve a lot of the issues brought up here. It does not take more time to do this than to make any mark on a card.

And also, judging is hard and while I do agree that some judges may be biased (like anything else in life, there are always some bad apples to spoil things for everyone), please dont tar and feather all.

I once asked to see the judge's card after my horse showed on the line. You would think I had asked to see his weanie!

Khamian Farms

Jul. 4, 2004, 10:45 AM

I have watched many a hunter round and have learned a lot. There are many good judges, and in my limited experience there are a few very biased ones.

Videos would not be a bad thing - like an "instant replay". I was once at a show at where the judging was so biased, it was an absolute insult to the competitors. A pony ran out to the left of the first jump in the line when the wind blew over the decorative plant. Judge allowed re do of the entire line and then pinned the one with a run out second - when several of the other competiors (class of 9 or 10 entries) had the same problem, but their ponies jumped around (and did not get a re do). Yes, said pony was "quality" and should have been in top ribbons, as long as it performed. It should not have been in top ribbons in that particular class - and that fact would be obvious even to someone not familiar with the intricacies of hunter judging - I mean, this was a really obvious mistake.

After complaints,management approached said judge, and judge claimed she allowed the re-do because it was not the plant, but judge's dog, that ran into the ring and startled the pony. No one else saw the dog. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Watched another judge (a quite prominent judge and trainer) chat with the jump crew the entire class - barely looking in the ring. Pinned a pair first, that had been off course - luckily BNT whose student got the ribbon is a class act - and pointed out the mistake. Judge didn't change the pinning, said it was not off course http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

These were "AA" shows in FL - I was really surprised to see such blatant favoritism, but I guess I should not have been.

These are just two examples in my very limited experience - I do talk with my feet - and recently avoided both weeks of an accessible show because one or the other of the above referenced two would be judging each week. We used to live in S. FL - but now we really have to plan more to horse show, as there are not many rated shows nearby.

The show wasn't disappointed that we didn't participate, probably didn't even notice - but my kid was sure disappointed that the only show available to us for the next few months (and near our new home) was being judged each week by judges we have sworn we will not show under again. We seriously reconsidered that stance, because we had the time and the money, the trainer and the equine partner, to show those weeks. There are a lot of variables on all sides.

Julie
www.caspianpony.com (http://www.caspianpony.com)

dogchushu

Jul. 4, 2004, 12:47 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by odilon:
These were suggestions to bring in more clarity to a situation.

It shouldn't be based on subjectivity but PERFRORMANCE

The said judge himself told me that he was reprimanded.

About the cards, please it's a miss mash of scribbles. No way to put them in reference to an other judges card.

I feel that it should be more clear to everybody involved. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Am I reading this correctly that you would prefer a set standard points added/points deducted and making officials more "referees" than "judges?" So at the end you'd get a set of scores for "movement," "manners," "jump #1," etc.?

If so, I hope you recognize that you're still going to get a subjectivity. It would still be a human being's opinion on whether or not a fault occured, the quality of the jumps, the quality of movement, etc.

I fail to see how making judges more "referees" than actual judges would eliminate this bias you complain of. Other sports are supposed to be judged on "performance" with set standards for points added or deducted. And you still hear allegations of bias.

Look at boxing, all the judges have to do is score the rounds: did a hit land or not. And you never hear of poor judging, politics, corruption or bias there. Never. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Hunter judging isn't so much a matter of adding up your score on each element and seeing where the totals fall. It's more your overall performance. Unlike dressage where you can (conceivably--it depends on competition) make up for one bad part of the test by doing stellar everywhere else, you can't really make up for one disaster fence with 7 good ones. However, that doesn't mean a really good mover and jumper isn't allowed a couple minor errors and still give a better overall impression than a lesser horse who doesn't have minor errors. It's a matter of the judge deciding who is the best horse in each class.

I'm not sure that appearance should really factor in, but movement and jumping talent--that's what hunters is all about!

If there is bias and the best horses aren't getting their proper placings, then that is wrong. But that should be addressed through the proper channels, asking to steward to talk to the judge and then filing a report if you still think there's a problem. But don't go changing the whole sport. If judges aren't placing according to the standards in place now (and I'm not convinced that's the case), I don't know that they'll place according to some different set of standards.

If you have problems with a judge at a show, complain about that judge to the proper people. Unless you remove all human judgement calls, people are always going to come to have different opinions about whether a particular call/placing was correct. Heck, every Monday morning our office is a-buzz with whether a particular referee in that season's sport made the right call or not. Fans of different teams will watch the same replay over and over again--and always come to the conclusion that the ref should have decided in favor of their team.

findeight

Jul. 4, 2004, 01:01 PM

That "nasty in some minds" Quality thing will keep coming up in the Hunters..as it does with Western Pleasure, Five Gaited or anything on the line/halter.

Bottom line is these classes are looking for the best mover with the best jump.

The 10 mover with a crack back jump and absolutely etheral lead changes with a rub or two? Do you drop him down behind a POS mover with a horrendous jump because he did not hit anything?

How about the same 10 mover and jumper that dropped a lead behind in the mud by the in gate? Want to put him behind a 7 mover/jumper who nailed all the lead changes..and got deep?

Hunters are a beauty contest. They search for that fluid mover that melts around a fence and sinks into lead changes-if they have a bobble or two, they still define the elegant Hunter.

They will and should beat Mr. Average according to the rules which seek the true great moving and great jumping Hunter..and forgive some minor errors when the style just blows everybody else right out of the water.

Other

Jul. 4, 2004, 01:29 PM

ALERT! ALERT!

Big news fresh from the circuit!!! I almost fell off my seat when I heard this, and immediately ran to my computer to let y'all know. This is big news for all you anti-hunter judging folks, so read closely. I think we might just have an answer for ya after all.

Apparently, the USEF has this crazy, innovative, cutting edge performance class that SCORES rounds using a totally objective, standardized method based on the degree to which horse and rider adhere to a pre-determined, accessible-to-anyone set of instructions.

The judge actually posts a piece of paper by the ingate that states EXACTLY what he or she wants to see in the class. The rider that best meets the pre-stated demands of the judge WINS!

And, what's more, they announce the score after every round. AND they penalize each horse the exact same way for specific errors, regardless of whether or not he or she is a "clunker" or a "world beater".

I can't remember exactly what they call this though...hmm... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Oh yeah! I got it! JUMPERS!!!!!!!!!

Riggs

Jul. 4, 2004, 01:43 PM

The aspects you have brought up - fluidity etc, could all be aspects agreed on for judging the 'perfect' hunter round. If people dont agree with this concept, then they will simply have to recognize that hunters are subjective, that's the way it is. Therefore, they will have to stop complaining about bias because there are not enough guidelines for it to be unbiased and it is solely someone's opinion, so since that is the way it is, put up with it. Can't have it both ways. Subjectivity does not equal agreement by all.

Those 'bad' judges will also find that they have shot themselves in the foot if enough people agree that they are being biased if people speak up to their trainers and the show committees or even forums like this.

People will have to learn to live with the subjectivity of the sport if people do not want it marked on a 'test' basis.

freckles

Jul. 4, 2004, 03:58 PM

Be careful what you wish for. If you standardize judging, the same horses will always win. Great movers will get 10's. Great jumpers will get 10's and everyone else will start out with that as a handicap. You can then spend your time hoping the great horses make huge (not minor) errors. Minor errors won't make up the difference. Just how I see it.

xegeba

Jul. 4, 2004, 09:53 PM

So, did we get this issue settled and behind us? Are we all on the same page?

pwynnnorman

Jul. 5, 2004, 03:04 PM

Sorry, I've been away.

As I've said over and over again, the problem is NOT necessarily with the judging per se. I am not a critic of judges. I am a critic of a system of judging that perpetuates a negative impression, especially to people on the outside and/or the "bottom" side...and I guess I'm a critic of those who say "who cares" to that impression, too.

I'm not advocating changing anything about how judging actually WORKS, just how it is communicated--in the rule book and, perhaps, sometimes, in show programs, and certainly, at judging clinics, etc. I (and many others, I think) are simply advocating the adopting of a system that produces CLARITY and CONSISTENCY.

I have no doubt that there ARE ways to tweak the system without robbing the sport of its essence. What perpetually STUNS me are the people who simply accept the status quo without ever thinking that EVERYTHING can use a little improvement over time. Why not put some thought to it (I ask decisionmakers)? Why not show a bit of respect for the exhibitor by at least making some outward show of addressing these issues?

Technical vs. artistic is one way. Standard deductions is another. Both leave room for overal impression. To me, it really doesn't matter one bit WHAT the standard is--I just don't want to have to break my bank HOPING to find out--and I really simply think it is unhealthy for only trainers deep into the circuit to have that knowledge. It simply excludes and discourages too many people. Indeed, the whole judging controversy, when it arises, surely must be seen as running counter to "grassroots" efforts.

What does so-and-so know that the rider's usual trainer doesn't? That person actually PRODUCED the rider, in reality.

And again, I emphasize only the patently VISIBLE things. The things spectators--knowledgeable or not--can't help but notice. IMO, those are the things that should be standardized because they are what causes the grumbling. EVERYONE appreciates the brilliant horse...indeed, I dare say everyone wants to see it rewarded, at least to some extent. But when you have a class of the quality of Devon, where MOST of the entries are just that type of horse, wouldn't technical perfection be the SAFEST determinant? Wouldn't that end the grumbling, once and for all?

For example, two brilliant horses are nearly equal EXCEPT that X did this and Y didn't. I believe that, then, no matter whether the judge has an association with Y's trainer or not, no matter whether the judge likes chestnut or not, no matter whether whatever--the tie breaker is technical, not subjective.

Wouldn't that end the impression of politics? Tie breakers, mind you. Nothing else. Surely it would be possible to set up a system such that unless the brilliant horse really blew it, it would always beat the plain one...or have one heck of an advantage. Indeed, I'm sure that's the way it actually IS--but it simply isn't apparent.

Why not just MAKE IT CLEAR?

I do wish someone would tell me why specific, visible flaws in a round can't be associated with specific penalties, regardless of other factors. After all, what difference would it make (except in clarity) if a hard rub was a 1/4 point penalty and a late change a 1/2 point? An 89 becomes an 88.75. The 72 still isn't going to beat it--but at least the flaw was accounted for.

AND the nice thing about consider THAT kind of system is that it would then open up discussion in terms of just how MUCH weight various flaws should have...and the product of that discussion would be a tremendous educational tool for EVERYONE, regardless of any specific use of point or deductions or weights or whatever.

What I find weird, again, is that after DECADES of this, there are STILL no takers in EVER discussing things. What sport, industry, endeavor exists over decades without EVER reassessing itself?

findeight

Jul. 5, 2004, 03:22 PM

I am with you on that all the way and have stated the same in the past.

A hind rub ought to deduct a set amount, likewise a dropped or late lead, deep distance, long spot, obvious speeding up to make a line then choking down in the corners.

There still will be plenty of room for that subjective opinion that allows the judge to prefer a certain style.
For example, long and low traditional versus more upright, slightly knee slapping WB types.

There will always be that element of judges preference built in.

BUT we sure could standardize major errors with specific deductions...and POST SCORES.
YES for all rounds. Even below the cut off for a ribbon.

We should be given something to compare past performances with, instead of just the gate, again.

Palisades

Jul. 5, 2004, 03:23 PM

But Pwynn, how do you decide what a hard rub is and what a soft rub is? How does a standard deduction deal with a slightly close distance vs. a much deeper one? The reason standard deductions work in jumpers is because you are only evaluating very big errors, like rails and refusals. Hunters are so much more subtle in the things that separate the good from the great (not a knock on jumpers, both are equally difficult and rewarding, etc etc). And in the end, it's still up to the judge to decide what starting score a horse is given.

I'm all for posting cards after every class. I just really don't like systems that try to take away what hunters are all about- a subjectively judged competition that compares the WHOLE PICTURE. Posting cards leave judges free to do their job while still allowing competitors a glimpse into why the results came out the way they did. Giving standardized deduction, IMO, unfairly restricts the judge and changes fundamental aspects of the discipline.

xegeba

Jul. 5, 2004, 03:46 PM

While I agree that it would nice for competitors to know what went wrong, this still does not solve the problem about what a judge thinks overall about a horse. If you take Devon or another venue of that caliber, what is wrong with the top horses being given an advantage over the lesser quality or up and comings? If you are going to beat them, you better BEAT them. And not by a little either. If I want to compete at that level, I either cough up the bucks or spend a lot of time and money on the fab OTTB.

findeight

Jul. 5, 2004, 04:26 PM

By wanting a score posted I don't mean it for telling me where I was wrong. I have a trainer for that.
I do want to know whether I did not place with an 81 when a 92 was the winner and 6th was an 84..which would tell me I did have a great trip. Or scored a 74 ..meaning the judge hated us or there was a mistake I was unaware of.

I want to know where I stood relative to the others in my class. Was I 9th out of the 30 or so? Or 27th?

The old "well you didn't pin" isn't enough anymore with today's huge classes and sky high fees. I want to know where I ranked.

sit up

Jul. 5, 2004, 07:14 PM

I don't understand why in the hunters and eq that the scores are not posted like they are in dressage shows. I think it is a great learning experience and I know that all the shows could definately get people to scribe for the judges so that we could receive a written score of our rides.

They wouldn't have to be so elaborate as the dressage scores but could just have a notation and a score. It would be easy to have all the fences (#1-round jump, #2 deep, #3 huge chip etc.) listed and then a section for comments of the overall round (late changes, tail wringing etc or lovely horse and lovely round).

That way, we would know what the judge likes/dislikes etc. I really feel that a well-qualified judge wouldn't have a problem with it at all.

Grn Hntr

Jul. 5, 2004, 08:46 PM

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading this (sometimes heated, but always interesting) debate over the state of Hunter judging. I agree that forums such as this one are exactly the place to air such feelings and start open discussion among industry peers. Look how many different ideas have been thrown around that could potentially bring about future change.

I suggest to anyone who feels thay have been witness to poor judging, pay attention! Take names! If you do not care to show under that judge again, don't. One caution: everyone has bad days, judges are only human, after all. Except in a few severe cases, I have been known to give a judge the benefit of a second chance before making a mental note to avoid them in the future.

I am more than willing to accept that ours is a discipline of subjectivity. That has never actually bothered me all that much. For as many times as I have felt mine or my horse's performance "victimized" by it's subjective nature, I can name an instance where I felt I received a "gift" that I didn't deserve. I think we have all been there, too. Would the creation of a point deduction scale help Hunters? Probably. Would it solve all of the Hunter world's problems? Certainly not, when it would still be at the whim of a human being to apply properly. Horse showing is what it is, for the most part.

OK. So far, so good. Now, let the controversial portion of my comment begin... Regardless of what you think of the all the subjective judging choices going on while the horses are jumping around, how about the judging portion that SHOULD be going on during the jog in for ribbons??? I have been to too many shows lately where a horse jogged back in for a ribbon and was obviously (even to non-horsey spectators)lame. I am beginning to wonder why we even jog for ribbons anymore! It seems to add so much unnecessary time to already long show days if the judges are not even going to watch-- much less be willing to excuse an unsound competitor.