The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 73
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May. 6, 1999
    Location
    Ocala, FL
    Posts
    10,424

    Default 60% of Prelim final scores are LT 60...10% LT 40. Analytical help needed.

    Hey, folks, remember the "mastering eventing" discussion? http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum...aster+eventing

    Well, we're moving ahead with implimenting it, but have hit something of a snag which we could use your help on.

    We've got just about everything sorted out--except the most important thing: qualifying scores. The program will award bronze, silver and gold medals to eventers who obtain three qualifying scores at at least two different venues (with no time limit in terms of how long it takes to get those scores). We'd like for the bronze medal to be relatively easy to obtain at each level (BN thru P), while the silver will need some effort and the gold will be only for the very determined. But at the same time, we don't want any medal to be determined by how often or how close you come to winning. We'd like to produce a program which encourages riders to master the level they are at, either forever (because they don't have to resources or desire to move up) or at least until they are truly ready to move up.

    So can you help us figure out how to support that philosophy, while producing a "reward program" that is easy to understand and reasonable to strive for? Here are the scores we are currently tossing around (you'd need to have finished on these scores three times over two different courses/venues for the scores to count toward your medal):

    Beginner Novice
    • Bronze: 52 (52% of all BNs in the country complete their event with a final score of 52 or lower)
    • Silver: 45 (41% of all BNs in the country complete their event with a final score of 45 or lower)
    • Gold: 35 (13% of all BNs in the country complete their event with a final score of 35 or lower)
    Novice
    • Bronze: 52 (59% of all Ns in the country complete their event with a final score of 52 or lower)
    • Silver: 44 (44% of all Ns in the country complete their event with a final score of 44 or lower)
    • Gold: 35 (14% of all Ns in the country complete their event with a final score of 35 or lower)
    Training
    • Bronze: 56 (56% of all Ts in the country complete their event with a final score of 56 or lower)
    • Silver: 47 (43% of all Ts in the country complete their event with a final score of 47 or lower)
    • Gold: 35 (11% of all Ts in the country complete their event with a final score of 35 or lower)
    Preliminary
    • Bronze: 60 (44% of all Ps in the country complete their event with a final score of 60 or lower)
    • Silver: 50 (28% of all Ps in the country complete their event with a final score of 50 or lower)
    • Gold: 40 (11% of all Ps in the country complete their event with a final score of 40 or lower)
    Please note that I have rounded off a few of these figures. The RED text is the areas we feel are most problematic: we are struggling with how difficult earning a gold medal should be. For example, if only 11% of ALL Prelim riders finish on a score lower than 40, how likely is it that among those 11% there would EVER be someone still at Prelim getting THREE scores like that? And, personally, I'd like to understand more about why there is such a big drop off in scores at each level (between silver and gold--silver at each level includes scores that 40% of all finishers, except Prelim, achieve; but finishers with gold qualifying scores plummets into the teens for each level. Why? Is the gold score too high? In this version of the table we've been working on, the gold score is a full 10 points lower than the silver score for most levels, while the gap between the bronze and silver is a bit less. Is that our problem? And what about different parts of the country. Will there be issues there involving who can do what and how often????

    There are a few other things we're grappling with, but I'll leave them for later on in the discussion, if possible.

    I realize this is long and complicated. Anyone who cares to work through it with us will be truly appreciated!
    Last edited by pwynnnorman; Jul. 17, 2008 at 11:23 AM. Reason: Corrected the N, T and P's.
    Sportponies Unlimited
    Athletic Thoroughbred crosses for the highly motivated, smaller rider.



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan. 5, 2006
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    5,053

    Default

    I'm so glad this program is moving forward!
    Last edited by CookiePony; Jul. 17, 2008 at 10:50 AM. Reason: Venues issue not on the table at this point



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    I suspect that drop off is where the pros riding young horses etc. are. In other words you are seeing the difference between pros and amateurs/juniors at that point.

    Reed



  4. #4
    Join Date
    May. 6, 1999
    Location
    Ocala, FL
    Posts
    10,424

    Default

    CookiePony, I deleted the venues issue--it's really a minority of us who have issue with it (moi, basically), so I'll let it go, at least for now.

    Reed, we'd really, really like to reward ammies with this program. If the drop off reflects the fact that it's ONLY pros who are left (at that level) by the time a gold medal would be a goal, that's a big problem.

    Is that what you mean?
    Sportponies Unlimited
    Athletic Thoroughbred crosses for the highly motivated, smaller rider.



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep. 25, 2006
    Location
    Plantation, FL
    Posts
    913

    Default

    Reed--

    Do you mean the pros have less rails down? The drop in percentage points seems to be by about 4-8 scoring points. Maybe one rail down in stadium and you don't rise to the level of gold?
    T3DE 2010 Pact Group
    Barefoot Eventers Clique
    http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...2lkxcbn110.jpg



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CBudFrggy View Post
    Reed--

    Do you mean the pros have less rails down? The drop in percentage points seems to be by about 4-8 scoring points. Maybe one rail down in stadium and you don't rise to the level of gold?


    pwynn and CBudFrggy, yes, that is what I suspect. Obviously a scan of competition records would tell. It does seem given that less than 10% of the riders are upper level/pro riders this drop off looks to correspond to that population who would be riding their young ones or riding sale horses for customers etc.

    Of course there are great amateurs out there and they can be in these numbers but especially at preliminary, I begin to doubt that.



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep. 25, 2006
    Location
    Plantation, FL
    Posts
    913

    Default

    We are also discussing whether to allow one rail down at a venue at the gold level--that is why I ask. Most of us, I think, maintain that you should have no rails down at all venues at the gold level--again Mastery.

    But maybe if the rider must have qualifying scores at 5 events over 3 venues a rider should be allowed a rail in one of the qualifying scores as long as the score was low enough to meet the criteria. Would that still be Mastery?
    T3DE 2010 Pact Group
    Barefoot Eventers Clique
    http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...2lkxcbn110.jpg



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar. 31, 2002
    Location
    Madison, GA
    Posts
    1,024

    Default Have you looked into...

    what comprises that final score.

    My observation is that at prelim and above, xc time penalties are more likely to come into play. One big reason for this is intentional - when your season goal involves a CCI event, your HT's are really preps up to a point. Many riders will go all out in dressage, then change XC strategy based on their dressage standings - if they are within reach of a top placing, they'll ride for time. If not, its treated as a prep and time penalties will likely be incurred. That could definitely affect your statistical base.

    For example, a few years back Jo and Diamond finished Advanced at Poplar on their dressage score, and when I investigated I discovered that there were just 11 times that year that a pair finished Adv on the dressage score. While I didn't check it out, I'm sure that the probability of having your final score equal your dressage score decreases as you go up the levels.

    I would like to see a gold medal at the prelim level result from finishing closer to 35 - either a great dressage score and a rail or a few time penalties, or finising on a good dressage score.

    can you break your results down by components?

    Just an observation that may be useful as you work this out. Thanks for your efforts.



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,707

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CBudFrggy View Post
    We are also discussing whether to allow one rail down at a venue at the gold level--that is why I ask. Most of us, I think, maintain that you should have no rails down at all venues at the gold level--again Mastery.

    But maybe if the rider must have qualifying scores at 5 events over 3 venues a rider should be allowed a rail in one of the qualifying scores as long as the score was low enough to meet the criteria. Would that still be Mastery?

    I think allowing for a rail down, here and there, is fair. We all have cheap rails, even the best of us. Given you are looking at multiple events and venues it makes more sense because the weather, or other conditions will come into play.

    As an aside, JDufort, your analysis speaks greatly of the findings by Murray et al. (2006) that showed that the higher a rider was placed after dressage, the great the probability of having a fall on XC.



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan. 10, 2007
    Location
    too far from the barn
    Posts
    5,619

    Default

    I agree with Reed. Shiver had one of those cheap rails last weekend
    Even when you see pros with long time partners at the upper levels, they can have rails. Mastery doesn't = perfection.
    OTTBs rule, but spots are good too!



  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct. 13, 2002
    Location
    Idaho USA
    Posts
    1,885

    Default

    This is interesting. I'm just thinking out loud here, so forgive.

    I too would like to see the required score broken down by dressage,xc,sj. I think that xc time pens should be thought about. We have never sent a horse out, prelim & above, with express plan to make time. Save that for when it really matters. Then again, maybe this gold medal would matter enough to some people to outweigh the risk!? Only at an FEI event would I expect to see "time" as a goal.

    Prelim is still a "learning level" where the horse is still learning. Jumping the jumps correctly is the no. 1 goal, then time. I guess that if you are staying at this level then Mastery would involve xc time, but not so much if you are just "passing through".

    Below prelim time is usually a non issue as it's fairly easy to make time. Prelim and up, that changes.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec. 4, 2003
    Location
    Area 51
    Posts
    1,635

    Default

    What a fun program! I do BN (may do N again someday) and the bronze at BN seems a little easy. I would set the thresholds at the 66th percentile for bronze, 75th for silver and 90th for gold. The 52th percentile seems too low for something with no time limit.

    But then again I don't do this for ribbons, just for fun so I don't want to take medals out of the hands of people who really want them!



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan. 24, 2000
    Location
    The Frozen Tundra
    Posts
    3,711

    Default

    You ask,
    For example, if only 11% of ALL Prelim riders finish on a score lower than 40, how likely is it that among those 11% there would EVER be someone still at Prelim getting THREE scores like that?
    In the worst case scenario, say scores are completely random (the correlation between your score at two different events is zero). Then, the scores are statistically independent, so the probability of scoring 40 three times in three events is 0.0013 (just over one tenth of one percent). The probability of getting three scores of 40 or below obviously increases with the number of events*: for example, the probability of getting at least 3 scores of 40 or lower in four events, again with the somewhat unrealistic assumption of no correlation between scores at different events, is 0.0047.

    Now, if scores are correlated (in other words, if someone who scores less than 40 in one event is likely to also score less than 40 in another event) then the probability of achieving three qualifying scores goes up. What I've given you is the lower bound for getting the qualifying scores in 3 events, etc. (If you want, I can give you the lower bound for as many events as you are interested in. I'm not sure what you mean by what is the probability of ever getting three qualifying scores, as it depends on the number of competitions entered.)

    If you have actual data, I can pull the correlation between scores and give you the actual probabilities from the data.

    *This is an application of the binomial distribution: the probability of getting k scores below the target level, in n competitions, assuming independence and the probability of getting the score in any one event is p, is (n k)*(p^k)*((1-p)^(n-k), where (n k) means "n choose k", or (n k)=n!/(k!*(n-k)!).



  14. #14
    Join Date
    May. 6, 1999
    Location
    Ocala, FL
    Posts
    10,424

    Default

    JD, that is, in fact, something else we've tossed back and forth: the breakdowns.

    Here is what the current draft includes:

    DRESSAGE ONLY
    Beginner Novice
    • Bronze: 40 (missing info)
    • Silver: 37.5 (42% of all BN dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 37.5 or lower)
    • Gold: 35.5 (30% of all BN dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 35.5 or lower)
    Novice
    • Bronze: 40 (68% of all N dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 40 or lower)
    • Silver: 36 (41% of all N dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 36 or lower)
    • Gold: 34.7 (32% of all N dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 34.7 or lower)
    Training
    • Bronze: 40 (61% of all T dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 40 or lower)
    • Silver: 37 (40% of all T dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 37 or lower)
    • Gold: 35.5 (30% of all T dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 35.5 or lowerwer)
    Preliminary
    • Bronze: 40 (55% of all P dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 40 or lower)
    • Silver: 38 (40% of all P dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 38 or lower)
    • Gold: 36.7 (33% of all P dressage tests recorded by USEA receive scores of 36.7 or lower)
    So, if you compare these dressage scores with the final scores I reported earlier, you'll see the x-c/stadium jumping and time fault impacts we're considering:

    X-C JUMPING PENALTIES: No jump penalties EVER at any level in cross country. (No score will qualify if it includes x-c jumping penalties, even--for example--if the dressage score was in the teens. This is NOT a definite decision. It's something we're struggling with: How to make sure the final score reflects "mastery" of all the sport's phases, not just brilliance in one, like dressage.)

    X-C TIME PENALTIES: No more than ten seconds (4 time penalties, including for excessive speed) on x-c for bronze or silver at BN and N; T: 20 seconds for bronze, 15 for silver, none for gold; P: 30, 20, 10). [IMO, this makes it too complicated.]

    STADIUM PENALTIES: At all levels, no more than 8 jumping, 0 time penalties for a bronze qualifying score; 4-0 for silver; 0-0 for gold.

    Is this making sense as presented? We are working off tables, so putting the information in text form is hard.

    Anyway, just a reminder: these additional characteristics of qualifying are being debated. We are having a hard time deciding whether to keep it simple and just use ONE "final score" or to qualify that score further by requiring that it have been the result of specific achievements in dressage, cross country and stadium.
    Last edited by pwynnnorman; Jul. 17, 2008 at 11:37 AM.
    Sportponies Unlimited
    Athletic Thoroughbred crosses for the highly motivated, smaller rider.



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun. 17, 2000
    Location
    Durham/Chapel Hill nc
    Posts
    3,707

    Default

    Funny -
    I have no problem with the 13 percent or so # - it's at the other end I wonder, what have you really demonstrated mastery of if you finish 3 training events with 48% dressage and two rails? or 56% quadruple clear??

    I might lean towards a Chinese menu qualification system - no jump faults earns you a couple bye points on the dressage. COnsistently superb dressage means you don't get penalized for the everpresent 1 or 2 rails. Or something...



  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan. 24, 2000
    Location
    The Frozen Tundra
    Posts
    3,711

    Default

    Just for kicks, here are the "lower bound" probabilities for getting the gold award at prelim, in 3 through 10 events:
    0.001331
    0.00473836
    0.010542851
    0.018766275
    0.029228473
    0.041621346
    0.055564496
    0.070646288



  17. #17
    Join Date
    Apr. 23, 2003
    Location
    Newark, MD USA
    Posts
    952

    Default Interesting

    I went back thru my scores for the past couple of years with my young horse who I have brought up thru prelim this year and have won a couple a each level N and T and place 2nd at three out of 6 prelim with nothing less than 6th. Based on you system we would have acheived gold at novice with all but one score in the thirties, silver at training only had two scores 35 or under rest under 45 except for one (had a XCstop) and at prelim, scores have ranged from 47 to 35.7 we would have earned silver thus far and one score from gold.

    I agree time plays a factor at prelim and it is harder to go clean in SJ

    Keep up the good work
    Cindy

    Make any mistakes going forward!



  18. #18
    Join Date
    May. 6, 1999
    Location
    Ocala, FL
    Posts
    10,424

    Default

    I'm not sure what you mean by what is the probability of ever getting three qualifying scores, as it depends on the number of competitions entered.)
    JAGold, this is (yet another) complication: Since there is no "upper" venue or time limit, the idea is that those striving for gold can take as long as they need to and can attempt to achieve qualifying scores at as many (different) venues as they want.

    And then there's the horse issue. I follow you on the probability: that one score that qualifies increases the likelihood that other scores will qualify, especially if the individual keeps trying (competing over and over again at the same level...on the same horse). But what if this score can only be obtained not only by a rider who has mastered the dressage, but also a HORSE which has the quality of movement necessary? Y'see, we don't know for sure what creates that score: pro rider, great mover, mastery--all of the above, two out of three? All we know for sure is that comparatively few manage it.

    Torri is digging out more data, though--along the lines of bip's "percentile" reasoning. We're trying to find that (lowest) score for gold which, say, 25% of finishers achieve (rather than only 10%). Bip's reasoning (basically to start with the percentile and work backwards) was something we discussed.
    Sportponies Unlimited
    Athletic Thoroughbred crosses for the highly motivated, smaller rider.



  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul. 24, 2005
    Location
    MD girl living in NC
    Posts
    929

    Default

    I think your data for the lower levels looks adequate--though I do wonder if receiving scores in the 50s should indicate any level of "mastery" (yes we all have bad tests and our horses have bad days, but I think if consistency is what we want, consistent scores in the 50s should not indicate mastery).

    For the upper levels (I say T and above), I think there should be a little leeway for time penalties. They likely were incurred in putting awareness of the footing, the conditions, the horse, the jumps to be negotiated, etc. ahead of a double clear round, which I think is something that needs to be recognized and rewarded.

    What if you worked on a system of "points"

    i.e. in BN
    a 50 in dressage would earn 3 points. A 40 would earn 5. A 30 would earn 8. A rail in stadium would incur -x amount of points. Time in either stadium or cross country would incur -y points (perhaps a fraction of the actual time over?). Riders kept track of their points and have to reach a certain number before sending in for approval?

    Just a way to factor in things that are acceptable mistakes vs. things that do not indicate mastery (i.e. refusals cross-country).

    I think you also need to clearly define what you mean by "mastery."
    This doesn't seem like a program that would benefit pros. At the levels you're discussing, they are usually riding sale horses, and the sheer fact that they are out there and known and considered experts means that people won't care i they have a "Gold Medal" at novice or not. So you are targeting this program towards juniors/amateurs, correct? Ok, well what makes a junior/amateur a master at the sport? An ability to go clean? An ability to not have cross-country penalties?



  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun. 18, 2008
    Posts
    218

    Default GREAT!

    I missed the first thread that started this whole thing...I am new to the COTH forum. But, this is a wonderful idea!! THANK YOU to who ever came up with this idea, and to those who have been working on all the ideas and details!

    I know that dressage riders use their status of gold, silver, and bronze to feel like they have actually achieved something for all of their hard work. In eventing there is pressure for alot of riders, owners, and trainers to keep moving up as the only way to prove what that have done/know!

    Is this program something that the USEA going to manage or is each area going to manage it?

    I am no help on the actual breakdown of scores. I think that having to reach the score for a certain medal should be at least 3 times, at different venues is a good thing. Esp. since there is no time limit on obtaining the scores.

    Is this per horse/rider combo? Are riders going to be responsible for reporting their scores?

    Wish I could help with getting this program up and running. If there is anything I can help with let me know



Similar Threads

  1. Waredaca T3d final scores?
    By frugalannie in forum Eventing
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Nov. 2, 2012, 09:30 PM
  2. Replies: 13
    Last Post: Mar. 29, 2011, 09:43 AM
  3. What happened to Equi-Analytical? or Dairy One
    By Rebmik in forum Horse Care
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Mar. 22, 2010, 03:04 PM
  4. Prayers Needed - **Final Update**
    By hossluva in forum Off Course
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: Nov. 14, 2009, 09:18 PM
  5. Replies: 10
    Last Post: Dec. 22, 2008, 02:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •