The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 85
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhiannonjk View Post
    Wow, I knew you could be a Steward, and TD makes sense, but to be an AA and a judge is incredible.
    Just why do you think it is "incredible"?
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  2. #42
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,271

    Default

    So should the pool of upper level, dedicated, AAs be considered for part of the next level of judges? Of course, they would stop being AAs -
    No they wouldn't.
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug. 15, 2011
    Posts
    96

    Default

    Paintlady: depends on the show. Some don't have the income, some do. Some shows pay scribes, others can't afford to. Some judges also are willing to cover their own expenses because they need te experience/shows



  4. #44
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MysticOakRanch View Post
    The L program can be a money maker for the GMO - it must be hosted by a USDF GMO.
    I guess it depens on the geography and other factors, but it can also be a big money LOSER for the GMO.
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  5. #45
    Join Date
    May. 26, 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    734

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Janet View Post
    Just why do you think it is "incredible"?
    "Incredible" a rather subjective term. It seems that if you are being paid to express the opinion of a rider, that would be considered at least as "professional" as if you were paid to school somebody's 30 year old arthritic mule. I'm not saying it's wrong. I just found it interesting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Janet View Post
    No they wouldn't.
    Yeah, that's been explained now. I get it. It wasn't something I had ever thought of before, so I never looked up the rule. I try to keep a good eye on things that I, personally, do that may cross the line.



  6. #46
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,271

    Default

    To go back to the OP
    In this case, do people lease school masters to get the level/score requirenments?
    Yes, I know at least one judge who leased a horse to get her required scores.
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  7. #47
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rhiannonjk View Post
    "Incredible" a rather subjective term. It seems that if you are being paid to express the opinion of a rider, that would be considered at least as "professional" as if you were paid to school somebody's 30 year old arthritic mule. I'm not saying it's wrong. I just found it interesting.
    The judge is no being paid to ride, train, show, or instruct.
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,271

    Default

    Even after you meet all the published requirements, you still have to be approved by the Licensed Officials Committee. And that is NOT a rubber stamp.
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  9. #49
    Join Date
    May. 26, 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    734

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Janet View Post
    The judge is no being paid to ride, train, show, or instruct.
    I had just never looked into that particular fine line before.
    Last edited by Rhiannonjk; Sep. 23, 2011 at 03:12 PM. Reason: spelling - removing snark.



  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,271

    Default

    NOT picking on you. Sorry if you felt that way.

    So many people misunderstand amateur status (especailly the first sentence) that I try to clarify it (not just for you, but for everyone that reads the thread) whenever I can.
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  11. #51
    Join Date
    May. 26, 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    734

    Default

    yeah sorry, I'm a major grump today and this thread was making me happy, and then I felt this one little detail was being hammered and hammered, and all I could think was "OK I GET IT!"



  12. #52
    Join Date
    Sep. 14, 2002
    Location
    Azle, Teh-has
    Posts
    7,803

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Janet View Post
    The judge is no being paid to ride, train, show, or instruct.
    AA status is always going to be questioned.

    I wish I was an AA. I ride less than some AAs but yet I'm still considered a pro.
    bugs me sometimes, other time I don't care at all.
    I would understand being a pro due to judge certification easier than I understand the reason I have to be a pro at the present time.

    I agree. You'd think a licenced judge would be considered a pro.
    And if we want to be overly picky we could go back to the one post that talked about reasons why judges should have a min of 4th level expertise...
    They are giving the rider instructional feedback to help them improve. And often they are being paid to do so.

    but hey.
    who makes the rules? not me.
    http://kaboomeventing.com/
    http://kaboomeventing.blogspot.com/
    Horses are amazing athletes and make no mistake -- they are the stars of the show!



  13. #53
    Join Date
    Feb. 3, 2000
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    35,271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by purplnurpl View Post
    They are giving the rider instructional feedback to help them improve.
    They are NOT supposed to do that.
    Janet

    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).



  14. #54
    Join Date
    Apr. 15, 2008
    Posts
    1,506

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by purplnurpl View Post
    They are giving the rider instructional feedback to help them improve.
    Au contraire, they are judging what they see.



  15. #55
    Join Date
    May. 26, 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    734

    Default

    I'm trying to think, where is the line between judging and instructing?

    We've already mentioned the ride-a-test clinics. What if a judge was a part of a clinic where their role was to judge tests, and then give a lecture in the evening in regards to commonly seen errors in tests? Is instruction limited to the human standing in the arena while a person is mounted?

    Could a judge watch videos and give commentary without becoming pro? Would "I would like to see more thrust in the canter" be crossing the line, in that informal situation, into instruction?

    and on that note, sometimes when the test ends, judges (particularly at schooling shows) will give some sort of feedback like "If you keep the left rein from getting long, he will stay straighter." Would that cross the line, right then?
    Last edited by Rhiannonjk; Sep. 23, 2011 at 05:10 PM. Reason: spelling



  16. #56
    Join Date
    Jun. 21, 2009
    Location
    Hunterdon County NJ
    Posts
    3,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beentheredonethat View Post

    You should not have to have a very fancy horse to get 4 scores at 65%. If you've trained your horse adequately and you are a decent rider, you should be able to do it, though it may take longer and more effort. I don't think there is any way they can require it, but I think the scores should be on a horse the judge trained, not bought. There's a huge difference in competency there.
    There is a very competent rider at my farm who has achieved the necessary 4th level scores with her Arabian. (The 2nd time she's trained an Arabian to 4th level. And this 2nd one is looking likely to do the PSG next year.) Whom she trained herself and purchased for $800 from an internet auction out of a halter horse breeding program in CA.

    Now she's a cheater, because she grew up on the Arabian circuit and knows the blood lines really, really well. She can look at the pedigree and know what it is. But it is possible to get an 'off the shelf' average horse and get the scores.

    Of course we don't tell her horse he is just average !!



  17. #57
    Join Date
    Aug. 13, 2006
    Location
    Doswell VA
    Posts
    651

    Default

    I just heard from the USEF that I passed the 'r' program. :-)

    This is 9 years since my 'L". I went into that with the goal of becoming a judge after talking to a number of people about a credential as a judge vs certified instructor. Since the latter has really not caught on as an expectation, and judges told me they get new clients based on their judge card, it seemed like a more versatile avenue to pursue. I am a professional since I teach lessons and train an occasional horse besides my own, but it is not my full-time job.

    After I graduated with distinction 2002, I could have directly applied for the 'r' with my 4th level 60% scores I had obtained on my first dressage horse, that I trained myself, and being 1/4 draft getting in the low 60's was good for him. However, I wanted to get some experience judging schooling shows because the L program really shows you exactly how difficult it is to judge well, so I decided to wait 2-3 years.

    Unfortunately, a year or 2 later, the requirements were changed to 65% scores as a rider instead of 60% scores as rider, trainer, or coach. This pendulum between low and high standards has swung before (there are a number of S judges who had not ridden GP at the time).

    To me, the issue is not whether it is possible for an "average" horse to get 65% scores at 4th level - of course it is - but that it is exceedingly difficult for any rider with a single horse to get those scores on any horse, especially an average horse, without some other complication intervening. When the requirements were changed, I had two horses - one mare was at second level and later injured a suspensory that was never right after that and the other, bought as a yearling was a 2 year old with a facet fracture in her neck.

    So, I spent a lot of money to buy a horse in 2006 who was confirmed at 4th and schooling PSG/I-1. This was not just for the purpose of judging, but I probably bought more horse than I would have justified to myself otherwise. But, hey the economy was good then and we only live once, right? I found a horse I love dearly and had a lot of fun and wonderful life-changing experiences with him.. We got our 4th level scores, no problem, and the next year, at the first show of the season needing only one more PSG score to have my 'R' requirements under my belt, I got a horrendous back spasm (doing a very minor, non-riding, maneuver) that kept me out of the saddle for the entire rest of the season. Then other things happened, the horse got injured the next year, yada yada.

    I now had my 'r' scores but by that time, my L had "expired" because the USEF had also shortened the amount of time it was good for! Fortunately, the Licensed Officials Committee agreed to grandfather my L based on their changing criteria, but this put my file on hold for an extra 6 months. Then when I got the green light, the next 'r' program was full and I had to wait another year!

    The program was worthwhile and I have no regrets because I am a much better judge now than I would have been in 2002. It has been a long, expensive road though. I flew to 2 shows in the midwest (taking my own scribe with me) to get my apprentice test numbers because a number of show managers refuse to acommodate apprentices (referring to previous 'bad' behavior by some).

    A couple of last points which I won't belabor because this is really long, but I disagree with the current premise that one must ride at the level (rather than train horses to or coach riders at the level) to be a good judge. And along a similar lines, not all BNT/olympic riders would necessarily be good judges.



  18. #58
    Join Date
    Jan. 26, 2010
    Posts
    6,197

    Default

    Mystic--The person you referred to is banned, for very good reason, and is the one I was referring to who was only able to get the "L" because of my training. It is a perfect example of someone who should never judge who found a way to manipulate the system.

    And THIS is why I think the requirements of riding are good. There is a huge difference in someone who can get scores with a made horse and help, and someone who has to struggle. Schiffon, I completely get it. There are many unforseen circumstances when you don't have all the money to have so much, and it can take a LOT longer to get requirements when you have something happen, but this hardship isn't necessarily a bad thing. I have had a lot of bad luck in dying horses, being really stupid to sell a super training I-1 horse to someone cheap who crippled her, and having to start over brand new, coming up, and running into injury problems with the horse and me. It sucks. But, I still think we need people who can DO it and not BUY it or manipulate it. It's the people who have to go through this process that make good judges because they really know what it takes.

    I agree not all BNT should be judges, but we could sure use more in the pool who want to b, and they really don't need to be put through the hoops because they have proven themselves and there is no way around that.



  19. #59
    Join Date
    Aug. 15, 2010
    Posts
    1,744

    Default

    CONGRATULATIONS Schiffon!!!!!



  20. #60
    Join Date
    Sep. 27, 2009
    Posts
    267

    Default

    Riding/training experience is required to be a judge, yes?

    Then why does USEF state that experience in one's field is insufficient and that one must be 'credentialed' to comprehend the biomechanics of riding? Credentialed was referencing a degree.

    This expression from USEF would mean that our judges would have to be credentialed in equine biomechanics in order to be an expert in judging the descriptions contained in the rules.

    So may I ask a question of 'L' program graduates and judges:
    Which is more important, riding/training experience, or a degree from a college/university in equine biomechanics?



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 110
    Last Post: Sep. 17, 2013, 07:44 PM
  2. Replies: 14
    Last Post: Sep. 16, 2013, 06:46 PM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: Jan. 22, 2010, 07:35 PM
  4. Replies: 59
    Last Post: Oct. 17, 2008, 07:52 AM
  5. USDF Associate "Certified" Instructor???? Huh?
    By Fantastic in forum Dressage
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: Jan. 23, 2008, 10:23 AM

Posting Permissions

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