When dressage judges get “olde” and “crotchety” after long careers spent carefully crafting their comments, they have a tendency to finally go ahead and open their mouths. And at the age of 71, it’s now my turn do so.

I’ve been an active professional trainer, instructor, competitor, volunteer and licensed American Horse Shows Association/U.S. Equestrian Federation dressage judge for 35 years. Our national federation, (formerly the AHSA, now the USEF) has, during that time, never failed me. It’s done wonderful things for me, including, among other things, gotten a horse passport for me in fewer than 10 days! The federation has organized and held excellent judges’ forums, and its staff have always treated me with respect, courtesy, efficiency and fairness.

But the time has recently come that I’ve turned in my judge’s license, effective 2011, because of an official complaint that was made to the Licensed Officials Committee. Kindly, the members of the LOC encouraged me not to turn in my card and to continue to judge. However, I’ve always taken all complaints very seriously and have tried to understand the reason behind them. The particular comment to the LOC about my performance was: “that I appeared in ill health and perhaps should not have been judging that day.”

This protest hit home, because as I age I find that I am unable to physically do so many things I was previously able to. I freely admit that my “suppleness” and “way of moving” is not what it used to be. I had previously believed that these age-related physical problems did not hinder my mind, but if there is even one person out there who feels otherwise, I am “outta here.”

What’s Really The Judge’s Job?

As I reflect on the role I’ve filled for decades, I hope that riders and judges alike can continue to strive for a more productive balance in the future.

A judge’s primary job/obligation is to abide by our national federation’s rules and to put the competitors in the right order of placement—i.e., the best wins the class, the next-best is second, etc. Our system of assigning a number value to the quality of each movement is only a means to that end. This principle, I believe, has stayed consistent since the beginning of horse showing and through many changes of emphasis on different aspects of each movement.

The judge’s second job/obligation is, I believe, often overlooked or under-appreciated by many riders. That is to explain, for every score of a 6 or less, why that score was not higher. Please ask any USDF “L” (Learner) graduate how much this obligation of an explanatory/corrective comment is emphasized in that excellent program.

Both of these obligations often make judges unpopular. In the first case, with everyone except the winner (and maybe even with the winner, should you not give them a qualifying or otherwise high enough score), and in the second case because the judge appears to have a negative attitude for deeming a performance “satisfactory” (which is the word assigned to a score of 6).

But when a judge comments, “nice round circle,” and scores it a 6, he or she is simply not fulfilling the judging obligation, as this does not guide the rider to knowing how to improve the quality of her performance. It’s actually a disservice to the rider.

It’s been suggested by complaining competitors that the “Oreo cookie” approach to judging—two nice comments for every critical comment—should be used. If we did that, I can guarantee that anyone who’s ever volunteered as a scribe would never do so again! There is just plain not enough time for this approach.

At the end of the test when judges can write a comment, they often rubber-stamp a nice phrase to make competitors feel good. That approach probably does no harm and is, of course, a nice thing to do, but is it really helpful in improving the performance?

I remember very clearly an experience I had while judging Lendon Gray many years ago. It was about 7:30 on a rainy Sunday morning, and she stopped in front of my booth before her test and (somewhat) growled at me, “I want to speak to you about something you did yesterday.” I started to quake!

But then she continued, “You told me how to make my 8 into a 9 or a 10, and I wish more judges would do that. Thanks.” Then she rode off. She knew that the score given was a compliment but that my corrective comment was out of respect to her and her horse, and that I believed they could do even better.

We Assume You Want To Improve

There are many reasons for a rider to enter a horse show. These include but are not limited to: to win; to get her horse accustomed to an exciting venue; to see how her horse compares to the other horses that show on that day; and to be with friends and just have fun.

In stark contrast, a judge’s job/obligation does not change; we are mandated to treat all competitors the same, every time. So the recent addition of the adult amateur division within each class has added a real complication to our job. The rules clearly state that judges are to score adult amateurs exactly the same as the open (mostly professional) competitors. But because the adult amateurs are competing against only each other, they’ll have a better chance to be in the ribbons.

Complaints from adult amateurs that judges are prejudiced and “always score us lower and criticize us all the time,” and to management, asking, “Why don’t you split a class of two or three so we can get a blue ribbon?” These comments make officials a little “head shy” about the amateurs’ understanding of the rules and obligations of management and judges.

I think the biggest thing to remember is this: Judges assume that all competitors do want to improve, and we sincerely intend our comments to help you understand what is needed to improve.

We hope that you realize that severe time limitations to write these comments force us be brief and to the point. On Sunday afternoon, after a judge has seen a horse/rider combination four times, and the performance has not changed despite the rider having access to her score sheets, and all final scores have been in the low 50 percent range, meaning “marginal” (which is the new word for a score of “5”) the following judge’s comment is sincerely meant to be helpful: “Nice horse and rider, but wish you had your rides videoed so you could see what I feel would improve your scores.”

After I wrote that comment, I received an official complaint about it being “too harsh.” I actually heard it firsthand, as the competitor was very loud about it in the crowded office when she turned in her protest.

In contrast, it’s been my experience that this phenomenon does not occur in eventing dressage. In fact, I gave an eventer what I feel was the harshest comment I’ve ever written in my career: “It is a sin to overflex a horse this much.” But I later heard from a student of this rider’s that he took it as a real wake-up call, and that he was definitely going to fix the problem before he competed that horse again. There’s a great attitude. Thank you, Wash Bishop.

It’s paramount to understand that yes, the dressage rider’s official complaints do “work,” in that they have an effect. But is the effect really going to improve the sport of dressage and the riders hoping to excel in it?

In my case, competitors are rid of one more “crotchety olde judge.” I resigned because of rider concerns about my capacity, despite the Licensed Officials Committee suggestion that I continue. I just hope that competitors will think realistically about the job description, experience, sincerity and good intentions of the person in the judge’s stand the next time they head down centerline.

Without blatantly teaching, which is clearly discouraged, judges truly want to help you and your horse improve and achieve your goals of a better performance and thus higher scores.   

Gretchen R. Verbonic got her riding start on hunters, equitation and event horses in Michigan as a child, and she caught the dressage bug from her mentor Chuck Grant at an early age. She also took up foxhunting in Northern Virginia while pursuing a career in computers in Washington, D.C. At her Check Mate Farm in Bluemont, Va., she trained riders and horses to every level of dressage, and she competed multiple self-trained horses through Grand Prix, three of which were long-listed for U.S. teams. Verbonic, now of Landrum, S.C., has been a licensed dressage judge for 35 years.