In 1971 the Winter Haven Horse Shows (Florida), headed by Professional Hunter and Jumper Trainers Association President Gene Mische, adopted the “number system” for judging hunter and equitation rounds. In the March 24, 1972, issue of The Chronicle of the Horse magazine, Lois U. Horvitz wrote the following article, titled “The Winter Haven Horse Show Number Judging System“ describing the system.

Chronicle editor Alexander Mackay-Smith wrote a commentary extolling the system’s virtues in the same issue, saying “The Number System has helped horse show management because of the widespread approval with which it has been received. It does require the best (and perhaps more expensive) judges, as well as judges’ secretaries. On the other hand it makes for a much smoother running, less time-consuming show—horses and riders no longer have to crowd the in-gate wondering whether they will get a call.”

During the two Winter Haven Horse Shows of the 1971 Florida Sunshine Circuit a new Number System for judging hunters and equitation was used. This system was used again at the 1972 Winter Haven Shows.

The Number System was devised to eliminate many criticisms of judging; ease pressures on exhibitors, trainers and horses; reduce show time delays; and increase spectator interest in the sport.

The judges who experimented with the Number System at these shows were: Charles Dennehy, Ronnie Mutch, Victor Hugo-Vidal, Frank Chapot, Edgar Mills, John Vaas, Arthur Hawkins, Daniel Lenehan, Howard Lewis and Roger Young. Although their views varied on the usefulness of the system, their constructive criticisms and suggestions provided ideas for improvement and further refinement.

The Number System, as used at the Winter Haven Shows, consists of three judges, each accompanied by a secretary, placed at different locations around the ring. The judges view the performance from different angles and each judge is able to see some fences better than others. Each judge independently judges the class, marking what he sees on his score card and then, in his own judgement, gives each performance a numerical score.

As the horse and rider leave the ring, the secretaries hold up the scores of each judge on flash cards. The announcer records the three scores and averages them to produce the final score for the round. The three scores and the final averaged score are immediately announced. This often results in a fractional score. The highest final scores produce the winning rounds.

Theoretically, the scoring is based on a system from 0 to 100, 0 being elimination and 100 being absolute perfection. However, since the judges are working independently with such a wide range of numbers, certain guidelines are used to keep the system uniform without losing the judges’ freedom of opinion. These standards provide the exhibitor and spectator with a scoring system that is easily understood.

The scoring standards are as follows:

1. 0, or no score, means elimination
2. 40 is the automatic score for one or more major faults (i.e. knockdown and/or refusal).
3. 50 is the automatic score for one or more secondary faults (i.e. breaking gait, two strides in an “in-and-out”).
4. 60 to 70 is a below average performance in the opinion of the judge.
5. 70 to 80 is an average performance in the opinion of the judge.
6. 80 to 90 is an above average performance in the opinion of the judge.
7. 90 to 100 is a superior performance in the opinion of the judge.

Using these standards, it is possible for the three judges to have the same basic opinion of a round and yet, their scores could be different since some judges are more critical or have higher standards of perfection than others.

For example, if each judge saw a specific round as an average performance, one judge could give it a score of 70, another a 75, and the third a score of 80. It might seem strange to see the 10-point difference, yet each score is within the guidelines set forth above.

This could be explained if the exhibitor or spectator were to follow the individual scoring of any one judge. He would see that each judge arrived at his own grading curve and would remain within his curve throughout the entire class.

Although judges may give higher or lower scores, at the two Winter Haven Shows the judges were statistically consistent in that each judge gave his highest sores to the winners of the class.

Before each class the judges are classified as No. 1, 2 and 3 for the purpose of breaking ties. In the event of tied final scores, the highest individual score given by the No. 1 judge will determine the winning order. If the tie remains, the No. 2 judge’s score will break the tie, etc. The tie-breaking order is rotated before each class. In the event of an unbreakable tie, the tie remains and prize money, ribbon and championship points are awarded to both horses.

One of the differences between the Number System and the traditional judging system is the necessity for the judge to evaluate each round by means of a number, which is immediately exposed to the spectator. This method has been used historically in other comparable sports such as diving and figure skating.

When used with three judges, as during the Winter Haven Shows, the Number System makes it possible for any judge to give the same score on what he considers to be equal rounds. There is no need to make an instant comparable judgement, for the decision will be made by the other two judges in the averaging of the scores. When a difference of opinion occurs under the present method the decision becomes a stand-off, with one judge having to give in to the other.

The Number System differs from the traditional judging system in that it openly informs the exhibitor and spectator of each judge’s opinion of every horse or rider’s performance. The openness of the scoring should have no bearing on one’s ability to judge. However, an inconsistent score would be immediately apparent to the spectator.

In order for the Number System to work effectively, judges’ score cards should be posted, as they were during the second Winter Haven Show. This informs the exhibitor and spectator of the reasons for each judge’s score.

The Number System is designed for A shows where it is feasible to invite three or more judges. However, it can be adopted for smaller shows, normally judged by one or two judges, by changing the guidelines pertaining to faults and prohibiting equal scores.