• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Judges' score difference at CDS/USDF Region 7 Champs

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Judges' score difference at CDS/USDF Region 7 Champs

    I went to this show at Los Angeles Equestrian Center to help a friend who was showing in the upper level amateur division.
    Her test scores varied by quite a bit between the two judges who scored her ride (difference was usually 3 pts per movement, sometimes more, sometimes less). We noticed the disparity, and knew that sometimes it happens.

    As the weekend went on, my friend said she heard several people - trainers and amateurs - complaining to management about the difference in scores on their tests, and the especially low scores given by a particular judge. One trainer was very vocal and made a scene in the warm up ring.

    Question: how far do you take your complaint ? only to show management, or up to USEF/USDF ? Does anyone up there really care anyway ? The results can't be changed....
    Last edited by Mardi; Oct. 13, 2010, 05:41 PM.

  • #2
    Do you have a time machine, Mardi? Did you go into the future and see what the results were going to be for the show? Because Region 9 Championships aren't until November 4. I think you mean Region 7.
    "I'm holding out for the $100,000 Crossrail Classic in 2012." --mem
    "With all due respect.. may I suggest you take up Croquet?" --belambi
    Proud Member of the Opinionated Redhead Club!

    Comment


    • #3
      If the judging was CONSISTENT I'd say you have nothing to complain about.

      Comment


      • #4
        I assume you are talking about FEI double-judged classes, where the judges were (from the sounds of it) very far apart. I would definitely fill out an evaluation form and send it in.

        Comment


        • #5
          There was a lot wrong with that show, IMO.

          I also heard about some pretty *significant* differences (10 percentage points?!). Have they posted the results online yet? It would be interesting to see which judges created the commotion, and if it was consistent throughout the show.

          Comment


          • #6
            There's not much you can do. Fill in an evaluation form. Welcome to politics. Hey, I got that beat. I had a 20 PERCENT difference in scores between judges at the championships (in LA no less.) One judge was the head of the FEI at the time and gave me a 65%. The other didn't like "colored" horses and gave me a 45%

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by honeydoozy View Post
              There was a lot wrong with that show, IMO.

              I also heard about some pretty *significant* differences (10 percentage points?!). Have they posted the results online yet? It would be interesting to see which judges created the commotion, and if it was consistent throughout the show.
              I was there competing this weekend. It was my first year in the dressage world and first time competing at championships. Overall I wasn't impressed with the running of the show at LAEC. It was really hard to find the stabling maps etc and several of the help were snippy.

              Many of the exhibitor dinners and hospitality that were listed in the premium never happened. Dinners were to be provided every night and all that happened was Little Caesars Pizza the first night. A lot of folks in the barns were upset about this as they were counting on those dinners after riding all day. There wasn't an announcement or revised premium - they just never happened. We asked and were told they didn't have sponsors for them so they canceled them. Yet they were charging people to attend and watch the show...

              Lots of gorgeous horses and met some great folks. The only scores I've seen online so far are on Cornerstone. They are the grand total scores though. I'd photographed the score sheets for my class so could see the comparison on all the scores.

              http://www.cornerstonedressage.com/results/2010USDF.pdf
              Cloverfox Stables

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by FLIPPED HER HALO View Post
                We asked and were told they didn't have sponsors for them so they canceled them. Yet they were charging people to attend and watch the show...
                I thought the charging of $10 *per day* was ridiculous. We need to be encouraging spectators/sponsors, not shut them out! If I were a vendor, I would be seriously upset. It's bad enough to have to pay $$ for a spot, but then to have your audience limited, is really unfortunate.

                Like I said, there was a LOT wrong with this Championship show... please don't let it turn you off - I hope you had a good time anyway!!

                (and thanks for posting some scores! )

                Comment


                • #9
                  At the championships, the placing is more important than the percentage, so one judge being consistently lower should not be a big problem.

                  It's also worth noting that judges have different views of the action. It was interesting to watch the live scoring at WEG. Frequently, the judges gave similar marks. But, frequently, they gave marks that were quite different; I know I saw one that got 4 and 8. Sometimes the glorious extended canter from the side is way crooked from the front, etc.
                  If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    This should not be a surprise to anyone. As we documented in our statistical analysis paper, a 10-13% point difference in scores between the high scoring judges and the low scoring judges is real. If you showed before one of the highest of the high scoring judges and one of the lowest of the low scoring judges, an even greater difference is possible.

                    Does this constitute a "reportable offense"? If each judge was consistent in their scoring and each class was ranked appropriately, probably not. While it is not pretty and does not do anything to advance the cause of judges as fair arbiters of dressage standards, having differences of opinion is not against any rules.

                    Does this wide difference constitute a problem for the dressage world? Very much yes. Lack of consistency in the application of the test standards eats away at the core of the showing process. It also calls into question the validity of all those awards that are based on achieving or exceeding a set point bar .... if you are smart and judge shop carefully, you can win a bunch of big awards yet not have the refined skills that should go with those scores.

                    *star*
                    "Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit."
                    - Desiderata, (c) Max Ehrman, 1926

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Mardi View Post
                      Her test scores varied by quite a bit between the two judges who scored her ride (difference was usually 3 pts per movement, sometimes more, sometimes less). We noticed the disparity, and knew that sometimes it happens..
                      So are you saying that for example one judge gave her "extended trot" and 8 and the other a 5 and that was consistent throughout the majority of the movements of the test?

                      If so I don't think that should happen.

                      I can see how one judge would think "7" and the other "6" and that the percentage might thus be "70" and "60", but I think a 3 point difference in the movement should be an oddity.

                      Comment

                      • Original Poster

                        #12
                        Originally posted by BetterOffRed View Post
                        Do you have a time machine, Mardi? Did you go into the future and see what the results were going to be for the show? Because Region 9 Championships aren't until November 4. I think you mean Region 7.
                        OMG. Yes, Region SEVEN.
                        Thanks.

                        Comment

                        • Original Poster

                          #13
                          Originally posted by caddym View Post
                          So are you saying that for example one judge gave her "extended trot" and 8 and the other a 5 and that was consistent throughout the majority of the movements of the test?
                          Yes.

                          Comment

                          • Original Poster

                            #14
                            Originally posted by FLIPPED HER HALO View Post
                            Many of the exhibitor dinners and hospitality that were listed in the premium never happened. Dinners were to be provided every night and all that happened was Little Caesars Pizza the first night. A lot of folks in the barns were upset about this as they were counting on those dinners after riding all day. There wasn't an announcement or revised premium - they just never happened. We asked and were told they didn't have sponsors for them so they canceled them.
                            Didn't have sponsors ? That's absurd. Who advertises an event, and THEN tries to find a sponsor ? If a sponsor can't be found, the party still goes on out of pocket. You can't take it back !! What a public relations nightmare. I know people who would have gladly sponsored one of the parties.

                            If anyone is going to complain to USEF about the show, another letter should be sent to the title sponsor of the USDF Regional Champs: Great American Insurance Group.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Scores for two different classes from the Reg 7/CDS Show as posted on someone's Facebook. Class and horse names cropped to protect the innocent. Don't know if Judge B and Judge C were the same for each class. Note the disparity between the two judges on the first two horses in the second class: one got 56% from C and 77% from B, while the other got 72% from C and 63% from B (percentages rounded to nearest whole number) so, at least in that case, the placings weren't consistent from judge to judge.
                              Attached Files
                              The Evil Chem Prof

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Originally posted by Mardi View Post
                                Didn't have sponsors ? That's absurd. Who advertises an event, and THEN tries to find a sponsor ? If a sponsor can't be found, the party still goes on out of pocket. You can't take it back !! What a public relations nightmare. I know people who would have gladly sponsored one of the parties.

                                If anyone is going to complain to USEF about the show, another letter should be sent to the title sponsor of the USDF Regional Champs: Great American Insurance Group.
                                CDS sent an email today asking for our comments on the shows - both good and bad. I mentioned this among a few other things. The MEC show last year seemed to run a lot smoother.

                                Originally posted by Peggy View Post
                                Scores for two different classes from the Reg 7/CDS Show as posted on someone's Facebook. Class and horse names cropped to protect the innocent. Don't know if Judge B and Judge C were the same for each class. Note the disparity between the two judges on the first two horses in the second class: one got 56% from C and 77% from B, while the other got 72% from C and 63% from B (percentages rounded to nearest whole number) so, at least in that case, the placings weren't consistent from judge to judge.
                                Wow, some of those are pretty different. I know in my class I competed in the scorea were darn consistent. There were a few that were off by a few percents, but for my own score it was really similar between both judges.
                                Cloverfox Stables

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Originally posted by Mardi View Post
                                  Didn't have sponsors ? That's absurd. Who advertises an event, and THEN tries to find a sponsor ? If a sponsor can't be found, the party still goes on out of pocket. You can't take it back !! What a public relations nightmare. I know people who would have gladly sponsored one of the parties.

                                  If anyone is going to complain to USEF about the show, another letter should be sent to the title sponsor of the USDF Regional Champs: Great American Insurance Group.
                                  Yeah, I'm not really buying the "no sponsors" thing either. If you say you're going to do something - do it.

                                  (that $10 per person/day entrance fee should have offset some of that??)

                                  Then again, I've come to NOT expect to see the advertised "hospitality" events at the LAEC shows... they just don't really happen, and when they *do*, they seem like an afterthought and not a real attempt to appreciate and celebrate exhibitors ( who sort of make the whole thing happen, ya know?).

                                  The whole "vibe" coming from the production of that show just seemed...unfriendly.

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    If you, as a rider, received extremely disparate scores and you are not happy about it, fill out a show report.

                                    This is the ONLY way that this information will get reviewed by the Licensed Officials Committee.
                                    www.TerriMiller.com
                                    Photos & Commissioned Paintings

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      It's hard to believe there wasn't SOME kind of mix-up or scoring error on the test that got a 55.9% from one judge and a 77% from the other judge. I just can't fathom how 2 judges can see a test THAT differently!

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        I attended the show. I have attended the region 7 annual show for several years in a row. First of all, I have yet to see the evening hospitality event offer up anything much better than Little Caesars Pizza.

                                        We also need to remember the RAIN!!!! It basically rained for two days (tues and wed) straight right before the show. I think show management had a lot more things to deal with rather than if we liked the pizza. They had to reschedule classes to fit everything from 5 arenas into the usable three arenas. They had to deal with the fact that for most of the first day of the show (thurs), there was one arena and a parking lot to use for lunging and warm-up and schooling. What some of the competitors at the show seem to forget was, this was happening to ALL of the competitors and not to just their so important self. Show management was getting pounded by complaints and it isn't like they ordered the rain, they were doing the best they could with the hand that EVERYONE was dealt.

                                        The show management is the same if the annual show is at Rancho Murrieta, LAEC or Woodside. I think we should all be counting our lucky stars that we are having the show at Rancho Murrieta instead of Woodside next year.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X