• 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

"L" Graduates and "r" Judges: Who's certified, how did you do it?

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

  • #41
    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).

    Comment


    • #42
      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).

      Comment


      • #43
        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

        Comment


        • #44
          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).

          Comment


          • #45
            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.

            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.

            Comment


            • #46
              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).

              Comment


              • #47
                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).

                Comment


                • #48
                  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).

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    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, 02:12 PM. Reason: spelling - removing snark.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      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).

                      Comment


                      • #51
                        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!"

                        Comment

                        • Original Poster

                          #52
                          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!

                          Comment


                          • #53
                            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).

                            Comment


                            • #54
                              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.

                              Comment


                              • #55
                                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, 04:10 PM. Reason: spelling

                                Comment


                                • #56
                                  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 !!
                                  "Friend" me !

                                  http://www.facebook.com/isabeau.solace

                                  Comment


                                  • #57
                                    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.

                                    Comment


                                    • #58
                                      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.

                                      Comment


                                      • #59
                                        CONGRATULATIONS Schiffon!!!!!

                                        Comment


                                        • #60
                                          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?

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X