• 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

Perf. Std: Disadvantaged Riders & Regions

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

  • Perf. Std: Disadvantaged Riders & Regions

    As some of you may be aware, the 3 data nerds have continued to nerd away. We have analyzed ~45,000 scores from 2008 shows from all regions and all levels.

    Some interesting stuff is emerging.

    Would people be interested to know that there are some "low scoring regions?"

    Would people be interested to know that there are some "low scoring breeds?"

    Would people still support a qualifying rule if the lowest scoring region scored, on average 2.5 points below the highest scoring region?

    These are not rhetorical quesitons. What should we do with this info?
    Last edited by pluvinel; Sep. 20, 2008, 02:02 PM.
    Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress.
    Alfred A. Montapert

  • #2
    Well, there are other data-data nerds on this board.

    I think you should post it, along with a brief description of where you found your source data and a description of what analytical methodology was applied to lead you to your conclusions.

    Then, the rest of us data nerds can evaluate it for you. Hey...it's not a peer-reviewed journal or anything, but I doubt that the USDF connection or Dressage Today is going to publish your findings no matter how sound your analytical method may be......



    (Wouldn't it be nice if our national organizations actually used a data-driven approach before making decisions?????)

    Comment


    • #3
      I agree -- post it here and email to the GMOs for discussion before the upcoming USDF conference. Send to John Long at the USEF too. Decisions need to be made on data...not opinions and anecdotes.
      "Dreams are the touchstone of our characters." Henry David Thoreau
      Touchstone Farm
      www.bytouchstonefarm.com

      Comment


      • #4
        I'd love to know about it.

        It could make a great difference and certainly raise some questions that should be looked at more closely.

        Not that I give a hoot about showing but I like patterns and facts.
        Ring the bells that still can ring
        Forget your perfect offering
        There is a crack in everything
        That's how the light gets in.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by pluvinel View Post
          Would people be interested to know that there are some "low scoring regions?"

          Would people be interested to know that there are some "low scoring breeds?"
          Interested, but not at all surprised. Would like to know which they are, to see if they match perception.

          Comment


          • #6
            I'd be fascinated - as a non american, non nerd, non mathemetician - it's interesting but it would need to come with a stats for dummies type explanation!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by pluvinel View Post
              As some of you may be aware, the 3 data nerds have continued to nerd away. We have analyzed ~45,000 scores from 2008 shows from all regions and all levels.

              Some interesting stuff is emerging.

              Would people be interested to know that there are some "low scoring regions?"

              Would people be interested to know that there are some "low scoring breeds?"

              Would people still support a qualifying rule if the lowest scoring region scored, on average 2.5 points below the highest scoring region?

              These are not rhetorical quesitons. What should we do with this info?

              Id love to see it (Im a math nerd too).
              www.spindletopfarm.net
              Home of Puerto D'Azur - 1998 NA 100 Day Test Champion
              "Charcter is much easier kept than recovered"

              Comment


              • #8
                I vote yes as well. I think it would be helpful. Might help various GMOs figure out where their area stands and could lead to helpful, knowlegeable, improvements.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Would people be interested to know that there are some "low scoring regions?"

                  Would people be interested to know that there are some "low scoring breeds?"
                  I am curious as well.

                  I can see the "low scoring regions" going either way. There are the big dressage areas like Florida and S. California, where we'd assume the scores would be higher (regions 3 and 7), but then there are also areas where dressage is not so big and where it is not unheard of to hire generous judges to encourage people to participate at all, and there is also the fact that although regions 3 and 7 contain Florida and S.Cal, they also contain other non dressage heavy states, which could also skew the results in terms of speaking regionally. In other words, I don't know if determining high scoring regions would really mean anything. Nonetheless, I'd still be curious!

                  It's the same with breeds, we can rather well guess which breeds are higher scoring and lower scoring, or can flip thru any Yearbook issue to see All-Breeds results. I'd still be curious in your specific findings, however.

                  While I don't know how meaningful the information may be in terms of the big picture, it would still be interesting.

                  I would also be interested in the average score nationwide, per level, to see how it drops as people move up the levels and the work gets more difficult, if this is information you happen to also have easily available.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Just looking at show scores I've often thought certain regions scored lower, but also that scores from specific shows average very differently even in a higher scoring region. and certain breeds score lower based on the HOY published numbers.

                    I'd really like to see the results of your study to see if my impressions are really valid overall, or just apply for the small number of scores I've looked at.

                    Do the scores run higher in california and florida? Are your numbers dividied by professional and amateur?

                    Comment

                    • Original Poster

                      #11
                      Originally posted by molliwog View Post
                      Well, there are other data-data nerds on this board.

                      I think you should post it, along with a brief description of where you found your source data and a description of what analytical methodology was applied to lead you to your conclusions.

                      Then, the rest of us data nerds can evaluate it for you. Hey...it's not a peer-reviewed journal or anything, but I doubt that the USDF connection or Dressage Today is going to publish your findings no matter how sound your analytical method may be......

                      (Wouldn't it be nice if our national organizations actually used a data-driven approach before making decisions?????)
                      PEER REVIEWED!!!!! This is brilliant!!!!! We welcome as many eyes as possible on the analysis.

                      We're in the process of finalizing the document. The question was basically what to do with said document. The inital results raised a few more questions on how to slice and dice for further analysis....so we're doing that.

                      It will take a week or so to finish the report as some of us need day jobs which interfere with this project.

                      But once the report is final, lets get a "gathering of the nerds" and have a data fest.

                      Give us a couple of weeks, but please continue to give us ideas about where the document should go, if they haven't already been covered.
                      Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress.
                      Alfred A. Montapert

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Nerd away...I would love to know, I am nerdly challanged.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          aahhh... but even regions don't tell the whole story.

                          My region includes NEDA (MA) and WNYDA (NY) and shows like NEDA fall, Syracuse, etc.

                          My *state*, and my *area* (5 +/- hrs from nearest big NEDA event) definitely don't fare as well as the rest of the region...

                          3 recognized shows this year within a 3 hr drive. That's it.

                          Still, I'd love to see the numbers.
                          InnisFailte Pinto Sporthorses & Coloured Cobs
                          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                          Bits are like cats, what's one more? (Petstorejunkie)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Please post them.

                            I could be wrong, but I'm guessing that the trends follow what has been published in USDF connections in regards to average qualifying and regional championship scores by region and the breeding statistics (performance scoring by breed, sire of get, produce of dam, etc. statistics).

                            Of course there are lower scoring regions. There will be higher scores in areas of the country where there is a higher disposable income to buy quality horses and take lessons and put the horse in professional training, where there is an abundance of quality professionals, where there is an abundance of breeders-especially quality mare owners, and where english-type riding is the dominant equestrian sport. Likely, the whole of the east coast, especially Florida, and California regions have some of the highest scores.

                            I'm sure my region (Region 9) is one of, if not the lowest scoring region. As a whole, Western disciplines are very popular (and draw alot of the horse people with money), there are alot of "nontraditional breeds" doing dressage, and we have relatively fewer quality trainers and breeders than, say, New England or the Mid-Atlantic, for the same land mass. There is also less money as a whole in this region. I mean, in between cities here we have alot of *open space* and ranches - not suburbs and small cities. We hear crap all the time about how terrible the region is as a whole.

                            Of course I would also expect low-scoring breeds. I'm guessing the most popular and populous breeds (hanoverians, dutch warmbloods, oldenburgs) are amongst the highest scoring and everything else would be a whole lot lower? I'm also guessing that those with common import breeds fall into a financial bracket that affords them to pay for professional training and lessons. NO DOUBT that increases one's scores. And that top professionals (who score well) are riding them (year end award and qualification stats support this). I'm guessing less TB and QH owners spend that amount of money on training - or they are doing other disciplines as well as dressage.

                            I think it is interesting information, but I'm not sure what it really says at the end of the day. We have judges coming to our region *expecting* to see low scoring horses and riders. I also hear people telling others that if they buy XX breed, they'll do better at shows and in the discipline (these conclusions can be supported by the various year-end award stats). This usually ends up with newer and amateur riders being overmounted - exactly the problem that the judges complain about. Who wants to buy an appropriate QH or Welsh cob when they already know they won't score as well as a NA-KWPN? I see this alllllllllll the time. Publishing data about high and low scoring regions, and high and low scoring breeds really needs to come with a real-life interpretation of what the numbers mean. I'm not saying that the stats geeks need to do this , but that people need to keep it all in mind. There's nothing worse than no stats than misinterpretted stats.

                            J.
                            Proud member of the Colbert Dressage Nation

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by pluvinel View Post
                              PEER REVIEWED!!!!! This is brilliant!!!!! We welcome as many eyes as possible on the analysis.

                              We're in the process of finalizing the document. The question was basically what to do with said document. The inital results raised a few more questions on how to slice and dice for further analysis....so we're doing that.

                              It will take a week or so to finish the report as some of us need day jobs which interfere with this project.

                              But once the report is final, lets get a "gathering of the nerds" and have a data fest.

                              Give us a couple of weeks, but please continue to give us ideas about where the document should go, if they haven't already been covered.
                              I'm a scientist nerd, and would be thrilled to be a part of the "gathering of the nerds". i love data fests!
                              Proud member of the Colbert Dressage Nation

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                I'm not a numbers nerd, but I KNOW this data is relevant and important; that it helps to dispel the myth that U.S. riders need a Standards Rule; that it helps to explain WHY the Standards Rule as presented will not work and has no operating system in place to help make it work.

                                BUT--

                                Honestly-- I think the only numbers that will interest John Long and the BOG are the economics.

                                If the people who vote are made to understand that this Performance Rule will undermine their cash flow; that this Performance Rule presents as elitist and is unattractive to riders and possible future riders...then I think there is a chance they will vote no.
                                one oak, lots of canyons

                                http://horsesportnews.wordpress.com/

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  FWIW, I vote to publish your data on the BB's. I think you would get some interesting feedback from many of the posters here and on TOB.


                                  Also, these 2007 vs. 2008 stats you posted on TOB were interesting. The 2008 scores are actually lower at T-4th levels (statistically significant )

                                  Originally posted by pluvinel
                                  In 2007, the average scores across all regions was (truncated at 1 decimal place):
                                  Training-62.3
                                  1st-61.7
                                  2nd-60.5
                                  3rd-60.1
                                  4th-61.3
                                  PSG-60.3
                                  Int-60.1
                                  GP-59.1

                                  In 2008, the average scores across all regions was (truncated at 1 decimal place):
                                  Training-61.9
                                  1st-61.7
                                  2nd-60.3
                                  3rd-60.160.0
                                  4th-60.9
                                  PSG-661.0
                                  Int-62.0
                                  GP-60.7

                                  And of all the scores, in all the regions, in both 2007 and 2008, only 0.03% of the scores were 40% or below.....

                                  Remember, the score of 4 means "insufficient"....ergo, the judges are NOT sending the message to the riders that their riding is BAD....

                                  The descriptors of "bad" starts at 3-"Fairly bad"...then 2-"Bad".....then 1-"Very bad"....so if the judges want to have the riders get "the message" then the score need to reflect bad riding when it so merits."

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    One data nerd here, would love to see this!!!
                                    You have to have experiences to gain experience.

                                    1998 Morgan mare Mythic Feronia "More Valley Girl Than Girl Scout!"

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      [QUOTE]
                                      Originally posted by pluvinel View Post
                                      As some of you may be aware, the 3 data nerds have continued to nerd away. We have analyzed ~45,000 scores from 2008 shows from all regions and all levels.

                                      Some interesting stuff is emerging.
                                      are there also any juges who consistantly give low scores all round ??? also I know in some other breeds/sports there are judges who are hired just because they are cheaper than all other folks...and sadly their opinions matter as they shape the year end scoring...

                                      best
                                      Production Acres,Pro A Welsh Cobs
                                      I am one of the last 210,000 remaining full time farmers in America.We feed the others.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        Let your fellow nerds know when the data are ready.......would be glad to have a look.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X