• 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

Show Standards Retreat..here it is folks.

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

  • Show Standards Retreat..here it is folks.

    Here's the take....

    I will post a bit of a "report" on what the Retreat was all about. I will not go into intense detail with a play by play. It was imperative, IMHO, that the retreat was held and as many of the Committee Members be there is person as possible..

    There are a couple of main points/highlights:

    First, there is already a list of Requirements for shows. We started there and then went on to a separate list of Recommendations. There are Guidelines in the managers manual we also looked at and we ALL had items and suggestions from so many of the exhibitors who had contacted us.

    Our goal was not to restrict management in their efforts to have shows at the rating/level they wish to have. HOWEVER, it was imperative that we try to find a way to help Quality and not Quanity.

    Another lengthy discussion was a GIANT priority to help find a way for the current system "B" "C" "Local" shows to receive help and information so they can once again be a VERY important part of our Industry. Everyone on that Committee is committed to exploring all avenues to regain the prestige and importance of the "Lower-Mid Levels" !!!! It is a sadness for all of to have the shows SEEM to either be "AA" or nothing.

    It was also a VERY LONG discussion that the quality of shows should be a source of pride for our Federation, the exhibitors, trainers, owners and spectators....no matter the "Rating". We discussed at length the importance of GREAT "B" "C" shows again.

    We repeated OVER AND OVER AND OVER the importance of "meaningful feedback" from just about anyone we can get it from. We received a report regarding the number of "Evaluation Forms" turned in over the past year......IT WAS ALL BUT NON-EXISTENT considering there were approx 2400 shows that year. I think it was like 45-60 forms TOTAL.....NOT counting Stewards and officials.

    For all the negative conversations about how awful certain shows were.....there were simply NOT very many evaluation forms.... if everyone who complains out here were to simply fill out the form AT THE SHOWS THEY ATTEND AND COMPLAIN ABOUT.....it would be sooooooooooooo much easier to know what the complaints are for SPECIFIC shows and therefore what "Required Standards" are of the most important.

    There have been several LONG threads here complaining about specific shows and I can tell you that Evaluation Forms DO NOT get fill out. How can we expect change if all we want to do is complain on a BB????

    The separation of the Jumper "Ratings" vs the Hunter "Ratings. A show is now governed by the Rating for the Hunters...Jumpers are secondary. A really GREAT jumper show WITHOUT HUNTERS basically has no rating now.

    Shows could then present 2 ratings....

    For those of you who think the sky is falling and the Hunters are just about dead....I also have felt that way and I must tell you that is the belief I had!!! BUT the reality in print is different. We got a report of the numbers in the Hunter ring for the past 5 years so we could see just how much the hunters have "declined".

    THEY HAVEN'T!!!! Counting the number of horses that received ANY points in the following divisions, from 1999 to 2004, the growth..or shrinkage..is as follows:

    The ones that got smaller:
    Regular Working.... - 32
    Reg Conformation... - 3
    Small Pony Hunter.. - 19
    Large Pony Hunter.. - 38

    The ones that grew:
    Grn 1st Year....... + 175
    Grn 2nd Year....... + 30
    A/O 35 and under... + 21
    A/O 35 and over.... + 103
    Grn Conformation... + 57
    Sm Juniors 15/under + 7
    Lg Juniors 15/under + 162
    Sm Junior 16-17.... + 39
    Lg Junior 16-17.... + 166
    Med Ponys.......... + 7
    Sm Grn Ponys....... + 39
    Med Grn Ponys...... + 39
    Lg Grn Ponys....... + 30

    AMAZING!!!!! I was really surprised! So it brings up the question.....if there are more horses/ponys receiving points BUT there are more classes NOT FILLING....WHY???? we (the Committee) do not have the answer BUT at least it gave us some statistics to chew on!

    We accepted the fact that what we can EXPECT may be a little different that what we WANT!

    We also spent an immense amount of time discussing the managers keeping their shows and dates. This was a difficult time for all of us since we are aware that shows have grown and grown but the "mid" levels of shows are smaller. We CANNOT, however restrict the American system of entrepreneurs succeeding.

    The real bottom line is that if exhibitors don't like a show they can always not go....it is their own personal decision. IF they want to chase those points then they have to make decisions and we (the Committee) cannot make decisions for them.

    FOOTING took up a lot of time. Just about everyone in the industry has a different "definition" of what is "good footing". And each part of each discipline has it's own definition of what is "good footing". And each height of fence classes has a bit of a different "need".

    To end this first postup.....All Standards/Reccommendations/Quidelines......

    For standards to work and be fair AT ALL they have to meet the following: They must be definable, measurable and enforceable. If we cannot "define" something it cannot go on the list of Standards. If we cannot "measure" something it cannot go on the list of Standards. If we cannot "enforce" something it cannot go on the list of Standards.

    That was always the main conversation we came back to on each and every point of discussion.

    To wrap this up.......I would love your input, suggestions and ideas and questions...BUT BUT BUT..

    If you would PLEASE refrain from negative attacks or long rambling comparisions or woe is me theorys...I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT.

    I am posting to get information out but I am not interested in this becomeing a slug fest.....
    [url]http://www.horseshowbiz.com
    [url]http://www.ijumpsports.com
  • Original Poster

    #2
    Here's the take....

    I will post a bit of a "report" on what the Retreat was all about. I will not go into intense detail with a play by play. It was imperative, IMHO, that the retreat was held and as many of the Committee Members be there is person as possible..

    There are a couple of main points/highlights:

    First, there is already a list of Requirements for shows. We started there and then went on to a separate list of Recommendations. There are Guidelines in the managers manual we also looked at and we ALL had items and suggestions from so many of the exhibitors who had contacted us.

    Our goal was not to restrict management in their efforts to have shows at the rating/level they wish to have. HOWEVER, it was imperative that we try to find a way to help Quality and not Quanity.

    Another lengthy discussion was a GIANT priority to help find a way for the current system "B" "C" "Local" shows to receive help and information so they can once again be a VERY important part of our Industry. Everyone on that Committee is committed to exploring all avenues to regain the prestige and importance of the "Lower-Mid Levels" !!!! It is a sadness for all of to have the shows SEEM to either be "AA" or nothing.

    It was also a VERY LONG discussion that the quality of shows should be a source of pride for our Federation, the exhibitors, trainers, owners and spectators....no matter the "Rating". We discussed at length the importance of GREAT "B" "C" shows again.

    We repeated OVER AND OVER AND OVER the importance of "meaningful feedback" from just about anyone we can get it from. We received a report regarding the number of "Evaluation Forms" turned in over the past year......IT WAS ALL BUT NON-EXISTENT considering there were approx 2400 shows that year. I think it was like 45-60 forms TOTAL.....NOT counting Stewards and officials.

    For all the negative conversations about how awful certain shows were.....there were simply NOT very many evaluation forms.... if everyone who complains out here were to simply fill out the form AT THE SHOWS THEY ATTEND AND COMPLAIN ABOUT.....it would be sooooooooooooo much easier to know what the complaints are for SPECIFIC shows and therefore what "Required Standards" are of the most important.

    There have been several LONG threads here complaining about specific shows and I can tell you that Evaluation Forms DO NOT get fill out. How can we expect change if all we want to do is complain on a BB????

    The separation of the Jumper "Ratings" vs the Hunter "Ratings. A show is now governed by the Rating for the Hunters...Jumpers are secondary. A really GREAT jumper show WITHOUT HUNTERS basically has no rating now.

    Shows could then present 2 ratings....

    For those of you who think the sky is falling and the Hunters are just about dead....I also have felt that way and I must tell you that is the belief I had!!! BUT the reality in print is different. We got a report of the numbers in the Hunter ring for the past 5 years so we could see just how much the hunters have "declined".

    THEY HAVEN'T!!!! Counting the number of horses that received ANY points in the following divisions, from 1999 to 2004, the growth..or shrinkage..is as follows:

    The ones that got smaller:
    Regular Working.... - 32
    Reg Conformation... - 3
    Small Pony Hunter.. - 19
    Large Pony Hunter.. - 38

    The ones that grew:
    Grn 1st Year....... + 175
    Grn 2nd Year....... + 30
    A/O 35 and under... + 21
    A/O 35 and over.... + 103
    Grn Conformation... + 57
    Sm Juniors 15/under + 7
    Lg Juniors 15/under + 162
    Sm Junior 16-17.... + 39
    Lg Junior 16-17.... + 166
    Med Ponys.......... + 7
    Sm Grn Ponys....... + 39
    Med Grn Ponys...... + 39
    Lg Grn Ponys....... + 30

    AMAZING!!!!! I was really surprised! So it brings up the question.....if there are more horses/ponys receiving points BUT there are more classes NOT FILLING....WHY???? we (the Committee) do not have the answer BUT at least it gave us some statistics to chew on!

    We accepted the fact that what we can EXPECT may be a little different that what we WANT!

    We also spent an immense amount of time discussing the managers keeping their shows and dates. This was a difficult time for all of us since we are aware that shows have grown and grown but the "mid" levels of shows are smaller. We CANNOT, however restrict the American system of entrepreneurs succeeding.

    The real bottom line is that if exhibitors don't like a show they can always not go....it is their own personal decision. IF they want to chase those points then they have to make decisions and we (the Committee) cannot make decisions for them.

    FOOTING took up a lot of time. Just about everyone in the industry has a different "definition" of what is "good footing". And each part of each discipline has it's own definition of what is "good footing". And each height of fence classes has a bit of a different "need".

    To end this first postup.....All Standards/Reccommendations/Quidelines......

    For standards to work and be fair AT ALL they have to meet the following: They must be definable, measurable and enforceable. If we cannot "define" something it cannot go on the list of Standards. If we cannot "measure" something it cannot go on the list of Standards. If we cannot "enforce" something it cannot go on the list of Standards.

    That was always the main conversation we came back to on each and every point of discussion.

    To wrap this up.......I would love your input, suggestions and ideas and questions...BUT BUT BUT..

    If you would PLEASE refrain from negative attacks or long rambling comparisions or woe is me theorys...I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT.

    I am posting to get information out but I am not interested in this becomeing a slug fest.....
    [url]http://www.horseshowbiz.com
    [url]http://www.ijumpsports.com

    Comment


    • #3
      Um I have filled out evaluation forms in the past in both ways .I.E. to commend a show for being so well run and also for poor qualities!
      However I did have an awful situation happen many years ago...I had filled out a show evaluation form given it to the steward which at the time was how those things were done.Two days later the manager accosts me at the ingate and wants me to explain to him why I said what I said.That was a really pretty 20 minutes let me tell you .After I told him why I felt the way I did.I complained to the steward and to the zone representative that happened to be on the showgrounds.
      If that has happened a few times it would keep exhibitors from filling those forms out .Also there is a continuing belief that no one reads the forms or does anything about what is brought up in them.
      Brilyntrip

      Comment


      • #4
        Wow! Thanks for all the great info!
        At least the things that need to be discussed are being discussed!
        I look forward to the next installment....
        KD

        Comment


        • #5
          How many members were actually present???
          *************************
          Go, Baby, Go......
          Aefvue Farms Footing Inspector

          Comment


          • #6
            khobstetter -
            You are to be commended for your efforts in letting us know what is going on. The USHJA is sadly lacking in disseminating information.
            Here's a thought for your group to work on in connection with the evaluation form situation. People generally won't pick one up and fill it out unless they have a complaint. So what the Fed receives are probably mostly complaints. Is there a way you can "choose"
            exhibitors to report to you on the show they have just attended? Randomly ask them to fill out an evaluation to help your committee. If it a positive thing to be asked to help, maybe you can get some unbiased answers as to the quality of the show. This idea could even be worked out to make the exibitor feel "important" in that their opinion was asked for. Just a thought.
            Interesd to know how many are on your committee and how many were present at the recent meeting.
            Keep up the good work and keep letting us know what's happening.

            Comment


            • #7
              We repeated OVER AND OVER AND OVER the importance of "meaningful feedback" from just about anyone we can get it from. We received a report regarding the number of "Evaluation Forms" turned in over the past year......IT WAS ALL BUT NON-EXISTENT considering there were approx 2400 shows that year. I think it was like 45-60 forms TOTAL.....NOT counting Stewards and officials.

              There are several reasons for this:

              1. The evaluation forms are not confidentail. Anyone filling them out does not have any reasonable expectation of privacy.

              2. There are no standards for show managers actually turning them in.

              3. There is no easy or convenient way to get the forms and fill them out.

              So, from a former association exec, here's a suggestion: pick a random number of exhibitors from representative shows (like 1 HITS FL, 1 Culpepper, 2 WINS, 1 Lamplight, 1 Indio, a couple of B shows, a couple of C shows, etc.) and send the forms from USEF with a return enveloped TO USEF.

              If you rely on people filling out forms on-site, you will continue to get the poor response.

              Just my humble opinion.
              "Socrates was a very wise man who went around giving good advice. They poisoned him." Anonymous...

              Comment


              • #8
                I would be happy to fill out an evalution form at each show if I knew that I wasn't slitting my own throat with the respective show managers or judges.

                It feels like the risk of penalty to those who dare to criticize is just too high. I know that there are many good managers and judges that wouldn't be less than fair, but they probably won't be the ones being complained about anyway.

                If everyone involved is given the name of those complaining, only the powerful can afford to speak out. We "little people" will have to just suck up being stabled as far away as they can put us with no water supply, and just go into the ring for personl experience because there's no way to get a ribbon from a judge (or judge's friend) that you complained about.

                If we could send our evaluation forms to someone who collated the data and released it without names, I think many more exhibitors would take part. It would be fine with me to put my name and USEF # on the form if I needed to be contacted and to verify membership, but I don't want it handed to someone for their &#*! list.

                Comment


                • #9
                  ummm......what about online evaluations? I imagine a LOT of exhibitors bring laptops with them, and most probably have computer access SOMEWHERE. Why not offer an online evaluation form, request a USEF ID# for verification if necessary, but let people fill them out at their leisure AND with some expectation that the form will: a) reach something like the appropriate party and b) not be read by the show itself.

                  Online forms could also allow for comments -- WITHOUT identifiers -- to be given back to the shows for their own improvements.

                  Now...if this is being done and I just don't know, my bad. If it's not, maybe it's a thought......

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I am starting the meaningful feadback right now. I am a card holding member of u the USHJA. I think that the B and C rated shows exist, they just don't bother getting rated with the USEF and USHJA. for example, or local association has shows that are run well, and could easily have a C rating, if not B. I'd go around to the local shows and engourage them to get themselves regognized. Look at some of the VHSA associate shows, they are all run better than most schooling shows, but they just don't bother to get the rating, IMO. Maybe I'm totally off the mark, though.
                    -Grace

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      What Kestral said..AND, do they really do any good at all...?? I feel like we are the pawns in the big game...No one listens to the silent majority.
                      The thing about smart people, is they look like crazy people, to dumb people.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        ah but OrangeHorse -- what would be the BENEFIT of those local shows getting rated?

                        Our local circuits are quite competitive. Many of the judges are rated judges from the area. Right now, they are inexpensive and accessible. Now, the local associations have started using some show software, that has netted an office fee (typically $5) for many of the shows, but that's it. There are not tons of other fees, and it doesn't cost as much as a division to come and show if you're not a member.

                        As to drugging.....many of the horses show both rated and local. If they've got a rated show next weekend, they aren't THAT likely to be drugging the horses, and honestly, the better horses and riders frankly do tend to win (with some longshots coming in sometimes). So if drug testing is the big bonus that may not be enough.

                        I think that the VALUE of being rated needs to be examined, improved and communicated. Or....perhaps we do need to recognize that the value is at the top, and for the base and the middle, it's not there and change accordingly.

                        Comment

                        • Original Poster

                          #13
                          WOW WOW WOW...I went to the movie (Monster-in-Law..IT'S GREAT!!!) and I get back to wonderful information...let's see if I can answer some of it..

                          Evaluation forms...they are completely private..used to give them to the Stewards, BUT they need to NOW come directly to the office!! We were not given any information about "who"..just what shows and what was said. There were quite a few positive forms also..

                          Hopeful Hunter:
                          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> ummm......what about online evaluations? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> This is the direction we really went. An online feedback form that is MAXIMUM of 2-3 minutes. We also went with a start to get Evaluations it be mandatory for ALL Licensed Officals and staff to fill out the form...and NOT give it to show management..directly to the offices in Lexington.

                          Kestral..<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> If we could send our evaluation forms to someone who collated the data and released it without names, I think many more exhibitors would take part. It would be fine with me to put my name and USEF # on the form if I needed to be contacted and to verify membership, but I don't want it handed to someone for their &#*! list </div></BLOCKQUOTE> THAT is the way they are handled now. NO ONE is given the information about who is complaining...only the office person knows and it is typed into a report..sort of an Excell grid with the show name on the right and topics across the top..IE: Competition name, prize money, schedule, facility, footing (arenas), footing (warm-up), courses/equipment, Hospitality, overall, any additional comments.

                          We did NOT get any information on who filled them out. We were ADAMENT that they need to be completely confidential. A manager will only know IF an exhibitor decides to file a protest!

                          briylntrip...I am sooooo sorry that happened to you..it NEVER should have. That is an example of why the system is changing!!

                          Doubleez<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> So what the Fed receives are probably mostly complaints. Is there a way you can "choose"
                          exhibitors to report to you on the show they have just attended? Randomly ask them to fill out an evaluation to help your committee. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> That was a HUGE discussion, BUT not all were complaints. I personally am going to try to keep Evaluation forms and envelopes in my golf cart at the shows. I will try to pass them out randomly and when an exhibitor fills one out I will put it in the envelope and then BOTH of us will sign the back across the flap so anyone can tell if it is tampered with.

                          I will then send them straight to the office in Lexington myself. I would suggest that for everyone. If you turn it in at the Horse Show office request that it not be opened and have someone else sign it with you. NOT because we don't trust anyone, simply for consumer confidence!!!!!!

                          Orangehorse <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> think that the B and C rated shows exist, they just don't bother getting rated with the USEF and USHJA. for example, or local association has shows that are run well, and could easily have a C rating, if not B. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> We could not agree more with you!! It seems IMHO..IMHO, not the Committees...that shows are either "AA" "A" or NOTHING!!

                          I find that soooooooooo sad..I remember Portugese Bend, Peacock Hill, some Santa Barbara, etc shows that were GIANT "B" shows and they were absolutely THE BEST!!!! I would love for us to get back to the place where the "MID" Levels are great, enjoyable and important again!!

                          Jumphigh<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> No one listens to the silent majority </div></BLOCKQUOTE> BOY did you hit the nail on the head..."SILENT" was your key word. With such a small amount of Evaluation forms BUT so much complaining there is no way to be heard if MOST are "Silent".

                          Hopeful Hunter <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> think that the VALUE of being rated needs to be examined, improved and communicated </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Agree, IMHO-and that of the Committee, all the Levels need to be really examined and evaluated!!
                          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> perhaps we do need to recognize that the value is at the top, and for the base and the middle, it's not there and change accordingly </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Here I respectfully COMPLETELY DISAGREE!! I think we have come to believe that but I don't for a minute think that should be the case. There is NO reason why we can't have quality and PRIDE at each and every level!!!!!

                          You guys are great!!!!! I do plan on taking this thread to the next meeting and going over each and every point!!

                          PLUS....you never know who else is reading here. We do have some super lurkers.

                          AND Thank you for keeping it positive...even the complaints mentioned so far were done in a positive manner...I REALLY appreciate that.
                          [url]http://www.horseshowbiz.com
                          [url]http://www.ijumpsports.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Kathy, I'm so happy to hear about how the evaluations are handled. It's very important for the exhibitors to know. Our state association will be putting the forms into our trainer hospitality baskets for use by the trainers and their clients at our WSHJA shows.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              You need to see what the Eventers do differently on their evaluation forms - I know most of them DO turn them in, and when I did, I got immediate response from my zone chair!!
                              co-author of 101 Jumping Exercises & The Rider's Fitness Program; Soon to come: Dead Ringer - a tale of equine mystery and intrique! Former Moderator!

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                &lt;&lt;The real bottom line is that if exhibitors don't like a show they can always not go....it is their own personal decision. IF they want to chase those points then they have to make decisions and we (the Committee) cannot make decisions for them.&gt;&gt;

                                <span class="ev_code_BLUE">So if this is the conclusion the committee reached, what will change? This is the present state of affairs, is it not? Simply NOT attending or attending alternative circuits (eg those well run, grass-roots, unrated shows) is a decision that many have already made. Hence the disparity between the AA's and the pitiful renditions that some B and C shows have become. There WAS a day when the "big" exhibitors would come to the B's and C's to "pick up points," and that was when those shows had numbers and quality...but then the increment system kicked in, and the value of the B and C points dropped for all but the children's and adult divisions. These divisions, in our area at least (LI) are what keeps these shows "alive." Not many want to consider these consequenses of using the increment system, however, and it seems to be all but sacrosanct. But until there is a value IN attending the B/C's, as opposed to a LACK of value in a show becoming a B/C, what is the incentive for anyone to either run one, or go to one, other than the childrens/adults?

                                BTW, I have a feeling that if your breakdown of entries per division was further broken down by show ratings, the numbers might be even more revealing.</span>


                                FOOTING took up a lot of time. Just about everyone in the industry has a different "definition" of what is "good footing". And each part of each discipline has it's own definition of what is "good footing". And each height of fence classes has a bit of a different "need".&gt;&gt;


                                <span class="ev_code_BLUE">I am at the point where I would settle for "no rocks." Honestly, footing is NOT as close to rocket science as you make it out to be. There is plenty of good footing around, but it can be expensive and time consuming to attain. More than one management has simply decided that footing is not their highest priority. I definitely vote with my entries on this one, but I'm only ONE picky person with ONE horse at the moment. Not much of a heavyweight in terms of effect on management's bottom line.</span>
                                Inner Bay Equestrian
                                Facebook
                                KERx

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Khobstetter, did you say how many people were at this meeting?

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Out of the loop once again. This is the first I have read about a retreat...

                                    In the 1980's when I was an AHSA Steward, I officiated at a couple of Arabian shows. Can we say culture shock?

                                    Anyway... The Arab world has a rule/policy of charging $5 when you pick up your number. This is a deposit that is returned when you hand in the show evaluation form that is contained in every exhibitor's packet (Yes, they are so organized that, even at shows with several thousand horses, each number comes in a manila envelope with a time schedule, the evaluation form and other greeting niceties.)

                                    One of the jobs I had (or took on -- I was never quite sure how obligated I was as an official) was to account for the total money v. forms at the end of the show.

                                    I asked management who determined the amount of the deposit and was told that it had been arrived at through trial and error. $1 was not enough of an incentive to have tired/hurried exhibitors return the forms, and everyone protested a $10 deposit.

                                    The system sure seems to work. Approximately 75% of the forms were returned. I think there were several reasons for this:

                                    1. It was part of the exhibitors' mindset to give feedback at every show. This is a learned habit and will have to be taught to H/J people.

                                    2. The forms were in their hands. They did not have to go searching for them. They could return them when they went to the office to settle their bill.

                                    3. The deposit gave the exhibitors an incentive to return the evaluation forms.

                                    -----

                                    Why not do the same thing in our discipline? This has been going on for decades in other disciplines. How much discussion has this idea gotten by the H/J people?
                                    "He lives in a cocoon of solipsism"

                                    Charles Krauthammer speaking about Trump

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Originally posted by Lord Helpus:
                                      Out of the loop once again. This is the first I have read about a retreat...

                                      In the 1980's when I was an AHSA Steward, I officiated at a couple of Arabian shows. Can we say culture shock?

                                      Anyway... The Arab world has a rule/policy of charging $5 when you pick up your number.

                                      <span class="ev_code_GREEN">Had. Those evaluation froms are a thing of the past. Part of the problem was that the Arab BNT's would collect the forms from their clients and fill them out with *their* opinions.</span>

                                      This is a deposit that is returned when you hand in the show evaluation form that is contained in every exhibitor's packet (Yes, they are so organized that, even at shows with several thousand horses, each number comes in a manila envelope with a time schedule, the evaluation form and other greeting niceties.)

                                      <span class="ev_code_GREEN">Things still tend to run like that, vis-a-vis the useful information packets.</span>
                                      "It's like a Russian nesting doll of train wrecks."--CaitlinandTheBay

                                      ...just settin' on the Group W bench.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        If the USEF is truly concerned about getting exhibitor feedback, then in my opinion, they need to be more proactive about it.

                                        There are many, many companies that specialize in surveying customers (and prospective customers) to obtain feedback for product improvement, customer satisfaction and competitive advantage. It would be a simple matter to hire this type of company to handle the survey and to provide the aggregate results (along with recommendations) to the USEF for action. This, in my opinion, would be a good use of membership dollars and would alleviate the concerns about confidentiality at the same time that it would solve the lack of data problem. Ideally you would have the third party survey company contact not only the actual exhibitors but also those that say, received a prize list but chose not to exhibit. This would give management an understanding of how their show (product) is perceived by the marketplace as well as a measure of how well they met their exhibitor (customers') expectations.

                                        It is also common practice across most service industries, and a pretty basic tenet of good customer service and product quality. *sigh*
                                        **********
                                        We move pretty fast for some rabid garden snails.
                                        -PaulaEdwina

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X