Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

A forum for discussion of training in dressage
lorilu
Herd Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:54 pm

Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby lorilu » Fri Feb 02, 2018 3:15 pm

Just a heads up. After the recent video, there is a renewed effort to create a qualifying system to move up the levels. SOme here were involved in beating down an earlier effort to do this a few years ago - the proposal was severely flawed.
Data collected at that time might come in handy this year.........
Just a heads up.
L

Ponichiwa
500 post plus club
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 2:27 pm

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Ponichiwa » Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:05 pm

I've heard the same thing and am disappointed. The rider's egregious behavior (one-handed whipping, reefing on the bridle after the halt) is independent of qualifications AND the rider actually has some decent scores at I2. In other words, a qualifying system would not have prevented that ride.

You know what would have? If the judges and TDs had enforced the rules already in place w.r.t. the use of the whip (must keep hands on the reins). Don't fix this problem (which I don't believe is widespread anyway) with more expensive/prohibitive rules. Use the rules we have!

User avatar
musical comedy
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 1302
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 3:41 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby musical comedy » Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:20 pm

Lorilu, your friend was judging at C. She could have eliminated the rider early on forthe one-hand whipping. Why didn't she?

Sue B
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 1185
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 2:55 pm
Location: Spud country (Idaho)

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Sue B » Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:22 pm

Requiring certain number of qualifying scores to move on in dressage would make it impossible for low budget riders like me who live in the hinter lands of dressage to ever make it to the upper levels. It would probably cast out all those with horses who, on their best day, have "6" gaits as well. I'm with Ponichiwa...how about simply enforcing rules already in place?

galopp
Herd Member
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 12:44 pm

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby galopp » Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:36 pm

The thing is there is already different types of qualification, ie to go to finals, qualifying to do freestyles, and in getting 'medals'. The question are they high enough? And by those standards the lady in question would have qualified to move up with 60s+. What is problematic is the scores being given, and the fact that the rides are treated like materiale classes, (judging the horse) more than the TRAINING. The said rider got 5.5/6 for rider score (the only general impression now in fei tests), which is beyond absurd (esp at I-2). When the judge's forums (five years ago) state to judges that 5 is the new four, and (this last year) said 6 is the new 5, so by extrapolation 6 is the new 4; it speaks to equivocation in standards which pass on mediocrity, if not downright abuse. mho

User avatar
musical comedy
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 1302
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 3:41 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby musical comedy » Fri Feb 02, 2018 4:49 pm

galopp wrote:<respectfully snipped> When the judge's forums (five years ago) state to judges that 5 is the new four, and (this last year) said 6 is the new 5, so by extrapolation 6 is the new 4; it speaks to equivocation in standards which pass on mediocrity, if not downright abuse. mho
I've commented frequently about this change in standards. What used to be a 50% is now a 60% and sometimes even more because of that stupid half point. That's why you see so many people getting their Bronze that don't ride very well and even miss all their changes.

Chancellor
Site Admin
Posts: 1120
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 8:26 am

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Chancellor » Fri Feb 02, 2018 5:10 pm

musical comedy wrote:Lorilu, your friend was judging at C. She could have eliminated the rider early on forthe one-hand whipping. Why didn't she?


I think to be fair, where the judge was sitting, it may NOT have been obvious that she took her hand off the rein. It was obvious in the video because the camera was on the same side as the whip.

HafDressage
Herd Member
Posts: 231
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 12:51 am

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby HafDressage » Sat Feb 03, 2018 3:40 pm

I watched the ride, and it was horrible and honestly hilarious. The internet blog that some wacko wrote that got everyone stirred up, however, was equally terrible and wildly inaccurate.

I'm not for or against a requirement system, but a few notes below:

1. In all the time I've been riding, I've never seen another ride like this. So, it's a VERY rare event and yet we are talking about major changes to our system based on it.
2. I agree the judges should have eliminated her faster (she was eventually eliminated), but given how rarely they might see a ride like this, it's not insane that they were a little behind on protocol.
3. So if we have a qualification system, then someone buys a GP schoolmaster and has to start showing at TL if they don't already have higher scores? I'm not against that per say, except for all the people who are actually showing the lower levels bc that is where they belong, that might suck.
4. Some horses struggle with scores at the lower levels, but do well once they move up to higher levels. If you have a more compact horse who isnt' a big free mover, then this certainly can be the case.

So, I'm okay with a qualifying standard, but this one test being the driver behind it is sort of silly and I think there are some logistic issues that could come up for some people. Just thoughts on it. :)

galopp
Herd Member
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 12:44 pm

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby galopp » Sat Feb 03, 2018 8:39 pm

The score given for the test was over sufficient, the rider in the first test whipped one handed at X, and I have seen tests like this (at a higher level) and it was usually the TD who eliminated the rider for abuse (sadly, not the judges), who have even higher scores than this one (simply because the horses were naturally athletic). And if the quality of riding is ignored (for now there are four general impressions at national levels), and the rider passes on, no amount of qualifying is useful. It is not about the horse per se, it is about the training IF we are to just by the rules/directives. This not a rider problem per se, it is what is allowed, nee promoted, by the judges. It starts with equivocation of rules, and works its way down to teachers (which are often not trainers), and finally to the rider who simply is steering through a test (might be fine at tr. level, but problematic at fei). mho

Srhorselady
Herd Member
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 9:55 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Srhorselady » Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:33 pm

As others have said I'm not sure requiring qualifying rides will solve this issue. A major part of the problem is what Galopp said: our current system judges based on gaits not training. There are three elements involved: gaits, training, and riding. Good training and good riding can improve or detract from the gaits, but a certain part of it is innate, born in each individual horse. So as long as that is the primary element being measured scores such as the ride under discussion can happen. In this case there was a horse with good natural gaits and good training...the riding was lacking but the pair started with two out of three. Also judges are trained in the L program to be positive and try to suggest what is needed. I'm willing to bet that her scores for the beginning of the ride started higher and then decreased as the judges saw what was developing. The scores reflected the horses gaits and training and then went down due to the riding as the judges saw how bad it was. Unfortunately I don't know of any way to measure how training has improved a horses gaits. However, we have all seen what can happen when different riders get on the same horse. I love those jumping shows that require the riders to swap horses. Those are a very real measure of riding skill.

User avatar
Chisamba
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 4452
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:33 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Chisamba » Sat Feb 03, 2018 10:57 pm

I do not think qualifying would make a difference, in this case the ride already had qualifying scores. I also think that the ride was possibly the poorest that i have seen in a show ring, but i do not go to shows as often as others. I do think that gaits definitely pay much too important a role in the show ring, turning it into more of a beauty contest and less of a training platform.

i do not see how qualifying scores would change that except to make it easier for richer people to qualify with fancier horses more easily than plain horses

Dresseur
500 post plus club
Posts: 867
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 12:16 am

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Dresseur » Sun Feb 04, 2018 3:03 pm

I won't say much on the bullying/not bullying, but I agree, she didn't belong in the ring, at that level. So, the question is, how did she get there, and why was she allowed to continue. I agree - she should have been eliminated much earlier. However, as the rules/tests/directives are written - I can see how a highly trained, fancy horse got her qualifying scores. Last year's whirlwind of showing really opened my eyes to what's being presented in the show ring.

In any case, the horse physically came down centerline and halted - 6. The horse physically did an extended trot - 5.5/6. etc, etc. The horse did the movements despite it's rider, and with riders factoring so little in the judging, a pair like this can meet requirements and earn medals. I personally think that especially as you go up the levels, the rider should start factoring more. You don't have to be a classically beautiful rider to be quiet and effective. Put the saddle hours in and you can be a competent rider. No one is asking for people like SB to be brilliant riders, just be able to sit decently and not whip and kick out of spite. Para riders the world over manage to be kind, empathetic riders. I also think correctness of movements should be a factor, but that ship has sailed long ago. For example, spinning pirouettes routinely get 7s and 8s. Gaits rule the day, and this test was a shining example of how the directives are being failed.

User avatar
musical comedy
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 1302
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 3:41 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby musical comedy » Sun Feb 04, 2018 4:38 pm

Chancellor wrote:
musical comedy wrote:Lorilu, your friend was judging at C. She could have eliminated the rider early on forthe one-hand whipping. Why didn't she?


I think to be fair, where the judge was sitting, it may NOT have been obvious that she took her hand off the rein. It was obvious in the video because the camera was on the same side as the whip.
I think you are mistaken. Go and look at the video again (the Friday video). The whip was in the rider's right, inside hand as she was going down the long side toward A. The judge at C would have had a very good view of what happened. The rider took her hand off the reins twice on this long side and the horse bucked twice. The rider's arm movement was pretty obvious. The judge should have seen it and blew the whistle right then imo.

lorilu
Herd Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:54 pm

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby lorilu » Tue Feb 06, 2018 1:25 am

musical comedy wrote:Lorilu, your friend was judging at C. She could have eliminated the rider early on forthe one-hand whipping. Why didn't she?

And you know what? I am NEVER going to ask her. She is a GOOD judge who goes to more continuing ed than required. She is a POPULAR judge who scores rides fairly without bias. I respect her.

User avatar
Chisamba
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 4452
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:33 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Chisamba » Tue Feb 06, 2018 1:34 pm

I live in hope that a plain moving correct horse would score better than a flashy moving hollow one.

Probably also never going to happen. Dressage has become more and more of a beauty contest.

User avatar
Chisamba
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 4452
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:33 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Chisamba » Tue Feb 06, 2018 3:24 pm

One of the reasons i may be reluctant to see judges be capable of eliminating riders for " bad "riding is that it is so subjective. Using a whip one handed is pretty specific and even so, judges who are decent judges were not sure enough to pull the ride. Remember, we are not likely any better than these judges, we had the benefit of hind sight

Elimination for abuse, I think judges and stewards should do this, but even abuse is hard to define . welts and blood are easier, and i believe acted upon when evident.

but things like spurring with blunt spurs, as i have noted before there is a style of training where the horse is spurred aggressively for no reason to " wake it up" before going in the ring, tightness of curb chains, nose bands is also subjective. There was a complaint in Europe recently over a steward who loosened a curb chains so much that the bits over rotated, and the chains were banging on the horses chin with every stride. They had video of it and i cannot find it at the moment but it was definitely too loose by any standard.

anyway, as i think Galop noted, it is possible to get qualifying scores and still have a bad ride. SB is an example, i looked at her centerline scores and she has scores in the sixties with which to qualify.

anyway, i lived in a system where you had to qualify, the negative of that was once a horse had a certain number of scores it had to move up, whether the rider felt ready or not. I am not sure what system is proposed for the USEF, but the scores were horse based, not rider based. Also once a rider has made their scores, perhaps on a school master, they can go up, and if they get a bigger moving horse or lose their skills with age, they are already qualified for the higher levels.

I would like to say, as i said on facebook, that i have been to shows in Europe, i have seen bad riding at shows in Europe I suppose the systems much be different from country to country, but even then it is not fool proof, nor does it always speak for the comfort of the horse.

There is a " happy horses win" post going around that is clearly bullsh$t. i do not think Salinero or Blu Horse Matine, huge winners, were every particularly happy, Parzifal is another.

I try to train my horse in a "happy" atmosphere, but she, at shows, due to her own tension and mine, do not reflect the " happiness" of her training.

I think Steffen Peters is a quiet, kind rider and trainer, but had to pull Rosy from showing for a year due to her tension.

If i ever manage to get Deneb to the show grounds, i suspect there may be moments of ugliness needed just to keep her, me and others safe. I do not think that every horse can be trained to the point where they are quiet happy and safe every ride at a new venue. So does that mean you should eliminate Rosey and Steffen because Rosey is a tense horse? see, all subjective

exvet
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 12:28 pm
Location: Scottsdale

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby exvet » Thu Feb 08, 2018 3:04 pm

Abuse actually isn't hard to define. I am often in a position to describe the type of suffering an animal goes through by relating it to what would be an equivalent experience to a human. When I start to describe the physiologic process that goes on based on forensics and/or medical knowledge it's amazing to see the response and reaction of those listening. I have not seen the video but have read some of the threads that have spun off in reaction to what occurred. My questions during a potential abuse situation/case where I'm called in to investigate or help the prosecution usually start out with - (1) Did the animal suffer unnecessary pain? (2) Did the animal suffer unnecessary fear? (3) Was the animal unable to remove itself from an adverse situation without risking more injury to itself? Now as for welts and blood, yes, people want 'concrete' physical evidence so that there is no question as to the crime and damage; but, in my opinion that is the problem with the system - everyone waits until it's too late. I'll also point out that most of 'my' cases will include in the description of what occurred, the length of time of the suffering/infliction of pain. I then ask the court if they feel that it's reasonable to make an animal or a human go through that pain when all agree the pain was not necessary and was preventable. In this case I would add with the research to back it up that a repeated trauma delivered sequentially does increase the physiological response/reaction to fear and pain that is elicited - it is compounded until a threshold is reached. That threshold does vary with the individual animal to a degree; but, just because one can tolerate more than another or for longer time than another.......does that make it right or tolerable? My point is that just because the horse didn't bleed and as far as anyone knew at the time, welts were not apparent (there can be some delay in these developing) that the animal DID SUFFER pain and it wasn't necessary! That is ABUSE.

These situations often occur when rules and regulations are not enforced. Making more rules and regulations seldom will evoke the desired response or make an offending individual suddenly conform. There is no doubt in my mind reading the consensus that this rider should have been eliminated right from the beginning. What is horribly twisted and ironic is that I've seen very nice championship rides that were eliminated because the rider forgot to drop the whip going from warm-up to the show ring (clear cut break in rules) but a person whipping a horse one-handed (clear-cut break in the rules) didn't get eliminated because they failed to draw blood? Even on the race track improper use of the whip (yes, usually viewed via video replay) will and does lead to disqualification. If the dressage officials cannot police this type of thing effectively, other groups will. I'm willing to bet if there was some appetite in the animal control circles where that show occurred, a video and a description of the type of pain and suffering an animal suffers with that type of force applied is all that would be needed to bring charges, even if they are just misdemeanors. I'm not proposing such but it's these type of situations that repeatedly ignored fuel the arguments of those who think all riding is cruel, all showing is cruel, etc............ The dressage officials need to get their heads out of their asses and figure out that if they don't have the balls to stop it when it's happening someone else will eventually step in and change things, and won't necessarily 'be better' for the sport.

piedmontfields
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 2735
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 4:41 pm
Location: E Tennessee USA

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby piedmontfields » Thu Feb 08, 2018 3:11 pm

Excellent post and points, Exvet. Thank you for sharing your experience and insight.

User avatar
Chisamba
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 4452
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:33 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Chisamba » Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:33 am

exvet wrote:(1) Did the animal suffer unnecessary pain? (2) Did the animal suffer unnecessary fear? (3) Was the animal unable to remove itself from an adverse situation without risking more injury to itself?


1) what is unnecessary pain? is carrying a rider unnecessary pain? is a girth Unnecessary pain, how about a bit in the mouth. There are some who would claim that all three of those are things a horse is unable to remove itself from without adverse situation.

Did the animal suffer unnecessary fear. okay, so how about the fear of being removed from its home farm. loading in a trailer, how about spooking at the judges box. Are these "necessary" fears

you just said that you can prove that a horse repeatedly exposed to repeated trauma repeated sequentially. so, each time you circle the judges box to inflict repeated fear on the horse are you sequentially increasing the trauma. so getting the horse used to the judges scary box could in your own description, be likened to conditioned response.

I sound like i am arguing with you, and i suppose i am, but what i am really trying to point out is that based on what a person considered abusive by your description, riding should be banned completely.

I stand by my opinion that abuse remains hard to define. I happen to think its abusive for women to wear a hijab, but there are woman who vehemently support their right to wear one.

exvet
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 1588
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 12:28 pm
Location: Scottsdale

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby exvet » Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:44 am

1) You are right that there are those who would claim things as 'routine' as sitting on a horse is causing pain but in all honesty there is a lot of research that shows what is acceptable and does not cause unnecessary pain if we agree that a horse is livestock and a beast of burden.

2) As for fear, all of what you describe are conditional scenarios which a rider or handler can make adjustments (or at least try) to address the fear. Even if the attempt to address the fear are not successful, it goes to intent. Counter conditioning is perfectly acceptable because the intent is to give the animal the opportunity to be distracted and/or come to terms with the situation not really being scary.

3) LOL....well if I'm circling the judges box and not doing anything other than going around and around then possibly your argument holds but if I'm staying calm, reassuring the horse, providing a distraction to invoke a re-focus on me then actually I'm improving the situation and could get my ass out of court scott free. What I was really talking about was physiological responses to the exact same or escalated stimulus and there is no attempt to counter-condition or associate the experience with something positive or something good or a release. Again what your are describing is a calculated means to try to make something aversive not so - the animal is trained to be focused on you, a distraction so the scary object is not the center of attention and no longer scary. Beating a horse with a whip over and over may be conditioning especially if the horse can't escape but the cortisol response can't be denied in terms of increasing and having a cascade effect. This is demonstrating how a traumatic blow can have more ramification than simply wounding the sight of impact especially if because of the compounding nature of the cascade effect.

No, correct riding (discipline has no bearing on this and if you want to go down the rabbit hole of the big lick we can take this off-line) shouldn't be banned if, again we agree that a horse is livestock and a beast of burden.

Abuse of most animals is defined by law, some jurisdictions remain more vague but the vast majority no longer have that issue. My point is if we address those actions that do have an easy to prove from a scientific standpoint painful response, the challenges to whether riding a horse (correctly) should be considered abuse become increasingly inane. As far as your example of women wearing specific garments as being abusive, the claim goes out the window if the woman who is wearing it is making the decision on her own to wear it and isn't being forced to thus would otherwise not wear it.

You can argue with me all you want. I usually win in the legal battles on this issue which is why I get hired to do what I do. I'm sure you'll have more ammo but I have to focus on my other job and get some projects done. I'll come back to spar with you at a later time point if you wish to continue to do so. I respectfully say that because in the end I realize we always have a right to our own opinion......just be careful as I said earlier, it doesn't matter how many times someone gets away with it because times are changing.

Tsavo
Bringing Life to the DDBB
Posts: 1527
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 2:01 am

Re: Movement to institute qualifying to move up at shows

Postby Tsavo » Mon Apr 02, 2018 11:32 pm

That ride was bullshit and she should have been excused from the ring prior to finishing it FULL STOP. :-)

If that goes on then medals mean very little.


Return to “Dressage Training”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests