Articles from our
May/June Issue
The Elusive "10"
A "10" is the Holy Grail of dressage and for many riders just as hard to achieve. Competitors often wonder why judges don't possess a greater supply of 10s in their repertoire of marks.
Dressage tests are divided into movements, with each movement marked from 0 to 10 and the total converted to a final percentage that determines placings. A score of 70% will usually win a class and a 65% will be in the ribbons, but the winning scores can often be much lower. A score over 80% is rare.
It's easy to see then that a winning test will receive a lot of 7s, with some 6s and 8s thrown in. An ordinary test will have a lot of 6s, with some 7s, 5s and maybe a couple 4s.
Competitors become frustrated when they perceive a judge locked into the 4-5-6 range. The parabola of scores often seems to have 6 at the highest, widest point, with the frequency of numbers dropping off sharply at either end. Indeed, judges who are comfortable scoring 8s, and 9s are also at ease scoring 1s and 2s.
Spectators are often surprised when a movement they view from outside the ring is scored much higher or lower than they expect, but the position of the judge relative to the ring influences the score. When there is one judge, he sits at C, at the end of the centerline on the short side of the ring. From that position, he can see the straightness of the horse very clearly but not always the quality of the engagement.
A judge at C may award a 10 for a straight and immobile halt on the centerline. A judge or spectator on the side might consider the same halt as an 8 if the hind legs are left out slightly, which can't be seen from C, and thus both the 10 and 8 would be correct. Conversely, a half-pass with excellent engagement might earn a 10 from a judge on the side but maybe an 8 from the judge at C if the horse's position isn't as straight as it should be throughout the entire movement.
Experience Helps
Comfort level with both ends of the scale often comes with experience. Hunter & Sport Horse Magazine recently polled "S" and FEI judges, who are licensed to judge through Grand Prix, about how often they award a 10. Jayne Ayers said that some seasons she'll score five or six 10s and others none at all: "I have never been afraid to give 9 or 10 for movements that deserve it. I wish I could see more riding deserving of these scores." Debbie Riehl-Rodriguez said she scores a 10 probably once or twice a season: "With a 9, I'm impressed, but there may be just a bit something else that could have been there that would have made it a 10. I do think that more experienced judges are more likely to give higher scores as they're more confident. I have definitely given more as an S judge than when I was an R.
Trip Harting said he marks a 10, on average, once a show: "The longer I've been a judge, the more comfortable I am with what I'm looking for in the movements." Harting described an instance when a fellow 'S' and he watched a test from outside a ring where an 'R' judge and 'r' judge were officiating along with an 'L' graduate who was apprenticing. They later discussed the test together: "We (the two S judges) saw a horse doing a lovely stretch circle and instantly gave it a 9. The R gave the same movement an 8, the r gave it a 7, and the L graduate gave it a 6."
[There's lots more to this article! To read the entire article, be sure to get a copy of our May/June 2008 Issue.]
Essential Cross Country Jumps
You have the space and budget for only a few obstacles. What should you do? "So many stable owners, instructors and trainers feel that cross country obstacles are out of the question. They don't think they can do it. There's a big mystery about cross country course design and fence construction," says Emily Wigley. Emily is a USEA trained/approved course designer through Training Level. She is also the owner, manager, trainer, instructor (and yes, course designer) at Fish Bowl Farm in Washington.
Emily believes that the average farm owner can successfully plan a few basic cross country jumps. Space, time and finances may limit the options. However, proper design and placement can result in a few basic obstacles which are just right.
Understanding Basic Jumps
Emily explains, "It's possible to design a few basic obstacles which fit into many training situations and exercises." There are really just three shapes of fences: vertical, square oxer and ramped oxer. Look at the profile, or side view, of an obstacle to determine its shape. With these three shapes, you can create the most popular obstacles on competition courses: simple logs, coops, ramps, cabins or barns, rolltops. If you decide to build three obstacles, build one of each shape and make them your own with details and placement.
"Simply put, the goal is this: build simple profiled fences with nothing to trick or catch a horse. Place them safely and attach them to the earth so that they don't roll or move."
Where To Put Each Jump
The placement of each obstacle, based on the shape of the field and its terrain, is just as important as the composition of the obstacles themselves. Emily says, "Any shape of field -- oblong, square, dog-legged -- can be used for cross country riding. Draw a rough scale map and then walk or ride it a few times. Imagine going to fences and riding away from them. Place them where the approach feels welcome, open, straight-forward. The more you walk or ride the land, the more comfortable you'll feel with the placement of obstacles. Make sure there's a balance of obstacles on the flat, uphill and downhill.
"The best thing I've ever been told by a course designer is that the most important part of the course is the track and its footing! This is the only part a horse will (hopefully) touch, and therefore it is the most important. The track should always have a horse taking off from a safe spot.
What Not To Do
"The biggest problem I've seen is building mini-Badmintons," comments Emily. "At the lowest levels, jumps should be inviting, helpful and encouraging to green horses and green riders. The more difficult fences should be left to the mid- and upper- levels of eventing. These would include skinny fences, corners and tight complexes.
"Simple fences need not be boring! Dress them up with shingles, natural colored stains, chainsaw carving, interesting materials, etc. The shape is the blank canvas; the finish details are the oil paint. Mistakes come from too much imagination (small versions of upper level, inappropriate fences) and not enough imagination (log after log after log). Avoid monotony, keep the track flexible, and maintain it for safety. Banks and water complexes are best left to people with a lot of land land and larger budgets, where heavy machinery, elaborate building plans and materials such as liners for water obstacles, can be used.
"I've also seen too many combinations placed incorrectly. While this seems like an easy task, often at lower level schooling sites the builders aren’t riders. They don't understand the critical spacing involved. If an experienced rider isn't available for placement of combination obstacles, it's best to place your fences as unrelated distances. Walking (let alone riding) to an in-and-out such as a sheep pen is downright scary when the striding and spacing are off!
[This article offers lots more great information! To read it all, please order a back issue of our May/June 2008 Issue.]
EQuestrian & Answer:
Do The Year-End Award Systems Work Well?
Audrey Narducci and Ali Baba B won multiple 2007 USDF Horse Of The Year titles at First and Second Levels. The USDF year-end award system seems to work well for Audrey. What is that system? Audrey says, "You have to show in at least four shows, under four different judges. The USDF computes the median of your scores, and the highest median score at the end of the year wins. I think it’s a good system. Taking the median of percentage scores will reward quality over quantity. There's no reason at all to over-show your horse when eight scores can get you Horse Of The Year. Theoretically, you could show only two weekends -- eight or twelve classes at four separate one-day shows, each having a different judge -- and be Horse Of The Year.
" . . . . It's pretty hard to unfairly manipulate this system. Sure, once you've ridden for a while, you know that some judges give higher scores than others. Some give fives and sixes. Others give sevens and eights. You might think a certain judge likes your horse. But a show might employ five judges; you don't know which judge you'll have. You might ride tests for three or four judges during the show. I suppose you could scratch, rather than show for a judge who just doesn't like your horse.
". . . There is one change I'd suggest. At the Regionals, only one rider can ride each horse. This rule was made so that a trainer can't warm up a horse for an amateur, to be fair to the people who couldn't bring trainers. However, if I wanted to qualify Ali Baba in the Adult Amateur division and my trainer wanted to qualify him in the Open division, only one of us could actually show in the Regional Championships. I think that the USDF could arrange it so that a horse could be shown by a trainer and an amateur or Jr/YR rider, by having Open classes on a different day than the Amateur Adult or Jr/YR classes, or by having one division in the morning and another in the afternoon. I want to be fair to riders who don't have the luxury of bringing a trainer . . . but why shouldn't I be able to show just because I do have that luxury? . . . "
Traci Biro and Azuro were the USEF Zone 4 Amateur Adult 18-35 Champions in 2007. They also won quite a list of state association awards. "Whoever has the most points in the division at the end of the show year wins," Traci says of the USEF Zone award system. " . . . I have no complaints about the system. It rewards consistency. You have to go out and perform well, but you don't have to be champion at an AA show every time out. . . . No system can make everyone happy. You do the best you can with the fairest system you can devise. If there's a weakness in the USEF system, it's one inherent in any system designed for this many competitors and this many shows in such a spread-out geographical area: you and I may never compete against each other. Who knows which of us is better? The only way to identify the single best competitor is for all competitors in the zone to show against each other at every show! That's not possible.
"I don't think it's any fairer to go to an averaged-score system. Your horse could be by far the nicest horse in your locale, earning lots and lots of points, but is he the nicest horse in every other part of your zone? A percentage system doesn't answer this question any better than our current system.
" . . . I didn't go into the '07 season with winning the zone as my only goal. I skipped shows I'd planned on -- even knowing they were good places to earn points -- whenever I thought my horse needed an extra weekend off. People will still say that whoever shows the most, wins. I don't know what you can do about that. It wouldn't bother me if we counted points from only your ten best shows each year. But you'd still have riders who can do only eight shows, and riders who can do 30 to keep trying for a better show. I'm sure there are a few people who show and show and show to get points. I, personally, don't know anyone who cares more about points than anything else. As long as her horse stays healthy and sound, I won't judge someone for showing for the fun of it.
"We're amateurs! This should be fun. We're supposed to love our horses and love to show. . . . Winning the zone is just the cherry on top of the sundae."
[Excerpt from May/June 2008 Issue.]
Wanted: The Right H/J Trainer
Maybe your job relocated you. Maybe you're going away to college or you desire a warmer climate. Whatever the reason, you're about to choose a new rider/trainer for your hunter or jumper. No non-horse person understands the anxiety involved in handing the reins of a talented horse to a near-stranger, no matter how exalted his/her reputation. How do you identify the trainer with the right skills? Can the move be made without emotional wreckage? 'Yes!' says Cathy Morris Schmitt.
Cathy says " . . . It was a tough decison, but I decided to move my horses to California about three years ago, while I remained in Colorado. At that point, I owned two hunters, Clouseau and Caymus, and a young Grand Prix jumper prospect named Diesel. I needed to discover a trainer who could care for, ride and prepare my hunters, and also do justice to a good young jumper. I seriously investigated my options. I had to find a trainer who would, first and foremost, take excellent care of my horses at home and at the shows. I wouldn't be there every week, so I had to know that the wellbeing of my horses was the trainer's first concern.
"Also, I looked for a fun program. I looked for a barn in which I thought I'd have good chemistry with the trainers. I talked to trainers -- and you have to give it more than a ten-minute conversation between classes. Go out to dinner, at least.
"You can tell lots about trainers just by watching from the rail. Watch their horses go to the ring. Watch them coach clients in the schooling area. This is crucial! If this trainer doesn't have the patience to help you past any difficulties you might have when it's your turn in the schooling ring, then this is not the right trainer for you. If you're having a bad day, your empathetic trainer had better show up. The impatient trainer won't work, especially for me. . . . A barrage of criticism or instructions would be too much. The trainer has to be right for my horses, too. I don't deal well with a trainer who exhibits any temper towards the horse. That's a deal-breaker . . . ."
[Excerpt From May/June 2008]
Authors:
"The Elusive 10," by Margaret Freeman.
"Do The Year-End Award Systems Work?" by L. Allen.
"Essential Cross Country Jumps," by L. Allen.
"Wanted: The Right Trainer," by L. Allen.
May/June 2008
