My Soap Box Rant

10/29/2015

Lecturing on a soap box is a bit arrogant unless you have something to say that people actually want to hear. Otherwise, you're just some weirdo spouting off cockamamie ideas that make people roll their eyes and cross the street to get away from your idiocy.

Truth or WTH?

Knowing that, I am climbing up. You can roll your eyes and walk away, or you can gather and shout amen, sister! with the rest of the believers ... Dressage is incredibly hard. Showing dressage is even harder still.

After I finished my first test of the weekend, I left the arena feeling a bit grouchy and made that statement to my trainer. It's not that I resent doing things that are difficult. I thrive on demanding work. The more onerous, the better. Give me something that stretches me to my limit, and I am a happy camper. Weenie babies don't ride 100 miles through freezing cold temperatures in a single day. I did, more than a few times, and loved every minute of it.

What used to drive me nuts about endurance riding was all the people who would claim that they too were endurance riders. Whenever they were asked which endurance races they had done, they would claim that they just "conditioned" their horses in endurance saddles or had done 10 - 15 mile fun rides.

Sorry, simply using an endurance saddle to get your horse fit doesn't make you an endurance rider. You have to actually ride an endurance distance on a prescribed course under a vet's observation. And doing it more than once helps. That's what makes an endurance rider.

I am sure you can see where this is going.

As I finished that test and groused about this sport being difficult, what I really meant was that unless someone is actually showing at USDF-rated shows, they don't know how hard it really is to put it all together in front of a judge, make it look easy, and get a good score. It's hard, really hard.

Internet Photo

When we ride at home, we can repeat the transition over and over. We can ride that figure twice until it feels balanced. If we're not ready for that canter departure at C, we circle back around and give it another go. Or, we pick it up at M. Who is going to notice the difference? At a show, the rider has to string all of the movements together without any do-overs.

That's what makes showing so hard. We don't get a second, third, or twelfth chance to get it just right. It has to be done correctly then and there, ready or not. So even if someone's horse has a few lovely flying changes at home, until they have to get five 4s from H to F with the third one landing at X, those changes don't mean much. And they mean even less if the rider can't follow it up with five 3s across the other diagonal. That was for Jen and her Prix St Georges test this weekend. Ask her if riding it correctly in front of a judge is easy or hard.

The thing about showing at a USDF-rated show is that the judges aren't cutting you any slack. It's not their job to make you feel good. It is their job to give you legitimate, honest, and helpful feedback. The judges at fun shows or schooling shows ARE there to encourage you and give you softball scores. That's their job. They're trying to get you to come back. They want you to feel good about showing so you'll pay your USDF money and help the sport grow.

I know many people will disagree with this viewpoint. Many riders feel that the judging at schooling shows is equal to that at USDF-rated shows. Maybe. I only show here in California, but I find it awfully difficult to believe that the L Program Graduates would change their style just because they live in another region of the US. The USDF and USEF work very hard to standardize judging around the country.

Internet Photo

When I was still competing in endurance races, I loved those shorter distances for introducing a horse to his job. As a dressage rider, I've done many schooling shows for the same reason. There's no sense spending all that money on a USDF show until you know how your horse will deal with new venues, judges' booths, and the stresses of showing,

Until you can put it all together in front of a USEF judge at a USDF show, preferably one that holds his or her "S" license (Senior Judge), it might be best to hold off a bit on the celebration. Those USEF judges are tougher than they look.

So that's it. That's my rant. I am getting down from my soap box. What's your feeling on judging and scores?

jenj

10/29/2015 06:12:47 am

+10000 on this rant. It IS hard to put an entire test together in front of the judge... especially when you're on a horse who KNOWs you're in front of the judge and that he won't be reprimanded (i.e. sat on his butt and made to do it over, correctly) for doing what he wants. Brat.

As for the scoring, around here, it depends on the judge. There's one judge who I felt was basically giving scores away at a rated show (interestingly, he's rated #31 in terms of generosity on http://www.dressagedetective.com/). There's another judge who will cheerfully hand out 75s at schooling shows... and yet another one who seems to judge schooling shows HARDER than rated shows (???). So while I would love for scoring to be consistent, judges are only human. I certainly know how much I liked a test (or not), regardless of what the judge has to say about it. After all, we're our own best/worst critics, lol!

Carol

10/29/2015 06:26:33 am

Many of the judges at my local schooling show also judge at recognised shows. My instructor is a retired judge. I would hope they would score my test with the same standards regardless of the venue. But, I don't really know. And I suspect some of my tests have been judged leniently. But others have not. Perhaps it depends on the judge? I don't want my schooling scores to be inflated. And then go to a recognised show and be discouraged. I'll be sure to ask my instructor next lesson. I do understand your argument, and it makes sense. But I also think that it may depend on the judges perspective too.

Jan link

10/29/2015 06:46:47 am

I've come to the conclusion (in eventing and dressage) that unless you're willing to put up the $$ for recognized shows, you're not that serious about it - which is perfectly fine, as long as your honest with yourself and others about that! I did a lot of unrecognized events. Part of it was the money, part was the I'm-never-moving-on-from-this-level-so-why-pay-recognized. Then when I DID do recognized events at BN, I didn't even bother joining the USEA because I wasn't sure I was sticking with it (spoiler- I did a couple novice MTs and quit before doing my first novice HT).

I know there are people who are serious about it and just don't have the money to go to recognized shows. I get that because I spent a long time there. But I have goals and drive and need to compete and I find myself quite serious about the recognized shows. I make sure I find the money to be able to go- the old, if you want it enough, you'll make it happen.

I shouldn't call Mikey my 3rd level horse. We never got a 60%+ at a recognized show. Flying changes worked 50% of the time at home, and 10% of the time in public. I call him one anyway simply because consistent flying changes were the only thing missing from getting that "satisfactory" score. For me, 60% and you're satisfactory at the level. 65%+ and you're doing well. I'm not one to talk about when to move up- I simply wanted my scores for my bronze medal before something happened to Mikey or before he got too old, so I moved up to 3rd long before I should have.

I've found some interesting things about judges. I enjoy riding for S judges the most simply because they're usually consistent with each other. I've ridden for some pretty terrible L judges at schooling shows. I've seen r and R judges be tougher than S. S and above are the ones that matter, sorry! Schooling shows are for good experiences and introduction to the sport, and I think you can easily subtract 2-5% from whatever score you get there in order to convert it to a recognized show score. Schooling shows are easier than recognized, end of story. It's their job! To rope you in so you go to the recognized show.

The fancy tricks (piaffe/passage/tempis) etc really only matter once they're done in public, for a judge where you get a satisfactory score. Otherwise your horse knows super cool things, but without public scrutiny, they may or may not be correct, or they may need "more". Not to rag on anyone who has taught horses to Pi/Pa at 2nd/3rd level to help the trot at that level. I'm all for it, don't get me wrong. Plus, it's pretty darn neat!

Let me just add to the pot here about something that irks me- people who leave their horse in training all year round, ride it a couple times a month and for recognized shows. I totally get needing the help of a trainer, and having a trainer ride your horse to help you along. 100% good with that. I know of two people who leave their horses in full training and don't ride/train them themselves (one of those is a trainer herself). Yes, they get mid 60's at recognized shows, and now they're working at 3rd-PSG using that same system. I know you can't just get on and ride those levels, you have to know something, but I have a difficult time taking them seriously. Maybe it's because that's not something I could afford to do, part of it is jealousy, but I feel like if your goal is upper levels, you need to ride and train the horse yourself, for better or worse!

emma link

10/29/2015 08:09:41 am

i agree with a lot of what you say here, but take exception to the first sentence. i am serious about my sport but don't bother with recognized. it's a question of outcomes. what is to be gained by doing recognized?

if the goal is qualifying for medals or championships, then yea, it's gotta be recognized. or if i'm trying to develop a record for a sales horse, yea, that's another good reason.

but barring that, i struggle to come up with other reasons why recognized is preferable to unrecognized. prestige? not important to me. bragging rights are the same. quality of judging? ehh i've got trainers for that.

the flip side is that i can (more or less) afford two unrec. events for every one rec., meaning i can gain experience and move quietly up the levels right up through P/T. to go full prelim i'll need to go recognized. but before that? i dont' believe it matters.

10/29/2015 09:01:49 am

I think a lot of that comes from exactly what you said about building a show record- people trying to sell a horse without the recognized show record. I've seen a ton of second level dressage horses that have never been to a recognized show, only the small local ones.

I guess never had the real desire to do recognized events like I do dressage. I had fun at the MTs, and I did some recognized ones but meh, I wasn't going to spend a ton of money for recognized. I had more fun at MT than HT because it was schooling and relaxed. I was serious about eventing, but the love for it fizzled out. I was never as serious about eventing as I am dressage though. I think I'm defining serious as- going for awards (against self or championships), looking to build records, get to the top etc. Just going on my own personal experiences with recognized vs schooling.

10/29/2015 11:08:08 am

gotcha - that makes sense. and i'm wondering if there might be greater differences between rec. vs. unrec. in different disciplines (like dressage v. eventing). it's certainly interesting to think about !

Exploringdressagebiomechanics link

10/29/2015 07:10:45 am

I totally agree about the scoring, schooling show versus USDF show. That said, if I can't consistently ride a test, start to finish with no pauses, do overs, etc. at home being videoed, that is in the solid 70s, I know will not get in the high 60s at a rated show. Show nerves, horse nerves, and atmosphere almost always take away points at any show. Rated or unrated.

10/29/2015 07:57:59 am

i'm not comfortable agreeing that unless i am competing at a recognized level, i don't really know what it's about or can't really say i am a participant in that sport. by that logic, i'm not actually an eventer. but see, i identify as an eventer, really truly. but perhaps there are folks who see me as otherwise? idk.

all the same tho - i DO agree on the show atmosphere being completely different from riding at home, and it is clear that the judging and scores can change drastically by judge at the schooling show level. for my purposes, i usually pay more attention to how i score relative to the pack to get a sense of what the judge actually thought of us.

10/29/2015 08:12:12 am

The relative to the pack thing- exactly! I was grooming at a mini trial where the low score for the open novice division was a 39. The woman who got that score actually complained to management for too tough judging- she's been riding Prelim at recognized events for probably longer than I've been alive, usually winning them every time out. She knows her stuff (and is either an L or r judge I believe). A 40-45 was actually doing really well at that show. Normally, you'd go home and reevaluate your dressage and what went wrong for something in the 40's, that time out? Nope. You did just fine, scoring was super tough.

10/29/2015 08:16:22 am

yup - exactly. i had the same story (but in the opposite direction) at my last event. scored a 33, nice right? except it put my in 11th of like, 14 or something. my sea of 6s and 7s wasn't really as impressive as it might look on paper haha

Lauren link

10/29/2015 08:05:39 am

I have very similar thoughts about schooling vs rated in hunter/jumperland too. Doing 2'9" jumpers at a schooling show is SO MUCH EASIER than doing it at rated... usually. You'll never convince me otherwise! ;)

Karen

10/29/2015 08:11:40 am

AMEN sister! I agree 100%. It is really friggin hard to string tests together. Around here (KY), I usually pull off mid-60s at Third Level at schooling shows. At rated shows? Try 53s, 54s, and woohoo a couple of 62s. There is absolutely a difference at rated shows. The judges are not giving away things for free.

Mia link

10/29/2015 08:27:05 am

I didn't think L grad's were allowed to judge 3rd level. Only up to 2nd.

10/29/2015 08:25:57 am

I agree that schooling show judges can be more lenient. It depends on the judge though. It seems like half are out there handing out 70's like it's water, the other half you're lucky to eek out a low 60 with a flawless ride.

I don't believe you have to show at a rated show to be a "real dressage rider", but I do believe there should be some humility shown if you've never even attempted a rated show. The people that go on about how successful they are at whatever level, and how their horse is getting mid-70's... but then you find out that they've only ever ridden at the schooling show where they board at. Well, it puts a whole different spin to their claims.

The one thing I will say... the comments from the majority of the schooling show judges were still mostly accurate. They still highlighted where we were weak or strong. The scores may not have been as refined, but the overall gist of where our training was at was fairly accurate (a little too generous on the good though). The issue I found was that I was able to ignore the weak sections because A.) my score was still above 60, and B.) the judge was very polite about the issues. I think if the judge had been a bit more honest, a bit more brutal, I would've had my eye's opened sooner then they were. Then again... who knows. I didn't know how to fix it at that point anyway.

Tracy link

10/29/2015 09:07:16 am

So obviously I don't show dressage, and maybe it's different between disciplines, but I feel like the differences between schooling and rated shows are two-fold: 1) the judging is a little bit more strict and 2) the quality of your competitors is different.

What might be a winning hunter round at a schooling show, might not be a winning hunter round at an "A" show

Alanna link

10/29/2015 03:45:29 pm

I have to say that I disagree. Just because someone doesn't show at USDF rated shows doesn't mean they don't understand how hard it is. I consider myself a dressage rider and have never ridden at a USDF show. Part of what has kept me at the schooling shows is that it is hard and I want to show up ready to really compete when I do spend the money on a USDF show.

Austen link

10/29/2015 07:06:52 pm

Oh man. I'm gonna disagree big time here. L and little r judges tend to score cushy at 1st and below, and harsh as hell on 2nd and above. I've had much better scores (and more consistent!!) from S and above judges when showing 2+.

I think the R, r, and L judges don't see the 2+ rides enough to get a good handle on what's appropriate for the level. I often feel they imagine a 2nd level horse should be collected like a Prix St. George horse, which is ridiculous. I finally got sick of getting 50s on the work S+ judges were giving 60s on, and only show recognized now. Back in Indiana the price wasn't much different because of travel costs, so really it was about the scores and feedback.

Megan link

10/30/2015 11:43:53 am

Hmm I haven't had the same experience. I find that some of our L graduates (L "judges" are actually not judges, they aren't considered judges until they get their r) are just kind of awful at all levels. There are some that I like, but the vast majority simply don't have the education to be judging, but you gotta learn somehow so they dump them on the schooling shows.

r judges have been trained through Second and half their testing is on Second level (they have to do a lot on 2-3), so I'd trust an r judge to know Second pretty well. Especially because I believe an r judge has to have had students compete at Second and they themselves need to compete at Fourth.

I would say that in my experience, it really just depends on the judge regardless of rating. Second is a huge jump from First and the major complaint most judges have is on throughness and collection, which take sooo long to develop, I think those elements take longer to develop from 1st-2nd than any other level jump except I1 to I2. I find that my students actually score better at Third+ than at Second, not because the judges don't know how to judge at Second, but that by the time we get to Third, we have had an additional year to get the collection down. And Third tests are just better structured.

Saiph link

10/30/2015 03:05:19 am

I also disagree.

In my country I competed at recognized shows in the jumper division as a teenager thanks in a very large part to being sponsored for them. When I switched to dressage after moving to the US, I only aimed for schooling shows, despite a trainer that believed we could be competitive at recognized shows, simply because of the money. Plain and simple. Schooling shows were very local to me (a 10 minute drive), whereas USDF shows involved a much longer haul (hours), which only added to the expenses. Our schooling shows sadly were tremendously cliquey however and scores were based on popularity, hence why I *was* motivated to go for the recognized shows, so I could get some REAL scores. I *wanted* those tougher scores, I *wanted* to up the ante. Until I saw what it would cost. I don't want to train for months and years and spend hundreds of dollars on entry fees so I can only ride one class that could end up going poorly because of a million different variables (showgrounds, show nerves, something upset the horse in warm-up, the horse injured herself in her stall overnight, etc, etc, etc). It just wasn't worth it to me. I don't have anything to prove, either. *shrug* And then I eventually moved on into endurance, which I love because I can actually afford to compete at the true endurance distances (only on a well-prepared horse, of course) thanks to a minimal price difference between endurance and limited distances in my region.

I totally understand your point here re: tougher scoring at recognized, but it's not that black & white. You can't say that a rider isn't a real rider in whatever discipline simply because they don't compete at the recognized level. Wanting "easier" judges is not the only reason for sticking with schooling shows. And just because someone chooses to compete at schooling shows exclusively doesn't mean they aren't aware of how tough recognized shows are.

10/30/2015 07:19:00 am

For reference, I almost exclusively ride under S judges, mostly because that's who we get in this area for most of our shows and I've been riding at the FEI level for the past few years. I can't remember the last time I rode under an R or r judge. I almost never do schooling shows, only this past year on my baby have I done them, and that was mostly so that I could keep those lower scores off my record.

After the schooling shows, I have a sour taste in my mouth from the L graduates (since the term "L Judge" does not exist because as an L graduate, you are not a judge just yet). I feel like some of them are serious about their judging and do a decent job. Others I feel like are just not educated enough. And they aren't, they're just starting. The comment I got about my 4 year old horse at Intro B needing to be more uphill made me really realize that schooling show judges are not enough for me to feel like I'm getting good feedback for my money. In addition, so many of them are super inconsistent with their judging rider to rider (esp when kids and cute ponies are involved) that I simply don't trust them.

BUT I even see rated shows as more of a spectrum. JenJ posted the dressage detective, and you can see that there are judges of varying difficulties. There are some judges who are super easy, and a lot of the time people judge-hunt for medal scores (guilty!). In California, getting a 65% with Creeky Routson or Melonie Kessler (love those judges, they give great feedback, but they tend to be on the generous side) means something different than earning the same score under Tracey Lert or Axel Steiner (again, love those judges, great feedback, love clinicing with them, kill me if I have to ride under them, I will be crying). All are "S" judges or above.

So I totally agree with you on all counts: yes there is a HUGE difference in schooling at home and riding in a show, in a show there is only one chance to do something correctly. And there is a HUGE difference between a schooling show judge and a rated show judge. But I'd add that there is also a HUGE difference between one S judge and another.

Shows are so complicated!

10/30/2015 09:12:14 am

I score hunt, too. That said, the difference between S judges is often only 5% not 10+%. I think a schooling show is a great place to preview your test riding for a new test/level and work on nerves. Otherwise I plan to stick to recognized.

10/30/2015 12:05:36 pm

For me there's simply no comparison between an L grad and an S judge. To get into and graduate from the L program you need a few scores at Second and no teaching experience, the S program is an insane amount of teaching, judging, and riding experience.

Even if I show at a schooling show and earn a 65% and then show at a rated show under a rated (especially an S) judge and also earn a 65%, the likelihood that the L grad arrived at the same score in a similar manner is very low. The L grad could hand out the 65 for vastly different reasons than the S judge and I would discount the L grad's score quite a bit more. It's hard to explain, but for me, they're just not comparable even if it's the exact same score.

It's like taking a class at a community college with a professor who is in their first year of teaching with a master's degree vs taking the same class from a top researcher at a top tier university. I may earn a B in both classes, but those Bs may mean vastly different things.

That said, I'm not discounting schooling shows at all! That's all I showed in this year. Just my reasons for not wanting to have the majority of my scores coming from L grads and why I discount those scores.

Jodi link

11/2/2015 11:58:24 pm

This is a hard one for me, because a show is a show in my mind. I don't get more nervous at one versus the other. Mostly, I just want to be happy with my test. It's not that I don't care about scores or winning, I love to win, but I just kind of accept that my test is going to be what it is no matter what kind of score I get at what type of show. So, I don't necessarily find recognized shows more difficult (except for affording them). I do however enjoy them more because the judges are more knowledgeable and I appreciate the better feedback. Give me an 'S' judge over an 'L' or 'r' judge any day.

I don't know that I would say that someone isn't a real dressage rider because they haven't done a recognized show (I'm not meaning to say that you're saying that, just comparing the dressage to the endurance situation). I feel like it's mostly about the training and if a person rides often and continuously works hard to increase their knowledge of the sport, I would still consider them a dressage rider too. If they don't want to, or can't, show at recognized shows, I don't think that takes anything away from what they have accomplished in their riding.

Comments are closed.

Not-So-Speedy Dressage

My Soap Box Rant

About the Writer and Rider

About Speedy G

About Izzy

National Rider Awards

Archives
By Topic

Archives
By Date

Not-So-Speedy Dressage

My Soap Box Rant

About the Writer and Rider

About Speedy G

About Izzy

National Rider Awards

Archives​By Topic

Archives​By Date

Archives
By Topic

Archives
By Date