As many of you will be aware, a new Task Force has been appointed to help our sport move forward, following the resignation of the last Dressage Committee at the request of Princess Haya (for full details see Eurodressage News archives).

The role of the TF is to advise the FEI on the following:

1. Review the issues surrounding the very significant area of the training and development of, assessment and selection of judges for major championships and Olympic Games; review as part of this development of randomized/computerized judge selection process.
2. The fitness for purpose of the method of judging dressage competitions needs thorough review – both in terms of the number of judges, their positioning and the judging process.
3. Following significant feedback from NFs it is clear that the decision to move from 4 to 3 riders in a team is not universally accepted as the best for the sport and this therefore needs reviewing.
4. The system for qualification for Championships, and the receipt of Certificates of Capability for Championships, WCs and OG's.
5. Review the consultation process within dressage and how it affects the structure of the committee going forwards to ensure maximum involvement by the key stakeholders both internal to the sport and external within the greater sporting/Olympic/Paralympics environment.

...I'll be back to put in my 2 cents' worth soon, but in the meantime, what suggestions would you have for the Task Force?

Views: 76

Replies to This Discussion

Ok, so here are my ideas of what to do:

1. select judges on a random basis.
In the age of computers it should be easy to write a software that assigns judges with the right qualification level to the competitions. That's important to give judges an independance status. Rotate, so that all judges get experience

2. Control judge riding experience
No matter which nationality, judges should have to prove sound riding experience, including the exercising of at least one horse from a youngster to at least medium level. Its not enough to buy a top dressage horse form umpty $$$ and ride a grand prix. Anybody with enough money can do that and still have no real expertise in horse riding.

3. Judge training
All judges should go through the same training and a qualification test. This test may have some exercises in writing or interviews, but the real test should be judging real performances as an assistant, maybe together with a mentor for at least for one year time. - The organizers should set up a 6th position, maybe at "A" for this.

4. Variable tests
Today the horses have to go the same tests all the time. Even show jumping would be boring if they always did the same course.
We should appoint a dressage "chef" who composes the test and publishes it 1 hours before the start. The test can be read to the performance by the organizer or a person from the rider's team in their own language.
This way we would see much more interesting performances. To avoid training overnight, the "chef" will compose a new test for the next day.

5. Short tests for "jump off"
The organizers would like to have short tests for more TV coverage. Ok, the riders will do the Grand Prix as usual and the top 10 go into a "jump off" round with a short test, composed by the dressage "chef". In order to make it short he can omit some lessons. For example take the half passes to the left in trot and to the right in canter, etc... Its no need to show the full program like in the Grand Prix because the "Chef's" responsibility would be to create new tests every day and balance the lessons so that every lesson will be shown sometime. Anyway the riders will have to prepare for everything as the "Chef" may pick and choose.

Of course this "Chef" needs to be an experienced person, probably with a sound trainer or rider experience as well as a judge qualification and an additional "Chef-training" qualification.

I think that would make very interesting competitions.

6. Public scoring
We have open scoring on some events already, but I think it should be mandatory. It will not always be possible in "real time" during the test, but than the data should be published at the event.

7. The most scary lesson of all!
I know its very, very scary for some people, but I suggest to include jumping a little, like 80-90cm fence at the end. Its a test for obedience and control of the horse. -

Well, what do you think?
Ciao
Bernd
I love these ideas - you should be on that task force! :)
I particularly like 1, 2, and 3 in terms of basic changes, in order to minimize complaints about bias and under qualified judges.
5 and 6 would certainly add a fresh approach. I must admit that although I have been riding and competing for years, I no longer stay at the show to watch a day's full of tests. As my husband says, it's is sometimes like watching grass grow. Your ideas would certainly keep competitors and viewers on their toes and would separate those who have practiced the test to death at home in order to achieve a mark, and those who have the basics so solidly in place that they can "wing it".
6. Would the public scoring count? For what percentage?
7. Yikes, that would be fun to watch!!
Hi,
thanks for your nice comments.

With public scoring (point6) I mean that the scores given by the judges are published. In some events they put up monitors for everybody to see the scores develop during the test. It really makes it much more interesting to watch.

Some people are afraid that judges may feel uncomfortable if they can recognize those. So the monitors are put up at positions were the judges don't see them. Personally I think judges should have enough self confidence and experience to stand to their own judgement.

As a rider I don't mind if judges disagree on some points. Usually a lesson were you collect scores from 5 - 7 are in fact those were some points are good and some are poor. As long as I get the reason why a judge gives me a lower score its ok. In most cases those comments are very valuable because they show me what I need to improve.

Point7:
Actually in the beginning of the 20th century the Olympic riding tests were a combination of jumping and dressage. The dressage was much less demanding though.
The jump was fun as it included juming over a bucket being rolled towards the horse.

I remember when I was young :-)) a jump of 80cm at the end of the dressage test was mandatory.



Ciao
Bernd
Bernd, thanks for your comments, enlightening as always!

I agree judge riding experience is so important! And as many judges are now well past their riding careers, and standards have improved all the time, their experience may still be a long way from relevant in the modern sport (just watch some old videos of dressage in the 80's!). Not to mention "the older we get the better we were" mentality...

Your ideas for test variation are certainly interesting. Why not mix things up a little? In jumping they have different classes for speed, height etc...what would be the dressage equivalent of a puissance I wonder? You could also have more than one horse in the arena together for direct comparison...like a "dance-off" ;-P

A jumping component would certainly weed out those of us who neglect jump training (but it could spell the end for a lot of riders, one way or another!!) Yikes! I guess it shows how specialised (or narrow?) our sport has become.
Well, it's been a while but I have been mulling it over in between clinics and competitions in the last few weeks...

1. Training of judges: we need to really clarify the goal of dressage, and what it actually looks like. This applies at all levels, not just at Olympics, as it is severely damaging to our sport when results are confusing (eg discrepancies of 10% , and 8 ranking places between judges as happened to me last weekend!). Many members of the general public think dressage is boring and incomprehensible and to be honest I can see their point.

One thing we should be concentrating on is standardising the training of new judges, (particularly here in the antipodes!) - this could be done by getting video of whole classes from a show in a country where they are getting it right. NOt the top shows, but regional or national classes at all levels, with some good quality horses taht will go to the top and some lesser ones, with 'normal' riders, to help calibrate the quality of what to look for. We need to see the sort of work at all levels that percolates through the system to produce top results. They could judge from the video, and then discuss their assessment and those of the actual ground jury on the day. This could be done once a year maybe at a German show one time, and a Dutch show the next, and the DVD's and judges' notes distributed to judge educators all over the world. A lot of our judges here cannot afford to travel overseas for experience, or if they do they would go to Aachen and then come home and be really disappointed!

Judges for the Olympics should be selected randomly from a short list, and judges should be permitted to judge at OG more than once (but perhaps not in subsequent years?)

2. Method of judging: As i have mentioned in other discussions, I think half marks should be used. I think it would add refinement to the process, especially as the differences between riders is often very small. This could surely be trialled at a few shows to see how it goes?

I also think making the individual movement scores public would enhance the spectator experience immensely, especially if it can be done live. Definitely for OG and WEG.

3. Teams should consist of 4 riders. I just think so :-)

4. Qualifications and COC's... from what I have heard it can get seriously political but how do you get around that in a judged sport?

The task force certainly have some challenges ahead, I just hope they have the courage to meet them head on and make a difference.
Hi,
I think we're on the same track. Surly the training of judges is a key point.
The method of judging in half scores should be tested in some events.

Also I'd expect the team to get 4 riders again. The original idea was that it will favour the 'big' dressage nations as they have enough riders to qualify, whereas some smaller nations may not. However the drawback is that one poor performance or a problem with one horse will disqualify the team, as happend in HongKong with the US team. I think they will go back to 4 riders.

I certainly agree that the public real time presentation of the scores during the test enhances the expereince for the spectators dramatically. It should be standard as much as possible. Yes, there may be discrepancies in some scores, but so what. That's the way dressage scores are.

I would like to come bakc to my earlier idea about more variable tests. That would make the performnce much more exiting and at the same time give the advantage to riders who are really in harmony with their horse.

What do you think about asking the web community here for comments and maybe a vote? We could forward that to the task force members.- maybe we can add a little bit of 'voice-of-the-people' to the usual backroom discussions.

ciao
bernd

RSS

The Rider Marketplace

International Horse News

Click Here for Barnmice Horse News

© 2024   Created by Barnmice Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service