Should the rules be enforced?

spirithorse · Advanced

Should the rules be enforced?

barnfrog · Advanced

The horse was doing a piaffe pirouette and then balked. 20 seconds starts from the point(s) of each refusal to go forward. It was NOT 20 seconds. I will grant you that such resistance should be heavily penalized in that box and in the submission general impression (and likely was), but it is not a eliminateable resistance. They DID follow the rules.

Why don't you go to a judges forum, or L program, and audit.

spirithorse · Advanced

The reaction of the horse was complete resistance, including reverse and crow hopping.

The horse should have been eliminated.....because the judge does not have to allow 20 seconds for such negative resistance.

Geoffrey Pannell · Well Schooled

That disabedence lasted 4 seconds, it did not endanger anyone, no ellimination in that. It has to go for more than 20 seconds or endanger the horse, rider or public. Have you ever been to a judges seminar?? The judges did follow the rules and i'll bet the score for that movement was very low!! Still waiting for the video you promised to show us how to di it properly!

justice · Grand Prix

Resistance? Clearly. Elimination worthy? Not that I can see but I am a little guy out there. Low score, maybe an error in execution or even a '0', depending on where she was in her test when the resistance took place. Collective remarks would reflect this as well.

I do not perceive that Ms Werth was in hazardous danger nor was her horse or apparently anyone else in immediate danger. The situation was diffused/abated efficiently and Ms Werth was unseated at no time thru-out the resistance. She seemed to never shift from conviction to hope like people do when it hits the fan : )

-- Edited by justice on Sunday 22nd of May 2011 09:51:02 PM

Barnmouser Ash · Grand Prix

Perhaps I've no place to comment as I've never even touched a dressage saddle, but the horse looks confused/like it's having a bad day, at best. I made sure to watch the nose and head for "behind the vertical" movement and actually found the horse in front or on vertical most of the clip. Never did I see Ms. Werth reel the horse's face in; in fact the reins were loose when he took a side-hop. I know these points weren't brought up, but I know how this discussion will go ;)

I agree with Justice here (surprise surprise, LOL) - Perhaps the horse and rider should have received a 0 for the movement, but no one was endangered, the resistance did not go on for even close to 20 seconds (and having been that the horse seemed moderately under control and didn't even buck, I would say grounds for under 20 second elimination are void).

I think the judges did a fine job. I don't see the point in nit-picking every single thing that happens in a dressage ring. Horses have bad days; it does not necessarily indicate towards the rider or trainer's methods. Have you ever seen Teddy O'Connor doing dressage? The O'Connors are wonderful riders IMHO, but Teddy just would not have any of it. Horses are people too, ya know :)

-- Edited by Barnmouser Ash on Thursday 26th of May 2011 02:43:58 PM

Queenrider · Advanced

Enforcement of the rules has to begin at the bottom. Many times I have seen horses way BTV in low level shows getting good scores and winning ribbons. I have seen lame horses at the low levels win ribbons in dressage.

Nikki Salo · Grand Prix

I just decided to watch the video, now I recall watching this live --- how many years ago now?

Horses have melt downs, and they're more than likely to have this happen while under the spot light in a competition.

As for Isabell Werth being disqualified, the total act-out was 4-5 seconds (that is the handy thing about a timed video), what I see is the horse balking from the forward aids and sucking back (causing his nose to come behind the verticle in a few frames as he loses forward motion and balks), Isabell is riding with appropriate length and contact on the reins to keep some contact while asking him to keep moving forward/with impluse from behind. Had she of thrown the reins up his neck the outcome could of been worse, as she wouldn't of been able to pull his head up when he went to buck. I think she rode the whole thing like a pro to be honest.

I believe she did recieve a 0 on the movement, but it could be somebody else that I am thinking of?

spirithorse · Advanced

The video does not show that down the long side she was using her spurs on him and his tail was wrenching. And throughout the breakdown, the tail is wrenching.

The rules declare that tail wrenching shows resistance.

So under the circumstance of the entire picture, she should have been eliminated.

barnfrog · Advanced

Learning the rules/directives in toto rather than selective sections are in order for those who want to judge by them.

The OP mixes up where things are 'punished' in a test. Resistances to going forward, in terms of stopping/balking/etc for 20 seconds, is elimination.

But resistance in terms of hollowing, wringing tail, BIT ACCEPTANCE is 'punished' in the Submission section of the GENERAL IMPRESSIONS (AND noted in the individual boxes).

DR 116.2.Submission does not mean subordination, but an obedience revealing its presence by a constant attention, willingness and confidence in the whole behavior of the horse as well as by the harmony, lightness and ease it is displaying in the execution of the different move- ments. The degree of the submission is also demonstrated by the way the horse accepts the bit, with an elastic contact and a supple poll. Resistance to or evasion of the rider’s hand, being either “above the bit” or “behind the bit” demonstrate lack of submission. The main contact with the horse’s mouth must be through the snaffle bit.

a.Putting out the tongue, keeping it above the bit or drawing it up altogether, as well as grinding the teeth or agitation of the tail, are mostly signs of nervousness, tension or re- sistance on the part of the horse and must be taken into account by the judges in their marks for every movement concerned, as well as in the collective mark for “submission”. b. The first thought when considering submission is willingness, that the horse under- stands what is being asked of it and is confident enough in the rider to react to the aids without fear or tension.

Barnmouser Ash · Grand Prix

spirithorse wrote:
The video does not show that down the long side she was using her spurs on him and his tail was wrenching. And throughout the breakdown, the tail is wrenching.
The rules declare that tail wrenching shows resistance.
So under the circumstance of the entire picture, she should have been eliminated.

Why didn't you post the entire test, then? We as "uninformed viewers" so to speak cannot fairly judge or learn from these instances if parts are left out.

I agree with Nikki. The horse sucked back (which as far as I know is not a violent resistance method..), had a slight melt down as all horses do from time to time, and moved on. If the horse was provoked, please show us when and where.

I would also note that the use of spurs does not indicate cruelty or misuse of aids. Some horses are less sensitive than others and require stimulation. Some specific movements require a cue via spur touch. The simple use of spurs on the horse alone does not denote cruelty or provocation for resistance/a melt down/etc.

spirithorse · Advanced

Barmmouser Ash,
That is the video I posted, however, I cannot find her whole ride.
As for the misuse of the aids known as spurs....a wrenching of the tail whenever a spur is applied is a demonstration of two things....resistance to the spur by the horse....and more importantly ineffective use of the leg aids by the rider whom has had to become dependent upon the spurs.
I teach my clients to ride without spurs and keep their heels off the horse. This way their leg and seat aids become more effective and less visable.

Barnmouser Ash wrote:
spirithorse wrote:
The video does not show that down the long side she was using her spurs on him and his tail was wrenching. And throughout the breakdown, the tail is wrenching.
The rules declare that tail wrenching shows resistance.
So under the circumstance of the entire picture, she should have been eliminated.

Why didn't you post the entire test, then? We as "uninformed viewers" so to speak cannot fairly judge or learn from these instances if parts are left out.

I agree with Nikki. The horse sucked back (which as far as I know is not a violent resistance method..), had a slight melt down as all horses do from time to time, and moved on. If the horse was provoked, please show us when and where.

I would also note that the use of spurs does not indicate cruelty or misuse of aids. Some horses are less sensitive than others and require stimulation. Some specific movements require a cue via spur touch. The simple use of spurs on the horse alone does not denote cruelty or provocation for resistance/a melt down/etc.

Barbara F · Grand Prix

Queenrider wrote:
Enforcement of the rules has to begin at the bottom. Many times I have seen horses way BTV in low level shows getting good scores and winning ribbons. I have seen lame horses at the low levels win ribbons in dressage.

Ugg...do you think that's because the judges at the lower levels don't yet have the education?

It's pretty scary if that's what's going on because all your training is built on whatever your foundation is and if riders are being told btv and lame is just fine, that's what will guide them.

Jackie Cochran · Advanced

Well Barbara, this is the reason that I think that dressage judges or riders are not qualified to critique my riding. When blue ribbons are only given out for incorrect riding I do not think the judges are qualified to judge ANY riding, much less dressage. I do not care if they win/judge Olympic classes or any other high ranking competitions.

Of course I think that ALL, ALL, ALL riding BTV is bad riding. If the trainers in their infinite unwisdom think that BTV is necessary it should not be used for more than 1-3 strides, at home, out of public view. IMHO people use BTV and RK because they are not able to ride that particular horse properly. If I, weak with my MS, can ride and control an 18.2 draft/warmblood horse without keeping his head BTV I wonder why unhandicapped people have to ride their smaller, lighter horses BTV.

But of course most people seem to disagree with me nowadays. I don't care. The day that I can't ride a horse properly, with its nose leading, will be the day that I will realize that I have to give up riding. I may be handicapped but I have my pride.

The lame horses may be "bridle lame", reacting with very uneven strides to the rider's misuse of the bit. Of course, in a dressage class especially, any horse that looks lame should be excused from the class, not given a ribbon and high score. But nowadays I do not expect any better from judges. And every year it gets worse.

barnfrog · Advanced

As a juge I agree that a horse which is steadily (held) btv should be scored quite low. The rules say that the horse should as a general rule be with the poll the highest and the face in front of the vertical. Historically this has applied to h/j/wester/dressage/etc. With h/j the bascule is negatively impacted if this does not happen, with western the horse drops the tail onto the ground and stiffens the hindlegs in a slide, in dressage the purity of the gait is negatively impacted. That said, there are people who have no idea about ifv done correctly either, and miss that the back can be hollowed easily. The judges job is to HOLD A STANDARD, judge by the DIRECTIVES. It is my belief this has been compromised in the last 30+ years (from Lette onward). That said, spirthorse, clearly has never been to a judge's forum, not puts the rules in a frame of reference...and if that ride is the worst he has seen, he should sit at C. That said, at GP one has to WONDER why (pretty clear actually where that comes from), and the score should be only 1 or 2 for those movements. However it was NOT 20 seconds of steady stop/backing up.

spirithorse · Advanced

Thanks Barnfrog...............

I just wish the elitists at USEF and FEI would comprehend the problem.

May I quote you?