# Was this judge correct?



## busysmurf (Feb 16, 2012)

Here's the situation:

Huntseat (english) equitation class. So it's completely on the rider. Rider #1 has near perfect equitation. Her shoulders are slightly rounded, and heels are slightly forward. At all of the gaits, rider is seated quietly, moving with the horse. For the most part, a decent example of good equitation.

Rider #2 is a very good rider (especially riding western), but has a form of multiple sclorosis so her body alignment is far from where it should be. Her heels are in a vertical line from her knees, and she is leaning forward quite a bit. Her movements are "choppy" at the trot and canter, like she's fighting to find the rythym of the horse.

Both riders personnaly know the judges. And both riders are competing for and currently tied for all-around.

Rider #2 places above rider #1. Reasons given were: taking rider #2's physical/medical situation into consideration she had the best ride for what her limitations where. Though rider #1 had a very good ride, she did not have physical limitations that prevented her from completely straightening her shoulders, and keeping her heels in the correct line.

Without sounding like a completely insensitive B****, where the judges correct and justified in taking rider #2's medical condition into consideration when placing the class?


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

busysmurf said:


> Without sounding like a completely insensitive B****, were the judges correct and justified in taking rider #2's medical condition into consideration when placing the class?


Yes, they were. 

There's no way Rider #2 could have improved her posture, while Rider #1 had no such limitations.

Everything else being equal, if Rider #2 had the better ride and presentation, then she deserved to pin above Rider #1.


----------



## themacpack (Jul 16, 2009)

ITA with SR -- apparently Rider #2 did the absolute best she possibly could have and Rider #1 did not.


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

busysmurf said:


> Here's the situation:
> 
> Huntseat (english) equitation class. So it's completely on the rider. Rider #1 has near perfect equitation. Her shoulders are slightly rounded, and heels are slightly forward. At all of the gaits, rider is seated quietly, moving with the horse.* For the most part, a decent example of good equitation.*
> 
> ...


You said it yourself - 'for the most part'. Judging is subjective.


----------



## busysmurf (Feb 16, 2012)

Very Interesting! Now let's throw a wrench in the situation (I like to instigate, LOL).

What if Rider #1 had a previously broken collarbone that had healed in a forward position preventing her from physically straightening/squaring her shoulders. So now both riders have physical limitations that prevent them from having 100% equitation. One that has a visible condition & one has a condition isn't as appearant. Now all things are equal. 

What are your thoughts?


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

busysmurf said:


> Very Interesting! Now let's throw a wrench in the situation (I like to instigate, LOL).
> 
> What if Rider #1 had a previously broken collarbone that had healed in a forward position preventing her from physically straightening/squaring her shoulders. So now both riders have physical limitations that prevent them from having 100% equitation. One that has a visible condition & one has a condition isn't as appearant. Now all things are equal.
> 
> What are your thoughts?


You already said in your original post that 

_Though rider #1 had a very good ride, she did not have physical limitations that prevented her from completely straightening her shoulders, and keeping her heels in the correct line._


You can't change your story because you don't like the answers.


----------



## maura (Nov 21, 2009)

Well, here's the biggest problem - we can't see the class.

Position is a big part of judging an eq class, but there are other parts. Was one horse traveling inverted or showing a lack of acceptance of the bit? Were both rider's transitions prompt and obedient? Did both riders immediately rise on the correct diagnol by feel or did one have to post a few strides and then switch? Did one, heaven forbid, look down for their diagnol or lead? Did one get a wrong lead or blow a canter depart?

Equitation is about effective horsemanship, so a rider with poor posture but impeccable control should always pin above a rider with excellent position but with an error or disobedience. 

You've described two riders with position flaws. I'm guessing that the judge did not take disability into the equation at all, but judged the riders on their effectivenss and other criteria.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

Yes the judge is right, they make the best decision they can, in their opinion, and on that day, if you stop believing that then there is no point going into the ring.

After every class there is one person who thinks that the judge is a wonderful judge, and the rest of the class has doubts.


----------



## hoopla (Jan 29, 2012)

Of course the judge is correct.

Judges are always right.

That's the first rule of showing.


----------



## Saddlebag (Jan 17, 2011)

Would you believe, first impressions count a lot when entering a ring. Many riders "straighten up" after they've entered the ring. That first impression carries a lot of weight when a difficult decision has to be made.


----------



## Allison Finch (Oct 21, 2009)

I am surprised, although I have never done hunters or equitation. I am surprised that the overall correctness is not the criteria regardless of "handicap". I guess the riders need to submit their entire medical histories to be considered in every equitation class. I have broken both legs, so I have an excuse, now, for my ankles not being as far down as they should be? Where does that end?

I believe the rider with the best equitation, and most effective ride should win....period. I guess that makes me an old poopy head.


----------



## farmpony84 (Apr 21, 2008)

They actually have classes for people with disabilities at most shows. The only issue is they are limited to the classes they can compete in. 

In reality, my opinion would be no, the class was not judged fairly because at any other show, the judge would not have been privy to her medical condition, therefore would have judged both riders similarly and rider #2 would not have placed or would have placed lower.

Because this was probably a local show and the judge knew both riders, my geuss is, they were judged fairly based on the background information that the judge had.


----------



## rob (Aug 8, 2011)

maura and hoopla,i like what you both said.i am an aqha judge and if i didn't see the class,it would be hard to make this decision.and saddlebag,as soon as you step foot in my ring,you are being judged.


----------



## busysmurf (Feb 16, 2012)

mls said:


> You already said in your original post that
> 
> _Though rider #1 had a very good ride, she did not have physical limitations that prevented her from completely straightening her shoulders, and keeping her heels in the correct line._
> 
> ...


For starters, I don't like or dislike the answers either way! I was just curious! I wanted to hear ppls opinions, that's all. (i.e. "let's throw a wrench in it...")

For the record, I may have very strong opinions of my own, but I RESPECT the fact that others may have just as strong opinions. I just like to learn from how other people veiw different situations, like looking at it from a different angle that's all.


----------



## mildot (Oct 18, 2011)

farmpony84 said:


> In reality, my opinion would be no, the class was not judged fairly because at any other show, the judge would not have been privy to her medical condition, therefore would have judged both riders similarly and rider #2 would not have placed or would have placed lower.


I think this is the key point.


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

busysmurf said:


> For starters, I don't like or dislike the answers either way! I was just curious! I wanted to hear ppls opinions, that's all. (i.e. "let's throw a wrench in it...")
> 
> For the record, I may have very strong opinions of my own, but I RESPECT the fact that others may have just as strong opinions. I just like to learn from how other people veiw different situations, like looking at it from a different angle that's all.


I based my response on the information you gave. Different facts can change the answers. 

I stand by my opinion that you were a bit put out by the posters that sided with the judge.


----------



## busysmurf (Feb 16, 2012)

I guess I never thought that "Very Interesting! Now let's throw a wrench in the situation (I like to instigate, LOL)." could be construde(sp?) as being put-out.

I wonder then, what would the correct response have been if I think that something is interesting, and want to compare similiar items without sounding put-off? 

(please note: this comment is not meant for me to sound "put-off", it is simply meant as a question.) (Please note about the please note: would it be best for me to put the above original please note statement as my signature?) (Please note about the please note the please note: Why is everyone so serious around here?)


Read more: http://www.horseforum.com/horse-shows/judge-correct-113989/#ixzz1n9EPyM00


----------



## MHFoundation Quarters (Feb 23, 2011)

farmpony84 said:


> In reality, my opinion would be no, the class was not judged fairly because at any other show, the judge would not have been privy to her medical condition, therefore would have judged both riders similarly and rider #2 would not have placed or would have placed lower.


This. When judging, showing personal bias because of outside personal knowledge is a big no-no and in some cases could get your card pulled. I've judged where folks I knew rode under me and vice versa plenty of times. On those days, you can't "know" that person and have to judge accordingly. 

I'd say that Maura is spot on with her assessment of the class. There are too many other factors to consider to make a fair judgement call on if it was right or wrong.


----------



## Whisper22 (Jan 2, 2011)

I don't show and know very little about it, but I'm a little confused why someone would be allowed to ride in a show they were not capable of riding correctly. Who's to say she would have ridden correctly even if she could.


----------



## back again (Mar 29, 2011)

The issue you raise (with the monkey wrench ) is an interesting re visible vs invisible limitations.

I am very much a believer in being judged based entirely off your performance, no other facts included. In your situation I would not expect a riders disability to be accounted for in the judging (however I am not saying that the judge made the wrong call as (as others have mentioned) there are a million variables)...

I do not think that any type of disability or liability should be considered by the judge but only the performance given.

So, if people have broken legs, collar bones, or any other disability that impacts the way they ride, then they should expect this to impact the judges opinion of their performance. 

Horses dont tell the judge they are stiff on one side so it should be excused so riders shouldn't get to either D - i just imagined a horse walking up to a judge with a list of excuses... including not being fed enough carrots to be expected to do this stuff...)


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

I think it was pretty unfair. The judging should be judged against a standard, nothing else, you either meet that standard or you dont. 
I would expect the disabled person would expect to be treated and judged like everyone else. Letting her win because she is disabled is insulting to both riders.


----------



## DuffyDuck (Sep 27, 2011)

Joe4d said:


> I think it was pretty unfair. The judging should be judged against a standard, nothing else, you either meet that standard or you dont.
> I would expect the disabled person would expect to be treated and judged like everyone else. Letting her win because she is disabled is insulting to both riders.


 
I have worked with children with 'additional needs'- as is the PC of it all, we take a group of 30 odd children on holiday. Some have additional needs, others are carers of siblings/parents with additional needs. The children with physical needs do not like to be pointed out and made seperate from the other, more able bodied.

However, I believe you have to draw the line. I wouldn't let someone with a big physical impairment climb a climbing wall that may damage themselves, where as an able bodied person can.

So should we seperate those with disabilities to other classes, where does it clasify as 'disabled enough' to qualify for those classes, or should and would they want to be judged fairly within the able bodied class they have taken? Sure, Rider no2 is aware of her physical limitations in the saddle, and Rider no1 may also have some issues though not classed as a disablity.

If we try and bunch disabled people in to seperate classes altogether, they feel insulted that they can't compete and be judged against able persons. To a point. Thats why we have paralympics.

However, as the judge is known to both riders, and knows the physical flaws, disability or additional needs of both riders, then I would say it is unfairly judged. As has been mentioned, there are classes for disabled riders, but if you show in a class that is meant for able bodied riders, why shouldn't you be judged equally and fairly against them?

I have very little strength in my left shoulder, and it drops massively, causing a lot of issues I have to over emphasise in my writing, but I'll be damned if I let the judge know to see if I get scored differently because its there- I work harder at it, like Rider no 1 could do.


----------



## DuffyDuck (Sep 27, 2011)

Just to reinforce part of my post.. some competitors don't want judges to know, they want to be judged fairly-- not saying that Rider no2 doesn't want to be, however the judge made comment on her riding ability due to MS in an able bodied class

Lola Walters: Blind teenage gymnast who is taking America by storm | Mail Online


----------



## Charmonix (Feb 20, 2012)

If everyone judged like this judge, this girl would never loose a class, because there is no one, ever, that rides perfectly, so this girl would always have the advantage because "she rode to the best of her ability", and everyone else could have done better. 

I don't mean to be insensitive to the disabled riders, but there is a standard for any class that is judged, and the only thing that should be judged on is that standard. The show you are talking about must have been fairly small where most people knew each other, because I know that at any show I have ever been to, there would have been complaints about that judging if that happened, as terrible as that sounds. People don't pay lots of money to be judged unfairly. If her disability affects her riding that much that the judge needs to accommodate her than she needs to be riding in classes for the disabled.


----------



## rob (Aug 8, 2011)

i agree charmonix.if you're going to show with the big boy's,than be judged like the big boy's.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

I think it's insulting to the judge to try and gauge how much of an allowance was made for the rider.

Without being there and watching the class how do we actually know what the judge saw?

Example,

I was doing a prix caprilli class, one judge actually marking, two people marking for experience, G Man bucked after the last fence, and I nearly came off, 2 people saw it, one judge happened to look down and missed it, all she had was off line written down, and was shocked when she heard what she had missed.

My point is spectators and judges rarely see the same thing, even multiple judges don't see the same. Also the judge is supposed to be unbiased in their view, spectators rarely are.

Bottom line the judge was correct because it was their class.


----------



## DuffyDuck (Sep 27, 2011)

Golden Horse said:


> I think it's insulting to the judge to try and gauge how much of an allowance was made for the rider.
> 
> Without being there and watching the class how do we actually know what the judge saw?
> 
> ...


 
Very true... but then again we can only go off the post that the OP gave us, and use that information.. I don't know if the situation was real, or a made up example..?


----------



## busysmurf (Feb 16, 2012)

Real, for the most part. The broken collar bone was a stretch, she actually just had a bruised shoulder. It wasn't me though. It was at a local open show, & I was following the judge for my FFA judging team waaay back in high school. Just to be clear, I was neither one of the riders nor the judge! but I knew both riders fairly well, so I knew their backgrounds.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Tapperjockey (Jan 2, 2012)

that's terrible. I certainly wouldn't show under that judge ever. How.. patronizing. 

I have some limitations now riding (due to some bad falls). It means I have to work harder at some things. But everyone has limitations (physical, mental, time, money, etc) and we each have to overcome them as best we can. I'd be HORRIFIED if I found out I placed above someone because I rode "to the best of my ability" but wasn't as good as they were. 

I don't need a handout of ribbons from a judge. I don't want a handout. I want accurate and honest assessments of how my horse and I are doing that day, in that class, against the competition.


----------



## Allison Finch (Oct 21, 2009)

I have very little patience for students who care more for winning than putting in a good ride. They are not always the same thing, at all.


----------



## busysmurf (Feb 16, 2012)

Allison Finch said:


> I have very little patience for students who care more for winning than putting in a good ride. They are not always the same thing, at all.


OMG, I love that picture! And I don't even like cats
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## GotaDunQH (Feb 13, 2011)

I agree with the people that said it was judged unfairly. Equitation is equitation and it is based on the position and posture of the rider, correct alignment etc. In all honesty, I find the placing a "pity" placing, so to speak.....the rider did not earn it.


----------



## MacabreMikolaj (May 9, 2009)

Agreed with it being unfair. I have scoliosis and I ride so crooked, it's like one leg is 3 inches shorter then the other. However, I believe if I work hard enough, I can ride just as good as a "normal" rider and I will try hard. I was given no special treatment when I competed in my first Dressage show, as my position was negatively affecting my horse. I was grateful for an honest opinion of exactly what my bad position was doing to my horse.

If you are disabled to the point where hard work will never help you, then accept it and ride with the disabled riders. It frustrates me when people somehow act like we're "excluding" disabled people. No, it's the EXACT same reason as why we have men's and women's sports. Women, in general, have a distinct disadvantage to men and it's nothing to be ashamed about. In most sports we have different weight classes, all designed to acknowledge that many people have distinct advantages over another group of people.


----------



## Joe4d (Sep 1, 2011)

I disagree with the "ride with the disabled" comment. Ride where you want. While you shouldnt get special treatment or pitty judging.
Maybe someone with disabilities is just happy to be able to compete, maybe they would rather come in last in an open class than first in a restricted class. I know I would.


----------



## MacabreMikolaj (May 9, 2009)

I didn't mean it like that. I meant it's ridiculous to assume that because we have separate classes for disabled people, we're somehow excluding them. And often, it's a matter of safety when it comes to disabled people competing in open competition.


----------

