Competing at a lower level to 'warm up' - rant!

[Maesfen]

Have hardly read any of the replies to OP but so many in the horse world like to be big fish in little ponds which is fair enough but there does come a time when it is only seen as pot hunting by others who are either in the audience or those who are striving for higher levels and quite sad that those don't have the courage of their convictions to move up a level which opens them up for ridicule too.
I was always told to compete against yourself, if you are happy with your performance as a whole then that's fine but always strive for the highest you can go; if that results in someone else thinking you deserve a placing then that's the icing on the cake.

 

[Hurricanelady]

All this thread has taught me is to fear the menopause in terror as I will have to start doing intro tests?!

 

[JoJo_]

As I said in my last reply, intro was dropped from our affiliated competitions due to no interest but it is a very popular level for the unaffiliated competition and I dont see a problem with it as a starting point. Our judges (mostly affiliated) are usually encouraging with their marks at that level so competitors do tend to move up to prelim in a reasonable timescale.

We have also had suggestions to run an unaffiliated dressage competition which we are calling 'Nervous Dressage' for those who want to compete but fear going in warmup arenas! We have had so much interest in this from people who's horses misbehave in warmups or from novice riders who are too nervous to be in a busy warmup. Am sure some people wont like the idea of this as a competition! Basically each competitor is allowed 30mins in the school so they warmup and then do their test without anyone else riding in the arena with them. First competition is on sunday and it is quite busy. Some people are using it as a bit of experience for youngsters before moving on to getting them used to warmups.

 

[Walrus]

I do think there is a place for intro, especially at UA. we went out and did about 3 when we were starting out. I didn't have transport so there were months between our competitions and our canter was diabolical for ages - no fault other than my own, once i got some lessons, a saddle that fitted, a bit that he was happy in and a clue then we were off and running. The 3rd time I took him out to some dressage I did the intro and prelim, decided to do the intro as a warm up and the prelim as a stretch - we won the intro comfortably and were about 5th in the prelim - it was the last intro we did, no need to do anymore after that.

However, i totally agree with the people saying if you get beat, work harder, improve and aim to get better. I have recently (about 3 years after that first intro) affiliated my lad - we went to area festivals at prelim, I came 4th in my section. I looked up the comp record of the person that won my section (like you do!), they had been competing at novice all season and even done a few elementarys, but they were inside the points limit before entries closed (2 days after entries closed they went over) - so they were within the rules. Was I annoyed, not really, I was pretty chuffed that we were anywhere near them at our 4th ever BD comp - and also kicking myself that if i had been more accurate on the centreline and the circle we might have beaten them - lesson learned!!

 

[teapot]

but my opinion remains that intro's do nothing to encourage people to up their game or raise their standards.

That depends on the person I think. It was hammered into me in lessons years ago that if you can't get it right in walk and trot, you shouldn't try and won't get it right in canter so actually going out and doing an Intro (which I've watched friends do, only done prelim myself) and getting a judge's opinion is no bad thing IMHO. They're not doing any harm and if it funds the venues providing higher level tests, that again is only a good thing. Same goes for BE and the BE 80 sections.

Also, and you'll say this is an separate issue but I think it's wrong to ignore the RDA/Para side of it. I actually teach those aiming at the RDA Regionals and Nationals, where standards are incredibly high, and having Intro tests means riders can get arena experience before RDA comps. Throw in the fact that for the South East, our Regionals are held at Hickstead and the Nationals are at Hartpury across three days. The ONLY good way of getting riders used to those sorts of environments is to get them out
at the SAME level. BD and RDA are actually working together to increase the number of RDA and pre officially graded para riders out at unaffil, let alone affiliated. I've met the guy in charge of this aim and one of the big issues that always comes up when riders are told they should enter their local dressage competition is 'but I don't want to canter and I'd rather not have the issue of explaining to a judge/being judged by others'. Intro tests remove that additional pressure. Oh and no RDA tests are not easier than BD or RC ones at the equivalent level. There's one RDA walk only test I'd hate to ride tbh!


Just be nice if people looked at the bigger picture once in a while.

 

[HotToTrot]

I feel like I've just looked into the future, and I don't like what I see...


I certainly don't want to stagnate at lower levels. If I'm going to get rubbish scores, I'd rather get them at a stupidly high level

Oi! Have you changed your name by HHO deed poll? Is this so that you can ride incognito at Grand Prix, before returning to wipe the board at Walk & Trot?

 

[JFTDWS]

Oi! Have you changed your name by HHO deed poll? Is this so that you can ride incognito at Grand Prix, before returning to wipe the board at Walk & Trot?

Yep. That's exactly what I've done. Now I just need to install tempi changes and I'll be ready to win all those pretty red rosettes at local intros

No wait, the one time I tried to give myself a confidence-building run at prelim (after a long break) I got my worse score ever

 

[Moomin1]

For me, having seen the standard that many unaff intros are at, I would not gain pleasure from being placed in them in all honesty. I think a lot of them are extremely low standard, and that's fine if someone wishes to just have a bit of a day out with chips, a chat, and a laugh. But I wouldn't take any pride in a placing I had at that level. I've seen some horrendous performances who have still managed to get in the 70% region, and it's all a bit of a mockery to be honest. I don't see an issue however in actually doing them, if it is purely for getting the horse used to the environment, or for the rider's confidence, particularly for kids. I just tend to think that if people want to compete, they should make a bit more of an effort to school their horse to the best of their ability first.

 

[Maesfen]

But I wouldn't take any pride in a placing I had at that level. I've seen some horrendous performances who have still managed to get in the 70% region, and it's all a bit of a mockery to be honest.

The marking perplexes me (doesn't take much!) but how can they give such big scores to mediocre tests? There's being encouraging and there's bending over backwards to give a nice score when in many cases, it's not deserved. How has it become the norm' to get high 60's for a bad test? Is it just the follow on from big marks at Grand Prix level filtering down to the lower levels or just the fact that everyone has to be seen to have done well even if they don't deserve it? Can't people be told they rode like cr$p and have the mark they actually deserved any longer or is it all too PC now?

 

[ihatework]

The marking perplexes me (doesn't take much!) but how can they give such big scores to mediocre tests? There's being encouraging and there's bending over backwards to give a nice score when in many cases, it's not deserved. How has it become the norm' to get high 60's for a bad test? Is it just the follow on from big marks at Grand Prix level filtering down to the lower levels or just the fact that everyone has to be seen to have done well even if they don't deserve it? Can't people be told they rode like cr$p and have the mark they actually deserved any longer or is it all too PC now?

Generally standards are getting better.
70% means that on average the test was 'fairly good' for the expectations of the level

That said, I do agree that some judges have moved a little to much towards generosity, which then inflates the riders perception of how good a test is. Mostly at unaff, but I have seen it aff too.

 

[cptrayes]

I just tend to think that if people want to compete, they should make a bit more of an effort to school their horse to the best of their ability first.

Maybe they have?

 

[cptrayes]

The marking perplexes me (doesn't take much!) but how can they give such big scores to mediocre tests? There's being encouraging and there's bending over backwards to give a nice score when in many cases, it's not deserved. How has it become the norm' to get high 60's for a bad test? Is it just the follow on from big marks at Grand Prix level filtering down to the lower levels or just the fact that everyone has to be seen to have done well even if they don't deserve it? Can't people be told they rode like cr$p and have the mark they actually deserved any longer or is it all too PC now?

It must depend on the region/centre I think. The test I put up above got 61 per cent, which I thought was nicely encouraging without being stupidly unrealistic.

 

[cptrayes]

Talking of marking, I saw a slow motion breakdown of piaffe that Totilas did on his last win, and it did not even meet the written rules to judge the movement. In other words, he never did it, he only did what they call half steps. Yet he scored nines for it.

Now that is bad scoring that really matters.

 

[eahotson]

Now now cptrayes you are at it again.Repeat after me.Only people who ride in intros ride badly!! See easy really.We won't mention the people who all send their horses for a months intensive schooling by a pro for some at least, of their comps.

 

[cptrayes]

Now now cptrayes you are at it again.Repeat after me.Only people who ride in intros ride badly!! See easy really.We won't mention the people who all send their horses for a months intensive schooling by a pro for some at least, of their comps.

I'm so sorry Shelley I also need to apologise as you pointed out earlier on, for having too much fun. Heavens, I was even smiling in that test, when will I learn!

 

[FellOutOfFavour]

It seems to me that far too many people are way too bothered about what other people do, or what they think. Everyone has their reasons for competing at the level that they do, and as the old saying goes "Never judge another person until you have walked a mile in their shoes".

I am currently competing at intro with my horse. We can't canter well enough to canter in public, this doesn't mean he'll be a danger to anyone in the warm up and he certainly won't be careering round out of control causing other competitors to flee for their lives while screaming in terror, it just means canter transitions happen at random times and rarely on any specific lead. As an older horse who has had absolutely no schooling in the past and who is bred to trot then his canter will take some time to put right. This doesn't bother or worry me, it is just how it is. I have chosen to take him out at intro rather than waiting until we are ready to compete at prelim because I'd like us both to get some experience in the ring, I have competed before but he hasn't. From a psychological point of view getting this experience now is necessary for me because I struggle with nerves, particularly following a nasty fall 18 months ago. If I leave it too long to go out I'll constantly find excuses, so it is better that I just bite the bullet and get out there. We have done three tests so far, we have won one and been last in one, but I genuinely don't care about placings as I am just putting in place the foundations that will mean we can go and have fun at prelim once we have the canter cracked. Then once we have prelim cracked I'll attempt to install the medium trot and medium canter buttons and try for novice.....

 

[eahotson]

I'm so sorry Shelley I also need to apologise as you pointed out earlier on, for having too much fun. Heavens, I was even smiling in that test, when will I learn!

LOL

 

[eahotson]

It seems to me that far too many people are way too bothered about what other people do, or what they think. Everyone has their reasons for competing at the level that they do, and as the old saying goes "Never judge another person until you have walked a mile in their shoes".

I am currently competing at intro with my horse. We can't canter well enough to canter in public, this doesn't mean he'll be a danger to anyone in the warm up and he certainly won't be careering round out of control causing other competitors to flee for their lives while screaming in terror, it just means canter transitions happen at random times and rarely on any specific lead. As an older horse who has had absolutely no schooling in the past and who is bred to trot then his canter will take some time to put right. This doesn't bother or worry me, it is just how it is. I have chosen to take him out at intro rather than waiting until we are ready to compete at prelim because I'd like us both to get some experience in the ring, I have competed before but he hasn't. From a psychological point of view getting this experience now is necessary for me because I struggle with nerves, particularly following a nasty fall 18 months ago. If I leave it too long to go out I'll constantly find excuses, so it is better that I just bite the bullet and get out there. We have done three tests so far, we have won one and been last in one, but I genuinely don't care about placings as I am just putting in place the foundations that will mean we can go and have fun at prelim once we have the canter cracked. Then once we have prelim cracked I'll attempt to install the medium trot and medium canter buttons and try for novice.....

I have been where you are.Wrong horse for too long.Nerve shattered at every level.Enter the then newbie. A total saint but no schooling worth mentioning and coupled with my shattered nerve.We went to an INTRO. I just wanted to get round in one piece.Horse trundled round heaving an occasional sigh and saying 'Get a grip woman'.Doing it all was a great achievement as far as I was concerned and the rosette (a 6th) in 9 places was the icing on the cake.We did that when I had owned newbie for about 3 months.In 3 years with the other one I never got near an intro.

 

[PaddyMonty]

I think a lot of people seem to have forgotten the purpose of a competition. It's sole role is to find out who is the best at that time. Nothing more nothing less. This of course has nothing to do with why people choose to enter a competition. There are probably as many reasons as there are fish in the sea. However, no persons personal reason for entering changes the purpose of the competition.
There can only be one winner in a comp. If you don't win you can do one of several things.
1) you could whinge about how unfair it all was. (this seems to be more common these days).
2) you can go home and hope you have better luck next time and the competitors are of a lower standard (getting to more of a common response)
3) you could analyse why you didn't win, identify improvements then work your butt off to make those improvements happen. (least common approach).
What might surprise some people is those that adopt approach 3 tend to win a lot and then get classed as pot hunters. oh and just for the record, schooling for 30 minutes twice a week when the weather is nice does not constitute approach 3.
Above all else people need to accept that no matter how good you are, you will always run the risk of coming up against someone better. This is the nature of competition. In any sport that has multiple levels there will always be a mix of those that are just starting that level, those that are established and those who are ready to move up. Unsurprisingly, the last group are the ones that tend to win (and get classed as pot hunters). If you are just starting at a level it should not come as a surprise if there are people better than you and you don't win.
Peoples perception of fairness is generally very self centred. For instance.....
There is a local unaff dressage venue near to me. The same person pretty much always wins the into and prelim classes. I'm sure most of the other competitors believe that this person is wrong to compete in these but I'm sure the individual thinks its fine. Now one day I ended up competing in the prelim class on the horse that I had just finished BD regionals gaining a top ten place (same level). No surprise we won both prelims beating the afore mentioned person by 7%. I'm sure they felt I was totally wrong to compete said horse that day, just as the rest of the competitors felt most weeks. Fact is, the rules allowed me to do so and on that day the normal winner came up against a combination that were simply better.
That's competition for you.

 

[ester]

I think a lot of people seem to have forgotten the purpose of a competition.

Are you suggesting it isn't cheesy chips??

 

[PaddyMonty]

Are you suggesting it isn't cheesy chips??

I can remember the days when we had to win to be able to afford some cheesy chips. Now that was an incentive to train.

 

[ester]

I can remember the days when we had to win to be able to afford some cheesy chips. Now that was an incentive to train.

That was in the days you used to win money to buy stuff!!?

 

[NinjaPony]

I think intros have their place to introduce novice/nervous combinations to a competition environment, especially children. I don't compete intro because my pony schools at novice/elementary but I took my last pony to an intro and it was very low key which was perfect for her. I had had to retrain her almost completely with a lot of help and her walk and trot was very good but her canter was rushed and unbalanced. I wanted to get her out (only unaffiliated) because I wanted her to get some life experience but I didn't want to knock our confidence so an intro was really good because I knew we could do it easily and it meant I didn't have to put any pressure on her or myself. So I think that they are a useful stepping stone when competing- but they should be that, a step to the next level of competition. If I had a horse secure in canter then I probably wouldn't bother tbh. And I think it's important to understand that having a horse not entirely secure in canter doesn't mean that said horse is out of control/not ready for competitions- it just means that the training is ongoing and the rider or horse might want a low pressure outing. But having said that, I think they should really be reserved for that purpose.

 

[ihatework]

i think a lot of people seem to have forgotten the purpose of a competition. It's sole role is to find out who is the best at that time. Nothing more nothing less. This of course has nothing to do with why people choose to enter a competition. There are probably as many reasons as there are fish in the sea. However, no persons personal reason for entering changes the purpose of the competition.
There can only be one winner in a comp. If you don't win you can do one of several things.
1) you could whinge about how unfair it all was. (this seems to be more common these days).
2) you can go home and hope you have better luck next time and the competitors are of a lower standard (getting to more of a common response)
3) you could analyse why you didn't win, identify improvements then work your butt off to make those improvements happen. (least common approach).
What might surprise some people is those that adopt approach 3 tend to win a lot and then get classed as pot hunters. Oh and just for the record, schooling for 30 minutes twice a week when the weather is nice does not constitute approach 3.
Above all else people need to accept that no matter how good you are, you will always run the risk of coming up against someone better. This is the nature of competition. In any sport that has multiple levels there will always be a mix of those that are just starting that level, those that are established and those who are ready to move up. Unsurprisingly, the last group are the ones that tend to win (and get classed as pot hunters). If you are just starting at a level it should not come as a surprise if there are people better than you and you don't win.
Peoples perception of fairness is generally very self centred. .

spot on

 

[Tiddlypom]

spot on

^^^This.

As I posted earlier, I'm just an average rider who works hard. It took just three years from my teenage cob and his happy hacker rider entering our first ever RC prelim in 1984, getting 50% and 5th out of 10 (which I was chuffed to bits with!), to placing just below Stephen Clarke in our first affiliated elementary.

There was a huge lot of blood, sweat and tears in between, which made it all the sweeter.

If I considered I was not ready to compete at any point, I dropped the competitions and concentrated on the training until we were back on track. Of course sometimes we went out and performed poorly, but it would not be from lack of preparation, just that things went wrong on the day. However, the more correct training you do, the fewer poor days you will get.

I look at the videos that people post of their UA tests, and wonder how on earth they get the marks awarded. IMHO it only encourages mediocrity.

 

[khalswitz]

^^^This.

As I posted earlier, I'm just an average rider who works hard. It took just three years from my teenage cob and his happy hacker rider entering our first ever RC prelim in 1984, getting 50% and 5th out of 10 (which I was chuffed to bits with!), to placing just below Stephen Clarke in our first affiliated elementary.

There was a huge lot of blood, sweat and tears in between, which made it all the sweeter.

If I considered I was not ready to compete at any point, I dropped the competitions and concentrated on the training until we were back on track. Of course sometimes we went out and performed poorly, but it would not be from lack of preparation, just that things went wrong on the day. However, the more correct training you do, the fewer poor days you will get.

I look at the videos that people post of their UA tests, and wonder how on earth they get the marks awarded. IMHO it only encourages mediocrity.

PM and TP I agree SO hard!

My boss once said to me that there is no point even going to a clinic until you have your basics mastered, or you end up paying £40 to be told to keep your heels down.

And that's just clinics! Competing when you aren't ready and the training isn't there is a waste of time and money. Your horse will get 'competition experience' just as quickly once he is actually ready, and you will have a better trained horse underneath you too which will make it much easier!

Now we've gotten into BD, I'd be much less likely to go out and compete before the horse is ready, as it does leave a record.

 

[Palindrome]

I think a lot of people seem to have forgotten the purpose of a competition. It's sole role is to find out who is the best at that time. Nothing more nothing less. This of course has nothing to do with why people choose to enter a competition. There are probably as many reasons as there are fish in the sea. However, no persons personal reason for entering changes the purpose of the competition.
There can only be one winner in a comp. If you don't win you can do one of several things.
1) you could whinge about how unfair it all was. (this seems to be more common these days).
2) you can go home and hope you have better luck next time and the competitors are of a lower standard (getting to more of a common response)
3) you could analyse why you didn't win, identify improvements then work your butt off to make those improvements happen. (least common approach).
What might surprise some people is those that adopt approach 3 tend to win a lot and then get classed as pot hunters. oh and just for the record, schooling for 30 minutes twice a week when the weather is nice does not constitute approach 3.
Above all else people need to accept that no matter how good you are, you will always run the risk of coming up against someone better. This is the nature of competition. In any sport that has multiple levels there will always be a mix of those that are just starting that level, those that are established and those who are ready to move up. Unsurprisingly, the last group are the ones that tend to win (and get classed as pot hunters). If you are just starting at a level it should not come as a surprise if there are people better than you and you don't win.
Peoples perception of fairness is generally very self centred. For instance.....
There is a local unaff dressage venue near to me. The same person pretty much always wins the into and prelim classes. I'm sure most of the other competitors believe that this person is wrong to compete in these but I'm sure the individual thinks its fine. Now one day I ended up competing in the prelim class on the horse that I had just finished BD regionals gaining a top ten place (same level). No surprise we won both prelims beating the afore mentioned person by 7%. I'm sure they felt I was totally wrong to compete said horse that day, just as the rest of the competitors felt most weeks. Fact is, the rules allowed me to do so and on that day the normal winner came up against a combination that were simply better.
That's competition for you.

That is not true in fact, in dressage there is the competition but there is also the test sheet with written feedback from the judge and detailed notes. Some people go to win against others, some want to improve their last score, etc... Whatever floats your boat really.
Personally I don't see the point in entering over and over at a level you are winning at, particularly a level that is for beginner dressage riders as there is no prestige in winning. But then I am not of the "blood, sweat and tear" philosophy either, I just enjoy schooling and have my horse moving correctly off a light aid. In fact, as she gets better and stronger she gets near effortless to ride, as long as you seat straight you just need to wiggle a bit your bum/breath, etc...

 

[PaddyMonty]

That is not true in fact, in dressage there is the competition but there is also the test sheet with written feedback from the judge and detailed notes. Some people go to win against others, some want to improve their last score, etc... Whatever floats your boat really.

I think you've just proved my point. Dressage comp is not the place to gain valuable feedback as the 'notes' are far from detailed. Half an hour training with a listed judge would be far more value for money if you just want to improve. Like I said, the purpose of a competition seems to be getting lost on some folk.

 

[Palindrome]

I think you've just proved my point. Dressage comp is not the place to gain valuable feedback as the 'notes' are far from detailed. Half an hour training with a listed judge would be far more value for money if you just want to improve. Like I said, the purpose of a competition seems to be getting lost on some folk.

The 2 are very different as my horse doesn't behave at all the same at home or in a familiar environment for a lesson and me neither. To me both kinds of feedback are valuable.

 

[ihatework]

PM and TP I agree SO hard!

My boss once said to me that there is no point even going to a clinic until you have your basics mastered, or you end up paying £40 to be told to keep your heels down.

And that's just clinics! Competing when you aren't ready and the training isn't there is a waste of time and money. Your horse will get 'competition experience' just as quickly once he is actually ready, and you will have a better trained horse underneath you too which will make it much easier!

Now we've gotten into BD, I'd be much less likely to go out and compete before the horse is ready, as it does leave a record.

I disagree with that to a certain extent.

I'm all for homework, don't get me wrong, but at the end of the day the competition environment is different to home environment.

At some point you have to accept you need to push yourself and step out of your comfort zone. So I'm actually pro getting out and having a go. Yes you might spend money and not have a prize to show for it, but the money isn't necessarily wasted - more invested in a learning experience. Which goes back to PaddyMonty comment regarding the reasons why people compete being vast.

PS - normally the only person that cares about a BD record is yourself. It doesn't generally register on anyone else's interest levels unless you want to sell the horse for lots of money!