Murky morning musings - naturally talented versus accurate tests?

[Lgd]

I've competed to a good level with 'untypical' dressage horses. 7/8 TB mare competed to Inter I, Fell Pony to Medium level, Orlov x TB/Connemara to PSG, IDSH currently out at Medium level.

What you have to do is make sure not to waste any marks. Get those centre lines straight, accurate transitions, good basic training, correct way of going etc. All of them have made it to regionals and got placed. The TB mare made it to Nationals a couple of times. The one similarity between them was immense trainability that overcame the lesser physical ability. Yes, they often get beaten by something with better paces but equally I've thrashed many a posh WB with them because my presentation and training was better on the day. Interestingly all did far better in the higher level tests where technical skills come more to the fore than just good paces.

It is easier in some ways with a horse bred for the job have a young homebred WB mare (out of the 7/8 TB mare) just starting to compete. Physically talented, trainable but with a bit of an opinion at times (she is chestnut ). She finds everything incredibly easy, but she went out at the weekend and did two novices in the training section. She got poor marks (55%, 54%) because she was tense, naughty and made mistakes. Equally I could pretty much guarantee that if her mother had been as naughty she would have got lower marks. The difference is her paces and natural balance are inherently better so she does pick up higher marks for the good bits (marks ranged from 2 to 7!)

 

[DabDab]

This is such an interesting discussion, thanks for starting it op
For me the most interesting pace in terms of marking is the trot, because when a flashy mover isn't working well it seems to lose almost all inherent correctness in its way of going. Whereas if you put that horse into canter on the same bad day its inherent correctness is far less affected. In comparison I've seen a lot of horse who don't have the best conformation but when they are working well in the trot they look very correct (but much less so as soon as they go into the other paces), particularly at the levels up to elementary.

 

[maxine1985]

Completey agree with Table Dancers comments, this is exactly the same as my instructor explains it to me, she's list 2a, so not far off list 1

In my first lesson on my new youngster, although not flashy, he's 3/4 ID 1/4 TB she said he should get 8's for his paces, they're very rythmical correct and balanced. Didn't really believe he was capable but a few months down the line and he's out at BD Prelim regularly scoring 8's for paces and marks have ranged from 3-9 in one test, regularly scoring in late 60's, still very green so making baby mistakes and abit spooky! But in very few outings has 6 sheets for pet plans and qualified for summer regionals, will aim for Pet plans then winters though.
But like TD said, his base mark is 8 for walk and trot, if he gets tense, loses balance, inaccurate this drops to 6 or 7, if he does a fab centre line he gets 9's. His canter work is work in progress, won't score higher than 7 until he's stronger.
Been told he's capable of consistent 70% scores at prelim and novice and this isn't because he's flashy, just very correct, so I do believe accurate and correctness will be rewarded over flashiness, particularly at the lower levels!

 

[LEC]

I have the flashy horse who does disappointing tests. You can almost read the judge's disappointment! It is getting better with a lot of work but we get absolutely hammered on some things which a less flashy horse would get away with.

 

[Caol Ila]

LOL. I sometimes think the only conclusion that can be drawn is that everyone thinks the grass is greener for everyone else. The people with flashy horses think the judges are harder on them because they expect more, and the people with average horses think they'd get those 8s if only their horse had bigger paces.

 

[*Nik*]

There is no reason that a less flashy horse cant get just as good marks as the flashier types at the lower levels. My little Irish Cob is testiment to that. He is far from flashy and although straight moving he lacks freedom through his shoulder and has quite a Pony stride yet he is out winning at Prelim and Novice with near 70% every time. Qualified for the unaffiliated dressage championship at hickstead and got reseve champion and the 4th highest score out of 130 and when we event he is getting mid to low 20's.

I just make sure i am as accuarate as possible in all my movements and where he struggles with the medium work and walk (usually 6's and sometimes 7's for these movements) I try and make up the marks elsewhere and focus on not pushinghim out of his rhythm and squeezing every mark out of my test.

 

[Tr0uble]

LOL. I sometimes think the only conclusion that can be drawn is that everyone thinks the grass is greener for everyone else. The people with flashy horses think the judges are harder on them because they expect more, and the people with average horses think they'd get those 8s if only their horse had bigger paces.

I'm not sure that's necessarily the case, just that everyone is out there experiencing things and depending on the type of horse you have, the experience will be different.

ie I AM finding that at the level I'm trying to establish at, a bit more flash would carry me more...but at the same time I recognise the areas where i DO pick up marks for correct training and accuracy...so I choose not to worry too much about the odd 5 for our weakest rein medium trot, but I will kick myself for getting less than an 8 if my centre line is wobbly.

But, up a level I think the complexity of the tests show the holes in the training and accuracy, so flash holds less weight...if that makes sense?

I do think that whoever said that 2 horses, one flash, one not, performing the same move with the same accuracy, then the horse with naturally better paces SHOULD score higher. Otherwise they'd have to start up a handicapping system to put all on the same level, and that's just sillyness!!! lol!!

 

[nikicb]

Thanks for all the replies, there's loads of really interesting stuff here to think about. I think my horse falls somewhere between the two extremes. He has nice paces when he can be bothered, although is still unbalanced especially in canter, but he will never be super duper flashy like a lot of the lovely WBs are as he just isn't built that way. Lots of accuracy and training for us I think.

 

[thetrainer'smissus]

MiniTD had some lessons last year from a List One judge and Junior/YR selector - it was really interesting. She would say each horse has a basic mark underlying each pace, so for our pony let's say it was 8 for walk (really good rhythm and stride length, huge overtrack) 7 for trot (nice enough, correct and through, not flashy) and 6 for canter (tendency towards four time, lacking engagement). Then the marks for each movement will obviously reflect how well you ride it: preparation, accuracy etc and how well the horse responds (any resistance etc) but will be decided around the basic marks for that pace. So if miniTD does a mistake-free trot serpentine it will get a seven, if pony resists a little in the leg yield or quickens in the medium trot it will get a six, if she does a fantastic straight centre line with a good transiton to a square halt to finish she might get an eight. Etc etc. In the collectives, this pony would get a seven for paces, as an average of the walk, trot, canter.

Thing is, if someone comes along who has a horse who has an eight walk, eight trot, eight canter as a starting point, the starting point mark for each movement is going to be an eight - marked up to nine if it does it particularly well (stunning medium trot for instance) - and dropping to seven for minor mistakes, obviously more for bigger ones...

So you could argue it is quite a handicap to start with a more limited horse. HOWEVER, same trainer's argument is - going back to miniTD's pony who is not gifted on the flat, if she can nail her basic score as cited above for each movement without throwing away any marks, she is on for 70%, which is a pretty competitive score at least for our purposes. Ok, he might drop a couple on the mediums, but then with a really flashy extended walk she might one back with a nine (happenend sometimes but not as often as we would have liked ) and pick up a few extra eights with great halts, transitions, reinback etc. So all in all, plenty to play for even when you are starting with a less flashy horse. The aim, then, was always to ride for a "clear round" (dressage trainer trying to speak eventer-speak D) ie no mistakes, no marks "thrown away".

Agree with this and well put. Also agree with others who have said that some of the wrinkles are ironed out as you go up the levels. My very ordinary horse is out at PSG/Inter1 and for sure if you can do a clear round at that level, the fact of performing the difficult movements properly will carry you along a bit.

What we have done over the course of the last few weeks is to forensically analyse the score sheets to see where the extra half marks can come - a little bit more here and there can make a big difference in percentage terms - we've moved from 60% when we started competing in April to >64% last week, simply by squeezing half a mark onto as many of the 6s as we can and focussing on the clear round. We expect to qualify for the regionals next week, which didn't seem to be on the horizon 6 weeks ago.

The rider can do an awful lot to help the horse and to help the judge award the higher marks - seems obvious, but it doesn't always happen. 1% on the score is usually only two or three marks, and they will be there if you look for them. "Incremental gains" was the mantra of the British Cycling guys and they turned themselves into the best in the world with that policy.

 

[Auslander]

You've met Alf! A more unlikely advanced dressage horse would be hard to find. Much as I love him, he is a teeny bit common, and doesn't have much going for him movement wise.
He got to where he did by being super correct, and exceptionally willing to be trained. He is totally consistent - most of his marks throughout his career were very similar, and he always trys very hard to second guess what his rider is asking him for - and does it, no matter how woolly the aid!

 

[Cortez]

You only have to think back to last year's Olympics to see the way dressage judging is tending: lovely, free, buoyant Valegro who made a bunch of mistakes and was rewarded for the joy of his performance, and horrible, tense, clenched, drilled "Other Horse" that was absolutely accurate, but finished behind. Judges SHOULD reward good training over rider wobbles, but not all do.

 

[TarrSteps]

I'm interested that 'flashy' seems to equal 'athletic' in this conversation, as I would not necessarily find them synonymous. A flashy horse, to me, is one that arches its neck and throws its feet around and makes a big first impression. An athletic horse moves like a well oiled machine, with a big engine and a powerful, sinuous step. There are horses that are both, who have a lot of presence and also move very well, but it's not a given.

I don't think it's 'disappointing' that dressage favours an good mover any more than sj favours a scopey, careful horse or eventing favours a quick, bold one. Good riding and training can let you work closer to the margins of a horse's ability and make the most of what it has to offer, but you'll still likely get beaten by the better athlete, possibly even if it's not ridden quite as well.

People argue that dressage 'should' be about training but that's technically true of all jose sports. It's always going to be a bit more complicated than that. Luckily most of us are working nowhere near our own or our horses' optimum so there is always room for improvement.

 

[Baggybreeches]

I'm interested that 'flashy' seems to equal 'athletic' in this conversation, as I would not necessarily find them synonymous. A flashy horse, to me, is one that arches its neck and throws its feet around and makes a big first impression. An athletic horse moves like a well oiled machine, with a big engine and a powerful, sinuous step. There are horses that are both, who have a lot of presence and also move very well, but it's not a given.

I don't think it's 'disappointing' that dressage favours an good mover any more than sj favours a scopey, careful horse or eventing favours a quick, bold one. Good riding and training can let you work closer to the margins of a horse's ability and make the most of what it has to offer, but you'll still likely get beaten by the better athlete, possibly even if it's not ridden quite as well.

People argue that dressage 'should' be about training but that's technically true of all jose sports. It's always going to be a bit more complicated than that. Luckily most of us are working nowhere near our own or our horses' optimum so there is always room for improvement.

I kind of agree with this, I certainly wouldn't call my mare 'flashy' she has powerful paces but even in walk she has an 'expression' about her (it's hard to explain but that's the best way to describe it!), some horses just have that 'thing' that makes them look better than the rest. I also agree with the incremental gains statement by thetrainerswife!

 

[nikicb]

Agree with this and well put. Also agree with others who have said that some of the wrinkles are ironed out as you go up the levels. My very ordinary horse is out at PSG/Inter1 and for sure if you can do a clear round at that level, the fact of performing the difficult movements properly will carry you along a bit.

What we have done over the course of the last few weeks is to forensically analyse the score sheets to see where the extra half marks can come - a little bit more here and there can make a big difference in percentage terms - we've moved from 60% when we started competing in April to >64% last week, simply by squeezing half a mark onto as many of the 6s as we can and focussing on the clear round. We expect to qualify for the regionals next week, which didn't seem to be on the horizon 6 weeks ago.

The rider can do an awful lot to help the horse and to help the judge award the higher marks - seems obvious, but it doesn't always happen. 1% on the score is usually only two or three marks, and they will be there if you look for them. "Incremental gains" was the mantra of the British Cycling guys and they turned themselves into the best in the world with that policy.

I love this post and it shows how hard work and a bit of strategy really can pay off. It also fits with how I 'work' as far as my riding is concerned. I was the one at my previous livery yard who was called 'lucky' because my mare was so well schooled. Well it didn't happen overnight and I put a lot of effort into it. It's lovely to hear that this still works at the higher levels and gives us all hope. Thank you.

 

[TableDancer]

Agree with this and well put. Also agree with others who have said that some of the wrinkles are ironed out as you go up the levels. My very ordinary horse is out at PSG/Inter1 and for sure if you can do a clear round at that level, the fact of performing the difficult movements properly will carry you along a bit.

What we have done over the course of the last few weeks is to forensically analyse the score sheets to see where the extra half marks can come - a little bit more here and there can make a big difference in percentage terms - we've moved from 60% when we started competing in April to >64% last week, simply by squeezing half a mark onto as many of the 6s as we can and focussing on the clear round. We expect to qualify for the regionals next week, which didn't seem to be on the horizon 6 weeks ago.

The rider can do an awful lot to help the horse and to help the judge award the higher marks - seems obvious, but it doesn't always happen. 1% on the score is usually only two or three marks, and they will be there if you look for them. "Incremental gains" was the mantra of the British Cycling guys and they turned themselves into the best in the world with that policy.

Spot on - we were using the same approach last season in the run up to team selection. And the "Incremental Gains" approach is fascinating and can apply far wider than just the test analysis