Question for Ciss

L

Ladyfresha1

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 February 2008
Messages
430
Visit site
Why are there only six horses in the three year old eventing section at the championships? Also why do qualifying places not pass down the line if someone decides not to go? I can't see why it shouldn't seen as it does when someone has to decide on one section when qualified for two, can't see what the difference is. I could see the point if the next horse in line had a low score.

Also re a previous post where masks were written on the sheet for two sections when only one was entered - I can't see how this is fair as I (as did many others) paid to be given two sets of marks. Not having a go at anyone, I just think that this is a little out of order as the rest of us paid for the extra set of marks. Maybe an idea for next year would be for the judges to only mark once if only one section is entered. I don't know if this has been done on any other occasion this season but I was a little peeved when I read the post and wondered why I had bothered paying the extra £25 when I could have got an extra assessment for free. I know you will probably say that a premium/rossette was not awarded but that is not the point. As for the poster - lucky you!

Thanks
 
[ QUOTE ]
Why are there only six horses in the three year old eventing section at the championships?

[/ QUOTE ]

Becuase only 1st Premium horses qualify for the finals and whilst at least four 3 year old colts/geldings achieved this in eventing only 2 fillies did and it is the top four (if they get 1st premiums) in each age/sex secttion that qualify. The next in line in the relevant age/sex section is asked to full up the place if a dual qualified horse decides to go for another discipline but only of they achieved a 1st Premium score. This could not happen in the fillies as only two 1st premiums were awarded anyway.

Realistically, scores of 8.37 for eventing and 8.19 for showjumping are a bit off the qualifying marks of 8.56 and 8.53 which were the respective lowest qualifying scores for 3 year old eventing and showjumping geldings but I cna understadn your disappointment if you did not read/understand the rules on passing down qualifying places for the Finals correctly.

[ QUOTE ]
Also why do qualifying places not pass down the line if someone decides not to go? I can't see why it shouldn't seen as it does when someone has to decide on one section when qualified for two, can't see what the difference is. I could see the point if the next horse in line had a low score.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've just answered your own question (see above). The purpose of the Futurity is to identify where excellence lies and a 2nd premium is not an indicator of excellence at the time it is awarded.

[ QUOTE ]
Also re a previous post where masks were written on the sheet for two sections when only one was entered - I can't see how this is fair as I (as did many others) paid to be given two sets of marks. Not having a go at anyone, I just think that this is a little out of order as the rest of us paid for the extra set of marks. Maybe an idea for next year would be for the judges to only mark once if only one section is entered. I don't know if this has been done on any other occasion this season but I was a little peeved when I read the post and wondered why I had bothered paying the extra £25 when I could have got an extra assessment for free. I know you will probably say that a premium/rossette was not awarded but that is not the point. As for the poster - lucky you!

[/ QUOTE ]

To my knowldge this is the only occassion on which this happened during the entire series as it was the only time that the owner refused to take the evaluators advice and allow her horse to be transfered into another section. I rather suspect that the evaluators did it just as a lesson to show what the scores would have been had she allowed that to happen but as the second set of (actually higher) scores are not in the system and this was a one-off early in the series I think we can be sure that far from feeling lucky the owner is now somewhat embarrassed at having dismissed the evaluators specialist advice so quickly just becuase she has already decided that her horse will become a dressage horse wherever its natural talent lies.
 
I am sorry to have caused some concern over the way my horse was evaluated, and Ciss, I am far from embarrassed at the way I handled things.

It was my first evaluation and I was somewhat in awe of the whole event. Bar a few horses, most at the evaluation I went to were from one stud and all being handled by the 'stud owner'. Therefore I felt very out of place initially and quite intimidated. I am not ashamed to say this.

When we did the evaluation, the evaluators could not have been nicer, and I am incredibly pleased we went because I have learned so much. I bred my horse for myself to compete in dressage, so when they asked whether I would like to change I kindly explained the reason I had put his dam in foal and would very much like the feedback on him as a dressage horse for my own knowledge and his future life with me. I found what they were saying absolutely fascinating (once the results had been given) and listened intently to what they said about why they had given each mark. I would not have gained this knowledge from such awesome people had I not gone this route.

I do not feel lucky as like Ciss has already said, these results are not on any database or recorded in anyway other than on my own sheet. I was not expecting to have them entered for free on the database as I have offered to pay the full entry fee (so £50, not the £25 as a second discipline) if it would be possible, therefore I would be in no better a position than yourself if you paid the £25 extra. Yes, I know the marks he 'would have' been awarded as an eventer, but that is it. There were no comments or feedback on this, which I am afraid to say was the most important part of the day for me. The feedback they gave and advise was the main reason I attended the day.

I hope this clears a few things up, and once again I apologise if anyone feels they have been 'put out' by my admission of this. It was not intended as I think the BEF did an outstanding job, and made first time breeders like myself eager for the dates next year! You only have to read some of the posts on this site to see how pleased people have been with the organisation and hard work that has gone into these classes, and I wish everyone at the Championship the best of luck! There are some awesome hoses starting to come up through British breeding which is such a pleaure to be a part of!
 
Ciss I did not ask why my horses didn't qualify. I asked why there were only six horses. If you look at the programme for Sunday it actually says that there three colt/geldings and three fillies NOT four colts and two fillies. In the 3yr old SJ it says there are two males and six females NOT 4 of each. So I am sure you can see why I asked the question. I am not worried about the finals, my lorry is out of action so I wouldn't be going anyway so sour grapes is so far off the mark, I am just questioning what was in front of me as it seemed wrong somewhere. I can understand that there was a rush to get the programme ready but if mistakes are made you have to answer the questions.

With regard to passing down, in this particular section, yes, it would not pass down as the horses were low scorers, what would happen if six horses achieved first premiums and one couldn't go? The place would not pass down to a worthy horse.

Jetset, please don't think I am moaning about you! I'm not, believe me. I was a first time attendee this year as well, with my first colt, the first time I had taken him out anywhere. There is nothing wrong with dismissing their advice re moving section, so I don't see why she should be embarrassed about this.

This post was not about Jetset, it was about the judging. It seems a little unprofessional to me. Also maybe do proof read your programme next year. Then my first query wouldn't have come up. I did look back at previous ones to work out for myself what sex the horses are. Its just makes the whole thing look a shambes and it really isn't. This is the flagship of british breeding and things like this just let it down.

My own experiences at the grading were excellent, I thought the grading was well run, the judges helpful and welcoming and overall I am very happy. It is just a shame that a few schoolboy errors have been made. But never mind, maybe these things can be corrected next year as I'm sure they will be.

Good luck to everyone on Sunday.
 
well i have to say for me personally, from what i have read from some post, that the futurity is not for me?? i think i will just show my foals at county shows and see how we get, seems less hassle.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Ciss I did not ask why my horses didn't qualify. I asked why there were only six horses. If you look at the programme for Sunday it actually says that there three colt/geldings and three fillies NOT four colts and two fillies. In the 3yr old SJ it says there are two males and six females NOT 4 of each. So I am sure you can see why I asked the question.

I am not worried about the finals, my lorry is out of action so I wouldn't be going anyway so sour grapes is so far off the mark, I am just questioning what was in front of me as it seemed wrong somewhere. I can understand that there was a rush to get the programme ready but if mistakes are made you have to answer the questions.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you come tomorrow you will hear it announced that there is an error in some of the entries where colts are described as fillies die to a computer glitch. I can assure you that there are 4 males and 2 fillies in that class whatever it currently says in the printed version.

[ QUOTE ]
With regard to passing down, in this particular section, yes, it would not pass down as the horses were low scorers, what would happen if six horses achieved first premiums and one couldn't go? The place would not pass down to a worthy horse.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry don't understand the question /point here.

[ QUOTE ]
Jetset, please don't think I am moaning about you! I'm not, believe me. I was a first time attendee this year as well, with my first colt, the first time I had taken him out anywhere. There is nothing wrong with dismissing their advice re moving section, so I don't see why she should be embarrassed about this.

This post was not about Jetset, it was about the judging. It seems a little unprofessional to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps *you* should have checked your original wording more correctly then as well, as it did sound like a scattergun attack on all concerned so I'm not surprised she was a bit upset.

[ QUOTE ]
Also maybe do proof read your programme next year. Then my first query wouldn't have come up. I did look back at previous ones to work out for myself what sex the horses are. Its just makes the whole thing look a shambes and it really isn't. This is the flagship of british breeding and things like this just let it down.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I said, it was a computer glitch and perhaps the Futurity's wish to keep as many people happy as possible by running qualifiers as near as possible to the final date did backfire a little here, but perhaps your rush to fault-finding judgement was also a little hasty too, as it has already been noticed and all will be rectified on the day.

[ QUOTE ]
My own experiences at the grading

[/ QUOTE ]

Also perhaps you could check your terminology as well, as to what grading do you refer? This was an evaluation.

[ QUOTE ]
were excellent, I thought the grading

[/ QUOTE ]

not grading, evaluation

[ QUOTE ]
was well run, the judges

[/ QUOTE ]

not judges, evaluators

[ QUOTE ]
helpful and welcoming and overall I am very happy. It is just a shame that a few schoolboy errors have been made. But never mind, maybe these things can be corrected next year as I'm sure they will be.

[/ QUOTE ]

And perhaps by next year you will have taken on board that the special terminology used in the Futurity is not just there by accident but precisely to differentiate its transparent and unique procedures from any existing 'grading' or show -- and BTW, gradings are only held by studbooks and the Futurity is NOT run by a studbook but by the BEF.

[ QUOTE ]
Good luck to everyone on Sunday.

[/ QUOTE ]

Luck hopefully does not come into it in a truely robust assessment. Good wishes for a good, fair result would be appreciated by all participants though I am sure :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top