SSH Stallion Grading Results

i was looking at the results on the website last night and i noticed that quite a few of the stallions did not get graded. I don't know that much about gradings and i was wondering if that was normal? Sorry if it is a silly question!
 
Flyingbuck, I read in your guidelines that if stallions are to be shod that they must have a full set of shoes on for the grading. Yet from the pictures several only have front shoes on? Do the SSH frequently deviate away from their rules when grading stallions?

I was also speaking to someone yesterday who had attended and they said that one of your committee members who had a stallion entered went in and changed the whole jumping lane for their own stallion? I would have thought that with any stallion grading that the jumping lane and set up should be the same for all stallions entered; otherwise this could be seen as flaunting the rules depending on who you are? Surely none of the owners should be near the lane, so that they are not seen to be influencing anything with their stallion?

I was informed that you were in the ring during this time, so perhaps you could shed some light on the above, given you are the Chairperson for the SSH and obviously oversee the guidelines and what happens at your events.
 
lornaA said:
i was looking at the results on the website last night and i noticed that quite a few of the stallions did not get graded. I don't know that much about gradings and i was wondering if that was normal? Sorry if it is a silly question!
Click to expand...

It really depends on the stallions forward on the day - there is no way of knowing how many will pass/fail until the vet and graders have assessed them.
 
bettysmum said:
Did that Amourex nto fail it's grading befoer?
Click to expand...

Yes he has, he failed two years ago. I can only go on what I was told yesterday, but the judges said it was conformational faults. But I believe by all accounts the owner of the stallion made their feelings well known in front of everyone.
 
I think it is a shame that you have highlighted one stallion only that has failed. I personally do not like to comment on posts unless I have something good to say, as was posted on horsegroomingsupplies forum recently, imagine it is your horse you are commenting about.

From what I have seen this stallion has been very successful in competition this year and has attracted a significant number of mares.
 
delphipuppy said:
I think it is a shame that you have highlighted one stallion only that has failed. I personally do not like to comment on posts unless I have something good to say, as was posted on horsegroomingsupplies forum recently, imagine it is your horse you are commenting about.

From what I have seen this stallion has been very successful in competition this year and has attracted a significant number of mares.
Click to expand...


delphipuppy, perhaps bettysmum made a note on this stallion as it was the second time he had been presented and subsequently failed. At the end of the day if any horse goes forward for scrutiny, be that a show, grading etc, then the owners have to understand that people will talk, be that good or bad. Who is to say what people were speaking about on the day. Human nature will never just speak about the good things in any walk of life, they will make a balance with the negatives as well. The horse in question may well have done well in competition, but also judges at two seperate stallion gradings have said that they feel he is not stallion material, therefore it is up to mare owners to judge for themselves whether to use him or not.

Many stallions have been discussed on this forum, in the positive and negative terms.
 
delphipuppy said:
I think it is a shame that you have highlighted one stallion only that has failed. I personally do not like to comment on posts unless I have something good to say.
Click to expand...

I think this is true where we are speaking about someone's private horse which should have no relevance to other people; but I think it is a different situation where we are discussing a stallion offered at public stud and very actively marketed. How good the horse is, his good and bad points, become relevant to his potential public and up for (fair, informed) discussion. While its only realistic to expect stallion owners to present their boys in the best possible light, for the rest of us to be limited to only saying good things is pretty pointless, I would suggest, and certainly no help to us mare owners.

For example, this horse was at the Blair stallion parade, professionally and beautifully ridden; he looked a million dollars. But Blair is open only to graded stallions. The implication to mare owners such as myself was that he had now graded successfully. To muzzle discussion re. his grading would, under these circumstances, be party to a deceit.

I understand this horse has now failed his second grading, under two different judges, for the same reason he failed his first; hind leg conformation. This IS significant. He is not going to grow out it. This DOES single him out from the others who didn't pass on the day, some of whom will have been a bit immature or foxed by the shenannigans with the jumping lane (yes, I heard about that too, Jeanette) or just not quite what the evaluators were looking for in terms of type. So I can see why this horse was commented on particularly.

But:
delphipuppy said:
From what I have seen this stallion has been very successful in competition this year and has attracted a significant number of mares.
Click to expand...
He has also produced prizewinning foals, rewarded by the same society that finds itself unable to grade him. He does, however, appear (IMO) to pass on his odd hind legs. If you look for Amoureux on sportshorse data, you can see (IMO) those same hind legs - stuck out behind, very close, with upright pasterns, passed down to him through generations of (graded, well-liked) horses...

For me, this horse is the epitome of HOW GRADING IN ITS PRESENT FORM DOESN'T WORK.

Here we have a horse with obvious qualities - and a real fault. He is the result of a continental grading system which has already given its blessing to the fault by approving his ancestors. I can quite understand why his connections might have expected him to grade in turn; but he has not.

On the continent I suppose he would be gelded; here, whether as a result of ignorance or inspiration, he has been widely used and it has paid off for some, with prizewinning foals.
Gelding him would remove the chance of passing on his fault; but it would also deprive the breeder of the choice of taking a punt; breeding to him in the hope of passing on his qualities without the fault. Whilst in this case this wouldn't be my choice, with or without the grader's blessing, the same scenario is repeated time and time again each time a horse is graded; for no horse is perfect. The fact that a horse has graded confers an aura of worth that may not be really deserved, whereas a fail means that he is lost to the system, which undermines the system itself.

Its this "Pass or Fail" aspect of grading that doesn't work, especially when the horse is going to be used anyway. INFORMATION; an assessment of the horses' strengths and weaknesses over a range of points with the final choice left to the breeder would be so much more helpful.

And unfortunately it is this information which is missing from the SSH list that Flyingbuck posted here; the bland score or "Not Graded" tells you next to nothing. No wonder breeders ignore it.
 
jamesmead said:
For example, this horse was at the Blair stallion parade, professionally and beautifully ridden; he looked a million dollars. But Blair is open only to graded stallions. The implication to mare owners such as myself was that he had now graded successfully. To muzzle discussion re. his grading would, under these circumstances, be party to a deceit.
Click to expand...

Would it not be a more constructive idea to raise this matter with the organisers of Blair if you feel misled in some way, rather than bleating on a public forum? In any event, this is outwith the gambit of the SSH.

jamesmead said:
I understand this horse has now failed his second grading, under two different judges, for the same reason he failed his first; hind leg conformation. This IS significant. He is not going to grow out it. This DOES single him out from the others who didn't pass on the day, some of whom will have been a bit immature or foxed by the shenannigans with the jumping lane (yes, I heard about that too, Jeanette) or just not quite what the evaluators were looking for in terms of type. So I can see why this horse was commented on particularly.
Click to expand...

Here, I am not referring to any one stallion, but reply in general terms...
And how exactly does this "understanding" come about? Have YOU actually seen the Grading marks, the graders comments, the vet comments, the x-rays etc, or does it suit you to repeat hearsay? With any stallion, I would want to see it in the flesh and I would want to see the Grading marks etc for myself and I do not see any bona fide stallion owner not acquiescing to that request. The information that I linked to in this thread is supposed to be a starting point for mare owners - how lazy to expect not to have to tear yourself away from your pc long enough to do some leg-work of your own.
 
Last edited:
I have looked at this stallions' online advert, having read the thread with interest, and it says this:-

"in september 2010 Amoureux was presented at the UK KWPN keurings and successfully passed his IBOP performance test and was awarded the Ster Predicate.
His character is golden, impecable stable manners, affectionate and gentle.
Click to see full details for Amoureux STER IBOP Performance Tested...."

Please can someone explain how it is possible for him to be awarded the Ster Predicate by KWPN, taking that information purely on face value, whilst failing the SSH Grading, or is this down to individual socities having different methods and values? It does sound to me as if they are saying that he is 'approved' in some way with KWPN, probably he is regsitered with them but that is a long way from being Graded.

But I have very probably misunderstood the whole thing.
 
jamesmead said:
I think this is true where we are speaking about someone's private horse which should have no relevance to other people; but I think it is a different situation where we are discussing a stallion offered at public stud and very actively marketed. How good the horse is, his good and bad points, become relevant to his potential public and up for (fair, informed) discussion. While its only realistic to expect stallion owners to present their boys in the best possible light, for the rest of us to be limited to only saying good things is pretty pointless, I would suggest, and certainly no help to us mare owners.

For example, this horse was at the Blair stallion parade, professionally and beautifully ridden; he looked a million dollars. But Blair is open only to graded stallions. The implication to mare owners such as myself was that he had now graded successfully. To muzzle discussion re. his grading would, under these circumstances, be party to a deceit.

I understand this horse has now failed his second grading, under two different judges, for the same reason he failed his first; hind leg conformation. This IS significant. He is not going to grow out it. This DOES single him out from the others who didn't pass on the day, some of whom will have been a bit immature or foxed by the shenannigans with the jumping lane (yes, I heard about that too, Jeanette) or just not quite what the evaluators were looking for in terms of type. So I can see why this horse was commented on particularly.

But:

He has also produced prizewinning foals, rewarded by the same society that finds itself unable to grade him. He does, however, appear (IMO) to pass on his odd hind legs. If you look for Amoureux on sportshorse data, you can see (IMO) those same hind legs - stuck out behind, very close, with upright pasterns, passed down to him through generations of (graded, well-liked) horses...

For me, this horse is the epitome of HOW GRADING IN ITS PRESENT FORM DOESN'T WORK.

Here we have a horse with obvious qualities - and a real fault. He is the result of a continental grading system which has already given its blessing to the fault by approving his ancestors. I can quite understand why his connections might have expected him to grade in turn; but he has not.

On the continent I suppose he would be gelded; here, whether as a result of ignorance or inspiration, he has been widely used and it has paid off for some, with prizewinning foals.
Gelding him would remove the chance of passing on his fault; but it would also deprive the breeder of the choice of taking a punt; breeding to him in the hope of passing on his qualities without the fault. Whilst in this case this wouldn't be my choice, with or without the grader's blessing, the same scenario is repeated time and time again each time a horse is graded; for no horse is perfect. The fact that a horse has graded confers an aura of worth that may not be really deserved, whereas a fail means that he is lost to the system, which undermines the system itself.

Its this "Pass or Fail" aspect of grading that doesn't work, especially when the horse is going to be used anyway. INFORMATION; an assessment of the horses' strengths and weaknesses over a range of points with the final choice left to the breeder would be so much more helpful.

And unfortunately it is this information which is missing from the SSH list that Flyingbuck posted here; the bland score or "Not Graded" tells you next to nothing. No wonder breeders ignore it.
Click to expand...

I have a foal by Amoureux and she has recieved High First Premium by BEF Futurity and 1st place in the Dressage section of the KWPN Keurings Warwickshire. If he can produce foals of this quality how can the SSH fail him for grading. The foal i own has the most amazing temperament. I would use Amoureux again on my mares.
 
Flyingbuck said:
Would it not be a more constructive idea to raise this matter with the organisers of Blair if you feel misled in some way, rather than bleating on a public forum? In any event, this is outwith the gambit of the SSH.

Here, I am not referring to any one stallion, but reply in general terms...
And how exactly does this "understanding" come about? Have YOU actually seen the Grading marks, the graders comments, the vet comments, the x-rays etc, or does it suit you to repeat hearsay? With any stallion, I would want to see it in the flesh and I would want to see the Grading marks etc for myself and I do not see any bona fide stallion owner not acquiescing to that request. The information that I linked to in this thread is supposed to be a starting point for mare owners - how lazy to expect not to have to tear yourself away from your pc long enough to do some leg-work of your own.
Click to expand...

Flyingbuck if you ACTUALLY care to read JMs whole post then you will see that they are making a point about the whole grading system, and as Blair was only open to graded stallions they make a fair point.

The grading marks of all the stallions was available on the SSH website two years ago, so it is not rocket science for anyone to find out that this stallion failed then, just as it is available on the link you posted saying that he was not graded again.

Also as the Chairperson of the SSH "if you want to see the grading marks" then why have these not been detailed on the results link above, why withhold this critical information from mare owners? Why just give the marks of those that passed? You are drowning in your own self belief of the SSH, rather than seeing that what you are writing yourself makes no sense at all! Also if you are going to use HHO as free advertising space for the SSH, then you are leaving yourself open to comments, and that is the right of any user on this forum!

What is "lazy" about stating the above, if the SSH does not present ALL the information in their reports then only assumptions can be made. Also interesting to note that you have never answered my other questions above, which only pushes to the fact that rules were flaunted on the day.

chrissie1 - the "ster" predicate can be awarded to a mare, gelding or stallion based on the marks awarded. For horses doing the IBOP test, this is purely looking at them under saddle and their way of going. This is by NO means of them saying that a stallion is Approved by them, just that they made the criteria for that award. Also the KWPN would have been looking at this horse as a sportshorse and not as a stallion candidate. I have just looked at the advert in question and it does not actually state what this means to mare owners. It is a strange thing to enter a stallion into the IBOP, which is normally just used by mare owners. Personally I do not see any benefit in doing this, but the owner of the stallion maybe sees it as a useful tool in marketing him.

jazmineduke - well done on your offspring, and nobody can take away that result from your foal, and you will naturally be delighted with this as a mare owner. Nobody is saying not to use the stallion, or taking away what he has done in sport or in offspring, and as a mare owner you have the right to choose what stallion you use for your mare. But judges of a stallion grading, based on their own expertise, will decide on the day whether they think a stallion is worthy of being granted breeding approval or not. At the end of the day mare owners will make their own choices, just as you have done, and I certainly wish you luck with your foals.
 
Last edited:
Flyingbuck said:
Would it not be a more constructive idea to raise this matter with the organisers of Blair if you feel misled in some way, rather than bleating on a public forum? In any event, this is outwith the gambit of the SSH.
Click to expand...

Complaining to Blair would serve a different purpose; it would make the organisers aware and perhaps more cautious about this and other stallions next time; but it would not serve to illustrate my point within this discussion, that disallowing comment on what is negative can give a distorted viewpoint.

I don't think I had suggested that this is specifically a matter for the SSH? However, since you mention it, I would suggest that the public advertisment of an SSH stallion as graded when it is emphatically NOT graded, IS, or should be, within the gambit of the SSH; unless you are to view the whole process of grading as worthless.

Flyingbuck said:
Here, I am not referring to any one stallion, but reply in general terms...
And how exactly does this "understanding" come about? Have YOU actually seen the Grading marks, the graders comments, the vet comments, the x-rays etc, or does it suit you to repeat hearsay?
Click to expand...

Very much to my point, I think. Breeders need this information.

However, I don't think you are speaking generally here; otherwise you would be rather arrogantly suggesting that I should not have an opinion on any stallion unless given permission to do so by the graders. In the case of this horse, the faults are self evident when you see the horse standing; less obvious when in motion. Unless the graders have identified further isssues of which I'm unaware?

Flyingbuck said:
With any stallion, I would want to see it in the flesh and I would want to see the Grading marks etc for myself and I do not see any bona fide stallion owner not acquiescing to that request. The information that I linked to in this thread is supposed to be a starting point for mare owners - how lazy to expect not to have to tear yourself away from your pc long enough to do some leg-work of your own.
Click to expand...

This is not supposed to be a guessing game or some sort of puzzle; clarity of information is something to be sought after, not deliberately concealed to encourage mare owners to be industrious. As for stallion owners supplying accurate information; I'm sure most will; some do not. I don't think I have anywhere suggested mare owners should rely purely on information given, or that they should not go to see the stallion? With the inadequacies of the present grading system one would be a fool not to.
 
Please find a summary of Amoureux's Stallion Scores at both his 2008 and 2010 Gradings. It has been stated that Amoureux failed his grading once gain on conformation, on this occassion he did not fail on his conformation score but on his MOVEMENT and JUMPING SCORES. Our Licensed stallion Umenno obtained a conformation score of 69 for comparison.

Conformation score 2008

Judge 1 Judge 2
5 5

Conformation Score 2010

7

Stallion Grading movement scores 2008

Judge 1 Judge 2 Average

Walk 6 7 6.5
Trot 7 6.5 6.8
Canter 8 8 8

Total overall average 7.1

Stallion Grading Overall Movement score 2008

6.7 (We have not yet received our stallion grading score sheets 2010 so cannot provide a break down but have been informed he was awarded 6 for canter)

Jumping scores stallion grading 2008

Judge 1 Judge 2

Technique 8 Technique 8
Take off 8 Take off 7.5
Scope 8 Scope 8


Overall average score 7.8

Jumping scores stallion grading 2010

Overall jumping score 6.5

(Only asked to jump two small fences which he jumped with the same quick foreleg technique, fences not big enough to encourage bascule, demonstrate use of the body opening of haunches or assess scope. Only one set of scores provided where as in 2008 two individual scores and LINEAR score sheets were awarded.

Loose jumping Championship 2008.

Conformation, movement, Technique, Take Off, Scope, all 8's

KWPN Keurings on Friday 3rd September

Walk 8.5
Trot 7
Canter 7.5

Overall movement score 77

Additional marks for rideability, suppleness, self carriage are also awarded in the IBOP I have not yet received his score sheets from the KWPN however recall 8s being awarded for the majority. He was also awarded STER with above average suitablility as a dressage horse.

The KWPN Reported in the IDS International magazine:

"The five-year-old stallion Amoureux (Saros van ’t Gestelhof out of Ruby ster preferent by Krack C, breeder: S. Spaans of Barsingerhorn) was presented under saddle in the IBOP. He boasts a good walk and attractive front end, and he used his legs nicely, especially his front legs. However, he needed to show more carriage and a quicker hind leg. His canter demonstrated good stride length and balance. He passed the IBOP with 75 points. Later, he was presented in-hand for the ster predicate, which he received with a score of 70 points for his handsome conformation"

They also reported on his daughter:

"In the dressage breeding direction, judges deemed F.Amour Perle the best, whose sire Amoureux performed a successful IBOP in Scotland. Today was his daughter's turn, a filly out of Feine Perle (s.Florestan, breeder: S. Hicks). Although she is still young, she could be a bit more full-bodied; however, she used her legs correctly and showed abundant balance in the canter"

http://www.umenno.com/img/2010/solaris_amoureux_kwpn.jpg

In affiliated dressage competition, Amoureux has consistently competed against Scotland's leading riders. In the Sheerwater Potential International 5Y0 young horse classe judged by Jane Bartle Wilson, he gained scores of 8 for canter 8 for trot and 7.5 for walk overall score 78% winning the class and described as an International discovery in Scotland by Horse and Hound. In all of his tests bar the Hickstead qualifiers he obtained 8s for paces.

http://www.umenno.com/amoureux_H&H.jpg

The latter qualified him for the British Dressage Nationals held on the 11th of September but chose to present Amoureux at the SSH stallion grading instead, despite the obstacles the SSH put in place of having additional x-rays being requested, having formerly sailed through with grade 1s on ALL views in 2008.

In the Badminton Young Dressage Horse Of The Future he scored 8 for paces with an overall score of 80% Winning the class.

In the Sheerwater Potential Young Horse Elementary 5YO Dressage Horse he scored 80% winning the class.

At the Hartpury dressage Festival in the Sheerwater final he finished with a score of 74% judge Peter Storr. He was eliminated due to rider error for carrying a whip. His score would have ranked him equal 13th. Special aptitude for lateral work was noted and he lost marks due to "tension" also noted at the Badminton qualifier.

I have discussed the scores and results with the graders who maintained that he is weak in his movement, lacks self carriage, and that he was being assessed as a breeding sire. I can only emphasise that as a breeding sire, to date, Amoureux has from the words of one of the graders herself, "greatly improved on the mare" in reference to one of his his filly foals scoring 78% in 2009.

He sired two of the second highest scoring foals at the SSH Gradings 2009 out of mares of mixed breeding. Five out of the six foals were awarded first premiums the sixth a high 2nd, the same filly presented at the KWPN Keurings was awarded a high first premium foal judged at the BEF Futurity evaluations scoring 87.9%, Lynn Crowden also awarded his daughter "Elissona", pony foal Champion at the North of the Border Foal Show, with his daughter Cullenbay Aurora in third place above a good number of International sired foals with high marks for conformation movement and presence. His offspring have performed well at county and local shows consistantly winning Championships and Supremes of show.

We chose to represent Amoureux because he had matured considerably in the last two years, to the point that we were confident that his conformation score would be improved upon, which it was by 20%, we were not however anticipating that a considerable decrease in his movement and jumping scores would this time result in an overall fail mark.

I am happy to provide his 2008 and 2010 linear score sheets from his SSH gradings should any one wish to see them along with his KWPN linear score sheet once we have received it. I can clarify that there are a wide number of disceprancies between the linear score sheets that we do have.

I can say with confidence that Amoureux passes on a great deal of presence to both his sons and daughters. He adds length of limb, neck and body. He raises the forehand considerably so extemermly suitable for mares that are built down hill. I have one such mare and he has produced the BEST foal today from this mare. He adds length of stride often in in all three paces, especially his canter. He adds knee action and foals with attractive front leg use. It is too early to assess him as a progenitor of jumping foals but the stallion was awarded exceptionally high marks on the SSH scale for jumping in 2008 and at the loose jumping championship.

His foals are eligble for KWPN registration in the B register only (auxilary) and can be presented at the UK Keurings in the advisory classes. His daughter's progeny if bred to KWPN approved / recognised stallions will be eligble for VB (main foal book) papers. His sons will not be eligble for stallion licensing with the KWPN but would be eligble for licensing with a number of UK stud books.

We are confident that they will make great competition horses for both amatuer and professional as above all else Amoureux has to-date produced the most wonderful, trainable, easy to handle foals with a calm outlook on life which we and our clients enjoy.

Much of the content of this post has been provided to the SSH committee and we have received an invitation from them to represent Amoureux in 2011. Regretably none of the points raised have been addressed other than our discontent that Amoureux was only loose jumped twice but a score 15% lower was awarded as a result. I have also emphasised that none of the committee members were responsible for the outcome on the day.

To date Amoureux has achieved a "pass" mark in all THREE phases Conformation 70% Movement 71% and Jumping 78%

In the meantime Amoureux remains in training with Mette and Michel Assouline and will remain available for stud duties in 2010.
 
Last edited:
Opie I must congratulate you for being so open as to your stallion’s results. Most stallion owners would shy away from the thread and ask it to be removed perhaps, so well done on coming into this thread and posting all the relevant information.

I think it is a bit of a misconception of words though that you state he has passed “all three phases”, as while that is factually correct given the above scores over the last two years, the horses have to do it all at the same time. That is a bit like saying that over the space of two years a horse had achieved a clear round, when at several shows he had a fence down.

Can I ask what his overall movement score was for 2010, as you just give the canter score? Did he pass the movement score, and just failed on the jumping?

You mention the differences on scores between gradings and through the dressage tests and loose jumping competitions, but people have to also consider that these are all done on separate occasions, with different judges looking for different things. The only way you could make any similarities is to take all those separate judges and have them judge the horse as a stallion at the same time, which is the only way you can then use the statistics to give a proper over view of him as a stallion by everyone who has looked at him. I am not detracting from his achievements, but surely you must see that you cannot make direct comparisons to the above because they are all in different contexts, the KWPN judges would not have been looking at him as a stallion prospect for KWPN Approval. The only two similarities you can go between is the two SSH stallion gradings, and as I believe you are also part of the SSH Committee (Vice Chairperson according to the website), so you must know how these gradings are run, and what the judges are looking for?

I have heard of stallions being presented twice for grading perhaps due to maturity issues, but three times, would that be a gamble any stallion owner is going to take, could be third time lucky, or bad luck runs in threes? Maybe you should see about another society to grade him with and see what a completely different assessment makes of him? Especially if you have your own issues with the SSH?
 
Cannot edit but wish to ammend;

Stallion Grading Overall Movement score 2008 (should sate 2010)

6.7 (We have not yet received our stallion grading score sheets 2010 so cannot provide a break down but have been informed he was awarded 6 for canter)
 
jeanette10 said:
chrissie1 - the "ster" predicate can be awarded to a mare, gelding or stallion based on the marks awarded. For horses doing the IBOP test, this is purely looking at them under saddle and their way of going. This is by NO means of them saying that a stallion is Approved by them, just that they made the criteria for that award. Also the KWPN would have been looking at this horse as a sportshorse and not as a stallion candidate. I have just looked at the advert in question and it does not actually state what this means to mare owners. It is a strange thing to enter a stallion into the IBOP, which is normally just used by mare owners. Personally I do not see any benefit in doing this, but the owner of the stallion maybe sees it as a useful tool in marketing him.
Click to expand...

You can choose to have a horse's movement assessed under saddle (through the IBOP) instead of loose. We've done it with some of ours where the horse is likely to get a bit silly/tense if it's loose in a strange place but is going very nicely under saddle... For a stallion, it was probably a good choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top