Walk & Trot/Intro tests - are they helping?

[milliepops]

Firstly *please* let me say I don't have an agenda here, I don't think I have an opinion either way and I'm not out to put anyone down

But there have been several threads recently where children have been to their first intro dressage tests and been disappointed with the scores because the pony has been above the bit.

I wonder whether the new intro tests are encouraging people to have a go before they are ready, because there is no *need* to be able to canter within the confines of an arena. It seems like the basics aren't in place for a competitive score but there is a misconception that it doesn't matter because it's an intro

As I said, I've got nothing against people who want to have a crack at it. It's a good way into the sport and whenever I've moved up a level I've always had a thought at the back of my mind that I might be pushing it but like to have a bash. I can take the crit though if I'm not meeting the criteria.

Anyway, anyone have any other thoughts on the subject? I suppose it's a similar debate to those when BE80s were introduced, only without the danger of inexperienced combinations riding xc

 

[Gamebird]

I rode Intro A and B last night (on a very wobbly 4yo baby having its first big outing) and was surprised by how difficult they were. They may not have any canter but they're very technical and actually some of the walk and trot movements are harder than at prelim. There's things like half 10m circles E to X to B in trot: it's very hard to get the sizing, bend and straightness over X (ie. the accuracy bits) right before you even start to worry about making sure the shoulders and quarters don't fall out, keeping the rhythm and maintaining the outline through the change of bend. That's just one movement with a LOT to think about. How many people would go from E to X to B and think that just because they've gone in roughly the right direction they ought to have a 6, and not comtemplate all the other points? There's also a stretchy trot circle in Intro B which is something that doesn't appear in the 'proper' tests until Novice.

I was fairly dismissive of the walk/trot tests when they first came out by now that I've looked at them I think they're actually pretty difficult and require a lot of preparation - more so than the easier prelims. Possibly people underestimate them?

 

[Perfect_Pirouette]

The thing is- these tests will generally probably attract 2 types of people.

Person A- Likes dressage, 'does dressage' and has a baby/green/inexperienced/horse that perhaps hasn't competed alot and could explode in canter. It is well schooled in walk and trot and they know all about forwardness, rhythm, straightness, working from behind and over the back, even contact yadda yadda. They also know how important it is to be accurate. They will achieve all or some of this in their test, despite the fact 'It's only an Intro'

Person B- Child or someone who isn't really bothered by schooling/dressage but wants to have a go or perhaps a more novicey type of rider. Perhaps hasnt had much, if any 'training' and perhaps may not be that knowledgable on schooling and flat work, or too young to completely understand the technicalities of it (as to me, dressage is quite technical, though I suppose you can over-complicate it)

I think person A would probably have an advantage over person B and score/place higher in most instances. Person B then upset.

I think they are good tests though and have done them on 2 horses now, 1 was a mare I rode and competed for someone who used to buck/bronc sometimes in the canter transition/canter at home and had never competed so I thought it sensible to ease her in with Intro (which we won ) this mare is lovely and even at that point was easily working Elem at home so perhaps we shouldn't have been in the class, however I like all my bones in tact and didn't see the point in forcing canter at her first shows and am glad I didn't! Second was my old horse who was so green when I got him and motorbiking/going disunited in the canter was his speciality when I first got him so again, I did Intros (which again we won and again, perhaps we shouldnt have entered) but his canter was truly, truly awful and until it improved I didn't want to go there. I did want to get him out though so Intros = perfect

Both these horses were pretty well schooled (especially the first who had been schooled by pros, bar me her whole life) and worked in consistent outlines etc but both needed (IMO) to be in the Intros when they were. So yes, we did score better than some of the children in it and I must admit I felt a bit daft/mean but Intros are good for different horses and riders depending on their individual circumstances.

 

[SpottedCat]

I think there's also a perception that they will be marked encouragingly because they are for people to 'have a go' at dressage. When they then get marked according to the scales of training and the criteria against each movement, that comes as a big shock to some people!

I think there's probably a middle ground - what's the point in marking everyone at below 50% in an unaff W&T even if against the scales of training that would be the 'correct' thing to do? It just demoralises people.

 

[milliepops]

...How many people would go from E to X to B and think that just because they've gone in roughly the right direction they ought to have a 6, and not comtemplate all the other points? There's also a stretchy trot circle in Intro B which is something that doesn't appear in the 'proper' tests until Novice.

I was fairly dismissive of the walk/trot tests when they first came out by now that I've looked at them I think they're actually pretty difficult and require a lot of preparation - more so than the easier prelims. Possibly people underestimate them?

Yes, I think you're right. It's strange beast when the movements in some of the prelims are less testing than in the intro tests
Ho hum. Just a musing really, I'm avoiding doing proper work and was chewing over what was going on in TR

 

[milliepops]

I think there's also a perception that they will be marked encouragingly because they are for people to 'have a go' at dressage. When they then get marked according to the scales of training and the criteria against each movement, that comes as a big shock to some people!

I think there's probably a middle ground - what's the point in marking everyone at below 50% in an unaff W&T even if against the scales of training that would be the 'correct' thing to do? It just demoralises people.

Agree, but where does this perception come from? Is it coming from instructors? If so they are doing their clients a disservice

I suppose the 'fair' thing to do it one was trying to avoid bruised egos in an unaff W&T would be to comment as normal but score more highly. You would still come up against reality though when progressing from W&T to Prelim

 

[sarahann1]

I would argue there is a 3rd type of person who would want to do intro tests, me!

I can work mostly work a helpful/giving horse on to the bit, I can ride accurately two half 10m circles over x, etc, etc, but somehow the the thought of cantering in a test blows my brain out. I can canter fine, I can work a horse on the bit in canter, but for some reason I have a mental block about it out and about. I'd not expect a good mark, but I feel the intro tests are a good start for those of us that have some holes in our brave pants

Unfortunately its been years since I've been able to do anything resembling a competitive dressage test, but I'll definitely be starting back at intro once I am able to get out and about.

 

[milliepops]

I'm glad people are taking my OP at face value, I was a little concerned that it could be misinterpreted

sarahann1, totally see what you are getting at and guess it's also a useful stepping stone to get over show nerves first, before cantering-at-a-show nerves

Hmm, interesting views guys, thanks. I think possibly the confusion arises because the dressage marking criteria are a bit of a mystery to people who aren't really *that* interested, so it's hard to see why you didn't score more highly when you've done the right floorplan.

Unlike mini have-a-go type SJ, where you wouldn't expect to be placed above someone with a clear round if you rolled a load of poles... it's obvious what's happened even if your horse behaved better than theirs.

 

[Wheels]

I will watch this thread with interest as am thinking of doing a couple of these with my youngster.

He is the kind of horse that needs something to think about with lots of changes of pace and direction to keep him interested and I think at least some prelims are not fast paced enough for him whereas the intro test with the two half ten m circles will suit him better for now.

Although we won't be bothered if we get a bad score at this level, it's just competition experience for him and for me to suss out a bit of a warm up routine

 

[SpottedCat]

I think that's exactly it OP - people have very little understanding of what they need to be presenting and why, and are demoralised because they trotted where it said trot, walked where it said walk, and don't understand how to improve because they haven't a clue what the judge is looking for in the first place. I can see how that would be really demoralising - you think you've done what the sheet asks, you get a rubbish score, and you have absolutely no idea how to produce a better one, because you thought you were doing the right thing in the first place.

 

[056775]

I think this is an interesting thread...

I think it does serve a purpose however think if the rules were changed to include the following, standards and competition would increase

* Once you have won a Intro or £20 in prize money in dressage - You should not be allowed to stay in this class

*To ride an Into - The horse and rider should be turned out to Prelim ( inc plaited and washed!)

My main irritation is that some people I know - constantly do the class and win but do not them go onto Prelim - or do, dont get placed and come back to Intro.

Secondly is the person, who, because they have mastered riding on the correct diagonal, think they will have a go. Despite the fact the horse is wholly unbalanced, not straight and neither horse nor rider particularly care... I think if these people had to put the time/money into the correct turn out, it may make them either up their riding standards or question if they really want to go to the effort.

Sure many will disagree but thats my opinion ;-)

Think its good for young horses, older horses, new combinations, rusty horse and riders. But think people should value and respect that its there to encourage to the next level and not the finishing point.

 

[Gamebird]

I think that's exactly it OP - people have very little understanding of what they need to be presenting and why, and are demoralised because they trotted where it said trot, walked where it said walk, and don't understand how to improve because they haven't a clue what the judge is looking for in the first place. I can see how that would be really demoralising - you think you've done what the sheet asks, you get a rubbish score, and you have absolutely no idea how to produce a better one, because you thought you were doing the right thing in the first place.

That's what I was trying to say regarding the half circles - I suspect people who are disappointed may be riding roughly the right shape of movement but not realising about all the other factors such as degree of neck/body bend, where the shoulders and quarters are, how to change bend over X smoothly and via a stride or two on a straight line, how to keep the rhythm and balance on a tight turn. Someone who only does the right shape of movement may get a 5 or a 6, someone who considers all the other factors should get an 8 or a 9. The person with the 6 doesn't realise what the difference in the presentation is so gets annoyed with their mark.

 

[Gamebird]

Secondly is the person, who, because they have mastered riding on the correct diagonal, think they will have a go. Despite the fact the horse is wholly unbalanced, not straight and neither horse nor rider particularly care... I think if these people had to put the time/money into the correct turn out, it may make them either up their riding standards or question if they really want to go to the effort.

Sure many will disagree but thats my opinion ;-)

I'll disagree! I don't think there's any positive correlation with having to go to the effort of plaiting and being able to balance a horse!

 

[milliepops]

I think that's exactly it OP - people have very little understanding of what they need to be presenting and why, and are demoralised because they trotted where it said trot, walked where it said walk, and don't understand how to improve because they haven't a clue what the judge is looking for in the first place. I can see how that would be really demoralising - you think you've done what the sheet asks, you get a rubbish score, and you have absolutely no idea how to produce a better one, because you thought you were doing the right thing in the first place.

Except, SC.... Putting aside any feelings towards the often berated unaffiliated/unlisted judge.... there are some gooduns so if the judge has written comments to go with the poor scores why aren't some people taking those on board as those are specifically the aspects they need to improve or didn't deliver on this occasion.


It's a funny thing dressage, I often read a comment on a test sheet and want to run over to the judge and say 'yes, but we used to have x problem, what we did today is so much better than it was, we are on the way to sorting it .. ' etc etc but then have to remember the judge doesn't know all of the history, nor is it relevant

 

[milliepops]

Secondly is the person, who, because they have mastered riding on the correct diagonal, think they will have a go. Despite the fact the horse is wholly unbalanced, not straight and neither horse nor rider particularly care... I think if these people had to put the time/money into the correct turn out, it may make them either up their riding standards or question if they really want to go to the effort.

Ahh, now I absolutely don't see a problem with a novice having a go. Dressage can seem difficult to get into/pointless/boring/snobby etc etc to some people and I don't think it is any of those things So am happy for anyone to give it a try to see if they like it Only problem I would have is if they complained about their scores when the judge noticed all of the above faults

I suppose I expect other people to be like me - if I decide to do something I throw myself into it and want to be as good as I possibly can be. Being honest with myself about weaknesses and trying to address them one by one.

Whereas I think what I've twigged is that it's quite possible to compete in a sport without doing that. I haven't phrased that very well, it's not meant to sound patronising I hardly ever compete SJ but would do if there was a space on the box to go to a jumping show. I'd just jump round for fun but if I had a load of poles I wouldn't think the show was unfair, just that I hadn't prepared/tried/trained well enough

 

[windand rain]

I think they help novice horses and ponies what they dont do is encourage people to try harder they have a steady number of people who win or get placed every week in Intro then do prelim and novice at the same show Sorry I do think all intro classes should be limited and noone should be allowed to enter if they have won or been in the top three (in a large class say over ten entries) in an Intro class trouble is those pot hunters will still go round the circuit and be dishonest
I have no objection to people entering when they are preparing horses for other classes but if you are schooling at elementary at home why on earth would you do a walk trot test at a competition
My pony was third in the Intro on her first attempt it was her last attempt we moved straight onto prelim.
I just dont get it surely dressage is like golf you always want a better score for yourself and work at home in order to get one.
The dont care have a go people are the bread and butter of venues so dont knock them as they are the ones that keep the shows going

 

[sportsmansB]

My summer project is 7, but stood in the field as an ornament since being backed and ridden for a month or two at 4. He is very sweet but very weak and quite big.
I normally wouldn't be one for going out until things were pretty well organised, but got offered a short notice lift to an unaff who were offering Intro. TBH I wanted to go as much to ride in the warm up as to do the actual test, I had never done Intro before, always just started at prelim.

He is weak and unbalanced and we get the correct canter lead about 5 out of 6 times, I don't think thats good enough odds to do a test!!

We went and did the Intro (B, with the 2 1/2 circles AND the stretchy trot!!), he had a good look at the white boards and the judges car but made it round, behaved in the warm up and came 2nd. The person who won was a pro on a 4yo. The judge said after he had to score us better because our horses were working forward in an outline and we were more accurate (knowing, for example, to aim for a yard before the marker on a diagonal so as to make it into the corner, and achieving length bend on a circle which had no corners...)
He admitted that he does mark these tests more 'encouragingly' but proportionately so - so I got 70% but never would have in 'real life', and my nine was really an 8, etc etc

I now know that he can cope with a warm up, got to go to a party rather than just boring schooling at home, and when we go to as prelim worrying a bit about cantering and staying in arena, we won't need to worry about him never having seen a car at the end of an arena or white boards.. So it definitely served a purpose for us but I won't be pot hunting in it every week.

 

[glamourpuss]

I entered a Walk & Trot test when I first took my young lad out. I scored pretty low & I deserved to. In fact I'd feel pretty short changed if I'd gone to the hassle of entering a competition to get find it was being marked leniently *just* because it was a walk & trot test. Just because its seen as a lower level it still deserves the attention of a higher level just within the constraints of that level of training (that makes sense in my head lol )
Now even at the most basic level there should be rhythm, straightness & acceptance of the bridle. Without those a horse & rider should score low at ANY level including intro!
As for comments, yes it would be nice if they could be sugar coated & 'constructive' but really there isn't time. When I've written the judge just gives me the score, the accompanied comment being the issue that needs addressing to improve the score. That's all. It's not some great reflection on your riding, or your horse. It's merely feedback that that judge at that moment thinks let that movement down.

 

[056775]

Now even at the most basic level there should be rhythm, straightness & acceptance of the bridle. Without those a horse & rider should score low at ANY level including intro!
.

I think Glamourpuss makes a better attempt of the point I was getting too ;-)

 

[ecrozier]

I've just done a walk trot on mine - and hopefully would fit into group A as described above - yes, he's now 7 but has had a full year out and only been back in work 4 months. Plus even before that we were still only very sporadically established at prelim level, and had done maybe a dozen tests total?
Anyway - I think OP/Gamebird/SC have it spot on, I was most surprised to find the two half tens in trot on the test - not an easy move for a big fairly green horse at the best of times.
I think the intro tests do serve a purpose - for me, it was a test of his willingness to get back out there, his canter still needs more work than his trot, plus I wasn't sure how he would be on a different school surface etc after last year's lameness problems.
I was amazed though - when I last did a WT test with him when he was 4, there were about 4 or 5 entries - on Saturday there were 20!! It's definitely increased in popularity.
I do think its a bit of a shame that people are perhaps encouraged to have a go now at dressage without gaining the understanding of the basic scales of training (I was thrilled to get comment of 'excellent basic scales of training shown today' on his sheet) and do think there is the potential for people to get a bit 'stuck' at intro level if they don't understand how to move on - but tbh that probably just used to happen at prelim instead? I know many combinations that year in, year out score 58-62% at prelim level!

 

[chaps89]

Local show/dressage to me caps intro entries, once competed/placed in a certain number you can only enter HC or go up to Prelim, I think this is fair.
If all goes well this afternoon with a vetting I will be the owner of a very wobbly, green 4 year old. His current owner took him to his first 'party' last weekend and did Intro B. She scored 54%. Not great by most peoples standards. But he loaded & travelled well, warmed up with other horses for the first time & went in & did his test in an indoor arena with mirrors which was another first, all of which was done with a calm inquisitiveness, no silliness, spooking, explosions etc. So in our view it was a success.
Having easily accessible levels like Intro means people like me/her can get home produced 'baby' horses out & about with not much pressure. Yes in time the aim will be to be more consistent & move up to prelim etc but everyone needs a starting point. I am not a competitive person & won't ever go out with the aim to win (if I get there & back in one piece it's a success to me) but I will set myself up for success, practice before hand, lessons & try to have an understanding of what I need to do & how to score better marks.
Where I think the issue lies is what has already been said - people 'expect' more encouraging marks and don't have a true understanding of the expectations (ie, movement x was carried out at marker y so why does it only score a 5)

 

[milliepops]

I do think its a bit of a shame that people are perhaps encouraged to have a go now at dressage without gaining the understanding of the basic scales of training (I was thrilled to get comment of 'excellent basic scales of training shown today' on his sheet) and do think there is the potential for people to get a bit 'stuck' at intro level if they don't understand how to move on

The problem, then, is how to help people to find out about it

As I said above, I suppose some people aren't interested enough to invest a load of time and energy and just want to ride a floorplan. The issue is really for those people who want to understand but don't know where to start.

Some areas run days where you ride a test, get judge's assessment & bit of training and then ride again with more understanding of what to do. Anyone know if they are well attended?

 

[chaps89]

As I said above, I suppose some people aren't interested enough to invest a load of time and energy and just want to ride a floorplan. The issue is really for those people who want to understand but don't know where to start.

Some areas run days where you ride a test, get judge's assessment & bit of training and then ride again with more understanding of what to do. Anyone know if they are well attended?

I fall into the category of 'would like to understand but don't know where to start'. Those sorts of days sound super & probably more beneficial (especially in the long run) to horse & rider as a combination then people just taking a horse to a show for the experience. As to whether they are well attended I can't comment as my (clearly badly informed) impression was they only existed for people riding at higher levels?

 

[ecrozier]

We've done a couple of those with our RC milliepops and yes have had good turnout on the whole.
I must admit, our local unaffiliated championships runs a walk/trot championships, which you qualify for with a 1st/2nd place at a local show, lots of venues on offer, then in the autumn go off to championships and again ride a WT - not sure of the purpose of that as would expect the aim to be to move up to prelim.... But each to their own I guess

 

[Amaranta]

I'll disagree! I don't think there's any positive correlation with having to go to the effort of plaiting and being able to balance a horse!

Totally and completely agree with you gamebird! I, as a judge, would much rather see a horse who is balanced and rythmical, not particularly concerned where the nose is at intro as long as the horse is forward, in a good tempo and maintains balance through the movements than one who is scrubbed to within an inch of his life but cannot perform the movements properly.

 

[Nicnac]

They have their place, however really think that some people competing in them, including some posters on this thread, should go HC

There's a lot of pot hunting in unaffiliated - it was confined to Prelim but has now unfortunately filtered down.

If a child wants to have a go at dressage to see if they enjoy both the discipline and competing, why shouldn't they have a go? They are the ones we want to encourage surely and I agree they should be scored in line with scales of training, however less emphasis should be put on correct outline but more on balance, rhythm and accuracy.

 

[BeckyD]

The problem, then, is how to help people to find out about it

As I said above, I suppose some people aren't interested enough to invest a load of time and energy and just want to ride a floorplan. The issue is really for those people who want to understand but don't know where to start.

Some areas run days where you ride a test, get judge's assessment & bit of training and then ride again with more understanding of what to do. Anyone know if they are well attended?

Some people really aren't interested - they enjoy going out, having a go, and going home and then forget about it until next time. Some people really don't worry what mark they get as long as they made it there and didn't panic etc. I don't say that in a disparaging way - I'm not particularly competitive so I can very much understand the mindset. Sometimes, especially perhaps for the less experienced or less confident rider, it is enough to have done it, without having done it well.

Others really do want to improve but don't always have the help/facilities/support network to make the step onwards. These are the people we need to keep going because if they can't see why they aren't getting better marks, and they want to get better but can't seem to find a way, then they will be discouraged and possibly give up, whereas dressage (training and sometimes competing) can be so rewarding and inspiring when you can start to meet the challenges (of course at any level, not just intro).

"Run through a test" days are very well-supported round here with the right instructor.

 

[milliepops]

If a child wants to have a go at dressage to see if they enjoy both the discipline and competing, why shouldn't they have a go? They are the ones we want to encourage surely and I agree they should be scored in line with scales of training, however less emphasis should be put on correct outline but more on balance, rhythm and accuracy.

^^ this is kind of the crux of it for me I think. Yes, emphasis on balance, rhythm and accuracy and would definitely agree that the rider should be encouraged - I don't take issue with that as they are important building blocks.

But how would you want to see a combination like that but with pony above the bit (therefore not also showing submission, suppleness, contact, throughness etc - even in a baby way) scored?
Should they really get 60%+?

 

[Justturnedfifty]

We started with W & T tests because surely this is the starting point? I have a 10 year old child competing on a well bred, good enough to show, traditional 12.2 Dartmoor 6 year old pony (sorry no plaiting for us). Both of whom had no dressage ring experience, but work under an instructor, who would only let my daughter compete as and when jockey and pony was ready. She has done two un affiliated dressage tests scoring over 70% in both tests, which has motivated us to join BYRDS and focus on dressage. We are aiming for our first Prelim competition next week. To be expected, the pony is not continuously on the bit, but is rhythmical, reasonably balanced and obedient. The feedback from any judge is constructive criticism and in parts, praise. We personally use the information to continuously improve my daughters overall performance. Surely this is the point of dressage? She likens the test sheet to her school report!
Yes we have done showing too and not knowing why we were not placed higher in the line up, or why we were not placed at all is absolutely frustrating. You try speaking to the showing judge and getting feedback, it is impossible!
Give me dressage anytime because at least you get the chance to show off your hours of practicing in a test environment and get feedback from a judge, regardless of whether it is good, bad or indifferent, and there is a choice of tests to pursue so that you can control the challenge you want to undertake. Dressage offers ALL riders an opportunity and W T tests are your starting point.

 

[milliepops]

I fall into the category of 'would like to understand but don't know where to start'. Those sorts of days sound super & probably more beneficial (especially in the long run) to horse & rider as a combination then people just taking a horse to a show for the experience. As to whether they are well attended I can't comment as my (clearly badly informed) impression was they only existed for people riding at higher levels?

C89 - I only knew of RC ones from reading about them on here, but I know that BD trainers run them in some areas from Prelim upwards. Definitely not something just for the upper levels and worth looking out for.

You could probably approach any decent instructor or trainer and ask to do the same thing at home