Walk & Trot/Intro tests - are they helping?

[ecrozier]

Our RC ones we offer tests from intro to elementary. Haven't done one for a whole but tend to respond to demand so if a few people fancy it we will organise
With regard to going HC - I had considered it last weekend, however when I arrived and there were 20+ in the class, more than half of whom were also doing the prelim, and including one well known local instructor (who won the class incidentally) I decided that as they had elected to compete and horse and I were eligible, then I was going to remain in the competitive section too. We won't do another, having scored 70%+, but it was a very useful outing to judge how his return to work is progressing and also how he would behave in a competition environment again!

 

[chaps89]

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

Thanks for the reply.
How might I find out about the BD ones- BD website?
Yes, am hoping to have lessons so certainly a useful exercise for at home tho I wonder if going through it with a trained judge in an 'away from home' environment may be more useful when gearing up to competition which is why if those days exist in lower levels I'd certainly be interested!

 

[ecrozier]

If you sign up on BD website as an associate member (free, gets you on mailing list) they tend to send out emails?
Also check local venue websites, know a couple near me do these themselves occasionally

 

[SpottedCat]

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.

Because they genuinely do not understand what the comments mean and what is being looked for, and/or have no idea how to go from where they are to where they need to be. If a judge writes, for example, 'hollowed through transition but even walk steps - 6' and you have never sat on a horse which stays through and connected, so have no concept of what it should feel like, then how can you possibly be expected to ride it?! What often happens is that people think 'hollow' means 'pull the nose in' and then they get the same mark but with a different comment, so they then feel even more demoralised because they think 'but I fixed it - what the hell does the judge even want?!'.

I know this because until I had my riding deconstructed and reconstructed, I was one of those people, and I consistently scored in the 58-62% range. Now I know what is being looked for, and how to get it without having a fight with the horse, it doesn't matter to me what mark I get because if it's wildly off I know the judging is just a bit off, and most of the time it is exactly what I'd expect it to be.

I'm sure I'm one of those people who NicNac thinks should go HC in Intro tests (I've done 3 with my very green horse and won't do any more - we got a 4th, one where I have no idea what the score was as the sheet disappeared and there was no score board and won the last one) - but I was eligible and the horse had been in work under 6 months, so TBH I felt it was entirely legitimate!

 

[milliepops]

Are the directives/criteria shown on the test sheets for the W&T tests? I've never seen them but a lot of the new tests list some of what is expected next to the movement.
Doesn't mean the judges will only comment on that I know

I do have a copy of Prelim 1 which has these directives and think the intro tests were introduced after that?
Agree that there is then the issue of how a novice interprets a term used in the directives Or, indeed, how any of us understand the same concept

But if I received a comment I did not understand I think I'd ask, at that point. Either the judge, the organiser, a more experienced friend, an instructor...

With regard to not knowing what is expected because you've never felt it before, I know what that's like and it applies all the way up the levels IMO. I'm always riding at the limits of my ability as my horse is the first I've trained to anything above novice and I've never had a schoolmaster to learn the correct feel on. It's not impossible if you have an enquiring mind (though it is definitely difficult ! )

 

[SpottedCat]

I don't disagree with you. But not everyone takes that approach, and not everyone has an instructor full stop, let alone one essentially capable of teaching feel, which is really what a lot of it is about

 

[milliepops]

No, that's very true. I suppose I lack patience if people who complain about the judging being a mystery don't then look for input of any kind (whether that's by teaching yourself by being brutally critical and sucking up info wherever you can get it, or by seeking a good instructor).

But people do it in all walks of life I guess, we all love a good moan!

 

[leflynn]

I think they are helpful as an introduction to DR. I've done 3 (on diff horses) and I am by no means a great rider and one of the horses was a 29 yo veteran who I was taking to accompany a younger horse. The other 2 tests have been on my OH's horse who is very green in his ways and makes the decision himself between bend and forwards atm. I took him to get him out and about without the pressure of cantering and jumps to worry about (we've done some xc schooling).

He is by no means a dressage horse (he much prefers jumping) and I am not Charlotte Dujardin but it's useful to us both to see how we are doing, to practice turnout/loading and to just get out and about and enjoy life Our tests are not the greatest but I find it interesting to read the comments, first 2 tests I agreed with totally and they gave us something to work on and I'm waiting on the sheet for the most recent one (worst of all @ 53 something %). What I take from it is that we overcome the fence monsters in a strange arena, learn how to warm up at the right amount and gives us focus of things to work on at home - we can just about a reasonable test and even managed an 8 for a final halt in our 2nd one. It also gives my OH pleasure to see his horse doing things while he is unable to ride him. The minute I win one of a reasonable size (more than 5 in the class) I'll be pushing myself to go to prelim (if it ever happens) to give thenext lot of people like me a chance - I do know there are a lot of pot hunters out there and it's sad but thats life...

I'm also lucky to have an instructor who believes in the usefulness of these test and how to use them to progress

Sorry bit of a ramble but if it weren't for intro I wouldn't be out places yet as prelim is a bit above us atm!!

 

[Gamebird]

I have to say I don't think I've met any of these Intro pot hunters. I'd say that Nov is the worst level for it. A lot of people do fairly well up to and including Nov but are either put off the step up to Elem or the step up finds out the holes in their training so they stay within their comfort zone instead. A lot of unaff shows just do Intro-Nov anyway so people just stick to that and once they're doing well at Nov don't necessarily seek out anything else.

 

[leflynn]

I have to say I don't think I've met any of these Intro pot hunters. I'd say that Nov is the worst level for it. A lot of people do fairly well up to and including Nov but are either put off the step up to Elem or the step up finds out the holes in their training so they stay within their comfort zone instead. A lot of unaff shows just do Intro-Nov anyway so people just stick to that and once they're doing well at Nov don't necessarily seek out anything else.

I know they exist but don't look to spot them, if thats their bag then crack on as I'm there to learn not just win *unlikely to win as too much to learn*

 

[TGM]

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.

I think the problem is that judges don't normally know what standard of competitor is going to come in front of them. As others have outlined, there is quite a range of people who compete in Intro tests, from dressagy people doing a first test on a green youngster to once competent riders who have lost their nerve, to people who have never done a dressage test or perhaps even had a proper lesson in their lives!

So when the first competitor comes in and does a very weak test - circles the wrong size and shape, horse very unhappy in the mouth with the wrong bend, with disobediences, the judge will give a low mark, perhaps thinking that there will be much more competent competitors coming later in the test, so they need to retain scope to reward the better competitors. However, on that day none of the better competitors come forward, so it looks like the judge has been particularly harsh!

The other side of the coin was shown at a local competition near us. There was an Intro class, a Prelim class, and a Novice class. The Intro judge was also judging the Prelim. Many of the Intro competitors also did the Prelim. Many of the Prelim competitors also did the Novice. The organiser gave the earlier Prelim times to those also doing the Intro, and the later times to those also doing the Novice, so the more competent riders tended to be at the end of the Prelim.

Lots of wobbly and novice competitors did the Intro and the judge marked them very sympathetically and generously. Started the Prelim and many of the same competitors came in and the judge continued to be generous and kind with the marks. However, by the end of the test the standard had improved immensely and some competitors ended up with scores in the high 80s, which was not a realistic mark at all!

So I can understand why judges stick to a standard scale of marking, rather than making allowances. (Might be a different scenario, however, when a competition is specifically designated as 'have a go' or 'beginners' dressage, with quite stringent eligibility restrictions).

 

[SpottedCat]

That's true TGM - I guess it's a conversation for organisers to have with judges really!

 

[056775]

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.

Sorry - I did not make the point clearly - What I was referring to was more the type of rider who competes in the test being completely unprepared for the movements or not having a horse any where near ready for any type of Dressage test, and brings its horse in from the field chucks a saddle on and off they go...

I'm all for having a go - we all started some where (and made mistakes along the way).. Just although it is an Intro Test, it is still dressage and not ponder around an arena with some one watching in a car!!!

 

[Jesstickle]

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.

So true. I wrote for my first ever tests this year. Couldn't believe how thick and fast everything came up. Suddenly all those 'brusque' comments I've been receiving for years made total sense. There was no time to say it any other way!

Prelim tests are much easier than intro tests. Intro tests are hard!

 

[Luci07]

Couple of extras to add...

1. Stretchy trot IS in prelims. I think it's a great exercise as most horses take to it very quickly.
2. Unaffiliated dressage judging can be a real curates egg and some of the judges really should not be doing it. There is only one place I go for unaffiliated as they do use good or listed judges and I can be sure the comments are helpful and will give me something to work on.
3. Judges need to have a proper think before they start as to what they expect to see. If you judging an unaffiliated w/t at a local show, then you should expect real novices and I would want to see positive commentary to encourage people.

 

[TarrSteps]

It's interesting that on the one hand people want 'standards' so they can accurately gauge their performances and yet also want judges to adapt their judging to the 'market'. I don't see how it's possible to serve both masters.

I guess it depends a bit on how you see dressage tests in general. Personally, I see them primarily as examinations and only tangentially educational. If I don't do well on a test I find a teacher or some other form of education to help me reach the required standard. I wonder if, at the lower levels, people confuse the explanatory comments with teaching? The comments are there to explain why the judge gave the mark. They MAY also be helpful but that's not actually the mandate.

Frankly, I look at intro type tests as an opportunity to get horses and riders out without one component than many find exciting/stressful. If it goes well then we move on, if it goes badly we regroup.

I do think we forget sometimes that horse shows are a business. They offer classes that someone will pay for! It seems many people like these classes merely as 'outings' and they are a fairly recent invention to provide a service, not something that comes from dressage tradition or theory. Wondering how they fit into the system might be too much thinking!

Re the stretch on a circle, this is not 'an exercise' it's a test of the horse's connection and willingness to seek the hand. To ask that in a test that doesn't even ask the horse to be on the hand seems somewhat bizarre to me and, actually, seems like EXACTLY the sort of thing a less experienced rider might misunderstand and not teach correctly, without understanding how that might affect later work but hey ho, see comments above.

 

[Sol]

I wonder if it would be good to introduce 'have a go' tests, where you got no *mark* as such, but just comments, or verbal feedback after riding your test. I know 'test clinics' already exist but that probably seems a bit daunting or for people more 'into it' to children/parents/novices? I'm sure they could still perhaps award 'special' rosettes or perhaps a rosette to best junior/senior? It would be less demoralising surely than getting a score of 50% or such if you've never done it before!

 

[TarrSteps]

Perhaps the equivalent of 'clear round' or 'jump training' but specifically targeted at people new to the discipline?

I've actually done something similar in the past and it was quite well received. We did it at a large facility in the winter, as a way for people to get out to school, but perhaps there is call for something similar here in the summer.

 

[mle22]

I think that if you and your horse are capable of doing a Prelim test, you shouldn't be in an Intro. Surely an Intro test is for a young horse or an very inexperienced rider.