PasoVoice.Com :: Was Salome ROBBED?

caliber · Site Admin

From her Title?

Your opinon please!

Disclaimer! this has nothing to do with IPHF! is the judging system!

Roseanne

It does have to do with the judging system, and you can be sure that EVERYONE involved with the system will not rest until everything that happened is fully investigated and any errors are fixed. We knew that using a new system had a significant risk of error no matter how well planned, but errors will not be perpetuated.

Salome is, without a doubt, one of THE MOST talented, unique, and special horses in this entire breed. There is no other mare competing that has her particular presentation. She has rapidly earned the position of being an icon for our competition horses, primarily due to a consistency and demeanor that demonstrates the qualities which all competition horses should aspire to display.

caliber · Site Admin

Is a great system! but eventually like every system, can fail if not used properly (for this class.)

In my opinion, the first and only priority of any show should be the horses. The USA have lost numerous show supporters trough the years due to the lack of honesty that goes on the show ARENA. By no means am I insinuating that our judges nor show personal is dishonest, what I am trying to say is the following:

Horses should be worked and worked and worked TO KEEP THEM and the COMPETITION HONEST before any placement is "earned" by the HORSE....... I will highlight the word EARNED..........

Perfect example was Mundial in Colombia (2002 I think, getting old) between Pedregal and Dulce Sueno.......... enough said!

By no means am I saying which horse deserved what. But, I am saying that if those 2 mares where given the opportunity to demonstrate their abilities with WORK, this thread wouldn't be here Wink

and I am sure Judges, Show Staff and Spectators would have been fully satisfied, encouraged and motivated, ...... THE MARES WOULD HAVE SPOKEN! not the Judges, nor the spectators......

In the overall! I did enjoy Sharon and the other Judges explanations of the classes and specifically what they where looking for on each class. Carlos Tobon did a fabulous job with the translation......(very detailed)

And last but not least! THANK YOU and IPHF for a great show!

goodjob

BigJ

The judging system worked exactly like was intended. Nothing went wrong with the computers or the calculations so the results were correct. If you want to investigate what happened, then you are investigating the opinion of a judge not the judging system. How are you going to "fix" that?

The judging system is a statistically based system designed to lower bias (throwing out the high and low scores) and then providing a relative "balance" by summing up the middle or median scores. The problem, as with most systems, is when there is a tie that a computer cannot differentiate and where intrinsic values come into play. These intrinsic values are based on knowledge, experience and the opinion of an individual to measure "quality" where a computer only measures "quantity".

The idea of having 5 judges was to decrease the possibility of bias and to try to eliminate ties. This only necessary for large groups. It is a worthless exercise where classes have few entries. My impression was most people do not understand why or when more than one judge is needed and what system to use and why it is used.

You cannot control the randomness of opinion of the judges, the performance of a horse, or the skill of an exhibitor no matter what judging system is chosen. The attempt to do so has led to some of the most robotic displays of the paso fino I've ever seen. We all know the pattern and surely any horse can memorize it as well. Instead of trying to fit living beings into a microchip to feed a computerized algorithm, it is time to go back to the basics as Felix mentioned.

A clear champion is the horse last left standing. It takes TIME to work the horses so that the ones who shine can be seen by all who observe it. The judging "system" now in place tries to eliminate guess work by making a very mundane, repetitive testing process. Too much time is spent assuaging or massaging egos. Minutes are wasted waiting for horses to enter the arena, then the introductions...get them in there and WORK them. The best will always come out above.

Also, don't expect any system to replace the tried and true method of competition with peers. One show, one class does not make one a champion or a loser. Only testing again and again does one know who is the best under various judges and conditions.

Was the judge wrong for placing Salome 4th causing her to be placed second because of a tie? If more time had been given to really work and test the horses again, maybe not. So I would not be so quick to discount one person's observations. Statistically speaking, by the system chosen, his opinion carries the same weight which means you cannot legitimately say he was right or wrong no more than the others. You don't have enough basis to throw out that opinion. Only working the mares and incorporating the "quality" of the performance could have done that.

Roseanne

The issue is not about disregarding opinions of judges or throwing out placements. The issue is when there is a new system in place and a tie occurs is the method used to break the tie the best method available?
As you said, the most widely accepted method of tie breaking is to continue to work the horses. The judges committee for the IPHF takes their job very seriously and feels that they have a great responsibility to analyze and adjust this system in any way that it is required to promote a solid foundation for judging based on clear criteria with an emphasis on clarity for everyone involved.
To investigate why something occurs does not necessarily mean there is wrong doing. It only means that we have to look at our systems - which involved several steps on paper, palm pilots, and computers so we know what we are looking at and don't repeat mistakes just because things are set up initially in a particular way.