On January 19 & 20, 2019, USDF held a national level judges clinic presented by Lois Yukins, Gary Rockwell and Lisa Gorretta at the Embassy Suites West Palm Beach Center and at High Meadow Farms.

Lois Yukins is a USEF ‘S’ Dressage judge and a 4* FEI Dressage Judge. She is on the USDF judges committee and is an L Faculty member. Gary is an FEI O/5* judge, USEF ‘S’ Dressage judge and FEI Young Horse 5* judge. Lisa Gorretta is on the USDF executive board, serving as president, and she is a USEF Level 3/FEI Dressage Steward and R/Dressage TD.

Lois began the clinic by telling the full-to-capacity crowd that we needed to “forget the politics.” She emphasized that as judges we work for the horse, who doesn’t care about the ribbons and who doesn’t care about rider medals. We work to help the rider be good for their horse. Not only that, but we are also obligated to learn. She said that it’s important not to compromise our standards. Lois asked us to answer these questions:

What are we trying to do?

Who are we trying to please?

Are we on the right track?

Then Lois spoke to the USDF L Graduates and the USEF ‘r’ Dressage judges in the crowd and said, “Have you learned you won’t make money at this? You do it for the love of the horse!”

Gary discussed the 2019 tests and the changes made. He spoke about the design and flow of the test at each level from test 1 to test 3. He talked about the coefficients and why they were placed to emphasize certain movements. He said that the coefficients are placed to emphasize the training issues the committee sees. In this case, the committee added coefficients to transitions because they felt this area was really lacking in the horse’s training.

As always, in every dressage clinic, we went through the pyramid of training in great detail. This is the highlight:

Rhythm (regularity and tempo)

Suppleness (elasticity and freedom from anxiety)

                Lois reminded us that we can only redo muscling. We can’t change bones. We can help the horse move more efficiently within the range of the bones.

Contact (connection and acceptance of the bit through acceptance of the aids).

                Lois gave us the example of dominoes to demonstrate back-to-front riding, with the last domino being the horse’s poll pushing forward.

Impulsion (engagement and the desire to go forward)

Straightness (improved alignment and equal, lateral suppleness on both reins)

                Lois wanted us to know the difference between straightness and alignment. She said we work on straightness from the moment we get on a horse, even at 3 or 4 years old. A horse may lose straightness due to an evasion. When we notice, for example, a short side left and long side right, we need to build the muscle, especially on the horse’s short side. If a horse leads with his haunches (an alignment issue), he will become on the forehand.

Collection (balance and lightness of the forehand from increased engagement)

                In order for a horse to be able to produce collection, he needs more engagement, more power, and more straightness. The horse must be even behind, with even muscles.

Gary said our highest goal as judges was to place the class correctly. He thinks many judges are afraid to use the lower end of the point scale.

We watched videos and discussed scores and appropriate comments. We discussed the walk, trot, canter, stretching the frame, turn on the haunches, working pirouette, pirouettes in walk and canter, piaffe and finally passage. We held up point cards so everyone could see the range of scores. Certain participants were called upon to discuss their score. It was also discussed throughout the video session what are “worse” faults. For example, in a flying change, is a miscount worse than a late change? No. Although a counting mistake is not good, a bad change is worse because the training is wrong.

Some comments that Lois and Gary made were:

o   In the walk, the whole horse needs to walk “catlike.” The whole body should swing.

o   Don’t use the term “needs more” so often. Saying “needs to reach to contact” is better.             

o   Don’t let the rider get away with fiddling with the bit.

o   Underline key words on the directives.

o   Qualify comments “a little unclear at _____,” “at times a little too ____________,” “a little unsteady at _______.”

o   In a turn on the haunches, if the rider is pushing the haunches, that is a rider error. The girth and shoulders of the horse should move. A horse can’t engage if the haunches lead, and the movement can’t be supported if not in alignment. Also, the rider needs to understand shortening the stride is not slowing the tempo. Gary also advised riders to continue on the line they come out on. No leg-yielding or half-passing back into place!

o   Let the rider know if a movement, such as a pirouette, is not started clearly from straightness.

o   In a canter pirouette, can the judge tell where it starts and if the rider is in control?

o   A piaffe has no impulsion because 2 feet are always on the ground. Look at the quality.

Lisa Gorretta took us though some of the USEF rules, ranging from errors to tack. She also spent time on the new Social Media policy that licensed officials must adhere to. It was emphasized that we need to be professional and ethical when using social media because the lines may blur between us as judges and us as individuals. Some specifics mentioned in the policy:

o   Disclose we are a licensed official if we are discussing USEF-related matters.

o   Be clear when we are expressing our opinion so it doesn’t appear that we are speaking on behalf of USEF.

o   Be careful about the personal information we disclose.

o   Act responsibly and ethically so we don’t misrepresent ourselves.

o   Honor our differences (no discrimination).

o   Adhere to the laws governing copyrighted materials.

Then we looked at various bits and other tack to identify what was legal or illegal based on new rules. Just because some bits or bridles may be illegal one year, doesn’t mean it will be illegal the next year so it’s important to stay on top of the changes.

On Sunday we drove through near hurricane-like conditions, barely seeing the road and definitely not seeing stop lights, as we made our way to High Meadow Farms to see live test rides. We self-judged each ride and then had discussions, using our point cards to show each other and group leaders our score ranges as we compared what we did to what Lois or Gary did. As is always the case, scores seemed to vary based on where on the short side we were sitting. For example, everyone to the left of C may have scored a movement in the 7 range while everyone to the right of C scored the same movement in the 5 range. This also led to discussions on the value of panel judging and what can cause scores to vary. It was especially helpful to discuss each ride’s main issues and how that became the words for the further remarks.

Gary told us not to be so tough with everything at training level. For example, if the horse breaks gait, and the rider is quick to correct it, the judge can give a 5. A break of gait at training level doesn’t automatically mean 4 or less. He also said that since the FEI tests only have one collective score, which is for the rider, we have to take into account the whole ride, not just how the rider sits. If the horse’s tongue is out, has bad transitions, quits behind – everything is taken into consideration. We also discussed movements like a halt not being square makes the rein back easier, or noticing if a horse has more trouble bending right than left and seeing how long it takes for a horse to cross a diagonal.

We were grateful that each scheduled horse and rider showed up to present their test. Many of the horses were tense from the weather conditions, and one rider even had an unscheduled dismount during a bronc that developed from the medium canter. The exposure for us was invaluable, and we appreciated the opportunity to observe and learn.

Although Lois and Gary didn’t agree with each other over everything that was said, they did embrace each other’s differences, and the event was light-hearted and jovial. It was a real treat to be able to attend the clinic. Not only was the West Palm Beach setting gorgeous, it was also wonderful to connect with old friends, and I made many, many new friends.

On January 18, 2019, USDF held a Continuing Education in Judging Musical Freestyles clinic presented by Terri Ciotti Gallo and Gary Rockwell at the Embassy Suites West Palm Beach Center in Florida. Terri, a lively and entertaining presenter, has more than 25 years creating musical freestyles from national through Olympic levels and owns Klassic Kur, LLC. Gary brought his unequivocal judging experience as an FEI O/5* judge, USEF S judge and FEI Young Horse 5* judge to the presentation.

This presentation was very important for USEF and USDF to coordinate because there are riders making their way to national finals with errors to their freestyle program that should have been caught at the local show level.

Terri began the presentation with audience participation by playing music compilations without corresponding video for the participants to determine what parts of the music went with the horse’s walk, trot or canter. With the pieces that had the most audience discrepancies, Terri required us to close our eyes and move our bodies to a walk, trot or canter rhythm. Then we were able to really feel what the music was designated for.

When listening to the music, think about these pieces:

• Is the music cohesive and seamless?
  • The music should never end with a long fade.
  • Listen to the underlying beat (or pulse) of the music.
  • Pay attention to the music transitions.

• Can you determine the order of gaits?
  • Listen to the music’s rhythm (how the beats get organized). Trot is 2, walk is 4, canter is 3.
  • A typical trot tempo is 132-168, walk tempo is 98-112, canter tempo is 92-105 and passage tempo is 105-116.
  • Terri says, “Matching footfalls are NOT REQUIRED, but the music has to suggest the gait.”

• How would you characterize the music?
  • Is there a theme or connection to the pieces? Think about the genre, theme or instrumentation to make the pieces cohesive.
  • Does the music make the horse stand out or fade out?

• Would this be suitable for a lower (or higher) level horse?
  • Various music pieces affect the visual impact of the horse’s performance. Terri showed us Ravel doing the same half-pass pattern to various pieces of music. Each music piece fit Ravel’s trot, but only one really matched his real life presence and personality and was the most suitable.
  • Does the music highlight the horse’s strengths?

Terri’s presentation was organized by explaining in great detail the artistic impression categories. This is a very, very brief overview. We were told that the order of the directives is important to the judge in determining the comment and score.

MUSIC (everything that happens before the show, not the execution at the show).

Suitability (criteria), cohesiveness (modifier), seamlessness (modifier).

INTERPRETATION (what happens during the performance)

The music expresses the gaits (criteria), phrasing (modifier) and dynamics (modifier).

We spent time understanding what was meant by “phrasing” and “dynamics” because it was new to some participants. The phrasing is the horse making a change in line with the music’s dynamics, which is the variation in the intensity of the music. For example, the music gets louder as the horse transitions into a medium trot, then as the music gets softer the horse performs a transition to collected trot. The participant judges were told to not deduct points for a freestyle with no phrasing but to add a half point if at least six points of phrasing are shown.

DEGREE OF DIFFICULTY

The judge will evaluate the degree of difficulty of a movement, for example, a steeper half-pass or a shoulder-in on the quarter or centerline. Then, if the movements performed are at the lowest level of the test (i.e. matches first level test 1 or 2, or the highest level of the test, for example, first level test 3). Poor execution of a movement will result in a deduction on score. A good execution of a difficult element will earn an increase in the score for difficulty.

CHOREOGRAPHY

Design cohesiveness (criteria), use of arena (modifier), balance (modifier) and creativity (modifier).

The design cohesiveness–its clarity and logic in structure is the most important criteria. Creativity has to do with presenting movements in combination. The more combinations and patterns (done well), the better.

HARMONY BETWEEN HORSE AND RIDER

Harmony goes beyond the submission and the aids. It has to do with trust and confidence, the ease of being able to perform the test, the horse being attentive and the presentation being fluid.

Then Terri discussed the freestyle judging methodology. In traditional judging it is basics + criteria +/- modifiers = the score. In judging freestyles it is a bit more complex because we have to know the rules, we have to time the horse before entry and then time the actual freestyle performance, we need to know when to give deductions, when a movement is illegal for that level or if violations have occurred, and if movements were performed to the minimum distances.

Terri gave us her personal methodology. First she divides her brain into the comments and scores she verbalizes to the scribe. Then she tracks the phrasing and dynamics presented, tracks music suitability, music expressing the gaits, music cohesiveness and use of arena with directional balance. Terri emphasized the importance of preparing a meaningful summary statement based on the score sheet terminology and she is aware of the need to be quick so she does not delay the next ride.

It is the greatest responsibility for the judge to be prepared and to always brief the scribe. Terri provided the participants some handouts and checklists to help us develop our freestyle judging skills. The presentation was excellent and informative, and I’m so glad I chose to attend it.

Highlights of some rules:

1. There are no more restrictions for holding reins in one hand.
2. There is a 4-point deduction under technical execution if the rider purposefully did a movement above the level.
3. An omitted movement is a zero, and the difficulty can’t be higher than a 5.5.
4. USEF rule supersedes USDF rule at a USEF rated show.
5. Extended trot or canter MUST be on a straight line. If it is attempted on a circle then it’s a medium, not extended.
6. Don’t be a fly in a paper bag (meaning the judge can’t tell where you are going and what you are doing).
7. Each movement a rider posts when he or she should be sitting is a -2 deduction.
8. After the bell, the rider has 45 seconds to signal the sound booth. When the music starts, the rider has 30 seconds to enter the arena (it used to be 20 seconds).
9. Exit music is not allowed.

If you happened to see a large group of people in the stands or bleachers during the ADA Fall Fiesta horse show, that could have been the fantastic group of dressage judge apprentices with their fearless leader, USEF “S” dressage judge Joan Darnell. The apprentices were: Ruth Shirkey, Sharron Sarchet, Marie Maloney, Nicole Chastain, Patty Mayer and Michell Combs.

Organizing a USEF-approved group apprenticeship takes a lot of work, but nothing would have been possible without the support of the show manager and the ADA board.

Thank you to Jay Chabucos, Kathy Smith, Sue Plasman and the show management team, as well as the ADA show committee, for allowing the six dressage judge apprentices to be at the show. Our goal was to learn and to judge as many classes as possible without any interruption to the show.

Thank you so much to the people who helped me obtain volunteers, and thanks to Lara Bowles, Racie Evans, Betty Drake, Barbara Duzan, Kim (Kolstad) Berley, Erika Reyes, Joan Gasperak, Meghan Cassidy and Cheryl Prather. Special thank you to Ellie Stine-Masek, who contributed to our oral judging session.

Of course, there is no show without our amazing horses and riders that make these shows possible. We enjoyed seeing and evaluating a great variety of breeds and levels of training. After judging classes, we scored the tests, placed the classes from our scores, and discussed what we did compared with Joan. There are always great discussions and learning that come out of these sessions.

Some words-of-wisdom from Joan are:

• The side judge should be the geometry police.
• From the side, evaluate a leg yield or shoulder-in for stride length, tempo, and connection.
• Wait to give your score on a walk until you see the transition (for example from the free walk to the medium walk).
• Ask yourself: how did the horse go (impulsion), and how did the horse come back (submission)?
• Have a clear and specific methodology for movements like turn-on-the-haunches and simple changes.
• Use words the rider will understand.
• In your further remarks, consider what can you write that is both encouraging and the most helpful information the rider should understand.
• Make sure the scribe writes extra words like must, should, lacks, could, a little, very, etc. because these become part of the reason for the score.
• Be clear and tactful with word choices for rhythm issues, balance issues, soundness issues, and tension.
• Be cognizant of the people around you, including volunteers, who may know the horses and riders you are judging.
• Be respectful of all horses and riders at all times.

Thanks to The Dressage Foundation and the Shannon Foundation Fund for Judges’ Licensing, I was able to attend Part 1 of the USEF ‘r’ Dressage Judge Training Program August 17-19, 2018, in Saugerties, New York. The program was hosted by NEDA, coordinated by the amazing Sally Davenport and supported by her extraordinary volunteers. The instructor for the program was FEI 4* dressage judge Sarah Geikie.

The flight in from Phoenix to Albany was challenging. The original route was though Chicago, which was experiencing bad weather. The flight was delayed and then changed. I was happy make it to Albany and arrived three hours later than expected. Fellow candidate Missy Gilliland coordinated the Airbnb and rental car so we were all set.

On Friday, Sarah Geikie worked with the nine candidates to thoroughly study the candidate’s notebook, reviewing USEF rules, the basics of dressage methodology and the scale of training. In addition, we watched videos analyzing various qualities of walk, trot and canter and then specific dressage test movements. All of us attended the group dinner at a restaurant by the Hudson Friday night.

Saturday was quite adventurous. All the candidates had an experienced, wonderful scribe to assist us. We made it through the training level oral and actual test judging. Then the rain started by the time we were ready to begin second level. After judging two tests, the downpour was so intense that we ran for cover. The show had to be cancelled the rest of the day due to severe weather and flooding so our group went back to the host hotel, where we finished judging second level rides from videos. Then Sarah spent time reviewing the tests as we judged them compared to how she judged them. We had discussions about the tests and overall placements. Our group bonded over the experience. Many of us went out for dinner and dessert afterwards. With the excessive rain and lightning, I admit that night I was singing “raindrops on roses” from “The Sound of Music!”

Sunday was back to normal. Thanks to the great footing at HITS-on-the-Hudson, the show was back up and running at 8:00 a.m.  Our group completed first level oral and actual test judging and then reviewed our tests with Sarah’s tests and reviewed our overall placings. After lunch we met as a group and then individually with Sarah to see how we were doing and what we needed to improve upon.

Some specific things we learned over the training were:

A. Look at the big picture; don’t just judge the mistakes. Look at the whole horse—the attitude and confidence. A judge must be able to see the overall picture.

B. Have a clear expectation for the gaits.

WALK – Purposeful

TROT – Swing

CANTER – Jump

C. Understand the difference between impulsion and submission.

Can’t do it – impulsion issue

Won’t do it – submission issue

D. Ask yourself, “How would I ride the horse?” Work on suppleness? Work on energy?

E. Make sure the first-place horse is the one with the best quality and the best training.

F. Don’t say “needs,” say “work for improved ___________” or “develop more ________________.”

Sarah believes it’s important to be very specific in the comments and let the rider know what they can do to improve the movements and the overall test.

It was an intensive and adventurous weekend. I believe the dressage community has nine wonderful candidates to be the next generation of dressage judges and further the sport.

In order to become a USEF licensed judge, a candidate, such as myself, has to meet many requirements, including apprentice judging. Recently I scheduled an apprentice judging assignment for Western Dressage at the Colorado Horse Park in Parker, Colorado. Travelling requires a lot of organizing for flights, car rental, hotel and having all the apprentice/judging paperwork and ”stuff.” Since I’m not from Colorado, I also needed assistance from the horse community to have a volunteer scribe. After communicating with show management staff, I realized I’d also be required to bring a second volunteer to help in the show office.

I contacted Bev Clemens, president of WDACO, and Gwen Ka’awaloa, president of RMDS, to help me find available volunteers. They each found me an AMAZING volunteer. I had Becky Schooff to help in the show office and Mary Jo Hoepner as my scribe.  Mary Jo’s scribe experience is well known, and after the first test Mary Jo was asked to become the “C” judge scribe.

The show manager was appreciative that Becky and Mary Jo were on hand, and I was able to do my apprentice work without any interference to the show. Not only that, but I had the best volunteers! They are both such nice, friendly, effective and conscientious women—it was truly a dream team.

If anyone ever has an opportunity to assist an apprentice judge, please consider it. Nothing ever happens in the horse show environment without volunteers. When Becky and Mary Jo agreed to assist me, it was a huge weight off my shoulders. I know that having Becky and Mary Jo on my team allowed me to prove myself to be the best judge possible.