QUOTE (Disappointed & upset @ Sep 7 2006, 10:15 AM)
Sorry, Oliver, but this is makes no sense at all. And it is certainly not best for all, it is in fact completely and totally unfair. You are saying, in effect, that judges have no regard for the qualities, the components that make up a good horse? If they want a horse to win, it doesn't have to be the best one? I really, really, really hope you are wrong.
The best horse should win, always. And the best horse is the one who deserves the highest total score in his class, spread out over each of the five categories. It is that simple. That's what the scores are for!
I didn't say it's "the best for all".
Read carefully."If they want a horse to win, it doesn't have to be the best one?"
I never said this and you twisted my words completely. Of course the horse a judge sees
as the best one should win - and with this method it surely does..."And the best horse is the one who deserves the highest total score in his class, spread out over each of the five categories."
No, it's not that simple. It's wishful thinking. I would suggest that you try to judge a class with
sixteen different horses in it. Then you'll see what I mean.
In reality the "European" judging combines the "absolute" system (agianst the "ideal")
with the comparative system. If you wouldn't do that you would end up (at least at the big shows)
with three or more horses in each class with an identical score. Then you need to re-judge
these horses. What's the difference?
It was never possible to compare the marks of different shows with each other -
you even can not compare the maeks of the same
show from different years. Why?
I give you an example: At the All Nations Cup the quality of the contenders sometimes is so even
that judges have to give extreme marks for some horses (marks that are way too high
for the horse when look at it in an objective way) to pick a winner!
These are no absolute or definite marks! At another show the very same horse might compete with average horses and
a "normal" score (that means: more objective!) is sufficent to win.
Marks given at a show are a reflection of both the individual quality of the horse and the quality of the whole class
And another thing to think about : When I read what you hve written I get the feeling that you
have forgotten that we are all human beings. Every judge has its own taste. There is no such thing
as an "objective" or "definite" score for a horse. One judge sees it this way, another completely different. But that's another story...