I did some research about this comparison of 10-point system versus 20-point system just couple of months ago, as we have been using 10-point system in our national ECAHO C Show for the last two years here in Finland. There has been lots of confusion, how the medals should be given and what is a good score and what isn't. I also wrote an article about my findings in our Finnish Arabian Horse Society's magazine, but unfortunately the article is written in Finnish, so it is no use to publish the article here...
Anyhow, as somebody stated here before, you cannot really compare these systems with each other. I found for example 28 horses in Sweden that were shown in two shows year 2004 (Bollerup and Swedish Nationals), one using 10-point system and the other 20-point system. On the 10-point system the average score of these horses was 36,22 points, which would only be bronze, if the medals were given as in 20-point system (65-74,99% bronze, 75-84,99% silver, 85-100% gold). On the 20-point system the average score of these SAME 28 horses was 87,14, which is gold medal points. There were only 5 horses that received silver medal points (under 85) and all the rest 23 horses received gold in the show using 20-point system. Rankings of these horses in both shows were nearly identical, so the quality of the shows was the same.
It seems that with 20-point system the medals have lost their meaning as it is clear that 80-90% of shown horses can not be worth the gold medal. It is just absurb idea...
Also with 10-point system, the same ranges can not be used for giving medals as with 20-point system. We noticed that clearly in our show this year and last year, where we used the same ranges divided by two (bronze >32,5, silver >37,5, gold >42,5). On this year's show only one horse managed to get silver, most horses got bronze and even some horses didn't get the medal at all. Quality of the horses in the show was in reality better than before, especially in the 1-3 year old classes, but the scores were much worse than with 20-point system, where our average scores have been high silver medal points (83-84). After the show, owners of the horses were quite confused with the Champion Junior Colt and Filly, Champion Gelding and the Champion Senior Stallion having received bronze medal points and Champion Senior Mare just barely silver.
Because of all this I did more research and noticed that actually quite often the way judges are using this 10-point system is as 20-points, but without the first number. At least in the shows in Sweden and Finland, the judges are in reality using numbers 5-10 in 10-point system and 15-20 in 20-point system, so if you want to compare these systems, the closest thing to do is take all the individual scores of the judges and change 5->15, 6->16, 7->17 ---10->20. This comparison was very accurate to at least those 28 Swedish horses I mentioned before, the scores differing only 1,64% between these two shows. If the scores were just doubled, the difference was 17,34%, which is huge difference (more than one medal range!).
IMHO, ECAHO could give some guidelines, how to use this 10-point system and what kind of medal ranges should be used, as anyhow this system is recommended to all C Shows, so we should learn to use it properly. I am in favor of this system, because with 20-point system the scores have started to be ridiculously high at least in International Shows, but some kind of ranges should be defined for the 10-point system also, so the owner of the horse could know what is a good score and what is not.
Hanna S, Shaaga and Prix