| Author |
Message |
    
Janet Pilling
| | Posted on Wednesday, 1 December, 2010 - 6:26 pm: | |
As Anna said at the conference, "There's only one way to get better marks - TRAIN HARDER!" :D |
Jackie Herd
| | Posted on Tuesday, 30 November, 2010 - 4:10 pm: | |
As this is a three phase competition, why do the poor old cones never get a mention! I took a look at the open horse class at Windsor and the average cone penalty was 15. This would be a huge amount to knock off either your dressage or marathon score yet so many people seem to not practice.
I used to be useless at cones, often having 6 down and a bucketful of time penalties so I made myself practice twice a week with my axles out and the cones only 10cm wider instead of the 20cm we are allowed in competition. I would not let myself come in until I had driven 30 clear (and my Mum mad) but it worked. I have had two cones down in 3 seasons which has made a huge difference to my overall placings.
I do think that if you take a look at the overall placings that the people who consistently come in the top 4 are consistently good at all three phases and that if we changed the scoring these people would still keep on winning, and there is nothing wrong with that, it is a competition afterall. |
James Broome
| | Posted on Monday, 29 November, 2010 - 9:33 am: | |
Jeff
One of the reasons that there was an overwhelming objection to changing the way that the dressage phase is scored is because many of your central arguments were flawed.
If you would like me to go into detail I will. Just as a taster though, the mathematics that you used to calculate the current weighting between the phases were not valid. As far as I can remember, you explained that whilst dressage is out of 160, the marathon phase was usually won by someone on about 70 - 80. I can't remember the figures that you used for the cones, so please excuse me for that, but you used the above figures to create a ratio of 16:8:?? for the 3 phases. However, as the marathon score does not have a maximum, to be consistent, you should have used the average winning score from the dressage to compare to the average winning score from the marathon. As far as I can remember, no one has won a dressage phase with a score of 70 - 80 so, QED, the ratio is already weighted in favour of the marathon.
Personally, I think that the reason people feel frustrated by the present dressage scoring system is because when there is a driver in their class that is so far ahead after dressage, that they are unlikely to be caught. However, the same would be true for the marathon specialists if the marathon was run on the first day.
I'm afraid I don't have time to put together a quantative analysis of the results for you as I need to be outside practicing my dressage. |
D Paffett
| | Posted on Friday, 26 November, 2010 - 10:58 pm: | |
Thank you all, I think I’m getting a bit of a feel for it now.
Did anybody happen to mention why they supported the current system?
(Btw No Christmas => no turkies). |
Martyn Willis
| | Posted on Friday, 26 November, 2010 - 9:19 pm: | |
Jeff,
I think your opening comment is a little disingenuous.
There was a very open discussion about changing to percentages in which you made a very good presentation. During this discussion many views were put forward. Which included the following to change the emphasis of the scoring. These have been taken on board by council for further consideration.
A request for tougher marathons.
A request for some 5 section marathons.
A note that BE have 0.4 penalties per second on their cross country sections.
The place for votes of this nature is at conference and not the internet.
The members present made their opinions clear and as previously stated overwhelming supported continuing with the present system.
There was little point in having a supplementary proposition until the options have been reviewed
Martyn |
Carole Redgrave
| | Posted on Friday, 26 November, 2010 - 6:45 pm: | |
Wouldn't it be interesting if there could be a Forum Vote on the subject. More members can get access to a computer than can get to the BHDTA Conference........
I for one would be behind Jeff all the way!! |
Patti Atkinson
| | Posted on Friday, 26 November, 2010 - 4:06 pm: | |
I believe many that were at conference wrote in favour of the change on this forum but the concensus at conference was that the marathon should have more influence and if it did then no change was needed to the dressage.
Only one vote was taken. If a second question had been posed that the marathon be made harder (by more hazard penalties, faster trot speeds, 5 sections ,etc) then I believe this would have been supported overwhelmingly. |
Julia Liles
| | Posted on Friday, 26 November, 2010 - 10:22 am: | |
Daniel, you can't expect turkeys to vote for Christmas.
It would be naive to think a change to the scoring system would be instigated by a vote at Conference. The majority of the drivers in the audience were there to collect rosettes and awards for their deserved success under the existing system, and very happy with the status quo.
However, even at Conference, it was muted that the influence of the marathon should be reinstated. How this can be achieved in a three phase competition without the weakening of another phase, seems to be the conundrum for many; and is, as we have already seen, impossible.
Jeff |
D Paffett
| | Posted on Thursday, 25 November, 2010 - 11:11 pm: | |
Extract from the BHDTA conference report.
“Jeff Liles spoke to an interested audience about his proposal, which had been well aired on the BHDTA Discussion Forum, to replace the present system of scoring dressage with a percentage score to reduce the influence of dressage on the results of the competition. Following some very lively discussion, a show of hands from the floor indicated overwhelming support for continuing with the present system”
... I was wondering why? |
|