AMHR Nationals, scoring, do you understand

Miniature Horse Talk Forums

Help Support Miniature Horse Talk Forums:

Frankie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2003
Messages
4,430
Reaction score
36
Location
Muncie, Indiana
I know this topic was discussed some last year, but what I find to be the problem when discussing, is not a whole lot of people understand the scoring. This type of scoring system is about as out of date as the manual typewriter. For it to be changed I think it will take a lot of us attending National Convention to get it done. I will be in attendance this year.

I guess I don't understand why it is so hard to average the scores and place the horses from there. To me it is the most simple and too is more fair. It would take a computer person only a short amount of time to build a program that could score the class in a short amount of time. Including placings in case of a tie.

The current AMHR system does not give you a consistant winner. A horse that places on all 3 cards, in a consistant placing, we will say given a 4th, by all three judges, may not place even that high, depending on if another horse was placed higher by the 2nd judge, that is where you get a circle, and the highest circle is where the placings come from.

This system will work, but only if there are only 10 horses in a class and there are 10 places given. When you have 60 horses in a class, with many horses getting on 2 cards and the 3rd judge giving them the gate, the scoring system is no longer fair.

The first time your horse appears on a card, you get a check mark, the second time you appear on a card, you get a circle. If the gate was given by the third judge, then they go through, read the lines and the highest circle places.

Here are two examples I saw at Nationals, and looked them up in the book at the office to verify.

Horse A: 4th, 10th and the gate.

Horse B: 9th, 9th, and the gate.

Horse A: 5th, 8th, and the gate.

Horse B: 9th, 7th, and the gate.

In my opinion, logically, in both of these cases, Horse A should have placed about horse B. But if you looked at the examples and felt that to be true as well, you would be wrong. Why, because in both cases, the circle, given by 2nd judge was higher, and that is how they are placed, by the circle, and which horse placed the highest with that circle. In both of these cases, owners of Horse A tried to talk to officials to better understand, it made no logical sense to them, and in both cases were handed a set of scoring rules and told, that is the way it is. Again, the above two examples were actual placings from this year's nationals.

I also took a set of the scoring rules. Have read them a ton over the past week. I do believe I now better understand how the system works, but have got to say there are way too many cases where it just doesn't work.

Would like to know your opinions on this for discussion.

Don't worry, if you are confused and after years of showing at Nationals, still don't understand the scoring, you are in no way, alone!!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Vertical Limit

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
96
Location
The Northeast Georgia Mountains
There are many scoring systems out there that are computerized. When they get to be so involved that you actually do need a computer system and back up for checks the exhibitor is passed on they expense.

Now if you think it's hard to figure out some, you should see the others. That is why a computer does it as there is no possible way you could do it in your head. (unless you are a mathematical genius......NOT!)

Sequential, National Point, MOS, COS, European. They all require computers.

Scoring systems are debated yearly in almost every breed that uses them. You can be sure that there is not one scoring system where people don't have valid complaints.

If you go with high point' the horse that wins may not have a first on any card. Should that be a National Champion??..........when none of the judges think it was worthy of a first? That is just one question that comes up when using one type of system. When you get into others you open up other cans of worms.

Again, you will never make everyone happy with any one system because if you missed a Top Ten that you would have not missed with another system you will be one of the complainers.

This is just another subject where no matter what people try to do there are always people that are not happy. And no matter what system you use it is always going to be confusing...................trust me as I have seen more scoring systems in the 30 years I have been showing at US Nationals.
 

minih

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
3,085
Reaction score
13
I think a question could be, why not just average the scores each judge has as an average score instead of all the confusion? Why come up with different types of scoring whens it should be an average of the judges scores?
 

Vertical Limit

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
96
Location
The Northeast Georgia Mountains
minih said:
I think a question could be, why not just average the scores each judge has as an average score instead of all the confusion?  Why come up with different types of scoring whens it should be an average of the judges scores?
473242[/snapback]

Yes, you COULD do it like that, but again, maybe you did not read my post. Do you think you should be National Champion when you were not worthy of a first on any card??? So then, that particular scoring system needs adjustments.

I personally do not think if you cannot be first on ATLEAST one judges card you are worthy. That is just me.

This can be debated till doomsday............I have seen it all and heard it all. I go..........I take what I get and I don't look at what COULD have been.

That's all I can say from many many years of experience.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

minih

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
3,085
Reaction score
13
No, I'm sorry I read the first post and then answered.
I should of read, I didn't understand that, I am one of those that totally does not understand the whole scoring thing myself. No, I don't think it would be right if you did not place a first anywhere you should get first. I will drop out and read what everyone else has to say and maybe learn.
 

Belinda

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
775
Reaction score
5
Well said Carol


The MOS system that AMHR/ASPC uses is about as fair as any.. I look at this way to understand .. The Majority Rules , that is how it was explained to me many years ago. We also rotate Call judges many times during the day, so that way we are never stuck for a whole day with one judge that might not be to our best advantage.

I think this system is as good as any and many other breeds use and it has worked for many many years with no problem.

Personaly I think it is better than having 5 judges and then throwing away two of the scores < the high and the low score > as that puts you right back to only 3 judges,, but you have to pay for 5 ??

So this takes you back to what Carol wrote in her post , we can go over this again and again and it all goes back to the same thing..


and of course this is JMHO
 

mistyrose

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
553
Reaction score
0
I agree I don't like dropping the highest and lowest. But I do think the points should be added up and in case of a tie the call judges placing determines the placing.

Lines and circles don't make sense to me but numbers do.
 

Frankie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2003
Messages
4,430
Reaction score
36
Location
Muncie, Indiana
First I want to say that neither one of these examples was my horse, nor was my horse in this type of a situation.

I do understand and agree with some that has been said. This system does seem to work well, AS LONG as no horse gets the gate, as long as a horse is on all 3 cards: once a horse gets a gate, things change.

The quality of horses at Nationals was just the best!!! So there were a number of horses placed by 2 judges and not a 3rd. What I am talking of will mostly affect places 6-10. BUT, with this high quality of horses, places 6-10 are a big deal.

As some have said, a horse that gets first on a card, should place above a horse that had 3rds all the way across. The horse receiving one first place to actually win. This system will do that. BUT, in the same sense, in the examples I used, shouldn't the horse that placed 4th, and 10th place above the horse that placed 9th under two judges? Kind of the same thing, only lower placings. An average would have changed that.

If you are going to have a show that has over 60,70, 80 in a class, the system needs to work well for places 1-10, not just work well for the top 3 places. Just my opinion.

I am not saying I know the answer, I was hoping with a discussion, a lot of someones out there would have the answer.

Call judges many times during the day, so that way we are never stuck for a whole day with one judge that might not be to our best advantage.
They do rotate, but the call judge just gives you your check mark, his placing is actually unimportant, as long as he places you. The second judge then is where the actual placing comes from, he gives you your circle. Now this is in effect when the 3rd judge gives both horses the gate. So you would really prefer the call judge place you lower and the 2nd judge place you higher as his circle is what counts.

If the concern with the average system, is that a horse can win with no first places,,,,,then I would suggest you weight a first place given by any of the 3 judges, and still use the average system.

Just a thought.

And you who said, can't make all happy, probably true as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Vertical Limit

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
96
Location
The Northeast Georgia Mountains
used, shouldn't the horse that placed 4th, and 10th place above the horse that placed 9th under two judges?
No not always. And I know it is difficult to understand, but it depends on the number horses that you BEAT and not the actual placing of each individual. (yes, it's confusing) But it works quite well. I just think that you need to actually read HOW the system works. Majority rules is about the fairest system I have ever seen.

See if you can find an explanation of the system and then sit down a study it.

My Rule Book is no where to be seen or I would copy it for you.

If the concern with the average system, is that a horse can win with no first places,,,,,then I would suggest you weight a first place given by any of the 3 judges, and still use the average system. Just a thought.
That is another judging system that was widely used and also has many flaws once you start tweaking that Championship and Res. placing.

Carolyn.........they ALL have their drawbacks but they ALL work. The MAJORITY RULES has been by fair the fairest because, again, its the number of horses you actually beat.

In order to understand how these systems work and how they are flawed is to have participated and actually seen these things for yourself. I am by no means computerized in my head and it is hard to figure some of it out. But it does get easier when you see it work year after year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Frankie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2003
Messages
4,430
Reaction score
36
Location
Muncie, Indiana
I also took a set of the scoring rules. Have read them a ton over the past week. I do believe I now better understand how the system works, but have got to say there are way too many cases where it just doesn't work.
used, shouldn't the horse that placed 4th, and 10th place above the horse that placed 9th under two judges?

No. And I know it is difficult to understand, but it depends on the number horses that you BEAT and not the actual placing of each individual.
Serious question, the horse that placed 4th and 10th, beat more horses, than the horse that placed 9th and 9th, right?

I have read these rules a million times, especially in this case. The first judge gave them their check mark, the 2nd the circle. They go through each line and after the check mark, the placing goes to the highest circle. The 3rd giving them both the gate.

The biggest problem I find, not enough people understand. Got some emails from this, and for most, their problem isn't the placing, but participating in something that can not be explained to them, and if it is, after 10 years, they still don't understand.
 

runamuk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Messages
2,604
Reaction score
0
And you think this is confusing try understanding other scoring methods....such as with rabbits I often went to 2 judge shows in essence it is 2 shows one day you show under the judges seperately so in the morning show you might get that champion award and in the afternoon your champion gets sent off the table......from what I am learning of dog shows they are quite similar......coming from a horse background with all of our different judging/scoring it was a real shocker....

I agree the high point system is not a fair system.....and a horse that wins first should be first in at least one judges cards.....the point system used in dressage is IMO a fairer method but that is because you aren't competeing against other horses per say but against a set of criteria to be met.......

I agree no matter how you shuffle the deck someone will find it not fair
 

backwoodsnanny

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
2,372
Reaction score
0
We dont show but I was a statistician for many years and it would seem fair to give 1st place a weight making it impossible to win the class without at least one first place from one judge and then using an average giving someone who gets the gate score of 0 for that judges card and still divide by 3 for the average.Then if a tie occured which it could use the call judge just as I assume you do now,
 

Vertical Limit

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
96
Location
The Northeast Georgia Mountains
The biggest problem I find, not enough people understand. Got some emails from this, and for most, their problem isn't the placing, but participating in something that can not be explained to them, and if it is, after 10 years, they still don't understand.
I don't mean to sound rude here.......BUT if somebody has been showing under the same judging system for 10 years and they still don't understand it something is wrong on their part. IF you do anything for 10 years and don't understand it, something is wrong. All you have to do is read. If you want to learn something bad enough you will learn it. It's not a hard concept to figure out. I am totally mathematically challenged but I still understand it.

It's one thing to actually understand it and it's another to be able to calculate it yourself. When there are 30 to 40 or more in a class don't even begin to think that your mind can do this. I assume they use computers at R Nationals? There is a reason they use computers and not humans.

I understand it but I would never assume that I am capable of actually placing the class in the correct order by just looking at the cards.

We have classes at Nationals (Arab) called Yearling Sweeepstakes. In that class the judges, one by one, at the end of the class, line the horses up that they pinned (1st thru 12). When you see the actual horses standing in front of you, lined up according to placings it gets even easier.

Get a copy of how it works and study up. It's not that difficult to understand.

That's about all I can say on the topic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ionafarm

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2002
Messages
169
Reaction score
1
The last time we went to AMHR Nationals (02) we had great difficulty understanding the scoring system. I went to the show office and asked if someone could explain the placing of a class to me. It was a similar situation to theone's being discussed here.

I was told that there was no one there on the show staff that understood the way it worked. The only one who understood was Lenny Davenport, the show manager, and he was not on the grounds. There is something wrong when even the show staff cannot understanf the scoring system.
 

Jill

Aspiring Cowgirl
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
27,188
Reaction score
527
Location
Spotsy., VA (USA)
I'm going to try and remember to look at this again tomorrow or later this week. I also am curious about the scoring system, but I don't wanna think hard enough to understand the information here tonight.
 

Frankie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2003
Messages
4,430
Reaction score
36
Location
Muncie, Indiana
According to the scoring sheet I was given,

All three cards are laid out next to each other and the marks are given by one person, and verified by a 2nd person. There is no mention of a computer used.

If you were at the show, there were a few classes that took a long time to announce, and it was too announced the time was due to a computer problem. A lady in the show office said that computer was used to insert the back number of the horse that placed, and then giving the announcer the name of the horse and the name of the owner, so he could give that info when announcing.

I am not saying this is written is stone, or is 100% true, only passing along information given to me by the show office.
 

Latest posts

Top