Frankie
Well-Known Member
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 This type of scoring system is about as out of date as the manual typewriter.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!!!!
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: