Finally settled back in after Nationals and have been thinking about it alot. It seemed that there where lots of conversations about how it could be improved for next year. I plan on starting to go to the conventions and before I open my mouth and everyone says shutup you crazy, I was hoping to see what everyone else thought. :bgrin
1.
The Awards.
It seems that with the amount of money coming in from entries/stalls that awards could be improved on. If money really is to tight, I for one would be more than willing to pay $52 per stall instead. I would love to see plaques awarded for the top ten horses.
2.
Order of Go.
Many of the classes are getting ridiculously huge. It is getting very difficult for the Stewarts to find all the entries before the class begins when they are looking for 70 horses. On top of that I have noticed a trend by a few people high in the registry to take a smoke break at the ingate, so that other horses go in first. Some of the time they aren't even lit as they frantically search for anyone else in the class who hasn't gone in yet. I have even witnessed them telling the Stewarts to call the rest of the horses and threaten to close the gate as they have horses in the class and want the others to go in first.
An order of go is easy enough and would take all the "politics" out of going into the ring. Plus with a posted order of go everything would just run smoother at the ingate. Win win for all involved.
3.
Point system.
I was looking at lots of the results, having been told last year that there system of calculating the winner was created to benefit the horses that where the most consistent. Which would make sense. But some of the results I saw had a horse receiving 1.1.11 beating a horse that was placed 1.2.3 That whole idea blew my mind. Also a few of our National Grands where gated under 1 judge and horses that placed behind them where much more consistently placed very high.
Also if you have question about the way the end result is gotten to, you are given a large packet that involves lining the cards up and placing circles and slashes through placings to come up with the end placing that only a very mathematically inclined person could logically explain. If simple averages were used the more consistently placed horse would win, every time, and the average person could see exactly to the point why they placed where they did. For example, 10 points awarded for first, 9 for second, etc... So for a horse receiving 1,1,11 would get 20 points. The horse who got 1,2,3 would receive 27 points, would be the winner.
Hoping to here everyone else's opinions,
James
1.
The Awards.
It seems that with the amount of money coming in from entries/stalls that awards could be improved on. If money really is to tight, I for one would be more than willing to pay $52 per stall instead. I would love to see plaques awarded for the top ten horses.
2.
Order of Go.
Many of the classes are getting ridiculously huge. It is getting very difficult for the Stewarts to find all the entries before the class begins when they are looking for 70 horses. On top of that I have noticed a trend by a few people high in the registry to take a smoke break at the ingate, so that other horses go in first. Some of the time they aren't even lit as they frantically search for anyone else in the class who hasn't gone in yet. I have even witnessed them telling the Stewarts to call the rest of the horses and threaten to close the gate as they have horses in the class and want the others to go in first.
An order of go is easy enough and would take all the "politics" out of going into the ring. Plus with a posted order of go everything would just run smoother at the ingate. Win win for all involved.
3.
Point system.
I was looking at lots of the results, having been told last year that there system of calculating the winner was created to benefit the horses that where the most consistent. Which would make sense. But some of the results I saw had a horse receiving 1.1.11 beating a horse that was placed 1.2.3 That whole idea blew my mind. Also a few of our National Grands where gated under 1 judge and horses that placed behind them where much more consistently placed very high.
Also if you have question about the way the end result is gotten to, you are given a large packet that involves lining the cards up and placing circles and slashes through placings to come up with the end placing that only a very mathematically inclined person could logically explain. If simple averages were used the more consistently placed horse would win, every time, and the average person could see exactly to the point why they placed where they did. For example, 10 points awarded for first, 9 for second, etc... So for a horse receiving 1,1,11 would get 20 points. The horse who got 1,2,3 would receive 27 points, would be the winner.
Hoping to here everyone else's opinions,
James