Originally Posted by Spyder
Unfortunately since I stopped showing I have found scores that were way out of line to what I would recognize as good or bad rides and it pains me to see rides being rewarded for mediocre rides at best.
I realize that one ride may be the best of the day and that judges should always think "I will give you a 10 so show me why you may get less" as opposed to "I will give you only a zero so show why I should go higher" but that does not mean that average performances deserve 60% scores or higher.
If I rode a test as you described your horse I would be lucky to break 55. When I was competing getting every single percentage was like pulling teeth from good judges and impossible from biased ones. Even our Olympic riders found it difficult to break into the high 60's.
Yes but Spyder you cannot judge an entire test from a photo. Since you have gotten out of showing the quality of horses has gotten so much better. Even a really nice horse from 6 or 7 years ago that would have stood out in the ring as exceptional, now looks very mediocre against the new really nice horses. Even since I started showing my horse who looked exceptional at 5, now has been overshadowed by some of the horses that age and he's only 7.
These days, the standard for a "good mark" is 65%+ and for an "exceptional mark" is 75%+. In my area, just purely because of the quality of horses being shown, if you are not near the 80% mark in training level, don't expect to win.
The marks are not going up because the judges are being nicer, there is still a fair share of eliminated tests and scores in the 40% range. The marks are going up because of the increasing quality of horses and to some degree our training is getting better.
PS. The Canadian WEG team still can barely crack 70%, except for their top rider.