|
Post by delfachhighwayman on Sept 11, 2014 13:28:03 GMT
It is indeed and I knew that. No idea how but I somehow read the marks incorrectly from what was posted on the show's site. Apologies to anyone I have misled There has been confusion all along here as it seems some folk are talking about the 'M&M WHP' marks and some, the "Flat". Confusion and mixed messages is how wars begin. Hugely full 'marks'(!) to Guestless for her apology. However, (and here you have a person who NEVER usually bothers to retrospectively look at a Show's 'marks') I HAVE looked at M-in-the-M, just beacuse there seems to be this extreme, hyped up confusion. And, because it is the last attempt of the season to gain that magic "Golden ticket" which so many consider is their divine right of passage. One thing is VERY clear. The FLAT marks (SHP as well as M&M, Adult as well as Mini) are, across the board, universally Low. Ponies winning, Qualifying for HOYS even, many on sub-90 marks. This doesn't represent the Judging in just one Section, as it is, as stated, right across the board at this venue. Which possibly - and here I say possibly, goes to show that, like it or loathe it, maybe the 'best' have already 'achieved'?? I think I might be looking for the proverbial "tin hat" now!! I don't disagree with what you are saying regading the best horses/ponies having already qualified, because this is probably true on average however not always. I do, however, think it is unnecessary to say that the low marks across the board means lesser quality ponies attended the show as this could be the range the judge chose to use, for those who have qualified at MM, this detracts from their achievement.
|
|
|
Post by CarolineNelson on Sept 11, 2014 18:40:12 GMT
Indeed - it is possible that, by coincidence, all the 'Flat' pony Judges who's services were utilised at this particular show, work from a low 'bench mark'.
Please note that I was not commenting specifically about the M&M classes, which is why I used the term "across the board" meaning the other Flat 'marked' classes, too.
I simply made a mild but unavoidably factual comment on said numbers . . . . .
|
|
|
Post by sycamore1210 on Sept 15, 2014 15:10:04 GMT
Absolutely thrilled to see that Pasadena Cruiser qualified in the Welsh section c class, always know he would go to HOYS one day!! :-) Absolutely chuffed to bits! I had the privilege of owning him last year and due to unforeseen circumstances had to sell him but my mind is at rest as he sure is doing fantastic!
|
|
|
Post by 5874julie on Sept 15, 2014 19:18:50 GMT
It was a mixture, the last class only had 2 clears!! There wasn't one particular jump catching the ponies out either.... 122- 15 forward 7 clear 133 - 26 forward 17 clear 143 - 32 forward 14 clear 143+ - 13 forward 2 clear thank you for the info. looking at the numbers in each height category makes me think, once again, that the new height splits just don't work! the 14hh are once again ridiculously overloaded.
|
|
|
Post by serendipity on Sept 17, 2014 12:17:45 GMT
122- 15 forward 7 clear 133 - 26 forward 17 clear 143 - 32 forward 14 clear 143+ - 13 forward 2 clear thank you for the info. looking at the numbers in each height category makes me think, once again, that the new height splits just don't work! the 14hh are once again ridiculously overloaded. You are so right Julie. HOYS response to this argument is that the majority of competitors in the M&M WHPs like the new split. Well they would wouldn't they - as it makes their classes much smaller for most. Even some of the up to height 14 h.h. may prefer it as it means they jump smaller jumps than they used to. Just because the majority prefer it - it does not make it fair. Every single time we have competed this year there have been at least twice as many in the 14 h.h. class as any of the others.
|
|
|
Post by 5874julie on Sept 18, 2014 15:54:30 GMT
thank you for the info. looking at the numbers in each height category makes me think, once again, that the new height splits just don't work! the 14hh are once again ridiculously overloaded. You are so right Julie. HOYS response to this argument is that the majority of competitors in the M&M WHPs like the new split. Well they would wouldn't they - as it makes their classes much smaller for most. Even some of the up to height 14 h.h. may prefer it as it means they jump smaller jumps than they used to. Just because the majority prefer it - it does not make it fair. Every single time we have competed this year there have been at least twice as many in the 14 h.h. class as any of the others. likewise! depressing isn't it! i know whatever split you have it won't suit everybody. and the first year was even worse, you could normally add all the other 3 sections together and you still wouldn't have as many ponies as the 143 class! i expect the market in 13hh cs and bs is booming as those numbers are creeping up, but the 143s can potentially have 8 different breeds in it! and the new split still didn't cater for the most disadvantaged group of all, the shetlands.
|
|