|
Post by Dipsy on Jun 13, 2017 12:08:18 GMT
I was more thinking of the phones we have in our pockets being used as a calculator rather than any kind of 'showing app'. All the stewards I have ever met have been wonderful - they sometimes get a bit stressed and shouty but dont we all! Some very good ideas though above about removing the marks all together. I just think that some people take it all a bit too seriously and obviously when money is involved (and we all spend far too much on this activity!!) That does not help! BSPS Rule 49 - mobile phones etc must not be taken into the ring The next complaint would be the steward/judge was checking text on phone to see who was supposed to win - said tongue in cheek (I hope!) Was about to make the same comment, that phones are not allowed in the ring.... personally I wouldn't want to use my phone incase it got damaged. As a steward and if I am on my own doing scores with one judge, I add them up as I'm going along and transfer the scores over onto the right hand side of the sheet. Purely for my own sanity of trying to add up loads of scores in one go. And dependent on the show, I've quite often been in the ring anywhere from 8 to 10 hours with a quick break for food..... (I'm not complaining though as I always feel that I want to do my best to help the show)
|
|
|
Post by catkin on Jun 13, 2017 13:42:48 GMT
Ok, fair enough, apps not ideal - but then neither is a pen and paper. All the more reason to do away with the marks!
|
|
|
Post by Yes But on Jun 15, 2017 19:35:55 GMT
Fine all the officials give up their time etc etc..But many the competitors are still forking out large sums of money to compete whether it be showing, dressage,SJ or BE..and with any money changing hands for a 'service' or 'product' you would hope that the least you could expect out of 4 people was a little accuracy Sorry but being a volunteer who is wet/tired etc would not be accepted in any other walk of life when you have paid a large sum for a professional opinion.
|
|
|
Post by WHY? on Jun 15, 2017 21:26:59 GMT
Fine all the officials give up their time etc etc..But many the competitors are still forking out large sums of money to compete whether it be showing, dressage,SJ or BE..and with any money changing hands for a 'service' or 'product' you would hope that the least you could expect out of 4 people was a little accuracy Sorry but being a volunteer who is wet/tired etc would not be accepted in any other walk of life when you have paid a large sum for a professional opinion. Glad its not only me. My point exactly
|
|
|
Post by gillwales on Jun 16, 2017 5:15:58 GMT
Fine all the officials give up their time etc etc..But many the competitors are still forking out large sums of money to compete whether it be showing, dressage,SJ or BE..and with any money changing hands for a 'service' or 'product' you would hope that the least you could expect out of 4 people was a little accuracy Sorry but being a volunteer who is wet/tired etc would not be accepted in any other walk of life when you have paid a large sum for a professional opinion. Glad its not only me. My point exactly You have paid for a Judge's opinion, they are not professionals, they are not paid, they do not do it for a living, plus when assessed their mathematical skills are not assessed but their ability to assess the conformation, type and way of going. If you moaners all think you can do better then I suggest you do your stint in a ring. The pressure to get through classes, whether a judge or a steward is immense; especially at bigger shows, not least by the competitors who are waiting to come into the succeeding class; or worse still, who are entered into another class.
|
|
|
Post by janetbushell on Jun 16, 2017 5:33:56 GMT
Fine all the officials give up their time etc etc..But many the competitors are still forking out large sums of money to compete whether it be showing, dressage,SJ or BE..and with any money changing hands for a 'service' or 'product' you would hope that the least you could expect out of 4 people was a little accuracy Sorry but being a volunteer who is wet/tired etc would not be accepted in any other walk of life when you have paid a large sum for a professional opinion. Glad its not only me. My point exactly Gosh! And I thought it was only me who is perfect! (Joke!) Mistakes happen (in ALL walks of life - sometimes with tragic consequences) because we are human and whether money is involved or not, so what do you suggest we do about it? Do you want us to stop judging/stewarding because we are tired/it is raining/we have exceeded the European working time diktat etc etc because we MIGHT make a mistake? No one ever deliberately wants to make a mistake - everyone tries to avoid them by procedures in place but sometimes they are not picked up - and these are the ones which are shared all over social media, not the other 100s that are correct on that day, that show and even by that team. Obviously I am not suggesting that mistakes are perfectly OK/acceptable or however you wish to describe it, just that I genuinely cannot see a world in which human beings will ever cease to make mistakes on occasions.
|
|
|
Post by Yes But on Jun 17, 2017 4:09:02 GMT
[/quote]You have paid for a Judge's opinion, they are not professionals, they are not paid, they do not do it for a living, plus when assessed their mathematical skills are not assessed but their ability to assess the conformation, type and way of going. If you moaners all think you can do better then I suggest you do your stint in a ring. The pressure to get through classes, whether a judge or a steward is immense; especially at bigger shows, not least by the competitors who are waiting to come into the succeeding class; or worse still, who are entered into another class. [/quote]
I have up to and including HOYS & RIHS classes. AND stewarded these classes AND in years where there were 40+ in a class.The reason you check your stewards work is to say it is correct and sign your name to it....sorry but FOUR people getting it wrong is not a simple case of human error..it is lack of attention...you count your numbers of scores on one sheet against those on the transferred sheet...you check you have no other score higher than your Ist place .. you check all the time...
|
|
|
Post by lucynlizzysmum on Jun 17, 2017 5:15:13 GMT
Quite frankly Yes But - I think you should set up some stewarding training then - then we can all become as perfect as you!
|
|
|
Post by gillwales on Jun 17, 2017 6:19:08 GMT
Has everyone noticed that the judge/ steward bashers have posted anonymously? I do think that one improvement is to make the boxes bigger on the score sheets, it is quite easy for the eye to wander with the figures being close to eachother which is how the mistakes are made
|
|
|
Post by MrsShowing on Jun 19, 2017 10:36:13 GMT
Janet has made some very valid points.
As a competitor who has been at the top of the line when the rosettes were given out, and then learning that there had been a mistake and I'd not qualified after all, I have to say that: a) everyone involved was absolutely mortified, and yes there had been many checks and double checks; b) everyone did their best, including me, to deal with it sensibly and kindly; c) the rider of the pony that did qualify and I became good friends through it; Perspective is needed on these things. You know that mistakes happen from time to time before you enter the ring, just as you know if you accept to undergo a serious medical procedure that there are risks involved because mistakes can and do happen. That is what you sign up to when you enter the ring, that everyone will do their best to get things right, but there is a risk that they may not. No matter how much money and work you put in to showing, it is just a pony show and the fact that you didn't get the right placing or whatever on the day, if it is subsequently corrected, doesn't alter the satisfaction you should feel in your corrected result.
As a competitor, if I don't get in the placings I don't look at the marks. I already know that my pony wasn't the preferred exhibit that day.
As a judge, regarding conformation judging, like Janet I mark to the breed standard as an absolute and adjust up and down according to what is in the class. Judging a showing class requires you to sort the exhibits in to an order of merit; that is the aim of the judging, to decide an order in which prizes will be awarded, and if you have a small class one week and a huge class the next week, the same pony's mark may change because it needs to fit in to a different place in the order of merit against other exhibits, and then added to that is the point that Janet makes about how the finer nuances of how a pony looks and moves can change from week to week. It is not a breed grading exercise in which aim is pass or fail and all animals can theoretically attain the exact same result.
|
|
|
Post by bigmama on Jun 19, 2017 13:56:02 GMT
Just a thought ... do mathematical errors happen as much in non-M&M ridden classes? The sheer volume of competitors in Hoys ridden M&Ms, taking up long hours in the show ring in all kinds of weather will inevitably lead to mistakes being more commonplace in those classes.
I really do think many of you on this thread are being unkind to the ring officials. Hands up those who would want to swap places with them to stand in a ring for several hours in searing heat or pouring rain watching hundreds of entrants? Not I, not a chance, so thank you to those who freely give of their time to provide us with our showing days.
|
|
|
Post by calerux on Jun 19, 2017 15:43:01 GMT
Has everyone noticed that the judge/ steward bashers have posted anonymously? I do think that one improvement is to make the boxes bigger on the score sheets, it is quite easy for the eye to wander with the figures being close to each other which is how the mistakes are made A very good point! HOYS marks sheets in particular are a nightmare to manage every line is so close and not much space to write competitors numbers especially when there are more than one on the same mark. My gripe is back numbers, it would be really helpful if in HOYS qualifiers in particular that competitors have a back number of no less than 3 digits. It is so easy to transpose a back number with a mark, for example if competitor no 86 gets a mark of 68 transferring over it can easily be transposed when there are distractions and stewards are under pressure to complete marks sheets and get the placings done asap, numbers from 100+ would at least remove this potential error. Yes we all have our checking systems with our fellow stewards and then the judges, but it can happen. In respect of technology, as an experienced steward (and a judge) I was asked my opinion on using IT to avoid mistakes. However, as has been previously pointed out it is still a human inputting the figure so if it goes in wrong it will still be wrong. At least on paper it is easier to see if something doesn't look right and to be able to correct it and have the judge initial or sign the change, not so easy on a tablet or iPad. I was also asked about marks being immediately transferred to the Secretary's office by Bluetooth in live time but as I pointed out Bluetooth is not secure imagine finding out your rivals marks before the class has ended, there'd be uproar! The biggest downside of technology is reliability, when you can't even get a decent mobile signal on a showground wi-fi or 4G would be impossible! Then there's the great British weather, imagine trying to keep a tablet or iPad dry in the rain or not being able to see it when the sun comes out! Don't get me wrong I'm not a technophobe I just don't know if IT is the answer just yet. Plus would Grandstand Media fund all this technology for every qualifying show or would the cost be borne by show organisers and therefore passed on to competitors? The answer is a long way off, but just remember when you are being critical no one deliberately gets it wrong and no matter how careful you are, checking and double checking on the RARE occasion a mistake can happen. Worse things are happening in the world at the moment to put it in to perspective. In the meantime where is the next public flogging of a steward due to take place? Maybe those amongst us who are perfect would like to keep a supply of rotten eggs and squashed tomatoes ready to throw as after all public humiliation is the only way to get satisfaction.....!
|
|
|
Post by maxandpaddy on Jun 19, 2017 19:32:47 GMT
It'l end up like dressage with the personal element gone - sat at desks watching from the sides and scoring accordingly The set show will be hysterical: Trot away from the desks/people sat in tee-pees/sat in trailers/at the bar.....
|
|
|
Post by MrsShowing on Jun 19, 2017 21:52:22 GMT
Fine all the officials give up their time etc etc..But many the competitors are still forking out large sums of money to compete whether it be showing, dressage,SJ or BE..and with any money changing hands for a 'service' or 'product' you would hope that the least you could expect out of 4 people was a little accuracy Sorry but being a volunteer who is wet/tired etc would not be accepted in any other walk of life when you have paid a large sum for a professional opinion. A large sum of money for a professional opinion??? I know that entry fees for the big qualifiers are relatively expensive, but really, they are nowhere near commensurate with what you could call paying for a professional opinion. In most professions a person charges several hundred pounds a day for giving his or her opinion and certainly wouldn't expect to do it merely for the cost of travel expenses and a bit of lunch. If you want sufficient professionals who are not wet, tired, etc, and for all of them to be paid adequately so that expectations can be raised, more training provided, then you are going to have to be prepared to dig very deep for entry fees. Shows all over the country are folding because they can't make ends meet. And even then, as is the case in all professions, mistakes still happen. Mistakes happen in public examination results, GCSEs, A Levels, etc, where the calculation process is meticulously managed over a period of weeks, in secure conditions, involving a large number of professionals, and with the aid of sophisticated computer systems and statistical analysis. I think it's inevitable that in the conditions of the show ring mistakes are going to happen. Nobody is forced to compete. Mistakes are inevitable due to the nature of the thing. If you cannot accept that risk, just do something else instead.
|
|
|
Post by the showing register on Jun 20, 2017 3:38:09 GMT
I think the comment about how small the column for the 100 section is on the mark sheet is very correct. So often you have 4 or 5 tying and the numbers are all squashed up or running onto another line . This is a simple improvement that might help stewards
|
|
|
Post by MrsShowing on Jun 20, 2017 11:03:25 GMT
I think the comment about how small the column for the 100 section is on the mark sheet is very correct. So often you have 4 or 5 tying and the numbers are all squashed up or running onto another line . This is a simple improvement that might help stewards That is an excellent idea. Dare I say it, but those of us over a certain age who need to wear glasses for close reading do struggle a bit with the 100 list. You need your glasses on for transferring to the 100 sheet, but definitely glasses off for keeping up with the judge and the class, so you're fiddling with glasses on and off while holding the clipboard and pen and listening and writing and adding.
|
|
|
Post by serendipity on Jun 20, 2017 13:26:15 GMT
As I have already said i am fully aware and never suggested that it was not deliberate! It isn't rocket science to be able to see that there are 2 less numbers on the results sheet than there were competitors. All I am saying is that these things should be checked and with 4 people should be picked up. If there was a basic system, as in this case the number of entries checked to number on results sheet this wouldn't happen. I won't comment any further as obviously you're not happy with my input even though there was no malice intended but I hope it gives food for thought and maybe just maybe more care will be taken.
|
|
|
Post by serendipity on Jun 20, 2017 13:27:59 GMT
As I have already said i am fully aware and never suggested that it was not deliberate! It isn't rocket science to be able to see that there are 2 less numbers on the results sheet than there were competitors. All I am saying is that these things should be checked and with 4 people should be picked up. If there was a basic system, as in this case the number of entries checked to number on results sheet this wouldn't happen. I won't comment any further as obviously you're not happy with my input even though there was no malice intended but I hope it gives food for thought and maybe just maybe more care will be taken.
|
|
|
Post by serendipity on Jun 20, 2017 13:30:21 GMT
As I have already said i am fully aware and never suggested that it was not deliberate! It isn't rocket science to be able to see that there are 2 less numbers on the results sheet than there were competitors. All I am saying is that these things should be checked and with 4 people should be picked up. If there was a basic system, as in this case the number of entries checked to number on results sheet this wouldn't happen. I won't comment any further as obviously you're not happy with my input even though there was no malice intended but I hope it gives food for thought and maybe just maybe more care will be taken. I think you may have made an error in your first line. I think you meant to say that you never suggested that it was deliberate. Perhaps you should double check your text before you post next time.
|
|
|
Post by serendipity on Jun 20, 2017 13:41:46 GMT
Has everyone noticed that the judge/ steward bashers have posted anonymously? I do think that one improvement is to make the boxes bigger on the score sheets, it is quite easy for the eye to wander with the figures being close to eachother which is how the mistakes are made And the workers should have a "100" sheet so that no score gets missed in the final placings.
|
|
long suffering steward
Guest
|
Post by long suffering steward on Jun 20, 2017 13:47:25 GMT
hi Serendipity the falt mark sheets also have a 100 sheet on their sheet
|
|
|
Post by WHY? on Jun 20, 2017 14:41:50 GMT
As I have already said i am fully aware and never suggested that it was not deliberate! It isn't rocket science to be able to see that there are 2 less numbers on the results sheet than there were competitors. All I am saying is that these things should be checked and with 4 people should be picked up. If there was a basic system, as in this case the number of entries checked to number on results sheet this wouldn't happen. I won't comment any further as obviously you're not happy with my input even though there was no malice intended but I hope it gives food for thought and maybe just maybe more care will be taken. I think you may have made an error in your first line. I think you meant to say that you never suggested that it was deliberate. Perhaps you should double check your text before you post next time. Thanks you have just proved my point exactly! No-one said anyone is perfect and shouldn't make mistakes but the point I was making is that if, as inevitably will happen, someone makes an error there are 3 more people to check
|
|
|
Post by janetbushell on Jun 20, 2017 15:05:39 GMT
I think you may have made an error in your first line. I think you meant to say that you never suggested that it was deliberate. Perhaps you should double check your text before you post next time. Thanks you have just proved my point exactly! No-one said anyone is perfect and shouldn't make mistakes but the point I was making is that if, as inevitably will happen, someone makes an error there are 3 more people to check Actually I think it disproves your point - if you look at how many people have read this thread & not until several days later did someone pick up the fault!
|
|
|
Post by WHY? on Jun 20, 2017 19:18:16 GMT
Thanks you have just proved my point exactly! No-one said anyone is perfect and shouldn't make mistakes but the point I was making is that if, as inevitably will happen, someone makes an error there are 3 more people to check Actually I think it disproves your point - if you look at how many people have read this thread & not until several days later did someone pick up the fault! Sorry to disagree but I would think in this instance no-one thought it important enough to point out as there are no significant consequences, unlike with show marks which are actually quite important to some people!!
|
|
|
Post by WHY? on Jun 20, 2017 20:24:43 GMT
Actually I think it disproves your point - if you look at how many people have read this thread & not until several days later did someone pick up the fault! Sorry to disagree but I would think in this instance no-one thought it important enough to point out as there are no significant consequences, unlike with show marks which are actually quite important to some people!! ETA that neither is it in anyones remit to actually check the content of my post unlike in a show ring
|
|
|
Post by Another cock up on Jun 21, 2017 5:08:58 GMT
I see at cheshire in the hoys m&m workers they missed 10marks off of someone's marks they went from 7th to winning and qualifying
|
|
Serendipity but can't log
Guest
|
Post by Serendipity but can't log on Jun 21, 2017 12:31:57 GMT
hi Serendipity the falt mark sheets also have a 100 sheet on their sheet Yes that's what I mean - the "100" sheets are really useful and I don't see why they are not used in Workers.
|
|
|
Post by Dipsy on Jun 21, 2017 18:15:01 GMT
hi Serendipity the falt mark sheets also have a 100 sheet on their sheet Yes that's what I mean - the "100" sheets are really useful and I don't see why they are not used in Workers. The 100 score sheets can be used if the show says so BUT the ruling connected to what happens in the event of a tied score is different on the sheets. So may add even more confusion to making sure that the correct horse or pony is brought forward
|
|
|
Post by kateanne0 on Jun 22, 2017 16:06:37 GMT
As I have already said i am fully aware and never suggested that it was not deliberate! It isn't rocket science to be able to see that there are 2 less numbers on the results sheet than there were competitors. All I am saying is that these things should be checked and with 4 people should be picked up. If there was a basic system, as in this case the number of entries checked to number on results sheet this wouldn't happen. I won't comment any further as obviously you're not happy with my input even though there was no malice intended but I hope it gives food for thought and maybe just maybe more care will be taken. I think you may have made an error in your first line. I think you meant to say that you never suggested that it was deliberate. Perhaps you should double check your text before you post next time. LOL well spotted Serendipity
|
|
|
Post by Yes But on Jun 23, 2017 18:32:02 GMT
My cousin received notification that she actually came 4th at SOE. They missed off 10 marks! She has missed her "moment" but it's fine, because the judge and stewards were probably tired.. She will have her moment in her hallway at home when the rosette and prize money come through the post... Sorry but competitors have the right to be upset and not be shouted down by the defensive few
|
|