|
Post by Strange rule on Sept 6, 2017 13:42:55 GMT
I have wondered for a while why this rule is allowed. Surely if a judge is faced with a horse/ponythat is sired by the judges stallion it will be favoured in the placings. It makes sense for the judge to promote the animal therefore promoting their own stallion, I realise that when they are born the judge/stallion owner would never have seen the animal but surely the person Showing should use discretion and refrain from doing such a thing. I saw a riding pony youngster win under the owner of the stallion and it just seemed bizarre -
|
|
|
Post by gillwales on Sept 7, 2017 12:24:46 GMT
How would you know what was by your stallion? Judges are not allowed a catalogue in the ring. When you get a mare to stud you have not idea what her off spring will be. The only rule I think should be in place in this matter is not to judge brood mares and their foals when the foals at foot are by their stallion, they might be able to recognise these animals.
|
|
|
Post by kateanne0 on Sept 7, 2017 12:40:22 GMT
In this case I would think that the onus not to show youngstock sired by the judges stallion lies with the exhibitor, it is the exhibitor that is compromising the judge.
|
|
|
Post by janetbushell on Sept 7, 2017 12:49:17 GMT
In this case I would think that the onus not to show youngstock sired by the judges stallion lies with the exhibitor, it is the exhibitor that is compromising the judge. I don't see why the judge is compromised? They will never have seen the animal. If it does well it is likely to be because it will be a "type" the judge likes. The exhibitor may well not even know that the judge stands the stallion, as often the stallion may not share the Stud's prefix
|
|
|
Post by kateanne0 on Sept 7, 2017 15:45:20 GMT
In this case I would think that the onus not to show youngstock sired by the judges stallion lies with the exhibitor, it is the exhibitor that is compromising the judge. I don't see why the judge is compromised? They will never have seen the animal. If it does well it is likely to be because it will be a "type" the judge likes. The exhibitor may well not even know that the judge stands the stallion, as often the stallion may not share the Stud's prefix Thank you Janet, in light of your comment, let me rephrase. If the exhibitor knows that the stallion is standing at the judges premises and takes the mare to the judges premises then the onus would be on the exhibitor not to show under that judge? Reason being that the judge has had a financial gain from the mares owner?
|
|
|
Post by janetbushell on Sept 7, 2017 16:55:18 GMT
I don't see why the judge is compromised? They will never have seen the animal. If it does well it is likely to be because it will be a "type" the judge likes. The exhibitor may well not even know that the judge stands the stallion, as often the stallion may not share the Stud's prefix Thank you Janet, in light of your comment, let me rephrase. If the exhibitor knows that the stallion is standing at the judges premises and takes the mare to the judges premises then the onus would be on the exhibitor not to show under that judge? Reason being that the judge has had a financial gain from the mares owner? Yes but they might not be the owner of the progeny (either then or even at the time of foaling!) so again - how would they know. I have no problem with exhibitors feeling they may be compromising the judge & not showing under them if they are aware of what they feel is too close a connection, but it is not against the rules & nor IMO need it be for all the reasons I have explained above. However, I should also like to point out that with every passing year, if the stallion has say 10 mares/year, all producing stock which is then shown from a foal to a veteran ridden (20 years), it wouldn't be very long before there were no judges eligible to judge any animal on this basis. This is why in the rule books the wording "Stud Fees Excepted" is added to the financial gain/eligibility clause.
|
|
|
Post by CarolineNelson on Sept 7, 2017 19:20:25 GMT
I don't see why the judge is compromised? They will never have seen the animal. If it does well it is likely to be because it will be a "type" the judge likes. The exhibitor may well not even know that the judge stands the stallion, as often the stallion may not share the Stud's prefix Thank you Janet, in light of your comment, let me rephrase. If the exhibitor knows that the stallion is standing at the judges premises and takes the mare to the judges premises then the onus would be on the exhibitor not to show under that judge? Reason being that the judge has had a financial gain from the mares owner? "Stud fees" are exempt from the 'considered' "Financial Gain". Hey - the resulting foal may be not of show standard/ not survive . . etc. Stud owners cannot be expected to 'choose' between their business - or the (occasional) qualified judging appointment. All other stuff has been well described in other posts above. OP: if I may suggest - chill a little, or there will be no Breeders (or, no knowledgeable Judges) left!!
|
|
|
Post by mandmgirl0164 on Sept 7, 2017 19:42:31 GMT
There was a rule regarding this several decades ago - it brought classes to a standstill whilst the judge had to work out there and then on the spot, if each pony that was by certain stallion, was that stallion at their stud in the year that that offspring was conceived...... It proved completely unworkable.
|
|
|
Post by kateanne0 on Sept 12, 2017 9:33:21 GMT
Thank you m&m girl, Janet and Caroline. Makes sense the way you explain stud fees, exemption and progeny. Just exploring the scenario of showing young stock and judges. I'm sure the original poster will now understand clearly why there isn't a rule and stud fees are exempt. I love proper discussions where posters explain clearly the reasons behind the subject matter, in this case the showing of young stock, ownership of stallions and judges not really being compromised.
|
|
|
Post by Hack up on Sept 18, 2017 17:37:17 GMT
I have a hack sired by a judges stallion, BUT said judge did not own the stallion when mine was bred. Does this mean I could not show under same judge? Would said judge know my hack was by her stallion? I am in a wrong if you do or wrong you don't situation. I was unaware this judge owned the stallion until I Google it long after purchase
|
|
|
Post by gillwales on Sept 18, 2017 18:56:17 GMT
you can show under the judge
|
|
|
Post by New Park on Sept 18, 2017 19:38:56 GMT
At New Forest lots of Hacks by a certain stallion came forward for judging under the stallion,s owner and the commentator even gave out the breeding as each did its show.
|
|
|
Post by Philippa on Sept 21, 2017 4:18:49 GMT
At New Forest lots of Hacks by a certain stallion came forward for judging under the stallion,s owner and the commentator even gave out the breeding as each did its show. Oops!!! Quite embarrassing for the judge I expect.
|
|
|
Post by CarolineNelson on Sept 21, 2017 7:02:53 GMT
At New Forest lots of Hacks by a certain stallion came forward for judging under the stallion,s owner and the commentator even gave out the breeding as each did its show. Oops!!! Quite embarrassing for the judge I expect. Not necessarily Philippa! - as, when judging (and seriously concentrating) you simply ignore and cut out overhead noise such as any commentary. Presumably you get into the same sort of mind-set as being a coach driver with a rowdy crowd behind you, or living under a flight path . . . Enthusiastic 'real-time' show-ring commentary is the modern way and a very good way to keep the viewing public engaged in a sport which, to the less involved, must otherwise be like watching paint dry.
|
|
|
Post by Philippa on Sept 21, 2017 7:04:07 GMT
Oops!!! Quite embarrassing for the judge I expect. Not necessarily Philippa! - as, when judging (and seriously concentrating) you simply ignore and cut out overhead noise such as any commentary. Presumably you get into the same sort of mind-set as being a coach driver with a rowdy crowd behind you, or living under a flight path . . . Enthusiastic 'real-time' show-ring commentary is the modern way and a very good way to keep the viewing public engaged in a sport which, to the less involved, must otherwise be like watching paint dry. It was said quite tongue in cheek as I'm sure not all will look or go fantastically!!
|
|
|
Post by CarolineNelson on Sept 21, 2017 9:00:41 GMT
Not necessarily Philippa! - as, when judging (and seriously concentrating) you simply ignore and cut out overhead noise such as any commentary. Presumably you get into the same sort of mind-set as being a coach driver with a rowdy crowd behind you, or living under a flight path . . . Enthusiastic 'real-time' show-ring commentary is the modern way and a very good way to keep the viewing public engaged in a sport which, to the less involved, must otherwise be like watching paint dry. It was said quite tongue in cheek as I'm sure not all will look or go fantastically!! Absolutely so!
|
|
|
Post by gillwales on Sept 21, 2017 21:21:17 GMT
Re the Judge and the commentary, I must admit that mentally when I judged I would put my fingers in my ears and sing loudly to myself when I gave out rosettes so I did not hear the names of the ponies I put up. That way I could be completely impartial.
|
|