 |
| Lois Yukins |
On March 19
and 20th, 2016, the Delaware Valley Combined Training Association
(DVCTA) hosted the USDF Continuing Education in Freestyle Judging Program.
Saturday was filled with a classroom discussion held at New Bolton Center, and
Sunday was comprised of live freestyle rides at Ardara Sporthorses. Presenters
were Klassic Kur Freestyle Designer Terry Ciotti Gallo and FEI 4* and USEF
"S" Judge Lois Yukins. The audience consisted of 12 Participants,
made up of L-graduates and USEF-licensed Dressage Judges, approximately 25
auditors and 11 demonstration riders.
Yukins began
the day by describing the path to creating the USDF Continuing Education in
Freestyle Judging Program. Her
description began with “a box of stuff” that was handed around the L faculty,
but no one could sort out how best add the information into the
already-densely-packed L Program itself.
Yukins approached Gallo about the problem, who utilized her enthusiasm
for freestyles and background in gymnastics judging to turn the “box of stuff”
into this well-thought-out program.
|
With that introduction, Gallo began Saturday’s lecture. She started by defining the purpose of the
event—to eliminate the “touchy-feely” element of filling in the “artistic
impression” side of a freestyle score sheet, which often intimidates judges. The silence coming from the participants
illustrated her point. Terry solved that problem by tossing Easter eggs filled
with candy to everyone who contributed to the discussion.
 |
| Terry Ciotti Gallo |
Participation
came more easily as Gallo outlined the specific criteria judges are to use to
evaluate each category of the freestyle performance, augmented by video of good
examples and poor examples. By putting
the evaluation into familiar judging methodology of “Basics + Criteria +/-
Modifiers = Score,” she created a comfortable format for judges to begin their
evaluations.
Gallo began with an example of how
music can enhance or detract from the horse’s gaits. She played a short video clip of Steffen
Peters riding Ravel in a trot half pass, and played several music clips with
it. The video clip never changed, but
different music made him look lighter and more elegant, while other clips made
him look slightly hurried.
Using this
as her segue into explaining methodology for evaluating the “Music” line on the
score sheet, Gallo stressed that suitability of the music to the horse is the
primary factor in evaluating the “Music” score.
According to Gallo, the criterion for this mark is the suitability of
the music for all three gaits. If the
music is suitable, the score starts at a 7.
If the music enhances all three gaits, then the score is higher. Modifiers that can push the “Music” score higher
are cohesiveness, or is there a common thread in the walk, trot, canter music,
and seamlessness of the editing. If music is suitable, music works together,
and editing is good, it can earn an 8.0 or higher. In summary, the “Music”
score is about the music selection and preparation, and is the score least affected
by the technical performance.
After that, Gallo tackled the topic
of “Interpretation.” The primary
criterion for “Interpretation” is what Gallo called “six-point phrasing.” She defined “points of phrasing” as times
when the horse’s movements changed with a musical phrase or dynamic change. A
ride that shows six key “points of phrasing” should earn a 7.0 in the
“Interpretation” category.
The six key
“points of phrasing” are as follows:
 |
| Tracy Basler adn Bondurant awaiting instruction from Terry Gallo |
- 1. Initial halt and salute
- 2. First movement changes
- 3. Lengthening or extension in trot
- 4. Lengthening or extension in canter
- 5. Gait change
- 6. Final halt/salute
If the ride shows more than these
six “points of phrasing,” the score can go higher than a 7.0. Gallo showed her personal shorthand system
for counting points of phrasing, where she made tally marks for each point of
music phrasing or dynamic change highlighted by the choreography.
The modifier that can push the
“Interpretation” higher is if the music expresses the gait. To illustrate this,
Gallo played several music clips, and asked the participants decide if it was
walk music, trot music, or canter music.
She stressed that the horse does not need to be “in step” with the
music, but if the horse is in step, as this is a very hard thing to do in a
show setting, it should be rewarded. In
summary, if a ride expresses more than six points of phrasing, has music that
suggests the gait, and the horse’s gaits match the footfalls most of the time, the
score should be an 8.0 or higher.
The third element Gallo explained
was “Degree of Difficulty.” Evaluating this criteria is pretty clear-cut—if the
requirements of the freestyle match the highest test of the level in all three
gaits, then the score is a 7.0. If the
freestyle pattern is harder than the highest test of the level, and is
performed well, then the score should go above a 7.0. However, if the choreography includes a
difficult movement, but it is not performed well, then the “Degree of Difficulty”
score will be reduced. This score, and the “Harmony” score, are the
two scores where the strength of the horse’s basics will impact the number
earned.
Next Gallo explained the
requirements for the “Choreography” score. “Design Cohesiveness” is listed as
the criterion for this category on the score sheet. According to Gallo, choreography that shows a
clear and logical pattern that is easy to follow meets the criteria for a
7.0. If the pattern uses the entire arena
well, shows equal use of right and left rein work, and has some elements used
in interesting or uncommon ways, the score should be higher. This score is mostly independent of technical
execution, except when the technical execution makes the choreography hard to
see.
The final element Gallo covered in
the lecture is “Harmony,” which relies largely on the technical execution of
the freestyle. Gallo said she put this
discussion last because it is comprehensive of the entire freestyle
performance. To earn a high “Harmony”
score, the horse needs to be calm and attentive, and the freestyle should look
easy and fluid. If the horse shows some
tension issues during the ride, the harmony score should be below a 7.0.
Gallo and Yukins also discussed
that the FEI Freestyle sheet differs a little from the USDF Freestyle score
sheet, placing “Rhythm, energy and elasticity” on the artistic side of the
score sheet, whereas USDF places the equivalent score, worded as “Gaits,
Impulsion and Submission,” on the technical side of the sheet.
Day two involved using live horses
to allow the participants to practice their new methodology. After Gallo used a live horse to demonstrate
how she selects suitable music, Yukins took the lead in discussing scores for
each of the 10 demo rides.
The demo rides ranged from a
training level teenager on a pinto pony to a Pas de Deux to a CDI rider’s
Intermediate freestyle. Yukins began by giving a tactful evaluation of the
first ride. Her comments helped each
participant understand how she arrived at her numbers, and helped each demo
rider understand the strengths and weaknesses of their performance. As the day
progressed, she changed tactics and started asking the participant judges to do
the evaluating before she revealed her score.
Yukins' gifted teaching skills created a comfortable environment for the
candidates to begin to use their new skills, by teasing the high-scorers that
“they’d get hired a lot” and accusing the low-scorers of “Sunday grumpies.” By
the last few rides, participant’s scores were very similar to Yukins and Gallo’s
marks.
After two days of education,
participants came away with a clear methodology for evaluating freestyle rides.
 |
| Lois Yukins discusses scores with the participating judges |
DVCTA would
like to thank Lois Yukins and Terry Gallo for sharing their knowledge of
judging freestyles with all who attended.
Your style and your wit create such a positive learning environment for
all involved. Many thanks to all our
volunteers and to our demonstration riders without whom this weekend would not
have been so productive:
Karen Anderson / Fhinland - Third Level
Lauren Annett / Savannahh - Intermediate
Tracey Basler / Bondurant - First Level
Anecia Delduco / Captain Morgan - Fourth Level
Melanie Delduco / Flacon - Fourth Level and Pas de Deux
Lauren Kramer / Mazur - First Level and Pas de Deux
Rebecca Langwost-Barlow / Chesapeake - Intermediate
Silva Martin / Aesthete - Intermediate
Jordan Osborne / Domino - Training Level
Jamie
Reilley / Feinest Proof - Second Level
 |
| Melanie Delduco and Flacon |
