Whether it’s a CDI which you catch streaming on the USEF channel or a local, low-key schooling show, controversy over whether the winner has deserved to win is par for the course. Everyone has axes to pick and bones to grind so the lack of unanimity in this matter ought not to shock you.
Though it has been explained a zillion times before, I think it’s worth going back and reminding you what the judge is rewarding when he gives a test a high mark. First of all, as much as he might admire a particular horse, he isn’t necessarily pinning the best one—neither the best mover nor the one with the best conformation. Nor is he necessarily pinning the best trained horse or in some cases even the most correct one.
The best rider doesn’t always win either.
So what’s left? Judges are trained to look at the big picture while monitoring a myriad of details which can move the scores up or down. The best ride in the context of the specific test being presented and the varying coefficients which are applied to individual marks determine the victor.
In actual fact, when the final scores are really, really close, most judges will not know whom they placed on the top until everything is added up. A phrase we fall back on is “All other things being equal . . .” Which of itself is disingenuous because most of the time the other things are not equal. It is certainly reasonable to say that a better mover with built-in suspension and elasticity has a better chance to score well than an inferior horse. Unless it isn’t ridden so well. Unless its haunches fall out on the bending figures. Unless it is enthusiastically unmanageable or uncollectible.
While the quality of the gaits certainly does matter, except at the rarefied Olympic level, the size of the horse does not figure in so much. Bigger horses may be fashionable, but a smaller horse who fits his rider and still moves the way the judge wants to see him will do just fine.
Speaking of fashions, while we might wish it were not true, from time to time some tidal wave of emotion seems to grip the international judging community. Totalis was extraordinary, and his success encouraged judges to reward horses with similar though lesser abilities. Predictably, a backlash ensued, and now the pendulum is swinging rightfully towards a more harmonious picture than some which were in favor.
Lowering the coefficient on the Gaits score of the Collectives is an attempt to slightly level the playing field for horses with more moderate movement, but that can only help so much. The quality of a horse’s gaits is intrinsic to every single score given throughout each test (excepting the halts). If you can’t handle that, the USEF Rider Tests are a better place for your money.