Ok, this is not a new topic. It’s been discussed here and elsewhere many times. But perhaps it’s worth bringing up again. I don’t have much to contribute to this topic as I’ve never felt a victim of it, nor do I know how it feels to stand in the center of the ring having to be quick and decisive with the fate of a class in your hands. I personally feel that if exhibitors voice praise for the judges they feel are fair and honest to show officials and USEF, we’ll see more of those judges being hired. As a result, dishonest judges will either need to change or move on. But is there anything else we could do to make things more “fair”?
I’m curious how most judges evaluate a class? As has been discussed before there are criteria for each division that are ranked and reordered in importance depending on what class you’re looking at. How do you factor the relative importance?
This probably wouldn’t be feasible for being able to make quick decisions, particularly in large classes, but I was thinking it would be interesting if a judge was given a form for each exhibitor for each class. The class criteria would be listed in order of importance and the judge would score each exhibitor for each criteria. The scores would then be weighted by importance and added up for a final score for each exhibitor in the class and would determine how the class is pinned. WAY too involved to be practical, but if an exhibitor could look at their form they’d know exactly what they need to work on to be better the next time.
This is not to say people wouldn’t still be unfair, but at least it would require them to think more critically about each person’s performance. I’m sure if I tried to subjectively try to judge a class and then use a formula like this to get results they would probably not turn out the same, and the formula would probably give a more honest result. Just brainstorming here…