s
Committee, says of the process for Trakehner foals. “The ATA gives three evaluation scores for foals: type, conformation and movement. Any foal that receives a total score of 24 points or more is designated a Premium Foal. This represents 80 percent because the foal garners 24 points out of a possible 30 points.” “Over the last five years the trend has been a slight increase in foal evaluations,” he continues.
“This year the ATA has evaluated 18 foals to date with a few more expected at our annual meeting in November.” In 2017, the ATA conducted eight inspections in the U.S. and Canada. The organiza- tion does not name champion foals at inspection sites or publish national championships. At keurings, KWPN-NA foals follow the tradition of receiving First Premium or Second Premium
ribbons. A jury of two judges announces scores. They do not issue written scoresheets for foals. Horses three and older are scored with the linear scoresheet. (See sidebar for more information on linear scoring.) “One jury member travels to all the keurings in order to maintain the best consistency. He has seen all the horses, so it’s a pretty reliable observation to compare horses nationwide,” explains Willy Arts of DG Bar Ranch in Hanford, California. In 2017, that judge was Bart Henstra, breeder and KWPN inspector from the Netherlands. “For example, they might
point out how a certain foal’s conformation is long-lined and elegant and moves very light- footed as opposed to having a more square body type or moving more downward and heavy-footed,” says Meghan De Garay of Iron Spring Farm in Coatesville, Pennsylvania. “I think when they look at the foals they review all the aspects of the linear scores and then mention the key components when they give the owner and spectators the scores.”
She also explains that the scores foals receive aren’t perma- nent scores. They are simply to give breeders an idea of the
Opposite page, top: Un Amour (San Amour x Don Schufro) presented here as a 2013 foal, bred and owned by Carol Reid. Above: Un Amour’s 2017 foal Greyjoy (Grey Flanell x San Amour), bred and owned by Carol Reid.
LINEAR SCORING Linear scoring is a complicated process where, in short, judges use a scoresheet to describe a series of traits, using linear values on a scale from minimum to maximum. For example, The KWPN began testing the linear scoring system in 1989. Their scoresheet has 28 traits for dressage-bred horses, and 36 for jumper-bred horses. Traits can be described on a nine-point scale. Sweden started linear profiling in 2013 for three-year-olds as a complement to the established system. The
scoresheet has eight conformation traits, seven movement traits, and five numerical scores for conformation, walk, trot, canter and general impression. Judges total the scores and calculate a percentage. “When it comes to the linear scoring in Sweden, it is done parallel with the old system when evaluating three- and four-year-olds,” says Hillevi Brasch, who does public relations about Swedish horses. For foals, judges do not use the linear scoring method. Instead they total the marks and figure the percentage. Ulf Wadeborn is a licensed B-level judge in Sweden who can judge both conformation and gaits. He is also an “S”
judge with USEF. “It’s more for the statistics,” he says about linear scoring. “You don’t really look at the paper—the boxes that are marked—you don’t get a picture. So that’s why we in Sweden judge the old way at the same time, because that is easier for people to understand. [For linear] you have the average of the horse here, and you have the positives and the negatives. You want the positives to be a little bit more than the negatives.” Ulf says the benefits of linear scoring are enormous. “When you look at the statistics, you can get a much clearer
picture of what the stallions and mares are producing. I think that’s why we have such good horses nowadays. Look at the horses today compared to 20 or 30 years ago. It’s a totally different animal,” he says.
Warmbloods Today 55
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
