oral reasons - wordpress.com · 2016. 4. 2. · 5. presentation: oral reasons should be presented...

P a g e | 1

© 2005-2015 William C. Golden & Kristopher R Wilson, All Rights Reserved

Oral Reasons

1 PHILOSOPHY AND OBJECTIVES FOR GIVING REASONS

While a major emphasis in horse judging training programs is placed on students learning to evaluate

horses objectively, equal importance is placed on students learning to discuss and defend judgments

rendered in the process of placing a class of horses. The combined process of placing horses, then

defending those placing, teaches students to be objective, honest, and fair in their approach to

evaluating horses. Further, the process of giving reasons discourages student judges from rendering

opinions which may be based on personal likes and dislikes, and encourages them to render defensible

judgments in regard to current standards in the horse industry.

Another major purpose for giving reasons in judging contests is that it offers an opportunity for students

to learn how to think, organize thoughts and speak about those thoughts in a refereed environment.

Students who master those skills find them useful in many ways for the rest of their lives. Many leaders

in agriculture, business, and industry have judging team experience, and they frequently point to the

reasons process as significant in developing leadership abilities.

Giving reasons should be a positive and pleasant learning experience for students. Students should be

encouraged, not discouraged, when giving reasons, and they should gain confidence in themselves

through practice. Performance in the reasons room by students who are prepared should be evaluated

from a positive view, rather than a negative view, giving every advantage possible to students who do a

good job. Reasons judges should never use a negative, penalizing, “fault out” system for scoring

reasons. Reasons judges should be positive. Their actions toward students and their scoring method

should reflect a positive approach.

1.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD REASONS

1. Organization: Styles of reasons will vary with individual personalities and coaching methods, but all reasons should be well-organized and systematic. Within that framework, judges should score well organized reasons similarly, with no preference given to individual style. The basic approach is the comparison of animals in three pairs: the top pair, the middle pair and the bottom pair. Other additions will be included and are perfectly acceptable as long as the basic organization is followed. However, reasons should not consist of a simple description of each animal. The focus should be on why one animal in a pair was placed over the other animal in that pair.

2. Relevancy: Reasons should reflect the actual differences in the pair and consist primarily of those points of comparison that were significant in the placing of the pair. Use of comparative or descriptive reasons that are irrelevant or unimportant in the placing of the pair are discouraged and should be scored lower. Judges should be alert to the so-called

P a g e | 2


“canned” or pre-prepared reasons that may sound good, but in fact do not fit the particular points.

3. Accuracy: Truth is the primary consideration in scoring reasons. Students should be credited for accurate statements regardless of how the horses may be placed. Redundancy in terminology describing similar points of discussion between separate pairs of horses should be avoided. Errors of omission are to be considered when the student leaves out something important, but inaccurate statements are considered the major fault in a set of reasons. A complete and accurate set of reasons should receive a high score, even when placings differ from official placings. Official judges are cautioned to listen carefully for accuracy and should not penalize the reasons score simply because the student’s placing is different from the official placing. It is entirely possible for a student to receive a high reasons score with a low placing score.

4. Terminology: Some emphasis should be placed on use of terms commonly used to discuss horses or performances. Terminology will vary among students, but it should reflect terminology commonly used among horsemen. Major emphasis should be placed on comparative rather than descriptive terminology. However, descriptive terminology can be used to a limited extent in the opening statements and to describe faults.

5. Presentation: Oral reasons should be presented in a poised, confident, convincing manner, but they should never convey arrogance. Loud, boisterous, arrogant delivery is not desirable and should be penalized. Likewise, shy, timid, unconvincing presentations should not receive the highest scores. Reasons should be presented in a relaxed, conversational manner. The presentation should not contain lengthy pauses and must be delivered within two minutes. In most cases a complete set of reasons should be no longer than 1 minute and 30 seconds in length. Speaking manner will vary, but all students should use correct English. Oral reasons should be grammatically correct with proper pronunciation and enunciation of words and syllables. While good presentation is important, reasons judges are cautioned that this is not a contest of oratory at the expense of accuracy, relevancy, organization and terminology used in discussing a particular class of horses.

1.2 GRADING AND SCORING REASONS

Reasons scores are to be reflective of organization, relevancy, accuracy, terminology and

presentation of reasons, regardless of the student’s placing of the class. A poor placing must not

automatically result in a low reasons score. If students see the differences in the horses and reflect

those differences accurately in their reasons, they must not be penalized on the reason’s score because

their emphasis for placing the horses was different than that of the official judges. Reading reasons

from notes should be strongly discouraged at judging contests. It is recommended to inform students

that they will receive a zero score if they read their reasons verbatim. This is designed to encourage

students to practice and give reasons without notes, as it will make the process of learning to give

reasons more expedient.

P a g e | 3


Reasons should be graded, then scored as per the following outline:

REASONS PERFORMANCE GRADE SCORE RANGE

Good to Excellent A 46-50

Above Average to Good B 41-45

Average C 36-40

Below Average D 31-35

Poor E 30 and below

A contestant who is reasonably well prepared and gets through a complete set of reasons should never

receive a score less than 25.

Reasons judges should mark the contestant’s reasons score on the individual cards provided for each

participant. The cards will have only the contestant’s number for identification, and care must be taken

to ensure contestants and cards are in the proper order and agree when the score is recorded. It is also

advised to keep a master sheet of scores for contestants in case a card is lost or score questioned.

1.3 ETIQUETTE IN THE REASONS ROOM: OFFICIAL JUDGES

Reasons judges must be continually aware that their actions and mannerisms can be stimulation or

distracting to the student presenting reasons. Judges should be polite and encouraging to the student

and should never present a harsh, critical attitude. Judges must be aware that any personal action can

have either positive or negative influences on the students as they prepare for the next set of reasons or

future contests. Emphasis should be on a positive attitude, not on excess criticism.

There is no need for judges to attempt to educate contestants individually during the reasons session.

Teaching is the responsibility of the coaches. Judges should focus their attention on the accuracy and

quality of reasons performances, irrespective of the class placing. Remember, contestants have already

been awarded points for their class placings. Also, reasons judges should never tell contestants the

correct placing of a class.

It is particularly important that judges avoid any mannerisms which may be distracting to students.

Eating, drinking, smoking, chewing, etc. must be avoided while students are presenting reasons. Also,

judges must not stand, move around, use excessive eye and head movements, yawn, etc. while students

are presenting reasons. Judges must be aware the student who is presenting reasons is trying very hard

to concentrate on the class of horses, and mannerisms or actions of the reason judge must not cause a

break in their concentration.

P a g e | 4


1.4 ETIQUETTE IN THE REASONS ROOM: STUDENTS

Before entering the reasons room, the student should be focused and ready to deliver their reasons.

The student should not be chewing gum and may not use any sort of written notes.

Upon entering the room, the student should greet the reasons taker in a friendly manner. This is

necessary to test acoustics/echo of the room so the student can conclude an appropriate volume. The

student should stand about five to six feet from the judge or at the appropriate conversational distance.

One should place their feet shoulder width apart, keeping their feet and hands stationary with their eyes

fixed at the judge’s forehead or eyes. Students may begin their reasons upon the judge’s

acknowledgement.

2 REASONS FORMAT

The opening statement of a student’s reasons should include the class name, the placing, and the most

obvious, unarguable good or bad statement about the class. Reasons are comparative between each

pair. Each pair should cover two or three main points.

Simply format your reasons by comparing your top, middle and bottom pairs. Each pair should include a

grant. For example, you placed horse 1 over 2 and discussed why throughout your top pair. Before

moving to your middle pair, however, you should grant something that 2 did or had better than 1.

Include these grants in all your pairs.

Close your reasons explaining why you placed the final horse last. Finally, restate the class name and

your placings.

Over the next few sections we will break down each portion of a set of reasons, giving you good and

poor examples of each.

2.1 OPENING STATEMENT

Making an accurate and unique opening statement is extremely desirable because it makes a good first

impression with the reasons judge. If one should give a poor opening statement or lie it makes it

difficult to gain respect from the official and receive a high score. That is why being honest is the most

important part of the opening statement as well as any other part of reasons. With more experience,

opening statements can become more creative and flashy. An opening statement should include your

placing for the class followed by an overall explanation of the class as well as a sentence leading into the

top pair. The opening statement should be short and to the point as well as accurate.

P a g e | 5


Always try to avoid cutting the class for the reason’s judge. It is their job to cut the class. You just need

to make an accurate statement in your opening sentence that no one can argue with.

2.2 COMPARISON BOX:

There are three comparisons (first, middle and last pair) in every set of reasons. At the

beginning of each comparison you should state the placing of the pair and then proceed to why one

horse is placed over the other. The reasoning should be presented in an organized matter with the most

important facts stated at the beginning of the comparison. For example if one horse is easily heavier

muscled than the next that should be the first thing you talk about in the pair. A good reasons giver will

explain exactly where the horse is heavier muscled and then move on to the next most important

difference between the two individuals. When comparing two animals it’s good to use comparative

terms such as “er” and “more” terms; like heavier muscled or more fluid mover. Remember, at this

stage you are comparing one animal to another, so you should avoid superlative terms such as “est” or

“most.” The comparison box is also a good time to use transition words like “furthermore” and “also”.

Using a specific transition term for each pair will help you smoothly move through your comparison box

and allow you to talk about different facts while worrying less about the specific structure of your

reasons.

Good Examples:

I placed the Aged Geldings 1, 2, 3 and 4, finding an obvious winner in 1, the palomino, who

combined quality, balance and muscling to the highest degree.

I placed the reining 1, 2, 3 and 4, easily using 1 over 2 as 1 was the most athletic performer in

today’s class, staying the lowest in the spins and showing the most speed variation in its

circles.

Poor Examples:

Sir, I placed the Aged Geldings 1, 2, 3, and 4. Finding this to be a two pair class.

Sir, I placed the Aged Mares 1, 2, 3, and 4. 4 is the heaviest muscled horse in the class who is

nicely balanced.

P a g e | 6


2.3 BUZZ WORDS/JUDGING CRITERIA:

Buzz words, or judging criteria, can be used to capitalize on an important point. Stating specific

judging criteria can help to prioritize your reason and may make them easier for the reasons taker to

follow.

Good Example:

In the middle pair balance alone placed 2 over 3. 2 divided more evenly into thirds, with a

shorter back and a longer reaching underline, whereas 3 was long in the back and short over

the croup. Just as impressively 2 was a higher quality individual, with a more refined muzzle

and cleaner throat latch, compared to 3 who was course about the head and neck.

Moreover, 2 was more structurally correct, standing on a straighter column of bone,

allowing 2 to step out with a truer stride.

Note the use of “balanced placed 2 over 3.” You should avoid “I preferred” or “I believe.”

Here, your buzz word “balance” places the pair for you. This is a good opening.

Poor Example:

In the bottom pair I prefer 3 over 4. 3 is an eye appealing horse who is heavy muscled and

well balanced. 4 is also heavy muscled but is the least desirable to look at on the profile.

This example uses descriptive terms exclusively when the reasons giver should be comparing

horses instead. It is also too general and lacks specific details in the comparison of the two

animals.

1.1.1 Examples:

Balance alone placed 1 over 2……………………

Quality of movement clearly placed 3 over 4……………………..

Quality and structural correctness easily sorted 2 over 3……………………….

Controlled athleticism and accuracy of pattern placed 2 over 1…………………….

P a g e | 7


2.4 GRANTS:

Grants give you a chance to credit horses that are placed second within the pair. There are

three grants given through the course of a set of reasons. Once after the 1st pair, again after the second

pair and finally a grant will be is given for the last place animal. Grants may be obvious or very slight

depending on how close the pair was. Generally your grants should be short and to the point. The main

goal, as always, is to be honest and accurate; this shows the reason taker that you saw the class

correctly and will help you to earn a higher score.

Terms to use when granting:

I realize

I concede

I recognize

I appreciate

I respect

I am aware

It was obvious

It was apparent

Clearly

Obviously

There is no doubt

Certainly

Good Examples:

There’s no doubt that 2, the bay, is a higher quality individual, especially in her head and

throat latch. Unfortunately……………………………

Clearly 2 is a more athletic mover, driving with power and impulsion out of the hind quarters,

however………………………..

Note in these examples that there is a grant followed by “unfortunately” or “however.” This

is to allow a transition from the grant into a criticism of the same animal. This is sometimes

referred to as the grant-fault method. You can also simply grant a horse and move to the

next pair if you wish. If it’s appropriate, you may also want to add, “and it is this advantage

that places 2 over 3 in the middle pair” after your grant.

Poor Example:

2 is well balanced, but lacks…………………………………

This grant lacks the level of detail needed to earn a high score.

P a g e | 8


2.5 CRITICISMS:

After you have granted a horse you may then critique it to explain why it placed where it did.

Criticizing is a lot like granting back to a horse. You should only say a few things and make sure that

you’re honest. If there is obvious problem with the horse then let the reasons taker know it was easy

for you to see that problem. Always be careful to not be too critical or say too many negative things, as

reasons should be mostly positive. If a horse is really awful, just give a generalized statement, there is

no need to list every problem with an animal when everyone else can see the same things.

2.6 TRANSITIONS:

Transitions are simply a way of moving smoothly from one section of your reasons to another.

This should be done as simply as possible while still maintaining a smooth transition. Transitions can be

a good place to be creative. You can use unique and original terms that will set you apart from the

competition. Many of these phrases will also work as grants.

Directing your attention

In addition

I admire

I understand

Surprisingly

But in reality

But after this

Without a doubt

On the other hand

However

Plus

Besides this

Furthermore

Although

Even so

There was a definite Advantage

Good Examples:

However, 3 was the poorest quality individual being the most common in the head and

deepest in the neck. Still, it is 3 over 4 in the bottom pair…..

In reality 3, was the worst balanced in the class, being long in the back and short through the

croup. Nevertheless, 3’s advantages in muscling still place it 4 in the final pair…..

Poor Examples:

3 was somewhat light muscled and was slightly lower quality than 4.

3 was the lightest muscled horse who was also poor balanced and had the worst structure as

well as lacking shape and expression to its muscle shape and was toed in.

P a g e | 9


This table contains some examples of terminology to use when

transitioning through pairs.

Opening for Pairs Continuing Terms

for Pairs

Grants Criticism Closing

Beginning

Opening

Moving to

Continuing with

Coming to

Concerning the

In analyzing

In discussing

Closing with

Culminating with

Concluding with

Further

Furthermore

In addition

Additionally

Moreover

Beyond this

Coupled by

Complimented by

Also

Granted

I grant

I realize

None the less

I appreciate that

Undoubtedly

I recognize that

I did recognize

I concede

I contrast

Conversely

I acknowledge

However

I readily admit

I criticize

I fault

However

Nevertheless

Unfortunately

Thus

Therefore

In closing

Culminating with

Reaching a final

placing

To transition between pairs, a student should use smooth transitions to help the judge follow

the reasons from pair to pair without confusion. The best transition terms may not always come from a

list or a book; some of the best terms can be learned from your fellow students.

P a g e | 10


2.7 CLOSING STATEMENT:

A closing statement should be brief and to the point. You should summarize why you placed the

last horse you should make a simple statement such as “Thank you” to inform the judge that you have

finished your set. In the past students have been encouraged to restate their placing, but this is not

necessary as you’ve already made your placing clear to the judge at the beginning of your reasons.

2.8 COMBINING GRANTS AND CRITICISMS:

With more experience you may want to try combining your grants and criticisms. This will give your

reasons a smoother, more conversational flow, and can help to make them more interesting to listen to.

This is another good area to use “whereas.”

Examples:

The grant-transition method:

I readily grant that 2 was more correctly balanced than 1 and it is this balance that places 2 over 3 in

the middle pair….

The grant-fault method:

I admit that 2 was more correctly balanced than 1. However, 2 was poorly structured, standing with

too much set in the hock when viewed from the side. Now, moving to the middle pair…..

The grant-fault-grant method

I concede that 2 was more correctly balanced than 1. However, 2 was poorly structured, standing too

straight through the hock when viewed from the side. Nevertheless, it is still 2’s advantages in balance

that places 2 over 3 in the middle pair….

The fault-grant method

(In a class placed 1-2-3-4) I must fault 1, as his neck ties in deep at the shoulder, and I grant that 2 is

cleaner tying.

(Beginning the middle pair) This advantage in quality, coupled with balance, helps to place 2 over 3

in .the middle pair….

Example:

Three is the least functionally correct and acquired the most penalty points thus placing at

the bottom of the class. Thank you.

P a g e | 11


3 TAKING NOTES:

Use following format for organizing your reasons. You must have the class placed correctly first. Once

you have the class placed, following format below should make it easier to organize your notes for your

reasons.

Opening Statement

1/2 Compare 1 over 2

Grant 2 over 1

Criticize 2, transition to middle pair


Grant 3 over 2

Criticize 3, transition to final pair


Grant 4 over 3

Criticize 4, closing statement (Thank you)

P a g e | 12


Example Reasons

Aged Mares

I placed the aged mares 1, 2, 3, and 4, finding a commanding winner in 1 who best combined quality,

balance and structural correctness.

1 obviously exhibited a higher quality and more feminine head and neck, being more refined in her

muzzle with a larger, brighter eye. She was tighter through the throat latch and had a thinner neck,

where 2 was coarse in her throat and tied in deep at the base of the neck. Just as impressively 1 divided

more equally into thirds, being shorter and stronger in the back with a longer more athletic appearing

underline. As a bonus, 1 stood on a straighter column of bone.

I admire the fact that 2, the blue roan, was a more massive individual who was deeper barreled. And it’s

this power and substance that placed 2 over 3 in my intermediate pair.

2 simply spread more muscle over her frame, and she was more prominently V-ed in the pectoral

region. She was more muscular out of her hip and showed more true muscle shape over her croup. She

also carried the most bulge and expression around the forearms and gaskins.

Now, there’s no question that 3 was more feminine. But, to go along with 3’s femininity, 3 was also the

lightest muscled and narrowest based horse of the class. Despite this, quality still placed 3 over 4 in my

concluding duo.

3 was smaller about the muzzle and had less distance from her eye to her muzzle, while also being

cleaner through the throat latch. Furthermore 3 was more balanced, as she was a longer profiling, more

modern appearing mare, with a more sloping shoulder, forward reaching underline and a longer, more

level hip.

4 was undeniably heavier muscled, but after this she was the lowest quality worst balanced individual of

the class.

Thank you.

P a g e | 13


4 REASONS REMINDERS

Descriptive terms, words that end in “-est” (smoothest, biggest, etc.), should only be used in

opening and closing statements. Reasons should be comparative, so use words that both describe and

compare, such as those ending in “-er” (smother, bigger, etc.) throughout the body of your set. It is your

job as a contestant to describe the class in detail to the judge.

Speak in the same tense. For example, if you start your reasons in the past tense, you should

maintain the past tense throughout your reasons. Performance reasons should always be given in the

past tense, as you are speaking about something that has already happened. Halter reasons may be

given in either the past or present tense, as long as you are consistent throughout the set.

5 TIPS FOR PRACTICING REASONS

DO NOT MEMORIZE YOUR REASONS. The judge will be able to tell if you have memorized or

“canned” your reasons. Each time you practice your reasons, say them differently, using a new term for

describing the pair, so if you do stumble on your words in the reasons room you can think of a term

more easily. You will be less likely to have your reasons memorized and lose your place in your reasons.

That being said, it is recommended that you memorize a format, or skeleton of transition phrases to fill

in with specific terms for each class. This will cut down on the time needed to prepare a set for a

specific class, and will provide you with a set of mental markers to guide you through your reasons if you

get lost.

The best way to get good at giving reasons is just to give them over and over and over. Say your

reasons out loud with your eyes focus on a stationary object or person; you can even practice in front of

the mirror or video tape yourself to measure your progress and improvement over time. Complete your

reasons every time you give them. Don’t stop and start over just because you got lost or stumbled on

your words. If you do get lost, simply take a deep breath and continue; do not make the judge aware of

your mistake.

P a g e | 14


6 CUTS

1

Horses are extremely similar; no obvious reason why one should be placed over the

other; or, both horses have numerous faults and none supersedes the others; placing

is strictly a matter of personal preference; placing varies among official judges.

2

Horses are very close, but one horse has one or two qualitative or quantitative

advantages; the majority of official judges would not switch the pair, but half the

contestants could logically switch the pair.

3

Horses are of unequal quality and there is a logical placing in favor of one horse;

either one horse has several faults or several advantages; all official judges would

agree on the placing; no more than one third of contestants would be expected to

switch the pair.

4

Horses are not of similar quality; one horse has several decided advantages based on

many points; all experts would quickly see the placing; no guesswork or personal

preference required to make placing; no more than 10 percent of contestants would

be expected to switch the pair.

5

Large number of extreme differences between the horses; placing is obvious to

everyone on first quick observation; careful study not required for the placing; pair

consists of an inferior horse vs. a consistent winner; only very inexperienced,

uninformed contestants would switch the pair.

6

Horse not even comparable; differences reflective of a champion quality horse or

performance vs. a horse or performance that is not of show quality.

7

Largest cut; differences reflective of a world-class halter horse vs. an extremely poor

quality or lame horse; or a world-class performance vs. a disqualified performance

oral reasons - wordpress.com · 2016. 4. 2. · 5. presentation: oral reasons should be presented...

Documents