: mysql_connect(): The mysql extension is deprecated and will be removed in the future: use mysqli or PDO instead in
: mysql_connect(): The mysql extension is deprecated and will be removed in the future: use mysqli or PDO instead in
There could be a lot of preliminary evaluations, such as costs involved, technical aspects etc, before the FEI will implement EQM in live competition. Could the system be used to educate judges in the meantime as that would be extremely useful?
When the EQM system is implemented each measured performance will be a new chapter in the book of �judging the musical and artistic elements of the freestyle�. EQM system �at work� generates in 6 minutes a massive stream of data which all can be used to analyse the performed freestyle; and could be used for education of judges, trainers, riders and coaches.
For analyzing a performance now, the EQM team has to generate all these data by hand; and is depending on the quality of the recorded data. (video and music)
Overall the quality of the video material EQM has to handle is very poor; in the sound department the music is often ruined by a commentater or speaker, bad sound equipment at the venue or the poor broadcast recordings.
EQM-team has approached many of the music producers, riders or owners in order to get a copy of their freestyle music; unfortunately 95% of these producers/riders/owners would not co-orperate in this. It�s quessing why there�s so much resistance to hand over the music for analyzing it
It�s also kind of strange that these same kur producers, riders or owners do not have any problem to show the rest of the World their freestyles on Youtube, or dedicated websites.
However EQM has analysed 76 freestyles in the past 4 years; and the result of these analyses will be published on the EQM website later this year.
The analyses EQM team made by hand, including very recent freestyles of Cornelissen with Parcifal, Gal with Totilas, Van Grunsven with Krack C, Imke Bartels with Sunrise and Laura Bechtolsheimer with Alf, are all uasable educational tools.
The EQM-team would like to share her knowledge with FEI and a proposal for an educational tool using EQM analyses is in progress.
Horses are not machines and even the most regular horse cannot perform to a metronome. All horses will have irregularities, maybe in the most advanced movements such as passage and piaffe, or when performing other figures, like half passes, extended trot etc. Sometimes the half pass in trot to one side (for example the stronger side of the horse) will put more emphasis on a certain beat of the music, whereas reversing the half pass may mean that the synchronisation loses perfection. Is it not acceptable for the music to sometimes compensate for the fact that horses are not machines?
This question is in close relation with two questions (below) from O Judge Ghislain Fouarge; the answer is more or less the same.
In the assessment of the �takt� (rhythm), it seems that EQM is focused on the rhythm of the front legs, while the presentation confirmed my existing impression that many more problems occur with the �takt� of the hind legs. How would EQM judge which is more important? (by G.F)
Some horses struggle to preserve their natural pulse (beat) or �takt� in canter. But what about the pirouette, where it is practically impossible for a horse to maintain the original natural pulse of the canter? (by G.F)
First of all, EQM doesn't try to make the horse perform like a machine; it won't change anything that we are used to seeing in the Freestyle. It only analyses what is happening between the horse�s performance and the chosen music.
A good Freestyle maker/compiler will take the horse�s 'irregularities' into account and will respond to them, as long as this doesn�t interfere with the music. Some Freestyle composers/producers will compensate the strong and weak sides of the horse in the tempo used; if a horse moves a bit faster to its left side, the tempo of the music will be a little faster; the same goes for a slower right side; the tempo to the right will be slower. We agree, this sort of production is the limit in Freestyle music producing, but it can make a difference between a gold or silver medal.
These composers also try to compensate for the always present change of tempo of a horse, depending on its state of mind and (training) condition. By filming the horse several times, in different stages of training, they try to find the 'natural' tempo and rhythm of the horse. It may sound a bit scientific but it's one way of approaching the Freestyle; and we can only conclude they have a high score as a result of it.
Is it acceptable for the horse to be a little ahead of the music in order to give the impression of more impulsion in the arena?
This question is also similar to a question of Ghislain:
Suppose that two horses are both 25% in a correct rhythm. One is clearly not 75% correct while the other shows just a slight abnormality in its 75%. What are EQM�s criteria? Are they equally good or bad? In my opinion I would think the second horse would be better, but what is the model that EQM uses? (by G.F)
A little ahead or a little behind doesn't really matter as long as the tempo of the horse has the same tempo and pulse as the music. It's a matter of taste, but all of the EQM music consultants prefer to see a horse a little behind the music. It's also the correlation that counts. As with a good singer or solo musician, being ahead of the music will sound (or look) hasty; it's also not good to start a pirouette (or any other movement or transition) if the music is 'not there' yet. Riding ahead of the music is therefore not preferred.
EQM has also measured the music delay at several locations and events. In very poor to very good conditions the delay is negligible between the rider, judges and audience (even where there are ring-monitors - speakers just for the rider).
However the EQM sound engineers found many very poor sound systems, even at indoor venues. The exceptions were those events where the German sound engineer Gunther Alberding was involved, for example most of the important World Cup competitions. He not only brings his own equipment but also a lot of knowledge of how music should be used at this type of event. The EQM team suggests that the FEI implements some basic rules about equipment, speaker systems, rider monitors etc for all organisers. Dressage is a professional sport and therefore should be using professional equipment and engineers.
Sometimes we see a Kur that creates an ATMOSPHERE that cannot be measured in technical terms. I believe that this needs to be judged with a major emphasis in respect of synchronisation, good cuts, fades, sound production etc. How best can the atmosphere that the music creates be judged?
I still think it's a part of the whole artistic interpretation; but it's very difficult to measure if not impossible. It's a matter of taste and taste is personal and personal is subjective. I think this is why EQM is a (big) help in a lot of measurable factors but we always will need human adjudication in the Freestyle.
If the combination TOGETHER WITH THE MUSIC AND CHOREOGRAPHY creates a special atmosphere I think the judges will and should give higher marks for music, interpretation of the music and choreography.
This question is a good description of the �feeling' that dressage can create; it also illustrates how the FEI itself describes the Freestyle: The music of a Freestyle test is not just a background: performing in synchronisation with the rhythm is the ultimate aim. Freestyle is the pinnacle of Dressage execution and when it works, the result is magic.
However a combination with perfect 'fitting' and 'touching' music and an original choreography (if possible) will always create such an atmosphere. And a horse like Totilas could bring a crowd to tears, even with the sound of trash bins in the background. But this has nothing to do with the FEI�s description of performing a Freestyle to music.
The musical content will be judged with the MDA part of EQM; not only the musical cuts and audible fades but nine objective elements of music.
How much would it cost to implement the EQM system into actual competition?
EQM has a financial business plan. It's a matter of financial strategy how much implementing the system will cost. One possibility could be licensing the system but we can think of many other ways to implement it.
An intensive research and development programme is ongoing. The system has to be tested under all circumstances and the sooner this happens the lower the costs will be. The system will develop too, at the moment it needs four engineers and two cameramen but we believe we can reduce this to a staff of four, maybe less.
The end user can also use EQM's 'live data' transmission, and for broadcasters this is a very interesting option. Also there is the development of the video data bank, a huge dressage video archive; this will be available for all sorts of users such as research, training, judge education and many other possibilities.
With the use of EQM - �live-screen data� - all sorts of data can be projected on a video screen, or for the audience, or for the viewer at home on his TV. Does this not affect the �objective watching� of dressage and does it not lead to a negative way of observing a dressage test?
Direct data information (such as with Formula One on TV; the graphic display of speed, rev�s, throttle and gear use, braking) is possible with use of the EQM system, but some of the judges, riders and stakeholders EQM has consulted prefer not to bother the audience with it. On the other hand they suggested it would be a great and a welcome help supporting the judges �live� and �real time� with this data during the performance.
Though we live in an era where more and more �direct data access� is requested, it will be the choice of the user of the system. The audience can be given less information than the judges, anything is possible.
EQM has some great examples of this real time data information, from very brief to very complex, and it is good to experience that �simple� info works best. For instance, a green to red block in which a pointer indicates how the combination moves synchronously with the music. If it�s all green, it�s super, and conversely, if everything is red, it is because any harmony between the combination, the movement and the music is lacking.
Does the use of EQM not lose the charm of watching and hearing a Freestyle test?
see next question
�Good� music affects the emotion of the viewer/audience; one of the reasons why Freestyle is so popular; is all this not affecting freestyle dressage negatively?
(We have answered questions 2 and 3 together because they are very close.)
No, the viewing of the Freestyle will not lose its charm. EQM changes nothing of the Freestyle experience we�re used to; it simply measures it invisibly so an objective score is produced.
It�s no surprise that every sport in the world is measured, like a ball is in or out (with tennis - the famous Hawkeye system), and time measurement (Omega, Heuer etc) with any speed sport and so on, except for dressage until now.
Everything will remain the same. But the Freestyle adds something to what a combination has already shown in the Grand Prix and the GP Special. To be precise it adds music and choreography and both elements score an artistic value. These two factors have to be judged precisely on their own merit and not simply as an extended GP or GPS.
Until now, the winning combination in the Freestyle will have the highest scores in the music and artistic performance when you look at the percentages, whereas logically this is not necessarily the case if the human eye and ear cannot measure the synchronicity (as shown in the video presentation).
A slightly lesser combination, technically speaking, when riding and performing an excellent Freestyle to music (and also touching the audience), should be able to win, compared to a combination that performs a perfect technical test but with bad choreography, and poor music production that does not match the choreography, tempo, pulse or rhythm of the performance.
In addition, �good music� is a subjective term, but when used in a Freestyle test it is possible to apply at least the following expectations and/or demands to the music:
� A credible sound production (at least broadcast quality)
� Adequate support in rhythm and tempo as well as supporting all the transitions the combination shows in the performed choreography
� Preferably thematically in a logical narrative form
� If possible original, �catchy�, and supporting what the combination shows
EQM will improve the overall standard of music production, so the audience will no longer hear audible fades in or out, amateur musical cuts, dislocated bars or harsh and sometimes worse sounding music productions.
The audience is paying for expensive tickets to see and listen to the Freestyle. EQM will help to provide the best possible experience for the audience because Freestyle composers, compilers, producers and riders will be able to be more focused on this element. This will have the benefit of attracting even bigger crowds to the sport of Freestyle. We must remember that this is how the FEI describes what the Freestyle should be: The music of a Freestyle test is not just a background: performing in synchronisation with the rhythm is the ultimate aim. Freestyle is the pinnacle of Dressage execution and when it works, the result is magic. (Source FEI.org)
According to the video presentation it appears that EQM is only measuring the �hits� in relation to the rhythm of the music; and the amount of �hits� when riding an exactly synchronised test is translated into a score. Isn�t it ridiculous that two top combinations, as shown in the presentation, even if they have so few �hits�, have to leave the arena with such a low score?
The �hits� are a relative value; if a combination is �behind or ahead of� the music, it is still �in sync� with the tempo of the music. But if a combination 'randomly' hits the tempo and rhythm it will score a random synchronisation, which is much lower.
Unfortunately, when measured objectively (in accordance with the FEI statement) by EQM, many Freestyle music productions cannot be seen as top products.
In the assessment of the �takt� (rhythm), it seems that EQM is focused on the rhythm of the front legs, while the presentation confirmed my existing impression that many more problems occur with the �takt� of the hind legs. How would EQM judge which is more important?
The word and concept �takt� is rarely ever used in music, but rhythm, pulse and tempo are three concepts that have much to do with the equestrian term 'takt'.
To clarify: EQM actually measures all three - rhythm, pulse and tempo. But it really comes down to one thing when you take the rhythm, pulse and tempo of the music into consideration, and that�s what we would call the 'bounce' of the combination of horse and rider.
Sometimes this �bounce� is literally the footfall, as in the passage (but not in the piaffe, this often has almost no bounce at all and only the footfall from the horse's tempo, rhythm and pulse is the �given�).
Music always has a rhythm, sometimes with clear drums, sometimes just as clearly without the use of pure drums or rhythm instruments. (For example, each note or tone which is played ALWAYS has a rhythm, tempo and pulse.)
The big advantage of these measured �metrics� by EQM is that the judges have more space and time to adjudicate the regularity, evenness and strength of the movements, and also give more attention to the horse�s cadence and expression.
Please note that in musical terms the word cadence has a totally different meaning, but this will become clear in the new dictionary to be published by EQM.
How does EQM deal with a horse that does not meet the criteria, i.e. it does not show all the required movements?
A combination participates in the Freestyle or not; EQM only measures the results of the performed movements, nothing more. It is the judges� responsibility to recognise if certain movements are not performed.
Suppose that two horses are both 25% in a correct rhythm. One is clearly not 75% correct while the other shows just a slight abnormality in its 75%. What are EQM�s criteria? Are they equally good or bad? In my opinion I would think the second horse would be better, but what is the model that EQM uses?
What clearly emerges is the margin of hits, as previously explained. If a horse is just behind or just in front of the music, but the tempo of the music is equal to the pace of the horse, EQM will evaluate this, and the horse with the smaller deviation will score higher and more correctly.
As the question has implied, there is a difference between the horse with a limited deviation and the horse which is clearly incorrect. EQM will measure this exactly, so that the jury can trust and have confidence in the system, and focus on other significant details in the performance.
EQM's test results have led to the recognition of upcoming injuries or irregularities, and thus helped in preventing them.
Some horses struggle to preserve their natural pulse (beat) or �takt� in canter. But what about the pirouette, where it is practically impossible for a horse to maintain the original natural pulse of the canter?
EQM cannot measure the extent to which it is difficult for a horse to keep its natural pulse, but EQM will count and measure any irregularity and inequality; and not only in relation to the music. A horse which shows a high degree of irregularity and lack of evenness will express this in expense of synchronicity to the music. And this will always be reflected in the percentage EQM awards.
This also goes for the pirouette and many other �difficult� movements like piaffe and passage. Here again when EQM measures a high regularity and evenness, higher scores will be the verdict; a 100% score is not feasible, but an excellent pirouette is something we often see; EQM will compare this with the offered music.
The EQM system measures a horse that has lost its natural pulse or takt, but if the music was adapted to the unwanted movement it could theoretically also lead to a high percentage of �hits�. Would such a test still score a high percentage for the music and performance?
If a horse's natural �pulse� has been lost it usually refers to a disorder or irregularity in the locomotion, but that does not mean an injury has occurred. It may indicate many things and each horse has its strengths and weaknesses. But when assessing irregular movements, which could point to an injury, tension etc, the jury is always in charge, and its decision will be final and decisive.
However �making music� (a Freestyle production) for a horse that shows irregular or uneven movements, goes a bridge too far for even the EQM music consultants. It�s impossible to 'hide' these kinds of disorders or irregularities in the music; and even if someone succeeded, the EQM Music Data Analysis would recognize this in the sections on tempo, rhythm and pulse.
In addition, no listener would really appreciate such a Freestyle music production.