This scenario should not happen. If the tester can't be impartial then they should excuse themselves from scoring that person's horse.

Case in point, the cert. I attended a year ago had Dave Ferguson as the examiner and he ended up being the person scoring my practical along with another tester. Dave and I had a bit of a rough history before that time. We had argued quite a bit on here as well as the AFA site when it was working over leadership issues while he was president. I knew this going in but he didn't realize it until I had already started the practical portion. At that point he had the tester question me about the fact we had a history and if I liked, Dave would excuse himself from scoring my test and have another tester take his place. I said I didn't have a problem if Dave didn't, and that I expected him to do his job as it was suppose to be done per the AFA regulations for examiners. I figured that if he was a man of his word and really believed in the cert. process he would do an impartial job. That he did and low and behold I passed that section of the cert.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that if the examiners and testers can't be impartial and leave their personal feelings out of the scoring process, then they shouldn't be examiners or testers.

To my knowledge, the AFA's tests are pass/fail.

cuttinshoer in gray new stuff in black

These same people that enter these competitions also do a very good job picking what judge likes their horse or style, and they enter in the shows where those judges are so they can win and not lose any money.

If you say it happens with the horse show set, I guess it does - but I never passed up a rodeo because of a judge; furthermore, I don't know anyone who ever did.

It happens in halter and wp in Indiana a lot.

I studied my butt off three years ago to take the CF but due to my back on a good day I might make time, on an average day I won't, I didn't want to take the chance of losing my money.

Fair enough, but that doesn't have damn-all to do with the fairness of the test's evaluation.

I posted that so I wouldn't get slammed for not stepping up and taking the test, which I haven't yet but maybe someday I can. evidently it didn't work

Having said that lets say hypothetically I know Rick Burten and he likes my work, but Tom Stovall on the other hand doesn't care a whole lot for it. Which one do you think I'm going to go take my test with.

Assuming we are typical AFA judges, whether Rick or I "like" the work you've done in the past is irrelevant to today's judging. I think I can speak for both of us when I say the ONLY work that would have ANY influence on our evaluation would be the work you've done on the test horse - and I sincerely hope that would be the case, no matter who had the pencil!

Yes I agree with you,Sorry for using yours and Rick's names only ones I could think of at time, I tried to cover any hard feelings by using the word Hypothetically, what I was trying to point out was the comparison of show judges to examiners, which I think you started that topic.


That to me diminishes all the credibility of the test.

If favoritism exists, it diminishes the credibility of the testers, not the test.

Yes, but in the eyes of a horse owner they may feel differently than you and is that not what you guys are trying to accomplish, more relevancy to the horse owner leading to a better organization for a farrier to belong to.

I have never taken a test in my life where scoring could be changed after the fact.

You've never rode rough stock.

The answer to that is yes I rode bulls until I figured out I wasn't any good at it and the reason for the great back, and then became a bullfighter for a few years,and then got smart and became a pickup man.

I don't have any farrier credentials after my name, but I am a NCCO Certified Crane Operator, Certified Forklift Operator, and OSHA Competent Person in the excavating and building industry, not sure if their right on that one, but I passed the test:D, so I have taken a couple of different certification tests and you either pass or you don't.

To my knowledge, the AFA's tests are pass/fail.

Crane Cert. is based same way as the AFA' cert, written plus practical. After taking the practical no one went back through and re-evaluated the scores as was discussed earlier as a problem with the AFA test, I guess I didn't word that statement correctly, and maybe it might help to set a standardized format for testing by looking at other formats outside the farrier industry that are recognized professionally across the U.S. except in Chicago.

Why can their not be a test where you determine what size shoe your going to use for the horse, and set standards of break over goes here, x amount of expansion, proper nailing and finishing, x amount of shoe past buttress, x-ray to see how close to balance they are, etc. and if your of x amount of millimeters either way you get deducted. And if that shoes not right for the horse you get to see how good they are at pulling shoes.

Without standardized criteria and rigid guidelines for quantification, there is no possibility of objective evaluation.

Is that not what I was trying to suggest.

Tom, you need to relook at the test score sheet there are three sections. Each broken down in to individual areas that are scored on a scale of 1 - 10. When a section is completed the points are added togeather to optain an over all score for that section. When the test is complete all the sections are added together to get a final score. One has to have a total score of 196 min to pass the test.