I read an interesting, and surprising newsletter from the PBR. Needless to say, I almost fell out of my chair. Lo and behold, they have finally decided to do something about the judging. What was Jeff Shearer thinking? Or was he thinking? Was he distracted? Sheesh. In case you missed the event on Versus, I will include the link. One other thing that surprised me is that they actually allowed fans comments and opinions.
I remember the time I had posted the exact same thing there that I have here, and my comments were deleted. Now how is that for 'sweeping dirt under the rug'?
I have to clarify one point that I made in my earlier blog. I said I would continue to watch the PBR to see which rider the 'good old boys' decided to let win this year. I have to rephrase that. In retrospect I realized that I it sounded as if I was discounting the abilities of the riders and bulls. That is certainly not the case. I scanned through the various comments on the official web-site and was interested to read that others thought the same..that the judging was very unfair.....but they put it a lot better than I did , I believe.
Not counting the gross mistake Jeff Shearer made when he gave Jacoby a 18, when all the other judges gave at least a 20 and above, there has always been favoritism shown to certain cowboys. When Justin McBride won, it was because of two things, he rode extremely well all season and they were good rides. BUT.....throughout the year one of his closest competitors, Marchi was given just enough points to keep him close but at least half a point shy of what he needed. The second time McBride won, he rode extremely well all season but during the finals he missed several of his bulls. His two closest competitors, Marchi and Mauney rode well, BUT just a half a point shy of what they needed to get to the championship round at the finals. Coincidence? I think not. There are many ways to 'skin a cat' as the saying goes.
Most times when I hear an announcer say: 'He needs an 85.50 to take the lead'. I realize that if it is someone the judges don't want to catch their 'favorite', likely as not, that rider, no matter who he is, will get just shy of what he needs, say an 85.25. This has happened so many times I've lost count.
Don't get me wrong, Kody Lostroh worked hard as did Justin McBride and they both rode exceptionally well. They earned 99% of the points they got. It is the other poor guys I feel bad for...they rode well and they always were well shy of the points they should have been awarded.
I never meant to imply that the winners of the finals or the championship were not deserving, had not worked hard, had not ridden through pain, had not ridden well, had not deserved to win, I'm simply saying that the judges gave them that one little push that made them keep ahead, while they stymied the others by holding them back that one little bit. As Ty likes to say ,' that was a text-book ride right there'. No Doubt. Let's face it, the judges can't be so blatant as to award high scores for sorry rides, no matter who they want to win, the riders have to give a good ride, but when it comes to shaving or adding a bit to the scores, the judges do it covertly.
Sad to say that if Ty and the others are hoping this latest controversy and punishment will stop the tide of complaints that there are big problems in the PBR, his is in for a huge surprise. We all make mistakes...so why do the riders get fined 500 for challenging a score? Shouldn't the rider either pay nothing, or better yet, the PBR award the RIDER if the replay is in favor of the rider???? Do they do this and I missed it?
My hat is off to all the past and present World Finals and World Champions. You are among the best, and you deserved to win and I congratulate you.
If it were I, I would hope the judging was fair and that way I could know for sure that I won hands down. After all, what good is winning a horse race if your two closest competitors are carrying sumo wrestlers?
PBR finds inconsistencies with judge's score
- Locker Room
- how it works