Menu

Stay in Touch
Sign up for ENews
Subscribe Now

Unlimited access >

Menu

Badminton anyone?

Eventing
#241

I was able to look at down to 2009, 2008 did not have totals to work with. By the numbers:

[TABLE=“width: 325”]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Not Continued after xc[/TD]
[TD]Total Completed[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“align: right”]2008[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]37.04[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]69.23[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“align: right”]2009[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]37.50[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]72.73[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“align: right”]2010[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]48.00[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]67.57[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“align: right”]2011[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]32.14[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]75.68[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“align: right”]2013[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]27.69[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]78.31[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD=“align: right”]2014[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]55.42[/TD]
[TD=“align: right”]38.55[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

While there was movement, the general trend was averaging around 70% total completion and mid 30% for riders eliminated. I could break the eliminations by retire vs E, but kept it general in this case. Maybe not great, but by some views, reasonable.

In 2014 that was flipped. Had I seen numbers all over the place than by all means “That’s just eventing”. When the numbers trend for a while then a sudden change, that is not normal. At what number does a organization (and members) say, this is not good for our sport. How many owners and riding teams want to spend some major dollars when they could start to look at lowering success rates for completion.

Apply these kinds of numbers to the lower levels of this sport and watch how quickly people start to drop out. At a recent Event they had only 2 of 9 riders complete at training (HT) while almost all T3D horses completed. Do we shrug and say “guess they didn’t measure up” or maybe look at why and make a correction so in the future the success or failure is not did you survive a course, but how well you finished on time and penalty. That when people attend an event the general odds of competing and completing are fair.

When we accept a course that created such conditions at this level, then at some point that acceptance filters down and it could have a negative impact on the sport as a whole. Understand, this is not an viewpoint of “dumbing down” the challenge, it is one that says take a look, question when numbers go against a trend.

riderboy
The attrition rate doesn’t bother me

It should. When entries start to drop at top shows, because the trend of attrition is increasing, when courses get more technical, when they start to eliminate more riders to the point where people don’t want to spend the money on maybe finishing and shows start to cancel for lack of entries…attrition should damn well bother you. It bothers me and I’m a nobody, but a nobody who loves this sport enough to challenge even gods to ask, show me you are doing right for the whole sport. When we look at injury rates as a sign of success or fail we are not doing the sport a service. It may be a more dangerous sport than others, but if we maximize successful completions, then naturally injury rates would be low.

This sport does not exist because of the Kings and Pitts, and Martins, it exists because of the masses of people who support those that make it to the top. Ignore attrition of any kind at the long term peril of this sport.

#242

The thing that will kill this sport faster than anything else, IMO, is that everyone plops around safely at XC and then Eventing becomes a dressage test, with perhaps the odd SJ rail coming into play. A tough, but safe, XC (“safe” is a relative term for this sport) is essential. Still doesn’t bother me. Nor did it bother any of the 6 of us who XC schooled yesterday and talked about Badminton. We, “the masses”, stand in awe of the Kings, Pitts and Duttons. Seriously, do you think the massive crowds at Badminton on XC day would be there to see riders shlep over 15 logs in a circle?

#243

[QUOTE=Madeline;7573316]
I was interested to see many riders retire after one refusal or a couple of shaky fences. I have NO gripe with pulling up when you are out of contention, but I would love to know how many of the 18 retirees said, “This isn’t working for me, I’m not going to have a top 10 finish, and I’m stopping now so I can play another day.” This tells me that maybe the course wasn’t too hard, but that the riders are getting smarter. And that would be a Good Thing.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. If you read a lot of the blogs and the twitter reports of the riders that pulled up…most did because they felt their horse was tired and not jumping well. THAT is horsemanship. To know you horse…and to know when to raise your hand and walk off. At the 4* level…it really is NOT uncommon for a lot to not finish because of riders putting up their hands. This is very different to me then lots not finishing because of horse falls. It looked to me like only one fence was causing a suprising number of bad jumps (the Owls hole or what ever that key hole was called).

I also thought it was very telling that all but 2 horses that completed, presented and passed the jog on Sunday. That is a sign that riders were making the right choices. It is often a much higher percentage that do not present.

You can not control the weather. This was a solid 4* course designed to run in decent (not perfect) weather…when weather increases the difficulty, I’m glad to see so many riders making the right choices for their horses.

#244

One assumes that they will leave the course very nearly unchanged next year. Then it will be possible to evaluate the course fairly if the weather is decent.

One thing that I find odd about this is that Della Chiesa (who by the way is not only the chairman of the eventing committee but also an Italian Marquise and has doctorate in economics) designed the Course for the European Championships at Pratoni del Vivaro in 2007 and is described as their “resident designer”, but hasn’t done other non-Italian courses that I can find. Does anyone remember how the 2007 Pratoni course rode? He doesn’t seem to have the Big Name Designer credentials of many other course designers who travel the world, and his experience is mostly being TD at many large games and events. If he’s the resident designer for Pratoni, how have his courses at the 3* generally ridden?

In fact, does anyone know if he’s ridden 4* himself? The highest I’ve been able to find for him was Boekelo 3* in 1992, where he finished 9th and 14th. I couldn’t find a reference to him at any Championships either, although he was the Italian eventing alternate for the 1992 Olympics.

Of course as TD for many big Games and events he’s seen lots of courses.

http://fei.org/news/2007-fei-european-eventing-championship-new-man-gives-new-look-traditional-course

I just looked at the results for the 2007 Championships, and only one horse went double clear in what was beautiful weather. All the rest had time faults.
https://data.fei.org/Result/ResultList.aspx?p=CE51C179AB5692E7B6B97C250CEB06FCEFECEAC0E82F1E4290ED85B0CEA28B77

There is some video of the 2007 competition available on Youtube.

#245

I don’t know if it’s new math, but all your numbers except 2014 add up to more than 100%.

#246

I do not think anyone is saying this should be the result at a novice event. These are fine results for a 4* Event. Here are numbers:

2014 Badminton:

Starters: 83

Started XC: 78

Percentage started XC: 93.98%
Retired on XC: 18
Percentage of XC starters that retired: 23.08%
Retired after 0 or 1 stop: 10
Percentage of XC starters that retired after 0 or 1 stop: 12.82%
Eliminated on XC: 25
Percentage of XC Starters eliminated: 30.12%
Fall of Rider: 12
Fall of Horse: 7
Withdrawn after XC: 3
Finishers: 32
Percentage finished: 38.55%

#247

What killed Eventing was the removal of the long format, but then that ship has sailed. There are/were ways to make the sport more then just a dressage test, instead you and the gang of 6 seem to like the version that just leaves bodies strewn around (metaphorically speaking of course)

We, “the masses”, stand in awe of the Kings, Pitts and Duttons.

actually I believe it was you and the gang of 6, I think there were other “masses” that did actually have concerns. I don’t want to just stand in awe, I want them to be an inspiration and right now, those that choose to retire a horse because the course was unsafe have just as much respect from me as those who completed. I would prefer to see them all complete. I figure we all respect the hell out of top riders so I don’t think that is the issue or question.

Seriously, do you think the massive crowds at Badminton on XC day would be there to see riders shlep over 15 logs in a circle?

Of course not, but do they want to see falls, spills and thrills such as are posted on youtube. If so then why bother with any safety equipment, why bother setting limits on jump sizes. Let’s make Eventing courses such that the jumps just get bigger and harder until only the bravest strongest can even finish. Let’s make each fence a multiple combination so us masses can ohh and ahh at the magical ability of our gods… till they fall then we gasp and cheer or perhaps feel bad (depending on the outcome).

When I raced I didn’t hope for a squall line to come and wipe out half the field simply because they were better sailors then I, instead I learned how to be a better sailor. You don’t like teams finishing on a dressage score, then change how scoring is done for all phases instead of secretly hoping some folks won’t make it so others can score better.

Me, I’d put dressage at the end, lengthen the cross country courses without making so many technical questions (can you make time after 16 or 17 minutes of hard work), adding variation heights to stadium to force more balance adjustments (jump an increasing height line or alternating), then, if they still have a horse on the final day, perform dressage. Now let’s see if they can use dressage to improve their score, not define it. This mass of one would rather see 80+ entries ride down center line on the last day than 20 some do stadium poorly. But that’s just me.

#248

[QUOTE=Madeline;7573432]
I don’t know if it’s new math, but all your numbers except 2014 add up to more than 100%.[/QUOTE]
It was rough math, done with a lot of manual excel work. If you want I can either post a google drive url to a spread sheet I created, you can do the numbers yourself, or you can understand I was showing trends and 2014 did not fit the trend.

I did not count those that either did not make final inspection or were withdrawn after xc country for I was looking at just xc elimination in one number and overall completion in another. They would normally not add up.

#249

It looked to me like only one fence was causing a suprising number of bad jumps (the Owls hole or what ever that key hole was called)
.

That fence was a new one last year and, to everyone’s surprise, rode really well and caused absolutely no problems. This year it had a skinny afterwards. People seemed to ride with that in mind: a lot of stops as the horses lacked sufficient impulsion for the step and then the hole. Riders got better as the day progressed. Not really a horse problem.

#250

I should add…that I would have rather seen all the horses who set out on xc come home well (maybe most with time and a scattering of jump penalties). I don’t like any horse falls…but a few pop offs by riders is fine in my book. I don’t want eventing to be a dressage show…and a 4* should be a damn hard test in all three phases.

I do think that most of the trouble this past weekend looked to be rider errors…and weather related.

#251

[QUOTE=Willesdon;7573480]
.

That fence was a new one last year and, to everyone’s surprise, rode really well and caused absolutely no problems. This year it had a skinny afterwards. People seemed to ride with that in mind: a lot of stops as the horses lacked sufficient impulsion for the step and then the hole. Riders got better as the day progressed. Not really a horse problem.[/QUOTE]

I agree…it didn’t look like a horse issue…many of the problems on course did really look like rider mistakes. You could see it coming for many of them.

#252

[QUOTE=bornfreenowexpensive;7573524]
I agree…it didn’t look like a horse issue…many of the problems on course did really look like rider mistakes. You could see it coming for many of them.[/QUOTE]

Or slips or sticky footing or the horse jumped too big or too small. Remember people said that it did not ride as it walked. (Very odd phrasing that). The course left no room for any errors in the combinations and related fences.

What’s the technique for controlling the scope of a jump?

#253

Profile of della Chiesa;
http://www.countrylife.co.uk/countryside/article/531244/Badminton-appoints-Italian-course-designer.html

MK announcement;
http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/exclusive_mary_king_to_retire_olympic_horse_1_3596911

#254

[QUOTE=vineyridge;7573570]

What’s the technique for controlling the scope of a jump?[/QUOTE]

The type of canter that you come into the fence, how much leg off you give off the ground at the base, how much release in the air–your body position on approach and landing. You absolutely can cue a horse to just step over this fence, jump flatter, jump into the air more. At these levels as well, you can have a horse that understands the cue that something is on the back side and put your feet down quick.

But it can be a rider error not hold the correct line, to ride too backwards to a fence (because of the accuracy question)…to have not saved enough of their horse earlier on in the course. In the end…90% of the time most issues are rider related.

#255

[QUOTE=JP60;7573449]
What killed Eventing was the removal of the long format, but then that ship has sailed. There are/were ways to make the sport more then just a dressage test, instead you and the gang of 6 seem to like the version that just leaves bodies strewn around (metaphorically speaking of course)[/QUOTE]

This is such a bizarre thing to say. That you can slate Badminton this year for being dangerous and hark back to an era where people could fall and continue, the ground was not prepared as it is now, there were no frangible pins, horses had to carry lead weights and horses were allowed bute to get through the trot up…

Put down the rose tinted specs and run the stats of completion rates from then - remembering to eliminate all those that fell.

With regard to lengthening the XC. I assume the ‘long format’ you refer to was not the ‘old’ long format of having phases A-E? Phase E (called The Run In) was dropped eons ago as being archaic, unnecessary and unfair. Great call wanting it back…

I don’t understand your reference to ‘secretly hoping some folks won’t make it’, maybe someone PM’d you, but I can’t see anyone here ‘hoping’ people don’t make it or insinuating there’s bad sportsmanship in the sport. If you believe that, you’d best go back to sailing as you’ve fundamentally misunderstood the eventer’s mentality.

#256

[QUOTE=Doodlebug1;7573684]
, but I can’t see anyone here ‘hoping’ people don’t make it or insinuating there’s bad sportsmanship in the sport.[/QUOTE]
Lord, I did not say that nor talk about bad sportsmanship. This medium sucks to have any understandable dialog for people either read too damn literal, skim, or maybe just spin the words based on whether they like a “person” or not.

People post that they don’t like that a show where the finish is determined by dressage. Okay, then how to you stop that? Make the course harder you might say. How hard? Hard enough where instead of a field finishing, not everyone does. Whether it is rider, horse or some combination, make it so there is a percentage that may not complete the course or finish with penalties. How hard? It’s rhetorical, because that cannot be answered.

Yes, clearly I want to go back to no vests, light helmets, fall and pop back on simply because I mentioned Long Format. Is it possible that you can have an ABCD format and still have helmets, vests, and rules that continue to say gee, you fell off, you stop now. Funny enough, I just completed one and it was the best experience I ever had. As I also stated, that format is dead (at the top). As I never even heard of “E”, sure, I advocated for something I don’t even know about.

My suggestions, such as they were only reflected a view that instead of focusing on more and more technical style courses, that courses be more open, but slightly longer so riders would have to manage both the horse and time better, maybe not all doing so. I’m not the one who asked why were horses not fit, but in reading one rider on course, it was not the horse, it was the footing.

As to your last comment to me, FU. Seriously, I am about as mad as can be. I do not mind discussion and even disagreement, but FU for being so arrogant and to tell me to “go back to sailing” and I misunderstand the eventer’s mentality. I don’t have to answer or defend to you sir, but while I started late in life learning not only to ride, but to event, I also have had my share of falls, broken ribs, shattered nerves, frustrations, trials. I have put my heart, blood, and money into this sport, into being the best I can be while taking care of my horses along the way. Your arrogant viewpoint does only one thing for me, reminds me why I should never get involved here, and it reminds me that amongst all the good people I’ve met in this sport, and there have been many, there are those that don’t rise to the same level. interpret that how you will.

#257

What killed Eventing was the removal of the long format, but then that ship has sailed. There are/were ways to make the sport more then just a dressage test, instead you and the gang of 6 seem to like the version that just leaves bodies strewn around (metaphorically speaking of course)

Eventing died? Why does no one tell me these things! And there’s really no gang, more like a mob.

Of course not, but do they want to see falls, spills and thrills such as are posted on youtube. If so then why bother with any safety equipment, why bother setting limits on jump sizes. Let’s make Eventing courses such that the jumps just get bigger and harder until only the bravest strongest can even finish.

No need for hyperbole.

This mass of one would rather see 80+ entries ride down center line on the last day than 20 some do stadium poorly. But that’s just me.

If 100% of the XC starters at Badminton made it around to the finish, it would not be Badminton. It would not be Eventing, because that doesn’t happen 100% of the time at the lower levels.

#258

Who suggested that what is being sought by critics on this thread is 100% completion?

It’s so much easier to argue with the silliest version of someone’s concerns than the real ones. Those being, as I understand them, that the combination of course and weather at Badminton on Saturday was hard enough to be scary and dangerous-looking, and very experienced, best in the world horse and rider pairs went ass over teakettle at a rather surprising rate.

While no one suggested that 100% completion is being sought here, it doesn’t seem wildly unreasonable to suggest that what we saw looked bad enough to raise eyebrows and to raise the question of whether the course, in those conditions, was more hazardous than one would like to see. Just because no one broke their necks doesn’t prove the course didn’t look a bit much. Are Mary King and Peter Atkins just not BAMF enough for the flavor of eventing you all idealize?

Like I said before, if that rotational fall had produced a more harmful outcome, then advocates for this course’s appropriateness would be in a whole 'nother kinda shitstorm, and would be backpedaling as fast as you could.

#259

[QUOTE=Doodlebug1;7573684]
I don’t understand your reference to ‘secretly hoping some folks won’t make it’, maybe someone PM’d you, but I can’t see anyone here ‘hoping’ people don’t make it or insinuating there’s bad sportsmanship in the sport. If you believe that, you’d best go back to sailing as you’ve fundamentally misunderstood the eventer’s mentality.[/QUOTE]

But you did say that… and I didn’t tell you to go back to sailing - I said IF you believe that, you’re best off going back to sailing.

You seem to now be saying you don’t believe there is bad sportsmanship, or ‘secretly hoping some folks won’t make it’; so there’s not a problem is there :wink: (apart from the fact you called me ‘sir’, but as you don’t know me and my D cup, I’ll let you off that one).

#260

No offense meant to anyone, but Burghley last year seems to have cracked the nut on what a modern, short format 4* can be. It was not a dressage competition; the top five would have been in the top five with or without the coefficient. It seemed to be tough, but fair. They had 42 finishers out of 68 starters, so just under 2/3 got round.

Although you might say that Burghley really WAS a dressage competition because the first five after dressage ended up being the first five at the end. The dressage score range was very similar, with this year’s Badminton’s being a slight bit better.

So would y’all want to say that Burghley last year was not a real 4*? Not hard enough? XC not influential enough? From 2010, Burghley seems to average about 2/3 finishing; That also seems to be the historical average for Badminton, at least as long as I’ve been crunching numbers.

Get your Digital Subscription here - only $29.99 / year

Subscribe here
See gift options

Sign up to our monthly newsletter!

By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.

Copyright © 2023 The Chronicle of the Horse