Southern Eights Farm is running long formats at many different levels. Maybe that’s where a BN long format was available?
[QUOTE=Winding Down;8668790]
You must not have spent much time at the finish line of the big 4* back in the day. Or watching the catastrophic falls.
Numbers do not lie.
And in my experience, neither do vets.[/QUOTE]
I would actually be hesitant to make that numbers statement. The data has never been corrected for increased numbers of riders as compared to the past. And the current FEI data set fails to provide variance or N values at each data point. As a scientific reviewer, this tend to stick out like a sore thumb in indicating that there is no significance in the presented data.
I suggest reading “How to Lie With Statistics” published in 1954.
Fifty years ago if you saw someone going into a solid fence fighting with their horse … everyone else just looked at one another and thought … oh boy … spoiled horse and stupid rider.
[QUOTE=RAyers;8668913]
I would actually be hesitant to make that numbers statement. The data has never been corrected for increased numbers of riders as compared to the past. And the current FEI data set fails to provide variance or N values at each data point. As a scientific reviewer, this tend to stick out like a sore thumb in indicating that there is no significance in the presented data.
I suggest reading “How to Lie With Statistics” published in 1954.[/QUOTE]
good one.
I only believe in the statistic I forged myself
Technical stuff, please. They are perfectly strided. I wish people would look at what it used to be, to understand were the sport has come from.
What can be more difficult than combinations that have no striding at all.
Please go to youtube, go Olympics or WE, and find the videos.
If you ask any rider of today to ride that stuff, the technical difficults, during endurance day, they would tell you, you are nuts. That s.it nobody would ride to today and could not.
Quit dreaming
So what is it then? The type of horse being used? The time allowed? The fitness level of the horse/rider? Dumb luck? If the problem is not overly technical questions, what is causing the falls? Not trying to be glib with the rapid fire questions. I was under the impression that it was just too many questions being asked at each fence, but that does not seem to be the case from what people are saying on this thread.
[QUOTE=tbchick84;8669086]
So what is it then? The type of horse being used? The time allowed? The fitness level of the horse/rider? Dumb luck? If the problem is not overly technical questions, what is causing the falls? Not trying to be glib with the rapid fire questions. I was under the impression that it was just too many questions being asked at each fence, but that does not seem to be the case from what people are saying on this thread.[/QUOTE]
I think the point is that we don’t know WHAT “it” is. We don’t even know if falls are becoming more or less frequent with reasonable statistical reliability. What we do know is that the current rate of injuries to horse and rider seems too high to be acceptable to most spectators and many participants here in 2016. Sadly, there hasn’t been a solid, concerted effort towards improving safety which has moved the dial enough to satisfy the average fan/participant of the sport. Part 1 of solving the problem would be to d
Sorry, preemptive posting.
I meant to say that the first step is to clearly define the issue we are hoping to solve (horse deaths? Rider deaths? Non-fatal catastrophic injuries? Rotational falls?) I think the sport as a whole has struggled even to define the basic safety goals. We need well-defined goals to even begin coming up with solutions. For example, the goal “no rider deaths” may have a different set of solutions than “no rotational falls.” They may overlap, but would necessitate the use of different types of experts and strategies. It would be nice if the governing bodies could articulate these concepts beyond “maximize safety.”
The good old days:
1976 Olympics eventing
1978 world championships
1989 Weribee Horse Trials (In Australia; watch the horse crash at 3:10 and the rider gets up and continues on…)
In the 1989 video, the crash at 3:10, would that fence design even be allowed today? A back rail a full foot below the front? How not fair is that to the horse?
[QUOTE=Christa P;8668058]
I am a big fan of Rush [/QUOTE]
Having read through this whole thread as well as all the others on the safety topics, I now have evidence of something I did not believe actually existed: a female Rush fan.
This is the equivalent of spotting the most elusive bird on a life list. I have heard, on occasion, claims and anecdotes of actual real live women at Rush concerts but these turn out to be mostly apocryphal.
I guess Rush would say eventing is about free will, eh?
[QUOTE=JER;8669179]
Having read through this whole thread as well as all the others on the safety topics, I now have evidence of something I did not believe actually existed: a female Rush fan.
This is the equivalent of spotting the most elusive bird on a life list. I have heard, on occasion, claims and anecdotes of actual real live women at Rush concerts but these turn out to be mostly apocryphal.
I guess Rush would say eventing is about free will, eh?[/QUOTE]
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
[QUOTE=JER;8669161]
The good old days:
1976 Olympics eventing
1978 world championships
1989 Weribee Horse Trials (In Australia; watch the horse crash at 3:10 and the rider gets up and continues on…)[/QUOTE]
How about the lawn dart at 6:20 in the last video? I can’t believe she didn’t break her neck! And she got back on a clearly lame horse and managed to finish. Lamer than Le Samari. We HAVE come a long way.
[QUOTE=blackwly;8669151]
I think the point is that we don’t know WHAT “it” is. We don’t even know if falls are becoming more or less frequent with reasonable statistical reliability. [/QUOTE]
The margin of error is distressingly narrow when we ask a horse to jump over a solid obstacle. Drop a hoof, leave part of a leg, misjudge height or width or depth – all of these things can have grave consequences.
I don’t know how eventing can ever get away from this truth.
[QUOTE=Badger;8669188]
How about the lawn dart at 6:20 in the last video? I can’t believe she didn’t break her neck! And she got back on a clearly lame horse and managed to finish. Lamer than Le Samari. We HAVE come a long way.[/QUOTE]
She literally bounced off her head! I can’t imagine she was seeing straight after that.
I recall a friends trainer getting knocked out and transported to the hospital then checking herself out ama, having her student drive her back to the event and going out xcountry on her other horse! Advanced! And the TD LET HER. Over her groom’s and husbands objections. Needless to say she ended up back in the hospital I believe after encountering the first water complex. She wasn’t right for days. At the time everyone thought that was an hilarious story (except me, her husband and the long suffering groom). Would have been around late 80s/ early 90s. Safety really is better today. The level of riding and fitness at the lower levels is arguably enough less to make up for a good chunk of that though.
[QUOTE=blackwly;8669155]
Sorry, preemptive posting.
I meant to say that the first step is to clearly define the issue we are hoping to solve (horse deaths? Rider deaths? Non-fatal catastrophic injuries? Rotational falls?) I think the sport as a whole has struggled even to define the basic safety goals. We need well-defined goals to even begin coming up with solutions. For example, the goal “no rider deaths” may have a different set of solutions than “no rotational falls.” They may overlap, but would necessitate the use of different types of experts and strategies. It would be nice if the governing bodies could articulate these concepts beyond “maximize safety.”[/QUOTE]
I’m going to go down the path towards zero horse falls. ZHF would clearly be in the best interest of our silent partners and have obvious spillover benefits for increased rider safety.
ZHF will be at odds with some of the traditions of eventing or what some consider essence of the sport. However, elimination of the long format proves that those traditions are not set in stone.
[QUOTE=JER;8669161]
The good old days:
1976 Olympics eventing
1978 world championships
1989 Weribee Horse Trials (In Australia; watch the horse crash at 3:10 and the rider gets up and continues on…)
The margin of error is distressingly narrow when we ask a horse to jump over a solid obstacle. Drop a hoof, leave part of a leg, misjudge height or width or depth – all of these things can have grave consequences.
I don’t know how eventing can ever get away from this truth.[/QUOTE]
Thank you, JER.
When or when will people of today realize that the good old days were really really not that great.
What I have found interesting in this thread and others is that often the final event is preceded by trouble sometimes several fences out and can be seen in retrospect. I’m not exactly sure what one can do about this, but in situations where the horse is traveling more and more on its forehand, giving it plenty of opportunity to refuse or duck out might be part of the solution. Isn’t this more true at Rolex?
The other thing I have found interesting is the lack of scrutiny and follow-up analysis on exactly what caused the incident in the first place. We can build all the safeguards in the world into the jumps, but until we can begin to understand some of the whys of the matter, we haven’t solved the basic problem.
[QUOTE=JER;8669161]
The good old days:
1976 Olympics eventing
1978 world championships
1989 Weribee Horse Trials (In Australia; watch the horse crash at 3:10 and the rider gets up and continues on…)[/QUOTE]
Watch Part 1 of the 1978 WCs. Karen Stives has a rotational fall, dies, is revived by a motley crew of bystanders and a state trooper? Then gets hauled off by the ambulance, aka a bunch of dudes in a van, to be treated for a major TBI. But as the announcer cheerfully informs us, she’s riding again in less than a month!
As late as the 90s I recall people being hauled off course by the emergency crew unconscious and coming back to ride another horse the same day. And the TD LETTING THEM. Even over other people’s objections.
[QUOTE=betonbill;8669583]
What I have found interesting in this thread and others is that often the final event is preceded by trouble sometimes several fences out and can be seen in retrospect. I’m not exactly sure what one can do about this, but in situations where the horse is traveling more and more on its forehand, giving it plenty of opportunity to refuse or duck out might be part of the solution. Isn’t this more true at Rolex?
The other thing I have found interesting is the lack of scrutiny and follow-up analysis on exactly what caused the incident in the first place. We can build all the safeguards in the world into the jumps, but until we can begin to understand some of the whys of the matter, we haven’t solved the basic problem.[/QUOTE]
Betonbill- I mentioned in the other thread (“What are we doing?”) that there needs to be some sort of NTSB-like investigation process involved. BFNE reminded me that there is a report done by the officials/TD/Safety Officer that goes back to USEA/USEF, using information from interviews/photos/video/etc. However, none of that raw info is shared with the public (for good reason!). Usually the only findings/“conclusion” we get is in the form of a press release and the rumor mill. If there was a way for the investigative committee to release their findings and a “this is what likely happened, and here are our recommendations on how to prevent it from happening again” report, it would do the community a lot of good. There is no transparency with the USEA/USEF on accident reporting, and it causes people to assume, speculate, and ultimately feel like nothing is being done (even though it is).
