WTF Are We Doing?

[brindille]

[QUOTE=Jealoushe;8160397]
Worth repeating. What does it say when it is different horses? I feel the same way, huge fan for so long, not getting the warm and fuzzies right now. Have also heard the horses were not in a fitness program one would expect at that level, but that is not something I can say I have witnessed with my own eyes.[/QUOTE]

Indeed. She’s still my fave, and is such an amazing person to interact with, but today’s release about being in the saddle in a few weeks just makes me nervous. I’m not a professional and just a lowly amateur, but don’t see how a horse can be ready for a four star after just one CIC*** run in an 8 month period, especially when the rider has just given birth (I’m pregnant now, and no matter who you are, you lose core muscle tone). It’s unfortunate because the fine line between wild success and tragedy is often a matter of luck in eventing…

[Divine_Comedy]

For those asking about reverse qualifications, I wrote in detail about this subject for EN earlier this year. Shockingly, many people ignored it and were totally surprised when it happened to them.

The Elephant in the Room: Reverse Qualifications

I also wrote about not persisting with horses who perhaps do not want to play on the cross country at the level we wish them to. I’m hoping more people read and digested and thought about this one, and perhaps took it to heart. I wrote this in about fifteen minutes after Conahy’s Courage was euthanized at Red Hills.

The Will to Walk Away

[Jealoushe]

The horse will lose qualifications through FEI rules only if any of the following take place:
Elimination three times at FEI competitions within a rolling 12-month period for any combination of the following eliminations: dangerous riding, accumulation of refusals, rider falls, horse falls.
Dangerous riding must be one of the three eliminations to fall under FEI rules only; otherwise, see below.
Elimination two times in consecutive FEI competitions for any of the following eliminations: dangerous riding, accumulation of refusals, rider falls, horse falls.
Horse falls must be only one of the two eliminations to fall under FEI rules only; if two horse falls occur consecutively, see below.
The horse will lose qualifications through USEF rules only if any of the following take place:
Elimination three times at either a combination of FEI competitions and USEF horse trials, or at USEF horse trials only within a rolling 12-month period for any combination of the following: accumulation of refusals, rider falls, horse falls.
At least one of the three eliminations must be at a USEF horse trials to fall under USEF rules only; if all three eliminations occur at FEI competitions, see below.
Eliminations two times at any combination of FEI competitions and USEF horse trials within a rolling 12-month period for the following: horse falls.
The two eliminations must not be at consecutive FEI competitions to fall under USEF rules only; if both eliminations occur at consecutive FEI competitions, see below.
The horse will lose qualifications through both USEF and FEI rules if any of the following take place:
Elimination three times at FEI competitions within a rolling 12-month period for any combination of the following eliminations: accumulation of refusal, rider falls, horse falls.
Dangerous riding must not be one of the three eliminations to fall under both FEI and USEF rules; if otherwise, see above.
Elimination two times in consecutive FEI competitions for the following: horse falls.

A bit hard to follow, but would this mean JP would lose her qualification for two falls consecutively, or they have to be on the same horse?

Any updated link to those at risk from FEI?

Both excellent articles.

[Divine_Comedy]

The FEI updates this list weekly, usually on Thursdays.

Warning List of Possible Reverse Qualifications

And yeah it’s hard to follow because quite frankly, it’s more complicated than it appears. And the reverse qualification only occurs if the issues are on the same horse, as technically it is only the horse that loses qualifications.

[Jealoushe]

ok that makes sense. Interesting to see the list. Thanks.

[FLeventer]

Has anyone read this article? It looked like at one point the USEA and USEF was willing to make a change. Heres a glimpse at proposed ideas.

*If a horse has a rotational fall, horse and rider are suspended from competing for three or six months.

2. If a horse has a rotational fall, horse and rider lose their qualification at the level at which they are competing.

3. If a rider falls off on the course, he or she is eliminated.

4. Open oxers on courses at every level are made with frangible parts.

5. If a horse falls related to a jump, both horse and rider are suspended from competing for one month.

So the one fall rule came into effect as well as the pins, but none of the others? These would have been a step in the right direction. They could have saved people/horses and given riders a chance to slow down after a major fall and think or reconsuder their plan for the horses and the show year instead of rushing off and training for the event next weekend.

Link: http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/officials-respond-aftermath-rolex-kentucky-tragedies

Also the article about Amanda that Danny wrote is on the mark. Completely on the mark. I feel as though it pertains to JP as well and her fall. Do you think she would be out doing a 3* or a 2* so quickly after pregnancy is the PanAms werent this summer? I think she may have taken it slower. I dont know though, but it seemed like she was in such a rush to get back and have good runs at the qualifiers.

I like JP. She has never been anything but nice to me at the events and when Ive chatted with her in person. She is funny and always wears a smile. She encourages her students and is there at xc warmup even at the end of the looong day with a laugh and politeness. I would have been upset to lose her as a rider.

[devvie]

[QUOTE=Divine Comedy;8161164]
For those asking about reverse qualifications, I wrote in detail about this subject for EN earlier this year. Shockingly, many people ignored it and were totally surprised when it happened to them.

The Elephant in the Room: Reverse Qualifications

I also wrote about not persisting with horses who perhaps do not want to play on the cross country at the level we wish them to. I’m hoping more people read and digested and thought about this one, and perhaps took it to heart. I wrote this in about fifteen minutes after Conahy’s Courage was euthanized at Red Hills.

The Will to Walk Away[/QUOTE]

Both great articles – and you mention in the second one about retirements on course to avoid loss of qualification, and now I always notice those on the results pages. Thank you for your writings.

[Fred]

[QUOTE=Manahmanah;8160000]
Different horses though. It is worth a mention that the horse that fell at rolex (alr) wrecked a Frangible fence both at rolex this year and had a similar wreck last year - I forget where the fall was last year, but it was scary. (they didn’t fall but crashed the pin) It caused a big debate on social media. Fwiw, this horse has moved up the levels mighty quickly in my opinion.

The horse she fell on at JF also had a fall last year.

I don’t know what to make of this. She is one of my favorite riders but I do wonder with all of these falls if she isn’t pushing herself or her animals a little too hard.[/QUOTE]

I wonder if you might indicate where the “big debate on social media” was, I didn’t see it.

[Divine_Comedy]

[QUOTE=devvie;8161248]
Both great articles – and you mention in the second one about retirements on course to avoid loss of qualification, and now I always notice those on the results pages. Thank you for your writings.[/QUOTE]

Thank you. I don’t want people to misinterpret my article as thinking retirements should be counted towards reverse quals; there should always be a punishment-free way to leave the course or people will push harder to continue instead of quitting on a bad day. But individuals should take responsibility, as Danny wrote, and if they are retiring every time out, they need to re-evaluate the horse’s (or their) readiness for the level.

[Jealoushe]

[QUOTE=FLeventer;8161235]
Has anyone read this article? It looked like at one point the USEA and USEF was willing to make a change. Heres a glimpse at proposed ideas.

So the one fall rule came into effect as well as the pins, but none of the others? These would have been a step in the right direction. They could have saved people/horses and given riders a chance to slow down after a major fall and think or reconsuder their plan for the horses and the show year instead of rushing off and training for the event next weekend.

Link: http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/officials-respond-aftermath-rolex-kentucky-tragedies

Also the article about Amanda that Danny wrote is on the mark. Completely on the mark. I feel as though it pertains to JP as well and her fall. Do you think she would be out doing a 3* or a 2* so quickly after pregnancy is the PanAms werent this summer? I think she may have taken it slower. I dont know though, but it seemed like she was in such a rush to get back and have good runs at the qualifiers.

I like JP. She has never been anything but nice to me at the events and when Ive chatted with her in person. She is funny and always wears a smile. She encourages her students and is there at xc warmup even at the end of the looong day with a laugh and politeness. I would have been upset to lose her as a rider.[/QUOTE]

The fact that she is planning on riding in week or two makes me think she may still have plans to ride for the Pan Ams. I hope not.

I know the UL riders and supporters hate then they are under such scrutiny, but maybe the scrutiny is needed a bit to help the riders stop and think if their choices are really best for the horse and rider long term.

[JER]

I know this is slightly OT but, after re-reading DW’s article, I realized there was something that wasn’t clear to me.

Can someone fill in for me the general scenario of AW’s fall? I know she had a head injury, and that – I think – she was thrown clear, but DW’s saying that the horse wasn’t ready for Advanced made me wonder what exactly happened.

Not being ghoulish, just trying to fill in a blank in the story for me.

[kdow]

[QUOTE=JER;8160794]
So her air vest didn’t deploy BEFORE she hit the ground.

But is she saying that it did not deploy AFTER? Presumably her horse stood up, and therefore broke the lanyard, which would have caused inflation.

Or is it the case that the vest failed to deploy despite the lanyard being broken?

The sudden, rapid inflation of an air vest post-impact could adversely impact rib fractures and internal injuries. I say ‘could’ because there are other parallels in mechanisms of injury and emergency medicine, and the air bag vendors have failed to provide evidence in this regard.

If the vest didn’t deploy at all, was it defective in some way? Does anyone know the failure rate of a Point Two. Someone posted that there were 3 malfunction incidents at Badminton, which, if typical, would indicate a significant rate of failure.[/QUOTE]

One of my fears with all the talk of an international standard for vests is that somehow this will end up involving an air vest even though proper studies still haven’t been done with regards to equestrian events, and they still haven’t addressed questions like the risk of the vest inflating AFTER an injury has occurred. Do not want to be forced to wear one, no thank you.

[JER]

[QUOTE=NeverTime;8161020]
There certainly was a lot of talk about it at the time, but IIRC, the MRs were turned to TEs because the fence was taken off the course partway through the division in response to the problems. Because the fence was removed in response to the falls, and not all horses had to jump it, I believe they felt this was the best way to handle the situation fairly.[/QUOTE]

But if we are to accept that all horse falls are serious and, as such, are a serious factor in both horse welfare and eventing safety, to whom is it really ‘fair’ to convert a safety/welfare issue to a scoring issue?

(I’m not arguing with you, NeverTime, as you were reporting what happened. Rather, I’m making the point that ‘safety’ may be compromised here.)

[FLeventer]

[QUOTE=JER;8161310]
I know this is slightly OT but, after re-reading DW’s article, I realized there was something that wasn’t clear to me.

Can someone fill in for me the general scenario of AW’s fall? I know she had a head injury, and that – I think – she was thrown clear, but DW’s saying that the horse wasn’t ready for Advanced made me wonder what exactly happened.

Not being ghoulish, just trying to fill in a blank in the story for me.[/QUOTE]

According to the articles ive read it was fence 3 at fair hill so it should bave been something simple like a table or oxer since it was at the start of the course. I think she went through clear on another horse. Horse fell, but no article says how more than he tripped. Does explain if it was rotational, hung a leg, or fell on landing but she was thrown and landed on head. Horse was fine. She was in a coma and later pulled from life support.

Cant find more info related to the fall.

[JER]

Thanks, FLeventer. Another nice COTHer PMd me some details too, so I get the general picture now.

[pwynnnorman]

[QUOTE=goodmorning;8157418]

… Too many technological advances in many other sports have made things safer - eventing is not the exception to this rule. :([/QUOTE]

But I wonder, Goodmorning, if maybe eventing IS the exception. Not even in the horse world is there a competition like eventing–and all those technological advances you mentioned still don’t do much to connect horse brain to rider brain more effectively. And how many other sports have the variables eventing has, like the terrain, the weather, the footing, the crowd placement (at the upper levels)…and, of course, a four-legged partner.

You just can’t technie eventing into being a safer sport, IMO. Sure, you can do things to protect horses and riders better, policy-wise and equipment-wise, but I don’t think anything will ever stop horses from falling. Not ever.

[Vic_007]

[QUOTE=Jealoushe;8161277]
The fact that she is planning on riding in week or two makes me think she may still have plans to ride for the Pan Ams. I hope not.

I know the UL riders and supporters hate then they are under such scrutiny, but maybe the scrutiny is needed a bit to help the riders stop and think if their choices are really best for the horse and rider long term.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, she needs to take a step back before something more serious happens. She has a new baby, a barn full of students doing decent. I think her reckless luck is taking a bit of a bad turn right now and I would be very sad to see something worse happen to her. It does not matter who you are, having babies and getting injured compromises your body and you need to heal and have proper physio.

[kdow]

Having read the article linked, I have one point of disagreement - I agree totally that there is rider and individual responsibility involved (riders need to be willing to say ‘not today’ or pull up, coaches need to say ‘no’, etc.) but I disagree that the fact that personal responsibility is required means that there’s nothing the governing bodies should be doing to help that process.

Eventing, from what I have gathered, and especially upper level eventing, is a high adrenaline, high stress activity. It is difficult to make good judgements in those situations, regardless of how experienced you are, because of how the human brain responds to the various chemicals involved. Other high adrenaline, high stress activities recognize this and have education and training that tries to help individuals when they are in those situations so that they still make sensible choices. This is not an unknown area of psychology.

So while we can never be right there with the rider and say ‘no’ when the rider decides to push on, I completely think that there is room for one of the big organizations to add and encourage, if not require, upper level riders or folks aiming at the upper levels to get some education in how to handle the adrenaline and the stress, and heck, also the pressure associated with being an upper level rider and dealing with all those expenses and expectations.

If we’re going to have instructor certifications and the like, there’s no reason why there can’t be a ‘mental’ component to what it is expected will be taught, and there’s also no reason why that sort of instruction can’t be provided to people riding at a certain level as part of the team selection process or identifying young riders or whatever other programs there are to try to develop upper level riders for international competition.

Expecting people to figure these things out for themselves is unnecessary and far too often they learn at the expense of an injury to themselves or to a horse, even if it isn’t a life-threatening injury. I doubt an educational program would be perfect, but if it would at least move us a bit further in the direction of reducing incidents, then it seems worth doing.

[vineyridge]

Does ANYONE understand what it takes to get a reverse qualification under the FEI rules? The list of possible reverse qualifications includes at least one rider with 4 incidents i on the same horse. There are at least seven with three on the same horse. All the rest have two. You’d think if the horse were re-qualified, the old incidents would be deleted.

[bornfreenowexpensive]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;8161482]
Does ANYONE understand what it takes to get a reverse qualification under the FEI rules? The list of possible reverse qualifications includes at least one rider with 4 incidents i on the same horse. There are at least seven with three on the same horse. All the rest have two. You’d think if the horse were re-qualified, the old incidents would be deleted.[/QUOTE]

They are not really deleted. I thought it was two eliminations within a certain time period. If you re-qualify but then get eliminated again, if the other Es are still with in the period of time you lose your qualification again. So re-qualifying doesnt wipe the slate clean. At least this is what I remember off the top of my head but it has been a while since I read the rules.