WTF Are We Doing?

[Laurierace]

[QUOTE=LAZ;8663719]
this is what a Frangible study is for. To find the best way to support safe deployment in need.

We really need to get behind the research, both what works and what doesn’t. If a Frangible device deploying saves a catastrophic result it’s worth 1000 people donating $5 to a study. There are people that can afford more, but $5 is one breakfast from McDonalds, one coffee from Starbucks, half of one movie ticket. Surely those that are concerned can do that?[/QUOTE]
I don’t even consider myself to be a real eventer but I for one would much rather donate to a study to make eventing safer than yet another memorial fund.

[Justice]

Just popping in from h/j land. I didn’t know Phillipa, but she is from my area, and I have seen her ride at a couple of shows. She was a great rider. Truly. Young, beautiful, a new mom. It is enough to make a girl seriously consider hanging up her spurs when you think about her husband and daughter. I have never felt fearful about riding before, but when this popped across my newsfeed, it broke my heart and it scared me. It sounds like a freak accident, and if it happened to her, it could happen to any of us. I know that everyone dies, but this. Unfathomable. Too close to home.

[Auburn]

I agree with LAZ. I do believe that we should put our money where our mouths are. But, I would want to know that my money was actually being spent on designing safer jumps. As seen with some of the "safety studies’’ of the past, they get “tabled” and the money goes where? I am more than willing to donate, if the USEA actually finishes the study and affects change.

Maybe they should hire some of the NASCAR scientists, who have made that sport safer? They seem to know how to fix issues, much better our best minds do. JMHO.

[Winding_Down]

[QUOTE=Lord Helpus;8663637]
I think this carnage became so prevalent when Eventing went to the short format. Before that, x/c was only the last of 4 phases and was meant to show that horses were fit enough to still jump a cross country course after R&T, steeplechase, and R&T. Back then, x/c was stiff but not terrifying. Now, with nothing else to do, x/c has taken on gigantic (literally and figuratively) proportions.

Bring back the long format! (Yeah, like that will ever happen…)[/QUOTE]

Oh honey. Look at the stats. We had significantly more horrible accidents with the long format, if you look at number of injuries per starters.

I do not want to dredge up those numbers again - as I have done this for this forum previously. A few times over the past few years.

AND big ass tables haven’t changed a bit.

So often, those who lament years past paint with such rose colors. I remember watching those broken down horses, that completed a long format and had to then have 2-3 months off to mend… if they were mendable.

Look at how many events our horses can now complete with this format compared to in the past. I haven’t looked at those numbers but I bet they would show that today, it is all much easier on horses. I would much rather have my horse trot off a CCI ready to bounce around and work the following week, than be nursed along and prepped only to be ready to run again in months time.

We have huge room for improvement, however, and I have been so encouraged by the more recent research, development and refinement of frangible pins, and studies of jump design related to potential for serious falls. I love that Rolex was designed in such a way that issues usually resulted in glance offs rather than horse falls. But we need more, much more. I hate to think we could end up reducing the big galloping fences in favor of even more skinnies with frangible pins. I see the big solid fences as an integral part of our UL courses. But… times change and perhaps we will revert to less solid fences amenable to frangible pins. OR, perfect frangible pins on tables? Would that have made a difference in the fall at Jersey?

Yes, I am in the minority in my belief that our sport is more humane now than it has ever been.

Numbers do not lie. But I am so sad for this loss of life. So sad…

[vineyridge]

[QUOTE=ksbadger;8663549]
The problem with any collapsible fence is that there will a significant number of horses that will bank it and thus trigger a unwanted deformation with its own subsequent risks.
We should make any possible improvements to obstacle & course design but keep in mind that the total world Eventing deaths is probably less than those for pedestrians in any medium sized town over the same period.[/QUOTE]

Actually, in the Kentucky studies, one of the parameters for a successful design of a bankable type fence was that the horse must continue to be able to bank it–that the collapsing force not be vertical.

It also said that in 2010, the number of rider deaths in eventing from 1997 to the date of the study was 25.

[beowulf]

[QUOTE=Winding Down;8663777]
Oh honey. Look at the stats. We had far more horrible accidents with the long format, if you look at number of injuries per starters.

I do not want to dredge up those numbers again - as I have done this for you previously. A few times over the past few years.

AND big ass tables haven’t changed a it.

So often, those who lament years past paint it with such rose colors. I remember watching those broken down horses, that completed a long format and had to then have 2-3 months off to mend… if they were mendable.

Look at how many events our horses can now complete with this format compared to in the past. I haven’t looked at those numbers but I bet they would show that today, it is all much easier on horses.

Yes, I am in the minority in my belief that our sport is more humane now than it has ever been.

Numbers do not lie.[/QUOTE]

I’m with WD, long format had its own shortcomings and carnage, the difference was it was not as broadcasted. I liked LF but it is not in any way inherently safer. It is also much harder on the horse IMHO. The wastage on some of those horses back then was unreal. Our parameters for soundness have improved, our course designs have improved… now it’s just the safety that needs to be addressed.

There are answers out there but I don’t think long-format is one of them.

Personally, I know that when I’m deciding to send in an entry, I will avoid those in my area that are ‘table heavy’. I’ve never liked tables. To me, they’re inviting disaster and seeing them sit on course when there are plenty of better options is mindblowing. They rarely read right even when ridden correctly.

[Gnep]

[QUOTE=Auburn;8663739]
I agree with LAZ. I do believe that we should put our money where our mouths are. But, I would want to know that my money was actually being spent on designing safer jumps. As seen with some of the "safety studies’’ of the past, they get “tabled” and the money goes where? I am more than willing to donate, if the USEA actually finishes the study and affects change.

Maybe they should hire some of the NASCAR scientists, who have made that sport safer? They seem to know how to fix issues, much better our best minds do. JMHO.[/QUOTE]

It is actually not that difficult to design and built tables that would collaps and prevent that type of rotational.
But as Reed and I and many others have found out, the leaders of the sport have no desire and it is far to frustrating to fight them.
If one has ever been around the building of courses and has a little bit of a science background than the use of the pin for example is rather shockingly amateurish. Nobody actually knows how much the log weighs, wet your finger hold it up, check the direction of the wind and say it works.
If you go to your shows, have a look at the pins. They are supposed to be removed after the show is over. I bet 99% will not get removed.
The list is endless, how safety is neglected or not realy well thought out so called safety devices are used.
One day somebody will get a lawyer and than the crap will hit the fan.

[vineyridge]

[QUOTE=MNEventer;8663695]
Here’s my confusion: why do the courses have to keep getting tougher? It seems like there are a lot of course designers who have to make the questions harder and harder for horse and rider to figure out safely, and where the consequences of getting it wrong means maiming horse and rider, in the best case scenario. But why? Why is this a thing? In dressage, the movements of the levels have been the same for a long time, and somehow the sport survives. No one has proposed making horses canter backwards or do airs above the ground in dressage competition, but it feels like the equivalent is being asked of event horses on x-c.

Why does it have to be so hard? There are so many things that will make it not a dressage competition, so why make x-c a live version of the Saw movies? I just don’t understand it.[/QUOTE]

What we do know from many different fields is that things that were once considered very difficult became easy as the techniques to handle them became more common in training. This is particularly noticeable in piano music.

Snowrider’s point about the saddles is mentioned by Mike E-S in the Kentucky thesis.

Perhaps there was something very positive in learning how to jump at speed in the steeplechase phase very early on in a rider’s career.

After reading the KY study, it seems to me that the first major improvement must be a portable tester that produces accurate measurements of fences. The brits and Swedes have produced or were trying to produce a horse analog for their testing. That would be a foundation for improvement, just as crash dummies are the basis for vehicle safety improvements. The Brits had a table designed for use in competitions that was a measuring device. Perhaps we need more of those.

[Winding_Down]

[QUOTE=beowulf;8663785]
I’m with WD, long format had its own shortcomings and carnage, the difference was it was not as broadcasted. I liked LF but it is not in any way inherently safer. It is also much harder on the horse IMHO. The wastage on some of those horses back then was unreal. Our parameters for soundness have improved, our course designs have improved… now it’s just the safety that needs to be addressed.

There are answers out there but I don’t think long-format is one of them.

Personally, I know that when I’m deciding to send in an entry, I will avoid those in my area that are ‘table heavy’. I’ve never liked tables. To me, they’re inviting disaster and seeing them sit on course when there are plenty of better options is mindblowing. They rarely read right even when ridden correctly.[/QUOTE]

I hate tables. One reason I really didn’t want to go beyond the 2* or even continue at Intermediate was those tables. I used to walk the courses and walk up to tables and then look upward, with only a brief glance across the abyss…

Usually though, the big tables ride really really well… I do not recall ever having a “bad” one. (haha, Probably because I closed my eyes and didn’t pick … )

I rode at the ULs back in the day. I did not every enter a long format, although I was qualified more than once. I did not because I just did not want to go through all of that stress, conditioning, ice, poultice, ice, broken horse stuff that I saw others go through. It was just too much to risk and expense.

Interestingly, I have talked with 3 different top vets who were happy with the end of the LF because it was so sad to them, to treat horses afterwards. IV fluids, feet, legs, all of it…

[hamsterpoop]

To those who say Never Eventing… I respect that… and, well…bye. To those whose life blood and soul are in this…and (like laz) offer positive vibes. (and money)…well…Godspeed… A slogan. How about Eventing Lives Matter. Not original I know, I poached it from BLM but it’s a start.

[vineyridge]

IV fluid use hasn’t gone away. Nor have feet, legs, all of it.

[LAZ]

[QUOTE=Auburn;8663739]
I agree with LAZ. I do believe that we should put our money where our mouths are. But, I would want to know that my money was actually being spent on designing safer jumps. As seen with some of the "safety studies’’ of the past, they get “tabled” and the money goes where? I am more than willing to donate, if the USEA actually finishes the study and affects change.

Maybe they should hire some of the NASCAR scientists, who have made that sport safer? They seem to know how to fix issues, much better our best minds do. JMHO.[/QUOTE]

Jo Whitehouse emailed me

Lee Ann,

I cannot tell you how much I value your email. This has been the saddest day in the sport in the US for many years.

Thank you for your commitment to making the sport safer by so generously donating to the Collapsible Fence Study. If you would like to donate online, you can go to the website and click on the donate button. There is a check box on that page for the Collapsible Fence Study and you can be certain your dollars are going to that specific fund. Alternatively, if you would like to donate by check simply make your check payable to the USEA, and in the memo section write Collapsible Fence Study. I will alert our accounting staff to look out for such donations.

Thank you again for your thoughtfulness and for caring. All our hearts go out to Phillipa’s family and friends, especially her husband and daughter.

Gratefully,

[Winding_Down]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;8663818]
IV fluid use hasn’t gone away. Nor have feet, legs, all of it.[/QUOTE]

Of course not

But… the prevalence/frequency of all of it has gone down a great deal, acc’d to my vet friends.

[Ready_To_Riot]

[QUOTE=hamsterpoop;8663815]
To those who say Never Eventing… I respect that… and, well…bye. To those whose life blood and soul are in this…and (like laz) offer positive vibes. (and money)…well…Godspeed… A slogan. How about Eventing Lives Matter. Not original I know, I poached it from BLM but it’s a start.[/QUOTE]

Agreed! LAZ does a lot for our sport. A LOT! Listen to her. Get with her and chat. If
Mountains need to be moved, she will find a way. Follow her lead and help move them.

And I’m with winding down. I’ve always found tables to ride well. They scare me, so I’m pretty sure I too close my eyes, but my horse has always navigated them fine.

[FatCatFarm]

This may have been posted in this thread before. I had forgotten about this article and thought it worth reposting. Seems that eliminating certain types of jumps immediately from courses wouldn’t neutered the sport and would make it immediately safer for everyone competing. No brainer?

http://eventingnation.com/the-problems-in-the-eventing-world-today/

[drsmcc]

I think snowrider is onto something here. It is along similar lines to what I have been thinking too. I am wondering about the shape/profile of these large rectangular tables, and whether a change in profile, could reduce the tendency to produce rotation when a mistake is made.

Making the fences less rectangular should reduce the danger of catching a leg going up or coming down, and reduce the induction of rotation. It is generally accepted that these make obstacles “easier” to jump, and less scary, and we are aiming for difficult. But the rectangular profile, is harder precisely because it does not fit comfortably under the profile of a jumping bascule. (Granted that bascule is flatter at speed.)

And why are so many on this very forum saying how scared they are of tables?Why are they closing their eyes!? I think it is because the awkwardness, and the flipping danger of such fences is so intuitively obvious to our eye as we walk these courses, and as we approach them at speed, even if we are not conscious of exactly why that is so.

Additionally, they are so wide we are encouraged to “fly” these fences, which flattens the bascule even further. If you are going to jump on a flattened bascule, and still jump the rectangle cleanly, you have to stand off even more, and that makes the jump much wider still. And we are trying to make time…

[Blugal]

[QUOTE=LAZ;8663820]
Jo Whitehouse emailed me

Lee Ann,

I cannot tell you how much I value your email. This has been the saddest day in the sport in the US for many years.

Thank you for your commitment to making the sport safer by so generously donating to the Collapsible Fence Study. If you would like to donate online, you can go to the website and click on the donate button. There is a check box on that page for the Collapsible Fence Study and you can be certain your dollars are going to that specific fund. Alternatively, if you would like to donate by check simply make your check payable to the USEA, and in the memo section write Collapsible Fence Study. I will alert our accounting staff to look out for such donations.

Thank you again for your thoughtfulness and for caring. All our hearts go out to Phillipa’s family and friends, especially her husband and daughter.

Gratefully,[/QUOTE]

Thanks for posting this. I tried donating, but as a Canadian it kept spitting me out because the Zip wasn’t right. I think I’ll try to get hold of the USEA tomorrow to see if that can’t be fixed.

[drsmcc]

Follow the link posted by FatCatFarm. I think this is a very good article. I think she raises good points, many of which I have seen raised by Jimmy Wofford, a voice worth respecting.

[NCRider]

[QUOTE=drsmcc;8663931]
Follow the link posted by FatCatFarm. I think this is a very good article. I think she raises good points, many of which I have seen raised by Jimmy Wofford, a voice worth respecting.[/QUOTE]

Logically, it would make sense to me to also avoid having anything on the “roof” of the jump that would catch a horse’s leg on the way up or the way down. Get rid of vertical faces, but maybe also get rid of roofs and post rails that a horse could get a foot stuck in just long enough to rotate. I’ve seen at least one horse catch the top of its foot/shoe on the crevice between two parallel logs on the top of a jump as it was scraping across and putting down it’s landing gear.
I agree that we should be focussing as much on jump construction as we are on course design and jump type.

[Divine_Comedy]

I’m pretty flabbergasted that everyone keeps saying this is ‘just’ a table. Has anyone actually seen the photo of the fence? Practical Horseman posted a good view of the fence on the FB page, found here.

If you ask me, there are not just false ground lines for days on this fence (the shadows, the orange hanging flowers are UNDER the base of the fence), but there is also a problem with multiple ground lines with the extra basked of flowers in front of the fence in the center. Additionally, the rounded ‘lip’ of the fence on the front extends beyond the base. This is in no way a table I’ve seen many times, I’ve never seen a table designed like this except at JF.

On the other hand, this table has been on the course at least since 2011, when I myself jumped the 2* version of it. And my horse, who backs off nothing except water, clearly couldn’t figure out where to jump it so took off a stride early and cleared it by a mile. I distinctly remember it because of my horse’s indecision. So basically, hundreds of horses have jumped these tables at JF for years with no problem.

But in retrospect, there are definitely some major alarm bells for me when looking at that fence.