Eventing 3 horse deaths at Blenheim HT, have courses become too technical? Are horses not prepared enough?

Red-1 said:
I think the sport has indeed changed. I did my biggest challenges on a big and bold mare, she ate rider frighteners for breakfast.

I was somewhat irritated when the courses became more technical. The dressage part tests schooling and accuracy. The SJ tests accuracy too. I believe that eventing should be an all round test, so the XC should test power and boldness.

I hate the modern courses with a gallop to a cluster of jumps that are more like show jumps. They feel trappy and encourage backwards riding.

I read an interesting article that blames the increase of the technical clusters. It means the riders are making the horses more 'on the bit' and 'obedient' as opposed to free forward movement with the horse looking at the fence and making some of the decisions as to where their feet go!
Click to expand...

Oh my goodness! My thoughts exactly!
 
I think it's necessary to consider the course as a whole, including weather conditions, terrain, and many other external factors. I remember walking the course at badminton in my heyday and thinking I could jump each individual fence (given the right horse!)' but that'd not the question. The question is the whole course and how the horse/rider copes with the cumulative questions being asked of them. That may be why apparently innocuous fences catch them out- the fall is not really at that fence, it's a result of all the previous fences.....c
 
I've been following this thread with interest as I've been in love with eventing for as long as I can remember
However I was stood right next to the fence at blenheim. It was truly horrific to see. It felt really wrong to continue our 'day out' after witnessing it. And as a result it has made me question things. It wasn't a big ask for 4* necessarily however the undulating ground/hefty dip in the ground in between A and B was significant so it wasn't a totally straightforward combination.

I'm not sure of the answer but I do wonder if the loss of the Withington, belton etc has made a difference. I don't really know. But I do know that me, my relatively non horsey (but very keen) partner, and more 'old-school' eventing mother all are feeling the same way, - quite uneasy and unsure about it.

Quite a pointless response to the thread really- probably still a bit emotional about what we saw at blenheim- but equally I really am questioning the sport i loved after this season
 
spacefaer said:
I think it's necessary to consider the course as a whole, including weather conditions, terrain, and many other external factors. I remember walking the course at badminton in my heyday and thinking I could jump each individual fence (given the right horse!)' but that'd not the question. The question is the whole course and how the horse/rider copes with the cumulative questions being asked of them. That may be why apparently innocuous fences catch them out- the fall is not really at that fence, it's a result of all the previous fences.....c
Click to expand...

I agree with this totally. I never looked at Badminton fences and thought I could do them, but did at Bramham. My mare would have done any individual fence at Bramham, but not the course.

I used to say I had 2 good pulls in her, and a third that would be less effective. After three checks, she would take over somewhat and... not check! I actually retired just three fences from home once as I had used up all of my checks and she had taken charge. Three more simple fences to finish, and I was unable to present to them becasue it would have been unwise. Thank God I was eventing in the era of bold courses as she wouldn't have been able to complete check and gallop fences. It would have blown her brains. Once on XC, we would say that some horses throw their heart over the fence. Amber would go into the start box and throw her heart clean over the finish line and spend the rest of the time sighting the flags and catching it up. Not galloping blind at all, she would actively seek the flags. I had a struggle on occasion, if she sighted the wrong flags.

When schooling at home, her brakes and steering were impeccable, until within the last couple of strides, whereupon she had summed the fence up and you were over. On course, she was driven.
 
DabDab said:
I'm just sort of thinking aloud here because I agree that the growing problem is more a thing of perception....but I wonder if there is sometimes a failure to look at things more holistically. I know humans gravitate towards over-simplifying and generalising and (as on this thread) like to bang the drum for their own favourite root cause, but I wonder if that is the case for the governing bodies too.

Talking about the profile of a fence is all well and good but nobody jumps a fence on its own, it has to be considered in the context of the whole course, just like an advanced dressage rider fluffing a walk trot transition in a test is more to do with the mental energy required for the test as a whole than that movement alone. Ticking time bomb health issues (whether heart or limb) is all very well and good but how have we got horses being presented for top level sport with those sorts of issues going unnoticed? Is there truly no screening that would identify them? MERS seem to need constant re-evaluation, is that because the industry is changing so rapidly that capturing the right criteria to ensure competency is an ever shifting set of goalposts. Are the courses encouraging the wrong kind of riding or the wrong kind of horse to be developed? Etc etc

The thing is that for every incident with an unfortunate outcome there will be many more with a lucky outcome. Just looking at the deaths and serious injuries probably isn't that helpful for digging out common causes and connections. Even looking at all horse falls probably won't get you even a fraction of the understanding you need, because again you are looking at individual fences and only once something has already gone wrong.

But then do the likes of BE really have the money to do that kind of research and analysis. I doubt it. So informed guess work is probably the best that the industry can manage and just hope that it makes enough of a difference. But right now it doesn't feel like it is making enough of a difference. Not in the court of public opinion anyway.
Click to expand...

There's definitely 3 pretty decent strands of research, and that's probably not all. You've got the Transport Research Lab ongoing work since 2002 with BE, the FEI has its own research strand. And then eventing Ireland, BE and the FEI all work with Equiratings on risk analysis - it's their work that has led to introduction of the continued performance requirements (if you get eliminated twice consecutively at a level you have to move down a level and re-qualify). Trouble is that Equiratings can provide advice but it isn't necessarily taken up, as increased perf. requirements and MERs are often resisted by riders. The recently published study linked to FEI research did consider risk factors like where the fence was chronologically on the course and gradient on take off and landing. The results, totally unsurprisingly, flag that fences later in the course at 4/5* level have more risk attached to them. According to BE and FEI data corner fences are the most likely to cause falls, and more so when attached to a water question. Perhaps we'll see a shift away from using the (now fairly common) ask of putting brush corners in water complexes if advice from safety studies is followed?
 
RachelFerd said:
But the data says that courses ARE getting safer - so it is our perception that is changing more quickly than the nature of the sport is.

also edited to add - I'm just diving into the BE stats as well as the FEI ones. BE have been collecting safety data since 2002 and have been analysiing with support of the Transport Research Laboratory. The percentage of riders involved in horse somersault falls has been greatly reduced since 2002 - in fact, current levels are 75% less than in 2002 - horse falls have remained at a fairly stable level since 2010 (which probably aligns with widespread use of frangible technology).

Now this is heavily simplified and there's obviously much more work that goes on into looking at what happens at different levels of the sport - but its another bit of factual data which supports wider evidence that things are getting safer for horses and riders, not less. So knee-jerk reactions to what is probably just the weird impact of probability, aren't helpful to anyone involved in equestrianism.
Click to expand...

but if horse falls are stabilized since 2010 is that number acceptable to you, does that mean the trajectory will continue similarly?

i never watch eventing now, the risk to horse and rider diminishes the fun, i do not want to have heart failure at any moment.

is constantly expecting to hear that 3 horses have died at one event, sporadically, something that you are happy to live with?

and in one year was it 2014 ish 3 riders died, how does that figure in the stats
 
tristar said:
but if horse falls are stabilized since 2010 is that number acceptable to you, does that mean the trajectory will continue similarly?

i never watch eventing now, the risk to horse and rider diminishes the fun, i do not want to have heart failure at any moment.

is constantly expecting to hear that 3 horses have died at one event, sporadically, something that you are happy to live with?

and in one year was it 2014 ish 3 riders died, how does that figure in the stats
Click to expand...

No I don't personally think the stable level is particularly OK. I just can't stand the "it was better in my day blah blah blah blah" comments which the data clearly contradicts.
 
RachelFerd said:
No I don't personally think the stable level is particularly OK. I just can't stand the "it was better in my day blah blah blah blah" comments which the data clearly contradicts.
Click to expand...

But it should be much better, because it is now a professional sport, backed at the top by money from sponsors, with extra vet support, equine nutrition, equipment. The fences have the safety pins, the ground has now far more money spent on it, with course designers that are supposed to be far more experienced, factoring safety.
F1 had a spate of driver deaths,, it was normal for there to be at least two deaths a year in the 60's and 70's, until things were changed, now there are still crashes, but it's rare for anyone to die, the car disintegrates, the driver's cell survives and they get out and walk away.
https://flowracers.com/blog/how-many-f1-drivers-have-died/

So we now know more about how to prevent fall, how to design a course, we have horse sports science, combined with rider sports science, and we are still having too many deaths and injuries, so has the use of that knowledge been effective, or as effective as it could possibly be, or should they be looking at other factors? It's a sport, should any death or injury to the participants become normalised, even if the participants is a horse.
It would be useful to know is someone collecting data on how many injuries to horses and riders at none BE events, at any level.

Some stats from racing, the nearest comparison is jump racing.

'Jumps racing has long been steeped in controversy due to its high mortality rate. This brand of racing requires Thoroughbred horses to leap over a succession of fences and are generally run over longer distances. There are both hurdles (generally shorter with lower obstacles), and steeplechases (generally longer with higher obstacles). Animal welfare groups have been campaigning for around 30 years to abolish hurdle and steeplechase events in Australia. Many aspects to the sport pose serious risk to horses, and it harms horses at a rate far above that of flat racing. In 1991, an Australian Senate Select Committee address on animal welfare concluded they had serious concerns about the welfare of horses in jumps races and recommended that state governments across the country phase out jumps racing over a three-year period. New South Wales and Tasmania abandoned the sport in 1997 and 2008 respectively, but Victoria and South Australia continue.[80] Jumps racing has never been the massive industry in Australia that it is in Britain and Ireland, but even there some tracks have discontinued National Hunt racing.[81] Nottingham was the first to discontinue jumps racing in 1996, followed by Windsor in 1998 and Wolverhampton in 2002.[82] Lingfield and Kempton have considered discontinuing jumps racing as well.[83]


Fatal Injury Rate Fatal Injuries Starts
Flat 0.44 316 719,695
Jump 8.30 198 23,857

[79]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racehorse_injuries
 
Last edited:
honetpot said:
It would be useful to know is someone collecting data on how many injuries to horses and riders at none BE events, at any level.
Click to expand...

Well of course they aren't - there is no overarching organisation to unaffiliated eventing - it is one of the many reasons why I don't agree with unaffiliated sport. No oversight whatsoever.
 
RachelFerd said:
Well of course they aren't - there is no overarching organisation to unaffiliated eventing - it is one of the many reasons why I don't agree with unaffiliated sport. No oversight whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Depending on who’s organising - there may be some collection of stats. The BRC incident forms have a fair few questions which are collated and added to the Club log books. I did have a copy of the forms used at BRC National events, they’re not a 2 min job either.

Not sure what PC ones are like.
 
Last edited:
teapot said:
Depending on who’s organising - there may be some collection of stats. The BRC incident forms have a fair few questions which are collated and added to the Club log books. I did have a copy of the forms used at BRC National events, they’re not a 2 min job either.

Not sure what PC ones are like.
Click to expand...

Sorry - overexplaining again - but PC and RC events aren't unaffiliated - i'm talking about all of the other centre-organised and loosely league based unaffiliated stuff. And at any rate, none of it ends up in the big statistical study work that BE and FEI are involved with. And since the incidents, viewed in isolation, often seem to have no common thread, I think you need the volume of information for any of it to start to have statistical relevance.
 
RachelFerd said:
Sorry - overexplaining again - but PC and RC events aren't unaffiliated - i'm talking about all of the other centre-organised and loosely league based unaffiliated stuff. And at any rate, none of it ends up in the big statistical study work that BE and FEI are involved with. And since the incidents, viewed in isolation, often seem to have no common thread, I think you need the volume of information for any of it to start to have statistical relevance.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, Mrs Smith’s 70-90cm one day event, pay at gate type events.

Random question, what insurance coverage do these events use? Like say the local hunt ran a hunter trial, who/what are they covered under?
 
teapot said:
Ah yes, Mrs Smith’s 70-90cm one day event, pay at gate type events.

Random question, what insurance coverage do these events use? Like say the local hunt ran a hunter trial, who/what are they covered under?
Click to expand...

Not so much Mrs Smith's pay at the gate - but the cotswold cup series, the brigante cup series and any and all of the equestrian centres running events over their BE tracks at £70/£80 entries.

They'll insure independently through specialist providers. Companies like Shearwater I would hazard a guess.
 
Maybe that data could be got at - I do xc control volunteer work at some local events where there is both BE and unaffiliated and the software that I put the scores and notes into is the same for the unaffiliated as is used for BE. So the background database must be the same I would assume. Wonder if BE have ever tried to get at any of that data...
 
RachelFerd said:
Not so much Mrs Smith's pay at the gate - but the cotswold cup series, the brigante cup series and any and all of the equestrian centres running events over their BE tracks at £70/£80 entries.

They'll insure independently through specialist providers. Companies like Shearwater I would hazard a guess.
Click to expand...

You could pull data off the results surely? Does anyone know if incidents/falls are handled the same way as BE? I don’t mean rules wise ie see a medic, but paperwork wise?
 
I am late to this thread as I was on holiday with no internet. I volunteer at a variety of events both BE and Cotswold Cup in a number of roles. A recurring topic of conversation is "all the gear no idea" the standard of riding by many is appalling. The number of riders having a "watch" put on them both BE and un-affiliated is also increasing.
A lot of riders get their MER's at "soft" courses, Aston-le Walls being a favourite venue for fault free Advanced runs. Have a look at the competition records of the horses involved in the H/F's.
There are riders out there who enter events they are simply not ready for despite getting the MER, that sadly will always happen. I saw a horse get euthanised at Big Gatcombe after its rider rode an appalling line to fence and the horse fell in a rotational having been too close to snap its front legs up. It was awful to see but was entirely rider error. Said rider is still out and about and has broken rather too many horses in the process............
 
Velcrobum said:
I am late to this thread as I was on holiday with no internet. I volunteer at a variety of events both BE and Cotswold Cup in a number of roles. A recurring topic of conversation is "all the gear no idea" the standard of riding by many is appalling. The number of riders having a "watch" put on them both BE and un-affiliated is also increasing.
A lot of riders get their MER's at "soft" courses, Aston-le Walls being a favourite venue for fault free Advanced runs. Have a look at the competition records of the horses involved in the H/F's.
There are riders out there who enter events they are simply not ready for despite getting the MER, that sadly will always happen. I saw a horse get euthanised at Big Gatcombe after its rider rode an appalling line to fence and the horse fell in a rotational having been too close to snap its front legs up. It was awful to see but was entirely rider error. Said rider is still out and about and has broken rather too many horses in the process............
Click to expand...


well i wanted to say something about the riding and thought better of it, but now its out there, personally i see some of it as hair raising, at the top as well, those horse are are so clever and brave, rider savers in fact.
 
tristar said:
well i wanted to say something about the riding and thought better of it, but now its out there, personally i see some of it as hair raising, at the top as well, those horse are are so clever and brave, rider savers in fact.
Click to expand...

It is indeed hair raising at all levels sadly. It is the elephant in the room and a topic that should be being discussed. There is a British rider who was given an FEI yellow card at Badminton and who was given a FEI Recorded warning at an event in the summer. There was a foreign male rider who had already been yellow carded at Badminton who turned his horse over at the last fence but was only given a warning. If he had been yellow carded a second time he would have got an automatic 2 month suspension. IMHO he should have been yellow carded for not pulling up an obviously very very tired horse. That was a good example of bad riding!!
 
Velcrobum said:
It is indeed hair raising at all levels sadly. It is the elephant in the room and a topic that should be being discussed. There is a British rider who was given an FEI yellow card at Badminton and who was given a FEI Recorded warning at an event in the summer. There was a foreign male rider who had already been yellow carded at Badminton who turned his horse over at the last fence but was only given a warning. If he had been yellow carded a second time he would have got an automatic 2 month suspension. IMHO he should have been yellow carded for not pulling up an obviously very very tired horse. That was a good example of bad riding!!
Click to expand...

Said non GB rider got yellow carded for what they did immediately after their dressage test though.
 
I must admit I haven't watched any hunter trials for a very long time having been put off by a couple of incidents happening by me, one where a horse was euthathanised after a fall and another where a child was crushed under her pony in a rotational fall and badly hurt.
 
It isn't really about us lot, though. It's not even about the facts. It's about how quickly public opinion changes.

I love eventing, absolutely adore it. But it's such a niche sport. Others only seem to recognise it as "the one Zara Phillips does" or "the one that's in fields like hunting". Not the firmest base for public opinion to be resting on.

I remember watching a dressage championship a year or two ago with my husband and someone was eliminated for blood in the mouth.

"That'll be the cover story in your horse and hound this week!" My husband said.

I laughed and said it probably wouldn't even get mentioned in the article covering that championship.

"Why not?" Well, it's just not the way things are done I said.

If it were a football match and a bad tackle it would have been replayed, dissected, he said. He couldn't believe it wouldn't be the talk of the sport that week. He was seriously cross and confused. I think he felt a bit like I was patting him on the head and telling him not to worry himself, just let the experts talk vaguely about the rider having an overly firm contact...

I think we underestimate how much the public love and admire horses at our peril, most seem to be in absolute awe of them. They will have little time for our arguments if a paper gets the bit between its teeth on the issue.

Having said all that I don't know what the answer is. I think the industry needs to exert more pressure, rather than hoping no one external is going to notice if we keep everything quiet.

I definitely have no idea about how to improve eventing specifically, other than that a good deep brush fence is enough to dazzle my parents and husband when I drag them to watch one of the big events, but is relatively safe. So lots more brush rider (and spectator) frighteners is my request!
 
teapot said:
Said non GB rider got yellow carded for what they did immediately after their dressage test though.
Click to expand...
An over tight flash nose band re-leased as he exited the arena before the FEI tack inspection. I am aware of that and the ground jury correctly issued the FEI yellow card as his actions were clearly contrary to the FEI rule book during the Dressage phase of the competition. However his actions/re-actions/ non-actions at the later parts of his XC part of the 5* FEI competition contradicted hugely with the definition of https://inside.fei.org/system/files/2022_Yellow_Warning_Card_interactive_web.pdf
Extract of Article 527.2, c),d).
That was in-defensible his horse was exhausted before it fell over the last fence which resulted in screens and a significant hold on XC.
 
Gamebird said:
And for doing something which was arguably FOR the horse's welfare (just against the FEI rules)
Click to expand...

Is this a joke? He undid a noseband that was so tight it was illegally clamping the horse's mouth shut, in order to evade being sanctioned for it by the tack check, and you think he did it for the horse's welfare? I think most people would think that should have been a suspension, not a yellow card, to deliberately evade a check in that way. If the FEI were serious about horse welfare, it would have been.
.
 
BTW the riding is no better in France and they have licences to ride at certain levels.

They have tried carrot a few times with good riding awards but they didn’t hold much. I do think there needs to be a big push for rider responsibility and BE is about to address this through the Howden Way training academies up to 2* level but these will be voluntary.

I watch a LOT of eventing, and it’s adults who are the issue. Not the U18s who are very carefully watched and developed.

On another matter, someone I know has just had 2nd HF at Novice at a straightforward fence. The horse will now be going Sjing. They are a pro who has ridden at 5* as well!
 
Last edited:
I think if falls are going to be reduced to their absolute minimum, then both the horse and the rider have to be capable of being competitive in the cross country phase at least one height above the one at which they are competing.

I was a very gung ho rider at Novice but the two horses which I rode at that level were both well capable of a lot more. I have to shut my eyes when I see people going cross country at any level on a horse which is at its limit at that height/complexity, because then there is simply no room for error, and error there will occasionally be.

I don't know how you would make that qualification or who would judge it, though.
.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top