BE Safety vid - info, and suggestions wanted please.

As someone who has not evented but does jump judge, I agree that a jump judge probably doesn't feel they can comment on a riders ability. Not only from lack of relevent experience but because they see the rider jump one fence only. If I saw a rider mis-judge my fence I wouldn't know if it was a one off or they had badly ridden previous fences.

I would say something over the radio if I saw anything as bad as the 'how not to' clips in the video so that the TD and other judges could watch the rider over the following fences, as popsdosh said, but i've not seen anything that obvious so far.

At the last event we judged, my partner and I were scoring 2 fences and radio reporting on 3. We saw several incidences of less than perfect jumping of one fence but no-one made errors at more than 1 fence. However an observer with more jumping experience may have noticed something we didn't.

Could there be a formal observation of the cross country warm up? If a couple of fences of the standard to be faced on the course were provided it would be possible for a BE representative to watch riders warming up. An observer would get a reasonable idea of a riders style during a 20-30 minute warm up. At least they would see how balanced the rider was in canter etc and could watch how they approach and jumped several jumps.

If it isn't possible to provide someone to observe all riders, it could be done for new riders and when someone moves up a level by grouping them together in the running order. The observations could either be fed back to the rider or passed to the TD on course to observe them riding several fences. If a rider was picked up for bad riding at one event they could be observed for improvement during their warm up at their next couple of events.

As a said above, I've never evented so I will understand if riders think it wouldn't work but it's an idea for discussion.
 
I think there are some really good suggestions so far. My thoughts are:
I'd like to see if a solicitor genuinely thought accrediting someone holds the accreditor open to legal liability - if so surely BHS examiners, Pony Club examiners and all coaches are open to this liability if they suggest someone is "of a standard" to attempt something.
Perhaps a safer way to accredit people to event at the lower levels would be to set criteria they should meet, but give people a choice. E.g you can accredit yourself for intro by having X amount of lessons with a certain standard of trainer (should ideally be recognised i.e. BE trainer/BHS instructor of certain standard e.t.c) OR have been a member of a riding club and completed at intermediate unaffiliated level X amount of times OR have certain BHS/Pony Club exams. I'm not sure the accreditation from a BE trainer is the way forward as surely this encourages one session just to get accredited?
Pre Novice could be qualified for by completing an intro, Novice by completing a Pre Novice with lessons/qualifications/riding club requirements added in where necessary to encourage further training.
However from a business point for BE, this doesn't make sense as it potentially excludes lucrative fees from intro/pre novice standard riders who may not be able to enter until they have their accreditation (I'm working on the assumption that they receive most sales/fees from the lower ends that are busier than the higher ends). I guess in this way it would still "cost" members or BE something. But then no change for safety's sake will come cheap...
 
Well I read this thread earlier today and have been thinking ever since. I haven't ever competed at BE level, although I groom for someone who competes BE90 and BE100, looking to hopefully go Novice next season.

My first thoughts were that the majority of competitors do have the correct attitude in their approach to competing; they get an accreditted trainer, not because they want to win (well we all do) but because they look for improvements and guidance for themselves and their horses. Then there are a few who seem to think that by having a "competition" horse they will automatically "win" and ride better. And then there are a few who are none the wiser, everything seems to be going fine and will only invest in an instructor when things start to go wrong. Firstly I agree that attitudes need to be changed towards the sport, and that training is a must! I go to some BE events and the majority of the time there are a lot of riders who ride their horse well and know what to do, but there are some who are questionable, are flapping to get the horse over a jump, riding too fast, not riding enough etc... but are they none the wiser as they've never been told? Making people aware of wrong approaches is a good thing and I don't think it'd scare off sponsors etc as surely it's promoting bette riding!

I agree that there should be a stronger community, as word of mouth is the greatest marketing tool in getting the correct attitude across. Most competitors are more than willing to share stories of their training etc but there are some who don't, and is that because they don't know anyone, or is it because it doesn't matter to them - everyone strives to be better, and surely creating a community where people can talk about what they're upto will be very beneficial, and it will motivate people to go to training sessions with their new friends etc!

Also something else I noticed - jumping in the collecting ring before showjumping - as an observer I have noticed that a lot of people jump at least 15/20cm higher than what is required in the ring, and also overjumping jumps - I saw one competitor who jumped a good 15 times, and the last 3 times the jump was relowered as a straight for a rider warming up and they popped it (it looked like it was a case of well it's there so i might as well jump it!), when before they had been jumping the approproate height... is it right to be firstly overfacing a horse in the collecting ring by jumping a lot bigger? And is it right to be overjumping your horse and wasting energy? Surely little things like this can all add up to safety, or am I just being too observant - please correct me if I am wrong!!

Also another thought I had is if during say 3 or 5 competitions you horse has not gone clear cross country, then it could be down to a training issue and that the competitor must do at least 10 hours training with an accreditted trainer? or something like that? because if it has run out, had a refusal, or a fall 5 times then surely that's either a training, pain or confidence issue?

Sorry if i've rambled/not made sense, but I thought I'd just add something as an observer and (fingers crossed) a potential BE competitor.
 
I like the idea of accreditation but the only thing is they wouldn't be able to go on other peoples exams if I'm honest I have done 3 C+ test with PC - I failed my riding twice - each was entirely different to the others. One involved changing horses another 45 mins of work with no stirrups, two involved XC and one didn't. Although I assume the BHS exams are a bit more regulated and consistent than this!

Also someone could have the test and be a technically correct rider but be completely ineffective and perhaps consequently unsafe to event?
 
I haven't read all the posts - sorry!

But I thought this was a good idea and encouraged me to step into the scary and unknown world of BE (had no
real friends that were Eventing at the time, so no one to ask!)

BE in association with a local riding magazine ran an 'Introduction to Eventin' day at a local venue.

There were talks on the basics like how to apply for memberships, how to enter a competition as a member or on day ticket, and where to get your hat tagged.

They also had a couple of local professionals do a talk about their experiences, a vet to do a talk on fitness of the horse, a saddler (tack) and trainer to explain what level you and your horse should be upto before tackling your first competition.

They also explained about timing flags, what to do if you had a fall and how to retire and leave it for another day.

This was excellent! And confirmed to me that Rosie and I were ready as we'd done tons of Unaff ODE's, BSJA, hunted (one of the professionals said if you could hunt all day, jump and stay on, you were probably ready!!).

And it only cost a fiver.

To me, a big issue would be if it were compulsory to attend any expensive training sessions with a trainer you didn't know and who didn't know your horse.
 
madhossy - That sounds great and a really nice idea
smile.gif
 
QR

Some great ideas here! I quite like the idea of a tick box/comments area on the fence judges form. We don't all get radio's, so it's not always possible to radio back if a rider looks unsafe. Obviously we can only view the rider over one fence, but perhaps the steward/scorers could pick up if a rider has more than one comment on their safety, throughout the course? I'm sure this wouldn't cost much for BE to implement (new scoring books, 5 minutes more in the fence judges briefing), but would flag up someone who had problems all around the course. Down side of this is that it may not be picked up until they'd completed (or worst case scenario, had an accident). I do take the point that fence judges aren't necessarily riders (I'm not - XC scares me but I love watching it!), but basic safety points should be easy to recognise. Of course things can go wrong for any rider at any fence, but consistently getting things wrong gives cause for concern.

Sorry, bit of a waffle there!

Love the idea of a more locally based BE community. Training days a couple of times a year, putting people in touch with other BE members in their area. I don't think it would impinge too much on the riding club remit. Videoing each other is another good idea. How about a buddy system for new members/people moving up a level? Not necessarily a mentoring system, with a pro/experienced rider, but someone for moral support and eyes on the ground. This could be used alongside a mentoring system, perhaps with each "pro" mentoring a few riders at each event.
 
QR
Some random thoughts
1) Riders new to a level to be added to the " watch list" for their first three events at a new level so that extra attention can be paid to them and feed back given.
2) Experienced riders to be used as spotters on course, could pros be persuaded to do it just for an hour each at an event, not so much of a time committment as jump judging.
3) Rider records to be reviewed and riders continually having problems at a level to be watched.
4)Jump judges tick sheeet great idea
With so much data online I am sure BE could find volunteers to help them analyse data from home, it is certainly something I would help with
 
The problem with fence judges making comments (or ticking boxes) is that i know some people who have judged at BE events, up to intermediate level, and they honestly only just about know one end of a horse from another.

As it stands, FJ is almost 100% objective. I.e. a horse stops/runs out- it gets penalties. The only grey area is stepping back at drops/water, where an inexperienced judge may not be 100% accurate. This is a small % of error though. On the whole it is relatively easy for someone to fence judge. However, by asking for subjective comments/opinions from well meaning but not neccesarily experienced FJs, there could be alot of hassle. You are potentially reducing your pool of FJs to only those experienced enough to give an opinion on riding and not just whether someone has cleared a fence. One persons idea of too fast could just be because they dont even ride a horse, let alone gallop xc. Yes, downright dangerous riding would be obvious to most people but then these riders would be spotted by officials anyway. But asking for FJs opinions could not be that accurate a picture of the real situation and it would become a case of 'FJ says/rider says', which is no real help.
 
teddyt, i totally agree with this. i FJ'd once and could see another fence clearly from my position. whenever a rider approached and rebalanced a few strides out from that fence, or the horse did the same, (always perfectly safely imho) the fence judge would say over the radio "X almost grinds to a halt at fence 3" and this was occasionally repeated over the tannoy... probably making connections very nervous! this FJ new naff all about how to jump safely, the only ones they praised were the ones who took an absolute flier!
maybe just 1 or 2 experienced people to spectate from a good point where they could see at least a few fences, and judge how people rode over all of those. one or two fences could be very misleading.
 
As another who does not compete but does jump judge I wish there was training for jump judges. At the moment you just have the on the day briefing which is pretty much the same each time & concentrates on how to fill in the score cards & use the radios etc. I would really appreciate sessions on what constitutes dangerous riding that should be reported & how best to report it. Also how to record useful feedback that could help riders in future events/training. After all a jump judge may only see one fence but they see everyone over that fence.
Also how about someone videoing the trickiest 1 or 2 fences on each course so that riders could ask to view how they took that fence & see how they could improve. It's going to make the learning process easier if they can watch what they actually did. Might help course designers too.
 
I'd take this view too - both the judgment capabilities of those who fence judge (no disrespect meant at all - they are invaluable contributors but, as I have said before, many would be perfectly happy to admit that they do not have the knowledge or experience to make subjective judgments) and also the fact that riders need to be seen over several fences in most cases. e.g. there have been cases where riders have been damned for continuing to ride a horse that is obviously tiring. If a horse is only just beginning to tire before the approach to a fence, it may be that there has been no chance for the rider to take action - a fence judge watching the combination over just this one fence may then "mark" them down in the system put forward. However, if the rider/horse combo had been seen over several fences, the real situation would be more apparent. Not sure how clear that is (trying to do too many things at once here!)
 
hairycob - agree with that! I was quite shocked when I found out (from Kerilli actually!) that there was no training necessary to be a fence judge.

Perhaps fence judges assessing riding isn't such a great idea, as it's very subjective, but I do think feedback from fence judges is useful - written on the score sheet at the time (from experience, by the time you've seen 10 or so jump, you've forgotten most of them!). A few times I've wanted to provide feedback, but it hasn't been enough to warrant writing it on the scoresheet and I haven't had a radio (things like "lovely jump", "beautifully ridden" or "honest horse to get you out of that one!"). Still, I do agree that perhaps *some* fence judges are less experienced and wouldn't necessarily be able to give a valuable opinion/assessment on someone's riding. Although, if there was a 1 or 2 day training session for fence judges, this might not be the case....

Love the idea of videoing a couple of fences, especially on courses where you can see more than once fence (often straightforward ones as well as tricky ones). You could video as the horse approaches the "first" fence in shot, and follow it through that area of the course. That would give a really good idea of how that part of the course was riding, and how each rider was setting up etc. Taking it a step further, perhaps each rider could be given a copy, with a pro riding the same part of the course, to compare? USB disks aren't expensive, if each rider got one with their membership and took it to each event, the video could easily be copied in minutes. Then they could go away, watch it, and compare how they rode with how the pro rode the same fences. Obviously this would be dependent on a pro being available to ride the course on the day!

I'll stop waffling now!!
 
[ QUOTE ]
As another who does not compete but does jump judge I wish there was training for jump judges. At the moment you just have the on the day briefing which is pretty much the same each time & concentrates on how to fill in the score cards & use the radios etc. I would really appreciate sessions on what constitutes dangerous riding that should be reported & how best to report it. Also how to record useful feedback that could help riders in future events/training. After all a jump judge may only see one fence but they see everyone over that fence.


[/ QUOTE ]

A couple of years ago BE were going to run a 'Fence Judges Forum' afternoon at a local course.

Free to all.

I signed up for it but unfortunately it was cancelled due to lack of support.
frown.gif


I have done a fair bit of fence judging, but not for much for BE.

On the BE courses, I've always said I didn't want a water fence or drop fence to judge as I've thought it a bit of a scary prospect having to judge some of the pros and state 'first refusal' for a dither at the water for instance, and them then argue with me that that wasn't the case
crazy.gif


A proper days' fence judge training with videos of what constitutes a fault/stop would be very useful, including the ambiguous ones.

Would also be useful for riders to attend too !
 
I have not read all the comments so appologies if much of this has been said before. My views, for what they are worth are:
If BE are going to introduce competitions at a low level they are going to get members and competitors who really are not very good. If you watch an 80 or 90 class ( and even some 100's ) the standard of riding in some cases is appalling. In earlier times peole aspired to affilliated competition, now it is available to anyone who can afford to pay the fees. This is not necessarily a bad thing,but it does mean that the nature of membership and standard of riding will be lower. If BE consider that unacceptable then they have to accept that they need to operate some sort of accreditation system.
Before someone is permitted to enter anything above an 80 class I think they should be required to show that have undertaken a certain amount of training, with someone other than their regular coach, who may not be sufficiently objective and honest about their customers ability.Perhaps events/ centres could run training days where people pay a fee similar to an entry fee, and at the end rather than passing someone as ready to compete trainers could identify those that they consider need more training. The issue about sueing should not then arise. If there are 2 trainers involved and they are both of the same opinion then again it won't arise as if they both agree they have not been negligent ( which would have to be proved)
I think that there should be 2 or 3 observers on every course and they should record the names of those who appear dangerous, they could then be required to attend more training before being allowed to compete again.
The big issue I believe at the lower levels is xc speeds. To get in the time you have to gallop, and the fences are too small to be jumped safely in gallop. Until the fences get to Novice height the speed should be significantly slower. Andrew Hoy told me that it is much easier to get the time at advanced than novice because the fences are big enough to gallop at, he also said that he thinks it is almost impossible to get inside the time safely at Intro and Pre Novice level.
I don't think any of these measures will prevent the type of fatal falls there have been. As has been said the falls and fatalities have largely been at higher level and have been to very capable riders who would not have been identifited as being at risk.
I remain convinced that at the higher levels the risks are more associated with riders lifestyles, too many horses, too much travel,not enough sleep. Too much pressure to win, one particular high profile and hugely successful 3/4 star rider has had a very large number of falls and fairly serious injuries this year, is anything done about that? It seems that riders are congratulated for getting back on board while nursing broken bones, some top level riders compete when they are clearly not fit to do so.
Sorry this is so long!
 
interesting stuff, blue2262.
i really hope no-one will take AH's comment out of context though - he's referring to the kind of horse he usually rides (a horse such as Moonfleet could probably have won the Grand National!), and i agree that galloping over tiny fences on a big, high-bred horse would be a recipe for total disaster, whereas with big fences to back the horse off he could keep coming to them in safety. there are plenty of horses who are not as brave or speedy, who are fine cruising round the lower levels at the appropriate speed...
i totally agree with you about a certain rider, who has had a lot of nasty falls this year, i wonder whether it is huge pressure from owners, sponsors, etc etc.
frown.gif
frown.gif
frown.gif

the other big difference is that the better riders stay on for longer! i've seen two full rotationals posted on here in the last few weeks, both at tyres while schooling, and in both cases (thank heavens) the rider was thrown well clear and both horse and rider were unhurt. a Pro in the same fall would v probably have been securely in the plate for far longer...
 
, other big difference is that the better riders stay on for longer! i've seen two full rotationals posted on here in the last few weeks, both at tyres while schooling, and in both cases (thank heavens) the rider was thrown well clear and both horse and rider were unhurt. a Pro in the same fall would v probably have been securely in the plate for far longer...

[/ QUOTE ]
Good point, and in view of it perhaps there should not be more training, leave people loose in the saddle and easily ejected, at least then they are less likely to be killed!
 
Obviously my ealier post was somewhat tongue in cheek. I do think there needs to be some kind of compulsory scheme.
I was recently at a pony club training session where a well respected trainer had quite an unpleasant time with one of the mothers. The child who is 14 or 15 has been bought a nice young horse that has been produced by a professional. It is quite terrifying to watch, but they have jumped c round 2 intros and had entered a pre novice.The trainer was trying to explain that the child is not ready to do pre novice but the mother was adamant, they have met the necessary qualifications, and they are going!
There was nothing the trainer could do, but the child really does need protecting from the mothers lack of knowledge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top