National meeting. First fatality.

[teapot]

Yeeeeees..... 4 in 1000 is 1 in 250, just what I said. If the average is 5 runs per horse then 2% of NH horses in a year die on the course.

It's a much harder figure to stomach when you start talking about horses, not starters, isn't it?

I'm ignoring the average 5 run per horse thing and going by that graph alone. I read that graph as percentage fatalities from total runners each year. 2012 was roughly 0.25% of all runners.

Unless I'm reading it completely wrong and I can't see why?


Either way, the fatality rate in racing doesn't bother me personally. Harsh and as callous as it sounds. I'd rather they went that way then end up as poor uncared for stock on Dragon Driving, or in the hands of the RSPCA.

 

[amage]

Please explain where I am wrong Caledonia?

I suspect it is a shock to you to realise that the stats published are not for horses, but for each time every horse starts. You cannot get away from this, if an average NH horse runs five times in a year then at the end of a year 2% of horses will die on the course.

If you are horrified by that figure, join the club. But you cannot simply pretend that it is nonsense, it is directly from what BHB publish.

Very difficult to say the average horse runs five times per year. Certainly some would, some could run a lot more and most could run less. This is why the stats are published according to death per starters, it is a far more accurate figure. 1/250 is 0.4%. There is a far far greater number of horses race than event/jump and deaths are all recorded and the vast majority is televised so it is far more transparent. This is a debate that no side will ever convince the other of their point.

Little Josh was a much loved family trained/ridden horse and his demise is very sad. After the horrible fall (and I agree with whoever said he broke his shoulder on the non-takeoff - it certainly looked that way) I for one am very glad Sam Twiston-Davies walked away unhurt. Ruby is also to be commended for quickly rushing to the horses aid when he was unseated at the same fence. The loss of any horse is sad but it's outside the back door.

 

[BigBuck's]

Of course people make money out of racing, and plenty of it otherwise it wouldn't continue!

Industry figures for 2006/07:

The average cost of keeping a horse in training for one year was £18,600.

The average prize money per race (to be divided between all placed runners, which can go down to sixth place and out of which has to be paid jockey's fee and industry contributions) was £11,700.

20,500 different horses ran in at least one race.

5,800 of those horses, or just over 25%, won at least one race.

That left nearly 15,000 horses who did not win a single race.

You do the maths.

 

[Caledonia]

Please explain where I am wrong Caledonia?

I suspect it is a shock to you to realise that the stats published are not for horses, but for each time every horse starts. You cannot get away from this, if an average NH horse runs five times in a year then at the end of a year 2% of horses will die on the course.

If you are horrified by that figure, join the club. But you cannot simply pretend that it is nonsense, it is directly from what BHB publish.

No shocks here - you apply the same crass dogmatism to this as you do everything else that you don't agree with.

FWIW - you need to take the number of horses that have run in a year, and divide by the fatalities, not some random figure you've invented to try and
justify your claptrap!

 

[cptrayes]

No shocks here - you apply the same crass dogmatism to this as you do everything else that you don't agree with.

FWIW - you need to take the number of horses that have run in a year, and divide by the fatalities, not some random figure you've invented to try and
justify your claptrap!

1. Please do not be rude Caledonia.

2. You are correct, that would be the right figure. Can you get the BHB to publish it please? They prefer to publish only the 1 in 250 starters figure. I'm not surprised, because the % of horses is a much more disturbing figure.

 

[Caledonia]

1. Please do not be rude Caledonia.

2. You are correct, that would be the right figure. Can you get the BHB to publish it please? They prefer to publish only the 1 in 250 starters figure. I'm not surprised, because the % of horses is a much more disturbing figure.

They do publish it - quite why you want to lie about figures, and then accuse the BHA of being disingenous is a bit of a mystery.

 

[cptrayes]

They do publish it - quite why you want to lie about figures, and then accuse the BHA of being disingenous is a bit of a mystery.

WHERE?

Please do not accuse me of lying again.

 

[Caledonia]

Can you get the BHB to publish it please? They prefer to publish only the 1 in 250 starters figure. I'm not surprised, because the % of horses is a much more disturbing figure.

There?

 

[pines of rome]

You only have to look on here to see how many are lost every day!https://www.facebook.com/inmemoryofourracehorses?ref=stream

 

[cptrayes]

I'm ignoring the average 5 run per horse thing and going by that graph alone. I read that graph as percentage fatalities from total runners each year. 2012 was roughly 0.25% of all runners.

Unless I'm reading it completely wrong and I can't see why?


Either way, the fatality rate in racing doesn't bother me personally. Harsh and as callous as it sounds. I'd rather they went that way then end up as poor uncared for stock on Dragon Driving, or in the hands of the RSPCA.

It's 0. 25 of all starters not of all horses which run at least once in a year. Each time the horse runs there is a 1 in 250, or 0.25, or 4 in 1000 chance that it will die on the course.

Dragon Driving? Sorry, that's completely unconnected and irrelevant to racing deaths.

 

[cptrayes]

There?

The number of horse deaths as percentage of horses in training which ran is not available anywhere that I can see. Where are you looking??

If it was, then I would quote it and not keep guessing at the average number of starts to try to work the percentage of horse deaths out.

 

[dressedkez]

1. Please do not be rude Caledonia.

2. You are correct, that would be the right figure. Can you get the BHB to publish it please? They prefer to publish only the 1 in 250 starters figure. I'm not surprised, because the % of horses is a much more disturbing figure.

cptrayes - you simply want to stop horse racing.......(it would seem) what you hope to achieve from that for general horse welfare - I am not sure....as well as the economic impact on jobs etc. , if you had your way. Your argiments are generally - well generailist, and not terribly well grounded (that I can see)
I would prefer you to far wider research on horse ownership per se, to judge on 'general' wastage - rather than just focus in on a relatively small wastage effect (in terms of equine deaths) related to horse racing/ training.
I hated seeing Little Josh meet his end today (relatively high profile horse) I hate to see any equne / human end their life, when maybe they have a few more years / decades to enjoy - but it happens - and we do know that that LJ was a cosseted animal up to death, and the end was quick - there are many more equines and humans who cannot experience the same - I got the kids to google tonight how many horses died in the GN when Mr Frisk won on from ground (never to be allowed again.......) it was two - the same as lat year, and the year before - going to quick? The year when the race should not have been allowed to go ahead (aka Jenny Pitman) and Red Maurauder won - it seems all were all OK - though only 2 completed, and a couple were re-mounted (not allowed now)
I am gettting to the point that I am dreading tomorrows GN (having always loved it) because if a horse is killed - then that is far more in the headlines then the horse that won - how sad is that?
Final point ........439 horse have run in this race providing 7 fatalities since 2000- 2010. On average 4 fatalities for every 1,000 horses taking place in a modern day steeple chase race - how does that stat equate to horses simply breaking a leg in a field?

 

[cptrayes]

These deaths are additional not instead of.

The statistic published by the industry is four in one thousand starters, not horses.

By your figures it's sixteen in a thousand for the National.

 

[Sherri]

I wonder how the GN statistic on fatalties compares to the Velka Pardubice, I can't find many stats on that race but on watching the 2 events the latter seems a slower race.

 

[dressedkez]

These deaths are additional not instead of.

The statistic published by the industry is four in one thousand starters, not horses.

By your figures it's sixteen in a thousand for the National.

My figures? I freely admit I am no stastitition, but I like to feel that I am looking at a qualative picture here, as well as quantative......

 

[Elf On A Shelf]

The Velka Padurbice is much much worse than the GN! Hate it!

 

[Sherri]

But is the Velka worse? I can't find any info and would be interested to know

 

[Elf On A Shelf]

Oh yes! Unsafe fences, unsafe jockeys, trainers, horses - you name it, it's dodgy! But the prize money s good!

 

[Sherri]

EKW Is it worse for the horse, I've found one figure of 52 horse deaths in 120years of the race! but can't find anything to back this up. But if this is true it's a safer race for the horses.

 

[Elf On A Shelf]

They cross differing terrain which will lead to tendon problems. The jockeys aren't yup to scratch for the most part. The fences are better now than before yes. The last time I watched the race a good few years ago a man was seen remounting his horse and battering it even though it had a broken leg. Not as many die in the race itself no but the long term problems this race creates isn't worth it.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NgoigVSKZYE

 

[Mondy]

I am gettting to the point that I am dreading tomorrows GN (having always loved it) because if a horse is killed - then that is far more in the headlines then the horse that won - how sad is that?

Not sad at all.
It is merely a sign that this nation is developing (slowly) into one capable of feeling (at least subconsciously) queasy with the ethical minefield that is the National.

 

[Caledonia]

Not sad at all.
It is merely a sign that this nation is developing (slowly) into one capable of feeling (at least subconsciously) queasy with the ethical minefield that is the National.

Nope, it's a sign of shoddy journalism. The papers only want to bash racing. They are not interested in any alternative viewpoint.

 

[Caledonia]

The number of horse deaths as percentage of horses in training which ran is not available anywhere that I can see. Where are you looking??

If it was, then I would quote it and not keep guessing at the average number of starts to try to work the percentage of horse deaths out.

The BHA accurate stats are that 0.2% of all runners lose their lives. You are plucking random figures out the air, which is entirely disingenuous. It's impossible to average for each horse across the board, because they all have different schedules.

 

[cptrayes]

The BHA accurate stats are that 0.2% of all runners lose their lives. You are plucking random figures out the air, which is entirely disingenuous. It's impossible to average for each horse across the board, because they all have different schedules.

Please point me to that. The figure I see quoted for NH starters is 1in in 250 or 0.4

Are you including flat races?

It is impossible to average, yes. So why is the true figure not available? Without it, a guess at an average is the closest we can come to working out the number of horse deaths as a percentage.

 

[Caledonia]

Please point me to that. The figure I see quoted for NH starters is 1in in 250 or 0.4

Are you including flat races?

It is impossible to average, yes. So why is the true figure not available? Without it, a guess at an average is the closest we can come to working out the number of horse deaths as a percentage.

I was using the all runners one, yes.

I did work out the fatalities as a percentage on the GN course last year - will go and see if I can find it.

 

[Caledonia]

Last 12 years, with maximum field.

2012 2 40 (1 BD caused by a loose horse, 1 fell loose 4 fences later)
2011 2 40 ( 1 fell, 1 BD)
2010 0 40
2009 1 40 (heart attack after finish)
2008 0 40
2007 0 40
2006 1 40 (fell 1st)
2005 0 40
2004 0 40
2003 1 40 (injured loose)
2002 2 40 (both fell)
2001 0 40
2000 0 40

So over the last 12 years there has been a fatality percentage of 1.875%

Now, major changes (supposed improvements) were made for the 2011 race, and for the 2012 one, and four horses were lost after the changes, giving a horrifying 5% for the last two years.

Taking the ten years from 2000 to 2010, the percentage is 1.25%

If only they had left well alone, Dooney's Gate, Synchronised and According to Pete may well have still been with us.

 

[Scarlett]

Last 12 years, with maximum field.

2012 2 40 (1 BD caused by a loose horse, 1 fell loose 4 fences later)
2011 2 40 ( 1 fell, 1 BD)
2010 0 40
2009 1 40 (heart attack after finish)
2008 0 40
2007 0 40
2006 1 40 (fell 1st)
2005 0 40
2004 0 40
2003 1 40 (injured loose)
2002 2 40 (both fell)
2001 0 40
2000 0 40

So over the last 12 years there has been a fatality percentage of 1.875%

Now, major changes (supposed improvements) were made for the 2011 race, and for the 2012 one, and four horses were lost after the changes, giving a horrifying 5% for the last two years.

Taking the ten years from 2000 to 2010, the percentage is 1.25%

If only they had left well alone, Dooney's Gate, Synchronised and According to Pete may well have still been with us.

Very interesting to read those stats - thanks. It did seem like as they try to make it safer they are making things worse, and it appears that is the case...

 

[Alec Swan]

Any point is provable by statistics, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that "The Flat Earth Society", rely upon such evidence.

Alec.

 

[fburton]

About the Velka Padurbice...

Is it worse for the horse, I've found one figure of 52 horse deaths in 120years of the race!

But is it worse for the horse? Why?? Horses have to die sometime, so surely it's better that die 'doing something they love' (a valid argument although I don't necessarily agree with the 'love' part) than grow old and arthritic in a field. Or is there an even better alternative?

 

[fburton]

Any point is provable by statistics, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that "The Flat Earth Society", rely upon such evidence.

Alex, I hope that was said tongue-in-cheek, because by that argument we might as well abolish all figures of a statistical nature because they have no useful meaning.