Paul Graham of BE's comment in H&H today about lower-level not being dangerous...

kerilli

kerilli

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 April 2002
Messages
27,417
Location
Lovely Northamptonshire again!
Visit site
He said "We've got a good progressional ladder on the cross-country side at BE(80)T, BE(90) and BE(100) - it allows people to be ambitious and to make a mistake without being dangerous."

Do you agree with this?
Bearing in mind that a rider xc schooling on a former 4* horse was killed jumping a small fence (BE100 afaik), and that a fall at a BE(100) fence at Tweseldown last wk tragically led to the horse having to be pts, and 2 broken arms for the rider.
I know most horses can jump 1m fences pretty safely most of the time, but do you think it's reasonable to say that it isn't "dangerous", and to imply that you can get away with mistakes? Surely any fixed fence can be dangerous, even if small... I've seen a link to a full rotational fall at a tiny tyre fence while xc schooling. Not the "jumping the drop fence from the wrong direction" one either, this was on the flat.
I wonder whether there are people eventing now who would never have done so without this illusion of 'XC Safety' because of the introduction of the lower levels...
 
Any time you get on a horse its potentially dangerous,
having been to BE events since the start of the first intro classes I have seen a massive difference in the height and techical aspect of BE90 and BE100, therefore people people used to use BE90 to 'have a go' at eventing, now I think a lot of people are suprised at the fences.
 
However if you didn't want BE to be inherently dangerous you would all be doing jump cross and not jumping solid objects which don't move when you get it wrong?
 
I completely agree, I think for a start that it can allow people to take shortcuts. They know they are making mistakes - in training, or preparation - but think it doesn't matter as the fences are smaller. 1m is plenty big enough to still hit & suffer the consequences.
 
With respect, it is usually the less experienced riders in the lower classes and to my mind, that often leads to more "mistakes". Therefore I feel that the lower levels ar inherently more dangerous. Just my opinion.
 
CotswoldSJ said:
However if you didn't want BE to be inherently dangerous you would all be doing jump cross and not jumping solid objects which don't move when you get it wrong?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm not disputing that it's dangerous, that's exactly my point. Are people being fooled by the fact that the fences are small, into thinking that it's therefore 'safe'?
 
And they are only small if you and the horse are capable of jumping that height. I see some appaling riding at BE events.
 
Yes kerrilli. I completely agree with you.

ETS also Charlie 76--I fence judge a lot and often see really bad riding at lower levels, mainly due to the rider's lack of experience and capabilities. They think "oh, it's only 80/90cms, the horse will get me out of trouble" Often it can't because of the rider!
 
Last edited:
I actually think that hiscomment that lower levels aren't dangerous is quite horrifying and insensitive imo.

He is going to make a lot of people think that they don't need to worry about safety at lower levels, and therefore not take time to teach horse well ie. More dangerous riding and horses - because the lower levels are "safe"

I thought that most falls happened at the lower levels - the bigger levels only seem more dangerous because more publicized?
 
Two years ago I would have considered 1m fences to look small, however with my mare they look quite big. Surely size perspective is totally down to what you're sat on. A green rider on a green horse can be a lethal combination at any height whatsoever.

Maybe the statistics say otherwise, but surely telling people that fixed fences up to 1m are perfectly safe is totally irresponsible?

Haven't read the article yet so may have got hold of the wrng end of the stick.
 
This is very interesting. I disagree that the lower levels are not dangerous (excuse the double negative!). I suppose that objectively, a mistake at a lower level is less likely to be dangerous than a mistake at a higher level (as pointed out on XCC, if a horse gets off the ground, its forearms will be likely to clear a small fence, which reduces the chance of a rotational). At the higher levels, the horses are jumping higher and faster, which means greater impact on falling. However, the combinations competing at lower levels are not so experienced, therefore they are more likely to make mistakes. An inexperienced combination competing at a low level is also less likely to cope with having made a mistake and so the consequences may be more serious for them than for an experienced combination making a mistake at a higher level. I would be interested to see the stats on falls/fatalities across the different levels.

What I find interesting is the - brace yourselves this could be controversial - "dumbing down". When I started eventing (it was BHTA, not BE!) PN was the lowest level. This meant that people who did BHTA were of a certain level and the difference between affil and unaffil was quite clear cut. I first did BHTA after years of pony club rallies, schooling, hunter trials, etc and I am not sure people do that now. Am inclined to agree that maybe people come to it who are not ready for it and have not done enough training for it, because 80cm is quite accessible. I do think that people should be encouraged to event, and maybe there needs to be more training that's available to those who want to start out?
 
only_me, i think that's a "lies, damned lies and statistics" thing though.
yes, there are more falls at the lower levels, but there are also loads more runs at lower levels. statistically, I don't know which levels have the most falls per number of starters, will have to check.
also, you can, to a certain extent, get away with big mistakes at small fences (usually) because most horses can jump 1m or less even if strangled and stuffed into the base, stood off 5 yards like a lunatic, or whatever in between those two extremes, but when the fences get to Advanced level, the margin for error shrinks dramatically, and the slightest error can put you both on the floor. i think, off the top of my head, that there are statistically more horse falls at Adv, because of this, but i'm not positive.
 
HotToTrot said:
What I find interesting is the - brace yourselves this could be controversial - "dumbing down". When I started eventing (it was BHTA, not BE!) PN was the lowest level. This meant that people who did BHTA were of a certain level and the difference between affil and unaffil was quite clear cut. I first did BHTA after years of pony club rallies, schooling, hunter trials, etc and I am not sure people do that now. Am inclined to agree that maybe people come to it who are not ready for it and have not done enough training for it, because 80cm is quite accessible. I do think that people should be encouraged to event, and maybe there needs to be more training that's available to those who want to start out?
Click to expand...

Totally agree with this! I know someone who thought it a good idea to enter an Intro without any xc background (rider or horse) because they could jump showjumps (at home) at that height. Back in the day I don't think this would have happened
 
I also think that a bigger difference, taking into account poorer riding at lower levels (although this isn't confined to the lower levels imho ;) ) is that many poor riders will be less balanced and a lot less likely to stay in the saddle in the case of an accident. They may have accidents, but are perhaps more likely to land away from the horse due to lack of stickability.

Fwiw, after having a SJ lesson on the weekend, and discussing falls and saddles, I also think that many accidents may be 'helped' by the overpadded saddles that people have now. Some of the saddles I have seen people riding in hold people so snugly that imho, they are a lot less likely to be thrown clear.

Again, I think many of the fatal rider incidents happen at slow speed, which maybe would not have occurred over the faster (simpler?) courses of days gone by. XC now is more of a combination of SJ and XC with far more control required, I can't imagine Murphy Himself being able to get round a modern course. They have some horrendous falls in jump racing, yet rider fatalities (and horse?) are lower aren't they? But then speed helps in a fall I think. Although having said that I am very much a steady eddie xc :p
 
well there was a horse killed at the BHS scottish novice champs last october.... at a drop on a 2ft6 course. says it all really...
 
Horses die every day in fields after very minor trips etc. I really think some things are luck (or not) of the draw tbh.

I do think something should be done to improve standards xc - I'm just not sure how you'd go about it - unless you had compulsory tests for everyone? Yet can't help thinking that would be too expensive for many low level amateur riders - who do support the sport money wise, just by sheer numbers.
 
MegaBeast said:
Totally agree with this! I know someone who thought it a good idea to enter an Intro without any xc background (rider or horse) because they could jump showjumps (at home) at that height. Back in the day I don't think this would have happened
Click to expand...

Cripes. Out of interest, how far did they get...?!

This is the thing though, there isn't any respect for the fact that the fences are solid, and therefore inherently dangerous, because they are so SMALL.

when i started out we started over Novice (okay, much less technical than nowadays, but no smaller) and you had respect for fences of that height, esp fixed ones... and you made sure your horse already knew a lot about jumping, both sjs and xc fences.
 
I think I go back even further as when I started Novice was the first level you could start at.!
It does concern me that anyone who wants to (and can afford it!) can enter BE whatever their capabilities or not.
I know there are warning systems in place nowadays but that doesn't prevent any Tom, Dick or harry entering. They think that if they can jump 90cm/1m at home in the school, they are capable of doing a BE event.
Training is the key, but how could this be implemented and made compulsory?
 
Think the saddle thing is an interesting point - look at the tack the likes of Toddy, Ian Stark, Lucinda Green, Ginny Leng used and the falls they had and got away with compared to today's tack.

There's so much emphasis on knee rolls, thigh blocks, arse blocks etc that people are becoming not trapped but stuck in their saddles. But that could also to be to do with people who have no idea how to ride off their horse's back etc.

What really scares me about the lower levels when walking the course and watching warm up fences is the speed that little kids who would have normally stayed in the PC for years and years, are attacking these fences. I know ponies are more nippy and can chip in when needed etc but how many 14 yr olds are really going to respect a skinny upright on an intro or PN course and the dangers compared to that of a say an experienced 35 yr old?
 
Stencilface said:
I also think that a bigger difference, taking into account poorer riding at lower levels (although this isn't confined to the lower levels imho ;) ) is that many poor riders will be less balanced and a lot less likely to stay in the saddle in the case of an accident. They may have accidents, but are perhaps more likely to land away from the horse due to lack of stickability.

Fwiw, after having a SJ lesson on the weekend, and discussing falls and saddles, I also think that many accidents may be 'helped' by the overpadded saddles that people have now. Some of the saddles I have seen people riding in hold people so snugly that imho, they are a lot less likely to be thrown clear.

:p
Click to expand...

I think this is a critical issue. I am continually amazed at the current fashion to wear close contact event saddles, with mega short stirrups. I think it is the most bizarre trend, from a correctness perspective and a safety one.

Again and again I see riders whose hips & shoulders are a good 4/5 inches behind their heels, lower leg is wedged so far forward so that if the horse were to disappear, the rider would be sitting on their bottom. How can these riders use their legs, be balanced or move with the horse.

The rider is so far behind the movement that there is little chance of being thrown clear even without the added security provided by these saddles.

Honestly I see riders who are sitting at the back of the saddle with their weight over the horses kidneys, all the time. Why is this now happening? Sorry to sidetrack from the main thread, am rather fascinated by this phenomenon tho......
 
I have to say I totally agree with this. Also, the tragic incident of a pony clubber being killed in a rotational at a rally.
I was quite shocked to see PG's comment actually - wasn't Christopher Reeve in a state because of a tiny fence? Also, this may just be me, and it would be interesting to know if it is correct or not, I would think there are less frangible pins the lower down the levels you go? I think a fixed fence, whatever height, is dangerous if you make a mistake. It has just occured to my boyfriend that, every time I go cross country, there is the inherent risk that I may actually not come back - whether I'm on P doing a one star / novice [entered intermediate now as well] or on a 4yo in an intro.
 
I agree, Siennamum.
the trouble is, staying on is the most important thing nowadays. if you stay on, you might still win.
actually, falling off isn't the end of the world imho, but still being firmly wedged into your saddle as your horse rotates over just could be... i'd rather be thrown well clear thankyou, and live to compete another day. Literally.
a friend had a very blocky saddle years ago and was always bruised black and blue after every xc round. jeez.
 
I would have said the opposite to SiennaMum and said that those with shorter stirrups and flatter saddles are more likely to be thrown clear in a fall.

It's people riding longer in saddles with big thigh blocks and knee rolls that are most likely to get trapped in the plate in the event of a horse fall imho
 
MegaBeast, i'm not surprised... poor horse must have been totally bewildered!
T, Christopher Reeve's fall wasn't anything to do with the fence being fixed though, the horse stopped and he came off onto his head, it could have happened at a sj too really. it was small though, less than 3' iirc, i've seen the vid. :( :( :(
 
MegaBeast said:
I would have said the opposite to SiennaMum and said that those with shorter stirrups and flatter saddles are more likely to be thrown clear in a fall.

It's people riding longer in saddles with big thigh blocks and knee rolls that are most likely to get trapped in the plate in the event of a horse fall imho
Click to expand...

I think the issue has to do with balance. If you have short stirrups and don't have your heel under your hips, you are behind the movement. If the horses front end goes you will follow it, instead of being thrown off over it's head/shoulders.

The reason most people have their lower legs forward is for security, they have been drilled into believing that your lower leg can't be too far forward or too fixed. Prior to the Barcelona Olympics, and a new style of riding led by the Australians/Kiwis I don't remember this obsession. Since then, it's been drilled into people to never get ahead of the horse or let your lower leg go back, cause you'll fall off too easily. Sure if you do you may fall off on a drop, but you are less likely to be still in the plate when the horse hits the ground.

Now everyone rides like they are sitting in an armchair.
 
Has BE got 'less safe' at lower levels, because they started the BE 80 and 90?

Unaffiliated ODE's are a dieing breed, as why would you do this when its not recorded, and you could do a BE 80?

From my perspective we have a cross country course, but haven't run ODE's for years, under RC or PC they still need ambulances and all the expensive trappings. I think basically since foot and mouth, all the volunteers got time off and then decided it was a lot of hassle! (we used to run four per year)

These grass route events are gone, so riders have to enter a slightly higher level with BE80 and then tend to have more trouble as there is no local 2ft3" to enter.
 
MegaBeast said:
I would have said the opposite to SiennaMum and said that those with shorter stirrups and flatter saddles are more likely to be thrown clear in a fall.

It's people riding longer in saddles with big thigh blocks and knee rolls that are most likely to get trapped in the plate in the event of a horse fall imho
Click to expand...

I thought that too - I always feel like I'm going to fall off at the slightest thing in a close contact!
The worrying thing about his comment is that you might get more and more people who perhaps didn't dare do an event because it might be dangerous deciding to go eventing, and if they're nervous then they're more likely to make mistakes? I had a rotational fall over an 85cm SJ on my very experienced (ex-bsja) pony a few years ago. Some accidents will happen, no matter how hard you try to prevent them unfortunately :(
 
"We've got a good progressional ladder on the cross-country side at BE(80)T, BE(90) and BE(100) - it allows people to be ambitious and to make a mistake without being dangerous."
Click to expand...

I think this is a rather casual statement! I too have seen some appalling riding at BE. I saw one lady trot round the intro at twesledown hanging on to the front of her horse.. it was quite scary to watch I can tell you, I had my heart in my mouth as her horse tried to scramble over the fences.

I think this statement does indeed encourage people to be blasai (sp?). Theres nothing wrong with encouraging new people to give the sport a go IF they are properly prepared. This is basically saying that you could walk off the street jump on to a horse and go round.

Its ridiculous actually. Anything to do with horses is dangerous, you have to be properly prepared every time you get on a horse as accidents can happen hacking, schooling, over a 2ft X pole.

Im only going to go BE when im 100% sure my self and my horse are totally ready. If im not convinced I will get a good dressage mark and a double clear, I wont go. People need to be encouraged to be perfectionists wether the fence be 65cm or 1m35cm, they shouldnt be encouraged to just give it a go, cross their fingers and hope for the best because the jump is smaller than 1m.

Its simply too dangerous a sport, people die.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top