# Putting fatalities into prospective



## silu (17 April 2012)

I assume everybody reading posts on this forum are horse lovers and that is a given that we all deeply regret when any horse is killed or has to be humanely destroyed. Who doesn't know of equines being killed/severely injured during competition at all levels or during the process of training them to compete?
Recent examples of 3 horses being destroyed in Dubai flat racing and 2 horses being destroyed at/after BE events is proof enough that we all take risks competing our horses. Many other horses will also be badly damaged at competitions and destroyed later which never gets reported to the general public.
Indeed we all take risks while hacking on roads...our choice not the horses. I shudder to think how many horses are killed/injured during this non competitive pastime.
While I am all for trying to minimize risk to horses I do feel that The Grand National is getting a worse press than it deserves. I walked the course 3 weeks ago and the course IS very different to when I walked it about 25 years previously. It rode very well in the main during The Topham with very few fallers and no casualties.My own personal view is it might be a good idea to reduce the number of runners and INCREASE the sizes of the fences again to make horse back off them a bit more to hopefully prevent the "cavalry charge" as witnessed this year, however I very much doubt this idea will be implemented...non PC I fear! I also think there is weight to the argument that the modern Thoroughbred is lighter boned to increase it's speed at the expense of it's ability to withstand the rigours, but I am no expert on this matter so will stand corrected, if I am mistaken.
Who can honestly say they haven't witnessed some kind of abuse to horses/ponies? be it through neglect, over feeding, bad riding, bad temper!!!. "he who is without sin......" springs to mind, this abuse however is not witnessed by millions of "experts" on the TV. Many congratulations to Neptune a great horse who thoroughly deserved his day in the limelight having been overshadowed by the likes of Kauto, may he have a long and happy retirement.


----------



## BBH (17 April 2012)

No horse deserves to die in the name of sport and to equate death on the track with death via neglect / abuse is ridiculous IMO.

My Step father rode the GN in 1977 and it was the toughest track he'd ever come across for horse and rider. He went on to become a trainer.

I hate racing.


----------



## Dab (17 April 2012)

BBH said:



			No horse deserves to die in the name of sport and to equate death on the track with death via neglect / abuse is ridiculous IMO.

My Step father rode the GN in 1977 and it was the toughest track he'd ever come across for horse and rider. He went on to become a trainer.

I hate racing.
		
Click to expand...

Therefore are you saying that horses that die 'in the name of sport' are more deserving to stay alive than those that die not 'in the name of sport'?


----------



## Mondy (17 April 2012)

No, that is not what BBH is saying.  

Neglect is sad, yes, but horses dying because we want to be entertained - and make money - is not justified by other kinds of cruelty. 

The justifications for the Grand National are identical to those being thrown around near dog-fighting, bear-baiting and bull fights.


----------



## BBH (17 April 2012)

Dab said:



			Therefore are you saying that horses that die 'in the name of sport' are more deserving to stay alive than those that die not 'in the name of sport'?
		
Click to expand...

Not what i'm saying at all.

Thankyou Mondy.


----------



## Baileyhoss (17 April 2012)

TBH I think the bad press the national receives is justified and deserved.  I don't think it is appropriate at all to try and down play the risks of racing by comparing it to equine fatalities occuring in eventing or any other competative or non competative activities.

http://www.horsedeathwatch.com/  Although it's a dramatic sounding name for the site, it's actually just a list of the equine deaths in racing since 2007.  Now I have no idea of the numbers for eventing, etc.  But I would be happy to bet that they are no where near this.

We all know horse riding and competing has associated risks for the riders and the horses, and we all do our best to minimise those risks.  I am no expert on racing by any means, but it seems to me that racing is still primarily led by the financial aspect of the sport rather than the safety and wellbeing of the animals.


----------



## Maesfen (17 April 2012)

FWIW I totally agree with you Silu.


----------



## Miss L Toe (17 April 2012)

BBH said:



			No horse deserves to die in the name of sport and to equate death on the track with death via neglect / abuse is ridiculous IMO.

My Step father rode the GN in 1977 and it was the toughest track he'd ever come across for horse and rider. He went on to become a trainer.

I hate racing.
		
Click to expand...

We know you hate racing: the GN in 1977 was a hard race, the fences were huge, there were few safety considerations and yet, the fatalities were less. In the 1970's, horse were nothing like as  "race fit" as they are nowadays, they were not the same class, ie some were good jumpers, not fast racehorses, so they could plod along for four miles and win. Nowadays the horses are trained scientifically, they are much faster, and it is pretty much a given that they can gallop at a pace for four miles, and jump the fences.
No horse deserves to die, we don't want any horse to die, that is why they are trained for the day, looked after properly, and have all the best of attention, good riders, good feed, good vets, good trainers, good owners.


----------



## Dab (17 April 2012)

Mondy said:



			No, that is not what BBH is saying.  

Neglect is sad, yes, but horses dying because we want to be entertained - and make money - is not justified by other kinds of cruelty. 

The justifications for the Grand National are identical to those being thrown around near dog-fighting, bear-baiting and bull fights.
		
Click to expand...

Neglect is sad, horses dying in the National is sad. But we all 'own' horses for our own entertainment - and money is a mute issue as you must therefore condemn anyone who sells a horse for a profit and makes money from it!

Justification is not being made for the deaths in the National, but to say that no horse deserves to 'die in the name of sport' and that it does not equate to a death of a horse through neglect is unreasoned.


----------



## Rowreach (17 April 2012)

36 horses have died at Aintree in the last 12 years, including 23 on the GN course.  I am well aware that horses die all the time and for all sorts of reasons, but this is the one single event where you can be almost 100% positive that some of the starters will not be alive by the end of the race, or will be so badly injured that they will have to be destroyed.

As someone who is pretty knowledgeable about NH racing, I can assure you that I have put my views into pERspective and I do not think the risk of the GN is justifiable.


----------



## Dab (17 April 2012)

BBH said:



			Not what i'm saying at all.

Thankyou Mondy.
		
Click to expand...

Then make your point clearer, as that is how it reads.


----------



## cefyl (17 April 2012)

Silu - a well written post, we can choose to agree or disagree with.  Regarding the "type" of horse now racing remember Red Rum was bred to race on the flat over 1 mile.  He was not a massive horse at all, height or bone wise but exceptionally well balanced.  He had a knack for the National fences that few horses will ever match.

Speaking to a friend after the race who has ridden in the GN several times in the late 60's and 70's he thought this year some of the jockeys were on a suicide mission.  His comment was that many horses could have been presented better at most fences, too many too often grouping together in a bunch at fences where they could have given themselves more space without loosing racing line advantage.  There seemed to be more brought down as opposed to fallen that in previous years (Foinavon excepted) on the re-run, but someone will probably correct me on this one.  

I felt desperately sad for the connections of According to Pete, my sympathies to them, yes they knew the risk of NH racing but it does not make it any easier.  

I do find it somewhat contradictory though when some people are calling racing in general "cruel" and an "unnecessary loss of equine life" yet these same people will comment on the loss of an event horse with the greatest of sympathy for the owners / riders and see the horse dying doing something it loved!


----------



## silu (17 April 2012)

Apologies for the error in my posting it should read perspective..........my English tutor will be whirling in his grave!


----------



## MagicMelon (17 April 2012)

Rowreach said:



			36 horses have died at Aintree in the last 12 years, including 23 on the GN course.  I am well aware that horses die all the time and for all sorts of reasons, but this is the one single event where you can be almost 100% positive that some of the starters will not be alive by the end of the race, or will be so badly injured that they will have to be destroyed.
		
Click to expand...

Agree totally.  If as many horses were killed at Badminton for example then it'd get banned pretty quick I would imagine. Due to the shear amount of deaths in racing, it isnt even comparable to the number of horse deaths in any other disipline. I dont believe its right to say that horses can be killed at home just going for a hack for example, because the grand national is something which is pushing horses beyond their limits, thats why its so wrong. Its not JUST the GN though, yes a lot of horses die on the racetrack but theres also the huge volume of racers who dont make the grade or who get injured and are PTS every single year. In no other sport does that happen to anywhere near the same degree - if an eventer doesnt make the grade, its usually sold as a happy hacker or RC allrounder for example. Not many racers make it to being rehab'd.


----------



## Mitchyden (17 April 2012)

I totally agree with you silu. I looked into the statistics and far fewer horses were killed when the fences were larger. As you say though, they are never going to make them bigger because of the public outcry. I do not believe it would make much difference making the field smaller though as According to Pete fell when less than half the field was still standing. He was just very unlucky. Having said that when the fences were bigger, the jockeys avoided jumping Becher's on the inside as it was suicidal. Now it's been made easier, they were tending to stay on the inside hence being the cause of the bunching up.


----------



## Mrs B (17 April 2012)

Just a quick observation.

I think some of the arguments over the last x number of threads on this have been rather muddled.

Is it a morality problem? Because the horses do not, as people see it, die for a 'purpose' they approve of (such as raising animals for meat or as a pet), but for 'entertainment', 'business', 'betting' etc

Or is it a cruelty problem? Too much is asked of the horses, they're not running other than through fear, there is a delay before they are destroyed having injured themselves etc.

Personally, I think that horses (like most animals except man) have no concept of 'what if'. They have no foresight. And they don't really care how they die as long as it's swift. It's how they live until that point that bothers them.

I am not against racing or against the GN. I hope hysterical, knee jerk reactions are avoided as they can often be counter-productive; they excuse people from concentrating on the problem in hand and thinking things through properly.  I hope everything is assessed to see if lessons can be learned and my own wish would be for less in the field, but that is just my instinct.


----------



## Navalgem (17 April 2012)

Baileyhoss said:



http://www.horsedeathwatch.com/  Although it's a dramatic sounding name for the site, it's actually just a list of the equine deaths in racing since 2007.  Now I have no idea of the numbers for eventing, etc.  But I would be happy to bet that they are no where near this.
		
Click to expand...


I'd also bet that % wise it's a similar number of horses. How many horses race compared to eventing. A LOT more.

FWIW I agree totally with silu and I'd go as far to say I think making the fences smaller has made it worse as the horses and riders are inclined to go faster.


----------



## cptrayes (17 April 2012)

Let's put it in perspective, yes.

23 horses have died in 12 years of the Grand National. 40 horses run.

An average BE day has eight sections with 40 in each section.

The equivalent death rate would mean that for every single day of BE competition, all around the country, 15  or 16  horses would die on the cross country.

It would be stopped immediately.

Only in racing is it allowed.


----------



## Navalgem (17 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			Let's put it in perspective, yes.

23 horses have died in 12 years of the Grand National. 40 horses run.

An average BE day has eight sections with 40 in each section.

The equivalent death rate would mean that for every single day of BE competition, all around the country, 15  or 16  horses would die on the cross country.

It would be stopped immediately.

Only in racing is it allowed.
		
Click to expand...


I will assume you misinterpreted what I said.  You are speaking about one race. I am not. And I assume 'An average BE day' includes into's and prenovices? Hardly Grand National standard. Lets talk the likes of Badminton and Burghley events perhaps, make things more even. I believe it did not used to be uncommon for fatalities to occur at this level. I will concede probably less fatalities than in eventing as I have never seen eventers at any level gallop like they  do on a racetrack, but again that's another variable which affects comparison. BUT my point being horses have died and do die in eventing.

Anyway I digress slightly, how many horses race on an average day, how many days per week and how many die is your comparison for 'an average day BE' compared with 'an average day racing'.  That's the only reasonable comparison here.

In simple terms: list of horse deaths racing per annum divided by number of horses who have raced x 100 over 1 to give a percentage. Same for how many compete BE divided by those who die x 100 over 1. Percentages will be so small they'll be rendered meaningless. If anyone cares to give me figures I'll even offer to run them through ANOVA (Analysis of variance) and I'd bet the result is insignificant.

I do think changes need to be made to The National, same as they did in evening years ago to reduce numbers of death at the highest level.  I also stand by what I said, smaller fences have made the problem worse.


----------



## Dab (17 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			Let's put it in perspective, yes.

23 horses have died in 12 years of the Grand National. 40 horses run.

An average BE day has eight sections with 40 in each section.

The equivalent death rate would mean that for every single day of BE competition, all around the country, 15  or 16  horses would die on the cross country.

It would be stopped immediately.

Only in racing is it allowed.
		
Click to expand...

To put it into perspective and get an equivalent death rate would you not need to figure in a risk escalation factor - we need an actuary for that one!

But for example; 

1. dressage comps pose minimual risk for the horses, no fatalities - low risk factor
2. SJ comps pose's at little more risk for the horses than dressage and there are occasional fatalities - low to low medium risk factor
3. Flat racing maybe (not sure) pose more risk for horses than SJ, and there are a number of fatalities a year - low to medium risk factor
4. XC pose's more risk for the horses than flat racing, and there are a number of fatalities each year - medium risk factor
5. Hurdles...
6. Steeplechase...
7. GN....


etc then do a comparison.


Not trying to muddy the water, just that many have said you can't do a straight comparison....


----------



## Navalgem (17 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			Let's put it in perspective, yes.

23 horses have died in 12 years of the Grand National. 40 horses run.

An average BE day has eight sections with 40 in each section.

The equivalent death rate would mean that for every single day of BE competition, all around the country, 15  or 16  horses would die on the cross country.

It would be stopped immediately.

Only in racing is it allowed.
		
Click to expand...


taken from wiki: Modern steeplechase races have an average of six horse deaths per 1,000 horses taking part;[68] deaths in the Grand National are higher than the average steeplechase, with six deaths per 439 horses between 2000 and 2010.

also from wiki: Information about horse fatalities is difficult to locate, but at least 19 eventing horses, many of them top-level performers, died in 2007 & 2008, most of them in the US.

So at least 19 horses died in eventing in 2 years. Remind me again how many compete?

I also think your total for grand national deaths since 2000 is incorrect. I believe it is 11 but will happily stand corrected. Can you show me where you got your statistic please?


----------



## cptrayes (17 April 2012)

The previous post.

I'm not talking about NH racing, I'm talking about year after year after year deaths in the Grand National. If it was any other sport involving horses, it would be stopped.


----------



## cptrayes (17 April 2012)

Navalgem said:



			So at least 19 horses died in eventing in 2 years. Remind me again how many compete?
		
Click to expand...

About 7,000 last time I looked. How does that compare with deaths per 1,000 in NH racing?

And lets stick to British horse deaths, shall we. Nowhere near 19.


----------



## Navalgem (17 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			About 7,000 last time I looked. How does that compare with deaths per 1,000 in NH racing?
		
Click to expand...

The figures are insignificant as I suspected. six deaths per 1000 is not a huge amount. 0.6%. Hardly a death trap.

As wiki says its difficult to locate info on horse fatalities, I'll see what I can find for you.

Have you found the link to the 23 horses that have died in the grand national since 2000? 

BTW, statistically 69 horses have died in 150 years of the National. If there were 40 runners on average (which week now there hasnt always been as one year 66 ran!) thats a percent death rate of 1.15. 11 deaths since 2000 of an average of 40 runners is 2.3%, so have these so called safety measures worked? No!


----------



## bubbilygum (17 April 2012)

I am a big fan of racing, both National Hunt and Flat, and I was particularly surprised at how truly abhorrent I found this years Grand National. The death of According to Pete was just awful. I have come to the conclusion that I cannot support this race until some drastic changes are made. I find the argument that the Grand National isn't cruel because the horses are so well looked after completely laughable, it is total nonsense to think that is an acceptable excuse. Equally, I don't understand how owners, particularly owners of homebred animals which are considered to be part of the family, can send their horses out onto the National course with the phrase "we just want him to come back safely..."; how can it be worth the risk? 5% of the horses which ran this year had to be destroyed. I suppose it is hard for owners to argue with trainers who will continuously tell them how talented their horse. 

If you can support the Grand National as it is, then I don't think badly of you, but I personally cannot bear it any longer. It is damaging to the National Hunt on the whole, it isn't a good example of a national hunt race and it makes many members of the general public assume that all horse racing is dangerous and cruel which is simply untrue. The BHA needs to make changes to the Grand National quickly, each year it just gives the barmy folk at Animal Aid more ammunition against this great sport. I would like to see stiffer, more narrow fences, a smaller field, and ground no better that good to soft, but we will see - if the fences are made smaller again I will truly despair!


----------



## Navalgem (17 April 2012)

bubbilygum said:



			It is damaging to the National Hunt on the whole, it isn't a good example of a national hunt race and it makes many members of the general public assume that all horse racing is dangerous and cruel which is simply untrue. The BHA needs to make changes to the Grand National quickly, each year it just gives the barmy folk at Animal Aid more ammunition against this great sport. I would like to see stiffer, more narrow fences, a smaller field, and ground no better that good to soft, but we will see - if the fences are made smaller again I will truly despair!
		
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree!


----------



## Honeylight (17 April 2012)

I haven't got statistics to hand, but having watched NH racing for years & years, I'd say more horses died racing over hurdles than over fences. The factor of speed, of "missing" the smaller obstacles, lack of experience & lighter bone being factors.


----------



## Wishful (17 April 2012)

Dab said:



			To put it into perspective and get an equivalent death rate would you not need to figure in a risk escalation factor - we need an actuary for that one!

But for example; 

1. dressage comps pose minimual risk for the horses, no fatalities - low risk factor
2. SJ comps pose's at little more risk for the horses than dressage and there are occasional fatalities - low to low medium risk factor
3. Flat racing maybe (not sure) pose more risk for horses than SJ, and there are a number of fatalities a year - low to medium risk factor
4. XC pose's more risk for the horses than flat racing, and there are a number of fatalities each year - medium risk factor
5. Hurdles...
6. Steeplechase...
7. GN....

etc then do a comparison.


Not trying to muddy the water, just that many have said you can't do a straight comparison....
		
Click to expand...

Very few horses will die in "public" for SJ and dressage, BUT how many dressage horses are PTS after a long running attempt to get them sound again after DDFT injuries?  How many showjumper are PTS after they go lame or have incurable back problems.  Suspect the numbers might be surprisingly high.   Far more of the deaths eventing and racing are at competitions, so it is easy to create a list.  SJ/dressage deaths at the event are vanishingly rare (hence why Hickstead was such a shock).  It's far easier to sweep the DDFT injury statistics under the carpet, but if I were a horse I'd choose to die racing than after operations and box rest thanks very much!


----------



## Dab (17 April 2012)

Wishful, you make a good and valid point. There is also the same issue that for every top dressage and sj horse out on the seen, many have broken down trying to get there. No different from racing but they are rarely held to the same standards of welfare!


----------



## cptrayes (18 April 2012)

Wishful said:



*Far more of the deaths eventing and racing are at competitions ....  *

Click to expand...

I don't believe this is true, especially of racing. There is a very significant number of horses with severe tendon injuries, (probably the commonest example), which are boxed back home after a race to be assessed, (or have injuries where the severity is not apparent until some time has elapsed), which are then put down. 

I suspect that these far outnumber the ones that break a leg or neck on the track itself.



ps I can find only one recent horse death in British Eventing on record and that was Spring Along who had a heart attack before the fence.  He could have died at any time, as a six year old once did under me on a hack.


----------



## Amymay (18 April 2012)

Miss L Toe said:



			In the 1970's, horse were nothing like as  "race fit" as they are nowadays, they were not the same class, ie some were good jumpers, not fast racehorses, so they could plod along for four miles and win. Nowadays the horses are trained scientifically, they are much faster, and it is pretty much a given that they can gallop at a pace for four miles, and jump the fences.
		
Click to expand...

Bloomin nora's what a load of tosh


----------



## Dobiegirl (18 April 2012)

Miss L Toe said:



			We know you hate racing: the GN in 1977 was a hard race, the fences were huge, there were few safety considerations and yet, the fatalities were less. In the 1970's, horse were nothing like as  "race fit" as they are nowadays, they were not the same class, ie some were good jumpers, not fast racehorses, so they could plod along for four miles and win. Nowadays the horses are trained scientifically, they are much faster, and it is pretty much a given that they can gallop at a pace for four miles, and jump the fences.
No horse deserves to die, we don't want any horse to die, that is why they are trained for the day, looked after properly, and have all the best of attention, good riders, good feed, good vets, good trainers, good owners.
		
Click to expand...

MissLToe 1970 horses not as fit as nowadays is not true racing fit is racing fit, the only difference between racing in the 1970s and now is training facilities gallops etc. In the 1970s it was quite rare for a horse to win first time out because they were only half fit and needed a race or 2 to get them cherry ripe. No one would ever had entered the GN unless they were fully fit and as for they were not as fast as they are these days only has to look at Mr Frisks record time which was set up many moons ago.


----------



## cptrayes (18 April 2012)

Dab said:



			Wishful, you make a good and valid point. There is also the same issue that for every top dressage and sj horse out on the seen, many have broken down trying to get there. No different from racing but they are rarely held to the same standards of welfare!
		
Click to expand...

What an incredibly arrogant claim

Showjumpers and dressage horses "rarely held to the same standards of welfare" as racehorses. 

What planet do you live on  ?


----------



## Maesfen (18 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			ps I can find only one recent horse death in British Eventing on record and that was Spring Along who had a heart attack before the fence.  He could have died at any time, as a six year old once did under me on a hack.
		
Click to expand...

Sharon Hunt's horse at Weston Park last weekend too.
TBH it's not something either BE, BS or BD advertise is it, they're not as transparent as the racing industry.


----------



## cptrayes (18 April 2012)

Maesfen the racing industry isn't transparent. It produces records by runs not by horses. There is no record of horses put down because of, but not during, a race that I can find. And the stats that they publish about where horses have gone after leaving training are ridiculous. It may well be what owners/trainers are declaring, but it can't be the truth. I  did the sums on "horses sent to stud duties" and if they were true then either every TB stud is routinely killing many mares a year, or they are by now knee deep in brood mares. 

So we have identified one horse death on a BE course caused by the cross country itself out of hundreds of days of XC in recent years? It's a far cry from four in two years of one single race, isn't it  ?


----------



## cefyl (18 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			I think you need to research records throughly before you post a statement of only horse death in BE in recent years.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Racergirl (18 April 2012)

1996 Good 27 runners Rust Never Sleeps PU fatally injured approaching 13th.
 1997 Good 37 runners Smiths Band fell at 20th. 
1998 Soft 37 runners Griffins Bar fell at the 5th continued riderless before being fatally injured. 
Pashto fell at the 1st. 
Do Rightly. Heart attack.
 1999 Good 32 runners Eudipe fell at Bechers 2nd time around.
 2000 Good 40 runners All survived.
 2001 Heavy 40 runners All survived
 2002 Good 40 runners The Last Fling. Am I right in thinking he was killed running loose?
 Manx Magic.
 2003 Good 40 runners Goguenard UR 19th dead
 2004 Good 39 runners All survived but bless his socks, for Bounce Back it reads 'In touch until fell 6th (Becher's), fell twice more when riderless'. Did that horse have no self preservation instinct at all? You would've though two falls would be enough to put him off jumping!

2005 Gd/Sft 40 runners All survived.
 2006 Gd/Sft 40 runners Tyneandthyneagain fell at the 1st fatally injured running loose.
 2007 Good 40 runners Graphic Approach fatally injured while loose.
 2008 Good 40 runners Mckelvey died loose.
 2009 Gd/Sft 40 runners Hear The Echo collapsed and died.
 2010 Good 40 runners All survived
 2011 Good 40 runners Ornais died at the 4th. Dooneys Gate at the 6th.
 2012 Good 40 runners Synchronised & According To Pete 


thats as far back as can be arsed to go - starting with when the powers that be began really pandering to the animal aid types and buggering about with the fences.  Well done animal "lovers" - yet again you have killed far more animals than you have saved....


----------



## cptrayes (18 April 2012)

cefyl said:



			I think you need to research records throughly before you post a statement of only horse death in BE in recent years.
		
Click to expand...

"We have identified"  were the words used. If you know of more, educate me. I have googled and can find no more.

And if we extrapolate the last few years of Grand National deaths, even on the best possible interpretation, every single day of BE cross country would result in at least 10 horse deaths.

BE would be stopped. Why is racing allowed to continue?


----------



## Little Squirrel (18 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			So we have identified one horse death on a BE course caused by the cross country itself out of hundreds of days of XC in recent years? It's a far cry from four in two years of one single race, isn't it  ?
		
Click to expand...

There was a horse killed at Badminton in 2010 was there not? I have been to two 4* events and at both there was a horse lost on the x-country. 

Also two horses died at Badminton x-country in 2007.

This site is also quite interesting:http://www.eventing.zzn.com/


----------



## cptrayes (18 April 2012)

Little Squirrel said:



			There was a horse killed at Badminton in 2010 was there not? I have been to two 4* events and at both there was a horse lost on the x-country. 

Also two horses died at Badminton x-country in 2007.

This site is also quite interesting:http://www.eventing.zzn.com/

Click to expand...

Shame on BE for not making these figures easier to find.


----------



## Little Squirrel (18 April 2012)

I know it's worldwide but it's still interesting. 

Have just found another site which stated that in 2009 there were 128 road accidents involving horses being ridden. It doesn't state the number of horses which died resulting from the traffic accidents but if you take numbers into every context of equestrianism then the risk from doing everything to hacking to running a horse in the National is high no matter what.


----------



## cptrayes (18 April 2012)

Little Squirrel said:



			Have just found another site which stated that in 2009 there were 128 road accidents involving horses being ridden. It doesn't state the number of horses which died resulting from the traffic accidents but if you take numbers into every context of equestrianism then the risk from doing everything to hacking to running a horse in the National is high no matter what.
		
Click to expand...

I don't buy that argument, sorry.  Whilst it is probably predictable that a number of horses will die in road accidents every year, it is a tiny proportion of the number of horses that will go out on the road and it is normally a result of a third party's actions, the horse rider does not expect or cause the risk. It is, therefore, unreasonable to restrict the right of every horse owner to go out on the road.

It is equally predictable that out of, say 100 runners in the Grand National, at least one will die on the course. And that death will have been directly caused solely by running in the National, not the unexpected and illegal behaviour of a third party. It would not be anywhere near as unreasonable to stop the Grand National.  

The GN deaths by year given earlier were very interesting. It is beginning to look as if trying to make the race horse-safer has resulted in the opposite. I wonder what will happen now.


----------



## tristar (18 April 2012)

surely i'm not the only one to remember a badminton, within the last 20 years? it was very wet that year, and THREE horses died, why they did'nt stop after two fatalities i don't understand.


----------



## Maesfen (18 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			The GN deaths by year given earlier were very interesting. It is beginning to look as if trying to make the race horse-safer has resulted in the opposite. I wonder what will happen now.
		
Click to expand...

Well at least we agree on something.


----------



## amage (18 April 2012)

Navalgem said:



			I also think your total for grand national deaths since 2000 is incorrect. I believe it is 11 but will happily stand corrected. Can you show me where you got your statistic please?
		
Click to expand...

You are correct...the figure 23 is over the grand national fences as far as I am aware not in the National so the statistic encompasses the Foxhunters, Topham, Becher & I can't remember what the others are


----------



## cefyl (18 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			"We have identified"  were the words used. If you know of more, educate me. I have googled and can find no more.
QUOTE]

I assumed that someone who has the ability to post on HHO would also read the magazine, online and / or in print, even occassionaly.  And further more should not need "educating" though of course that has proved blatantly wrong.  You don't need to google, just read HH or BE or relevant eventing blogs, news, etc.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Roasted Chestnuts (18 April 2012)

Horses die in the field, out hacking, showing, having fun on the beach.......... the list goes on.

Animals and people do die in accidents freak or not. Yes its sad but there shouldnt NEED to be sonething blamed for it or a greater good etc.

Its a shame that this is the way sports are thought of. Why not look at the PEOPLE that die competiting in NON equine sports every year. Do they deserve to die more or less?? 

Sad state of affairs IMO


----------



## Rollin (18 April 2012)

Arriving a bit late to this thread but I wish as much emotion and charity support were put into making roads safer, for ridden horses, and that motorists were given higher penalties when they kill our horses.

It is my understanding that accurate figures are not available for horse deaths because the police lump them in with other animals killed on the road.

I have never been in the enviable situation of riding all off road, in Berkshire, Central Scotland and now in France I cannot avoid some road riding.  It is an unpleasant experience.


----------



## cptrayes (18 April 2012)

cefyl said:





cptrayes said:



			"We have identified"  were the words used. If you know of more, educate me. I have googled and can find no more.
QUOTE]

I assumed that someone who has the ability to post on HHO would also read the magazine, online and / or in print, even occassionaly.  And further more should not need "educating" though of course that has proved blatantly wrong.  You don't need to google, just read HH or BE or relevant eventing blogs, news, etc.
		
Click to expand...

Why on earth would you assume that anyone should read Horse and Hound and the BE magazine every week/month for years and keep a note of all the horse deaths or be able to remember them?
		
Click to expand...


----------



## cefyl (18 April 2012)

cptrayes said:





cefyl said:



			Why on earth would you assume that anyone should read Horse and Hound and the BE magazine every week/month for years and keep a note of all the horse deaths or be able to remember them?
		
Click to expand...

Well if you do not read anything relevant to a topic you are making wild claims of numbers and statistics on it may be pertinent in future to get YOUR facts correct before posting.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## cptrayes (18 April 2012)

cefyl said:





cptrayes said:



			Well if you do not read anything relevant to a topic you are making wild claims of numbers and statistics on it may be pertinent in future to get YOUR facts correct before posting.
		
Click to expand...

I made no claims. I asked for information. 

So now no-one can post on HHO unless they already know the answer? That'll cut things down a bit 

Click to expand...


----------



## cefyl (18 April 2012)

cptrayes said:





cefyl said:



			I made no claims. I asked for information. 

So now no-one can post on HHO unless they already know the answer? That'll cut things down a bit 

Click to expand...

Err you did make claims :-
"I can find only one recent horse death in British Eventing on record and that was Spring Along who had a heart attack before the fence"
"So we have identified one horse death on a BE course caused by the cross country itself out of hundreds of days of XC in recent years"
		
Click to expand...


----------



## cptrayes (18 April 2012)

cefyl said:





cptrayes said:



			Err you did make claims :-
"I can find only one recent horse death in British Eventing on record and that was Spring Along who had a heart attack before the fence"
"So we have identified one horse death on a BE course caused by the cross country itself out of hundreds of days of XC in recent years"
		
Click to expand...

Cefyl I'm sorry but what is the point of this discussion? Those aren't claims, they are statements. "I can find only one" - correct when it was written. "So we have identified one" - correct when it was written.

If you want to stop people making statements like that, you'll shut the whole board down. 

How about addressing the actual point of the thread - that if Badminton, the BE equivalent of the Grand National routinely killed one or more horses in 40 starters year after year, it would be stopped?
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Racergirl (18 April 2012)

Just been pointed in the direction of this article as well, which goes some way to trying to work out what goes on...


http://cuhrs.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04...howComment=1334761956431#c7545359378884812293


----------



## pipsqueek (18 April 2012)

Like everyone else on here is saddend and gutted when a horse dies in the Grand National, it is a high profile race and when fatalaties occcur the whole world knows, horses unfortunately break legs in jump/flat meetings over the year.  Horses also suffer ligament/tendon damage from competing in other horse sports, from general hacking out and from injuries sustained in the field,  and are put down.... not on live t.v.  I don't think it's fair to point the finger of blame at trainers it being all about money, guess there is good and bad in every sport but in general they love their horses.  I only know one trainer that regularly runs horses at Aintree but they have probably more retired oldies at home than runners!  The horses involved are looked after well, and racing is what they were bred for and love doing


----------



## Ladydragon (19 April 2012)

Miss L Toe said:



			We know you hate racing: *the GN in 1977 was a hard race, the fences were huge, there were few safety considerations and yet, the fatalities were less.* In the 1970's, horse were nothing like as  "race fit" as they are nowadays, they were not the same class, ie some were good jumpers, not fast racehorses, so they could plod along for four miles and win. Nowadays the horses are trained scientifically, they are much faster, and it is pretty much a given that they can gallop at a pace for four miles, and jump the fences.
No horse deserves to die, we don't want any horse to die, that is why they are trained for the day, looked after properly, and have all the best of attention, good riders, good feed, good vets, good trainers, good owners.
		
Click to expand...

Just picking up on this one...  I might not watch the GN but dodging the noise about Red Rum's hat trick and the first female jockey was nigh on impossible...  But two horses died that year so I'm a tad confused about there being less fatalities?  A field of 42 runners and 9 finishers...  This year...  15 (ish) finishers out of 40 (ish) starters?  Not worlds apart...

BBC News - GN 1977

According to good old Wiki - only '67 saw a fatality during that decade...  One or more horses in '73, 75, '77, '78 and '79 (8 horses)...  During the 80's only three years saw fatalities (4 horses)... Seven years out of the 90s (10 horses), and 6 years out of 2000 - 2009 (7 horses)...  Since 2010, 4 horses...  Maybe there was some 'protective factor' at play during the 60s and the 80s because outside of those decades, not much seems to have changed no matter what lip service to safety has been paid...

I'm a bit of an F1 gal and there were a big number of deaths in the 70s...  But after Ratzenberger and Senna died in 1994, changes were made and no one has died (to my knowledge) since...  For want of sounding a tad cynical, if jockeys were dying at the rate the horses are, I think we'd have seen backsides being shifted a lot quicker to implement effective changes...


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			What an incredibly arrogant claim

Showjumpers and dressage horses "rarely held to the same standards of welfare" as racehorses. 

What planet do you live on  ?
		
Click to expand...

That comment could have been construed as brazen, but it wasn't meant to be. What might have been a better way of expressing the sentiment, was 'that the finger is rarely pointed at other equine sport with a much vigour and righteous condemnation than it is at racing, but that other sports such as SJ and dressgae also have welfare concerns'. Would that be less incredibly aggrogant?



cptrayes said:



			I don't buy that argument, sorry.  Whilst it is probably predictable that a number of horses will die in road accidents every year, it is a tiny proportion of the number of horses that will go out on the road and it is normally a result of a third party's actions, the horse rider does not expect or cause the risk. It is, therefore, unreasonable to restrict the right of every horse owner to go out on the road.
.
		
Click to expand...

But by the same token the road riding owner is putting their charge at risk, what is the difference if the horse is bought down by a car or another horse, they are both 3rd party actions?



cptrayes said:





cefyl said:



			How about addressing the actual point of the thread - that if Badminton, the BE equivalent of the Grand National routinely killed one or more horses in 40 starters year after year, it would be stopped?
		
Click to expand...

Badminton can never be made as a straighforward equivalent to the National due to the nature of the event, i.e. a rider and horse at Badminton does not have to contend with 39 other riders and horses all trying to get over the jump at the same time!
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

Racergirl said:



			Just been pointed in the direction of this article as well, which goes some way to trying to work out what goes on...


http://cuhrs.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04...howComment=1334761956431#c7545359378884812293

Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing, lets hope this information gets seriously considered.


----------



## MagicMelon (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			There is also the same issue that for every top dressage and sj horse out on the seen, many have broken down trying to get there. No different from racing but they are rarely held to the same standards of welfare!
		
Click to expand...

What?!  How are dressage and show jumpers not looked after as well as racers?! They are hopefully BETTER looked after because IMO I strongly object to how racehorses are kept.  Yes, they have masses of money spent on their training / feed etc. but at the end of the day their basic needs aren't met!  They're backed horrifically early before their physically or mentally ready and they're stabled permanently whilst fed high energy feed.  My own horses welfare is of far higher quality than them as he is allowed to be out on grass grazing naturally and playing with other horses (as they should do, especially when young). Its such a basic need that so few racehorses get. I hate it when people think a horse who is wrapped in cotton wool is better looked after than one who is allowed to experience its basic needs.


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

MagicMelon said:



			What?!  How are dressage and show jumpers not looked after as well as racers?! They are hopefully BETTER looked after because IMO I strongly object to how racehorses are kept.  Yes, they have masses of money spent on their training / feed etc. but at the end of the day their basic needs aren't met!  They're backed horrifically early before their physically or mentally ready and they're stabled permanently whilst fed high energy feed.  My own horses welfare is of far higher quality than them as he is allowed to be out on grass grazing naturally and playing with other horses (as they should do, especially when young). Its such a basic need that so few racehorses get. I hate it when people think a horse who is wrapped in cotton wool is better looked after than one who is allowed to experience its basic needs.
		
Click to expand...

*please refer to comment 3 posts up*

Also the comment does not say that dressage or SJ'ers are not looked after as well as race horses! 

But there are race horses that are turned out, some NH horses get the summer off in a field (can't comment on flat horses). 

There are a number of top SJ and dressage horses that are not provided with turn-out - they are deemed to valuable to be turned out in a field where they risk injury. There are dressage, SJ and event horses that are started at 3.


----------



## Orangehorse (19 April 2012)

That was an extremely interesting and well researched article.  It really was simply bad luck that the two horses died.


----------



## Rowreach (19 April 2012)

Orangehorse said:



			That was an extremely interesting and well researched article.  It really was simply bad luck that the two horses died.
		
Click to expand...

Or you could say it was good luck that 38 of them didn't.


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (19 April 2012)

I've not read all of the thread but another eventing death the other week to throw into the mix - Sir Roscoe.

And also how many show horses and ponies get put down through lammi because of over feeding to get "Show Condition"? How many Showjumpers get pts through irreparable injuries? How many dressage horses get put down through buggered legs? Endurance horses - heart attacks? Polo ponies - bones and heart attacks? Idiotic owners who don't have a clue?

Come to think of it I can't recall the last time a horse died between the shafts of a cart? Maybe we should all take up driving!


----------



## Ladydragon (19 April 2012)

Orangehorse said:



			That was an extremely interesting and well researched article.  It really was simply bad luck that the two horses died.
		
Click to expand...

If there is more likely to be a fatality per race than not, I'm not sure that it can be deemed 'bad luck'...

To me at least, 'bad luck' suggests a random, unexpected event...  Which is certainly not the case for horse deaths and the GN...


----------



## Sherri (19 April 2012)

EKW said:



			Come to think of it I can't recall the last time a horse died between the shafts of a cart? Maybe we should all take up driving!
		
Click to expand...

Don't look into Harness Racing then as it will shatter the dream (please don't think I'm anti racing of any kind for the comment, but ALL sports involving horses have death rates)


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (19 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			Don't look into Harness Racing then as it will shatter the dream (please don't think I'm anti racing of any kind for the comment, but ALL sports involving horses have death rates)
		
Click to expand...

I had completely forgotton about harness racing! In my head I had the show carraiges and the skurry driving! But yes, I can now only imagine the fatalities in that.


----------



## Sherri (19 April 2012)

EKW said:



			I had completely forgotton about harness racing! In my head I had the show carraiges and the skurry driving! But yes, I can now only imagine the fatalities in that.
		
Click to expand...

I remember a description of harness racing that I was told by a harness racing trainer.. 

If horse racing (flat, NH types) is the sport of kings, harness racing is the ugly step sister... 

I worked on a harness racing yard and it was sort of true, but in fairness the jockeys are just as much at risk as the horses, being on a sulkie is like sitting on a catapult if the horse goes down for any reason you end up flying through the air.


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			What might have been a better way of expressing the sentiment, was 'that the finger is rarely pointed at other equine sport with a much vigour and righteous condemnation than it is at racing, but that other sports such as SJ and dressgae also have welfare concerns'. Would that be less incredibly aggrogant?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, less arrogant, now just plain wrong . If you were to search on this forum just a little bit you will find plenty of utter condemnation of how top horses are trained and kept in all disciplines, especially in dressage.





Dab said:



			But by the same token the road riding owner is putting their charge at risk, what is the difference if the horse is bought down by a car or another horse, they are both 3rd party actions?
		
Click to expand...

One risk is completely forseeable, expected in 1 in 100 starters in that race, normal behaviour on the part of the horses, and legal. A horse road traffic death is never expected, never predictable, not normal behaviour for the horse and almost always caused by inadequate, and often illegal, driving.





cptrayes said:



			Badminton can never be made as a straighforward equivalent to the National due to the nature of the event, i.e. a rider and horse at Badminton does not have to contend with 39 other riders and horses all trying to get over the jump at the same time!
		
Click to expand...


Exactly so, but if it caused deaths in the numbers that the Grand National does, it would not continue without major alterations.



...


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

EKW said:



			And also how many show horses and ponies get put down through lammi because of over feeding to get "Show Condition"? ....... Idiotic owners who don't have a clue?
		
Click to expand...

Do two wrongs make a right?


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (19 April 2012)

Of course not but seeing as people were bandying around with eventing I thought I would add in other disciplins just for the craic


----------



## Emilieu (19 April 2012)

Eke, didn't a horse die in New York while pulling a carriage fairly recently?  Sure I read that somewhere!


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			Whilst it is probably predictable that a number of horses will die in road accidents every year,
		
Click to expand...

Doesn't this^^^^^ contradict...



cptrayes said:



			A horse road traffic death is never expected, never predictable, not normal behaviour for the horse and almost always caused by inadequate, and often illegal, driving.,
		
Click to expand...

^^^this



cptrayes said:



			If you were to search on this forum just a little bit you will find plenty of utter condemnation of how top horses are trained and kept in all disciplines, especially in dressage.
...
		
Click to expand...

Maybe so but you rarely see this type of condemnation in say the red tops or the RSCPA making statements to the press or on the TV about these matters.




cptrayes said:



			Exactly so, but if it caused deaths in the numbers that the Grand National does, it would not continue without major alterations.

...
		
Click to expand...

And two horses died at Badminton in 2007, and the changes for 2008 were?. Even so, as has been stated previously you can not make a direct comparison with an event like Badminton.


----------



## Emilieu (19 April 2012)

*ekw! Can't edit (or type...) on phone x


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			Maybe so but you rarely see this type of condemnation in say the red tops or the RSCPA making statements to the press or on the TV about these matters.
		
Click to expand...

That's proportional to the number of people who watch the event. A footballer dies on a pitch in Redditch on a Saturday afternoon local league. It makes the local papers. A premier league footballer dies on the pitch in a televised match, it makes the evening primetime news. If Badminton killed horses year after year the RSPCA would comment.





			And two horses died at Badminton in 2007, and the changes for 2008 were?. Even so, as has been stated previously you can not make a direct comparison with an event like Badminton.
		
Click to expand...

It isn't a regular year after year occurrence.  You may not like me to, but I think you can make a comparison of horse deaths in two annual horse events that are each the "pinnacle" of their sport.

I don't know why those two died, but if it was the year that one was spiked by a fence flag pole jumping up off the floor after he broke it in half, then  those types of poles have never been used since.  If the ground conditions were to blame and the same ground conditions occurred the next year the event would likely have been cancelled. If it was found that running horses too close together caused more fatalities, then the time interval between starts would be increased even if it meant fewer than 60 horses could compete.

It is perfectly well documented that a very significant number of fallers in the Grand National are brought down by other horses, and yet they continue to run year after year with 40 starters. How about trying 25 next year, or even 30?


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			That's proportional to the number of people who watch the event. A footballer dies on a pitch in Redditch on a Saturday afternoon local league. It makes the local papers. A premier league footballer dies on the pitch in a televised match, it makes the evening primetime news. If Badminton killed horses year after year the RSPCA would comment.
		
Click to expand...

Fair point, but that is why the thread it titled 'putting the fatalities into perspective' (SP)






cptrayes said:



			It isn't a regular year after year occurrence.  You may not like me to, but I think you can make a comparison of horse deaths in two annual horse events that are the "pinnacle" of their sport.

I don't know why those two died, but if it was the year that one was spiked by a fence flag pole jumping up off the floor after he broke it in half, then  those types of poles have never been used since.  If it was found that running horses too close together caused more fatalities, then the time interval between starts would be increased even if it meant fewer than 60 horses could compete.

It is perfectly well documented that a very significant number of fallers in the Grand National are brought down by other horses, and yet they continue to run year after year with 40 starters. How about trying 25 next year, or even 30?
		
Click to expand...

Yes one was spiked by a flag, the other was a heart attack.

Precisely and based on the very good report from the Cambridge student (?) posted earlier, there seems to be a very crediable reason to reduce the field numbers in the National.


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Originally Posted by cptrayes 
_Whilst it is probably predictable that a number of horses will die in road accidents every year,_

*Doesn't this^^^^^ contradict..*

Quote:
Originally Posted by cptrayes 
_A horse road traffic death is never expected, never predictable, not normal behaviour for the horse and almost always caused by inadequate, and often illegal, driving.,_

*^^^this*

Click to expand...

No. 

It is predictable that a number of horses will be killed somewhere in the UK in the course of a year as a result of road traffic accidents. A tiny, tiny number of horses will be killed somewhere in hundreds of thousands of miles of road at any time of daylight on 365 days. Any one accident is not predictable.

Deaths in National Hunt racing are so frequent, and in addition related to horse ability, ground conditions and field size, that a statistician could easily produce odds on a horse dying in any particular race at any particular NH meet.





...


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			Fair point, but that is why the thread it titled 'putting the fatalities into perspective' (SP)
		
Click to expand...

How should I know, it isn't my thread


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			No. It is predictable that a number of horses will be killed somewhere in the UK in the course of a year as a result of road traffic accidents. A tiny, tiny number of horses will be killed somewhere in hundreds of thousands of miles of road at any time of daylight on 365 days. Any one accident is not predictable.

Deaths in National Hunt racing are so frequent, and in addition related to horse ability, ground conditions and field size, that a statistician could easily produce odds on a horse dying in any particular race at any particular NH meet.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, dont follow how that is not contradictory! 

It is predicatble that a horse will be killed somewhere on a road in the UK, but that any one accident is not predictable. Do you mean that the exact time, location, and exact nature of the incident is not predictable?


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			How should I know, it isn't my thread 

Click to expand...

Doesn't the title of the thread give it away????


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			Sorry, dont follow how that is not contradictory!
		
Click to expand...

Then I can't help you much more, sorry. If you want to understand I suggest you study some statistics.

Road accident deaths are random accidents and cannot be predicted except in the widest possible terms that some will occasionally happen.

National Hunt deaths are not random, they are a predictable and frequent outcome of National Hunt Racing.


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			Doesn't the title of the thread give it away???? 

Click to expand...

I think perhaps all you are saying is that you want the deaths put into a different perspective than the one I choose to take.


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			National Hunt deaths are not random, they are a predictable and frequent outcome of National Hunt Racing.
		
Click to expand...

Ah but they ARE random! Don't you see! I can't remember how many Jumps tracks there are int he UK at the moment but at each one there will be a minimum of 6 chase fences and 8 hurdles. You can't be sure of which particular fence is going to take a horses life that day, if at all that year or decade thus unpredictable. You also can not be sure of which horse it will affect - unpredictable. Now if more horses died at one particular fence or hurdle then it would be looked into and either moved a bit or completely rebuilt to make it safer.

 The National has a unique course and horses have been known to die all over the course, not always at the same fence. So that in itself is unpredictable. You start out with 40 horses - which ones fall - unpredictable - which ones get brought down due to fallers - unpredictable - which ones get injured running loose - unpredictable. There are far too many variables to say that it is predictable and frequent.

So going by your theory of predictability you should know exactly which horse is going to die on which road at what time so please - do tell us!


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			Then I can't help you much more, sorry. If you want to understand I suggest you study some statistics.

Road accident deaths are random accidents and cannot be predicted except in the widest possible terms that some will occasionally happen.

National Hunt deaths are not random, they are a predictable and frequent outcome of National Hunt Racing.
		
Click to expand...

It is not a problem with the statistics it is a problem with what is termed as predictable. In one breath you were saying that road deaths were predicatble but in the next not!

The arguement is spurious if National Hunt deaths are not random, but predictable then please predicted the next NH death, the race, the time, the manner of the death?


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

EKW said:



			Ah but they ARE random! Don't you see! I can't remember how many Jumps tracks there are int he UK at the moment but at each one there will be a minimum of 6 chase fences and 8 hurdles. You can't be sure of which particular fence is going to take a horses life that day, if at all that year or decade thus unpredictable. You also can not be sure of which horse it will affect - unpredictable. Now if more horses died at one particular fence or hurdle then it would be looked into and either moved a bit or completely rebuilt to make it safer.

 The National has a unique course and horses have been known to die all over the course, not always at the same fence. So that in itself is unpredictable. You start out with 40 horses - which ones fall - unpredictable - which ones get brought down due to fallers - unpredictable - which ones get injured running loose - unpredictable. There are far too many variables to say that it is predictable and frequent.
		
Click to expand...

As I said, you need to study more statistics, in particular probability. National Hunt deaths are not random, they are predictable and a good statistician would happily produce you the odds of a horse dying in any particular race. And since bookies use the same science of  probability to predict winners, and insurers use it to predict claims,  and bookies are rarely poor men and insurers never, then  you can see how it works.




EKW said:



			So going by your theory of predictability you should know exactly which horse is going to die on which road at what time so please - do tell us!
		
Click to expand...


You really don't understand, do you, and I'm at a loss how to explain it further.

It is the very fact that individual road deaths are completely unpredictable, and National Hunt deaths are not unpredictable that makes it acceptable, to me, for us to continue to ride horses on roads, but not to race them over NH fences and hurdles.


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			I think perhaps all you are saying is that you want the deaths put into a different perspective than the one I choose to take. 

Click to expand...

Sorry you feel this way, as that was not the jist of the arguement


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

The point is that National Hunt deaths are not accidents.

They are a completely logical and expected outcome of the sport. They are so expected that they are planned for and prepared for in such detail that the race continues around them. 

And for me, they happen far too often to be justified.


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			The point is that National Hunt deaths are not accidents.

They are a completely logical and expected outcome of the sport. They are so expected that they are planned for and prepared for in such detail that the race continues around them. 

And for me, they happen far too often to be justified.
		
Click to expand...

62.5% of major injuries to horses happen whilst turned out in the field. Should we start expecting not to have a horse o bring in of an evening anymore then?


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

EKW said:



			62.5% of major injuries to horses happen whilst turned out in the field. Should we start expecting not to have a horse o bring in of an evening anymore then?
		
Click to expand...

Do you not get concerned every time you go to bring your horses in and don't find them immediately in one piece? I do. I nearly lost one to a leg-breaking kick two years ago. It was only the fact that the kicker was unshod that saved the horse. And boy I can tell you how much you can panic when you finally find a dead Shetland in 15 acres of grass - so sound asleep that it didn't hear you shouting. 

But I am not prepared to deprive my horses of the natural behaviour of herd turnout to prevent my own sorrow if I lose one.

And neither would I put them in a situation where I know that they have a 1 in 20, 50 or even 100 chance of not coming back alive.


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			The point is that National Hunt deaths are not accidents.

They are a completely logical and expected outcome of the sport. They are so expected that they are planned for and prepared for in such detail that the race continues around them. 

And for me, they happen far too often to be justified.
		
Click to expand...

But again by the same token deaths on the roads are expected and logical outcome of being in that position! The exact nature and location of the accident is not predictable, but it is so expect that they will happen somewhere that the emergency services are trained and prepared to deal with them.


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			But again by the same token deaths on the roads are expected and logical outcome of being in that position! The exact nature and location of the accident is not predictable, but it is so expect that they will happen somewhere that the emergency services are trained and prepared to deal with them.
		
Click to expand...

I'm losing the will to live 

The probability of being involved in a road accident on any one hack on any one day which causes the death of a horse is so very, very, very tiny that it would not meet acceptable criteria for being statistically valid.

This is not so of the probability of a National Hunt horse being killed during a race. Events which are so frequent that they can be given a statistically valid probability score.

Neither the Fire Brigade nor the Ambulance service nor vets in cars carry a gun with which to destroy a fatally injured horse. My own vets carry Ketamine -  breaking the rules they have been given - for just such a use, which is almost never used in a road traffic accident.


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

With your knowledge of statistics what is the probability score of a NH being killed during a race?


----------



## Sherri (19 April 2012)

According to the BHA there are 4 fatalities per 1000 runners, so a 1/250 chance of dying in a race.


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			According to the BHA there are 4 fatalities per 1000 runners, so a 1/250 chance of dying in a race.
		
Click to expand...

And if the average horse runs 5 times a year, a 1 in 50 chance of finishing the season dead before the race has finished.

And how many more put down at home from injuries they can't recover from?

Would you hack your horse 5 times a year if it had a 1 in 50 or worse chance of dying if you did?


----------



## Ladydragon (19 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			According to the BHA there are 4 fatalities per 1000 runners, so a 1/250 chance of dying in a race.
		
Click to expand...

Taking the GN as an isolated race...that risk is substantially magnified...

For anyone who does follow the darn thing - the 80s saw four fatalities...  Double that in the 70s with the decades since being similar...  Since 2010, it's four so it does make me wonder if there's any identifiable aspect that mitigated the numbers of fatalities in the 80s...  Outside of that decade it averages out close to one horse per race - unacceptable risk for me...

PS...if the above statistics include the much higher risk of the GN - how much does it skew the overall stats?  ie, if no GN, would that 4:1000 drop somewhat?


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			And if the average horse runs 5 times a year, a 1 in 50 chance of finishing the season dead before the race has finished.

And how many more put down at home from injuries they can't recover from?

Would you hack your horse 5 times a year if it had a 1 in 50 or worse chance of dying if you did?
		
Click to expand...

Well now surely that would depend on the probablity score for each of the races you ran your horse in! If say you ran it in 5 races with a smaller probability score of it dying then the odds of it finishing the season would be far greater what you have quoted! Conversely it would go down the other way!

Also, does probabilty work that way? How is it cumulative over a year? Surely every time the horse runs it has a 1/250 chance of not finishing, the probablity is not cut the more times it runs as it is still 1 of 1000 runners.


----------



## Sherri (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			Well now surely that would depend on the probablity score for each of the races you ran your horse in! If say you ran it in 5 races with a smaller probability score of it dying then the odds of it finishing the season would be far greater what you have quoted! Conversely it would go down the other way!

Also, does probabilty work that way? How is it cumulative over a year? Surely every time the horse runs it has a 1/250 chance of not finishing, the probablity is not cut the more times it runs as it is still 1 of 1000 runners.
		
Click to expand...

I think your right, it's like the lottery playing it every week doesn't increase your chances of winning as each draw is an independent event.. So every time a horse runs each race is a separate event..


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			And if the average horse runs 5 times a year, a 1 in 50 chance of finishing the season dead before the race has finished.
		
Click to expand...

Further to this ^^^^^




cptrayes said:



			You really don't understand, do you, and I'm at a loss how to explain it further.
		
Click to expand...


Then maybe this^^^^


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			Well now surely that would depend on the probablity score for each of the races you ran your horse in! If say you ran it in 5 races with a smaller probability score of it dying then the odds of it finishing the season would be far greater what you have quoted! Conversely it would go down the other way!

Also, does probabilty work that way? How is it cumulative over a year? Surely every time the horse runs it has a 1/250 chance of not finishing, the probablity is not cut the more times it runs as it is still 1 of 1000 runners.
		
Click to expand...



If there is a 1 in 250 chance of a runner finishing alive, then to find out the chances of a HORSE finishing the season alive, you have to know the average number of times a horse runs in a season. I'm guessing that it's about 5. So unless deaths are seriously skewed towards horses that run less often, the "average" horse will have something like a 1 in 50 chance of not finishing the season alive. It's imprecise of course, but it's a much more honest figure to talk about horse deaths than runner deaths.

Of course it's a much worse figure, so the racing industry don't like to use it. Just like they don't publish deaths due to injuries caused by a race but not carried out until the animal gets back home.


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			I think your right, it's like the lottery playing it every week doesn't increase your chances of winning as each draw is an independent event.. So every time a horse runs each race is a separate event..
		
Click to expand...



Correct for every time the horse starts. Not correct for its chances of finishing a series of races.

The chance of any one throw of the dice landing a 6 is always 1 in 6. The chances of 6 sixes being thrown in a row are 1/6 x 1/6 x1/6  x1/6 x 1/6 x 1/6

So the chances of a horse racing for the whole season and not dying are much lower than the chances that it will not die in any  one of its races.


----------



## Racergirl (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			Neither the Fire Brigade nor the Ambulance service nor vets in cars carry a gun with which to destroy a fatally injured horse. My own vets carry Ketamine -  breaking the rules they have been given - for just such a use, which is almost never used in a road traffic accident.
		
Click to expand...

errr - they may  not nececcarily have a gun, but every vet (that doesnt hold a gun licence) that goes out as an ambulatory practicioner should have somulose or pentobarb on board - cant believe that people euthanase with Ketamine??!!!!! 

(sorry, completely off topic, but Im stunned that anyone would do this!!!)


----------



## Echo Bravo (19 April 2012)

And breaking the rules!! TUT TUT.


----------



## Racergirl (19 April 2012)

Who is - me?? how?? (rules here confuse me quite a lot  !!) 

just to keep deaths in racing on topic, there was one today - on the flat at Ripon. 
RIP Arrys Orse.

edited to add - and one eventing today too, Cavalier Bertie ridden by Sharon Hunt. (just as we seem to be comparing many different genres at the moment!!)


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			If there is a 1 in 250 chance of a runner finishing alive, then to find out the chances of a HORSE finishing the season alive, you have to know the average number of times a horse runs in a season. I'm guessing that it's about 5. So unless deaths are seriously skewed towards horses that run less often, the "average" horse will have something like a 1 in 50 chance of not finishing the season alive. It's imprecise of course, but it's a much more honest figure to talk about horse deaths than runner deaths.

Of course it's a much worse figure, so the racing industry don't like to use it. Just like they don't publish deaths due to injuries caused by a race but not carried out until the animal gets back home.
		
Click to expand...

When looking at probabilities it is not that simple. You would need to look at the total number of runners in a season, the total number of races, the amount of fatalities in that season and then factor in the number of times your horse has run in that season. Therefore it is not 1/50 chance of it finishing the season alive if it has runs 5 times!


----------



## silu (19 April 2012)

I have been very interested in the varied, knowledgeable and educational responses/links suggested by posters. In the main it would appear the debate is how we differ as to what are acceptable risks to horses and what are not.
I personally still feel The Grand National is berated disproportionately on welfare grounds and it is regrettable that the live export of horses for slaughter doesn't attract the same amount of adverse publicity. There is no doubting that some racehorses do suffer for financial gain, however ALL live exported horses for slaughter suffer for financial gain. If the plight of slaughter horses was shown once a year to millions of viewers world wide more might be done to stop this hideous trade, however this isn't such an "easy target" as The GN.


----------



## Dab (19 April 2012)

silu said:



			I personally still feel The Grand National is berated disproportionately on welfare grounds and it is regrettable that the live export of horses for slaughter doesn't attract the same amount of adverse publicity. There is no doubting that some racehorses do suffer for financial gain, however ALL live exported horses for slaughter suffer for financial gain. If the plight of slaughter horses was shown once a year to millions of viewers world wide more might be done to stop this hideous trade, however this isn't such an "easy target" as The GN.
		
Click to expand...

^^^this

thanks for bringing it back in focus


----------



## cptrayes (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			When looking at probabilities it is not that simple. You would need to look at the total number of runners in a season, the total number of races, the amount of fatalities in that season and then factor in the number of times your horse has run in that season. Therefore it is not 1/50 chance of it finishing the season alive if it has runs 5 times!
		
Click to expand...

I've been trying to tell you that it's not that simple and that it's an estimate! But until horse racing publishes figures of horse deaths instead of deaths by number of runs, incuding the ones put down at home shortly after racing, we can have no real idea of a the true scale of the problem of deaths in NH racing. Publishing only deaths by runs is disengenuous and makes it look like they have something to hide.


----------



## Ladydragon (19 April 2012)

Dab said:



			When looking at probabilities it is not that simple. You would need to look at the total number of runners in a season, the total number of races, the amount of fatalities in that season and then factor in the number of times your horse has run in that season. Therefore it is not 1/50 chance of it finishing the season alive if it has runs 5 times!
		
Click to expand...

But how much of a jump in probability if the GN is included?  The risks in that race alone appear to be substantially disproportionate to racing per se...



silu said:



			I personally still feel The Grand National is berated disproportionately on welfare grounds and it is regrettable that the live export of horses for slaughter doesn't attract the same amount of adverse publicity. There is no doubting that some racehorses do suffer for financial gain, however ALL live exported horses for slaughter suffer for financial gain. If the plight of slaughter horses was shown once a year to millions of viewers world wide more might be done to stop this hideous trade, however this isn't such an "easy target" as The GN.
		
Click to expand...

But the two are separate issues...  On the foot export for slaughter is wrong IMO...  So is the GN IMO...  They are both equally in need of being addressed...  It's a bit of a straw man argument to suggest one area can be mitigated by comparison to other, equally distasteful (for some) area...  You could flip it over and suggest that operating in the public eye with widespread societal acceptance and voluntary financial association by Joe Public is 'worse' than an activity that can flourish because it is so unknown...


----------



## Dab (20 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			Deaths in National Hunt racing are so frequent, and in addition related to horse ability, ground conditions and field size, that a statistician could easily produce odds on a horse dying in any particular race at any particular NH meet.
...
		
Click to expand...




cptrayes said:



			As I said, you need to study more statistics, in particular probability. National Hunt deaths are not random, they are predictable and a good statistician would happily produce you the odds of a horse dying in any particular race. And since bookies use the same science of  probability to predict winners, and insurers use it to predict claims,  and bookies are rarely poor men and insurers never, then  you can see how it works.
.
		
Click to expand...




cptrayes said:



			I've been trying to tell you that it's not that simple and that it's an estimate! But until horse racing publishes figures of horse deaths instead of deaths by number of runs, incuding the ones put down at home shortly after racing, we can have no real idea of a the true scale of the problem of deaths in NH racing. Publishing only deaths by runs is disengenuous and makes it look like they have something to hide.
		
Click to expand...

Well this is clearly where the confusion centres.

Your arguements are based on predictability and probability, and that there is an unaccepatble level of fatalities in NH. Therefore, by making this claim it would appear that you have a sound knowledge of the statitisics centred around National Hunt fatalities. 

However, when it is pointed out that your calculation of there being a 1/50 chance of a horse not finishing a season alive if it has run 5 times is incorrect, you now say it is only a simple estimate and this is what you have been saying all along!!! Yep it is, very simple and as you say a good statistician would happily produce you the odds!!!


----------



## Sherri (20 April 2012)

OK, I had a bad day at work so as already depressed I looked at the horse fatalities and made some stats from them. 

Please note I'm doing this on a tablet so may have miss counted some of the figures as had to manually count them.  Info on fatalities are from the AA website, other stats BHA website.  I am looking at racing as a whole, not separating the different types so NH, flat ect... but not point to point or harness racing. 

Last year there were 13680 horses in GB racing (though they might not all have raced that year)

There were approx 1400 fixtures, if you take the average fixture as having 7 races that is 9800 races.

Now to the fatalities according to AA there were 170 fatalities at GB race courses. if you take this without looking further then 1 in 57.6 races has a horse fatally injured, and a horse has a 1-80 chance of being fatally injured.  Not good odds for the horse.

Now the interesting part and how figures get clouded..

Counting through the list only 64 of the horses were GB horses, this means statistically a UK horse has a 1/213 chance of a fatal injury at a GB race. 

The other fatalities on UK race courses by country of horse are:

Ireland 80
France 18
USA 5
Germany 2
Newzeland 1

To give a full picture I'd need to know the stats for these countries and include them. 

The odds could vary so much, how many GB horses die in races abroad, how many horses travel to the UK to race, both these figures could totally alter the odds in either direction.  The one thing I would add is the UK is pretty open about horse racing fatalities compared to other countries.  

one of my fav quotes:

lies, damned lies and statistics... 

I just hope this gives a clearer picture on fatalities per horse but I fear it raises more questions than it answers.


----------



## cptrayes (20 April 2012)

I think those figures may be for where the horse was bred, not where it lives. For example, a French flat racer I bought lived in Britain and raced here under a passport with (Fr) after his name, and the same with the USA bred one I had.

So 1 in 80 is more like the real figure, probably.

But it does not include the many, many horses which are transported back home with life threatening injuries - tendon ruptures and stress fractures probably the commonest - which are then put down off the racecourse but as a direct result of the race. Those figures aren't collected, at least I can't find them anywhere.

Thanks for the stats, interesting!


----------



## Sherri (20 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			I think those figures may be for where the horse was bred, not where it lives. For example, a French flat racer I bought lived in Britain and raced here under a passport with (Fr) after his name, and the same with the USA bred one I had.

So 1 in 80 is more like the real figure, probably.

But it does not include the many, many horses which are transported back home with life threatening injuries - tendon ruptures and stress fractures probably the commonest - which are then put down off the racecourse but as a direct result of the race. Those figures aren't collected, at least I can't find them anywhere.

Thanks for the stats, interesting!
		
Click to expand...

OK, I wasn't clear on this so I'm happy that if it's breeding then the 1-80 odds it will be... but then we do need to include figures for horses travelled to the UK to race, which will alter this figure.  I think the variables are why the BHA go with the figure per runners.  But either way the figures I looked at are a lot different to BHA and I would of expected them to be nearer..    

As you say this doesn't take into account horses PTS at home as a direct result of injury in a race, but then it raises the question then of how long after a race should this be counted as a race injury.  I know for example a friend who was seriously injured in a car accident and died 3 days later wasn't included in the stats for fatal car crashes as they had died in hospital 3 days later... it's all very confusing. 

Looking at the figures online in fairness to the UK horse racing, as a nation we are pretty open about them and the figures are easy to find with minimal fuss... I'm not saying the risks are wrong or right, but at least they are admitted to.


----------



## Dab (20 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			Last year there were 13680 horses in GB racing (though they might not all have raced that year)

There were approx 1400 fixtures, if you take the average fixture as having 7 races that is 9800 races.

Now to the fatalities according to AA there were 170 fatalities at GB race courses. if you take this without looking further then 1 in 57.6 races has a horse fatally injured, and a horse has a 1-80 chance of being fatally injured.  Not good odds for the horse.



one of my fav quotes:

lies, damned lies and statistics... 

I just hope this gives a clearer picture on fatalities per horse but I fear it raises more questions than it answers.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for looking out the stats and good stats quote!

But, not following where the 1/80 chance comes from:

If there are 9800 races in a season i.e 1400 fixtures  with 7 races per fixture then with say 6 horses on average running in each race that gives you 57600 raced horses in a season. i.e. one horse will race more than once in a season....

Divide the total number of raced horses by 170 fatalities give you odds of 1/338.

or if as you say there is on average a fatality per 57.6 races then one horse could enter 57 races before it is expected to die!

Hope that helps.


----------



## Sherri (20 April 2012)

Dab said:



			Thanks for looking out the stats and good stats quote!

But, not following where the 1/80 chance comes from:

If there are 9800 races in a season i.e 1400 fixtures  with 7 races per fixture then with say 6 horses on average running in each race that gives you 57600 raced horses in a season. i.e. one horse will race more than once in a season....

Divide the total number of raced horses by 170 fatalities give you odds of 1/338.

or if as you say there is on average a fatality per 57.6 races then one horse could enter 57 races before it is expected to die!

Hope that helps.
		
Click to expand...

See problem with statistics, I divided the number of UK horses racing in 2011 against the number of fatalities in the UK... to give the fatalities per horse figure asked for. 

Your figure of fatalities per runner is much better than the official BHA one which is a pleasant surprise as normally I expect them to have swayed the stats in their favour.

I hate statisitics.. any way made me realise my work problems aren't that bad  no-one has died at my job..


----------



## Dab (20 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			Your figure of fatalities per runner is much better than the official BHA one which is a pleasant surprise as normally I expect them to have swayed the stats in their favour.

I hate statisitics.. any way made me realise my work problems aren't that bad  no-one has died at my job..
		
Click to expand...

Indeed but it is likely that the BHA figure is more accurate i.e 4 per 1000 runners as the one done above was based on assumption, i.e 7 races per fixture and 6 horses per race.

Hope your work problems sort themselves out.


----------



## Navalgem (20 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			And if the average horse runs 5 times a year, a 1 in 50 chance of finishing the season dead before the race has finished.

And how many more put down at home from injuries they can't recover from?

Would you hack your horse 5 times a year if it had a 1 in 50 or worse chance of dying if you did?
		
Click to expand...


I think you'll find your 1/50 stat is wrong is this is correct  : http://www.mathsisfun.com/fractions_multiplication.html

so with my calculations if a horse has a 1/250 chance of dying per race and runs 5 times the it has a 1/1250 chance of finishing the season dead......


----------



## cptrayes (20 April 2012)

Navalgem said:



			I think you'll find your 1/50 stat is wrong is this is correct  : http://www.mathsisfun.com/fractions_multiplication.html

so with my calculations if a horse has a 1/250 chance of dying per race and runs 5 times the it has a 1/1250 chance of finishing the season dead......
		
Click to expand...

No that's not how probability works. If it has a 1/250 chance of dying in one race it has a 1+1+1+1+1 in 250 chance of dying in 5 races - 1 in 50.

If you have a 1 in 6 chance of throwing a 6 and throw the dice 5 times, you have 5 chances to throw the 6.


----------



## Sherri (20 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			If you have a 1 in 6 chance of throwing a 6 and throw the dice 5 times, you have 5 chances to throw the 6.
		
Click to expand...

But each time you throw the dice you still only have a 1/6 probability of throwing a 6.  The probability doesn't change.  

I think you are confusing Probability with Chance (AKA likelyhood)

So with the lottery, there is the same probability that you will win with the following numbers: 
1,2,3,4,5,6

But the chance of this happening!!!!  well in all the draws runs so far a full sequence has never been drawn.


----------



## cptrayes (20 April 2012)

I am not confusing anything.

The probability of a horse dying in one race cannot be five times more than the probability of it dying in five races, which is where your sums end up, just think about it.

The probability of a horse dying in one race may be, say, 1 in 50. If that is the case then the probability of it dying in two races is twice that, and so on. The probability of it dying in the second race is 1 in 50, but nevertheless, if it runs twice, its probability of dying in two races is twice the probability of it dying in one race at the point in time that none of those races have taken place.

Please go check up your stats, I really don't want to do this any more


----------



## cptrayes (20 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			So with the lottery, there is the same probability that you will win with the following numbers: 
1,2,3,4,5,6

But the chance of this happening!!!!  well in all the draws runs so far a full sequence has never been drawn.
		
Click to expand...

Sherri I'm sorry but you don't understand statistics or random draws. The number sequence 1,2,3,4,5,6 has not come up for exactly the same reason that most of the other 13,000,000 plus combinations have never come up. It just hasn't come up yet. There is no less chance, and no lower probability of those numbers coming up than any others. There just happen to be so many possible combinations that in 100 draws a year done for 100 years,  _most_ number combinations will never ever be drawn.


----------



## Sherri (20 April 2012)

I'm wondering how the stats of deaths in Horse Racing measure up to other sports involving animals. 

Pigeon racing
Camel Racing 
Greyhound racing 
Husky/ sledge dog racing 

Presuming that any person has to accept that any sport involving animals carries risk for the animal and therefore the possibilities of a fatality then how bad is horse racing.  Is it the death race that AA would have us believe or is it a high risk sport that does it's best to minimise the risk as far as possible but that the inevitable accidents do happen.


----------



## Sherri (20 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			Sherri I'm sorry but you don't understand statistics or random draws. The number sequence 1,2,3,4,5,6 has not come up for exactly the same reason that most of the other 13,000,000 plus combinations have never come up. It just hasn't come up yet. There is no less chance, and no lower probability of those numbers coming up than any others. There just happen to be so many possible combinations that in 100 draws a year done for 100 years,  _most_ number combinations will never ever be drawn.
		
Click to expand...

I think I just am way to bored on a friday night... 

Probability is determined by analysis of data

Chance is something that has 'free will' and is indeterminable. 

So my lottery draw analogy stands... numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 could be drawn.

Though the analysis of data we know that the probability of these numbers coming out are the same as any other numbers. 

But the chance of them coming out in that order is not derterminable... try and work out how you could determine this  there is no way of creating a statistic to cover it as the balls have 'free will' to be drawn. 

I'm not saying the more times a horse is run that it doesn't increase the risk it faces, I'm just saying the probability stays the same... but the chance, well that's down to fate...


----------



## Dab (20 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			I am not confusing anything.

The probability of a horse dying in one race cannot be five times more than the probability of it dying in five races, which is where your sums end up, just think about it.

The probability of a horse dying in one race may be, say, 1 in 50. If that is the case then the probability of it dying in two races is twice that, and so on. The probability of it dying in the second race is 1 in 50, but nevertheless, if it runs twice, its probability of dying in two races is twice the probability of it dying in one race at the point in time that none of those races have taken place.

Please go check up your stats, I really don't want to do this any more 

Click to expand...

You might want to consider the following,

1.The probability does not increase per race run as you say. 

2. It would only increase in this manner if the 4 deaths per 1000 had not happened up to the point of the second time the horse runs.

3. So say on the day that the horse runs it just so happened that 1000 horses ran and 4 died. Then the next time the horse ran, because the 4 horses per 1000 has already happened the clock is reset for that race.


----------



## Sherri (20 April 2012)

Dab said:



			3. So say on the day that the horse runs it just so happened that 1000 horses ran and 4 died. Then the next time the horse ran, because the 4 horses per 1000 has already happened the clock is reset for that race.
		
Click to expand...

Thats DEEP...


----------



## Sherri (20 April 2012)

Started with looking at pigeon racing here a excert from a news article for 1 race 




			by 1pm yesterday only 683 of the reported 2575 pigeons that entered the race had returned to Sun City.
		
Click to expand...

Not good for pigeons...


----------



## cptrayes (21 April 2012)

Dab said:



			You might want to consider the following,

1.The probability does not increase per race run as you say. 


*I specifically stated the opposite.*

2. It would only increase in this manner if the 4 deaths per 1000 had not happened up to the point of the second time the horse runs.

3. So say on the day that the horse runs it just so happened that 1000 horses ran and 4 died. Then the next time the horse ran, because the 4 horses per 1000 has already happened the clock is reset for that race.
		
Click to expand...



If NH horses have a 1 in 250 chance of dying in a race, then before the season starts, if it is to run 5 times that season, then it has a 1 in 250 chance of dying in any one of those races, and a 1 in 50 chance of being dead before the end of the season.

If you do not understand this then you may spend your time more effectively by going and reading a book on statistics than continuing to discuss this on here.


----------



## cptrayes (21 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			I think I just am way to bored on a friday night... 

Probability is determined by analysis of data

Chance is something that has 'free will' and is indeterminable. 

So my lottery draw analogy stands... numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6 could be drawn.

Though the analysis of data we know that the probability of these numbers coming out are the same as any other numbers. 

But the chance of them coming out in that order is not derterminable... try and work out how you could determine this  there is no way of creating a statistic to cover it as the balls have 'free will' to be drawn. 

I'm not saying the more times a horse is run that it doesn't increase the risk it faces, I'm just saying the probability stays the same... but the chance, well that's down to fate...
		
Click to expand...

If you are saying that deaths in National Hunt racing are pure chance then I disagree with you. The way that the sport is set up will predictably cause the death of a large number of horses every year. There is a large element of chance in which horse it is, but since I own none of them and bet on none of them, that, to me, is an irrelevance to the discussion of whether NH racing, and the Grand National in particular, would be allowed to continue if it was any other horse sport.

I commend your concern for the deaths of other animals but two wrongs do not make a right.


----------



## cptrayes (21 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			Started with looking at pigeon racing here a excert from a news article for 1 race 



Not good for pigeons... 

Click to expand...

Actually bloody brilliant. The rest of them are now living free lives instead of being stuck most of their time in people's garden sheds or racing pigeon livery.  They didn't bother to go home. Doesn't mean they're dead


----------



## Dab (21 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			If NH horses have a 1 in 250 chance of dying in a race, then before the season starts, if it is to run 5 times that season, then it has a 1 in 250 chance of dying in any one of those races, and a 1 in 50 chance of being dead before the end of the season.

If you do not understand this then you may spend your time more effectively by going and reading a book on statistics than continuing to discuss this on here.
		
Click to expand...

This is where your misunderstanding arises, a NH horse does not have a 1 in 250 chance of dying in a race, it has a 1/250 chance of only dying in A race if 1000 horses are running that day.

Therefore over the course of the season, you can only work out the probability of it being dead by the end of the season based on the number of races it it is to run by looking at the total number of raced horses in that season.

Your confusion is that you are trying to muddled and asign the statistic of 4 deaths per 1000 with just one race.


----------



## cptrayes (21 April 2012)

Dab said:



			This is where your misunderstanding arises, a NH horse does not have a 1 in 250 chance of dying in a race, it has a 1/250 chance of only dying in A race if 1000 horses are running that day.

Therefore over the course of the season, you can only work out the probability of it being dead by the end of the season based on the number of races it it is to run by looking at the total number of raced horses in that season.

Your confusion is that you are trying to muddled and asign the statistic of 4 deaths per 1000 with just one race.
		
Click to expand...

I am not confused at all and it is your statistics which are wrong, not mine.

The number of horses running in that race or on that day are not relevant. The horse has a 1 in 250 chance of being the 1 horse in 250 that dies for the particular group of 250 runs that it happens to number amongst. It matters not to this probability calculation whether these 250 runs are are on the same day, never mind at the same meeting and still less in the same race*. And if it runs 5 times, it has 5 chances in 250 to die, and that is 1 in 50.

I will repeat, if you have a problem understanding this you will be much better off using your time to learn the mathematics of probability than you will continuing this argument with me, which you cannot win because you are not right.



* it is necessary of course - if the most accurate odds of a horse dying in a particular race are to be calculated - to take into acccount lots of other factors including the number of runners, but from the point of view of predicting before the season starts and those factors are known, the probability of a horse surviving the season if it runs 5 times, this calculation is about as close as we can get.


----------



## Dab (21 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			Deaths in National Hunt racing are so frequent, and in addition related to horse ability, ground conditions and field size, that a *statistician could easily produce odds on a horse dying in any particular race at any particular NH meet.*
...
		
Click to expand...




cptrayes said:



*No that's not how probability works. If it has a 1/250 chance of dying in one race *it has a 1+1+1+1+1 in 250 chance of dying in 5 races - 1 in 50.
		
Click to expand...




cptrayes said:



*If NH horses have a 1 in 250 chance of dying in a race*, .
		
Click to expand...




cptrayes said:



** it is necessary of course - if the most accurate odds of a horse dying in a particular race are to be calculated - to take into acccount lots of other factors including the number of runners, but from the point of view of predicting before the season starts and those factors are known, the probability of a horse surviving the season if it runs 5 times, this calculation is about as close as we can get*.
		
Click to expand...

Then there has been a misunderstanding with regard to what odds were being discussed, i.e. not the odds of a horse dying in any particular RACE but instead the average statistic before any horse has set foot on the turf.


----------



## Sherri (21 April 2012)

If you are saying that deaths in National Hunt racing are pure chance then I disagree with you.
		
Click to expand...

Probability is only a LIKELY hood of what can happen based on past FACT. So yes a Horse racing fatality is down to all factors including fate. I'm not saying it's all fate, but that's a big part of it.




			I commend your concern for the deaths of other animals but two wrongs do not make a right.
		
Click to expand...

Actually I was wondering how fatality rates compare, so I could see if horse racing is as bad as the likes of Animal Aid, PETA and RSPCA would like the general public to believe. 

The figures are very hard to find though, for example I've found information that suggests that pigeon racing has as high as a 75% fatality rate, camel racing is very hard to find figures on other than the child jockeys that have died, and Husky racing gives a stats of 2 dogs per itiarod race but not much on the racing as a whole.  I'm not saying the deaths are right or wrong, but animals including people DIE.  




			Actually bloody brilliant. The rest of them are now living free lives instead of being stuck most of their time in people's garden sheds or racing pigeon livery. They didn't bother to go home. Doesn't mean they're dead
		
Click to expand...

Kinda naive statement to make... I'd love to think of them living free but for starters they are domesticated so would struggle with wild living. The statement presumes that their care is substandard and I have no fact of that.

I can't say whether based on statistical information horse racing is cruel or not as to make an informed decision I'd need to see the mortality rates for all horses living in the UK.  IS horse racing substantially higher?  PETA, AA & RSPCA would have us believe it is, but until I'm shown hard evidence that the mortality rates are higher than other equestrian sport I will keep an open mind.  I would love to also see how it compares to other sports involving animals but the information isn't as available, the BHA say they are continuously working to improve the welfare of the horses and these figures would of helped to prove this. 

It is a very sad fact that animals die, but how much influence we have on their mortality rate is hard to judge.    

Chance! fate! whatever you would like to call it has a big part to play as well.  The statistic of deaths per race proves this, 1 fatality per 57.6 races meand that yes a horse in theory could ring 57 races and not face death, but looking at the information on some horses that have sadly lost their lives on race courses it was their first 10 races..


----------



## cptrayes (21 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			It is a very sad fact that animals die, but how much influence we have on their mortality rate is hard to judge.
		
Click to expand...

It is very easy to judge how much influence that we have over the mortality rates during a race of National Hunt jump racers. You compare them with a group of horses that do the same job - provide the basic raw material of the betting industry - in flat racing (NH or non NH fflat races or both together) and you count how many more jumpers die than flat racers. Simples!


----------



## Sherri (21 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			It is very easy to judge how much influence that we have over the mortality rates during a race of National Hunt jump racers. You compare them with a group of horses that do the same job - provide the basic raw material of the betting industry - in flat racing (NH or non NH fflat races or both together) and you count how many more jumpers die than flat racers. Simples!
		
Click to expand...

In some respects you are right, NH may have a higher fatality rate than flat racers, I've taken racing as a whole and not separated them but the bigger picture needs to be looked at. 

For sake of fatal injuries, we only have the racecourse figures.. As you mentioned there are the horses that break down following an race, say withing 7 days of a race for statistics sake. 

To see if horses racing has a higher mortality rate than other sports involving animals (inc other equestrian sports) then we need to be allowed access to these figures, these would have to include fatalities from injury and numbers competing.  This would enable 'Jo Public' to make a better informed decision.  From limited research I can say that horse racing is the most open on publishing this information. Try finding out how many racing camels were PTS last year... 

It's very easy to single out 1 sport but is this the right sport to target. I've worked on both a National Hunt yard and a Harness Racing yard, and I know what horse I'd prefer to be in terms of risk of injury and post career prospects. 

We can all crunch numbers all day long, but I will quote again 

Lies, dammed lies and statistics 

And fate is a force that NO ONE can alter..


----------



## Navalgem (21 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			We can all crunch numbers all day long, but I will quote again 

Lies, dammed lies and statistics 

And fate is a force that NO ONE can alter..
		
Click to expand...

I agree.  Ironically my first lecture of my Psychology degree was a lecture about how people/media etc lie with statistics............ LOL! (and therefore, as 'good' scientists, how we must avoid it!

Also, I don't think you can just simply the death ratio of 4/1000 to 1/250. or that's what they would have quoted surely? Must be some reason for it.


----------



## Navalgem (21 April 2012)

cptrayes said:



			No that's not how probability works. If it has a 1/250 chance of dying in one race it has a 1+1+1+1+1 in 250 chance of dying in 5 races - 1 in 50.

If you have a 1 in 6 chance of throwing a 6 and throw the dice 5 times, you have 5 chances to throw the 6.
		
Click to expand...

yes BUT each time you throw you still only have a 1/6 chance of throwing the six!!! so you were correct in saying the chance is 1/6 x 1/6x 1/6 x 1/6 x1/6.


----------



## Venevidivici (22 April 2012)

Haven't read whole thread and am rubbish at statistics but we had a racing pigeon(had a tag) turn up at the yard last year-it stayed for weeks,roosting in the woodstore next to the chicken coop,sharing chicken food and snoozing in the sun. The kids named it,the liveries talked to it and it looked very happy Then one day,it went. I reckon he had a lovely little self-imposed 'holiday' from racing


----------



## Rowreach (22 April 2012)

Venevidivici said:



			Haven't read whole thread and am rubbish at statistics but we had a racing pigeon(had a tag) turn up at the yard last year-it stayed for weeks,roosting in the woodstore next to the chicken coop,sharing chicken food and snoozing in the sun. The kids named it,the liveries talked to it and it looked very happy Then one day,it went. I reckon he had a lovely little self-imposed 'holiday' from racing

Click to expand...

... and sadly if he went home after his holiday he'd have had his neck wrung for being a useless racing pigeon


----------



## cptrayes (22 April 2012)

Sherri said:



			In some respects you are right, NH may have a higher fatality rate than flat racers, I've taken racing as a whole and not separated them but the bigger picture needs to be looked at.
		
Click to expand...

May? _* May*_?  for goodness sake Sherri, you'd have to be blind and deaf not to know that it *does*.




Sherri said:



			To see if horses racing has a higher mortality rate than other sports involving animals (inc other equestrian sports) then we need to be allowed access to these figures, these would have to include fatalities from injury and numbers competing.  This would enable 'Jo Public' to make a better informed decision.  From limited research I can say that horse racing is the most open on publishing this information. Try finding out how many racing camels were PTS last year...
		
Click to expand...

Two wrongs do not make a right. 



Sherri said:



			And fate is a force that NO ONE can alter..
		
Click to expand...

If you choose to call it fate that predictably somewhere between 1 in 50 and 1 in 80 horses which National Hunt race will die during the last of their races, and more will be put down shortly afterwards at home,  that's up to you.

But I don't call that fate, I call that man-made and avoidable horse death.



ps I too provide a holiday destination for tagged racing pigeons from time to time.


----------



## amandat (22 April 2012)

Rowreach said:



			... and sadly if he went home after his holiday he'd have had his neck wrung for being a useless racing pigeon 

Click to expand...

OMG where do some of you people get off, making such statements due to your assumptions.   How do you know the birds owners weren't waiting from it to come home every day ??   You don't do you ??


----------



## Honeylight (22 April 2012)

When I was a kid I had a re-homed racing pigeon as a pet. It came back to the loft hurt & as it was a champion the owner hesitated in killing it (he could no longer fly) so he asked my Dad who was on an adjoining allotment if he would like him for a pet for his little girl. We had Dandy for years.

So not all the pigeon racing people are bad. I know they want them back & do not necessarily kill them if they are late back from a race as they know there are lots of things that can cause a delay.


----------



## Rowreach (22 April 2012)

amandat said:



			OMG where do some of you people get off, making such statements due to your assumptions.   How do you know the birds owners weren't waiting from it to come home every day ??   You don't do you ?? 

Click to expand...

I like making assumptions.  It makes me feel as if I belong


----------



## amandat (22 April 2012)

well if insulting a certain group of people makes you feel like that i feel sorry for you


----------



## Rowreach (22 April 2012)

amandat you will need a sense of humour and a thicker skin if you are going to survive on HHO


----------



## amandat (22 April 2012)

Rowreach said:



			amandat you will need a sense of humour and a thicker skin if you are going to survive on HHO 

Click to expand...

it's ok i've got both  
this percentage thing is getting so boring must've bored into my brain haha


----------



## Venevidivici (22 April 2012)

Well,I like to think our holiday-pigeon (if he went home after us,or maybe on to some other hol destination, a two-stop hol? Hey,or maybe he'd decided to take a sabbatical and go travelling for a year to various holiday spots?!?) that his kindly little old dear of a bloke who owned him had been gazing at the horizon for him for 2weeks and was overjoyed when he returned,giving him the pigeon equivalent of a steak dinner and stroking him&talking to him until bedtime,in sheer happiness that he had his favourite bird back. Hmm...I may have watched too many Disney films with the kids over the rainy Easter hols....but anyway..that's the version in my head&I'm sticking to it


----------



## Venevidivici (22 April 2012)

Sorry,don't mean to lower the cerebral tone of the rather serious  statistical discussion above :-/ Am just in a silly mood


----------



## cptrayes (23 April 2012)

Venevidivici said:



			Sorry,don't mean to lower the cerebral tone of the rather serious  statistical discussion above :-/ Am just in a silly mood

Click to expand...

It has been scientifically proven that if a thread goes on long enough there is a 100% probability that someone in a silly mood will join it  I have visions of your pigeon on a deck chair wearing sunglasses.


----------



## cptrayes (23 April 2012)

Guess wot I've got today  ????  I couldnt' get the flash to work, so it's a bit indistinct, but this ringed racing pigeon is happily living in my yard today. He's got plenty to eat and he didn't seem much bothered by horses so I wonder where he's come from. He actually popped over the door while I was grooming one of them and sat in his food bucket 

What a coincidence he should arrive today!


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-eGEWNKDJ7Dw/T5WN2Ny0QeI/AAAAAAAAA4k/xCG_Si5HaP4/s640/PICT0130.JPG


----------



## Dobiegirl (23 April 2012)

Many years ago we had a racing pigeon turn up, we caught him and got his details off his ring and rang Cheltenham which is the pigeon racing capital of the world. This pigeon came from Northen Ireland and the owner got in touch with us obviously thinking we raced pigeons and offered to transfer ownership to us.
Well to cut a long story short this pigeon stayed and a female turned up and  they bred, we never had more than 6 at anyone time as the Sparrow Hawk sorted them out and on one occasion a Peregrine.


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (23 April 2012)

Dobiegirl said:



			Well to cut a long story short this pigeon stayed and a female turned up and  they bred, we never had more than 6 at anyone time as the Sparrow Hawk sorted them out and on one occasion a Peregrine.
		
Click to expand...

Now that is how you control the over-breeding of racing pigeons! Very good plan!


----------



## Dobiegirl (23 April 2012)

EKW they had a short but better life with me than the ones who live in the city, it seems to me every other one only has 1 leg after some accident and always looked in poor condition.


----------



## silu (23 April 2012)

Who would have thought my post ended up in a debate over statistics and racing pigeons! I totally agree with Dobiegirl's philosophy if I have understood her, in that it is quality and not quantity of life that is important to our animals and come to think of it us too. I personally am heading very swiftly to becoming an OAP and have NO desire to reach a ripe old age if my quality of life is seriously diminished.That debate however isn't perhaps suitable for H&H!?


----------

