• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse
1 of 2 < >

Update to Forum Rules: Criminal Allegations

In our continuing effort to provide an avenue for individuals to voice their opinions and experiences, we have recently reviewed and updated our forum policies. Generally, we have allowed users to share their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, trainers, etc. within the industry, and that is not changing.

When it came to overt criminal allegations, however, those discussions have in the past needed to stem from a report by a reputable news source or action by law enforcement or the legal system.

We are now expanding our policies to allow posters to share their own first-hand experiences involving overt criminal allegations, such as animal abuse or neglect, theft, etc., but only if they publicly provide their full first and last name along with the post. We still will not allow anonymous postings alleging criminal activity.

So, a user may now make a specific claim against a named individual or company, but it must be a FIRST-HAND account, and they have to IDENTIFY THEMSELVES. Users have always been legally responsible for their posts, and nothing has changed there, but we want to loosen the reins a bit and further allow the free flow of discussion and information relevant to the horse community.

We are not providing a free-for-all of anonymous rumor-mongering. As enduring advocates for the welfare of the horse, we want to provide a forum for those willing to sign their name and shine a light on issues of concern to them in the industry.

The full revised rules are posted at the top of each forum for reference.
2 of 2 < >

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the Forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums’ policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

Did you look up your EQRI yet?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by fordtraktor View Post
    To me, it seems like it weights having stops and runouts far too heavily. To me, the unsafe horse is one that jumps when it should stop.
    Excellent point. I think this is very true.

    Comment


    • #22
      Mine look a bit optimistic (it green lights my horse who hasn't evented in 3 years for a CCI*, and my horse who did 1 N in 2017 and a few T in 2016 for P).
      But, I suppose, with the right (much better) rider those things might not be worth a flag. I can see why they would want to focus the list on what looks really bad on paper.

      I am surprised it doesn't seem to take qualification into account though--why would it green light things you aren't even qualified to do under the rules?

      Comment


      • #23
        Like Hilary, mine is showing green up to CIC, which is funny since I've only completed one Prelim. Also I have a hard time believing this is good for showing advancement, because I've done over 30 Trainings with my guy (including two T3Ds with top three placings) yet have not been able to successfully get around Preliminary. *shakes head*
        Road to the T3D
        Translation
        fri [fri:] fritt fria (adj): Free
        skritt [skrit:] skritten (noun): Walk

        Comment


        • #24
          On the money for my horse...
          Kate

          Comment


          • #25
            For the horse I won two CO Technical merit awards at Training, it shows red all the way down to BN.

            Comment


            • #26
              I wonder if there's going to be some kinks to work out of the system as the info is analyzed.
              Amanda

              Comment


              • #27
                I am thrilled to see a step taken in the direction of data collection and analysis, to drive decision-making in eventing.

                Of course, there will be ongoing enhancement and optimization, and I am sure user feedback is welcomed.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by ake987 View Post
                  I am thrilled to see a step taken in the direction of data collection and analysis, to drive decision-making in eventing.

                  Of course, there will be ongoing enhancement and optimization, and I am sure user feedback is welcomed.
                  I think the point is that it is NO replacement for good training and judgement. This system may be good....but statistics NEVER tell the entire picture. This is just a tool and should just be treated as such. It should NOT be used for qualifications or anything in the rules. It honestly is not a tool that I think is needed by people who have good coaching. And I will hate if this becomes something that buyers think about at all in purchasing a horse.

                  There is no way you can distinguish a 20 that was caused by a rider v. Horse in statistics. And on one of horses that was off...most of the negatives on his xc record were definitely Me...not him. Such as pulling him up and retiring on course when my asthma was too much.
                  ** Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip. ~Winston Churchill? **

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    BFNE, I agree with each of your points, and they seem to be addressed by USEA for the time-being.

                    Some key snippets from USEA's ERQI FAQ page:
                    • ERQI is being used solely as an advisory tool in 2018.
                    • The USEA has no requirement for a horse to have a green ERQI to enter an event at the level in question.
                    • The ERQI should be treated as a guideline and the USEA strongly recommends that riders use ERQI and all the other tools at your disposal to make safe and informed decisions.
                    My horse is yellow for BN & N - we've competed in nine rec. events (all BN) and three had 20 XC jump penalties, plus an RF at our first event in 2013. I agree that we are running XC at a higher risk than a horse who has never had an XC jump penalty, but I still plan on moving up to N this year, following our season that ended with three events finished on our dressage score, including Area I Champs.

                    I also found this interesting:
                    The ERQI value also takes into account the level at which a horse is competing, and the level of performance displayed by all of those who competed in the same class. For example, if a high percentage of riders jumped clear at a particular event, cross-country faults would affect the ERQI more than on a day when a high percentage of combinations had faults. In this regard, the ERQI can react to whether a competition was statistically harder or easier than the average for that level of competition.
                    There was a lot of good information on the ERQI FAQ page I linked to, above, but if anyone has questions that aren't answered there, USEA requests you contact support@useventing.

                    I completely agree that is simply another tool, and a risk-assessment tool, at that (not a success or failure estimation tool). For now, the tool is also private and only available to owners and associated riders (so not something a potential buyer could see).

                    I have pictures on my wall at work that say "I <3 data" and "Keep calm & collect more data", so it is no surprise this appeals to me and that I am eager to see if it can have a similarly positive impact in the US as it has in Ireland.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by bornfreenowexpensive View Post
                      on one of horses that was off...most of the negatives on his xc record were definitely Me...not him.
                      Would you be comfortable sharing if you found the tool more or less accurate for your upper level horses (either the ones you ride or the ones you have an ownership affiliation with) or your lower level horses, or do you notice a difference? On that note, I suppose I should ask whether you have access to a horses's ERQI purely as an owner, not a rider?

                      From what I read, it seems the tool was developed based on statistics at prelim and up, so I wonder if perhaps it just hasn't been optimized for the lower levels (or perhaps there needs to be a different algorithm in place below prelim).

                      Comment


                      • #31
                        I'll throw mine in too from the perspective of a lower level rider, and I don't think it's entirely accurate. My first horse who only ever did BN is somehow green all the way through Prelim. He might have gotten around a training... maybe..but it would have been a stretch for him. Current horse's rating is basically questionable at BN, yellow and Novice and orange at Training. The only issues we had on xc wereone runout caused 100% by his amazing and totally less than stellar jockey...aka me...and the other time when I blew past a jump not remembering where exactly my BN jump was--I thought it was on up and that was counted as a runout. C'est la vie. Comparing both horses, there's no way first horse should be green through prelim and the second horse basically rated as sketchy as best because second horse is entirely more athletic and capable of Training and second horse's record is based upon 8 shows so there should be enough data to evaluate it (or so I'd presume). I understand it's just math and some algorithm, but I read mine with a heavy dose of "Really....?"

                        I feel like to be fair to my horse, they should have an option of the rider putting an asterisk next to the rating that says "Please don't hold my horse's scores against him because I'm a moron and can't remember where I'm going."

                        Comment


                        • #32
                          http://useventing.com/news/podcast-i...-quality-index

                          " The USEA announced earlier this week that EquiRatings Quality Indexes (ERQIs) are now available for all USEA registered horses who have competed in the last five years. EquiRatings formed a partnership with the USEA in 2017 with the goal of creating a risk management tool that allows members to track and monitor risk in a tangible way. The ERQI is calculated as a probability between 0 and 1, with values closer to 1 indicating statistically higher levels of positive performance in the cross-country phase for that horse at any given level.
                          This week, EquiRatings’ Founder and Director Sam Watson and Managing Director Diarm Byrne discuss how EquiRatings got started, the vision behind the company, their commitment to the risk management aspect of the sport, and how this tool will help riders make informed decisions.

                          "

                          Comment


                          • #33
                            I think that lack of entries also skews the data. My horse had no recognized BN (as a registered horse), and one clear ride at Novice. She is orange for both, which seems strange, since she has zero penalties for both of those levels. She has stops at her two recognized T rounds, and that's orange, too, which is more understandable than BN and N.

                            Comment


                            • #34
                              I always discount anything developed overseas for another system trying to be plugged into OUR system without someone hands on here entering the data. Our data and system is DIFFERENT from British Eventing. It doesn't work for me for that reason alone.
                              Proud & Permanent Student Of The Long Road
                              Read me: EN (http://eventingnation.com/author/annemarch/) and HJU (http://horsejunkiesunited.com/author/holly-covey/)

                              Comment


                              • #35
                                Originally posted by retreadeventer View Post
                                I always discount anything developed overseas for another system trying to be plugged into OUR system without someone hands on here entering the data. Our data and system is DIFFERENT from British Eventing. It doesn't work for me for that reason alone.
                                There were eight months of collaboration between USEA/ERQI prior to the launch of the tool. To me, that does not suggest it was a "plug and play" integration.

                                Comment


                                • #36
                                  Originally posted by Marigold View Post

                                  Would you be comfortable sharing if you found the tool more or less accurate for your upper level horses (either the ones you ride or the ones you have an ownership affiliation with) or your lower level horses, or do you notice a difference? On that note, I suppose I should ask whether you have access to a horses's ERQI purely as an owner, not a rider?

                                  From what I read, it seems the tool was developed based on statistics at prelim and up, so I wonder if perhaps it just hasn't been optimized for the lower levels (or perhaps there needs to be a different algorithm in place below prelim).
                                  I had access both as a rider and owner. Horses that are just Novice and several competing at or above Prelim and at FEI levels. It was not accurate for a few horses at all levels. It was accurate for many of them. Several I thought were odd...horses green two levels above what they have competed. One I don’t think would be safe at those levels. And just two I completely thought was wacky.

                                  In some ways I found it more wonky for horses with more of a record and those with very few starts. It certainly didn’t line up with scope and ability. As I said...not all clear rounds are equal!!!!

                                  I AM worried the USEF/USEA is going to use this down the road for qualifying. And yes, while the public may not have immediate access....nothing to stop a buyer from asking a seller for a copy of the report.

                                  Last edited by bornfreenowexpensive; Feb. 14, 2018, 10:15 PM.
                                  ** Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip. ~Winston Churchill? **

                                  Comment


                                  • #37
                                    Mine complely accurate. Horse has done multiple N and T, 2 clear prelim. One retire at training ( long story, jumped wrong fence that was prelim anf fell off and couldn’t find anything to climb on again...). Green thru CCI*, orange and red up higher...
                                    http://www.cngsporthorses.com

                                    Comment


                                    • #38
                                      My horse is yellow at BN (he was clear in his only bn..4 years ago), and orange at novice and training. He has done 3 trainings, 1 with me with a 20 and 2 clear with a pro. The jumps are easy for him but unlucky for him I am his main rider.. sooo there's a lot of pilot error going on. I don't even want to talk about his novice record other than he finished the novice 3 day clear and did another clear novice after that before moving up. I think that should be good enough to deem him safe at novice and below...

                                      Comment


                                      • #39
                                        Originally posted by fordtraktor View Post
                                        To me, it seems like it weights having stops and runouts far too heavily. To me, the unsafe horse is one that jumps when it should stop.

                                        I would not like to see it used for lower levels because it makes it super important to kick on over anything even if the day isn't going well and that's encouraging poor riding, if people are worried about their ratings. I already think Americans obsess too much about whether a horse ever had a 20 on its record. So many good reasons why a stop is the wise decision sometimes.

                                        Weighting against falls seems obvious and it could possibly be much more accurate at upper levels.
                                        Totally agree with this comment. My young horse has competed twice - once with one 20 due to pilot error and it was a tough course (1/3 of the class was eliminated!) and another with 3 x 20 - 1 pilot error, 1 green horse stop due to very difficult lighting, and 1 combination of green pilot and horse! However, she is 100% safe because she will definitely stop instead of jumping when she really shouldn't and her stops are never dirty. This is the prime reason I ride her - because of her sensibleness and safeness despite her youth/green-ness. She is rated orange at BN (and red on up, which is fine), which I am assuming is due to the stops but I think it fails to reflect her safeness. We have almost no schooling events in my area, so the only way to get experience is at the recognized level.

                                        Obsessing over 20s and their effect on ratings (especially if this system was to eventually be used to determine qualification for levels) seems very likely to encourage the wrong focus/approach for riders. I'd love to know how many clean runs are needed to "compensate" for each 20.

                                        Maybe it is more accurate at the upper level or for horses with a longer record (more data points usually increases accuracy) so I think perhaps there should be an "insufficient data" rating for horses with less than a certain number of data points.

                                        Comment


                                        • #40
                                          Boggles the mind here. We have a big group of horses ranked from horses currently competing to blasts from the past who have competed Novice thru CIC*. Our good boy BN / novice school horse is green lighted thru CIC*?? That would be scary! Some others would make sense looking at paper results which really didn't reflect the horses safety (and ability). Others just boggle the mind completely.
                                          Joan Davis
                                          http://www.flatlandsfoto.com/
                                          http://flatlands-equestrian.com/

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X