Announcement

Collapse

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

Post your objections to frangible technology

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

  • Blugal
    replied
    I object to course designers using frangibles as a justification for poor or downright dangerous course design (e.g. Burghley 2019).

    I object to anyone using frangibles that have not been extensively tested and designed to do the job they are supposed to (e.g. David O'Connor's design of a table; the deformable foam logs that were a fad for a few years about 5-8 years ago).

    I heard from local course designers that the cost of the frangibles is large and hits the organizers, but it also requires a crew at each frangible jump that is educated and available to fix them if they are deployed. We are short on volunteers anyway, so the organizers look at using other types of jumps that don't require frangible technology. I don't know if that's an overall positive or negative.

    Having said all that, if frangible fences can help prevent deaths in our sport, I'm all for it. Let's just do it intelligently, without complete knee-jerk reactions and with expert input.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marigold
    replied
    Originally posted by avjudge View Post
    I was surprised to see in it that frangible fences were linked with increased risk of falls in the years studied. But, that's just falls. Possibly they reduce injuries? Deaths? Or maybe more falls are happening at frangible fences because that technology is preferentially being deployed on difficult fences, and the fall rate would have been even greater if they weren't frangible. But clearly more analysis is needed to ensure that this is truly improving the situation.
    You are right that more analysis is needed to determine the causation behind these statistics. A leading theory is as you say above: frangible technology is being deployed on difficult fences, which themselves carry a high fall rate.

    However, the other important thing to note is that frangible technology is not necessarily designed to prevent a horse fall, but a rotational horse fall. The technology is designed to bear a significant amount of weight, up to a point where the horse is essentially already beginning to rotate (and thus place the majority of its weight on the fence). The fence then gives, and provides "release" to the horse's current direction of momentum. Sometimes that may allow the horse to regain their footing, but often it simply breaks the angle of rotation and the horse ends up falling onto their shoulder or side. It is a much less dangerous type of fall, which is the primary goal, but the deployment of the technology can still align with a horse fall because the horse was already falling when the technology deployed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Janet
    replied
    There is a USEF rule change in the works (for next year) that will impose a penalty for activating a frangible device at a USEF Horse Trials.

    Leave a comment:


  • eventingmania
    replied
    Originally posted by Twisting View Post
    Maybe breaking a pin should count against both the CD AND the rider. Make it an elimination. That would reduce the "it'll fall down so I don't have to be as careful" risk.
    I cannot remember how much they changed the frangible pins and flag rules the past 10 years but I am not arguing against you

    Leave a comment:


  • Twisting
    replied
    Maybe breaking a pin should count against both the CD AND the rider. Make it an elimination. That would reduce the "it'll fall down so I don't have to be as careful" risk.

    Leave a comment:


  • Scribbler
    replied
    What's the fall rate in show jumping where the jumps are knockdown? I've seen some pretty spectacular crashes on TV at Spruce Meadows.

    Leave a comment:


  • avjudge
    replied
    It seem intuitively obvious that this would make for safer jumps, but I am given pause after reading a report on a study of falls linked on the "Another Rider Death" thread. I was surprised to see in it that frangible fences were linked with increased risk of falls in the years studied. But, that's just falls. Possibly they reduce injuries? Deaths? Or maybe more falls are happening at frangible fences because that technology is preferentially being deployed on difficult fences, and the fall rate would have been even greater if they weren't frangible. But clearly more analysis is needed to ensure that this is truly improving the situation.

    I'm not saying that the technology shouldn't be deployed - it seems sensible to phase this in while studying what difference it makes, to the extent that there are enough data to draw conclusions - but it seems premature to go whole hog, assuming this will solve or in a great way reduce deaths.

    (Disclosure: I'm not an eventer, nor do I even jump, but I had - way back when - a physics degree and if there's anything that can teach the occasional failures of the intuitively obvious, it's studying the history of physics!)

    Leave a comment:


  • Saskatoonian
    replied
    My concern is that it will inadvertently encourage riskier riding by diminishing its consequences. Riskier riding is a broad category - from pros who want to win to green riders with more guts than experience to people riding horses who shouldn't be at the level.

    Compounding this is another concern: that the problem of horse falls isn't being analyzed globally. How many falls are actually happening at the jumps at issue and what is causing them? If 99 combinations jump it successfully, and one person flips, is that really due to the jump? We all know that may not be the case. Changing jump design doesn't address the real problem if it's the rider - and it may encourage similar riders who shouldn't be at that level.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jealoushe
    replied
    The cost
    The fail rate of pins
    The fact riders who know a fence is frangible might not ride as carefully
    The lack of pursuing other venues for answers as to why our sport is so dangerous.

    To be clear I support frangible devices but they are just 1% of the changes that need to be done.

    Leave a comment:


  • subk
    replied
    Frangible technology is good and should be broadly utilized, but courses and jumps should be designed so pins don't break in the first place. If someone regularly designed courses with dozens of horse falls they wouldn't be designing for long. And yet this is true of some of the most prominent designers in the sport if you start including pin breaks in the evaluation. The pins have allowed us to ignore bad design and to not hold designers accountable for it.

    Perhaps a pin break should be viewed as some sort of technical fall (not for the rider) and course designers should have some sort of sanction for designing courses with excessive number of falls and pin breaks.

    As a competitor I want to be able to search cross country result by xc course designer and I'd like to have that information prominently display rider falls, horse falls, and pin breaks at each level for each event. (As well as eliminations and refusals as a percentage of the division.) And yes, when I was competing more there were course designers whose events I wouldn't go to. As an organizer do you have the ability to evaluate a potential designer based on some sort of real data or even a safety rating? Or do you pick a designer because you want to rub elbows with someone who knows the queen or even just becasue they are someone who hangs with all the eventing cool kids?

    Leave a comment:


  • banmharcach
    replied
    Not an objection to frangible technology per se but to any blind faith in it actually always working.

    Some of the setups are quite refined & will require very particular installation and maintenance. Whilst probably not so much an issue for major events, I would worry about their use on smaller venues where they beome part of the schooling field etc & left out in all weather. As seen with even the Burghley gates, "frangibility" is not universally achieved depending on the approach & hit forces.

    Leave a comment:


  • CSU92
    started a topic Post your objections to frangible technology

    Post your objections to frangible technology

    It's been 20 years since the Hartington Report on eventing safety concluded that we must do everything possible to prevent horse falls. A course entirely consisting of theoretically perfect frangible fences would go a long way in preventing horse falls, mitigating most of the countless variables that contribute to the otherwise inevitable solid fence trips galloping horse scenario.

    We have a few frangible designs that have emerged but the evolutionary rate of these technologies seems to be glacial. There is a push to hasten development in this area but there are many questioning this approach. Is it a bad thing that the frangible cat is peeking its head further out of its bag?

Working...
X