 |
Re: [RC] Eventing deaths - statistically relevent? - Jackie CausgroveAh yes, that was sort of my point. That there are a higher number morbidity/mortality because there are so many more horse trails (and thus horses and riders), and just because there are more numbers doesn't mean that it is statistically high. It would be an interesting statistical run to do. Given the overall number of horse trails on any weekend, in this country, it would seem likely that it is not statistically extraordinary. That is my supposition. Also, that given the numbers of horse/riders in all disciplines, fatalities are not that common of an occurance. Of course, one does not wish to be the exception to that and be a fatality and a statistic. No comfort there. I am just addressing whether one discipline over another is inherently more dangerous than another. What is a bit more intersting to me is why not pick out
a more obvious discipline and that's American flat racing. There most (around 90%)horses never make it to the track and break down in training. Jockeys (at least in the recent past) have done terrible things to their bodies in order to keep their weights down. Why is eventing worse than flat racing??? My hunch is that statistically there are more injuries in flat racing than eventing. As to human fatalities and eventing vs. endurance, are the risks to the rider comparable in both sports? I'm very much a greenie newbie in endurance and in no way can answer this question myself. I do understand the risks involved in upper levels of eventing though. Just some thoughts................ Jackie Quentin & Libby Llop <qhll@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: I've never seen a summary of horse deaths for eventing. I only compared "I'd call him a sadistic, hippophilic necrophile, but that would be beating a dead horse. " Woody Allen __________________________________________________
|