Preliminary statistical analysis of the international eventing - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Preliminary statistical analysis of the international eventing results 2014

Madrid 23/1/15

Overview of the talk

Statistical analysis

• The analysis and the data
• Analysis of the fall data (related to a fence)
• Analysis of results data

What are the factors that on their own and as a combination are correlated with good results, Refusals, EL, Horse Fall, Unseated Rider ? Age of horse and rider, barely qualified, previous results, competing at international level since when, average number of successful / unsuccessful competitions per year at that level, number of competition as a combination, … Are there parameters that significantly alter the probability of a fall?

• 1. The questions addressed in this analysis

Homework: questions / interesting points raised during the seminar Possibility to distinguish XC profiles??

The major steps in a statistical analysis

• Define the interesting questions and factors, that might affect risk
• Query the FEI database and compose file with data
• Encode data for statistical analysis
• Perform the analysis
• Interpretation of the results

Giuseppe’s slide

Excel file with data on each international starter  161 000 rows and 650 columns

• 2. The data file

Profile of rider: age # different horses # starts 1*, 2*, 3*, 4* # MER 1*, 2*, 3*, 4* Profile horse: age # different horses # starts 1*, 2*, 3*, 4* # MER 1*, 2*, 3*, 4* Multidimensional highly correlated dataset Low dimensional uncorrelated dataset PCA, FA Profile of competition CCI or CIC Star-level SJ before XC Speed Distance Result Dressage: pen XC: pen, EL (R, Fall) RET,WD SJ: pen, EL, RET,WD Profile of fall 38 columns 977 rows Identifications, Date, Officials, … File: 2004-2014 but focus on 2014

Fall analysis

Grouping of competitions

CCIY1* CCIYH1* CCIJ1* CCIP1* CCIP2* CCIU252* CCIY2* CCIO3*-NC CCIU253* CICYH1* CICJ1* CICY2* CICYH2* CICO3*-NC

CCI1* CCI2* CCI3* CCI4* CIC1* CIC2* CIC3* CIC4*

Asian Games-C1* CH-EU-P-C2* WEG-C C.Am+Caraib Games-CCI1* CH-EU-Y-CCI2* CH-Balkan-CCI1* CH-M-YH-CCI2* CH-EU-J-CCI1* CH-N.Am-Y-CCI2* CH-M-YH-CCI1* CH-S.Am-C2* CH-N.Am-J-CCI1*

Championship 1* Championship 2* WEG

# starters # competitions # XC-FH % XC-FH # XC-FR % XC-FR CCI1* 3832 126 30 0.8 141 3.7 CCI2* 1667 73 25 1.5 69 4.1 CCI3* 642 22 22 3.4 48 7.5 CCI4* 308 6 20 6.5 30 9.7 6449 227 97 1.5 288 4.5 CIC1* 5421 146 40 0.7 180 3.3 CIC2* 4576 249 47 1.0 138 3.0 CIC3* 2314 80 38 1.6 90 3.9 12311 475 125 1.0 408 3.3 CH1* 221 6 9 4.1 17 7.7 CH2* 196 5 10 5.1 10 5.1 WEG 90 1 3 3.3 7 7.8 507 12 22 4.3 34 6.7

Competition Format and Horse Falls ? Normal competitions:

• numbers of horse falls and unseated riders increase with star level;
• approximately 3 times more unseated riders than horse falls

Championships:

• alarming number of falls in particular horse falls

Falls and type of fences

No normalization by the number of times the type of fence is jumped!

• C. square spread
• E. brush
• F. round

In total 912 falls related to fences Unseated Riders: 685 (75%) Horse Falls: 227 (25%)

Similar to 2013

In 2013 total 817 falls related to fences 2013 2014

More (as compared with FR) horse fall on type C less on type E Significant difference between the distribution of Unseated riders and horse falls (chi-square p=0.014) Unseated Riders: 685 (75%) Horse Falls: 227 (25%)

2013 Distribution Unseated riders and horse falls over the fence types Relative more Horse Falls than Unseated Riders on type C Relative more Unseated Riders than Horse Falls on type G (corner) and J(step)

Not in 2014

At the end?! Horse falls Unseated athlete

NB: 44 of the 974 falls are not related to fences

Where does the fall occur: fence number ?

Falls and ground conditions

FALSE TRUE valid Combination 370 542 912 Fence Type Option 901 11 912 Frangible 841 71 912 Portable 477 435 912 Related to water 728 246 974 Terrain 443 531 974 Ground Line 196 716 912 Off a Bend 629 345 974 Air Jacket worn 303 545 848 Air Jacket activated 452 504 956 Frangible break 5 Horse fell or tread on Rider 923 33 956 Accident Type 661 295 956 Horse slipped? 883 73 956 Wind 839 117 956 Poor Visibility 949 7 956 Horse refused? 674 238 912 Horse hit Fence? 411 563 974 Horse tipped portable? 4 Horse broke fence? 880 32 912 Horse somersaulted? 880 32 912 Inexperience 624 350 974 Rider fatigue 953 3 956 Horse out of control 937 19 956 Horse too fast 851 105 956 Horse too slow 887 69 956 Light situation 905 39 944 Horse impaired by health 953 3 956 Horse fatigued 936 20 956 Horse distracted 945 11 956

Other fall characteristics: frequencies of individual parameters

Component 1 2 3 4 5 Fall Fence Combination 0.513 Fall Fence Portable

• 0.572

Fall Fence Related to water 0.457 Fall Fence Ground line

• 0.341

Fall Fence Off a bend 0.468

• 0.463

Did horse fall on or tread on athlete Did the horse slip Injury level 0.421

• 0.316

Did horse refuse

• 0.548

0.364 Did horse hit the fence 0.684 Did horse break the fence 0.448 Did horse somersault 0.345 Inexperience 0.435 Athlete impaired by fatigue Horse out of control

• 0.527

Horse too fast

• 0.524

0.444 Horse too slow 0.384 0.565 Horse fatigued Horse distracted 0.346

Four (to 5) possible classes of falls related to a fence NB: falls not related to fence are not included in this analysis

Falls in relation to other results

CIC1* CIC2* CIC3* CCI1* CCI2* CCI3* CCI4* clear 66.3% 63.5% 59.2% 63.0% 58.8% 50.9% 40.5% 20 10.3% 10.9% 13.3% 11.3% 11.1% 13.2% 11.3% 40 1.7% 2.0% 1.8% 2.1% 2.4% 1.6% 1.9% 60 .9% 1.2% .5% 1.0% 1.0% .5% .3% XC-R 4.4% 3.6% 2.3% 6.1% 4.7% 2.8% 2.3% XC-FR 3.2% 2.9% 3.7% 3.7% 4.2% 6.9% 9.7% XC-FH .7% 1.0% 1.6% .8% 1.7% 2.7% 6.5% XC-OT 1.0% 1.3% 1.0% 1.0% .9% .6% 1.3%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0%

Downward trend compensated by Falls, WD and RET

Results in function of competition format

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% CIC1* CIC2* CIC3* CCI1* CCI2* CCI3* CCI4* 40 60 XC-R XC-FR XC-FH XC-OT XC-EL XC-RET XC-WD

RET FH WD FR WD RET

TD’s with more than 200 starters

Results and TD

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 clear 1 20 2 40 3 60 4 XC-R 5 XC-FR 6 XC-FH 7 XC-OT 8 XC-EL 9 XC-RET 10 XC-WD 11 XC-AH-DR 12 SJ-EL 19 SJ-RET 20 SJ-WD 21 SJ-WD 100

# starters

TD’s with more than 200 starters

Falls and TD # starters

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 XC-FR 6 XC-FH 7

118 of 210 CCI4*

CD’s with more than 300 starters

Results and CD # starters

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 clear 20 40 60 XC-R XC-FR XC-FH XC-OT XC-EL XC-RET XC-WD XC-AH-DR SJ-EL SJ-RET SJ-WD rest

CD’s with more than 300 starters

Falls and CD # starters

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 XC-FR XC-FH

ANOVA: the ResultCode has an influence

Dressage/Show Jumping score Result code, Starlevel

Result code N Mean

• Std. Deviation

clear 12098.0 54.3 7.5 20 2166.0 55.7 7.4 40 375.0 56.3 7.7 60 179.0 56.9 7.6 XC-R 817.0 57.1 9.0 XC-FR 699.0 55.5 9.6 XC-FH 225.0 55.4 9.6 XC-OT 204.0 57.0 8.4 XC-RET 839.0 55.5 8.4 XC-WD 751.0 56.2 10.0 Total 18355.0 54.9 7.9

52.5 53.0 53.5 54.0 54.5 55.0 55.5 56.0 56.5 57.0 57.5

Dressage penalties

Result code N Mean

• Std. Deviation

clear 12098 5.1 5.7 20 2166 5.7 5.6 40 375 6.7 6.3 60 179 6.4 6.3 XC-R 817 1.9 4.3 XC-FR 699 1.8 4.1 XC-FH 225 2.4 4.9 XC-OT 204 2.2 4.7 XC-RET 839 1.8 3.9 XC-WD 751 5.3 7.7 Total 18355 4.7 5.7

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0

Show Jumpiing fence penalties

Rider profile  Result code 2 types of riders

• 1 and 2* riders
• 3 and 4* riders

No clear clustering

Rider profile  Horse Falls X-axis: 3 and 4* riders Y-axis: 1 and 2* riders

Horse profile Horse profile Result code 2 types of horses

• 3 and 4*
• lder 1 and 2*

No clear clustering

Horse profile Horse profile Horse Faslls X-axis: 3 and 4* riders Y-axis: 1 and 2* riders

ResultCode

PC1rider PC2rider PC3rider PC1horse PC2horse PC3horse

XC-clear

Mean SE

XC-20pen

Mean

• 0.133

SE 0.025

XC-40pen

Mean SE

XC-60pen

Mean

• 0.318
• 0.298

SE 0.060 0.084

XC-EL-R

Mean

• 0.351
• 0.256

SE 0.023 0.035

XC-EL-FR

Mean

• 0.227
• 0.193

SE 0.030 0.032

XC-EL-FH

Mean

• 0.188

0.220 SE 0.061 0.083

XC-RET

Mean SE

XC-WD

Mean 0.180 0.176 SE 0.039 0.055

Total

Mean 0.001 0.000

• 0.001
• 0.001

0.001 0.001 SE 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009

No experienced 1 and 2* horses No 2 and 3* rider , Not many horses No experienced 1 and 2* horses No 2 and 3* rider , Not many horses No experienced 1 and 2* horses No 1, 2 and 3* rider , Not many horses No 1* rider Horse start in 2 and 3* 2and 3* rider with one horse Horse start in 2 and 3*

2013: summary To do 2014

Age of Rider, Horse Result Code, Star-level

Mean Starlevel Horse age at time of competition Athlete age at time of competition 1 9,67 28,68 2 10,37 31,01 3 11,64 34,10 4 12,62 36,52 Total 10,27 30,44

Mean ResultCode Horse age at time of competition Athlete age at time of competition XC-clear 10,19 30,48 XC-20pen 10,24 29,84 XC-40pen 10,36 29,92 XC-60pen 10,03 28,41 XC-EL-R 10,39 29,03 XC-EL-FR 10,60 29,33 XC-EL-FH 10,49 29,91 XC-EL-OT 10,64 33,04 XC-RET 10,66 32,15 XC-WD 10,62 32,91 Total 10,27 30,44

Age of horse and age of the athlete are significantly different in the different star- levels The mean age of the athletes is significantly different in the different results classes; not the age of the horse. 2013

Gender analysis Significantly more women in CIC1* No difference in results

Gender analysis

Males more competitive??

Acknowledgements FEI-eventing department: Giuseppe, Catrin, Nathalie FEI-IT department: Jérôme Begey