Member Statistics June 2022

 

JumpClear members averaged a 54% Clear Round Average in June.  While this is lower than we saw in May, it's in line with the rolling 12 month average.

Only one horse achieved a perfect 100% average.  Interestingly, he came from the FEI division!

Members were highly active across multiple competitions and a range of divisions.  Active members averaged 5.9 rounds over the month.  

Looking at Fault Source metrics, the most faulted course elements was an Other Oxer (28% of Faults). This is a consistent theme!  The next most faulted were Other Vertical (12%), Combination-Out Vertical (11%) and Liverpool Vertical (11%).  

In total, 35% of faults came from combinations, which is close to average.  

Looking at a few other metrics of note:

• 68% of faults came from a Related Technicality.  This is 10pp higher than the 12 month baseline.  Moreover, if we drill into this number, it isn't solely driven by Combination Faults (where Combination Mid and Combination Out are, by definition, "Related"; excluding Mid and Out, 60% of faults were at Related jumps.

• Other Oxer was the most faulted element for both Classes Over and Under 1.40.  However, there was a significant gap: it represented 38% of Faults over 1.40 and 29% under.  This is atypical - normally Other faults occur more heavily at the lower heights.
• Combination Faults did occur along their normal pattern - including all Combination Elements, Combinations made up 47% of Faults above 1.40 and 27% under 1.40.

JumpClear Member Statistics May

 

JumpClear members excelled in May with one of the highest overall Clear Round Averages to date, boosted by performances from 6 horses with perfect 100% CRA.

Members averaged a 67% Clear Round Average.  This is about 10pp above the rolling 12 month average. 

Members were highly active across multiple competitions and a range of divisions.  The six horses with perfect averages were similar diverse and included horses from Medium Amateur to Open 1.45+.

Looking at Fault Source metrics, the most faulted course elements was an Other Oxer (23% of Faults).  The next most faulted were Combination-In Vertical and Combination-In Oxer (both 12%).  Other Vertical was fourth at 9% of faults (the least we’ve seen in several months). 

In total, 39% of faults came from combinations (slightly higher than the 12 month average of 31%).  

Looking at a few other metrics of note:

• 61% of faults came from a Related Technicality
• 56% of faults came at an Oxer, and of these, 71% were the front rail
• in Round 1, faults were split evenly by Front and Hind leg.  For the Jumpoff, faults were 85% with the Front Leg

JumpClear Member Statistics April

 

Overall, we saw significantly less activity from JumpClear members during April, as might be expected during what many use as a transition month between the winter and summer season.  

Only 1 in 4 members were active.  For those who did compete, Average Rounds per Month were lower than usual - 3.5 versus an average just under 5.0.  75% of horses competed in just one competition.  

Members who showed averaged a 38% Clear Round Average.  This is significantly below the baseline.  

Looking at Fault Source metrics, the most faulted course elements continue to come from the "other" Jump Detail with Other Vertical driving 28% of Faults and Other Oxer 17%.  The next most faulted were Combination-In Vertical (14%) and Liverpool Vertical (14%).  

Keeping in mind we are considering a fairly small number of faults, a few more detailed points of note:

• 70% faults were at Related jumps (versus 53% in the baseline)
• 72% of faults were at Vertical jumps (versus 49% in the baseline)
• for classes 1.40 and above, 47% of faults were at Other; 41% were at a combination element. For classes below 1.40, 42% of faults were at Other.  Just 8% were at a combination element.  (Note: this is an exaggeration of a trend previously discussed that Combinations comprise a higher percentage of faults as jump height increases).  

Comparing Faults Types Between Different Horses

In the last post, we analyzed the baseline distribution of the Jump Detail fault metric and compared it to a hypothetical modeled course.  Our conclusion was on average, faults aligned well with the frequency different types of jumps occurred.

However, there are significant differences between individual horses.  These different fault distributions reflect the behavioral asymmetries of horses & riders and are the basis of JumpClear's Fault Source Analysis methodology.  

                                                                                            🠉

Standard Deviation measures the variance within a range of numbers. Here, it is used to capture the difference between the fault patterns of the individual JumpClear member horses.  We see the SDs are all large compared to the absolute values for the Baseline values.

Likewise, when we calculate a Fault Range of + or - one Standard Deviation, there is huge variance in possible outcomes.  There are 7 metrics alone where horses could vary from no faults (a negative value is calculated) to up to 10%! 

Going forward, JumpClear will use this approach of comparing a horse's fault distribution to the Baseline and Standard Deviation Range as part of identifying each horse's unique opportunities for improvement.   

Showjumping Course Analysis Combination Elements

As the JumpClear database grows, it's exciting to deliver more insights based on total member data.  Here we take a deeper look at Combination Faults...

Starting with the basics, Combinations - across all elements - made up 34% of Round 1 Faults for JumpClear members over the past 12 months.  They were a much smaller percent of faults in the jumpoff - just 15%.  

There numbers are interesting because they suggest that combination faults come down to simple math.  Combinations are faulted roughly in proportion to the percent they make up of total jumps on the course*; they are not - in fact - horrible bogey obstacles that stand in the way of every horse & rider's clear round.

(If you want to check that math: the average first round has between 12 - 14 numbered jumps with somewhere around two doubles and a triple or two doubles, so 19 to 21 obstacles of which combinations comprise 6 or 7.  The average jumpoff has about 7 - 9 numbered jumps with one double, so about 9 to 11 obstacles of which combination elements make up two).  

However, we see that combination faults differ quite significantly by division.

As a general rule, the lower heights have fewer combination faults.  This is largely - but not entirely - driven by the impact of the "mid" element and likely reflective of the limited use of triple combination in the 1.30 and 1.20 national classes.

By a slight margin, the most rails come from the Combination In Element.  Across all elements, faults are split nearly evenly between oxers and verticals.

Industry Insights Based on JumpClear Member Statistics (March 2022)

 

JumpClear members averaged a 53% clear round average in March.  This is in line with the 12 month average.  

This is the first month where no horse achieved a perfect 100% clear round average.  The highest average was 80%

Average Rounds/Month was 6.9 which is the highest we've seen.  

Looking at Fault Source metrics, the most faulted course elements continue to come from the "other" Jump Detail with Other Oxer driving 28% of Faults and Other Vertical 22%.  The next most faulted were three Combination elements: Combination-In Oxer, Combination Out-Vertical (both 11%) and Combination-In Vertical (10%). 

Member Statistics February 2022

 

JumpClear members averaged a 51% clear round average in February.  This is a significant decline from January but more in line with the 12 month average (54%).  

Their Round 1 Clear Round Average was nearly 20 points below the Jumpoff Average (45% vs. 65%); this is a slightly larger gap than usual.

Two horses achieved a perfect 100% Clear Round Average.

Members averaged 4.6 Rounds/Month and 2.7 Faults (# of Faulted Jumps).  Both are higher than January but more in line with the volume we saw late last Fall, suggesting Members may have been just gearing up for the season in January.  

Looking at Fault Source metrics, the most faulted course elements continue to come from the "other" Jump Detail with Other Oxer driving 23% of Faults and Other Vertical 15%.  The next most faulted was a Combination-In Vertical (10%).  

If we drill into more detail, Other Singles Oxer resulted in 13% of Faults; Other Related Oxers resulted in 10%.  

2021 Member Statistics: Fault Source

 

The most frequently faulted course elements for members during the 2021 competition year were an Other Oxer (25%) followed by an Other Vertical (15%).

If we drill down a third metric, a Front Rail Other Oxer contributed 15% of Faults.

Combination-In Oxer (9%) and Combination-In Vertical (7%) were the next most faulted.

In general, we consistently see the "Other" Jump Detail represent the most faulted course element by a wide margin.  Often, as we see here 2 or 3 metrics can be added to the analysis (for example, JUMP TYPE and RAIL) before any other Jump Detail reaches the same percentage of faults.  

2021 Member Statistics: Clear Round Average

 

JumpClear members averaged a 52% Clear Round Average during the 2021 competition year.  Their Clear Round Average in the Jumpoff was over 20pp higher than in Round 1.  

Members averaged 42 Rounds per Year, 31 in Round 1 and 11 in the Jumpoff.

If we look by division, the Clear Round Average was highest in the 1.20, followed by the 1.25, 1.30 and 1.25 Open Divisions.  The lowest Clear Round Average was in the High AO/JRs and the Grand Prix.

By Rider Status, we see a sizable gap between Pros and JR/AOs with Pros achieving almost a 10pp higher Clear Round Average.