Monitoring Performance in Show Jumping Horses: Validity of Non-specific and Discipline-specific Field Exercise Tests for a Practicable Assessment of Aerobic Performance

Abstract

Show jumping is a highly specialized equestrian discipline that requires technical skill but also power and fitness. Monitoring the horses’ aerobic performance is therefore essential in order to verify whether the training has induced the desired cardiovascular and muscular adaptations. This study therefore aimed at evaluating the validity of non-specific and discipline-specific field exercise tests for objective evaluation of aerobic performance in show jumpers. For this purpose, data obtained from horses competing at Junior and Young Rider level during show jumping competitions as well as field exercise tests were retrospectively analyzed. The effect of the level of difficulty, the horses’ age, the penalty score and the horses’ previous level of performance on blood lactate concentrations after show jumping competitions (100 observations in 49 horses) was evaluated by linear mixed effects models (horse as random effect). Estimated marginal means significantly increased from 140 (4.1 mmol/L) to 150 cm (5.2 mmol/L) classes (P = 0.02). Furthermore, post-exercise lactate values significantly increased with the horses’ age (P = 0.001). Another group of 12 horses performed a standardized incremental field exercise test on a track (SETtrack), a standardized show jumping course (SETcourse) and a standardized grid exercise (SETgrid) each on three consecutive days. Indices of aerobic performance, derived from the SETtrack [velocity at a heart rate of 140 bpm (V140) and at a lactate concentration of 2 mmol/L (VLa2)] were highly correlated with heart rate (V140: r = −0.75, P = 0.005; VLa2: r =−0.66, P = 0.02) and lactate (V140: r = −0.73, P = 0.02; VLa2: r = −0.72, P = 0.02) in response to SETcourse as well as heart rate during SETgrid (V140: r = −0.73, P = 0.02; VLa2: r = −0.76, P = 0.01). Subjective rating of muscular fatigue was significantly correlated to the mean heart rate during SETcourse (r = −0.64, P = 0.05) and SETgrid (r = −0.74, P = 0.02) but not to the aerobic indices calculated from SETtrack. Besides non-specific incremental field tests, performance monitoring in show jumpers should therefore also include discipline-specific tests that more closely reflect the internal load induced by show jumping competitions.

Long‐term performance of show‐jumping horses and relationship with severity of ataxia and complications associated with myeloencephalopathy caused by equine herpes virus‐1

“…Evaluating the performance of horses in FEI competitions is challenging because of various factors that influence outcome including rider, surface, as well as height, type and number of obstacles, and quality of other competitors or environmental conditions. [14][15][16]25 Surveys conducted with owners, riders, or officiating staff are a valuable tool, often providing the only available data for the researcher. Such information has been used as a basis for retrospective descriptive studies of the disease, 26 but often can be influenced by the subjectivity of those interviewed and may not be entirely reliable.…”

“…Evaluating the performance of horses in FEI competitions is challenging because of various factors that influence outcome including rider, surface, as well as height, type and number of obstacles, and quality of other competitors or environmental conditions 14‐16,25 . Surveys conducted with owners, riders, or officiating staff are a valuable tool, often providing the only available data for the researcher.…”

“…Long‐term outcome also was evaluated by comparing the jumping performance level 2 years before EHV‐1 infection and 2 years after recovery, depending on the time of return to competition. Data were collected from the FEI website for each horse, in the section https://data.fei.org/horse, and 3 variables related to the performance of jumping horses were analyzed 14‐16 : (1) average height of the jumped obstacle for each competition; (2) mean value of the final position in the tests performed (ranking); and (3) number of competition entries in a given period of time. Based on these data, each horse was given a score, termed the FEI Score: score FEI = 1, when the horse had the same or improved mean score in at least 2 of the 3 variables analyzed: similar ( P > .05) or increased ( P < .05) mean number of competition entries during the studied period, similar ( P > .05) or increased ( P < .05) mean height (cm) of the obstacles, or similar ( P > .05) or decreased ( P < .05) ranking score (a lower score implies a better classification).…”

“…Long-term outcome also was evaluated by comparing the jumping performance level 2 years before EHV-1 infection and 2 years after recovery, depending on the time of return to competition. Data were collected from the FEI website for each horse, in the section https:// Data.fei.org/horse, and 3 variables related to the performance of jumping horses were analyzed [14][15][16] A total score was given for each horse after adding the values of the FEI and survey scores. Horses with a score ≥1 were included in the full recovery group, whereas horses with a score <1 were included in the partial recovery group.…”