Would you like to share the source of the above infomation with us as I can not find a breakdown of deaths by starts at English Racecourses.
I did find an American one though which stated:
"..that during races at the state’s four major thoroughbred tracks, deaths have dropped from 3.05 per 1,000 starts to 1.93 since the installation of synthetic tracks.."
As from previous posts it appears that your maths is not 100% I would inform you that 1.93% is approx. 4 time more than the .5%.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...ehorse-deaths/
Take a look at:
http://www.horsedeathwatch.com/table.php
use the Course filter and you will find that since site started in 2007 there has been:
Aintree 17 deaths
Cheltenham 22 deaths
Does that answer your questions for you? and can I have my credibility back
How much deeper a hole are you digging for yourself[/QUOTE]
Your credibility keeps lessening. All you are doing is pulling stats from anywhere and everywhere without any consistency and therefore credibility.
You are trying to take stats from four racecourses in one state of America and trying to make them have some direct comparison with UK racecourses. If your Maths actually stacked up it would merely prove that the UK racing is safer than the US racing. Which supports your argument in what way?
Sadly your mathematics is badly flawed. And I quote:-
"..that during races at the state’s four major thoroughbred tracks, deaths have dropped from 3.05 per 1,000 starts to 1.93 since the installation of synthetic tracks.."
Now, even to the basic mind, 1.93 deaths in 1,000 starts is only 0.193% and not 1.93% as you claim. Tut-tut only a D- for that I'm afraid says Teacher.
Your other magic stat from Horse Death Watch does not mean anything relating to which course is actually more deadly. It only lists the number of horses that have died and not allowed a direct comparison about which tracks are more dangerous. Cheltenham hosts many more race meetings during a year than Aintree does, therefore more horses run there than Aintree in a year and therefore more horses are likely to die there.
I would remind you that you said you are not against horse-racing and this thread was supposed to be about how cruel The Grand National in particular is.
I am still to receive an explanation as to why no horses have fallen to their deaths in the last two Grand Nationals, while horses have died in shorter races over the same fences. Please make that your next port of call, rather than some desperate stats about Horses dying in races in Outer Mongolia!!
Bookmarks