Goat tying styles and performance in collegiate rodeo competitors

IF 1.3 3区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
M. Baxley, T. Powell, C.A. Porr
{"title":"Goat tying styles and performance in collegiate rodeo competitors","authors":"M. Baxley,&nbsp;T. Powell,&nbsp;C.A. Porr","doi":"10.1016/j.jevs.2025.105439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Goat tying is a rodeo event involving dismounting a horse, and flanking and tying 3 legs of a goat. Flanking is defined as picking a goat up and setting it on the ground on its side. Flank and gather (FG) is a style where riders scoop the legs with the right hand and then place them in the left. Catch the flank (CF), stuffing (ST), and funneling (FN) are other methods that involve the goats’ legs landing together so the right hand is not needed for gathering. The objectives of this study were to determine (1) if flanking method affects performance, and (2) where errors most often occur during a run. It was predicted that riders using FG would have more successful runs, and that most errors would occur while tying. Goat tyers (n = 17) competing in the Ozark National Intercollegiate Rodeo Association (NIRA) completed a survey about preferred flanking method and horse experience with goat tying. Rider runs (n = 73) were videoed at 5 rodeos and evaluated whether participants flanked the goat as reported in the survey, considered a successful flank, and where horse or rider errors were made. Not every rider competed at every rodeo. Seven riders used FG, followed by CF (n = 4), ST (n = 4), FN (n = 1), and other (OT; n = 1). Of those styles, FG had the highest success rate (n = 16 of 24 attempts; 67%), followed by ST, FN, and OT (n = 12/20, 3/5, and 3/5, respectively; 60% each), and CF (n = 6/19, 32%). Using Microsoft Excel, results of a chi-squared test for independence examining the relationship between flanking method and success rate were nonsignificant, χ<sup>2</sup>(4, n = 73) = 5.83, <em>P</em> = 0.21. Rider errors were grouped into 5 categories: dismount, approach, flank, gather, and tie. Most errors were made during the approach (31%), regardless of flanking method used. A chi-squared goodness-of-fit test was used to compare observed frequencies of different errors to expected distributions. There was a significant deviation from expected values, χ<sup>2</sup>(4, n = 165) = 24.79, <em>P</em> &lt; 0.01. Riders using CF made the fewest errors in tying (n = 4/19; 21%) as compared with riders using ST (n = 12/20; 60%). Horse errors primarily involved not running directly toward the goat, and only occurred in 8 runs. During those runs, 6 riders (75%) made errors in their approach. A conditional probability equation, determined that if the horse erred, there was a 74.5% chance the rider would make an error in their approach. While more data could strengthen the results, there was a significant difference in where errors were made, and errors were more likely to occur if the horse erred. Knowing that riders are more likely to make errors in their approach if the horse misbehaves, coaches may emphasize more time practicing with horses.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15798,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Equine Veterinary Science","volume":"148 ","pages":"Article 105439"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Equine Veterinary Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0737080625000978","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Goat tying is a rodeo event involving dismounting a horse, and flanking and tying 3 legs of a goat. Flanking is defined as picking a goat up and setting it on the ground on its side. Flank and gather (FG) is a style where riders scoop the legs with the right hand and then place them in the left. Catch the flank (CF), stuffing (ST), and funneling (FN) are other methods that involve the goats’ legs landing together so the right hand is not needed for gathering. The objectives of this study were to determine (1) if flanking method affects performance, and (2) where errors most often occur during a run. It was predicted that riders using FG would have more successful runs, and that most errors would occur while tying. Goat tyers (n = 17) competing in the Ozark National Intercollegiate Rodeo Association (NIRA) completed a survey about preferred flanking method and horse experience with goat tying. Rider runs (n = 73) were videoed at 5 rodeos and evaluated whether participants flanked the goat as reported in the survey, considered a successful flank, and where horse or rider errors were made. Not every rider competed at every rodeo. Seven riders used FG, followed by CF (n = 4), ST (n = 4), FN (n = 1), and other (OT; n = 1). Of those styles, FG had the highest success rate (n = 16 of 24 attempts; 67%), followed by ST, FN, and OT (n = 12/20, 3/5, and 3/5, respectively; 60% each), and CF (n = 6/19, 32%). Using Microsoft Excel, results of a chi-squared test for independence examining the relationship between flanking method and success rate were nonsignificant, χ2(4, n = 73) = 5.83, P = 0.21. Rider errors were grouped into 5 categories: dismount, approach, flank, gather, and tie. Most errors were made during the approach (31%), regardless of flanking method used. A chi-squared goodness-of-fit test was used to compare observed frequencies of different errors to expected distributions. There was a significant deviation from expected values, χ2(4, n = 165) = 24.79, P < 0.01. Riders using CF made the fewest errors in tying (n = 4/19; 21%) as compared with riders using ST (n = 12/20; 60%). Horse errors primarily involved not running directly toward the goat, and only occurred in 8 runs. During those runs, 6 riders (75%) made errors in their approach. A conditional probability equation, determined that if the horse erred, there was a 74.5% chance the rider would make an error in their approach. While more data could strengthen the results, there was a significant difference in where errors were made, and errors were more likely to occur if the horse erred. Knowing that riders are more likely to make errors in their approach if the horse misbehaves, coaches may emphasize more time practicing with horses.
大学牛仔竞技比赛中山羊系绳的风格和表现
系山羊是一项牛仔竞技项目,包括下马,从侧面绑住山羊的三条腿。侧翼的定义是把一只山羊抱起来,把它放在地上。侧翼和集合(FG)是一种风格,骑手用右手舀腿,然后把它们放在左边。抓住侧翼(CF),填塞(ST)和漏斗(FN)是其他方法,涉及山羊的腿着地在一起,所以右手不需要收集。本研究的目的是确定(1)侧翼方法是否影响性能,以及(2)在运行过程中最常发生错误的地方。预测使用FG的骑手会有更多的成功的跑动,并且大多数错误会发生在平局时。参赛的山羊选手(n = 17)完成了一项关于偏好侧翼方式和山羊系马经验的调查。骑手赛跑(n = 73)在5个牛仔竞技场上进行录像,并评估参与者是否像调查中报告的那样侧翼扑向山羊,被认为是成功的侧翼,以及马或骑手在哪里犯了错误。不是每个骑手都参加每一场竞技比赛。7名车手使用FG,其次是CF (n = 4),ST (n = 4),FN (n = 1),其他(OT;n = 1)。在这些风格中,FG的成功率最高(n = 24次尝试中有16次;67%),其次是ST、FN和OT (n = 分别为12/20、3/5和3/5;CF (n = 6/19,32%)。采用Microsoft Excel对侧翼法与成功率关系进行独立性卡方检验,χ2(4), n = 73, = 5.83,P = 0.21。骑手失误分为5类:下马、接近、侧翼、集合和并列。无论使用何种侧翼方法,大多数错误都是在接近过程中发生的(31%)。采用卡方拟合优度检验比较不同误差的观测频率与预期分布。χ2(4, n = 165) = 24.79,P <;0.01. 使用CF的选手在打平时的失误最少(n = 4/19;21%),与使用ST的骑手相比(n = 12/20;60%)。马的失误主要是没有直接跑向山羊,而且只发生了8次。在这些比赛中,有6名选手(75%)在进场时犯了错误。一个条件概率方程,确定如果马犯了错误,骑手有74.5%的机会在他们的方法中犯错误。虽然更多的数据可以加强结果,但在犯错误的地方有很大的不同,如果马犯了错误,错误就更有可能发生。如果马表现不佳,骑手更有可能在方法上出错,教练可能会强调花更多的时间和马一起练习。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Equine Veterinary Science
Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
249
审稿时长
77 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Equine Veterinary Science (JEVS) is an international publication designed for the practicing equine veterinarian, equine researcher, and other equine health care specialist. Published monthly, each issue of JEVS includes original research, reviews, case reports, short communications, and clinical techniques from leaders in the equine veterinary field, covering such topics as laminitis, reproduction, infectious disease, parasitology, behavior, podology, internal medicine, surgery and nutrition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信