[vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_empty_space height=”32px”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]In the world of course design its all about creativity, horsemanship and experience. Every competition and tournament is different. Some weeks the course designer is hoping to get more than 15 entries in the Grand Prix, while others run into the problem of how to create a fair course with a good number of clear rounds when having 60 or more entries for a major competition.

When it comes to a competition where the Course Designer is dealing with a big number of talented horses and riders there is a question that in my opinion is very important. What is a fair course and what is overdone?

This question has many different answers. Some people would point out the time allowed, the dimensions of the obstacles, footing or distances; but I really want to talk about the use of combinations.

In a typical Grand Prix we are used to see either one triple and one double combination or
three double combinations. But recently we have seen some Grand Prix courses using one triple and two double combinations.

As a Course Designer I have been thinking a lot about this situation, and I want to share with
you some facts that will hopefully give you a different perspective.

In the chart below you will find the number of efforts based on the number of jumps and the
number and type of combinations.

Number of obstacles	12	13	14
1 triple/ 1 double	15	16	17
3 double	15	16	17
1 triple / 2 double	16	17	18

Based on the chart we can conclude that the number of efforts in a course is the same if the Course Designer is using one double and a triple or three double combinations. Meanwhile using one triple and two doubles adds an extra effort.

Now lets compare what percentage of the efforts on the course are combinations based on the chart below:

Number of obstacles	12	13	14
1 triple/ 1 double	33.33%	31.25%	29.41%
3 double	33.33%	31.25%	29.41%
1 triple / 2 double	43.75%	41.17%	38.88%

This means that the combinations represent almost ten percent more of the efforts when using one triple and two double combinations. This also means that if we have a course where the faults are evenly spread within every effort, the combinations would be responsible for ten percent more of the faults.

With the facts above and knowing that combination obstacles are very demanding for the horses, I believe that the use of one triple and two double combinations can make a course overdone.

There are so many resources that a Course Designer can use (type of obstacle, distances, dimensions, time allowed, footing, material, and weather conditions), that there is no need to test the horses with too many combinations.

In my personal opinion the use of a triple combination and two doubles represents the easiest way to get more faults, and should not be encouraged.

Course Design is like playing chess with the riders. The only difference is that Course Designers have lots of time to think before they make a move and riders get only a few minutes to analyze their opponents move.

Therefore the Course Designer should be able to produce a great competition using as many different resources as possible (triple bars, walls, water jump, Liverpool, plank on top, skinny, Swedish oxer and natural), and not relying on the use of combinations.

The sport as a whole…

Oscar Soberon[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]