Science & Art

The HPR is a 100% data-driven calculation and is a powerful tool that is produced using scientific methods. The application of HPR is the art.

For example, an HPR achieved in an event like Badminton 2014 where the cross-country jumping and time, as well as the show jumping, were all tested to extremes, may not necessarily highlight the best combination going forward to an event in good ground conditions, with show jumping on a surface, and an expected cross-country test well below the level of a very tough Badminton.

High performance is a science AND an art. We work with teams in the same way as the hedge fund managers use various pieces of software to provide indicators on market strengths and weaknesses. Each of the riders and horses in your HP portfolio have strengths and weaknesses and their values are constantly changing. The software and the indicators are not a ‘get rich quick’ scheme. Your whole management team looking at each of the various aspects of each of the stocks in your portfolio is what makes some funds work more efficiently than others.

How do we calculate the HPR?

The High Performance Rating (HPR) is a score which quantifies the quality of a performance. It is based on an algorithm which measures performance by; 

  • the scores achieved;
  • the overall dressage scoring bias;
  • the quality of the competition field; and
  • the difficulty of the cross-country and show jumping phases with regards to both jumping and time.

The algorithm has been designed to fit on a scale of 0 to 100 across all levels, but there are always extreme outliers that break the mould. As this is high performance sport, we obviously don’t cap the outliers, so some performances (particularly at Championships when very strong fields come together) can go off the scale and into the 100s. 

The Thresholds

The threshold analysis below gives a much better ‘big picture’ overview of the HPR:

  • Top 1% threshold – 95
  • Top 2% threshold – 92
  • Top 3% threshold – 89
  • Top 4% threshold – 88
  • Top 5% threshold – 87

The highest HPR since 2010 is a 111. SAP Hale Bob and Ingrid Klimke set the mark with their performance at the 2017 Strzegom European Championships. Analysing 2018 and 2019 shows that SAP Hale Bob and Klimke remarkably posted another outlier performance of 111, this time at the Luhmuhlen European Championships in 2019. They were two points clear of the second best HPR (109) which went to Chipmunk and Julia Krajewski at Aachen 2018. Klimke and SAP Hale Bob also registered a 109 with their 2019 Aachen win, while Michael Jung posted the only other 109 result when taking up the reins on FischerChipmunk at the 2019 European Championships.

Looking beyond the very top thresholds we can see how the HPR scales down through the population:

  • Top 10% threshold – 82
  • Top 15% threshold – 79
  • Top 20% threshold – 75
  • Top 25% threshold – 72
  • Top 50% threshold – 52

 

What type of rating wins you a medal?

For individual medals, the benchmark of 100 needs to be comfortably in the sights. For team medals, the number to keep in mind is 90.

While some major championships will take something beyond the top 1% to win, a rating of 95 and above is definitely an indicator of individual medal ability. Thereafter the finer details of the competition and the combination’s strengths and weaknesses will become deciding factors. The Rio Olympics (due to the strength of the cross-country phase) produced a winning HPR of 108. The London Olympics and Caen WEG both produced winning HPRs of 100. Badminton was won with a 108 in 2018 and a 107 in 2019. WEG 2018 was won with a 105. These are all values above the 1% threshold and very much indicate the level of exceptional performance required.

Show me the ratings

FEI
SAP
OnForm
NDRC