12/14/2025
๐๐ ๐๐ต๐ฒ National Finals Rodeo, ๐๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ ๐๐ฒ๐ฝ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐ณ๐ถ๐ฟ๐๐ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฝ๐น๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฒ. ๐ก๐ผ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฏ๐ถ๐น๐ถ๐๐.
This world title wasnโt decided by one dominant performance or one standout run. It was decided by ๐ต๐ผ๐ ๐บ๐ถ๐๐๐ฎ๐ธ๐ฒ๐ ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐ฑ๐ถ๐๐๐ฟ๐ถ๐ฏ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฑ, ๐๐ต๐ฒ๐ป ๐๐ต๐ฒ๐ ๐ต๐ฎ๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฒ๐ฑ, ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ต๐ผ๐ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ด๐ฒ ๐ต๐ฒ๐น๐ฑ ๐๐ผ๐ด๐ฒ๐๐ต๐ฒ๐ฟ.
That might sound counterintuitive, but when you step back and look at ๐ฎ๐น๐น ๐ญ๐ฑ ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ ๐ญ๐ฌ ๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ๐, thatโs exactly what the data shows.
Hereโs what actually mattered:
๐ ๐ช๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฑ๐ฎ๐๐ฎ ๐๐ต๐ผ๐๐ ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ ๐ฎ๐น๐น ๐ญ๐ฑ ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐
๐๐ผ๐ป๐๐ถ๐๐๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ ๐บ๐ฎ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐บ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ป ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ธ ๐๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฑ
๐นOnly ๐ฒ.๐ณ% of all runs at this NFR were truly fast (14.50.
In other words, the Finals were shaped far more by:
โ
Avoiding big mistakes
โ
Staying in the ๐ญ๐ฏ.๐ฑ๐ฌโ๐ญ๐ฐ.๐ฌ๐ฌ window
โ
Letting others give money away than by outright speed.
โโโ
๐๐ผ๐ฟ๐๐ฒ ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐๐ถ๐ป๐๐ถ๐๐ ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐น๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ถ๐๐ต ๐น๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ
Riders who stayed on ๐ผ๐ป๐ฒ ๐ต๐ผ๐ฟ๐๐ฒ generally showed:
๐นTighter time distributions
๐นHigher percentages of runs under 14.00
๐นFewer extreme penalty outcomes
๐นMore upward movement late in the standings
Riders who rotated ๐ฎโ๐ฏ ๐ต๐ผ๐ฟ๐๐ฒ๐ showed:
๐นWider spreads across time categories
๐นHigher exposure to >14.50 or NT
๐นMore volatility round to round
This does NOT imply causation but it does show a strong ๐ฎ๐๐๐ผ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ฏ๐ฒ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ป ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐๐ถ๐ป๐๐ถ๐๐ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐๐ถ๐๐๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ in this setup.
โธป
๐ง๐ถ๐บ๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ผ๐ณ ๐บ๐ถ๐๐๐ฎ๐ธ๐ฒ๐ ๐บ๐ฎ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐บ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ป ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ป๐๐บ๐ฏ๐ฒ๐ฟ
Penalties earlier in the Finals had far less impact than penalties late.
Mistakes in ๐ฅ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ๐ ๐ดโ๐ญ๐ฌ had outsized consequences because:
โ
Round money is compressed at the top
โ
Average placement was already tight
โ
One miss could remove ๐๐ฒ๐ป๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ต๐ผ๐๐๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ๐ via average payouts
This is where variance (not ability) separated placements.
๐ฅ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ-๐ฏ๐-๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐๐ฒ๐
๐ ๐บ๐ฎ๐ธ๐ฒ๐ ๐๐ต๐ถ๐ ๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐ป ๐ฐ๐น๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฟ
When you look at when penalties and fast runs actually occurred:
๐น ๐ฅ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฏ had the ๐ต๐ถ๐ด๐ต๐ฒ๐๐ ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฎ๐น๐๐ ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ
โ 66.7% of runs were >14.50 or No Time (10 runs)
๐น ๐ฅ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฐ had the ๐บ๐ผ๐๐ ๐ฐ๐น๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ป ๐ฟ๐๐ป๐
โ 73.3% landed in the 13.50โ14.15 window (11 runs)
๐น ๐ฅ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฒ produced the ๐บ๐ผ๐๐ ๐ณ๐ฎ๐๐ ๐๐ถ๐บ๐ฒ๐
โ 20.0% of runs were under 13.50 (3 runs)
๐น ๐ฅ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ๐ ๐ญ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ด had ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ผ ๐ณ๐ฎ๐๐ ๐ฟ๐๐ป๐
โ No sub-13.50 times at all
This matters because it shows ๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ธ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ผ๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ผ๐ฟ๐๐๐ป๐ถ๐๐ ๐๐ต๐ถ๐ณ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐ฏ๐ ๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ, and riders were rewarded or punished based on when variance hit.
๐งฎ ๐ฆ๐ผ ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐๐ผ๐๐น๐ฑ ๐ต๐ฎ๐๐ฒ ๐ป๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ผ ๐ต๐ฎ๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ป ๐ณ๐ผ๐ฟ Patricia Lee ๐๐ผ ๐ณ๐ถ๐ป๐ถ๐๐ต ๐ญ๐๐ ๐ถ๐ป๐๐๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ?
Any one of the following would likely have flipped the outcome:
1๏ธโฃ ๐ข๐ป๐ฒ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฑ๐ถ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐ฎ๐น ๐ธ๐ป๐ผ๐ฐ๐ธ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐ฏ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐น ๐บ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฒ ๐ฏ๐ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐ป๐๐๐ฎ๐น ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ป๐ฒ๐ฟ
That likely drops her out of Top-8 average money, removing $23kโ$94k from the final total. That alone is enough to flip 1st and 2nd.
2๏ธโฃ ๐ข๐ป๐ฒ ๐น๐ฎ๐๐ฒ-๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฝ๐น๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐ ๐๐ฝ๐ด๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฒ. ๐ช๐ถ๐ป๐ป๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ฅ๐ญ๐ฌ ๐ถ๐ป๐๐๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฑ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ฝ๐น๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ.
That single placement change adds roughly $25kโ$30k, which forces the average payout to decide 1st instead of locking it.
3๏ธโฃ ๐ ๐ผ๐ป๐ฒ-๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ถ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐๐ต๐ถ๐ณ๐ ๐ถ๐ป ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ด๐ฒ
The average didnโt need to flip entirely.
Even:
๐นTricia moving up ๐ผ๐ป๐ฒ ๐๐ฝ๐ผ๐, or
๐นThe leader dropping ๐ผ๐ป๐ฒ ๐๐ฝ๐ผ๐
Changes payouts by $15kโ$30k, enough to reverse the final order.
๐ฏ ๐ง๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐น ๐๐ฎ๐ธ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐๐ฎ๐
Because of how the NFR payout structure works, world title wasnโt decided by who was the best rider or had the best horse. It was decided by:
โ
Variance management
โ
When mistakes actually happened
โ
How the average money stayed intact
And itโs why looking at the ๐ฒ๐ป๐๐ถ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐ป๐, not just the final standings, tells the real story.