A Review of Equestrian Polo and a Methodology for Testing the Mechanical Properties of the Mallet

Abstract

: Equestrian polo is struggling to grow and attract young players due to the perception it is a game played by royals and the rich only, and is not a real sport. This study highlights the high level of skill and athletic challenge faced by the players. Literature is scarce for polo despite its global appeal and the high value of the game in terms of historical reach and investment by the polo community. The game is also unique in sports due to the multiplicity of interactions such as player–pony, pony–ground, player–mallet, and mallet–ball. This work introduces the basics of the game with a graphical interpretation of the motion of the mallet during play. The mallet is constructed of natural materials, the shaft from a rattan cane whilst the handle and head are crafted from hardwood. Using a materials analysis approach, a testing methodology is proposed that will enable quantifiable data to be produced based on the properties and performance of the mallet. The purpose of this is to enable benchmarking of the mallet based on the material properties and their assembled response to the testing. Quasi-static load tests using a universal testing instrument are followed by dynamic testing using inertial sensors. All testing is done in planes chosen to replicate the common lines of action of match play. The quasi-static tests enabled a value for stiffness (k), and the dynamic testing enabled a damping coefficient (c) to be calculated. These quantities will enable a quantitative measure for the properties and performance of any mallet and thereby remove the subjective nature of assessment. Subsequent study will then determine how these data correlate with the performance in play, as well as impact, trajectory, and fatigue responses.

Full text

Proceedings 2020, 49, 99; doi:10.3390/proceedings2020049099 www.mdpi.com/journal/proceedings
Proceedings
A Review of Equestrian Polo and a Methodology for
Testing the Mechanical Properties of the Mallet †
Paul Ewart 1,*, Ken Louie 2 and Hong Zhou 3
1 Centre for Engineering and Industrial Design, Waikato Institute of Technology, Hamilton 3240,
New Zealand; paul.ewart@wintec.ac.nz
2 Centre for Science and Primary Industries, Waikato Institute of Technology, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand;
ken.louie@wintec.ac.nz
3 Centre for Engineering and Industrial Design, Waikato Institute of Technology, Hamilton 3240,
New Zealand; hong.zhou@wintec.ac.nz
* Correspondence: paul.ewart@wintec.ac.nz; Tel.: +64-(0)7-834-8800 (ext. 3877)
† Presented at the 13th conference of the International Sports Engineering Association, Online,
22–26 June 2020.
Published: 15 June 2020
Abstract: Equestrian polo is struggling to grow and attract young players due to the perception it is
a game played by royals and the rich only, and is not a real sport. This study highlights the high
level of skill and athletic challenge faced by the players. Literature is scarce for polo despite its global
appeal and the high value of the game in terms of historical reach and investment by the polo
community. The game is also unique in sports due to the multiplicity of interactions such as player–
pony, pony–ground, player–mallet, and mallet–ball. This work introduces the basics of the game
with a graphical interpretation of the motion of the mallet during play. The mallet is constructed of
natural materials, the shaft from a rattan cane whilst the handle and head are crafted from
hardwood. Using a materials analysis approach, a testing methodology is proposed that will enable
quantifiable data to be produced based on the properties and performance of the mallet. The
purpose of this is to enable benchmarking of the mallet based on the material properties and their
assembled response to the testing. Quasi-static load tests using a universal testing instrument are
followed by dynamic testing using inertial sensors. All testing is done in planes chosen to replicate
the common lines of action of match play. The quasi-static tests enabled a value for stiffness (k), and
the dynamic testing enabled a damping coefficient (c) to be calculated. These quantities will enable
a quantitative measure for the properties and performance of any mallet and thereby remove the
subjective nature of assessment. Subsequent study will then determine how these data correlate
with the performance in play, as well as impact, trajectory, and fatigue responses.
Keywords: impact; lateral; longitudinal; mallet; motion; near-side; off-side; polo; swing
1. Introduction
Literature is scarce for equestrian polo despite its global appeal and the high value of the game
in terms of historical reach and investment by the polo community [1]. There is an international
federation, and as with other high-level sports they are subject to the rules and regulations of the
World Antidoping Agency (WADA) [2]. Safety is a major concern within polo, and this is reflected
in the rules as not only the welfare of the players but also the ponies must be considered [2].
The game is played with a maximum of four players per team on the field at any one time. The
nominal field size is 275 (goal to goal) x 183 m (width) with safety zones of 30 m each end and 10 m
each side also required. The players manoeuvre about the field on ponies and use a mallet (stick) to

Proceedings 2020, 49, 99 2 of 7
guide the ball (76 to 89 mm diameter). Each team is allocated points based on sending the ball through
a goal at the appropriate end of the field with the goal marked by posts 7.3 m apart and 3 m high [2].
The game is also unique in sports due to the multiplicity of interactions [3,4]. These interactions
can be considered between the player and their pony, the pony and the ground, the player and their
stick, and the stick and the ball. Regarding the player and their stick, the international polo association
rules [2] state that all players must hold the stick in their right hand. This is unique in stick sports in
that it would seem to disadvantage players with a left-arm bias. However, the interaction of the
player and their pony ensures that the direction of swing and the type of shots taken by all players
are dynamically the same. Scoring is achieved by guiding the ball past the opposing team and
between the opposition’s goal posts.
Applying engineering physics [5] such as Newton’s principles of motion gives a fundamental
account of the kinetics of play. As the first part of a wider study of the game, these theories lead
directly into the modelling and characterisation of the materials and performance of the stick. While
no deeper investigation is done here, the dynamics of swing are being studied and will be presented
in a later study. The stick is the focus in this early work and therefore requires investigation of a static
nature. This includes measuring the material properties of each part of the stick and the physical
properties determined by the design and construction methods.
The polo community are largely traditionalist with the design style and equipment materials
remaining the same for many years [6]. This is seen in two of the most important pieces of equipment,
the helmet, and the mallet. Unlike cricket bats and tennis rackets, polo does not have strict regulation
of the mallet. The geometry of the stick and the materials used in its manufacture are only restricted
regarding safety of player and pony. Traditional construction sees the preferred shaft made from a
cane, a handle, and a head crafted from hardwood. The favoured cane (rattan) is produced in tropical
South and Southeast Asia [7–10]. Rattan is a native climbing palm grown in natural forest stands
[8,11]. Although it is known to have short harvest time compared to other timber species [8,12], it is
considered to be in severe decline due to habitat destruction, changes in cultivation practices, regional
degradation, and wasteful and intensive harvest practices [11,13,14].
The CAD model in Figure 1 shows (a) the mallet handle, shaft, and head and (b) the generic
connection of the head and shaft. When the ball strikes the side of the head during the shot, the point
of impact, the line of action, and the direction of both are critical to the subsequent trajectory.
Figure 1. CAD models of the polo mallet. (a) The full shaft with handle and head and (b) the head
used to strike the ball during play.
The materials and construction of the stick are key components in the analysis of performance
and will also influence player performance. As previously shown, there are multiple interactions to
consider in polo, there are also multiple connections or chains within each interaction [15]. For the
player–stick interaction we first consider motion of the stick and from this we determine a suitable
kinetic theory through which to determine the reactions and responses of the stick. As the motion of
the stick has been seen to be driven through biomechanical asymmetries, it should be logical to test
the stick under load relative to a standard six degrees of freedom (6Dof) model. This would enable
gradually applied and dynamic loading conditions to be measured and would be repeatable.

Proceedings 2020, 49, 99 3 of 7
2. Graphical Interpretation
To determine the six degrees of freedom (6Dof) methodology, the planes of action are
determined. The intent is that each line of action will be represented by a vector quantity in later
predictive modelling work to enable determinants to be produced relative to those planes. They can
then be consistently related to the player and position of the stick. Figure 2 shows standard shots
taken parallel with the medial line of the pony. The right side of the pony, referred to as the offside,
is the side used to hit the ball when an opponent is on the left, while the left side is the nearside, the
side used to hit the ball when the opponent on the right side. The swing is known as forehand (Figure
2a,d), where the palm of the hand leads the shot, while the backhand (Figure 2b,c) sees the back of
the hand leading the shot. More difficult shots, such as the neck shots, (Figure 2e–h), and belly and
tail shots, where the rider hits the ball laterally to the medial line, avoiding the ponies’ legs.
Figure 2. CAD models indicating the direction of swing of the polo mallet in relation to the pony.
Standard shots, (a) back nearside, (b) front nearside, c) back offside, (d) front offside. Neck shots, (e)
backhand nearside, (f) forehand nearside, (g) backhand offside, (h) forehand offside.
When striking the ball, the direction of trajectory of the ball is related to the angle of the head on
impact. The striking face is the side of the head not the planar front face. As shown in Figure 3a, the
ball will travel straight when struck perpendicular to the stick head. When the stick head is angled
to the direction of swing (Figure 3b) the ball will travel at an angle relative to the direction of swing.
Figure 3. CAD models indicating the direction of swing of the polo mallet in relation to the angle of
the head. The ball travel is (a) aligned to direction of swing and (b) aligned to the angle of the head.
From the above models we can then determine the testing method for the mallet. The direction
of loading is related to both the direction of swing and the ball trajectory. It is also dependent on the
physical property being measured, i.e., velocity or strain. Initially, the stiffness of the stick shaft was
considered through both dynamic and quasi-static tests. Once this was understood the relation to
impact and varying factors such as speed of the swing and momentum of the head could be included.

Proceedings 2020, 49, 99 4 of 7
3. Testing Methodology
The first test is a gradually applied load, perpendicular to the stick head, in a vertical direction,
as seen in Figure 4. This quantifies the resistance to load of the shaft in a controlled environment and
will enable a comparison to the material properties of the cane. The test has a deflection limit of 200
mm and varying crosshead speeds (125, 250, 500 mm/min). The resulting data were maximum load
(N) and deflection distance at maximum load (mm). These results are used to determine stiffness of
the shaft for both the forehand and backhand direction of swing.
Figure 4. The testing kit with the stick mounted to undertake direct loading in the vertical plane.
The second test is a measure of the resistance to motion and is a dynamic test. The head is
displaced by 200 mm below the horizontal line of the handle and released. Due to the internal
resistance of the shaft, the head will return to the horizontal plane before travelling past to a
maximum displacement above the horizontal line and continue to oscillate until it comes to rest.
Figure 5 shows the head at (a) the bottom of a cycle and (b) the top of the cycle. The resulting data
are collected using inertial sensors at the head and the handle in the form of acceleration (g) and time
(s). These results can be used to determine damping of the shaft for both the front and back direction.
Figure 5. The stick in motion after release, (a) bottom of deflection cycle and (b) top of deflection cycle.

Proceedings 2020, 49, 99 5 of 7
4. Discussion
The rationale for this study is that an in-depth investigation of the polo stick from a materials
perspective will allow a benchmark to be developed to aid in the prescription of sticks for the player
based on equipment performance. Traditional polo mallet materials and construction are like those
of the cricket bat, with the use of natural materials comes seasonal and locational variability of
properties. The use of a testing methodology will enable quantification of the material properties and
subsequent performance from these objective data will provide a consistent measure for players.
As part of a larger project investigating the engineering perspective of equestrian polo, the
rationale is that once the material properties are known they can be used in conjunction with theories
of motion to determine a predictive model. The model will also require testing for validity and so a
full and comprehensive data set is required based on a repeatable methodology. The testing
methodology is the first part, and as seen in the following sections, the resultant data will characterise
the individual sticks. Table 1 shows the data taken from the quasi-static load test on the back and
front of the head of the mallet. This provides an equivalent stiffness value [keq] [16] for the mallet
shaft, which can subsequently be analysed with respect to the elastic modulus of the rattan cane.
Table 1. Example test data for determining stiffness from the quasi-static load test.
Back of Head (Dev) Front of Head (Dev)
Headspeed
(mm/min)
Max. Load
(N)
Deflection
(mm)
Stiffness [keq]
(N/mm)
Max. Load
(N)
Deflection
(mm)
Stiffness [keq]
(N/mm)
125 23 (0.80) 184.6 (7.52) 0.125 24.4 (2.08) 188.6 (9.12) 0.129
250 23.2 (1.12) 191.4 (2.72) 0.121 23 (0.80) 197.6 (3.84) 0.116
500 24.4 (1.36) 197.2 (2.24) 0.124 23 (0) 197.7 (3.11) 0.116
Ave. keq 0.123 (0.001) 0.121 (0.006)
The dynamic testing of the stick was measured by inertial sensors mounted on the head and the
handle and provided data as shown in Figure 6. The response seen in Figure 6a is a typical damped
system, which is formed through the energy loss due to the internal resistance of the shaft to the
deflection. The handle, shown in Figure 6b, has a small response due to the fixed restraint at the
mount.
Figure 6. Data from inertial sensor taken showing damping characteristics of the stick at (a) the head
and (b) the handle. Vertical motion is the Z-axis and horizontal motion is represented by the X- and
Y-axis values.
The damping is quantified by the coefficient dependent on the stiffness and mass of the head
and any applied force as [17]:
𝑚𝑥

+𝑐𝑥+𝑘𝑥 =𝐹
𝑡, (1)
where m = mass, x = distance from initial location, c = damping coefficient, k = stiffness, F = applied
force, and t = time.

Proceedings 2020, 49, 99 6 of 7
In similar fashion to other ball and bat sports, the player manoeuvres into the best position
possible to strike and launch the ball through fixed goal posts. From a theoretical perspective
Newton’s principle of motion allows a deeper understanding of the interactions of the player and the
stick. The graphical observations (Figures 2 and 3) show the parts of the stick, the materials used and
their properties, the fully assembled stick, and the basic shots learned by all players. Performance
analysis and the concepts are further developed by application of the theory of motion to each shot.
In a later study a predictive model will be constructed from these first principles to analyse player
motion and support enhanced performance.
5. Conclusions
The mallet (stick) in equestrian polo is crafted and used in a similar fashion to other stick (bat,
club, racket) and ball sports. This study reviewed and proposes a methodology for benchmarking the
properties and performance of the stick using static and dynamic testing.
Static testing produces a value for stiffness (k), and the dynamic testing produces a damping
coefficient (c). These quantities will enable a quantitative measure for the properties and performance
of any stick and thereby remove the subjective nature of assessment.
Acknowledgments: Russell and Reagan from Centre for Sport Science and Human Performance. The ISEA
sports development grant.
Conflicts of Interest: The funding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or
interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.
References
1. Campbell, J. Polo Is the World’s Oldest Equestrian Sport; Salem Press: Encyclopedia, CA, USA, 2017; p. 4.
2. Federation of International Polo. The International Rules for Polo; FIP: Buenos Aires, Argintina, 2018.
3. Standing, R.; Best, R. Strength and reaction time capabilities of New Zealand Polo players and their
association with Polo playing handicap. J. Funct. Morphol. Kinesiol. 2019, 4, 48.
4. Oliver, G.D.; Gilmer, G.G.; Barfield, J.W.; Brittain, A.R. Brittian. Swing Mechanics of the Offside Forehand
in Profession Female Polo Athletes. J. Orthop. Res. Ther. 2018, 10, 2575–8241.
5. Mullany, M. Physics for Engineers, 2nd ed.; NorthTec: Tai Tokarau Wananga, New Zealand, 2017.
6. Croquet Mallets & Sets|Polo Mallets & Equipment–Wood Mallets. Available online:
https://www.woodmallets.com (accessed on 6 February 2020).
7. Wahab, R.; Sulaiman, O.; Mustafa, M.T.; Sidek, S. Rattan: Propagation, Properties and Utilization; Universiti
Malaysia Kelantan Publication: Toruń, Poland, 2015.
8. Ngo-Samnick, E.L. PRO-AGRO Production and Processing Rattan; CTA: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2012.
9. Affendi, R.; Rostiwati, T. Rattan Industry in Indonesia: Research and Development Challenges. In
Proceedings of the 2nd INAFOR, Jakarta, Indonesia, 27–28 August 2013; pp. 689–696.
10. Meijaard, E.; Achdiawan, R.; Wan, M.; Taber, A. Rattan: The Decline of a Once-Important Non-Timber Forest
Product in Indonesia; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2014.
11. Peters, C.M.; Henderson, A.; Maung, U.M.; Lwin, U.S.; Ohn, U.T.M.; Lwin, U.K.; Shaung, U.T. The rattan
trade of Northern Myanmar: Species, supplies, and sustainability. Econ. Bot. 2007, 61, 3–13.
12. Adefisan, O.O.; Wei, L.; McDonald, A.G. Evaluation of Plastic Composites Made with Laccosperma
Secundiflorum and Eremospatha Macrocarpa Canes. Maderas Cienc. Tecnol. 2017, 19, 517–524.
13. Defo, L.; Persoon, G.; Aquino, D.M. J. Bamboo Ratt. 2007, 6, 41–50.
14. Kusuma, Y.; Hendrian, D. Propagation and transplanting of manau rattan Calamus manan in Bukit
Duabelas National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia. Conserv. Evid. 2011, 8, 19–25.
15. Chu, S.K.; Jayabalan, P.; Kibler, W.B.; Press, J. The Kinetic Chain Revisited: New Concepts on Throwing
Mechanics and Injury. PM R 2016, 8, S69–S77.

Proceedings 2020, 49, 99 7 of 7
16. Kelly, S.G. Mechanical Vibrations; Aliano, J., Ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1996.
17. French, M. Vibration with Damping. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LbmT1ikTHE
(accessed on 19 November 2019).
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).