Nick Skelton on Tokyo...HHO article

Joined
14 May 2019
Messages
306
Would love to know what he said about the format but I can't get into the article. How do I get round it? I've tried deleting cookies. Apparently I've read my 5 or 3 ? articles this month although I've no idea when because I haven't been able to get in for ages. Would anyone be prepared to give a precise of what he said, please, thank you. I'm hoping they will go back to the 4 riders and only 3 count format.
 

Tiddlypom

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 July 2013
Messages
16,414
Location
In between the Midlands and the North

dixie

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 August 2005
Messages
4,359
Location
Devon
Another quote was

The unpredictable nature of equestrian sport means you need a team drop score and the riders were strong in voicing their opinions beforehand that this new showjumping format wouldn’t work, that it would come at the detriment of horse welfare, and so it proved.
 

Nicnaclaus

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 May 2007
Messages
6,840
Interesting what he said about the Irish rider:

We could all see what was going to happen after the second jump and it was uncomfortable to watch, but he had to get round or his country lost all chance.

And this absolutely:

There needs to be a clear rule about ringing the bell in that situation and perhaps there should by a professional rider in the judges’ box helping to make that call.
It threw up problems in the individual, too – under the new format, Big Star and I wouldn’t have got past day one in Rio and how many combinations did we see travel all that way for just 90 seconds in the ring, having picked up unlucky faults in round one? That shouldn’t be allowed to happen.


It's bad enough travelling locally for a 90 second round if it goes to pot, but the expense and toll on the horses for 90 seconds is pure madness.
 

Rowreach

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 May 2007
Messages
13,221
Location
Northern Ireland
Interesting what he said about the Irish rider:

We could all see what was going to happen after the second jump and it was uncomfortable to watch, but he had to get round or his country lost all chance.

And this absolutely:

There needs to be a clear rule about ringing the bell in that situation and perhaps there should by a professional rider in the judges’ box helping to make that call.
It threw up problems in the individual, too – under the new format, Big Star and I wouldn’t have got past day one in Rio and how many combinations did we see travel all that way for just 90 seconds in the ring, having picked up unlucky faults in round one? That shouldn’t be allowed to happen.


It's bad enough travelling locally for a 90 second round if it goes to pot, but the expense and toll on the horses for 90 seconds is pure madness.
It's a competition, and that is all. Any rider worth their salt would put the welfare of the horse first and in this particular instance, would have pulled up well before that crashing fall.

I would hate to think that any team would rather a horse fall than a retirement.

The format and rules need changing, but the riders need to take a bit of responsibility for how it all went down.
 

Nicnaclaus

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 May 2007
Messages
6,840
It's a competition, and that is all. Any rider worth their salt would put the welfare of the horse first and in this particular instance, would have pulled up well before that crashing fall.

I would hate to think that any team would rather a horse fall than a retirement.

The format and rules need changing, but the riders need to take a bit of responsibility for how it all went down.
Of course they do but it's not normal circumstances - one out and the whole team's out. The pressure resulting in bad welfare decisions is inexcusable, but verging on the understandable.

I believe we are saying the same thing.
 

dixie

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 August 2005
Messages
4,359
Location
Devon
Following on from a couple of comments in those articles, I never understand why the horse sports are always tweaking with the format to make it easier for non horsey people.
I’m sure other sports don’t do this and do just fine. I mean who actually understands the diving scoring / doesn’t mean I still don’t enjoy it.
 

HashRouge

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 February 2009
Messages
7,567
Location
Manchester
Following on from a couple of comments in those articles, I never understand why the horse sports are always tweaking with the format to make it easier for non horsey people.
I’m sure other sports don’t do this and do just fine. I mean who actually understands the diving scoring / doesn’t mean I still don’t enjoy it.
I also don't understand this, in large part because surely it is not that hard to understand a drop score? When you compare the scoring systems in other Olympic sports (just look at sport climbing!!), surely the equestrian sports are really not that hard to understand? The things that potentially are a little more complicated, such as understanding why the dressage judges give certain scores, or how the dressage team scores work (which did confuse me!) are not going to be made any less complicated by getting rid of the 4th rider and the drop score. It does sound like the riders all spoke out about this though, so hopefully next time round they will bring back the 4th rider.
 

TGM

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 April 2003
Messages
16,013
Location
South East
Would love to know what he said about the format but I can't get into the article. How do I get round it? I've tried deleting cookies.
What I do on my computer is right-click on the link to the article, then choose 'Open Link in Incognito Window' and then I can read it. I think the option is sometimes called 'private window' on some browsers/systems.
 

TheMule

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 October 2009
Messages
4,115
3 scores to count worked fine in eventing where you could argue it would have the biggest impact.
The right individuals won medals, the right teams won medals, it was a thrilling finish in both the individual and teams. Clear rounds were rewarded, surely that is how showjumping should work?
 

Denbob

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 September 2017
Messages
1,079
I might be misunderstanding this but I thought part of the reason for the move to 3 alongside trying to make it more engaging was also to create space for riders from less established nations to take part, which is admirable and there were some great examples in the eventing (the Indian rider springs to mind) and I confess I didn't watch enough of the showjumping to name any though I'm sure there will have been some. But from what I saw of the showjumping, and to be fair some of the eventing combinations, created an issue with inexperienced/overwhelmed horses and riders having trouble with courses above their level or at their level and under extraordinary pressure that wouldn't have been the case with the drop score implemented.
 
Joined
27 October 2016
Messages
7,320
Following on from a couple of comments in those articles, I never understand why the horse sports are always tweaking with the format to make it easier for non horsey people.
I’m sure other sports don’t do this and do just fine. I mean who actually understands the diving scoring / doesn’t mean I still don’t enjoy it.
They seem to change it every time the games are held. I dont know how the athletes are supposed to keep up with it.
 

AFB

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 February 2017
Messages
1,568
Does anybody have a link to Shane Sweetnam's round?

I haven't seen it - and without having seen it I do feel for him slightly, having that pressure on your shoulders and having to make that decision in a split second, with nobody to consult with, was tough. I agree he made the wrong call but I wouldn't have wanted to deal with that.

Time for yet another FEI bashing IMO.

ETA: BEF have just posted links to all coverage on demand for free - I'll watch later
 
Last edited:

LEC

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 July 2005
Messages
9,475
I loved the 3 man format. The big issue is that it was not tested for Sjing beforehand in Nations Cups etc.
The big issue is that there are 200 slots for horses at the Olympics and if you have 4 in a team it means less diversity of nations. Sjing already takes up the most slots. I think there will be changes but ultimately 3 man is here to stay.
 

LegOn

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 September 2010
Messages
642
3 scores to count worked fine in eventing where you could argue it would have the biggest impact.
The right individuals won medals, the right teams won medals, it was a thrilling finish in both the individual and teams. Clear rounds were rewarded, surely that is how showjumping should work?
The eventing wasnt up to full height or 5* standard as they were worried about the impact on less experienced countries so it was reduced to 4* because of the high human casualty element and statistics of eventing.

Not so for the showjumping as they constantly pointed out in the commentary - this was the biggest most technical track that any rider will face in their career. Full up to height, 1.65 & width, 2m. So it goes to show it was a true test but while the eventing made a call based on the human casualties and welfare, the same call was not afforded to the horses in showjumping because the falls are less and usually dont result in a fatality or life altering injury but it put way too much pressure on the horses to perform, as pointed out above, one mistake a whole country was knocked out.

Even Nick Skelton wouldnt have won gold in Rio if that format had of been implemented then.
 

Roxylola

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 March 2016
Messages
4,074
Do other events have team and individual competitions run together? Is there a "sprint" team competition as well as an individual one?
Would it make a lot of difference if they just competed as individuals as part of team gb (or France etc) as opposed to being part of the team gb dressage team? If you're just riding for yourself not as part of a 3 man team there's less pressure to keep going if its not going well maybe
 

Rowreach

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 May 2007
Messages
13,221
Location
Northern Ireland
The showjumping was horrible to watch, right up until the team final (when imo the course wasn't anything like as difficult, relatively speaking, as the previous rounds were), when it actually rode quite well.

Yes the right team won, but look at all the teams that you would have expected to be in the final that either didn't get there or withdrew in the middle of it.

Look at the carnage that the previous rounds produced, from nations of all levels. Horrible format, horrible courses.
 

AnShanDan

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 May 2007
Messages
1,455
The showjumping was horrible to watch............Horrible format, horrible courses.
I agree, I love watching all levels of SJ normally, from Pony Club up, this was no fun to watch.

With regard to complicated rules needing to be simplified for the general public, I did have to laugh when Sir Chris Hoy was trying to explain how one of the cycling events works and failed miserably!!! I mean, if he doesn't know or understand it, who does??
 

LEC

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 July 2005
Messages
9,475
The eventing wasnt up to full height or 5* standard as they were worried about the impact on less experienced countries so it was reduced to 4* because of the high human casualty element and statistics of eventing.

Not so for the showjumping as they constantly pointed out in the commentary - this was the biggest most technical track that any rider will face in their career. Full up to height, 1.65 & width, 2m. So it goes to show it was a true test but while the eventing made a call based on the human casualties and welfare, the same call was not afforded to the horses in showjumping because the falls are less and usually dont result in a fatality or life altering injury but it put way too much pressure on the horses to perform, as pointed out above, one mistake a whole country was knocked out.

Even Nick Skelton wouldnt have won gold in Rio if that format had of been implemented then.
Only 1 jump was 1.65cm which was fence 14.
The majority were 1.55m apart from the last parts of the doubles and the triple bar which were 1.60.
None of the widths exceeded 1.60m apart from the triple bar (1.90m) and the water (4m).

So its incorrect to say it was a full up 1.65m course.

Just as an additional note. There is no height difference on xc between 4* and 5*. Both are 1.20m on XC. There are variances in the questions being asked. Brush can be 5cm more on 5* and spreads can be 10cm wider. The main difference is in the amount of efforts allowed (5 extra at 5*) and the length of course required. The Sjing has 5cm difference and is 1.25cm at 4* and 1.30cm at 5*.
 
Last edited:

milliepops

Wears headscarf aggressively
Joined
26 July 2008
Messages
25,051
Do other events have team and individual competitions run together? Is there a "sprint" team competition as well as an individual one?
Would it make a lot of difference if they just competed as individuals as part of team gb (or France etc) as opposed to being part of the team gb dressage team? If you're just riding for yourself not as part of a 3 man team there's less pressure to keep going if its not going well maybe
I'm struggling to articulate myself on this but I'll have a bash anyway, something like relay swim/run springs to mind and those athletes compete on an individual level too in general i think?

is there something about the kudos of finishing at the Olympics that means that you rarely see athletes quit unless injured even though they aren't winning?

I guess the difference may be for some equestrians that they know they need the horse for the rest of their career and the feedback re "can you continue without risking injury or mishap" is less direct than when you're ragging your own legs off in a race. So some may err on the side of caution (and some may press on and get it wrong).
 

teapot

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 December 2005
Messages
30,940
The eventing wasnt up to full height or 5* standard as they were worried about the impact on less experienced countries so it was reduced to 4* because of the high human casualty element and statistics of eventing.

Not so for the showjumping as they constantly pointed out in the commentary - this was the biggest most technical track that any rider will face in their career. Full up to height, 1.65 & width, 2m. So it goes to show it was a true test but while the eventing made a call based on the human casualties and welfare, the same call was not afforded to the horses in showjumping because the falls are less and usually dont result in a fatality or life altering injury but it put way too much pressure on the horses to perform, as pointed out above, one mistake a whole country was knocked out.

Even Nick Skelton wouldnt have won gold in Rio if that format had of been implemented then.
The pure sj was not up to height in the first team rounds.
 

Roxylola

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 March 2016
Messages
4,074
I did think of relay events MP, and yes I agree for a prestigious event there is always the risk of someone pushing beyond what they should whether its for team or personal reasons but it is one less pressure. I can't really see the need for team and individual rounds though. Either count the best individual round from the team competition or run one or the other. I know riding is my world, but it's expensive and very niche really for the amount of medals to be won
 
Joined
14 May 2019
Messages
306
Interesting what he said about the Irish rider:

We could all see what was going to happen after the second jump and it was uncomfortable to watch, but he had to get round or his country lost all chance.

And this absolutely:

There needs to be a clear rule about ringing the bell in that situation and perhaps there should by a professional rider in the judges’ box helping to make that call.
It threw up problems in the individual, too – under the new format, Big Star and I wouldn’t have got past day one in Rio and how many combinations did we see travel all that way for just 90 seconds in the ring, having picked up unlucky faults in round one? That shouldn’t be allowed to happen.


It's bad enough travelling locally for a 90 second round if it goes to pot, but the expense and toll on the horses for 90 seconds is pure madness.
He makes a very good point which it is hard to argue against. I am a huge fan of Olympic equestrian events and even I was questioning why horses were undertaking such a huge journey to compete in the heat just for our own enjoyment.
 
Joined
14 May 2019
Messages
306
Following on from a couple of comments in those articles, I never understand why the horse sports are always tweaking with the format to make it easier for non horsey people.
I’m sure other sports don’t do this and do just fine. I mean who actually understands the diving scoring / doesn’t mean I still don’t enjoy it.
This is a really good point too. I guess they are already on the back foot that their sport will be dropped and feel the need to justify it more than something like diving which is much more accessible to people wanting to have a go?
 

TheMule

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 October 2009
Messages
4,115
The eventing wasnt up to full height or 5* standard as they were worried about the impact on less experienced countries so it was reduced to 4* because of the high human casualty element and statistics of eventing.

Not so for the showjumping as they constantly pointed out in the commentary - this was the biggest most technical track that any rider will face in their career. Full up to height, 1.65 & width, 2m. So it goes to show it was a true test but while the eventing made a call based on the human casualties and welfare, the same call was not afforded to the horses in showjumping because the falls are less and usually dont result in a fatality or life altering injury but it put way too much pressure on the horses to perform, as pointed out above, one mistake a whole country was knocked out.

Even Nick Skelton wouldnt have won gold in Rio if that format had of been implemented then.
30 clear rounds qualified for the 30 individual final places- perfect- what would you change?
The team qualifier saw several teams through on 0 or 4 faults (or just a handful of time faults)
The team final produced a great jump off for gold.

Maybe Nick shouldn’t have won gold in Rio? Maybe All In should have?
 
Top