Olympic Eventing xc thread

[Northern Hare]

Does anyone have a copy of the start-list for the Eventing Team SJ this afternoon - I can't see it on the RIO website - perhaps they don't release it until after the vets check?

 

[Biska]

Turns out Ingrid re-jumped it correctly

Linda Algotsson is now showing as NOT eliminated
48 SWE ALGOTSSON Linda FAIRNET 160.50

I would be interested to know the details of the re-jump a fence rule....can any one out there explain it? Sorry if I missed this earlier in the thread.

 

[Mince Pie]

We do need to have all team members capable of getting a decent dressage score - some of our best xc combinations cannot do that.

But then yesterday proved emphatically that a good dressage score is not the be all and end all, a 50 test and XC clear would still leave a rider in contention.

 

[Mince Pie]

Linda Algotsson is now showing as NOT eliminated
48 SWE ALGOTSSON Linda FAIRNET 160.50

I would be interested to know the details of the re-jump a fence rule....can any one out there explain it? Sorry if I missed this earlier in the thread.

From what I saw the flags on the left hand side of the A element were backwards so looked as if it was supposed to be jumped heading away from the frog.

 

[Annagain]

I've read Team GB all got through the trot up but any news on the other competitors? Can't find anything on net.

 

[Apercrumbie]

But then yesterday proved emphatically that a good dressage score is not the be all and end all, a 50 test and XC clear would still leave a rider in contention.

Absolutely, and I hope we never pick such inexperienced xc combinations again, but I think this does show that at the moment we cannot be truly competitive. To be able to win, you do need a very good dressage test, unless by some miracle all of the other top runners have awful xc/sj rounds. So either we have mediocre dressage tests with few jumping penalties, or we have good dressage tests with mediocre jumping rounds. Either way, we are not going to win.

 

[Lexi_]

Linda Algotsson is now showing as NOT eliminated
48 SWE ALGOTSSON Linda FAIRNET 160.50

I would be interested to know the details of the re-jump a fence rule....can any one out there explain it? Sorry if I missed this earlier in the thread.

Ok so this is just from BE level and I haven't consulted the rule book that recently... I assume FEI is the same...

If you have a refusal at a B or C element of a combination fence, you can basically do what you want on representing to the fence - it doesn't matter about circling/crossing tracks because you've already had the fault and the penalties. So, if for example if you run out at 22b, you can just rejump the B fence again OR you can rejump A and B. The latter is riskier cos if you have a problem at A on your second attempt, you still get penalties for it.

It makes sense if you imagine a step up as A and bounce or single stride to a rail as B - it's going to be nearly impossible to retake B by itself safely so the rules have to allow you to retry both elements.

If the fences are separately numbered (ie if those brush fences in the water had been 22 and 23) then you are eliminated if you rejump the first one when representing at the second because you'd have jumped it twice and you can't do that with individually numbered fences.

Does that make any more sense? I think the commentators got a bit confused yesterday - rejumping A isn't an automatic elimination like they were suggesting it was!

 

[Apercrumbie]

Ok so this is just from BE level and I haven't consulted the rule book that recently... I assume FEI is the same...

If you have a refusal at a B or C element of a combination fence, you can basically do what you want on representing to the fence - it doesn't matter about circling/crossing tracks because you've already had the fault and the penalties. So, if for example if you run out at 22b, you can just rejump the B fence again OR you can rejump A and B. The latter is riskier cos if you have a problem at A on your second attempt, you still get penalties for it.

It makes sense if you imagine a step up as A and bounce or single stride to a rail as B - it's going to be nearly impossible to retake B by itself safely so the rules have to allow you to retry both elements.

If the fences are separately numbered (ie if those brush fences in the water had been 22 and 23) then you are eliminated if you rejump the first one when representing at the second because you'd have jumped it twice and you can't do that with individually numbered fences.

Does that make any more sense? I think the commentators got a bit confused yesterday - rejumping A isn't an automatic elimination like they were suggesting it was!

This is also my interpretation.