# Sour grapes and bad sportsmanship this year?



## Shadowdancing (22 August 2016)

I know there were a few examples floating about but just had to share this  as it has been interpreted by at least a few people as being an unfair comment... full article is here: 

http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/skelton-scores-olympic-gold-six-horse-jump 




			Kent Farrington hadnt pulled a rail all week on Voyeur for the United States. They came into the jump-off ready to win, but pulled two rails. He went late in Round B and didnt have much of a break after the short course. Though he worked hard to get Froggy in peak form for Rio, the heat and demanding week took a toll.

I think my horse was a little bit tired, said Farrington. I think if we had more time to rest before the jump off it would have helped. Nicks horse finished early, had a bit of time to cool off, and everything before it comes up. The rest of us didnt have that. A lot of tired horses there at the end.

Like many in the jump-off Farrington questioned whether having six horses jump-off to determine all the medals worked out properly.

Six horses in a jump off is a lot, he said. I think its too many for an Olympic Games. Not an ideal set up so you know youll have only one person whos happy with the result in the end. But thats our sport, and thats what it is today, so we all have to give it a shot and go for it.
		
Click to expand...

TBH I breezed through the article and didn't really read that until I saw a statement from another reader at the end upset about the comment. What do you think?


----------



## Kylara (22 August 2016)

I know I've been in jump off rounds for placings with more than 6 horses. Not sure why the number matters - Clear rounds in the time get through to the jump off. 

Time to rest is one of those wiffly waffly ones - someone with a horse that goes off the boil if it gets too long a rest between rounds could moan that they didn't get to go soon enough.


----------



## MargotC (22 August 2016)

Well, by the same logic one could argue it is unfair they had a jump-off at all at the end instead of simply handing the title to the rider who had not gotten a single penalty throughout the competition. I very much wanted to see Eric Lamaze take home a medal after that feat but I was pleased for Nick Skelton too. As long as the competition format is what it is and the finals start at 0 penalties for all qualified, things are bound to be a little "unfair". I hardly think six riders in the jump-off was excessive nor strange given they all started on equal footing at the end. If time was to determine who got into the jump-off you could have argued there was no need for a jump-off etc.

Excellent point by Kylara, too.


----------



## dixie (22 August 2016)

I believe on that basis Nick Skelton would have won gold in London as he had not rails until the jump off - I think?
Usually the first one in the jump off is at a disadvantage. It's only because of Nicks brilliant round that he put pressure on the others.
You could also say that Nicks horse had time to go off the boil before the jump off. 
So you can look at the scenario in many different ways, depending who you are.  The competition was what it was, which I thought was a thrilling jump off.


----------



## Dunlin (22 August 2016)

I think it's just nit picking as usual plus the disappointment of losing a title like the Olympics is always going to hit hard when you were in with a shot so you're going to be more downcast than usual. 

6 in a jump off is nothing, I've seen more than double that before at Hickstead and I've been in a class myself where all 30 starters had a clear inside the time, that was a LONG jump off and my horse was actually asleep by the time I came to tack back up! First to go, last to go, they got some rain or the temperature spiked up, bit of wind, more crowd noise, sun moved so more shadows, there's always a 'problem', wasn't their uproar earlier this year when Oliver T was chosen as the Badminton pathfinder again? I noted at Burghley he has 3 horses entered, with baited breath I waited for another uproar at him possibly being chosen as the pathfinder, he wasn't though.


----------



## Shadowdancing (23 August 2016)

dixie said:



			I believe on that basis Nick Skelton would have won gold in London as he had not rails until the jump off - I think?
Usually the first one in the jump off is at a disadvantage. It's only because of Nicks brilliant round that he put pressure on the others.
You could also say that Nicks horse had time to go off the boil before the jump off. 
So you can look at the scenario in many different ways, depending who you are.  The competition was what it was, which I thought was a thrilling jump off.
		
Click to expand...

I agree completely, I think it's a little disappointing that anyone would try and say Nick had an advantage. After all not only in London, but with Arko in 2004- he was all over the winner until the latter rounds, just as this rider and his horse were, this is the nature of the game...


----------



## MotherOfChickens (23 August 2016)

6 rounds makes for a perfect jump off I reckon! I don't think he was really having a go, just voicing his disappointment-fair enough. I did read some disgruntled comments on a US forum about how the British cycling is selecting and training cyclists-seems a bit rich seeing how they select/treat their own track and field athletes.


----------



## Shadowdancing (23 August 2016)

MotherOfChickens said:



			6 rounds makes for a perfect jump off I reckon! I don't think he was really having a go, just voicing his disappointment-fair enough. I did read some disgruntled comments on a US forum about how the British cycling is selecting and training cyclists-seems a bit rich seeing how they select/treat their own track and field athletes.
		
Click to expand...

I saw a comment somewhere about how it's no wonder we did well at the dressage because we get loads of funding for it...?!!!


----------



## MotherOfChickens (23 August 2016)

Shadowdancing said:



			I saw a comment somewhere about how it's no wonder we did well at the dressage because we get loads of funding for it...?!!!
		
Click to expand...

people have short memories. of course top class sport needs funding-the UK always had the talent but no funding and little infrastructure (for any sport-look at tennis for example).


----------



## Jo_x (23 August 2016)

I think it sounds slightly like sour grapes but it could just be honesty in his disappointment. Normally being early to go in a class, especially the jumpoff, is seen as a disadvantage, which is why the running order was in reverse order of merit!

Six horses in a jumpoff is quite a lot by olympic standards, I doubt the coursebuilder was aiming for that many, but personally I thought it made for great watching. I dislike the general championship showjumping format of medals being decided by several rounds over a week and then possibly a small jumpoff at the end, often only to decide lower medal positions. It's far more exciting when people are busting a gut for gold medals and if they mess up they go home empty handed!


----------



## popsdosh (25 August 2016)

What is forgotten is the horses that had rails in the jump off were caused by Nick setting a clear and time that they had to go for from a position that would normally be deemed a disadvantage in a jump off. I believe those that had rails even did not better his time which says a lot about Nicks achievement.


----------



## OLDGREYMARE (25 August 2016)

Definitely sour grapes


----------

