# Showjumping faults...thought??



## MandyMoo (6 December 2009)

i was talking with my mum the other day when we were at an unaff sj comp. At this competition (and at many other unaff) i noticed they were giving 4 faults for a pole knockdown and only 3 faults for a refusal.

but i really dont agree with this system that most unaff sj centres have...because if there is say no clears and they place the lowest faulters...then a refusal would get placed above a 4 faulter...and in my book, a refusal is a lot worse (and technically should get more faults than a knockdown) than a horse jumping the fence but just tipping a pole.

thoughts??

should they make ALL unaff keep the same as BSJA, i.e. 4 faults for refusal/runout and also 4 faults for knockdown...or should refusals be 5 faults, so they are worse than a horse that has a pole??

just a bit of a discussion me and my mum had... 

please no-one jump on me if what i have said is a load of rubbish 
	
	
		
		
	


	








 lol xxx


----------



## Lolo (6 December 2009)

I disagree- while you can have an unlucky pole, you can also have an unfortunate glanceoff. Poles can be knocked down way easier than a refusal occuring and are often a result of worse riding than a stop- too fast/ not enough impulsion/ poor set-up.

I reckon (and this is porobably lol-worthy) you should have 4 faults for every pole- so if you take out an entire fence then its worse than just tapping the front rail.


----------



## MagicMelon (6 December 2009)

Ive never known anywhere to do 3 faults for a refusal. 4 faults is given for a refusal or a fence down at venues round me.  I dont even agree with that, I think a refusal should be penalised more as it is worse than a pole down. I think that the idea behind it at BSJA is probably because if you have a refusal then you'll likely get time faults anyway, but at unaffil. this doesnt happen.


----------



## ajf (6 December 2009)

I'm think i'm right in saying this, but someone will correct me or make it more understandable!
This is the traditional scoring system and was adopted everywhere (by affilated comps too), then the rules changed several years back.
As pretty much all competitions have risen from hunting etc, it is much much much safer for a horse to stop then knock and fence.  For example a solid gate or post amd rail fences out hunting would most likely cause a fall.  Therefore is better to have a ultra careful horse who may stop if it can't clear the fence than one which will always jump.


----------



## monkeybum13 (6 December 2009)

When I've SJ'ed at West Wilts they have gave 3 faults (unaff)
IMO a refusal is worse than a pole but others may disagree so I think a refusal should get the same as a pole.


----------



## Santa_Claus (6 December 2009)

Old SJ (BSJA) rules were 3 faults for 1st stop, 6 for second and 3rd was elimination rather than current 2 stops and your out rule. A lot of unaffil show centres kept the old rules to give novice riders more of a chance which I prefer.

BSJA changed rules with increases in class sizes and to move in line with FEI if I remember rightly. There was a lot of fuss at the time which I think was when I was on 12h2's so about 14 or 15 years ago now!!!

PC kept to old rules for many years but I think have now changed to 4 faults for first stop and second and 3rd is elimination though I think I may well be wrong as not competed PC comps in years either!

The theory with the old BSJA rules of 3 faults for first stop was that a horse who stopped should get time faults so a horse with a pole should come out on top!


----------



## Tinsel_Toes (6 December 2009)

and the other side of looking at this is in WH classes a refusal (disobediance) scores more penalties than a knockdown.  I see both sides to the argument, I'd rather a horse stop if it was going to have a fence that would cause a fall but in showjumping this is very rare as the poles fall.  However some horses stop due to a disobediance (not inc spooking novices in this) and IMHO that should be penalised as much as a pole.

I think it's really up to the individual show to have whatever rules they want, but being in line would make things easier, there's enough rules in each discipline without having 2/3 sets of diff rules for one!


----------



## kerilli (6 December 2009)

it always used to be 3 faults for a stop or run-out, and 4 for a knock-down, it only changed fairly recently.
before that i believe it used to be 2 faults for a knock-down with front legs, and something else for a knock-down with hind legs (or maybe the other way round, definitely different faults though).
personally i think it should be 4 for a knock-down and more for a refusal...


----------



## diggerbez (6 December 2009)

random i realise but i'm sure that when i did BUSA comps at uni stops were 5 pens and a pole down was 4....


----------



## glenruby (6 December 2009)

Yes, as said above it used to be 3flts for refusal and 4 for a knock down. And you had 3 attempts before elimination. I do believe that at one stage a 2nd refusal incured 6flts (plus 3 from the previous refusal therefor a total of 9flts for 2 refusals and elimanation for a further one. 
Like others I do think refusals should incurr higher flts than knock downs but Id like the old 3 strikes and you're out rule back too!


----------



## MandyMoo (6 December 2009)

[ QUOTE ]
it always used to be 3 faults for a stop or run-out, and 4 for a knock-down, it only changed fairly recently.
before that i believe it used to be 2 faults for a knock-down with front legs, and something else for a knock-down with hind legs (or maybe the other way round, definitely different faults though).
personally i think it should be 4 for a knock-down and more for a refusal... 

[/ QUOTE ]

yea i think i read that somewhere before...i think it was more faults for front legs and less for back legs or something? lol.

we are definitley in agreement about stop being worse than knock downs, so should have more faults really...not less xx


----------



## jumptoit (6 December 2009)

At unaff where time pens aren't in place a stop should be penalised more but in affiliated competition they should be the same due to time pens imo. At BE this year I had a silly stop and managed to end up with 9 faults despite the fact I was clear otherwise and hadn't exactly hung around!

That said why on most of the old BE records are SJ faults in multiples of 5? (2002 and before)

I also *think* that PC is 4 faults for first refusal, 8 for second and Elimination for the 3rd.


----------



## MandyMoo (6 December 2009)

just found this...

thought it was quite interesting the faults given at the bottom of the page 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 lol! they had weird rules in 1925!! 
	
	
		
		
	


	





http://www.britishshowjumping.co.uk/page/History


----------



## Saints_fan88 (6 December 2009)

I can remember the days of 3 faults for a refusal, seems like forever ago now!

Also with the BUSA uni comps first pole down is 2 pens, and the rest are 5 pens, whereas a one stop/run out is 10 pens so worth quite substantially more.


----------



## jumptoit (6 December 2009)

Judging must have been really complicated and probably more complaints to - did they have video evidence to prove it touched a pole?


----------



## ester (6 December 2009)

tbh, in the winter round here you arent going to get placed if you get a stop! in which case its just theoretical. Summer is perhaps a bit different

mostly courses arent timed so you dont get the add on of time penalties which makes a stop BSJA more of a problem. 

When I run stuff I tend to use RC rules which allows 3 stops which is much fairer for nervous/novices. and 4 faults for stops and knockdowns.


----------



## SJFAN (6 December 2009)

I'm one who still prefers the old BSJA &amp; FEI rule of 3 faults for the first refusal.  I much prefer a horse with the sense to stop when it knows it is certain (or at least very likely) to bring down the fence and quite possibly itself and rider, to one who carries on regardless.


----------

