Agreed, I have said this before. I actually thought this fence was MIM clipped, not pins. Now that I know it’s pins and that they seemed to fall easily, that doesn’t really accord with my understanding of how pinned fences should work. I see one of three things possible: 1) there was something wrong with the pins; 2) the course design was flawed if that many horses were hitting the fence so hard that the pins broke; or 3) riders on the whole did not give the fence the proper respect which caused flat/bad jumping. It was interesting that someone else on this thread said that both Oliver Townend and Tim Price did jump the fence fast and flat.
1 Like
Just read Mark Phillips’ opinion for Horse and Hound. The two relevant bits were that nearly half the fence had a jumpable face of less than 6 feet; and:
“We had five pins break as riders jumped into the Ariat Challenge at Bicton and on each occasion, either bad riding or a horse that lacked rideability caused the activation. We have to accept that this is part of the future skill of crossing the country, even if it’s a country mile from the traditions
of yesteryear.”
2 Likes
This isnt towwards you B - to his comment -Says who? Washed out CMP?
Funny the top riders currently disagree with him. Man can never admit fault.
So now we need a bold brave horse with a good jump, but better have the knees and hind end of a top class showjumper, but can’t hang in the air because of time… disaster.
If Tim Price, MJ, and Sam Watson don;t have their horses rideable enough at the Olympics and Bicton, how the hell will any of us smurfs ever stand a chance!!
2 Likes
What I find so odd is that it was pins breaking. The MIMs that went at the Olympics for Jung and Watson seemed too easily activated - certainly. But pins require quite a bit more force.
2 Likes
Mmmmm, seems to me there was a lovely string of women at the top of the results who didn’t trigger it, as well as, according to an article (BE, I think?) the youngest competitor. With all due respect to the riders who triggered it - and those whose names I know I respect - seems to me that you choose between riding for time sometimes and riding carefully. I’ve seen too many rides where top riders were crazy lucky to get by without a fall because they were going for speed. CMP got this one right, IMHO.
1 Like
Contrary to how some are making it sound (not you Sask, more meaning on social media, etc) it was possible to be riding for time and make contact with that rail, but not trigger it. It could, in fact, take some force without deploying (as it should). To see a good example, watch Vanir Kamira’s (lovely) trip through the question. That horse did go on to make the time.
1 Like
Frangible devices are designed to reduce the risk of a fall. They are a xc safety feature. The penalties for breaking a frangible device are designed to stop riders jumping a frangible carelessly - knowing it will break - and one might then say the penalties are also a xc safety feature. One is passive: the fence breaks, one is active: stop riders being careless.
2 Likes
Alright well good luck to ya teaching a horse who drops quick behind but is every other way a top FEI horse to stop doing that 
. For what reason? These silly pins breaking when they shouldn’t. Again not barking at you just jumping off your thoughts quoted.
There is an issue, to think there isn’t is being blind and just going along with whatever anyone says is fine. It’s great they are stopping falls, but lets figure out the penalty issue.
I really don’t think these things should fall like showjumps. It’s mental to think that is happening so often and so easily. The gallops between fences will be even harder and faster if you have to have a SJ canter over every pinned fence.
Oliver said: “We’ve trained these horses to drop the back legs on a vertical going into a coffin to jump the ditch correctly and jump out safely, and I think the FEI need to realise what the top riders want. There isn’t a five-star rider in the world that agrees with the penalties for the pins.
“The pins are a safety thing and I do believe if the ground jury decide it saved a fall, then award 11 penalties, but just to be handing these 11 penalties out to good horses that have done a very safe, correct job – it’s not cross-country any more.”
Don’t take my word for it…but listen to Ollie T
The FEI also issued an update on 30 August saying the FEI frangible device working group has agreed with MIM that the bolt should not be removed when fitting yellow MIMclip kits at all levels. This change will increase the amount of force needed to break the clips on these kits.
This update was “not directly related to the Olympic Games but to new information and best practice analysis”, said the FEI spokesperson.
Both the proposed rule change and the fitting instruction alteration are relevant only to the penalties incurred for activation of MIMclips; neither affect penalties given for breaking a frangible pin.
Poor MJ
Apparently 15 out of 18 finishers managed to teach their horses to jump through without triggering the pin - or maybe I’ve read this wrong. 
https://www.eventingscores.co.uk/Events/event.php?eventid=1218#A
If they’re complaining, I haven’t seen it. My teeny tiny violin would be out but it’s in the shop after the complaints about flag penalties at some other big event. LOL
5 Likes
I tend to agree. It definitely sucks, and it would be nice if the technology was perfect all the time, but it does not suck anywhere near as much as dying on course. For me, if you force me to pick a single takeaway from Bicton it was not how sad it was that a few riders took home a higher score than was perfectly ideal (and I do agree that they did), the takeaway was that a horse/rider had an exceptionally dangerous fall in a situation where there was no technology in place to prevent it, and they walked away due to luck and nothing else.
I do think we can solve two problems at once, and I do think that adding a ruling for video review (which we already have for other types of fences) to allow the GJ to take away certain hind-end frangible activations is worth considering (not all of them, mind you - even MJ has stated publicly that it was a darn good thing the frangible was there for him at Luhmuhlen). But to hear no one talking about a full rotational at a fence with no ability to deform, but then hear everyone yelling about a fence that deformed “too easily” feels like the wrong set of priorities here.
5 Likes
I think part of the problem is the size of timber that you need to use in order to use MIMs. It’s quite narrow/light, which you can see when you consider how all the MIM’d fences look - light and airy. When you pair this with being a vertical or a corner, add terrain, especially if for instance the vertical has a drop landing, you can understand why horses would be more likely to hit these fences than perhaps an old-fashioned log drop.
As well, if they “brush” their hind legs over an old-fashioned log drop, its rounded face and substantial weight usually mean it just acts as some brakes (occasionally causing a peck on landing). If horses have been brought up the levels on this type of fence, and then now are expected to show jump these pinned jumps, I can understand the difficulty.
Now, what I don’t understand as well is the size/weight of logs or other materials which are supposed to be used on pinned jumps. My own observation has been that they are generally substantial, much more so than the timber used with the MIMs. In general I think it’s been accepted that the pins didn’t collapse as much or as often as MIMs and perhaps even in situations in which they should have. MIMs have taken over as the frangible device of choice at many upper level events, though less so at the lower levels.
This could have to do with the relative cost, the experience needed to install, and to replace, and availability. In my own region I asked whether any course designers were using pins and most said no, they are expensive, hard to replace in the heat of competition, and basically caused more headache than they were worth. Therefore as many jumps as possible were built in a way that they couldn’t be pinned - so they didn’t fall under the new rules that all fences that can be pinned, are to be pinned. This generally involved using big timber with sloping or forgiving faces - not the worst outcome.
1 Like
You aren’t hanging out in the places its being discussed then I guess? Doesn’t mean it isn’t happening, I’ve seen a lot of chatter. That article there is someone complaining, but I don’t really think it’s about “complaining” more than discussing how there is an issue to be addressed.
Piggy March also addressed it on her VLOG. Eventing professionals at the highest level are smart enough to know to keep these conversations behind closed doors so as to not be seen as whiners or trouble makers. Ollie however, is 0FG 
1 Like
I never saw that fall so I can’t comment.
I just don’t understand why course designers choose that type of fence when they know it will likely blow a pin at a location like - the coffin. Why not use a round log or brush? THAT is what is bothersome, is the course designer using it as a trick to get more penalties. That is NOT the purpose of frangibles. That is unnecessary and CMPs comments make it seem like that was his intention. That makes this a showjumping question and not a XC question, or a hybrid, which is weird.
1 Like
It’s on playback on H&C - if you click to 2:11 on Part 3 of the cross-country, you can see the approach and the fall (rear angle only). It appears that they went for the long, horse chipped at the last minute, and rotated fully.
ETA: once they know that he and the horse are up and okay, they actually replay it in slow motion at 3:12, and don’t cut away mid-shot before landing as they did when it was live. (You can tell the livestream team were prepared for this - as it happens live there is a huge gasp from Spencer as he realizes what they may have just seen, but then his mic cuts and Nicole takes over with something bland. Horse hadn’t even landed before the video team had cut away, and you can then hear Spencer in the background getting an update on whether they were up and okay so he could report ASAP).
It’s tough to tell on playback through the jump but it does look like the horse landed on the rider at least to some extent. He then twists around on his back a couple times before finding his way to his side, then his feet, and is quickly trotting away soundly. Richard is up slower, but under his own power as well. You see him talking to medics a few seconds later and he’s clearly bleeding from somewhere on his face (mouth?)
Spencer does comment three times during the replay that it was “a heavy fall” , and even says “my goodness me, that could have been a pretty serious fall”. He is not wrong. @Jealoushe just for you it then gets into discussion of the benefits of air jackets.
I’m not a course designer, so maybe there is a reason that’s going over my head, but I don’t understand this either.
1 Like
can’t wait to rewatch for this lol
