RCS CD 960.3.6 [NR] Compulsory Rests 16-007

RCS # 16-007
Article – CD 960.3.6
Summary – Add penalties instead of elimination after final vet check
Proponent – Dave Saddler
Date Posted – 04Jun15
Change Date – 2016
Status –  Open for comments. Not recommended by CDC 16July2015

Current Wording – 960.3 Compulsory rests
3.6 If a Horse is not accepted by the Veterinarian at the rest area after 10 minutes the Horse and Athlete will be eliminated

Suggested Wording – ADD new language after 960.3.6 above

At ADS-recognized events, if a Horse is not accepted by the Veterinarian at the final rest area after 10 minutes, the Horse and Athlete will be penalized 10 points.

Reason for change – This would eliminate the urge to over-face the horse on the last, and most difficult, phase of the marathon, Section B and might make a competitor re-evaluate his/her thinking that “It doesn’t matter what shape my horse is in. The marathon is over, I can’t be eliminated. So what if I have to report back after 30 minutes for a final check.”

If a horse can’t recover adequately after 10 minutes following the walk (transfer) section, it is not allowed to continue and is eliminated. Since there are no provisions for elimination after the final vet check, some penalty should be accessed for the same failure to recover in the allotted time frame. Pleasure Driving rules have such a provision. Endurance riding and driving have similar guidelines with penalty assessments.

FEI AND ADS rules are all created for the welfare of the horse and the safety of competitors. What better way to help ensure the satisfactory preparation of the horse for the level of competition entered as well as the terrain and weather conditions present at an event than to access penalty points? Adds an element of responsibility to a competitor’s event strategy.

8 Response(s)

  1. daves says :

    July 23, 2015

    Care to give reasons for not recommending any of these proposals?

  2. daves says :

    July 23, 2015

    Horses are spun at rest stops and not allowed to continue all the time. This proposal does not call for the drastic penalty of elimination but rather specifies penalty points for unsatisfactory P&Rs and temp after the required rest interval. It’s all or nothing at the first rest stop. The final rest stop should not offer do overs without consequences.

  3. Zantke says :

    August 6, 2015

    Dave, we had that years ago, and it was discontinued for good reasons. It’s not in the international rules anymore. The vet check after the walk is to assure that no horse will continue which is not fit to do so. The vet check at the end of the marathon is only to make sure all horses are ok, but the marathon is over at that time, and there should not be any more penalties be added. Further, your proposal would create extra work to monitor this at the end of true marathon with at times very questionable judgement calls when to add those extra penalties and when not – and that was the main reason it was discontinued many years ago. hardy

  4. Zantke says :

    August 6, 2015

    One further comment to the rules department (Linda): The summary line is wrong & misleading, as Dave is asking for just adding a penalty. There is no elimination involved at this time at that stage. So please take out the “instead of elimination”.

  5. Linda Yutzy says :

    August 6, 2015

    Hardy, and Dave,
    I think there has been some confusion between the 2 “vet checks.” The article this RSC references (CD 960.3.6) actually only pertains to the In-Harness Inspection at the 10-minute Compulsory Rest before section B (see CD 935.3) , not the CD 935.4 In-Harness Examination after Section B (aka, final vet check), which is not a Compulsory Rest.

  6. Zantke says :

    August 9, 2015

    Thank you, Linda, for that clarification. Yes, I agree with you, it looks like Dave mixed up the article references, or rather just wanted to stick his suggestion into this article. But his text clearly refers to the final vet check at the end of the marathon. My apologies that I just went by his text and did not check the article number. And thank you, Linda, for making the correction.

  7. daves says :

    August 12, 2015

    Perhaps I didn’t insert this proposal into the correct article but my explanation was very clear as to my intent. 935.4 doesn’t deal with penalties just explains the last of the horse inspections (most of which do not pertain to ADS levels). The issuance of a warning card as a solution to my complaint also doesn’t create the immediate punishment needed. Causing too much trouble? Not any more so than spinning a horse before the marathon. Vet sees a problem, calls the judge, judge agrees or not, matter closed. Same here. Penalty points would go a long way toward instilling better management of care and quickly too.

    Put this idea where ever it fits best; just do it.

  8. Zantke says :

    August 23, 2015

    Dave, we had it many years ago, and it didn’t work. That’s why we don’t have it anymore. You have to come to peace with proven stuff.

Leave a Reply