- 2014 RCP #
- 54
- Summary
- Break in Gaits/canter/gallop
- Date Received
- 01Jun13
- Proponent
- Pleasure Driving Committee
- Change Date
- Next Rulebook
- Status
- Closed for comments – 01Sep13
- Activity
- Initial Posting: 01Jun13
- PDC – Recommended: 31July13
Current Wording – Article 28A Break in Gaits

| Break to canter or gallop | 3 or more full strides, advantage gained | 6 or more short strides, no advantage gained |
| Prolonged canter or gallop | More than 6 full strides |
1. In a multiple turnout all horses must break for a penalty to be assessed.
Suggested Wording – Article 28A Break in Gaits

| Break to canter or gallop | 4 or more full strides |
| Prolonged canter or gallop | more than 6 full strides |
1. In a multiple turnout all one or more horses must break for a penalty to be assessed. Exception: a sporting tandem leader may canter.
Reason for change
Easier to determine a fair penalty; revised by PDC after comment period.
See related changes on RCS2014#55
katie whaley says :
August 2, 2013It is not easier to determine a fair penalty,this change from a 25 year old rule is almost impossible to judge if one horse canters 3 strides then another starts 2 strides in and he stops then another starts how can you possibly keep track. What is to prevent anyone from putting a saddle on their leader for the obstacle classes to have a sporting tandem. Why would you change a rule that has worked well for almost 3 decades ???
shadowbrook says :
August 4, 2013I agree with Katy if it aint broke don’t fix it.
MikeRider says :
August 5, 2013I agree with previous postings. This is unnecessary. During an obstacle class, I’ve had a horse (especially in driving multiples) break to a canter for at least two strides before I realized what he was doing and then it likely took another stride or two to get him settled back into a trot. I’d hate for people to be eliminated from competition for a break to a canter of more than four strides. I can live with 6 as per the current rules, but it seems like there’s not a good basis for this change. As for the multiples cantering, this is just too hard to judge when one wheeler breaks to the canter and the rest of the four-in-hand canters, it becomes too punitive. Leave well enough alone with this rule!
Marjean McIntyre says :
August 5, 2013I agree. I have not been aware of a big problem with the rule as it is as a member of the sport for nearly 20 years, both as an organizer dealing with the officials making decisions and as a competitor.
rules says :
August 6, 2013To Mike, who said: “I’d hate for people to be eliminated from competition for a break to a canter of more than four strides.”
The penalties for canter breaks under the proposed suggestion are not being changed and would remain the same as the existing rule. Elimination only occurs upon the 4th canter break or for a prolonged canter. The primary differences are: a. the number of strides considered to be a break, b. the removal of the issue of whether an advantage is being gained and c. the number of horses breaking for turnouts other than singles.
Jeff Morse, Pleasure Committee Chair
MikeRider says :
August 9, 2013@Jeff – according to the proposed definition, a “prolonged canter or gallop” would be “more than 4 full strides” – and under most obstacle class descriptions, the penalty for prolonged cantering is elimination. I understand your point, but I think the intention is different than what is written.
bakers says :
August 23, 2013From what I’ve judged this year, this new rule would have penalized almost every multiple in a cones class. I don’t think this is what we want to do to our competitors. I don’t agree with this proposed rule change.
CaroleSweet says :
August 28, 2013Still not a fan of this one, either.
rules says :
August 30, 2013On behalf of Audrey Bostwick:
Yes