RCP2015#110 – New “Partner Entry”

2015 RCS #
110
Summary
New “Partner Entry”
Date Received
.
Proponent
CDC
Change Date
2015
Status
Open for comments
Recommended; BOD returned to CDC 23Oct14; BOD NOT APPROVED 13Nov14
Activity
Initial Posting: 7Sept2014

New Wording, revised 11/10/14
943.2.16 At the Organizer’s discretion, competitors may be invited to participate under one “Partner Entry.” This classification allows two named and qualified drivers to elect between themselves who will drive in each of the three competitions. Entries in this classification will be eligible for class and separate competition awards (if offered), but will not be eligible for overall event placings awards.

 

12 Response(s)

  1. Zantke says :

    September 11, 2014

    1. I think you are out of order with this RCS. The deadline for Rule Change Suggestions was June 30th. – So hold it over for next year.
    2. It would be nice if you would give us the Article No you are referring to, as 2.16 is a bit vague. I assume you perhaps mean Art. 916?
    3. Do we really need this?
    hardy

  2. Linda Yutzy says :

    September 17, 2014

    I am against this new classification. Too confusing and only add to organizing and scoring nightmare.
    Linda

  3. hoofnit says :

    September 17, 2014

    NO! The event is for a turnout of equine with human partner, not a mix and match of trying for find the right driver to WIN! The sport is to find the best of balance of equine and human. How about if we allow one human to bring three equines (as singles) one for each competition?

  4. simon says :

    September 26, 2014

    How silly these comments. There has been much discussion on being unable to attract new drivers or retain others for various reasons. Perhaps this option will help. It is really very simple – an entry can consist of two qualified drivers. Some may wish to participate only in Dressage or only on the Marathon. Some events already allow a Combined Training entries for dressage/cones only. The partner entry opens this to add the marathon as well. There is no complexity to scoring – the organizer is already offering the classes. Any competent scorer can handle adding/tracking a second driver. Obviously there can be no award for overall scores, but each driver is eligible for awards within each competition driven.

  5. keithy says :

    October 4, 2014

    I do not support this RCP.
    On one hand the CDC says that we must follow FEI so that the ADS Rules stay in line with the FEI and there are too many differences already. And then we see a proposal like this from the CDC which totally deviates from FEI rules.

  6. Merridy says :

    October 6, 2014

    Besides following FEI rules for Combined Driving, the CDC is also a great proponent of innovation — hence the Combined Driving cousins of Arena Trials and Driving Trials that we’ve supported for so many years. How do we attract new participants? We listen to what they say they want. The Partner Entry is one of those “We Heard You” ideas.

  7. keithy says :

    October 7, 2014

    So the way I see the “Partner Entry” in actual use is that a competitor will have their trainer drive the dressage to provide a low dressage score which would then give them a better chance of winning.

  8. Merridy says :

    October 7, 2014

    Yes, that could be one scenario. There could be myriad reasons to try this option. Trainers do drive CDEs quite a lot. Sometimes they win, sometimes, a “little guy” trumps them. Could be fun!

  9. mary anne boyden says :

    October 7, 2014

    What about the competitor that enjoys dressage and cones, but because of lack of confidence does not feel comfortable competing in the marathon phase? I’m not so sure it is all about winning, although I see that thought process. Why not try and see how it goes.

  10. simon says :

    October 8, 2014

    The Partner entry is not eligible for overall awards, only those for the competition driven. Thus only the person actually driving the competition will be eligible for the award – no unfair advantage. This is an OPTION, not a requirement. Organizers may offer this to attract entries that may otherwise not wish to participate. It opens another opportunity to promote the sport especially for small, struggling events and drivers who are not quite ready for all three competitions.

  11. Zantke says :

    October 8, 2014

    My first comments still stand – I don’t think you can disqualify them with simply saying “how silly…”. The proposal is out of order for this year’s Rule Change cycle.
    hardy

  12. Merridy says :

    October 8, 2014

    Hardy, this RCP is in order for the 2015 cycle. Everything displayed here is okay for this rotation, and we’ve already started a list for next time. It’s okay.

Comments are closed.