The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 74
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep. 14, 2002
    Location
    Azle, Teh-has
    Posts
    8,102

    Default Interesting issue with the 2 falls and you lose your QRs at that level:

    I thought this was an interesting case and wanted to throw it out there.

    My buddy had a fall at Pine Top Advanced in 2008 (going Advanced) BEFORE the two falls bump down rule
    She then had a fall at Ocala 2009 (going Intermediate) 6 weeks ago
    She had run 5 Intermediate HTs throughout the rest of 2008 and 2009 where she placed either 1 or 2.

    The HT falls were 1 year apart TO THE DAY!

    She has since run Intermediate at Poplar Place.
    Was scheduled to ride Intermediate this weekend
    And then do the CIC** May 1st

    She received a notice from the USEA yesterday that she has to run two Prelims before running an Intermediate again.

    IF she had known to check into the falls or if the USEA had sent a notice out even a month ago she could have run two Prelims before the CIC** and been ok to go.

    Doesn't that blow? I would have thought that the 1st fall would NOT have counted since it happened before the rule change.
    And it sucks that the USEA took 2 months to send a notice. Though I know that the USEA can't possibly keep up with everyone on a day to day basis...no way. We need to cover our own bases.

    I told her she needs to go back and see when her ride times were. Maybe the 2nd fall was one hour later in the day--in that case it would have been 365 days and one hour. Home free. lol.

    All in all she contacted USEA and they are looking in to it. I bet she will be ok to continue on with Intermediates but Wholly Cow! That email would have sent me into a momentary cardiac arrest. : )
    Last edited by purplnurpl; Apr. 14, 2009 at 02:35 PM.
    http://kaboomeventing.com/
    http://kaboomeventing.blogspot.com/
    Horses are amazing athletes and make no mistake -- they are the stars of the show!



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct. 22, 2001
    Posts
    5,387

    Default

    This seems an odd interpretation. Canterlope and I had a detailed conversation about this rule at Southern Pines: a rider who had a fall last May at Preliminary, but remounted and carried on (shortly before one fall and you're out was put in place). Same rider had a fall from the same horse had a fall this spring at Intermediate. C'lope, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the consensus we came to at that time that the rider would not need to re-qualify the horse at Preliminary by running two trainings? Seems like a different interpretation than what Purpl is finding.



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug. 21, 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,732

    Default

    Hmmm... I managed to fall off in show jumping at the same event one year apart - this winter and last winter. I was joking that it's my lucky fall to start the season, but I wonder if I'll get home to find the same letter in my mailbox.
    I evented just for the Halibut.



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov. 16, 2000
    Location
    Concord, NH
    Posts
    5,312

    Default

    I think the retroactive part shouldn't count. Just my opinion.

    And here's another flaw in the rule - here is someone who did back down after an incident, and was very successful all season. And now has another fall.

    Now if she'd fallen again right away, then yes, she's got a big issue. But having done very well not once but several times before the next fall seems to indicate she is doing something right.

    On the other hand, to fall off once a year at an event seems kind of frequent.



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep. 14, 2002
    Location
    Azle, Teh-has
    Posts
    8,102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GotSpots View Post
    This seems an odd interpretation. Canterlope and I had a detailed conversation about this rule at Southern Pines: a rider who had a fall last May at Preliminary, but remounted and carried on (shortly before one fall and you're out was put in place). Same rider had a fall from the same horse had a fall this spring at Intermediate. C'lope, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the consensus we came to at that time that the rider would not need to re-qualify the horse at Preliminary by running two trainings? Seems like a different interpretation than what Purpl is finding.
    Well, your rider went Prelim fall to Intermediate fall. And then had to back down to one below her LATEST fall. (which is P)

    My friend went Advanced fall to Intermediate fall. And has been asked to back down to one below her LATEST fall. (which is P)

    maybe is that the difference?

    I think it's just a tough rule to work out the quirks and USEA is still in the quirk phase.
    I bet everytime they feel the rule is good to go another odd situation comes up. : )
    http://kaboomeventing.com/
    http://kaboomeventing.blogspot.com/
    Horses are amazing athletes and make no mistake -- they are the stars of the show!



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep. 6, 1999
    Location
    Snottsdale, AZ
    Posts
    5,294

    Default

    Eeek! Bummer. And crap, thanks for reminding me. I can't fall at all again this year because I need another training like a hole in the head!
    When did that rule go into affect? Did last year's fall happen during that rule? Thinking of the grandfather clause.
    And the notification is a little late. Maybe we need a little blurb on useventing to tell us a synopsis of all the rule changes for 2008-2009 to remind us.



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep. 14, 2002
    Location
    Azle, Teh-has
    Posts
    8,102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hilary View Post

    On the other hand, to fall off once a year at an event seems kind of frequent.
    lol. I was going to comment on this because I assumed someone would wonder!
    The mare is ditchy and she slammed on the breaks at the Trakehner at Pine Top.

    And then at Ocala she didn't quite get the over hanging roof with no ground line house and caught a knee and twisted throwing the rider off to the side. The mare stopped and the rider just let herself down to her feet. But with the new rules that's a "too bad so sad"!

    Sh*t happens. : (

    I don't think that is out of the question. Considering there have been no other falls in the past 5 years.

    Crap. I would pass out and fall off my horse just galloping towards an Advanced trakehner.
    LMAO!!
    http://kaboomeventing.com/
    http://kaboomeventing.blogspot.com/
    Horses are amazing athletes and make no mistake -- they are the stars of the show!



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep. 14, 2002
    Location
    Azle, Teh-has
    Posts
    8,102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LisaB View Post
    Eeek! Bummer. And crap, thanks for reminding me. I can't fall at all again this year because I need another training like a hole in the head!
    When did that rule go into affect? Did last year's fall happen during that rule? Thinking of the grandfather clause.
    And the notification is a little late. Maybe we need a little blurb on useventing to tell us a synopsis of all the rule changes for 2008-2009 to remind us.
    And as riders it’s our job to constantly check the QRs and our records to make sure we have everything down pat--rather then letting the secretary catch an error.

    I can’t tell you how many minutes I’ve spent starring at the new FEI/USEF rules for the CCI Qualifications trying to figure out what QRs over lap and which don't!!
    http://kaboomeventing.com/
    http://kaboomeventing.blogspot.com/
    Horses are amazing athletes and make no mistake -- they are the stars of the show!



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec. 13, 2005
    Location
    SE PA
    Posts
    396

    Default Help me understand

    what happens to the pros that are riding 6+ horses every weekend at HTs. I'd bet they come off more than 2x/year. So, if Phillip comes off 2x at prelim he has to repeat at T? Sorry for not understanding.



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec. 24, 2007
    Location
    Chestertown, MD
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Am I remembering correctly that Phillip Dutton had a fall at Plantation Fields in stadium last Sept? I was there, and I think I remeber hearing that through the grapevine, I could be wrong. But if im right and that fall, combined with his fall at Fair Hill ***, he should have had to requalify. Not that it would have taken him long to do that. But does anyone know if he did?
    proud co-owner of the dark bay mafia and one very shifty chestnut.

    http://s252.photobucket.com/albums/hh22/EAlli/



  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun. 9, 2003
    Location
    Dolores,CO. Proud to be a Kraut
    Posts
    2,179

    Default

    The rider is not loosing the qualification, its the horse that looses the qualification.

    Thats why I feel it is a very strange rule, a rider can have several horses, lets say 3, falls off each horse once, 3 times, qualification loss ?

    2 horses, 2 falls, which one or if any would loose qualification ?
    That I have no use for them, does not mean, that I don't know them and don't know how to use them.
    Caveman extraordinair



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr. 14, 2006
    Location
    Saco, Maine
    Posts
    4,747

    Default

    This also just happened to a pal of mine who was scheduled to ride at Rolex in 2 weeks. She literally got the notice, had to shake everything loose and bomb out to ride an Intermediate HT (which she won, BTW). "They" told her if she didn't "do well" at the HT that she was for sure not riding at Rolex. Jeekers..........This is someone who has been riding at the top on a superlative horse for a long time..A little prior notice would have been nice. And retroactive rules? Huh?



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun. 17, 2000
    Location
    Durham/Chapel Hill nc
    Posts
    3,804

    Default

    When I asked about the rule right when it came out, I was told that it's not "retroactive" because it affects our entering future events... As in , "At this point, to be eligible to enter P in 6 weeks, you need to have not fallen off twice riding P (or higher??) in the past year."

    I think it is a flawed rule, as demonstrated by the examples given here. Maybe adding a clause which would take into consideration other runs had in the meantime?? Credit for dropping back before the second fall or something?? And more clarity about how falls at different levels affect qualifications...



  14. #14
    Join Date
    May. 23, 2006
    Posts
    5,588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverBendPol View Post
    This also just happened to a pal of mine who was scheduled to ride at Rolex in 2 weeks. She literally got the notice, had to shake everything loose and bomb out to ride an Intermediate HT (which she won, BTW). "They" told her if she didn't "do well" at the HT that she was for sure not riding at Rolex. Jeekers..........This is someone who has been riding at the top on a superlative horse for a long time..A little prior notice would have been nice. And retroactive rules? Huh?


    and she is furious I will tell you that!!!!



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar. 29, 2006
    Posts
    1,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snoopy View Post
    and she is furious I will tell you that!!!!
    Especially hearing the news on her birthday! But, it's all good now.



  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul. 12, 2002
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    193

    Default

    I agree, if the rule does not explicitly say it is retroactive back to a certain date, then it STARTS on the date it went into effect.
    Illegitimis nil carborundum - "Don't let the bastards grind you down."



  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug. 21, 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,732

    Default

    Apparently not, if both Corrine Ashton and the OP's person dealt with this. Corrine fell at Rolex last year and at So. Pines this spring. If it wasn't retroactive, So. Pines should have been counted as her first fall.
    I evented just for the Halibut.



  18. #18
    Join Date
    May. 23, 2006
    Posts
    5,588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NeverTime View Post
    Apparently not, if both Corrine Ashton and the OP's person dealt with this. Corrine fell at Rolex last year and at So. Pines this spring. If it wasn't retroactive, So. Pines should have been counted as her first fall.

    THAT is the problem!!!! The rule came into effect on 12/01/08 and says NOTHING about being retroactive. So we can all go round and round on this but the USEF feels that it IS retro. Again, a poorly "written" rule. I surely understand the reasoning for this rule BUT it needs to be made clear as it is written...and it certainly is NOT. Four or five riders heading to rolex have been caught out by this rule. One is not effected because his horse is lame and he is not going to rolex.



  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec. 19, 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    575

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by purplnurpl View Post

    My friend went Advanced fall to Intermediate fall. And has been asked to back down to one below her LATEST fall. (which is P)

    maybe is that the difference?

    That appears to be the difference, I found the relevant language in the rule (letter b) states you lose the qualification at the level the second fall occured.

    It says it was effective 12/1/08 which makes no sense since they are retroactively applying it to falls from the 2008 season. I am surprised any attorney at USEF would allow for this interpretation of the rule.

    LOSS OF ESTABLISHMENT. (Preliminary Level and up)
    a. A horse that is eliminated twice, for non-technical reasons, within any 6 month
    period loses its qualification to compete at the level at which the second elimination
    occurs.
    b. A horse that falls in competition 2 times in any 6 month period loses its qualification
    to compete at the level at which the second fall occurs.
    c. A rider who falls in competition from the same horse during competition 2 times in
    any 12 month period will cause the horse to lose its qualification for the level at which
    the second fall occurs. EC 11/17/08 Effective 12/1/08
    d. Having lost qualification, a horse may be re-qualified by achieving 2 QRs at the next
    lower level within a 6 month period following the loss of qualification.
    EC 7/21/08 Effective 12/1/08



  20. #20
    Join Date
    May. 23, 2006
    Posts
    5,588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cisco's_Mom View Post
    I agree, if the rule does not explicitly say it is retroactive back to a certain date, then it STARTS on the date it went into effect.

    Absoluletly agree and I am sure legal council would agree.



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 17
    Last Post: Nov. 8, 2011, 09:24 PM
  2. Replies: 52
    Last Post: Aug. 14, 2010, 11:44 PM
  3. Replies: 22
    Last Post: Nov. 19, 2009, 03:50 PM
  4. Replies: 105
    Last Post: Nov. 30, 2001, 09:09 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness