• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

The rider fall rule

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The rider fall rule

    Hi all, I was just wondering if the rule is the same or has been changed... that 2 falls within 12 mos on the same horse... that the rider cannot compete for how long? and drop down a level?
    I saw that a young girl that fell at Poplar, also fell 2 other times with in the last year on the same horse and is still competeing at I and even A.
    Did I miss something?

  • #2
    I thought that it was 3 falls of rider within 12 months and the horse loses qualification at the level. I think they have to wait 1 month before they can go for the 2 QRs it takes to get re-established.
    Balanced Care Equine

    Comment


    • #3
      The horse loses its qualification with two Es, not the rider. The rule book explains this clearly.

      Comment


      • #4
        If this helps:

        EV105.3:

        LOSS OF ESTABLISHMENT. (Preliminary Level and up)
        In cases cited in EV105.3, only penalties assessed during the cross-country phase of competition apply.
        a. A horse that is eliminated, for disobediences in the cross-country phase of competition, three times within any12month period loses its establishment to compete at the higher level at which the elimination occurs.
        b. A horse that falls in the cross-country phase of competition 2 times in any 12month period loses its establishment to compete at the higher level at which a fall occurs.
        c. A rider who falls in the cross-country phase of competition from the same horse 3 times in any 12month period will cause the horse to lose its establishment to compete at the higher level at which a fall occurs.
        d. Having lost establishment, a horse may be re-established by achieving 2 QRs at the next lower height level (e.g., loss of establishment at the CCI2* level requires re-establishment at the Preliminary Level) within any 6 month period and no sooner than one month following the loss of establishment.
        Balanced Care Equine

        Comment


        • #5
          casey mahoney

          Oh great, thank you!

          Comment


          • #6
            This is all well and good, but at SP II last weekend when I was fence judging, I noticed that most people retired when they were one disobedience short of elimination.

            Seems to me that the "Elimination" rule has a loophole big enough to ride a WB through. Careful people do not allow themselves to get eliminated anymore.

            [The above is the perception of a HP who volunteers to jump judge and notices that people are retiring on course. The explanation was given to me by an experienced upper level eventer. So if I am incorrect, do not blame me. Blame the BNE. ]

            If the intent of the rule is to protect people from themselves and to protect horses from more-guts-than-brains riders, perhaps the rule should be re-written to account for the total number of disobediences (say 10?) within the prior 12 months, whether or not the horse was eventually retired on course.

            Any horse that has 10 stops in 12 months is probably being overfaced; if the rider is not smart enough to go back down to fix things, then the rules should be written in such a way as to ensure that he/she has to go back.
            "He lives in a cocoon of solipsism"

            Charles Krauthammer speaking about Trump

            Comment


            • #7
              Good point on the E vs. R, Lord Helpus.
              Blugal

              You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng

              Comment


              • #8
                E vs. R

                Lord Helpus, I was one of those people (at least once I reached I/A), and I was that way before the loss-of-qualification rule was written, so that wasn't my motivation. I'd like to offer a different perspective: A first run-out might be caused by a missed line or a miscommunication. As a rider, if it feels like a bobble rather than An Issue, you go on. It's having a second where you think, "Wow, OK, this is clearly not our day/something's not right physically/we need to go home and practice some homework rather than galloping around this course."
                Now you are retiring with two stops, which with the combination of two newer rules -- 3 vs 4 stops for elimination, and loss of qualifications -- means you are "jumping through this loophole" just because you are making a responsible decision.
                Having said all that, though, I agree with you that a total # of stops over a 12- or 24-month period could be a good idea for ID'ing people who are repeatedly turning in marginal performances at a level.
                I evented just for the Halibut.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'd like to point out that I think it's a GOOD thing that people are choosing to retire instead of carrying on to be eliminated. It seems that quite a few of the nastiest accidents occurred after the horse and rider had already accrued several stops and kept going despite this. The rule kind of creates a mentality of rider responsibility (albeit for maybe not quite the right reason).

                  For instance, if a rider had two stops before the rule, what they should have thought is 'Maybe this isn't my day and I should go home before we eat a fence.' But instead they kept going until elimination occurred. Now, under the new rule the rider thinks 'Maybe this isn't my day and I should go home before I get eliminated and have to get reestablished for this level.' Different reasoning, not as good, but with the same result.

                  So the fact that riders are learning to pull up after a stop or two, before they get into real trouble, is great I think.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I raised that issue when the rule was first proposed. The people who proposed the rule acknowledged that would happen, but did not consider it a "loophole". It is one of the things they expected/intended to happen.

                    After seeing in practice, it no longer concerns me.

                    The people who "have enough sense to retire before they are eliminated" usually "have enough sense to figure out if/that the horse needs to drop back".

                    It is the people who do NOT "have enough sense to retire before being eliminated" (the "more guts than brains") who NEED the rules to tell them "the horse HAS TO drop back".

                    Originally posted by Lord Helpus View Post
                    This is all well and good, but at SP II last weekend when I was fence judging, I noticed that most people retired when they were one disobedience short of elimination.

                    Seems to me that the "Elimination" rule has a loophole big enough to ride a WB through. Careful people do not allow themselves to get eliminated anymore.

                    [The above is the perception of a HP who volunteers to jump judge and notices that people are retiring on course. The explanation was given to me by an experienced upper level eventer. So if I am incorrect, do not blame me. Blame the BNE. ]

                    If the intent of the rule is to protect people from themselves and to protect horses from more-guts-than-brains riders, perhaps the rule should be re-written to account for the total number of disobediences (say 10?) within the prior 12 months, whether or not the horse was eventually retired on course.

                    Any horse that has 10 stops in 12 months is probably being overfaced; if the rider is not smart enough to go back down to fix things, then the rules should be written in such a way as to ensure that he/she has to go back.
                    Janet

                    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Scoring Inconsistencies

                      Originally posted by faybe View Post
                      If this helps:

                      EV105.3:

                      LOSS OF ESTABLISHMENT. (Preliminary Level and up)
                      In cases cited in EV105.3, only penalties assessed during the cross-country phase of competition apply.

                      b. A horse that falls in the cross-country phase of competition 2 times in any 12month period loses its establishment to compete at the higher level at which a fall occurs.

                      c. A rider who falls in the cross-country phase of competition from the same horse 3 times in any 12month period will cause the horse to lose its establishment to compete at the higher level at which a fall occurs.
                      .
                      At Rocking Horse II, I saw multiple horse falls (4) and was shocked to see that the scores had just one MR. And, this has occurred at other events... I can't help to wonder if there isn't some leniency given in the final scoring because of the severity of the MR. I know of one person who has "talked" her way out of 2 MRs.

                      I am an experienced Jump Judge and I compete. I know what a fall of horse looks like ... just sayin'
                      Live, Laugh, Love
                      http://confessionsofanaaer.blogspot.com/

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X