• 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

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

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

  • 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, 01:35 PM.
    http://kaboomeventing.com/
    http://kaboomeventing.blogspot.com/
    Horses are amazing athletes and make no mistake -- they are the stars of the show!

  • #2
    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.

    Comment


    • #3
      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.

      Comment


      • #4
        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.

        Comment

        • Original Poster

          #5
          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!

          Comment


          • #6
            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.
            Even duct tape can't fix stupid

            Comment

            • Original Poster

              #7
              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!

              Comment

              • Original Poster

                #8
                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!

                Comment


                • #9
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    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/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      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

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        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?
                        Proud and achy member of the Eventing Grannies clique.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          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...
                          http://wildwoodfarmnc.com

                          http://cantersgutenberg.wordpress.co...g-quiet-goose/

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            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!!!!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              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.

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                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."

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  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.

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    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.

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      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

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        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.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X