Re: [RC] Overridden and Fit to Continue - Howard Bramhall
OK, this is a viable argument and there have been times in the past I have
thought this way, also.
First, let me say if a horse is in trouble, by all means, talk to the
vet. Tell them everything you know.
But, the competitive part of endurance, the part where it's a pass/fail
test at the vet check concerning lameness, heart rate and anything else
related to completing the vet check should be as objective as possible.
For a rider, who personally knows the vet or vice-versa, this is where you get
caveats thrown into the game that should not be there. For example, a well
known rider comes in with a horse that appears to be tired. The vet tells
the rider that the horse needs to go slow or stop completely. The rider
agrees and promises to slow down the next loop. The vet, because he/she
knows and trusts this person, allows the horse to continue.
The above situation should not happen. Period. And, it does,
more often than one would like to see. To me, the horse either passes the
vet check or he does not. No discussion is really necessary. As many
endurance vets will tell you they've heard every excuse under the sun mentioned
by riders who want to continue on with their horse that is borderline.
After all, to finish is to win. What does that imply if you don't
finish????
IF the horse is in some sort of trouble, maybe, you should pull him
out of the game. Then, by all means, speak with the vet. But, until
then, let's handle the vet checks objectively, the way they were
intended. Sometimes the will of the rider to complete an endurance
ride influences a ride vet more than it should and this is what I'm talking
about. Take it out of play and our vet checks will become more
objective.
When I made the comparison between FEI rides and AERC ones I was speaking
of the fact that at FEI rides (and, someone please correct me if I don't have
this right), the vet and the rider do not interact during the Vet Check.
Not at all. The reason, I believe, is to show impartiality and fairness to
all. All riders treated equally. Imagine that!
Over and over I've heard vets say, at pre-ride meetings, that
they'll only be seeing the horses for a few minutes at vet checks, that
they don't know most of our horses and are depending on riders to tell them
what's been going on out on the trail. That they're looking for input
from the person who knows the horse best. [Not whining, not excuses
-- information.]
At my first LD ride, I made sure to tell the vet at
the mid-point check that this was our first AERC ride (I knew the vet, from
volunteering at lots of rides, and thought she might not realize this was
my first time competing). And I told her that I wasn't surprised that my
horse got all A's except for a B on gut sounds, because he never starts
drinking until we've done about 10 miles, though he ate and drank like
crazy when we came in to that vetcheck. It's my responsibility to
help the vet get a complete picture of my horse's condition. Then
it's the vet's job to integrate all the information available to judge the
horse's fitness to continue.
Cindy
----- Original
Message ----- It's one of the few things I appreciate about FEI. No
talking with the vets, no personal interaction. And, quite frankly,
it's the way it should be. The Vet at a ride should not be your
buddy, he should not be your friend. If you have a relationship with
him than you should go see one of the other ride vets. He should be
evaluating your horse, and only your horse. Your comments, your
opinions should have nothing to do with his decision.
NOTHING!
