RE: [RC] 30 vs 60 minutes at finish? - Nancy Mitts
Pro: Institutes an objective pull criteria that insulates vet staff from making a subjective "not fit to continue" call and the ensuing arguments and legal threats that may ensue.
Con: Pressure on ride management & staff to meet the obligation can not be stressed enough times. One can not simply "add extra minutes" for distant finish lines, since this does effectively add recovery time.
Con: Horses not meeting pulse recovery within 30 minutes are few & far between.
It is the fear of maybe not making it slowing riders down, but only the
rider's who care. The same few people who are just barely squeaking by
with completions will still do so.
Con: Will not stop the "out of the blue" crashes where horses pass the final exam and crash later.
There is continued confusion as to whether the actual proposed rule would be pulse only or a complete vet exam.
Nancy Mitts
"How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail
a leg? Four. Calling a tail a
leg doesn't make it a leg."
-- Abraham
Lincoln
> On Sep 25, 2009, at 10:43 AM, stephanie teeter wrote: > > Regarding a potential AERC rule change: from 60 minutes to reach > criteria, to 30 minutes to reach criteria - at the finish > > (these are comments I've heard so far) > > Pro- > 1. standardize rules for EN and LD > 2. standardize re FEI and other countries > 3. disincentivize racing to finish > 4. identify horses with elevated pulses 30 minutes after finish > > Con - > 1. logistical (time) difficulties of dealing with finish line > distanced from vet area > 2. 'hassle' for riders of rushing after the ride > 3. change from norm > 4. encourage over-aggressive cooling to reduce HR more rapidly > 5. encourage RM's to move finish line closer to PR area > > more? > > Steph >
