Check it Out!
Re: Pull codes
We need another pull code....something like "surface factors."
West region director
----- Original Message -----
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2001 10:58 PM
Subject: RC: Pull codes
> In a message dated Mon, 8 Oct 2001 12:30:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Dot
Wiggins" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > There was no question that the horse was pulled for lameness. Was then
> > surprized to see in ride results RO listed under pull code. Would this
> > because I brought the horse back after passing the vet check?
> > Doesn't really matter, doesn't change much, just not quite accurate in
> > reasons for non-completions.
> Unfortunately, it is still a common misconception about "RO"--managers
will use it because the rider made the choice to pull. The L and M codes
have NOTHING to do with who made the choice--as you point out, they are
supposed to be indicators of WHY the horse did not go on, not WHO made the
decision. The rider option code should be used ONLY for cases when there is
NOTHING wrong with the horse, and the rider chooses to pull for personal
reasons--got sick, broke arm, didn't want to go on because companion got
pulled, that sort of thing. My own last pull was an RO pull because I had
heat stroke. Many riders do the wise thing and pull their own horses
because some minor thing is brewing, but those are still classified by
whatever the problem is--lame or metabolic. I DO wish we could add one more
category, though--something for an injury that does not cause lameness.
This category is needed for things such as tack galls, lacerations that need
attention but don't cause lamenes!
> s, etc. These problems don't fi
> t the present categories, but do render enough pulls to have a category of
their own, IMO.
> Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
Check it Out!
Back to TOC