Home Current News News Archive Shop/Advertise Ridecamp Classified Events Learn/AERC
Endurance.Net Home Ridecamp Archives
ridecamp@endurance.net
[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]

Re: [RC] RO-L vs LAME - John Teeter

On Jan 15, 2008, at 9:44 AM, Beth Walker wrote:

I disagree. In this example, the horse went lame between two control points (preride and vet check 1). The next time the horse could be officially pulled would be at Vet Check 1
This is an interesting point. If, the rider turns around and goes back to the previous check-point(the start in your example), they have already eliminated themselves from the competition. (for not following the prescribed trail)

They would never receive an in-time at Vet Check 1, nor would the vet at Vet Check 1 ever get a chance to look at the horse. In fact, if all the vets left camp and went to vet check1 it's quite possible there would be no evaluation for quite some time and -

, and the vet has the first crack at it. Therefore: LAME, not RO-L.
It is possible that, by the time the vet evaluates the horse, whatever problem was there has gone away. In this case, the rider had "first crack at it", therefor RO-L not L :)

The way I read the articles and AERC rules, the vet must have a chance to look at the horse after whatever went wrong happened. Only then, if the vet passes the horse, can the rider elect an RO-X code.

This is in agreement (sort of) with Eric's view, and while it may be the intent, it is not specifically articulated that way in either the rules or the other publications. My contention is that more attention needs to be placed in the articulation of both the basic rule(s) and the associated procedures (as stipulated in the vet manual and summarized in Melissa's article) to insure that ALL rides everywhere use the same procedures.

This little discussion has shown that there are easily formed interpretations which lead to different outcomes with respect to these RO-x pull codes. As long as that is the case, the RO-L, RO-M, and RO-SF pull codes really have no meaning, for ride managers and vets will not be uniformly using the codes as they report eliminations at their events.

jt


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp

Ride Long and Ride Safe!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


Replies
[RC] RO-L vs LAME, rnbianchi
Re: [RC] RO-L vs LAME, John Teeter
Re: [RC] RO-L vs LAME, Beth Walker