THE SPUR OUT RULE
PROPOSED RULE CHANGE
SUBMITTED BY RONNIE CHRISTIAN- PRCA# C12058L
PROPOSED RULE CHANGE: 10-17-2024 BY RONNIE CHRISTIAN, PRCA# C12058L
October 17, 2024 (Previously February 4, 2016), I hereby submit the following rule proposal.The proposal is a penalty of 5 points per side for failure to spur the horse out on the first jump.
R.10.2.1 Spur Out Rule.
To qualify for a marking bareback or saddle bronc rider must have the rowels of the spurs touching the horse above the break of the shoulders when horse’s front feet hit the ground on its initial move out of the chute.
A five point penalty per side will be added if rider fails to do so.
It is time, and really past time, to change the Spur Our Rule due to all of the disagreements, misunderstandings, wrong/bad called decisions, different implementations according to understanding, uneven competition, arguments, and disputes it causes.
Changing this rule will make rodeo better for the following elements in rodeo: Contestants, Stock Contractors/Rodeo Producers, Rodeo Committees, Rodeo Officials (Judges), and Rodeo Fans/Spectators. The rodeo will be a much quicker and smoother production. There will be less arguments, disagreements and bad calls by judges. This will “reduce injury” to cowboys and to rodeo livestock when it comes to getting out an animal which is fighting or causing trouble in the chute. A contestant can opt to nod for the gate to open even when the horse is not standing exactly straight and still. The rodeo committees, contestants and stock contractors will see less turn outs, especially when the rodeo is two go-rounds or more. The fans/spectators will be less confused and enjoy the rodeo more. They will also see more rides because of less turn outs. When a Rodeo Official/Judge makes a mistake it will not cost the contestant as much and totally take him out of the pay in many cases.
Sincerely,
Ronnie Christian
PRCA #C12058L
The Spur Out Rule and Rodeo
www.spuroutrule.com
Effect on Committees, Stock Contractors, Fans, Contestants, Rodeo Judges, and Livestock
Commentary on the effects that deleting the spur out rule would have on the different elements of rodeo.
October 17, 2024 Previously submitted FEBRUARY 4, 2016 and April 30, 2019 (Original-June 7, 2007 and update January 12, 2011)
Why change the spur out rule? The positive effect and advantage of changing the spur out rule far outweighs keeping the spur out rule the way it is (whether it is “done away with altogether as I believe it should be” or the “rodeo judge penalizes the contestant 5 points per side”).
Let’s look at this from the different groups it affects in rodeo.
1) Committees – This will effect committees with two or more go rounds (or a go round and a finals) the most. The rodeo committee works hard at getting the added money, advertising, volunteering, etc. to get the rodeo contestants in front of the paying customers-rodeo fans. Far too often the number of contestants competing in a given performance is too low. One thing that adds to the low number of contestants is due to turn outs. As for the horse riding events, if a contestant misses his first horse out resulting in a zero score, he may not go back to that rodeo to ride the 2nd Go drawn for him since he is out of the average, (especially if he has a mediocre horse drawn). This is not good for the committee who has worked hard to put on a rodeo with a full slate of contestants. One thing that could help this is to change the spur out rule. For example, if a contestant is 83 points, less a 5 point penalty for missing out the horse, his score is reduced to 78. It may or may not be good enough to place, but at least it’s good enough to keep a contestant in a position to place in the average. His probability of coming back is much greater. If there is a “no spur out rule” and the contestants score is 83, his probability of coming back increases. The committees will benefit by having more contestants in front of the paying customers. They pay to see a full-blown rodeo. We should take measures to increase that likelihood. The rodeo committees would be happier and have less to complain about regarding contestants not showing up as advertised.Also in one go-round contests the excitement of the rodeo will increase with scores announced to the fans.
2) Stock Contractors/Rodeo Producers – Some of the same above is true. Stock contractors often gripe or get upset about the number of turnouts. Contestants sometimes will even turn out a good horse if he received a no score in the previous go round. With the spur out rule changed the stock contractors will have more contestants, thereby putting on a better rodeo and will keep the rodeo committees much happier as well as the fans and the contestants. Stock contractors will buck even more contestants off if they go to the belly or spur low and get behind the first jump. So contestants will still try there hardest to continue to spur a horse out the first jump. Contestants are more likely to nod for the chute to open even if a horse is not standing perfectly or if a horse is acting badly in the chutes. This will cause the rodeo to go smoother and more quickly. Also it reduces the possibility of the horse getting worse in the chute, which will reduce the possibility of injury to the animal. Any thing we do to lessen the possibility of injury to the animals is good for our humane concerns.
3) Fans – Fans don’t always have a great understanding of the spur out (or Mark-out) rule anyway. Often fans see a great ride (or any ride for that matter) and are left hanging with an empty feeling of – no score! If the judges went ahead and marked them at least the fans could hear what the score would have been less the penalty. This increases the excitement of the event. (Sort of like having a 7.6 second runs in the team roping plus a 5 second penalty for missing one hind foot.) At least the fans can still try to follow the scores and look forward perhaps to the contestant in another performance when he tries to come back in another go round and for the average pay off. Instead, the way it is now the fans that pay money for a full rodeo see fewer contestants. (Sometimes only two or three show up for an event.) This is a poor quality way of presenting professional rodeo to the paying customer. Whether it is one go round or more, the excitement of a score with a penalty is higher for the fans than a “no score”. A “no score” for missing a horse out will leave them hanging with an empty feeling. Fans understand a contestant getting a no score when a contestant bucks off, slaps or aids himself with the free hand. Many don’t understand and cannot explain the no-score for the contestant not marking the horse out on the first jump. (Even rodeo contestants and rodeo judges sometimes differ among themselves on their understanding or this rule.)
4) Rodeo Contestants – Often if a horse is missed out, or not spurred out the first jump it is obvious, but often it is not too obvious. There has been many a heated argument and disagreements over this for many years. While changing the spur out to a penalty won’t change the disagreement, it will change the outcome somewhat. A great ride might still place. In two head or more go-rounds you will see far less turnouts. The turnouts are a complaint and a problem for all involved. Contestants enter to compete. Doing away with the spur out rule will increase the times they compete. Contestants with a score are far more willing to drive for hours, pay for gas or an airline fare if they are in the running for the average, or it they know the horse is extra bad in the chute and the way he leaves the chute. (As for the NFR, contestants with a broken barrier, or have a penalty for roping one hind leg have eased back high into the average at the 10 go- round event, but with a no score it is almost impossible.) Also in a one go round event, a contestant who gets a really bad shot out of the chute but gets no free roll from the judge can still possibly place without the spur out rule or with a 5 point penalty. Sometimes judges see the second jump and not the first jump or initial move of a horse out of the chute due to signage on the chutes, or for other reasons. And sometimes the rider gets fouled and the judge does not get a clear sight of it. Changing the spur out rule to a penalty will not change the disagreement or the unfortunate circumstances, but a contestant may be able to place and not get totally left out of the money due to a mistake made by someone else. Having the “no spur out” rule will cause these arguments, disagreements and misunderstandings and bad judgments by a judge concerning the spur out to cease. Contestants will not be left out of the money due to mistakes or an unfortunate event. I prefer the “no spur out rule” to the penalty idea but either way is better than the current rule. Remember, it’s to the contestants benefit to spur a horse out anyway, whether there is a spur out rule in effect or not; spurring a horse out the first jump will put a contestant in his best position to start and make a good high score spur ride. So the contestants will still strive to spur a horse the first jump.
Note 1 – Even if you go with the penalty over the deleting the spur out rule consider this: If a bareback or saddle bronc rider can spot his fellow contestant 5 points (or even 10) and can still have a higher score – this will show just how good the horse and ride really were. If a guy can spot the rest of the field 5 or 10 points and still win – more power to him!
Note 2 – Committees, Stock Contractors, Contestants, and Fans -speed of event and lessening of injury to contestant and horse. The best way to accomplish this is to delete the “spur out rule”. A contestant might take a chute fighting horse a little quicker thereby, lessening his or the horse’s chance of injury (although he will take a chance of being docked 5 or 10 points.) If there is no spur out rule at all, this won’t be the same concern. With or without the penalty every contestant deserves a good start. So it is still the contestant’s decision when the chute opens.
Note 3 – Although it does require some effort and ability, spurring a horse out does not require a major amount of extra athletic ability for a bareback or saddle bronc rider. When a horse does not move at all the judges cancel the spur out rule altogether, but if a horse gives a person a bad shot out of the chute he is still required to spur the horse out and very few rodeo judges will award the contestant an extra point for the extra work.
Note 4 – What about “starting the horse out”? The term “spurring out” came from this. Years ago contestants would spur the horse in the neck when the chute opened before the horse even moved. This would start the horse. Today contestants wait for the horse to move and spur the horse in the neck before his front feet hit the ground the first jump or initial move out of the chute so the term “starting the horse out” is obsolete. Of course contestants would still want to start the ride with his feet in the neck; by starting in this position he will be in position to make a good spur ride the full eight seconds and receive a higher marking.
Note 5 – Rodeo Officials (Judges) – This group will have more work to do because they will have to score every qualified eight-second ride. It will cause them to watch every ride more intently. Sometimes when a judge throws the flag for a miss out the first jump he seems to casually watch the ride if there was no apparent foul or reason for a “free roll”. However, sometimes to their surprise the other judge has given a “free roll” (or dismissed the spur out rule) and he has to score the horse and rider. Although he may have watched the ride, often it is with less scrutiny – you can see this because he does not move as much and go to the side or down the arena as far to keep a clear picture of the ride. After all, he threw a flag and feels the score will be zero – then when he learns the other judge dismissed the spur out rule, he has to come up with a marking. At 5 points a foot each ride will receive the attention and fairness the rider deserves. With “no spur out” this will not be a problem. This also does away with partiality or rodeo judges for a particular contestant (s) when it is a close call about the position of the spur on the first jump or whether a foul caused a problem and the spur out is waived. Also, should an unscrupulous judge slip in and be hired he cannot abuse the spur out rule against a particular contestant (s) to the point of no score at all.
Note 6 – Discussions With Others – In my talks with Bareback Riding and Saddle Bronc Riding Directors and contestants over the past 30 years some are ready to change the rule, even if it means taking the spur out rule out all together, because of the inconsistent way rodeo officials interpret the rule. Some Saddle Bronc Riders believe it still helps their event but I believe it is the same for both events. However, if the Saddle Bronc Riders want to keep it in, so be it. This still does not help the turn out situation for the Saddle Bronc Riders I mentioned earlier. Bareback Riding and Saddle Bronc Riding are two different events although they both involve bucking horses. Each group should do what is best for their individual event. In talking with Bareback Riding Directors, World Champions and top 15 Bareback Riders over the years some favor the 5 point per foot and some say “either keep it in or out – keep it or do away with it all together.” Some see the benefits of doing away with the spur out rule completely. The change in the spur out rule could be phased in or it could be put on a six month to one year trial basis or it could be a ground rule at certain rodeos where the stock contractors are willing to try it out. Years ago, Jiggs Beutler (Bennie’s father) told me he was willing to try it out at a few rodeos. Others would also if given the choice. Of course we could just change it like so many other rules have been changed. If it is not good for rodeo, it can be changed back again. After a period of trial the change can be permanent if it is good for the overall elements of rodeo. I believe as do many I have talked to over the last 55 years that changing the spur out rule will be good for the overall rodeo business – including all the groups mentioned above: Rodeo Committees, Rodeo Stock Contractors, Rodeo Fans, Rodeo Contestants, Rodeo Officials (Judges).
Note 7 – If the Saddle Bronc Riders want to keep the spur out rule but the Bareback Riders want to change it, then the rules for each event would be treated separately.
Note 8 – At rodeo Officials Judging Clinics, judges may be instructed to give more points for a rider who starts in the neck and keeps spurring in the neck. If a rider has his feet extremely low, his score should be lowered just as it is lowered now when his feet drop below the neck during the ride. With the penalty the rider would be docked 5 points automatically for missing the horse out. If there is no spur out rule rider may still be docked just like the rest of the ride.
Note 9 – From my talks with contestants – some would like to keep the spur out rule, but some favor the 5 point per foot penalty. However, when you consider the above reasons concerning the turn out problem, disagreements, fan excitement and the overall reasons listed above, it seems having “No Spur Out” rule would be the best way of scoring. However, the general consensus at this time would be to have five point penalty per side rather than taking it out all together, I would appreciate your consideration on this rule change and your getting feedback from the different elements of rodeo mentioned above.
Sincerely,
Ronnie Christian
- PRCA# C12058L
- Texas Circuit Bareback Rider Finals Contestant
- PRCA Member since 1970
- Gold Card Member
- Bareback Rider for 26+ years
- Bareback Riding Instructor at over 40 years of Rodeo Schools
- Saddle Bronc Rider -NIRA college rodeos
- Steer Wrestler for about 3-5 years
- PRCA Rodeo Official/Judge (occasionally) since 1978