The Impact of Playing Strategies on Recovery in Low‐Goal Polo‐Ponies

Abstract

IntroductionPolo is a popular sport; teams compete in matches comprising 4–6 chukkas, each between 7–10 minutes. Players commonly change ponies between chukkas, but changing within a chukka, known as ‘half‐chukkering’ is permitted. This is believed to ‘save’ the horse by preventing fatigue and facilitating recovery. This study evaluated the impact of half versus full chukka playing strategies in low goal polo; team handicap 0–4 goals.MethodsResting heart rates (HR) were established for 48 polo‐ponies deemed of comparable fitness by riders, competing in low‐goal tournaments; riders selected their playing strategy either full‐chukka (n = 32) or half‐chukkering (n = 16). HR was recorded at the end of play and during recovery; for the full‐chukka and 2nd half‐chukka period at +2, 4, 6, 10 and 20 minutes, and until ponies returned to play after the 1st half‐chukka, >6 minutes. ANOVA analyses investigated HR variation during recovery between ponies playing full‐chukkas and the 2nd half‐chukka period, and within the two half‐chukkas played.ResultsAt the end of play, full‐chukka horses′ mean HR were 95 ± 13.1 bpm, compared to their 2nd half‐chukka counterparts at 103 ± 7.7 bpm, which was not significant. Significant differences in HR did occur throughout the subsequent recovery period: at 2 minutes (P<0.003) and between 4–20 minutes (P<0.0001), with full‐chukka ponies recovering faster. No differences occurred during recovery between the two half‐chukka periods although mean HR differed at the end of play (1st: 100 ± 7.7 bpm; 2nd: 103 ± 7.8 bpm).ConclusionsPlaying strategies influence cardiovascular recovery; full‐chukka ponies recover faster than those playing in consecutive half‐chukkas. Preparation of half‐chukka ponies may predispose to reduced fitness levels compared to full‐chukka ponies. Implementing a full‐chukka playing strategy is advocated to optimise pony welfare and performance in low‐goal polo.Ethical Animal ResearchEthical approval for the study was granted from the UWE Hartpury Ethics Committee. Explicit owner informed consent for participation in this study is not stated. Sources of funding: none. Competing interests: none.