statistics

[terre <tobytrot@bigfoot.com>]

From David LeBlanc:
>I'm not sure that I can answer that directly, but for the rides I was
comparing, here's some numbers - for LD rides, the median (1/2 were slower,
1/2 were faster) _winning_ ride speed was 8.47 MPH.  For endurance rides of
less than 100 miles, the median winning ride speed was 9.42 MPH.  If you
can't manage 4.6 MPH, then you don't complete, so that's too slow.

This is very interesting stuff--thank you for doing the work!  	The
question is--what does it MEAN?  That's the problem with statistics; the
need to interpret the data.
	For example (and I'm just speculating here) an analysis based on winning
times could be skewed by one or two exceptionally fast horses winning all
of the (endurance) rides in the database.  We tend to assume that the LDers
are 1)newbies riding 'entry level'--ie young or not-really-cut-out-for
endurance horses, or 2)physically compromised riders or 3)pleasure riders
(or some variation of the above).  While this is certainly not universally
true, if it were true in this region, or in the rides analysed, it would
tend to account for the relative slowness of the LD winners, given that the
'endurance' winners can be assumed to be 1)experienced riders riding
mature, conditioned horses selected for the sport 2)healthy or masochistic
enough to ride that distance, as opposed to shorter and 3)competitive (or
they wouldn't have won).
	Also, as we've been commenting, the perception of speed is
relative--'racing' or 'too fast' can depend on the individual case.  A
horse is ridden too fast (in any distance) if it is ridden beyond it's
capabilities.  I have seen 'overridden' horses come in dead last (not just
in LD)--they were not fit enough for the work required, and speed had
nothing to do with it....
	Did you crunch any numbers for "middle of the pack" speeds, or even
"tail-end" speeds?  Don't know what they would mean either--just wondering!
 Did you look at 100s?

Interesting stuff!  Thanks David.

terre