Re: ...Ridecamp//"Successful" Endurance Riding

["ruprecht" <ruprecht@tidepool.com>]

Sure -- been there

Started in 1978, borrowing my "away to College" daughters mare
(quarter/morgan) only 14'2".  Ancient second had saddle, English stirrups,
twined with baling string so muddy garage sale tennis shoes did not slip.
no not running shoes, just canvas tennis.  ( I actually paid 10 cents a pair
for them.

Did not train, just pleasure rode with my kids,  of course no electrolytes,
only alfalfa hay, and salt blocks, insufficient worming program.  etc.etc
etc.

Those horses were still successfully competing into their late 20s.

And Trilby and I started, at around 43 or 44 and we were both born in S.F.
but I only have 12,000 and still going strong.

Guess Who!
From: <DVeritas@aol.com>
To: <greymare@jps.net>
Cc: <ridecamp@endurance.net>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 8:44 AM
Subject: RC: ...Ridecamp//"Successful" Endurance Riding


> In a message dated 10/20/00 9:05:57 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
> greymare@jps.net writes:
>
> << 13:  My favorite question:  How did so many of the early riders
complete
> ride after ride without the
>  HRM, custom electrolytes, improved tack and advanced endurance research?
> How did so many of you ride 100 miles in tennis shoes and english
> stirrups??!!!
>   >>
>
> Many of the early riders did do just that.
> Many of the early riders did not.
> I would love to see some completion statistics (number started/number
> finished) from...say 1980 (particularly for rides that are still going)
and
> compare those completion statistics to say 2000.
>     I think we would be surprised to see just how big a difference the
> techno-endurance gadgetry of today does or does not make a difference in
> COMPLETION rates.  It does (probably) make a difference in the SPEED in
which
> those same rides are completed SAFELY.
>     It seems to me, (and I could be wrong here, but...) that much of what
we
> see in techno-endurance gadgetry these days (i.e., HRM's, altimeters to
track
> total feet ascended/descended), etc.) can, at times, actually hinder in
the
> successful campaigning of some endurance horses (time used tinkering on
the
> trail rather than "feeling" and monitoring effort/cost ratios/efficacy.)
If
> the rider actually spent the TIME to get to really REALLY know a given
horse
> and its particular idiosyncrasies of effort-expended and its relative cost
> (oxygen used, muscles used, recovery gaits/rates, etc.), THEN, the most
> efficient manner to get down the trail for that horse could be determined,
> used and maintained for some time.
>     That said, I know there are many "successful" endurance riders out
there
> that have the ability to manage their particular techno-endurance stuff
and
> my opinions are in no way an attempt to diminsh their efforts or
> abilities...they're good at what they do.
>      I have a hard time drinking from my water bottle without dropping it
on
> the trail...but I'll work on that.
>      Anyway, Karen, I love that question.
>     Have a nice horsey day, weekend, Autumn,
>              Frank.
>
>
>
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>