Re: RC: Re: Tieing up

[Tivers@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/19/00 11:07:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, CMKSAGEHIL 
writes:

<< Actually, Tom, it is a phenomenon that many of us have observed for 
years--including the fact that in some families the resting HR drops with 
conditioning and in some families it does not.  (Genetics?)>

Is this data you're talking about? Or are you just kidding? 

>  But so far I haven't noticed any link between the drop in resting HR and 
the recovery times to a clinically normal range,>

That's one of the reasons why HR recovery is next to useless in a vet check.

> so it hasn't been something I've thought to be high on the priority list 
for further investigation.>

But high enough on the priority list to attempt to prove a point here?

 > The ones with resting HR's of 36 when fit will drop just as well as their 
compatriots who "rest" at 24.  (Scientific research generally does not arise 
out of a void, but rather because someone observed the beast and said, "How 
come?") >

Really? I thought it all had to do with grants and funding. I've asked "how 
come" a couple hundred times when I've seen a horse break down on the track 
after direct veterinary attention--but nobody finds that  a high priority 
subject.  

 >And as I said before, even horses like Steph's with pretty low resting 
pulses still seem to go to about the same point for a "top" HR--so the 
difference is bigger, but the end performance is about the same.>

That's a loosey-goosey observation. Have any actual data you can share?  
 
 Heidi
  >>
ti