Re: RC: reply to NATRC Swanton by Guest

[guest@endurance.net]

Deanna German finishis2win@columbus.rr.com
Lynn,

Thank you for clarifying NATRC rules. My question was somewhat rhetorical
(although I did not make that clear) as I suspected that NATRC rules were
much like the rules of the CTR organization I compete under.  After the
horse has met parameters in accordance with other rules, the rider has
descretion to either leave at the out time or hang around and let the
horse eat, drink or whatever it takes to convince the rider that it's
sufficiently recovered enough to continue.

As you can see below, the original poster expressed concern that the CTR
hold time includes the 10 minutes between arrival and presenting for pulse
rather than beginning after the pulse reaches a parameter. She mentions
that she doesn't believe that having a 10 or 15 minute cooling time, then
a presentation for pulse, then another 15 or 20 minutes of hold encourages
taking care of the horse on trail and expresses concern about the horse
having enough rest. My reply to her was, in a nutshell, that it's up to
the rider to do what's best for the horse and ride in slowly and/or stay
after the out time.

>on 7/23/01 11:13 PM, KIMBERLY PRICE at kmprice51@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Lastly, I like my time to start at p&r when the HR is down...encourages
>> walking in and having a recovered horse at the start of the rest
period.
>I
>> did really like coming in, having 15 minutes go by and then getting a
>pulse
>> taken, and goodbye.  Just another little difference but one too that
>doesn't
>> encourage taking care of the horse ahead of time so they truly do have
>15
>> minutes of recovered rest.

Lynn Kinsky wrote:
>The NATRC rules don't require you to leave when your P&R time is done,
>although if you don't you'll be off on your ride timing and probably have
>to hustle out on the trail.

Define hustle. Hustle because why? Someone's holding a gun to the rider's
head? Oh, because the rider will get time penalties. Hmmmmm.... I thought
we wanted to do what's best for the horse.


>In general the NATRC P&R criteria are tougher
than endurance criteria -- to lose no points your horse has to recover to
>48 within those 10 minutes.....

48? Do they add points if you're below that number for the more fit
horses? ;-)  IOW, I don't think 48 is all that tough. Wow, that's not even
close to resting heartrate for a fit horse (at least horses in my
experience). I define recovery as close to the resting heartrate after 10
minutes, although I realize that that's not everyone's definition. My
organization deducts for anything over 44 after 10 minutes (and, yes,
we're going between 5 and 7 mph so that's the same), and I know of at
least one other CTR organization that is more strict. If I had a horse
that was barely meeting the parameter for continuation (60 or 64), you bet
I'd rest more and take it easy; give me the time penalties. (There are
reasons why they pull the rider after giving him/her two chances - 20
minutes to meet parameters.) A recovered heartrate under 44 in my CTR
organization is still worth something because it's used for breaking ties.
It encourages striving for aerobic fitness and taking care of the horse on
trail and in camp.

See, this is my biggest problem with NATRC. I view CTR as a way to compare
the fitness levels of the entrants. IMO, the fittest (BC) horse should
win. That's at the heart of why I don't like or do NATRC. (And why CTR
organizations will likely never be under one umbrella.) Too slow to stress
the horse and the rules don't truly determine who's got the horse in the
best condition at the end.

But, that said, it's clear to me that NATRC rules allow the rider to do
what's best for the horse. The penalties are in place to allow comaprisons
between fitness levels of horses and abilities of riders. If NATRC's all
ya got, it's still a good way to learn about pacing and taking care of the
horse.

Deanna (Ohio)