RE: RC: reply to NATRC Swanton by Guest

[Deanna German <finishis2win@columbus.rr.com>]

>Deanna, where have you been getting your information about NATRC?

From people in this area who ride NATRC and from reading RC. Regarding
rules, I read and offer comment comparing it to what I am familiar with.
Please notice that I did ask a lot of questions. I am truly interested in
clarification.

>I'm curious as to why you assume that NATRC is too slow to stress the horse and
>the rules don't truly determine who's got the horse in the best condition --

High pulse (IMO, if it only needs to be 48 before points are deducted) plus
the horsemanship judging. 15% is 15% and it seems to me that they need that
15% to make a difference between scores. Stress the horses more and they
will sort themselves out according to condition only.
 

>The Open Division (50 miles) definitely puts your horse to work -- mentally and
>physically.  In my  experience, NATRC is an excellent preparation and
>compliment to endurance riding.  The two go really well together and I
>thorughly enjoy both during the same ride season.  I use the NATRC rides to
>condition my horse for the Tevis each year.

I don't believe the one or two NATRC rides around here offer open division.
They seem geared toward the pleasure rider or the show rider who wants to do
some trail puttering. You and I have chatted about some of the ridiculous
obstacles they offer. Other CTR organizations have a greater presence
because they serve as a better prep for endurance and are less "creampuff",
less horse show. They're paced faster and no horsemanship judging. Perhaps
NATRC in this area is different than what you're accustomed to because the
other CTR organizations are so well entrenched and NATRC is seeking a way to
be different. Nothing wrong with that if that's the case. Different strokes
for different folks. Just not for me since I have such wonderful
alternatives.



>Hope this doesn't come across argumentative -- not my intent.  I just react
>when people make blanket statements about NATRC when they don't really
>understand what its all about.

Sylvia, you have never been argumentative and have always represented what
your experience has been. Your track record speaks for itself. I have the
utmost respect for you and have learned a lot from you. It is merely my
opinion that a different organization's rules work better for me. I wish
everyone had the CTR offerings that we have in this region. (AHAO, UMECTRA,
ECTRA are a few... oh, and NATRC). Then everyone could sample and decide
what works for them. I'm learning that there are some vast differences.

It's at the heart of why the CTR organizations will never come together
under one umbrella, as much as NATRC tries to think that *they* are that
umbrella. I just wrote a letter to Horse Illustrated to tell them that they
show their west coast bias every time they fail to mention any other CTR
organization.

Deanna