Ridecamp: [RC] re: Stephanies LD post

> [RC] Proposal for Change in LD BC award definition

> 
>   I'm so tired of this thread, I've been just deleting them.  Somehow I had
>   the misfortune of reading this one and am a little erked.  CT region is
>   great, should problems in other regions affect us?  I sure hope not.

Well, I'm not Mike, but I'll respond with what 'I' thought he meant, 
since I did email him about LD as a topic for the BOD meeting in SLC.
> 
> 
>   1.  It's not based on just top 10. Why? I enjoy finishing, but if I get top
>   ten, what a feeling

I don't feel strongly here, but some regions like to judge all LD
finishers for LD, so judging more than just the top 10 horses for BC 
might increase chances of all regions conforming to one standard. 
> 
>   2.  If you "race" - it may negatively affect your chances of
>   getting the award  Why? You won't get BC if you OVER-race.  I had the
>   pleasure of riding for a short time with two ladies that have done 100's,
>   the Tevis, and butt-loads of 50's, on *the same horses*.  They mainly do
>   25's now.  They had a pace I could not hang with, and placed ahead of me.
>   Yeah, they were racing (in my book, not in theirs).  Apparently with a
>   great deal of knowledge between them, you gonna "negatively affect" them?
>   Like they don't know s*** from applebutter?

OH - I'M sure Mike just meant that points off for veterinary portion
of the score should be suffficient to penalize folks who exceed their 
equine's ablility to go that fast that day, NOT that SPEED is bad in 
and of itself.  This is certainly true for the 50-100 mile distances
as well and is a reason why some folks would like to see AERC step
foward and give ride vets a more well-defined standard for how they
should judge rides - as an example. Roger stated an instance where a
ride vet wanted to dis-allow a completion for a high CRI -dont remember
the exact #s but I'm sure it was not more than 3pts difference in the 15 
sec count. OTOH  I was once given 7/10 pts for recovery with a CRI of
13/16.   I was well out of the BC anyway on time points, and less 
than perfect vet scores elsewhere, plus I'm sure there were horses that 
got 10's for recovery that day, but this just illustrates the huge
differences on vet score judging that exist across the nation. And
they exist because the guidelines from AERC are so vague, not because
ride vets are ignoring AERC guidelines, IMO.  
> 
> 
>   3.  It takes into account that there may be a limited amount
>   of vet time available for this.  They may not have time to
>   look at every horse in the LD ride.  WHAT? I'm the mother of a toddler.  I
>   cannot devote myself to being the *true* endurance rider and move up to
>   50's at this time.  After 20 miles, I'm tired!  My horse is getting tired!
>   It's 90 degrees with 100% humidity.  You mean I can't have the peace of
>   mind, the professional 2nd opinion, the Vet's double okay that we completed
>   in good condition?  I know we have, but I have double vision at this point,
>   what If I miss something that the vet will pick up on?  Hell, let's just
>   leave the vet out of the whole race.  If the 50+ milers in other regions
>   think the LD riders don't need a vet check, then maybe they wouldn't need a
>   vet check either?  Shoot, that would really reduce our entry fees!

I'm POSITIVE that Mike is not saying don't vet LD's, just saying that
vets
might not have time to do the more thorough BC exam on all LD riders, so
even 
if we(AERC) don't make LD BC only top 10 eligible we dont force every
ride to
BC score every LD finisher. -Leaves the LD committee with the
significant task
of coming up with a criteria that fits this bill... -funny so did my
email 
suggesting some kind of national veterinary score only award ... -the
devil
IS in the details

-- 
Teresa Van Hove
AERC member M17417,

p.s. What I most would like AERC to look at is the weight 
points for LD BC (and perhaps all distances)  I'm an engineer, so 
for me it seems like weight points should scale with distance, since
work is a function of weight times distance. Horses carrying extra 
weight 100 miles work harder than horses carrying that extra weight
just 50, and  both 50 and 100 miler horses worked harder carrying
extra weight than a horses that went 25-35 miles.  I'm pretty
pretty sure that some statisitical analysis was done to come
up with the current 0.5 pts/lb, but that LD rides were not
included in that analysis.  So either AERC should just cut
the BC weight points in half for LD rides, or they should
do another statistical analysis, looking at each distance
separately - IMO

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
 Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=