Re: RC: Re: Qualification for Nationals

[Truman Prevatt <tprevatt@mindspring.com>]

That's all cool, but the clock started in August. Seems to me that the
qualification for 2002 should have been in place prior to the start of the
qualification period. That's normally what happens in non-disfunctional
organizations. November was a bit late to make any changes and March is
absolutely irresponsible to make any changes for 2002. The BOD should be
looking at the 2003 and 2004 ride for qualifications - otherwise the AERC will
look like a two bit organization with no concept of planning beyond the end of
its nose with it's head stuck somewhere the sun never shines.

Truman

Karen wrote:

> I think the change is great.  If somebody is going to be an AERC National
> Champion, they should have had to have actually done something to get
> there.  The standards should be something people aspire to.  The  National
> Championship ride is advertised as a "race" in Endurance News. IMO, we
> should not be trying to attract riders who have less than 500 miles on a
> horse to be "racing".  In the eyes of many endurance riders, being a
> National Champion because you did well at one ride is a joke.  If it
> doesn't mean anything, why do it?  500 miles is only ten rides.  Or five
> rides.  It's pretty hard to learn everything there is to know about a horse
> in various conditions without riding at least that many rides.  I know I
> would rather compete against a seasoned competitor than a new person who is
> clueless that if they race the first year or two their horse probably won't
> make it thru very many seasons.  The AERC NC has the potential to be more
> successful than the ROC, but not if they keep lowering the standards.
>
> Karen
> West Region
> 9000+ miles
>