Re: RC: Nat'l Champ qualifications and such

[Karen <karen@storallnv.com>]

At 08:13 AM 02/07/2002 -0500, odd farm wrote:
>  As far as
> completions, the Tevis was barely 41% ( 91 finishers out of 260+ or
> something like that) completion. So it wasn't much better than last years
> NC ride 

You aren't comparing apples to apples.  Look at the winning times of
the Tevis, and then the NC ride.  Maybe the problem at the NC was
the trail was too fast and riders got carried away?  I was pointing
out the completion rate at Tevis because anybody can enter it, it's a
tough ride and yet more people completed it, with a 3 hour longer winning
time.  I am not bringing up any of these points to knock
anybody.  I simply want to know why.  I've done a lot of stats
on the Tevis now and have a pretty broad understanding of how/why/what
things work in some areas.  I've learned a lot of things. 
Riders that do have a lot of miles don't necessarily know what they are
doing anymore than somebody doing the Tevis as their first endurance
ride.  While it might appear that you have a 50/50 or so chance of
completing Tevis; since those are about the odds -- it doesn't really
work out that way when you look at the individual rider stats. 
There is a lot of chance or luck, as there are always riders or horses
who don't finish that ride who have done say 3,000 miles without a
pull.  It doesn't always make sense but the big picture shows that
the riders who have experience and a good completion record really do
have a much higher chance of making it thru the ride.  One year I
figured the average mileage of each rider who finished in the top
ten.  It was a considerable amount, either aerc or natrc
miles.  Experience does count for something.  

>. They had plenty vet checks and the vets
were just as cautious there as any ride I have been to. 

Since I've completed Tevis twice, I can say that I think that one
of the problems is that there are too many vet checks.  They added
another one this past year, and it didn't do anything to help completion
rates go up.  In fact, they were lower in spite of really nice
weather.  What the extra vet checks do is force the riders to have
to ride faster between them.  At least, that is how it's worked when
I've done the ride because I've ended up stuck at vet checks with no hold
times in long lines.  So I have to make up that time on the
trail.  

Ultimately, it is up to the rider.  No amount of veterinary criteria
or vet checks will make a lot of difference if the riders aren't
careful.  I think that most AERC riders ride with the goal of
completing and more emphasis should be placed on that at the NC
ride.  You know, make completing the NC ride something important,
like how some people view having a Tevis buckle.  

k