Re: Re: Re: [DR] Re: QUALIFICATION THOUGHTS

["Cora" <bandc@teknett.com>]

Well said...Cora
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Holland" <lanconn@tds.net>
To: "Ridecamp" <ridecamp@endurance.net>
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 12:34 PM
Subject: RC: Re: Re: [DR] Re: QUALIFICATION THOUGHTS


> If "ONE NATIONAL CHAMPION" means we're picking the "best" horse
> nationwide based on the results of one ride, IMHO, there just ain't no
> way. To many variables.
>
> - Will the trail be specified as "hot, humid, and technical(rocks, mud,
> hills)" as in last years NCR?
> - How about "hot, humid, and flat with good footing"...say Liberty Run?
> - How about "hot, dry, and rocky, but no hills"?
>
> If you list all the environmental factors that impact completion at a
> given ride, you might make a list something like this:
>
> Heat, Cold, Rain, Humidity, Mud, Rocks, Elevation, Sand, etc.
>
> The more moderate these are, the less "technical" the trail. IMHO, the
> more training and experience you AND your horse have in extreme
> environmental conditions, the better chance you have. The more technical
> the trail, the greater the chance of not completing, especially if you
> are pushing your speed. You could even just be unlucky and find that one
> rock with your name on it. I train in the type of terrain found at the
> NCR all the time and rode very conservative (30th overall) Still, my
> horse took a hard fall on his butt and stumbled numerous times.
> Luckily, no injury. Bottom line, this means that a horse who does well
> in the flat of UAE, may have a little harder time in Kentucky. I betcha
> a lot of "good" riders didn't attend because they didn't like the trail.
> (Just guessing here, but some were notable by their absence) I have no
> problem with that. Perhaps they were not willing to "risk" a good horse
> by trying to win where the odds against them were greater. In summary, a
> horse who might win a NCR on a moderate trail, would be at a
> disadvantage at a highly technical ride. Conversely a good "mountain
> horse" might be at a disadvantage on the flat against a horse with a big
> extended trot and who can canter forever.  All you can say is that the
> winning horse was the best horse on that day over that trail with that
> rider.
>
> How DO you factor in the rider? This CAN be a major factor, depending on
> the trail you specify. For example, I'm a runner, but I'm not in Marcia
> Smith's class. She could probably take MY horse Sunny and have a better
> chance of completing the Tevis (or even Old Dominion) than I would,
> simply based on her athleticism. A good, physically fit rider will get
> better results, (finish higher with a more sound horse) especially in
> extreme conditions. I can personally vouch for that.
>
> You can't do it fairly nationwide with points. Some areas of the country
> just don't have enough rides due to the weather to provide a level
> playing field.
>
> There are also the issues of having the time and $$$$ to get to a NCR
> that happens to be on the other side of the country....but that's
> another issue.  (I couldn't afford to go to California now, even if I
> KNEW I could win)
>
> The National Championship Ride is just that.  A National Chmpionship
> Ride held at a specific venue under specific conditions.  Attendance is
> optional.  You don't HAVE to attend, but if you don't, you CHOSE not to
> compete on THAT day in THAT National Championship and won't be a
> National Champion this year. That's the way it is in most sports. If
> you're REALLY a good rider, your horse is experienced over all kinds of
> terrain and environmental conditions, and you want to play, attend.  If
> not, nobody holds it against you. You know, we could just as easily pick
> one ride in a region on a rotating basis and "call" that the NCR. Handle
> it just like IAHA does. There would just be a NCR set of awards along
> with the regular ride awards, but you enter seperately and only if
> you're "qualified". We could call it, for example, 2002 NORTHHEAST
> NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP RIDE. Next year it could be the 2003 WEST NATIONAL
> CHAMPIONSHIP RIDE.....and so on.
>
> I have no problem with the NCR being open to anyone.  After all, there
> are no special qualifications to attend Tevis or OD. It really doesn't
> matter if all the riders are not your peers. You ride with newbies,
> completers, "hot shoes", etc. at every ride.  Shouldn't impact YOUR
> performance. Based on the discussions, I agree that we should not change
> qualifications in midyear.  However, IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE
> QUALIFICATIONS,  my only objections would be to including LD miles in
> the qualifications and I would like to see all riders with 1000 miles on
> the same horse automatically qualified. (2003, of course)
>
> If everyone would support the NCR we would have so many riders there
> that we would HAVE to have qualifications to reduce the attendees.  It's
> ridiculous that the AERC membership voted to have a NCR, then the RM has
> to worry about having enough people there to break even.
>
> If you missed the 2001 NCR, you missed a happening.  I urge you NOT to
> make the same mistake this year! <grin>
>
> Jim, Sun of Dimanche, and Mahada Magic
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Barbara McCrary wrote:
> >
> > I've come to believe that AERC should have only one national champion,
> > regardless of weight division.  While having top 5 or whatever in each
> > weight division gives more people more prizes, I, and many others, have
come
> > to realize we simply don't remember who was a champion in what division,
in
> > which year.  When we had only one national champion, I can still
remember
> > the winner of that particular year.  I feel that giving national
> > championships to so many riders diminishes the importance of the award.
> >
> > Barbara McCrary
> >
>
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>