It used to be with endurance that not only did you have to finish,
but your horse had to be *capable of going on*.
I'm of the old
fashioned school. To me part of the art and science of endurance
riding is understanding and abiding by the old bucket analogy: Your
horse has so much energy/capability in the bucket. You ride your horse
so that when you get to the finish line, there is still enough
energy/capability left to go on.
How big the bucket is, and therefore
how much energy/capability is available, is determined by genetics,
conditioning and such before you even get there. During the ride, you
use up energy/capability and you can replace *some* then, but not
all.
What endurance is is about using that bucket's contents... not about
maintaining a balance between energy in and energy out. You can't go
faster or farther than a grazing horse would during a normal day and
maintain that balance. Endurance is about pushing the envelope, going
farther and faster than normal, even if for a rider it's going at a 4 mph
pace for 25 miles. That's farther and faster than a bucket can handle
and stay full.
So the art and science is riding so that you go as
fast and far as you can while using the least amount of energy/capability in
that bucket. To me, you ride with the understanding of how big your
bucket is and how fast it's contents get depleted, and it is imperative that
you don't use too much of it's contents. To me, if I have to use
veterinary or other artificial aids to replenish the bucket, I've not
understood about my bucket, and I've failed as an endurance rider - no
matter what vets or completion records say.
Being capable of going on is
a very simple way of saying that there is energy/capability left in a
horse's bucket.
Capable of going on - I don't see how using a
preventative IV is in alignment with that. If there's a chance that
the horse would be in trouble without the IV, would that horse be truly
capable of going
on?
