Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

Hey Heidi, 

I guess we just disagree; like my Grandma always used to tell me, "Life is
Long".  

A couple of "slower than optimal" endurance rides of any distance aren't
going to ruin any horse or rider at the beginning of their career, imo. 

I don't think I'm missing the point, and I'm sure you'd agree that this sport
is very good at teaching patience to it's adherents.  

Lisa 

(aka Grasshopper ala young David Carradine in Kung Fu, "When you can walk
the rice paper without leaving footprints, you are ready to move on." :-)
 ) 

Heidi Smith wrote:

>I think that's what I proposed for rookie horses and riders ...  but it kind of sounds like your saying the "problem" with 25 milers, is people going too slow with their horses?  What region are you in?  I've never heard that comment before. ;-)  

 

No, the problem is that if they go slow enough, they haven't gotten far enough "into" the horse for him to take it seriously.  If they go too fast, they install "race brain"--and if they go slow and don't go far enough, the horse figures next time he SHOULD go faster and fights to do it.  But if he went far enough to kind of get his attention--to convince him it's gonna be a long day--then he THINKS about it at the next start and says "hey, I'm not rushing into THIS!"


>If the horse NEEDS to be going slow, he needs to go slow for 25, or 50 miles, you don't ride the first  25 fast and then slow down, so what's wrong with a minimum time/rookie rule?

Again, horses are different.  The concept of a "rookie" speed may still be way too slow for SOME horses, but may be way too fast for others, while giving a novice rider the idea that it is "ok" to ride that speed since it is the "rookie speed."  THEIR rookie speed maybe needs to be slower still!  And the best people to determine that are the rider and the ride vets, talking with each other.  (I know, I know, Howard wants a rule against that, too.)

 

>I'm talking novice horses here.  No horse needs to do a fast 25, 50, or 100 for it's first ride, IMO.  

 

The example I gave IS a novice horse--to endurance.  Granted, not ridden by a novice rider, by any stretch.

 

>Why not? What kind of ride times?  

 

Not fast--but not easy courses.  First one in 6:08--but that was only 18 minutes behind first.  Second one in 7:41--but that was only 16 minutes behind first.  (But then, as Deanna was discussing, we don't usually pick "race track" courses for our novice horses, either--that's a deliberate move, too.)

 

>I'm guessing these were 50s?  

 

Yep.

 

>Will you ride him faster now?  

 

No--as I stated in the last post, if he starts getting "pushy" at this optimal pace, he isn't ready to race, so we'll go further.  So far, he hasn't--he just motors along without a care in the world.

 

>Sounds like you used a two ride "get acquainted" strategy with this new horse, like he was a rookie for 100 miles?  What would it matter if AERC called him a rookie for that long?  

 

I don't care what they CALL him--what I care is having a limit put on that prevents him from being ridden optimally.  What if the courses had been easier?  Should he not have been allowed to go a bit faster--IF it was optimal for him on that day?

 

>It wouldn't matter to you since that's what you do anyway, but it really might for someone who didn't know any better, since this horse is "so game".

 

The point is that what for him would be "any faster" would be winning the rides, whereas for another horse, just getting THROUGH might be sufficiently challenging.  Where do you propose to set the bar?  If you put the bar at his level, other novices would in effect not HAVE any bar.  If you put it at their level, you'd be preventing him from being ridden the way he should be.

 

>  Heck, ride the horse faster and take a 2 hour hold at a vet check under that type of rule, if you, as a trainer think it will ruin the new horse to ride it too slow, as a "rookie horse" for 100 miles or whatever a rule specified.

 

You miss the point.  That kind of strategy doesn't allow him to learn efficiency in his holds, requires "starting over" with a warm-up at each check, and in essence ceases to be a 50-mile ride--but rather a couple of 25s that just happen to fall on the same day.  The ride is the WHOLE experience--not just the trail.  It is learning how long he has to eat, what the routine is in the check, etc.

 

Heidi