 |
Re: [RC] What's in a name? - Joe LongOn Sat, 1 Nov 2003 21:44:41 -0800, "David LeBlanc" <dleblanc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ... Alas, you put your finger on a sad trend in society today: too many people want to attempt some challenge, but they want the challenge made easier rather than do all the hard work and preparation to achieve it. In this case, people wanting to lower the definition of an endurance ride instead of working up to riding 50 miles in one day. I don't agree with that argument. Whether or not the label "endurance rider" applies to someone doesn't have much to do with the dumbing down of society, at least in my mind. If you're new, or coming off an injury, or challenged in some way, 25 miles can be a serious challenge. ARRGGHH!!!!! This fallacy keeps coming up over and over in these perennial discussions. Look, FIVE miles can be a serious challenge for some riders and horses! But we don't define an athletic challenge like an endurance ride (or a Marathon) by the lowest common denominator. For example, there is the Olympics, and there is the Special Olympics. Those folks competing in the Special Olympics are facing challenges just as tough, *for them*, as those in the regular Olympics. But no one says the two are equal. The demand to call LD rides endurance rides has everything to do with the trend in our society to have things made easy for us, rather than for us to rise to the challenge. Now, LD rides are distance rides (as are competitive trail rides). But although all endurance rides are distance rides, not all distance rides are endurance rides! There's a lot of levels of challenge here - 50 miles, 75 miles, 100 miles, multi-days, winning a ride, top 10, BC, being in the top horse-rider teams for the season, 1000 mile (or more) horse. I've managed attaining several of these, but haven't pulled off others (like 1st place, or doing a 100). I felt like the lone LD ride I did in 2002 was a bigger challenge than many of the 50's I've done - Laser and I were both coming off an injury (turning the 25 into a 40 by mistake didn't help - doh!). Level of challenge can be very personal. I don't think it diminishes my achievements or anyone else's if someone who has only completed LD rides calls themselves an endurance rider. Anyone can call himself anything he wants. Whether his peers, or a sanctioning organization, agrees is another matter. Personally, I would not want to claim to be something I hadn't earned. My first wife had a bad heart and could not run 100 yards. Her doctors ordered her to stop going to the AERC Conventions in Reno because the 4,000-foot altitude was dangerous for her. She was able to ride some, but any distance was a major challenge for her. She attempted one LD ride (doing that was literally risking her life) and she completed it. I was VERY, VERY proud of her, but I am also proud of the fact that she did not use that ride to claim to be an endurance rider. They're a LD endurance rider (to me), and if they're happy doing that and support our sport, that's great. I've managed to attain some very high levels of achievement in other areas, and I really don't support lowering goals so people feel better. I don't feel like what I'm saying implies that. We may want to agree to disagree on this one. I guess we'll have to, since I believe it is clear that lowering the definition of an endurance ride to 25 miles is doing just that. Frankly, it doesn't matter if you like it or not, but until you successfully complete a 50-mile (or more) one-day endurance ride, you are not an endurance rider -- no matter how many LD rides you've done. Just as it doesn't matter how many 10K races someone runs, she's not a Marathoner until she completes a Marathon. Sorry, but that's the facts, folks. I think that's an outdated and somewhat harmful definition. Again, I'd be really surprised if I managed to change your mind on this. No, because if we ever do change the definition of an endurance ride, it needs to be *LONGER*. As in, 100 kilometers in one day (61 miles), or 75 miles in one day. I don't expect that to happen, though. I also think it's an artificial distinction - in my book,75's and up are _real_ endurance. And in mine, but there must be a distinction and there is enough history to 50 miles that I doubt it will be raised. If you read my previous posts you know that I largely agree with this. There is so much variation in trail diffulty and weather conditions that not all 50-mile one-day rides are what I regard as a real test, on an easy trail it takes 70 - 80 miles for that IMO. However, there are many 50-mile trails that are genuinely tough, and a real challenge. That's true - some 50's are pretty darn tough. Did one Labor Day that was that way. An average 50 isn't all that hard, IMHO. -- Joe Long jlong@xxxxxxxx http://www.rnbw.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|