Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

> At 02:25 AM 1/31/2005, kimfue@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Such a high attrition rate is worthy of discussion. 
The vetting standards at the wec were very tight, much tighter than AERC events 
that I have 
been involved in. There was only one complaint (that I heard) from riders 
concerning the 
vet evaluations, and that had to do with be criteria being too tight rather 
than too 
loose (i.e. a horse pulled when it may not have been necessary rather than a 
horse not
pulled when it should have been). 

So the attrition rate is a reasonable thing to discuss, but not in comparison 
to general 
AERC events I think. Do your comparisons with other championships level events 
which have
similar application of criteria.

My comment re: the US squad relates to the August FEI ride we had in Oreana. 
The temp was 
a bit hotter in Aug - it was a bit less humid - these same horses (on the US 
Team) were 
mostly there and all completed a sub 8hr 100 with a 70%+ completion rate. There 
are 
other factors at play that need to be figured out. 

IMO "CHANGE" is the one to look into - what changed in the management of each 
horse/rider. 
what stayed the same? feed/shoeing/electorlytes/pacing??

Lots of factors which should be reviewed.

comparing attrition is only a minor aspect and one that does not reflect well 
into adjustments
to individual management initiatives.

jt.


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

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!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=