Home Current News News Archive Shop/Advertise Ridecamp Classified Events Learn/AERC
Endurance.Net Home Ridecamp Archives
ridecamp@endurance.net
[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]

[RC] re: elevator rides as incentive & weight divisions - Mary Krauss

As a complete newcomer, let me tell you, I absolutely would consider a hundred-miler more seriously if it were in the context of completing 50, then 75 miles successfully on the designated day. I've run several marathons that allow one to stop at the half-way point (13.1 miles) if one desires a half-marathon "success" that particular day. What's the difference to anyone else? Those that have to gear-up mentally for 100 miles would still do so. (Doesn't everyone have to do this for any distance?) I seriously doubt they'd be more likely to stop short of that goal simply because they could get some points for the lesser distance. Points are not the real incentive for completing rides so they should not play much of a part in stopping short. I can't remember being tempted to stop at the halfway point in a marathon with one exception--I had my once-only case of blisters and was going to have to quit. I managed to limp the last mile or so and got to say I'd run a half-marathon that day instead of having to say I'd had to drop out of a race--not a big deal either way but nicer the way it turned out.

As for the idea that ride managers would be inconvenienced, how so? How are they put out any more by someone getting points for completing fewer miles than they would be for someone's having to pull around the same distance? Not many who can complete 100 are going to stop short just because they can (well, not any more than if were going to have to drop out anyway whether from fatigue, injury, or just a weak psychological moment.)

None of this will effect many of us--but it won't hurt a single person or horse out there so why not give it a try? (And could it happen by this fall in the NW region?! :-)

Now, to really throw some gas on a fire, will someone please explain the weight thing to me? Were all the races being won by little people? Not to be obvious, but if so, is that wrong? Were the outcomes overwhelmingly suggestive of a need for divisions? Is the handicapping idea taken from Thoroughbred racing? Please reply privately unless you can be very tactful--otherwise everyone will hate me for starting up a topic that apparently has seen enough air in this forum in the past.

Your Truly,
Mary K. (Not even a Newbie yet)
lazykfarmatcomcastdotnet