Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

Had to catch up on this one today....lots of reading.   I agree with everything that Joe and Angie have stated.  There was a time when it meant something.  We are going to the NC this year, not for me, but because Joni wants to compete.   And at least she doesn't have to worry about 4 different weight divisions of Juniors!!!   But, given AERC membership enough time....and they will throw that out there !!!!   Not fair to the kids that weigh more.  And yes, I ride as a lightweight...but I am a very FAT lightweight.

Just ask Rose about carrying me around.  :))

Joe Long <jlong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:06:07 -0400, Truman Prevatt
wrote:

>In human athletics in those sports where weight is a critical factor -
>there are weight divisions. A partial list is wrestling, boxing and
>weightlifting. In general the impact of weight on an endurance horse is
>more akin to the impact of weight on the above sports than many other
>sports that are mentioned because the horses are carrying the weight!

Some do, some don't. Football where weight is a big factor does not
have weight divisions, just as basketball where height is a big factor
does not have height divisions. There are no divisions for arm length
in fencing AFAIK.

A HUGE difference between wresting, boxing, weightlifting and such is
that endurance is a TEAM sport: the horse/rider team. No one has
suggested different divisions for different-sized horses! Absent
weight divisions, you select and train your TEAM as best fits your
ambitions and abilities.

Heavy people are clearly at a disadvantage in running footraces, but
I've never seen weight divisions for 10K's or Marathons. Age
divisions, yes. But I don't think many people want to see age
divisions in AERC, for either riders or horses.

>An you are absolutely correct - it's high school physics. It takes more
>energy to move the extra weight. That results in a higher heat load -
>the conversion of glucose to mechanical energy is only about 50%
>efficient with heat being the byproduct. More heat load, more heat to
>dissipate, more issues with dehydration, etc.

No one has ever disputed this. It's not the deciding factor, though.
I point again to the fact that we're talking about the horse/rider
TEAM, and many of those with heavy riders have done very well in
overall placings.

...
>A national championship based on weight divisions is a good ideal.

Many people agree with you. Many do not. I would like to know how a
majority feels about this. I do know that our "Championships" have
lost a great deal of respect as we went from two (Senior/Junior), to
three, to four, to five, and now to ten. As they should have, IMO.

If we really must have weight divisions, can't we at least have fewer
of them? IMO three was plenty, and four is clearly too many! And why
can't we still have a "First Overall" or a single "Champion of
Champions?"
--

Joe Long
jlong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.chiprider.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!!

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

---

Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.