Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

Earlier I posted my belief that Limited Distance would benefit from a 
change in focus.  I also said it would be very difficult to institute a 
program for LD that was not patterned after the Endurance program.  After 
all, that is what we are all used to.  Still, like it or not, Endurance is 
a race and the first to finish in condition fit to continue wins.  Given a 
group of horses in great condition, Endurance rewards SPEED.  Even the Best 
Condition award, though the title implies that it will go to the horse that 
finishes in the best shape, is limited to only those 10 horses that go the 
FASTEST.  Is that the model we want for LD?

I know there are LD riders who believe that the short rides are deserving 
of the same degree of recognition and prestige as are the longer rides. 
These riders want ride times, First Place and Top Ten acknowledged and Best 
Condition restricted to the Top Ten, just like in Endurance, so only they 
who have the time to condition well enough to do 50’s will have a shot at 
BC.  These riders plan on staying at the LD level and compete strongly for 
the regional and national awards.  Judging from the posts on Ridecamp, such 
individuals do not constitute the majority of LD riders.  There are five 
other groups: 1) those with insufficient time to condition for 50+ mile 
rides, 2) new riders just learning the ropes, 3) riders on inexperienced 
horses whom they are bringing into the sport, 4) riders whose age or other 
physical limitations precludes riding 50+ miles and 5) riders who have 
horses that are either too old or do not possess the right conformation to 
go 50+ miles.  These groups do not routinely ride with the intention of 
going fast enough to Top Ten.

I think that what most worries Endurance riders is the belief that Limited 
Distance is being shaped by the first group, those who want the recognition 
and prestige of winning and Top Tenning without putting in the effort 
required to do so at the 50+ mile level.  This group of riders, though 
small, has demanded and gotten a mini-Endurance program.  They want even 
more awards to fully mirror the “senior circuit” and expect AERC to provide 
more and more resources to this end.  I am pretty sure I'm on safe ground 
when I say that the vast majority of LD riders do not believe those who 
ride only 25 or 30 miles DESERVE the same degree of respect and reward as 
those who do 50 or 100 miles.  LD can be a lot of things including a 
stepping stone to the longer rides or a safety net for older horses and 
riders but it is NOT a true test of endurance.

So what to change?  Starting with Best Condition, are YOU riding LD to Top 
Ten for a BC?  Do you feel that only the few who train hard and ride fast 
should be eligible to show for Best Condition?  Or would you prefer to see 
everyone who finishes with a horse in great condition get a crack at BC?  I 
think we should revamp the whole LD BC system.  The biggest problem with 
opening up the LD BC judging to all finishers is that in some regions, 
there are just too many horses in the LD rides to judge all the entrants. 
So why not run the LD BC this way:

1)  All horses completing are eligible for BC
2)  Current rules (L6.2.1.1)require LD horses do their final vetting within 
30 minutes of finishing. If more than 30 minutes elapse from pulse down to 
vetting, the horse will no longer be eligible for BC.
3)  As each horse is vetted for completion, the vet will make a snap 
determination as to whether the horse is in very good condition or great 
condition.  Of the first ten LD's to finish, all, and ONLY, very good and 
great condition horses will be allowed to show for BC.  All the rest of the 
LD horses will be similarly classified and every LD horse in really 
superior condition will be allowed to show.
4)  Standard BC form will be used and calculated in the same fashion as for 
Endurance BC's.

Thus the FIRST criterion for BC would NOT be Top Tenning but rather the 
veterinarian's estimation of the quality of the finishing horses.  However, 
on the judging itself, both time and weight of rider would be factored into 
the final tally.

If having the vets make a quick decision on the caliber of the finishing 
horses seems like it would be too difficult, just harken back to some of 
the Tevis posts (Nick Warhol's, for example) where vets were easily able to 
note the horses that were in excellent condition.

I think the mileage awards, both regional and national should be abolished. 
 They both reward and encourage staying at the LD level, not for those who 
MUST but for those who are really good at it and can win stuff.  I think LD 
awards should reward those in LD who really cannot COMPLETE longer 
distances while simultaneously NOT rewarding those who just want to stay in 
LD because it is easier.  Therefore we shouldn't have awards based strictly 
on winning or mileage.  There must be other criteria.  Some ideas:

Perhaps the oldest rider and the oldest horse completing every ride could 
be singled out and reported to the office as the winners of the Veteran's 
Awards for that ride.  Placing wouldn't count and each region could have an 
award for the Veteran Horse and Veteran Rider with the highest mileage for 
the season.  We could try this without having a lower limit and if it 
didn't seem to be working, perhaps we could impose limits - say no rider 
under 55 and no horse under 18.

Similarly we could have an award for physically handicapped riders.  We 
would need formalized guidelines to identify such riders and then, like for 
Veteran Riders, each ride would award a completion point to all Challenged 
Riders and report same to the office.  Year end awards would be based on 
total miles completed.

There are many Juniors who start at the lower distances.  We could continue 
to have total mileage awards for them, either regionally or nationally or 
both, but with some constraints not now in place.  First no award to any 
Junior riding less than a certain number of miles, say 150.  That would be 
only 6 rides.  If that seems like too many, stop and consider.  Awards for 
mileage are for MILEAGE, not for just showing up a few times.  No Junior 
could win an award in both a regional AND the national categories.  Any 
Junior who rode 100 LD miles or more in any season would become ineligible 
for any LD Junior award in future seasons.  The rationale would be that 
after completing four LD's in one year, you have enough experience to move up.

AERC has been told that a lot of LD riders wanted the current structure - I 
REPEAT A LOT OF LD RIDERS - because they worked so hard to do well and 
weren't getting the recognition they deserved.  If this is true, and a 
revamped Best Condition available to all finishers isn't enough, I must 
admit I do not know how to address that problem.  The danger in having 
awards for those who, according to Terry Woolley Howe, "...are becoming 
'career' limited distance riders, with no intention of ever participating 
in endurance rides", is that those who do the short rides and get these 
awards increasingly seem to acquire a far greater opinion of their efforts 
than is warranted by going only 25 miles.  They act as if they DESERVE the 
same respect as riders who do the longer distances.  This is not only 
ridiculous, like giving all Thoroughbreds the same rating whether they win 
at five furlongs or one mile, but it is also incredibly offensive to the 
riders who DO spend the time to bring their horse up to a level where they 
can compete effectively at the longer distances.  Do you have thoughts on 
how to accomplish both?  That is, recognize the efforts of riders without 
actually promoting 25 miles as a desirable end in and of itself?  Or is it 
impossible to do both?  Maybe the answer lies in an entirely different 
direction say awards that have nothing to do with Endurance like a Family 
Fun award or costume awards or a Sportsmanship award, awards that though 
done at the local level might be at least partially reimbursed to the RM by 
AERC for their PROMOTIONAL aspect :)  Imagine the HUNDREDS of people 
receiving such recognition vs the mere handful getting mileage or BC awards 
today.

The biggest problem as I see it is that the current structure just doesn't 
offer enough riders the slightest chance at an award. Here the AERC was 
sold the LD structure on the premise that the majority of those who do LD 
deserve more recognition (see above), yet you, the majority, are exactly 
the ones who haven't a prayer.  LD today rewards only two flavors of rider. 
 1) The person who has the time and money to go to a lot of rides and rack 
up mileage (and with all that time, presumably they could do more 
conditioning and do 50's) and, 2) the rider who has the time to condition a 
horse well enough to Top Ten in great shape, ie, condition well enough to 
actually DO a 50.  Nowhere in there is the person pressured for time who 
can just barely get it together enough to participate in a few 25 mile rides.

In Endurance, almost all riders acknowledge that the goal is to complete 
with a healthy horse in the fastest possible time.  That is why speed based 
awards work.  In LD, there are many goals, few of which have anything to do 
with finishing as fast as possible.  That is why I believe it is time to 
completely re-work the Limited Distance program so it more thoughtfully 
reflects the demographics of the riders participating.



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
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!!

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