When Alison and I set up our Pacific South program there were two goals. One would be to honor 100 mile horses in our region. The second and maybe more important would be to encourage riders to move up to the 100 mile distance. By the way, we have at least 9 first time PS 100 riders that PAID their $25 registration fee betting they will be riding/completing their first 100. I also know of one rider who will be trying her first 100 on her husband's Gold Level Horse at 20 MT. I am so sure she is going to complete that I asked her to be on my team at 20 MT :) I don't know too many endurance riders that just throw $25 away because they "might" want to do something down the road sometime in the far off future.
I personally don't think that every horse that rides in AERC rides whether LD, 50s, multidays, etc can be a 100 mile horse. Therefore in my opinion a horse that completes the one day 100 mile distance is not your average run of the mill endurance horse. Many may disagree but that is my opinion. We set the bronze level at 1 100 which I guess some would consider pretty low. But it is an incentive for someone to get their horse to their first 100. I am pretty sure that Truman had mentioned in a previous post a few weeks ago that a horse completing two 100s was not a very big deal. Somehow, in our program, we wanted to balance horses being honored for completing the 100 mile distance yet promote longevity. I know many may disagree, but I don't think a horse that has a 250 miles of endurance miles and 1 100 and never is seen again should be given any kind of recognition. Many in endurance don't even consider 1000 miles a seasoned horse. So we set the minimum qualification for Bronze level at one of the minimum mileage medallion that AERC recognizes and only a single 100 mile completion. This certainly does not favor the way I ride as I do very low mileage, but I do believe it is in the best interest for the sport to have programs that include longevity. There is one hole in this system and that is that a horse that completes several 100s and does not do lots of mileage will fall through the cracks. Because this is a regional award program sponsored by individuals we can tweak the program to fit our region's needs. We added an additional award that is not part of the levels. It is called the 100 Mile Award of Excellence. We can give that to any horse that we feel has excelled at the 100 mile distance, competed season after season yet does not meet the mileage requirement. Think of it as a HOF type of recognition in which each horse is individually evaluated.
Now I am the first to admit that the structure of our program would probably not work at the National/AERC level. One reason is that to get 20+ board member to agree on how to honor 100 mile horses AND include a mileage requirement would be almost impossible. Look at the varying opinions just on this list on the number of 100s for the various levels of recognition. How could you make a fair program that included a second requirement like mileage or seasons of competition to include EVERY 100 mile horse's accomplishment? There really is no room in a large organization like AERC to include a "subjective" award like our "Excellence" award without someone crying favoritism. We have incentive awards for first time 100 mile horses and riders which AERC could never include in an official awards program. Also, there is the cost involved when giving awards that increase in value as the horse progresses through the program. This would put a substanial financial burden on AERC to impliment an award program like this.
So that is why I suggested a duplicate of the mileage medallion program. Using the basic premise of KISS, it is fairly easy to impliment, would probably be most cost effective, and would be considered FAIR by most. No horse would fall through the cracks because of a secondary requirement. As mentioned in several other posts, AERC already has a mileage program so why duplicate it here.
As far as being retroactive, I do believe that ANY horse that is still competing should be entered into the program with the 100s already completed in the career. As far as retired horses, they should be listed at the level they retired at but I am not sure if they should be eligible to receive the actual award or medallion. I would hate to see the added cost of giving retroactive award to retired horses the reason the program would not be started.
