 |
RE: [RC] Changes to Int'l - Steph TeeterTerre - this is about as much detail as was given - (just one of several ideas being tossed around) - that of stopping the competition at some arbitrary point, rather than at the time that the last horse crosses the finish line. And calculating finish times and placement based upon the last successful vetgate. Details and rational I really don't know. But one does have to consider the entire field when calculating Team scores, since often the teams members are not in the first flush of finishers. Steph -----Original Message----- From: ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of terre Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 2:03 PM To: ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [RC] Changes to Int'l Steph wrote: Another idea is that of stopping the competition, stopping the clock, at a certain point. For instance after the first 30 horses have crossed the finish line, the competition is over. For purposes of team calculations, the competitor's times would be calculated based upon where they were when the clock stopped (e.g. the 5th vetgate was that last official time). Steph, could you clarify? Say a horse is at 80 miles when the clock stops--he gets "credit" for 80 miles and his finishing time "projected"? All competitors still in the field at the time the clock stops have earned a completion - a progressive finish completion. Unless I'm not understanding this correctly.....I think I hate it. Personally, I would rather be dq'd for "going too slow and missing the cutoff" than get a completion for miles I didn't do, or a ride I didn't finish. Unless you mean I've "completed an 80 mile ride". Still doesn't make any sense to me...like a "de-elevator"... you sign up for the longest distance, but whereever you quit you get credit for. The point of this idea is to avoid the need for riders to drag tired horses around the course simply in order to earn a completion. To avoid the injuries and fatigue that many horses (in this case the less elite athletes) experience in the final miles of competition. But horses who take a whole 14 hours to do a 100 mile ride are not necessarily "fatigued". This sounds to me to be less about the welfare of the horses, and more about not wanting to keep the ride going once "the fat lady has sung". The best horses will finish within a certain time percentage of each other, the rest can stop at some point without the (unneccesary) stress of getting through those last miles, when the race is basically already over. Very interesting concept. I would actually be happier with something like "eliminating" any horse that wasn't within a certain %age of the (say) tenth place horse. These are supposed to be the world's top athletes; they had to turn in a certain level of performance to get there--if a given horse is running "way below" his normal performance, perhaps he should be pulled. Of course, a policy like this would be more likely to speed up the competition than slow it down. But realistically, riders (or chefs) who could see by half-way through that a horse was going too slow could withdraw it right then and there, and save everybody the effort (especially the horse). Allowing the support staff to concentrate on the front runners. I'd be very interesting in hearing you expand on this. terre =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 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!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 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!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|