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]

Re: [RC] Changes to Int'l - kimfuess

Steph,
I am curious how the entire field can be considered if the ride is stopped and horses are not allowed to finish the entire course. It seems strange to me to even consider this as many times placement can change drastically in the last part of a ride or from the last vet check. I think this is even more true in the 100 mile distance than the shorter distances. I also think it is a misnomer that horses that finish later are slow because they are more tired. They may be finishing later because the riders are pacing different than the front runners. The horses may be in fine shape but just averaging a slower pace. I guess that if this type of system is tried it will become more of an event of "how many miles can a horse complete in x number of hours instead of seeing how many horses can complete 100 miles in a given time".

It really would seem strange to me to end the ride and then give horses (teams) that did not complete the entire course some type of completion.

Kim Fuess

Please keep us posted as this concept is discussed further.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steph Teeter" <stephteeter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 2:46 PM
Subject: RE: [RC] Changes to Int'l


Terre - 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!!

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



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

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!!

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

Replies
RE: [RC] Changes to Int'l, Steph Teeter