 |
[RC] Horse rider weight reply part 2 - Sisu West RanchContinuation of previous post:I want to now consider possible reasons why a perfectly valid correlation study of Tevis could produce misleading results if applied to Endurance competitions in general. Again these considerations do not invalidate the validity of the study as a predictor of the future results of Tevis. Also I do not know if any of these considerations are actually real, they are just the type of things I would look into if it were possible. 1. Are the entries into Tevis representative of endurance riders in general? Since I moved west I have run into a lot of riders who have entered Tevis, but never before or after entered another ride. I suspect that this is different than the usual 100 mile ride. There seem to be more male riders entered in endurance rides in the west than in the Midwest. Are the heavy riders at Tevis more likely to be Male, and does this effect the way the select, train and ride their horses? Is there a different breed or cross preference among Tevis riders or heavier Tevis riders than in the population in general? Are heavy endurance riders in general selecting the wrong breed or cross of heavier horse? 2. Does the Tevis trail stress the equines differently than other trails? It is a point to point ride where the elevation at the start is higher than at the end. This means that there is an excess of down hill work. A circle ride like the Big Horn, has exactly equal up and down hill elevation change. 3. Tevis has cutoff times and because of the interaction of trail conditions, field size, and training level of entries, sometimes has delays at trail obstacles. These delays can cause riders to end up chasing cutoffs. Does this effect the soundness of heavy horse rider combinations by making them go down hill faster than they normally would? I wish to restate that all of the above considerations, and many more that I haven't though of do not invalidate the subject study. It is usual for scientific work to raise more questions than it answers. It is also usual for further work to show that even the best correlation studies did not uncover the real cause of the observed effect. A classic example of good science that did not uncover the real cause of the effect goes back to ancient Rome. Someone observed that people who lived near the swamps got Malaria more often than others. They then drained the swamps and the Malaria went away. So far good correlation and experiment. The conclusion was that "bad air" from the swamps caused the disease. They could have done a further experiment and proved that keeping mosquitoes away actually prevented the disease, but that had to wait for modern doctors, like Walter Reed. Ed Ed & Wendy Hauser 2994 Mittower Road Victor, MT 59875 (406) 642-9640 ranch(at)sisuwest(dot)us =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 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!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|