> of family obligations, because your horse is only capable of completing that
> distance or by choice you should be acknowleged for what you have
> accomplished but you are NOT competing at the highest level in endurance.
Maybe not at the highest level IN endurance, but what a lot of posts here
today have meant is that they are competing at the highest level OF their
endurance.
I am sorry, but some people have a harder time riding 25 miles than you
may have riding a 100 simply because of health limitations. That should
in no way put down what they are doing or attempting to do just because
they did not ride the upper distance.
While 100 miles IS the ultimate distance, for some people, being able to
camp, saddle a horse, and ride 25 miles is the ultimate distance for
them!!
I don't think they should be prohibited from riding because they don't
have the capacity for whatever reason to ride in the upper distance. It
seems a tad snobbish and somewhat elitest to me to have the attitude that
if I ride 100 miles today, I am better at this sport than you are since
you only rode the 25 mile training ride.
Maybe that's not what your post meant, but it sure seemed that way in the
reading.
We all do what we can, while we can, with what we got, and hopefully have
fun at it all!! When people start thinking they are better or more
capable due to a distance or speed they can go, it will start to be no fun
for some. just like the experiences that I have had at some of the horse
shows I have been to. If you don't show your horse in ....., then you are
not really showing!
I am not intending this post to be argumetative, just pointing out another
way of looking at it.
> I would also like to mention that when a ride manager allows 50 milers
> to vet in front of 25s it is usually because the 25 is being run as a
> training ride and the 50 is being run as a race where time is a factor.
yes, but I have had to wait for the vets to check out 15 horses before my
horse got to the vet. Is it fair that my horse has to wait that long
while a horse that just comes in off the trail is allowed to go on
through? My horse stiffens up so someone can get ahead of me in line when
they still have the whole 45 minute hold time, and I am hoping to be able
to find someone to hold my horse while I can go pee? I'm sorry, I don't
buy that. I have gladly let upper distance horses go in front of me at vet
checks. Especially if I am done, I will always do that. But, if I am
trying to see that my horse gets time enough to get some food and water
and I can do the same, then I think that I deserve my time just like
everyone else does.
> Unless you want ride managers to charge more for limited distance entries so
> 25s can have their own vet I think that limited distance riders should allow
> 50s to vet first. If you are there only to condition what does it matter if
> you are held up a few more minutes?
It could matter. If your horse stiffens up due to waiting, then yes, it
matters.
In the SE, the managers plan for lots of riders. we have a minimum of 2
vets at ever ride. SERA rules. many managers will ask for pre-entry, not
necessarily money sent, just ride form, so they can plan for food, vets,
awards, etc. It's really nice to have vetting go smoothly and quickly.
Also, many times the Ld riders are started at least 30 minutes behind the
upper distances, sometime as much as a couple of hours later. It really
helps at the checks. Not as much congestion, and even the slower 50's can
get in a vetted through before the bulk of the LD riders get there.
by working with your riders, and making them feel valuable, no matter what
distance they ride, your rides can be run smooth, and you get filled up no
matter what time of year or how many rides are run around you!!
samm--running again!!