Events
Groups
Rider Directory
Market
RideCamp
Stuff
Much has been mentioned making comparisons between endurance racing and sprint
racing (I won't say flat racing, because their are weight handicaps in
steeplechases as well). As I said before, I am unconvinced that weight
carried by sprint racers has much bearing on the outcome of flat races (which
I discuss in my other post entitled "What happened to Cigar?" which you are
all welcome to read). However, EVEN IF weight does have a significant bearing
on the outcome of the race. . .
You must understand that the purpose of sprint racing and the purpose of
endurance racing are completely different. And I am not talking about the "to
finish is to win" motto of the AERC. Under Carl's plan, those riders who wish
only to complete are not required to carry his stated required minimum weight,
and can continue to ride as lightweights or feather weights, or get small
children to ride their horses for them. . .
Despite the impression that the purpose of the racing is to determine the best
horse. . .the purpose of sprint racing. . . is to have an "interesting"
outcome. The general intent of all the handicapping schemes that are used in
sprint racing (of which changing the weight carried is but a small one).
Sprint racing makes money, by having people bet on the outcome of the race
(and the track rakes the pot, distributing some of that rake to the
competitors and keeping some of it for itself). In order for the betting to
be interesting (and therefore encourage people to bet), all the competitors
have to be evenly matched.
Sprint racing does this by having a MULTITUDE of classes of race (not just
two, as Carl proposes for endurance), and the system is set up in such a way
to either encourage or require racehorse owners/trainers to run horses only in
their class.
There are claiming races (for a myriad of dollar amounts. . .a $2,000 claimer
is a completely different class of horse from a $75,000 claimer). If an owner
runs his horse below his class in a claiming race, he may win the race, but he
risks losing the horse.
There are allowance races: e.g. non-winners of two races in the last three
months at distances of. . .
There are maiden races, there are special weight races, there are age races,
there are sex races, AND. . .there are breed races. To my knowledge, there is
not a single sprint race (at least not one associated with any kind of widely
organized sport) that is not restricted in some way.
At the AERC we have a rule (somebody besides me can quote the number) that
says something along the lines of "rides shall be open to all equines" over
the age of 60 months. In endurance riding, we have what is called "open"
competition (which, incidentally, is fairly uncommon in horse sports). And in
my opinion, a true champion wins against all comers and asks for no handicaps
from any of the competition.
In endurance, we already have special "handicapped" divisions (i.e. weight
divisions, age of rider divisions, and regional divisions--of which the
regional divisions make the most sense to me); but we also have open
competition where competitors are required to manage the myriad of variables
that contribute to success in this sport to the best of their ability and the
best horse/rider team wins.
To take away open competition as Carl suggests would take away a great deal
from the sport. One of the nice things about endurance is that you can
compete in the handicapped divisions as wells as the open competition at the
same time (i.e. you ride against all the riders, and you ride against only
those riders which are in your division in the same ride); his plan would
require lighter competitors to decide whether they wanted to compete in their
weight division or to compete in the open division. Heavier riders would not
be required to make this choice.
Besides true champions are those that can compete in open competition "with
the big boys" (or the little girls, or whoever :)).
To introduce more handicap divisions may make sense as the sport grows (it
certainly isn't big enough to do that now), but let us not take away the
greatest aspect of endurance riding. That we have true "open" competition
where you can pit yourself against the best, of the best, of the best--with
nobody pretending that we are all starting on an even playing field, and
nobody pretending that we are trying to make the sport more "interesting" by
having all of the horses cross the finish line at the same time.
Interesting for betting spectators is not the intent of endurance. Here's to
hoping that it never will be.
kat
Orange County, Calif.
Events
Groups
Rider Directory
Market
RideCamp
Stuff