stepchildren and also rans?!

["Beth Glace" <lb@nismat.org>]

> >Angie wrote:
  I see nothing wrong > with doing 25's forever if that's your thing.
 But I also see no glory
> whatsoever in bragging that you win them.

OK, I know I'm new to this sport, and perhaps I have too little
experience to comment on this, but this kind of thinking stuns me.
So, I'll risk provoking people  and say that perhaps those that win at
100's might not win at 25 if they were competing against horses who
trained specifically to excel at that distance.  You might find that
some horses are genetically predisposed to have those traits
 that would allow them to train seriously, race seriously and be
taken seriously at that distance.  Maybe the Anglo/Arab crosses we've
been discussing?
   I've said this before but I'll say it again, I think it's narrow
minded to think that an animal who competes well over a 6 hour
period, or 12 hour period or whatever, is a better athlete than one
who races well over a 2 or 3 hour period.  All of the above distances
would qualify the horse as an endurance horse.  All predominantly
slow twitch muscle fiber recruitment. Again, this is exactly the
attitude people took just after the running boom in the 80's when you
weren't a real runner till you ran marathons.  Well, a lot of them
were, excuse me, just plain old slow. Looking at their marathon times
you'd have to say "gosh, I don't know what they were doing out there
but it wasn't running!"   I tested 120-125 runners last year alone in
our physiology lab and I can tell you that many of those "ultra"
endurance type athletes are not very fit, although they may be very
patient.  When the stepchildren of the running world who did shorter
races challenged these "real" runners at any distance, all that speed
work paid off.  Just about  every person who runs at a world class
level in the marathon, earlier ran and specialized in shorter
distance races.  When they got older, and their speed began to
dwindle, they moved up to the longer races.  Because longer races are
more legitimate?  NO!  Because for the most part they were no longer
competitive in the shorter event, and they had years of base
training to work off.  I think there are some parallels that can be
drawn between these sports.

I am by no means belittling the training, preparation, experience and
common sense that most endurance riders bring to each race.  But,
please, if the LD's are illegitimate it's not due intrinsically to the
distance, its due - in part-  to self congratulatory attitudes by
some individuals involved in the sport.
  She trotted very fast over switchbacks that had dry,
light
> powder brown dirt hiding the sharp granite stones.
>
This person sounds like she has a very fit horse that she took too
many risks with.  Pehaps she has an ego problem.

> ****I ended up getting away from this group, but also notice
> everyone else kind of let their horses take up that pace and follow
> her right along.
Clearly many people start with the 25s because you can complete them
on lower training mileages.  This can also mean that you have rookie
riders that are trying to follow the example set by other riders, and
who  may get sucked into a dangerous situation if they follow the
wrong person.  We are each responsible first to get our horse safely
through the course, and it is no excuse that someone else was going
too fast....

> ***BTW, gotta tell ya, if I ever did win a 25 and my HORSE was in
> 100% condition, IĘd be damn proud.  But I wouldnĘt be if I were
> running him down hills with hidden rocks or if he was sore and
> miserable.

And you'd have a right to be proud!  I hope we see  people who learn
to specialize in the shorter distances and who race these distances in
a safe and sane manner.  Hey Tom Ivers any thoughts on this?
Will I be blasted now?  Ikes, preparing my forifications and
thickening my skin...
Beth and Klass Act ["but Mom, going fast is so much fun"]