Re: Newbie query: why required weight?

["Joe Long" <jlong@mti.net>]

On Thu, 3 Sep 1998 10:54:00 -0600, "Robert Morris"
<bobmorris@rmci.net> wrote:

>OK let's get this discussion down to basics which is the expenditure of
>energy!

>BTU's expended are a factor of the weight moved and the distance it is
>moved! (basic physics)

Sorry, Bob, but your physics is off.  Energy is only expended moving a
mass against resistance (such as gravity).  It takes more energy to
*lift* a given weight a given height, but not to move it horizontally.
All else being equal it takes no more energy to move 200 pounds one
*level* mile than to move 100 pounds one level mile.

>Therefore, a light weight horse with a light weight rider expends fewer
>BTU's than a heavy weight horse with a heavy weight rider. Now we know
>mechanics are introduced in that the very light weight horse cannot carry
>the very heavy weight rider. This is a mechanical limitation and while
>influencing the choice of horses, does not influence the basic formula of
>energy use. 

Aha ... all else is not equal.  Because of mechanical resistance
(friction) and the effort required to support the weight, what you say
above is true.  The question, though, is to what degree?  And don't
forget that a larger horse stores more BTU's in his body and is
generally able to expend more BTU's per hour.

>The criteria for minimum weight is to influence that part of the formula 
>regarding the use of energy. Trying to make the conditions as even as
>possible for every one on that course on that day. The uneven factor is the
>horse, and that is left to the discretion of the competitor. There is no
>limiting factor on the size, breed, sex or color regarding the horse.

Yes.

>Could any thing be simpler???

Simple concept -- difficult to adjust for equitably in the real world.
Which is why I agree that a single minimum weight carried requirement
(in the neighborhood of 165 pounds) is the best we've found for major
events, and a few (IMO no more than three) weight divisions for the
rest of our events.

I believe it would be sheer folly -- and doomed to failure -- to try
to adopt a weight handicapping system for endurance.

A personal anecdote:  my most embarrassing moment on the Board came
during a discussion of weight divisions at a General Meeting (before
the membership) at a Convention.  Some fellow, in all earnestness, got
up and proposed a system of starting the heavy riders first, lighter
ones later, the lightest riders last, according to a formula of so
many minutes per pound.  I burst out laughing at the idea, it is so
wildly impractical over the varied distances, terrain, elevation and
weather that we ride.  Then I tried to apologize for laughing and only
made it worse.  : ^ (

-- 

Joe Long
jlong@mti.net
Business Page  http://www.mti.net
Personal Page  http://www.rnbw.com