Re: Newbie query: why required weight?

["Robert Morris" <bobmorris@rmci.net>]

Joe & Ride camp:

You state:>>> 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.>>>

This is absolutely correct but the horse in creating impulsion must lift
the weight, total weight animal and rider, into the air and then push it
forward so the factor of gravity, the overcoming of the movement from
static to dynamic state and the like are repeated over and over. Then you
have also introduced the factor of elevation change no matter how slight.
So there is a very distinct "lifting a given weight a given height". That
weight is the factor that brings forth the necessity for setting some
standard such as the minimum 165 lb criteria.

<<<Simple concept -- difficult to adjust for equitably in the real
world.>>>

Who ever said life was fair or equitable. The weight criteria is an attempt
to level things out but will never come close to helping the way training,
conditioning and desire to excel will. I have always ridden as a heavy
weight but never felt it was a handicap. Gave up on the idea of winning
when I found the "view" from further back was much better. That is why I
now always let those sweet young things get ahead of me (including my
wife).

Bob Morris
Morris Endurance Enterprises
Boise, ID

----------
> From: Joe Long <jlong@mti.net>
> To: ridecamp@endurance.net
> Subject: Re: Newbie query:  why required weight?
> Date: Thursday, September 03, 1998 11:35 AM
> 
> 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
>