Re: Newbie query: why required weight?

[Teddy Lancaster <Teddy@runningbear.com>]

Tom:  Comments?

On Thu, 3 Sep 1998, Teddy Lancaster wrote:

> I must vehemently disagree with you. Weight carried by a horse,
> especially over long distances has been proven over and over again to be
> a MAJOR decided factor in the outcome of ANY race.

Show me the statitics.  The only studies I have ever seen where anybody
actually tried to figure out what the effect of weight carried had on
outcome of an endurance competition came to the statistical conclusion
that weight of the rider (and all its tack) is "insignificant."

Now this may not be meaningful since the avialbility of data for endurance
is pretty poor.  However, data has been collected for TB racing for a
century, and if you take all that data, you will find that there is NO
correlation between weight carried and outcome of the race.




K S Swigart wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Sep 1998, Teddy Lancaster wrote:
>
> > I must vehemently disagree with you. Weight carried by a horse,
> > especially over long distances has been proven over and over again to be
> > a MAJOR decided factor in the outcome of ANY race.
>
> Show me the statitics.  The only studies I have ever seen where anybody
> actually tried to figure out what the effect of weight carried had on
> outcome of an endurance competition came to the statistical conclusion
> that weight of the rider (and all its tack) is "insignificant."
>
> Now this may not be meaningful since the avialbility of data for endurance
> is pretty poor.  However, data has been collected for TB racing for a
> century, and if you take all that data, you will find that there is NO
> correlation between weight carried and outcome of the race.
>
> > The 165 pound rule is
> > only a MINOR attempt to make the competition fairer for all.
>
> It is this perception that addin g weight to 165 lbs is "Minor" that makes
> people engage in it at all; however, adding as much as 40 pounds of
> useless weight (and where you put it) is not a MINOR thing at all.  And to
> think that you can make things "fairer" by measuring static weight by
> making riders get on a scale shows a substantial lack of understanding of
> the dynamics of weight carrying of objects in motion.
>
> > Horse-racing has handicapping...can you imagine the problems that would
> > cause for us?
>
> And the 165lb minimum weight requirement is a "handicap" for lighter
> riders.  It is, in essence, saying that smaller riders, because of their
> stature, are more physically suited to the sport and therefore should be
> handicapped so that riders who are less physically suited to the sport can
> compete.  And you are right, this handicapping causes problems for the
> riders who have to deal with it and the officials who have to deal with
> it.
>
> > Why do you think AERC has weight divisions?
>
> The AERC has weight divisions (which actually substantially FAVOR heavy
> weight riders) because people like you think that weight ought to make a
> difference.  Because of the poor way that the weight divisions are
> specified (to the extent that there are virtually no HW riders) all a
> heavy weight rider has to do is stagger across the finish line to finish
> first in his/her division.  The light weight division (not the feather
> weight) is the most hotly contended division, if for the simple reason
> that most people fall in this division.  In fact, many lightweight riders,
> ride as featherweights because they don't want to have to compete with all
> the lightweight riders, they would rather give weight away and compete in
> a smaller division.
>
> > Think about it...
>
> Think about it.  It has long been believed that weight of the rider (and
> all his tack) OUGHT to make a difference in the outcome of a race.
> However, no data has ever been collected to prove this out.  WHatever the
> effect that weight carried has on the outcome of an endurance event, it is
> far too complicated to think that you can "equalize" it by making riders
> get on scales.
>
> kat
> Orange County, Calif.
>
> p.s.  It might be quite difficult to get any data for endurance to
> demonstrate that weight makes a difference, since many heavy riders are
> heavy because they are fat, and one could reasonably make the contention
> that fat riders don't do well in competition, not because they are heavy,
> but because they are unfit for an endurance event.  To demonstrate that
> weight has an impact on outcome (as in actually weight carried vs.
> fitness level of the rider), you would have to control for fitness level
> of the rider...and, BTW, you would have to control for gender if you
> wanted to be totally accurate.
>
> Note that there are MANY successful HW riders in the AERC, and these
> riders almost always have one thing in common, which is that they are fit.