Check it Out!    
RideCamp@endurance.net
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index]

Fwd: RC: "Weighty issue"

I am tyring to remember who wrote to address this issue in the last issue of 
AERC News - please stand up! I agreed with the column, and so...here goes! 
When I took my old mare out for her first ride, we were at a clear 
disadvantage - she was smallish, older, and had had the problems and injuries 
that go with age - bowed tendons, some arthritis, just plain old - old! But I 
CHOSE THAT! I babied her through a number of rides, none over 35 miles, but 
at her age, that was suitable. She has been awarded a LD BC several times, 
much to my amazement. I would NEVER have wanted allowances made for either 
her size or her age. Why? Because when we start making those allowances, it 
seems to me that not only does the cost go up - again - but then where does 
it end? Do we make allowances for the darker horses who don't cool as 
efficeiently? How about the breeds? Special consideration for Q-horses or 
gaited horses, or....see what I mean? 

Of all people, WE understand the profound effects of CHOICE! We have CHOSEN 
to ride an old mare, a rehabbing stallion, etc. It comes down to choice.  We 
don't have Thoroughbreds, so should we be given allowances over fences of 5" 
and up for the reason that our horses are smaller? No. 

Please understand, no disrespect intended here, and certainly I understand 
this issue, having been on both sides, mostly the SHORT side :). But to start 
weighing in horses as well as riders....where will it end? We CHOOSE to ride 
the horses we do. I wouldn't expect to do well in polo with my horses, but 
they ARE nice show and endurance horses. The system does not in itself favor 
anyone in particualr; howveer, it DOES award the horses best suited to teh 
sport.
san

---- Begin included message ----
In a message dated 4/20/99 1:09:49 AM EST, seamstob@telusplanet.net writes:

> 
>  Ya don't have to be fast just fat. That's why I figure it is easier to
>  eat then train.

If you don't want to get this started, just don't reply!  I've held my tongue 
as long as I can about this....something needs to be done about the weight 
divisions and how BC is calculated.  I had a welsh pony in the Leatherwood 
Challenge ride April 3rd, he placed 7th and stood for BC.  There were some 
problems with how the vets figured the BC scores, but the issue here is that 
my pony was penalized for carrying 25% of his body weight!  The rider was 
light, but so was the pony.  No consideration is given to the size of the 
horse.  The vets were upset and told me that he should have won BC and he 
shouldn't have been given a weight penalty, it wasn't fair.  What is so wrong 
with using a weight tape on all top ten horses, weighting the rider/tack, 
then using the ratio for determining the weight penalty?  This pony weights 
550 pounds, his rider/tack was 138, a full 25% of his body weight.  The BC 
winner's horse was about 900 pounds and rider/tack weighted in at 198, this 
is 22% of the horse's body weight, now who was at a disadvantage?
Leigh Preddy SE (and "Wynn" the wonder pony)


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
---- End included message ----
    Check it Out!    

Home    Events    Groups    Rider Directory    Market    RideCamp    Stuff
Back to TOC