Re: Fwd: Firemountain 50 -2nd that!!

[jlong@mti.net (Joe Long)]

On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 15:35:18 EST, SandyDSA@aol.com wrote:

>In this light, then, it would be logical, fair and sensible NOT to have the LD
>ide in conjunction with the ride in quiestion. Why? Put simply, when I send in
>an application fo a ride - money and all - I expect to ide. So....I prepare,
>just as any other ider, take time off, find child care if necessary, arange
>for horse care for our others horses, tune up the pickup, check out the
>trailer....you get the idea. It is patently unfair to treat LD riders any
>different that the others when it comes to courtesy and these other aspects.

However, a Championship ride *is* different.  There is a small number
of designated events; not getting to ride in one because it "filled
up" essentially puts a rider out of contention unless he's rich enough
to travel across the country to find another.

>So...to be told a week or so befor ethe ride - OOPS! You just got put on  a
>waiting list because we had 12 more 50 mielrs send in apps. Who believes THAT
>is fair? I don't. So, just don't OFFER the LD ride then. Plain and simple. san

Well, I agree that a week is too close to the ride date.  The cutoff
for Championship entires getting priority should be two to three weeks
before the ride date IMO; even 30 days might be appropriate.  Again,
the Championship rides are different, and I think it's reasonable to
expect Championship riders to sign up in advance -- they surely should
be planning farther ahead than that!

But I do agree that if the ride can't reasonably assure Championship
riders being able to enter if an LD is held at the event, no LD ride
should be held.

-- 

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