Re: RC: THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP

[jlong@mti.net (Joe Long)]

On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 09:20:59 -0400, Teddy Lancaster
<Teddy@runningbear.com> wrote:

>If you are using only 100's...four is enough...same with 50's as it requires
>8 of them.  Use the best 400 miles......  more will encourage people to
>overuse their horses...you will end up with a bunch of sore/lame/overused
>horses if you strive to have them do 1000 miles.

I think requiring more miles encourages people to *not* overuse their
horses, as they must keep them fit and sound for more rides.  When I
was competing in the "grand total of all the rides you did for the
year" days, it typically took over 1,000 miles to have a chance at a
Championship, and properly managing your horse's fitness was
essential.

The key problem with the proposed system is, again, that you are
trying to rank competitors who are not competing under the same
conditions.  If rider A competes on the west coast, rider B on the
east coast, and rider C in the middle of the continent, and none ever
meets the other on the trail, who can say which is the "best" no
matter how the points come out?  Two of the three times I was Reserve
National Champion under that system I never competed directly against
the rider who was National Champion.  In one of those cases I believed
I was at a distinct disadvantage due to having fewer 100 mile rides
available to me.  Who knows?

I know we've stuggled with our Championship system, trying to find
what will work.  I don't think going back to a system where the riders
don't at some point compete head-to-head is the answer.

-- 

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


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=