LD vs CTR (long: I deserve an editor!)

[Glenn Foster <gfoste19@idt.net>]

I just filled out the LD questionaire from AERC,
and then found more of the "Great LD Debate" on 
today's ridecamp postings.  I was planning to
maintain my proper humility as a novice and stay 
out, but I guess I just cant resist.   Just one
comment before I dive in.  What follows is what
I believe to be true right now.  I'm definitely 
still learning and reserve the right to change
my mind on any of this at any moment if someone
can show me a good reason to.

The AERC LD questionaire was a little frustrating
just because it was all about "LD" as though 
AERC LD was the only way to do 25 miles. I read at
least part of last year's LD Debate in the archives
before subscribing to ridecamp.  At that time, 
the argument against 25 mile rides seemed to be all
in the form of "it'll be a flat race and they'll 
kill their horses", an argument I personally think
has considerable merit if the rules don't clearly
discourage "racing".  

Between that and my experience last summer as a 
first time rider doing UMECRA, AHAM and AHAO CTR's,
I had come to the conclusion that there really
is a place for shorter (ie 25 mile) rides, but
that the AERC LD is flawed, and a better approach
is the kind of "CTR" done in the midwest, 
(also southeast ?).  The essential rules difference 
from endurance is that the scoring includes point
penalties for going either too fast or too slow.
The addition of the time rule (BOTH PARTS) is all
that is needed to make a 25 mile event both
competitive and reasonably safe.  Too fast/too slow
implies a ten minute "window" in which you can
finish with no penalties.  In effect everybody does 
about the same average speed.  The only contest
is the equivalent of "best condition".   

Let me hasten, though, to agree at the outset with
those who say a 25 mile ride is NOT an endurance ride.
To just finish does not have the same meaning as in
true endurance.  It does have some meaning.  99 % of 
the horses around could probably finish 25 miles, 
if they lived in pastures instead of paddocks, and if
their riders ever got them to the start.  But 
99.999999999999999 % of the people around would never
ever go through the kind of effort it takes to 
"get it all together", learn to ride outside an arena,
train and condition the team, get the horse to the ride
scene and find their way down a strange trail through
the woods, cross the scary bridges, etc.  It could be
a really long walk back if you fall off and your partner
goes home without you (mine did once on a training ride
-- <grin and blush>).  An accomplishment, yes. 
Just not an endurance achievement.  

The minimum time (with a points penalty for too fast)
protects the horse.  At least the rules make sure no one
is motivated to "speed".  This is also a lot stronger
than the current AERC LD rule.  AERC tries to avoid
rewarding speed (no "official" first,second,third 
placing), but this rule makes it clear by providing
a formal penalty.

The maximum time (with points penalty for too slow)
makes sure that enough work is done to stress the
horse so that small problems or lack of conditioning
or riding and management shortcomings will _start_
to show up.  The actual riding speed is typically
about 6.5 - 7 mph.  This is enough to insure
that the vet exam will be able to separate 
horses/teams based on which are "more ready". 
By the way, for those who haven't tried it, the
technical problem of finishing within the time
window seemed to be really easy.  The challenge
is to have the soundest horse with you when you do.

Even though all teams go at approximately the
same average speed, they definitely do not end up
all riding together.  There will typically be some
groups who choose to do so, but different groups
and individual riders all seem to "ride their own
ride" and go at widely different paces in different
places, just like in an endurance ride.

Even though the achievement itself is not endurance, 
and "to finish is to win" just isn't applicable in
the same way, the preparation and skills tested,
and results measured are the same ones that apply
to endurance.   A higher score does indicate a better
prepared / more successful team.  In fact, I think
I would give more weight to a first place finish in
one of these than to a "best condition" in an AERC LD
where there were only a few entries and the entire
ride might have been at a walk. 

From a training standpoint, both horse evaluation and
training of the rider (lot's of us wish we had grown
up on a ranch but didn't), it really isn't practical to
get this kind of evaluation "at home".  I can't really
ask a local veterinarian to stand around for hours
while I do a training ride, so he can do a pre and
post-ride check.  Local veterinarians, even race-horse
veterinarians or riding-school-trainers with no endurance 
experience would not necessarily be able to help me
learn and find the beginnings of problems that show
up in a real endurance ride.  It isn't fair to expect
them to.  Some of the ride vets have been doing this 
for 20 years or more.  It is a specialty.  I learned
as much from those examinations at the four rides I 
went to last year as I had in 5 years of reading books
and taking care of three horses at home.

My personal ambition is to move up to longer distances
and true endurance, but that doesn't mean everyone
should feel this way, or that I always will, or that
that is the only thing I will ever do.  It is certainly
an "honorable thing" to train and condition the horse-rider
team for distance riding and then test the results in 
this format.  At one of the Sunday rides I went to I
was told that most of the horses in the 25 CTR had done
the 50 Endurance on Saturday.  "Fit to continue", and
proving it by doing another 25 at a respectable pace
but short of racing !

There may be purely practical reasons for not being able
to ride 50 or 100 miles, and these reasons might not prevent
the necessary conditioning.  All of the rides around
here are 4 to 6 hours away.  It isn't always practical
to take a Friday off work to do that drive, so getting 
to the ride in time to vet in before dark Friday may be
just impossible.  Ride management and the Veterinary staff 
probably would have co-operated with a Saturday morning
vet-in, but frankly I don't think it would be fair of me
to put that burden on others, especially not for my 
first season, and there would be no opportunity to walk
part of the trail, etc.  

A Sunday 25 can be accomplished by driving there Saturday,
resting, relaxing, and walking part of the trail Saturday
afternoon and evening, then riding Sunday morning and 
driving home late Sunday afternoon.   

In my case this has nothing to do with conditioning.  There
can be plenty of riding time even if you cant really get
long weekends.  Dansyn Dominique and I just have lots of
night-riding practice already.  Of course, if everybody
else wants to start the 100 at noon Saturday, ride through
the night and finish noon Sunday ... 

There really should be a National standard for these rides, 
and it really should be AERC.  Aside from being the only 
really national organization around, AERC seems to have a 
strong professional veterinary support and focus which is
critically important to any format that actually tests the
horse's condition.  I don't beleive this would benefit from
being diffused among numerous organizations.

The proliferation of regional organizations is actually a 
little confusing and frustrating, especially to newcomers.
So far as I know those first few (135) miles I rode last
year are not recorded with any organization.  Between UMECRA,
GLDRA, AHAM, and AHAO, and forms to mail in after the ride,
it was just too much confusion and trouble to bother with
records.  Not really important to me at all, and they should
NOT be confused with endurance miles, but I suppose it would
have been nice, and it could be a big deal to a lot of people.
(For this year I plan to just stick to GLDRA, so that's all
taken care of for me.)  All of these organizations seem to
play a vital role in actually getting rides organized, 
scheduled and supported on the ground, but they probably 
can't perform the traditional role of AERC in providing
standards and record-keeping.

If AERC doesn't provide the focus and recognition, then 
someone else might.  The only other national group around 
seems to be IAHA and even though my horses are both arabs,
I dont like the idea that what we do should ever become 
tied to a breed.  I want to keep on proving my special
horses against everything out there.

I would suggest that below about 50 miles the "CTR format"
always makes more sense than the "endurance format", and
the "CTR format" makes the shorter rides a meaningful
test.  In rides around 50 miles there might be good
arguments favoring either format.  By the time you get
up to 100 miles the "speed rule" would probably be 
inappropriate.  At 100 miles the reality of the thing 
takes over and overwhelms the rules.  That's Endurance!   

Maybe there should be a new name for these rides.  Always
sounds like a "politics" thing to change the name, but 
sometimes that can actually clear things up.  The word
"Endurance" really is misleading.  The word "CTR" seems
to confuse a lot of people because of its association with
complex and irrelevant rules from other organizations.
"Limited Distance" seems to have been an attempt to make 
it "Junior Endurance", but that's not really fair either. 

What's a better name? "Distance Riding Trial" ?
"Distance Riding Test" ? "Endurance Training Trial" ?
"Distance Horse Trial?" "Distance Riding Competition" ? 
I dunno.

Again, I'm definitely still learning and will probably change
my mind about at least some of the foregoing before the end
of the week.  (and its already Thursday !) It's just that 
I've felt for a while now that the argument for adding the
speed rule to the LD is really compelling and that there
are good reasons to look for ways to deal with shorter
distances.  

Just one last thing... Did I ever feel the least put down by 
"50 milers" ? Not hardly!  At my first ride the vet spent at
least an extra half-hour with me to help me understand 
everything going on.  Then he asked if I had a water bucket
with a cover, to put in the truck to go to the mid-point
check.  When I didn't, one of the "50 milers" went and got 
hers (along with a bunch of apples and carrots).  I dutifully
filled it and set it out to go like they had told me.  When
I got to the mid-point check the bucket was there just as
promised.  What I wasn't expecting was the same "50 miler"
was also there and proceeded to take us in hand and act as
"crew" through the check!  Everything Becke Gramm told you
about Michigan riders is true. Cold winters / warm horsepeople. 

Glenn Foster
SE Michigan