Re: LD question

[CMKSAGEHIL <CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com>]

When you apply minimum times, you essentially have CTR's, and the more I see
and the more I hear on this forum, the more I believe that we should be
abandoning LD's in favor of CTR's anyway.  (In fact, have been thinking about
doing that at my own rides for a few years now, and as of next year, I think I
will do just that, regardless of what AERC does.)

As to the terrain, the "easy" terrain only speeds up the faster horses.
Unless terrain is really extreme, it is not too difficult to maintain a CTR
pace (say 5-6 mph) even if there is single-track with climbs and descents.
Ideally, a trail has some of each, so that there are places one goes slightly
slower and places one goes slightly faster.

The thing with minimum times is that we must be aware of the consequences of
any rules we make.  If we opt for a minimum time, it is difficult for novices
to always guage their time, and I don't think it would be productive to
disqualify people for being a few minutes early.  This is the beauty of CTR
for learning to pace--one has a "window" to shoot for, and rather than being
DQ'ed, one is penalized for being either early OR late.  That way, the rider
in a hurry learns that his or her placing is way down the list somewhere.  (Of
course, the horse score may be lower, too, making the placing even lower.)  

The areas of the country that have primarily CTR's instead of LD's are on the
right track, IMO, and it is long past time that those of us in other regions
and AERC as a whole followed their example.  Our "challenged" riders who
cannot "move up" to 50's would still have a chance to come out and enjoy the
trails and the camaraderie, and the new riders would have a format that is FAR
more educational than LD!

Heidi Smith, DVM--Sagehill Arabians (Oregon)