Re: LD question

[Chris Paus <paus@micoks.net>]

The Middle of the TRail Distance Riders Assoc. in Kansas has mostly CTRs
with 15 and 30 mile rides. We have had people try the 30s right off and get
discouraged and not come back, which is why they instituted a 15 mile
novice distance. It is not mandatory and there is no set amount of rides
you have to do either distance (unlike NATRC which boots you up to open
after so many novice rides). Teh rides are set between 5 to 7 mph depending
ont eh terrain with a 20 to 30 minute window on either side of the finish
time.

Unfortunately, there are still people who will blow past you and then stand
at the finish line waiting to cross at the appropriate time! But it happens
less often than in LD rides where the time is wide open.

I still like the general format of the LD rides, but do wish people
wouldn't think they havet o finish it in 2 or 3 hours even when the ride
manager tells them it won't get them a prize.

Unfortunatley, I think they go on to be the ones who race their horses at
longer distances, too, so I'm not sure you can legislate common sense. 

Maybe these people ahve more horses than I do. I have just one distance
riding horse and I have to take good care of him. Besides, he's my bud adn
I don't want to hurt him.

chris paus

At 10:37 AM 4/3/98 EST, CMKSAGEHIL wrote:
>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) 
>
>
>