Re: Maryben's Message

["Sandy Bolinger" <bolinger@bigsky.net>]

HERE  HERE!!!!!! (or is it ..HEAR, HEAR!!)?

----- Original Message -----
From: <CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com>
To: <Merryben@aol.com>; <ridecamp@endurance.net>
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2000 9:06 PM
Subject: RC: Maryben's Message


> In a message dated 9/10/00 6:44:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Merryben
writes:
>
> << I could be wrong and often am, but I don't remember LD ever being given
> points for the year end awards.  That was the big deal with the LD
committee.
>  They got nothing and were second class citizens and essentially paid the
> bills for no awards. .......mb >>
>
> I'm not sure what year it changed.  But they sure did get points back in
the
> 70's.  When I started riding, virtually all rides were only one
distance--and
> a great many were only 35 or 40.  And then came the great idea to offer
> different distances all the same day--and 25's became pretty standard
since
> one could easily do loops and have 25, 50, etc.  I can remember the ride
in
> Vale, OR--I think it was the year John Sumerlin was National Champion.
His
> horse was getting a bit iffy, but the win on the 25 would net more points
> than a mere completion on the 50.  I can't remember if John won or not,
but I
> think he did.  The winning time on that 25 was 1:09, and I've never seen
such
> a uniformly sorry bunch of horses than those front runners.  But because
of
> the shorter mileage, if you were running for points, you pretty much had
to
> run to win, because the "net" for points wasn't very much if you didn't.
So
> folks were REALLY cut-throat.  At too many rides, the vets were kept so
busy
> treating the "short ride" horses that it got pretty frantic.  Since you
don't
> get hands on a horse but once in the middle, and the ride times were so
fast,
> a great many crashes did not occur until well after the rides.  AERC
figured
> it was best to be pro-active and deal with the issue before it drew too
much
> attention and got us labeled as a sport that truly abused horses--and the
> idea came about to take the points out of the short rides and eliminate
them
> altogether as an AERC entity.  It worked.  They became rides for novices
> trying to learn, people who simply didn't care to ride further, etc.--and
> even though there was still an element of racing, to this day, the winning
LD
> is often slower than the winning 50 on the first lap.  Of course, this
> complete excision of the short rides from the "system" also had its
> problems--you named the main one, which is that LD'ers (as they later came
to
> be known) felt like they were paying the bills and being treated like
second
> class citizens.  Another problem was the concern that the "short" rides
would
> not be run to AERC standards if they were not sanctioned.  (Most rides had
> them, and to this day, I don't know of any that DIDN'T run by at least
some
> semblance of AERC rules, but whatever.)  So AERC set up the LD program.
This
> gave some credit and recognition to folks who were content to continue to
> ride at what most sports would call a novice level--and indeed, there
isn't a
> thing wrong with that and it happens in virtually every horse sport.  And
> certainly it behooves AERC to be involved with the LD rides, for many
> reasons.  There is no shame in being an LD rider, any more than there is
any
> shame in doing intro or training level dressage, or any other entry level
in
> any other discipline.  However, to go back to awarding LD's the same
career
> credit (re points, miles, etc.) is a giant step backward in being able to
> monitor horses and protect those whose riders don't take the
responsibility
> to ride to the horse's ability.  (Yes, this IS the rider's responsibility,
> but let's face it--if everyone did that, we wouldn't need ride vets or
> standards for continuing or completion, etc.  Even responsible folks get
> caught up in the heat of competition from time to time...)
>
> LD is a great thing.  It serves many purposes--it's a stepping stone into
the
> sport for some, a "ride intro 101" for young horses that need the
> socialization as part of their training, a way for riders to participate
and
> enjoy who for whatever reason (age, infirmity, no time to stay fit for
longer
> events, etc.) can't go longer distances, etc.  But there was good reason
to
> remove the "short" rides from the points program to begin with, and we
would
> be fools to revisit history in that regard.
>
> Heidi
>
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>