Re: RE: Re: Re: Fw: RC: endurance prospect, etc.

["Helga Loncosky" <hblmh@ptd.net>]

Thanks for the feedback, this makes sense.


Helga Loncosky
Archival Morgan Record
http://home.att.net/~a_m_r/index.html
Beacon Morgan Horses, Ltd.
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Acres/5292/
hblmh@ptd.net
***********************************************************
No heaven can heaven be, if my horse isn't there to welcome me.
-----Original Message-----
From: Steph Teeter <steph@endurance.net>
To: ridecamp@endurance.net <ridecamp@endurance.net>
Date: Tuesday, February 08, 2000 12:56 AM
Subject: RC: RE: Re: Re: Fw: RC: endurance prospect, etc.


>>> if all that you say is true about the winner being
>more fit and better because of it, why aren't there more 1st placers who
>also win the BC award?
>
>A few reasons that come to mind:
>1) BC is based on time + weight + vetscore.  - more factors
>than just the condition/fitness of the horse. If the time is close, 
>the weight factor can make a big difference. Plus the vetscore is a
>subjective score. Much variation between vets in how they
>rate a horse's condition. A high headed Arab can give a much
>better impression than a laid back QH when scoring for
>quality of movement. Plus if the horse has any soreness
>due to interference,  saddle galls, etc the vetscore will be
>reduced. Even the vetscore does not entirely represent the
>fitness/condition of the horse.
>
>2) one of the components of the vetscore is Recovery - a horse
>that races in for the win will probably take more time to cool down, take
>longer to recover, and have a less impressive 10 minute CRI. 
>A horse that hangs back a little towards the end may lose
>a little in time, but gain a lot in vetscore. 
>
>3) many riders have other/different goals than winning on a
>given day - at least at the local level. I think the FEI rides and
>high profile rides such as ROC draw a more competetive crowd.
>But a lot of riders see the local rides as one in a chain of many
>during the season, with a particular end goal in mind such as points
>or BC awards, or conditioning for 'the big one' later in the year,
>or even later in their career.
>They are probably less willing to give it their all at a
>local 50 miler. I think there are a lot of fit horses that fall
>into this 'save it for another day' category. Whether we do
>in fact risk hurting our horses in a sprint to the finish is
>debatable... it certainly seems logical to me that higher speed
>= higher risk. But, on the other hand better fitness = lower risk.
>And then there's just plain old luck.
>
>Personally - I wish I had more nerve. In my dreams I race for
>the finish, but when it comes down to it I'll more often than
>not pull back and gain control and hope for a BC. I have
>tons of BC's but only a few wins, and my wins have all been
>'easy'. I love to ride fast, but I'd rather settle for 2nd 
>than sprint for the finish. (though I'm working on this ..
>too many run-away horses as a kid I think).
>
>There have been times when I've pooh-poohed the winners 
>because they were foolish riders, and their horses did
>pay for it eventually. But more often than not I'm in
>total awe of those that can ride well and win too.
>
>And speaking of 'riding well ' - Tom, I can't totally
>agree with you on this one:
>
>>> In genuine competition, the winner is always fitter and better
>>>conditioned--and harder all around because of it.
>
>I think you under rate the skill and ability of the rider. There is
>a reason that some jockeys earn big bucks, and others don't. A good
>rider can make THE difference. In pacing, in bluffing, in reading
>the course and the moment. A win demands both a good/fit
>horse and a talented rider. 
>
>Steph
>
>
>
>
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
>Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
>