Rutter's nomination comments

[guest@endurance.net]

Cindy Collins sunsetrim@hotmail.com
I have to say that I agree with much, if not all, of Steve's comments.  I
expecially would like to see the AERC take away all "illusions" of placing
within L.D.  It just sickens me to hear people talking about "winning" a
L.D. ride and it happens all the time.  There's no way I can convince
novice riders that it's not a race when we list them in finishing order.
The idea of listing alphabetically, both at the ride awards and in the
AERC is EXCELLENT!  Also, while I'm at it, please consider adding pulled
because of  "time" or "over-time limit" to reasons why a horse didn't
complete.  It looks ridiculous to put rider option  and make folks
questions whether a horse was OK, when often, especially on 100s, the
horse may be absolutely fine, but the rider just misjudged the speed or
the terrain and ran out of time prior to the finish and so pulled at a
stop.  Having personally quit the Tevis and the Big Horn 100s at the last
vet check, with a horse in excellent condition, after passing the vet
check, because there was no way I could make the 24 hour limit, I'd prefer
to be able to give a more accurate accounting.  Finally,  I'm also
concerned about the ideas being tossed about to require that all 50s have
more than one vet check.  If this happens, I just hope that multiday rides
are given an exception.  Just my thoughts.  Cindy Collins, AERC #176