Check it Out!
Qualifications for the NC
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Qualifications for the NC
- From: Randy H Eiland <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2001 09:00:31 -0700
- Cc: DR@yahoogroups.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, Enduroride@aol.com, email@example.com, Kenayala@aol.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, Sschom@mail.platte1.k12.wy.us
In 1998 when the Board decided to have a "head to head" event and call it
the AERC NC, I agreed to manage the 1st two based on the following
1) I would absorb all losses and split 50-50 all profits with AERC (not
too smart on my part).
2) AERC would advertise and promote the event in the Endurance News (did
not happen with any regularity in 1999)
3) I felt strongly that The AERC NC could not be managed "by committee"
and stated that I would not manage the event if AERC put a committee in
place to oversee and direct the event. I was not opposed to a committee
that would assist the RM and act as a source of information for
subsequent NC Ride Managers.
Regardless of what happened at the CLASSIC, the major problem that
Crockett and Sharon ran into was a "committee" running the event. There
is only one Ride Manager in any event and that person must take on all
ultimate responsibility for the event. I don't know of any RM who would
welcome another person, or even worse, a committee, to "help" them by
becoming an equal partner in the decision making process required of Ride
A) When AERC decided they would not participate in profits or losses of
AERC NC's, AERC removed itself from any operational control of the event.
If we expect Ride Managers to eagerly "bid for the ride", then AERC must
allow the Ride Managers to control all aspects of the ride. I do think
AERC can set standards that must be followed, but to believe that Ride
Managers will "take the risk" while letting a committee dictate what they
must/should do is a real mistake. Managing a ride is no different than
managing a business and I don't know of anyone in business for themselves
who would allow a "committee" to come in and dictate how the business
B) I think AERC can set the qualification criteria for the event,
however, at the same time we must realize that it is still in its infancy
and the RM must have a pool of riders that allows the RM to break even or
make a profit. The qualifications have changed every year of the event
and I think that is a mistake. We need to let the membership get used to
a format before we begin major changes.... I wonder at our wisdom in
changing the qualifications 3 months after the "window of time for
qualifying" has already started. I do think the approved qualifications
are good. I have a hard time understanding why a horse/rider team should
not have 500 miles together...that does not seem like too heavy a
criteria. I believe endurance is a "team sport" and not a sport of
jockeys, but I would have liked the start up date to be in 2003 and not
after the window of time had already started for 2002.
Check it Out!
Back to TOC