Re: RC: Hold times at endurance rides?

[Jim Holland <lanconn@tds.net>]

Dot....

"Ride Time", of course, doesn't mean "time in the saddle"....it means
"time of the event (ride)"...from the start of the ride to the time you
cross the finish line. I don't think changing this is as simple as it
appears.

For example, in the SE, hold times vary all over the place from year to
year even at the same ride, depending on the weather conditions. 
Typically, a given ride does not add or subtract vet checks, just
increases or decreases the hold time. (Assuming the ride is over about
the same course every year) Assume that in a 50, there are 3 vet checks
of 30, 40, 30 minutes. If hold times were excluded, then riders would
have an extra 1 hr, 40 minutes to complete the ride. Let's say the
weather is hot and humid, so vet check time is changed to 40, 50, 40.
The riders would now have an extra 2 hrs and 10 minutes to complete the
ride. In the last example, if you started the 50 at say, 7:00 AM, the
last rider could complete at 9:10, well into darkness.  For a 100,
assuming the same number of vet checks, this would provide over 4 extra
hours to complete the ride, almost noon of the next day. That's WAY too
much more time. 

This would be a radical change, since IMHO, we would need to reduce the
time allotted to finish rides to some extent to avoid a significant
change in completion criteria, not to mention the logistical impact for
ride managers. OK, so now we change the time for a 50 to say, 11 hours
instead of 12.  For rides with only one vet check, (40 minutes, for
example) you are forcing the riders to go FASTER!  Hmmm...now we need to
make a rule to adjust the time of each ride depending on the number of
vet checks or specify that "there will always be x number of vet checks
with a minimum of x number of minutes per hold".

IMHO, I don't think we want to go there.

Jim, Sun of Dimanche, and Mahada Magic

Dot Wiggins wrote:
> 
> There is a difference in the total hold times at rides.  One ride may have
> one vet check with an hour hold,   another may have three checks with 15
> min,  45 min,  30 min, for total hold time of an hour and a half.  Still
> another will choose 30 min,  1 hour,   and then another 30 min hold.
>  There are a lot of variables in why the differences,   including difficulty
> of terrain,  length  of loops,   temperature, logistics of getting staff to
> checks etc.
>   The rules require all holds to be counted against total riding time.
>   In the case of a difficult ride, perhaps with high temps,  two hours of
> holds may be a pretty good idea,  however it  leaves  riders only ten hours
> to complete, which may push some to make it in time.
>   If the ride is easy, temps are cool,  shorter holds may be appropriate.
>   My point is,  this is not a "level" playing field and I'd like to throw
> out an idea.
>   What if all mandatory hold times were not counted against total allowed
> completion times?
>   This would allow  ride managers  to set holds that fit each ride.  If it
> looks as if the ride may be very easy, why take long holds.  If it is hard,
> set hold times to give more rest, eating time for the horses.  This may make
> it a bit safer for the fast horses and not penalize the slower ones.
>   Going back to the early days,  some rides counted the hold times against
> elapsed time, some didn't.  In the interests of standard rules holds were
> made part of the total time,  6 hrs for 25s,  12 hrs for 50s,   24 for 100s.
> Maybe it is time to rethink this.
> 
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=