<% appTitle="Ridecamp Archives" %> Ridecamp: [RC] LD again
Ridecamp@Endurance.Net

[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]
Current to Wed Jul 23 17:28:15 GMT 2003
  • Next by Date: Fw: [RC] juniors
  • - Lori Bertolucci
  • Prev by Date: [RC] Laura Toston and Her Riders
  • - Ridecamp Guest

    [RC] LD again - Steph Teeter


    >>How many others on the BOD agree with this?  Is it time to really look at
    the purposes of LD and ensure that that's how LDs are managed and that's
    how LDs are ridden?
    Lif Strand
    Quemado NM  USA
    >>
    
    Here's my opinion on LD as a BOD member - (but, however) it's not a simple
    issue.
    
    I very much agree with Tamara's recent post:
    >>From Tamara: "Tamara Woodcock plasmatica@xxxxxxxxxxx
    Back to the same LD arguement again.
    There is a whole section of rules pertaining to LD only.  And there is a
    section/rule which states that there is a minimum completion time.  This
    means the stopwatch matters and that Limited Distance, same as for
    Endurance, is therefore a race.  The only thing differing the two is the
    "finish line", which is actually a finish line for endurance, and is meeting
    the pulse criteria of 60 for Limited Distance. Many times the rules use the
    words "competitor" and "compete" in reference to both Endurance and Limited
    Distance.  No where is mentioned "this isn't a *real* competition, so don't
    try to win"  And there are guidelines in place for handling rides that do
    give placements.">>
    
    (Steph speaking now:) But: I don't think that the current LD format is the
    best training tool - if AERC's intention was to provide education and
    training of new riders, then they should not have defined LD as a timed
    event - i.e. race. If a proposal came before the BOD to redefine LD, I would
    have to consider it very carefully.
    
    However: As it currently stands, LD is by definition a race, just as 50's
    and 100's are by definition races. Therefore, I would prefer to see AERC
    focus on methods of training new, LD riders , such as seminars, one-on-one
    discussion, articles in EN, etc., to EDUCATE new riders. Most mistakes at
    the LD level happen because riders really don't know any better. There may
    be some career foolish LD yahoos, but not very many in my experience
    (actually none in my experience). There are also many career top finishers,
    who condition their horses and ride good smart rides. For those who are, and
    always will be, inclined to race, the current LD format is a reasonable
    starting point - they learn how to pace for a top finish, they learn the
    importance of training, electrolyting, paying attention to their horses -
    but since it's only half the distance, the risks of getting the horse into
    serious trouble are less.
    
    I don't like the mixed message that AERC currently sends - "LD is a race by
    definition, but we really think you shouldn't race". There have been hard
    feelings on both sides (LD and non-LD) since I've been in the sport. We
    (AERC) need to either change the format, or support the one we have.
    
    Steph
    
    
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
     Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
     Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
     Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    
    

    Replies
    Re: [RC] Malibu Ride, Lif Strand