<% appTitle="Ridecamp Archives" %> Ridecamp: Re: [RC] ENDURANCE NOT
Ridecamp@Endurance.Net

[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]
Current to Wed Jul 23 17:28:14 GMT 2003
  • Next by Date: Re: [RC] The Aging Equine Athlete!
  • - Renee Gonzalez
  • Prev by Date: Re: [RC] The Aging Equine Athlete!
  • - Heidi Smith

    Re: [RC] ENDURANCE NOT - Dana B.


    Hmm, this has been a very interesting thread for me, with all of one LD under my belt but with hopes of many more. 

    "Short and sweet", LD rides are not endurance.  Ok, we all knew that, that's why they are called *limited* distance.  So then I'm guessing that the conflict here is the inclusion of LD at all with endurance rides?  But as someone said, without LD riders, what would the average ride fee be for the "real" endurance riders?  Seriously, I would have to think they would at least double, possibly triple, or else the ride would cease to exist.   Or is it just the fact that LD riders are recognized in mileage statistics, albeit separately?  So if those less able for whatever reason wish to participate in such statistics, they need to form their own group? The American Pleasure Ride Conference? :-)

    I truly admire the ability of the people and horses who do 100 mile rides and multiday.  However, I really am at a loss at the animosity I'm seeing with this whole subject.   Throwing out that folks who do limited mileage should "just" do CTR is like handing someone a carrot when they asked for an apple.  A CTR is different than a LD ride, and some folks prefer one to the other. :-P

    As for the PC running the ranch, if that were the case no one would get placings at all.  Everyone would be given the same handshake and congratulations irrespective of their placing or distance.  I don't see where giving LD separate awards and mileage in any way dilutes the statistics of endurance riders.  Or maybe the objection is to having 50 milers included in endurance statistics, as those are "training rides"? 

    So, what is the 'dilution' that is occurring here?  I don't get it.  To me it seems the LD/endurance relationship is a win/win situation.  The endurance riders benefit by the financial support of all those LD riders who are willing to pay almost the same to do a shorter ride.  And face it, there are lots more folks capable of doing LD than endurance.  The LD riders benefit by having a structure similar to the endurance rides which they probably would love to be able to do but can't for whatever reason.  Where is the dilution?  They are separate animals, but use the same organization to track statistics and share ride facilities and management.

    I totally understand and agree on one thing.  The LD I did (a 30) was absolutely a pleasure, possibly one of the most pleasurable days of my life and one I will remember until my dying day.  I hope to move on to 50s, and my dream is the Tevis, but until then I will be content to eat the dust of the you endurance riders and take inspiration from your accomplishments. :-)

    Dana the confused

    PS  I think doing 30 miles (600 laps) on a merry-go-round would be an absolute test of endurance and way harder than 100 miles on a horse.  I think I'm gettting dizzy.....  :-P

     

      Subject: [RC] ENDURANCE NOT


    Larry Lewis www.aerc75@xxxxxxxxx
    I am posting for my buddy Tom Sites his computer was fried by a=
    virus....short and sweet...like it or don't here is his post and=
    I agree 100%.....25's are pleasure...50's are training 100's and=
    multi-days are ENDURANCE...if you let the PC run the ranch we=
    will be getting mileage and placings on merry-go-round=
    horses...twenty revolutions to the mile...DILUTE NOT...ts



    ddbpaso@xxxxxxxxx
    ************************************
    <\___~~ "Paso Fino: Born to Love"
      (\   /\



    Do You Yahoo!?
    Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup