The recent note on LD from Roger Rittenhouse statees:
1. Drop ALL national level LD award programs Placing ,BC,
high mile
> etc.
> 2. Keep Lifetime mileage in the LD miles program
> 3. Award REGIONAL placing and Regional BC and high
mileages for those
> Region that want to
> support the concept. As we do in the SE.
*******************************************
The following are my comments on these:
1. Drop ALL national level LD award programs Placing ,BC,
high mile
etc.
*** I think we are getting a little carried away here. There
is no National LD BC award. At least not in the Dec 2001 EN
or in the 2001 yearbook. The ONLY national award for LD is
the LD mileage championship and I don't think that having
one award at the national level is unreasonable for a
sizable portion of our membership. To have none would seem
unreasonable to me. Mileage is the one thing that LD does
consistently across the country. I support this single award.
2. Keep Lifetime mileage in the LD miles program
*** Of course we should do this - one of the principal
responsibilities of the AERC is to keep member records.
3. Award REGIONAL placing and Regional BC and high mileages
for those Region that want to
support the concept. As we do in the SE.
*** Note that with the change we made at the last mid year
for the regional LD BC listings(show only cases where a
horse has 2 or greater) - the June EN has only 2 horses now
for all the regions compared to 60 listed in the Dec 2001
EN. We've eliminated almost all of the awards going to the
16 way ties with 1 BC placing. I think we should also do
this for endurance BCs as well to be consistent.
That said - I'm still unhappy with the wide variation on how
different regions administer the program. I don't see how
you can say - for those regions that support them. I'm
starting to see a few rides now in even the PS following the
AERC BC rule. PS has traditionally not supported the AERC
rules on BC. How do you decide "which regions support them"
if some RM in the region do?
I'm somewhat supportive of regional LD high mileages as I
believe that recognition for those individuals and horses
who do many rides w/o being pulled is rewarding those who
make completion their goal rather than placing. Mileage is
consistent across the regions.
I'm not enthusiastic about regional placings because I
believe this places emphasis on winning - something we don't
tend to believe is in the best interests of the young
horse/learning phase. Note it may be appropriate for the
mature horse and for a rider who does LD more than
endurance. I could "live with" regional placings.
None the less - I do feel strongly about listing finishing
order. This is a significant portion of our membership and
they need goals associated with this part of our sport.
I'd like to see LD BC concept be made into a "coveted" award
for LD riders that emphasizes "condition" rather than
winning. It may be that we need a radical redefinition of
what BC is for LD rather than take the "racing or Top Ten"
definition of BC from endurance. Perhaps we can get better
support from all the regions if this is done. I think it's
important to be consistent across the country. Yes - I know
the term BC has condition in it but it's only for the top 10.
I don't see a strong need for age changes because the
statistics don't exist to support it. I'm uneasy with a 4
year old doing a 5 day LD but even there - I don't have
stats to support this uneasy feeling.
Mike Maul
AERC Director at Large
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
