<% appTitle="Ridecamp Archives" %> Ridecamp: [RC] LD/BC/Weight Divisions

[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]
Current to Wed Jul 23 17:29:24 GMT 2003
  • Next by Date: [RC] Sportack Cover
  • - Ridecamp Guest
  • Prev by Date: [RC] Starting a e-lyte program/feeding program
  • - kit kat

    [RC] LD/BC/Weight Divisions - Ridecamp Guest

    kathy mayeda kathy.mayeda@xxxxxxx
    "Teresa Van Hove
    AERC member M17417,
    p.s. What I most would like AERC to look at is the weight
    points for LD BC (and perhaps all distances)  I'm an engineer, so
    for me it seems like weight points should scale with distance, since
    work is a function of weight times distance. Horses carrying extra
    weight 100 miles work harder than horses carrying that extra weight
    just 50, and  both 50 and 100 miler horses worked harder carrying
    extra weight than a horses that went 25-35 miles.  I'm pretty
    pretty sure that some statisitical analysis was done to come
    up with the current 0.5 pts/lb, but that LD rides were not
    included in that analysis.  So either AERC should just cut
    the BC weight points in half for LD rides, or they should
    do another statistical analysis, looking at each distance
    separately - IMO"
    In respect to the weight division issues; in our local rides there are a couple of heavyweights(?) that consisitently Top 10 and compete well for BC.  But they do a LOT of running.  They do the game very well and use the heavyweight scoring and their own athletic ability to their advantage.  This is good.  I'm not quite sure that reducing the weight scores in half would make a difference in LD BC scoring, and what's the point anyway?
    As far as LD BC, it definitely seems to be our regional preference NOT to offer BC as defined by AERC, which is based on scoring the top 10 finishers only.  I have no problem with this, but then again, I do mostly 50's.
    LD's are a very important part of our ride scene and I'm glad we have them.  I'm bringing on a young horse and I'm not quite ready to think about doing a 50 with him yet even though he's "legal age".
    I'm still against enforcing the AERC BC criteria across the board nationally for LD distance. Realistically, this would drive the vets nuts trying to sort out a BC winner because at this distance, there is probably not enough differences in condition between the horses.  I have nothing against a RM choosing to offering an LD BC based on the current criteria, but they should have enough vet power to accomplish this.
    I would rather see the veterinarians energy go towards what most of them do already:  educating the endurance rider on the proper care and condition of the endurance horse.  If they are running ragged trying to fill out BC forms for LD riders, I the educational aspects of the ride vets job will suffer.  They will just have plain less time to talk to the riders about issues.  I don't know how many times I've asked for advice from our local ride vets and they are always willing to spend time with me if they have the time.  Or just plain point out an issue I had no clue was an issue - like a thumping horse and what to do about it!  A lot of the ride vets in our area are competitors themselves, so they can offer endurance related veterinary advice far better than the local non-endurance habituated vet.
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 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