<% appTitle="Ridecamp Archives" %> Ridecamp: [RC] AERC Rewards/breeding/strategy
Ridecamp@Endurance.Net

[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]
Current to Wed Jul 23 17:36:28 GMT 2003
  • Next by Date: Re: [RC] Club Foot
  • - Deblyons54
  • Prev by Date: [RC] OT trail
  • - Wintersdwbob1

    [RC] AERC Rewards/breeding/strategy - Rides 2 Far


    
    > >That said, I DO have an idea of a different method for awarding"bonus
    points" with respect to completion time that takes some of the emphasis
    off of specific order of finish and emphasizes speed a little bit less
    than the current system.
    
    I think you and I *may* be on the same track here.  The USA-East squad
    used a points system to choose our team in 1991.  What it came down to at
    Biltmore was about 20 pts. difference per placement slot...never mind
    that one horse might finish 3rd, then an hour later 3 horses finished
    together for 4, 5 & 6.  I thought it was misleading for the third place
    horse to only get 20 pts more than the 4 th which finished an hour later,
    but the 4 place horse...whose rider may have used very risky behavior
    (which isn't good for team tactics later) to get 40pts more than the 6
    place rider who might finish 10 seconds later.  At least for our team
    selection points, I thought perhaps giving 200 pts to the winner's ride
    time, then dropping one point per minute down to a minimum of I don't
    know...maybe 50 or something. (haven't thought through details at
    all)That way if you had three horses come in together it took away the
    incentive to race in... which is rough on the horse and really does
    reward risk takers.
    
     ANd it doesn't require anybody to subjectively
    > >determine in advance the degree of difficulty of the course (which>
    >is one of the biggest drawbacks I see to Matthew MacKay-Smith's>
    >proposed idea).
    
    I agree on that point too...and told him so.  I thought the levels
    system, which they have in Scotland, GB, Australia (I think) and other
    places was good for setting personal goals...sort of like the training
    levels in dog obedience.  I'd like to see the SE try it, but don't really
    believe it would even require any sort of tangible award (other than
    maybe a certificate...or sticker for your horse's trailer).  It would be
    simply a descriptive title that sorts out horses.  "This is Kaboot, he's
    gold level" (would mean something like, has done "x" miles, "x" 100's, "x
    speed". (remember when people would say, "This is Buck...he's ROC
    qualified" and you *knew* what he'd done?)
    
    The Australians have a very rigid *required* system a horse has to stay
    within and complete before he meets criteria to race.  Don't know that I
    want to go the "required" route, but "recommended" could be cool.
    
    Going through old Endurance Worlds that I hadn't really read completely
    I'm struck by the fact that Australia and France *really* emphasize
    *breeding* horses specifically for success in endurance...then gradually
    introducing them to racing over a course of a couple of seasons.  I feel
    that we in contrast are still riding "the horse that was available".  The
    French are so sold on it they have a sort of futurity program which the
    4,5,& 6 year old horses come up through they have maximum distances, and
    a maximum number of rides per year, at fixed speeds. The horses are paid
    off anywhere from $40 to $120 for completing.  At the end of the year the
    horses receive ratings depending on performance, general condition at the
    finish and conformation.  They receive a rating label of quality for
    potential buyers.  The system is sponsored by the racing industry.  The
    whole idea is to promote the *breeding* of quality horses with good
    recoveries, bone, etc. but it sort of protects them from being blown up
    in their youth.  
    
    According to Meg Wade, her 4 year olds are ridden around the farm doing
    15-40 km. (up to 25 mi) Then she states:
    
    >snip<
    
     "Then between the ages of 5 & 6 they do three 80 km (50 mi) rides at a
    controlled pace and lower heart rate recovery. This is the qualifying
    system in Australia which I totally agree with"  Then it's five months
    off before going back into training for another 80 km ride, then up to
    100 and 120 km rides. "I like them to have done at least 6 shorter rides
    before they do a 160 km"
    
    >snip<
    
    So...are we losing some of our best young horses by not having a "little
    league" for them to come up through?  Just a hypothetical question. I
    haven't really formed an opinion. Just asking myself a lot of questions.
    
    Angie
    
    ________________________________________________________________
    GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
    Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
    Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
    http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
    
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
     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
    
     If you are an AERC member - PLEASE VOTE in the upcoming By-Laws 
     Election!!!! (it takes 2/3rds to tango!!)
    
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=