Re: Nationals Qualifications

[guest@endurance.net]

Mike Sofen msofen@pacbell.net
Howard,

The whole point of endurance is NOT to create a flash in the pan but to
build horses that can compete at the highest levels for years.  There are
simply too many horses in that category to discount.  By requiring a
mileage combo, we start discouraging the elitist mentality that has come
to dominate so many other portions of the equine and sporting worlds.

I think Barabara McCrary's point about too many awards diminishing the
value of the award is right on - let's make a national award actually mean
something.  Just watch a little of the Olympics and you'll see what I
mean...

Mike Sofen
Santa Cruz, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: Howard Bramhall [mailto:hwb67@msn.com]
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 9:39 AM
To: ridecamp@endurance.net
Subject: RC: Re: Nationals Qualifications

-------

I think the mileage combo is a big mistake.  Geezz, what if you actually
were rich (imagine that, a rich endurance rider), and had tons of horses.
More than one fit for Nationals.  But then, you can't enter some of your
horses because you don't have the 500 lifetime miles (horse/rider combo).
That would suck.  It's a rule that needs to be amended or voted on.  By
the membership, not the Board.

Some horses only have one or two great years in their career.  It would be
a shame, if it came to them early in life, not to allow them at Nationals
because of this restriction.  I have no problem with this number for the
rider, or even the horse, separately; but to make it a combination of the
two is restricting the field of play and missing out on some exceptional
competitors.  Sometimes a "flash in the pan" actually deserves to win.



cya,

Howard