Home Current News News Archive Shop/Advertise Ridecamp Classified Events Learn/AERC
Endurance.Net Home Ridecamp Archives
ridecamp@endurance.net
[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]

RE: [RC] [RC] Redefining "Endurance Ride" - Howard Bramhall

You go, Kat!!!!!

To tell the limited distance riders that the reason we don't think that distance is endurance is because, in the past, too many of them were running their horses into the ground is treating this group of riders, of which I'm one, like children. Things were different back then. 72 was the passing criteria for the BPM heart rate. You walked your horse out to get a completion, not the trot. You only had one vet check, at the finish. NObody knew what CRI meant. Rider education was what your neighbor next to you thought.

Times have changed. We are doing things better in this area and will continue to do so. The phrase "the horse's health and well being must always come first," isn't just a silly phrase made up by some horse lovers, it's become a mantra and I'd love to see the day where that replaces "to finish is to win." I'd love to get rid of that word "win," because it implies that if you pull your horse, on your own, because something doesnt "feel" right, you're a loser. And, that's the last thing that you are.

We're grown ups and this sport has evolved and will continue to do so. The word "limited" has got to go. "Endurance: Level One," sounds so much better. Make it all one sport, with different levels, and with different point scales, but, put it all together into one entity. Make it all inclusive. Could you imagine the turn out of a National 25????? Boggles the mind actually.

Hey, I'd even say if 25 bugs some of you then make it 30. Just think of the new rides this would add. There are some folks who have wanted to put on rides but didn't have enough trails to do a 50 without repeating the same trail 4 times. They've tried to put on AERC sanctioned 25's or 30's but were told, "Sorry, but you have to have a 50 to be sanctioned by AERC." And, that's a crying shame. It should not be like that.

cya,
Howard (who's been watching so much hockey I'm actually looking forward to one of you attempting to slam me into the boards on this one)


From: "k s swigart" <katswig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [RC]   Redefining "Endurance Ride"
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 08:07:51 -0700

While in my last post about this subject I stated that MY definition of
a true endurance ride is 100 miles, I wouldn't want anybody to think
that I want the AERC to redefine endurance ride to only include those
that are 100 miles long, because, make no mistake, if the AERC were to
do this then ride managers would start putting on 100 mile endurance
rides that were only 80 miles long and calling it 100 miles.  So that
more riders would be able to finish them and fewer riders would complain
that they were too hard to do or because 100 miles of trail is hard to
find.....much the way many ride managers do this today with the 50 mile
distance.

Personally, _I_ would WELCOME the idea of the AERC redefining endurance
to be anything of 25 miles or greater, and I would welcome the idea of
the AERC requiring ride managers to sanction their rides for to the
nearest mile distance they actually are rather than allowing them to
"round off" to the nearest five mile increment.  We have computers now
to do the math for us so there is no particular reason not to.


_________________________________________________________________
Stop worrying about overloading your inbox - get MSN Hotmail Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=hotmail/es2&ST=1/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/

============================================================
REAL endurance is sleeping in the tack compartment of your trailer w/the
door open, and your horse snorts/snots on your forehead every 30 min!
~ Heidi Sowards

ridecamp.net information: http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/

============================================================