 |
Re: [RC] The Reality of Weight Divisions - Beverley H. Kane, MDTitle: Re: The Reality of Weight Divisions On 7/30/06 9:29 AM, "g brass" <imeasystreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:[...E]veryone has limitations. Do the best you can with the abilities you have and don't whine about "level". I'm too small to play professional football and too big to be a jockey, I didn't ask the rest of the world to change the rules to enable me to do either.-------- E-zackly! Much as I hate posting from pissy Libertarian persona mode, the point of my previous message in that genre was: we should only expect to win at something that we are made to excel at with our god/dess given attributes. If you want a handicap, take up golf. The weight equations of classical physics are pretty irrelevant too. The real advantage is in manipulating quantum physical properties. That is, due to the wave-particle duality of matter and Schrödinger's probability wave distribution function, the trick is to spend most of the ride as a wave in a Schrödinger's cat state. Then you’d have no mass and no reality at all. At vet checks, you return to particle phase and collapse the wave function with your Will to be in 1st place. I personally plan to petition AERC to create divisions based on the real differentiators of fairness-- Age: <18, 18-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, 70-79, ≥80 Years of Riding: <5, 5-9, 10-19, ≥20 Years in Endurance: <1, 1-4, 5-9, 10-19, ≥20 IQ: <100, 100-109, 110-119, 120-129, 130-139, 140-149, 150-159, ≥ Mensa That way I can win lots of embroidered blankets for smart aleck featherweights 50-59 w/ <5 yrs riding & <1 yr in Endurance. BK, PL
|