 |
Re: [RC] Weight - Joe LongOn Mon, 31 Jul 2006 13:52:39 -0700, Bruce Weary DC <bweary@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ... [weight carried] is a constant, additional factor presentfor a heavyweight, by definition, that is never present for a lightweight. All riders, including heavyweights, are subject to the other factors you mentioned--rider age, horse age, horse size, etc.,. Except for rider age ( which can't be changed, but isn't a limiting factor in itself--infirmity can happen at any age) most of the rest of the factors can be changed through strategy or getting a different horse. If our horse has a limiting attribute we can live with it or change mounts. That part of the paying field, is, I think, level. I understand your point. I don't think specific attributes should be singled out for special dispensation or recognition, but I think a strong case can be built that says unavoidable significant weight carried adds to the difficulty of the horse doing his job as he competes against other horses not so burdened. Until someone shows us that with the other variables controlled weight doesn't really matter, I guess that will be my position. If I'm proven wrong, I'll have a good cry and shut up about it. I do think we could go back to three weight divisions, though. Rider weight is a factor that heavy riders are keenly aware of, and easily measured, but I don't think it's a greater factor than those others. As to age, we lose our own abilities at different rates as we age, but we all lose them. I'm keenly aware of how much less able I am than I was 20 years ago! Which is why distance running has age divisions -- something that has been occasionally proposed for AERC but which I hope never comes about. I would not have the concerns I do if we had only two or three weight divisions, and if the NC ride had not stopped recognizing overall placings. I can say, as I was there and party to the discusssions and voting, that when they were created the weight divisions were never intended to REPLACE overall standings, but to be ADDITIONAL categories. It was only later that some heavyweights felt that they weren't getting enough recognition, that the weight division winners were "second-class citizens" (sound familiar?), that there was a push to eliminate overall standings and have "four separate rides." We could ask ourselves at what point weight does matter. You can conceivably put enough weight on a horse that he stops, his legs quiver, and he collapses. We had a horse death this year wherein a horse suffered a spontaneous spinal fracture and died, while carrying a very heavy rider. These are extremes, but extremes are reached incrementally. My experience tells me very clearly that a heavyweight horse has to do more just to keep up, much less excel. Truth be known, I actually like the extra challenge of dealing with it. I have never complained about it. I have been getting several personal emails from riders who basically agree that weight matters, as well. Maybe we can get some more perspective from other heavyweights? Dr Q, who must go to lunch now. -- Joe Long jlong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.chiprider.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 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 Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|