Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

> Let's talk about the practical side of the LD issue. 
Just a few more observations along that line, Kim.

Regarding multiday LDs, I think every multiday in this region offers
LDs.  The one 5-day ride only offers them for 3 days, but that's
plenty.

Regarding the survival of rides without LDs, many of the rides in this
region have ample entrants on the longer distances to "survive" just
fine without LDs.  So having a large contingent of LD riders means
hiring more vets, buying more awards, etc.  But RMs here do it because
it is the "right" thing to do, and because it is an investment in the
future of the sport.  Most RMs here give LD riders a price break, even
though it costs just as much per LD rider to put on a ride as it does
per longer distance riders, with possible exception of having a
difference in the completion award.  As Dot pointed out, the same
portion of the LD's entry fee goes to AERC for
rider fees and drug fees as what comes from the entry fee of the
endurance entrant as well.  So in many cases, it may be that the RM and
the riders of the longer distance are actually subsidizing the LD
riders, rather than the other way around.

What I find very interesting is that if one looks at relative sizes of
the endurance portions of rides, the NW region and the W region have
entries very much in proportion with their relative AERC memberships. 
But if you look at LD rides, the NW region, with a far smaller
membership, has a MUCH bigger LD entry.  And I believe this holds true
for the SE as well.  Why is this?  Perhaps because we historically take
better care of our LD riders.  And what this tells me is that riders in
the W region are ALREADY staying away from LD rides because of the
attitudes of the RMs.  In a previous incarnation of this discussion,
one W poster suggested that the reason was that more W region riders
are into "real" endurance.  Yet the "real" endurance entries (as I
already mentioned) are quite proportional to the relative memberships
of the two regions.  

The "bottom line" here is whether or not we care about the entry level
of this sport.  Oh, sure, I know--there are lots of people who ride LD
for a lot of reasons besides being "entry level."  (And I'm one of them
sometimes, and when I'm old, I'll probably do even more LD rides.)  But
that does not negate the fact that MOST of our entry-level riders ARE
riding LD.  So do we help them to learn what endurance is about, strive
to educate them in care of their horses, etc.?  Or do we treat them like
second-class citizens?  If we do the former, we have a far better
educated group of riders that moves up to endurance.  And that is
something to be heartily desired, if for nothing else, for the sake of
horse welfare--which really should be one of our BIGGEST areas of
interest and concern.

In my experience, if old RMs quit putting on rides, new RMs step forward
to take their places.  So I'd submit that if a few jaded RMs DO quit
putting on rides because of something this educational and beneficial,
then perhaps the riders will actually be better off in the long run.

Heidi



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

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!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=