ridecamp@endurance.net: Re: BC and are holds necessary?

Re: BC and are holds necessary?

Barbara Madill (madill@teleplex.net)
Tue, 9 Sep 1997 14:13:00 -0400 (EDT)

If AERC competitions are intended to be speed first, condition second, WHY
is not the organization entitled "American Endurance RACING Conference"?
Definition of "endurance" 1. The power to withstand hardship or stress. 2.
The state or fact of persevering. Enduring -- lasting, durable (from The
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language).
If this definition were observed, then one shouldn't expect the winning
horse to be particularly depleted, for if they ARE to endure, they must be
fit to "go on"..... ad infinitum, I should suppose.
Again, if a strict definition of "endurance" were observed, and if the
veterinary parameters for allowing continuation were sufficiently
restrictive, then the question of the length of "hold" wouldn't apply. A
horse passes the vet, and, because in order to finish at all it must be fit
to go on (assuming at the same rate), the onus of how long the horse should
be rested weighs on the rider, not management.
If the terminology were changed to Endurance Racing, I'd have no gripe
against the concept of "using" the horse to its safe maximum capacity for
the distance travelled.
Perhaps the sport has grown to the extent that there should be different
divisions with a qualification process beginning with recovery (not speed)
counting at the beginning levels(as in limited distance). The next level
would have speed be the qualifier, but with structured holds, as seems the
norm in the sport now. A horse would accumulate a portfolio of distances,
times and veterinary scores to qualify for the next level of competition --
i.e. "X" miles of competition at "X" MPH with vet scores all A's and B's.
I should think this would be easier on management as the proof of
qualification to move up towards the highest performance would be the
rider's responsibility.
I do think that it is management's responsibility to provide a veterinary
staff beyond reproach, and, from what I've seen, management strives to do
just this. It would be suicidal for the ride if the judging weren't competent.
Regarding weight advantage for BC awards, perhaps we should go back to
weighing the horses and doing it by a percentage of body weight that the
horse is carrying. That's what was done in the "old" endurance (U.S.
Cavalry) rides back in the 1920's.

Barbara Madill (and "Z" -- I really think we ought to do Endurance, Mom)

Home Events Groups Rider Directory Market RideCamp Stuff