Re: heart rates & recovery

["Glenda R. Snodgrass" <grs@TheNetEffect.com>]

> Yes I think some of them would be definitive, and a couple would be relatively
> easy to achieve. What the paper said was that heartrate recovery was not
> definitive--not close, as far as actual recovery and readiness to go on is
> concerned. So, if that's a primary criteria, then why not substitute something
> else, rather than passing a horse that can't go on or holding a horse that can
> go on?

I may be speaking out of my depth here, since I'm still new to endurance,
but I don't think a horse is ever pulled or passed based on the heart rate
alone -- lots of things are checked (hydration, muscle tone, temperature,
gut sounds, impulsion, attitude) and the horse's condition judged on the
cumulative indicators.  I think heart rate is most often "quoted" because
that's the only truly objective measurement that is readily available --
12 beats in 15 seconds is 12 beats in 15 seconds no matter who's counting,
whereas the other indicators are more subjective, and require more
experience to judge.  Accurate and objective measurement of other
parameters could certainly be useful, but I can't imagine that any you
mentioned would be considered definitive to the point of replacing heart
rate as a baseline, if for no other reason than that the average rider
cannot avail himself of this information on training rides, and thus has
no way to judge condition and preparation.

Glenda & Lakota
Mobile, AL
AERC # M18819 & H27310
SE Region