Re: Completion times

["Joe Long" <jlong@mti.net>]

On Fri, 16 Jan 1998 10:03:40 +0000, "Linnea Skoglund"
<skoglund@lamar.colostate.edu> wrote:

>I am a newbie so please be patient.  I have really enjoyed this 
>thread on time limits and completions.  I entered two LDs last year.  
>The first was pretty much flat and open.  The second was in the 
>mountains and far more demanding for my little paso.  Now the ride 
>manager (different for each ride) was concerned about us rookies in 
>the mountains so had longer hold times.  I presumed the purpose of 
>the longer holds was to make sure our horses were rested and not 
>moving too fast.  But that meant we had less actual ride time and had 
>to move at a faster pace to complete in time (an important factor 
>for me as I intend to make a career of winning tail ender awards).  
>That seemed counter productive to me.  I believe the same could have 
>been said of the 50s.   Can someone explain the logic of this to me?  
>Yes, I know some rides are more difficult than others (thank goodness 
>they aren't all equal!).  But what is the point to slowing riders 
>down, ie. more hold time, and at the same time make them ride harder? 
>I must be missing something here.  Help me to see the light here 
>guys. :-}

That is actually the intent.  The Board felt that to not include the
hold times would allow an unscrupulous ride manager to get around the
rule by having, say, three four-hour vet checks.  By including the
hold times within the limit, any attempt to use abnormally long hold
times is self-defeating.

Unfortunately, as you noted, that limits the ride managers (and head
vets) ability to set hold times in the best interest of the horses.
Another way a "simple" rule has complex consequences.

-- 

Joe Long
jlong@mti.net
http://www.mti.net     Business
http://www.rnbw.com    Personal