Re: RC: Various thoughts/recent posts

[David LeBlanc <dleblanc@mindspring.com>]

At 09:00 AM 11/2/99 PST, Nancy Mitts wrote:
>The posts over the last couple days have left me with these impressions:
>Why do some people just insist on wearing the terms "Newbie" &/ "LD Rider" 
>like hair shirts?

[snip - essentially, why don't people listen]

As a relatively new rider, I think I can answer some of this.

First problem is that too much of our 'knowledge' is based on handed down
information, and too little of it is based on scientifically valid
research.  When I go to ask 3 different experienced riders the same
question, I usually come up with 3 very different answers.  How am I to
sort out who is right?  It is normally the case that none of the people can
actually support their answer with anything better than "Works for me".  If
I'm lucky, 2 of them will agree and then I've got some reassurance that it
might be right.  Something we really need is more research, so that we've
got valid answers.

As a case in point, last year I'd been riding a 26-year old quarter horse
all summer on very strenuous and long trails.  He was extremely fit, and
the person who owned the land we were keeping him on (another endurance
rider) suggested that Skipper might be OK to do a 25 if I took it easy.
Another friend who keeps up with all sorts of reading insisted that I'd
kill him.  End result was we came in about the middle of the pack and
passed both vet checks with straight A's.  Which of these old-timers should
I listen to?  I can also cite instances where the friend who was worried
gave better advice.  I also see "old-timers" putting up with nutso horses
I'd never go near.

You're also dealing with plain human nature - people usually don't listen
very well to unsolicited advice of any kind, and they often don't listen if
you're telling them something they don't want to hear.  Sometimes they have
to learn for themselves.  It is indeed a shame that sometime people and
horses get hurt because of this, but there isn't much we can do about it.

Something else I think would help would be a change in the rules - why
treat anything less than a 50 as second-class?  The reality is that's where
people and horses need to start out.  By setting up the rules so that a 50
is the minimum to be a "real endurance rider", we're encouraging people to
go to the longer distances before they are ready.  Denegrating people doing
less than 50 miles is just plain wrong.  Bad for the sport, and bad for the
horses.

I've also got a suggestion - encourage a new rider to crew at least once at
a big ride, and set them up where they can watch the horses trotting out.
I crewed for Robin Oscar and Jennifer at JD's last year, and got one heck
of an education watching who got pulled and who didn't.  I look at it as a
course in lameness 101, too - I'm a _lot_ better at being able to spot
lameness now, and I also recognize what a too-tired horse looks like.
Robin told me I'd learn more by crewing than by riding, and he was
absolutely correct.  When you sit there and watch 100 horses trot out, see
who gets pulled and who doesn't, you get a really good feel for what "fit
to continue" means.  Something I want to do sometime to get versed in
lameness 102 is to go be a vet helper at a ride.

David (not Jennifer)

David LeBlanc
dleblanc@mindspring.com


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=