A good indication that it's not the same sport (was: Thanks)

[k s swigart]

Dawn said:

> I've had more than one person tell me that they've done
> one or more 100s and don't plan on doing another...they
> didn't like them, didn't like riding alone, didn't like riding
> that long at once, etc.  The reasons given were all mental...
>they all completed ok, they just didn't "like" the distance. 
> They do regular 50s, both 50s on 2-day rides, and even
> multidays quite happily. 

To me, this statement, and because it is not uncommon, is a good indication that
the different distances sanctioned by the AERC are not merely different levels
of the same sport, but rather quite different sports.

I cannot ever imagine going to a dressage show and hearing somebody who rides at
Training Level say: "I successfully rode Grand Prix dressage and I have a horse
that can successfully do Grand Prix dressage, but I prefer Training Level, so
that's all I ever plan to do in the future with my Grand Prix horse."

There are plenty of people at dressage shows that have neither the horse, the
riding skill, and/or the desire to attain both/either and who thoroughly enjoy
the process of riding at the level that is suitable for them and their horses,
but I don't know a single one that wouldn't "like" to be able to move further up
the levels if they could.  Even those that have accepted that they probably
never will.

The AERC has already separated the introductory distance from limited distance. 
Perhaps it is time to recognize that 50s and 100s aren't the same sport either
and separate them as well.

Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that they are quite different sports, not just
the same sport with different levels of expertise.  If the AERC doesn't lump
them all together in determining the year end awards, then perhaps it will make
everybody more happy.

There is no reason that different sports cannot be managed by the same
organization or that the events cannot be managed by the same people at the same
venue sharing some of the same resources.  CTRs, Ride & Ties, poker rides, etc.
are already held in conjunction with AERC events all with their own sets of
awards the people are quite content to not jointly pursue.

There are, apparently, lots of people who are perfectly content to stay at
riding 50 mile rides forever and have no desire to ride a 100 even though they
can and have the horse for it.  Personally, I think it would do a great deal to
advance and promote the sport of 100 mile in one day distance riding if the
people who WERE interested in it didn't have compete with people who aren't for
year end awards.  The problem with the "should 1 day 100s get twice the bonus
points of 50 mile rides or only 1.5 times the bonus points of 50 mile rides as
acknowledgement for their greater efforts" would completely go away.

After I have had a chance to think about it, I may even come up with a more
detailed proposal for how the AERC might differently approach the different
distances that come under its umbrella than the way it currently does.  Maybe by
doing so it will get rid of the idea that people at the "lower distances" are
being "looked down upon" by the others.  I have never heard a person doing the
Ride & Tie say that they felt like they were looked down upon by the endurance
riders at a joint event (or vice versa), both sets of participants just accept
that, though they are sharing some of the same trails, they aren't engaged in
the exact same event--even though some of them participate in both of events on
different occasions (the skills and the horses required are quite similar).

kat
Orange County, Calif.
:|

[Sandra Adams]

There is one marked difference between distance and just about any other equestrian sport - while I can ride just about any dressage test with similar effort and even time spent - though I may devote considerably more training time to preparing - the physical effort and time needed to ride 100 vs 50 or 25 are different. I am not sure it is simply "not liking" - though I am sure there are many of those - but as I get older, and have to do with more people my age and up, it is clear that portions of my body that have taken some kind of trauma or beating simply don't hold up as well as they used to, and so, while I can still take a horse over a course of 3m as easily as 2m6, a 50 is much harder on my screwed together ankle than a 25, and a 100 miler is likely out of the question, since my surgeon said I would likely never compete even at 25 ever again. It is simply a tougher challenge. 

Begin forwarded message:

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to:       ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Sandy Adams

Deep Sands Arabians

www.garyadamsbooks.com

Home of Salazar SF

"The Gentleman Stallion"

[Jody Rogers-Buttram]

Kat and all,   After knowing what is being "thought about' for this sport and th fun rides.  I have to say this.   Yes, I rode before the LD rides were created. The biggest mistake that I can think of that AERC made was changing the name.  It went from  NOVICE to LD division. I am sure this was to make it more PC to those that rode LD.  They didn't want to be called NOVICE.   According to what Kat just posted, I agree.  We need diffierent divisions.  Separate the "men" from the boys.  Really...and I have ridden LD's when I wantedt to ride a ride and the horse wasn't old enough or ready for the 50.   When you changed that name, you changed the dynamic, and made it something that was "ok" to compete, and I do mean compete in.  AERC gives awards for those that "do it best".   Honestly, if I was a cripple, I would be embrassed to come FAST in the LD division. I would rather be turtle in the 50.   It is not, and never will be the soul of endurance.  I am SURE I started something.  :) Jody

--- On Fri, 5/17/13, k s swigart <kat...@att.net> wrote:

From: k s swigart <kat...@att.net> Subject: [RC] A good indication that it's not the same sport (was: Thanks)

-- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to:       ridecamp+unsub...@endurance.net

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistributed+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Carla Richardson]

Same with me ... physically it gets harder and harder for me, although I don't have any hardware attached.  I'm glad you're riding.

I know there are some who like to think the 100s are in a different sport.  I don't see it that way.  I don't have any problem with how awards are allocated.  In fact,  I think AERC does a good job of recognition for 100 milers. 

Carla

[Diane Trefethen]

On 5/17/2013 1:01 PM, Jody Rogers-Buttram wrote:
> The biggest mistake that I can think of that AERC made was changing the name.

> It went from NOVICE to LD division... According to what Kat just posted, I

> agree. We need diffierent divisions.

I think the point is that a ride designed for a green horse and/or green rider
is not a reasonable venue for an experienced race horse nor is an LD race a good
place to make your first try at distance riding or to take your green horse,
ESPECIALLY if you want to do distance riding instead of distance racing. Both
Sandra's and Jody's remarks support Kat's contention that AERC should revisit
their approach to the various distances and restructure our events not by
distance, per se, but by style and intent of the endeavor. In the Hunter world,
Green Hunters use the same courses as Open Hunters but the fences are usually a
bit lower. Hack classes do the same things in the ring whether Green or Open but
the younger horses are not expected to perform at the same level and thus do not
COMPETE at the same level as their more seasoned counterparts. Stakes qualified
thoroughbreds do not run in Claiming Races. And so on and so on.

[Carla Richardson]

There is a special award that only 100 mile riders can get, the National 100 Mile Award, ten people and horses are recognized.  That is very special.  They also recognize by adding a number behind the horse's AERC name, how many 100's they've completed.  What more would you want to do?

Carla

[Diane Trefethen]

On 5/17/2013 1:29 PM, Diane Trefethen wrote:
> Both Sandra's and Jody's remarks support Kat's contention that AERC should
> revisit their approach to the various distances and restructure our events
> not by distance, per se, but by style and intent of the endeavor.

In this same vein, the basing of AERC achievements on miles traveled might also
need a re-tooling. No one who has ridden a mountain ride in the snow would ever
say those miles were "the same" as a flat desert ride in early Spring. Humid
rides are harder on horse and rider than low humidity ones. Soft sand adds
another level of complexity. These and many other factors are what lead Ride
Managers to excuse the shortness of their rides "to make up for" their ride
being so much tougher. So how about we go from just miles to a handicap system?

We could start slowly, perhaps factoring in just total elevation at first.
Refine that and add other factors as we obtain good data on the impact of
various ride conditions. Difficult? Yes. Doable? I think it might be possible.

[karen standefer]

To me, if we go down this road, then there will be a million other things that we have to try to "make even" across all rides.  I'd just as soon not even start.

Can't we just do this sport for fun and all agree that there are too many variations to make everything equal and fair? 

Karen

[Kathy Mayeda]

I don't know if it's still true, but I think we are talking about points, and adding all the points and the multipliers for 50-100 mile distances together for year end point standings.  This is not separating the distances into categories for that award....  

Maybe we could have LD's multiplier be 1/2 a point for the year end sum point standings.... hehehehe.....  OK ducking the flame bombs now...

K.

[Melissa Kanzelberger]

In addition to doing some endurance riding, I event.

The levels are:

Beginner Novice

Novice

Training

Preliminary

Intermediate 

Advanced

Points in one bracket don't count toward points in another.   We also have open and amateur divisions.

My husband made an interesting point a few days ago. He asked me, why are all the "early" levels of eventing synonyms?  I laughed because it had never crossed my mind. The theory that we came up with?  So that riders didn't become over confident.

By the time you are riding advanced, you are in serious big league company.  I am riding Novice this year, and the level of jumping that you I see even at that level is very impressive.

With respect to endurance...

Last year, I did a 35 mile LD after doing several 50's.   It had been a few years since my previous LD, and I would tell you things had changed quite a bit.    This shorter distance was much more like "flat racing" and I literally got slammed and run over at the start of the race.  I found my 50 mile horse (who's was 6th in the previous 50 mile race) to be unprepared for the rapid pace.

So here's my proposal for the LD's. After placing in the top 3 with the same rider/horse combination 3 times, the  rider must move from a lower division to an open division.  The 2 divisions can have somewhat different start times so that the other riders don't get trampled. 

Perhaps we have the following scale:

Beginner Novice: 15 miles

Novice: 25 miles

Training: 35 miles

Preliminary: 50 miles

Intermediate: 75 miles 

Advanced: 100 miles

Points count only toward the appropriate division. Just my 2 cents.

Melissa

--

Dr. Melissa Kanzelberger

 

www.officialhorsesense.com

 

www.melissakanzelberger.com

 

[merri melde]

This is what I think about points.

I've been riding endurance 14 glorious year now. I've ridden 25's and 50's and a few 100;s and multidays.

I don't even know what points are. They are probably for the zillions of awards AERC gives us at year's end - !?!?

I ride for the fun of it.

: /

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Kathy Mayeda <klma...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Kathy Mayeda]

Yep, that's how I feel about points too.  I also laugh that a newbie friend of mine was refusing to enter a local ride because she didn't think the completion awards were good enough in her eyes.  To me, the reward is the ride itself!!!

[Carla Richardson]

Even though I've been in the awards every year, it is because I go to a lot of rides, that is the only reason I win awards.  And trust me, I know that!

 

So if you really want to get awards, go to a lot of rides.  Pretty simple!

 

I'm riding because I love to ride, too, Merri!  I'm with you!

 

Carla

[Carla Richardson]

I'm with you, Karen.  I think most of us are in this for FUN.  Most are not really thinking about the points, although some of us are, for sure.  I left NATRC because I got sick of the arguing and complaining, and the many rules on everything, with a microscope on the rules. 

 

Why make it more complicated.  It can be simple.  AERC started literally with 10 rules, it doesn't need to be complex.

 

Carla

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 
To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net

[maji...@gmail.com]

I love, love, love this idea!  I’d make a few modifications:

 

• Collapse novice and training into one level. 
• Do not make it mandatory for people to move up to a more advanced level.  If some one wants to stay at novice level forever, let him/her.  
• Add divisions for multi-days novice and multi-day preliminary. 

 

Angie Fura

[Truman Prevatt]

Oh good grief. The US Track and Field federation recognizes Track and Field. Track and Field is a combinations of events that
involves running faster and jumping farther - with two different types of jumps (long jump and triple jump) and jumping higher (were
one is the human only - high jump - and the other is aided by a pole - pole vault) and throwing stuff farther - shot put, javelin, discus and hammer.

The running events ranges from as short as 60 meters (normally done indoors) to 26 miles 385 yards ad all distanced between even with some over hurdles.

Track is a series of events that all involve running. Endurance riding is a series of events that all involve riding a horse for distances that normal people would not
consider riding a horse. It is one sport with different events.

Truman

> --
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
>
> To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
>
>
>
> --

> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

--
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it with religious conviction."
- Blaise Pascal

[Sandra Adams]

the problem with multiple levels and qualifications and forced advancement is three-fold:

firstly, a lot of people hale from the show ring and HATE so much structure. They just want to ride.

Secondly, this kind of arbitrary assignment then eliminates the easy transition back and forth for horses and or people who are injured, new or old, marginally disabled, etc. It fails to offer anything for the old campaigner whose rider is past prime - or perhaps the horse is - etc. 

Thirdly, from an RMs point of view, this could be a nightmare of paperwork and management. I know some who will not even co-sanction with FEI or R & T for that reason. Making it more complicated for both riders and RMs seems like more trouble that it would be worth - HOWEVER, I do believe that LD has taken on a chaotic form and controlled starts and perhaps marginally staggered starts might help. 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Dawn Carrie]

I'm with Karen and Carla on this one.  Terrain differs across the country, as do weather, humidity, and many more variables.  I'm in favor of leaving handicapping out of it.  However, I WOULD like to see all endurance rides be a true 50 miles (or whatever mileage they are sanctioned for).  Now THAT would make for a level playing field, IMO.

 

Dawn (who has a major beef with short rides)

[Bonnie]

Hello Diane,

Please please please don't take this the wrong way.

I think a handicapping system would really be dumbing down endurance.
I can't believe I said that, but I am saying it!

Each ride in each different regions has its own challenges. To
institute a handicapping system would probably require AERC course
judges who would have to go over the course before making a decision
as to 'how to handicap a ride'. Those people probably wouldn't be
volunteers and would have to go from ride to ride to make their
handicapping decisions.

First problem what would happen if a freak front came through and
caused a weather extreme that was abnormal for that area. What would
happen to the handicapping system then? I have been to a couple rides
where weather extremes have reared their head, from a November ride in
Missouri that should have been at about 50 degrees but was instead at
16 degrees at night with a windchill below zero. The Oklahoma ride
where in March, it was pushing 90 degrees and the horses were having
problems.

Then there is the fact that each ride has its own challenges. What
some would think would be an easy flat ride can be very challenging.
Take for example a ride in Norther Missouri that was on the rails to
trails system. The ride was flat. In my opinion the footing was great!
Should have been able to set a record for the 50. Sadly, a lot of
horses got pulled at that ride. The nice flat terrain had a lot of
them going too fast and the footing was to hard for horses that
weren't used to it unless you kept your horse off to the side where
the footing was a bit softer. Wasn't a problem for our horses as we
conditioned on gravel roads and our horses were used to concussive
surfaces.

A ride in Park in Tennessee, well, it seems to be an easy ride. But,
there are a lot of wooden bridges to cross, lots of strange things
that can spook a horse from helicopters taking off to buffalo, to
people jogging or riding bicycles or pushing baby strollers on the
same trail the horses are on. Oh and there is the loose dog park you
ride through.....that was an experience the first time ;-) Pretty
flat, but still a very challenging ride.

Wyoming, well, it also had its own set of challenges. Lots of flat
spaces and then some big ups and downs, then water so cold from the
well it could cramp your horse up if they drank too much at the end of
the ride. Oh and that poor horse that we helped get around the last
loop on the LD that day. That horse just didn't want to cross water
even though the water was only about an inch deep. My horse liked to
wade in up to his withers in ponds at home so he helped get that horse
around.

Great Santa Fe, one of the days we had to open and close 22 cowboy gates
on the 50. It sucked ! How would you handicap that?

The only things across the region that can be kept to something that
is known and fair is the distance and some of the vet check criteria.
Distance can be a constant nothing else can.
Handicapping for supposed terrain or elevation differences would
really dumb down endurance. So I rode a 100 but it was really only 75
miles because the terrain was so hard. You might as well justify
cheating by using drugs. The terrain was so hard that I needed to use
drugs on my horses so they could make it around. Perhaps they could
shorten Tevis to 60 miles, or rate it as a 200?

And, how do you explain to people what you did on the weekend? I rode
a 50 but it was really only 25 miles long or 40 miles long? I want to
be able answer the question of what did you do this weekend with, "I
rode 50 miles," or "I rode 25 miles" or " I rode 100 miles"
and have that be the true mileage. I don't want to have weasel around
and explain that while I got credit for 100 miles or 50 miles that it
wasn't really 100 miles or 50 miles.

I have ridden in a lot of different regions on a lot of different terrain and
in all kinds of weather conditions. Each terrain and set of weather
conditions had its own challenges. Some rides I thought were going to
be easy turned out to be really hard. Some of the rides I thought
would be hard turned out to be easy. You just never know, but at least
one thing I was hoping would be right would be the mileage.

--
"What is the best legacy that one can leave after a full
life? That the world was a better place because
you were in it and that it is now a lesser
place because you are gone; that those around
you loved you and will miss you. If one person
can say that about you in total honesty, then
you can enter heaven. The key to open heaven's
gates is so simple that we have to ask ourselves
why so many people fail to find it."Lazlo Zalezac
Best regards,
Bonnie mailto:bon...@b4boots.com
http://www.b4boots.com
check out our blog at http://www.b4boots.com/w

> --

[Bonnie]

Hello Majik3000,

I think that truly LD needs to somehow eliminate racing. I used to
have a different opinion, but really, I think that yes, LD should not
be about racing. If one wants to accumulate miles in LD great go for
it. But racing, sorry, I have been run over too many times in LD and I
have been run over too many times when riding a 50 by the LD riders.

--
"What is the best legacy that one can leave after a full
life? That the world was a better place because
you were in it and that it is now a lesser
place because you are gone; that those around
you loved you and will miss you. If one person
can say that about you in total honesty, then
you can enter heaven. The key to open heaven's
gates is so simple that we have to ask ourselves
why so many people fail to find it."Lazlo Zalezac
Best regards,
Bonnie mailto:bon...@b4boots.com
http://www.b4boots.com
check out our blog at http://www.b4boots.com/w

> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.3336 / Virus Database: 3162/6332 - Release Date: 05/17/13

> --

[Karen Page]

Personally, I would like to see "first timers", horse or rider given a longer time to ride an LD.  That would encourage new riders, or riders with green horses to take it easy, IMO.  The only two LD's I've been to this year did NOT give an award for 1st place.  I applaud those RM's!!!!  Giving BC makes sense.  Personally, I would rather be #10 and get BC than finish 1st any day.  Yes, I've been duly influenced by those rides I've attended, but also by stories I heard before I started riding at these events.

Karen

Oklahoma

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to:       ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en

--

Karen Page
Stardust Arabians
Lawton, OK
kmpa...@gmail.com
www.stardustarabians.com

High Quality Family Horses

 

[Firedance Farms Arabians]

Ha! Karen, that's because you ride in the best region...CENTRAL :)  :)

 

 

Louise, mgr of the ride last weekend where Karen rode very smart on a very muddy trail!

 

Louise Burton
Firedance Farms Endurance Arabians
http://www.firedancefarms.net

[Lynn White]

For me the actual event of getting on a horse and doing the ride itself  is the easiest part of the endurance experience, whether I'm riding a 25, 50, 75, or 100 mile event.  Training, conditioning, saving up money, and all the banal motions I have to go through just get to a ride  is pretty much the same effort independent of the distance chosen.  I'm just as sore after a 25 as I am after a 100.  All are equally fun.

 

I chose endurance riding for it's simplicity:  I go to a ride, camp overnight, get on my horse, and ride a course for the shear fun of it. There are no competative divisions or classes to worry about.  There is nothing that I have to "qualify" for, and no judges to impress.  I'm responsible for me and my horse.  I have enough disorder in my life as it is, and I don't think it's necessary to over complicate endurance riding due to "definitions."  I don't care if someone else calls a 25-mile ride an LD, it's all endurance to me.  I

 

 

 

[Laney Humphrey]

I've long been in favor of separating the different distances but keeping them all under the AERC aegis.  To me, having the same vet requirements for everything from a 25 to a 100 or even mutli-days is not good thinking because it's obvious that the longer distances require different output from the horses (& riders).  Aside from that, there are other reasons why a person might choose to ride one distance over another.  I've never had a crew nor an unlimited budget so for me, multi-days were the most efficient use of my effort and money.  100 milers make a crew more necessary (some diehards would disagree).  Now that I'm older, LDs are probably the most my horse and I could achieve. 

While I think the Australian system of keeping strict records on the horses and not allowing a horse to move up to a longer distance until it has completed a certain number of shorter rides (I think that's how it works), is a great way to add a layer of protection against over riding young horses, I'm not sure we North Americans are quite ready for that.  Like Merri and Carla, I don't even know how points are calculated since I've always ridden purely for the joy of spending time with my horse looking to see what's over the next hill so I'll let those who care about them figure out good ways to calculate them.  Laney

[Laney Humphrey]

Great points, Karen!!! I'm with ya!  laney

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 
To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net

[Susan]

Allowing longer to finish probably won't work.  The rider must learn how to pace.  So, the best answer would be to ride with a mentor.  There will be some WONDERFUL mentors at Pokie Okie.  Remind me and I'll mention mentoring at the ride meeting each night. Susan Young, Ride Manager Your Pampered Chef Consultant http://www.pamperedchef.biz/GlenndaSueskitchen Your Independent Mary Kay Beauty Consultant Glenndale Grace Farm, Ft Gibson, Oklahoma U.S.A. "Ride on! Rough-shod if need be, smooth-shod if that will do, but ride on! Ride on over all obstacles, and win the race!" - Charles Dickens (1812-1870) --- On Fri, 5/17/13, Karen Page <kmpa...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Karen Page <kmpa...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [RC] A good indication that it's not the same sport (was: Thanks) To: ride...@endurance.net

[maji...@gmail.com]

Hi Bonnie - in my opinion, new people to the sport have no business racing
in any division, LD, 50, or otherwise. However, I don't think AERC has the
appetite to put any official oversight in place (think Australia here), even
if it means increased focus on the welfare of the horses in our sport. We
Americans like to self-manage. So that means we'll have to resort to peer
pressure and new rider meetings to reinforce the idea of learning to "walk
before you run."

Angie Fura

[Don and Pam Bowen]

Hiyiyi!  No, no, no.  JMO, but no.  No weird rules to add to the issues we already have, no handicapping, no 6 LD divisions.  Come on, we already have arguments over too many directors, too many weight divisions, too many rules, I can't even keep up with the drug rules, some are an obvious duh! but some are silly, like topical ointments or if your horse eats too many dandelions (we live in dandelion heaven, I don't/can't care).

 

I agree with Kat and Jody, the 100 mile distance is what it is and really what we (AERC) are based on.  I liked the 2x points for 100 milers, apparently our board was pressured into taking that away, whatever.  The 100 mile distance may indeed be its own monster, and it should be.  One 100 mile ride @ 2x points (IF you complete) is still less than a 5-day pioneer ride.

 

Carla is right, AERC does have a national 100 mile award, and also you can go to the trouble of signing up your horse for the recognition behind the horse's name on AERC records (big deal, a lot of trouble that nobody appreciates anyway, my current horse has completed 12 1-day 100's and I didn't sign him up yet), but they also have a national Pioneer award (with weight divisions to boot), so sorry Carla, overly canceled out.  There are MORE national Pioneer awards.

 

I've ridden them all, 1-day LD, multi-day LD, 1-day 50, multi-day 50 at 2, 3 and 5 days, and completed a whopping 3 1-day 100 milers.  Personally, for me, the hardest ride mentally was the 5 day pioneer, I was good on days 1-3, day 4 sucked, day 5 the only thing that got me on the horse was to get the coveted jacket that I drove all that way to earn!  If you asked me to pick between a 100 or a 5-day, I'd pick the 100, between a 100 and a 3-day, I'd pick the 3-day.  Or if you asked if I just wanted to ride the LD, I'd say yes in a heartbeat J.

 

But why are 100's special?  Preparation, rider and horse + VC logistics, you're out there all day and likely most of the night as well.  Cost?, all or nothing, whereas multi-day 50's are usually pay as you go with a higher success rate per day vs the 100.  It's different, just is, and it's tough, it is a different ballgame.

 

Our RMs are our core, beating on them is not going to help especially in this economy (short rides, yadda-yadda, whatever),  RMs are supposed to make a profit, even if for seed money for the following year, I think most are lucky to break even.  Can't make a nightmare for them, nor do we need more awards.

 

The LD stuff is a mess, to me anyway.  One poster brought up a good point, the LD racers.  I was unlucky enough to have one of those in the one ride I did manage.  Why did they do it?  Because they could at that distance.  Winning was it, even tho they had been cautioned by the vet at the hold.  The horse would have been in serious trouble at the 55 distance (and conscientious vet kept peeking in on horse after ride), but lived at the LD distance, so the distance is an issue and kind of ruins it for those that are truly novice, or are older/broken, want a shorter ride to enjoy, or whatever.  I'd be happy to re-visit the LD stuff.  Should the distance be welcome?  Heck yes!  But there are always those few that mess things up for the entire LD platform, and we enable it if we offer the BC and award the top 10.  I wouldn't have a problem with the LD BC if it weren't for those few.  I didn't offer LD BC at my ride, I gave a high vet score instead and the award was the same as the 55 mile BC (a nice embroidered polar fleece cooler).  It went to a gal that was still top 10, she was a RAT that came to condition, she ran a lot J, for herself I'm sure.  She left early, not expecting anything, I sent her award home with my friend Suzy Kelley as they lived nearby. 

 

On another ride I saw an old timer that was conditioning/preparing for an upcoming 100, she came to support the ride (that offered LD BC) but the 50 mile distance was not on her conditioning schedule so she did the LD.  She came in 1st, told the RM & vet to NOT award her as it wasn't fair.  She left as she lived nearby, at the awards dinner they announced it and gave it (both 1st & BC) to her anyway.  She was pissed when she found out!  I don't know what the answer is, perhaps someone could come up with something a little more simple……………..  I think most LD riders are great, including myself J, but what about those few that we enable and then they blow it????

 

Pam Bowen

M31878

 

[Kathy Mayeda]

Haw Pam, I totally understand the old timer's feelings about winning an LD!  Cracks me up that she was PO'd.  It is what it is though....

I've seen the RM's being pressured into giving BC's for LD's and now it's almost a norm.  I haven't been to ride in awhile, but the last few were LD's and I didn't see that much racing because they were mostly non-Arab riders just having fun on their TWH and such who really have no interest in 50's. Of course when you're riding in the back of the pack with an older horse that never did endurance (my broodmare) and a wiggy horse that has no interest or attention span to really do endurance, I guess I'm way left in the dust with the racing!

I miss doing real endurance, but it will have to wait for a new horse to come into my life when the dust settles from my move(s).

K.

--

[Keith W. Kibler]

1. We absolutely need the Ld riders to make this association stay viable. Any thought different to that is not realistically looking at where we are at as an organization.�
2. Not sure if you were mentioning the particular riders who were not interested in "endurance" because they were riding twhs or if you meant that twhs and their owners where not interested in endurance. Although I have no idea of the folks you where writing about whether they where interested in endurance, but as someone who trains and competes twhs and other gaited horses for 50s and 100s, the notion that they cant compete, yes race, in endurance is quite incorrect.
Keith Kibler
Shawnee Sunrise Farm
(and membership committee)
On 5/17/2013 10:56 PM, Kathy Mayeda wrote:

Haw Pam, I totally understand the old timer's feelings about winning an LD! �Cracks me up that she was PO'd. �It is what it is though....

I've seen the RM's being pressured into giving BC's for LD's and now it's almost a norm. �I haven't been to ride in awhile, but the last few were LD's and I didn't see that much racing because they were mostly non-Arab riders just having fun on their TWH and such who really have no interest in 50's. Of course when you're riding in the back of the pack with an older horse that never did endurance (my broodmare) and a wiggy horse that has no interest or attention span to really do endurance, I guess I'm way left in the dust with the racing!

I miss doing real endurance, but it will have to wait for a new horse to come into my life when the dust settles from my move(s).

K.

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Don and Pam Bowen <bor...@cot.net> wrote:

Hiyiyi!� No, no, no.� JMO, but no.� No weird rules to add to the issues we already have, no handicapping, no 6 LD divisions.� Come on, we already have arguments over too many directors, too many weight divisions, too many rules, I can't even keep up with the drug rules, some are an obvious duh! but some are silly, like topical ointments or if your horse eats too many dandelions (we live in dandelion heaven, I don't/can't care).

�

I agree with Kat and Jody, the 100 mile distance is what it is and really what we (AERC) are based on.� I liked the 2x points for 100 milers, apparently our board was pressured into taking that away, whatever.� The 100 mile distance may indeed be its own monster, and it should be.� One 100 mile ride @ 2x points (IF you complete) is still less than a 5-day pioneer ride.

�

Carla is right, AERC does have a national 100 mile award, and also you can go to the trouble of signing up your horse for the recognition behind the horse's name on AERC records (big deal, a lot of trouble that nobody appreciates anyway, my current horse has completed 12 1-day 100's and I didn't sign him up yet), but they also have a national Pioneer award (with weight divisions to boot), so sorry Carla, overly canceled out.� There are MORE national Pioneer awards.

�

I've ridden them all, 1-day LD, multi-day LD, 1-day 50, multi-day 50 at 2, 3 and 5 days, and completed a whopping 3 1-day 100 milers.� Personally, for me, the hardest ride mentally was the 5 day pioneer, I was good on days 1-3, day 4 sucked, day 5 the only thing that got me on the horse was to get the coveted jacket that I drove all that way to earn!� If you asked me to pick between a 100 or a 5-day, I'd pick the 100, between a 100 and a 3-day, I'd pick the 3-day.� Or if you asked if I just wanted to ride the LD, I'd say yes in a heartbeat J.

�

But why are 100's special?� Preparation, rider and horse + VC logistics, you're out there all day and likely most of the night as well.� Cost?, all or nothing, whereas multi-day 50's are usually pay as you go with a higher success rate per day vs the 100.� It's different, just is, and it's tough, it is a different ballgame.

�

Our RMs are our core, beating on them is not going to help especially in this economy (short rides, yadda-yadda, whatever),� RMs are supposed to make a profit, even if for seed money for the following year, I think most are lucky to break even.� Can't make a nightmare for them, nor do we need more awards.

�

The LD stuff is a mess, to me anyway.� One poster brought up a good point, the LD racers.� I was unlucky enough to have one of those in the one ride I did manage.� Why did they do it?� Because they could at that distance.� Winning was it, even tho they had been cautioned by the vet at the hold.� The horse would have been in serious trouble at the 55 distance (and conscientious vet kept peeking in on horse after ride), but lived at the LD distance, so the distance is an issue and kind of ruins it for those that are truly novice, or are older/broken, want a shorter ride to enjoy, or whatever.� I'd be happy to re-visit the LD stuff.� Should the distance be welcome?� Heck yes!� But there are always those few that mess things up for the entire LD platform, and we enable it if we offer the BC and award the top 10.� I wouldn't have a problem with the LD BC if it weren't for those few.� I didn't offer LD BC at my ride, I gave a high vet score instead and the award was the same as the 55 mile BC (a nice embroidered polar fleece cooler).� It went to a gal that was still top 10, she was a RAT that came to condition, she ran a lot J, for herself I'm sure.� She left early, not expecting anything, I sent her award home with my friend Suzy Kelley as they lived nearby.�

�

On another ride I saw an old timer that was conditioning/preparing for an upcoming 100, she came to support the ride (that offered LD BC) but the 50 mile distance was not on her conditioning schedule so she did the LD.� She came in 1st, told the RM & vet to NOT award her as it wasn't fair.� She left as she lived nearby, at the awards dinner they announced it and gave it (both 1st & BC) to her anyway.� She was pissed when she found out!� I don't know what the answer is, perhaps someone could come up with something a little more simple�����..� I think most LD riders are great, including myself J, but what about those few that we enable and then they blow it????

�

Pam Bowen

M31878

�

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net

�

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en

�
�
�

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

�
�

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net

�

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en

�
�
�

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

�
�

[Don and Pam Bowen]

Keith,

 

My take on Kathy's response is that the TWH folks came and had a good time and sounds like they were/are very responsible.  It's Kathy's opinion (or knowledge) that they were there for fun, perhaps she may or may not know if they are interested in 50s or not.  She was there, we weren't.  So I'll take her word for it, that they were there for a good day.  What's so wrong with that?  Kathy never said the TWH "couldn't" compete at longer distances, she just said the particular crowd she was seeing was just there for fun which is still a very good thing, fun, we all forget about the fun.  Chill dude……………

 

Pam

 

From: ridecampre...@googlegroups.com [mailto:ridecampre...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Keith W. Kibler
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 9:16 PM
To: ride...@endurance.net
Subject: Re: [RC] A good indication that it's not the same sport

 

1. We absolutely need the Ld riders to make this association stay viable. Any thought different to that is not realistically looking at where we are at as an organization. 

2. Not sure if you were mentioning the particular riders who were not interested in "endurance" because they were riding twhs or if you meant that twhs and their owners where not interested in endurance. Although I have no idea of the folks you where writing about whether they where interested in endurance, but as someone who trains and competes twhs and other gaited horses for 50s and 100s, the notion that they cant compete, yes race, in endurance is quite incorrect.
Keith Kibler
Shawnee Sunrise Farm
(and membership committee)
On 5/17/2013 10:56 PM, Kathy Mayeda wrote:

Haw Pam, I totally understand the old timer's feelings about winning an LD!  Cracks me up that she was PO'd.  It is what it is though....

 

I've seen the RM's being pressured into giving BC's for LD's and now it's almost a norm.  I haven't been to ride in awhile, but the last few were LD's and I didn't see that much racing because they were mostly non-Arab riders just having fun on their TWH and such who really have no interest in 50's. Of course when you're riding in the back of the pack with an older horse that never did endurance (my broodmare) and a wiggy horse that has no interest or attention span to really do endurance, I guess I'm way left in the dust with the racing!

 

I miss doing real endurance, but it will have to wait for a new horse to come into my life when the dust settles from my move(s).

 

K.

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Don and Pam Bowen <bor...@cot.net> wrote:

Hiyiyi!  No, no, no.  JMO, but no.  No weird rules to add to the issues we already have, no handicapping, no 6 LD divisions.  Come on, we already have arguments over too many directors, too many weight divisions, too many rules, I can't even keep up with the drug rules, some are an obvious duh! but some are silly, like topical ointments or if your horse eats too many dandelions (we live in dandelion heaven, I don't/can't care).

 

I agree with Kat and Jody, the 100 mile distance is what it is and really what we (AERC) are based on.  I liked the 2x points for 100 milers, apparently our board was pressured into taking that away, whatever.  The 100 mile distance may indeed be its own monster, and it should be.  One 100 mile ride @ 2x points (IF you complete) is still less than a 5-day pioneer ride.

 

Carla is right, AERC does have a national 100 mile award, and also you can go to the trouble of signing up your horse for the recognition behind the horse's name on AERC records (big deal, a lot of trouble that nobody appreciates anyway, my current horse has completed 12 1-day 100's and I didn't sign him up yet), but they also have a national Pioneer award (with weight divisions to boot), so sorry Carla, overly canceled out.  There are MORE national Pioneer awards.

 

I've ridden them all, 1-day LD, multi-day LD, 1-day 50, multi-day 50 at 2, 3 and 5 days, and completed a whopping 3 1-day 100 milers.  Personally, for me, the hardest ride mentally was the 5 day pioneer, I was good on days 1-3, day 4 sucked, day 5 the only thing that got me on the horse was to get the coveted jacket that I drove all that way to earn!  If you asked me to pick between a 100 or a 5-day, I'd pick the 100, between a 100 and a 3-day, I'd pick the 3-day.  Or if you asked if I just wanted to ride the LD, I'd say yes in a heartbeat J.

 

But why are 100's special?  Preparation, rider and horse + VC logistics, you're out there all day and likely most of the night as well.  Cost?, all or nothing, whereas multi-day 50's are usually pay as you go with a higher success rate per day vs the 100.  It's different, just is, and it's tough, it is a different ballgame.

 

Our RMs are our core, beating on them is not going to help especially in this economy (short rides, yadda-yadda, whatever),  RMs are supposed to make a profit, even if for seed money for the following year, I think most are lucky to break even.  Can't make a nightmare for them, nor do we need more awards.

 

The LD stuff is a mess, to me anyway.  One poster brought up a good point, the LD racers.  I was unlucky enough to have one of those in the one ride I did manage.  Why did they do it?  Because they could at that distance.  Winning was it, even tho they had been cautioned by the vet at the hold.  The horse would have been in serious trouble at the 55 distance (and conscientious vet kept peeking in on horse after ride), but lived at the LD distance, so the distance is an issue and kind of ruins it for those that are truly novice, or are older/broken, want a shorter ride to enjoy, or whatever.  I'd be happy to re-visit the LD stuff.  Should the distance be welcome?  Heck yes!  But there are always those few that mess things up for the entire LD platform, and we enable it if we offer the BC and award the top 10.  I wouldn't have a problem with the LD BC if it weren't for those few.  I didn't offer LD BC at my ride, I gave a high vet score instead and the award was the same as the 55 mile BC (a nice embroidered polar fleece cooler).  It went to a gal that was still top 10, she was a RAT that came to condition, she ran a lot J, for herself I'm sure.  She left early, not expecting anything, I sent her award home with my friend Suzy Kelley as they lived nearby. 

 

On another ride I saw an old timer that was conditioning/preparing for an upcoming 100, she came to support the ride (that offered LD BC) but the 50 mile distance was not on her conditioning schedule so she did the LD.  She came in 1st, told the RM & vet to NOT award her as it wasn't fair.  She left as she lived nearby, at the awards dinner they announced it and gave it (both 1st & BC) to her anyway.  She was pissed when she found out!  I don't know what the answer is, perhaps someone could come up with something a little more simple……………..  I think most LD riders are great, including myself J, but what about those few that we enable and then they blow it????

 

Pam Bowen

M31878

 

--
--

You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

 

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

 

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--

[Kathy Mayeda]

Nope, not saying that non-Arabs can't do it.  While I went through a streak of LD's a couple of years ago, it seemed like I had seen the same LD riders riding LD time after time on non-Arabs.  They were more interested in having fun at a local ride and doing LD's than in conditioning a little more for 50's which is fine by me totally.  I enjoy seeing them at rides. I'm just saying that I'm seeing more non-Arabs in LD's then before.  From what I heard, LD riders have surpassed those riding in 50's at some of the local rides, and maybe it's because we have more interest from the non-Arab riders than before.

But I have to admit that I haven't had the urge to go gaited yet, so my next endurance horse will be an Arab!

K.

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Keith W. Kibler <KWKi...@frontier.com> wrote:

1. We absolutely need the Ld riders to make this association stay viable. Any thought different to that is not realistically looking at where we are at as an organization. 

2. Not sure if you were mentioning the particular riders who were not interested in "endurance" because they were riding twhs or if you meant that twhs and their owners where not interested in endurance. Although I have no idea of the folks you where writing about whether they where interested in endurance, but as someone who trains and competes twhs and other gaited horses for 50s and 100s, the notion that they cant compete, yes race, in endurance is quite incorrect.
Keith Kibler
Shawnee Sunrise Farm
(and membership committee)
On 5/17/2013 10:56 PM, Kathy Mayeda wrote:

Haw Pam, I totally understand the old timer's feelings about winning an LD!  Cracks me up that she was PO'd.  It is what it is though....

I've seen the RM's being pressured into giving BC's for LD's and now it's almost a norm.  I haven't been to ride in awhile, but the last few were LD's and I didn't see that much racing because they were mostly non-Arab riders just having fun on their TWH and such who really have no interest in 50's. Of course when you're riding in the back of the pack with an older horse that never did endurance (my broodmare) and a wiggy horse that has no interest or attention span to really do endurance, I guess I'm way left in the dust with the racing!

I miss doing real endurance, but it will have to wait for a new horse to come into my life when the dust settles from my move(s).

K.

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Don and Pam Bowen <bor...@cot.net> wrote:

Hiyiyi!  No, no, no.  JMO, but no.  No weird rules to add to the issues we already have, no handicapping, no 6 LD divisions.  Come on, we already have arguments over too many directors, too many weight divisions, too many rules, I can't even keep up with the drug rules, some are an obvious duh! but some are silly, like topical ointments or if your horse eats too many dandelions (we live in dandelion heaven, I don't/can't care).

 

I agree with Kat and Jody, the 100 mile distance is what it is and really what we (AERC) are based on.  I liked the 2x points for 100 milers, apparently our board was pressured into taking that away, whatever.  The 100 mile distance may indeed be its own monster, and it should be.  One 100 mile ride @ 2x points (IF you complete) is still less than a 5-day pioneer ride.

 

Carla is right, AERC does have a national 100 mile award, and also you can go to the trouble of signing up your horse for the recognition behind the horse's name on AERC records (big deal, a lot of trouble that nobody appreciates anyway, my current horse has completed 12 1-day 100's and I didn't sign him up yet), but they also have a national Pioneer award (with weight divisions to boot), so sorry Carla, overly canceled out.  There are MORE national Pioneer awards.

 

I've ridden them all, 1-day LD, multi-day LD, 1-day 50, multi-day 50 at 2, 3 and 5 days, and completed a whopping 3 1-day 100 milers.  Personally, for me, the hardest ride mentally was the 5 day pioneer, I was good on days 1-3, day 4 sucked, day 5 the only thing that got me on the horse was to get the coveted jacket that I drove all that way to earn!  If you asked me to pick between a 100 or a 5-day, I'd pick the 100, between a 100 and a 3-day, I'd pick the 3-day.  Or if you asked if I just wanted to ride the LD, I'd say yes in a heartbeat J.

 

But why are 100's special?  Preparation, rider and horse + VC logistics, you're out there all day and likely most of the night as well.  Cost?, all or nothing, whereas multi-day 50's are usually pay as you go with a higher success rate per day vs the 100.  It's different, just is, and it's tough, it is a different ballgame.

 

Our RMs are our core, beating on them is not going to help especially in this economy (short rides, yadda-yadda, whatever),  RMs are supposed to make a profit, even if for seed money for the following year, I think most are lucky to break even.  Can't make a nightmare for them, nor do we need more awards.

 

The LD stuff is a mess, to me anyway.  One poster brought up a good point, the LD racers.  I was unlucky enough to have one of those in the one ride I did manage.  Why did they do it?  Because they could at that distance.  Winning was it, even tho they had been cautioned by the vet at the hold.  The horse would have been in serious trouble at the 55 distance (and conscientious vet kept peeking in on horse after ride), but lived at the LD distance, so the distance is an issue and kind of ruins it for those that are truly novice, or are older/broken, want a shorter ride to enjoy, or whatever.  I'd be happy to re-visit the LD stuff.  Should the distance be welcome?  Heck yes!  But there are always those few that mess things up for the entire LD platform, and we enable it if we offer the BC and award the top 10.  I wouldn't have a problem with the LD BC if it weren't for those few.  I didn't offer LD BC at my ride, I gave a high vet score instead and the award was the same as the 55 mile BC (a nice embroidered polar fleece cooler).  It went to a gal that was still top 10, she was a RAT that came to condition, she ran a lot J, for herself I'm sure.  She left early, not expecting anything, I sent her award home with my friend Suzy Kelley as they lived nearby. 

 

On another ride I saw an old timer that was conditioning/preparing for an upcoming 100, she came to support the ride (that offered LD BC) but the 50 mile distance was not on her conditioning schedule so she did the LD.  She came in 1st, told the RM & vet to NOT award her as it wasn't fair.  She left as she lived nearby, at the awards dinner they announced it and gave it (both 1st & BC) to her anyway.  She was pissed when she found out!  I don't know what the answer is, perhaps someone could come up with something a little more simple……………..  I think most LD riders are great, including myself J, but what about those few that we enable and then they blow it????

 

Pam Bowen

M31878

 

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--

[Keith W. Kibler]

Pam
 First, I have spent the last 3 years trying to figure out how to help grow this sport on the membership committee.
re twhs,
Btw, gaited horses now make up about 8%  of the sport. Believe it or not, twh make up the second most used horse to arabians and part arabians in the sport. It is a distant second, but still second. Now, back to LDs,
  One of the things I love about the aerc is that the tent is big enough for the once a year Ld rider, as well as the dedicated 100 rider.
  We have to have, I mean HAVE to have ld riders in this sport to sustain it.
  When I see attitude that suggests looking down at them, I am going to respond to it. Keep in mind I do not ride LDs. But I know we have to have them to make the sport work. Re read the posts in this thread, their was a significant amount of attitude looking down at Ld riders in the posts. No matter what the history of the sport is, to not look at the economic realities of the moment is simply not realistic.  Complain about BC for Ld? Are you kidding me, give them t shirts and cake and a live band if that is what it takes to sustain the sport.
 
Keith Kibler
MW and Membership Committee.

[Kathy Mayeda]

P.S.  Keith, I have had three Arabs that at this moment cannot do 50's.  One is retired from 50's and is 22 y.o. with horrible melanomas in his nether regions so I won't put him through any hot and sweaty moments now, the other is a 13 y.o. vain metrosexual show horse that could do it physically but not mentally because I might ruin his "do"getting sweaty, and my broodmare is deceased so she can't do 50's either.  Not all Arabs can do real endurance!   I had resorted to doing local LD's for awhile because of these limitations, and don't regret it.

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Keith W. Kibler <KWKi...@frontier.com> wrote:

1. We absolutely need the Ld riders to make this association stay viable. Any thought different to that is not realistically looking at where we are at as an organization. 

2. Not sure if you were mentioning the particular riders who were not interested in "endurance" because they were riding twhs or if you meant that twhs and their owners where not interested in endurance. Although I have no idea of the folks you where writing about whether they where interested in endurance, but as someone who trains and competes twhs and other gaited horses for 50s and 100s, the notion that they cant compete, yes race, in endurance is quite incorrect.
Keith Kibler
Shawnee Sunrise Farm
(and membership committee)
On 5/17/2013 10:56 PM, Kathy Mayeda wrote:

Haw Pam, I totally understand the old timer's feelings about winning an LD!  Cracks me up that she was PO'd.  It is what it is though....

I've seen the RM's being pressured into giving BC's for LD's and now it's almost a norm.  I haven't been to ride in awhile, but the last few were LD's and I didn't see that much racing because they were mostly non-Arab riders just having fun on their TWH and such who really have no interest in 50's. Of course when you're riding in the back of the pack with an older horse that never did endurance (my broodmare) and a wiggy horse that has no interest or attention span to really do endurance, I guess I'm way left in the dust with the racing!

I miss doing real endurance, but it will have to wait for a new horse to come into my life when the dust settles from my move(s).

K.

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Don and Pam Bowen <bor...@cot.net> wrote:

Hiyiyi!  No, no, no.  JMO, but no.  No weird rules to add to the issues we already have, no handicapping, no 6 LD divisions.  Come on, we already have arguments over too many directors, too many weight divisions, too many rules, I can't even keep up with the drug rules, some are an obvious duh! but some are silly, like topical ointments or if your horse eats too many dandelions (we live in dandelion heaven, I don't/can't care).

 

I agree with Kat and Jody, the 100 mile distance is what it is and really what we (AERC) are based on.  I liked the 2x points for 100 milers, apparently our board was pressured into taking that away, whatever.  The 100 mile distance may indeed be its own monster, and it should be.  One 100 mile ride @ 2x points (IF you complete) is still less than a 5-day pioneer ride.

 

Carla is right, AERC does have a national 100 mile award, and also you can go to the trouble of signing up your horse for the recognition behind the horse's name on AERC records (big deal, a lot of trouble that nobody appreciates anyway, my current horse has completed 12 1-day 100's and I didn't sign him up yet), but they also have a national Pioneer award (with weight divisions to boot), so sorry Carla, overly canceled out.  There are MORE national Pioneer awards.

 

I've ridden them all, 1-day LD, multi-day LD, 1-day 50, multi-day 50 at 2, 3 and 5 days, and completed a whopping 3 1-day 100 milers.  Personally, for me, the hardest ride mentally was the 5 day pioneer, I was good on days 1-3, day 4 sucked, day 5 the only thing that got me on the horse was to get the coveted jacket that I drove all that way to earn!  If you asked me to pick between a 100 or a 5-day, I'd pick the 100, between a 100 and a 3-day, I'd pick the 3-day.  Or if you asked if I just wanted to ride the LD, I'd say yes in a heartbeat J.

 

But why are 100's special?  Preparation, rider and horse + VC logistics, you're out there all day and likely most of the night as well.  Cost?, all or nothing, whereas multi-day 50's are usually pay as you go with a higher success rate per day vs the 100.  It's different, just is, and it's tough, it is a different ballgame.

 

Our RMs are our core, beating on them is not going to help especially in this economy (short rides, yadda-yadda, whatever),  RMs are supposed to make a profit, even if for seed money for the following year, I think most are lucky to break even.  Can't make a nightmare for them, nor do we need more awards.

 

The LD stuff is a mess, to me anyway.  One poster brought up a good point, the LD racers.  I was unlucky enough to have one of those in the one ride I did manage.  Why did they do it?  Because they could at that distance.  Winning was it, even tho they had been cautioned by the vet at the hold.  The horse would have been in serious trouble at the 55 distance (and conscientious vet kept peeking in on horse after ride), but lived at the LD distance, so the distance is an issue and kind of ruins it for those that are truly novice, or are older/broken, want a shorter ride to enjoy, or whatever.  I'd be happy to re-visit the LD stuff.  Should the distance be welcome?  Heck yes!  But there are always those few that mess things up for the entire LD platform, and we enable it if we offer the BC and award the top 10.  I wouldn't have a problem with the LD BC if it weren't for those few.  I didn't offer LD BC at my ride, I gave a high vet score instead and the award was the same as the 55 mile BC (a nice embroidered polar fleece cooler).  It went to a gal that was still top 10, she was a RAT that came to condition, she ran a lot J, for herself I'm sure.  She left early, not expecting anything, I sent her award home with my friend Suzy Kelley as they lived nearby. 

 

On another ride I saw an old timer that was conditioning/preparing for an upcoming 100, she came to support the ride (that offered LD BC) but the 50 mile distance was not on her conditioning schedule so she did the LD.  She came in 1st, told the RM & vet to NOT award her as it wasn't fair.  She left as she lived nearby, at the awards dinner they announced it and gave it (both 1st & BC) to her anyway.  She was pissed when she found out!  I don't know what the answer is, perhaps someone could come up with something a little more simple……………..  I think most LD riders are great, including myself J, but what about those few that we enable and then they blow it????

 

Pam Bowen

M31878

 

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--

[merri melde]

It wouldn't be difficult at all to change the Best Condition LD awards to the High Vet Score awards, like Pam said.

that way the RM/vets can ENCOURAGE the not racing, by saying the high vet score will not take the finish time into account, and riders that race are less likely (well, *possibly* less likely, but this can be emphasized) to win the HVS than those who don't race.

--
www.endurance.net/merri
www.TheEquestrianVagabond.com

[Truman Prevatt]

The AERC has gone from 7000 members to about 4400 members over the past five years.  It had grown from abut 4400 to 7000 over a 7 year period starting in about 1996 or so.  The SE region went from about the 5th in the AERC in starts to in 1996 to close to the top today. 

Why the growth - an openness to all that come to enjoy the sport be in riding 25 to 100 miles, signal day or multiday.  This was particularly true in the SE.  I don't think it is an accident that while 100 mile rides have been declining everywhere in the SE there have been on the average 8 since I joined in 1990.  I also don't think it is an accident that at the same time the SE is the LD region with near the top in LD starts and LD riders are treated just like "real riders" can sit at the big table and all.  There has been a huge growth in the MW because of LD's.

Of course much of the decline has to do with the economy and an aging population.  However, you want it to decline farther- start this non-sense about classes, levels, making the LD a CTR - if I want to ride a CTR - there are better places than a modified LD.  The AERC grew because it was inclusive.  The SE region grew especially because we pride ourselves on being exclusive.  

Right now there is nothing wrong with endurance riding - that needs a major overhaul.  

Truman

--

"The greater our knowledge increases, the greater our ignorance unfolds."
   - John F. Kennedy

[Joe Long]

On 17/5/13 10:54 PM, Keith W. Kibler wrote:

...

  When I see attitude that suggests looking down at them, I am going to respond to it. Keep in mind I do not ride LDs. But I know we have to have them to make the sport work. Re read the posts in this thread, their was a significant amount of attitude looking down at Ld riders in the posts.

This is one of the things that drives me crazy.  Is recognizing that LD and endurance are different "looking down" on LD riders?  Is recognizing that one-day 100 mile rides are more challenging than 50-mile rides "looking down" on 50-mile endurance riders?

Are Marathon runners "looking down" on 10K runners when they don't call 10K runners "Marathoners?"  I've completed Marathons, and I have a friend who runs the Ultras.  If he doesn't call me an Ultra runner too is he looking down on me?

No.

I think this is a general thing in society today, a thin-skinnedness that says everyone must have equal recognition no matter if their achievements are not the same.  Don't keep score, you might hurt someone's feelings.  You can't recognize excellence, that's elitist.

When I rode my first Novice ride, the 25-mile ride at Natchez-Trace, I was in awe of the endurance riders.  When I watched the first ones race in to their finish I thought "Wow, I could never do that."  I would never have claimed to be an endurance rider at that point, but sometime later I DID "do that."  And when I did, I EARNED being called an endurance rider.  I didn't ask for it without earning it.  And in that time between my first LD and my first Endurance ride I didn't whine about being "looked down on."  I don't understand  why some people claim recognition for what they have not done.

Yes we need LD and LD riders in AERC and distance riding.  Yes we have a long tradition of welcoming and encouraging LD riders, that is the entry-level path to Endurance for most folks.  Yes LD riders deserve respect and recognition for what they do.  That does not mean recognition for what they do not do.

-- 
Joe Long  aka ChipRider
jl...@chiprider.com
A++ G+ PKR+ PEG+ B+ M+

[Natalie Herman]

I agree, leave it as it is. I do think that it wouldn't be bad to add SOME kind of handicapping system (it can be done AFTER the ride, to account for weather)...really not too complicated. But short of that, yes..please stop harassing RMs about whether or not their ride is perfect. Want an exact 50? How about hosting your own ride, and then wheeling the entire distance(s) (only real way to be at least close to exact in most terrains). Then get a day manager and ride your ride. We want staggered ride starts to avoid the 'horrible racers' (which I have seen at BOTH distances, AND been run over by fast 50s going back on their last loop while I did an LD... rude and idiotic riders are present everywhere)? It's called going to the start five minutes late (this is my general operating plan at all rides I go to, no matter the distance). Worried about the 'green idiots' that also start late? Not that hard to hand walk to the start, see what is going on, and time your start to not be caught up in that. Sheesh.. I handwalk the first mile or two anyway, to keep MY horse from being a dork...even after yrs of riding. Good habit to have, warms my body up to on ride mornings :) Can't handwalk do to body issues? Ride a calmer horse. ;) But seriously, I think we have MUCH bigger fish to go for here....
Trails: CA is trying to back out of the rec trails program..more money lost if that happens... how about we go for helping save trails more?
Volunteers: I just had to cancel my 3-day pioneer ride... why? no volunteers... going to the above...lots of our trails are a mess, and the FS crews are already out on fire season work and the locals in the area are uninterested in back country stuff...other organizations have their own things they are doing and it takes forever to allocate them to 'your' systems. It was going to be just me, and my co-manager out there... NO WAY we can get 150 miles worth of roads and trails figured out and cleared, and in some cases re-built (30 yrs of no use, stuck on the sides of mtns and barely visible), with just the two of us...especially since I drive 3+ hrs to get to the area they are in. Volunteers on ride day were out too..again, local horse ppl were flaking (totally not interested in anything not involving a rodeo or whatnot) and trying to get ppl from elsewhere to drive many hours and spend 4 days in a hot camp with nothing but my thanks and some food as the reward? Good luck with that.  So you want a new rule? How about a rule that you are required to work at least 10hrs on trails somewhere during the year, and volunteer at 2 rides a year in some fashion, if you want to qualify for any points or awards? Otherwise you can ride your rides for fun, but if you want 'goodies', you have to help make rides possible.
  Nat (been kinda mad and depressed the last week or so...LOTS of work and emotional energy invested, and some non-refundable money, in a stupid sport that ppl want to argue more about 'fair' points, exact miles, awards, and the like, over winning some stupid t-shirt or a year end plaque...get a life ppl, and come help us put on the rides you are arguing about...)
PS...we still are offering 3 days camping, food,  and some trail riding (up to 25 miles for those that want long distances, 8-15 for greenies) that weekend...how many will show up? Likely few, as there are no points or miles to 'win', even though you can go 25 miles (75 if you ride 3 days) if you want... but heck, camp is paid for, so I will have three days to ride MY pony at least, in some pretty country, instead of hassling with paperwork, grumpy riders, sabotaged trails, etc...

[Carla Richardson]

I'm so sorry you had to cancel your ride, Natalie.

And I agree 100%, you pointed out the REAL issue facing us for the future.  Support your rides, support your ride managers, or you may end up with no ride, no trail.

Carla

--

[Carla Richardson]

This bounced back to me.  So not sure if it went through or not.

On May 18, 2013 5:28 AM, "Carla Richardson" <richards...@gmail.com> wrote:

No argument on what you're saying, Pam, I agree there are more pioneer awards.  I think that's a function of the sponsor rather than AERC, but I don't know for sure.  Adequan sponsors the 100 mile award and they do top 10 by points.  Belesemo Arabians sponsors the pioneer awards (and give awesome awards!) and perhaps they choose to do the weight division by points as the criteria.  There is no overall pioneer winner.

I don't know why the board changed the 100 mile points back to 1.5 from 2.  I assure you, I did not complain, and never heard anyone say anything pro or con about it, except a few comments on Ridecamp or the members list.  I know it was done as an incentive to get more 100 mile riders.  I don't know if it made a difference. Or if it would have if it had stayed in place.  Usually, riders that are focusing on 100s and have only one horse can't do as many overall rides in the year. 

Demographics are a big part of the picture.  We are getting older and many people have less money to spend on hobbies like endurance.  Including more trail riding locals to rides by offering fun rides is an idea that helps keep ride managers from going broke.  I'm all for it.  It also brings more people into the sport, if they hear about it and see it firsthand, that's all for the good.  If they discover that it's a friendly group of folks out riding the trails, maybe they'll come again and even move up to LD.  Or not.  Personally, i think anyone who's willing to ride their horse and pay an entry fee should be welcome, I've always enjoyed seeing the "fun riders" on the trail.  They are smiling and having a good time.  Works for me.

Carla

--

[Karen Page]

FWIW, the reason I chose endurance over CTR is because I don't want someone judging me.  That's not the same as a vet checking my horse.  That's priceless!  Don't tell me I have to tie my horse a certain way and step over a log a certain way, etc.  I just want to ride in a safe environment.

And for me, getting an award is the frosting on the cake.  Not needed, but nice if you get it.  I'm not that competitive.

I'm not sure you are going to totally eliminate the race aspect, ever.  A lot of people are very competitive.  Even if you don't award it, some will go for the win, regardless.  I can even see my (deceased) brother, who was very, very competitive saying "They don't award ribbons, but I was first over the finish line."  It wouldn't matter to him whether or not you recognized him as "best", he had to be the best at everything he did.  That was his OCD.  Those people will always try for fasted/best no matter what you do.

So, IMO, do your best to award sanity in riding, but don't obsess about it.  You can't fix someone else's OCD.

[Truman Prevatt]

Nat is right on the mark. If we don't get out and volunteer - and just not of ride day we won't have a sport.

There is a disaster in the Western states with the pine bark beetle.  The last number I heard and it was a year ago, over 5 million acres of pine trees were standing dead in the forest. Guess where those trees end up, on the ground closing trails.  Independent if the droughts in the West are man made through fossil fuel or not - the long term droughts in the West are causing fire season to start earlier and impact more areas.  The prediction this is again for a long hard fire season.  

The Forest service has been cut.  They don't have the resources to fight a longer fire season and keep our trails open.  At some point it will be up to us to keep our trails open if we want to ride them.  It's a damn shame that the same people that will probably bitch because Nat had to cancel her ride would be the last people to show up and help volunteer to clear trail, mark trail, etc. 

Truman

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
 
To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
 
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--

"There is always a well-known solution to every human problem--neat, plausible, and wrong. "H. L. Mencken

[Linda Parrish]

Sorry to hear you had to cancel the ride, Natalie. You do have some good suggestions as far as working for the awards. There are lots of riders out there who have no idea how hard it is to find, clear and mark trails that are not kept up by some authority/organization. We have held rides on Davy Crockett National Forest, Texas for over 25 years. Then came the order to shut the forest down last year after hurricanes, tornadoes and drought. So we had not been in the woods for over a year and a half. This year has been lots of work to start getting trails rideable again. Thankfully we have had a lot of help from the endurance crowd. We only have about half of the trails left to clear now. I sure wish you could have had the same enthusiasm in your neck of the woods. Without the trails, there will be no endurance rides.

 

Linda Parrish

Kennard, TX

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Natalie Herman

To: ride...@endurance.net

Cc: bor...@cot.net

Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 10:38 AM

Subject: Re: Re[2]: [RC] A good indication that it's not the same sport (was: Thanks)

--

[Lynne Glazer]

Truman,

If Natalie was putting on a ride down in SoCal, she'd find that work parties are successful here, where there is a greater rider population and within driving distance of urban centers. She is putting on a ride in a very remote area, note the "I drive 3+ hrs to get to the area they are in" comment on her trails.

I do agree with the comments on volunteering in general--everyone should volunteer at least once a year, and in lieu of that, after you finish your ride (hellloooo, LDers!) RMs would welcome your help after your horse is cared for. Especially welcome are people who will help with cleanup/ride equipment packing on the morning after the ride!

LD program is OK--leave it alone. Encourage new riders to do their homework and not make their horses one-season-wonders. Some people are not coachable, no matter the distance entered. I wish more people were willing to volunteer to learn the ropes and a little about where the "edge" is, at others' expense.

Lynne

[Diane Trefethen]

Caveat: I did NOT say we SHOULD handicap rides. I said we should LOOK at
handicapping rides because Ride Managers ARE ALREADY DOING THAT by offering
rides that are less than the advertised distance. When an RM says her/his ride
is a bit short but, oh, the terrain/elevation is much harder than most rides,
s/he IS handicapping her/his ride. My SUGGESTION* was that we consider making
that approach official instead of leaving it to individual RMs to do on a hit or
miss basis.

On 5/17/2013 6:03 PM, Bonnie wrote:
> Hello Diane,
>
> Please please please don't take this the wrong way.
I don't think I have. You have legitimate concerns about the fairness,
complexity, and do-ability of any handicap system. Yes?

> I think a handicapping system would really be dumbing down endurance.
"Dumbing down?" I don't think that's what you meant to say. Dumbing down means
simplifying something so a dummy can understand it but your arguments against
the concept of handicapping all reference the added complications it would add.
Perhaps you meant to say "unnecessarily complicating" instead?

> Each ride in each different regions has its own challenges.
After over 25 years in this sport, I am well aware that every ride is different.
Of course handicapping would be difficult but if, and I did say IF, that is the
direction to go to provide a more level playing field, then obviously you have
to start somewhere. I suggested total elevation as that starting point since it
would be less subject to manipulation and/or guesswork than most other factors.

> To institute a handicapping system would probably require AERC course
> judges who would have to go over the course before making a decision
> as to 'how to handicap a ride'.
Why? We don't use AERC "judges" for any other ride management issues. We trust
the RMs to plot the miles, hire competent control judges, report the results
accurately. Why couldn't they also be trusted to first estimate and then refine
their estimates, first on elevation and then on other ride factors?

> First problem what would happen if a freak front came through and
> caused a weather extreme that was abnormal for that area. What would
> happen to the handicapping system then?
That's an easy one that AERC and RMs together could solve. First a weather
baseline for each venue could be established using NOAA/RAWS data (available to
anyone on the Internet). Next, on the sanction form, each RM would submit on a
scale of 1-5, or whatever, the hardship that a specific weather phenomenon would
introduce to their ride. Lastly, upon submitting ride results, the RM would
declare the ride's weather factor 0-5.

> Then there is the fact that each ride has its own challenges.
Most other factors would not be considered initially. They are too diverse. As
time passed, an RM could request a factor at her/his ride be handicapped. This
wouldn't be unlike when an RM recommends that you bring only well-conditioned
horses or that you pad your horse or whatever.

> The only things across the region that can be kept to something that
> is known and fair is the distance and some of the vet check criteria.
Why do you suppose I suggested that we LOOK at handicapping? Because all 50 mile
rides ARE 50 miles? Ah... no. There is far too much smoke on the subject of
short rides for there not to be a fire of material impact. AND... at least one
person has noted that some vets give some riders completions when they are NOT
fit to continue while some RMs give some riders completions when they are really
over time.

> So I rode a 100 but it was really only 75 miles because the terrain was
> so hard. You might as well justify cheating by using drugs. The terrain
> was so hard that I needed to use drugs on my horses so they could make it
> around.
These are two unrelated points, the former valid, the latter unsupportable. A
handicapping system would require new terminology, perhaps along the lines
suggested by Melissa or possibly by using a ballpark mileage number followed by
�hcp.� That's what they do in Dressage, in Eventing, in Hunter classes, in FEI,
on the race track. In fact, MOST equine competition is handicapped. Endurance is
a rare exception. During the transition period, there would be an extra burden
on the AERC in terms of record keeping. They would need to continue the "old"
miles only method of rating a ride while simultaneously calculating the
handicapped rating as well.

As for the comment equating handicapping to cheating, that stretches credulity
beyond reason. Handicapping has always been viewed as a method to level the
playing field, never the equivalent of cheating.

> Some rides I thought were going to be easy turned out to be really hard.
> Some of the rides I thought would be hard turned out to be easy. You just
> never know...
Precisely! YOU, THE RIDER, never know but the RM does. S/he sometimes warns
about toughness in the ride flyer, sometimes not. Wouldn�t it be nice to know
that Ride A was rated as a 50hcp because though only 46 miles, the elevation
changes were over 10,000 feet while Ride B was also a 50hcp because it was a
relatively flat and rolling true 50 miles? YOUR horse might be able to cruise
the latter and finish on time but be either pulled or overtime at the former
because it couldn�t handle hills. Wouldn�t that be nice - to have a good Heads
Up! for each ride?

[Diane Trefethen]

I am amused at the tenor of the LD comments here. It wasn't too long ago that
the general consensus was that racing 25-35 miles was okey-dokey because the
people who do it know what they are doing and are ENTITLED to use LDs to race if
they want to. Anyone who suggested that the LDs were the only place for green
(Novice) horses and green (Newbie) riders to get a gentle introduction to
�Endurance� were dismissed as effete snobs, elitists, and people who �demeaned
and looked down on� LDers. Some of that defensiveness was apparent in Keith�s
note. While his point that gaited horses can be quite capable at longer
distances is true, his comment that �we need the Ld riders to make this
association stay viable� was clearly passive-aggressive as it addressed an issue
not under discussion.

Apparently enough riders have been �run down� by LD racers to have had a change
of heart. Back in the earlier discussions, my pet peeve was the LD racer who
blasted past the 50 miler taking it easy on her/his horse�s first 50. The
response was you shouldn�t be out there doing a 50 if you couldn�t handle it. :(

[Kathy Mayeda]

So true though.  I took my greenie on an LD and found out just how unprepared he was for ANY endurance distance when we got passed by the lead 50 milers.  I blame my lack of preparation for his meltdown, not the fact that the lapping 50 milers were whizzing past me.  Endurance is what it is and if you can't stand the heat get out of the fire.  Racing happens at all distances, not just LD.  After that experience, it took him two other tries before he was able to finish an LD with only minor meltdowns.

I also have the same attitude with the Parelli people when they say they won;t ride trail with any others but Parelli people.  You can't control who you share the trails with, so you may as well accept that and prepare your horse for emotional fitness while being whizzed past.  That's what leapfrogging exercises are for.

I think a lot of this discussion is greatly exaggerated.  I see a lot of people out there having a good time and smiling their way through rides, and a lot of the same faces, in all distances.  If people were that unhappy being run down by others, they would give up on riding endurance events because it takes a lot of effort to voluntarily do something unmandatory that's that uncomfortable.

K.

On Saturday, May 18, 2013, Diane Trefethen wrote:

I am amused at the tenor of the LD comments here. It wasn't too long ago that the general consensus was that racing 25-35 miles was okey-dokey because the people who do it know what they are doing and are ENTITLED to use LDs to race if they want to. Anyone who suggested that the LDs were the only place for green (Novice) horses and green (Newbie) riders to get a gentle introduction to “Endurance” were dismissed as effete snobs, elitists, and people who “demeaned and looked down on” LDers. Some of that defensiveness was apparent in Keith’s note. While his point that gaited horses can be quite capable at longer distances is true, his comment that “we need the Ld riders to make this association stay viable” was clearly passive-aggressive as it addressed an issue not under discussion.

Apparently enough riders have been “run down” by LD racers to have had a change of heart. Back in the earlier discussions, my pet peeve was the LD racer who blasted past the 50 miler taking it easy on her/his horse’s first 50. The response was you shouldn’t be out there doing a 50 if you couldn’t handle it. :(

[Carla Richardson]

One thing that is predictable on Ridecamp is that if you wait long enough, every discussion will repeat itself, recycle, and change course.  I have no doubt I've changed mind on several issues over the years.

Oh yes I'd better put in a :)

;)
Carla

On May 18, 2013 1:17 PM, "Diane Trefethen" <tr...@wakerobinranch.com> wrote:

I am amused at the tenor of the LD comments here. It wasn't too long ago that the general consensus was that racing 25-35 miles was okey-dokey because the people who do it know what they are doing and are ENTITLED to use LDs to race if they want to. Anyone who suggested that the LDs were the only place for green (Novice) horses and green (Newbie) riders to get a gentle introduction to “Endurance” were dismissed as effete snobs, elitists, and people who “demeaned and looked down on” LDers. Some of that defensiveness was apparent in Keith’s note. While his point that gaited horses can be quite capable at longer distances is true, his comment that “we need the Ld riders to make this association stay viable” was clearly passive-aggressive as it addressed an issue not under discussion.

Apparently enough riders have been “run down” by LD racers to have had a change of heart. Back in the earlier discussions, my pet peeve was the LD racer who blasted past the 50 miler taking it easy on her/his horse’s first 50. The response was you shouldn’t be out there doing a 50 if you couldn’t handle it. :(

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to:       ridecamp+unsubscribe@endurance.net

[Diane Trefethen]

On 5/18/2013 7:11 AM, Truman Prevatt wrote:
> Of course much of the decline has to do with the economy and an aging
> population.

Ya think?

> - if I want to ride a CTR - there are better places than a modified LD.

ROFL! I�m SURE Truman is old enough to remember when what we call LD today was
called a Novice Ride. So which is the �modified LD?� The LD Race or the LD Ride
geared toward novices and those who don�t feel up to doing 50+ miles?

[Diane Trefethen]

On 5/18/2013 11:54 AM, Diane Trefethen wrote:
> My SUGGESTION* was that we consider making that approach official

Sorry about leaving out the footnote.
* I first heard about the idea of rating or handicapping rides from John Parke.
It is not mine originally.

[Lynne Glazer]

Ah, yes that was a very animated discussion!
Bistro seating for 3. Who needed hot topics? ;-)

Lynne

[Bonnie]

Hello merri,

That would work and it seems reasonable.

--
"What is the best legacy that one can leave after a full
life? That the world was a better place because
you were in it and that it is now a lesser
place because you are gone; that those around
you loved you and will miss you. If one person
can say that about you in total honesty, then
you can enter heaven. The key to open heaven's
gates is so simple that we have to ask ourselves
why so many people fail to find it."Lazlo Zalezac
Best regards,
Bonnie mailto:bon...@b4boots.com
http://www.b4boots.com
check out our blog at http://www.b4boots.com/w

> --

[Truman Prevatt]

On May 18, 2013, at 3:42 PM, Diane Trefethen <tr...@wakerobinranch.com> wrote:

> On 5/18/2013 7:11 AM, Truman Prevatt wrote:
>> Of course much of the decline has to do with the economy and an aging
>> population.
> Ya think?
>
>> - if I want to ride a CTR - there are better places than a modified LD.

> ROFL! I’m SURE Truman is old enough to remember when what we call LD today was called a Novice Ride. So which is the “modified LD?” The LD Race or the LD Ride geared toward novices and those who don’t feel up to doing 50+ miles?
>

Actually my first LD was in 1989. In the SE I don't ever remember them being call anything but LD. My second LD, four of us galloped the last five miles in the swamp at Jonathan Dickenson State Park near West Palm Beach, FL to finish in 2 hours and 40 minutes. It was a blast. I also remember that many RM's ran the LD the same way people ran 50's with the exception of a 60 pulse at the finish. SERA had that rule long before the AERC. In 1996 SERA standardized the BC LD to the same as the longer races for SERA sanctioned rides. The SERA BOD took this measure because those that were riding LD's wanted consistency in the award of the LD BC which most RM's gave.

It was only when ridecamp came on line that I heard about "Novice" rides and all these problems with LD's. Either they started in 1997 (was it ) or we never had them in the SE.

Truman

>
>
> --
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
>
> To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

--

"I cannot call to mind a single instance where I have ever been irreverent, except toward the things which were sacred to other people." - Mark Twain

[Diane Trefethen]

On 5/18/2013 2:33 PM, Truman Prevatt wrote:
> Actually my first LD was in 1989. In the SE I don't ever remember them
> being call anything but LD.

Ahh... that explains it. Well, guess you'll have to take my word for it (along
with anyone who wants to confirm that this is so). Rides of 25 miles but less
than 50 miles were called Novice rides. They generally cost about half of what a
50 cost and were intended, as the name implies, to accommodate green horses,
green riders, as well as both horses and riders on the rehab. Back in the early
days, although we had "older" riders, most of them were too ornery to admit they
could no longer ride 50s and 100s :)

[Gary Fend]

Are you suggesting all LD finishers be judged for HVS--not just the top ten?

 

Gary

---

From: merri melde <me...@endurance.net>
To: "ride...@endurance.net" <ride...@endurance.net>
Sent: Sat, May 18, 2013 6:48:59 AM

Subject: Re: Re[2]: [RC] A good indication that it's not the same sport (was: Thanks)

[Don and Pam Bowen]

Yes, that's the general idea and still up to the entrant to choose to show.  It's kind of a PITA as it could make for more work for one vet at the ride.  But it's something that could easily be changed nation-wide (good-thinking Merri), and for RMs that don't like the LD BC, I think they'd be much more receptive to the HVS and actually it would increase LD competition for nation-wide awards.

 

It also gets rid of the argument about what LD is or is not supposed to be.  Race, ride, intro, novice, whatever.  We have to consider what we are rewarding/awarding.  And we're still trying to use LD to introduce/lure new members into the sport, right?

 

From what I've seen, especially at "rich" rides with lots of awards that hand out placings, BC and HVS, it is not uncommon for the 1st place to also receive BC and HVS.  It means they were more than totally prepared and the horse looks great.  What is more common is that 1st place may or may not receive BC, HVS goes to someone else usually also in top ten but just rode smarter for the conditions that day, that person may also receive BC, but that person is also prepared.  Also seen 1st, BC and HVS go to 3 different people, still usually in top 10.  But there's that occasional surprise where the HVS goes to a horse out of top 10, because they totally rode smarter for the conditions and capability that day, says a lot about what your horse looks like at the end of the day. 

 

But what I like best about it?  When you get that stupid yahoo that shows up at your LD, runs the heck out of his horse, he sure as hell won't win HVS, but he sure may have a possibility with a BC with the emphasis on time/weight, I don't think we should award flops.  And look at the example set for any other new folks there!

 

But then again, after really thinking about your question, could LD not have placings, but the top 10 only be eligible to show for the coveted HVS?  That could be a way, but I'm not totally convinced.  I'm not knocking any LDer out there, most are experienced and smart and will ride their own ride smiling all the way.  Some are new and learning but trying their best I'm sure.  But by using LD to attract, sometimes we attract problems, and it just takes that one to make life miserable.  JMO.

 

Pam

[Laney Humphrey]

Oh Nat, I am sooooo sorry you had to cancel your ride, especially it wasn't because of Mother Nature or the Government, but because of people and their lack of interest.  I hope you get a good number of people, especially more or less local folks for your 3 days of camping so they can see the beautiful country they live in.

Laney

--

[Maryben Stover]

Don't you guys remember the last years when the West region was vilified for not giving an AERC BC for the LD rides.  We used to give HVS or horse excellence award and took a lot of heat at the convention talks as well as on ridecamp.



..........mb

---

Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 16:54:05 -0700
From: gary...@pacbell.net

Subject: Re: Re[2]: [RC] A good indication that it's not the same sport (was: Thanks)

To: me...@endurance.net; ride...@endurance.net

[Barbara McCrary]

When we included an LD ride with our 50-70-R&T, we did not acknowledge first place, and that was before RMs were giving BC. We're we to manage rides today, I would cheerfully vote for giving HVS chosen from all the LD riders. I do wish (some) LD riders would stop the racing, because at that distance, racing could kill a horse. It also disturbs the pacing of the longer distance riders for those who are trying to rate their horses.

Barbara

Sent from my iPad

[Barbara McCrary]

Actually, I have a feeling that the first sub-50 mile ride along with an endurance ride was the brain-storm of Courtney Hart when he was still RM of Castle Rock ride in the mid-1970s. He called it a "mini-ride."

Barbara

Sent from my iPad

[Don and Pam Bowen]

A mini-ride? Be careful Barbara, you could get stoned for speaking of such
things :)!!!!! But it is cute :).

Pam

-----Original Message-----
From: ridecampre...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:ridecampre...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Barbara McCrary
Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 10:46 PM
To: tr...@wakerobinranch.com
Cc: ride...@endurance.net
Subject: Re: [RC] A good indication that it's not the same sport (was:
Thanks)

[Lisa Belhage]

I'm going to ask an ignorant question, and admit that I haven't read through ALL the posts, nor have I read AERC rules since they don't apply to me here in Denmark.  However, if the goal is to limit racing in LD, why not put a speed limit as is the case in lower level rides here?  Anyone finishing with a speed over 12km/hr is DQ'ed.  Our rules don't allow any standing still or circling around in the last 1 km to lower an otherwise too fast average speed.

[Barbara McCrary]

That is the method used in competitive trail rides here in the USA. Endurance doesn't compare itself to CTRs much, if any. It appears very difficult to control the urges of some riders to race the LD rides. They were originally designed as introductory rides, but eventually took on a different format.

Barbara

Sent from my iPad

[Char Jewell]

From reading this thread it appears that the basis of the concerns comes from people over riding horses on LDs.

Has anyone actually bothered to research treatment rates & pull stats between LD, 50's & 100's?

Lets start talking about facts people. Lets get away from assumptions & innuendo. That's when people get upset.  People don't get upset about cold hard facts. (Well, I suppose some do!)

Has anyone run the numbers? 

Sent from Char's iPhone

[Truman Prevatt]

Lets see, that had to be back in the days that our biggest national security threat was the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union hasn't been around for a long time and is getting to the point of being rightly relegated to history. Maybe it's time that we look forward and address the sport that has evolved and address the population of potential new riders that exist today - rather than that existed pre 1990.

It's pretty hard for a Soviet expert to get a job today ;-).

> --
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
>
> To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

--

“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” - Steven Weinberg

[Truman Prevatt]

Mathew MacKay-Smith got up at the ride meeting at the OD one year and described the 100 mile trail. Then he
said - now for the half ride (which was the 50). Some were not happy ;-).

T

--
"It is hard to fight an enemy who has outpost in your head." - Sally Kempton

[Truman Prevatt]

We already have that sport in the US.  In fact it is much older than endurance riding and there are multiple sanctioning bodies in different ares of the US that promote it. 

It is called Competitive Trail Riding and the first which was in Vermont was roughly based on the old US Cavalry Remount trials.  If people want to ride that format they can.

In fact in the MW region there are often CTR rides offered in conjunction with endurance rides and 25 mile CTR's and 25 mile LD rides both offered.  Choice is good.

Truman

“He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."  Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil

[jksi...@mts.net]

Melissa, I think forcing someone to move up is a REALLY BAD idea. If you make it a rule it will catch some people that are not ready to move up. In my area we have some really small ride turnouts. One ride last year we had only 7 people show up. EVERYONE was in the top 3 in their division! Even some that were spankin' new to the sport. With that rule they could be forced to move up to 50's (or whatever) when they have less than 10 rides under their belt. Or some of our riders will never be ready to move up. We have lots of non-arabs competing here.
A lot of the casual people are competing on well conditioned QH's. And while they do good at 25, they will not be able to longer distances. Nor do they want to. They are coming out to enjoy the trail with their horse, not for awards or even really love of the sport. A rule like this would make them stop showing up.
I think we just have to live with how it is. After all, how many of us claim we are really competing against ourselves? To finish is to win? Right?
There are so many reasons for people to compete in the sport, especially in the LDs that we really cannot make it all equal and fair.

BTW, I would be super pissed if AERC reduced my miles by applying a fraction in my multiplier!!! Do you have any idea how many ride I'd have to go to (support) to get equal miles to a person who rides 50 or 100s. But I am just not able to do anything more than an LD right now. I am a single mom with a toddler. It will be many years before I get my greenie conditioned enough for a 50. All this complaining about LDs makes me not want to ride with AERC.

Jen

[jksi...@mts.net]

I agree here with Keith.
And if you want to discourage racing, WHY are you complaing about BC award for LDs?? If you award for BC instead of 1st place, wouldn't that encourage them to push their horses less?? Hoping to get BC?

[Carla Richardson]

You do have to top 10 to get BC and your time is a big factor in BC judging.

Without the time factor, middle pack horses are probably going to be in better condition than some of the top 10 horses.  But obviously they can't stand for BC.  So people ride faster to top 10 if that is their goal. 

If it is a training ride for endurance 50's and up, and endurance is a race, then I can see the conflict right here.  I guess if your goal is to race in 50's why wouldn't you race in a LD as training? 

And yes I know there are "permanent" LD riders and racers.  My question above is just thinking about how that could be seen from another point of view.

Carla

On May 19, 2013 8:36 AM, <jksi...@mts.net> wrote:

I agree here with Keith.
And if you want to discourage racing, WHY are you complaing about BC award for LDs??  If you award for BC instead of 1st place, wouldn't that encourage them to push their horses less?? Hoping to get BC?

[Carla Richardson]

Jen, remember that this is a chat list and in that respect it is not the real world where you ride and are enjoying your horse on the trail.  Hopefully, you have never heard this kind of stuff at the rides.  I know that I haven't. 

Please don't be discouraged and quit.  Enjoy what you have, which is truly precious!  Maybe one day soon your toddler will be riding with you, time flies and kids grow up fast.  Happy trails.

Carla

[Truman Prevatt]

I looked at a lot of data on pull rates.  Bottom line, the LD pull rate is low.  The LD fatality rate is low.  The pull rates on 50's are higher than on LD's and the fatality rate on 50's is significantly higher than LD's.  The 100 pull rate is significantly higher than on 50's (the pull rate on 100's is between 30 and 40 percent from memory)    The fatality rate on 100's is also significantly higher than 50's and LD's combined.  

In reality I think this is much to do about nothing. 

Here are the numbers for about 11 years worth of rides.

http://www.seraonline.org/Archives/Pull%20analysis.pdf

Truman

--

“Many people consider the things government does for them to be social progress but they regard the things government does for others as socialism.” Earl Warren

[Diane Trefethen]

On 5/19/2013 6:41 AM, Truman Prevatt wrote:
> Lets see, that had to be back in the days that our biggest national security

> threat was the Soviet Union...

> Maybe it's time that we look forward and address the sport that has evolved
> and address the population of potential new riders that exist today - rather
> than that existed pre 1990.

Like most people, I don't appreciate having my comments ridiculed with sarcasm,
especially when they were simply clarifications. Whether the concept of LD
rides, as opposed to LD races, is pass� or not, you were the one who misspoke
when you referred to adding levels as modifying LD. The modification was the
conversion of a venue that was originally intended to be low-key rides, into
races with prizes for speed. The suggestions here, levels, replacing BC with a
High Vet Score award, are not modifications but ideas on how to return to the
original concept.

You may well be correct that a return to LD as ride may create a further decline
in membership. However, THAT is not the comment I criticized. Your suggestion
that catering to novices and/or promoting a HVS would modify LD, when LD-as-race
was the real modification, is what I saw as flawed.

Furthermore, I would point out that your vaunted evolution of the sport of LD
seems to BE returning to a kinder, more gentle venue, at least if some of the
comments here are to be believed. 25 mile races may KEEP people who know what
they are doing in the sport but I don't think it benefits AERC to ATTRACT
inexperienced newbies who think endurance is all about crossing the finish line
in first place.

[Char Jewell]

Thank you Truman.

Is it also true that the entries in LD distances are higher than 50's & 100's?

If that is the case, then statistically, the LD horses are safer.

Sent from Char's iPhone

[Keith W. Kibler]

I appreciate being amen-ed, but would also like to apologize for being
defensive and for , as an earlier poster commented, "getting my britches
in a bunch". They were just that and have now been unbunched.
As my adult lawyer son recently said, "Wow Dad, I am seeing you turn
into a grumpy old man right in front of my eyes!"
Sorry, the fact that it is "just the internet" is NOT an excuse for
boorish behavior.
Keith Kibler
Shawnee Sunrise Farm
Marion IL

[Carla Richardson]

Keith,

You are a passionate defender of your breed, and the sport.   I for one always respect passionate people, even if, and sometimes because, they occasionally get their panties in a wad.  Or britches in a bunch, as the case may be.

Carla

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net

To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to:       ridecamp+unsubscribe@endurance.net

[enduranc...@gmail.com]

I had done 5 rides.

35 turtle. 

50 turtle. 

25 overtime. 

50 pulled at 40 (we were still trying to find the right saddle - sore back).

50 pull (back boot broke day before ride, rode without back boots and found rock. Were turtle when we pulled).

Yesterday we did our 6th ride. Had been training for 50 but was sick/fever the night before, plus another too-embarrassing-to-mention-medical-condition  so switched to 25. I had a good saddle and back boots and had covered 17000 ft of elev in the last 6 weeks traiming. My horse was feeling goood. I ALWAYS hold her back but just let her motor on this ride, sill held her back but not as much. Stopped at all but on water. Asked before gently passing. Got off and lead her down the last big hill. Didnt know it till 1/2 hour after the ride but we "won". I feel like winning was sort of a silly word because I think everyone else was pretty much ambling along. To me This was between me and my horse and nobody else. I was trying to see where she was at condition wise as our plan is to do 50s so let her fly some. I also wanted to test my saddle a bit more. I purposely trotted in to finish and got pulse without removing saddle because I wanted to see where she was at. She was at 70. Pulsed again in 2 minutes and were at 60. She did have one slightly tight muscle. I now have a lot more info to go on before we do our 50. It was not about winning for me. I was actually holding back tears at the last mile because I felt how far I'd come with this horse after so many struggles - in and out of endurance. It was just a great day.

Our time was something like 2:45 after subtracting the hold. (left my vet card so dont know exactly). Apparently I was way ahead of 2nd.

Were we racing? It would have been a whole different day for me had we had to amble along and I also would not have learned as much and it would not have been as much of a conditiong ride for our next 50. 

I completely understand not wanting people riding unprepared horses too fast, but unless you're going to require people to hand in training logs to determine their max pace, how can you say who is going too fast? If the horse finishes healthy and happy, who cares?

I too wonder, how many LDers are really over-riding and having metabolic issues, is it really a big issue? Most people I know who arent conditioning their horses cant trot more than a couple hundred yards without having to stop and walk. Where are all these people coming from that can just hop on a horse and speed through 25 miles without getting themselves in shape by getting their horse in shape, cuz I sure havent met them, and I sure couldnt do it. Maybe when I was younger?

As for the passing issue, if people are galloping by in Cramped spaces I get that that is not safe or polite. But I get the feeling that some are not comfortable being passed in any fashion. Without passing you obviously finish in the order you started, you just cant eliminate it :) At my first ride my horse was a total MANIAC any time anyone passed no matter how fast or slow, but she had to learn to "deal" because until this last ride we never passed, only got passed :)

I like things the way they are, already too many rules in life.

Karen in MT
Sent from my iPod

[enduranc...@gmail.com]

For me I see 25s as both training for 50s but moreso gaging my horse's conditioning for a 50. If I had to go really slow it wouldnt suit either purpose. I dont know how drastic of a speed limit some people are thinking though. 

Sent from my iPod

[Diane Trefethen]

On 5/19/2013 3:26 AM, Char Jewell wrote:
> From reading this thread it appears that the basis of the concerns comes from
> people over riding horses on LDs.

That's not what I see in this thread. I see comments about being run down by
racing LDs, making the ride more difficult for people with green horses, and
conveying the wrong impression to newbies that endurance, especially LD
endurance, is all about racing.

There are no "stats" on any of those complaints.

[Diane Trefethen]

On 5/19/2013 3:26 AM, Char Jewell wrote:

> From reading this thread it appears that the basis of the concerns comes from
> people over riding horses on LDs.

[Bonnie]

Hello Diane,

Yeah that is pretty much it in a nut shell. And yes, I have ridden
LD, 50 mile rides and multi-day rides. I have conditioned the horses
my husband rode for his 75 mile rides. He placed 2nd in one of the two
75 mile rides on, gasp, a gaited horse....a registered TWH. Oh and
they were barefoot, not booted, but barefoot for both 75 mile rides
they competed in. Whoops, sorry forgot to mention all of the rides
were on gaited horses we even top tenned some LD rides and have had
many horses stand for BC in LD and Endurance rides.

I know, most of that post is not going to what you said Diane, but I
had to add it because I have learned through experience and changed
my mind about LD.

I have seen horses pulled and treated in all distances that AERC
sanctions. I think that you have a lot more leeway in a 25. A lot of
horses can get through it but still be looking pretty bad after if they
have been raced to hard for their conditioning. ( please note how I
said that) I have seen LD horses and 50 mile horses get in trouble
because they were not in shape for the ride even though they finished
mid pack or farther back. But the LD horse that raced hasn't tapped
into the reserves that a 50 mile or 75 mile or 100 mile horse has to
finish those longer distances. Hence, the 25 mile horses don't need as
much treatment nor do they have as many fatalities. That is my
opinion by the way. Nothing to really back it up though. It is a
theory, have fun knocking it apart! LOL And yes, I have seen a rides
where LD horses were treated. I thought it was nuts that those horses
still placed. The treatments were needed after the horses has
completed and gotten their "awards" in most cases, so I guess those
treatments didn't count.

Here is a good question. If the horse completes according to AERC
criteria, and gets their placing, but then needs treatment by a vet
an hour or more after completion does that treatment get recorded as a
treatment for the ride. Or, does that treatment fall under the radar.
I have seen quite a few LD horses that needed and got treatment by the
ride vet after and hour past the completion of the ride. What is this
saying about LD? I am not sure myself what it is saying. I kind of
think it might be saying that a there are some LD treatments that are
getting swept under the rug, or at least that there are LD horses
that are getting treated, but still place in the top ten because they
are treated after that golden hour. ( let the flames begin)

--
"What is the best legacy that one can leave after a full
life? That the world was a better place because
you were in it and that it is now a lesser
place because you are gone; that those around
you loved you and will miss you. If one person
can say that about you in total honesty, then
you can enter heaven. The key to open heaven's
gates is so simple that we have to ask ourselves
why so many people fail to find it."Lazlo Zalezac
Best regards,
Bonnie mailto:bon...@b4boots.com
http://www.b4boots.com
check out our blog at http://www.b4boots.com/w

> --

[Truman Prevatt]

On May 19, 2013, at 7:28 PM, Enduranc...@gmail.com <enduranc...@gmail.com> wrote:

I too wonder, how many LDers are really over-riding and having metabolic issues, is it really a big issue? 

According to the numbers from an 11 year sample. The answer is no.  Metabolic pulls are much more prevalent on 100's. 

Truman

--
“The belief that there is only one truth, and that oneself is in possession of it, is the root of all evil in the world” - Max Born 

[Bonnie]

Hello Truman,

I don't know if the info is there. I have been to rides and watched LD
horses place and then need treatment after they have officially gotten
their completion. Do those treatments slip through the cracks since
the horses technically completed.

I mean it kind of sucked to come in 4th place at an LD ride and have
the horse that took 2nd place standing there tied to the trailer with
a 5 liter bag pouring into the veins in its neck. The horse had
obviously gotten treatment. Heck there have bee quite a few horses at
LD rides that I have noticed tied up to a trailer getting fluids IV.
My horse was fine by the way, I had done a lot of conditioning with
him for that ride. Heck, I probably should have done the 50 since he
came in fourth both days back to back 25 mile rides, but I didn't know
any better at the time.

I know, it would be hard to keep track of this stuff, but if a vet at
a ride is administering the treatment that info should be there. What
I guess I am asking is if that info was included or if it is hanging
out there in limbo?

--
"What is the best legacy that one can leave after a full
life? That the world was a better place because
you were in it and that it is now a lesser
place because you are gone; that those around
you loved you and will miss you. If one person
can say that about you in total honesty, then
you can enter heaven. The key to open heaven's
gates is so simple that we have to ask ourselves
why so many people fail to find it."Lazlo Zalezac
Best regards,
Bonnie mailto:bon...@b4boots.com
http://www.b4boots.com
check out our blog at http://www.b4boots.com/w

Sunday, May 19, 2013, 8:59:08 PM, you wrote:


> On May 19, 2013, at 7:28 PM, Enduranc...@gmail.com
> <enduranc...@gmail.com> wrote:








> I too wonder, how many LDers are really over-riding and having
> metabolic issues, is it really a big issue?

> According to the numbers from an 11 year sample. The answer is no.
> Metabolic pulls are much more prevalent on 100's.

> Truman

> --

> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.3336 / Virus Database: 3162/6338 - Release Date: 05/19/13

> --

[KSherman]

Once a horse passes it's completion exams it cannot be removed from completion for veterinary reasons. AERC Rules 6.2.1 and L.4.1

Kathy

[David Lewis]

At the Mt. Adams ride in Washington this past weekend, there were over 170 riders. 81 of them entered into the LD distance. It's a great way to introduce people to the sport of endurance, and give a way for some horses to ride longer distances that they are capable of doing, since not all horses/breeds can really go 50+ miles. Or some riders just don't have the time to condition their non-Arab breeds to be able to do a 50, or they themselves might just prefer the shorter ride of an LD. Nothing wrong with that, and these riders will continue to help keep AERC and our local organizations strong.

-- David

Redmond, WA

[Diane Trefethen]

From Bruce Weary:

Truman--

You can't compare LD metabolic pulls straight across with those of 100's. Your
conclusion is the same as saying, "Those people who run marathons, across the
board, tend to be more sore and tired at the end than those who run 10k's,
therefore 10k's are safer." The far greater physical demands of a 100 miler
bring an expectation that more horses will tire at that distance than 25 miles.
It stands to reason. We're not comparing Chevys and Fords. The unraveled truth
is that there is great potential to overrun a horse in an LD ride. Though LD
rides are not only for beginners,they are the environment most populated with
newbies who may, through ignorance, inexperience or bravado, run a horse too
hard.The statistics that are conspicuously absent are the numbers of orthopedic
and metabolic injuries/illnesses/maladies and deaths that occur at home days or
weeks after a ride. This is true of all distances. One would be foolhardy to
operate from the premise that because a horse passes a vet exam a few seconds or
minutes after crossing the finish line that all is well in that moment and will
continue to be. Examples to the contrary are ubiquitous. Truman, I'm surprised
(not really) that with your mathematical background you fail to include the
plethora of variables that potentially influence the outcome for a given horse
at a given distance, and how those variables magnify over larger and larger
samples of participants, including days and weeks after the ride. The comparison
you made of metabolic pulls in LD's versus 100's neither comdemns 100's nor
indemnifies LD's regarding the potential for harm.

Over nearly 30 years of doing this sport, I have seen at least as many, if not
more, distressed horses in LDs as the other distances.

IMO, without a doubt, the single factor that contributes to bad outcomes in
endurance riding, at any distance, is pilot error--whether that be through poor
shoeing, tack fit, conditioning (or lack thereof), excessive speed for the
conditions or horses ability, and any number of judgmental mistakes made on
behalf of the rider. It's not so much "the distance" that causes the problems.
It's how the rider manages his/her horse OVER that distance where the problems
usually begin. We live in a society where is it increasingly common to avoid or
deny responsibility for bad outcomes, and it is no less true in our sport. My
experience has been that when things go wrong for the horse, riders often have a
look of puzzlement and dismay on their face, as if to say, "I have no idea what
could have gone wrong, and I don't deserve this." I believe that truly
knowledgeable and skilled riders probably have a clue or two that may be
difficult to admit to, and also probably know that some or all of it can often
be avoided. Horses make few mistakes. Riders make plenty. Thus the need for
mentoring and education, hopefully before another first-time newbie tries to win
a race. Bruce Weary

[Char Jewell]

Good points Diane.

To all -

We do not have much of these issues here in the east at AERC rides. Most people start in CTR so the peer pressure to behave & act politely is at a high level.

I would think that peer pressure would work well in these cases too.

If you know there is a rude rider - go dress them down. Complain to the ride manager, file a protest.

These are all valid concerns, but trying to rewrite the LD rules will not solve any of them.

We have these issues at CTRs as well - until the person is "trained". lol

You can't get any tighter rules than a CTR.

Sent from Char's iPhone

[Truman Prevatt]

You can check, but I believe that all treatments are required to be reported by the vets to the AERC - competition or not.

While I have not been too active for the past few years, I sure was for over 20 years. In that period I only remember
seeing 1 LD horse require significant treatment. I have seen, however, more 50 mile horses and 100 mile horses
require treatment. I've seen lines of horses on IV's are some of the high profile 50's and 100's. At one point the term
"Biltmore Virus" was coined simply because the number of horses that needed to be treated at that ride and that ride did
not have an LD.

There should be a record of each treatment in the AERC office.

Truman

> --
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to ride...@endurance.net
>
> To post to this group, send email to ride...@endurance.net
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ridecamp+u...@endurance.net
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RidecampRedistributed" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistri...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

--

"I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way." - Mark Twain

[Truman Prevatt]

On May 20, 2013, at 5:32 AM, Diane Trefethen <tr...@wakerobinranch.com> wrote:

> From Bruce Weary:
>
> Truman--
>
> You can't compare LD metabolic pulls straight across with those of 100's. Your conclusion is the same as saying, "Those people who run marathons, across the board, tend to be more sore and tired at the end than those who run 10k's, therefore 10k's are safer." The far greater physical demands of a 100 miler bring an expectation that more horses will tire at that distance than 25 miles. It stands to reason.

That is exactly correct. However, a horse that crashes, transported to a vet clinic and requires 40 liters of fluids to recover doesn't really care if it results from a 100 or happens in the pasture. The risk of short term injury and/or long term issues such as laminas will be related to the stress and the time that stress on the system is applied. At the end of the day a development of a metabolic issue is still a metabolic issue somewhat irrelevant of the time (and/or distance) because the long term impact to the horse is irrelevant to what distance the horse is riding. I sure don't want to see any horse requiring 40 liters of fluids - do you?

>
> Over nearly 30 years of doing this sport, I have seen at least as many, if not more, distressed horses in LDs as the other distances.
>

One should be able to verify this through the AERC records.

> IMO, without a doubt, the single factor that contributes to bad outcomes in endurance riding, at any distance, is pilot error--whether that be through poor shoeing, tack fit, conditioning (or lack thereof), excessive speed for the conditions or horses ability, and any number of judgmental mistakes made on behalf of the rider.

I would also add that the longer such stress is ongoing which is directly proportional to the distance traveled, the more likely a stress related breakdown. That's what the numbers show, be it measured by pull rates, metabolic pull rates or fatality rates. Sticking our organizational heads in the sand will not change that.

Truman
>

--
"A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems." - Paul Erdos

[Bonnie]

Hello KSherman,

I know that, but it would be interesting in knowing the numbers of
horses that have to be treated by the vets after they have gotten a
completion. It is still a treatment and most likely from over riding.

--
"What is the best legacy that one can leave after a full
life? That the world was a better place because
you were in it and that it is now a lesser
place because you are gone; that those around
you loved you and will miss you. If one person
can say that about you in total honesty, then
you can enter heaven. The key to open heaven's
gates is so simple that we have to ask ourselves
why so many people fail to find it."Lazlo Zalezac
Best regards,
Bonnie mailto:bon...@b4boots.com
http://www.b4boots.com
check out our blog at http://www.b4boots.com/w

> --

[Shannon Loomis]

>
>
> The most horses I've treated with fluids at a single ride is 6 (maybe 7?). We had unseasonable extremes in temp and humidity and it was picking horses off like crazy. The funny thing was, I treated only 1 horse who completed the 50, over an hour after she finished middle to back of the pack (my daughter's Morgan melding). The rest were split between the LD and the 50's and most were showing signs of problems well before 25 miles. And none were being ridden fast, overall it was not a super fast ride, it was just the unexpected weather, and all were presented to the vets by concerned owners. We had fans and misters and enough ice to sink the Titanic set up to cool horses down but it was just so bloody hot that once they moved away from the fans, they heated back up again, which is what happened to my daughter's horse. As long as she was moving or had a fan on her, she was fine, but when we put her in her corral, she got too hot.
>
> Shannon Loomis
> QED Farm - Sport Morgans
> Pleasant Creek, WV

>>> --
>>> "What is the best legacy that one can leave after a full
>>> life? That the world was a better place because
>>> you were in it and that it is now a lesser
>>> place because you are gone; that those around
>>> you loved you and will miss you. If one person
>>> can say that about you in total honesty, then
>>> you can enter heaven. The key to open heaven's
>>> gates is so simple that we have to ask ourselves
>>> why so many people fail to find it."Lazlo Zalezac
>>> Best regards,
>>> Bonnie mailto:bon...@b4boots.com
>>> http://www.b4boots.com
>>> check out our blog at http://www.b4boots.com/w

[Kathy Mayeda]

You know, I don't think the system is broke so why fix it.  I haven't seen the majority of LD riders racing at all here in the West Region.  I don't think the majority of endurance riders start in CTR's here, but you often hear endurance riders complain that CTR's have too many rules.  And this is coming out of the mouths of seasoned endurance riders who believe in Finish is to Win motto.  This is not the picture I see at all as far as riding LDs.

K.

[Buddy]

Well said and well put. Thank you for such a positive post that
supports AERC...

On May 20, 3:20 am, David Lewis <highwayofl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> At the Mt. Adams ride in Washington this past weekend, there were over 170
> riders. 81 of them entered into the LD distance. It's a great way to
> introduce people to the sport of endurance, and give a way for some horses
> to ride longer distances that they are capable of doing, since not all
> horses/breeds can really go 50+ miles. Or some riders just don't have the
> time to condition their non-Arab breeds to be able to do a 50, or they
> themselves might just prefer the shorter ride of an LD. Nothing wrong with
> that, and these riders will continue to help keep AERC and our local
> organizations strong.
>
> -- David
> Redmond, WA
>

> On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Endurancehors...@gmail.com <

>
>
>
> endurancehors...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For me I see 25s as both training for 50s but moreso gaging my horse's
> > conditioning for a 50. If I had to go really slow it wouldnt suit either
> > purpose. I dont know how drastic of a speed limit some people are thinking
> > though.
>
> > Sent from my iPod
>

> > On May 19, 2013, at 9:08 AM, Carla Richardson <richardson.ca...@gmail.com>

> > wrote:
>
> > You do have to top 10 to get BC and your time is a big factor in BC
> > judging.
>
> > Without the time factor, middle pack horses are probably going to be in
> > better condition than some of the top 10 horses.  But obviously they can't
> > stand for BC.  So people ride faster to top 10 if that is their goal.
>
> > If it is a training ride for endurance 50's and up, and endurance is a
> > race, then I can see the conflict right here.  I guess if your goal is to
> > race in 50's why wouldn't you race in a LD as training?
>
> > And yes I know there are "permanent" LD riders and racers.  My question
> > above is just thinking about how that could be seen from another point of
> > view.
>
> > Carla

> > On May 19, 2013 8:36 AM, <jksim...@mts.net> wrote:
>
> >> I agree here with Keith.
> >> And if you want to discourage racing, WHY are you complaing about BC
> >> award for LDs??  If you award for BC instead of 1st place, wouldn't that
> >> encourage them to push their horses less?? Hoping to get BC?
>
> >> --
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to

> >> ridec...@endurance.net
>
> >> To post to this group, send email to ridec...@endurance.net

> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to:

> >> ridecamp+unsubscr...@endurance.net

> >> For more options, visit this group at
> >>http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
>
> >>  --
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to

> > ridec...@endurance.net
>
> > To post to this group, send email to ridec...@endurance.net

> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to:

> > ridecamp+unsubscr...@endurance.net

> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en
>
> >  --
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to

> > ridec...@endurance.net
>
> > To post to this group, send email to ridec...@endurance.net

> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to:

> > ridecamp+unsubscr...@endurance.net

> > For more options, visit this group at

> >http://groups.google.com/a/endurance.net/group/ridecamp?hl=en- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Joe Long]

I did my first ride, a Novice ride, in 1978 in Tennessee. They've been
called Limited Distance rides since the AERC brought them under our
wing. I believe the reason was that the Directors felt the name
"Novice" was not appropriate for rides that some people entered year
after year. In all the years that I lived in the Southeast, I don't
recall any controversy about LD rides or about LD riders being looked
down on. In fact pretty much the only time I've heard that is on this
maillist and the AERC maillist.

On 18/5/13 3:33 PM, Truman Prevatt wrote:
> Actually my first LD was in 1989. In the SE I don't ever remember them being call anything but LD. My second LD, four of us galloped the last five miles in the swamp at Jonathan Dickenson State Park near West Palm Beach, FL to finish in 2 hours and 40 minutes. It was a blast. I also remember that many RM's ran the LD the same way people ran 50's with the exception of a 60 pulse at the finish. SERA had that rule long before the AERC. In 1996 SERA standardized the BC LD to the same as the longer races for SERA sanctioned rides. The SERA BOD took this measure because those that were riding LD's wanted consistency in the award of the LD BC which most RM's gave.
>
> It was only when ridecamp came on line that I heard about "Novice" rides and all these problems with LD's. Either they started in 1997 (was it ) or we never had them in the SE.

--
Joe Long aka ChipRider
jl...@chiprider.com
A++ G+ PKR+ PEG+ B+ M+

[Joe Long]

Another reason having racing at LDs is not a good idea is that LDs allow
horses that are only four years old to compete. The stresses of going
25 miles at first-place speeds for a four-year-old horse do not bode
well for his long-term soundness. Yet another reason is that LD rides
are intended for green horses and green riders (I'm not saying intended
for them only!), so adding high speeds into that mix is not good for
those competitors.

[Joe Long]

Hear, hear!!!

On 17/5/13 2:01 PM, Jody Rogers-Buttram wrote:

Kat and all,   After knowing what is being "thought about' for this sport and th fun rides.  I have to say this.   Yes, I rode before the LD rides were created. The biggest mistake that I can think of that AERC made was changing the name.  It went from  NOVICE to LD division. I am sure this was to make it more PC to those that rode LD.  They didn't want to be called NOVICE.   According to what Kat just posted, I agree.  We need diffierent divisions.  Separate the "men" from the boys.  Really...and I have ridden LD's when I wantedt to ride a ride and the horse wasn't old enough or ready for the 50.   When you changed that name, you changed the dynamic, and made it something that was "ok" to compete, and I do mean compete in.  AERC gives awards for those that "do it best".   Honestly, if I was a cripple, I would be embrassed to come FAST in the LD division. I would rather be turtle in the 50.   It is not, and never will be the soul of endurance.  I am SURE I started something.  :) Jody

[teddy]

Back in the 90's I managed 3 ER/year.  Every ride had an LD.  I had NO award for placing..ever.  But we did have a "BC"...  It was rare to have riders really racing and I do not recall one horse being treated.  Age CAN make a difference, but it is the experience the rider got and learned that led to putting a better "base" on a horse before considering "racing".  I truly stand by AERC's motto: "To Finish is to Win".  While it is an awesome experience to "win (by time)", I considered it a goal for both riders and horses who have many miles under their belts over several years. "Winning" an LD can lead to great disappointments down the road for many an ill-prepared LDer.  I have seen it many times since. Someone comes along with a horse that is fast and goes to one LD after another "seeking glory"...most of those stayed awhile, then disappeared.  I am sure that is NOT what any of us want.  We would like to see those than are willing to spend the time to be prepared properly move up.  There will always be a place of LD rides: they help pay the bills, they are a means where those who cannot ride 50+ anymore can still participate and they can be a tremendous education for all.

[Natalie Herman]

Exactly! I see some racing..but I see it at ALL distances... I see over riding and I see it at ALL distances (though less so at 100s, as the horses get pulled fairly early that are going fast and I am not at the VCs..but you 'hear' about such and such that got pulled at such and such check, for going too fast too early). I am an RM and offer LD first and top ten and BC at my rides, despite the fact that I think the whole sport should be run as a true 'to finish is to win' (ie NO top tens, first, or BC in ANY distance..just a Horse Excellence award pulled from all riders). I myself have no desire to race at any distance, and love to poke around in back seeing the nice scenery and enjoying the day with my horse, regardless what distance I am riding. 
Why do I offer these awards? Cause we a)have a Ntl BC award and I think it is not fair to have an award, if all the regions are not going to offer BC. The West (where I am at) seems SO anti-BC/racing in LD, that very few rides offer an AERC BC. Pretty silly because b) HOW can anyone reason, that it is ANY more dangerous to race on a SHORTER distance, than longer?!? This is constantly the logic I hear and it makes no sense mathematically, or realistically... we not only allow, but seem to encourage a 'good ol fashioned race to the finish' at many 50s...and at 100s...so why is it ok to do so at 2xs or even 4Xs the distance, where the horse is expending more energy and will be more tired, but on a quick little LD it is NOT ok?? We say 'cause it's the first timers racing, and they will kill their horse'...well, I have seen first timers (or 3-10 timers...basically NOT experienced riders) racing in the 50 a number of times. They do it because there is more 'prestige' in winning a 50 (since LDs are not REAL endurance after all)...usually what I see in the LDs, are the riders who really do want to just try out the sport and have fun, not race it. If we allow racing at the longer distances where the risk is greater, then we can't not allow it at the shorter ones.
  That said, we could make it safer by a simple rule change... no placings allowed in whichever distance you choose, until you have X number of rides at that distance under your belt (which number, we can figure out statistically maybe to see when 'experience' kicks in..though honestly I have seen some idiots overriding horses that have been in the sport for some time...some ppl will always put their prestige over the horse's welfare, no matter what....). Same goes for young horses (and I believe a 5 or 6 yr old shouldn't be racing a 50 either, let alone a 100...but since they can enter a 50-100, they CAN race it)..we can put in a rule that placings will not apply, until X age and X number of rides are under that horse's belt as well... But we don't like complicated rule structures, so that's not ever going to happen...
   Nat

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecampredistributed+unsub...@googlegroups.com.