You can't solve a problem if you are unwilling to admit that it exists (was: EEF launches new committee...)

[k s swigart]

From EEF.ae

> "The EEF has always sought to uphold the highest standards in horse and

> athlete welfare and integrity. The Endurance Committee will look to build

> further on those standards, working in collaboration with the FEI, and ensure

> that the FEI's rules and regulations are applied in endurance racing across

> the UAE.”

The problem with this statement is that the whole world knows that the EEF has never sought to uphold any standards of horse welfare or integrity.

Consequently, the EEF's new Endurance Committee has nothing to "build further on." There is no way that any such committee could succeed unless it acknowledges this.

The above statement demonstrates that they aren't even pretending to be sorry that they got caught. They are simply continuing to pretend that they have never done anything wrong.

This is not a recipe for being able to make even minor changes, let alone significant ones.

I suspect that the reason they think they have never done anything wrong is that the FEI is only just now complaining about what they have been doing all along, and they may even be genuinely confused as to why people who have been accepting their behavior for the past 10 to 15 years are only just now expressing any displeasure.

I can understand why a group of people who have been doing the same thing, without making a secret of it, for years are now surprised (that and the fact that what they have been doing is not all that much different from what everybody else has been doing; the EEF doesn't have the corner on the "ignore the rules" market, not in the rest of the horse world, nor in the rest of the endurance world--e.g. Dave Nicholson advertises on his XP website when discussing the application of the AERC's rules that "its [sic] best to keep a low profile and not worry too much about the rules.").

kat

Orange County, Calif.

:|

[Lynn White]

Kat, I Initially found their intial statement regarding "integrity" laughable.  However, what is to expect from those who live in alternate realities?  Sorry to get existential, but integrity and honor have totally different meanings to people that feel  they are entitled to win.

 

The problem of comparing the so-called rule violations between Duck rides and Gulf states venues is this:    One venue is predicated on getting high mileage, and the other is speed and who comes over the finish line first.  Oranges and Apples.

 

  

--
--
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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ridecamp+u...@endurance.net.

[Diane Trefethen]

Hi Lynn,

On 6/1/2015 7:51 AM, Lynn White wrote:
> Kat, I Initially found their intial statement regarding "integrity"
> laughable. However, what is to expect from those who live in alternate
> realities? Sorry to get existential, but integrity and honor have totally
> different meanings to people that feel they are entitled to win.
>
> The problem of comparing the so-called rule violations between Duck rides
> and Gulf states venues is this: One venue is predicated on getting high
> mileage, and the other is speed and who comes over the finish line first.
> Oranges and Apples.
>

I agree with your first point but not your second. It’s not “Oranges and
Apples.” What you’ve done is split hairs. The goal is not important to
Kat’s argument which was that “the EEF doesn't have the corner on the
‘ignore the rules’ market.” Sorry to get existential but ignoring the rules
is immoral. If you do it, it doesn’t matter whether you’re Dave Nicholson
fostering high mileage* or the UAE looking to cross the finish line first.

*Disclaimer: I personally have no knowledge of Dr Nicholson’s telling
anyone to not worry about the rules nor do I know from personal experience
that he thinks ignoring rules is acceptable.

Diane Trefethen
AERC #2691

[Lynn White]

Diane,  let me clarify.  The motivation for breaking the rules is different.  In one instance one is breaking the rules for a heafty financial gain.  On the other, breaking the rules is for perpetuating participation.    Both are immoral, but the stakes are much higher in the former.  One could argue that few people are going to run a horse to death on the first day of an XP, or any day for that matter.  Participants are riding an XP for an entirely different reason than hired jockyies on horsess they barely know.

 

People break rules all the time, and there is corruption everywhere.  It's the extent of our tolerance of rule breaking and corruption that defines us.

 

Cheers,

 

Lynn

[Lisa Salas]

Kat commented on,

"-e.g. Dave Nicholson advertises on his XP website when discussing the application of the AERC's rules that "its [sic] best to keep a low profile and not worry too much about the rules.").

I always took that to mean that the XP rides were not the same as any other AERC ride in the sense that XP rides were more about REALLY finishing miles, and not racing. The "low profile" was more about being laid back and enjoying the ride and not looking for a gaggle of prizes and praises. So not really racing and not a lot of awards therefore, no need to worry so much about rules cause...if your not racing, pulse time shouldn't be an issue. If not a lot of awards, no worry about placements, divisions, etc. I'm sure AERC rules are adhered to when applicable as his rides are sanctioned. The XP rides in my mind don't really warrant any kind of cheating cause they really are not the same as other AERC rides. I have a feeling that the groupies of XP rides would not tolerate cheating. They don't even like crybabies. 

Lisa Salas, The odd farm

[Karen Sullivan]

Lisa, I would not make those assumptions. Honestly, if the rides are
going to have AERC sanctioning and be thus eligible for points, then
all the criteria need to be strictly adhered to.
Karen

> 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/d/optout.
>

[Lisa Salas]

I was not assuming anything. It is my interpretation that the rules at XP rides are followed, but the atmosphere of the ride is far different than that of the rides run in the UAE.  Also, XP rides seem to me, to be different than other AERC rides. Not illegal, just different. In a good way.

If you are not doing anything wrong, you don't have to worry about the rules. I think the XP rides speak for themselves. 

Lisa Salas, the oddfarm

[Lynn White]

On a different tangent, there are two issues.  People will break rules if they know rules won't be enforced.  FEI was pretty lax in enforcing many of the rules, or just deciding when it was appropriate to let the rules slide.   We can all agree on this one. 

[marshall Bates]

Lets here of and document actual rules violations that The Duck has supposedly made. I for one back his efforts..

Marshall Bates aka the muleman

---

From: Lynn White <ldlw...@gmail.com>
To: ridecamp <ride...@endurance.net>
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2015 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: [RC] You can't solve a problem if you are unwilling to admit that it exists (was: EEF launches new committee...)

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.

[Maryben Stover]

I kind of wonder if any of those that are taking about rules violations have actually been to a Duck ride in the last 10 years.




..........mb

---

Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 00:04:33 +0000
From: ride...@endurance.net
To: ride...@endurance.net

[Mary K]

I thought the "under the radar" stuff regarding xp rides was to keep a low profile as they dash through areas that might require ridiculous amounts of permits/bureaucracy....

I'd be cautious of being OCD about rules in the case of The Duck rides. He manages to preserve a tidbit, a hint of an American Self-Reliance culture, that Emerson celebrated among others. The notion that one is an asshole if one overrides one's horse seems pretty clear in the Duck culture where it's the rider's job to be careful. That's so entirely different than the Region 7 cultures from what we've learned of late as to be not worth comparing.

[k s swigart]

It is interesting to me to notice that the assorted responses, other than Diane's, to the statement that "ignore the rules" happens at AERC rides as well as UAE rides is some variation of either: "It isn't happening" or "It doesn't matter."

Which rather proves the assertion of the subject line.

Throughout the past few years of AERC members harping about the cheating scandals associated with the FEI and GR-7 participants in endurance I have often been reminded of the line from the Robert Redford/Paul Newman movie The Sting. After the poker game on the train where Paul Newman beats the mark after they had both stacked the deck, the mark is in his train compartment and says (to the person who stacked the deck unsuccessfully for him), "What was I supposed to do, complain that he cheated better than I did?"

I strongly suspect that the participants in the GR-7 see the rest of the world's complaints about their own cheating in the same way...they think that their detractors are just a bunch of cheaters who are upset, not by the cheating (after all, everybody cheats), but by the fact that the people in the UAE are better at it. Because I can almost guarantee you that they don't see a big difference between cheating to win endurance mileage awards and cheating to win endurance races. If you look at things from the outside, the US complaints about the UAE cheating in endurance over the past decade comes across very much as sour grapes from the US at having lost its preeminence in international endurance racing.

If members of the AERC truly believe that the violations of their own rules don't matter, then the solution to the cheating problem is simple. Just get rid of those rules that they think don't matter.

However, even this cannot happen unless AERC members are willing to admit that there IS a problem.

In 1987 Matthew Mackay-Smith, as president of the AERC, published in his EN President's message: that some people are outraged that there are "short rides, short cuts, manipulated results, and concessions to friends" and that there are other people who are outraged that anybody would care...and that people who care should "vote with their feet."

There is no WORSE way to deal with cheating than to tell the people who care that if they think cheating is a problem that they should leave.  Because if you do so, it won't be long before nobody who is still around thinks cheating is a problem (and not because there is no cheating, but because everybody is enured to it). Doing this creates a culture of cheating.

Cheating is not a problem that if you ignore it, it will go away. It is a problem that if you ignore it, it becomes so firmly entrenched that you CAN'T get rid of it. Such that the only possible way to get rid of it is to have somebody powerful come in from the outside and rip your organization apart; although, if it is firmly enough entrenched, even that won't work.

It is yet to be seen whether the outsiders are powerful enough with respect to FEI GR-7 endurance to dig out their cheating problem.  I have my doubts.  Even the US government and Acts of Congress have not been powerful enough to dig out the cheating/horse welfare problem that is so firmly entrenched in the Tennessee Walking Horse Show World (while the people within that organization deny that it exists). And the EEF's initial responses: File an appeal to deny the problem ever existed, and then drop the appeal but make a pathetic statement like "we have always had the highest standards of integrity" to continue to deny any problem ever existed does not bode well.

Until INSIDERS are willing to admit that they have a problem, that problem will persist.  25+ years on, the AERC still has "short rides, short cuts, manipulated results, and concessions to friends." [Matthew MacKay Smith's words, not mine.] I have come to accept that nobody within the AERC cares enough about this to do anything about it. Which is why I am no longer a member of the AERC (and yes, I know that this helps to perpetuate the fact that nobody within the AERC cares enough to do anything about it and that by refusing to join I am abandoning the organization to the cheats--however, I would rather be a powerless non-member than a powerless member).

If the AERC wants to fix its cheating problem, I am more than willing to help it do so. But when I asked a long-time member of the AERC Board of Directors (who acknowledged that the problem exists--as have many other Board members I have spoken with) if the will exists on the Board to fix it, I was told, "No, it does not" (in exactly those words).

kat

Orange County, Calif.

:|

p.s. If also find it interesting that some people seem to think that cheating is okay so long as you are playing for low stakes. To me, it is exactly the opposite. People who cheat for high stakes are understandable (not excusable, but understandable). People who cheat for low stakes are just petty. Cheating to win a million dollars and a Mercedes at least makes some sense. Cheating to win an embroidered jacket or a t-shirt is just pathetic.

[Ed & Wendy Hauser]

On 6/3/2015 7:58 AM, k s swigart wrote:

AERC still has "short rides

The most blatant, and disturbing, "short ride" I can remember lately was Tevis "lite" that was obviously ~80 miles.  Yes, there was no way to hold a full 100 mile ride that day, but the riders got prestige of a 100 mile ride, 100 miles, and 100 mile bonus points.  A moral ride organizer would have turned in results, and insisted, that the ride be listed as the right mileage.

It has made me wonder what the mileage of previous and subsequent Tevis Cup rides really are?   It is remarkable that a ride through the wilderness where the trail is often, for good reason, changed is always 100 miles not 95 or 105 etc.

Ed

p. s.  Yes I am aware of the existence of other short rides.  That is not the subject of this post.

--
Ed & Wendy Hauser
5729 175th Ave.
Becker, MN 55308

Ed: (406) 381-5527
Wendy: (406) 544-2926