Re: RC: Heartrates up to 220]

[Tivers@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/9/00 4:02:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
karen@chaton.gardnerville.nv.us writes:

<< >As long as there is a minimum weight requirement, the more massive horse 
is
 >going to have the advantage--assuming equal fitness for competition.
 
 Wouldn't this vary according to the type of course you are riding?>

Not really. Except if it's a real gymnast's course, then the smaller, more 
agaile horse might make better time.
 
>Not that I'm going to argue since my horse with the greatest mass is the 
 one I would pick as being the most athletic on a more technical trail, but 
 not the one I would pick for being the fastest on the flats.>

Agreed.
 
> Do the larger horses I see that are taking longer to recover taking longer 
 because they are larger or because they are carrying more weight?  (oh 
 geez, that's a dumb question, isn't it?)  duh.  <bg>

Bigger horses may have other unwanted characteristics--they may have a higher 
percentage of FT cells and run hotter. Their hearts may not match their size 
in some cases. If they are big boned, that might be a disadvantage--best to 
have the weight in the muscle mass where it can do some good. 
 
 >Karen
 
  >>

ti