 |
Re: RE: [RC] small horse/ not so small rider - hrsldyloryFinally, someone with their head screwed on right! From: "Susan E. Garlinghouse, D.V.M." <suendavid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: 2005/03/23 Wed PM 08:48:26 EST To: <heidi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> CC: <ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: RE: [RC] small horse/ not so small rider So based on the 20% rule, it would be more suitable for a 400 lb tub of lard to ride a 3 year old 2000 lb draft horse, than for someone as fit as Bruce Weary at say 220 with tack to ride a 950 lb fit, mature and well-conformed horse? Not likely. Obviously, there are a lot of other factors involved and you *cannot* make sweeping judgments about how much horses as a broad category can or should carry. I agree with Heidi's comments, that a mature, well-conformed horse is better suited to carrying weight (ANY weight) than an immature youngster---and remember the studies that demonstrate the bones along the vertebrae don't totally mature until the horse is 7-8 years old. I'd much rather see higher weight being carried by a good old campaigner than a 4 year old. I have to see too many lamenesses already in "performance" horses that started competing at 2-3 years old and are having hock and stifle problems before they're 5 years old. As Heidi also mentioned, I did complete a study at Tevis looking at weight carrying abilities in a couple hundred 100 mile horses. It's on my website if any one wants to see it, and yes, it's peer-reviewed. There were *plenty* of horses that carried well over 20% of their weight and finished sound. I think the top weighted horse carried around 30% and finished top ten. I also noticed that most of the higher rider weight ratio riders spent more time on foot, were more skilful riders, got off going downhill, etc. And while vetting rides, I don't necessarily see a higher incidence of sore backs in HWT riders, maybe because the GOOD hwt riders know they have to ride SMART. Sometimes I think featherweights get lazy, thinking they don't weigh much, so it's okay to never get off or okay to ride sloppy. Does the additional weight have an effect, sure it does, but doesn't mean you can't ride the dang horse, for pete's sake. It means you have to choose the horse carefully for substance, don't assume bigger means more weight-carrying ability (it doesn't, because bone doesn't increase at the same rate as body mass), realize where the weak points are going to be (more concussion and stress to front limb soft tissue, more biomechanical issues), and ride accordingly. A 80 lb kid can ride a horse flopping around in a saddle for a mile or two and probably not cause too much damage. 250 lbs riding like a sack of potatoes for 25-100 miles and you've got a lame horse sooner or later. And ten pounds making much of a difference, gimme a break. That's less than a good drink at a water stop. Converting ten pounds from fat to muscle, that's useful. You could also claim you're helping your horse with less weight by skipping feeding him, passing by water stops or riding bareback without any saddle at all. Most people would agree the extra pounds of water, forage and good tack are worth the extra pounds. You just have to make sure the rider in the saddle is doing their share of work as well. JMO. Susan Garlinghouse, DVM, MS -----Original Message----- From: ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of heidi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 7:31 AM To: bj3romanuski@xxxxxxxx Cc: ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [RC] small horse/ not so small riderI read in a John Lyon's magazine that anyone whose weight + the weight of tack was 200# or more should not ride older horses.Good grief! It is the older horses that have been RIDDEN who are the most capable of carrying the weight! If there should be a caution about age of horse in this equation, it should be aimed at YOUNGER horses who are not yet mature, and who could possibly sustain damage from being overloaded.Than I also heard that a horse should not carry more than 20% of their weight.A great many of us would not be riding if this were the case. Again, look at the Susan G study--the problematic area seems to be COMBINED horse-rider weight, with in increase in soundness issues if that COMBINED weight goes over 1200#. So the HW rider should realistically be looking for a very well-conformed horse that weighs about 950...Maybe there should be more attention to the ability of the riders to ride with a "light" seat, rather than the weight of the rider.I agree. And the successful HW riders do tend to be GOOD riders. Heidi =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|