-----Original Message----- From:
ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Kristen A
Fisher Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 6:35 PM To:
suendavid@xxxxxxx; ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [RC] rider
weight studies, part 1
I finally had the time to read these posts
in detail and have a few questions/speculations.
Would it be fair to say that the parameters below for
Tevis could be extrapolated to 50s or even pleasure riding? Eg, if a
horse/rider under a combined 1200# can finish a 100 mile ride and be fit top=
continue, wouldn't you say that in a 50 mile ride or a pleasure
ride, the same would be true? Just because of the lesser exertion on the
team.
If
that is so, then why do I keep hearing a LOT of people bandy about the 20%
rider weight "rule"? Even Deb Bennett recently stated in Equus Mar 2007 that
"when the [rider weight] percentage rises to 20 extra care must be taken." She
does go on to say that conformation and bone structure also matter - but has
IMO nonetheless perpetuated the 20% rule/myth/whatever.
Maybe it's just one of those old "rules of thumb"
that people can't let go?
Kristen
From: ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Susan E.
Garlinghouse, DVM Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 4:37 PM To:
ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [RC] rider weight studies, part
1
The
conclusion that is drawn in the study is that all other things being equal
(as far as those parameters which could be quantitatively measured), a horse
and rider team carrying heavier total weight is at a disadvantage over a
horse/rider team carrying less weight, REGARDLESS of how the weight is
divided between horse and rider (within reason). Example, a 1200 lb
horse carrying a 200 lb rider, carrying less than 17% of his body weight, is
still at a biomechanical disadvantage over a 900 horse carrying the same
rider, even though the smaller horse is carrying over 22% of his body
weight.
