Events
Groups
Rider Directory
Market
RideCamp
Stuff
>Even though posting was "developed" to minimize the workload of the =
rider,
>it also minimizes the work load of the horse....if the timing is right.
>Believe it or not, though the horse is indeed providing the energy for
>accelerating the rider's body upward, it is the movement of the trot =
that
>is providing the energy and does not increase the work required by the
>horse at all. The energy is provided in the form of inertia (i.e. =
gravity
>is doing the work, of thrusting you up out of the saddle, not the
>horse--to put it crudely).
>> Whereas, a rider who maintains his body up out of the saddle at a
>> trot, absorbing the up-and-down motion of the horse by flexing his
>> knees, does not place that burden on the horse. Does this make sense?
>The rider who maintains his body up out of the saddle at the trot and
>absorbs the up-and-down motion of the horse by flexing his knees must do=
a
>great deal of work to fight the effects of inertia. The extent to which
>he is capable of absorbing all of the motion of the horse in his legs
>(which requires a great deal of work on the part of the rider) he will
>indeed keep his horse from having to lift the weight of his rider out of
>the saddle. However, if the rider is not successful at doing this, by
>resisting the effects of inertia which throws him up out of the saddle
>(even if his butt is not actually in the saddle) the horse is doing =
extra
>work.
I respectfully disagree with your analysis. Inertia comes into play
when you change the velocity of a mass -- such as when you change the
downward motion of a rider's body into an upward motion. If the
rider's body is staying level, and not moving up and down, inertia
plays no role. It is physically impossible for the body of a rider
which is moving downward toward the horse to be thrown upwards without
the application of force, and as the rider is mounted on the horse
that force must necessarily come from (or be applied against) the
horse. The laws of physics allow for nothing else.
Also, staying up out of the saddle is not a great deal of work for the
rider if done properly. After all, you are only maintaining your
height above ground, the same thing you do when standing or walking.
The horse's up-and-down motion is absorbed in the flexing of the knees
and there is no inertia to overcome for either the rider or the horse.
I personally find it no more tiring than posting, and easier to
maintain over uneven ground.
>> What are some other opinions on this?
=20
>> (Of course, posting is clearly superior to just sitting on the saddle
>> bouncing on the horse's back!)
>The advantage of posting, in addition to reducing the workload of the
>rider (which nobody denies) is that it also reduces the work load of the
>horse. What causes the horse to have to do extra work when the rider is
>just sitting on the saddle bouncing on the horse's back is not the fact
>that the horse has to carry the rider's weight in the saddle rather than
>in the stirrups, but rather because of the direction of motion of the
>rider's weight is different than the direction of motion of the horse.
Yes. A great deal of the benefit of balanced riding is keeping the
rider's center of gravity in harmony with the center of gravity of the
horse.
>When a rider posts, the direction of motion of the horse and rider are =
the
>same, while expending the least amount of work for the rider and the
>horse.
Actually, they are not the same. As the rider's up-and-down motion is
at half the frequency of the horse, about 50% of the time they are
moving in opposite directions. The rider's vertical motion
momentarily stops at the top of the rise, at the same time that the
horse's vertical motion stops at the bottom. Good posting depends on
the rider regaining contact with the saddle just as the horse's second
downard motion concludes, so that his next upward motion will lift the
rider's body up out of the saddle and start it on it's next upward
cycle. That requires acceleration (overcoming inertia) of the rider's
body, which in turn requires upward force applied to the rider's body
by the horse.
>You can also do this by standing in the stirrups or sitting in the =
saddle
>if you timing is impeccable (i.e it is possible to keep your butt =
touching
>the saddle the whole time and, ,in essence, move it up and down in =
perfect
>time with the horse--this means absorbing all of the motion of the horse
>in your lower back--the exact opposite of standing the whole time, where
>your legs are absorbing all of the mootion of the horse).
If you are up out of the saddle (or in very light contact), the timing
is not critical. On the contrary, it becomes automatic,
second-nature, where you concentrate on the trail ahead (and enjoy the
beauty of the countryside, conversation with your fellow riders or a
good song) and your legs simply follow the horse's movements without
you thinking about it.
>Me, I say post, let gravity do all the work and let the motion of the
>horse be absorbed by thin air.
If you prefer posting, great. I'm not about to tell anyone not to do
it. But the motion of the horse cannot be absorbed by thin air, no
matter how you ride. Any vertical lifting of the rider must
ultimately come from the horse, gravity cannot be escaped.
--=20
Joe Long
jlong@mti.net
Business Page http://www.mti.net
Personal Page http://www.rnbw.com
Events
Groups
Rider Directory
Market
RideCamp
Stuff