Definition of a "weight carrier "

[SatansLittleHelper]

Ok, while this may seem fairly obvious on the surface of it, I'm wondering how people actually define a "weight carrier"....it seems that cobs and heavy horses are always classified as such but apart from bone what makes a horse a good weight carrier..??? Only asking as I know someone who is looking and they have found a small ID x (15.3hh) that the owner says would carry 15-16 st without batting an eyelid as it took her 16st husband hunting. It doesn't look like the traditional weight carrying type to my eye but clearly does the job....it's been owned by this couple for 9 years and at 17 is looking for an easier life as a hack.

 

[Trouper]

For me the breed/build is almost immaterial. I would always go by the 15/20% weight calculation of the horse with some leeway made if the rider were experienced and in good balance. And then there is the whole question of what you want to do with the animal - gentle hacking is one thing, regular 3-day eventing is another!!

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

I would say look for the good, flat bone and a short back in proportion to the rest of the horsew. My 16.3hh IDx had a long back and wasn't really up to a lot of weight, while the 16hh Westphalian had a short back and could carry anybody.

 

[TPO]

I'll try and find the link (don't hold your breath!) to a paper/study that I read the other day about what weight horses can comfortably carry.

The riders were all experienced. Small was circa 9st9, Med 11st 11, Large 14st something and XL was 22st iirc

The large and extra large were all stopped due to being detrimental to the horses

I cant remember the horse details but I'm pretty sure they were sports horse types and not fine TBs etc. They were all assessed with and without a rider at WTC (excluding the ones that were stopped).

They also said that drafts are often touted as weight carriers because of build and bone but that isnt strictly true. This is because drafts were/are designed to pull not carry. The paper author did say that they would like to carry out further work with drafts to draw a conclusion.

The author also acknowledged that it was a small study group so wasnt a definite answer.

They also said that cobs are often recommended and appear to have a large capacity if using the % bodyweight but that a lot of horses are overweight so their ideal weight should be used.for the calculation.

Obviously the weight issue is a sensitive one. As well ad the weight that horses are expected to carry there are also issues like saddle fit. I've seen riders english and western who had weight beyond the cantle and the horses looked really uncomfortable

 

[scruffyponies]

I would say look for the good, flat bone and a short back in proportion to the rest of the horsew. My 16.3hh IDx had a long back and wasn't really up to a lot of weight, while the 16hh Westphalian had a short back and could carry anybody.

So many people overlook the back length. Try putting a heavy thing on a trestle table and moving the legs apart...

 

[Orangehorse]

Width across the loins and chest. Bone of course. A smaller, stocky animal is probably a better weight carrier than something bigger. Think of the showing classes of heavyweight hunter and heavy weight cob.

 

[Goldenstar]

It’s about conformation of the back and increasingly I think it’s also about the suspension in the paces the best weight carriers have strong backs and very conservative natural lift in the paces .

 

[WandaMare]

People would always say my cob X WB would be a good weight carrier but in fact she struggled with heavier riders. She was probably 550/600kg but she was quite long in the back and if someone 14 st plus got on her you could see she wasn't moving forward as freely and happily as with a smaller rider. My smaller ID x is closer to 400kg and she is actually a much better weight carrier. She is shorter backed, very strong conformation in her hind legs (almost quarter horse type) and will bounce forward with a heavier rider even though she is quite a bit smaller. So for me its much more about conformation and how the horse actually moves forward when carrying a rider, can they still move forward freely or do they look restricted by the weight.

 

[Winters100]

I was told 15% up to a maximum of 14 stone, after which it is too much for a horse, but no idea if this is really true.

 

[HufflyPuffly]

It’s about conformation of the back and increasingly I think it’s also about the suspension in the paces the best weight carriers have strong backs and very conservative natural lift in the paces .

That is interesting, I’ve always considered Topaz a weight carrier, she’s only 15.2hh but solid with tons of bone. However, she is very active with lots of cadence to her paces, though I do have to work hard to make her as strong through her back as she is through her limbs if that makes sense.

 

[chaps89]

I'll try and find the link (don't hold your breath!) to a paper/study that I read the other day about what weight horses can comfortably carry.

The riders were all experienced. Small was circa 9st9, Med 11st 11, Large 14st something and XL was 22st iirc

The large and extra large were all stopped due to being detrimental to the horses

I cant remember the horse details but I'm pretty sure they were sports horse types and not fine TBs etc. They were all assessed with and without a rider at WTC (excluding the ones that were stopped).

They also said that drafts are often touted as weight carriers because of build and bone but that isnt strictly true. This is because drafts were/are designed to pull not carry. The paper author did say that they would like to carry out further work with drafts to draw a conclusion.

The author also acknowledged that it was a small study group so wasnt a definite answer.

They also said that cobs are often recommended and appear to have a large capacity if using the % bodyweight but that a lot of horses are overweight so their ideal weight should be used.for the calculation.

Obviously the weight issue is a sensitive one. As well ad the weight that horses are expected to carry there are also issues like saddle fit. I've seen riders english and western who had weight beyond the cantle and the horses looked really uncomfortable

Is it this study you referred to?
https://beva.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eve.13085

 

[TPO]

Is it this study you referred to?
https://beva.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eve.13085

Yes although I've probably worded mine 100 miles away from how they presented it!

 

[Goldenstar]

It’s an interesting study .
however they assessed the H and VH riders in saddles that clearly did not fit them and it would not take a scientist to see that the VH rider is far to big for the horse she is pictured riding .

 

[TPO]

It’s an interesting study .
however they assessed the H and VH riders in saddles that clearly did not fit them and it would not take a scientist to see that the VH rider is far to big for the horse she is pictured riding .

There is a bit in the study as to why they didnt allow individual saddles namely as that wouldn't be the situation at a riding school.

VH rider looks too heavy for any horse <dons tin hat>

 

[Goldenstar]

There is a bit in the study as to why they didnt allow individual saddles namely as that wouldn't be the situation at a riding school.

VH rider looks too heavy for any horse <dons tin hat>

Yes and that’s the limit of the study .
my horses have what we call ladies and gents saddles and that extra half inch plus adjusted panels makes a huge difference .
Its is an extravagance but hunters carry their riders for hours they need the right saddle for the rider .

 

[AShetlandBitMeOnce]

I have a 19hh warmblood - most people think height = more capacity to carry weight but I wouldn’t put more than 14 stone on him for anything other than a ride up the lane. He has big paces, warmblood legs and I think that longer ligaments and tendons actually withstand less stress, which goes along with what other posters have said about long backs.

interestingly I think the weight limit for Cumbrian Heavy Horses may also be 14 stone? But I may be out on that.

 

[deb_l222]

It’s a total myth that heavy horses can carry weight. Their breeding and conformation is such that they are less likely to carry weight that some other breeds. They were bred to PULL not carry.

In my honest opinion, I don’t believe there’s any such thing as a weight carrier and the term is just used flippantly as an excuse to plonk totally unsuitable people (weight wise) on the back of a poor horse.

I’m horrendously overweight myself at the moment so this is in no way a ‘fattist’ comment. When I had my horses however, I was always very conscious of my weight and kept it down.

I also don’t agree with this argument that a balanced heavy rider is OK. No they’re not. No matter how balanced you are, you’re still an excessive wait sitting directly over the spine of another animal.

 

[scruffyponies]

Some ponies do seem happy to take what seems like 'too much' weight. My son (almost 17) still occasionally rides his childhood pony, which is a stocky 12.2 Dartmoor. He looks ridiculous, but the pony is obviously delighted with it (as is the boy), and goes like thunder.
Wouldn't want him doing it every day, mind.

I disagree that balance doesn't make a difference. It's not that balance makes it easy to take weight, but lack of balance makes it intolerably worse.

 

[rabatsa]

Think of the showing classes of heavyweight hunter and heavy weight cob.

To me these are just fat when watching them in the show ring.