Discussing the 20% weight rule

[tallyho!]

It's not as if BB is riding Ben on a 20 mile trek now is it?

She's taking him to have a lesson with someone on the ground who can give her pointers about how to get him fit enough to carry her.

Correct me if I am wrong but from what I can gather BB is a pleasure rider and rides seldomly. I can't imagine how that is considered an "extreme" compared to a horse that has to carry 18st doing the TEVIS CUP!

Where's the pragmatism gone? BB knows she's too heavy to do any extended time on Ben, but she would like to enjoy him for half an hour here and there.

Despite me being a 15-20% type, I cannot see what is wrong with what BB is doing - which is just plodding around.

I wish her the very best of luck getting to her target weight. It must be really hard and made harder by the comments on this thread. I don't want to say the word "bully" but it is seriously looking that way.

Whilst I agree there is no justification of riding when you are overweight however, considering the police force go by the 30% rule for healthy fit horses, it's no wonder that one would investigate the legitimacy of such a calculation.

Whilst everyone here is "bashing Big Ben"... there are 15 mo tb's being asked to carry up to 60kg this season in maiden races - they've been in training all winter and the first rider on their undeveloped backs were probably the same weight. Yes it's 15% but just think how young these horses are.

There is no doubt that Ben needs to be fitter and BB is working on that. Hopefully together they can achieve fitness and lightness this year with some positive encouragement.

 

[Wagtail]

It's not as if BB is riding Ben on a 20 mile trek now is it?

She's taking him to have a lesson with someone on the ground who can give her pointers about how to get him fit enough to carry her.

Correct me if I am wrong but from what I can gather BB is a pleasure rider and rides seldomly. I can't imagine how that is considered an "extreme" compared to a horse that has to carry 18st doing the TEVIS CUP!

But we don't know that, do we? According to BB she wasn't riding at all. She was telling people on here that she was going to lose x amount of weight before starting again riding Ben. And that when she rides him it will only be 20 minutes in walk blar blar blar. But what do we find? She is actually riding a 15hh horse with only 7.5 inches of bone (which incidentally is less than any TB I have owned or cared for), and in trot! So excuse me if I do not believe a word of what she types.

I do believe she comes on here to wind people up. I don't believe she cares about what anybody thinks as she has made up her own mind. I do feel sorry for her as it is a horrible thing to have to go through having to lose so much weight, but when it affects the welfare of her horses, and is plastered for all to see over the internet, then I feel obliged to say something.

 

[WelshD]

I'm not sure whether it's a need to get justification for their right to ride or whether the OP simply likes poking people with sticks but I'm not surprised that people have been outspoken this time.

BB when you arrived here the reception to you was pretty good and I think if you steer clear of the weight topics you would enjoy your time here, people love seeing your wonderful horses and hearing about how things are different over there but people will always disagree over the weight issue so maybe tone that down (no pun intended!) and you'd be fine here

On the subject of weight TO I believe the OP's plans are for dressage which would include hours of schooling. I don't think they should have to state their weight either but personally don't think it's going to be a pleasant surprise if we did find out.

In general though it's one thing to be a passenger but quite another to ride effectively. Falls (even from a standing position) can cause a lot of damage when you are heavy so goodness knows what a fall from a horse would do to you (and them!)

I agree that as a plod Ben is quite capable of carrying weight but what about the wear and tear on him overall?

We are told that horses are seen as 'tools of the trade' over there bit if we compare them to probably the most common tool of the trade - the car we know that a vehicle is capable of carrying huge weights but will begin to be affected after a time if overloaded and the wear and tear will become obvious

 

[Holding]

Okay, after reading through the entire thread, I can't help but add my own opinion.

I have lived in the US and Canada, and the attitude to weight is totally different to what we think in the UK (which is not nearly as extreme as what they think in Germany!). I did a few university dressage competitions in Washington, and the weight limits the owners had set for their horses were honestly absurd - pretty much nothing was over 16hh and they were all lightweight QH types, and the weight limits were around 250lb. I also went to one Western competition which put me off for life - I was worried about my weight but the vast majority of the girls there were twice my size, and swathed in sparkly spandex as well. Almost all of them were extremely underhorsed.

So to get back on topic, I can totally see where BB is coming from. One forum is telling her she's absolutely fine to ride all of her horses, one is telling her she shouldn't be allowed to get on a horse at all. I don't understand how anyone can claim that horse welfare is universal, when in this case it clearly isn't.

In my own personal opinion, BB, the amount of riding you're doing with Ben is fine - he's a big lad and twenty minutes of walk isn't going to hurt. It was a shame to see you on Cody, as you say yourself that you really are too big for him. I know exactly how frustrating it is to have to wait - I am well within 20% of all of my horses' weights, but because they are all unfit and have no muscle, I refuse to ride them until I can spend a couple of weeks lunging and building up fitness. As I have nowhere to lunge atm, I'm not riding. If I was lighter (say 10% of their weights) I'd get on and build fitness that way; as I'm not, I have to compromise. Everyone has to be honest with themselves and make their own judgements, but let's not pretend there is any hard and fast rule, because clearly ideas of what is and isn't acceptable vary to ridiculous degrees.

 

[Wagtail]

So now, having compared the two threads you can see why this subject interests me.

As to Cody, well I first took him over to a friend, who hopped up on him first

Then suggested I tried him, so I did, got on and walked him around the arena and got off. She said it looked OK,

You see, this is why I find it difficult to believe what you say. Take a close look at this picture, and why it does not tally with your statement.

 

[Nohorse]

I KNOW it's not the same thing but I can easily carry 20% or more of my weight for short periods. I suspect we all could. I am not super fit but am able to carry my 2 and a half stone daughter on my shoulders, piggy back etc for periods of 20 mins or so with no ill effects. Surely a handful of times in walk/trot over a year can't possibly be doing any damage?

Clearly it wouldn't be ideal on a long term or frequent basis but I really find it hard to imagine that she has caused him harm.

P.S yes, I know I'm not a horse but still....

 

[Wagtail]

I KNOW it's not the same thing but I can easily carry 20% or more of my weight for short periods. I suspect we all could. I am not super fit but am able to carry my 2 and a half stone daughter on my shoulders, piggy back etc for periods of 20 mins or so with no ill effects. Surely a handful of times in walk/trot over a year can't possibly be doing any damage?

Clearly it wouldn't be ideal on a long term or frequent basis but I really find it hard to imagine that she has caused him harm.

P.S yes, I know I'm not a horse but still....

I get what you mean. However, the way we make horses carry the weight is completely different. When you carry your daughter, all of her weight is concentrated in a straight line down through your body to your feet. A horse has to carry the weight complely differently, on a kind of sling. The weight is concentrated downwards towards their belly. It is a much harder thing to do.

 

[tallyho!]

I get what you mean. However, the way we make horses carry the weight is completely different. When you carry your daughter, all of her weight is concentrated in a straight line down through your body to your feet. A horse has to carry the weight complely differently, on a kind of sling. The weight is concentrated downwards towards their belly. It is a much harder thing to do.

God forbid they carry a foal to term. Wagtail, that's just silly.

 

[Nohorse]

Thanks for taking me seriously, I thought I'd get laughed out of town!

Seeing as we are continuing the analogy, I have to play horses sometimes with her too (as per username, needs must!). I can carry her in the style of a horse for ages, my kneecaps give in before my back!

Yes yes, I really do know I'm not a horse....but I just find it hard to believe damage could be done to Ben under current circumstances. Perhaps if he were very elderly or had significant underlying skeletal/soundness problems but as it is I can't imagine he has muh to complain about.

If she were to ride him regularly, for a long time and ask a lot of him I would agree that would be far from ideal but it doesn't sound that way.

Agree re Cody though.

 

[Wagtail]

God forbid they carry a foal to term. Wagtail, that's just silly.

A foal is around 50 kg at full term. Most of that weight is gained in the last month or so. I'm not being at all silly. I'm talking physics. We are discussing putting a person on the back of a horse who weighs 300lbs including tack.

I find it quite sad that you are arguing that this is all right.

 

[Wagtail]

Thanks for taking me seriously, I thought I'd get laughed out of town!

Seeing as we are continuing the analogy, I have to play horses sometimes with her too (as per username, needs must!). I can carry her in the style of a horse for ages, my kneecaps give in before my back!

Yes yes, I really do know I'm not a horse....but I just find it hard to believe damage could be done to Ben under current circumstances. Perhaps if he were very elderly or had significant underlying skeletal/soundness problems but as it is I can't imagine he has muh to complain about.

If she were to ride him regularly, for a long time and ask a lot of him I would agree that would be far from ideal but it doesn't sound that way.

Agree re Cody though.

I don't agree, I'm afraid. If a horse is hardly ever ridden, then it is LESS able to carry a big weight than if it is fit and properly conditioned. I weigh around 12% of my mare (including tack). She has had various issues that have meant she has not been in regular work. I will be starting again with her shortly and will be riding her for only 5 minutes in walk for the first week, building up to 20 minutes in walk over the first month. This will be 6 days a week. Only then will I start short bursts of trot.

 

[Wagtail]

Thanks for taking me seriously, I thought I'd get laughed out of town!

Seeing as we are continuing the analogy, I have to play horses sometimes with her too (as per username, needs must!). I can carry her in the style of a horse for ages, my kneecaps give in before my back!

Yes yes, I really do know I'm not a horse....but I just find it hard to believe damage could be done to Ben under current circumstances. Perhaps if he were very elderly or had significant underlying skeletal/soundness problems but as it is I can't imagine he has muh to complain about.

If she were to ride him regularly, for a long time and ask a lot of him I would agree that would be far from ideal but it doesn't sound that way.

Agree re Cody though.

The other thing to remember is, the smaller the animal, the more weight it can carry in proportion to its size. Ponies can actually carry more weight as a proportion of their size than a horse for example. An ant can carry 20 times its own weight with ease. So I'm afraid your analogy does not stack up.

 

[tallyho!]

A foal is around 50 kg at full term. Most of that weight is gained in the last month or so. I'm not being at all silly. I'm talking physics. We are discussing putting a person on the back of a horse who weighs 300lbs including tack.

I find it quite sad that you are arguing that this is all right.

Shes just plodding around on her horse wagtail. It's not the welfare issue you seem to be making it out to be.

A mare has to carry that foal plus the placenta and extra fluids which actually amounts to more than 50kg every minute of everyday until it is born. Very different to carrying someone for half an hour three times a week.

I agree that Cody shouldn't be ridden by her full stop but Ben is capable for the amount she is doing.

Keep it in perspective.

I find it sad you continue to hound this woman for for being fat.

 

[Caol Ila]

I'm not getting into the whole "fat" debate, but just saying that I am about 110% certain that Big Ben is not a troll. I've "known" her on the other forum for a while (and I bet she has no idea who I am over there, as I have a different handle -- LOL). I suppose she came to this one to get back in touch with her English roots. Same reason I occasionally look at that one, to get in touch with my American roots (though lately, I've kind of bailed on it for the Chronicle forums, and this one as well, as the Horse Forum has gone downhill of late).

 

[Littlelegs]

I do kind of get what you mean nohorse, but that doesn't stack up for me either. I'm just under 9stone. Daughter was 4stone last time I weighed her, about a year ago. And seems to have just got longer & thinner, so I doubt she's more than a few pounds heavier now. I can carry her, throw her up, put her on my shoulders etc. I'm strong for my size & fit, & my daughter is long. But a bag of hifi, which is lighter, I find harder. And I doubt a 9stone unfit person could carry her. I've also spent 8yrs getting used to her weight very slowly increasing from 7lb to 4 stone. Which is very different to an unfit person being suddenly told to carry half their bodyweight. Most importantly, I have a choice, I can put her down the second it is less than pleasant, rather than when I show signs of struggling. Which isn't an option for a horse.

 

[WelshD]

I don't think anyone is hounding the OP or thinks that she is a troll. BB invited discussion and that's what she got.

 

[Beausmate]

A mare has to carry that foal plus the placenta and extra fluids which actually amounts to more than 50kg every minute of everyday until it is born. Very different to carrying someone for half an hour three times a week.

But the weight of a foal builds up gradually over many months and some mares don't do well physically from carrying the weight around after all that.

I was overweight for a while, I put on nearly three stone, 20% of my current bodyweight is around two stone. I walked around carrying more than that for months until I lost it, it didn't do my already dodgy knee any good at all and I felt so much better when it had gone. But because it was gradual I got conditioned to the extra load.

Like soldiers, running for miles carrying heavy packs. They're trained up, it's conditioning.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is, the 20% rule and definitely 30% should apply to fit, gradually conditioned horses only if you want to reduce the risk of injury. When I was heavy, I didn't ride my chunky 15.2hh tb as I love him and I don't want to make him sore and uncomfortable. I would have been asking him to carry over 14st with tack, that's less that 20%.

 

[Nohorse]

Littlelegs my daughter would disagree that I have a choice! I might start bucking a bit or napping to put her off! Or she might want to feed me some linseed and take my shoes off. Or longline me for a bit first to build up my fitness levels.

Anyway, joking aside, while I don't think it's great, I guess worse things happen at sea. And I'm not sure that the incremental weight increase has much bearing on my ability to be a horse for daughter. I did it for nieces when I wasn't a mum. Maybe I just have excellent conformation!

From a personal perspective I do think it's easier to be an effective rider when carrying less weight and that it benefits both horse and rider.

In fact one of the Too Heavy threads last year inspired me to lose weight - over 2 and a half stone since Oct. I do feel much better for it and as a rider I feel more effective and balanced although I wasn't hugely overweight beforehand.

I can see both sides to this.

 

[melbiswas]

Personally I have to question the OP's mindset.

In my working life I treat a lot of patients with a high BMI that is causing them joint (among other) problems.
Quite often there is a high level of denial of the effects their weight is having on them and inaccurate accounts of food intake, exercise levels etc

Could this denial transfer to the effect you are having on your horse?

I think some are being hard on Wagtail. There is no delicate way of saying I think you are too heavy and will cause harm. The OP says she knows she is too heavy for Cody and yet has still ridden him.

What better incentive to lose weight than the care and respect you have for your horses welfare.

 

[tallyho!]

But the weight of a foal builds up gradually over many months and some mares don't do well physically from carrying the weight around after all that.

I was overweight for a while, I put on nearly three stone, 20% of my current bodyweight is around two stone. I walked around carrying more than that for months until I lost it, it didn't do my already dodgy knee any good at all and I felt so much better when it had gone. But because it was gradual I got conditioned to the extra load.

Like soldiers, running for miles carrying heavy packs. They're trained up, it's conditioning.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is, the 20% rule and definitely 30% should apply to fit, gradually conditioned horses only if you want to reduce the risk of injury. When I was heavy, I didn't ride my chunky 15.2hh tb as I love him and I don't want to make him sore and uncomfortable. I would have been asking him to carry over 14st with tack, that's less that 20%.

Well thank you very much for teaching me to suck eggs, much appreciated

As an advocate of the 15% rule yes I think you were too heavy for your horse.

Joking aside, if you want to go down that route then why shouldn't we?

Lets explore whether or not the question should be "should humans ride horses?"

Many would argue that it's a cruel sport. Why would you want to put ANY weight on a horse. They are clearly not designed to carry things. No animals were yet we use cattle, donkeys, goats to carry and pull our belongings and often ourselves.

Anatomically speaking, the spine is designed to carry weight underneath it. Look carefully at the way the horse is designed and you will see that putting weight on its back is really quite a silly thing to do! It puts the animal off its natural centre of gravity, it puts pressure on places where there shouldn't be and we think we have the authority to say how much it should carry.

It's a preposterous argument.

Horses can and do carry weight on their backs, they have done for hundreds of years and yes they were damaged in some way. If nature didn't give them wear and tear in old age, we certainly contributed to the aches and pains in its life. No one can deny the empire was built on the horses back but we destroyed a fair few of them too in the process.

So, should we ride horses? Is it a bit outdated? Medieval? I mean we have cars and bicycles now, why would we want to do damage to some poor animal?

 

[tallyho!]

Personally I have to question the OP's mindset.

In my working life I treat a lot of patients with a high BMI that is causing them joint (among other) problems.
Quite often there is a high level of denial of the effects their weight is having on them and inaccurate accounts of food intake, exercise levels etc

Could this denial transfer to the effect you are having on your horse?

I think some are being hard on Wagtail. There is no delicate way of saying I think you are too heavy and will cause harm. The OP says she knows she is too heavy for Cody and yet has still ridden him.

What better incentive to lose weight than the care and respect you have for your horses welfare.

There is one thing saying it, and quite another going over it repeatedly. I am not being harsh on wagtail, I agree with her points but I just think she's taking it too far.

If she cares, why doesn't she have a private conversation with Big Ben and help her? Stringing this out on a forum isn't going to help someone with a possible case of denial.

 

[touchstone]

Well thank you very much for teaching me to suck eggs, much appreciated

As an advocate of the 15% rule yes I think you were too heavy for your horse.

Joking aside, if you want to go down that route then why shouldn't we?

Lets explore whether or not the question should be "should humans ride horses?"

Many would argue that it's a cruel sport. Why would you want to put ANY weight on a horse. They are clearly not designed to carry things. No animals were yet we use cattle, donkeys, goats to carry and pull our belongings and often ourselves.

Anatomically speaking, the spine is designed to carry weight underneath it. Look carefully at the way the horse is designed and you will see that putting weight on its back is really quite a silly thing to do! It puts the animal off its natural centre of gravity, it puts pressure on places where there shouldn't be and we think we have the authority to say how much it should carry.

It's a preposterous argument.

Horses can and do carry weight on their backs, they have done for hundreds of years and yes they were damaged in some way. If nature didn't give them wear and tear in old age, we certainly contributed to the aches and pains in its life. No one can deny the empire was built on the horses back but we destroyed a fair few of them too in the process.

So, should we ride horses? Is it a bit outdated? Medieval? I mean we have cars and bicycles now, why would we want to do damage to some poor animal?

Good point, however I think that if you come to the conclusion that you are going to ride, both to increase fitness and lessen boredom for the horse and for fitness and pleasure for yourself, then it makes it all the more important that you ensure that the horse is fit enough for the job, that you limit the weight and burden he has to carry as much as possible and make sure tack is well fitting etc.

I have no issue with anyone being overweight, I've got a few pounds to lose myself after a good christmas and too much rich grazing but I do think we owe it to our horses to make life as comfortable as possible when we do ride them, and I wouldn't have contemplated riding Cody if I was BB - (sorry to make it personal BB.)

 

[Arizahn]

I DON'T THINK ANYONE ON ANY FORUM IS QUALIFIED TO GIVE OUT PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS!!!!!!!!

And re actually, the photo of BB on Ben, I think you look ok, for walk and trot. I have seen far worse, in real life! I would say, stick to walk for a few weeks, let him build up to trot with you. This will also let you get your seat established, which will make it easier on both of you. Riding will also cause you to burn fat to muscle as I am sure you already know.

As for Cody, I think height wise you are too tall to ever be fully balanced, regardless of weight. (He was the grey one, right?)

There is an ignore user option, btw.

Does anyone even remember the opening post?

 

[tallyho!]

I remember the opening post which is why I'm now defending Big Ben as it has gone way off topic.

 

[Arizahn]

<Waves at Tallyho!> I am on my mobile thingy, but here is the jist of it:


I know that the 20% rule is widely accepted when talking about horse weight carrying abilities, and yes I've seen the research that backs that up.Interesting reading from the American Endurance Riders Conference, taken from their handbook, Chapter 3 selecting the endurance horse:

II. BREEDSWhen it comes to breeds, it’s obvious that as a group Arabians do the best. On the other hand, individuals from any breed can excel in endurance, and not all Arabians are suitable candidates. Arabians are usually easier than other breeds to keep fit once they are in shape. In fact one is looking for a type of horse, not a breed, I.e., a sound, efficient mover with staying power. What does seem to be true is a higher percentage of Arabians are the right type than most other breeds.III. AGEThe most preferred age of a prospect is 3-8 years. If you like to start with a horse who has never been ridden and are willing to spend the two years for basic equitation training then 3-4 is a good age, otherwise look for the 5-8 year old. A younger horse may take many years before you will have any idea whether or not he is suitable for the sport, and an older horse is fine if you are well aware of his history. (Endurance horses often perform competitively well into their late teens.) This history should include regular exercise, preferably trail riding. It will normally take two to three years to have the horse in top fitness if they have not been exercised a lot before your purchase but while you are conditioning you may enter many endurance rides on horses that are this age when you purchase them, provided you have the self-restraint to ride these early rides as conditioning rides and not races. Many a good prospect has been ruined by racing too soon Remember, if your horse obviously has shown you that he is not a good endurance horse prospect, there are many others out there that will fill the bill.IV. SIZEThere is no ideal size for an endurance horse. Ponies can do very well, as can horses of 16 hands or so. Many good endurance horses are between 14 and 15 hands. The size of the horse should be appropriate for the size of the rider, however. No one could expect a pony to be competitive carrying a 200 pound man. Small, lightweight riders obviously have an advantage in that they have a greater range of sizes from which to choose.*As a rule, the horse can carry up to 30% of his body weight, depending on his bone size, I.e., a 900 pound horse should be able to carry approximately 250 pounds on his back.

For those not familiar with AERC:

About AERCThe American Endurance Ride Conference (AERC) was founded in 1972 as a national governing body for long distance riding. Over the years it has developed a set of rules and guidelines designed to provide a standardized format and strict veterinary controls. At the same time it has sought to avoid the rigidity and complexity so characteristic of many other equine disciplines.From its beginnings in the American West, the AERC has spread roots both nationally and internationally. The AERC sanctions more than 700 rides each year throughout North America. In 1978 the Federation Equestre Internationale (FEI) recognized endurance riding as an international sport, and since that date the U.S. and Canada have regularly swept the team and individual medals. In 1993 Endurance became the fifth discipline under the United States Equestrian Team (U.S.E.T.).In addition to promoting the sport of endurance riding, the AERC encourages the use, protection, and development of equestrian trails, especially those with historic significance. Many special events of four to six consecutive days take place over historic trails, such as the Pony Express Trail, the Outlaw Trail, the Chief Joseph Trail, and the Lewis and Clark Trail. The founding ride of endurance riding, the Western States Trail Ride or "Tevis," covers 100 miles of the famous Western States and Immigrant Trails over the Sierra Nevada Mountains. These rides promote awareness of the importance of trail preservation for future generations and foster an appreciation of our American heritage.AERC Mission Statement: To promote the sport of endurance riding and to encourage and enforce the safe use of horses in demonstrating their endurance abilities in a natural setting through the development, use and preservation of trails. Further, AERC's mission is to maintain horse and ride records of event competition and completions, to record and provide awards to outstanding horses and riders, to ensure that all sanctioned events are conducted in a safe, fair and consistent manner, and to actively promote and conduct educational efforts and research projects that will foster a high level of safety and enjoyment for all horses and riders. The above is to be accomplished with the understanding that goals for the rider must be meshed with the abilities of the horse. Part of AERC's mission is to attract and reward members who act to insure the highest priority for their horses' immediate and long-term physical and emotional health and well-being.AERC Vision Statement To be the preeminent authority and leader in developing and promoting the sport and pastime of endurance riding in the United States, Canada, and throughout the world.

This is not a thread about anyone, or to promote the larger rider, I am interested in the difference in views on this one.*From my point of view, I grew up in the UK accepting that horses shouldn't be backed until they are 3 or preferably 4, and that the 20% rule was probably gospel. Also that horses needed shoes.Now on the other side of the Atlantic, I know that horses don't ALWAYS need shoes, I struggle with 2 year old horses being broken and ridden away, and with the acceptance of the larger rider.*Obviously AERC wants to have fit and healthy horses, it wouldn't do them any good to advise the 30% rule if horses were breaking down, and I'm sure that there are enough fitter, thinner people doing endurance that they didn't need to opt for the 30% rule arbitrarily.So, any chance of a decent discussion on this one?

 

[Arizahn]

I think clue is in the last paragraph there...

 

[Wagtail]

I find it sad you continue to hound this woman for for being fat.

Now you are being silly.

I have never in my life hounded anyone for being fat. That is just a stupid thing to say. I am picking up on the various untruths she has been saying (and only because she tried to imply I was making it up about her riding rather than put Billie right herself as any honest person would do). I have picked up on the fact that she is not considering the right type of horse. In fact I have never even used the word fat to describe her. As I have pointed out many times before, this is not about being overweight, it is about being too heavy for the horses she chooses to ride. I would have no issue whatsoever if any of her mounts were suitable to carry her.

So yes, I have issues with this woman, but none of them are because she is overweight.

 

[tallyho!]

Yes, well I always wondered if horses needed shoes too...

 

[Arizahn]

Barefoot is best. Especially when they run over you...

 

[Wagtail]

Personally I have to question the OP's mindset.

In my working life I treat a lot of patients with a high BMI that is causing them joint (among other) problems.
Quite often there is a high level of denial of the effects their weight is having on them and inaccurate accounts of food intake, exercise levels etc

Could this denial transfer to the effect you are having on your horse?

I think some are being hard on Wagtail. There is no delicate way of saying I think you are too heavy and will cause harm. The OP says she knows she is too heavy for Cody and yet has still ridden him.

What better incentive to lose weight than the care and respect you have for your horses welfare.

Thank you Melbiswas.

Many people told Big Ben that Cody was in need of building up and that he was poorly put together and in need of some TLC. She continued to run her weight loss threads telling people she was not riding until she had lost a load of weight, and that she would then start to ride Ben again. People supported her saying it was something to look forward to as a reward. All the while she was actually still riding and not Ben, her bigest, but Cody, malnourished and only 15hh with hardly any bone.