cally23
Well-Known Member
So glad I just checked into the forum, OH snickers bar is now back in his secret stash draw 
Done to death I know but rider weight?
- Thread starter poiuytrewq
- Start date
poiuytrewq
Well-Known Member
So glad I just checked into the forum, OH snickers bar is now back in his secret stash draw
Haha! I so wish there was a secret stash drawer in this house!
Farma
Well-Known Member
That's good to hear and exactly what is needed and not soon enough!
cally23
Well-Known Member
It has been a necessity, as I have felt to heavy for my cob, so I have lost a stone, 13 sounds and feels so much better than 14! I still want to lose at least one more. If I see sweet things, especially chocolate, I am a gonna but somehow (most) of the time, I totally forget about his (I can eat anything - God don't you just hate that?) not so secret stash.
AandK
Well-Known Member
I expect it is more of a cumulative effect, so I doubt there would be many stories where 'damage' is attributed to an overweight rider. There are probably horses who have had soft tissue injuries which may have been exacerbated by their rider being a bit too heavy for that particular horse.
poiuytrewq
Well-Known Member
Well done! It's hard going I know. I'm still considered relatively slim but I've gained over the past years jut a tiny bit here and there and I'm not totally comfortable In myself as it's not how I feel "right"
So difficult though
AShetlandBitMeOnce
Well-Known Member
well from the posts and photos on here over the years I don't think I have ever seen one horse with a physical issue being investigated that I have thought 'well that is clearly because XYZ user is overweight for that horse'. In fact those on here for whom some have expressed the views that they are too large for their mounts seem to have some of the soundest, happiest, issue free beasts.
I don't see how this is the point though... I don't need to see physical injuries to decide that my horse probably doesn't want to lug someone around that's too heavy. I refer back to ''just because 'it' can, doesn't mean 'it' should''.
Unless your idea of what we should/shouldn't make a horse do is based solely on whether it will be of any physical detriment to the horse or not.
ETA: Well done to those who have shifted some lb's! Wish I had the same motivation, lacking at the moment!
ester
Not slacking multitasking
Don't hold out much hope that it will be better than what we have already iirc their terms for horse recruitment were very narrow (which they have to be but again misses so much)
ester
Not slacking multitasking
I don't see how this is the point though... I don't need to see physical injuries to decide that my horse probably doesn't want to lug someone around that's too heavy. I refer back to ''just because 'it' can, doesn't mean 'it' should''.
Unless your idea of what we should/shouldn't make a horse do is based solely on whether it will be of any physical detriment to the horse or not.
ETA: Well done to those who have shifted some lb's! Wish I had the same motivation, lacking at the moment!
Well I do tend to work with evidence so what is too heavy to 'lug' though? How do you define lugging is it something you can observe in the horses way of going? If the horse is going well does that mean it isn't lugging? Or are you putting the emotion/feeling of 'why am I having the lug this around' onto the horse? In which case should we never expect them to physically exert themselves? Is it just the picture 'looking right' which varies from person and doesn't pertain to actual weight as we all carry it differently. It is all subjective opinion which is why I particular picked up the example of the people on here who have been deemed too big by other posters either based on weight or pictures, have owned their equids for many years and those equids are sound, happy and trouble free even as they get older. Whereas there are plenty of posts about issues generally on the forum, daily!
AShetlandBitMeOnce
Well-Known Member
Right okay, I see what you mean! I suppose my theory that people should judge what is appropriate for the horse to carry without needing physical injury limit would depend on the human sufficiently being able to do so; which is exactly the issue here.
Wagtail
Horse servant
How would you know though? Most damage is cummulative. Most horses are very stoic animals. Those little donkeys still plod along with those fat tourists up the steep hill to Santorini. Where would you draw the line? Is this too heavy? Donkey is clearly charging off with him and doesn't appear to be staggering but most people would say he's too heavy. How do you measure it?
ester
Not slacking multitasking
Yup I understand what you are getting at too I think we'd all like a nice little formula but it isn't going to happen so I imagine this being debated especially for those in the 'middle range' when I'm far too old to ride . Basically if I chopped my boobs off I reckon that must be pushing a stone
I'm still in awe of the 100kg deadlift though, I did my first proper squat at 35 kg tonight!
I think we'd all like a nice little formula but it isn't going to happen so I imagine this being debated especially for those in the 'middle range' when I'm far too old to ride . Basically if I chopped my boobs off I reckon that must be pushing a stone I'm still in awe of the 100kg deadlift though, I did my first proper squat at 35 kg tonight!
Orangehorse
Well-Known Member
I thought the Army had done some weight calculations years ago for horses carrying troops and as packhorses and that was for being on the move all day, not just being ridden for a restricted time. I know that the horses were regarded as transport, but they did expect them to have a reasonable length of service due to the investment in training.
Batgirl
Well-Known Member
Yup I understand what you are getting at too
I'm still in awe of the 100kg deadlift though, I did my first proper squat at 35 kg tonight!
Thanks
you'll get there, there is a lot of technique involved 
Leo Walker
Well-Known Member
duplicate
Leo Walker
Well-Known Member
It was 25% of their bodyweight
Xanthoria
Well-Known Member
Yup I understand what you are getting at too
After we get some data from the tests mentioned above, we just need a website where people can enter their own data and each horse can have a weight limit assigned to it. The website might start with a 15% limit and raise or lower the upper weight limit based on the inputs. You could have it set up to ask various questions, such as:
1. The horse:
Age
Height
Heart girth, length (to give us weight)
Bone measurement
Body type (light vs cobby)
Condition on Henneke scale
Fitness level
Past history of sore back etc
2. The rider:
Height
Weight
Experience level (more experience doesn't mean you weigh less: Less experience means you weigh more, potentially)
3. Saddlery:
Type (some saddles distribute weight better)
Weight including additional items
Professionally fitted to horse?
4. Intended ride:
Duration
Speed (e.g. all walk, mostly walk with 5 mins of canter etc)
Ambient temperature, wind, rain (hot weather making it harder for the horse etc)
Elevation
Flat or hilly
Jumps or none
Footing (heavy sand/mud, groomed arena, rocky trails)
It would totally take the guesswork out of the equation, and a lot of the hurt feelings and arguing.
Xanthoria
Well-Known Member
Right about that yes - I found this info online from 'Horse, Saddles, and Bridles', by Colonel William Carter, 1902. The book goes into great detail on lessons learned in the Civil and Indian Wars regarding maintaining horses, endurance, equipment, and standard practices in the U.S. Cavalry.
The U.S. Cavalry saddle weighed 17 lbs.
Total equipment weight (including saddle, guns, boots, etc) 90 lbs.
Maximum allowed weight of Cavalry trooper 165 lbs.
Preferred weight of Cavalry trooper 130 to 150 lbs.
Average weight of US Cavalry horse 1052 lbs.
Which makes the max allowed on the horse 272lbs but they preferred to keep it to 237-257lbs, which is 22.5-24.4% of the horse's weight. So not far off but they obviously wanted it lower because they recognized the impact.
About a million went to fight in various overseas wars. They were all either killed or left behind - horses were seen as expendable, so they were worked hard and a 15 year + career was not the goal of the army.
http://www.mustangs4us.com/unused/history_4-20thCentury.htm
So, I think if you want less impact/a longer working life, the army requirements might be reduced.
ester
Not slacking multitasking
After we get some data from the tests mentioned above, we just need a website where people can enter their own data and each horse can have a weight limit assigned to it. The website might start with a 15% limit and raise or lower the upper weight limit based on the inputs. You could have it set up to ask various questions, such as:
1. The horse:
Age
Height
Heart girth, length (to give us weight)
Bone measurement
Body type (light vs cobby)
Condition on Henneke scale
Fitness level
Past history of sore back etc
2. The rider:
Height
Weight
Experience level (more experience doesn't mean you weigh less: Less experience means you weigh more, potentially)
3. Saddlery:
Type (some saddles distribute weight better)
Weight including additional items
Professionally fitted to horse?
4. Intended ride:
Duration
Speed (e.g. all walk, mostly walk with 5 mins of canter etc)
Ambient temperature, wind, rain (hot weather making it harder for the horse etc)
Elevation
Flat or hilly
Jumps or none
Footing (heavy sand/mud, groomed arena, rocky trails)
It would totally take the guesswork out of the equation, and a lot of the hurt feelings and arguing.
but the tests mentioned above aren't going to give you the data you need to generate an accurate algorithm from the above??
Leo Walker
Well-Known Member
I havent had chance to look into it properly, but this seems to uggest that they conducted fairly thorough tests to work out the best ratio and type of horse. There arent any references to verify it, but I cant imagine it would be hard to do if you had the time and inclination to look.
ester
Not slacking multitasking
I was talking about the new research plans just in case that is a cross wires situation.
KittenInTheTree
Well-Known Member
Thyroid is fine, thanks, and I'm not currently on any meds that affect metabolism. I used to be on one though, for about twenty years, which is what caused me to end up overweight in the first place. Now I just need to wrap my head around eating more - very small appetite, always have had!
Wagtail
Horse servant
I thought you said you were over 12 stone. You are trying to lose weight? Why would you want to eat more? I'm confused.
ester
Not slacking multitasking
Because myfitnesspal has suggested that KITT is not currently consuming sufficient, I guess based on the starvation mode model. I'd think that might be even more of an issue if long term metabolism affecting meds have been a factor, or it at least might make losing weight more complicated.
Overread
Well-Known Member
Eating too little encourages the body to put on fat reserves and slow the metabolic rate. Essentially its preparing for a longer period where you might have lower food intake so its doing what it can to maximise what you get; which means less into growth and development and more into fat reserves.
This can be made worse if you're eating too little to start with and then put yourself on a strict exercise program so you're trying to burn more energy and put the body under even more stress.
Of course go extreme and increased activity and lower food will break this, but its a very unhealthy way to lose weight.
Also don't forget that different foods will affect you differently, so its perfectly possible to eat an increased volume of food without it all being high sugar and high fat.
This can be made worse if you're eating too little to start with and then put yourself on a strict exercise program so you're trying to burn more energy and put the body under even more stress.
Of course go extreme and increased activity and lower food will break this, but its a very unhealthy way to lose weight.
Also don't forget that different foods will affect you differently, so its perfectly possible to eat an increased volume of food without it all being high sugar and high fat.
{97702}
...
I couldn't care less about BMI or any other stats - if you are concerned that you are too heavy for your horse, you probably are......
alainax
Well-Known Member
It's true! The only horses I've know to have recurring back problems or lameness have slim riders. Both good and bad riders I might add!well from the posts and photos on here over the years I don't think I have ever seen one horse with a physical issue being investigated that I have thought 'well that is clearly because XYZ user is overweight for that horse'. In fact those on here for whom some have expressed the views that they are too large for their mounts seem to have some of the soundest, happiest, issue free beasts
I don't see how this is the point though... I don't need to see physical injuries to decide that my horse probably doesn't want to lug someone around that's too heavy. I refer back to ''just because 'it' can, doesn't mean 'it' should''.
!
Same could be said about riding in general, or bits, shoes, rugs, stables...
Lévrier;13589726 said:
I think the opposite actually, most people who think they are too heavy, usually aren't. Too tall often yes, but from the posters on here at least, rarely too heavy.
ester
Not slacking multitasking
So on the basis of the weight lifting discussion, and the huge difference it is making to my form, posture, and daily comfort working under load .... maybe they are stronger from the 'lugging'
*aware of huge extrapolation and somewhat off the wall thinking
*aware of huge extrapolation and somewhat off the wall thinking
alainax
Well-Known Member
Haha I was thinking that but thought I better not open that can of wormsSo on the basis of the weight lifting discussion, and the huge difference it is making to my form, posture, and daily comfort working under load .... maybe they are stronger from the 'lugging'
*aware of huge extrapolation and somewhat off the wall thinking
Orangehorse
Well-Known Member
The Army used Morgan horses, although they had more bone than the modern show Morgans, and they were around 15.00 hh but were broad and quite chunky.