Is there (or should there be) a ceiling weight to horse riding

[abbijay]

I've been pondering this for a while and feel it's time to start a thread and see what people come up with...
I know many riding schools have very low limits for good reasons so I'm not looking to get into that side of it, I'm thinking about private horses.
Is there a weight at which a rider should accept that no horse can safely or comfortably carry them? I follow an "equestrian" on facebook who has a clothing with phrases like "Every Body is an Equestrian Body" and "my horse doesn't care what size i am". While I am all for body positivity and finding the right horse for the rider but I also think there must be a ceiling weight at which a person just has to accept no horse can fairly be asked to carry a rider.
What weight would you think no horse should be asked to take?

 

[mini_b]

Abi funny you’ve brought this up this morning, I’ve posted a similar veined thread on selling to private sellers.

https://forums.horseandhound.co.uk/threads/would-you-hypothetical.807210/

I don’t think you can be weight specific on a single weight, the horse needs to be matched to the rider.

I’ve seen a lot of very large riders on US pages riding much smaller/finer horses than bigger riders here tend to ride.

It’s a sport at the end of the day, you should be fit for purpose, you expect it from your horse. most posters on here that know they are too big for their horse are not riding and trying to do something about it.

 

[mini_b]

For the ceiling weight, would you have to work out the max weight by the 20% rule on a HW horse? But then this wouldn’t apply to a 17hh TB.

Tricky.

 

[abbijay]

For the ceiling weight, would you have to work out the max weight by the 20% rule on a HW horse? But then this wouldn’t apply to a 17hh TB.

Tricky.

nor would it apply to a clydesdale! My clydie last weighbridged at 832kg so according to that 166.5kg or 25 1/2 stone/357lbs. For me no one of 25 stone should be on a horse...

 

[dorsetladette]

I don't think there could be a specific weight as all horses are different and so are riders. A novice will sit and hold themselves very differently to a much more experienced rider. But, I think as a rider you should be aware of your weight and what your horse can happily carry.

the 20% rule is helpful as a guide. But does it really reflect the horses ability? heavy horses for example were bred to pull heavy loads not carry heavy loads.

 

[Pippin and Poppy]

I volunteer for RDA and we have a weight limit for each horse and pony. Many of our riders are unbalanced and ride 'heavy' so the weight limits are set lower than the general guides.
I don't know how you could (fairly) specify a set weight though, there are so many variables: Rider ability, horse fitness, age, breed, the work being done, how many hours under saddle and so on.

 

[mini_b]

nor would it apply to a clydesdale! My clydie last weighbridged at 832kg so according to that 166.5kg or 25 1/2 stone/357lbs. For me no one of 25 stone should be on a horse...

Yeah exactly.... not easy to put a hard and fast rule onto it.

 

[AShetlandBitMeOnce]

Since losing Jacob I have ballooned, and I'm about 15.5 stone - the only horse I would ride at this weight would be a chunk of a big irish draught type (not a horse designed to pull, eg: heavies). And even then it would be with a view to losing weight pretty quickly so it's not for a prolonged amount of time. I haven't looked for a share or to ride whilst I am working on losing weight as I don't think it's fair and I don't feel comfortable, although (and it may be as I am tall and carry the weight 'well') I have been offered plenty.

I'll stick my neck out and say that I think 16.5 stone is a absolute upper limit for me even for a bit of a plod around. If you are this weight or more then you still have options eg: in hand showing, or carriage driving.

I'm sorry if that upsets anyone, that's just how I feel. I think it's an issue the whole way through the spectrum though, you may not be at the top weight for riding at all, but if your behind bulges over the 16inch saddle your pony needs then you are too big for them.

 

[Flicker]

Yes. I am all for body positivity and disagree with the narrow parameters we apply to determine what is beautiful or healthy. However, if you are expecting another animal to deliver an athletic performance of any sort (even walking down the road) while carrying you, you have a duty to that animal to make it as easy as possible for it to do this. This includes keeping your weight at a level that is comfortable for the animal to carry.

This has nothing to do with the body positivity conversation and everything to do with welfare.

I am 6ft, with low percentage body fat, weighing in at about 12 stone. I would not dream of sitting on a 15h TB, I’m simply too heavy. However I ride a 15h heavyweight cob for a friend and he’s perfectly capable of carrying my weight.

I’m no vet or statistician but I can’t help but wonder whether the higher incidences of arthritic changes, kissing spine etc correlate with us becoming heavier.

I also think that if we are asking our horses to perform even moderately taxing athletic movements - jumping, dressage etc - we owe it to them to try to keep our own bodies as fit and strong as we can to help them.

 

[Widgeon]

I do think a lot of this must also be related to horse fitness - just thinking about back in (let's say) Georgian times, when many people rode as transport, and unless you were rich you wouldn't be able to afford to seriously break your horse. Leaving aside the fact that there probably were many poorly treated working horses back then, horses in general must have been very fit, muscled and used to daily hard work. So they'd have presumably been better able to cope with carrying weight than your average "hacked a few times a week" horse today. Also, I wonder whether the average man's riding horse back then (I'm excluding women because women on the whole seem to have been much smaller then) would have been more of a hunter type (if you were rich) or a cob type (for the middle class). Therefore more bone and substance than the many TBs and ISHs around now.

Those are just my thoughts, I don't know how accurate they are - what I need is a historian specialising in the history of the riding horse! Anyone know one?!

 

[Gloi]

I’m no vet or statistician but I can’t help but wonder whether the higher incidences of arthritic changes, kissing spine etc correlate with us becoming heavier.

If this was the case wouldn't it be more common in smaller animals, which it isn't.
I think horses are being bred to narrow parameters such as extravagant paces and jumping ability which is moving away from a strong robust animal. In nature a horse isn't meant to be 16.2 and the further we go from the wild model the more weaknesses are built in.
Look at ponies such as the Exmoor and Mongolian ones to see how strong per kg an equine can be

 

[mini_b]

I do think a lot of this must also be related to horse fitness - just thinking about back in (let's say) Georgian times, when many people rode as transport, and unless you were rich you wouldn't be able to afford to seriously break your horse. Leaving aside the fact that there probably were many poorly treated working horses back then, horses in general must have been very fit, muscled and used to daily hard work. So they'd have presumably been better able to cope with carrying weight than your average "hacked a few times a week" horse today. Also, I wonder whether the average man's riding horse back then (I'm excluding women because women on the whole seem to have been much smaller then) would have been more of a hunter type (if you were rich) or a cob type (for the middle class). Therefore more bone and substance than the many TBs and ISHs around now.

Those are just my thoughts, I don't know how accurate they are - what I need is a historian specialising in the history of the riding horse! Anyone know one?!

Very interesting!
I would have guessed that if you weren’t very rich and travelling by horse that you would have been slim due to hard work/lack of food?!

Then the rich people that lived off goose travelled in a carriage of some sort?

Then in goes the argument that horses back then were bred for totally different attributes. Eg strength rather than flashy paces etc

 

[AShetlandBitMeOnce]

I do think a lot of this must also be related to horse fitness - just thinking about back in (let's say) Georgian times, when many people rode as transport, and unless you were rich you wouldn't be able to afford to seriously break your horse. Leaving aside the fact that there probably were many poorly treated working horses back then, horses in general must have been very fit, muscled and used to daily hard work. So they'd have presumably been better able to cope with carrying weight than your average "hacked a few times a week" horse today. Also, I wonder whether the average man's riding horse back then (I'm excluding women because women on the whole seem to have been much smaller then) would have been more of a hunter type (if you were rich) or a cob type (for the middle class). Therefore more bone and substance than the many TBs and ISHs around now.

Those are just my thoughts, I don't know how accurate they are - what I need is a historian specialising in the history of the riding horse! Anyone know one?!

Ignoring the fact we pick up on more things and have more advanced veterinary capabilities, I do also wonder whether these horses lasted longer as A) they weren't the product of selective breeding for all the wrong things and B) they worked in the way that was best for them, they weren't subjected to what we think is biomechanically right, or had bungee's/draw reins plonked on them, or hauled into broken at the 3rd vertebrae and over bent outlines. (Sweeping statement). There was no collection, extension, tight turns at speed etc.. I think our influence over what they are doing is probably instrumental in these injuries. If we said to horses can you get from A to B in whatever way/manner you see fit, they would probably last a while longer.

Unless you have a warmblood, they would probably injure themselves in a padded cell.

 

[PapaverFollis]

"My horse doesn't care what size I am"

...


Yes, he does love. Sorry.

I think we owe it to them to be as light as we can reasonably manage. I naturally run to fat and heavy. I work pretty hard to stay at a weight I can reasonably expect my horse to carry. It's just part of the sport to me.

 

[scats]

Weight is a very emotive topic, but I truly believe that if you’re going to expect an animal to carry you, you should do your best to be in the best physical shape you can, and that means not carrying excess weight.
I think about my weight far too much and I recognise it’s probably not particularly healthy to be like that, but I am careful not to overeat in order to stay at my desired size. I get frustrated when people tell me how lucky I am to be slim, as if I can eat anything I like. I really can’t. I have to work hard and make sacrifices where food is concerned to stay slim.

 

[Caol Ila]

You'll never really know how incidences of lameness and breakdowns historically (and when are we talking about? Middle ages? 17th century? 19th century? And what country?) compare to now. I don't think that data exists. But I would not jump to the conclusion that relying on them for transport and work meant everyone took better care of them and they were sounder. People rely on cars for transport and work now, and but it doesn't mean everyone takes great care of their cars, whether they can afford to repair/replace or not!

We can say that there's always been an appetite for extravagant movement. Different sort of extravagance, but extravagance nonetheless. In European and American cities, a high-stepping carriage horse was seen as a status symbol, like a Lamborghini. Do we know the attrition rate of those animals? Elsewhere, like Iceland, or the Scottish Highlands, large men were riding fairly small, primitive horses who were hard as nails. Working ranchers in the American West have been asking their horses for fast spins and stops since there were white people in the American West who needed to chase cows.

It is very likely that natives and cob-types weren't used for horse sport to the degree that they are now. Your labouring classes wouldn't have really had the time to pursue that stuff with any dedication, although some might have engaged in the occasional road race. There's a fair bit of documentation of Native American tribes racing their horses. But horse sport like dressage, thoroughbred racing, and polo seemed to be primarily the space of the upper classes. A working class drayman wasn't going to ride his dray horse in the dressage school on the weekends! Since leisure time across social classes has increased by hugely significant margins (I read a paper on this once), and the horse has gone from transport to pet, all types of horses are now used in sport. Are they any less or more sound? Who knows.

 

[Flicker]

If this was the case wouldn't it be more common in smaller animals, which it isn't.
I think horses are being bred to narrow parameters such as extravagant paces and jumping ability which is moving away from a strong robust animal. In nature a horse isn't meant to be 16.2 and the further we go from the wild model the more weaknesses are built in.
Look at ponies such as the Exmoor and Mongolian ones to see how strong per kg an equine can be

Excellent point!

 

[ester]

I stopped riding once I was more than 15 stone, partly as I wasn't doing horses much at the time but it was an absolute no for me on anything once I'd gone past 16 stone. I have friends who would have happily had me ride but I wasn't happy putting that on any horse.
I've dropped 4 stone and am back around 13st and its amazing to be riding again.

I do think it also matters a bit what the horse is conditioned to. Frank was always fine with me but I might not have jumped on another 14.2 welshie that was conditioned to a 9 stone rider.

 

[abbijay]

"My horse doesn't care what size I am"

...


Yes, he does love. Sorry.

Especially when the same horse has been subject to various injuries and lameness at a relatively young age but that's a very different rant than the general "how big is too big" question I am asking today.

 

[Lurfy]

There was a very overweight woman at my adult riding club some years ago, she would have been easily over 100 kilos. She was a good rider but too heavy for her horses, I would say she was too heavy for any horse.

She had three horses in the time I saw her at the club and each one developed bad back problems. She retired them all on her property so at least they were taken care of. She loved horses and riding and had mental health issues, horses were her outlet. It was really hard to tackle the subject with her, and I think I pretty much failed because she was such a complex character.

 

[mini_b]

I stopped riding once I was more than 15 stone, partly as I wasn't doing horses much at the time but it was an absolute no for me on anything once I'd gone past 16 stone. I have friends who would have happily had me ride but I wasn't happy putting that on any horse.
I've dropped 4 stone and am back around 13st and its amazing to be riding again.

I do think it also matters a bit what the horse is conditioned to. Frank was always fine with me but I might not have jumped on another 14.2 welshie that was conditioned to a 9 stone rider.

Well done!!

 

[Dyllymoo]

People put weight limits on "loan" adverts, and not just for ponies/ fine horses. I've seen weight limits on 12 year old sports horses.

I've never seen one on a for sale advert which is interesting.

I'm bigger than I want to be but I'm currently nowhere near a horse.

I would be mortified if someone told me I was too big for their horse (I'm not huge), but I would steer clear of an advert if I was over the weight limit, so maybe that's the way forward?

 

[millikins]

I would question whether you can be a good rider if you are very overweight. How can you effectively use your thigh muscles if they are encased in flab? Or have any core strength with a a vast belly?
But I'm not sure it's a question of weight, it's more about weight distribution and body proportion. If a simple weight limit is set it would rule out most men and larger framed women riders.
I'm feeling decidedly fattist at the moment, I went to our native's breed show a couple of weeks ago and was "uphauled" by the number of obese riders lumbering around on their long suffering animals.

 

[HollyWoozle]

It is such a contentious and complicated issue with so many factors. I do believe that there are many riders too big for their horses, absolutely, and I don't like to encounter it... but I don't think a 'ceiling weight' would ever work as it depends on so many things. Everyone has different ideas about it too, sometimes I read the maximum weight people think is OK for a horse and it's lower than what I would think was fine! There is of course a point when I think people probably won't be able to find a suitable horse to carry them but hard to put a cap on it, so to speak. My OH is about 16st 4lbs and a beginner and I have no issue with him riding certain horses and firmly believe they can carry him. But I do think we are seeing more and more heavier riders who are not suitably mounted.

It's funny to encounter this topic this morning as yesterday I posted a canter clip from a ride I did in Mongolia in a FB horsey group. Someone very quickly screenshotted a moment showing one of the Mongolian horsemen on a particularly tiny Mongolian Horse with the phrase "OMG", evidently appalled, but there was not one moment in Mongolia when I didn't feel comfortable with those tiny horses carrying me, the riders in my group or the local horsemen and women. They are miniscule but absolutely as tough as nails and it didn't bother me at all. Equally I have ridden many horses on trips abroad who were smaller than I would choose for myself but they were fit and up to the task in my opinion.

 

[Flicker]

I would question whether you can be a good rider if you are very overweight. How can you effectively use your thigh muscles if they are encased in flab? Or have any core strength with a a vast belly?
But I'm not sure it's a question of weight, it's more about weight distribution and body proportion. If a simple weight limit is set it would rule out most men and larger framed women riders.
I'm feeling decidedly fattist at the moment, I went to our native's breed show a couple of weeks ago and was "uphauled" by the number of obese riders lumbering around on their long suffering animals.

So I am a larger framed woman, pretty fit, low percentage body fat, and am very careful about what I ride. I may sit lighter and have more ability to use my aids effectively than a rider the same weight who is carrying a lot of body fat, but my weight would still be unpleasant for a fine, smaller horse to carry. Therefore before I get on anything I am very clear what my weight is and allow the owner to make the decision regarding whether they are happy for me to ride or not.

 

[Nudibranch]

20% as per the existing guidance, reduced to 15% for big draught types.
If someone is over that they can always take up driving, or working in hand (in which case they might end up nearer to the target weight anyway).

 

[ester]

I would question whether you can be a good rider if you are very overweight. How can you effectively use your thigh muscles if they are encased in flab? Or have any core strength with a a vast belly?

Fwiw on this bit I was doing bootcamp 3 days a week, cycling 60+ miles a week fast lane swimming twice a week so my thigh muscles were pretty effective! core variable due to hypermobility... but I was pushing 17 stone.

 

[rabatsa]

I am 6ft, with low percentage body fat, weighing in at about 12 stone. I would not dream of sitting on a 15h TB, I’m simply too heavy. However I ride a 15h heavyweight cob for a friend and he’s perfectly capable of carrying my weight.

Red Rum won the Grand National carrying 12st.

 

[CanteringCarrot]

Hm. When I was up to 10 stone I will admit some inner thigh flab annoyed me. Still plenty of muscle, I just carried some extra flesh on my inner thighs and it was noticeable to me in a dressage saddle. In a jump saddle/with shorter stirrups not so much. So sometimes it isn't your weight exactly, but where your body prefers to store its fat.

I do think there should be a ceiling here and the 20% rule is good but there are horses out there such as my own that give a reasonably solid appearance but he is not weight carrier. I had a fit but heavier than me rider on him and the difference was very noticeable in his way of moving. Same when my OH sits on him. So there are variables.

 

[Birker2020]

It's really hard as I have put on weight over the last three or so years since I stopped schooling my previous horse due to her physical issues. Hacking didn't burn the same calories and I've not actually ridden for the past six months other than walked around a field on a friends horse which was very kind of her to offer and I was very grateful. Lock down didn't help matters either.

Since losing Bailey over a month ago now I am seeking my next horse. I am worried about my weight and also about how others perceive me when I try a horse out. It is very hard but I have gone every day to the gym and done a 40 minute spin class and most of those times also swum a number of lengths. I have cut down on my food and look a lot more toned than I was and I have actually lost a few pounds but obviously any more weight will take a while to come off. I know if I get another horse simply by riding it I will lose more weight but it is very difficult having the confidence to go and try horses with a view to buy.

I have found that there are some incredibly shallow people out there that are very judgemental with the way they perceive you. I am dreading viewing but I am also excited.