Rider "obesity" makes it on the Beeb

I have just weight taped two of my horses! One is my 16.2 who is actually 17.1!! Tb and he is 1112lbs so his 20% would be 16 stone?

The other fake 17hh (17.3hh) is 1282lbs so his 20% is 18 stone 2

Does thus sound correct?!
 
Jesstickle said:
I don't want to sound like a know it all but as you can see above I have clearly said all of that already!
Click to expand...

I am sorry you feel that I was underminding or copying anything you have already said. Its quite a long thread so I think I can be forgiven to have missed some of your comments.

I think the authors should be applauded to making the first steps in researching a huge subject which clearly from this thread is an emotive subject for many.
 
flump said:
I have just weight taped two of my horses! One is my 16.2 who is actually 17.1!! Tb and he is 1112lbs so his 20% would be 16 stone?

The other fake 17hh (17.3hh) is 1282lbs so his 20% is 18 stone 2

Does thus sound correct?!
Click to expand...

http://www.horsesciencenews.com/horseback-riding/how-much-weight-can-a-horse-carry.php

20% is the maximum weight before the horse shows signs of stress. The 20% includes the saddle, rider's clothes and other equipment, plus the horse should be a healthy, fit, not overweight adult. Of course it is better to be well under 20%.

In the new study, does the 10% they prefer include tack, clothes and equipment?
 
So over will cause distress, the horse I said that his 20% would be 18 stone 2 had a rider of 22stone on him not incl a wow dressage saddle and pads etc, he was peforming all sorts with her and jumped... What % would she be?
 
to do list said:
I think the authors should be applauded to making the first steps in researching a huge subject which clearly from this thread is an emotive subject for many.
Click to expand...

I think the authors should be berated for approaching such a potentially emotive subject in such a ham fisted manner and allowing such extensive (and seemingly inaccurate) press coverage without publishing their research for public scrutiny first. I also think they should be accountable for publishing inaccurate data based on weight tape measurements.
 
JFTD said:
I think the authors should be berated for approaching such a potentially emotive subject in such a ham fisted manner and allowing such extensive (and seemingly inaccurate) press coverage without publishing their research for public scrutiny first. I also think they should be accountable for publishing inaccurate data based on weight tape measurements.
Click to expand...

agreed!
 
flump said:
So over will cause distress, the horse I said that his 20% would be 18 stone 2 had a rider of 22stone on him not incl a wow dressage saddle and pads etc, he was peforming all sorts with her and jumped... What % would she be?
Click to expand...

The research I linked to says this

The horses had noticeably faster breathing and higher heart rates when carrying tack and rider amounting to 25% or more of their body weight. A day after trotting and cantering with the heftier weights, the horses' muscles showed substantially greater soreness and tightness. Those horses that were least sore from the exercise had wider loins, the part of a horse's back located between their last rib and croup.
Click to expand...

Does your horse have a wide loin?

Of course, you would need a heart rate monitor to see how his heart rate changed with a lighter rider compared to a heavier rider.
 
He definitely is getting better the more I lose weight but couldn't comment on the 22stone thing as I only saw him being ridden for 30mins by her.. I'm under 20% for him but would aim to be 15% of all my horses (so would probably be nearer 10% on big horse as midget horse is tiny!) so that's my goal.. It's a bit mad really!
 
Partoow said:
I'm afraid I agree that there are far to many overweight riders riding. I'm not a fan of the making saddles bigger to fit our ever expanding backsides or the bigger and bigger riding clothes.
It seems as a nation we will not take responsibility for our actions. We eat too much and do too little.
I work very hard to make sure I maintain a healthy body weight because I expect my horses to perform and be happy and comfortable with that. When you are over weight for the horse it is so difficult for the horse to maintain balance and to use their vulnerable backs effectively.
If you want to ride , make sure your the correct size and weight for your horse. Don't make the horse fat either to cover up your own failings! If you can't then don't ride.for me this is a welfare issue.
Click to expand...

Agree, well said.

I think you can tell from the emotive response on here how many people aren't prepared to take personal responsibility for their weight!!!
 
Big Ben said:
Be careful what you invoke by saying the name.
.
Click to expand...

:eek: *hides*

tumblr_mdkdi0hqDb1rq0hnm.gif
 
yes but suggesting 7 stone is the max a welsh cob/JFTDs highland for example should carry is just ridiculous and an element of common sense is required I think
 
canteron said:
Agree, well said.

I think you can tell from the emotive response on here how many people aren't prepared to take personal responsibility for their weight!!!
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with people being overweight pers se though is it? Someone could be obese and within 10% of the weight limit or underweight and be over the 10% it depends on their choice of mount.
 
sussexbythesea said:
Nothing to do with people being overweight pers se though is it? Someone could be obese and within 10% of the weight limit or underweight and be over the 10% it depends on their choice of mount.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, so as I said previously how one is going to break it to WFP, Sir Mark Todd, Nick Skelton et al that they are now too heavy to compete, or even ride, I don't know.

Good old Phil the Greek will be the only member of the Royal Family able to carry on his preferred horse sport - although if Zara P can find something over 640Kg she'll be ok.
 
But even the optimum 10% would be too much for some horses - ones with awful conformation, injuries and so on. It is surely a complete blunt instrument to go on weight ratios alone.

By this calculation, I should be mounted on something which is around the 600kg mark (I'm a healthy weight for my height btw). But I would be as happy mounted on a horse lighter in weight but with good conformation, good bone and in good health than on a larger horse with poor conformation.

Put it this way, on my last holiday I hacked a 15hh fit cob. I doubt he was anywhere near 600kg, but we had a ball, and he was not struggling on a fast beach ride - not at all. I've returned to the same centre several times over the years, and this horse has always been there, doing the same job, and healthy and happy as they come.

I agree some people are under horsed, to put it delicately, but many adults would struggle to be at this 10% figure. It seems excessively cautious.
 
ester said:
yes but suggesting 7 stone is the max a welsh cob/JFTDs highland for example should carry is just ridiculous and an element of common sense is required I think
Click to expand...

Exactly!!!!!

people are going off on a major tangent about the magic 10% when that is quite clearly unrealistic.

People should be using the AVERAGE 15%
 
It's not many years ago that eventers had to carry weights, to make it fair between the lads and lassies. I can't remember what it was but I think about 11st 12lbs that works out that the horses had to be 750kg (10% rule) I don't think I saw any heavy horses going round a 3 day event?
 
A couple of genuine questions..

Usually on these threads much of made of the 20% rule, which has oft been argued to be scientific, so now people are saying ignore that, or the 10% mentioned here, go for 15% (which incidentally is the number that some of us liked all along so it (MUST be right)

This is simply the other side to the thread that I started asking about the research into the 30% causing no detriment, and asking what it takes to change peoples minds, and the answer seems to be quite a lot. There are as many people saying that 10% is crazy as there is saying 30%.

So first genuine question, does anyone REALLY believe that this will change whatever figure you have in your head as he magic figure?

Second, according to this http://pediatrics.about.com/cs/safetyfirstaid/l/aa090202a.htm your kiddies back pack should not weigh more than 10 - 20% of their weight, I genuinely don't know the answer to this, but is the biped child, or the quadruped horse the better designed for weight carrying?
 
canteron said:
Agree, well said.

I think you can tell from the emotive response on here how many people aren't prepared to take personal responsibility for their weight!!!
Click to expand...

Well that's not exactly fair - many of the posters expressing surprise, horror and amusement at this study are far from obese, and would have to be emaciated to hit that magic 10%.

And some of us just don't like bad science and terrible reporting.
 
Of course there are other welfare issues, some of greater, some of lesser importance. But something like bad management, ill fitting tack etc is widely regarded as being acceptable to comment on. Whereas discussions on weight are nearly always viewed as fat bashing & personal. If a ym was to raise concerns over forage, hoof care, worming etc it would be regarded as perfectly fine, even if the ym already knows the client is struggling financially or timewise. Whereas if a ym expressed similar concerns over a too heavy rider, its seen as insulting. Likewise vets, instructors etc, they tread on eggshells round weight issues when they wouldn't with other concerns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top