Vets guide to weight of rider V horse!

Just to correct those who thought I found the research.... it was TOUCHSTONE who found it :). I just quoted it to comment on the fact they only tried it on 8 horses and wanted to do a larger study!!! How ridiculous....
 
Lots of emotive posts here!! I would have a couple of points to make.
Firstly it depends on the fitness of the horse/pony. A fit horse can carry more weight.
Secondly it depends on the fitness of the rider. An athletic rider riding in balance "weighs" less than a lighter unfit/novice rider.
Thirdly it depends on the terrain! A long ride along hard sand on a beach takes less energy than an uphill/downdale ride.
Fourthly- if a rider is considered "overweight" why can't they exercise their horse by driving????
So imo you need to think outside the square. If one cannot help their weight - and I recognise there are some that cannot! Then get the horse fit by driving, and perhaps you can use some of the exercise time riding once the horse is fit. But then again you should consider the age of the horse. Once a horse is over the 20 mark you need to make allowances for "old age"....!!!
 
ozpoz said:
agree...I wince just thinking about the pressure per square inch and the strain on joints. :mad:
Sorry op, your vet sounds wrong and barking mad.
Click to expand...

Firstly I am not 16 stone, let along 26 stone... please read thread properly I got this from FB! My reputation is at stake lol
 
Last edited:
Aren't we missing the point here? So... you go to a referral hospital to help treat your obese horse with metabolic syndrome. EMS is basically a very similar disease to human type II diabetes.

Surely everyone else can see the irony of this - after all an obese 24 stone person is a sitting target for type II diabetes (along with arthritis, heart failure, liver failure etc. etc.). Put the effort into sorting yourself out as well as your horse or you'll both have a seriously shortened lifespan.

My husband and I are both ~6ft and I'm not particularly skinny but no one person should weigh the same as the pair of us put together. Ever!

ETA - just read the above comment by the OP. Phew! That sounds a bit healthier
 
People tend to interpret things to suit their own situation. Overweight people who want to ride horses that are too small for them will usualy find some statement to back up their selfish actions.

The ponies that were bred to carry grown men were carrying men who were much smaller and lighter back in the old days and this should be remembered.
 
Murphysgirl said:
People tend to interpret things to suit their own situation. Overweight people who want to ride horses that are too small for them will usualy find some statement to back up their selfish actions.

The ponies that were bred to carry grown men were carrying men who were much smaller and lighter back in the old days and this should be remembered.
Click to expand...

This^^

I am actually getting fed up to the back teeth of this 'movement' that seems to be happening across facebook and other websites to justify very heavy riders riding their horses. With the 'fattist' card being pulled out at every opportunity, if ever they are challenged. When will they realise that most people don't care how fat someone is. They just care if they are too heavy for their horse! :mad:
 
I find this appaulling! I have a blooming big horse but people assume he is automatically a weight carrier.
After letting a 15stone munchkin ride him and ruin his back I am now very careful about what he carries. He does not have perfect confirmation for larger weights and his saddle fits me so is too small to distribute the weight well. I care about his welfare more than anything and therefore if this is above his limit for harder work that's fine with me. I'd rather upset a human (who can learn to deal with it) than hurt my honest and lovely boy.
If I applied the 20% rule he'd be carrying 28 stones! IF I took that up to 30% it's 42 stones!!!! To be honest if someone of either of those weights wanted to get on him I would not hesitate to be down right rude to them.
 
Last edited:
So if we work on a 550kg horse 20% would be 110kg which works out at 17.3 stone. I also think the ability of the rider needs to be taken into account as well as horses confirmation age etc I don't think all rules apply to all horses
 
Oh dear!
My first thought was that, yes perhaps cavalry horses could carry 20+ stone, but how long were they expected to last on the battlefield? I don't think that the long term effects of carrying this weight was considered, because there is no "long term" expectation in war - they simply weren't expected to survive long.
I think perhaps the lady in the article is just trying to justify riding her horse, despite her morbid obesity. She should lose 7 stone and maybe then consider riding her Perch for short periods, which will help her balance (which can't be great at her current weight - have you seen how Weebles wobble???) and help her shift a couple more stone before she rides her 15.2.
She must be fairly well off if she can afford a tailor made cavalry-style saddle - why not spend the money on a gastric band instead?!
 
Just caught up with this from yesterday.

Just wanted to say thank you to Ladydragon and touchstone for their replies.
 
She must be fairly well off if she can afford a tailor made cavalry-style saddle - why not spend the money on a gastric band instead?![/QUOTE]

Brilliant!!! I'm giggling my way to bed after a night shift, thanks.
 
Bertolie said:
It wasn't an article in the magazine or on their website but a thread on the Your Horse forum.

I think the comments were one person's (wagonsroll) attempt to justify why she rode her horse(s).

http://www.yourhorse.co.uk/Community-Landing/Forum-Landing/Forum-Categories/Topic/?&topic-id=53767

ETA - just re read the thread and the post(s) made by wagonsroll that contained the 'information' from the vet has been deleted!
Click to expand...

I particularly like this melodramatic post by the woman in question:

"Well I'm a dress size 26 - 32 depending upon which part of me you're dressing! I'm always interested in all forms of bigotry so tell me tommy tank why should I "in your opinion" be too big to ride?"

Bigotry? Someone needs a new dictionary :D
 
I think people do underestimate what a horse is capable of carrying when it comes to the sake of a stone or two, but that is just utterly ridiculous.
 
Interesting thread! Also the build of the animal needs to be taken into account a 16.2 weedy horse with a long back is going to less capable of carrying weight than a 14.2 short coupled pony with a shorter back. I am overweight and ride a 14.2 appy, i have had him for seven years, noone - instructors, judges, vets, back lady have ever said that i am too heavy for him, he is fit and well, yes we would get better results if i lost a couple of stone (i am trying!!) but its not having an adverse affect on him. Other peolple have ridden him who weigh a lot less than I do and it makes no difference to the way he goes or performs. Just also like to say that honesty is great on this forum but not reading some of these posts, support and encouragement are the way forward, is that not why we are all using this forum?
 
vanessa roberts said:
Just also like to say that honesty is great on this forum but not reading some of these posts, support and encouragement are the way forward, is that not why we are all using this forum?
Click to expand...

I think the person the OP refers to needs less encouragement, not more. She seems to feel anyone who thinks the health of a horse could be compromised by obesity is a bigot and has even likened someone who said "I think a size 24 though is too big to ride a horse" with the Ku Klux Klan. For her horse's sake she needs a dose of reality...pandering to her spurious justifications won't help her horse. She's entitled to endanger her health in whichever way she chooses; she's not entitled to endanger her horse's health. Have a read of the thread in question, posted a while back...no one on there has said overweight people shouldn't ride or that there aren't suitable horses for most people, only that the weight-carrying capacity of the horse should be appropriate and realistic.
 
aggie said:
I can confirm that the deer ponies are not ridden by their handlers, which are usually young trainee gamekeepers that are terrified of the ponies, which the Highlands use to their full advantage of!
Click to expand...

isn't that what highlands do best?! :D
 
zozo said:
So if we work on a 550kg horse 20% would be 110kg which works out at 17.3 stone. I also think the ability of the rider needs to be taken into account as well as horses confirmation age etc I don't think all rules apply to all horses
Click to expand...

That sounds about right, on the assumption it's 550kg of fit horse and 20% is it's MAXIMUM and the rider is capable. Take off 1.5st for tack and riders clothes etc and that's a 15st rider. Most 550kg horses (so a 15hh cob or a 16hh hunter type or a 16.2 TB) would carry a 15st rider fine. Of course if you need to take poor conformation or novice rider into account, but then you reduce the %.
 
Surely if you were that big wouldnt you worry about the horse more than yourselfs pleasure, wouldnt it be a bit of a kick up the backside to loose some weight then you could actually ride, probebly be much more flexiable and supple. I always think whats the point in paying for a horse if you dont enjoy it surley having to pay for the horse and someone to ride was all very nice! but if you cut down on the calories, lost weight you would be saving money getting someone to ride your horse and actually getting pleasure out of you horse. Mabye people wouldnt agree with me but coming from a farming family a horse has to have a Purpose to stay.
 
MILLGREENLADY said:
Surely if you were that big wouldnt you worry about the horse more than yourselfs pleasure, wouldnt it be a bit of a kick up the backside to loose some weight then you could actually ride, probebly be much more flexiable and supple. I always think whats the point in paying for a horse if you dont enjoy it surley having to pay for the horse and someone to ride was all very nice! but if you cut down on the calories, lost weight you would be saving money getting someone to ride your horse and actually getting pleasure out of you horse. Mabye people wouldnt agree with me but coming from a farming family a horse has to have a Purpose to stay.
Click to expand...

I agree. Sadly, some people who are grossly overweight are quite happy to stay that way, at least they'd have you believe. And that is fine, and entirely up to them. But unfortunately a small minority think that they are entitled to do anything they please despite their weight. Of course they cannot possibly do most sports except for swimming, and the sport where someone else does all the hard work; horse riding. :(
 
Kallibear said:
That sounds about right, on the assumption it's 550kg of fit horse and 20% is it's MAXIMUM and the rider is capable. Take off 1.5st for tack and riders clothes etc and that's a 15st rider. Most 550kg horses (so a 15hh cob or a 16hh hunter type or a 16.2 TB) would carry a 15st rider fine. Of course if you need to take poor conformation or novice rider into account, but then you reduce the %.
Click to expand...

^^this

i'm about a stone overweight, but a quiet sympathetic rider - and frankly if anybody told me I was too heavy to ride either of my 2 i would tell them where to go.

as several others have said, common sense must prevail - of course it may not be sensible to put a 12 stone person on a section A, but all the larger native breeds, tb's, arabs, etc are all capable of carrying that kind of weight EASILY.

obviously there are variables as kallibear said, but them u adjust the weight accordingly. i do think sometimes people are a bit precious - but that article was completely ridiculous!! LOL'd a lot at the suggestion of a gastric band :p
 
id be surprised if that was knottenbelt who said that..........!



its not fair on the horse



just because you CAN (on paper) ride it at that weight.........dosent make it right!...


23 stone.. noway.
 
I am also a stone over weight but following the 20% rule, if my calculations are correct, my pony can carry over three and a half stone more than I weigh. If the tack is 1.5 stone (this is just going by someone else's estimate above, but my saddle is quite light and I have nylon stirrup irons) I still have two stone to spare. Plus my pone is wide in the loins. Perhaps I will let my 11 stone friend take him hunting next season!

Still no excuse for me not to try and shift some weight though!
 
It's really got nothing to do with being fattist, its a case of too heavy is too heavy. You can be a skinny teen or adult & your still too heavy for a mini. I would love to ride 11h ponies, but at 5'10 I am too tall, regardless of weight, so I except its not an option. Why can't someone of 24 stone accept that?
 
littlelegs said:
It's really got nothing to do with being fattist, its a case of too heavy is too heavy. You can be a skinny teen or adult & your still too heavy for a mini. I would love to ride 11h ponies, but at 5'10 I am too tall, regardless of weight, so I except its not an option. Why can't someone of 24 stone accept that?
Click to expand...

Because it's nothing to do with what they should and shouldn't ride, and everything to do with convincing themselves they don't have as much of a weight issue as they realise deep down ;) "Look, look, I can even ride my 15.2! I can't be THAT fat then, can I?!" I'd feel some sympathy for that level of desperation if a living animal's wellbeing wasn't being sacrificed in the process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top