# Denied Lessons for Being 175lb



## AppaloosaFan

Hi everyone,

I found this board while researching weight and horseback riding.

I was hugely into horses as a kid and took lessons for about 2 years. Unfortunately, my mom wasn't able to afford them after that and I had to stop.

I decided this year to sign up again. I've always loved horses and I really yearn to ride. Plus, I've been trying to lose weight recently (down from 190) and every bit of exercise helps.

I found a barn that offers lessons to adults and kids. I called and asked for information. Great! Then they sent me their 'barn rules'. There was a height and weight chart in there. It said that for my height (5'3), one has to be under 165 lbs to ride. I was completely shocked. I really don't see what height has to do with it. And I know MANY people over 175 lbs are able to ride horses successfully. On the page, it mentioned that each additional pound is more strain on the horse's back so they can't have any riders classed as medically obese. Fair enough, but again, the common standard seems to be 20% of the horse's weight is fine. So I could even ride a fairly small 900 lb horse.

I really feel discouraged. I definitely won't be going back to that barn even when I lose the weight. I also don't think I'll be calling another barn until I'm 150 lb or so. 

The silver lining of all of this is that I found this board. I have learned so much already and I plan to stick around for the long haul. So I guess even bad events can lead to good things!

Thanks for reading and feel free to share any thoughts, whether you agree with the barn or not.


----------



## SilverMaple

If you were a man, they would likely have no issue... at 175 pounds, you should be able to ride nearly any decently-built horse. I would be thrilled to be back down to your current weight again-- I ride regularly and weigh more than you (thanks health condition) with no issues and comfortable horses.


I would suspect this barn has the rules in place because a novice rider tends to bang around more on a horse than an experienced rider, and 'school horses' tend to be put through enough with even a very light rider. A weight limit is common for trail riding rentals, etc. but generally height is not brought into it... and most of those limits are 220 or 240 pounds. 



If you own your own horses, would the rule still be in place? Or is this strictly for lessons? Is this a show barn? Some show barns, especially those who work with riders of certain disciplines, will do anything they can to avoid larger riders are they aren't "pretty" on a horse. Been there, done that. 



Keep looking for a barn. There are certainly ones out there where your current weight would not be a concern. 



I'm sorry this happened to you.


----------



## horseluvr2524

That is BS. Some barns do have a weight limit (one I've seen before is 'riders up to 250lbs'), but that has nothing to do with height. If the rider is large in weight, then they use horses that they feel are more capable of handling the weight. Usually a lesson barn or trail riding facility has designated horses for larger riders.

My mom is about 170lbs, 5'7". She successfully rode her 14.3 hand, 1050lb quarter horse mare. Not a large horse by any means. Did not have any problems. I had a couple of times where some truly overweight, dare I say obese, people mounted up on her. She went into bucking fits with these two riders (very uncharacteristic as she was a sweet and mild mannered mare, very well behaved). I think that this was due to an undiagnosed kissing spine condition though, because normally horses don't have freakout bucking fits when they have too much weight put on them.

Please DO find another barn. IMO, you are not dangerously/ridiculously overweight, certainly not obese. Was this an 'english style' barn you went to? I have heard about english riding barns being very picky/fussy about weight. You might try going to a western barn. Or, if you are not comfortable with that, go to a tourist type trail riding business. They certainly will not turn you away. Going on a few trail rides can give you some horse time and build your confidence to go to a lesson barn again.

Horse and rider situations are always so individual. You certainly can't use a generic chart to determine what is OK and what is not.


----------



## AppaloosaFan

It's alright, I'd rather they keep the best interests of the horses in mind. Even if they are a bit overzealous about it.

I really have no idea if they'd have a problem with it if it were my own horse. The link just says "barn rules" so perhaps they would still not allow it. 

It doesn't seem to be a show barn. They teach a variety of styles but I chose Western since that's what I did before.

It makes a lot of sense that beginners are more prone to flopping around and they just want to be safe. I can _say _I'm balanced and fit for my size but many people say that even if it's not quite true. We can tend to be bad judges of our own fitness. So I totally get that.

It was just a bit odd. Honestly, I do think I'm going to wait to look for another barn until I reach at least 165 but possibly 150. I don't want to feel like my enjoyment is being hampered by wondering if everyone is judging my weight or not.


----------



## beau159

AppaloosaFan said:


> Fair enough, but again, the common standard seems to be 20% of the horse's weight is fine. So I could even ride a fairly small 900 lb horse.


Just for clarification, the 20% rule of thumb also has to include all your TACK. 

So if you have a 30 pound saddle and a 5 pound saddle pad, plus your 175, means you would need a horse that is at least over 1,000 pounds. 

But that rule of thumb is flawed because it doesn't take other factors into account, like the build of the horse (muscles, bone structure, fitness, etc). 

Regardless, I'm sorry that you were turned away. Ultimately, it is their barn and their rules. Perhaps their lessons horses are smaller horses, and that's why they have a weight/height limit?


----------



## mmshiro

It makes perfect sense because a knight, riding into battle with full armor and weaponry, would be well less than 165 pounds. /*sarcasm*/

A skilled overweight rider will be lighter on a horse than a sack-of-rocks skinny beginner, but you really can't judge them too harshly until you see the horses they have in their portfolio. They wouldn't have a bunch of warmbloods and drafties if 98% of their revenue comes from giving lessons to children whose legs wouldn't reach below the saddle on those horses.


----------



## bsms

I'm a male. Weight fluctuates. The Battle of the Bulge will end when I die, not sooner. This morning, without tack, so to speak, weighed 172. With tack, so to speak, and even using an Abetta saddle, about 200 lbs.

No vet has ever estimated my horse at over 820 lbs. Let's say he's now 850. So...23.5%. 25% if I use my leather saddle.

Today's ride was 80 minutes. We did a lot of off-trail walking. We did trotting in deep sand in the desert washes. I asked him to climb out of the wash in a few spots steeper and taller than his previous experience, which he did without hesitation. Powered his way up at a walk like a 4-wheel drive tractor. We cantered on some uneven trails.

I'm not a beginner, but truth be told...I'm not God's gift to horses either. In fairness to the business, my horses get a lot more time off than lesson horses. In fairness to my horse, though...he is almost freakishly slender:








​
The business may have had problems in the past, including people claiming to be much lighter than they really are. They may have decided to err on the side of caution for their horses' sake. I cannot fault them for that. But you are not too heavy to ride. Just need the right horse and a reasonable goal - plenty of walking as you learn your balance, for example.


----------



## Horsef

Just thinking out loud, maybe they bring the height into equation because of the saddle sizes they have? Not to be insensitive, but weight distribution on a short and a tall person of same weight will be different (speaking as a short person here).


----------



## farmpony84

I would give them a call and tell them what you weigh and how tall you are. It COULD be a general thing they put out there and possibly might make an exception. I have a feeling IF it really is a "if you are this tall - you weight this much or less" they might be considering it a balance issue? Safety blah? It could also have to do with how they run their program. Some places will use the same pony for 2 or 3 lessons in an evening so it might get ridden three hours a day. 

I think you could also try some other barns. Don't give up though and congrats on the weight loss! Keep it up!


----------



## ShirtHotTeez

Personally i've never been sold on the 20% rule. I think someone pulled that figure out of a hat and made it gospel. Like the old food pyramid which turned out to have no sound basis but the world based their food intake on it slavishly.

The majority of horses these days are worked way under what they are capable of, and that without 'overworking' or over burdening them.

Even school horses who probably do more than most, certainly in a well run establishment, are not usually overburdened. 

So for a one hour lesson if a rider is heavier it is not going to hurt a horse of reasonable fitness, and you should always be making decisions for each individual animal within your daily plan anyway. So if one horse seems to have worked too hard in one lesson then rest it longer. Quite often people fuss about the weight of a rider but the horse hasn't even broken a sweat.

Comes back to basic common sense and an awareness of your horses.
@AppaloosaFan I just worked your weight back to kilos and you are lighter than my ideal weight! I don't see that height has much to do with it. A sturdy pony would carry you easily so a horse would. 

I feel too big on a spindly light horse, but it can still carry me. My thoroughbred is used to a lighter rider than me (for racing) so I think he got bit of shock lugging my weight at first :rofl: but it is certainly not an issue, just a matter of getting different muscles fit.

and @mmshiro is right about the knights and armour. Wouldn't the pc brigade have a field day today!!
@Horsef just thinking about that. You have two people the same weight who ride in the one saddle. One person is taller than the other. The saddle is in the same place so technically the broader person is going to spread the weight more !! maybe its tall people who need to stop riding :rofl: 

. . . but I see what you are trying to say. I think if the saddle fits the horse and rider and is well padded, it is mostly about fitting the right horse to the rider. After all the rider is there for a lesson to learn not to bump around!


----------



## SilverMaple

mmshiro said:


> It makes perfect sense because a knight, riding into battle with full armor and weaponry, would be well less than 165 pounds. /*sarcasm*/


Especially considering evidence points to the 'war horses of old' that were supposedly so big as being more around the 14-15 hand height, and built more like Andalusians or Friesians than the giant draft horses of myth and legend. The draft horse really didn't start getting the size we think of until the Industrial Revolution, when heavyweight horses were bred for drays and fieldwork. When viewing Middle Ages and Tudor horse armor and barding, it's amazing how small the horses (and many of the knights and noblemen) actually were. Even Henry VIII, long-said to tower over his court in height and later, weight, stood just slightly over 6' tall and his horse, the largest that could be found, must have barely stood 15 hands if the armouring is measured. Tudor breeding programs greatly increased the size of the 'Great Horse' for war and jousting due to the small horses available, so it stands to reason that horses before the Tudor period may have been even smaller. Certainly, very few, if any, of the jousting or war horses stood as tall or massive as is widely believed. A smaller, well-built animal with good bone and agility would prove far more useful in battle and in the joust, as well as remain sounder and eat less than a horse the size of the modern Clydesdale or Shire.


----------



## Woodhaven

This is just a remark to encourage you. You have already lost weight (good for you) and you only have 10 lb. to go to meet their standards. I encourage you to make a blitz and try to loose that 10lb. Not saying it's easy but I think you are motivated and will reach your goal. 
if you can manage this then the riding will certainly help you with your weight.
If you can find another stable that's good but if this is the only one in your area then it's only 10 lb away.

Easy for me to say only 10lb but I think you can do it.


----------



## Golden Horse

As an obese horse rider...

Every single horse owner gets to make a choice who rides their horses, the list of people I will allow to ride Fergie besides me is two, trainer and coach, that's it. Why"? doesn't matter my horse, my rules...

Barn owners are no different, and this is not sexist, sizeist or anything else, it is people making decisions, sometimes based of gut feel, maybe bad science but they get to decide.

It could be a good reason, no suitable horses, no suitable tack, whatever their choice.....

At 175 pounds you are no 'plus size rider' in terms of weight, many many horses would carry you with no issues at all, so take your money and go ride at a place who welcomes you and body.....


----------



## gottatrot

I'd just tell them I was 5'4" and 163 lbs. What are they going to do, weigh you? I've never seen a scale for humans at a barn, and I doubt they'll measure your height. Most people can't guess another person's weight within 10 lbs by looking.


----------



## loosie

ShirtHotTeez said:


> Like the old food pyramid which turned out to have no sound basis but the world based their food intake on it slavishly.


Sad to say, my daughter has come home from school with an assignment on 'healthy eating food pyramid'. I'm going to be 'helping' her with it... tho it's probably not going to be what the teacher wants to see!


----------



## AppaloosaFan

Woodhaven said:


> This is just a remark to encourage you. You have already lost weight (good for you) and you only have 10 lb. to go to meet their standards. I encourage you to make a blitz and try to loose that 10lb. Not saying it's easy but I think you are motivated and will reach your goal.
> if you can manage this then the riding will certainly help you with your weight.
> If you can find another stable that's good but if this is the only one in your area then it's only 10 lb away.
> 
> Easy for me to say only 10lb but I think you can do it.


Thanks for your encouragement. I definitely know I can do it too. I'll probably wait on riding until that time.

I actually drop weight fairly easily when I don't eat unreasonable things like tons of fast food, pizza, cakes, etc. I know I'm lucky in that regard and some people on this board have it MUCH tougher due to metabolic issues, etc.

It's kind of odd. I used to have a huge appetite for these sorts of foods but it just fell away rather suddenly.

Still, I'm not sure I'll go to this barn. The policy just doesn't make sense to me. Men can be up to 240 lbs according to their chart. But a 4'9 woman at 140 lbs would not be allowed since she is obese. I know they have a right to choose who rides their horses but it just seems really, really odd.

Thankfully there are about 4 barns near here that offer lessons to adults!


----------



## ShirtHotTeez

@loosie make sure your daughter gets the updated food pyramid if she is going to use it, or perhaps a comparison is a good format for the assignment


----------



## mmshiro

loosie said:


> Sad to say, my daughter has come home from school with an assignment on 'healthy eating food pyramid'. I'm going to be 'helping' her with it... tho it's probably not going to be what the teacher wants to see!


Whatever "the food pyramid" is, I love how the *government* tells the same guideline to a boxer, a lumberjack, an accountant, and a ballerina.


----------



## AnitaAnne

AppaloosaFan said:


> Thanks for your encouragement. I definitely know I can do it too. I'll probably wait on riding until that time.
> 
> I actually drop weight fairly easily when I don't eat unreasonable things like tons of fast food, pizza, cakes, etc. I know I'm lucky in that regard and some people on this board have it MUCH tougher due to metabolic issues, etc.
> 
> It's kind of odd. I used to have a huge appetite for these sorts of foods but it just fell away rather suddenly.
> 
> Still, I'm not sure I'll go to this barn. The policy just doesn't make sense to me. Men can be up to 240 lbs according to their chart. But a 4'9 woman at 140 lbs would not be allowed since she is obese. I know they have a right to choose who rides their horses but it just seems really, really odd.
> 
> Thankfully there are about 4 barns near here that offer lessons to adults!


This is unacceptable! It is sexual discrimination to allow males to be 240 lbs. but females only 140 lbs. 

IMO you should stay far away from this stable and be sure to let others know why. It is one thing to have a weight limit, but it is a whole different issue if they allow heavier males than females! This is discrimination in its purest form. 

I would make sure to have copies of their requirements, and then put this case before the appropriate government agency. 

Please do not feel bad about your weight. We all struggle with our weight in one form or another. 

Find another place to ride and have fun doing it. Never let someone keep you from your dreams!


----------



## 4horses

When I gave lessons I set the weight limit to 200lbs. If I did it again I would probably set the limit to 175lbs. Why? Because giving children lessons is where the money is. This means from a business perspective it makes more sense to buy ponies. Ponies eat a lot less than a large horse. I also required any new riders to give me a rounded up number of what their weight is...this makes it easier to plan which horse will be ridden by who and make sure none of the horses will get overworked. 

Giving lessons is a difficult business. It is expensive to get established and the liability is huge. In our sue happy nation we are lucky most lesson stables haven't been run out of business.

Many lesson horses are often older bombproof animals so they may have some arthritis started. This is fine for beginners walking, but again lighter riders are preferred.

The fact that the stable has a policy just shows that they value the welfare of their animals. I did have people who were upset with the weight policy but too bad. You are my guest, riding my horses. The horses come first.


----------



## 4horses

Obesity may increase the risk of a riding accident so I'm not sure it qualifies as discrimination to have a weight/height chart.


----------



## AnitaAnne

4horses said:


> Obesity may increase the risk of a riding accident so I'm not sure it qualifies as discrimination to have a weight/height chart.


There is no good reason that I can think of to allow a 240 pound man on a horse but not a 240 pound female. The weight limit for a female is 140 pounds? But a male can be 240 pounds? 

This is not a case of limiting the riders to children as opposed to adults. This is different standards for different sexes.

Also do not know of any studies ever stating that obesity increases the risk of horse riding accidents. Would expect the reverse to be true. Would expect skinny people to take more risks, and overweight people to be more cautious.


----------



## Kalraii

Firstly huge props to coming here and sharing your experience. I love it! Nothing to be ashamed of!

Secondly... this is the first time I've heard of a BMI chart being used to regulate their riders >.< They might as well have a sign screaming "we dont accept fat people but tall people are OK".... -.- Oh my, the parrot would get a jolly good flipping if I was at that establishment! They have to do better at helping people find a solution, find some inspiration.... but so often people want to keep the good things just to prop their pedestal. 

I know a chick that is child sized - literally. Barely over 100lbs. But her cardio is SO BAD that her balance goes out of the window and when she's struggling for air she begins to haul herself up with the reins in rising trot. And you can imagine the way she lands... But no one blinks an eye at anything other than her technique. The horse is usually irritated but not sore in the hours or days following. Add another 100lbs to her frame and yeah you can sort of understand. BUT THAT'S WHAT INSTRUCTORS ARE FOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!! To make sure rider and horse fit!!!!!! And that they progress at their level and within their limitations!!!!!! At one place if you were over 10 stone (full stop.) you weren't allowed to ride. Didn't matter that they had a 16.3 belgian or several large cobs. And she was super unhappy letting anyone ON the limit ride at all at the best of times >.< She would also weigh us before every ride.

...But wait it gets better... let's put a 200lb mentally disabled person on a horse for therapy. "Oh, don't worry that he leans heavily on one side, kicks the horse, scratches it and bunny hops in the saddle as if the horse was a trampoline. This is _therapeutic_ and for a great cause!" 

"But you see that fat man over there? Yeah, he has a bmi of 6000, an IQ of 0.02 and the communication skills of a dead twig. He'll ruin our horses! Don't even let him _look_at a horse!"

"But he was in the grand prix-"

"I DON'T CARE HIS BMI IS TOO HIGH!"

Sorry got a bit carried away. This is an exaggeration but some of the conversations I overhear.... make me wonder, they really do and your experience just adds to my confundlement.

....................................................................................

There are hypocrisies everywhere. You will find an instructor that will understand that you're not a total beginner and as long as you convey your understanding about your own limitations at this moment in time... One of the school owners near me is above your starting weight but is a top level jump instructor and competes regularly on horses that are neither oversized nor to small to bear her. And they train and she is considerate of her weight and the fact she has to work hard to make it easier for the horse. I'm currently training as a nurse and the discrimination and lack of empathy to anyone overweight is just harrowing I am very sorry that you had to face that in your search to start an amazing journey with horses >.<

Keep searching and another idea to help keep active - any chance you can volunteer a few hours? Muck out and groom? Exercise AND inspiration. If a rider is above the limitations and/or a true beginner one of the yards I ride encourages people to help out and spend some time with the horses on the ground. As a way to remind them of their goals and inspirations. You're not far off - I can smell it. When you finally get to ride - soon - please update us with how it goes 

Good luck! <3

edit: and for the love of god if I have any advice for you it's work on your fitness! Don't focus on your weight so much as making sure you can jog for 5 minutes without dying. I remember coming back into riding... why did I book an hour? I couldn't even last 10 minutes!


----------



## Kalraii

4horses said:


> Obesity may increase the risk of a riding accident so I'm not sure it qualifies as discrimination to have a weight/height chart.


I don't think it actually increases the risk of an accident in the first place but yes, someone overweight is likely to suffer greater injury and bruising if they have an accident. But y'know.... even then it's just too vague to know. What about a skinny person undiagnosed with early onset of osteoporosis? What then? >.<


----------



## Acadianartist

Go to a different barn. I understand why they want people to be fit, but there are lots of horses out there who would have no problem carrying you. Riding will help motivate you to continue to lose weight, and you will build muscles in places you didn't know about! 

And yes, someone who is not fit is going to be less balanced, but that's why you take lessons. It's not like they're going to make you run a barrel pattern on the first lesson. You'll be walking for a while, then trotting for a long time. Your body will get stronger and you'll get better and better at it. 

I don't think you should wait until you're at 150 lbs, because then you may get discouraged and never ride. Find a barn that will let you start now. Explain that you are working on getting fit, and that riding is part of your program.


----------



## blue eyed pony

So coming from my saddle fitter who is also an equine bodyworker and does A LOT of work with horses ridden by people of ALL sizes:

"It's not about what you weigh. It's about how you use your weight. There's a point at which the most balanced rider on the planet is too heavy for a horse but it's higher than most people think."

Edit; I should probably mention I am tiny and athletic, I weigh about 8% of my horse's weight, and this comment was made in the context of making sure I have a saddle that fits ME because I have trouble balancing myself in one that doesn't. He literally was telling me MY tiny self would hurt my horse if I was too unbalanced, and my mama whose saddle fits her and her horse perfectly is 100% fine to ride even though she's significantly above 20% of her horse's weight.


----------



## Acadianartist

I just hate to hear people putting off doing something they really want to do because someone tells them they're not fit enough. I don't think it's very motivating to hear that. Instead, put her on a solid school horse that is great at teaching beginner riders. That will be far more motivating than being told "nope". 

Life's too short to wait OP. Find another barn! Don't let this be something you regret in 10 years. Do it.


----------



## LoriF

I wouldn't put too much into it. Maybe they have smaller horses, Maybe they have tack mostly for children, who knows, maybe they are just ignorant. I guess the bottom line is, it's their horses/ponies. 

I personally don't think that 175 lbs is a big deal for a horse and what does a horse know about height. Will a shorter rounder person have less balance? A legitimate question as I don't know. Even if it's true, your body can learn balance just like any other beginner horse rider.

I wouldn't wait to ride if you can find a different barn, the next barn just might think the last barn is crazy, lol. If you find another barn, just ask them what their weight restrictions are before you show up.

Honestly, I would let you ride my horses as long as you could handle them.

@blue eyed pony I agree with what you say about saddle fit for horse and rider but we all (large and small) can probably agree that the perfect saddle fit for horse and rider is such an illusive animal. Throw riding school into the mix and it's next to near impossible.


----------



## jaydee

I don't know about western barns but its not uncommon for English riding schools to only keep a small number of larger, taller horses and so they're reserved for taller riders - which in turn tends to be men.
Since the majority of people who ride in these places are children, teens and women they will have more ponies and smaller lightweight horses.
At 5ft 3inches (same as me), if the barn you contacted is like that then you'd be expected to be able to be the right size for one of those smaller mounts.
I rode at a local barn here one winter and I was put on either a 14 hand or a 14.2, both very narrow and lightweight pony types. At the time I was about 124 pounds so not a problem. They were both good ponies for a beginner or for someone experienced so I can't blame them for wanting to be careful with them.


I'd push on and lose the weight - I've gained weight the past few years and now working hard to lose it because at 131 pounds I feel obese!


----------



## AnitaAnne

jaydee said:


> I don't know about western barns but its not uncommon for English riding schools to only keep a small number of larger, taller horses and so they're reserved for taller riders - which in turn tends to be men.
> Since the majority of people who ride in these places are children, teens and women they will have more ponies and smaller lightweight horses.
> At 5ft 3inches (same as me), if the barn you contacted is like that then you'd be expected to be able to be the right size for one of those smaller mounts.
> I rode at a local barn here one winter and I was put on either a 14 hand or a 14.2, both very narrow and lightweight pony types. At the time I was about 124 pounds so not a problem. They were both good ponies for a beginner or for someone experienced so I can't blame them for wanting to be careful with them.
> 
> 
> I'd push on and lose the weight - I've gained weight the past few years and now working hard to lose it because at 131 pounds I feel obese!


They are capping all women's' weight at 140 pounds. I can not understand how anyone believes this is a reasonable rule.

They cap the men's weight at 240 pounds! that is a significant difference! If they have a horse or horses capable of carrying a 240 pound male, why can't that horse carry a 150 or 175 or 200 pound female? 

It is sexism and/or fat-shaming. Unacceptable in this day and age.


----------



## cbar

I wouldn't wait any longer to start riding again. Find another barn and start riding now. You have waited long enough....although putting it off may help you achieve your goal faster of losing the extra 10lbs....the riding you do now will also help you lose that 10lbs. And you'd be doing something you've been dreaming of. 

Don't let some stupid barn rules discourage you from doing something you truly enjoy.


----------



## mmshiro

jaydee said:


> I'd push on and lose the weight - I've gained weight the past few years and now working hard to lose it because at 131 pounds I feel obese!


People need to stop worrying about the scale and start worrying about the tape measure and skin-fold caliper. With suitable exercise, you may well put on numerical pounds, but fit into tighter clothes - muscle is denser than fat.

I'm not saying you don't have sufficient and rational reason to want to trim up, but "looking at the scale" should not be the sole factor in assessing one's fitness level and body fat percentage.

/*soap box*/


----------



## jaydee

AnitaAnne said:


> They are capping all women's' weight at 140 pounds. I can not understand how anyone believes this is a reasonable rule.
> 
> They cap the men's weight at 240 pounds! that is a significant difference! If they have a horse or horses capable of carrying a 240 pound male, why can't that horse carry a 150 or 175 or 200 pound female?
> 
> It is sexism and/or fat-shaming. Unacceptable in this day and age.


In her first post she says that she would have to be under 165 pounds to be able to ride the horses/ponies that they're deeming to be suitable for her height so I'm missing the 140 pound cap
As I said - I think that barn probably only has a couple of horses that are tall enough and sturdy enough to carry larger people so they have a policy of insisting that smaller people have to ride smaller horses and ponies.
The place we went too only had two horses that were tall enough for my son to ride.


----------



## AnitaAnne

AppaloosaFan said:


> Men can be up to 240 lbs according to their chart. But a 4'9 *woman at 140 lbs would not be allowed since she is obese*. I know they have a right to choose who rides their horses but it just seems really, really odd.
> 
> Thankfully there are about 4 barns near here that offer lessons to adults!


This is where the 140 pounds came from.


----------



## Golden Horse

Right, this is a subject dear to my heart, and I am passionate about it..so as an old, fat woman...

Number 1 Rule...

DO NOT PUT OFF DOING THINGS...

You will never be thin enough, pretty enough, talented enough, rich enough, there will never be enough time. So many people think that they will do things in the future..STOP IT, go do it NOW....Work with what you have, your time, your budget, whatever...do it..this is not a practice, this is your life...

Number 2 not rule, but strong belief....

Stop bitching all of you about discrimination, either against size or sex....riding is not a right, it is a pleasure activity, and barn owners have every right to set whatever stupid limit they want.

In this sue happy world they are dammed if they do, dammed if they don't, put a larger or very unfit rider on a horse and they fall and get injured, then who is going to get sued? Don't have clear publicized weight rules, then how do they turn away my fat backside when I want to ride their 15hh skinny built horse?

Differences between men and women, all sorts of them, the way the fat is distributed on the body, the amount of jiggle...yes knockersaplenty I am looking at you..

At the end of the day, vote with your feet, most people can find somewhere that they can ride...

My beloved barn, my coach who is a friend, as well as my coach, who has a vested interest in keeping me as a client....3 years ago when they sold the horse I was leasing, we both knew that there was nothing else in the barn that would take my weight, so I was grounded until Fergie turned up...It was what it was.....fact of life, she does not keep many big horses. 

Back to the OP, who is not overweight in a pure weight carrying calculation, should be easy to find a place where you can ride....


----------



## AnitaAnne

cbar said:


> I wouldn't wait any longer to start riding again. Find another barn and start riding now. You have waited long enough....although putting it off may help you achieve your goal faster of losing the extra 10lbs....the riding you do now will also help you lose that 10lbs. And you'd be doing something you've been dreaming of.
> 
> Don't let some stupid barn rules discourage you from doing something you truly enjoy.


:iagree:


----------



## jaydee

mmshiro said:


> People need to stop worrying about the scale and start worrying about the tape measure and skin-fold caliper. With suitable exercise, you may well put on numerical pounds, but fit into tighter clothes - muscle is denser than fat.
> 
> I'm not saying you don't have sufficient and rational reason to want to trim up, but "looking at the scale" should not be the sole factor in assessing one's fitness level and body fat percentage.
> 
> /*soap box*/


 Muscle might be denser but it weighs the same and I can tell you from my own personal experience that my legs can feel the difference when I'm carrying around those extra pounds. 
Plus I have 5 horses that are stabled at night so have to be mucked out daily - emptying wheelbarrows, lugging bales of hay from the loft where its stored and carrying bags of shavings around, I remove manure from 7 acres of paddocks every day, grow all of our vegetables and maintain half an acre of English style garden (flowers beds!!) by myself so actually stay pretty fit thank you!!
When I was 112 to 119 pounds I was riding out a min of 4 hours a day, had more horses on the yard, biked everywhere and used to go to a sports club every week because I competed in 400 yards running competitions - I was way more muscled and fitter than I am now


----------



## AnitaAnne

mmshiro said:


> People need to stop worrying about the scale and start worrying about the tape measure and skin-fold caliper. With suitable exercise, you may well put on numerical pounds, but fit into tighter clothes - muscle is denser than fat.
> 
> I'm not saying you don't have sufficient and rational reason to want to trim up, but "looking at the scale" should not be the sole factor in assessing one's fitness level and body fat percentage.
> 
> /*soap box*/


:iagree:

This is also true for horses!


----------



## farmpony84

OP - have you checked in to other barns? 




If you haven't because you are determined to lose the ten pounds so you can ride at this facility, then please start us a thread so we can follow your journey and cheer you on!


----------



## Vixenkit5

.I’m not going to be very popular here but I’d like to toss my hat in the ring for one reason only....Its all about balance. It is body shape as well as weight. Where is your weight carried and how does that affect your balance? You are absolutely correct about human weight ratio to horse weight it is usually total weight of the tack and body weight the horse will carry to 1/3 the horse’s weight. If horse is 900 lbs then subtract your weight and tack weight and if it is less than one third of 900 lbs its a go and if over STAY OFF the horse! Also taking into consideration conditioning of the horse height of horse and what kind of rider you are. Again its all about balance and demand on the horse. Condition of horse is also about its bone structure and build. It can be 900 lbs of solid Fjord or it can be 900 lbs thin Arab. Different structure different carrying . Remember the better shape you are in the better your riding skills will become. CONGRATS on you weight loss!! I too came down from 213 lbs to the 175 I am today and my horse is a 1100 lbs quarter horse so I don’t worry about the weight issue but I do worry about my balance on his back carrying 225 lbs or so with tack and rider. I applaud you in returning to the horse world and find a different riding instructor. Keep up the great work on your weight and I hope you will have MANY good years with horses to come!!!!!


----------



## Spanish Rider

@AppaloosaFan , I just wanted to hit on a few points here:

1) Using different BMI height/weight charts for men and women is sexual discrimination and highly unacceptable. I have worked in (human) medical research for more than 25 years, and BMI charts are the same for men and women. Period.

2) More recent medical research has also been establishing waist circumference limits to define obesity (similar in theory to the caliper @mmshiro refers to). In this case, the limits for men are higher than for women, as women tend to have a more defined waist and larger hips. Logical. (However, as a tall woman, why should my waist circumference be the same as a 5-ft woman's?)

3) It's all B.S. As others have said, there are so many other factors that come into play (fitness, muscle mass, bone structure, balance, quiet seat, etc.) that this is a decision that any decent trainer determines on an individual basis, pairing horse with rider by taking into account rider/horse size, rider/horse fitness, rider/horse age, horse muscle/bone structure, rider skill, horse temperament, etc.

4) Most importantly, there are barns and trainers out there who are more professional, and I would not want to ride at a barn that openly advocated sexual discrimination. Like @Golden Horse, I encourage you to go after your dream and not let uneducated individuals preach to you about their poorly established and completely unsupported sexist practices.

I say this as a fit 5'11" rider who weighs more than you and rides 14 and 15hh PREs.


----------



## loosie

ShirtHotTeez said:


> @loosie make sure your daughter gets the updated food pyramid if she is going to use it, or perhaps a comparison is a good format for the assignment


Oh there's an updated version is there? Without the ton of carbs at the bottom? I will have to look it up & see if I agree - hope this explains it being taught now...


----------



## SilverMaple

The new eating guide being taught is a plate--- I think it's called MyPlate. Basically, it divides a plate up into rough quarters of fruits, vegetables, grains (rather than carbs) and protein. A glass of dairy/yogurt is off to the side. From what I've seen at local schools, there is a lot of emphasis on filling up on vegetables and proteins and choosing whole grains rather than simple or processed carbs.


----------



## Mythilus

gottatrot said:


> I'd just tell them I was 5'4" and 163 lbs. What are they going to do, weigh you? I've never seen a scale for humans at a barn, and I doubt they'll measure your height. Most people can't guess another person's weight within 10 lbs by looking.


I did this once. They said riders had to be 70kg (~155lb) so I told a white lie. Why? Because I'm not much heavier and I wasn't going to be turned away because I was slightly over their limit. They put me on a big 17hh TB/WB anyway.


----------



## Mulefeather

As another large person, I'm telling you that you're NOWHERE near the limit of being unable to ride - find a different barn. I've never, ever seen BMI being used to determine if a rider was over the limit for an in-shape, frequently worked horse to carry. 

Remember that the BMI was set sometime in the 1700's...by a Dutch statistician, for insurance purposes. Not even a doctor - he was a mathematician. It's junk science at its most blatant.

It's understandable for a barn to set reasonable limits, especially for beginners - they tend to be the hardest on a horse, since they're just learning how to ride and control their bodies to help the horse rather than hinder. But if you set unreasonable limits for adults, you're going to find out there are a lot of adults out there who don't fit the "mold"...yet somehow are still riding, and succeeding in their chosen disciplines. 

Go find a barn that isn't as stringent, and have fun learning to ride!


----------



## 4horses

Here is a story of what can go wrong....my friend was a warmblood breeder. She had a gorgeous 4 or 5 yr old black gelding- 17 hands. The brother of this gelding sold for $30,000 as a 3 year old... To put some perspective on what the horse was worth... This was her baby that she raised and trained and that I loved. He was the biggest goofy horse i have ever met. He would steal your hat, your phone, the pitchfork... What a character. 

She put him up for sale and had someone come try him out. Granted i wasn't there to see this. Someone very very large came to try him. The lady mounted up and immediately kicked him- hard. He jumped forward and she lost her balace and jerked him in the mouth, pulling him backwards. He broke his hock. I'm not sure if he slipped, but the damage was done. My friend ended giving him away to someone who wanted to rehabilitate him for a year. If he became pasture sound... I don't know. 

Having a weight limit is controversial - certainly. I feel like lesson stables have to have a limit because many people treat horses like cars. They are expendable and the people who come for lessons are not the ones paying for that horse's vet bills or retirement. I had one vet student come to lessons who was kicked out promptly. She jumped on my horse and proceeded to canter the entire lesson. She didn't want to learn anything just gallop around. Then she complained about how "lazy" my horse was. I certainly wasn't going to put her on a more excitable mount and have her run that horse into the ground. Honestly, i pitty any horse who ends up with her as an owner. I had her switch horses to my pacey mare. You can run the mare but you won't be comfortable doing it... that put a stop to it. 

People seem to think they are entitled to do whatever they want, just because they are offering you money. I had several people looking for horse rentals. Are they seriously thinking I'm just going to hand them the reins, and let them ride however fast they like? With no supervision? 

To the original poster- I'm certain you are none of these things and will have no problem finding a stable to ride at. I'm not certain why the stable you spoke to has the policy they have but I'm betting that if you asked them, it is probably due to liability reasons. Perhaps before being insulted, you should ask them why they adopted that policy.


----------



## ozpoz

mmshiro said:


> It makes perfect sense because a knight, riding into battle with full armor and weaponry, would be well less than 165 pounds. /*sarcasm*/
> 
> A skilled overweight rider will be lighter on a horse than a sack-of-rocks skinny beginner, but you really can't judge them too harshly until you see the horses they have in their portfolio. They wouldn't have a bunch of warmbloods and drafties if 98% of their revenue comes from giving lessons to children whose legs wouldn't reach below the saddle on those horses.


New research would suggest this is not true. It was carried out at the Animal Health Trust in Newmarket and a full report will be published in December. 
Have you ever seen a suit of armour or old military uniforms. I have - and they are tiny,really tiny. And it wasn't so long ago that horses were considered "aged" by 12. Warmbloods have mostly thoroughbred breeding, so not suitable for weight carrying. The hard thing for a larger rider is finding a saddle they will fit, that also fits the horse without putting pressure on the spine too far back. I'm glad that barns near you take welfare seriously because the horse doesn't have a voice.


----------



## Golden Horse

@ozpoz i’m Wondering where you live that horses were considered aged at 12? I’ve never come across that one.

Also take issue with the sweeping statement that Warmblood, with TB blood are not suitable for weight carrying. There are TB’s out there built like brick out houses, and they cross out well. Heck the whole English hunting scene was based on warmblood breeding no capital W, crossing well built TB’s onto drafty types or make weight carrying hunters.

Again, can’t say 20% rule, can’t say weedy Arabs can’t carry weight, can say, look at the horse and rider combination, and go from there.


----------



## bsms

"_Analysis of existing horse armour located in the Royal Armouries indicates the equipment was originally worn by horses of 15 to 16 hands (60 to 64 inches, 152 to 163 cm), or about the size and build of a modern field hunter or ordinary riding horse. Research undertaken at the Museum of London, using literary, pictorial and archaeological sources, supports military horses of 14 to 15 hands (56 to 60 inches, 142 to 152 cm), distinguished from a riding horse by its strength and skill, rather than its size. This average does not seem to vary greatly across the medieval period....

...Further evidence for a 14-16 hand war horse is that it was a matter of pride to a knight to be able to vault onto his horse in full armour, without touching the stirrup. This arose not from vanity, but necessity: if unhorsed during battle, a knight would remain vulnerable if unable to mount by himself._"








​
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horses_in_the_Middle_Ages#Size_of_war_horses

_Evidence gathered from 3,000 skeletons reveals that human height has varied little over the past 1,000 years. From the 10th century through to the 19th, the average height of adult men was 5ft 7in or 170cm - just 2in below today's average.

Women were an average of 5ft 2in or 158cm - just over an inch shorter than today.

All the bones in the study came from the medieval St Peter's Church in Barton upon Humber, North East Lincolnshire._

Myth debunked: Our medieval ancestors were just as tall as us says a new study | Daily Mail Online

"_According to Steckel's analysis, heights decreased from an average of 68.27 inches (173.4 centimeters) in the early Middle Ages to an average low of roughly 65.75 inches (167 cm) during the 17th and 18th centuries. __"This decline of two-and-a-half inches substantially exceeds any height fluctuations seen during the various industrial revolutions of the 19th century," Steckel said._

_Reasons for such tall heights during the early Middle Ages may have to do with climate. Steckel points out that agriculture from 900 to 1300 benefited from a warm period – temperatures were as much as 2 to 3 degrees warmer than subsequent centuries. Theoretically, smaller populations had more land to choose from when producing crops and raising livestock._"

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040902090552.htm

Also see: https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/aams/hd_aams.htm

Having different weight limits for women than men is bizarre. I doubt the horse knows the difference.


----------



## farmpony84

@bsms - the rider is still anatomically fit meaning that his body, even with all of the extra weight is still well balanced.




The issue with weight and riders is simple. One being that an overused horse such as a trail horse or lesson horse will be carrying a lot of weight around over long periods of time so sometimes it's as simple as limiting how much an animal carries. The other reasoning is the riders safety and balance. A short robust man or women is not nearly as balanced as a very tall fit person who is at the same weight as the shorter more robust person. 




That being said. The OP is very close to the riding/weight limit and I encourage her to continue with her quest to ride!


----------



## bsms

I'm not convinced an overweight 150 lb woman is any harder on a horse's back than a fit but new-to-horse-riding 200 lb man. The fit person may improve faster. 

I say "may" because a key part of good riding is relaxing. I had 40 years of jogging before I took up riding. To this day, my jogging has a negative impact on my riding. It tightens things that need to be loose. It takes me about 20-30 minutes to "melt into the saddle". Someone who isn't a jogger might "melt" sooner.

I learned riding from reading VS Littauer & the US Cavalry manual on equitation. I still enjoy this quote from Piero Santini: 

"_The verb 'to sit' should be eliminated from our vocabulary where riding is concerned, for the idea it conveys is intrinsically misleading. Were it nor for its indecorous connotation the word 'perch' would more aptly suggest the position that the rider should assume in what is commonly described as the 'forward' seat._"

The cavalry was interested in teaching athletic young men how to ride quickly. I needed to learn to stay on a very spooky horse quickly. And "perching" is a good approach. I joke that I ride Bandit like he is a surfboard. And honestly, at the start of almost every ride, I do ride him like a surfboard, perching on top of him.

But after 20-40 minutes of riding, I melt into the saddle. I sit. Then riding becomes more like a dance and less like an athletic competition. Instead of trying to avoid his movement, I accept it and even anticipate it. We start to flow. And I suspect Bandit is as comfortable after we start dancing as he is when I'm surfing.

Any lesson place can impose any rules they wish. Their horses, their rules. But I strongly suspect a lot of somewhat overweight riders can dance with their horse just fine. I also think a lot of overweight new riders could stay on a walking horse just fine, and I think a rider can learn a LOT at a walk. But I don't run a "barn" and no one would want to take riding lessons from me...

PS - A tall, fit rider carries more weight high above the horse's back. Not a big problem going in a straight line, but a challenge in tight turns or uneven terrain. I sometimes ride our 13 hand mustang. He's built like a tank and doesn't seem bothered by my weight per se, but struggles with me in tight turns or uneven ground. It feels to me like I have too much weight too high above his back and he's hard pressed to compensate.

When Trooper carried this guy, he didn't seem bothered by the WEIGHT. The height and the amount of weight carried in this very athletic person's shoulders seemed like more of an issue to me:








​


----------



## Foxhunter

Majority of horses amd ponies can carry heavier weights for a period of time *but* on a regular basis it is not good for them. 

I weighed around 140 - 147 lbs in my younger years and never has a small pony, 12 hand or lower, carry me whether it was riding them to the field bareback or riding them to sort the little beggars to behave. I never did them any harm but, it was for short periods of time, had I ridden them for a couple of hours doing hard work, then the weight would have told on them.


----------



## Avna

ozpoz said:


> New research would suggest this is not true. It was carried out at the Animal Health Trust in Newmarket and a full report will be published in December.
> Have you ever seen a suit of armour or old military uniforms. I have - and they are tiny,really tiny. And it wasn't so long ago that horses were considered "aged" by 12. Warmbloods have mostly thoroughbred breeding, so not suitable for weight carrying. The hard thing for a larger rider is finding a saddle they will fit, that also fits the horse without putting pressure on the spine too far back. I'm glad that barns near you take welfare seriously because the horse doesn't have a voice.


1. Many suits of armor you might see are tiny because they are not made to be worn, just displayed. A common mistake modern people make. 
2. Warmbloods are not "mostly" TB, they are actually a type of horse originally developed from TB types and draft types crossed. They are certainly intended to carry weight although not like a draft horse. 
3. "Aged" in horse terminology did not mean too old to use. It was a term that essentially meant "mature" as opposed to "young and still growing". Perhaps it is archaic now but it was in use fifty years ago still.


----------



## loosie

ozpoz said:


> New research would suggest this is not true. It was carried out at the Animal Health Trust in Newmarket and a full report will be published in December.
> Have you ever seen a suit of armour or old military uniforms. I have - and they are tiny,really tiny.


You've lost me. What's suggested as not true? If it was mm's first comment, note the *sarcasm* lable - he was not serious. And it depends what style/age(etc) suit of armour you're talking of as to being 'tiny, really tiny'. Yes, on average men were smaller in the middle ages, but suits of armour - Many were seriously heavy - even needing a helper for knights to mount. I believe Percherons were originally bred to carry heavyweight knights in shining armour. Later, type of metal & design(chain mail for eg) allowed them to be far lighter.


> mostly thoroughbred breeding, so not suitable for weight carrying. The hard thing for a larger rider is finding a saddle they will fit, that also fits the horse without putting pressure on the spine too far back. I'm glad that barns near you take welfare seriously because the horse doesn't have a voice.


The first bit - never heard that before. What makes you think TB's are not suitable for carrying weight? The next sentence is very relevant to the thread though.


----------



## loosie

4horses said:


> Having a weight limit is controversial - certainly. I feel like lesson stables have to have a limit because many people treat horses like cars. They are expendable and the people who come for lessons are not the ones paying for that horse's vet bills or retirement.



Agree absolutely. These are living, feeling, hurtable animals & some people just have no clue &/or consideration. I used to work at a trail riding co & some huge people would turn up & get very offended & angry if we said we didn't have an appropriate horse for them. 

However, OP's stated stipulations, & how height & sex makes a difference is far less(or not) rational IMO.


----------



## bsms

Field armor for knights weighed around 50-60 lbs. Compare:

"_When soldiers headed out on extended foot patrols, their average load ranged from 87 pounds to 127 pounds. When they came under attack and dropped their rucksacks, most of their fighting loads still exceeded 60 pounds...A 2007 study by a Navy research-advisory committee found Marines typically have loads from 97 to 135 pounds._"

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/weight-of-war-gear-that-protects-troops-also-injures-them/

Also: https://www2.kuow.org/specials/militaryweight.pdf


----------



## loosie

For the sake of OP & thread relevance, lets get off the 'knights in shining armour' trip now & back on topic, if there's any more to say on that. ;-)


----------



## TXhorseman

Many cavalries used to have a 170 pound weight limit, but the horse often had to carry over 100 pounds of additional equipment.

This establishment’s rules may be based on misguided understanding or personal bias. Weight is not as important as balance. If a rider remains balanced over the horse’s center of gravity, the horse can move much better than when carrying a lighter rider who requires the horse to adjust for the rider’s imbalance. Some establishments have weight rules primarily to avoid awkward situations of having to personally deny some people the opportunity to ride. 

I once visited a riding school in Portugal that had a 170 pound weight limit. This was a facility that taught classical “high school” riding where good balance is more important than in more casual riding. They let me ride even though I weighed about 200 pounds at the time. They knew I was experienced and rode several horses daily.


----------



## kiltsrhott

I mean, it's their barn, so their rules. There's nothing you can really do about it. If you want to take lessons, you'll have to find another barn. Honestly, it would be well worth finding another barn. Find another place with a more welcoming attitude.

This crap really ****es me off though. Not about setting weight limits on horses, but for discrimination against weights. There's such a societal negative against women who aren't supermodel thin. There are a lot of reasons why someone might be overweight. Laziness and poor diet often aren't it. It can be, but not always. Genetics, side effects of medication, hormonal imbalance, stress, or other health problems can be major contributing factors as well, and not everyone is put together the same way. BMI and body fat percentage do not always align with each other either. Depending on your overall build, bone density, and muscle mass, you can have a high BMI but a normal body fat percentage.

165 is a really low limit if they're teaching adult riders. That's a normal BMI for anyone who is at least 5'9" which is some women and most men. And if the limits change based on the rider's height, that's garbage. Being overweight doesn't make you a bad rider. You can be overweight and still be a light and balanced rider, especially with proper instruction. And because horseback riding is exercise, it could help a person struggling with their weight to get in better shape.

I'm 5'5" and about 165. The least I ever weighed was about 130 and that was when I was in a really bad place emotionally and would go without eating at all for days. It was unhealthy. When I was down to 130 I was actually underweight. My ribs, hips and collar bones stuck out, and I was dizzy all the time. I'm one of those people that usually has a higher BMI than body fat percentage. I've been told I have dense bones. I don't know. It's just the way it is. I probably actually feel best when I'm in the 150 ballpark, but it's been a slow shed since I was pregnant last year. I had a lot of complications with that so I'm not expecting my body to bounce back super fast. Horseback riding is what I've been using to get back in shape the right way, instead of by starving myself.

Honestly, I may not get all the way back down to 150. Most of my weight was actually gained in my chest, and I don't think exercise and healthy eating is going to get rid of that unless I want to drop my body fat percentage below my feel-good place. Who are other people to judge me for my weight? For my ability to ride a horse because of it? For my worth as a woman based on my place on a chart? Being a woman isn't easy, physically. Attitudes like the one put forth by this riding stable, with their different weight limits based on gender or height, are the reason so many women have low self esteem, depression, eating disorders etc.


----------



## Zexious

I'm going to start by saying that I haven't read all of the replies--but I'd still like to throw in my two cents regardless.

Is the 20% rule a little on the simple side? Yes. There are countless factors that should go into determining whether a horse and a rider (from a physiological standpoint) are a good fit. It's no different than using the BMI system. Is it a little too simple? Also yes. It does a poor job of factoring in muscle, fitness levels, body type, etcetc. 
But I think it's still necessary. There needs to be some system that can be used to discuss weight from an unbiased standpoint.

As far as the actual rule? They are perfectly within their right to protect their assets and impose whatever rules they see fit.
I can sympathize with OP. I'm currently trying to get back into shape after years of surgeries. It's no easy feat. I also wouldn't feel comfortable reaching out until I was back below 150.


----------



## Tihannah

The whole weight and logic thing baffles me. Is it weight based on height?? Below is a recent picture of me riding. I am 165 on a GOOD day, but most days veer closer to 170. But I am 5'8. My horse is 17h and over 1300lbs, but I've been on 15h horses with a much smaller build and they had no issue carrying me. No one has ever told me I was too heavy to ride. But if I was say 5'1, would my weight then be too much for a smaller horse?? I'm essentially in the same weight range as the Op and would love to see if her barn would deny me lessons. I should also add that most BMI calculators place me as overweight and a recent health evaluation machine at work told me I was 35% body fat.


----------



## kiltsrhott

Yeah and this is what I look like... classed as overweight according to a BMI calculator. No one's ever told me I'm too heavy to ride either, probably just because I don't look "fat" even though I'm heavy. I'm sure it's my body type and the way I carry my weight that keep me from being told I'm too heavy. If I were to apply on paper to this stable, I wonder if they'd reject me.


----------



## Horsef

I’m gonna go with the tack issue again. You both fit nicely into those saddles. I am the same height as OP and I would not fit into them if I weighed the same as you do.

I guess it does depend on the body type but a lot of women, me included, carry a lot of weight in our bottoms. I guess it would be fair to assume that a woman would carry more weight in that area than a man. As far as tack goes a big belly isn’t an issue.

I personally would prefer to have some arbitrary general rule upfront. I would be mortified if I had to go there just to be told that my bottom can’t fit their dainty equipment.


----------



## jaydee

Tihannah said:


> The whole weight and logic thing baffles me. Is it weight based on height?? Below is a recent picture of me riding. I am 165 on a GOOD day, but most days veer closer to 170. But I am 5'8. My horse is 17h and over 1300lbs, but I've been on 15h horses with a much smaller build and they had no issue carrying me. No one has ever told me I was too heavy to ride. But if I was say 5'1, would my weight then be too much for a smaller horse?? I'm essentially in the same weight range as the Op and would love to see if her barn would deny me lessons. I should also add that most BMI calculators place me as overweight and a recent health evaluation machine at work told me I was 35% body fat.


 If they were the type of barn that would usually put a 5ft 1 rider only on smaller horses/ponies (14.2 and under) then they would probably say you were too heavy for them but if they keep larger horses for people that are taller - which you are then you wouldn't be considered too heavy for them
Its not easy to understand what their aim is but I'm guessing that they tend to not have a lot of larger horses so small women/children are always put on small horses/ponies leaving the larger horses reserved for taller riders.
You also have to take into account that if they do insist on putting riders that are shorter in height on smaller animals the saddles that fit a 13.2 to 14.2 ponies, especially if they're short backed are typically going to be between 15 and 16 inches which is going to be too small for a taller rider or a larger rider - so for @Horsef - having a correct sized saddle for a smaller pony isn't anything to do with the saddle being too dainty for someone with a large backside its about whats a good fit for the pony which should always be a priority
When my son and I rode at an Arabian barn they just didn't cater for 6ft+ riders at all but as they did have a couple of part breds that were tall enough for him and up to his weight which was about 160 pounds at the time they were happy for him to take his own saddle along


----------



## jgnmoose

I always thought this sounded like something that came from a mounted military units that actually saw combat, like Dragoons and Cavalry. Those horses were used hard, saw a ton of miles every day and jumped a lot. 

It makes sense to me in the modern context of racing, show jumping, eventing and maybe even endurance. A light rider is just going to do those things better and be easier for the horse. 

There are a lot of big boys out there riding horses doing real work like roping and performance events. 230+ wouldn't even be overweight for a rider that is around 6'3 or so. 

Sorry that happened to you. Honestly they probably did you a favor, you can guess what kind of people they are when they have rules like that for even beginner level riders.


----------

