# How Much do you weigh?



## CowboysDream

You might get more answers if you said why you want this information. I notice your first ever post was to say that some of the ladies are too big for their horses and telling them to lose weight. I sure hope your motivation in this thread is not to tell people they are too big for their horses.


----------



## Speed Racer

Number one, NEVER ask someone's weight. That's completely rude and out of line.

Number two, what makes YOU some sort of expert about the weight a particular horse can carry?

Total noob poster, and in your _very first post_ you insulted people by telling them they need to lose weight because their horses look uncomfortable.

Unless you're George Morris, you don't have the expertise to tell _anyone_ what they should or should not be doing, or what weight their animals can carry.


----------



## SouthernTrails

.

I am 6'-4", weigh 475lb and Ride a 14 hand Quarter Horse, what do I do with them? Feed them Mostly :lol:


.


----------



## Roperchick

erp derp...what they said^^^^:lol:

im not a plus sized rider (5'8" 120lbs) but *I* dont even like getting height/weight done at PT tests by people i *know*....i dont see why anybody would answer that question of a complete stranger whos ONLY OTHER POST was a critisism of peoples weight and saying theyre basically bad people for riding?????


----------



## Ems1

Im curious as to what weights you actually think horses can carry!!
Im not out to start a fight Im pureley curious.

Does a western saddle distribute weight differently to an english? How do you get on? how would you say your horse would tell you enough?




> Mod note


While it is not a rule to type around word sensors, my personal discretion says it is, please do not do it again EMS1

.


----------



## CowboysDream

Ems1 said:


> Im curious as to what weights you actually think horses can carry!!
> Im not out to start a b1tch fight Im pureley curious.
> 
> Does a western saddle distribute weight differently to an english? How do you get on? how would you say your horse would tell you enough?


How much weight a horse can carry is dependent on every individual horse. Some factors that help horses carry more weight are: 
- good confirmation
- short back
- strong thick legs
- good bone
- good feet
- overall good condition / fitness

Of course then there's the riders balance and fitness. The same horse could carry a 200lbs rider who has good balance and seat better than it could carry a 150lbs rider who has no balance and bounces around on their backs. Also duration and pace of rides come into account as well. 

I am pretty sure english saddles distribute weight differently than western. You could do a google search or search the forum and I am sure people have discussed this before. 

I get on by using a mounting block, then putting my foot in the stirrup and swinging my other leg over. Just like anyone else might.

Sometimes you can just tell, for example I would never even try to get on a horse with a long back. Thats just asking for trouble. But for actual riding, if your horse braces itself and groans when you get on, then that horse is not a suitable match for you. If the horse flicks its head around for you and not other riders than it is most likely uncomfortable. I assume a horse would tell you just like any other horse would when its in pain. Through body language.


----------



## Roperchick

yes western and english saddle distribute weight differently

an example:
"


> -A typical English saddle with a 150 lb rider up will apply about 1 ¾ lbs of pressure per square inch to the horse’s back.
> -A typical western saddle, with that same rider up, will apply only ¾ lb per square inch.
> Why the difference? A western saddle has far greater weight bearing surface to better distribute the weight."


so even though western saddles can weigh up to 30-60lbs its built to distribute the weight over a broader area of the horses back, alleviating some of the stress of the weight

while english saddles are built to give more close contact to the horses back, and has a more concentrated/smaller area for weight distribution.

so while english saddles are lighter and smaller, it may nto always be easier on the horse...

it depends alot on the factors that CD listed.


----------



## MBFoley

I am 5'2" and weigh more than I should but less than I have. I ride a 16.1hh thoroughbred. We thus far have mostly walked around the arena and boarding stable, have gone on one (mostly) walk only trail ride (I say mostly because he wanted to gogogogo and while I was able to keep him to a walk for most of it, we did do a little trotting). We have done a little trotting in the arena but not much because I am still getting my balance and seat back and while my posting is coming along, I still don't like bouncing on him that much. We ride English although I would like to get a western saddle as well, and eventually bareback as that has always been my favorite way to ride. As far as how I get on - I use the same 3 step mounting block the rest of the riders at my barn use to get on. As long as Kid acts happy to be brought in and tacked up, stands willingly for me to get on, moves willingly and smoothly, stays sound in feet and legs and his back shows no sign of soreness (which he did have a sore back when he came off the track) then I am content in knowing I am not asking too much of him.


----------



## afatgirlafathorse

Guess.


----------



## afatgirlafathorse

I really mean it!


----------



## waresbear

I won't guess, cuz I haven't a clue, but it's not a guess when I say your horse can carry you with absolutely no problem, great pics!


----------



## CowboysDream

And Im not guessing because I am a bit biased in that I have read almost all her blog posts XD <3


----------



## Ems1

I would guess around 14stone and would agree you look great on your horse!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## afatgirlafathorse

That's flattering. But you are off by about 4 stone. I recently published my weight (and clothing size!) on my blog. I would be over the moon if I only weighed 14 stone!

Here's another one! Guess how much this HORSE weighs!


----------



## Ems1

I'm not sure of weight of horse but I personally wouldn't like it to carry more than 13 stone excluding tack 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Roperchick

*drool* he looks like maybe the same build as charlie...but a little shorter...
and charlie is 1300lbs so im going to guess in between 1200-1300lbs


----------



## afatgirlafathorse

She died about a month after this photo was taken and was weighed, ON A SCALE, not with a tape, in her necropsy at 1290... which would mean that following the 20% rule, she could carry up to 258lbs... which is equivalent to about 18 stone.

I AM getting at a point here, not just playing a guessing game.

You can't look at a person and or horse and make the judgement call one way or the other, whether the horse "appears" to be in distress or not. Some horses are much more stoic than others and if their rider surpassed the "20% rule" (which I kind of call bollocks on anyways, unless you have WEIGHED your horse with something besides a deceiving weight tape!). Someone might LOOK 250lbs and actually weigh less based on their body structure, or somebody might LOOK like they weigh 14 stone (again, thanks for the compliment) but actually weigh 250lbs. Then you look at the horse - I would never have guessed my mare to be 1290lbs, and to be honest, I am not sure what she taped at (but in my experience, they are not all that accurate). Without the numbers in hard, cold fact - can you really make the call fairly?

This is the same reason why while I don't have a problem with stables with rider weight limits, I DO have a problem when the way that they "weigh" the rider is by what their EYE tells them the rider weighs. 

I really think you need to look at each horse and each rider individually with consideration for all factors beyond the weight of the horse and weight of the rider + tack. Experience, conformation (of both horse AND rider), fitness (of both horse AND rider), etc.


----------



## Roperchick

i just want to say...im super proud of myself for calling that horses weight while only being able to see about an inch of the picture at a time!:wink:

but back on topic...im completely derp about "stones" weight that yall keep measuring....any way you can spell it out for me? haha


----------



## BarrelracingArabian

I weigh 115-127 at any given time. I have ridden everything from 11.2 hh ponies to 16.3 h thoroughbreds the ponies had absolutely no problem, but then again they were physically fit and i rode them bareback. Currently I ride my trainers 14.1 hand gelding who is very thick and has absolutely zero problems holding me or my trainer. Also i ride western. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Inga

I believe that a stone is equal to 14 pounds. This makes me about 12 stones a few pebbles and a can of soup right now. Sad to say. I need to get back down to 9.5 stones. Ugh!


----------



## Roperchick

so really...im in between 8.5-9 stones depending on if ive been crazy working out hmmmm interesting

good to know haha thanks


----------



## silverfae

I'll play your game, if only to try to prove how wrong you are. I weigh 275, but at the beginning of the summer I weighed 290. I ride in an orthoflex cross country saddle that weighs about 25 lbs and I do competitive trail. I ride a 15 hand haflinger that weighs about 1200 lbs. 

How do I know that my horse can carry me with no issues? Because there are very stringent vetting rules at every competitive trail ride I go to, where my horse is looked at by a vet for lameness, muscle soreness, and metabolic function, both before and after each ride, and my horse scores 99.5's, meaning that after carrying me 15 miles in 2.5 hours, he has not changed at all. If he acted at all like he was tired after 15 miles, I might consider riding him less or conditioning him more, but he is ready and willing to go farther at the end of our rides. 

Here we are at the ends of some 10-15 mile rides:


remi15 by jnmount, on Flickr


remipond by jnmount, on Flickr


remirftc by jnmount, on Flickr

Happy, fresh, not looking at all like he's struggling.

So, how do you know your horse doesn't have a problem with what you do with it? Do you have such stringent vetting in your sport? Do you check your horses back every time that you ride?


----------



## Lexiie

180 lbs and 5'7"
I ride a 930 15.2 hand Standardbred 

We do trails, jumping, english (pleasure) and tons of other fun stuff!!


----------



## peppersgirl

Before pregnancy I was 168 (actually I dropped weight at the beginning and am now back at this per my last dr visit) at 5'4". Based on BMI I am darn near "obese"...but have yet to EVER get told by a doctor that i need to lose weight- plus I have been poked and proded and found to be very healthy and actually at my last dr visit I was complimented on my abs (6 months prego)!

I guess Im just like a good tomatoe- heavy for my size

My main horse is a 14.1 966lb (taped on monday by the vet) qh mare. I would guess that all of my equipment is roughly around 50lbs.... When Im in more riding appropriate shape That horse gets ridden pretty hard with out a problem. Trail rides, sortings ect and she goes ALL DAY just fine.


IMO that stupid 20% is just another way to bash on fat people....I can garantee you that alot of those slender professional trainers you see riding these young and or small horses come in at close to 200#s...and you dont hear jack about this 20 % rule non sense. Every horse is an individual and should be treated as such, some slender built horses can carry alot of weight and go all day, where some other even hardier built horses cant..but I also believe that comes down to conditioning as well.


----------



## MN Tigerstripes

I weight 145lbs about 5'9" and ride a 1250lb QH and a 800lb grade welsh without any problems. 

The QH has a bigger dislike for heavier riders in comparison for his size, he thinks that I'm the right size and anything much bigger is just asking too much. He is much more forgiving of beginner riders (on property) if they are lighter and much less forgiving of a heavier rider if they are unbalanced. 

The pony can and has gone all day with me on her back with no lagging or issues keeping up. Not just walking around either, trotting, cantering, galloping, running through water, up and down hills, and racing a couple of QHs. She's a willing little creature and very honest, but sensitive enough that I have no doubt she'd give me a lot of hell if I was too much for her. 

It depends on the horse, like so many things in the horse world. A rider must learn to read their particular animal and determine for themselves what they are capable of doing. For the most part I think "heavier" riders are far more aware of their horse's limitations than lighter riders. I know when I ride the pony I'm watching for signs of me asking too much more than when I ride the QH.


----------



## Golden Horse

So not playing, but as to the weight carrying thing...

I am not a huge fan of using the 20% rule as gospel, maybe a good guideline. 

Some common sense thoughts:

If 20% is the guideline for a horse carrying a man all day every day in the cavalry, do the same guidelines apply to cross country, a days hunting, a half hour stroll at a walk?

Emmy is currently overweight, if I taped her and worked out 20% it would not be a true reflection on her weight carrying ability.

I like this calculation, as it takes into consideration the horses bone, and the combined weight of horse and rider



 *Add up the total weight of the horse, rider, and tack. Our example: Horse + rider + tack= 1188 pounds*​
 *Measure the circumference of the cannon bone midway between the knee and fetlock. Our example: 7.5 inches*​
 *Divide the total weight by the circumference. Our example: 1188 / 7.5 = 158.4*​
 *Divide the result by two. Our example: 158.4 / 2 = 79.2*​
 *Values below 75 are great! Values from 75-80 are acceptable. Values over 80 indicate weaker legs and a need to train carefully, especially downhill. At this level a rider needs a horse with more substance.*




Even with this one of the issues is the ability of people to accurately measure or asses their horses weight, weight tapes are notoriously difficult to use properly.


​


----------



## eclipseranch

just curious why is this such an issue for the OP. I looked back and saw some beautiful ladies riding some gorgeous happy, healthy horses


----------



## Birdz

I want the OP to come back here and guess how much I weigh!








riding atop a 13.2hh pony.


----------



## eclipseranch

Birdz love your pad!


----------



## Golden Horse

I think it is a legitimate discussion to have, as long as it is done in the proper way. 

Look as a larger rider I am constantly asking myself if I am OK on my horse, and I would hate to think that I looked like this










and no one pointed it out, that to me looks like a very stressed horse, and you wonder why the people riding with the gentleman don't say something.

I feel totally comfortable on Big Ben 










and he shows no sign of worry with the riding we are doing.

Now Willow, the people who saw me ride her say that she was OK, but in my mind I am not sure










So at some point people do have to speak out, because there is a point when the rider is just to much for the horse.


----------



## tinyliny

you look great on Ben. He looks like fun to ride ( I get that itchy feeling of wanting to put my hands on the reins connected to his mouth).


----------



## Sahara

Here's some info for all of us to chew on according to Dr. Deb Bennett:

The basic rules and concepts are:

1. Total weight of rider plus tack must not exceed 250 lbs. There is no horse alive, of any breed, any build, anywhere, that can go more than a few minutes with more weight on its back than this. Not even the U.S. Army ever packed a mule heavier than this. So if you mean by "plus sized riders" that they weigh more than 250 lbs., including the weight of their saddle, then in good conscience what you must tell them is to look for another hobby activity, or confine their horse activities to either driving or groundwork.

2. Horseback riding is not a right: it is not a right for small people, not a right for large people. It is a privilege. If the person is too big to be on a horse's back without doing the animal harm, they should in ethics and courtesy acknowledge that as a fact -- not demand that they ride anyway. To do this would be like demanding that, because they dream of being Superman, they should be permitted to fly when they dress up in a red cape and jump out of a fifth-story window. In other words: what they dream of is a violation of natural law, to which there are no exceptions.

3. It is a lie to tell any child that he can be anything he wants to be. You cannot be anything you want to be. You can only be what you are fitted to be. If you have a tin ear, I don't care how much you practice; you are never going to be Mozart, and you are also never going to be pleasant to be around when you are practicing your clarinet or your voice lessons. If you are short, you can love basketball with all your heart and learn to carry the ball aggressively and shoot like a demon, but you still aren't going to get on a professional basketball team. If you are long-limbed and not very strong, you're never going to be a gymnast. Unless you have knees that bend both directions, you're never going to be an Olympic medalist in the butterfly or freestyle. And unless you weigh less than 250 lbs. including your tack, you will struggle on horseback, you will fall more often, you will get hurt worse every time you do fall, and you will slowly ruin your horse's back. If you are a plus-sized person, find an activity that you like and one that you have an aptitude for.

4. A "plus sized person" is not one that is necessarily overweight. However, many large people are overweight. The more anyone is overweight, even if they have talent for horseback riding, the more they limit themselves. I know this from my own case. A decade ago, before my knees became so painful that I could no longer run (except in a therapy pool), I weighed 20 lbs. less than now. I am aware that the extra 20 lbs. costs me in the areas of stamina, flexibility, timing, balance, and feel, both in ground schooling and in the saddle. Another way to put this is that for every extra 20 lbs. you're carrying, you lose 1 "dressage level". I know several obese upper-level riders who would be KILLER if they would or could lose weight. Sometimes, for whatever reason, weight loss isn't going to be possible, and if that's the reality, and the total is above 250 lbs. rider + tack, then the person needs to re-structure their horse activities in such a way that they stay off the animal's back.

5. The maximum weight-bearing capacity of 250 lbs. already mentioned applies only to horses with weight-carrying conformation to their backs -- and this by no means includes all horses. Some horses cannot comfortably carry even 175 lbs. rider + tack; so that if the rider rides 'western' where the saddle typically weighs at least 20 lbs., then the rider is going to have to be below around 155 lbs. Horses that cannot pack the maximum have long backs and, more specifically, narrow, tubular couplings -- they are what we call 'dog backed' because the span from the last rib to the hips is rounded and narrow as in a dog. We do not ride dogs and this is the essential reason why. To be a weight-carrier, a horse needs a strong loin coupling, which is short, smooth, pathology-free, broad, and deep. See my conformation series in Equus Magazine, the issue out this month, for helpful specifics on the coupling.

6. The ability to pack weight does not increase with height. Tall horses in fact often have weaker backs than shorter ones. Ponies often have the strongest backs of all. It is a question of absolute breadth across the loins, secondarily of depth from loin to groin, which indicates whether the horse makes the effort to arch its back and oppose the rider's weight with every step he takes.

7. The ability to pack weight does not relate specifically to the size of the feet or the amount of "bone". If you have been following the Equus Magazine series, you will already have learned that the heavier the horse (or horse + rider + tack), the more "bone" the horse needs in order to stay sound over the long haul. However, to be a weight-carrier the horse always has to have the short, broad coupling. If he is long-backed and dog-loined, he can have the recommended amount of 8 inches or more of bone-tendon circumference per 1,000 lbs. of weight, and it won't help him: his back will still go down over time, the weaker the sooner.

8. The ability to pack weight does relate heavily to how well the horse carries himself. Many, many horses ridden by people plenty small and light enough to fit below the 250-lb. cutoff weight slowly ruin their horses over time anyway, because they either do not know how, or do not care, to insist that the horse round itself up the entire time they're in the saddle. "Rounding up" is the minimum requisite effort that fills the rider's seat and opposes and neutralizes the downward force of her weight.

9. The ability to pack weight comfortably over the long haul also relates heavily to riding technique. If the rider bounces when trying to sit the trot, intentionally jabs the horse with her seatbones, sits all the time to one side of the saddle, hangs on the reins, or believes in "breaking the horse back at the root of the neck" in order to obtain high head-carriage, these things are recipes for a short useful life for the horse, and again, the weaker the back to begin with, the sooner it will go down.

10. The exact same may be said of tack: the heavier the rider, the more crucial it is that the saddle fit the horse well. And the more inexperienced or clumsy the rider, again the more crucial is good saddle fit. A rider's mere presence on the horse's back hyperstimulates the muscles that HOLLOW the back; so the last thing we want to do is add to this by hyperstimulating them further through bouncing on his back and/or jabbing it with an ill-fitting saddle.

These are the truths that I can share with you concerning rider weight and the horse's weight-bearing abilities. I am not lecturing anybody to lose weight. What I am doing is reminding you that not everyone is cut out to be a rider; there is a limit above which we cannot go and still claim that we care about horses' welfare. There are plenty of satisfying high-skill activities around horses other than riding, which makes it even more wrong to use these beautiful animals as vehicles to fulfill an unattainable fantasy. -- Dr. Deb


----------



## Baroque

Not sure if this will work, but here I am in the summer on the Halflinger I was leasing. I felt great on her, but was worried when I saw the pictures. My coah and friends all said that she was more than able to pack me for lessons. I have lost some weight since then.

I was about 212 here. Now I am just under 200.


----------



## Inga

Baroque I don't think you look too big on that pony.


----------



## Baroque

Thanks for the comment. I am moving up to a larger horse - this is the guy I am in negotiations to buy:


----------



## eclipseranch

Sahara said:


> Here's some info for all of us to chew on according to Dr. Deb Bennett:
> 
> The basic rules and concepts are:
> 
> 1. Total weight of rider plus tack must not exceed 250 lbs. There is no horse alive, of any breed, any build, anywhere, that can go more than a few minutes with more weight on its back than this. Not even the U.S. Army ever packed a mule heavier than this. So if you mean by "plus sized riders" that they weigh more than 250 lbs., including the weight of their saddle, then in good conscience what you must tell them is to look for another hobby activity, or confine their horse activities to either driving or groundwork.
> 
> 2. Horseback riding is not a right: it is not a right for small people, not a right for large people. It is a privilege. If the person is too big to be on a horse's back without doing the animal harm, they should in ethics and courtesy acknowledge that as a fact -- not demand that they ride anyway. To do this would be like demanding that, because they dream of being Superman, they should be permitted to fly when they dress up in a red cape and jump out of a fifth-story window. In other words: what they dream of is a violation of natural law, to which there are no exceptions.
> 
> 3. It is a lie to tell any child that he can be anything he wants to be. You cannot be anything you want to be. You can only be what you are fitted to be. If you have a tin ear, I don't care how much you practice; you are never going to be Mozart, and you are also never going to be pleasant to be around when you are practicing your clarinet or your voice lessons. If you are short, you can love basketball with all your heart and learn to carry the ball aggressively and shoot like a demon, but you still aren't going to get on a professional basketball team. If you are long-limbed and not very strong, you're never going to be a gymnast. Unless you have knees that bend both directions, you're never going to be an Olympic medalist in the butterfly or freestyle. And unless you weigh less than 250 lbs. including your tack, you will struggle on horseback, you will fall more often, you will get hurt worse every time you do fall, and you will slowly ruin your horse's back. If you are a plus-sized person, find an activity that you like and one that you have an aptitude for.
> 
> 4. A "plus sized person" is not one that is necessarily overweight. However, many large people are overweight. The more anyone is overweight, even if they have talent for horseback riding, the more they limit themselves. I know this from my own case. A decade ago, before my knees became so painful that I could no longer run (except in a therapy pool), I weighed 20 lbs. less than now. I am aware that the extra 20 lbs. costs me in the areas of stamina, flexibility, timing, balance, and feel, both in ground schooling and in the saddle. Another way to put this is that for every extra 20 lbs. you're carrying, you lose 1 "dressage level". I know several obese upper-level riders who would be KILLER if they would or could lose weight. Sometimes, for whatever reason, weight loss isn't going to be possible, and if that's the reality, and the total is above 250 lbs. rider + tack, then the person needs to re-structure their horse activities in such a way that they stay off the animal's back.
> 
> 5. The maximum weight-bearing capacity of 250 lbs. already mentioned applies only to horses with weight-carrying conformation to their backs -- and this by no means includes all horses. Some horses cannot comfortably carry even 175 lbs. rider + tack; so that if the rider rides 'western' where the saddle typically weighs at least 20 lbs., then the rider is going to have to be below around 155 lbs. Horses that cannot pack the maximum have long backs and, more specifically, narrow, tubular couplings -- they are what we call 'dog backed' because the span from the last rib to the hips is rounded and narrow as in a dog. We do not ride dogs and this is the essential reason why. To be a weight-carrier, a horse needs a strong loin coupling, which is short, smooth, pathology-free, broad, and deep. See my conformation series in Equus Magazine, the issue out this month, for helpful specifics on the coupling.
> 
> 6. The ability to pack weight does not increase with height. Tall horses in fact often have weaker backs than shorter ones. Ponies often have the strongest backs of all. It is a question of absolute breadth across the loins, secondarily of depth from loin to groin, which indicates whether the horse makes the effort to arch its back and oppose the rider's weight with every step he takes.
> 
> 7. The ability to pack weight does not relate specifically to the size of the feet or the amount of "bone". If you have been following the Equus Magazine series, you will already have learned that the heavier the horse (or horse + rider + tack), the more "bone" the horse needs in order to stay sound over the long haul. However, to be a weight-carrier the horse always has to have the short, broad coupling. If he is long-backed and dog-loined, he can have the recommended amount of 8 inches or more of bone-tendon circumference per 1,000 lbs. of weight, and it won't help him: his back will still go down over time, the weaker the sooner.
> 
> 8. The ability to pack weight does relate heavily to how well the horse carries himself. Many, many horses ridden by people plenty small and light enough to fit below the 250-lb. cutoff weight slowly ruin their horses over time anyway, because they either do not know how, or do not care, to insist that the horse round itself up the entire time they're in the saddle. "Rounding up" is the minimum requisite effort that fills the rider's seat and opposes and neutralizes the downward force of her weight.
> 
> 9. The ability to pack weight comfortably over the long haul also relates heavily to riding technique. If the rider bounces when trying to sit the trot, intentionally jabs the horse with her seatbones, sits all the time to one side of the saddle, hangs on the reins, or believes in "breaking the horse back at the root of the neck" in order to obtain high head-carriage, these things are recipes for a short useful life for the horse, and again, the weaker the back to begin with, the sooner it will go down.
> 
> 10. The exact same may be said of tack: the heavier the rider, the more crucial it is that the saddle fit the horse well. And the more inexperienced or clumsy the rider, again the more crucial is good saddle fit. A rider's mere presence on the horse's back hyperstimulates the muscles that HOLLOW the back; so the last thing we want to do is add to this by hyperstimulating them further through bouncing on his back and/or jabbing it with an ill-fitting saddle.
> 
> These are the truths that I can share with you concerning rider weight and the horse's weight-bearing abilities. I am not lecturing anybody to lose weight. What I am doing is reminding you that not everyone is cut out to be a rider; there is a limit above which we cannot go and still claim that we care about horses' welfare. There are plenty of satisfying high-skill activities around horses other than riding, which makes it even more wrong to use these beautiful animals as vehicles to fulfill an unattainable fantasy. -- Dr. Deb


Just Wow!


----------



## SorrelHorse

I saw a wonderful post on facebook earlier, that showed an out of balance tiny rider was significantly soring their horses up more than a very heavy rider who is riding balanced would. It showed the heated spots of the horse's back before and after the ride. When I get home, I should find it and post it. I'm small, (114lbs and 5'2'') and I have always been conciously aware of how in balance I am. I've had lesson kids sore up their horses because they were schooling sitting trots and doing nothing but bouncing up and down.


----------



## SorrelHorse

As for speaking out, when I was little I remember going horse camping with my Mom, Dad, Grandparents, and my Aunt (Who is overweight). 

She asked to ride Hobby, my Mom's horse, and even though he was small no one had the heart to tell her he couldn't carry her, so they said go ahead.

They got him next to the mounting block (I remember this very vividly) and when she got on, he actually fell over. He legitimately buckled and collapsed.

At that point, she owned up and said she shouldn't ride him, and apologized thoroughly to everyone and spent the rest of the day brushing and feeding treats to Hobby. Since then, she has bought a big boned horse who is suitable to her and they get along great, and he has had no trouble with her whatsoever.


----------



## Birdz

eclipseranch said:


> Birdz love your pad!


Thank you  Its my own creation intended to match the pony I was riding!


----------



## ladygodiva1228

Sorry Sahara, but what you put down is a load of crap. If the limit was 250 for rider and tack then I know a ton of people that should not be riding including myself.

My gelding was a 16.3 appendix quarter horse who had narvicular in both front hooves and he would take me on the best 3+ hour rides and hunter paces ever. He was checked numerous times by my own vet and vets at the events and he was never stressed, sore, tired, or in any pain. His feet were done like clock work every 8 weeks to keep him sound (shoes with pads). 
And this was all when I weighed 325lbs. I have been riding horses/ponies since I was 3 years old and my balance is very good. 

Heck when my saddlebred was at the trainers and my lessons on her started the trainer was so impressed with how "light" I looked in the saddle she would say to her students "watch the way she rides, do you see her bouncing around, constantly adjusting herself, no you don't". I was down to 235 at the time.


----------



## Sahara

ladygodiva1228 said:


> Sorry Sahara, but what you put down is a load of crap. If the limit was 250 for rider and tack then I know a ton of people that should not be riding including myself.
> 
> My gelding was a 16.3 appendix quarter horse who had narvicular in both front hooves and he would take me on the best 3+ hour rides and hunter paces ever. He was checked numerous times by my own vet and vets at the events and he was never stressed, sore, tired, or in any pain. His feet were done like clock work every 8 weeks to keep him sound (shoes with pads).
> And this was all when I weighed 325lbs. I have been riding horses/ponies since I was 3 years old and my balance is very good.
> 
> Heck when my saddlebred was at the trainers and my lessons on her started the trainer was so impressed with how "light" I looked in the saddle she would say to her students "watch the way she rides, do you see her bouncing around, constantly adjusting herself, no you don't". I was down to 235 at the time.


You do realize that those are not my words. They are from Dr. Deb Bennett. An expert in equine anatomy, physiology, and biomechanics. You will have to forgive me if I value her opinion more than yours.


----------



## Sahara

ladygodiva1228 said:


> Heck when my saddlebred was at the trainers and my lessons on her started the trainer was so impressed with how "light" I looked in the saddle she would say to her students "watch the way she rides, do you see her bouncing around, constantly adjusting herself, no you don't". I was down to 235 at the time.


Good for you!


----------



## silverfae

Sahara said:


> You do realize that those are not my words. They are from Dr. Deb Bennett. An expert in equine anatomy, physiology, and biomechanics. You will have to forgive me if I value her opinion more than yours.


You do realize that Deb Bennett, PhD, does not have a degree in anything equine related, correct? And that anyone on the internet can claim to be an expert on anything? And there will always be some gullible enough to follow them. You will forgive me if I value my own experience over the opinion of someone who lists on their website that they really have no experience with veterinary care, or diagnosing any sort of equine related illness, and that they do not, in fact, have any degree which confers upon them some expertise in equine biomechanics.


----------



## waresbear

silverfae said:


> You do realize that Deb Bennett, PhD, does not have a degree in anything equine related, correct? And that anyone on the internet can claim to be an expert on anything? And there will always be some gullible enough to follow them. You will forgive me if I value my own experience over the opinion of someone who lists on their website that they really have no experience with veterinary care, or diagnosing any sort of equine related illness, and that they do not, in fact, have any degree which confers upon them some expertise in equine biomechanics.


I heard of Deb Bennett well before there was such a thing as an "internet". She had a monthly article in Horse & Rider magazine called conformation clinic. What her degree is in, I have no idea, but she has been well known before she went on to have website. If she is right or wrong, I haven't a clue, but the woman did explain in detail about confirmation & what it meant to a horse.


----------



## Sahara

silverfae said:


> You do realize that Deb Bennett, PhD, does not have a degree in anything equine related, correct? And that anyone on the internet can claim to be an expert on anything? And there will always be some gullible enough to follow them. You will forgive me if I value my own experience over the opinion of someone who lists on their website that they really have no experience with veterinary care, or diagnosing any sort of equine related illness, and that they do not, in fact, have any degree which confers upon them some expertise in equine biomechanics.


Listen, I don't care one way or the other if overweight people ride horses. I am just offering some pretty solid information regarding weight carrying capabilities of the horse. If you want to look at one page of her website and discredit her knowledge or life's work, that is your loss. It is too bad you are taking such a defensive position. I became familiar with Bennett's work in Equus. She has written many profound articles on equine anatomy that are published in Equus. I imagine you would probably enjoy them as they are quite informative and written in a context which most people can understand. 
In fact, I believe she published an article (along with vets and experts in the field) regarding this topic in Jan. 2010. 

Just because you don't like what she is saying or don't want to follow her advice doesn't make it wrong. 

If this make me gullible, than I am more than happy to be gullible. :wink:


----------



## Sahara

silverfae said:


> You do realize that Deb Bennett, PhD, does not have a degree in anything equine related, correct? do not, in fact, have any degree which confers upon them some expertise in equine biomechanics.


I am afraid you lost me here. 

Her degree is in Vertebrate Paleontology, which emphasizes the anatomy and biomechanics of fossil animals. Dr. Bennett is known as an authority on the classification, evolution, anatomy, and biomechanics of fossil and living horses.

So, how is she NOT qualified to address this topic?


----------



## silverfae

I take offense to it because this:



> Total weight of rider plus tack must not exceed 250 lbs. There is no horse alive, of any breed, any build, anywhere, that can go more than a few minutes with more weight on its back than this.


is such a ridiculously crazy thing to say. If it were true, horses would be dropping dead all over the place, or going lame, or whatever she thinks will happen to them after a few minutes of this. There is absolutely no reputable evidence that I am aware of to support such a wild claim. 

Do overweight riders need to make absolutely sure their horse is up to carrying them? Definitely. But to say that no one over, essentially 230 lbs, should ever ride is just silly. Plenty of people over that weight ride horses who work hard and stay sound into their late 20's/early 30's. 

And Sahara, she is a paleontologist. So, maybe she is qualified to say what weight prehistoric horses could carry, but afaik, paleontologists only study fossils and evolution, not modern species and their biomechanics. It's like saying that because I am a pathogenic microbiologist, I must know all about every kind of bacteria in the world. You can't specialize in everything, even within your area of expertise. 

I am sure that she knows a lot about conformation and biomechanics of horses, but I have never seen any research that would in any way back up her theory, and I have done a heavy amount of research. I would certainly be open to reading such research if it were ever presented, but I don't buy in to anyone just making claims that I have seen with my own eyes to be false.


----------



## Tracer

I honestly don't think that anyone can put a limit on a riders weight. So many things come into account - the weight of the rider, the size of the horse, the conformation of the horse, the riders ability, what work is being done, the saddle type and fit.

Yes, maybe 250lbs is a good guideline for a rider who flops around in the saddle, but we've seem a few cases on this site where horses seem more than capable of exceeding that. 

You can use any calculation you want, but the only one who can tell you how much is too much is your horse. I'm not going to stop riding just because my weight + tack comes to around 280lbs. I never ride for long since I don't own my own horse, and I nearly always ride solid, short-backed horses. I've only ever had one horse that clearly couldn't carry me, and that was because she had a back problem. She was uncomfortable even with a rider who, I would guess, came to around 150lbs with tack. 

As for this Deb Bennett... I've never even heard of her, but it sounds like she's spouting some lies in saying that no horse can possibly carry 250lbs. The rest of what she said was quite informative to me, and there are some things that I will take away with me. But like I said, no one can possibly know how much a horse is capable of comfortably carrying.


----------



## KJsDustyDash

I have seen some happy women on healthy horses on this thread which would indicate to me that there are horses out there who can carry a heavier rider. However, rather than becoming defensive about Dr. Deb B (as an example, I am wholly unaware of her work or credibility therein) could we use it as a starting point of a civil discussion on the topic of how much weight a horse can safely carry over the long term? This is not limited to rider weight. I have seen horses stumble under riders and loads. 
Obviously a slim rider who is very unbalanced would be worse than a well balanced heavier rider, but only up to a point. As a personal example, I hike extensively, before I knew any better I carried a pack that was about 30 pounds heavier than it should have been for my height, weight and build. I didn't realize I was doing damage to my back (now a diagnosed problem.) Also, I was more prone to slips, trips and falls, even with a well balanced pack. 
On the other hand, I have seen great roping horses carry large riders into competition and win, and stay healthy for years. 
Less weight or more weight, I think there are too many factors to pin point a number after which it becomes dangerous to ride. For my young horses tho, I do stick to the 250 rule, as a precaution, which has put me in awkward situations with friends. As my mares get older and more comfortable this "rule" may change.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## silverfae

I just want to clarify - I am not saying that Deb Bennett has never said anything good or has not contributed to the horse world positively. I am just saying that in this particular case, she seems to have approached this in a most unscientific way and made some bold statements that are unequivocally wrong. I really would love to see the research that she is making these statements from, if there is any. I did a lot of research into it before deciding to get back on a horse at my weight, and I was not able to find anything other than anecdotal evidence for either side. In light of that, I decided to go ahead and try to find a horse, and I have, and we do great together. So the idea that "no horse alive can carry more than 250 lbs for more than a few minutes" sounds very silly to me, since my horse carries more than that for hours with no signs of lameness, soreness, or any other issues.


----------



## ladygodiva1228

I didn’t even notice the first sentence my eyes zoomed in the "no horse can carry over 250lbs." Please accept my apologizes Sahara I did not realize you were putting down someone else’s writings. Again I am sorry for assuming it was you writing that.
But I still feel that there are horses that can easily carry over 250lbs especially ones that are conditioned. Would I ride a 12 hand Welsh or Shetland of course not, but a 14 or 15 hand stocky horse or draft cross yes I would.​


----------



## peppersgirl

OK, I think a lot of what this Deb Bennet has to say (in saharas post) comes down to a matter of opinion ( fat biased IMO). And sorry but just because you have an article in a mag doesnt make you the end all be all of horse knowlege (take Cathy Adkins from fugly horse fame, she had an article in H&R mag- and she is a LOON)

Doctors do this all the time, they have their own opinions on stuff even though they have had pretty much the same education... Some dr.s take a stance that "you can not possibly be healthy unless your thin", while others think the opposite (which has been proven to be true.) 

You CAN be FIT AND FAT ( and healthy) .not everyone is meant to be a skinny minnie, and telling people they should tailor their horsey lifestyle to no riding just because they are past what someones OPINION of a decent weight is, is rediculous in my book. If this 250# rule was actually followed Im pretty confidant that some of the worlds great trainers/ riders ( i'm thinking more men here) wouldn't be riding, which would be a shame.


----------



## Ems1

i am truly shocked!!!!!!!

325lbs on ANY horse is not ok!!!!!


----------



## ladygodiva1228

Ems1 not sure what world you live in, but YES there are horses on this planet that can carry 300+ lbs with no issues. Be shocked all you want, but you must be a person who is looking through rose colored glass all the time and refuse to believe plus size people can ride horses.
I rode with a gentleman about 6 years ago that weighed just shy of 400lbs and was 6'8". His horse was an 18.1 hand shire stallion that weighed 3467lb. The horse was weighed on a scale not taped so the weight was accurate. Diablo had no problems carrying his rider and they rode EVERYDAY. So now if you were to do the 20% of the horses weight he would have been able to handle 693lbs with no issues.
So tell me draft horses are only for pulling and I will tell you your full of crap. Drafts and draft crosses make excellent riding horses and I know of four local stables that have some on hand so the plus size rider can ride.


----------



## Ems1

I am sorry but 300lbs plus is not plus sized its morbidly obese! You should not be putting that sort of burden on ANY HORSE!


----------



## peppersgirl

theres another blanket statement...seems to me that thats the only thing these 20% rulers are capable of throwing around.

FYI, plenty of men can weigh in at 300lbs and not be "morbidly obese".


----------



## Golden Horse

Ems1 said:


> i am truly shocked!!!!!!!
> 
> 325lbs on ANY horse is not ok!!!!!



You know people get shocked by all sorts of things, riding 2 year olds makes me go :twisted: I'm truly shocked by people who starve their animals, or leave them out in the paddock to take their chance when hit by colic, so many examples of what people find shocking.

I am not shocked by the thought of a horse carrying 325 pounds, if it is the right horse with the right load, doing the right things.

Is it ideal HELL NO, does balancing all the other wrongs against something that you see as so wrong make it any better, well no.

The simple fact is that as soon as we started domesticating the horse we started 'abusing' it.

I think my horses are happy, they live in a herd situation, they have adequate food, their veterinary needs are catered for, they do not wear shoes, they are not stalled, they are happily out there grazing in the rain today, no rugs/blankets as they will be all winter. They are barefoot, ridden in bits, and expected to behave.

In return they are expected to carry me around for short periods, at slow speeds, they are probably better off than some other horses you know.


----------



## elanorg

Afraid I totally agree with the 250lb limit. As I have mentioned in the other thread, my old mare would happily have gone for a days hunting carrying that weight or over, she's also try to bog off with me for a gallop when suffering from navicular (I was aware and after treatment advised to spend weeks of just walking to try bring her back into work). My vet at the time was certain that having been ridden by a rider over 200lbs had damaged her back and to never let someone that size on her again. That vet was extremely honest and not about making money.

Moving forward a few years ao do with and another horse had a vet who operated on another mare I had, carrying out a neurectomy on both her back legs. That vet was positive she could then be worked at the high level of dressage I was planning to do with her. This vet also told another girl at my yard she was perfectly fine riding her tb at her weight (approx 200lbs). A while later had another vet to my mare who was catagoric my mare should not be used for more than light hacking as her legs could go at any time and by time we knew it would be too late for her due to the neurectomy. This vet was also adamant the other girl was far too heavy for her horse.

Perhaps I'm just cynical but the vet who gave out the advice that her weight was fine and my mare was fine was one who was known for keeping any horse going in work, no matter what, and also did the op on my mare, which I would never have had done had I known that she would not be capable of competing again at a high level?

Personally I think that certain vets, physios etc will say whatever keeps the client on their books and paying, regardless of the animal's welfare sadly.

Final point, after having the 'decent' vet out my mare was immediately retired, even though it was incredibly sad as she was going so so well, and after a vet bill of around £9000 for the neurectomy and rehab


----------



## Golden Horse

elanorg said:


> Personally I think that certain vets, physios etc will say whatever keeps the client on their books and paying, regardless of the animal's welfare sadly.


Absolutely not all vets are created equal, some are about money, some are about welfare, some have specialized, a few were top pf the class, a few scraped in.

I have no doubt that some vets would keep animals going as a means of income, but I really hope that they are few and far between.

I would think more vets are pragmatic, if a horse is receiving the best of care in the place where he is, at the cost of being ridden by a larger person, is he any worse off than the same horse moving to a lighter rider who neglects his basic needs ( NO of course I am NOT saying that larger people are better horse keepers, just using it for arguments sake)


----------



## Sahara

ladygodiva1228 said:


> Ems1 not sure what world you live in, but YES there are horses on this planet that can carry 300+ lbs with no issues. Be shocked all you want, but you must be a person who is looking through rose colored glass all the time and refuse to believe plus size people can ride horses.
> I rode with a gentleman about 6 years ago that weighed just shy of 400lbs and was 6'8". His horse was an 18.1 hand shire stallion that weighed 3467lb. The horse was weighed on a scale not taped so the weight was accurate. Diablo had no problems carrying his rider and they rode EVERYDAY. So now if you were to do the 20% of the horses weight he would have been able to handle 693lbs with no issues.
> So tell me draft horses are only for pulling and I will tell you your full of crap. Drafts and draft crosses make excellent riding horses and I know of four local stables that have some on hand so the plus size rider can ride.


I implore you to do some investigating and educate yourself, at the very least, on equine biomechanics. This post is just beyond ridiculous and it gives some flat out WRONG information. 


Drafts make lousy, lousy, lousy riding horses. They are designed for pulling at a walk and at an unsuspended trot. When you make them do the work of riding horses (trotting, cantering, galloping, speed work, quick transitions and jumping) they are prone to injury and chronic lameness due to their shear scale. And if you do force them into this type of work expect a 10-15 year working lifespan. 

When you double a horse's size, the weight increases 8 times, while their bone density is below average. Most horses over 1700 lbs have lower than normal bone density. Please do not give the impression that draft horses are the solution to increased weight carrying demands. I assure you they are not. 

Big Jim was a 20 hand horse that weighed 2700 lbs.. I find it very hard to believe the horse you described was 18 hands and 3500 lbs. IF so, that horse had to be morbidly obese.


----------



## silverfae

The vets I have assess my horse after every ride are not paid by me. They are just the ride vets. I would think they would have no problem telling me if there was an actual problem with my horse. But I am going to check out of this conversation now, because it seems to be degenerating into a big fat hate conversation, and not one of the people who is making these claims has posted one shred of research showing that what they say is true.


----------



## Sahara

If you want research studies let's begin here:

How Much Weight Can Your Horse Safely Carry?

I will keep digging.


----------



## Tarpan

Why has this thread been allowed to continue for SEVEN pages? This is a plus sized forum, of course plus sized riders are going to be posting here. The decision to ride a certian sized horse at a certian body weight is the responsibility of the rider in question. This discussion seems to be more bad natured then informative.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Golden Horse

Because by it's very nature this is a discussion forum, and this is a legitimate discussion. It was not correct on the photo thread, but it is fine here. To me it is no different to any other concern, there will be different views, some very passionate, but you can't ignore the fact that there are concerns, that would not serve anyone, least of all the horses.

Just because I am fat, and I ride, it doesn't mean that I am above being discussed.


----------



## evergreen

silverfae said:


> The vets I have assess my horse after every ride are not paid by me. They are just the ride vets. I would think they would have no problem telling me if there was an actual problem with my horse. But I am going to check out of this conversation now, because it seems to be degenerating into a big fat hate conversation, and not one of the people who is making these claims has posted one shred of research showing that what they say is true.


I would say that haflingers are very good weight carrers. Whereas you are probably heavier than your mount would prefer, I think that he should cope a lot better than taller, finer boned animals.


----------



## evergreen

ladygodiva1228 said:


> Ems1 not sure what world you live in, but YES there are horses on this planet that can carry 300+ lbs with no issues. Be shocked all you want, but you must be a person who is looking through rose colored glass all the time and refuse to believe plus size people can ride horses.
> I rode with a gentleman about 6 years ago that weighed just shy of 400lbs and was 6'8". His horse was an 18.1 hand shire stallion that weighed 3467lb. The horse was weighed on a scale not taped so the weight was accurate. Diablo had no problems carrying his rider and they rode EVERYDAY. So now if you were to do the 20% of the horses weight he would have been able to handle 693lbs with no issues.
> So tell me draft horses are only for pulling and I will tell you your full of crap. Drafts and draft crosses make excellent riding horses and I know of four local stables that have some on hand so the plus size rider can ride.


I am sorry but I have never in my life heard of a horse that weighed that much! He must have been morbidly obese. :shock:


----------



## Delfina

evergreen said:


> Whereas you are probably heavier than your mount would prefer, I think that he should cope a lot better than taller, finer boned animals.


PREFER!!?? :lol: :lol: :lol:

I rode a pony for a friend yesterday. A fat, out-of-shape, pasture puff of a pony. I'm 5'2" and 110lbs and she wants to ease him back into work, so I offered to ride him. I can tell you right now that he most certainly didn't prefer my weight! Oh heck no! As far as he was concerned, absolutely zero pounds of rider, no saddle and no other tack is what he PREFERRED! Oh but since I was there, I could move him out of the drylot into the overgrown hay pasture and bring him a huge bucket of grain while I was at it. :?

If all we gave horses was what they PREFERRED, they'd all be eating giant vats of grain, massive quantities of sugar cubes and dead within a month. 

My kids would PREFER that I buy them Frosted Flakes for breakfast..... they got scrambled eggs and fruit. 

It's about provided good care and doing what is best for the horse, not giving them what they want or prefer!


----------



## ladygodiva1228

Ok I spoke with my SIL who is still friends with the gentleman I wrote about. I asked her about the time we went to the hunter pace and first met David. I wanted to verfiy that I put the correct information down. 
She called Dave and asked him about the weight of Diablo on that ride (he keeps track of everytime he is weighed) She also asked how tall he is. He said that Diablo has been sticked at 20.1 hands (which would make sense if I think about it because standing at his wither I could not see over his back and I am 5'9"). 
His weight was 2837lbs, but when I heard Dave talk about how much he weighed he kept saying 3476 at least that is what I was hearing. He was accutually talking about how much he and his horse weighed which was really 3272lbs including tack. So I wasn't to far off with the weight, just it wasn't all for the horse. So to break it down Diablo was 2837lbs, Dave was 385lbs, and the tack was 50lbs. 

Oh and Dave is not some fat blob, he is just a big dude ex-football player and body builder. The guy could bench 400lbs with no problems, went to the gym every day so he may be big, but he is far from mobidly obese. 

Unfortunately he can no longer ride Diablo due to some idiot that drove into him when he was on his motorcycle a year ago and had his left leg severed. The driver of the vehicle was to busy texting to pay attention to the road, crossed the yellow line and hit him. My SIL said the doctors told him if he was an average sized guy he would have been killed.


----------



## evergreen

Delfina said:


> PREFER!!?? :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> I rode a pony for a friend yesterday. A fat, out-of-shape, pasture puff of a pony. I'm 5'2" and 110lbs and she wants to ease him back into work, so I offered to ride him. I can tell you right now that he most certainly didn't prefer my weight! Oh heck no! As far as he was concerned, absolutely zero pounds of rider, no saddle and no other tack is what he PREFERRED! Oh but since I was there, I could move him out of the drylot into the overgrown hay pasture and bring him a huge bucket of grain while I was at it. :?
> 
> If all we gave horses was what they PREFERRED, they'd all be eating giant vats of grain, massive quantities of sugar cubes and dead within a month.
> 
> My kids would PREFER that I buy them Frosted Flakes for breakfast..... they got scrambled eggs and fruit.
> 
> It's about provided good care and doing what is best for the horse, not giving them what they want or prefer!


No laughing matter. Horses would prefer well fitting tack, is that wrong? They would prefer enough to eat, is that wrong? They would prefer not to have to work with too much weight on their backs, in fact the less the better, so long as the rider is balanced and proficient. Doing what's best for the horse is many things, and one of them is not overloading them.


----------



## usandpets

Even though this is in the plus size riders but I'm not plus sized, I'm going to pipe in. The 20 to 25% of the horses weight rule is a guideline. Saying a horse could not carry weight over 250 lbs even for a for a few minutes is sooo wrong. It may not be the best but it does happen. 

I am around 175 myself. I've rode double with my wife which puts the amount over 300, especially with the saddle. That was on her 950 lb arab. Of course we only walked, no trotting, running or jumping but he did fine. 

We have a friend that rode my wife's horse and she was around 350 lbs. That was during a trail ride, up and down hills. He never was lame or even sore after the ride. 

Another time, we had another rider, who definitely weighs more than my wife, lose her horse on a ride. The horse she was on decided to roll in a dirt field and she let go of the horse when she got off. The horse got up and ran back home. I had her hop on my horse, a 1100 lb 15.3 hh QH mare, and we rode back home double just fine. 

So, Dr Deb's statements posted by Sahara, are just her opinions to me. A horse carrying 250 or more can, does and will happen. If it is for an easy ride and depending on the horse, I see no problem with it. I wouldn't recommend it on a small horse or for jumping or running.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## evergreen

Of course a horse CAN carry more than 20% of its ideal bodyweight. Whether it SHOULD is another matter entirely. The one off examples you give are fine, as they are one offs. But I doubt you would want to work either of your horses double all of the time, even at low speeds. I'm sure I could carry a 56lb rucksack for an hour or so as a one off with no detrimental effects, but if I had to do it every day, there would doubtless be damage eventually.


----------



## Sahara

usandpets said:


> Even though this is in the plus size riders but I'm not plus sized, I'm going to pipe in. The 20 to 25% of the horses weight rule is a guideline. Saying a horse could not carry weight over 250 lbs even for a for a few minutes is sooo wrong. It may not be the best but it does happen.
> 
> I am around 175 myself. I've rode double with my wife which puts the amount over 300, especially with the saddle. That was on her 950 lb arab. Of course we only walked, no trotting, running or jumping but he did fine.
> 
> We have a friend that rode my wife's horse and she was around 350 lbs. That was during a trail ride, up and down hills. He never was lame or even sore after the ride.
> 
> Another time, we had another rider, who definitely weighs more than my wife, lose her horse on a ride. The horse she was on decided to roll in a dirt field and she let go of the horse when she got off. The horse got up and ran back home. I had her hop on my horse, a 1100 lb 15.3 hh QH mare, and we rode back home double just fine.
> 
> So, Dr Deb's statements posted by Sahara, are just her opinions to me. A horse carrying 250 or more can, does and will happen. If it is for an easy ride and depending on the horse, I see no problem with it. I wouldn't recommend it on a small horse or for jumping or running.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Of course a horse CAN carry over 250 lbs. I don't think that is the question. You have to read what Dr. Bennett writes within the intended context. She uses her horses. An occasional ride is far different from daily schooling. I think we can all appreciate that. She is writing under the assumption that all horses are used frequently for whatever discipline. She isn't referring to the 10 minute once a month rider (which is probably worse than one who rides more frequently). Any horse that carries over 250 lbs for any amount of time is going to sustain some type of damage/injury/strain. Is that damage/injury/strain going to be immediately obvious or will it be a "silent" injury that worsens over time? Who knows. That is the crux of what is being offered. 

She is postulating that no horse should carry over 250 lbs in an effort to keep the horse healthy and sound for its lifetime. Can they carry over 250? Yes. Should they? No - not if you want them to be usable their entire working lifetime. Are people going to use them to carry over 250 lbs? Yes. If that is your choice then be proactive and choose a weight carrying horse, condition the horse carefully, provide properly fitted tack, pay close attention to respiration, have frequent vet/chiro visits. 

This has nothing to do with "fat-bashing" or discrimination. People ask this question all the time and a ton of anecdotal advice gets thrown at them. There is very little research on the actual topic. Dr. Bennett has spent a lifetime studying equines, if she isn't qualified to address the topic then I don't know who is. Until further studies are published, her educated guess is the most thought out, reasonable standard we have available. 

Human beings have and always will do whatever they want despite what conventional wisdom tells them.


----------



## Speed Racer

Weighing down an animal with an improper rider for its size will of course affect its back, joints, and muscles. But then, ANY physical activity is going to cause wear and tear. 

I don't see people_ not_ jumping their horses, although that's one of the main causes of leg injuries. I also don't see them not racing, even though that puts unnatural strain on the_ entire_ animal's body.

Face it, even human athletes break down over time. Once you start using your body and/or an animal for athletic endeavors, there's going to be some kind of damage. 

Sure, we should all do what we can to minimize unnatural wear and tear, but unless everyone just stops riding and only has horses as pasture ornaments _some_ physical issues are just a part of normal usage.


----------



## barrelbeginner

I find th person who started this thread inconsiderate and rude. 

first, you ask how much people weigh.. and what type of horse they ride..

then you tell them they are too big for there horse.. I bet this people take great care of there horses..

EVERYONE that has posted pictures of them on their horses looks amazing

now for EMS1(or whatever sorry) I think that you need to quit while your ahead.. You know nothing about this obviously.. your opinion isnt going to change anything..

IMO. sorry if I am being rude.. JMHO


----------



## Sahara

Speed Racer said:


> _some_ physical issues are just a part of normal usage.


I agree with everything you posted. I think this is where we start entering the gray area: What is "normal usage"? Go above normal usage and those same physical issues are going to be worse, right? Which is why we have arrived at the 250lb. cut off? 

I think if you turn around the statement "no horse should carry over 250 lbs" and rephrase it with "generally, riding horses between 900-1300 lbs can safely carry up to 250 lbs", fewer people would take such offense to it? The phrase loses its exclusivity, and allows some wiggle room, perhaps?


----------



## Speed Racer

Yes, to state unequivocally that, 'no horse should EVER carry a rider over 250 pounds', doesn't take many other things into consideration.

I've seen some 110 pound women I wouldn't let up on my horses because they're horribly unbalanced and will cause undue stress and strain on the animal, not to mention annoy the heck out of them! There are also some people who may be just a skosh over 'optimum' weight, but who are light, quiet riders. Guess which ones I'll allow on one of my animals?

There are rarely cut and dried, black and white answers in life, and riding horses is no exception. Just because someone thinks fatties shouldn't be allowed on horses because it hurts their delicate sensibilities to see someone they deem unattractive and unfit, doesn't mean that person isn't a good rider or that they're hurting their animal. 

Common sense needs to play a role in riding but that goes for _everyone_, not just the people who are carrying extra weight. My belief is that the women shrieking the loudest about the 'fatties' are secretly worried they themselves are going to look that way some day. We hate what we fear.


----------



## peppersgirl

ugh double post again. wtheck??


----------



## peppersgirl

GOOD POST SPEED RACER! Totally spot on.

I can't speak for everyone else here, but I don't dump thousands of dollars into my horses every year to have them sit around. 

I wonder what would happen to these horses that are packing around more than 250#s...if you were to suddenly implement a weight restriction on horse ownership? A LOT of people/ horses would be affected by this nonsense. 


Before moving to the midwest,I worked for the man who built the ponderosa ranch attraction park.. They had one big bay QH gelding who had spent the majority of his younger years hauling around heavier tourists ( he was retired to their ranchette where I worked when the trail rides closed) on the trails around incline village and lake tahoe.... when I went to work for these people, this horse was a documented 38 years old (didnt look past 20), and he was still being ridden lightly by the ranch owners wife. He had some mild arthritis, but other that he was a spry old guy. Last I talked to her( last october) he was still kicking, albiet he was in full retirement by that time... and this is a good 8 years AFTER I had started working for them so the horse was at least 46 last I heard.

and that is all after spending many many years hauling around people who had NO IDEA how to ride.. My point is, is these blanket statements are stupid, andnot all horses are created equal


----------



## peppersgirl

Speed Racer said:


> Yes, to state unequivocally that, 'no horse should EVER carry a rider over 250 pounds', doesn't take many other things into consideration.
> 
> I've seen some 110 pound women I wouldn't let up on my horses because they're horribly unbalanced and will cause undue stress and strain on the animal, not to mention annoy the heck out of them! There are also some people who may be just a skosh over 'optimum' weight, but who are light, quiet riders. Guess which ones I'll allow on one of my animals?
> 
> There are rarely cut and dried, black and white answers in life, and riding horses is no exception. Just because someone thinks fatties shouldn't be allowed on horses because it hurts their delicate sensibilities to see someone they deem unattractive and unfit, doesn't mean that person isn't a good rider or that they're hurting their animal.
> 
> Common sense needs to play a role in riding but that goes for _everyone_, not just the people who are carrying extra weight. My belief is that the women shrieking the loudest about the 'fatties' are secretly worried they themselves are going to look that way some day. We hate what we fear.



I believe that you should get a post of the day award for this post! SO well put!


----------



## evergreen

Why is it that all these skinny minnies that weigh 110 lb wet through ride like a sack of potatoes with no balance or skill, whilst all those curvy people of 250lb or more, ride so light and balanced? I keep hearing about it. What about medium weight people like me?


----------



## SouthernTrails

evergreen said:


> Why is it that all these skinny minnies that weigh 110 lb wet through ride like a sack of potatoes with no balance or skill


 Really All of them?



> whilst all those curvy people of 250lb or more, ride so light and balanced? I keep hearing about it.


 Again, Really all of them?



> What about medium weight people like me?


I guess if you are in between, you ride like a light sack of potatoes?


Any way you look at it, you are generalizing far too much :wink:

.


----------



## Speed Racer

evergreen said:


> Why is it that all these skinny minnies that weigh 110 lb wet through ride like a sack of potatoes with no balance or skill, whilst all those curvy people of 250lb or more, ride so light and balanced? I keep hearing about it. What about medium weight people like me?


Where do you see ALL in anything that was written? I believe the word 'some' was used. Hyperbole much? :?

For someone who's supposedly a medium weight rider, you seem to have a real hate on for people who don't fit your idealized version of what constitutes a 'real rider'.


----------



## evergreen

Speed Racer said:


> Where do you see ALL in anything that was written? I believe the word 'some' was used. Hyperbole much? :?
> 
> For someone who's supposedly a medium weight rider, you seem to have a real hate on for people who don't fit your idealized version of what constitutes a 'real rider'.


I don't hate anyone. It is up to each individual whether they are overweight or not. They don't offend me in any way. The only thing I dislike is people who choose inappropriate horses to carry their weight. Skinny 14hh ponies or thoroughbreds carrying in excess of 250 lbs, for example. :-(

My comment was made because almost every obese rider I have come across says they ride light. And it appears there is a misconception out there that the skinny riders all seem to ride like a bag of poop. It is the impression I am getting.


----------



## evergreen

SouthernTrailsGA said:


> Really All of them?
> 
> Again, Really all of them?
> 
> 
> 
> I guess if you are in between, you ride like a light sack of potatoes?
> 
> 
> Any way you look at it, you are generalizing far too much :wink:
> 
> .


It is just the impression people are giving me. It seems that almost every heavy rider I come across says they ride light and that they would rather someone like them ride their horse than a skinny person who rides like a bag of poop.

What I actually think is that there are probably just as many heavy riders that ride like a bag of poop than there are skinny riders. And at the end of the day you weigh what you weigh. You cannot feel any lighter, but you can sure as h*ll feel heavier. Whatever weight you are.


----------



## evergreen

Just wanted to add that I would be equally upset by a skinny 110lb woman riding a miniature.


----------



## Baroque

You could just believe that people who ride regularly generally have good intentions. I'm pretty darn positive that any overweight rider has an inkling that they are overweight. We tend to be rather self-conscious about things like that. Let us deal with it ourselves.


----------



## evergreen

Baroque said:


> You could just believe that people who ride regularly generally have good intentions. I'm pretty darn positive that any overweight rider has an inkling that they are overweight. We tend to be rather self-conscious about things like that. Let us deal with it ourselves.


I don't have a problem with overweight people. I struggle to keep my own weight down. The majority of plus sized riders here are appropriately horsed. But I was shocked by a small minority of the photographs showing very very heavy people riding horses and ponies that are just not up to weight and should be carrying no more than 150 lbs, but are being asked to arry twice that. I also think there does come a time where someone is just too heavy to ride. Again this is a small minority. So probably most if not all who have replied to this thread are probably absolutely fine. Sadly, it is often those that are most concerned that they may be too heavy that are fine, and those who are grossly overweight for their horse that are oblivious.


----------



## usandpets

Sahara said:


> Of course a horse CAN carry over 250 lbs. I don't think that is the question. You have to read what Dr. Bennett writes within the intended context.She uses her horses. An occasional ride is far different from daily schooling. I think we can all appreciate that. She is writing under the assumption that all horses are used frequently for whatever discipline. She isn't referring to the 10 minute once a month rider (which is probably worse than one who rides more frequently). Any horse that carries over 250 lbs for any amount of time is going to sustain some type of damage/injury/strain. Is that damage/injury/strain going to be immediately obvious or will it be a "silent" injury that worsens over time? Who knows. That is the crux of what is being offered.
> 
> She is postulating that no horse should carry over 250 lbs in an effort to keep the horse healthy and sound for its lifetime. Can they carry over 250? Yes. Should they? No - not if you want them to be usable their entire working lifetime. Are people going to use them to carry over 250 lbs? Yes. If that is your choice then be proactive and choose a weight carrying horse, condition the horse carefully, provide properly fitted tack, pay close attention to respiration, have frequent vet/chiro visits.
> 
> This has nothing to do with "fat-bashing" or discrimination. People ask this question all the time and a ton of anecdotal advice gets thrown at them. There is very little research on the actual topic. Dr. Bennett has spent a lifetime studying equines, if she isn't qualified to address the topic then I don't know who is. Until further studies are published, her educated guess is the most thought out, reasonable standard we have available.
> 
> Human beings have and always will do whatever they want despite what conventional wisdom tells them.


You know what happens when you assume things (or read between the lines), right? Well, I try to not do that. I take what people say or write as that's what they mean. 

You put that she says "1. Total weight of rider plus tack must not exceed 250 lbs. There is no horse alive, of any breed, any build, anywhere, that can go more than a few minutes with more weight on its back than this." Where is the confusion about what she means? Point blank it means NO horse could handle it.

I'm sorry but if you quoted her correctly or accurately, I really have a hard time believing anything she says.


----------



## NeuroticMare

I respect Dr. Deb Bennett in her research, but another article I've read by her also states that horses should ideally not be started under saddle until they're 7 years old.

I am currently around 300lbs (I had lost a bunch of weight last spring but thanks to a change in medications for some mental problems, along with losing my job, most of it is back, my highest has been 317, so I am not there and am working my way back down now, or at least trying.

I've struggled with my weight my entire life, and when you ride horses, it seems (at least in my own experience) to lead some self-loathing. When I see come onto forums such as these just to be rude...

Anyway, I've had my mare for 12 and a half years, she is about 15.3 and about 1200 lbs, I've ridden her at all weights between 210 and 317. I haven't ridden her lately, not because of my weight gain, but because we moved barns twice this month (long story) and two barns ago I believe somebody fed her my entire ration of 50lbs of oats because I put it in my bin the night before, it was gone the day we left, nowhere in sight, and she was colicy and has been feeling icky since and I'm treating her for ulcers. At any rate, I have never had to treat her for anything beyond what horses who have lighter riders who do the same sports I've done (eventing, jumpers, dressage, and right now just trail riding cause new barn has 30+acres of private trails and I can't WAIT to explore).

My gelding I have ridden only once since last April. I had him leased, and when he came back he was sore. I finally was able to get his chiropractor out and it turned out to be his pelvis was stuck in extension, most likely from a pasture accident 6-12 months ago. Poor buddy! Anyway she said "you should try some cattle work with him" and I was like "oh, because western saddles distribute weight better?" and she looked at me like I was crazy and said "no, because it's so much fun and he's such a cool horse" and she said I was crazy not to ride him that I'm very mindful of saddle fit, riding, everything else. I haven't yet, but I will.

I'm recovering from a concussion (not horse related, you think my 1200lb horses can do damage, my 40lb blue heeler x ran into me this week and sprained my knee and pushed me down so I knocked myself out on my parent's bed frame). I am doing a lot of in-hand work, and it's fun too, but I can't wait to get back in the saddle.

My goal is to not be a 300lb sack o' taters, I take lessons and have a good trainer who helps me a lot. Sometimes I fall back into my old habits (my mare is hot and I get bracy at shows and so does she) but we can have nice, soft rides too  My trainer's daughter (who is like a sister to me, they both are) loves to ride my mare too, she is good with hot horses because she grew up on the back of her mom's OTTB.


----------



## tinyliny

Ok, first of all, I am in the middle of this discussion in that I am 210lbs (as of this morning), so not the heaviest , nor in the category of "normal".

I do not think it is rude to have this discussion in the plus sized forum. In fact, I actually think it rather apropros, and those that brought it up really need to have quite the backbone to raise an issue that is likely to ruffle some feathers . It's just not PC to these days to say that a person might be too heavey for riding.

However, there IS a limit. we all know that. And, there are some of us who may actually be wearing our horses down faster than they would if we were not as heavy as we are. But, we ride to "use" our horses; for our enjoyment. they have a natural lifespan which is both shortened by our "using them up" and lengthened by our feeding and caring for them properly. IN any case, we use them. It may very well be that the very heavy rider will use up the horse faster than the not so very heavy. It may be that the "normal" person , who rides super hard and over jumps the horse will use it up faster, too.
But there are limits as to what is a reasonable way to "use" a horse, and there is no reason why weight is one that cannot be discussed because it will cause hurt feelings. It is simply another parameter in horse care/health.


----------



## NeuroticMare

The only rudeness I have seen is the ones who are saying "I am shocked!!!!1!!" and that is really their only posts on the entire horse forum. They are not honestly curious, they already had their responses formed before anyone said anything.


----------



## ladygodiva1228

Speaking for myself when I say I ride "light" or someone is riding "light" I am referring to how myself or others are balanced on their horse it has nothing to do with how much the rider weighs. I know where my center of gravity is and I use my butt and leg muscles to make sure I stay balanced and in the center of my horses.

Far to many times have I seen riders of all shapes and sizes shifting from side to side putting strain on their horses back. I feel at what ever weight you are once you are in the saddle and before you ask your horse to walk off you should be properly adjusted in the sadde. Correct seat size and stirrups at the correct length make a world of difference when riding. People need to learn to ride with their horses and not against them.


----------



## eclipseranch

tinyliny said:


> Ok, first of all, I am in the middle of this discussion in that I am 210lbs (as of this morning), so not the heaviest , nor in the category of "normal".
> 
> I do not think it is rude to have this discussion in the plus sized forum. In fact, I actually think it rather apropros, and those that brought it up really need to have quite the backbone to raise an issue that is likely to ruffle some feathers . It's just not PC to these days to say that a person might be too heavey for riding.
> 
> However, there IS a limit. we all know that. And, there are some of us who may actually be wearing our horses down faster than they would if we were not as heavy as we are. But, we ride to "use" our horses; for our enjoyment. they have a natural lifespan which is both shortened by our "using them up" and lengthened by our feeding and caring for them properly. IN any case, we use them. It may very well be that the very heavy rider will use up the horse faster than the not so very heavy. It may be that the "normal" person , who rides super hard and over jumps the horse will use it up faster, too.
> But there are limits as to what is a reasonable way to "use" a horse, and there is no reason why weight is one that cannot be discussed because it will cause hurt feelings. It is simply another parameter in horse care/health.


very well stated Tiny!
I remember a horse where my kids first learned to ride that had to be put down because it had been jumped to a high level of success in international comp and then retired to a Uni & on "loan" to a schooling barn...well his legs had been completely destroyed from extreme use by age 13!


----------

