# Age to Break a Horse?



## roro (Aug 14, 2009)

3.5-4 year minimum, in terms of riding.


----------



## trampis (Mar 29, 2010)

I have a 2.5 y/o that I have been doing some basic ground work with. Nothing too stressful, but I am certainly preparing her for whats to come.


----------



## AztecBaby (Mar 19, 2009)

2 for light riding.


----------



## ~*~anebel~*~ (Aug 21, 2008)

I think that when they are weaned they need to be handled, broke to lead, have vet/farrier work. Then left in the field (except for vet/farrier) all winter and summer, and the next winter. At 2 they should start to be handled again and if they are good, perhaps have a saddle on and some light lunging. Again, put in a field for the winter and at 3 they should start with a saddle and light lunging for sure. They should be worked maybe 2 times a week through the winter if possible and eventually broke. Some horses will take until the spring of their 4th year to be sat on. It shouldn't be rushed.


----------



## ThatNinjaHorse (Jul 26, 2009)

Anywhere from 2/2.5-ish to 3, maybe 3.5. Obviously depending on the horse. Ive never fully broken a horse by myself, but the ones ive had anything to do with have, most of the time, been broken in then left for a while. Which i think works quite well, especially for the younger ones.
ETA: I think it depends on what discipline the horse will be used for as well.


----------



## pepperum (Nov 4, 2009)

I think the best age is 3-4 any younger than three and their bones haven't fused together correctly. Of course this is keeping in mind all horses are different and some mature faster than others.
My horse was incredibly well handled when I bought him unbroken so I started breaking him to saddle just before he turned 4 and that seemed to be an age where he was able to metally and physically cope with it.


----------



## aforred (May 12, 2010)

I think it depends on the physical and mental maturity of the horse and how much previous training it has had. When we were raising horses, we started them late summer/early fall when they were around 2.5 or later. We would get them to w/t/c both directions, and introduced concepts that would be used later, like moving off the leg. We've had some that we didn't start until they were three or four because they didn't have the physical and/or mental maturity yet.


----------



## writer23 (Apr 6, 2010)

It definitely depends on the physical and mental maturity of the horse. My current horse is 17.3hh and I love the fact he was allowed to maturity physically before being started as a 5 year old. So many injuries and disorders can be avoided by waiting until the crucial stages of growth.

There's a lot of talk right now about European Warmbloods being started at 3 and jumped heavily, when they break down in a few years they're imported to North America as 'dressage' horses. However, I have no first hand knowledge of this, just heard it in several conversations in different horsey circles.

I had an Appendix filly that was left to mature to 3.5 before she started under saddle work. She was easily to sell because she was left and not started at 2 and burnt out. The lady who purchased her obviously liked other characteristics about my girl, but she really appreciated getting a horse that didn't have a higher risk for joint issues, etc.


----------



## shesinthebarn (Aug 1, 2009)

I start all of my horses as 2yr olds. With the exception of my current colt...I was starting him and then found out I was pregnant so quit with him. Anyhow, I think if you are reasonable with them it's OK. I find there is a huge difference in how and when people start horses depending on discipline. English/dressage tend to start later, and it's pretty common for stock horse folks to break out their horses as 2 yr olds. Futurity horses get some education put on them even before that in some cases. Either way, I have stock horses so they are all started at 2 and generally start to show mid way through the 3yr old year.


----------



## LolHorse (Dec 28, 2009)

writer23 said:


> It definitely depends on the physical and mental maturity of the horse. My current horse is 17.3hh and I love the fact he was allowed to maturity physically before being started as a 5 year old. So many injuries and disorders can be avoided by waiting until the crucial stages of growth.
> 
> There's a lot of talk right now about European Warmbloods being started at 3 and jumped heavily, when they break down in a few years they're imported to North America as 'dressage' horses. However, I have no first hand knowledge of this, just heard it in several conversations in different horsey circles.
> 
> I had an Appendix filly that was left to mature to 3.5 before she started under saddle work. She was easily to sell because she was left and not started at 2 and burnt out. The lady who purchased her obviously liked other characteristics about my girl, but she really appreciated getting a horse that didn't have a higher risk for joint issues, etc.


My Appendix gelding was started at age 4 (and he is 5 this year), and you would never known he was a "late starter", he grew 2 inches in the last 3 mounths. So that slightly worries me, but am sure he'll be ok he's only lightly ridden.
It's sad seeing a lot of horses just burnt out because the age they were broke (and other things). I have many friends with top show horses started at age 2, and now those horse are 7,8, and 6 and they have arthritus, and are just plain lame.


----------



## Indyhorse (Dec 3, 2009)

It think it depends on the individual horse/breed/maturity rate. I've ridden a lot of 2 year olds. My own colt is 3/4 draft so wont be started under saddle until tail end of his 4th year in into his 5th year at the soonest.


----------



## Cowgirl140ty (Jan 7, 2010)

My horses are halter broke at about a month old. Weaned then turned out till they are a year. Then they learn to lunge w/t/c/whoa. Then they get the saddle and learn to lunge with it. Then I tie a bag on the saddle, let them lunge with it. During this time I also teach them to sidepass, pivot on the front and backend. Then when they turn 2 I get on. I ride them for about 10-15 mins at a walk, and work on sidepassing, pivoting a step. At about 2.5 I start trotting and spins, then at 2.75 I start cantering. By the time they are 3... they have the basics to go into any western disciplin.


----------



## luvridinhorses (May 13, 2010)

I stumbled across this but must admit I loved reading the responses.

I have a 2 year old filly to which when I got her a year ago was not even halter broke. She was a wild child... I was told put her in a rodeo, she was crazy. Nobody would handle her. My husband and I worked everyday with her and well now she is a wonderful horse. 

I have never broke a horse before her but I have been doing basic ground work, I have lunged her in a saddle (which needs work) and my 11 yr old daughter this past week sat on her bareback for one minute. The horse stood there perfectly still not knowing what to do. I am not pushing her at any length but working her slowly. I do not think she will be aggresively worked with until at least 3...but we do things here and there.


----------



## Silvera (Apr 27, 2010)

I think it really depends on the breed. If I had a warmblood or draft I wouldn't start them until they where 3-4 but I start all of my QH's and Morgans at 2. They grow differently so can be worked at different times.

When we have a baby we do a lot of handling in the first two years. Teaching them to lead, stand, back, tie. When they are two then we start lunging and working from there. They are ridden as soon as they are able to willingly except a rider. I don't beleive in leaving the babies out in a field for a year or two without having regular contact and lessons on leading and basic ground manners.


----------



## aforred (May 12, 2010)

None of the horses we started at two burned out, at least n ot while we owned them. I'm a firm believer in balancing work and play. We always got them out of a pen as soon as they were ready. It's amazing how much you can teach one out on the trail or going down the road. The key to our program was to keep them from getting bored, and to be able to read them.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## nrhareiner (Jan 11, 2009)

As for just training the day they hit the ground they start getting trained.

For under saddle work. The beginning of their 2 yo years.


----------



## smrobs (Jul 30, 2008)

aforred said:


> None of the horses we started at two burned out, at least not while we owned them. I'm a firm believer in balancing work and play. We always got them out of a pen as soon as they were ready. It's amazing how much you can teach one out on the trail or going down the road. The key to our program was to keep them from getting bored, and to be able to read them.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


 
I really like this post cause that is my way of thinking too. Though I usually try to wait until at least 3 before I start any real riding work with mine, I am comfortable starting a 2 year old. It is all a matter of knowing when to quit and knowing how hard you can push them and what is hardest on their joints. Younger horses, I will spend more time out on the trails with them and older horses I will spend more time doing circles at a lope. One way isn't better than the other, it is just different and teaches them the same things in a different way. I currently have a 10 month old that would probably fit my saddle better than the 3 year old that I just sent home but more than likely, he will get to wait another 2 years or so before I really start riding him.


----------



## Jessabel (Mar 19, 2009)

In my opinion, no younger than 3 for light saddle work, and preferably 4. If I ever get another baby, I won't break him out until he's 4. There are plenty of things you should be doing with a youngster prior to riding, like ground manners, desensitizing to things like tarps and water, ponying on trails, loading, learning to stand, tie, clip, put his head down, yield his fore and hindquarters from the ground, etc. I also don't believe in doing any serious work (jumping, barrels, whatever) until the horse is _at least_ 6 years old. Some horses don't even grow out of their obnoxious, attention span-less baby phase until they're 8 to 10 years old.


----------



## WSArabians (Apr 14, 2008)

I think lots of this depends on the type of horse, what sort of training it's getting, what it'll be used for, and how long you want the horse to last.

I've got a three year old that stands just a hair under 15hh. He'll be started under saddle this summer if he doesn't sell first. I've also got a two year old (in April) who'll be starting this saddle work this summer (Lunging, collection, flexion, etc) but there's a possibility he'll be rode by September if he's ready for it. 

I also believe it makes all the difference in the world if you know how to train a horse.


----------



## WSArabians (Apr 14, 2008)

luvridinhorses said:


> She was a wild child... I was told put her in a rodeo, she was crazy.





> I have never broke a horse before her but I have been doing basic ground work, I have lunged her in a saddle (which needs work)...





> ... my 11 yr old daughter this past week sat on her bareback...


Must say... I'm a little disturbed to have read all that in one paragraph. :-|


----------



## koomy56 (Jan 19, 2008)

We typically wait until they're 3 coming 4. They go through so many changes from 2-4 that we wait until 4 so that they've matured into themselves and have a solid sense of body awareness. Any sooner, as we have found, can sometimes lead to future issues. 
We had a filly that we lightly started at 2 1/2 and she was a piece of cake. She had the winter and spring off and was started up again in the summer. She had changed so much in her body and mind that the 2nd time around she had a hard time because she was lost in her new self which made what she already thought she knew more challenging. It definitely depends from horse to horse, but we generally wait until 4. They have the rest of their lives ahead of them I like to think its fair to them to allow them to grow up. 
That being said, we don't wait until 4 to do basic training such as good ground manners, being ponied on the trail, exposed to stuff here and there, things that make them more functional later on.


----------



## LolHorse (Dec 28, 2009)

aforred said:


> None of the horses we started at two burned out, at least n ot while we owned them. I'm a firm believer in balancing work and play. We always got them out of a pen as soon as they were ready. It's amazing how much you can teach one out on the trail or going down the road. The key to our program was to keep them from getting bored, and to be able to read them.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


 Well, it depends how hard you work the horse at that age of course, like if you jump a two year old there more then likely going to have troubles in there future, same with reining, barrel racing, racing (usaully).


----------



## nrhareiner (Jan 11, 2009)

LolHorse said:


> Well, it depends how hard you work the horse at that age of course, like if you jump a two year old there more then likely going to have troubles in there future, same with reining, barrel racing, racing (usaully).


I have been reining for close to 15 years. I have owned and started many 2yo who have gone on to show and every single horse has retired sound. Starting a 2yo in reining when done correctly and is conformationally correct does not burn them out or hurt them. Most of the time they are started before they are actually 2.


----------



## LolHorse (Dec 28, 2009)

nrhareiner said:


> I have been reining for close to 15 years. I have owned and started many 2yo who have gone on to show and every single horse has retired sound. Starting a 2yo in reining when done correctly and is conformationally correct does not burn them out or hurt them. Most of the time they are started before they are actually 2.


Yes, I understand I own a reining horse myself. Like I said it depends how hard you ride the horse.


----------



## savvylover112 (Jul 17, 2009)

well just putting this in here that I have heard more often that all horses regardless of breed mature at the same rate as in the same bones fuse at the same age for all breeds


----------



## LolHorse (Dec 28, 2009)

savvylover112 said:


> well just putting this in here that I have heard more often that all horses regardless of breed mature at the same rate as in the same bones fuse at the same age for all breeds


But thats what you heard. :wink: I've also heard pigs fly, but do they?
Not saying what you said is false, heck it may be true.


----------



## ridergirl23 (Sep 17, 2009)

^ thats what ive heard too. but in my opinion age 3-4 is good. :]


----------



## savvylover112 (Jul 17, 2009)

lol well I have seen pigs fly so there lol 

Well over here it really depends what the horse is going to be doing and what it is bred for generally here in Ireland the breaking age is 3 for any breed. If it is a TB however it gets complicated. If it is going to be a flat racer it will be broken as a yearling which I think is way too young, if they want to flat race but then move onto over hurdles they tend to break them at 2 and a half which is a more suitable age and if they are bred as national hunt horses they will be broken as three year olds left out and then brought back in in their fourth year for training and starting racing.


----------



## LoveMyDrummerBoy (Nov 5, 2009)

I personally think 2.5/3 years is old enough to start riding however i won't jump until at least 4.


----------



## 5cuetrain (Dec 11, 2009)

Riding a horse is the end result of training a horse. Start training from the time they are born and by the time they are ready to carry the weight of rider and gear life is good.

There are lots of forms of riding--work, pleasure, every day, once a week, performance-so there is no absolute answer.

You can start preparing them for their journey from the beginning.

I've seen 2 year olds fit as a 6 year old and actively working. I've seen 10 year olds that I wouldn't ride until they were in the proper shape to carry the load.


----------



## ridergirl23 (Sep 17, 2009)

^but then again, ( I'm a dressage rider) in my mind riding the horse is only the very beginning of training that never ends.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MacabreMikolaj (May 9, 2009)

Depends entirely on the horse.

As an average, the legs joints are closed by 2.5 years at the very latest - possibly 3 on some bigger breeds. After that, it's the spine that's the issue - and that doesn't finish fully fusing until a minimum of 6 years old, so anybody trying to keep the self righteous attitude about 4 being ok and 2 being unacceptable should brush up on equine development first. You have FAR more chance injuring a 4 old horse with improper training then you do with a 2 year old under the guidance of an educated and well schooled trainer. They have a spine that's just as susceptible to injury in places as a 2 year old.

It has far less to do with age then it does with proper training and guidance. There are PLENTY of 2 year olds that are going to be better off down the road then a big chunk of 4 year olds because of this misguided idea that a 4 year old horse is "mature" and able to handle 10x the concussion of a 2 year old. It simply isn't so.


----------



## LolHorse (Dec 28, 2009)

savvylover112 said:


> lol well I have seen pigs fly so there lol
> 
> Well over here it really depends what the horse is going to be doing and what it is bred for generally here in Ireland the breaking age is 3 for any breed. If it is a TB however it gets complicated. If it is going to be a flat racer it will be broken as a yearling which I think is way too young, if they want to flat race but then move onto over hurdles they tend to break them at 2 and a half which is a more suitable age and if they are bred as national hunt horses they will be broken as three year olds left out and then brought back in in their fourth year for training and starting racing.


:lol:
Nothing is impossible I suppose. :wink:
It's the same here in America, horses in general here are usaully broke at age 2-4 years old though, but there are a few that break at age 1.


----------



## LolHorse (Dec 28, 2009)

MacabreMikolaj said:


> Depends entirely on the horse.
> 
> As an average, the legs joints are closed by 2.5 years at the very latest - possibly 3 on some bigger breeds. After that, it's the spine that's the issue - and that doesn't finish fully fusing until a minimum of 6 years old, so anybody trying to keep the self righteous attitude about 4 being ok and 2 being unacceptable should brush up on equine development first. You have FAR more chance injuring a 4 old horse with improper training then you do with a 2 year old under the guidance of an educated and well schooled trainer. They have a spine that's just as susceptible to injury in places as a 2 year old.
> 
> It has far less to do with age then it does with proper training and guidance. There are PLENTY of 2 year olds that are going to be better off down the road then a big chunk of 4 year olds because of this misguided idea that a 4 year old horse is "mature" and able to handle 10x the concussion of a 2 year old. It simply isn't so.


BUT, your better off breaking a 4 year old then a 2.5 year old with the same exact training. 
Another thing is horses usaully broke at the older age of 3.5-4 are usaully given a lot more ground training then a younger horse, this gives time for the horse to get used to the saddle/bit/human contact idea. I think this is fair to the horse so you don't rush them. Agian, this is just my own opinion.

I really enjoy reading everyone's opionions, I find it interesting.


----------



## Beling (Nov 3, 2009)

Good point, LolHorse. I also think any mistakes that might happen at 2 are remembered longer than at 4.


----------



## SorrelHorse (Apr 9, 2009)

I'm too lazy to read through all those pages of replies 

Anyway, I would start saddling and maybe just sitting on and doing some walking at age 2, nothing like running hard or big stops and turns or anything. But age 3 and 4 is when the school really starts and they get shown eactly what is expected, especially for the futurities I have then ready at two and then at age 3 I finish them and just tone their performance so by age 4 they are ready.

Ages mine were broke -

*Jester* - Two
*Annie* - Yearling (She's racing bred, had a two-year-old racing year before we bought her)
********- Two
*Rico* - Three
*Rebel - *Yearling (Also race bred, but never ran. Lucky to be sound.)

I don't know about any others. But we always star tours at two.


----------



## Cougar (Jun 11, 2009)

I am on the 3-5 bandwagon. Beyond the physical arguement I like where the horse is mentally at that time. It's a matter of personal preference more than anything else. I


----------



## MacabreMikolaj (May 9, 2009)

LolHorse said:


> BUT, your better off breaking a 4 year old then a 2.5 year old with the same exact training.
> Another thing is horses usaully broke at the older age of 3.5-4 are usaully given a lot more ground training then a younger horse, this gives time for the horse to get used to the saddle/bit/human contact idea. I think this is fair to the horse so you don't rush them. Agian, this is just my own opinion.
> 
> I really enjoy reading everyone's opionions, I find it interesting.


Your argument is absolutely moot though based on the fact that no two horses will ever be the same in training. I find it quite the opposite - people basically assume a 4 year old is an "adult" horse, and will ride it harder and faster then any youngster while it still has vulnerable points on the spine. How many people here gasp at the idea of riding a 2 year old, and yet think jumping a 4 year old is perfectly fine? Joints are closed between 2-3 years old, so you're right up against the same wall - they both can suffer spinal damage.


----------



## WSArabians (Apr 14, 2008)

LolHorse said:


> But thats what you heard. :wink: I've also heard pigs fly, but do they?
> Not saying what you said is false, heck it may be true.


It IS false.


----------



## BJTS (Apr 7, 2015)

I break my stock horses at 2 and some are competing (and winning) by 2.5. As i don't jump my horses there is less stress put on their knees being closed over. The closing of their knees is the main factor to whether horses are ready to go into intense riding. I prefer not handle my horses at all between birth to breaking so as to avoid them being pushy and spoilt. 
Some horses that I break at 2 get put out for a year and brought back in at 3 to make sure they are developing okay. Breaking them early like this allows for a head start in behavior to make them easier and safer to start at 3. Sometimes it just isn't convenient to wait so long to break them, our horses are working horses, not so much pets.


----------



## Paintedponies1992 (Nov 17, 2013)

The one just got started this year and she's 3, but that's because she was slow to growing. My paint is being started this year at 2, but only ground work, saddling, bridling, line driving and someone light sitting on her.


----------

