<% appTitle="Ridecamp Archives" %> Ridecamp: Re: [RC] Mad Science
Ridecamp@Endurance.Net

[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]
Current to Wed Jul 23 17:30:21 GMT 2003
  • Next by Date: [RC] Riding at Night
  • - Val Nicoson
  • Prev by Date: [RC] Hey!
  • - Karen J. Zelinsky

    Re: [RC] Mad Science - Truman Prevatt


    Where were you measuring the cannon bone, the middle, or right below the knee. How about cannon bone length to circumference ratio? Taller horse longer cannon bone, same circumference - hmmmmm........longer lever but weaker.

    Truman

    Susan Garlinghouse wrote:
    From my experience, I believe that for my 180 pounds with tack a horse
    in the 14.1 -- 14.3 height range weighing about 800 -- 850 pounds is
    about ideal for most endurance rides. YMMV.

    Interestingly, the research data would agree with you. The rider weight
    ratio of 21% wasn't any more or less likely to finish Tevis as higher or
    lower RWRs, but horses carrying a total mass of around a thousand pounds had
    a very low incidence of lameness pulls. What was also interesting is that
    even though the weight of horses measured ranged between 750 pounds and 1250
    lbs, cannon bone measurements varied relatively little. The average
    circumference was around 7.5 inches, with only about a quarter inch standard
    deviation, a pretty narrow range.

    Susan G





    Replies
    [RC] Mad Science, JUDYK89
    Re: [RC] Mad Science, Susan Garlinghouse
    Re: [RC] Mad Science, Truman Prevatt
    Re: [RC] Mad Science, Susan Garlinghouse
    Re: [RC] Mad Science, Truman Prevatt
    Re: [RC] Mad Science, Joe Long
    Re: [RC] Mad Science, Susan Garlinghouse