Re: RC: Re: Re: physiology of weight/Absolutes? Nah.

[Lynne Glazer <lynne@glazer.org>]

I can't believe I'm posting on this cyclical discussion.  Nobody has 
mentioned that the rider's ability to RIDE has a lot to do with how 
hard the horse has to work.  I know a bunch of heavyweights who ride 
lightly, in balance, and conversely I know some who ride like the 
proverbial sack of potatoes.

It ain't just about rider weight.  Howard, how well do you ride?  Do 
you have strong enough legs and abs so that you land lightly in the 
saddle on the sitting part of the posting trot?  Can you suspend 
yourself slightly out of the seat during the canter?  <g,d&r>

Lynne
OK, T, yes, a tiny hiney

>
>--------
>
>It depends on the vets.  A good vet score will outweigh the points a 
>heavyweight gains over a lighter competitor in BC.  I, being a bit 
>overweight myself, kind of like the way BC is set up.  It seems to 
>be the only part of endurance that gives credit to the heavier 
>rider; credit they deserve.  I don't care what math you use, heavy 
>is heavy and a feather is a feather.  It does make a difference to 
>the horse.  IN some cases, it makes a big difference.
>
>How do I know this, you ask?  I'll tell you.  My kid and I ride the 
>same horses.  She weighs in at 89 lbs, with tack.  I come close to 
>being a heavyweight (I'm just a 6 pack short).  We have done enough 
>rides to know that when the kid finishes a 50 on Rebel or War Cry, 
>the horse isn't a bit tired.  They could both go on.  When I finish, 
>and I rarely finish one,  Rebel has had enough and War Cry lies down 
>to rest his tired legs.  Same rides, same horses, same 
>pace, different weights.