Kathy,
I posted the specific numbers only out of general interest because
people were asking/discussing those ratio numbers. If you'll read my
post again, it was fairly clearly discussed that the statistics showed
that how much weight the horse was carrying was irrelevant when the
horse was in good body condition. Therefore, the specific numbers of
how much the horse weighs, or the rider weighs, doesn't
make much of a difference, but how much body fat the horse he has on him
at the time DOES.
Obviously, this is not the ONLY factor in a horse's weight-carrying
ability. Of course conformation plays a major role, but I also saw many
well-conformed and well-conditioned horses at Tevis that did not
complete, in my opinion and in that of the statistics, possibly because
they carried insufficient body fat and therefore insufficient metabolic
fuel for 100 miles. Unfortunately, research is a pretty tedious and
long drawn out process, so huge leaps in insight are pretty hard to come
by. This study only possibly contributed one tiny little additional bit
of information, it isn't meant as a Total Explanation.
I realize this study is only the first step in attempting to identify
the factors that make endurance horses more successful. However,
getting this far took all the money available and until more funding
shows up, I can't take it any further to quantifiably look at other
things like conformation, bone density, etc., as much as I'd like to.
This particular study isn't meant to be the final or only word, just a
first step.
However, your points on conformation are well taken.
Susan