Would love to take up riding again... am I too big?

[awakemysoull]

I done riding lessons from the age of 10-13 when I was thrown off and broke both my arms. It put me off riding again but I still have a love of horses.

My brother started riding about 2 years ago and is doing it 3 times a week now. He has built a fantastic relationship with a horse and is hoping to buy her soon.

I don't know what he weighs, but he is a lot bigger and taller than me.

I'm 5'8 and 18st 2lb (size 20) at the moment. I'm on the Cambridge plan so losing about 7lb per week.

He has offered me the chance to start lessons with him.

I'm scared I'm too big and will hurt the horse. I know he's a lot heavier than me and the horse seems fine but I'm just scared I'll hurt her.

Any advice?

I'm not even sure the actual size of the horse but she is massive

Did you miss my previous post Foxy? (Tue 20.59)

Can I point out to the people who seems disgusted with me for even thinking of getting back into riding that I AM NOT GOING FOR LESSONS UNTIL I AM DOWN TO 12 STONE AT THE VERY MOST.

It was just a question, I have seen a lot bigger people on horses and I wondered what the horse/weight ratio should be.

I understand and have said several times up the thread that I'm not going to go for lessons. It wouldn't be fair on the horse and I don't want to cause it any suffering.

Foxy, I was provided with the horse by the riding school based on my height and weight, I trusted their judgement.

awakemysoull I don't think you have to wait that long, plenty of riding schools have a limit of 14 stone but that is because they don't have the horses that can carry more than that, it doesn't mean that there aren't any horses that can carry more than that comfortably (for example highlands are bred to carry huge stags down mountains, a 15 stone human wouldn't seem that much to them). I personally think 18 stone is too much to expect of a horse (and I realise you are in full agreement with that) but I wouldn't necessarily object to 15 stone on a suitable horse with properly fitting tack, so don't feel too bad .
You are correct that there are lots of larger people riding but that doesn't make it right so fair play to you for putting the horse's welfare first, too many people don't IMO.

agree with pixel, you are not that far away from getting back in the saddle

well done so far and good luck, keep us posted :)

(you see loads of quite big men out hunting for a full day so not everyone has to weigh about 6 stone)

It's a great aspiration, good on you for doing such positive things!

Im sorry to say a LOT of these comments are blatantly fat phobic a horse can safely carry 15-20% of its body weight (a study done at cornell shows and discussed by a vet at: www.viovet.co.uk/blog/p2896-How-much-weight-can-a-horse-comfortably-carry) id still recommend losing about 2 stone just so you have more optons but anything over 600kg so a highlander or bigger could carry you comfortably.

I know this is annold thread but a highland couldn't really be expected to carry 18st (no offence to the OP if she is still around). I own a highland, am very familiar with the breed, mine is a garron type so built like a brick shithouse. But now way would I allow anyone over 15st to ride her. In theory a fit, mature highland will carry a 15st stag down a mountain. But that's with very clever tack, walking and taking it steady.

Definitely not a floppy about human that's going to move, definitely not trotting or cantering and definitely not schooling.

And she's full up and I'd be surprised if she weighs 600kg, 550 absolute tops.

600kg is the high end of the highlander breed. I did this for as a 16 stone person at 15% of a horses weight which would actually mean they could ride a 558kg horse. This means a 16 stone person could VERY comfortably ride your highlander. Your response was just fatphobic.

Fatphobic? Really?

I put animals welfare before peoples feelings. I'm fat myself. And fyi the breed is highland not highlander. Also the breed standard is not more than 14.2. A 14.2 coming in at 600kgs is a potential welfare issue in itself as you probably are looking at an overweight animal. Add a rider that is too heavy, on an overweight and unfit animal and you potentially have issues waiting to happen. I have no doubt my mare could carry 16st, and she's kind enough and willing enough to accept 18st. It doesn't mean it isn't causing problems that cannot be seen and 16st of beginner bouncing around is very different to 14st of competent, balanced rider.

When you look at the research (this tests thousands of horses and look at x-rays and stress tests) the horses only start showing signs of stress on joints at 20-25% of their body weight as 16 stone is only 15% your horse would be fine. Why do you think I recommended OP to lose a few stone? It’s because it gave them more options on what to ride, i would not put a 18 stone on a highlander because that would be around 20% mark which would lead to stress on the joints. Highlanders can weigh anywhere from 500-600kg yours sits in the middle at the average. And fyi highlander is a nickname for anything that comes from the highlands.

I also have the option of a horse which is 17/3 if I was to take it up again

It’s not so much the height of the horse, but it’s build.

A 16- 17hh thoroughbred/eventer style horse won’t be able to carry as much weight as a 15-16hh cob or heavyweight horse.

If you start with slow walking for short periods too that will be easier on the horse than trying to trot/canter etc.

Have a word with your stables. I know you’ve said you’ll wait until 12 st but it may be worth asking for half hour walking hacks before that (14 or 15 st?). to get your strength and balance up- you can learn an immense amount in walk, and it will help shift the weight more quickly.

The OP started this thread almost 8 years ago, so who knows how much she weighs now. It's been resurrected by a poster seemingly intent on calling people fatphobic.

16 stone is only 15% your horse would be fine.

You know it's not just the rider's naked weight you have to use for the calculation, right? You need to include all their clothing and the tack as well. I would not put an 18 stone human on any horse. You can whinge about this all you like, but I prioritise the horse's welfare.

There are recent, careful studies of the affects of weight carrying on horses. 20% has been used as a guideline for around 100 years - but that doesn't make it right. Horses slow down if they can when they're carrying weight and their metabolic rate rises. You can read about it here equusmagazine.com/horse-care/weight_carry_062608 They have evolved to disguise pain which means you have to be careful how you interpret results. The OP made the right call - she accepted she needed to wait. There's no need, 8 years late, to leap to her defence.

Its not just her i’m defending its every one who isn't short and within a weight limit, this excludes tall people, plus size people and people who have prosthetic limbs. I calculated in an extra 6kg for tack weighf and clothing. The cornell study (referenced in this article: www.vettimes.co.uk/app/uploads/wp-post-to-pdf-enhanced-cache/1/weight-limitations-in-horse-riding-how-big-is-too-big.pdf) takes into account stresses on exray and stress tests, specifically looking at indicators before the horse shows any sign of stress. Thats the point of the study and it still agrees that a horse can carry upto 20% which is why im so annoyed at the rules in england being so low. One of my best friends is 16 stone 3 pounds . Making her overweight and she’s interested in riding again hence why I stumbled across this and your reactions where all drastically cruel hence why i had to butt in for OP. And if you read the article and actually understood what it was say, its saying that having a person on a horses back is exercise thats it, thats the jist of the article, just the same as us lifting a weight, metabolic rate is an indicator of how much exercise someone has done and thats the point of horse riding is to exercise the horse

I ride my pony to exercise her. A riding school rider is riding a horse for pleasure and leisure.

I'm sorry if you think I was cruel. But the studies I looked at weren't 'thousands of horses'. There was a study of 6 and a study of 30. You cannot compare an endurance animal with a donkey and with a typical riding school horse.

The yard owners set weight limits according to the animals they have available to them. So obviously the weight limits will vary from one yard to the next. No yard wants to turn potential clients away, they make their decision based on welfare and what makes financial sense. A lame or sore horse can't work.

There are some horses capable of carrying weight. Heavy weight hunters and some of the traditional European meat horses such as a perchon. Shires and clysdales were traditionally bred to plough or pull and aren't always conformationally suitable for heavier weights. It's not just height and weight, it's conformation, build, fitness, age and the workload plus the weight of the rider.

Unfortunately this issue won't go away. And nor should it. It's a contentious issue because it is a welfare issue. No one is being fat phobic or cruel.

My pony is my pony. I get to say who rides her and who doesn't. Same as riding school owners. Someone who can't find a riding school because they are too heavy either has to lose weight or put their money where their mouth is and buy their own horse. Plenty of people will sell a horse to anyone. They may get lucky an find something that can carry them comfortably and stay sound. But a weight carrying horse, sound and sane enough to take a relatively novice rider are few and far between and come with a price tag reflecting that. Which is why most riding schools are reluctant to go towards the upper limits. The closer you are to the upper weight limits, especially with novice riders, the more likely you are to get an injury. It's as simple as that, it's not worth it. Not fat phobic, it's good business sense.

@MotherofMikey no-one of any stature has a right to ride a horse. If you're too heavy for whatever reason, you're too heavy. I don't ride small ponies because I am too heavy for them. I am fortunate that I am light enough to ride many horses/ ponies over 13hh (depending on age, build, fitness levels etc). If I were heavier, I wouldn't do it.

I can read and understand scientific studies. I can also accept that there are somethings I cannot do and have no right to expect.

@BertramLacey And there lies the problem, there are horses that can carry a heavier person but there seems to be a blanket limit of 12/13 stone. When i was riding last year the school also had a lot of suffolk’s as the owner/riding instructor bred them, they are capable of carrying heavier loads, a lot of them where fit and not to old or young yet there was still the blanket rule of 12 stone. A lot of the riding schools I've been to had a similar issue. Admittedly some of them genuinely didn’t have horses capable of carrying a heavy load but the majority do and it isn’t fair that many heavier people don't get to take part in a sport i love when there are horses capable of carrying them and that is what i mean by fatphobia is that theres a blanket rule that doesn’t take animal welfare into account it is simply because a person isnt what theyd like riders to look like. And the instant disgust that a lot of people show when you mention a plus sized rider is what im reffering to when i talk about fatphobia because instead of saying hang on a minute let me check to see how much my horse can carry it eww no your too heavy.

A suffolk punch is a draught horse, heavy on the forehand and short coupled. They can certainly pull substantial loads but not necessarily carry substantial loads. They are also a rare breed with very few breeding mares left in the country. I'm surprised to see them at a riding school tbh.

No one gives a shiney shite what riders look like. Riding wear goes right through to big sizes, riding boots are made with xxxwide legs. No one actually cares.

If you are so desperate to ride then lose weight. Or buy your own horse. Instead of bleating about how fatphobic the equestrian industry is. 16st is pretty heavy, unless you are 6ft. At 16st you are at risk of injury yourself, mounting will probably be difficult, your balance will be off, your joints will already be under pressure and your heart and lungs will already be working harder. That's not fat phobic, that's science. Unless you are an athlete at 16st you are at risk of all sorts of additional problems. Riding is a physical, dangerous sport where accidents happen to the fittest and leanest riders. I'm fat, not 16st but still overweight and have just been for a run to improve my fitness and try and lose some weight ready for competing over the autumn/winter.

It's not fat phobic to say you are too heavy to ride.

Just to remind everyone that once again, it's a zombie thread

That being said I totally agree as to it being an individual owner's decision as to who rides their horses, whether that's a riding school or a private owner. I totally, totally get that larger people want to ride just as much as anyone else, and that when there are horses out there that can safely carry them it's frustrating to be told no by many schools. I would really love it if riding was accessible to more people of all shapes, creeds and backgrounds but it all comes down to £££ sadly. Schools are businesses at the end of the day, they can only afford so many horses and each one has to pay its way so they can't 'just' buy a weight carrier to ensure everyone can ride. Putting aside the 'fat' issue, there's been consternation/complaints at the riding school I livery at, who sold or full loaned out nearly all their larger horses during last year's lockdown, so taller adults (even very slim ones) are quite limited in the horses they can ride. The school have built up their horse numbers again since reopening and have invested in some new horses but they've deliberately chosen 14-14.2hh ponies, cobby/native types, these are hardier, sounder cheaper to keep and fit the majority of their client base (largely novices, children, teens and small adults) better than the minority who need much bigger/taller/more high powered horses. Obviously they didn't deliberately set out to exclude or lose clients (and I'm sure they didn't really want to sell their horses either some of whom they'd had for years) but things are financially really tough for riding schools right now, more so than when the OP posted 8 years ago, so some hard-hearted choices have to be made. If there was some kind of 'rule' that every school had to keep say 3 true weight carriers so larger riders could safely ride (3 - 5 would be the minimum I think so the riders got some variety and the horses could have rest breaks) I think honestly in would be the nail in the coffin of many schools, the purchase and keep costs for those horses on top of all the usual staff, facilities and insurance costs would way outweigh what most schools charge for lessons (unless you are happy for the larger rider to pay extra on top of the already very high cost for lessons? I wouldn't be happy with that system personally).

As it happens my school's main local competitor can offer lessons to larger riders, think their limit is 15 stone compared to 12 at my school, and a lot of the bigger/taller riders from my school are moving over there so as to be able to ride more 'proper' horses. They are a much, much bigger school with 120+ horses on site and not by coincidence they charge a huge huge amount more for lessons... but for anyone reading this as a larger person and feeling discouraged by some of the responses, it is possible to find a school that will take you but you may need to travel a bit further, pay a bit more or perhaps have less variety in the horses you can ride, so do stick at it...

I've been on several riding holidays and there are always some sturdy horses for heavier riders. They always have a maximum weight and that tends to be 13 or 14 stone. One of the reasons I've been dieting recently is that I felt I might be getting too heavy for my favourite mounts - 13.2 native types (I'm only 5'3") At 11 or 12 stone you will have plenty of choice.

I'm losing weight at the moment to have riding lessons. There's a maximum of 12 stone. I'd say 18 stone is far too heavy. It's a real motivation to lose weight though!

Balls! Zombie thread!

As far as I know the horse should ideally carry 10% of his body weight, max 20% (incl tack). So even heavy riders can ride, but they have to ride "heavy" horses.

I'm pretty sure OP has lost the weight by now Or maybe decided against it, moved on with her life and got another hobby in the last 8 years.

@Littlebigbum

Go to the stables, it is more about balance than weight.

It really isn't. Weight is weight. Yes, a rider that's in balance and not slapping around in the saddle is always preferable but 18 stone is 18 stone. If your brother is much heavier, he really shouldn't be riding. They are sensate animals, not motorbikes. just because a horse CAN carry you doesn't mean it should.