Weight in the saddle, or on the Jockey.

[Maxbet]

This is probably a subject that has been discussed on here before, But I would be very interested if people would share their opinion's and theories on this.

90% of the N/Hunt jockeys can do 10 stone, unlike the flat where there is a much wider spectrum.

I actually believe there is a hidden ratio of strength combined with good balance that gives some lighter jockey's a real advantage, l am leaning on the side of weight in the saddle (deadweight) is better.

Or is there a fine line between both ends of the spectrum?

 

[Perpetual]

Not something I’ve really considered, but first instinct is to go the other way, especially NH

That’s because I’m guessing weight distribution may be better on top as opposed to in the saddle and a larger person would be physically stronger (the reason you have different weights in boxing). Only guesswork though as haven’t sat on a horse for about 25 years, and never with extra weight!

 

[Maxbet]

I've good reason for asking this question, but feel it is important to share opinions.

On undulating tracks with steep inclines, a large horse with equal ability to it's lighter opponent will have an advantage and the opposite is true on flat tracks....

 

[Desert Orchid]

I've never seen a serious theory on the subject published or even discussed in any detail on TV.

It's the kind of thing the old Handicap Book/Update would see in the letters section (to which I was a fairly regular contributor). I also used to subscribe to a mail-only publication in which all sorts of weird and wonderful statistically-based theories were expounded and tested. Can't recall its name. But don't recall the weight question you ask being discussed either.

However, in 50 years of punting and almost as much in studying and rating, all I can remember is the odd comment along the way.

I've heard some top trainers talk about using a heavy jockey because it means less dead weight but that's about it.

I've never heard anything either about the effect of the size of a horse being more or less suited to the topography of a course but obviously we know nimble types are more suited to the likes of Chester whereas the big, long-striding galloping type would be more suited to Newmarket etc. It's the kind of thing that goes through my head when I watch The Bourne Identity. I can't imagine a Hummel chasing the Mini through the back lanes of Paris...

Obviously we regularly read about some horses not acting on certain tracks (eg the HQ dip, Goodwood, Cheltenham) but that tends to be attributed to natural balance.

Hope the debate goes somewhere, though!

 

[reet hard]

Haven't a clue on weight distribution, but I do understand simple physics enough to know that weight makes less difference around sharper tracks.

 

[barjon]

Since the jockeys weight is carried by the stirrups when they are racing and since the stirrups are attached to the saddle isn’t it all deadweight so far as the horse is concerned? The jockeys might move themselves around but the only time they relieve the pressure on the stirrups is when the lean on the horses shoulders. Or am I talking bollox.

Er, had a slight rethink on the basis that despite the weight carry as above the lurching about of a jockey must affect the horses balance and that will be worse the heavier the jockey. Or is that bollox too!!

 

[Maxbet]

Haven't a clue on weight distribution, but I do understand simple physics enough to know that weight makes less difference around sharper tracks.

I think weight makes all the difference Reet, in all aspects....it could be argued that a larger heavier object going around a sharp bend would be more inconvenienced by centrifugal force.
Take Chester for example, constantly turning the corner from the inside is definitely an economic advantage. Horses forced to go wider around the outside will naturally have to go a stride faster, thus exuding more outward (unbalanced) force.
If this said horse has its weight nearer the earth, on the saddle as opposed to a flailing tall jockey...then surely there is a difference.
This is a different angle but on the same dynamics as the undulating example.

 

[Maxbet]

Since the weight of the jockey is carried by the stirrups when they are racing and since the stirrups are attached to the saddle isn’t it all deadweight so far as the horse is concerned? The jockeys might move themselves around but the only time they relieve the pressure on the stirrups is when they lean on the horse's shoulders. Or am I talking bollox?

Er, had a slight rethink on the basis that despite the weight carry as above the lurching about of a jockey must affect the horse's balance and that will be worse the heavier the jockey. Or is that bollox too!!

Now we are getting somewhere....

 

[Maxbet]

Not something I’ve really considered, but first instinct is to go the other way, especially NH

That’s because I’m guessing weight distribution may be better on top as opposed to in the saddle and a larger person would be physically stronger (the reason you have different weights in boxing). Only guesswork though as haven’t sat on a horse for about 25 years, and never with extra weight!

Herein lies the counter-argument. Adam kirby has less weight in the saddle than 99% of the jockey's, his bump and jerk style around the sharp bends of Lingfield are often seen to great advantage...

So does the Racecourse character have an effect? on where the weight aught to be distributed....it would seem so!

 

[littlelad]

If having a light jockey and heavy saddle was thought to be advantageous then the champion bumper would be full of flat jockeys??

Sent from my SM-J415FN using Tapatalk

 

[Maxbet]

If having a light jockey and heavy saddle was thought to be advantageous then the champion bumper would be full of flat jockeys??

That's an interesting one....There is actually a lot more use of them in this race...Jamie Spencer won it...

But your answer would only be true if the question read;...."If having a light jockey and heavy saddle was Generally thought to be advantageous then the champion bumper would be full of flat jockeys??

If it were untrue, then why would anyone put Rachael Blackmore or Sean Bowen up???

 

[reet hard]

I think weight makes all the difference Reet, in all aspects....it could be argued that a larger heavier object going around a sharp bend would be more inconvenienced by centrifugal force.
Take Chester for example, constantly turning the corner from the inside is definitely an economic advantage. Horses forced to go wider around the outside will naturally have to go a stride faster, thus exuding more outward (unbalanced) force.
If this said horse has its weight nearer the earth, on the saddle as opposed to a flailing tall jockey...then surely there is a difference.
This is a different angle but on the same dynamics as the undulating example.

Simple physics, as I said; The sharper tracks have more bends, and more breaks in the pace as a consequence. Ipso facto; less energy required to negotiate.
Recall when the Lingfield AW track first opened- and we had a field day backing penalty carriers.

 

[granger]

Ive thought of this in terms of myself as the horse

Do i want more weight offset by 2 feet in stirrups and an intelligen (most part) jock on me or a fixed weight no matter what

I'd go with the jockey rather the saddle weight

Also boxers for years cheated weight scales so I like to think there is osmething in that

 

[Maxbet]

Ive thought of this in terms of myself as the horse

Do I want more weight offset by 2 feet in stirrups and an intelligent jockey on me or a fixed weight no matter what

I'd go with the jockey rather the saddle weight.

Intelligence apart, I wonder how much difference if any, was created by Ferney Hollow carrying 15Lb in the saddle and having Paul Townend aboard, and or, whether Appreciate It, appreciated having (pardon the pun) just 2Lb in the saddle, or Queens Brook an 1Lb in the saddle.


Could be that the 2nd and third aught to be upgraded....could be Ferney Hollow isn't so superior as might seem at first glance...After all, I would have thought Mr W P Mullins had the choice by way of having ridden both horses in all races prior!

Makes you think, you don't know what to think.. Makes me think about it more because I'm trying to rate them...

 

[jinnyj]

Always weight from jockey rather than deadweight of lead.

Re comment about Adam Kirby. I love Adam (he rode two winners for me) but I have seriously started to dislike his bump and grind style he now employs. It CANNOT be good for a horse to have jockey bang up and down on his back like that (and an awful lot of jump jockeys now do it). Physically the horses lungs are huge and run halfway down the back ending where the kidneys sit. To have this action constantly bashing away over those organs seems to me to be wrong. To say nothing of the effect it has on the musculature there and potentially the vertebrae (kissing spine is a problem that seems to be massively on the increase).

 

[Outsider]

I think I've heard someone,possibly Mick fitz say a jockey riding at the proper weight is better than carrying extra weight.

There was something I read yesterday that the weight of the horse is the thing.if a horse isnt at its racing weight it wont win.

 

[Grey]

Always weight from jockey rather than deadweight of lead.

Re comment about Adam Kirby. I love Adam (he rode two winners for me) but I have seriously started to dislike his bump and grind style he now employs. It CANNOT be good for a horse to have jockey bang up and down on his back like that (and an awful lot of jump jockeys now do it). Physically the horses lungs are huge and run halfway down the back ending where the kidneys sit. To have this action constantly bashing away over those organs seems to me to be wrong. To say nothing of the effect it has on the musculature there and potentially the vertebrae (kissing spine is a problem that seems to be massively on the increase).

I guess jockeys resort more to bumping horses along nowadays because of the whip rules, but I agree that with some jockeys it looks like it could be unhelpful to the horse.

Mind you before the whip rules were a consideration, Pat Eddery used to do it too. His version was a bit different, however, because he'd sit into the saddle for a few strides at the start of the procedure and then rise and fall every few strides after that as the horse started to pick up speed. Cash Asmussen did something similar too. It's about using your weight to assist the horse to find a rhythm, which is why live weight is better than dead weight.

 

[edgt]

Ernie Johnson wore a leather waistcoat to carry lead when winning the Derby on Blakeney.
How popular this was in the pre body protector days I do not know.
Health and safety would most likely ban it nowadays, plus as jockeys are heavier there is little need for it.
I was always amazed to see the amount of headgear two year olds had the days Joseph O'Brien rode them with an eight ounce saddle to enable him to hold them; it cannot have been beneficial for any horse he rode.
Then I think of the days Tommy Carberry won big races on the likes of L'Escargot ,Leap Frog , Brown Lad etc carrying 12/6; 12/7 with at least three stone of lead on board.
I can only conclude if the jockey can do it, the horse wins if good enough.
Ditto with riding styles; use the reins as if they were silk threads in danger of breaking .
Some guys and gals have what it takes, some just do not.
Pity I never rode; I would not be around now to spout all this !!!
Then again the best hurling is done from the ditch.

 

[Maxbet]

Holly in the saddle, a feather on the back....