In America it seems totally normal to back horses at 2. Here (UK) we usually wait till they are rising 4 or later (apart from race horses as far as I know). What are these ages based on? Do we just assume that what we are used to is the right way?
What age to back a horse?
- Thread starter Thyme & Me
- Start date
On our yard we've backed anywhere from 3 till 7!! I used to work in racing and always cringed a bit at the youngsters but they always seem a lot maturer than general riding horses, I guess the breed has developed over the years for this, that and lots of hard feed! I also understand the logic of backing a horse (just basic sit on, w/t/c) of a horse who is going to be very big and strong when they are only 2 or 3.. Controversial I know!
I think it's a cultural thing mostly. In France, and in other countries on the continent, they also tend to back horses younger than in the UK. Here 3 is normal, 4 and a half is a bit on the late side, rising 5 is more or less unheard of. Whereas the Brits often refer to 5-/6-/7-year-old horses as "youngsters", the French consider a "youngster" to be 3 or 4, and anything in double figures is "getting on a bit"... and if a horse hasn't done anything of note by the time it's 10, they reckon it's never going to.
Also, here the backing and bringing on process tends to happen quite quickly, where in the UK people tend to take a bit longer and do things fairly slowly. Many horses, even those just being produced for leisure riding, will be backed at 3 and immediately start flatwork schooling and hacking out, and start jumping not soon after - horses being produced for competition do things even faster. It's not uncommon for the introduction of tack, rider and first hack to happen within a couple of days.
Also, here the backing and bringing on process tends to happen quite quickly, where in the UK people tend to take a bit longer and do things fairly slowly. Many horses, even those just being produced for leisure riding, will be backed at 3 and immediately start flatwork schooling and hacking out, and start jumping not soon after - horses being produced for competition do things even faster. It's not uncommon for the introduction of tack, rider and first hack to happen within a couple of days.
Last edited:
traditionally, back at 3 1/2, turn away for teh winter, and then restart in 4th spring.
IMHO, that works pretty well for most, but some simply aren't ready, physically and/or mentally, and benefit from being given more time - though ground work can continue.
However, I think there is growing trend for people to be impatient. It almost seems the more the youngster cost, either to breed or to buy, the more of a rush people are to start 'getting their money's worth' :banghead: No-one thinks long-term anymore -if it breaks down, mentally or physically, they just 'throw it away' and get a new one:stomp: Does my tiny head in!!!
IMHO, that works pretty well for most, but some simply aren't ready, physically and/or mentally, and benefit from being given more time - though ground work can continue.
However, I think there is growing trend for people to be impatient. It almost seems the more the youngster cost, either to breed or to buy, the more of a rush people are to start 'getting their money's worth' :banghead: No-one thinks long-term anymore -if it breaks down, mentally or physically, they just 'throw it away' and get a new one:stomp: Does my tiny head in!!!
I would have gone with the 3.5 to 4 theory until I read this article on growth plates...
http://www.equinestudies.org/ranger_2008/ranger_piece_2008_pdf1.pdf
The really interesting stuff is from page 6 and explains all about growth plates and skeletal maturation. Just because a horse "looks" mature... doesn't mean that it is structurally able to support the weight of a rider.
There is no doubt that from a muscular point of view, a young "baby" racehorse will be fitter and stronger than it's field-bound peers.... I do have grave doubts that it's skeleton will necessarily be able to support it into longevity if it has been worked hard whilst still maturing. I know a lot of famous racehorses lived to good ages before they crossed the rainbow bridge.... but how many don't?
But that's just my humble opinion.....
http://www.equinestudies.org/ranger_2008/ranger_piece_2008_pdf1.pdf
The really interesting stuff is from page 6 and explains all about growth plates and skeletal maturation. Just because a horse "looks" mature... doesn't mean that it is structurally able to support the weight of a rider.
There is no doubt that from a muscular point of view, a young "baby" racehorse will be fitter and stronger than it's field-bound peers.... I do have grave doubts that it's skeleton will necessarily be able to support it into longevity if it has been worked hard whilst still maturing. I know a lot of famous racehorses lived to good ages before they crossed the rainbow bridge.... but how many don't?
But that's just my humble opinion.....
We have several ex racers broken at two and restarted at 5/6, ponies broken at 3/4 and a problem ISH still not sat on at 6...Our motto is 'no horse has a timetable'
great article EML.
I had heard that theory that by working them younger, they develop stronger bones, so it intersting to read research which confirms and quantifies this. However, as the article says, it doesn't make their growth plates mature any quicker, and this is where much of the damage occurs.
I was shown by a vet how to look at the knees of youngsters, and 'see' if the growth plates are mature or not - it is amazing how long many knees stay 'open' and therefore susceptible to damage. And of course, if the knees are immature, then many other joints will be too.
And fascinating that the spine is the last to mature. I honestly never even thought about all those joints in the spine needing to mature just the same as leg joints. Now I feel REALLY sorry for horses made to jump/carry riders for long periods when young
I had heard that theory that by working them younger, they develop stronger bones, so it intersting to read research which confirms and quantifies this. However, as the article says, it doesn't make their growth plates mature any quicker, and this is where much of the damage occurs.
I was shown by a vet how to look at the knees of youngsters, and 'see' if the growth plates are mature or not - it is amazing how long many knees stay 'open' and therefore susceptible to damage. And of course, if the knees are immature, then many other joints will be too.
And fascinating that the spine is the last to mature. I honestly never even thought about all those joints in the spine needing to mature just the same as leg joints. Now I feel REALLY sorry for horses made to jump/carry riders for long periods when young
Last edited:
Well I have 2 x 4.5 year olds that have been backed but are not really what I would call 'being ridden'.............One because I don't feel she is still mature enough (Welsh X Trad) and the other, my Shetland, because its so hard to find a regular rider.
I doubt if either will do too much thro' this Winter tbh, but come Spring we will hopefully all be ready to 'push on' and start hacking out.
I have had my Welshie X since a Yearling and for me it has worked the 'other way'.........because I have had her since being a baby I am in no rush and will carry on with the work schedule as and when I feel she is ready and not before.
I doubt if either will do too much thro' this Winter tbh, but come Spring we will hopefully all be ready to 'push on' and start hacking out.
I have had my Welshie X since a Yearling and for me it has worked the 'other way'.........because I have had her since being a baby I am in no rush and will carry on with the work schedule as and when I feel she is ready and not before.
I've got a 4.5yr old who has been very lightly backed but is nowhere near mature enough for proper work yet, we've spent the last few months working on long reining in walk and trot, introducing various shapes in the school etc. I'll start walking out in hand at the weekends again soon, then start long reining round the fields. I've been long reining in a Dually at the moment as she can be very stroppy so means I can keep on at her without worrying about her mouth, she's losing her last tooth at the mo and will be re-bitted after this.
Once re-bitted and long reining happily then I'll start getting back on.
I've had her since birth and she's a real sweetie, so want to take it slowly to get the best out of her! Would love to do a few walk and trot tests by the end of next year
Once re-bitted and long reining happily then I'll start getting back on.
I've had her since birth and she's a real sweetie, so want to take it slowly to get the best out of her! Would love to do a few walk and trot tests by the end of next year
If it's a small horse who will carry a big rider, later is better than sooner, a big horse with a light rider......? it's debatable.
I think the brain is as big a factor as the physical body. IF they are not ready in their head there's no point in struggling. I started a baby at 4, she was a totaly air head. Turned her away until she was 5-6 and she rode away like a good un. AS eml says, let the horse lead you, just don't go thundering around the show jumps every day with a 3yo.
I think the brain is as big a factor as the physical body. IF they are not ready in their head there's no point in struggling. I started a baby at 4, she was a totaly air head. Turned her away until she was 5-6 and she rode away like a good un. AS eml says, let the horse lead you, just don't go thundering around the show jumps every day with a 3yo.
June was backed at just gone 3 and has not been in regular work since ( about a year) - she is ridden a couple of times a month and worked from the ground.
Jazz was "broken" when I got him at 16 months. He was petrified of a saddle, you couldn't put your arm over his back, never mind lean on him. He will be 3 in April and in the past few weeks we have made saddles not scary and a friend has had a sit on while he's been eating his hay, and Leo his rider for the future has sat on (she's 5!)
And that will be it now until it comes to break him. He will be turned away next summer again as I just don't think he will be ready.
June is very mentally mature. She accepts things and works them out for herself, she is more level headed.
Jazz does not. He acts first and thinks later. He is a complete baby and it does not take much to blow his head! In 4 months he will be 3. In 4 months I would not contemplate putting a rider on him properly, he just will not be ready! He needs more baby time in the field with his friends and that's what he will get!
He has been sat on as I wanted him to get over his fear of saddles and things on his back now, while I can make it into a game for him, than on a years time when he is bigger and stronger and more opinionated! (if that's possible for jazz!)
Jazz was "broken" when I got him at 16 months. He was petrified of a saddle, you couldn't put your arm over his back, never mind lean on him. He will be 3 in April and in the past few weeks we have made saddles not scary and a friend has had a sit on while he's been eating his hay, and Leo his rider for the future has sat on (she's 5!)
And that will be it now until it comes to break him. He will be turned away next summer again as I just don't think he will be ready.
June is very mentally mature. She accepts things and works them out for herself, she is more level headed.
Jazz does not. He acts first and thinks later. He is a complete baby and it does not take much to blow his head! In 4 months he will be 3. In 4 months I would not contemplate putting a rider on him properly, he just will not be ready! He needs more baby time in the field with his friends and that's what he will get!
He has been sat on as I wanted him to get over his fear of saddles and things on his back now, while I can make it into a game for him, than on a years time when he is bigger and stronger and more opinionated! (if that's possible for jazz!)
This post is just confirming that I am confused! Most people in the UK back at 3-4 and then work very very lightly. The consensus seems to be they are not physically, cognitively or emotionally ready till then - or well after then - and anyone who tried to do it early ends up with a wreck or a basket case.....
But in the USA they are backed at 2 and ridden 'properly' from that age, all the time. Surely if this was catastrophic for them, trainers would have changed what they do. I'm not talking about evil impatient money grabbing horse traders, I'm talking about respected horse trainers like Mark Rashid who back 2 year olds routinely. Is it just about different breeds? Do American Quarter Horses mature quicker?? I'm not planning to back a 2 yr old and I didn't back my pony till almost 4. I'm just curious. :smile:
But in the USA they are backed at 2 and ridden 'properly' from that age, all the time. Surely if this was catastrophic for them, trainers would have changed what they do. I'm not talking about evil impatient money grabbing horse traders, I'm talking about respected horse trainers like Mark Rashid who back 2 year olds routinely. Is it just about different breeds? Do American Quarter Horses mature quicker?? I'm not planning to back a 2 yr old and I didn't back my pony till almost 4. I'm just curious. :smile:
I don't think this is quite correct tbh. There may be some areas where this is normal but I'm not sure that this is common practise for bog-standard leisure horses. With regards to backing 2-year-olds specifically, it may be commonplace for the original backing to happen in the horse's third year but then for them to be turned away. And as in any country it depends on what a horse is being produced for. Someone may well correct me on this!) I *think* Western horses are often backed younger than those being produced for English-style equitation. And of course competition horses will be backed sooner and produced faster than your average leisure horse. With regards to backing 2-year-olds - it may well be common
If by "trainer" you are specifically referring to someone who produces young horses, then no, they probably wouldn't have changed what they do if backing young was harmful. The problem with pushing youngsters too fast too soon, is that the physical effects of this often don't appear until later in the horse's life / ridden career. In general trainers of young horses don't need to look at the big picture or concern themselves with the long term.
Last edited:
By trainer I mean someone like Mark Rashid who has made a career out of finding kinder, softer, gentler ways to communicate with horses. Here he is talking about colt starting:
http://www.markrashid.com/semantics.htm
It's worth a read to get an idea of his attitude. Definitely not quick-fix, uninterested in the bigger picture. But he often starts colts at 2. Yes they are ridden Western style, but why should that make such a difference to whether the horse is ready?
http://www.markrashid.com/semantics.htm
It's worth a read to get an idea of his attitude. Definitely not quick-fix, uninterested in the bigger picture. But he often starts colts at 2. Yes they are ridden Western style, but why should that make such a difference to whether the horse is ready?
Personally I don't think it does. I'm just saying that's what is done and it appear to be part of the Western culture. Maybe I am wrong, that's just the impression I have got.
I like Rashid from what I know of him from his books and so on, I like his way of thinking and the way he tackles problems. But even so, when it comes to breaking young horses I have to wonder how high might "horse's chance of soundness in 10 years" come on a trainer's list of concerns. Surely if someone comes to Rashid or any other respected trainer with a 2-year-old they want him to break in, he will break it in - he will do it his wonderful way (the kindness, respect etc) but he probably doesn't say "come back in 2 years, because if I start him now he has more chance of having joint problems when he's older".
Just pondering...could it be because they don't have a shortage of horses? In other words, does anyone know what the average working lifespan is for these horses that are broken and ridden so young? Is it maybe that for them if the horse lasts until its early teens, that is fine for them, they can easily get another from the herds? Does anyone know any research into their active lifespan?
Something else that comes to mind is that we are all more aware now of the problems of pushing a youngster and the problems that can result in later life, also with the majority of Horse Owners in England being for leisure purposes and the expense of actually keeping a Horse here I think some of us are more aware of 'protecting our investment' and taking the time needed in these initial years to hopefully save on these problems in years to come.
newrider.com