From: patty@alpha.larc.nasa.gov (Patty Howell)
Newsgroups: rec.equestrian
Subject: Re: Dressage bitting
Date: 18 Nov 1992 22:14:55 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA  USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: alpha.larc.nasa.gov

>prejudiced that reflects very badly on the judge.  Also should a judge score 
>me lower for expressing my beliefs--what the heck it's just a dressage test, 
>it's not the end of the world!   
 
 yeah, yeah, I know. And horses *are* just a hobby, not a livelihood
 for most of us.
 I just think it would be better to wait, especially after you've
 just dropped $400-$500 in entry fees/stabling/transporting/show gear....


[stuff deleted (Grisone makes for grisly reading)]

>	Absolutely correct, thus there are some things about which the
>old masters were wrong.
 
 And some things they knew about that today's horsemen don't.
 [NOT Grisone. I hardly revere that fellow. But Newcastle I do hold
 in very high regard, as I do Xenophon. The contributions of de la 
 Gueriniere are of course put on a pedestal by everyone (which I think
 is a little much, he had his faults, too...) And of course, there
 are many others]


>>	"Regrettably, spurs are worn today beginning in Training Level.
>>Fundamentally, I beleve the same consideration should apply to spurs as the
>>double bridle:  they should only be allowed at Fourth Level and above.
>>Uneducated legs should not be armed with spurs, just as uneducated riders with
  ----------------------------------------------
>>poor hands are not allowed to ride with a double bridle until they are
>>sufficiently proficient to perform at Fourth Level or above."

[stuff deleted]

>	No, he would prefer that spurs not be used at all, he sees too
>many upper level riders ruining good rides by over-using them, or
>using them badly, or even using them as a crutch to cover lack of proper
>training however barring that he would limit spurs to 4th level and above, 
>no use on lower level horses regardless of the level of the rider.  He
>would prefer that the double bridle not be used in high level competition
>either because too many people rely too heavily on it as a crutch as with
>spurs.

 O.K., his "dream" would be to remove the double bridle and the spurs
 forever from the dressage world. (I think I said that: "although he would 
 prefer they not be used at all") Failing that, which he knows would
 never happen (changes usually have to be gradual), he'll settle for
 no spurs at the lower levels (which I agree with). His *reasoning*
 for this, which I have underlined above, is because of the level
 of the *rider* ("Uneducated legs should not be armed w/ spurs")
 *My* reasoning is because of the level of the *horse*. I agree with
 Steinbrecht, who said the seat should be adjusted to accomodate
 the horse's level of training. In other words, it is impossible
 to have a deep, comfortable seat on a lower level horse, thus
 spurs cannot be used with finesse until about fourth level.
 Steinbrecht is revered in the dressage world, yet he was apparently
 ahead of his time on this one (trainers still insist on teaching
 "dressage equitation" to green riders on *green horses* - Steinbrecht
 would be appalled (train of thought goes careening off in another
 direction....)
  
>> It is hard for me to believe that there are people at the top levels
>> that still don't know how to properly adjust a curb. If so, they are

>	Unfortunately there are, I have only been riding dressage for
>2 years and yet I have seen it.  Dr. Gahwyler in our conversation pointed
 
 You've certainly picked up more in 2 years than many dressage
 riders ever learn (certainly more than I learned in my first 2 years -
 of course I was only about 11 yrs old at the time ;> )

[stuff deleted]

>many times.  BEFORE he said that I watched a rider do an Intermediare I
>test where the horse she was riding was sorely pissed because every time
>she asked for a change of lead she jabbed him with her spur [...]

 I, too have seen similar use of the spur, and it is very ugly. The
 "hoppy hop" at every lead change is also yucky, as is the tail
 switching in the piaffe, and the pumping rider at the piaffe
 (Robert Dover does this all the time and it drives me crazy) and
 the basically freight train, bunched up performance (this last was
 being *rewarded* at the L.A. olympics - kindof turned me off Klimke
 until I saw his tapes, so he was obviously riding that way for the
 judges) The point is that all of this is wrong, but there is no
 change of tack that will cure these ills (except the first spur
 part) and all things that can influence lower level riders.
 It is going to have to be left up to the discriminating rider.
 Even a rider of high repute can have a bad day, and everyone
 should be bright enough to know that and judge according to
 what they see.

> a bigger impression) If a double bridle is an added difficulty, they
> don't belong in the higher levels.
	{meaning the rider}

>	The problem here is that there are many people who will copy a person 
>who rides bad higher level tests just because they are riding a higher level 

  You have enough intelligence to distinguish a good ride from a 
  bad one, don't you think other people can, too? And if they can't
  they'll never make it in dressage anyway, whether all the
  examples at higher levels are perfect or not.


>>You are judging a philosophy you are against by the worst examples.
>>(and a philosophy you are for by its best) I have seen just as many
>>horrible rides on a snaffle, and breathtaking rides with a full

>	But few of those horrible rides with snaffles were above the
>lower levels, I'd guess!  Horrible rides and problems are supposed to
>be worked out at the lower levels with a snaffle before proceeding 
>higher.  Unfortunately many people look at the higher levels as a
>chance to get around a problem by using a double bridle rather than
>as a reward for solving the problem.

 You would guess wrong. I have also *ridden* horses trained to higher
 levels, with their trainers coaching me along, (in snaffles by the
 way), who finally took the reins and "played horse" to my rider -
 the "feel of the horse's mouth" was incredible! By the end of
 that session, I thought I'd dislocated my arm sockets! 

>>bridle. The important thing is the rider, not the bit. A bad rider
>>trying to strong arm a performance will never be a pretty picture, 
>>whether in a snaffle or a curb, although in a snaffle, "bad hands"
>>are not as obvious to the spectator.

>	I disagree it is just the other way around, bad hands with a snaffle
>can be seen much more easily as the horse immediately hollows and loses
>collection, a curb tends to cover it up unless the errors are outrageous.

 Balogna. If you can't do it in the snaffle, there's No Way
 you can do it in a curb. Even Dr. Gahwyler says that
 the curb is a detriment to most riders - it is more difficult and
 requires more finesse. You can take an extremely hard feel
 on a horse w/ a snaffle, put a dropped noseband on so they
 can't open their mouths, and no spectator will be the wiser.
 And that is still a bad hand rider. If you can hollow their back in 
 a snaffle, you can do it ten times easier in a curb.


>	I have often talked to high level riders who when asked
>'what is the curb bit used for on the double bridel?' answer 'nothing,
>the horse should be ridden solely on the snaffle'.  Yet you
>will see riders relying on the curb to achieve collection and balance
>and the snaffle rein going loose.  How many high level riders can actually
>drop their curb completely and ride a high level test on just the snaffle?  

 Well, I can't speak for others, but I know I can. I also used to do 
 reining patterns and jump courses without any headgear at all (with
 my third level 1/2 arab pony I had as a kid. I admit it, I was
 showing off).
 

>Well the two women I saw could and did, and did a better job riding those 
>tests than many I have seen riding those same tests in a full bridle.  This 
>doesn't mean it is impossible to ride well in a full bridle, but it does show
>a true test of horsemanship to ask them to ride without!

 It is a "true test" of horsemanship only if you regard horsemanship 
 as a test of strength instead an art.


patty@alpha.larc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: rec.equestrian