The double bridle debate – the info, the opinions… and the politics

On this unique article for H&H subscribers, equestrian journalist Pippa Cuckson digs into a few of the key factors up for debate surrounding the usage of double bridles in grand prix dressage and touches on the politics surrounding these discussions

In 45 years as an equestrian journalist, I can recall nothing so polarising as the present debate surrounding the usage of double bridles. A bitting mixture that was for therefore many centuries thought-about refined and aspirational is now on the coronary heart of a public relations disaster with welfare issues taking centre stage.

The subject is so politically delicate that the FEI is reluctant to elaborate on its persevering with compulsory use of double bridles in worldwide grand prix dressage competitors, regardless of the deteriorating “optics” from the general public viewpoint.

As a substitute it retains its head down when a senior determine goes “off message”. Throughout the Paris Olympics FEI head vet Goran Akerstrom briefed Reuters that a number of riders had been warned for alleged “blue tongue” the place their use of double bridles had contributed to restricted oxygen provide of their horses’ tongues. This has by no means been clarified, confirmed or denied by FEI HQ.

Nevertheless, H&H didn’t anticipate that the FEI would fail to instantly reply any double bridle-related questions in any respect, once we aimed for extra perception into the present state of affairs.

As a substitute the overarching response from the FEI spokesman mentioned: “At the assembly [in Lausanne} on 1 October, the key stakeholders agreed on a unified vision for dressage. The aim is that, through balanced and systematic education, horses are trained and ridden to be calm, supple, flexible, confident, and responsive, fostering a deep and positive connection with the rider. The FEI is committed to achieving this. Doing so requires a holistic approach rather than just focusing on individual topics, such as specific pieces of equipment.”

Our questions posed to the FEI included the experimental classes proposed by its own dressage committee. The FEI also failed to comment on why available scientific research into the use of double bridles is deemed insufficient; whether its long mooted multi-sport round-table on double bridle modernisation will happen; Dr Akerstrom’s remarks in Paris; and if dressage rider qualifications needed review – currently no qualifications are required to enter a grand prix at CDI3* where a double bridle is mandatory.

While the FEI’s response was limited, one of the FEI’s stakeholder groups was willing to tackle this hot potato: David Hunt, president of the International Dressage Trainers Club, shares his thoughts later on.

The double bridle through history

Before looking further at the current use of the double bridle, it’s worth looking back at how it evolved. In the violent times of the Middle Ages, the curb or lever bit was viewed as a necessity for mounted warriors using a sword with only one spare hand for reins. The name “curb” has a mechanical derivation, from the Latin “curvus” – to curve or bend.

Then came the Renaissance. Nobles studied horsemanship as an art form, in the same mindset as drawing, philosophy and music. Antoine de Pluvinel (1555-1620) was the first master to adopt a kinder approach, pioneering the curb to enhance collection through subtle aids. Initially the second (curb) rein was held in one hand, giving a clue as to its new, non-combative intent.

FEI rules still say the objective (Art. 400) is “to preserve the equestrian art from the abuses to which it can be exposed and to preserve it in the purity of its principles…” But fast forward to our own era of immense societal change, and it looks moot.

Practices considered normal 30 years ago are now unacceptable to many, with improved knowledge of equine physiology and psychology, and changing views on the use of animals. This comes at the same time as dressage has diverged into a lucrative lifestyle business for producers and breeders, as well as a sport. This inevitably leads to suspicion over short-cuts taken in training.

The current situation

Those who would like to see the double bridle banned claim its leverage capability is currently used to prise rather than coax horses into shape; while exaggerating to make her point, at the Collectif Pour Les Chevaux conference in April, 1976 Olympic champion Christine Stuckelberger wondered why current athletes “have to ride with 100 kilos in each hand” instead of just “the weight of the reins”.

There is relentless circulation of images on social media associating the double bridle with hyperflexion; “blue tongues” caused by restricted oxygen supply; tight nosebands allegedly aimed at helping to conceal what is going on inside a horse’s mouth; and “conflict behaviours”, such as repeated mouth-opening to seek relief from pressure. A new study by Mette Uldahl and Prof Janne Christiansen recorded one horse opening its mouth 59 times during its 5min 30sec test.

It is only after many years of discussion that the FEI recently authorised a noseband tightness gauge, which will be rolled out next year. Then there is the use of sugar paste (also widely known as marshmallow fluff) for further concealment, which has been banned since 2021 but is still reportedly being used with no yellow cards as yet handed down.

It is worth noting that even a large horse may not have a big enough space inside its mouth to be able to comfortably keep its mouth closed around two bits. FEI rules set the minimum diameter of mouthpiece at 12mm for a curb, 10mm for bridoon and 12mm for a snaffle in horses. British-born, now US-based Dr Hilary Clayton has studied the equine mouth for 40 years. (Her first peer-reviewed fluroscopic study in 1985 on the effect of bits is still cited.) In another study, she found the average available space in a horse’s mouth is only 14mm for an average bit thickness of 15mm.

She told H&H: “Under these (average) conditions, the horse would not be able to fully close its mouth. This does not take account of the fact that the tongue normally covers the bars of the mandible [lower jaw] and cushions the impact of the bit on the bars.”

So why is the double bridle rule underneath query?

After the Tokyo Olympics, the FEI convened an Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Fee underneath equine behaviourist and scientist Dr Natalie Waran from New Zealand.

In 2022 one in all its six preliminary suggestions was to cease mandating double bridles in grand prix dressage – rapidly vetoed by the FEI’s personal dressage committee (the DTC), the IDTC and Worldwide Dressage Riders Membership who mentioned “giving in to unwarranted or ignorant criticism is virtually and ethically mistaken”.

Makes an attempt to revive this by Sweden and the Netherlands – two nations already permitting snaffles in nationwide grand prix lessons – had been rejected in 2023 and 2024 on procedural grounds; doubles are categorised as a “sport” matter and never a welfare one.

One other current stakeholder remark has irked the scientific group: that present analysis into double bridles just isn’t “significant” sufficient.

Cristina Wilkins was a Spanish excessive efficiency eventer earlier than shifting to Australia the place she collaborates with famend researchers Paul McGreevy, Andrew McLean and David Mellor. She mentioned: “It’s very easy to get distracted by makes an attempt to discredit, misrepresent, overrepresent, and usually weaponise the analysis, to distract from the purpose at situation – to trigger confusion and purchase time.”

Cristina is presenting at a convention in Copenhagen on 18 November, hosted by the Danish ministry of agriculture. It’s a “who’s who” of distinguished vets and welfare activists: different audio system embody Professor Madeleine Campbell, chair of the British Equestrian Federation’s ethics group and the impartial animal welfare committee that advises DEFRA; Mette Uldahl (chief guide to Horse & Animal Welfare, Animal Safety Denmark) and Janne Christiansen; Julie Taylor, the “blue tongue” whistleblower 15 years in the past and creator of I Can’t Watch Anymore; Crispin Parelius Johannessen, the photographer whose photographs have fuelled the blue tongue debates on social media and in Scandinavian mainstream press; and Hans Christian Mathiesen, a vet and president of the Worldwide Dressage Officers Membership, whose private help for non-mandating the double bridle and revamping the best way dressage is judged haven’t but elicited any public help from his friends.

Many are regulars on the convention circuit, the place dressage welfare subjects inevitably characteristic. But FEI staffers and stakeholders hardly ever attend and even appear to know these occasions are taking place. Two weeks in the past the anti-hyperflexion campaigner Dr Eva van Avermaet addressed the annual convention of FEEVA (the 7,000-strong European federation of equine vets) in Lisbon. It’s understood the FEI was represented, however has not fed again but.

Would the snaffle possibility really make a distinction?

British Dressage (BD) CEO Jason Brautigam would welcome the FEI permitting the selection to make use of a snaffle in any respect ranges – aligning with BD nationwide lessons.

“The form of the horse’s mouth, expertise of the rider, the kind and temperament of the horse, should all be considered,” he mentioned. “We due to this fact help making [using a double bridle] non-obligatory, to offer riders the selection, however we shouldn’t be conflating this with welfare. The main target must be on higher coaching, schooling, and consciousness of the proper use of tack and tools, backed up by scientific information, to forestall issues resembling mouth lesions and ulceration.

“The query of whether or not the snaffle must be permitted at grand prix is due to this fact extra about sustaining a stage enjoying discipline and guaranteeing that contact with the bit will be judged constantly. Since making the snaffle non-obligatory, we’ve got not encountered any points in judging at elite stage.”

Europe-based Equestrian Motion Group (EAG) has additionally lobbied the FEI to just accept what many really feel is inevitable: “it’s higher to accompany this improvement constructively than to attempt to delay it”.

Unexpectedly, the FEI’s dressage committee has now mentioned it could encourage organisers to run experimental grand prix lessons in snaffles as much as CDI3*. EAG member Antonella Joannou de Rham is a former Swiss dressage crew rider eager to strive. She is the primary rider identified to have ridden a Intermediare II at a CDI2* in a snaffle, at Crozet in September.

However rider competence will nonetheless be an element, regardless of the bit.

Is freedom of selection the reply?

Mette Uldahl prefers total freedom of selection in any respect ranges: “On the precautionary precept, it must be primarily based on the rider’s determination to determine which sort of bit suits the person horse one of the best. Additionally, many riders usually are not able to using at larger ranges once they strive.

“[Mouth] ulcer frequency will increase at larger ranges, so it could then be higher for the horse to not put on a doubtlessly stronger bit just like the double bridle.

“Too many horses are introduced [at shows] with a too excessive show of battle behaviours. The explanations could also be lack of rider expertise, however we also needs to acknowledge that present sport codecs encourage methods in coaching and presentation which are dangerous for welfare and soundness, however rewarded by the judging system.

“I see findings of an [mouth] ulcer as a historic marker of the horse having had a previous downside, which it was compelled to alleviate by leaning or permitting an excessive amount of stress from the bit.”

Dr Clayton noticed: “After all, there’s the prevalent opinion that the power to carry out the excessive stage actions in a snaffle is a advantage, however this ignores the added ability required for proper use of the double.

“I wrestle with whether or not horses must be penalised as a result of their oral conformation makes it tough to put on a double bridle. Horses with an extended tibia, making it tough to get the hind limb underneath the physique, or horses with a downhill construct making it tough to lift the forehand are judged on how they carry out – not on how they may carry out if they’d higher conformation.”

A dressage stakeholder’s response to key questions

To complete, David Hunt, president of the Worldwide Dressage Trainers Membership tackles some continuously raised factors associated to the double bridle debate beneath. He was the primary British rider to win all three grands prix at a serious worldwide (Rotterdam in 1988, with Maple Zenith) and can also be on the FEI’s Judges Supervisory Panel.

Why is the double bridle not a “welfare” matter?

“Right here is the frustration: lower than perfect contact, acceptance of the bridle or self-carriage has been conflated to imply welfare dangers or abusive using and that’s not the case.

“Coaching horses is a course of; contact, self-carriage, engagement and so forth. are all issues that should be taught and it’s not at all times a simple, straight-line process. Some persons are extra expert and others usually are not, some horses catch on extra rapidly, some don’t.

“However an unskilled rider doesn’t rise to the extent of a welfare situation. All of us began as rookies! How can we anticipate to draw individuals to our sport or encourage the event of equestrian expertise if the learner is relentlessly criticised? Everybody is continually studying, even probably the most profitable rider will agree. That’s the problem and pleasure of dressage.

“After all, when somebody embarks on this journey they have to accomplish that responsibly which incorporates, amongst different issues, in search of certified steerage, figuring out appropriate horses to be taught on, and being lifelike about their stage of ability.

“I discover it curious that those that are so adamant about not utilizing unfavourable coaching methods with horses take such a unique view when making an attempt to encourage riders and use disgrace and humiliation so continuously.”

Why proceed to mandate utilizing the double bridle?

“The power to make use of a double bridle accurately and importantly to coach a horse to just accept and perceive it displays the best stage of equestrian competence and due to this fact must be examined on the elite stage.

“Sure, it’s a part of the custom however it’s also a selected ability. The Dressage Handbook – Tips for Judging units out how acceptance of the double bridle have to be evaluated. It requires the principle contact to be maintained with the snaffle rein with a lighter contact on the curb rein. If the rider presents a check with the curb rein utterly free, a deduction of 1 level must be made [from the collectives]. Nevertheless, if the rider presents a check with the principle contact solely being with the curb bit and the snaffle rein free [a deduction should be made from every movement].

“To eradicate the testing of this ability can be a dumbing down (and long run would cut back the inducement to realize the ability). We acknowledge that this objective just isn’t achievable for all riders and a few horses. All elite stage sport is unique by nature and will depend on a beneficial mixture of coaching and genetic potential (each bodily and temperamental).”

Why can horses with open mouths or behind the vertical nonetheless get good scores?

“Within the check a constantly open mouth or the nostril behind the vertical is not going to/shouldn’t be rewarded with a excessive rating. That is very clear in The Dressage Handbook – Tips for Judging. Nevertheless the handbook additionally states “When judging whether or not a horse is accurately accepting the contact…, it’s not sufficient to look solely on the head and neck. Judges want to have a look at the entire horse, its place and carriage and specifically, the best way it strikes.”

“Judges don’t overlook issues with contact or self-carriage, however should rating the totality of the train. Nevertheless issues with head carriage or contact are at all times famous within the feedback.

“We warning towards inserting an excessive amount of weight on images as they’re solely a second in time and sometimes don’t present enough context.”

Is the brand new noseband gauge a step ahead?

“The noseband has a respectable operate. The Ideas of Using, German Equestrian Federation state: A noseband completes the bridle. It ensures a quiet place of the bit within the horse’s mouth and that a few of the affect of the bit is not directly transferred onto the bridge of the nostril. It have to be neither too tight nor too free. A noseband gives a level of restriction to the mobility of the jaw, nevertheless it must not ever utterly forestall it. To make sure that the horse is ready to chew on the bit with relaxed tongue muscular tissues, it will need to have sufficient freedom within the jaw.

“The operative phrases are TOO tight or TOO free. It’s OK for the noseband to operate to discourage motion of the jaw however not forestall motion. The optimum tightness shall be particular person for every horse and due to this fact the rider must be given most leeway to do what fits his/her horse finest inside these tips.

“There are various research which have proven that each a too tight or too free are related to elevated mouth lesions. Trying to standardize issues is neither productive nor lifelike.”

● What are your ideas on use of double bridles in grand prix dressage? Write to us at hhletters@futurenet.com, together with your identify, nearest city and nation, for the prospect to your letter to look in a forthcoming situation of the journal

You might also be eager about: