a thought...following the air jackets... rotational falls

[racingdemon]

I've been reading through all the threads on the air jacket, and have one observation/comment, most people are concerned with a rotational fall, and the consequences of said fall.... now rather than adding more kit, personally i'm really interested in stirrup length and the impact this has on a fall.

since i've been back in the swing of things, i've really noticed people riding XC with (IMO) thier stirrups too long, now i've no idea why people are doing this, but i have two theories, and they are generalisations

a) at lower levels people are not used to riding with short stirrups, so feel off balance and unsteady, hence they drop thier leathers
b) at high levels riders are riding horses that you could argue are on the small size for them physically, (i'm thinking thigh length) so to get a saddle to fit, they need a shorter saddle, and whatever you lose in the back, needs to be made up for in the leg length, so while they can make them vey forward cut, the thigh still needs to sit somewhere, so dropping a couple of holes in the stirrups may be required

adding more kit to make you safer is great, and it's a good job we all have it, however, i am starting to think more attention should be paid to angles of the riders body in the saddle, and the impact these have on the outcome of falls

Just a thought......

 

[LEC]

I have noticed increasing length at all levels. One of my theories is the increasing amounts of skinnys and technical fences - if you have longer stirrups you have more control over the horses body.

 

[MrsMozart]

A very interesting observation

.

I do get annoyed that the cross-country is getting so technical. From what I remember eventing was split to show: obedience (dressage); technicality (show jumping); bravery (cross country).

It seems now that the technicality that was the forte of the show jumping, is now in the cross-country. It used to be big solid jumps, in general the kind you'd find out hunting, with some extra odd interesting bits. Now there's all sorts (literally!).

Why can't the cross-country jumps go back to how they used to be, to when the damage and death rate was lower. It's meant to be a sport that one comes home from, maybe a bit battered around the edges, but still comes home.

Sorry to ramble. As someone who hopes to get herself and her horse both fit enough and good enough at the same time to get fairly serious at this, it is close to my heart. As a mohter with a daughter who wants to get to the top at this, it is my heart.

(disclaimer for any soppiness - I have a poorly head

).

 

[teapot]

Re: saddle debate - WFP doesn't ride overly long and IIRC he doesn't have problems with saddle fits either (think it was in H&H once)

From a personal perspective I'm 5ft 11 and currently riding 13.2/14hh ponies. Naturally the saddles are smaller because they're short-backed and I probably only ride about 1 hole longer than I would on something bigger! Saying that, I've always been complimented on how secure how my lower leg so perhaps the two inter-link - I feel as secure riding ponies as I do riding a 16hh

Thing is though - your balance should be good enough so you can jump without stirrups if the need appeared (lost a stirrup etc) but given the state of jumping lessons in riding schools.......

 

[racingdemon]

good point, interesting.. and then you could argue that the new design of XC course (technical etc) actually making safe riding harder, becasue to ride the fences technically correctly, you need to keep the horse straight, but this is having an impact on how riders fall....

also re: the control of the horse's body, maybe eventing needs to work closer with other disciplines, and develop riders skills riding with shorter stirrups, you can keep horses straight with short stirrups, but its a darn sight harder & needs a well balanced horse, but that brings me to another area of interest, & thats the amount of time people work horses on artifical surfaces.... (another day)

 

[racingdemon]

but say you don't have the leg position of WFP (or yourself

) and you don't have the ability to cope XC without stirrups, which i think can apply to alot of people, then you could argue that you are already unbalanced, and by lengthening rather than shortening your stirrups, you'll just unbalance everything further, which even if its only marginal, might have quite an impact on the angles & direction of a fall,

 

[teapot]

It's a very good point and whilst people think lowering their stirrup length helps, they're actually making it worse. Comes down to basic training doesn't it? Where I effectively learnt my trade we were actively encouraged to only hack in a forward light seat. I wonder honestly how many people do so when they're hacking out? I'm talking anything faster than a walk too

would make a fab study

 

[lucretia]

QR

you will get brownue points from myself and from my very good friend Francis Whittington who have both made this obdervation. it was inn the letter i wrote on safety etc to Mike ES in May.
I think as well that now there is no chase people do not school or lean to jump plain fences at high spped which has certainly contributed.
and on the subject of WFP and saddles on small horses I seem to recall somewhere he has had one or two saddles adjusted with the flaps more forward cut so he can still keep his usual lenght of leg regardless of which horse he is on. Remeber he has quite a lot to do with racing folks

 

[kerilli]

i think lec's point has a LOT to do with it, longer legs around the horse to steer it at skinnies.
i know i ride longer on green ones who might have a wobble or a spooky stop at anything, and with the increase in skinnies i probably ride a hole longer on anything that i can't trust to be as straight as a die.
i wouldn't be surprised if Andrew Nicholson's style hasn't made a lot of people imitate his stirrup length... famed (quite rightly) for his supreme stickability, he rides fairly long i think, his knees aren't at much of an angle between fences whereas those who ride short show much more of an angle. (not criticism, just observation!)
i agree with the OP that stirrup length is something that has a big effect, and especially in rotationals imho.
(fwiw it's one of the first things on the list of variables i want to test if i manage to get the testing on the Fall Simulator to happen.)

the real question is why are more rotationals happening, if they are? (hard to tell from the statistics, which now include Training, Intro and PN, so to compare those against the fall statistics when it was only N, I and A isn't really equal.)

actually, what i really question is the wisdom of a sport whose rules put stickability above safety. i'd like to see penalties for a rider fall hugely reduced. falling off is not the end of the world, but being so determinedly secure that you're still in the saddle as the horse turns over could be.
(i realise this isn't going to happen, btw! but it does make me wonder whether it's why the Team Chasers have a safer sport than we do??)

 

[millitiger]

when watching the lower levels i have seen lots and lots of riders with imo far too long stirrups- not getting out of the saddle between fences etc.

i am not sure if you can prove a correlation between stirrup length and rotational falls (injuries etc) but it is logical to think the better 'wrapped' around the horse you are, the bigger the risk of you going down with the horse instead of being catapulted out of the way.

 

[kerilli]

millitiger, don't you think it's about balance though, and education, not length of stirrups? i agree, i've seen riders at lower level who don't get out of the saddle between fences, but i don't think it's got anything to do with stirrup length. i've done gallop work in a dressage saddle before (jump saddle being adjusted!) and it is of course perfectly possible to stand up in your stirrups at dressage length and let the horse work underneath you. in fact, you need less balance and strength for this than to stand up in stirrups when they're short (or at jockey length, which i discovered when working pointers is a new definition of agony if you're not used to it!)
i totally agree about being wrapped round the horse etc.

 

[millitiger]

nope, i generally think a lot of people at the lower levels are riding too long- surely the reason jockeys etc ride short is because it is easier to balance over the horse at faster paces without interferring?

i also agree it is a training issue- i'm no expert but at the average BE event i see a lot of very ugly riding and the riders seem unaware of how they are affecting the horses by being out of balance and using the horse's mouth to hold themselves up in the saddle.

if you are happy and secure with longer stirrups, as AN, Matt Ryan etc obviously are, then great but i think the majority of riders would find it easier to balance with shorter stirrups- if this isn't the case why do we put up our stirrups at all from dressage length?

 

[kerilli]

well, jockeys ride really short because they are right over the horse's centre of balance up there... but a few hundred years ago, they rode flat races (possibly steeplechases too, judging by the old paintings?!) with long stirrups, just standing upright in the stirrups. the horses still went fast!
endurance riders do the same, it is less tiring for the rider and as long as the rider's weight is in balance, not hanging off the mouth, and off the horse's back, i don't think the horse minds!
totally agree with you about some of the ugly sights at BE.

i've seen riders sitting bolt upright between fences (including on the 'chase!!!) and thumping up and down in the saddle. must feel as awful for them as it does for the horse, serious lack of training there.
i think we put them up so that we can get off the horse's back for big efforts, i hate long stirrups on a young horse that might buck, no way of avoiding all that power up your bum and sending you into orbit! shorter stirrups = being able to use knees as shock-absorbers, and get up out of the way as the horse uses its back. jumping in a dressage saddle is not fun, esp if the horse really bascules...! AN rides short enough to be well above the saddle for that sort of thing, but compare his style to, say, Zara, who rides pretty short xc, and it is dramatically different imho.

 

[Lanky Loll]

I agree I think stirrup length has a lot to do with it. I prefer to ride in a forward cut saddle (on anything from 14.2 to 16.2) and ride what is considered to be unfashionably short. A throwback to the days of growing quickly when riding ponies and my trainer hoicking my leathers up

I find that as short as I ride I can get my legs on better, keep a better contact and if I am riding something that's misbehaving, deal with it better. With a longer stirrup my lower leg gets a bit rubbish and I don't feel nearly as secure or in control. And of course it also means that when I go forward for fast work, I'm straight off their back with less temptation to sit on my butt and make it harder for them.

 

[CrazyMare]

Probably a throw back from when I was taught at first, but I feel I almost have two riding styles - One is long leathers, deep seat for flatwork, while the other is stirrups hoicked right up, a light half seat for jumping/fast work.

I have noticed a major increase in those who ride long, weather it be show jumping or XC, and those are the ones who also have major balance problems.

Maybe its because I have very long legs, but even with short stirrups ( and I take my stirrups up around 4 holes from dressage to jumping) I don't find I have an issue with steering or straightness, as the horse responds to weight signals too.

Overall, I do think we have a huge, and widening gap between riders leaving a RS enivronment and joining the horse owning environment, with them being less knowledgable, and more easily led down the wrong path by people who shouldn't be teaching. Thus ending up with a group who believe themselves to be educated, yet expose themselves to risks by not being.

 

[cglen]

French Eventing squad going for a gallop on a beach, check out the different stirrup lengths

http://www.fontainebleau-2009.com/pages/actualite-articles_fr.htm

 

[millitiger]

regarding jockey's stirrups- surely the fact that they used to use long stirrups and have evolved to ride with very short stirrups is because it works better and more effectively at faster speeds??

so a jockey is right over the horse's centre of balance with very short stirrups- is this not what we are aiming for when going xc?
to be in balance but out of the way of the horse.

i have 2 very different styles for jumping and dressage- i go up around 8-10 holes from dressage to jumping length.

i really hate that in-between length that a lot of people seem to ride at- they aren't long enough for really using the leg and seat in flatwork and aren't short enough to get out of the horse's way jumping.

 

[racingdemon]

if you think of the distances covered by endurance riders, and the comfort factor for both horse & rider, i think this might have more influence on stirrup length. doing an endurance ride with very short stirrups would probably lead so some very uncomfortable riders, they are doing huge distances without stopping, event riders, team chase riders & jockeys are all covering a short distance at a higher speed, so can manage short stirrups in the way an endurance rider may not

 

[SpottedCat]

I agree that stirrups are way too long these days, and IMO it stems from riders starting (and continuing) jumping before they have a well established 2-point position. You see pics on here all the time of people balancing on the reins and asking how they can get a better position, and when questioned about their 2-point position it transpires that they cannot maintain a 2-point position for a circuit of the school, let alone a whole XC course!

Before I was allowed to start jumping, I had to have a secure 2-point position which I could maintain around the school and down over a line of trot pole, and you had to be able to knot your reins and drop them with arms out to the side down the entire line of poles, and not loose your position.

These days, RS don't seem to teach this, so with the rise in people buying horses when they come from a RS background not a horsey family one (I was former not latter, so am not knocking it) they don't realise the importance of this skill, and when they ask on here, they then don't bother going away to learn it for a month or two.

I know I spend Jan-March gradually building up my capacity for maintaining the 2-point position out hacking until I am fit enough to do it for a whole XC course, because it does take work and fitness to be able to do it - if your stirrups are longer it is easier to balance, but not particuarly useful for doing a decent XC round or being balanced over a fence, and I agree it leads to probs as you describe.

 

[ihatework]

QR: I certainly think stirrup length has a part to play but I think it is only one part of the equation.
As a comment to the standard of riding at lower levels I certainly think rider fitness has a large part to play in the ineffective riding seen, and I include myself in this catagory. A lot of people riding at Intro/PN are one horse working amateurs. Most lack real riding fitness and a proportion are carrying excess weight. This makes it difficult to really get out of the saddle and stay in balance for an entire XC round. I am more than willing to admit I come back from XC feeling a bit out of puff and my legs ache too much the next day!

 

[LEC]

Just on the Zara Phillips stirrup length. She has had some pretty horrible falls has the horse ever gone rotational? I am just wondering how far she gets thrown clear?

 

[racingdemon]

and RS's don't seem to be able to teach the type of no stirrup no rein jumping i did when i was little & bombed about on fat bad mannered ponies, i suppose H&S has a massive impact on what people learn, and if they never have the opportunity they may not even realise they need to have the skill & ability.

i do think if BE want to make the sport safer, they need to take a much wider look at every factor, including things like stirrup length, rider fitness, and even things like how much horses work on prepared surfaces, so themselves are less well balanced.

it leads me to another disscussion point & thats type of turnout, and the impact it has on developing a horse's ability to balance themselves..... (another day)

 

[Festive_Felicitations]

Not really commenting on rotational falls as I think there are too many factors involved, but regarding stirrup length:

I think stirrup length is a difficult one as it all depends on what you are used to. You can ride long and be really secure (a la AN) or loose and all over the place, but at the same time you can ride short and be secure or insecurly perched on top.

I have ridden 'XC' in a western saddle & bareback (logs & brush and 1m banks after cattle) and conventionally XC in a jump saddle. Once I got my balance sorted for the western / bareback I was as secure as in a jump saddle, it does take a bit more thigh strength but it is all a matter of what you are used to. I fell off a few times in the trasition period from Eng to western and then back after my stint on the ranch. Going from short striding nippy QH to long striding TBxWB didnt help (doesnt say much for my flexibity

).

I think it has more to do with riders knowing how to use their lower leg and actually 'sit down' into the saddle instead of perching on top, rather than stirrup length. Unfortunatly the balance & seat kids/people seem to develop hunting or messing around bare back doesn't seem to get taught in RS and that is why we are seeing, espcially at lower levels, so much bad riding.
From observations of lessons here -instructors rather then saying keep your leg & knee flat on the saddle and stretch your heel & calf down and actually use some leg muscle, to get people into the 'DR position' they advocate opening up the knee off the saddle which forces the calf on, but means that if the horse stops, turns suddenly or shies they have no strength/grip in the upper leg and the rider goes straight out the front/side door. Worryingly they teach people to jump the same way. (That is a slightly abreviated version of the philosphy and possibly not well explained but that is how I understand it).

Some one also mentioned surfaces - if people always ride/school on a flat, even arena they don't have to develop the balance to help a horse deal with slopes, stumbling due to holes/mud/deep sand and so when faced with varied terrain and the horse does stumble they get thrown off balance / fall off, again it all comes back to developing a 'good seat'.

Just my theory(s).

 

[Festive_Felicitations]

Opps just seen that I have dittoed a few people in a rather long winded way sorry!

 

[millitiger]

QR- totally agree about rider fitness.

when i just have my horses (riding 2 or 3 a day) i am noticeably more tired after xc than when i was riding 10-12 horses a day and doing a lot of canterwork with them all.

even though i don't feel tired during the xc round itself i wonder how much of this is just adrenalin as i also noticed a huge difference in how mentally alert i was when i was really 'riding fit.'

 

[teapot]

Interesting cross comparison between Zara and AN is that the falls I've seen of Zara - she tends to end up quite far from the horse whereas AN normally is in still close proximity, rein grabbing territory

 

[oldvic]

I agree that many riders do not ride in balance across country, sometimes due to stirrup length and sometimes other factors such as physical fitness, core strength, unsuitable saddle (even if comfortable!), lack of technique, etc. A forward going horse is much easier to be balanced on as is a well balanced horse. In racing, jockeys ride with short stirrups but they are dealing with a different situation to riding the modern cross country course. They are travelling at speed over sloping fences, no skinnies, angles, combinations, uprights,etc. so there is not the need to be able to use the leg in the same way. Racehorses tend to lean on the rider's hand so the whole balance issue is different.
Another factor that dictates rider balance is their shape! As a rule most girls are heavier through the hip and tend to have rounder thighs which has a bareing on where their centre of balance is. Andrew is able to keep his balance with longer stirrups than many but few, if any, could match his strength. It works exceptionally well for him and maybe he has needed a certain length of leg a) to stay on some seriously bad situations and b) to be able to use enough leg to get some horses to go. Zara developed her style on a big forward going horse who is not prone to major error. One of her father's edicts is to ride across country as short as you dare. Probably a good policy but the shorter you ride the harder it is to use your legs effectively so I think that each rider has to adapt to different horses and situations.

 

[Mike007]

The reason stirrups got shorter in racing was that racing started to have dedicated tracks and ballance with the horse became more of a race winner than stickability.I think the idea that because jockeys ride shorter and have less serious injuries per fall ,that the two are related.is false. In my experience ,the impact of coming off in a steeplechase is really quite minor because of the forward speed makes the angle of impact very shallow, and you skip and slide.A jockey does not leave the saddle,over the handlebars!, if his horse chests a fence,because his feet are very much forward at that point,If the horse starts to rotate he is pinged out of the saddle in exactly the same way as an eventer,its just the speed and energy is greater and throws him clear.Longer stirrups give more security for changes in direction, somthing a jockey really doesnt have to worry about.It is no good harping back to the"good old days of open galloping courses,when most venues have rock hard ground for most of the season either.

 

[millitiger]

Mike and Oldvic- what you are saying totally makes sense about the different between what jockeys/event riders need to do on the course.

and i'm not likely to harp back to the old days as i am only just 23!

what i was saying was that surely it is better for the horse to be off it's back at faster paces- pure physics suggests this is easier with the platform (stirrup) held higher up against the horse's side.
if this wasn't the case we wouldn't bother with seperate saddles for dressage and jumping and we wouldn't put our stirrups up at all.

obviously speed plays a huge factor in falls and i know that it is the speed which helps to throw jockeys clear of the horse in most racing falls.
but surely there is some logic that says the shorter the stirrups and the smaller the angles in your hips, knees, ankles etc the better you will 'fire' out of the saddle so to speak?
in my head i'm thinking of Frankie Dettori and his trademark 'leap' from the horse- which would be nigh on impossible to perform with long stirrups.
which leads me to think (not know) that the more wrapped around your horse you are the more likely you are to stay with it if it falls.

i understand the want/need to have longer stirrups for the accuracy fences and i'm not sure how you can get around that- however i was talking about the lower levels mainly where a lot of people i watch going xc would need to put their stirrups UP about 3 holes to match even AN's leg position.

not really sure if any of the above made sense

but please believe me when i say it did in my head!

 

[oldvic]

Millitiger - What you say is absolutely correct and if an event rider only had to gallop and jump over big fences more like in the old days then it would be short stirrups every time. However, with the modern trend, the rider has to find a happy medium between being able to stay off the horses back and be able to use their legs. I agree that at lower levels many ride virtually at dressage length and are therefore not in a good enough balance to stay up off the back and help the horse.