Bitless Dressage

[khalswitz]

So, following on from the discussion Faracat and I started on the polo welfare thread in TR (hijacking!!), do you think that BD should offer spectate classes/sections for bitless?

Personally, I have nothing against seperate classes, but certainly the videos of higher level bitless dressage I have seen have shown a very different type of work with poorer quality, and I think legalising bitless in BD in general would be not only be against the central tenet of submission to the bit, but unfair on bitless riders, for whom the scores on average would be worse, and therefore put pressure on BD to change the whole scoring system.

I also think when comparing to illegal bits and nosebands, you would have to be very careful where to draw a line on what was legal.

I know this question can open a can of worms, but I would love to hear some valid for and againsts that don't just come back to 'choice'.

 

[Meowy Catkin]

If the bitless and bitted classes were separate, I don't think that it would be unfair on the bitless riders if they scored less on average. If the quality of the work is scared fairly, then you would just have to accept that it may be harder to get the top quality work achieved bitted.

I think that with separate classes you could change the wording to 'submission to the aids' without undermining the bitted section which would still have 'submission to the bit'.

Yes, the type of bitless brides allowed would have to be carefully chosen, but I think it's possible, plus having the sections separate wouldn't muddy the water RE banned nosebands in the bitted section.

Anyhoo, I want to be able to take my gelding in a local dressage comp in the future so I think it should be allowed. He has a blingy browband at the ready

 

[khalswitz]

If the bitless and bitted classes were separate, I don't think that it would be unfair on the bitless riders if they scored less on average. If the quality of the work is scared fairly, then you would just have to accept that it may be harder to get the top quality work achieved bitted.

I think that with separate classes you could change the wording to 'submission to the aids' without undermining the bitted section which would still have 'submission to the bit'.

Yes, the type of bitless brides allowed would have to be carefully chosen, but I think it's possible, plus having the sections separate wouldn't muddy the water RE banned nosebands in the bitted section.

Anyhoo, I want to be able to take my gelding in a local dressage comp in the future so I think it should be allowed. He has a blingy browband at the ready

See, in theory I don't have a problem with that. However I would hate to see traditional dressage change because of allowing bitless.

Do you not think that introducing bitless classes will just encourage a push for 'fair treatment'? Maybe it's because of the people I personally know who are very vocal about it, but I have visions of cries for equality between bitless and bitted, and I could see changes to the movements required at certain levels being pushed for (collection at elementary would be more of a barrier point to bitless than bitted for instance). I already dislike the dumbing down of Medium with all this allowing rising to extended trot malarkey... Let alone the inevitable changes to a system based on being bitted to allow for correct bitless training?

For example, look at 'western dressage'. Has it's own governing body, and it's own rules so that the way of going of a western horse is maintained and required movements designed with the way of training in mind. I would prefer that separate body and seperate test design route, personally, rather than seeing an amalgamation.

Regarding submission, 'to the aids' sticks in my teeth a little, as it isn't 'to the aids' that is being judged with that comment, it really is simply submission to the bit, nothing to do with seat or leg (that's a seperate consideration). And when submitting to the bit is outlined as something to look for in marking, replacing it with a mild noseband seem to eliminate part of what you are trying to achieve - especially if the reason for going bitless is precisely BECAUSE the horse won't submit to a bit.

And I share the bling appreciation.

Whilst people like yourself who can't do dressage due to their horse's preferences it is a shame, a lot of bitless proponents do not have that limitation, and simply don't want to bit. That does get my back up, as I feel that, tough, I'd like to use my Waterford!!

 

[Meowy Catkin]

So you don't consider your hands 'aids' OK, then just word it 'submission to the bridle'. When you simplify it, you want a horse that is well trained to respond to it's rider's signals. Is a bit is essential to that?

If BD ran both the bitless and bitted sections they could prevent some of your worries happening. I don't think that having bitless classes would be the beginning of the end for dressage. It would open it up to more people which is a good thing IMO.

What's wrong with not wanting to use a bit? Please explain.

 

[cptrayes]

I'm swayed by your argument K. From what I have seen of higher level dressage bitless, it is a different game from bitted riding. I would like to see people able to do dressage bitless, but they need their own competitions, I think. I put up a thread earlier offering to run one in the north west of there were enough takers, but it doesn't look likely at the moment.

Until I read this thread, I did think classes should be mixed, since the riders without bits will be at a disadvantage with current scoring. But I see your point, as soon as that happens, there will be pressure to change the scoring to level the playing field, and I would not want to see that.

 

[khalswitz]

So you don't consider your hands 'aids' OK, then just word it 'submission to the bridle'. When you simplify it, you want a horse that is well trained to respond to it's rider's signals. Is a bit is essential to that?

If BD ran both the bitless and bitted sections they could prevent some of your worries happening. I don't think that having bitless classes would be the beginning of the end for dressage. It would open it up to more people which is a good thing IMO.

What's wrong with not wanting to use a bit? Please explain.

There is nothing wrong with not wanting to use a bit. However when a sport has regulations, wanting those regulations changed simply to suit your preferences is absurd.

My friend would love to ride her Spanish horse in her Iberian saddle to do dressage - but it's not allowed. Does she make a fuss? She just doesn't enter.

Another friend rides his SJer in draw reins, but isn't allowed to compete BS in them.

Another who uses a market Harborough to BS, but isn't allowed it at bE.

Impersonally want to be allowed to wear my sparkly browband to do The dressage phase AT LEAST in BE, but I haven't kicked up a ruckus.

And like I said before, my old lad only went well in his Cheltenham gag, but there was no way we were allowed to compete in it.

Why is bitless any different? In terms of just wanting bitless as a preference, I don't see it as any different to other tack rules. A horse who won't go in anything other than bitless is a different starting point than believing bitting is cruel and dressage should be 'more enlightened' as I have been told in the past.

Do I sound bitter?

ETA as I got lost with what I was meant to be saying

I don't have a problem with people wanting to train and compete their horse bitless, but my personal experience has been of it being pushed in my face, and being told that my discipline and governing body are inherently wrong for encouraging bitting and not bitless. So I do get a bit defensive when I get told that bitless should be a choice, as there are a lot of other tack regulations that are not a choice. There should be better reasons than that.

 

[khalswitz]

I'm swayed by your argument K. From what I have seen of higher level dressage bitless, it is a different game from bitted riding. I would like to see people able to do dressage bitless, but they need their own competitions, I think. I put up a thread earlier offering to run one in the north west of there were enough takers, but it doesn't look likely at the moment.

Until I read this thread, I did think classes should be mixed, since the riders without bits will be at a disadvantage with current scoring. But I see your point, as soon as that happens, there will be pressure to change the scoring to level the playing field, and I would not want to see that.

Like I said I fully support the idea of doing a western dressage -esque approach and aiming the whole section/test design etc towards bitless, but I think BD running it will force a comparison and you would definitely see changes being made to the aims and expectations.

However a BBD (British Bitless Dressage) or some kind of body to run pure bitless dressage would be much more positive as well, in terms of actually creating a training pathway for bitless that works well.

 

[Meowy Catkin]

Yes!

I think that separate classes are the only logical way forward.

I don't think that it's wrong to introduce new classes alongside the existing ones. Maybe they'd only work up to a certain level, but it would be nice to have more people and their horses able to do a test, get feedback from a judge, have aims with their training and experience the enjoyment that dressage brings.

Inclusivity rather than exclusivity IYSWIM.

ETA - I'm not sure that BD running it would bring the issues you fear though.

 

[maccachic]

In my opinion the highest level you can achieve is bridleless, esp with what is coming out of the dressage world at the moment (rollkur). A brilliant rider is one who can get a horse to perform with the minimum of gadgets I find it odd that the higher levels have double bits - its not finesse like is spouted its force. I do ride in a bridle however if I could be anything it would be able to ride top level without a bridle (Id prefer saddle for comfort but without would be fine).

I really admire the jumpers like free riding and would love to see this become more mainstream.

 

[cptrayes]

I do personally think it adds an additional level of horsemanship to be able to produce higher movements with no bit in a mild bitless bridle. But the results that I have seen are far less precise than with a bit, though some of that may have been down to the fact that no top level horse is going to be ridden bitless. So I can see K' s point, that at some stage people are going to say that the less precise test should not be marked down because it's more difficult to ride, or the 'welfare' issue will be raised as the justification, and the whole top end of the sport could be altered. The problem I see is that this is really wanted by riders at prelim and novice who just want to join in the fun with their friends and where it would make precious little difference.

I've offered to run a competition, but I'm being deafened by the lack of response. One yes, and one 'talk to this lady if you want to find competitors'

 

[Twiglet]

I don't see where the harm is with separate competitions if there's a demand for them - although I'm not sure what the demand would be. I think you'd be more likely to have demand from the eventers wanting to do the dressage section bitless than pure dressage riders (pure speculation!).

With regards to the other tack examples - few of these are because the horse 'can't' go without though are they? Eg. if you 'can't' ride your horse in a SJ class without draw reins, should it be in the class? Or if you 'can't' ride without an Iberian saddle (!) then, um, compete in Spain?! I don't know! But if a horse is unable to take a bit for whatever reason - and there are many - should it be excluded from a whole discipline?

I'm on the fence because I've had some experience with bitless this year, and it's something that I may have to go back to because of Buzz's cancer, and it's very frustrating that if I can SJ, XC and take him on the gallops in a bitless (or pressure headcollar most of the time ) I can't do a dressage test without a bit. Admittedly it would only be the lower levels, but if I'm willing to go up against people bitted - and be marked down because he's not going the 'right' way - then surely that's up to me? To be quite honest his way of going at prelim/novice level bitless was actually softer and rounder than when he was bitted, and I'd quite happily take my chances in a comp with it.

 

[Meowy Catkin]

Maybe my 'what's the big deal' attitude has come from my RDA background? Many RDA riders use equipment that is banned in non-rda dressage (eg two whips, stirrups tied to the girth etc....). Having RDA dressage exist, that has different rules to BD, hasn't caused this erosion of non-rda dressage that K fears. I wonder if the bitless fanatics she talks about have worried her?

Maybe the demand is too small for bitless only events -that certainly seems to be the case from CPT's experience - but if Dressage comps had their normal classes, plus a couple of bitless classes, that might work?

I'd love to hear more opinions from other people.

ETA http://www.rda.org.uk/dressage/tests/RDA_DRESSAGE_RULE_BOOK_2012.pdf Read the 'object of dressage' section.

 

[Chirmapops]

What I'm finding interesting here is the number of people who've said they've tried to organise bitless dressage comps but not had any interest. Bearing in mind that for BD to implement any rule changes they have to have all sorts of meeting and consultations then put it through at the AGM, is it actually worth them doing? Perhaps those who are really keen on the idea should organise a few competitions, get the numbers up and then would be able to put forward a proposal showing it would actually be worth the time and money and has genuine support? Otherwise it seems like an awful lot of work for an already overloaded organisation, simply to cater to a handful of people who (if they are at the lower levels) may well then just use the rule changes to compete bitless at unaffiliated and provide no revenue to BD anyway.

 

[khalswitz]

In my opinion the highest level you can achieve is bridleless, esp with what is coming out of the dressage world at the moment (rollkur). A brilliant rider is one who can get a horse to perform with the minimum of gadgets I find it odd that the higher levels have double bits - its not finesse like is spouted its force. I do ride in a bridle however if I could be anything it would be able to ride top level without a bridle (Id prefer saddle for comfort but without would be fine).

I really admire the jumpers like free riding and would love to see this become more mainstream.

I very much disagree with a double bridle being force over finesse. A double allows for much more subtle communication, and the Weymouth gives completely different signals to a snaffle, and the two combined allow much finer communication. A snaffle alone is a very blunt instrument in comparison, and I guess that is probably the one of the biggest difference between bitless high level dressage and traditional bitted, is the lack of substitution for that finer aid in the Weymouth bit - even if a Double isn't used often, it is still an important part of training and performance.

I do personally think it adds an additional level of horsemanship to be able to produce higher movements with no bit in a mild bitless bridle. But the results that I have seen are far less precise than with a bit, though some of that may have been down to the fact that no top level horse is going to be ridden bitless. So I can see K' s point, that at some stage people are going to say that the less precise test should not be marked down because it's more difficult to ride, or the 'welfare' issue will be raised as the justification, and the whole top end of the sport could be altered. The problem I see is that this is really wanted by riders at prelim and novice who just want to join in the fun with their friends and where it would make precious little difference.

I've offered to run a competition, but I'm being deafened by the lack of response. One yes, and one 'talk to this lady if you want to find competitors'

I think part of what makes high level bitless look so poor is because training a horse bitless is obviously going to be different. I know my horse has a totally different outline even when working correctly when I ride in a headcollar instead of my bridle, so obviously the way of going will be different. No one has seen a GP level horse that is ONLY ridden bitless, so we don't even know if training to that level is possible completely bitless.

I agree that low level dressage for those who ride bitless in separate classes isn't a problem alone, but I can see where it might end up, and seeing our bitted training ideals altered because of it would make me angry.

I don't see where the harm is with separate competitions if there's a demand for them - although I'm not sure what the demand would be. I think you'd be more likely to have demand from the eventers wanting to do the dressage section bitless than pure dressage riders (pure speculation!).

With regards to the other tack examples - few of these are because the horse 'can't' go without though are they? Eg. if you 'can't' ride your horse in a SJ class without draw reins, should it be in the class? Or if you 'can't' ride without an Iberian saddle (!) then, um, compete in Spain?! I don't know! But if a horse is unable to take a bit for whatever reason - and there are many - should it be excluded from a whole discipline?

I'm on the fence because I've had some experience with bitless this year, and it's something that I may have to go back to because of Buzz's cancer, and it's very frustrating that if I can SJ, XC and take him on the gallops in a bitless (or pressure headcollar most of the time ) I can't do a dressage test without a bit. Admittedly it would only be the lower levels, but if I'm willing to go up against people bitted - and be marked down because he's not going the 'right' way - then surely that's up to me? To be quite honest his way of going at prelim/novice level bitless was actually softer and rounder than when he was bitted, and I'd quite happily take my chances in a comp with it.

My old horse COULDNT go in a snaffle, only in his gag. There you are, absolute classic example. It's ok to stop a horse doing dressage because it cannot go in a snaffle, but if it won't go in a bit full stop, then we should change the system? He would have been fab at dressage, but that was no option. I was told at the time, if he can't take a snaffle he's not suited to dressage - get something that is if you want to do dressage. Why does that apply to him and not bitless? I am playing devils advocate a bit with this, but I struggle to see where you would fairly draw the line if it was changed.

Maybe my 'what's the big deal' attitude has come from my RDA background? Many RDA riders use equipment that is banned in non-rda dressage (eg two whips, stirrups tied to the girth etc....). Having RDA dressage exist, that has different rules to BD, hasn't caused this erosion of non-rda dressage that K fears. I wonder if the bitless fanatics she talks about have worried her?

Maybe the demand is too small for bitless only events -that certainly seems to be the case from CPT's experience - but if Dressage comps had their normal classes, plus a couple of bitless classes, that might work?

I'd love to hear more opinions from other people.

ETA http://www.rda.org.uk/dressage/tests/RDA_DRESSAGE_RULE_BOOK_2012.pdf Read the 'object of dressage' section.

Very possibly it is. A lot of show jumpers are the same when they try out dressage (what's this illegal bit thing? Why can't I wear a martingale?), they can't understand why so much is restricted. You are marking more than the performance, but the training etc as you move up the levels.

I understand that RDA dressage hasn't eroded those values, but equally they have a separate body with different tests. Even Para BD has different tests afaik? Because they expect different things. I think if you aren't prepared for that, then it will lead to test changes for everyone.

What I'm finding interesting here is the number of people who've said they've tried to organise bitless dressage comps but not had any interest. Bearing in mind that for BD to implement any rule changes they have to have all sorts of meeting and consultations then put it through at the AGM, is it actually worth them doing? Perhaps those who are really keen on the idea should organise a few competitions, get the numbers up and then would be able to put forward a proposal showing it would actually be worth the time and money and has genuine support? Otherwise it seems like an awful lot of work for an already overloaded organisation, simply to cater to a handful of people who (if they are at the lower levels) may well then just use the rule changes to compete bitless at unaffiliated and provide no revenue to BD anyway.

This is a very good point. Running unaff bitless leagues at low level would put the groundwork in place, and then if it works and proves popular BD would have some evidence to work from in creating a bit less section, if there was demand.

 

[Prince33Sp4rkle]

couldnt go in a snaffle but ok in a cheltenham gag? basically the same mouthpiece bar the running cheek issue..............................i do feel for people with horses who cant take a bit due to mouth deformity/illness/medical problem but if its simply a case of not being able to ride in a snaffle without leverage/running cheek then i dont think (and fortunately cannot ever see) that rules should/would be changes to accommodate that as its a lack of training not a medical issue!

completely different issue.

I dont think the uptake would warrant BD introducing it. No one i know starts out doing dressage only wanting to do low level, they want to progress, and as being as the FEI will never allow bitless dressage, most people would view it as a waste of time to bother with something that will hinder progression.

an unaffiliated sort of thing i could see taking off, but not BD.

 

[Twiglet]

couldnt go in a snaffle but ok in a cheltenham gag? basically the same mouthpiece bar the running cheek issue..............................i do feel for people with horses who cant take a bit due to mouth deformity/illness/medical problem but if its simply a case of not being able to ride in a snaffle without leverage/running cheek then i dont think (and fortunately cannot ever see) that rules should/would be changes to accommodate that as its a lack of training not a medical issue!

completely different issue.

This is what I was going to say but couldn't be bothered to type out...so ^^

 

[HufflyPuffly]

Ah but where do you differentiate between the horse which cannot accept the bit because of training issues rather than a physical reason? Would you need a vets certificate to state that it is bitless because of a physical reason rather than a training one?
As most of the bitless bridles I've seen have fairly hefty leverage about them (on the poll or nose etc) or would the bitless classes only be for those which didn't use leverage?

Sorry I'm being factious as I completely agree with K' why would it be ok to include one set of banned tack but not another?

Agree with the rest of your post and those further up, can't see this ever happening really at BD but an unaff series would be good for those that want it.

Also I use a bit as a refining tool not too force her to comply, Topaz will be introduced to the double when the time is right, not to force her but to refine my aids...

x x

 

[Batgirl]

I am sorry, I think you simply don't understand how the double is meant to work (not that it always used correctly mind you!). It absolutely refines, the two reins/bits do separate very different things, the double clarifies the aids.

I also disagree that bridleless would be the highest aim, the horse has nothing to work into, it would be like asking a gymnast to perform without a sprung floor IMO (no quite the best analogy).

My two penneth worth on the bitless bit anyway, most has been said, it is a rule, if you don't like the rule you don't compete as people have said, people would prefer to compete in gags, but they are not allowed, why should bitless be? This coming from someone who rode a horse bitless in every phase but dressage, and we did ***** dressage because of it, because he wasn't submissive. Some bitless bridles are so much harsher than some of the bits not allowed which IMO would hit at the heart of dresage. (and yes any bit can be harsh in the wrong hands)

 

[khalswitz]

Ah but where do you differentiate between the horse which cannot accept the bit because of training issues rather than a physical reason? Would you need a vets certificate to state that it is bitless because of a physical reason rather than a training one?
As most of the bitless bridles I've seen have fairly hefty leverage about them (on the poll or nose etc) or would the bitless classes only be for those which didn't use leverage?

Sorry I'm being factious as I completely agree with K' why would it be ok to include one set of banned tack but not another?

Agree with the rest of your post and those further up, can't see this ever happening really at BD but an unaff series would be good for those that want it.

Also I use a bit as a refining tool not too force her to comply, Topaz will be introduced to the double when the time is right, not to force her but to refine my aids...

x x

Thank you!!! This was my point about most people I know who want bitless simply choose to ride bitless rather than injury etc. why should that choice get priority over choosing a gag?

Yes, he would only go well in a gag - there was something he liked about the poll pressure. Went beautifully in it, but would go tight and behind the bit in a snaffle. Tried various mouthpieces and snaffle cheek pieces but he only liked his gag. Call it poor training if you like, but why then say a horse who won't have a bit at all is better trained?

This is my point - I feel the whole thing is a bit hypocritical. You can't allow one lot of illegal tack and not another IMO. BD has it that submission to a snaffle is the aim, so either a gag or bitless is sidestepping that aim. So why one over the other?

Yes, horses with paralysed nerves or injured mouths are a bit of a different story. But that only accounts for a small number of bit less (and F I don't know your story but I've inferred from what you've written that it's his preference rather than a physical problem?) and the rest it is purely a choice, which IMO should mean a choice not to do dressage if they can't keep to the rules.

 

[Meowy Catkin]

I can't get a bit in, full stop. Gag for the dentist, yes. Don't ask me what he's thinking and why one's OK but the other isn't, I don't get it.

 

[cptrayes]

I don't think GP level dressage without a bit is 'poor', K, I thought it was delightful to see the horse do the movements almost entirely from the rider's seat and in its own balance, but it was definitely imprecise, and completely different from bitted horses.

 

[khalswitz]

I don't think GP level dressage without a bit is 'poor', K, I thought it was delightful to see the horse do the movements almost entirely from the rider's seat and in its own balance, but it was definitely imprecise, and completely different from bitted horses.

Let me rephrase - compared to our current scoring system, and what we look for at GP, it was poor. You are right it is completely different, and has positives to it as well (the balance and cadence, and the very different outline) and that is a big part of why I don't think the two should mix.

 

[khalswitz]

I can't get a bit in, full stop. Gag for the dentist, yes. Don't ask me what he's thinking and why one's OK but the other isn't, I don't get it.

So weird. Is he one of your homebreds? you've broken him yourself?

See, and unaff bitless league for people like yourself would be lovely, but I think mixing it with BD would throw up a lot of problems...

 

[Lolo]

Can I meander in and ask a really stupid question? Why aren't ported snaffles allowed in dressage?

 

[khalswitz]

Can I meander in and ask a really stupid question? Why aren't ported snaffles allowed in dressage?

Because they apply pressure to the roof of the mouth. Some horses go fab in them as they relieve the tongue, but a port applies pressure to the roof of the mouth which can force the head into an 'up' outline falsely

ETA This is what my instructor told me, not from the mouth of BD or anything

 

[cptrayes]

And of course the result has been the development of a number of bits that effectively form a port once rein pressure is applied, like the neue schule verbindend

 

[Cortez]

And of course the result has been the development of a number of bits that effectively form a port once rein pressure is applied, like the neue schule verbindend

And thank goodness they do! Not all horses appreciate having their bars and tongue mashed............

 

[Meowy Catkin]

So weird. Is he one of your homebreds? you've broken him yourself?

See, and unaff bitless league for people like yourself would be lovely, but I think mixing it with BD would throw up a lot of problems...

I bought him as a yearling. He's very head shy due to being ear twitched as a foal.

Even with his bitless bridle I have to take it apart and put it back together on his head. I'm still sort of shocked that doing his teeth went so well. He's quite hot and sedation doesn't touch him... apart from intravenous sedation... but he's also needle shy, so that not often possible.

 

[khalswitz]

I bought him as a yearling. He's very head shy due to being ear twitched as a foal.

Even with his bitless bridle I have to take it apart and put it back together on his head. I'm still sort of shocked that doing his teeth went so well. He's quite hot and sedation doesn't touch him... apart from intravenous sedation... but he's also needle shy, so that not often possible.

Wow. Sounds like you've done a fab job getting that far! How old is he now?

And Cortez - I didn't get what that comment was aimed at, was it ported snaffles?

 

[cptrayes]

And thank goodness they do! Not all horses appreciate having their bars and tongue mashed............

No, I've never understood the port ban, and now these other bits are available it's a complete nonsense