FEI outlaw rollkur!

Goodness me this sounds a mess. Whilst I'm not a fan of some of the more extreme versions I've seen (and I must say most of these have been photos, not videos) I think this could bring in cases, appeals, things dragging on forever and all in all not a good thing for dressage's image.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Stewards will also have a tough time identifying and proving the 'aggressive force' clause which seems to differentiate rolkur from riding long, low and deep.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rollkur isn't long and/or low though, it's an extreme head position created by excessive force. I hope that the stewards will have the courage to stick to this and pull up those riders abusing their horses like that. Any rider who thinks that dressage is about forcing their horse to 'perform' is missing the point entirely.
 
Fabulous news indeed!!! this will go some way to improving things, I'm elated that the FEI are actually appearing to be really doing something about this and obviously listening to a lot of people/experts. I'm sure a lot of riders will have to change their warm-up ways especially if there are cctv cameras that can't be hidden from, and stewards will be well trained in what to look for I'm sure. Most people are not stupid and know the difference between rollkur and riding relaxed long,deep and low. The changes will take time to make a real difference but at least it's starting to show those that ride totally by force that they are not going to get away with it much longer. I can hear PK jumping up and down with triumph right now
grin.gif
grin.gif
grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Stewards will also have a tough time identifying and proving the 'aggressive force' clause which seems to differentiate rolkur from riding long, low and deep.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rollkur isn't long and/or low though, it's an extreme head position created by excessive force. I hope that the stewards will have the courage to stick to this and pull up those riders abusing their horses like that. Any rider who thinks that dressage is about forcing their horse to 'perform' is missing the point entirely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well to be fair, this is not true. Neither the people who practice it (Anky) or the people who do not (Kyra) believe that it has anything to do with force.

But either way, I still can't see how stewards will tell the difference.

The FEI statement says "low, deep and round" (at least according to the HH report) which is going to be a bugger to define when it comes to actual cases.
 
It is indeed going to be a nightmare to define and therefore to enforce.....whatever 'it' may be..
But seriously, if it is down to stewards to report, this is really ga-ga.
Most stewards are volunteers, even FEI approved ones, and they are the background people (no disrespect, just fact compared to 'stars' in warm up arenas) who give of their time for the good of the sport. Is it fair to put them in an 'enforcement' position, potentially against people out to win, in the stress of competition situation?
Am sorry, this does not add up to me at all.
And a friend on Facebook (who saw it there) just asked me what 'rein weight measurement' is? B******ed if I know, or want to. Apparnetly it may be a way of measuring whether excessive force is employed.
If horsemanship comes down to that we're all off to hell in a hand cart!
 
[ QUOTE ]
Don't know if other sports bodies have responded yet, but here's the response from Equine Canada.
http://www.barnmice.com/group/horsejournals/forum/topics/equine-canada-ceo-akaash

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for that....very interesting to hear Canada's opinions are educated and sensible!!! yes it will be difficult to start with and very secure guidelines need to come from the FEI but it is a necessary ruling to stop so called 'top' riders riding in this way to get prizes!!!

Also to the person above re stewards being volunteers..yes that's true, but many many of them are very experienced riders/teachers themselves, they just do this to help out, and it won't take much for them to learn the guidelines.
 
This is feather smoothing exercise by the FEI and thers no way stewards are going to put themselves in the firing line, it doesnt work in BS and it wont work in BD.

Having witnessed spur and whip abuse in many top class warm ups it matters not if abuse takes place in public or in private, people dont speak up.

Until horses are ridden correctly (ie slightly in front of the vertical) and the judges demand that they are, these extremes of carriage will always be there for all to see. Sadly this isnt going to happen either, those judges who demand the correct FEI carriage will end up with no competitors to judge, as with all competition they will go under those who 'like their way of going'.

Until the sport has a MAJOR shake up things wont get any better.
 
I think the main problem with these regulations is that they affect the collecting ring, not the judges.

Judges are supposed to penalise horses that are behind the vertical and have more authority to do so.

In the collecting ring people work in a variety of outlines which are unproblematic, e.g. long and low, at the buckle end, etc. Horses will also sometimes naturally go behind the vertical all by themselves and despite the rider's best efforts to correct this. The stewards will have to see all this, differentiate it from rollkur through the idea of the use of force (can't really see how this is possible) and intervene (highly unlikely).
 
I think the FEI are hoping that it will silence the anti-rollkur "movement" and they can now sweep this under the carpet.

My view is that whilst this may pick up those few public incidents where a rider can be seen to be forcefully and aggressively riding in rollkur, it won't pick up those horses who have become so used to the way of going that they don't require excessive force to put them in that place anymore. For me there is no difference between a horse being "aggressively" put into a rollkur position and it seeming to be there without force. The only difference is that the latter horse will have been worked in hyperflexion so much at home that it's second nature and doesn't require force in public. Stewards may be more inclined to pull up someone who appears to be acting aggressively but they'd never comment on AVG and the like because, whilst their horses are ridden in a hyperflexed position, that way of going is a matter of course for them which has long since passed the point at which the rider would need to force them there. The way of going is still just as damaging and humiliating to the horse, but apparently the FEI believes it can only be damaging if the rider is obviously aggressively putting the horse there.

Sadly I think you are correct Spaniel in what you say re. judges. They shouldn't be marking those horses who go incorrectly well, however they don't seem to be able to stand up to the competitors.
 
To me, this just sounds suspiciously like politics. There has been so much bad publicity and negative connotation attached to the terms rollkur and hyperflexion that they had to look as though they were doing something. But it seems as though all they have done is changed the name. You'd be struggling to find many people in warmup areas riding long and low these days. 'Long' went out of fashion when AVG started winning competitions. So to use the term 'long, low and deep' as a yardstick for acceptable overbending strikes me as a little ingenuous. I think we'll find that what we now call rollkur has basically been renamed as long, low and deep.
 
Sorry but this is just a very clever statement from the FEI and nothing has really changed.

They say there will be not rule changes so the rules are just as they were before.

They say that no aggressive riding allowed well this was already covered under the welfare rules.

They say that LDR is allowed well what is LDR how much rounder does LDR need to be before it is rollkur.

What if the rider puts the neck in a rollkur position without force which is possible to do if done correctly is that allowed, what if they use a bit of force but it is only in a LDR position is this allowed.

When I first read the statement I thought the whole thing read like a whitewash, I can't believe that anyone thinks it is a ban on rollkur in anyway.
 
I saw this posted elsewhere and found it interesting. It's a statement from the Dr. Cook of "Dr Cook's Bitless Bridle" fame. I agree 100% with everything he says and think it's very sad that the FEI have chosen not to deal with this issue again. I am well aware that people will say he's just trying to promote his product, and I'm sure that's a part of it, but I still agree with the sentiment re. the FEI and rollkur:

'Low, Deep and Round' or a blow, deep and unkind?

Dr Robert Cook FRCVS, PhD (drcook@bitlessbridle.com)

Once again, the FEI has rejected the evidence and another opportunity for reform has been lost. Over bending may be acceptable to the FEI but it is not acceptable to the horse. The FEI is just dodging the issue by changing the name of the shame. 'Low, Deep and Round' is simply a synonym for 'Rollkur,' hyperflexion and over bending. 'Rollkur' by any other name smells just as rotten. A semantic sleight of hand will not stop this regrettable practice.

Yet there is a way to establish a humane requirement for the degree of poll flexion to be permitted. Such a guideline already exists in the FEI rule book and it is one easily monitored by stewards in the warm-up ring. The rule book requires a horse to be 'on the bit.' Part of the FEI's own definition of this phrase reads: " ... the head should remain in a steady position, as a rule slightly in front of the vertical ... " So I agree that, in this respect at least, there is no need to change the rule book. All that the FEI has to do is to abide by it. 'Low, deep and round' transgresses the rule book. It also transgresses the injunction that a horse be "calm, supple, loose, and flexible ..." and "must not be subjected to any training methods which are abusive or cause fear."

The FEI's assertion that the practice of 'low deep and round' achieves flexion without undue force' is refutable. Apart from the FEI's unfortunate endorsement of the concept that force of any sort is an acceptable part of training, how would they define 'undue' or 'aggressive'? Such words merely provide loopholes through which any lawyer could drive a double-decker bus. Furthermore, it is noted that in commending 'low, deep and round' (LDR) they are quietly substituting the word 'flexion' for 'hyperflexion.' Yet LDR involves hyperflexion and this is not a physiological position for a horse's head to be in during forward motion. Even at the walk, no horse at liberty would choose to place its head in such a position.

The statement, " ... the main responsibility for the welfare of the horse rests with the rider" is an abrogation of the FEI's responsibility. Are they washing their hands of any requirement on their part to promote equine welfare? If so, they renounce the primary justification for their very existence.

The question should have been determined on the basis of the scientific evidence, not by consensus. By all means let's have a debate, preferably an open debate. And after the debate, let the decision be based on the evidence of equine anatomy and physiology. Scientific truths are not determined by majority vote.

If we do not protest the FEI's current non-compliance with nine of the ten items in their own code of conduct, we must all bow our heads in shame that human beings have once again failed to show humanity.

Robert Cook, FRCVS, PhD
Professor of Surgery Emeritus, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine
February 10th, 2010

Reference
Cook, W.R. (2007): "Why is Rollkur Wrong?" Available online at www.bitlessbridle.com

Robert Cook FRCVS, PhD
Professor of Surgery Emeritus
Tufts Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top