I think Swales Bits should be banned from the show ring.

Munchkin said:
I'm going to respond only to the original post otherwise I'll be here all day.

I don't think swales bits should be banned from the show ring, no. However, there would be a far easier way of eliminating those being used only for fashion, and here it is.

In classes where horses are supposedly being judged largely on manners (I'm thinking hacks, hunters, riding horses), they should be marked down if they require more severe bits. Stronger bits do not equal manners, they equal submission. Those of you saying you've never seen a horse "in distress" in one of these bits - surely that's often because they're behaving purely to avoid being reprimanded by the bit? Horses are very good at hiding discomfort, as flight animals it's a survival technique they have developed.

I can 100% guarantee that if someone had a horse that went equally as well in a double, but was using a swales with a foot-long shank because it was "the next big thing and so-n-so-name has one", found out they'd be marked down for it, it would not be in that horses mouth at its next outing.

This may also encourage the rider who uses the swales because it "suits" their horse - which will take off with the judge otherwise - to go home and work with that horse to ensure they know how to seek a contact and work correctly as opposed to "putting their head in the right place because otherwise it hurts" and to respect the rider's aids.

Again, if said horse is a bit of a g*t and does not respond to that schooling, that I don't think it's unfair to mark it down against a horse that has.

Not going to happen, but that would be my preferred approach, rather than an outright ban.
Click to expand...

Thanks,

This comes back to my earlier point how could you regulate

Allowing the judges to mark down will definately have an effect and may well let the system be reactive to the new fads, and may be more workable than regulation.

My main comment would be that the assesment of a bit should be undertaken in a scientific not anadotal way which is surely something that should be done away from the show ground by people of the appripiate scentific knowledge...O for an ideal world.

PS Do the "names" have a reponsibility to lead by example?
 
FMM said:
But it IS a level playing field as we can all use pretty much what we like!
If a judge doesn't like the bit being used, they will tell the competitor and give some advice about options.

I run a 4 day residential showing camp every year, where top judges come along, ride the horses and offer suggestions for bitting if they feel that improvement could be made to the horses way of going.

I truly do not believe that the problem is so prevalent that there needs to be new legislation about it. And bearing in mind there are photographers at pretty much every affiliated show, if there are so many horses "in pain" from their Swales, then there should be plenty of pics available.

The horse you saw going badly with the Swales would probably go equally as badly in a double - but fortunately, from what you say, this is in the minority.
Click to expand...

FMM... call me a world weary cynic of the highest order but I can't see a judge telling a big name to change a bit - expecially as many of the big names are on the boards and committees! Are they really going to stick their necks out that far? Look at the comments on here towards the 'antagonist'!! (And now me I should think!!!):D:D
 
antagonist said:
PS Do the "names" have a reponsibility to lead by example?
Click to expand...


I dothink that they have to lead by exampe but they shouldn't not be allowed to use bits just because some idiots decide to copy.
They should however be trying to educate people who could eventually be in their shoes on why they use this bit and what horse and rider it is suitable for. Again it just comes down to knowledge/ a lack of it.
 
abercrombie&titch said:
FMM... call me a world weary cynic of the highest order but I can't see a judge telling a big name to change a bit - expecially as many of the big names are on the boards and committees! Are they really going to stick their necks out that far? Look at the comments on here towards the 'antagonist'!! (And now me I should think!!!):D:D
Click to expand...

I don't believe that the "names" are the ones beig criticised for bad hands on this thread? Or am I wrong? I was under the impression that the horses going badly (can't comment, as I haven't noticed the problem so far, but will take more of an interest in future!) were those who were "copying" the "names". Why would a judge want to tell a "name" to change the bit if the horse is going perfectly OK in it?

Sorry for the over use of " " - but it made more sense as I was typing it!

If I have the wrong end of the stick, shout!
 
BobbyMondeo said:
I dothink that they have to lead by exampe but they shouldn't not be allowed to use bits just because some idiots decide to copy.
They should however be trying to educate people who could eventually be in their shoes on why they use this bit and what horse and rider it is suitable for. Again it just comes down to knowledge/ a lack of it.
Click to expand...

That really made me laugh! There is a person on my yard that was supposedly a groom for a VERY WELL KNOWN showjumper and she jumps and schools at home in draw reins and a magenness.
 
Munchkin said:
I'm going to respond only to the original post otherwise I'll be here all day.

I don't think swales bits should be banned from the show ring, no. However, there would be a far easier way of eliminating those being used only for fashion, and here it is.

In classes where horses are supposedly being judged largely on manners (I'm thinking hacks, hunters, riding horses), they should be marked down if they require more severe bits. Stronger bits do not equal manners, they equal submission. Those of you saying you've never seen a horse "in distress" in one of these bits - surely that's often because they're behaving purely to avoid being reprimanded by the bit? Horses are very good at hiding discomfort, as flight animals it's a survival technique they have developed.

I can 100% guarantee that if someone had a horse that went equally as well in a double, but was using a swales with a foot-long shank because it was "the next big thing and so-n-so-name has one", found out they'd be marked down for it, it would not be in that horses mouth at its next outing.

This may also encourage the rider who uses the swales because it "suits" their horse - which will take off with the judge otherwise - to go home and work with that horse to ensure they know how to seek a contact and work correctly as opposed to "putting their head in the right place because otherwise it hurts" and to respect the rider's aids.

Again, if said horse is a bit of a g*t and does not respond to that schooling, that I don't think it's unfair to mark it down against a horse that has.

Not going to happen, but that would be my preferred approach, rather than an outright ban.
Click to expand...

FMM: Sorry I think you missed the point.

I think the point is: would a judge mark down a "name" in the circumstances munchkin outlined?

Boy... have I been metaphorically shouted at in the private of my own study, I couldn't see a judge being willing to put thier necks out with marking down a "name".
 
spottybotty said:
That really made me laugh! There is a person on my yard that was supposedly a groom for a VERY WELL KNOWN showjumper and she jumps and schools at home in draw reins and a magenness.
Click to expand...

Were not talking about showjumpers here....i feel thats a topic for annother day.
Im also not talking about someone seeing someone using something going "oh ill try that!" and then doing it.
Im talking about top level show riders raising awareness of bits like the swales in an eloquant way that explains why it is good for the horse and how it works with the horse and the rider.

Not quite sure why it made you laugh really.....
 
As it is a level playing field I think the the "names" come under more scrutiny than the rest TBH. I personally saw a very well known competitor leave a ring at speed over the collecting ring fence. He was in a very mild bit the next year he came out in a swales and went on to be a massive winner.
 
antagonist said:
FMM: Sorry I think you missed the point.

I think the point is: would a judge mark down a "name" in the circumstances munchkin outlined?

Boy... have I been metaphorically shouted at in the private of my own study, I couldn't see a judge being willing to put thier necks out with marking down a "name".
Click to expand...

Do we not have to assume that judges are sufficiently horse and gadget aware that they can "feel" the difference between a horse being over or wrongly bitted and a horse being light and responsive? If so, then what is in the horse's mouth at the time is irrelevant - it is the way of going, typyness (is that a proper word?) and conformation that should be most important - and way of going is dependant upon the horse being comfortable in its mouth.
 
BobbyMondeo said:
Were not talking about showjumpers here....i feel thats a topic for annother day.
Im also not talking about someone seeing someone using something going "oh ill try that!" and then doing it.
Im talking about top level show riders raising awareness of bits like the swales in an eloquant way that explains why it is good for the horse and how it works with the horse and the rider.

Not quite sure why it made you laugh really.....
Click to expand...

Because I have seen far worse biting at pony club shows in the jumping ring! So should the whittakers be explaining and raising awarness of the over use of grackle nosebands and three ring dutch gags and martingales and spurs on kids.
 
FMM said:
I don't believe that the "names" are the ones beig criticised for bad hands on this thread? Or am I wrong? I was under the impression that the horses going badly (can't comment, as I haven't noticed the problem so far, but will take more of an interest in future!) were those who were "copying" the "names". Why would a judge want to tell a "name" to change the bit if the horse is going perfectly OK in it?

Sorry for the over use of " " - but it made more sense as I was typing it!

If I have the wrong end of the stick, shout!
Click to expand...

FMM - no, you don't have the wrong end of the stick (or bit:D!!) - the horse I saw was from a professional yard, being ridden by a professional rider. That to me was the huge sadness - and do I really believe that the judge would say anything..... I agree that the judge should.... but is it really going to happen? And that being the case... a list (as with dressage) of 'legal' bits... I'll fall off my soapbox now!!:D
 
rushyj said:
As it is a level playing field I think the the "names" come under more scrutiny than the rest TBH. I personally saw a very well known competitor leave a ring at speed over the collecting ring fence. He was in a very mild bit the next year he came out in a swales and went on to be a massive winner.
Click to expand...

I can see your point

But this screams to me that this person used the bit as a quick fix rather than focusing on getting the horse listening in the milder bit. I think its this kind of thing that causes people to think that is ok to use bits like this on an everyday basis

The problem is that we will never know if the horse actually needs this bit and this is the bit that is most comfortable in because we do not know this person or what they went through at home with the horse which is why it is difficult to regulate bits and probably why it hasnt been done before now
 
Without sounding arrogant this person is at the absolute top of the tree and noone would dream of thinking she would use a quick fix on a horse. Obv can't mention names on here for obvious reasons...
 
Speaking strictly as an amature, and not even a top or even close to top one at that...

I don't go out buying bits (or using training methods, for that matter) because I saw a name (amature or professional) using it. That would just be silly because my horse isn't necessarily like the horse I'm watching. And even if it was...I wouldn't necessarily think to myself "ooooh, I gotta have that". I'm just an average RC rider that wants to enjoy horses/showing and I do get lots of lessons . Even then, if my RI suggests I try something, I do my homework first!

On the occasion in which I found myself shelling out £70 plus VAT and shipping for a Swales (a lot of money for me) it was because I got advice from a bitting advisor, my RI, and used some common sense. I did not attempt to ride my horse in it without my RI present at any session that I used it. I know it's a strong bit.

I would say that I've seen it's use more since I bought mine - maybe it's just cos I have one that I now notice it's use more and I recognise it.

I don't think that "names" should bear the reponsibility for us mortals do. I think each person as an individual alone is repsonsible for his/her actions.
 
FMM said:
Do we not have to assume that judges are sufficiently horse and gadget aware that they can "feel" the difference between a horse being over or wrongly bitted and a horse being light and responsive? If so, then what is in the horse's mouth at the time is irrelevant - it is the way of going, typyness (is that a proper word?) and conformation that should be most important - and way of going is dependant upon the horse being comfortable in its mouth.
Click to expand...

Sorry to sound repetative, but do the judges (experianced horse people as I am sure they are) have a sound scientific knowledge to be able to analyse the action of a bit in relation to a horses anatomy, do they have a knowledge of the physiology and anatomy of the horses head. A knowlegde of the position of nerves and sensitive structure. A knowledge of the biomechanics of the horses lower jaw.

I would suspect that their knowlege is through anadotal evidence, articals in the equine press, and a relatively small (in relation to the total knowledge available)base of personal experiance.

The equine sports have an image problem, surely they should uphold welfare as thier highest priority and also be seen to uphold it. The only way to do this is with a impartial, scientific based assesment of new (or reinvented) devices weather bits or anything else before they are allowed in the show ring.
 
spottybotty said:
Because I have seen far worse biting at pony club shows in the jumping ring! So should the whittakers be explaining and raising awarness of the over use of grackle nosebands and three ring dutch gags and martingales and spurs on kids.
Click to expand...

Yes they should!!! they are ambassadors for their discipline and thousands of kids accross the country copy what they do.
 
rushyj said:
Without sounding arrogant this person is at the absolute top of the tree and noone would dream of thinking she would use a quick fix on a horse. Obv can't mention names on here for obvious reasons...
Click to expand...

Fair enough! Was merely commenting that on an open forum it could come accross that way to many people. I dont think that anyone at top level would use a quick fox either to be honest with you.




Im leaving this thread now, im fed up with repeating my point, people taking it the wrong way ect. Its so hard to get accross your point on a forum, i feel that if we were having this debate in person we would have actually agreeed on most things.
 
I know wasn't being rude just was a bit out there on a limb mentioning it but couldn't them clarify by mentioning the person.... :)
 
antagonist said:
Sorry to sound repetative, but do the judges (experianced horse people as I am sure they are) have a sound scientific knowledge to be able to analyse the action of a bit in relation to a horses anatomy, do they have a knowledge of the physiology and anatomy of the horses head. A knowlegde of the position of nerves and sensitive structure. A knowledge of the biomechanics of the horses lower jaw.

I would suspect that their knowlege is through anadotal evidence, articals in the equine press, and a relatively small (in relation to the total knowledge available)base of personal experiance.

The equine sports have an image problem, surely they should uphold welfare as thier highest priority and also be seen to uphold it. The only way to do this is with a impartial, scientific based assesment of new (or reinvented) devices weather bits or anything else before they are allowed in the show ring.
Click to expand...

No, I am sure most of them don't. But what they DO have (mostly) is the ability to FEEL what is going on under them when they ride. Anecdotal evidence and articles in the press are nothing compared with personal experience.
 
FMM said:
No, I am sure most of them don't. But what they DO have (mostly) is the ability to FEEL what is going on under them when they ride. Anecdotal evidence and articles in the press are nothing compared with personal experience.
Click to expand...

But what about scientific fact, is that not the gold standard of evidence.

Surely there is enough doubt about this bit to put it under proper scientific scrutiny.
 
Megan_T said:
I don't know anywhere near enough to make a comment on the use of the bit as I've never used one nor have I ever even seen one!

However, I have only one comment to make and that is that, in my opinion, the whole tone of the original post was only EVER going to get people's back's up. It was aggressive in nature and very forceful.

You mentioned early in the thread that you only wanted to "start a debate". Well, it might be worth bearing in mind next time you want to do so, to not take quite the same tone.

The reaction you've recieved here is nothing more than you should have expected, or deserved.
Click to expand...

Have I missed something here? I would just like to say that I have thoroughly, thoroughly enjoyed this debate, that's what it is....a discussion, debate etc etc. I've read loads of different peoples views and opinions, whether I agree with them or indeed they agree with me doesn't matter at all. What matters is that it opens your mind on different subjects and lets you consider what other people think, some of them very experienced and some not so. I've learnt a few things from this thread, it's made me question a few things I thought in my own mind and debate and consider with myself, this can only ever ever be a good thing in the horse world, so you speak for yourself Megan T I've had a great time, I don't feel this thread has 'kicked off' at all.
 
antagonist said:
But what about scientific fact, is that not the gold standard of evidence.

Surely there is enough doubt about this bit to put it under proper scientific scrutiny.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't have thought so as the anatomy of every horse's mouth will be quite different. And as there does not appear to be any scientific fact, your comments are probably no more valid than those of anyone else!
 
fumanchu said:
But is there though?
Click to expand...

Is this not the doubt: (as well as the 5000 watchers to this debate)



1)EARLIER this year, a BSPS judge wrote to H&H, concerned about the use of the Swales 3-in-1 bit in showing and describing it as "an old cavalry jaw-crunching bit".




2)The Swales bit has become extremely popular in cob and hunter classes in recent years, but a leading show producer has warned against its overuse.

Jayne Webber, winner of the 2009 supreme horse at Horse of the Year Show, says: "The Swales us a very sharp 'elevator' bit, which helps to get the horse to 'sit-up'. This is especially useful for cobs, which tend to want to go on their forehand.


"They seem to be in fashion, but I only use it as a training bit and, once I've got the horse off its forehand, I change into another bit.


"You have to have forgiving hands to use it properly; you have to ride off the leg. In the wrong hands, it can make horses back off the bridle."


Jayne's words of warning are supported by judge and exhibitor Lucy Killingbeck, who adds: "I hate to see them so widely use, since a lot of riders just don't have the hands for it. As a judge, it can be horrible to ride a horse in a Swales which hasn't been used properly."

MM and fumanchu you are both obviously more knowledgeable than me. Would you agree it is a "very sharp elevator bit....in the wrong hands it can make the horse back of the bridle" why are they backing off the bridle?

If I surported the swales bit I think I would be more than happy to open it to scientific scrutiny if not for my piece of mind but at least to prove men wrong!
 
antagonist said:
But what about scientific fact, is that not the gold standard of evidence.

Surely there is enough doubt about this bit to put it under proper scientific scrutiny.
Click to expand...


good luck with that! it takes a very very long time for something to become scientific 'fact' and even then it is open to change :)
 
My god is this post still going on???? To the OP, get a life!!!!!!!!!!! It has nothing to do with you or anyone else what bit someone puts in their horses mouth, if it gets results then its up to them if they use it or not.
The only time I have seen a Swales Pelham used has been at county level showing. These horses have a job to do and so do the riders/owners and if a bit helps them achieve this then so be it. I dont see you telling an athlete to not use a certain type of shoe because it pushes on certain nerves in the feet or does'nt support certain areas. If you dont like it then thats fine dont use it. You have made your point but it is dragging on a bit now.
And as for the post at the beginning of the thread basicaly saying if you dont use a snaffle on your horse then you cant ride, what a load of ****. My mare goes lovely in a snaffle at home and on gentle hacks. But goes like a train at shows, so I put a stronger bit in. I have never used a Swales Pelham on her but if I did and it helps me achieve what im doing then I would!!!!!!1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top