Secure Lower Leg, isn't this more dangerous??

Firewell

Firewell

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 May 2008
Messages
7,817
Visit site
Ok so i'm bored and I have been thinking.

I was thinking about how its always drummed into us how important it is to have a good, secure, lower leg especially for jumping and obviously it's the classical position for dressage because its what works best. My lower leg seems to have a mind of its own and i'm always been shouted at for it, how its not safe for XC ect.

However during my musings I started to think about top jump jockeys and showjumpers. Showjumpers in particular seem to lack lower leg security.

For example:-
http://www.equus-academy.com/clip_image002.gif

and jockeys seem to have the stirrup quite far back along their foot and their foot has a tendancy to point downwards:-

http://d.yimg.com/i/ng/sp/empics/20...orse-racing-tingle-creek-day-sandown-park.jpg

Obviously these riders are very good riders beautifully in balance and very secure. Nick Skelton for instance probably has more talent in his little finger than I do in my whole body, it would be like comparing my rubbish painting to a Monet but his lower leg position over a fence is probably worse than mine ;p (if you can compare jumping 6ft to 3ft ;) )

Raceing it would be very dangerous if you were not thrown clear, and the jockeys perched up on top are so light. They are brilliantly balanced riders and it amazes me how some stay on sometimes over an awkward jump when they ride with such short stirrups but when they fall they are more catapulted out the way because there is nothing holding them in place.

If its proven at top levels of Raceing and Showjumping over massive fences that you do not need a good lower leg position to stay onboard why is it so important to Eventing? Surely if your horse catches its legs and goes to rotate I know i'd rather be catapulted out the way like this:-

http://www.latenightwithjimmyfallon.com/2009/04/03/horseinvert.jpg

Then dangerously close to my horse like this:-

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mjygrVVad...0/Nicolas+Touzaint+falls+off+his+horse+04.jpg

or this:-

http://www.eventingworldwide.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/WaitFence5.jpg

Im only posting this because i'm assuming i'm missing the point somewhere and I would like to be enlightened with people opinions because it might help me learn :)

Also if its unantural for someone to change their position when they feel perfectly in balance as they are (i.e a BHS instructor trying to tell Nick Skelton his jumping position needs work) wouldn't that make it worse. Surely if you are in balance and are very secure normally then it doesnt matter where your leg is as long as its not hindering the horse. If it does come down to a fall where you really have no hope staying on anyway (like the above examples) its best to properly fall off and be thrown clear then to be so close to the horse when really secure leg position or not you really have no hope of staying upright and all the leg position does is hold you in a more dangerous position??

Musings! :)
 
I agree, I'm not in favour of the very defensive seat, but sometimes I feel i'm the lone voice...
The trouble is that in Eventing, staying on is EVERYTHING. because of it, riders have won big events - Andrew Nicholson won Burghley when his horse nearly did a headstand but he stayed on.
I wish they'd get rid of penalties for rider falling off, as in Team Chasing. that'd set the cat among the pigeons! But Team Chasers jump huge fences very fast (bunch of utter nutters imho), and they (thank the Lord) don't get squashed as far as I've heard. They're often in racing saddles, for lightness and speed, and so they get catapulted clear if the horse really hits a fence or starts falling... not much security in a racing saddle, you rely purely on balance. Stirrups too short for any grip either, but at longer lengths, particularly for men (stronger in the leg, usually), that grip can keep them on.
I had a trainer say to me years ago that you should NEVER 'fall off' xc, it's only permissible to hit the deck if the horse is falling...
The jockey in the pic is being catapulted that far possibly because the horse was travelling faster than the horses in the other 2 photos. speed of horse, and how fast its forward movement is arrested, have a huge effect.
The sj riders don't really need a secure lower leg because they're rarely doing drops etc, and there's much less likelihood of the horse pecking because the surfaces are generally uniform.
Riders who claim that they can 'get out of the way' if a horse starts rotating are mental imho. I hope they continue to convince themselves, but it's claptrap. Once the horse starts rotating, it is purely in the lap of the gods whether it stays on a straight trajectory (the arc of the fall) or goes to one side or the other, and where the rider lands is also pretty random... unless you manage to get thrown clear. 'tuck and roll' does not work if 1/2 tonne of horse is a foot behind you at 20 mph... the only safe place to be is well clear.
I don't have a defensive seat, and it's only cost me a couple of falls xc in 20+ yrs.
 
i dont have any words of wisdom but your pictures in the links have certainly been interesting! horses are such a mystery! :D
p.s as is how to ride like the pros!
 
Well. I do wonder about this. I have seen a series of pics of Mark Todd's horse falling - he is extremely defensive and the author says that because of this, he will be thrown clear. But I don't know - he is behind the horse, rather than with it, as it falls. I suppose that the sooner you fall, the more chance you have of being thrown clear and this is an argument for not adopting a defensive position. Very interesting, will be following this!
 
I have to agree with OP. I find it strange how so many people get totally fixated on achieving the 'perfect' jumping position. The way I see it if you are still on the horse after landing and have not interferred with the horse over the fence then thats as perfect as it needs to be unless someone can convince me otherwise ;)

I've had 3 rotationals so far. One SJ and two XC. The frst two I stayed with the horse (very secure seat) and am very lucky to be here to write this. The third I felt the horse going down and literally threw myself off to the side long before horse hit the deck.

I certainly wouldn't want to be so secure that I came off at the slightest peck but staying with the horse all the way to the ground is not to be recommended.
 
I'm guessing, over the bigger fences, maybe gravity and force have a greater effect on leg stability perhaps?

I don't know.

I just felt I had to comment as Skelton was mentioned, and I grew up throughout my teenage years with a huge obession for Arko :) Haha.
 
I think it's important to have a secure lower leg to free your upper body from relying on the reins/horse to stay in balance. If you can be as 'with' the horse as poss eg like you are joined to it from the waist down, then you will interfere very little with it's balance and movement. I think the case for it being dangerous to ride xc without a secure lower leg is because say you jump a fence lose your position going down a hill, and shift all your weight onto the horses forehand just before you are then asking it to jump and upright skinny, you have just reduced your chances of a clean balanced jump and made the horses job much more difficult which has more likelihood of resulting in a fall/stop/run out.

imho xc is safer with a secure lower leg to keep you in balance and take as little away from the horse as poss reducing the risk of accident down to just bad luck or misreading a question
 
I despair of the current obsession with having the lower leg so far forward. I think it is a fad and that there will be a change back to 'correct' riding. By correct I mean with the heel in alignment with the hip and shoulders instead of 6 inches in front of the hip, even when the horse is just standing.

You see it ALL the time and it's wrong. The rider should be able to land in balance upright if the horse were removed.

It also has the unfortunate side effect of the ridersd ar*e banging up and down on the back of the saddle which must be really uncomfortable for the horse. It's bizarre to look at pictures of people who have their bottoms wedged right at the back of the saddle, way past the point they should be sitting on. Their knees rammed in blocks at the front of the saddle and their lower leg dropping in a straight line from there, with ridiculously short stirrups.

I constantly hear people going on about having short enough stirrups as if this is the answer to all our positional problems. If you had NO stirrups you would still be able to ride surely.
 
What about Nick Skelton (I seemed to be obsessed with this example!) going down the Hickstead derby bank with his less than perfect lower leg and still managing to clear a gappy 1m50 upright seconds after?
That's the closest showjumping to eventing example that I can think of!! How much is balance and security really linked to lower leg positions? I know some BHS trained riders with very heels down leg positions that fall off all the time?

Other than that I appreciate the differences between the sports and how this can affect things. I'm not sure though.. I think if Im going to fall no matter what I'd rather be safe with my not very safe leg position...

Although tbf I hadn't thought about how not having a good leg position XC could cause a horse to have a fall.
 
Some interesting POV on this and food for thought.

My opinion is that "secure lower leg" is different from "extremely defensive" or "extrtemely loose" and that the two extremes are most likely not desirable. I think it would be madness to not want a secure lower leg when doing any type of riding, never mind when jumping and again, when galloping XC. As Chloe points out, this is what stops riders relying on their hands for balance and makes life much easier for the horse surely?

As terrifying as the thought of being stuck to the horse in a rotational fall is, surely the stats would mean you were at risk of a serious injury at some point if you kept scooting off due to no stable lower leg at the drop of a hat (or horse's shoulder! ;) )? I guess Melanie Reid's accident and her column about it is still fresh in my mind- that was a "simple" fall over the shoulder of her horse where she landed on her head/neck "wrong" and is now paralysed. :(

I guess we can only do what we can to improve our riding, balance, awareness of how to approach and jump various fences (pace, line etc) and hope that we can get it right most of the time and when we don't, that luck is on our side. There's only so much you can do and there is another being with it's own mind involved also to add to the mix. :(
 
I dunno it just seems that the more experienced eventers, the ones taught to be really secure in their legs are the ones that get squished :(
Some of the more amature riders who may cause more accidents through riding incorrectly or being off balance seem to not be the ones making the news.. Maybe because they get thrown clear or fall off quicker, I.e before the horse hits the ground?

Yet top showjumpers and jockeys and team chasers while brilliant riders who rarely fall off, when they do they get thrown more clear as they have different tack, leg positions.

I know there's so much more to it than that and the sports are so different but I was just confused by the whole lower leg thing :)

The replies have been really interesting though and I have learnt stuff, especially chloes reply. It mentioned things I hadn't thought of at all :)
 
I event with very short stirrups compared to most people. I'm of the school of thought that if anything's going to happen, then I want to be thrown as clear as possible - like when i'm racing! I hate seeing people crosscountrying with long stirrups, heels jammed down and immovable legs. I know that sounds strange but I just imagine if the horse trips or hits a fence, then they ain't going to be able to get out of the way at all! I like to see people perched :D
 
firewell said:
I know some BHS trained riders with very heels down leg positions that fall off all the time?
.
Click to expand...


I would say that they dont have a secure seat! All your weight down ur heels doesnt make you have secure legs - I know as I used to put my weight down my heel, now I focus on my leg secuirty instead. Maybe they need some more lessons if they keep falling off?!?!
 
FigJam said:
My opinion is that "secure lower leg" is different from "extremely defensive" or "extrtemely loose" and that the two extremes are most likely not desirable. I think it would be madness to not want a secure lower leg when doing any type of riding, never mind when jumping and again, when galloping XC. As Chloe points out, this is what stops riders relying on their hands for balance and makes life much easier for the horse surely?
Click to expand...

Agree with this!

I must also say, that although it is common to see showjumpers with lower legs that fly back, I haven't seen that so much with jockeys. Yes, jockeys ride very short but most of them seem to have their lower legs quite far forward.
 
I think people are talking as if having their legs glued to the horses body is a substitute for balance. It's not a secure lower leg which gives you an independent seat, it's being balanced IMO.

Generally when jockeys/SJers, good riders have short stirrups, their lower leg is moved back to ensure they are still balanced. If you move your lower leg forward and shorten your stirrups you will simply be unbalanced. You cannot really stay balanced if your foot isn't under your body..... it's also very strenuous as you are bracing to keep your balance.
 
siennamum said:
Generally when jockeys/SJers, good riders have short stirrups, their lower leg is moved back to ensure they are still balanced. If you move your lower leg forward and shorten your stirrups you will simply be unbalanced. You cannot really stay balanced if your foot isn't under your body..... it's also very strenuous as you are bracing to keep your balance.
Click to expand...
It seems that people have very different definitions of what is a secure lower leg. To me a secure lower leg IS one that is underneath the body (as opposed to flying back behind it), and really the length of stirrups shouldn't change that, shorter stirrups just mean tighter angles in the leg joints.
 
I think there has been some confusion here about what constitutes a secure lower leg. Heels jammed forward is a stiff unyeilding position and not the desireable secure lower leg that we all aspire to watching the likes of lucinda green, mary king or mark todd (the latter has actually completed a 4* xc having completely lost one stirrup part way round, if that isn't a secure position I don't know what is!).

Occasionally these riders may look behind the movement, often because they can see the horse is on a poor stride and they are taking a defensive position because it may be a rocky ride, but generally they have pretty spot on alignment with their shoulder over their foot over a fence. This alignment and secure lower leg means that they have the balance and freedom to allow their horse to get itself out of trouble.

I think Jockey's are generally similar, the toe down look is more due to their soft boots than poor position. And if you watch a jockey in the hurry scurry (is that the class I'm thinking of??) at HOYs they have a super strong lower leg and amazing "stickability".

Generally I think showjumpers are much better now, and if you watch someone like ben maher his position is very much what you would expect a good jumping position to look like. The flinging legs out was much more prevalent in the seventies and eighties, back then there were lots of rider who proudly proclaimed they had never had a lesson and I suspect that this style was a case of results coming first and a bit of emulating the greats. As the sport has become more professional and competitors have had more training they have refined their positions and interfere with the horses less.

There is a reason we don't see many show jumpers going over jumps like Annette Lewis anymore. Such a flamboyant style doesn't add anything to the results, and at worst maybe hinders the horse and tires the rider.

In eventing such styles probably wouldn't have made it to the top in the first place, as they would have been vulnerable to a lot of falls, but in showjumping the risks are less and as long as the results keep coming people don't question it.

So I do think a secure lower leg is desireable, but this shouldn't be confused with an overly defensive position or a rigid braced position.
 
Last edited:
TGM said:
It seems that people have very different definitions of what is a secure lower leg. To me a secure lower leg IS one that is underneath the body (as opposed to flying back behind it), and really the length of stirrups shouldn't change that, shorter stirrups just mean tighter angles in the leg joints.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. Unfortunately the trend is to buy an expensive eventing saddle shorten your stirrups, push your bum to the back of the saddle and sit as if in an armchair. I think a horribly high percentage of event riders do it. It's my personal bugbear, and given my fairly poor position personally I'm hardly in a position to criticise. It's never stopped me before tho - haha
 
kerilli said:
I wish they'd get rid of penalties for rider falling off, as in Team Chasing. that'd set the cat among the pigeons! But Team Chasers jump huge fences very fast (bunch of utter nutters imho), and they (thank the Lord) don't get squashed as far as I've heard. They're often in racing saddles, for lightness and speed, and so they get catapulted clear if the horse really hits a fence or starts falling... not much security in a racing saddle, you rely purely on balance. Stirrups too short for any grip either, but at longer lengths, particularly for men (stronger in the leg, usually), that grip can keep them on.
Click to expand...

I would beg to differ on the type of saddle - I'm very involved with one of the top open TC teams and I'm yet to see anyone with a racing saddle, although they do tend to favour the flatter more "open" saddles rather than those with the big blocks. But I agree that they tend to have a different type of fall, and also a different riding style. They tend to ride more like XC riders from 20/30 years ago before everyone become so "neat and polished". More long reins and "active" riding for want of a better word. In fairness team chase courses are also more like the xc courses or old.

So far as not getting squished goes - two riders in the same team had a nasty squash this spring, both gettng knocked cold and pinned under their horses at the same jump. One was a friend of mine and she actually broke several vertabrae and her ankle but didn't realise for a week!!! They make TCers tough!.

So far as lower leg goes - when was the last time you saw drop fences, water jumps and varying terrain included in your "typical" show jump course? (I'm not including Hickstead in this as that's the exception). It's possible to get away with far more in a showjump course
 
Thank you all for your opinions, I found them very interesting.
It seems like everything in life both the extremes are undesirable and something in the middle, a well balanced and natural leg position is best.
I was more thinking of the trend of really shoving your feet forwad and heels really down. I've always felt really tense when instructors have tried to make me do this.
I can jump without stirrups so can't be that bad lol.
I'm going to watch other riders with interest see what they do. I love William Fox Pitt he really is my fav event rider because he looks so natural when he rides, not forced like some of the pros.
I wonder like anything wether people realised it was helpful to have a correct balanced position and then fashion took it too far! Like the fashion in the old days of the backwards hunting seat! Maybe some riders will regress to that extent lol before adopting the 'forward seat' again! :D
 
Fashion has a lot to answer for in questions like this. ;) The people who developed the American Jumping style, fantastic riders and trainers, would (and in the case of some of the old guard, do) despair of the way people have taken good advice and practice to such an extreme it not only isn't good practice anymore, it's positively dangerous and ineffective. It seems to be human nature to assume if a bit is good, more must be better, which almost always ends in tears.

Most of the pertinent points have already come up regarding not confusing "fixed" with "secure" and the different demands of different sports etc. Sorry, but there is a HUGE difference in jumping very large fences and going very fast, especially in the heat of competition. Many of the riders that get held up as "extreme" certainly don't look the same when they're schooling/riding younger horses. I also think it's not always a good idea to take great talents as models as, almost by definition, they don't always have to do things by the book to get results, often because they excel so completely in other areas. There are just people with fantastic feel etc who are exceptions to the rule. But you know what they say about exceptions and rules . . .

The original point seems to imply that position is simply a way of staying on the horse, but obviously there's a lot more to it. It's the "platform" through which we communicate with the horse and how we apply the aids we want - not to mention how we don't apply aids we don't want - is dependent on how precisely and independently we can use the "tools" we've got to work with. Not just hands and legs, but balance, core strength, sensitivity of touch, ability to accurately judge/apply suitable force etc. The position we consider "correct" isn't random, it's developed literally over centuries of experimentation and study to produce the best results. Obviously it's "sport specific" to some extent and all the above factors come into play as well, but the basics are the way they are for good reason, much of it to do with how physics applies and how horses work.

In the end, it does really only matter if the horses do the job. And, luckily, the vast majority of us don't use anything like our horses' full potential so if things aren't all that perfect, it's hardly noticeable. BUT if the horses are not performing optimally, I think it's a least worth considering that the rider might be playing a negative role.

Riding is ALWAYS a balance between security and subtlety (which requires "active" relaxation). To some extent the choice is individual, to some extent it's shaped by circumstance. I suspect if someone has worked hard to get to the Olympics they're highly motivated not to "slip off" if the horse ducks and dives a bit, not least because that's almost certainly going to happen even if everything goes quite well. Look how many people have had a "moment" and gone on to win a medal?
 
siennamum said:
Generally when jockeys/SJers, good riders have short stirrups, their lower leg is moved back to ensure they are still balanced. If you move your lower leg forward and shorten your stirrups you will simply be unbalanced. You cannot really stay balanced if your foot isn't under your body..... it's also very strenuous as you are bracing to keep your balance.
Click to expand...

or 'waterskiing' against the contact, which imho puts horses on the forehand because they lean against the rider's bodyweight, which is pulling back against them.

I agree with those who have said that lower leg underneath the rider, and angles closed up, gives true balance and security.
Unfortunately the more forward lower leg position seems to be very in favour somehow, at least with certain trainers...

MegaBeast, i stand corrected, it's a long time since I was at a Team Chase, and back then quite a few of the riders I saw were using racing saddles... perhaps that was just a passing fad, and caused too many falls. I hadn't heard of any squishes TCing. :( :( :(
 
kerilli said:
I hadn't heard of any squishes TCing. :( :( :(
Click to expand...

For some reason they glossed over it in the H&H report (was at the Taunton - Pontispool)... but to be fair it was one of those freak accidents due to circumstances which occured at the time, long story but those involved have never had a fall like it before and the one person (my friend) has been team chasing for 20 odd years and never been trapped under a horse before, they just don't normally happen. Oh, and I must just add team in question are sponsored by Point Two and were wearing their air jackets at the time - friends' doctor reckons it saved her from much more serious injury (but that's a whole different discussion!)
 
FigJam said:
As Chloe points out, this is what stops riders relying on their hands for balance and makes life much easier for the horse surely?
Click to expand...

I have a very poor leg position which I have been working on since January time, but I always give plenty with the rein over a fence, whereas my friend, who has a very secure leg posi balances entirely on her hand by pulling back on the mouth over fences.

I'll link you to my FB pics, but won't to hers, but I think that I've never felt insecure, always stayed on fine (touch wood!), and have always been soft to the mouth - I don't rely on my hand at all really!

http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/photo.php?pid=1187977&id=1446493429&fbid=1434026737787
That's probably the best example, but if you flick through the whole album there are other examples. There is one from Hambleden which is not great, but when you look through the album you'll se it's a one off. I think that the correllation between security of the leg, and balance entirely in the hand is not as set in stone as you and chloe suggested!
 
Amazing answer tarrsteps thank you, v informative!

Golden match, I agree. My lower leg position isn't the greatest I admit but I rarely catch the horse in the mouth. I seem to have a style all of my own lol and that's partly what prompted this discussion. Although I feel comfortable and I think my horse does as he's not a stopper it does worry me! I'd hate to be hindering him.

Despite my naughty lower leg I haven't fallen off in 8 years! I don't compete at a high level granted and I do have a higher than usual sense of self preservation but I have competed at 1m10 (nothing to shout about) as well as bringing on 2 youngster ex-racers and I ride most days. I'm aware than WHEN I do fall off I'm clearly due for an absolute corker :( :( but u would have thought probability would have made me take a tumble before now?! Unless iv just been blessed by more than my fair share of luck and it's all about to end tomorrow. I must be able to balance myself without a perfect lower leg ( and mine is not underneath me all the time but sometimes ummmm a bit far back and pointing down!)
I do work on my position though, at least when I remember or my trainer shouts at me! :D
 
Golden_Match: although you say your lower leg is not perfect (let's face it, who's ever going to have the perfect lower leg 100% of the time anyway), it will still provide you with a bit of a base for balancing on. Having quickly looked at your photos, it seems like your problem is gripping with your knees? You look like you are very forwards with your upper body- maybe this is how you are counterbalancing the weaker lower leg without relying on your hands? Your position doesn't look bad at all though. :)

I'm absolutely no expert though and have found the different opinions on this thread interesting and plenty to think about. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top