Danish Dressage

[HornungTheHelpful]

What are the views on Blue Hors stud withdrawing from competition? And the proposed ban on double bridles?

I don’t believe double bridles are inherently cruel. I don’t ever ride in one because I don’t need to and I would have concerns about incorrect fitting/use. But I don’t see the issue if fitted and used correctly. Query if they can always be fitted correctly? I can believe the confirmation of some horses is such that they can’t comfortably wear one. And I’ve seen them misused - but better to punish misuse/fitting rather than outright ban?!

Too many photos of blue tongues and horses obviously in discomfort at best, pain at worst!
Dressage needs to take a long hard look at itself! You can achieve the same results with zero bridle and just a neck strap, look at what Ben Atkinson does as 1 example. Yet BD still won't allow bitless, its ridiculous.

I’ve seen and very much admire Ben Atkinson (been taught by him too a few years back) - but what he achieves without a bit (and he does use bitted bridles too - is not dressage in any sense of the word - classical or otherwise.

Is blue tongue an inevitable result of a double or down to misuse/bad fitting? I think the latter.

So while I don’t have a problem with dressage changing and developing it does feel to me like a knee jerk reaction to a - justified - image problem. I have no issue with bitless in dressage - though just as easily misused in my view - as long as how contact is assessed is worked out.

But what I don’t understand is why sanctions aren’t used effectively for misuse rather than just throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Ben Atkinson does not do dressage, and dressage riders do not do stunts. But it’s disingenuous to suggest that a high level of training cannot be achieved without a bit. I have ridden horses in double bridles and bit less bridles, and would absolutely say the tack itself is not the issue here. It’s the way it is used. The hackamores I rode the little endurance horses in in Europe could be horrific if used with unkind hands. But it is easier to ban certain tack than it is to police riding and training methods.

I disagree that what he can do isn't dressage in any sense of the word. Fundamentally dressage is just about schooling and there are videos of him doing piaffe with just a neck rope.
Dressage has become a parody of itself and has moved away from the classical principles. I hate watching 80% of the top level dressage riders, if that's what you call dressage then I'm not interested; tense, tight horses and tight riders.

FEI are useless and toothless, just look at their lack of action with UAE riders in endurance. They allow horrendous combinations of bits for SJ, they overlook blood + blue tongues in dressage and reward poor riding all round.

Horses in sport is in major peril and we are so close to losing our social licence for even riding horses. It's too late to tinker around the edges, we need proper change now if we want to continue to be able to ride our horses in competition.

I don't think you are wrong with what you say more broadly, however, I think where we disagree is on the approach to address the very serious issues.

I also wonder how the piaffe was trained - if it was trained with a bit first? Quite possibly not - it may well simply have been trained from the ground, however, the end result is not the training.

He trains on the ground I believe

Yes, I've seen horrendous hackamores, which makes me cautious re bitless - it's no less open to abuse. And really that is, I think, where I disagree with you about banning tack. Ultimately whatever we use can be abused, so why not tackle the abuse - and in some cases the ignorance that leads to the abuse.

If there were a few high-profile lifetime bans I am sure that welfare standards would improve and that is going to be easier than banning tack, then banning more tack, then banning different tack, which is what I think banning tack would ultimately do.

Also, why not some sort of "competitive licence" where you have to have certain training on welfare, tack etc, to compete at a particular level. Governing bodies could give the courses and it's another revenue stream, which could be devoted to welfare checks.

Banning things that are not in and of themselves an abuse, but which are capable of abuse looks great in the press, but risks not having th welfare outcome desired.

With these dressage riders it's not ignorance that leads to the abuse.

It isn't due to ignorance or lack of knowledge though, it is needing to win at any cost!
Standing horses on lorries trussed up in draw reins isn't ignorance. Same as having over tight nosebands or barbed wire on inside of nosebands. Electric boots on show jumpers aren't used because of ignorance.

I didn’t say I agree with banning certain tack. I said it is easier to ban certain tack. That is the line some authorities take rather than address the usage issues.

Yes, high profile abuse is due to putting winning over welfare. But every dressage competition I attend I see unacceptable use of all sorts of things. This weekend I had a 5 year old doing a couple of prelims - so mostly seeing the lower levels. At least two horses "bridle lame" from being held in so tightly in a double (both for elementary classes - and riders were not capable of using the double appropriately, and had no need to be using one at all). One woman hugely oversized on a pony that could not be more than 13.2hh, and which was having its nose tucked in by main force (also in a double for elem classes). Swan-neck spurs on unstable legs. Horses grossly overburdened by their riders. One horse standing on its back legs regularly for no obvious reason.

No one queried any of this. I obviously didn't see the test sheets, but I don't imagine that any of this was penalised, or that it was explained what the problem was. The woman on the tiny pony should have been asked to dismount and not permitted to compete. The bridle lame horses should have been disqualified as not going evenly (and tbf the last competition before this one, I did see a very slightly lame horse rightly disqualified) and the judge should have queried with them whether it was genuine lameness or because of the excessive restriction from the misused double. In my view the organisers would have been right to query if the rearing horse was fit to compete, to give the rider the opportunity to explain that it was not pain related - and that this had been checked.

But this was just all ignored. Everyone gets so caught up in the high profile issues - and it is wrong to say there are no ethically good high profile riders - and are willing to ignore the welfare lower down, which is often poor. Is it nice to see "blue tongue" in international competition? Of course not. And yes those riders have no excuse and should know better (though I genuinely suspect sometimes don't - this is the problem with the way riding is taught; it all seems to be instinctual and very few riders really knows in depth how they do something, or why it works). So punish them. Either with sanctions or with low or no marks. But horse welfare could be massively improved with education at grass roots too. So why just focus on that and pretend the happy hackers who compete at Quest twice a year aren't riding in ill-fitting tack etc. There's nothing to say that we can't focus on both.

Finally, I am not convinced (from the Facebook comments sections of a number of forums) that the majority of us can properly spot blue tongue/behind the vertical etc. There should be more training for judges in high level competition focussed on identifying these and other features of abuse.