[QUOTE=Willy Von Whompers;8797032]
I could see nice vests or tech type polos and breeches and boots and a helmet of course. The shad belly always reminds me of Victor Borgia sitting down at the piano. Or an undertaker. It looks ridiculous in this day and age. I wish we could make the change.[/QUOTE]
I love vests and they would do just as well covering various figure flaws as a coat does.
Actually, I love the vests, too. Back in the old days, if jackets were waived, a lot of riders doing FEI tests would wear their stock ties and their canary vests. This was before points on shadbellys were used.
Wearing actual athletic wear will also make equestrians look much more like athletes rather than overdressed snobs prancing around on ponies to the general public. Read any non-horsey media article about an equestrian event at the games and every second comment will either be that the horse does all the work or that the rider is rich and is funded by mummy and daddy.
I don’t know how this thread got off on bikinis and high-cut legs. I think the issues is about whether riders should be able to dress in athetic clothing that is designed to maximize performance and comfort. And yes, while we are doing that, we would like to be asthetically appealing to both dressage riders and to most of our audience. I do not see the shadbelly as doing ANY of these things well.
Okay, so what about how reiners dress? Jeans, belt, boots, pressed clean dress shirt (white at the WEG from what I recall), and cowboy hat.
Should we wear long sleeved rat catchers (white), colored breeches, belts, boots, and helmets?
I personally think everyone should be wearing a helmet when competing (or warming up at events) but know that isn’t a popular opinion among western riders. Blows my mind that Australia’s reining governing body says you can be thirteen and ride without a helmet but must be eighteen to handle/ride a stallion…
I agree that helmets should just be required. Period. I totally do not understand why there would be any question. Western or English…you are still on a horse and it’s a long and (once in a while) violent way to the ground.
I do think a shad belly looks ridiculous - it really does. And it feeds into the notion that the rider just sits there as if he were at a piano, and the horse is the athlete.
Breeches and boots and gloves of course are a no brainer…but the bit the covers the riders’s body has to be figured out. A vest does seem the most practical and flattering. i can’t see isabelle in a one piece lycro suit of any sort.
Spectator only here. Personally, I like the look of the shadbelly. Dressage is a formal, elegant discipline and the shadbelly and top hat contribute to that. I understand the safety factor of wearing a helmet so I can understand a rider going for that instead of the top hat. But from a spectator’s standpoint, competing in a polo or vest, just makes the sport look meh. The female gymnasts could compete in plain leotards but the sparkly ones add pizzazz. The formal attire does the same for dressage.
BTW, if you want to see some extreme costumes, watch synchronized swimming. Very pretty thong swim suits.
[QUOTE=achcosuva;8796845]
Male dancers wear long tights and tuck in their shirts, which gives the leg quite long lines too. This guy even has a costume with color blocking that divides the ‘torso’ from the ‘leg’ just above his abs.
Oh, and I know nothing about gymnastics, male or female, so I’m not actually arguing any side. I just thought I’d throw some more info on dance-wear into the mix. :)[/QUOTE]
I consider this very different than the line leotards give to female dancers (the photograph you posted looks like an average professional dancer looking average. In a mostly unattractive costume that doesn’t do him any favors). The difference between men tucking shirts into tights at waist level & women dancers wearing higher cut leotards that give an optical illusion about where their thigh ties into their hip is pretty great. I’m well aware that male dancers are not tromping about on stage in jeans and loose t-shirts. Ultimately - as was the point with my original post - women’s “line” tends to be much more emphasized than that of men’s. What do male dancers tend to be praised for? Purity of line? Gorgeousness of arabesque? No. (Yes, of course, SOME of them are, but it’s generally not EMPHASIZED) It’s mostly their explosive power in “male” movements (which means allegro, generally - power, quickness). Think here of Baryshnikov. Was anyone like “That dude was SHORT!” (he was 5’6", for the record - 6" shorter than my favorite ballerina was on pointe). Generally speaking - NO! He was so powerful, his jump was so high, his allegro so great - HE was just so great. I look at the video of him doing Balanchine’s Tchai Pas with Patty McBride - OMG. He’s like watching a great show jumper - he just explodes off the ground, reaches an incredible height, and HANGS THERE. Who cares what his line looks like?!?! (Of course he looked great, he was also a freak of nature & didn’t need costuming to make him look better) Of course male dancers want to accentuate their positives to the greatest extent possible, but generally they really ARE being judged on what they CAN DO, not what they look like. Female gymnasts (and dancers) are also judged on what they CAN DO, but also on WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE DOING IT. You could be the most fabulous soubrette ever, but if your legs look stumpy, you’re not getting hired.
Regardless, my original point was that there is a practical reason for high cut leotards, and it’s not giving pedophiles something to get off on, it’s to make one’s line look as long as possible. Leotards are a lot more practical for the purpose at hand than shadbellies.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
