I’ve been using the Stubben Soft Touch Dynamic spurs. Although I like them a lot - they just don’t pack enough punch in our dressage work. The rowels that I borrowed from a barn-mate seem like maybe a bit too much. I also have a pretty long leg, so I don’t feel like I really am able to do much with the Stubbens, being that they are pretty small! Does anyone have any spur recommendations? He’s pretty sensitive and responsive, but we are always working on quality of gate and getting some cadence & loft in his trot.
I use Neue Schule spurs on my sensitive critter. Both the knob and the rowel are much softer than the german ones I’ve used (the rowel is very rounded and a bit wider of surface–the knob is a ball). Although they are soft, they have a nice long neck so that you can reach your horse without a lot of leg movement.
1 Like
If your leg is really long have you considered swan neck spurs?
1 Like
I just got a pair of plastic spurs where you can swap out the end to a variety of styles. I absolutely love them! They don’t pack as much punch as a pair of metal spurs, so you may have to step up from what you usually like (or you may find that the rowel piece is perfect rather than being a tiny bit too much), but I love the flexibility of being able to change the type of spur and the relative soft touch of the plastic material. I can’t recall the brand off hand, but I’d be happy to look if you want more info.
1 Like
I was using those, too, and found the same issue. I actually use a shorter pair of spurs with a little more of a square edge that do the job better. I have very long legs, too, so no matter what, I have to bring it up to actually use spurs.
Like these: http://www.ridingwarehouse.com/Toklat_Ladies_Stainless_Steel_Hammerhead_Spurs/descpage-TLSSHS.html
1 Like
This sounds like what I need! Thanks! And thank you to everyone for your suggestions!
Did anyone read the most recent USDF Connection article - there has been some research on the severity of spurs - measuring the amount of hair found in spurs, any blood, and damage on horse’s sides - I found it really surprised, because the round roller spurs were one of the worst ones (roller ball and hammer style), and then the longer the shank, the more likely to see damage.
I would have guessed the roller ball spurs were going to be less damaging! It is an interesting read, and might be relevant to your sensitive horse…
1 Like
Thanks for pointing this out. I just looked up the Uldahl and Clayton 2018 research article (doi: 10.1111/evj.12827), and it’s quite interesting.
Their sample had very few roller ball spurs at all (roller ball style n=21; 9.52% had hair on spurs, so just 2 riders out of the 2,317 used in their model), and in the test for worn hair on the horse’s ribcage (which did not find spur type to be a significant predictor) the roller ball spurs showed less evidence of damage than many other styles (n=27, 3.7% worn hair). As far as I can tell from their write-up they treated all predictors as independent, but we do not know if there is any association between spur type and other predictors (e.g. spur length, rider level, discipline and pony vs. horse classes). For example, they found the incidence of hair on spurs was strongly associated with the level of the rider, with lower level riders being more likely to have hair on spurs. It may be that more beginners choose roller ball spurs because they are, indeed, a soft choice. But roller ball spurs on the heels of a beginner may not be more humane than classic blunt spurs on a very educated leg. We really don’t know from the analysis they did.
I enjoy seeing research to help riders understand how our pursuits and choices impact our equine partners, but I think that more controlled research to piece apart the relative impacts of these potentially non-independent predictors would be necessary before passing judgment on many types of spurs, or, as the authors suggest, making changes to spur rules. I certainly wouldn’t relegate the roller ball spurs to some dark corner of a tack box on the basis of this research.
3 Likes
Oh, I wouldn’t dump my roller ball spurs either - but I think it is interesting. Of course, there are a lot of other factors going on. But what I WOULD take out of this study is check your spurs after every ride! If you see any hair - you might want to re-think the type/length of spur you are using.
Pretty sure this is the first time anyone has ever studied spur use - so maybe we’ll see more studies (and more controlled?) studies in the future.
1 Like
Yes. You might want to check the length of your spurs, in particular, if you are creating rubs or finding hair on your spurs. This gem stood out to me as the actionable information from the study:
Spur length should be determined by the position of the rider’s heel relative to the horse’s chest wall, so that the spur can be applied lightly without an exaggerated movement of the rider’s leg. The positive associations between longer spurs and lower competition levels with the presence of hair on the spurs or worn hair on the horse’s ribcage suggest that riders should be educated about the correct use of spurs and how to measure the appropriate spur length for a specific horse-rider combination. To reduce the risk of spur-associated lesions or bleeding, riders should select the shortest shank that is adequate for the rider-horse combination. (Uldahl and Clayton 2018, 8)
People’s first concern is usually not length; it’s smooth rowel vs. roller ball vs. Prince of Wales vs. whatever else. It sounds like the reliable conclusions from this article are that the most common shapes in dressage (plain shank, smooth rowel) are not particularly associated with damage, that squared off vs. rounded shank ends on plain styles doesn’t seem to matter (but smooth vs. sunburst rowel might), and that all else equal, you should choose the shortest spurs you can touch your horse’s side with.
