I think you’re misinterpreting who is the one with the hurt feelings here. You seem mortally offended by the mere existence of these products since you yourself don’t wish to use them.
It is in fact possible to not like or understand something without calling everyone else abusive.
A drop noseband, used correctly, is rather nice. It helps keep the bit stable in the mouth. Given that it sits lower than a regular noseband, it also needs a lot LESS force for the desired effect. “Desired effect” is a quietly closed mouth - not a painfully clamped mouth. Unlike a figure 8 or flash, the force doesn’t act diagonally. Like any piece of equipment, it can be tightened harshly or set too low on the nose’s cartilage. But the wrong use of tack should be blamed upon the the user not the equipment.
The only one to use that term so far is you 
I am seeing that a lot of these are actually just being misused , as in adjusted to fit lower than they are supposed to be .
I don’t think that’s necessarily abuse but it’s not ideal either.
I can not “like” or use something but still want to be informed.
I mean …. I think Ogilvy half pads were another “craze” that went widespread nuts, and were advertised as having benefits that I honestly don’t think they had. IMO they actually caused more issues than they solved (for me).
Not saying they’re abusive , not saying no one should use them , I just don’t “get it”. Maybe they are a miracle product for others ? Who knows.
They totally did look nice though.
If we all looked and thought the same, the sport would be pretty boring !
I wish this could be a pinned comment.
With innovation, research, and time, many elements of horse care and equipment have evolved for the better. Holding on to an old design that puts pressure on the most sensitive structures of the face under the guise of “tradition” or “not falling for fads” is irrational. The horse comes first.
Sometimes for the better, sometimes not - just like running shoes, or any other technology.
But why so defensive? Isn’t it always good to try and figure out whether something is really better before adopting it?
A single crownpiece in todays bridle distributes the pressure from yesterday’s bridle. What kind of horse doesn’t benefit from this?
The analogy to gluten-free bread is strange.
I actually do prefer a single, padded crown piece myself.
I also think, though, that the OP has a point: there are a great many rather weird-looking bridle designs out now, and it’s hard to believe that all of them have been proven to be better for every horse. Some may be, some may not, but I don’t see anything wrong with investigating a new trend before buying into it.
They were proven to provide uneven pressure and discomfort to the horse, and lie over sensitive anatomical features and nerve endings.
You can still buy the “good old fashioned classy hunter bridle” – but know that no matter what you do, it will never be as inherently evenly pressured or comfortable as some anatomical bridles.
People tend to get defensive when they’re accused of needing to tie their horse’s mouths shut and only buying things for a trend.
Everyone is trying to do right by their horses and we have tools such as 3d modeling and pressure mapping that couldn’t even be dreamt of 20 years ago for this kind of application.
By the same token, “it’s what we always did and the horses were fine” isn’t any more evidence in favor of “the old way” than there is for any of the new anatomical stuff. Apply your own common sense and decide if it makes sense to you. If not, then don’t use it; arguing that you need evidence to support it when there’s no evidence for the old way, either is a pretty weak argument.
Well, to be fair, “It’s good because it’s new!” is pretty weak too.
Couldn’t we just agree that, with any new product, it’s best to try it and see without any preconceptions either way?
I guess I’m ahead of the curve; I’ve always kept my nosebands lower than usual. There’s a vein there and it seemed silly to have something that could possibly be tight on it (especially with martingales). I’ve been stopped by quite a few people over the years to ‘adjust’ my bridle, and I just have to tell them no thanks, I like it that way.
I’m also not too surprised by the crank actually having less pressure overall. It kind of hugs the nose, unlike if you tighten a regular noseband too much, which tends to pinch the sides.
Hear hear!
Nobody said they are all proven to be better for every horse. They can’t be, no more than every saddle can be proven to fit every horse.
Just because there are general physical paths of nerves and blood vessels (see my link above) doesn’t mean ALL horses’ nerves and blood vessels are in exactly the same place.
If a traditional bridle fits a given horse such that he doesn’t even notice it’s there, then you don’t NEED an anatomic bridle
All these makes and models of anatomic bridles are different, just as saddle configurations are different, because horses are different.
100%. Change for the sake of change isn’t necessarily good. Change with purpose doesn’t always work out either, but if you don’t change something you’ll never figure out any better ways, ever.
Yep. Well put.
I’d only disagree with the idea that, “Nobody said they are all proven to be better for every horse.” Advertisers do say that, and many of their ad campaigns are quite sophisticated too.
As somebody else pointed out, we all want to do well by our horses, but figuring out exactly which new design might contribute to that goal can be pretty complicated - not to mention expensive.
Wouldn’t it be nice to find some kind of bridle rental service, like the ones the have for trying bits? That would be SO helpful.
Yeah, but they are trying to sell a product. They aren’t going to say ‘our product is good for some horses’.
It’s the same how every golf club manufacturer claims they have the most superior clubs. They can’t all be the worlds best….
A bridle trying service would be nice.
Fair point, I thought someone on this thread was saying that, or had heard someone else saying that.
Advertisers are selling a product. Purina will absolutely say Outlast is suitable for every horse (when there are horses who absolutely cannot have alfalfa in any amount). Tribute will say the same about the Constant Comfort system.
If someone without a product to sell, is the one saying “This Thing works for every horse”, they are the ones to run from. At least with advertisers, you know they’re “supposed” to say that.
Oh, yes! I fully expect advertisers to try to sell every single customer her very own copy of the Brooklyn Bridge.
That’s what makes it so hard to figure out what’s real and what’s hokum.
Besides the trial service, it might also be nice to have more online videos on how to fit these things. I’m no expert, but just looking at some of the designs above, which seem to fit the details of the horse’s face in a very precise and specific way, make me think that expert input on fit would be especially important here.
A friend is a fitter for a couple of different anatomic bridles, and yes, it is very much a hands-on deal for the best results, between the different styles, and even subtle adjustments. You CAN get the job done on your own, but like saddle fitting, you at least have to be educated enough to know what you’re looking for.
Something I think is really amazing is how we now take a horse’s comfort into consideration.
I know we used to put all our horses in the same flat saddle with the same size tree while wearing the same bridle and bit. Some of our horses thrived, others protested. We deemed the latter group “naughty” and “for experienced riders only.” If they were too bad to be useful, they were knackered.
Yet now we recognize that even something like bridle design can make a big difference in comfort, and therefore performance. Horses can be better partners if they aren’t throwing all their energy into complaining about their tack.
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
