Newly illegal crownpiece

[eponacelt]

So as of October 1, the crownpiece on all my good bridles is illegal. Apparently because the leather lining does not continue all the way across the poll in one single piece, I have to replace 2 bridle parts.

I can’t for the life of me understand what the issue is. For reference, here is a link to the crownpieces on both my snaffle and double bridles. https://bridle2fit.com/us/product/crown-piece-hp-6/

Can someone explain why? I mean, its not like there’s tons of padding anywhere. Its not pressing against the horse’s ears. Its not a wildly odd shape sitting way back from the poll. I would love for someone to explain this to me. Any insight COTH?

[SillyHorse]

Just a guess that because the padding is not continuous, it can create pressure on either side of the area without padding. Again, just a guess. Where did you read about this change?

[beowulf]

Interesting, as that will make several different brands illegal, including Antares’. If memory serves, Antares’ comfort crown was specifically allowed before.

Sometimes, I wish I knew what was going on when they discussed these changes. It’s not the first time they’ve changed a rule and it hasn’t really made sense.

[endlessclimb]

It’s super frustrating.

The finally added the loose ring Bombers Ported Barrel that I had lots of emails with them about, but they still include a picture of “another” Bomber Ported Barrel that is illegal. Well, 1) the picture they show is a snip of a photo of one on a 2 ring gag, and 2) Bombers doesn’t make different port heights in this mouthpiece. ETA: re: the Bomber Ported Barrel - they still have it wrong, it shouldn’t be legal for a bridoon because it locks but they have it legal across the board. You wouldn’t think one mouthpiece would result in several years of not updating or updating incorrectly the rule book. Shows the “quality” of at least that part of the organization.

By the logic they use for the crown piece being illegal, are they also making any saddle pads with spine relief illegal?

[SillyHorse]

@endlessclimb

By the logic they use for the crown piece being illegal, are they also making any saddle pads with spine relief illegal?

Where are you reading about this logic?

[endlessclimb]

I’m assuming it’s the same logic you posted - I can’t think of anything else.

[SillyHorse]

It was just a guess. The OP hasn’t provided any evidence about it. Normally, when tack is made illegal, USEF provides the reason.

[PopPopcorn]

Per the USEF rules it looks like “the shape may cause pressure to a sensitive area”.

I’d assume your crown falls into that category since it looks similar and has a “gap”.

Shame, my horse with poll trauma goes lovely in a similar crown too.

[beowulf]

Weren’t there studies done that proved the opposite? I’d have to look but I thought I saw something, at least in regards to the Antares Precision headpiece.

[trubandloki]

@beowulf

Weren’t there studies done that proved the opposite?

That was my thought too. I thought the gap in the padding was there to prevent pressure in a sensitive area, not cause it.

[endlessclimb]

I’m honestly struggling to understand how rule writers can be so out of touch. The baucher thing, now this?

[hoopoe]

As a generality, rule changes often come from evidence that someone found a way to abuse the situation.

I am not saying that it happened here, but I can see how that crownpiece could be retrofitted with something that produces pain / discomfort/ aversion/ punishment when a horse rolls or lifts above

[endlessclimb]

I’m curious what you’re thinking could be done, versus a standard poll piece?

[tabula_rashah]

It’s funny how they can focus on things like this that are actually helping some horses be more comfortable in their tack but you can still crank the crappola out of a nose band and overflex till your heart’s content.

The things that make you go hmmm…

[IPEsq]

Once again, the rule makers seem to have no concept of physics or anatomy.

And @endlessclimb I wonder if the TSF girth and those like it with the elastic in the middle are next too

[pluvinel]

@endlessclimb

I’m honestly struggling to understand how rule writers can be so out of touch. The baucher thing, now this?

A solution in search of a problem? Horse people trying to be engineers? If I had a horse in this race, I would challenge this with actual engineering measurements.

Here is FujiFilms Pressure Indicating Film

[endlessclimb]

They aren’t likely to respond kindly to this, as I have a series of emails about that ported barrel mouthpiece, and not a single question I asked was answered in regards to how they measure the mouthpiece.

“Port height” on a bit that has joints is not static. They didn’t even comprehend the question I was asking when I asked how they define the mouthpiece’s neutral stance in order to measure it.

[hoopoe]

Just looking at the picture could something be slipped across the underside, filling the “relief” area or hidden under the pads on either side.

[cardinale]

@hoopoe

Just looking at the picture could something be slipped across the underside, filling the “relief” area or hidden under the pads on either side.

Yes, what you propose makes sense. Or, have a leatherworker make a new pad that is continuous, if that would work? However, at a competition would an official suspicious because of the brand require that the entire bridle be removed for examination? That might be problematic in some circumstances.

[PopPopcorn]

I use Equifit poll pads on my bridles (but I use a traditional crown). I wonder if an added pad would “fill” that gap? Probably wouldn’t make it legal though.