Does the padding extend more than 1.5cm on any side? If not, it appears legal to me.
Id send a picture in to the dressage person at usef.
2 Likes
It appears the B2Fit HP5 is also illegal according to the description because the padding extends in the center. I have that one too.
Bridle2Fit Crown Piece HP-5 – Horse By Horse
Thanks - I just sent an email for clarification.
A TD at a show I attended in June was causing panic in the stable area when she was telling riders (AA’s) the Fairfax could be illegal if you don’t adjust it right and questioned how the crown piece laid. All while said bridles were on hooks in the tack room. The way the browband is screwed on the crown can’t sit too far back behind the ears like the TD said would happen. Thankfully she didn’t eliminate/card anyone that I know of. Especially with the research behind the bridle. Side note my horse didn’t like the fairfax crown piece but loves the noseband so we have a Frankenstein bridle of old school Jerry’s with the FF noseband.
2 Likes
I’m just going to come out and say it. This is the stupidest rule change I have ever heard of. Likely going to cost riders hundreds of dollars in unusable tack. Most of the anatomical crown bridles are not cheap.
32 Likes
On that bridle wouldn’t the pieces marked E make it illegal? Or is it just the crown piece that has to be smooth?
Maybe but that doesn’t change the fact that many “professionals” don’t bother to read the rules or comment on proposed changes.
I actually don’t. And like you said, it’s not being enforced. This actually is a welfare issue, unlike a baucher cheekpiece or a split crownpiece.
Measuring tightness at a fleshy/gappy part of the face is ridiculous. How about a wedge piece that gets inserted at the chin and at the bridge of the nose? That way it’s standardized, and it actually measures the tightness the horse feels.
18 Likes
In the document linked (in the post above and now here), I believe it is the red text that is what is changed, not bolded text.
Link to the dressage regulation
Edited to make link work.
Engineer here, it can’t. There are threads with many diagrams and explanations of this already, but the gist is that because the rein is in line with the mouthpiece, there is no fulcrum and no way to have any leverage. It has an arm, but not a lever arm.
47 Likes
Thank you for the heads up, I will fix it.
Edit to add - should be all fixed now. An extra / can ruin a link so easily.
1 Like
That bridle would be legal because the rule specifies that the crown piece can extend to the front but not so far in the back. I agree that it’s confusing to have some things in the annex and some in the rule itself.
1 Like
Yes, in the rulebook it is red, but in the rule change location it was bolder. Doesn’t change anything except how far padding can extend, and may clarify what material it can be (the padding, same as crown piece). I’ll have to go and look at the person’s prior post where she/he was eliminated.
Thank you. My eye was twitching about that 
ETA: wasn’t there a study that showed a baucher actually has negative poll pressure when engaged? Aka the opposite of leverage? I’ll have to go digging
23 Likes
I remember seeing that, as well.
6 Likes
Applied mathematician here.
I’ll look for those threads. I’m thinking the leverage isn’t necessarily applied in the mouth but on the poll. Granted I haven’t done the structural analysis.
Either way, there’s a reason horses more difficult in a plain snaffle sometimes go “better” in a Baucher, I have one of those.
@fivestrideline - Neue Schule published data on their bits showing the baucher actually relieved poll pressure. It’s on their website here - https://nsbits.com/article/neue-schule-poll-pressure-guide
18 Likes
Yeah, it’s the stability of the cheekpiece.
11 Likes
