Western Bitting -- Why Is It So Complicated and Controversial?

[Rackonteur]

English bitting is so simple and straightforward. A snaffle is a snaffle. A curb is a curb. A pelham is a pelham. A Kimberwick (UK “Kimblewick”) is also a type of pelham.

We have french-link snaffles. Bean-mouth. Single-joint. Dr. Bristol. D-ring, loose-ring, full-cheek, fulmer. Etc.

We have curbs. Curbs have shanks and [usually] curb chains.

Kimberwicks have ported mouths, or they have jointed mouths; some have slots; the latter are called Uxeters.

Western bitting, OTOH, has snaffles with rings and “snaffles” with shanks. It has “curbs” with jointed mouthpieces. There doesn’t seem to be any agreement among western riders as to what a snaffle is and what it is not; or what a curb is and what it is not.

I’m not even gonna get into all the “specialist” bits – the ones with chain mouthpieces, spade mouths, and the ones that purport to do mechanically what dressage people train to do with their seats, legs, and hands – train self-carriage, head carriage, forwardness, and throughness.

Western even has “correction” bits, although no one seems to be able to say what the bit is supposed to correct; I say that if a horse is trained properly he doesn’t need mechanical “correction.”

So, what’s it all about? Why can’t the western riding world just get together and agree on such basics as snaffle and curb. Forget which bits are legal for which disciplines, or which bit is “best” for one discipline or another.

If they could just get straight on the difference between a snaffle and a curb, and then take it from there, it would simplify things so much both for the western people and the rest of us!

[NoSuchPerson]

I disagree with your premise. The English world has an equally bewildering array of bits. Just spend some time perusing the selection at some place like The Horse Bit Bank, where you will find things like the “medium high ported Dalehead long shank,” the “Sheldon swivel ring copper green link,” and the “Sheldon butterfly flip bit waterford with spinner.”

[Showbizz]

I show at about 15 show per year. Everyone there seems to know and agree with what is a snaffle and what is a curb.

A correction is simply a name given to a specific mouthpiece on a curb. It doesn’t correct anything any more than a gag bit makes a horse gag.

[ChasPonyCat]

@NoSuchPerson

I disagree with your premise. The English world has an equally bewildering array of bits. Just spend some time perusing the selection at some place like The Horse Bit Bank, where you will find things like the “medium high ported Dalehead long shank,” the “Sheldon swivel ring copper green link,” and the “Sheldon butterfly flip bit waterford with spinner.”

I agree. Right away I immediately thought of all the threads on these forums by english riders looking for the right bit.

[findeight]

Or " what the heck is this pile of straps and metal on the International Jumpers head""?

IMO the confusion is due to lack of the knowledge of bit theory all tne way up to teaching Pros who can’t pass along knowledge they don’t have to newbies complicated by flashy marketing guaranteeing the instant gratification that seems to be where " training" is aimed these days.

Time, patience and the quest for knowledge seem to be dying concepts. Especially if it requires more then 15 minutes.

[beau159]

@Rackonteur

English bitting is so simple and straightforward.

I disagree. Look at everything you just listed. There’s just as many “options” as Western.

A snaffle is a snaffle. A curb is a curb. A pelham is a pelham. A Kimberwick (UK “Kimblewick”) is also a type of pelham.
We have french-link snaffles. Bean-mouth. Single-joint. Dr. Bristol. D-ring, loose-ring, full-cheek, fulmer. Etc.
We have curbs. Curbs have shanks and [usually] curb chains.
Kimberwicks have ported mouths, or they have jointed mouths; some have slots; the latter are called Uxeters.

@Rackonteur

Western bitting, OTOH, has snaffles with rings and “snaffles” with shanks. It has “curbs” with jointed mouthpieces. There doesn’t seem to be any agreement among western riders as to what a snaffle is and what it is not; or what a curb is and what it is not.

So does English. Do you want to call a pelham a snaffle with rings, or call it a curb with a jointed mouth?

You also forgot to mention “elevator” bits in your list of English bits. Or wait … is that a snaffle with rings? Or a pelham?

…equal confusion starting

@Rackonteur

If they could just get straight on the difference between a snaffle and a curb, and then take it from there, it would simplify things so much both for the western people and the rest of us!

And what gives you the impression that Western people don’t know the difference between a snaffle and a curb?

If you are referring to what catalogs call bits … well, I don’t trust anything catalogs say because they also have a “worming” section (as if we are putting worms into out horses). :rolleyes:

@Rackonteur

I’m not even gonna get into all the “specialist” bits – the ones with chain mouthpieces, spade mouths, and the ones that purport to do mechanically what dressage people train to do with their seats, legs, and hands – train self-carriage, head carriage, forwardness, and throughness.

I personally have no purpose to ever use a spade bit, but I will say for a horse that has been trained properly to carry one and a rider that uses it correctly, those horses are VERY well trained to seat and leg cues and can do so on a loose rein (unlike dressage). Just because the training looks different to you, doesn’t mean it is wrong.

[spotnnotfarm]

@beau159

I disagree. Look at everything you just listed. There’s just as many “options” as Western.

A snaffle is a snaffle. A curb is a curb. A pelham is a pelham. A Kimberwick (UK “Kimblewick”) is also a type of pelham.
We have french-link snaffles. Bean-mouth. Single-joint. Dr. Bristol. D-ring, loose-ring, full-cheek, fulmer. Etc.
We have curbs. Curbs have shanks and [usually] curb chains.
Kimberwicks have ported mouths, or they have jointed mouths; some have slots; the latter are called Uxeters.

So does English. Do you want to call a pelham a snaffle with rings, or call it a curb with a jointed mouth?

You also forgot to mention “elevator” bits in your list of English bits. Or wait … is that a snaffle with rings? Or a pelham?

…equal confusion starting

And what gives you the impression that Western people don’t know the difference between a snaffle and a curb?

If you are referring to what catalogs call bits … well, I don’t trust anything catalogs say because they also have a “worming” section (as if we are putting worms into out horses). :rolleyes:

I personally have no purpose to ever use a spade bit, but I will say for a horse that has been trained properly to carry one and a rider that uses it correctly, those horses are VERY well trained to seat and leg cues and can do so on a loose rein (unlike dressage). Just because the training looks different to you, doesn’t mean it is wrong.

100% perfect response! I love when people critique other disciplines they know nothing about.

[Montanas_Girl]

The definitions of the terms “snaffle” and “curb” don’t change between disciplines. There are many people (both English AND western riders), and apparently some bit manufacturers/catalog writers, who don’t understand these definitions. That doesn’t mean that the definitions changed.

Direct contact (no shanks) = snaffle.
Indirect contact/leverage (shanks) = curb (kimberwickes and pelhams are both types of curbs).

All the other words just describe the type of mouthpiece, type of ring, length of shank, etc. Elevators, gags, and hackamores fit into their own categories, obviously, regardless of discipline.

[bugsynskeeter]

Spade bits do not “do mechanically what dressage people train to do with their seats, legs, and hands – train self-carriage, head carriage, forwardness, and throughness.”

Spade bits and the like are the final level of finishing in western. The horse achieves that level of training after YEARS. In fact, most of the training for a finished bridle horse is done with a bosal…so no bit at all.

I’m not sure how this post is wanting to be about education. It has the sound of how one discipline is better than others. Do you really want to learn or do you want to pick a fight?

[NoSuchPerson]

@findeight

IMO the confusion is due to lack of the knowledge of bit theory all tne way up to teaching Pros who can’t pass along knowledge they don’t have to newbies complicated by flashy marketing guaranteeing the instant gratification that seems to be where " training" is aimed these days.

Time, patience and the quest for knowledge seem to be dying concepts. Especially if it requires more then 15 minutes.

A number of years ago, I embarked on a serious quest to find book/articles/web pages that took a scientific approach to bits. How they work, why they do what they do, what the purpose of different bits is and why they suit that purpose, etc. I found virtually nothing.

The work done by Dr. Hilary Clayton, now retired, I think, from Michigan State, and funded mostly, if not entirely, I think, by USDF, was pretty much all I found. Two computers ago, I had all that stuff bookmarked, but no longer, so I can’t share links.

One of the interesting things she found was that, contrary to what so many people believe, single jointed snaffles do not poke a horse in the roof of the mouth when you pull on the reins.

But I digress…

[findeight]

I think you’ll need to delve into sources that discuss oveall training, such as Reining, Southwest Vaquero traditions and such. The info is scattered among them, not in a centralized location. Least not that I am aware of.

[GhR009]

The western style of riding doesn’t have a problem with bitting. If you don’t want to use a western bit, don’t. If you don’t want to use ANY bit, don’t. It is amazing just how many bits work fine when used little and used light.