[QUOTE=vineyridge;8385351]
Maybe part of what is upsetting is the trend to take bit concepts that were designed for the use of two reins and using them with only one–the harsher one. Most gags were meant originally to have the snaffle rein and the gag rein. Pelhams were designed to be ridden with two reins. In short, the empirical consensus, if looking at lots of XC photographs is valid, seems to be that riding on the snaffle rein just doesn’t work very well today for many riders. Now whether that is caused by lack of foundation, holes in training, or modern courses is the question.[/QUOTE]
Not disagreeing with you, but I’m having a fascinating time looking through these Kit Houghton photos from the mid-1980s and so far, every pelham I’ve seen on XC (maybe 15 in the pictures I’ve looked at, including Mark Todd, CMP and Rodney Powell, so not exactly second-string horsemen) is being used with a converter. The only people I saw riding with two reins was Lucinda Green in a full double bridle, and Mary-Anne Tauskey in a pelham without a converter. So if using one rein where two should be is an issue, it’s not a new one, nor is it a de facto mark of poor skill or horsemanship or a need created by today’s courses. People like having less knitting to put back together.
Other interesting observations from these photos: None other than CMP using what appears to be a lever noseband. If so, probably the earliest photo I’ve seen of one. Blood in the mouth isn’t uncommon, and sometimes comes in combination with a bit with serious leverage. (From other photos, it looks like David Green wasn’t one to be constrained to a snaffle; here he is with a big gag and shadow roll combo; in others it’s the gag with a figure-8 or shadow roll with pelham and converter).
Look at how Western riders use curbs with very long shanks. I don’t know much about western riding, but as I understand it, the horrible looking curbs with nasty things like spades on the mouthpieces are the last thing that a horse gets in training. By the time the leverage is introduced, the horse will have been started bitless (bosal or side pull), gone to a snaffle, then a snaffle mouthpiece with shanks, and only after the horse is well trained, particularly in neck reining, is the curb chain added. The leverage bit is only applied in cases of emergency. Most of the time the communication is with neck rein or seat and weight. This may not be a correct description of what happens, but the Western bits that look so horrible are only used in the horse at the end of its education.
[QUOTE=NeverTime;8386170]
Not disagreeing with you, but I’m having a fascinating time looking through these Kit Houghton photos from the mid-1980s and so far, every pelham I’ve seen on XC (maybe 15 in the pictures I’ve looked at, including Mark Todd, CMP and Rodney Powell, so not exactly second-string horsemen) is being used with a converter. The only people I saw riding with two reins was Lucinda Green in a full double bridle, and Mary-Anne Tauskey in a pelham without a converter. So if using one rein where two should be is an issue, it’s not a new one, nor is it a de facto mark of poor skill or horsemanship or a need created by today’s courses. People like having less knitting to put back together.
Other interesting observations from these photos: None other than CMP using what appears to be a lever noseband. If so, probably the earliest photo I’ve seen of one. Blood in the mouth isn’t uncommon, and sometimes comes in combination with a bit with serious leverage. (From other photos, it looks like David Green wasn’t one to be constrained to a snaffle; here he is with a big gag and shadow roll combo; in others it’s the gag with a figure-8 or shadow roll with pelham and converter).
Unrelated: Awww… Bruce and Buck in Lexington, 1978.[/QUOTE]
Wow I had no idea those types of pics existed to be gone through! I noticed the first one with blood in the mouth also seemed to be a twisted wired of some type. Would love to know if they cause more cuts and bleeding that another bit. It would make sense but I would imagine getting the actual stats would be difficult.
I have one that prefers a soft mouthpiece and some leverage… in a snaffle or harder mouthpiece we end up bickering a bit, but in a pelham I can give a reminder and leave her alone - even when galloping her on the track on a windy day. Keeps everything relaxed and happy!
[QUOTE=NeverTime;8386170]
Not disagreeing with you, but I’m having a fascinating time looking through these Kit Houghton photos from the mid-1980s and so far, every pelham I’ve seen on XC (maybe 15 in the pictures I’ve looked at, including Mark Todd, CMP and Rodney Powell, so not exactly second-string horsemen) is being used with a converter. The only people I saw riding with two reins was Lucinda Green in a full double bridle, and Mary-Anne Tauskey in a pelham without a converter. So if using one rein where two should be is an issue, it’s not a new one, nor is it a de facto mark of poor skill or horsemanship or a need created by today’s courses. People like having less knitting to put back together.
Other interesting observations from these photos: None other than CMP using what appears to be a lever noseband. If so, probably the earliest photo I’ve seen of one. Blood in the mouth isn’t uncommon, and sometimes comes in combination with a bit with serious leverage. (From other photos, it looks like David Green wasn’t one to be constrained to a snaffle; here he is with a big gag and shadow roll combo; in others it’s the gag with a figure-8 or shadow roll with pelham and converter).
Unrelated: Awww… Bruce and Buck in Lexington, 1978.[/QUOTE]
I love bits, I have my favorites and what I like in the show ring and at home are often different. In the show ring I like to have quick response and since I have spent a lot of time in the hunters I wanted something that I didn’t need to touch much.
I do think by having more technical courses you need a quicker response from the horse. I also thing it is hard to judge and criticize what they are using on course at a big event. I would bet most of those riders probably do use snaffles at home 90% of the time.
I also think the change from TB’s who I agree tend to be ones that prefer soft and no leverage to WB’s who often need a little more to respond is part of why for the change.
Also I have to think that many of the riders of past would have loved to use some of the bits we have today on certain horses.
Where the stronger bits play a roll are not just for overall control but the difference between taking 5 strides to accomplish change in pace/balance can be done in 2 (just a random example) where it hurts? It is easier to end up with the horse behind your leg from too much hand. My goal when I ride is to use something as soft as I can in their mouth that also allows me to be soft as well.
I honestly think the decision to go with one rein instead of two comes down to what it takes to gather yourself after a bad jump into a combination (my first though being a water complex).
Imagine your horse just took the long distance into the water and landed in a heap with your reins all strewn from here to tomorrow. You have a bending 4 stride to a narrow corner followed by a going 5 stride to an even narrower corner. It’s a lot easier to collect up one set of reins and navigate the combination as opposed to two reins, trying to make sure you’re holding them correctly, AND navigating the combination.
I’m not going to try to argue any bitting choices as some just frustrate me, but on my eventing pony (the little xc beast) I used to ride her in a happy mouth elevator on the bottom ring. She was always schooled with two rings but the snaffle rein was removed for ease of “re-gathering” as I’m a rein slider if I think I’m going to get in her face. She was schooled on the 2nd ring at home and the 3rd ring off the farm. She was the loopy rein type, that liked no contact over the jump and liked an open rein for steering, but needed the extra leverage to get her from freight train pony to powerhouse jumping pony.
Also, on a side note, I thought I saw a picture of someone using a gag with a running martingale… doesn’t that defeat the purpose of the gag?
No, it doesn’t. you hear that a lot but the running martingale only comes into play if a horse has its head very high or is tossing its head around when correctly adjusted. A gag is for horses that tend to put their heads too low. So that combination could be very appropriate for a horse that tended to travel with its head low, but sometimes has a head tossing problem. You see it a lot in the jumpers. I see no problem whatsoever with a gag and running martingale though I don’t have that combo on any of my horses. if the running is too short it’s stupid but a RM should never be too short anyway.
people assume runnings are just for high heads and forget about the tossing, but tossing is a real issue and one that it’s very appropriate to add a running because it can ruin your canter very quickly if a horse starts getting fussy with its head and you lose the connection between leg and hand. This is especially true when the jumps are big enough that impulsion is really important. Some horses can feel a lot steadier in a running and that can save rails when it matters.
With the gag, you don’t want the head to be too high, you just want it up where it ought to be. It ought not to engage the RM correctly adjusted or you are using it too much.
Well, head tossing is not ideal at all but lots of jumpers have lovely flatwork and get very strong and excited over fences. It’s a lot smarter to stick a RM on one of these than to get a broken nose because you don’t want anyone to think you look silly in the pictures. Of course, you keep working on the flatwork and the rideability all the time but most upper level jumpers are quirky to some degree. My best horses have always been the most difficult ones. My junior jumper went in the ring in that W gag with a running martingale for a while, he was a total freight train and heavy on the forehand but when he was corrected he would toss his head occasionally (“I don’t WANT to canter on my haunches, mom! I like cantering on my face, darn you!”) He had beautiful flatwork when there weren’t 4’6 oxers in front of him. He flatted in a plain D, which was 90% of the time. He jumped once a week at most, a lot less in the off season. Eventually he jumped in the D with no martingale but he had to work his way down. Rubber gag, Pelham, 2 ring happy mouth elevator, then the D. I had him showing for 15 years so I got to see him transform from wild thing to kid-safe packer but it takes time. Meanwhile, I don’t see any reason to sit at home and do nothing because the horse isn’t going to get the miles he needs to become the kid-safe packer unless he gets out there doing stuff. And for that, a horse like mine sometimes needs a reasonable increase in bit.
I prefer leverage to twisted bits, I have never had any kind of blood result from such a bit. Big fan of French link and happy mouth mild elevators like the 2 ring and the beval bit on a strong horse. I usually ride with 2 reins but don’t get all judgey about one.
My horses now go in a loose ring HS Duo and a RS Dynamic D, so I’m not really the poster child for bitting up, but it has its place.
I used to do weird approaches to retraining … go to a hackamore and learn to trot big fences. I actually trotted a large course (4’ field hunters) on a horse that was a show jumper that raced his fences at breakneck speed over 5’ courses … that was hair-raising. Field hunters are supposed to canter … but I got 1st because noone believed it could be done. That horse calmed way down and became a beautiful jumper in a regular eggbutt snaffle.
I’ve tried bitting up on a couple of horses in for retraining and they took off running backwards … they knew exactly what was going on, which is why they were in for retraining.
[QUOTE=Lady Eboshi;8386114]
…
Your trainer allowing you to use a double bridle was up there with getting your toe shoes in ballet–it meant you had reached a certain milestone in skill and preparation.
…[/QUOTE]
This entire post (I snipped a small bit) was a great summary of the journey through hunt seat bitting, and should be published somewhere accessible.
And learning to use this bit being a milestone in a rider’s career was so true of the program I learned in for 5 years. It was such a big moment to be taught to use a Pelham (the program didn’t use doubles; too expensive :winkgrin: ). A rider had arrived, was a Real Rider now … until you found out how inept you were with a Pelham, and the time it took to master it! :lol:
We had such patient and forgiving horses who were kinder to us than we were to them, until we started to get it. But every rider that stayed with that program did learn to use the two-rein Pelham with fairness and confidence, intuitively. :winkgrin:
Drop the curb rein and ride on the snaffle, until you were back in clear going and could gather the reins. I was better at doing that then walking on flat ground, I think.
If you could keep a loopy bit of curb rein under a finger while all this was going on, good, the picture would look better. But if it was too complicated, let it go and keep the snaffle. It took practice but wasn’t hard once it was ingrained.
I can’t say this would be a good solution for cross-country today, or better than the other options now available. Or that it would work for UL riding generally.
It took many, many hours of riding in varied conditions and paces, and many mistakes, forgiving horses and infuriated instructors before a two-rein Pelham became second nature for the riders who stuck with the program that I was in long enough to learn how to do this instinctively. And honestly, that was probably 10% of the number who started in our first beginner course. But back in the day I felt like my hands had their own separate brain to manage a two-rein Pelham smoothly, kindly and through all kinds of chaos.
That said - the reason we used the Pelham and were required to learn it to advance to certain activities is not because Pelhams were wonderful - I don’t mean to assert that by any means. It was that there weren’t many other choices of things you could buy. People sometimes rigged up their own ideas. And there were probably more options available for riders on the east coast than the limited offerings in the catalogs through which we in the west bought almost everything English.
Pelhams and doubles were by no means an ideal solution for many needs, and I am very glad there are more choices today. Long shanks in particular were easily and abusively misused. They were well known and reputed as dangerous in the wrong hands, on the wrong horses.
In fact, I believe that the long-shanked Pelham, when used severely, is excruciatingly painful for a horse, because of the extreme reactions if either the rider, or the horse, or both, were insufficiently schooled or made a serious mistake at the wrong time. Horses didn’t just resist, they reared and became frantic. In the worst incidents with long-shanked Pelhams, some horses would rear up and go over backward to escape the bit - that was rare but it happened. Few riders that I knew were willing to ride with more than a medium shank.
Today, I think something good that has come of the evolution of bits is that, for all the confusing angles, levers and pulleys, they don’t seem to be getting those kinds of extreme and dangerous reactions from horses. They may actually be avoiding the most extreme pain points. I’ll give credit that this is probably the intent of most of these bits.
Very good summary. These days reining futurities are required to be in a snaffle.
I’m told by a reining rider friend that some horses that do futurities for a couple of years (I think is the qualification) and then go to the breeding shed will never show in a curb at all.
In western riding, curb/leverage bits are not for steering. That used to be the case in English riding as well - but no more.
I think this is where the current trends in elaborate bitting with only one rein are somewhat confusing to some of us old fogies. A leverage bit with one rein is steering off the action of the curb. The leverage bit IS the direct contact bit.
And it seems to be working, in many cases. But for some of us who were taught that using a curb/leverage bit to steer on direct contact was a mortal sin worthy of being told to get off and walk back to the barn … well, I’m trying to wrap my brain around how to think about the current trends in bits.
I am not for over-regulating and and trying to control rider choices with a lot of rules. I am for using rules to protect horses, where experience has shown it is necessary. Do these bits represent that point, in general practice? I’m honestly not sure.
How many bleeding mouths are actually out there? Can we say specifically what caused the bleeding? Hands - bit design - improper adjustment or tack?
What, exactly, is it that needs to be regulated about cross-country bitting? The effect of the bitting, or the bit itself? If it’s just bleeding mouths, that’s one path. If it’s the bit - which aspects of the bit?
Port size? direct contact? shank/leverage length? gag stoppers? some combination of all these and other factors? It seems to me that it is going to be very difficult to pinpoint specifics of this complex subject, unless it sticks to just very basic principals.
If these things can’t be pinpointed fairly definitely, new bitting rules will be confusing and open to interpretation and argument. That’s going to do more harm than good. IMO
At this time, at least, it’s not clear to me what direction new rules about bitting should take. There is a general feeling that things have gone too far and enough riders are making poor choices that it’s time for some rules - but what rules, exactly? Maybe there are others who are very clear as to what they think should not be allowed, and what should be.
[QUOTE=fordtraktor;8388093]
Well, head tossing is not ideal at all but lots of jumpers have lovely flatwork and get very strong and excited over fences. It’s a lot smarter to stick a RM on one of these than to get a broken nose because you don’t want anyone to think you look silly in the pictures. Of course, you keep working on the flatwork and the rideability all the time but most upper level jumpers are quirky to some degree. My best horses have always been the most difficult ones. My junior jumper went in the ring in that W gag with a running martingale for a while, he was a total freight train and heavy on the forehand but when he was corrected he would toss his head occasionally (“I don’t WANT to canter on my haunches, mom! I like cantering on my face, darn you!”) He had beautiful flatwork when there weren’t 4’6 oxers in front of him. He flatted in a plain D, which was 90% of the time. He jumped once a week at most, a lot less in the off season. Eventually he jumped in the D with no martingale but he had to work his way down. Rubber gag, Pelham, 2 ring happy mouth elevator, then the D. I had him showing for 15 years so I got to see him transform from wild thing to kid-safe packer but it takes time. Meanwhile, I don’t see any reason to sit at home and do nothing because the horse isn’t going to get the miles he needs to become the kid-safe packer unless he gets out there doing stuff. And for that, a horse like mine sometimes needs a reasonable increase in bit.
I prefer leverage to twisted bits, I have never had any kind of blood result from such a bit. Big fan of French link and happy mouth mild elevators like the 2 ring and the beval bit on a strong horse. I usually ride with 2 reins but don’t get all judgey about one.
My horses now go in a loose ring HS Duo and a RS Dynamic D, so I’m not really the poster child for bitting up, but it has its place.[/QUOTE]
ANY horse is at the mercy of the hands on the other end of the bit. I’ve probably used at least 30 or more different designs of bits, and NEVER ONCE do I remember cutting a horse’s mouth with one, or otherwise wielding it such that his mouth shows blood.
If that is a “thing” now I have to conclude the horses are insufficiently trained or unsuitable on some level to the questions being asked. TIME costs money today and it’s harder to take the time truly needed when owners want results.
Well, I’ve seen blood in a horse’s mouth before. The bit was a sealtex wrapped eggbutt snaffle and the trainer had some of the softest hands I’ve ever seen. The horse just bit its tongue. Blood doesn’t always mean anything nefarious.
