Double bridle. Why?

First off, I think this thread needs some smiles.

Now, on to business:
Double bridles in and of themselves are not abusive, however what I see in the ring today and in the warmup ring is telling me that some riders are misusing them.
Why would it be so bad to allow snaffles at the upper level?

Quote:

If the sport has come so far off track that the very fundamentals are being rocked anyways (behind vertical, disunion at trot, etc etc etc) then why not this one?

Again, I'm not only comparing this to Rollkur, I'm also saying that our top riders right now are quite off-track with dressage, Rollkur is just one of many. What about this:

or this:

JDI- I think you are doing an excellent job intelligently and politely debating your point!

I completly agree. By no means do I think it should be banned, in educated, light hands it is a wonderful tool. But why is it mandatory? That is like saying it should be a illegal to show hunters without a standing martingale. They serve their purpose, but no horse should NEED to show in one. If a horse can do it's job without in a snaffle or without a standing martingale, let them

I think rules should ban the use of too much equipment, never ban using the lightest , gentlest tack possible

I have to agree with JDI's point on this one. While I have absolutely NO problem with people riding in double bridles, I don't think it should be a requirement. If someone thinks they can do it in a snaffle, then let them do it. If they think they need a double, let them use a double. It should be the educated rider's prerogative to choose which bit they want to put their horses in. I'm not going to pretend that I'm close to competing in Grand Prix dressage, but both of my trainers ARE Grand Prix level riders, and I've watched and ridden many of the top level horses at my barn in snaffles. The ONLY reason some of the horses are schooled in doubles is because it's required - otherwise, you can bet they'd be happily performing -very well, might I add- in their snaffles.
If you want to use a piece of equipment & are educated enough to use it properly, then cool, more power to you. But a piece of equipment shouldn't be forced upon someone who, truth be told, would really rather be using something else.

Outside a few not so good riders, dressage is in a reasonably healthy state. MOST of the grass root riders do just fine.asonably

This whole thread is in fact obsolete simply because if anyone had actually done their research they would have realized that having the double as optional at the FEI level is ALREADY before the FEI rules committee.

So for that person that has relatives all over in Europe, maybe they don't communicate very well with you?

MIE, I think most of us understand that the double bridle is a wonderful tool. The question is, why does it need to be required? Nobody is trying to say that a snaffle is superior to a double. I think the majority of the people here believe that the use of bridle/bit should be a choice and not a requirement. And while many riders use a double with ease, there are some who prefer a snaffle. These people should not have to use a piece of equipment that is not familiar to them if they want to reach the upper levels. Do I think the majority of the professional riders would suddenly switch to a snaffle if this rule was changed? No, I do not. But some may, and new riders might start taking a horse to the upper levels without a double bridle. I have seen valid arguements that the double bridle is marvelous, but I don't see any valid arguements explaining why they must be required.

ps-JDI that piaffe clip is from a GH lecture! Did you go to one? I did but they didn't show that clip, he only showed us some clips of a rein-lame horse.

i agree with JDI, i like double bridles and think they look very elegant, but i dont think it should be mandatory. im not sure if its madatory in the states, but here in canada it is. and i ride serious dressage too, but i dont think they should be mandatory, i have seen double bridles used badly because the rider was getting mad at the horse. and with the sport these days people that really shouldnt be riding at a high level are, and using double bridles when they shouldnt be.

I don't know Hon. I'm not on the committee, nor was I alive when it became a rule. I do not ride at Upper Level Dressage nor plan on doing it.

It is a rule period. We can argue, hold our breath, stomp and whine about it all we want, but that is not going to change anything.

Tradition is tradition, rules are rules.

I had no part in making them, but if I were at those levels, I would respect the sport, the committee and follow them.

None of those riders are forced to compeate at those levels. They accept the rules and abide by them.

If one doesn't like that, then they don't have to ride at those levels.

It is what it is. Period. I accept it.

I don't know again. I am not at these levels. I am not on the commitee, nor do I ride or train under GP level Dressage Riders. No one here has or does - except Spyder.

I believe the two most quallified people on this forum who really have a leg to stand on with this topic, are Spyder and Anabel.

~~~~

If I want to join the Fox Hunt Club that is in my area - are any area to that matter of fact. I have to follow their rules. Their rules, that I chose to be a part of.

If I am a Fox Hunter, being a Woman, I am not permitted to wear a red jacket. I have to wear a black jacket with a blue collar. Do I like it? Nope. I want to wear a red jacket, but rules are rules.

Tradition is tradition.

I am not allowed to wear black tack. So that would mean I would have ot invest in brown - traditional. I hate brown tack, but that is what I have to abide by, if I choose to join their organization.

I understand that this has nothing to do with a bit in a horses mouth - but I am trying to get the point of rules across and tradition and how things are ran - whether lower level riders like it or not - it is what it is.

If you don't want to have to use a Double Bridle, don't ride in the levels of dressage where it is mandatory. Period.

I don't like the rules and politics of the Hunter World - so I choose to stay away from that world.

~~~~

I see this with any bit in a horses mouth - I've seen this done with Snaffles. With Waterfords. With 3 Ring Elevators, Kimberwicks, Loose Rings, - shall I go on?

I see all kinds of bits in horse mouths, when they shouldn't be - period. Whether they are in a Western Saddle or an English Saddle.

Regardless of what sport you are involved in - this uneducated B/S happens.

And the Riding Levels - again, that goes with any equestrian sport.

Just because someone says they ride at A Circuit in the Hunter/Jumper World - doesn't mean they should be. Just because someone is on a College Equestrian Team - doesn't mean they are any good at riding.

Just because someone is compeating at Prelim Level Eventing - doesn't mean they should.

~~~~~

Thank you Spyder. We'll haveto leave it in their hands. We have no control over the matter.

I agree... Dressage is supposed to be about how well you can train your horse and if they can do everything without a bridle, well obviously they're better trained! I have very little respect left for competitive dressage.

MIE, it's just a friendly debate - I don't plan on changing the world, but it would be awesome if it was changed. If I had the time, I'd perhaps see about being on some sort of "snaffle committee" haha!
Anyways, Spyder, thank you for informing us about that point, I think it's a wonderful step forwards. I would LOVE to see some upper level riders in a snaffle!!

If everyone had that attitude, then women would still not be allowed to vote. The ONLY way to change rules is by argueing, being vocal, educating people, and asking for change. How do you think the fact that the change is being put to the committee now, came about? I don't think it was because of NOBODY argueing the point.

Wrong. At least one other person in this thread has stated that they train under GP level dressage riders.

This thread isn't obsolete. It's a discussion for heavens sake! People can discuss whatever they like. Even if the rule is changed, we have every right to discuss why double bridles USED to be required.

JDI - You are a saint. My head would have filled with steam by now, lol!