Proposed rule change - no more double at 3rd

[KathyK]

https://www.usef.org/documents/ruleChanges/439-15.pdf

IMHO the double never should have been permitted at third level. I hope this passes. I have seen way too many people using the curb to achieve "collection."

[MaryC]

We just recently did our first 3rd level test - in the double because there's less "discussion" about who gets to carry whom and she says straighter between my aids (and yes, I get that she should ALWAYS carry herself, I should be able to keep her straight, yadda yadda regardless of the bit, and I rarely school in the double) My curb reins are usually almost loopy, though. That said, I completely agree with the rule change. There's a lot that should be confirmed before adding in the double, and I know in my case it would be too easy to ignore some of our training issues when they're "hidden" by the bridle.

[galopp]

The point of a full bridle is very specific use of each bit for purpose, but collectabilty must exist is a snaffle, that the horse is up/open/folding the hind legs. THe curb is a refinement. Too many start light collection (second), and then use the curb (with torqued) to lower/close the horse immediately. It is not the use of a curb, the horse must be in a confirmed collection first, with a degree of lightness/self carriage/ability to be checked by uberstreichen/descente de main first.

[Shadowfax]

In the breed world people introduce the double when the horse is very young, 3 or 4. They put it in like normal, ride off the snaffle, jiggle the curb once or twice, and then go back to riding in the snaffle. When the horse is ready for the curb he already has the experience in his formative years of carrying both bits and has a basic understanding of the curb action.

[HafDressage]

I think the double at 3rd is fine. Of course, there are some that abuse it, but there are some that abuse whips and spurs and nosebands, etc. and we allow those things (and rightfully so). So, in all cases we trust people to do what is right by the horse.

My horse will likely go in the double at 3rd (hopefully this year) and that is because he just has more respect for it. I do, of course, rotate it with the snaffle, but at a show I would likely opt for a double. Whereas he might decide to get strong (and he has a shorter neck, so I mean STRONG) in a snaffle because he knows he can, he won't test the double. This is especially the case in things like lengthenings, where he likes to pull with the shoulder instead of push with the hind and thereby get super strong in the hand. So, it's not about torquing his neck down or compressing, it just about having a tool available when necessary.

[MagicEm]

If used correctly, I think certain horses can benefit from a double at 3rd.

However, that said, I support the proposed rule change. I know several people who struggle with movements in 2nd level (movements that are traditionally designed to prep and prefer for 3rd level) who skip ahead to 3rd b/c they prefer the patterns and think b/c they can use a double that it's easier. Then their 3rd level tests reflect these "holes." I think the proposed rule change should give those riders less reason to skip over or speed through 2nd level, and this should theoretically be helpful in the long run.

[lorilu]

No, they will skip right to 4th..........

2nd is really hard, it is where the foundations of the upper levels are based. Riders skip to 3rd because the double lets them fake it.. Now, they will skip up to 4th, after all, if a horse has a change and the HP, what much else is different at 4th? A walk P rather than ToH? The "beginnings" of a CP?

IMO the only real answer is to get the judges to really mark down signs of resistance to the bridle or bad riding, Open mouths. pulled in shortened necks. etc. Only then will it stop, because no one wants a low score on their record.

And remember, lots of damage can be done with a snaffle!!

[Ganas]

IMO the only real answer is to get the judges to really mark down signs of resistance to the bridle or bad riding, Open mouths. pulled in shortened necks. etc. Only then will it stop, because no one wants a low score on their record.

I sooo agree with this.

[boots-aregard]

IMO the only real answer is to get the judges to really mark down signs of resistance to the bridle or bad riding, Open mouths. pulled in shortened necks. etc. Only then will it stop, because no one wants a low score on their record.

I sooo agree with this.

I agree, too. It's an interesting question -- when a flaw should be addressed by a rule versus when a flaw should be addressed by judging.

[Ganas]

IMO the only real answer is to get the judges to really mark down signs of resistance to the bridle or bad riding, Open mouths. pulled in shortened necks. etc. Only then will it stop, because no one wants a low score on their record.

I sooo agree with this.

I agree, too. It's an interesting question -- when a flaw should be addressed by a rule versus when a flaw should be addressed by judging.

I've always had the opinion that you can't fake dressage. So part of me doesn't really understand why there's a need to have bitting rules such as that one.

[galopp]

There isnt IF the judge doesnt accept the negative impact what occurs the result of a torqued curb/compressed outline. It was put in the first place because of teacher who wanted riders to be able to control the horses and show mid levels more quickly. The question to ask is: is there refinement/collection/reasoning behind the introduction of the bit.

[Chisamba]

If no one would object to seeing a well trained horse show at third in a double, the poorlyv trained or rushed ones should be addressed by judging.

No one wishes to hold individuals accountable directly, so they try to fix things by making new rules, rather than making sure the old rules are followed before changing then.

This is a comment on rule making in general, rather than just this specific proposal.

[Kathy Johnson]

Back in the old days, there was no double at third but there were no flying changes. Then they put the flying changes in. Then they put the double back in. I think the level of collection needed to facilitate the changes is something to consider.

[musical comedy]

Back in the old days, there was no double at third but there were no flying changes. Then they put the flying changes in. Then they put the double back in. I think the level of collection needed to facilitate the changes is something to consider.

There was a period circa 2003-2004 when the double was not allowed at third but there were flying changes at 3-2 and 3-3, but not at 3-1.

There are more and more horses showing PSG in just a snaffle and getting their tempis just fine. I think it's a good rule change.

[Kathy Johnson]

Good point. I always wondered if it was a cop out, because generally, it's starting the changes that's hard, and once they have the singles, the tempis aren't so bad. I wondered if they were allowing the double because of the control it gives when starting the changes at shows.

But...I am divided on the question. I have also seen upper level horses that could not tolerate a double bridle, and I wonder if this is a hole in their training, and the snaffle rule is a cheat for them (like riding bitless can be a cheat if your horse won't tolerate a bit).

[svvdressage]

I have heard that this proposal was withdrawn