PDA

View Full Version : Why are stirrups required?



mg
Oct. 2, 2009, 03:27 PM
So I got into a motorcycle accident a couple weeks ago and finally got an MRI and an appointment with an orthopedist and found that I have a small fracture on my tibial plateau. For the next 6 weeks, I'm to keep weight off the leg. While not riding at all would probably be ideal, my orthopedist was more concerned if I fell off than the actual riding. So I will be doing my riding without stirrups so I don't put weight on the joint.

I thought maybe I could do a schooling dressage show during this period, so I checked the rules regarding stirrups and found that you have to use them.

DR117
4. Unless indicated on a Federation Dispensation Certificate, International Para-Equestrian Classification Card (FEI PE Card), USEF Para-Equestrian Classification Card, or Presidential Modification letter, the use of stirrups is required. BOD 1/18/09 Effective 4/1/09

I was just wondering why this is?

poltroon
Oct. 2, 2009, 03:30 PM
I always thought it was a silly rule.

As it says, you can get an exception for a disability. Since it's a schooling show, you probably don't need to go all the way to USEF. I would just call the organizer and explain the injury and ask to ride without stirrups. I can't imagine a schooling show organizer turning that request down.

(Heck, at our schooling shows, some people ride in western saddles.)

mg
Oct. 2, 2009, 03:33 PM
I always thought it was a silly rule.

As it says, you can get an exception for a disability. Since it's a schooling show, you probably don't need to go all the way to USEF. I would just call the organizer and explain the injury and ask to ride without stirrups. I can't imagine a schooling show organizer turning that request down.

(Heck, at our schooling shows, some people ride in western saddles.)

That's true and a good point. I'll definitely try that.

Now I'm just curious about the rule and its purpose! :)

bort84
Oct. 2, 2009, 03:57 PM
It's probably similar to why you need to use a bit and reins and ride in an english type saddle. It's just the way it is and the way the sport was built = ) Though I'm sure most of the top riders could do a darn good job without stirrups too.

twofatponies
Oct. 2, 2009, 04:13 PM
If everyone uses the same equipment, then they can judge the riding and the horse, not "well, she did well, considering she has/doesn't have stirrups/a saddle/such and such type of bit/bridle". It eliminates more variables for judging, I'd imagine.

InsideLeg2OutsideRein
Oct. 2, 2009, 04:35 PM
Not a silly rule. Stirrups actually serve a purpose (gulp) in stabilizing and enabling more precision in the application of your leg aids (see: Steinbrecht: "The Gymnasium of the Horse").

poltroon
Oct. 2, 2009, 04:42 PM
Not a silly rule. Stirrups actually serve a purpose (gulp) in stabilizing and enabling more precision in the application of your leg aids (see: Steinbrecht" The Gymnasium of the Horse").

It's not that they don't serve a purpose, but why should they be required? If, for whatever crazy reason I have, I want to ride without stirrups, I don't see why they should be compulsory. A saddle pad is not required, for example. Tall boots also stabilize your leg, but jodhpur boots are permitted.

InsideLeg2OutsideRein
Oct. 2, 2009, 04:49 PM
It's not that they don't serve a purpose, but why should they be required? If, for whatever crazy reason I have, I want to ride without stirrups, I don't see why they should be compulsory. A saddle pad is not required, for example. Tall boots also stabilize your leg, but jodhpur boots are permitted.

Lol, why not play basket ball with tennis balls then?

poltroon
Oct. 2, 2009, 04:51 PM
A dressage saddle isn't required, either. I can compete in a jumping saddle if I like. So long as it has stirrups. ;)

bort84
Oct. 2, 2009, 05:26 PM
A dressage saddle isn't required, either. I can compete in a jumping saddle if I like. So long as it has stirrups. ;)

Isn't a dressage-type saddle required once you hit the FEI levels?

mg
Oct. 2, 2009, 06:06 PM
Isn't a dressage-type saddle required once you hit the FEI levels?

yes

Mach Two
Oct. 2, 2009, 06:44 PM
If I were you, I'd drop that leather a hole, and add some latex wrap to the stirrup to make it tacky, so you don't need pressure to keep it on your foot. Or you could slip a big rubber band under your foot, over your spur, and loop it under the stirrup, and then over your toe to keep the stirrup on with the one leather longer.
And check the rule book...but no, all you safety sticklers, she will not be tied to the saddle and in danger.

Foxtrot's
Oct. 2, 2009, 07:46 PM
For me - I sat deeper and my horse went better for me without stirrups (phew).

slc2
Oct. 2, 2009, 07:52 PM
"why are stirrups required"

because it's too easy to ride without them.

I don't think the para rider accomodations are intended for someone with a temporary injury.

And I think if the doctor thinks it would be really bad if you fell on you, I think you shouldn't ride. And maybe not be at the barn, easy to drop a horse, a trunk or something heavy on you.

Petstorejunkie
Oct. 2, 2009, 09:41 PM
I have no clue why they are required. I've ridden in turn of the century dressage and capriole saddles from the spanish riding school, and they didn't even have a stirrup bar to attach one to!

mbm
Oct. 2, 2009, 11:08 PM
most likely becuase in the "old" days the folks competing were military. and mostly they competed in jumping saddles (cause they jumped too).... and the guys that wrote the FEI rules were military.....

so because the military probably required stirrups (and other equipment) the rules of the first dressgae competitions would of required the same.

also, i agree with the person that said - to be able to judge you need everyone using the same equipment.

dressage is, to a large degree about tradition. we train our horses to traditional ideals, using traditional equipment etc.

Alagirl
Oct. 3, 2009, 04:40 PM
it's been so long, how much weigt does one put in the stirrup in dressage?

does it say you have to have your foot in it - at all times?

slc2
Oct. 3, 2009, 05:22 PM
Even if the rules don't say your feet have to be in the stirrups, I'm sure that one would still run into problems trying to get around the stirrup rule that way. And I'm sure the goal of the rule isn't just to have the stirrups on the saddle and not use them.

It's just too easy to ride without stirrups. The rider doesn't have to correct his seat and leg.

There was an older instructor at Morven Park who used to say something the likes of, 'Any da**** sailor can ride without stirrups, but put them on and one by one they all fall off'.

Another example of 'Equestrian Hyperbole', but the concept is true.

Coreene
Oct. 3, 2009, 06:18 PM
Or you could stay off the horse and not run the risk of further damage.

Piaffing
Oct. 3, 2009, 11:03 PM
What's the rush to go to a show. Stay home and work on your seat.

AllWeatherGal
Oct. 4, 2009, 10:51 AM
Cannot answer the question of why they are required but did just discussed the question of whether they are yesterday with a judge. Her recollection from a recent exam is that riders (without dispensation) may complete only one movement without stirrups. If they don't take them up, the judge may (must?) stop the test and require that they return feet to irons.

I couldn't find anything in my literature about this rule and have asked her to find her source when she can.

Random google find:

Rules about what to wear and what to put on your horse in great detail!!!!
http://www.usef.org/documents/FormsPubs/DressageEquipmentBooklet.pdf

Dressage test versus Equitation test judging criteria
http://www.usef.org/documents/international/dressage/Judging-Guidelines.pdf

dalpal
Oct. 4, 2009, 05:35 PM
Actually in certain incidents/with approval of USDF you can ride without stirrups. Robin Brueckmann does indeed compete without stirrups due to health issues.

http://usparalympics.org/athlete/athlete/2045

oldenmare
Oct. 4, 2009, 06:08 PM
Just for clarity - Robin Brueckmann also has an USEF cert of dispensation for the no-stirrups - have seen it up close and personal myself.

As someone who manages a number of schooling (as well as recognized shows) - but for the purpose of the OP - as the manager of multiple schooling shows - call the manager of the show AND be willing to provide a note from your doctor re the no-stirrups.

I would permit you (with original doc's note in my hot little hand) to compete without stirrups at a SCHOOLING show.

The two reasons I would require a note (as I know *someone* will question it):
- as a legitimate reason for permitting someone to ride without stirrups
- as documentation in the event of further injury/fall that would help mitigate any (if any) liability on the show's behalf.

goeslikestink
Oct. 5, 2009, 03:02 AM
stirrups are for decoration legs are for direction

slc2
Oct. 5, 2009, 05:40 AM
I don't think that's really true.

Stirrups are really the test if the rider has a correct seat. If he can't ride with stirrups in dressage, he is lacking a correct leg.

People are too used to admiring bareback riding, or jumping without stirrups, or just admiring someone who doesn't fall off when the stirrups are taken away, so they don't get this.

egontoast
Oct. 5, 2009, 09:30 AM
why are stirrups required"

because it's too easy to ride without them.





HEY! Not really. For example, stirrups are in fact very useful for remounting when you have to get back on your 17 + hh horse on the trail after picking a violet, moving a hazard or removing a pebble from the hoof.

Not a problem for slc as she is no doubt an expert vaulter and can get back on her high horse in all conditions... without stirrups
:)

<3OTTB
Oct. 5, 2009, 09:57 AM
I'd get a dr's note. Maybe call the show's organizers ahead of time and and explain your situation and then provide them with a note.

<3OTTB
Oct. 5, 2009, 09:59 AM
I don't think that's really true.

Stirrups are really the test if the rider has a correct seat. If he can't ride with stirrups in dressage, he is lacking a correct leg.

People are too used to admiring bareback riding, or jumping without stirrups, or just admiring someone who doesn't fall off when the stirrups are taken away, so they don't get this.

I SOOOO agree with this. In fact I've had stirrups taken away during lessons to show where my leg should be. Not as easy to keep the position when the stirrup is back on.

egontoast
Oct. 5, 2009, 10:03 AM
OK, I get it now.

The stirrups are required by the rules so dressage won't be ""too easy"" ;-))

slc2
Oct. 5, 2009, 06:09 PM
I don't really think it's exactly that it's 'too simple' without stirrups, but I do think it's easier. And in fact I think it's the dilemma of the training and first level rider that he takes away his stirrups and feels great, and takes them back and says, oh my god I can't ride with these things, mostly because he hasn't yet opened his hip. But I think stirrups are required for competition because it is a traditional way of measuring the correctness of the rider's seat and leg, just as the old guy at Morven Park used to say.

AllWeatherGal
Oct. 6, 2009, 10:04 AM
As promised, I still can't answer the original question, but judge says according to the judge's testing the answer is that stating that they are required equipment implies that using that equipment is required.