Double bridle debate continues – as FEI dressage committee has its say

The FEI dressage committee has said it is in favour of double bridles remaining compulsory at international grand prix level — 2GBMKXF Nose sports red horse in the bridle. Portrait stallion in the double bridle. Horse muzzle close up. Dressage horse. Equestrian sport.

(Image credit: Lucy Merrell)

The FEI dressage committee is “in favour” of keeping the double bridle compulsory at the top levels of international grand prix – as the debate continues.

The FEI independent ethics and wellbeing commission’s recommendation to make double bridles optional in grand prix dressage – and spurs optional in any FEI discipline – came to light when the International Dressage Riders Club (IDRC) and International Dressage Trainers Club (IDTC) published a letter strongly opposing the proposal (news, 6 Oct).

The letter, which has since been removed from the groups’ websites, raised points including their opinion that opposition to the double bridle stems from a “lack of understanding“ of how and why it is used, that double bridles and spurs used properly allow riders to give defined aids, and that making them optional would have “no positive impact on horse welfare”. In response, the FEI said the proposal was part of an ongoing consultation process – and an interim report will be presented at next month’s general assembly.

The matter has continued to be a talking point and in an update on 14 October, the FEI gave H&H further information on how the recommendation arose. The FEI spokesman said the ethics and wellbeing commission met in August and agreed to submit six recommendations on “technical/sport aspects, and research and education” to the FEI. The technical/sport recommendations were shared with the technical committees, and on 20 September the dressage committee discussed the proposals, during which it was highlighted that under the current rules, double bridles are optional up to CDI2* level – but mandatory at CDI3* and upwards.

Last week IDTC president David Hunt wrote to H&H (letters, 13 October) after the organisation “heard some of the reaction” to the IDRC and IDTC letter. He said the organisations’ opposition to the proposal was based on the “optional” aspect, and said it was put forward as “advancing horse welfare” – but if something is deemed harmful he believes it should be banned. He added that “welfare and sport issues must not be confused”.

“There is no valid reason to keep the double bridle mandatory. If a rider thinks his or her horse would perform better in a snaffle, why not let them? Everybody can keep riding with the double bridle if they think it works best. The jury still looks at all the same markers regardless of their bridle. We’ve given the riders in the Netherlands this option in the last 15 years and there has been absolutely no problems, the same goes for use of spurs. It’s disappointing that these suggestions are dismissed without any substantial arguments”.

Stay in touch with all the news in the run-up to and throughout the major shows and events during 2026 and beyond with a Horse & Hound subscription. Subscribe today for all you need to know ahead of these major events, plus online reports on the action as it happens from our expert team of reporters and in-depth analysis in our special commemorative magazines. Have a subscription already? Set up your unlimited website access now

TOPICS

Since joining H&H in 2018, Becky has covered a broad range of equestrian news including welfare matters, veterinary studies, FEI Tribunal hearings and road safety campaigns. She has also interviewed top riders including Scott Brash, John Whitaker and Ian Stark, to name just a few. Becky’s reporting has taken her to Canada for Spruce Meadows and France for Pau five-star, as well as the Royal Highland and Blair Castle International Horse Trials closer to home. She was also a key part of the remote reporting team for the Tokyo Olympics and the Europeans.

Double bridle debate continues – as FEI dressage committee has its say

“This change, introduced in 2019, reflects a progression in the level of skills of the athlete and training of the horse from low and medium level to the highest level of performance,” said the spokesman.

“The dressage committee is in favour of maintaining the double bridle compulsory at grand prix level.”

The spokesman added that a final report was presented to the FEI board, and on 14 October the recommendations were submitted to the national federations and stakeholders, ahead of discussion at the general assembly.

As the debate continues, H&H sought opinions on the proposal from stakeholders.

He then told H&H making the double bridle optional is a “slippery slope”.

“Riding in a double bridle and spurs is traditional, but it is also a very skilful thing. What concerns me is if they try to dumb everything down; you allow more people perhaps to compete, but you’re dumbing down the the level of competition,” he said.

“‘Welfare’ is being used as an escape because it catches people’s attention. If [the ethics and wellbeing commission] think a double bridle is a welfare issue, then we shouldn’t be using it.”

Mr Hunt, who said he was not aware the letter had been taken down, added that the sport is “rigorous in its protection of horses”.

“We have stewards in place and we are very restrictive in the bits we are allowed to use, unlike other sports where they have a massive variety. Our horses are looked after to such a high degree, and I struggle to find why they keep picking on dressage,” he said.

“If we start allowing things to creep in then we’re dulling the whole brilliance of the sport. That’s what makes it so beautiful, because horses are in self-carriage and they’re not supporting and leaning on the bit, which they can do in a snaffle.

“We are constantly making sure that we have welfare as our main objective. We are open to and seek people’s opinions – but I don’t want our sport dragged down by a small majority of people who think that the horse should only be out in the field grazing.”

“The epitome of riding international grand prix is to produce a horse to the highest standards with the classical tack. My grand prix horse goes better in a snaffle than a double, it’s harder to ride in a double sometimes, but it’s not a welfare issue,” he said.

“Part of the achievement of international dressage is to do things correctly and well with your horse. The perception that putting a double bridle on is some barbaric way of overcontrolling a horse is misguided.”

“The welfare of the horse is our number one priority. Therefore we put forward several proposals in this year’s rules revision that underline this,” Irish Boelhouwer, the federation’s high performance manager told H&H.

“I don’t know whether I think it should or shouldn’t be optional, but I think there should be a healthy debate and we should come up with the reasons for and against.”

“People who have horses that are happy in a double will be happy to keep the rule, and people who have horses they wish they could ride in a snaffle would like the rule to change,” he said.

“This clearly shows that the FEI needs to take its stakeholders with them on any policy move, and we need to collaborate. For me, the issue has been a lack of collaboration and communication with stakeholders before the recommendations were presented to the FEI,” he said.

“We need to work together with the commission because the point of the commission is not only to decide on issues of wellbeing, but is to protect the use of horses in sport – which are very commendable aims.”

Mr Davison added that the double bridle being optional at grand prix level is “nothing new” – it is optional at national level in a number of countries including the UK.

“The principle of the double bridle being optional is already embedded in FEI rules, all that they’re talking about is extending that to CDI3* and upwards.”

You might also be interested in:

‘Controversial’ proposal around double bridles and spurs sparks debate

More powers to pull riders up and debate over dressage: how horse sport may look in 2023