Hyperflexion was more common in the 2008 World Cup than the 1992 Olympic Games in dressage classes, researchers found.
The hyperflexed head and neck position has been the source of much discussion in the past several years. While some laud its benefits, others believe it's detrimental to horses. And as some believe the practice has become more common in the dressage world in the 21st century, horses are receiving higher scores in top international competitions, according to the results of a recent study. But are the two related?
āThese horses received higher scores indeed, but there is no way to attribute those scores directly to the head and neck position per sĆ©,ā said Willem Back, DVM, Cert. KNMvD (CKRD), Cert. Pract. KNMvD (Equine Practice), PhD, Spec. KNMvD (Equine Surgery), Dipl. ECVS, Prof. (U Ghent), of the Department of Equine Sciences at the Utrecht University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine in the Netherlands. āThe quality of the horses and other aspects, like training, has considerably improved over time. Nonetheless, if the heads had been in front of the vertical, overall scores would have been even higher.ā
Still, a head and neck position held behind the vertical (dipped closer to his chest than the nose in a vertical line to the ground) was far more common in the 2008 World Cup than the 1992 Olympic Games in dressage classes. Specifically, the top 15 competing horses in 2008 held their heads behind the vertical on average more than 50% of the time in the four main classic dressage gaits, compared to only two of those gaits in 1992, Back said.
In both years, horses kept their heads behind the vertical about 55% of the time in the collected canter and 51-53% of the time in the collected trot, Back said. But in 1992, their heads were behind the vertical only 48% of the time in passage and 45% of the time in piaffe, whereas in 2008 those figures were a staggering 71%, in both gaits.
Even so, average final scores jumped five percentage points from 65% in 1992 to 70% in 2008, he said.
āItās not a matter of never happening; itās a matter of whatās in the rules,ā Back said. āThe rules state the head needs to stay in front of the vertical at all times. But thatās actually pretty difficult to achieve. And keeping the head slightly behind the vertical is probably a little easier to do.
āA more flexed neck possibly also helps those horses achieve a more extreme forward protraction of the front limbs,ā he added. āThat may be whatās giving those horses such higher scores. But that doesnāt mean itās the right thing to do.ā
In their study, Back and his fellow researchers reviewed frame-by-frame video images of the top 15 dressage finalists in the 1992 and 2008 competitions. A computerized analysis provided detailed information about the horsesā head and neck angles in complete strides. The researchers then compared these statistics with scoring results, which revealed higher scores in horses that held their heads behind the vertical more frequently.
The research findings have prompted strong criticism from top equitation scientists.The Veterinary Journal, for instance, printed a related editorial written by Uta Kƶnig von Borstel, PhD, researcher at the University of Gƶttingen, in Germany, and Paul McGreevy, BVSc, PhD, MRCVS, MACVS (Animal Welfare), animal behavior and welfare science professor at the University of Sydney.
The FƩdƩration Equestre Internationale rules, combined with recent research about the health consequences of a hyperflexed position, spurred Kƶnig von Borstel and McGreevy to react to the new study.
āDressage (that comes from the French word ādresser,ā to train) is all about training,ā they stated. āIt showcases best practice. If horse welfare cannot be assured in dressage, then what hope is there for other horse sports?ā
To counter this problem, Back and his fellow researchers suggested that judges take advantage of āmodern, objective, mobile gait analysis toolsā to help sharpen their skills. āWe can equip horses with so-called inertial sensors to see, mathematically, what theyāre doing in the show ring,ā he explained.
The goal, he added, would not be to replace human judging by scienceāwhich would turn the art of dressage into something too āroboticāābut to train judges and riders alike to recognize when theyāre going past that critical vertical line.
Such technological assistance is a concept that other equitation scientists support.
āWe have entered a time defined by information technology, where every smartphone can record animal use and abuse,ā stated McGreevy and Kƶnig von Borstel. āJudging decisions would be less assailable if judges could draw on such evidence-based assessment of head posture, movements, conformation, or correct fit of gear.ā
Above all, they added, itās a question of equine welfare.
āWe have also entered a time when pushing horses beyond their physiological limits in the name of sport is being questioned,ā the pair stated. āSo now, more than ever, we have to demonstrate that horse sports are both sustainable and ethical.ā
Back summarized and concluded, āIt's incorrect to assign a causative effect to head behind the vertical being responsible for the horses receiving higher marks. Our methodology absolutely cannot show that. We only see that both things increased over a period of time but many other things changed over that same time periodāincluding the quality of horses and quality of training among themāthat are much more likely to have been why the scores improved.
āWe have shown that one aspect of performance is not meeting the competition requirements but it's not as if the horses were going around with their chin on their chest,ā he relayed. āWe certainly never intended our research to be used as fodder for (animal welfare organizations). We can only say that more horses have their head behind the vertical but it can be very subtle, just a matter of a few degrees can flip the score from in front to behind.ā
But, it is consistent, he said, āand more horses (carry their heads behind the vertical) in the second show (2008) than in the older competition (1992). And that this seemingly doesn't get punished in the score. But this indeed might be because the horses are scoring better on all other variables. We don't know whether or not they are subtracting point for this.ā
Study authors also included Morgan Lashley, DVM, of the Equine Veterinary Clinic āDe Raaphorstā in Wassenaar, The Netherlands; Sandra Nauwelaerts, PhD, of the McPhail Equine Performance Center at Michigan State University, in East Lansing, and the Functional Morphology Lab at Antwerp University in Wilrijk, Belgium; Hans J.C.M. Vernooij, MSc, of the Department of Farm Animal Health at the Utrecht University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine; and Hilary Clayton, BVMS, PhD, Dipl. ACVSMR, MRCVS, professor and McPhail Dressage Chair Emerita at Michigan State Universityās (MSU) College of Veterinary Medicine and president of Sport Horse Science, in Mason, Michigan.
The study, āComparison of the head and neck position of elite dressage horses during top-level competitions in 1992 versus 2008,ā was published in The Veterinary Journal.
