This message is from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 5/16/2006 10:22:12 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Guess what? I have a 6 yo mare who has nothing noticeable or technically
wrong w/ her mouth + palate, (even did a bit seat for her) but she is
VERY sensitive
This message is from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ah, but the a Kimberwick DOES come in a low port. And if
used on the full ring or the upper slot, there is no leverage.
So... Why does it not qualify as a snaffle?
According to what I understand from reading the USEF/USDF rules, the
problem with
This message is from: Pat Holland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We polled other trainers/owners and Wayne Hipsley, the chief
evaluator, and all were in agreement that other bits should be
allowed--that the bit component of the rules needed to be
re-evaluated--especially for the advanced tests.
This message is from: Lori Albrough [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pat Holland wrote:
At the very least, we whom have the experiance and knowledge of the
discrimination understand it. Those making the rules apparently do not.
I was a member of the evaluation committee when the issue of bits for
English
This message is from: Karen McCarthy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lori and everyone else who reads this list and is concerend about this, I
think we need to remember that we are not trying to do a 'pure' dressage
test, nor a 'pure' western test...I thought the intent of the evals was
to make the testing
5 matches
Mail list logo
