Abstract: The purpose of this study is to find convincing arguments, how horses should be ridden correctly, especially concerning the best head and neck position. Currently in the riding world, the opinions differ: The traditional way is to ride a horse with its nose in front of the vertical, while a new method claims that pulling the nose behind the vertical with an extreme flexion of the poll implies “gymnastic movements”. This article is focussed on the welfare and comfort of the horse in different head-neck positions, expressed by behaviours which document discomfort. As a first step, the behaviour of standing horses was observed while their heads and necks were put into seven postulated or frequently assumed positions. In the hyperflexed position the horses displayed most discomfort (with 49,7% of all reactions, like open mouths, head tossing, tail movements and other signs of resentment). The second strongest reactions of discomfort were shown in the highly raised position of the head (34,9%). The moderately rounded neck position as in traditional dressage lessons was not without signs of discomfort either, but less than the other two positions (11,2%). The high position and the extended position did not cause discomfort at all (0,17% and 0,23% respectively). In a second step, horses moving in all gaits under a rider were observed at competitions without the riders´ knowledge. The total number of observations was divided into two categories (each containing 30 horses) on the basis of the common rules of the FN: ridden with the horse’s nose in front of the vertical and ridden with the horse’s nose behind the vertical. The proportion of horses showing discomfort with the nose behind the vertical was clearly much higher (89,3%) compared to those ridden with the nose in front of the vertical (10,7%). Thus, the horses in the first category displayed signs of discomfort 8 times more frequent than those in the second group. In addition, scans carried out at tournaments showed that 92.8% of the horses were ridden with the nose behind the vertical. A clear result of this study is that the reality of riding differs widely from the rules. These results also show that riding in the hyperflexed position causes a great deal of discomfort for the horses and therefore should be abolished.
Die aktuellen Diskussionen in der Reiterwelt, welche Art und Weise des Reitens, besonders welche Kopf-Hals-Stellung zu erstreben ist, werfen die Frage auf, ob und wie die Pferde selbst ihr Befinden zum Ausdruck bringen. Über die Empfindungen der Pferde in verschiedenen Kopfhaltungen ist bisher sehr wenig bekannt. Deswegen wurde zunächst an stehenden Pferden das Ausdrucksverhalten beobachtet. Missfallensäußerungen häuften sich (mit 49,7% aller gezeigten Verhaltensauffälligkeiten wie Sperren, Rückwärtsgehen und Kopfschlagen) in der aufgerollten, hyperflektierten Stellung des Halses. An zweiter Stelle folgten Unmutsäußerungen in der absolut aufgerichteten Haltung (34,9%). Auch die beigezäumte Haltung wurde nicht ohne Unmutsbekundungen hingenommen, hier war deren Anzahl aber wesentlich geringer (11,2%). Die hohe Kopfstellung (0,17%) und die Dehnungshaltung (0,23%) bereiteten den Tieren kaum Unbehagen. Auch das Ausdrucksverhalten der Pferde unter dem Reiter wurde untersucht. Hierfür wurden, unter Berücksichtigung der schriftlich fixierten Regeln für das Turnierwesen der FN, je 30 Pferde in zwei Kategorien beobachtet: mit der Stirnlinie vor der Senkrechten und Pferde mit der Stirnlinie hinter der Senkrechten. Die Beobachtungen wurden unbemerkt von den Reitern auf den Abreiteplätzen von Turnieren durchgeführt. Die Anzahl an Verhaltensauffälligkeiten der Pferde mit der Stirnlinie hinter der Senkrechten war deutlich (89,3 %) erhöht im Gegensatz zu der anderen Gruppe (10,7 %). Die Pferde mit der Stirnlinie hinter der Senkrechten zeigten 8 Mal mehr Unmutsäußerungen als die mit der Stirnlinie vor der Senkrechten. Entgegen den Regeln der FN zeigten die durchgeführten Scans, dass unmittelbar vor den Prüfungen auf Turnieren 92,8% der Pferde mit der Stirnnasen-Linie hinter der Senkrechten geritten wurden. Ein Befund dieser Studie ist die Feststellung, dass die Praxis deutlich von den Regeln abweicht. Das Reiten mit der Stirnlinie hinter der Senkrechten ist nach diesen Befunden abzulehnen, da die Pferde deutliches Unwohlsein in dieser Haltung signalisieren.

Abstract: Rollkur, the usually coercively obtained hyperflexion of the horse's neck, is employed as a training method by some dressage riders; however, its use is controversial as it may cause discomfort and adversely affect the horse's welfare. The objectives of this study were to determine: (1) if horses showed differences in stress, discomfort and fear responses as measured by heart rate and behaviour when ridden in Rollkur (R) obtained by pressure on the reins compared to regular poll flexion (i.e. with the nose-line being at or just in front of the vertical; N), and (2) if they showed a preference between the two riding styles when given the choice. Fifteen riding horses were ridden 30 times through a Y-maze randomly alternating between sides. Riding through one arm of the Y-maze was always followed by a short round ridden in R, whereas riding through the other arm was followed by a short round ridden in N. Immediately after the conditioning phase, horses were again repeatedly ridden into the maze; however, riders left it to the horse to decide which arm of the maze to enter. During R, horses moved slower and showed more often behavioural signs of discomfort, such as tail-swishing, head-tossing or attempted bucks (P < 0.05), and 14 of the 15 horses chose significantly (P < 0.05) more often the maze-arm associated with N rather than R. Subsequently, eight of the horses were also subjected to two fear tests following a short ride in N as well as a ride in R. During R, horses tended to react stronger (P = 0.092) to the fear stimuli and to take longer (P = 0.087) to approach them. These findings indicate that a coercively obtained Rollkur position may be uncomfortable for horses and that it makes them more fearful and therefore potentially more dangerous to ride. Further studies need to assess horses' reaction to gradual training of Rollkur, as opposed to a coercively obtained hyperflexion, in order to decide whether the practice should be banned.