Rethinking what’s ‘normal’

The sight of a horse moving in a bridle, poll flexed, lips gently closed, has long been seen as the mark of advanced schooling and correct work. However, new research into bridle and bit pressure, nerve pathways, and facial anatomy is challenging that assumption, suggesting that many horses perform despite discomfort, rather than because the tack fits or functions optimally.

As the fields of biomechanics, welfare science, and tack development intersect, it’s time we ask: Are we prioritising control and appearance over comfort and communication? And can better-fitting, or better-chosen tack reduce tension and improve performance?

Mapping the face

The horse’s head is a highly innervated structure, packed with sensitive tissues and nerve pathways essential for proprioception (body awareness), communication, and calmness.

Key structures to be aware of include:

• The infraorbital nerve, which runs along the face near the cheekbones, and is often compressed by tight nosebands or flash straps.
• The facial nerve, which has branches around the jaw and lower cheek and can be irritated by tight curb chains or poorly placed buckles.
• The poll area, which is the site of multiple nerve exits and blood vessels. It is prone to pressure from narrow crown pieces, tight bridles, or layered head pieces (e.g., anatomical bridles with nosebands attached over the crown).

When these areas experience sustained pressure, horses may show:

• Headshaking or tossing
• Difficulty accepting contact
• Resistance to bridling
• Gaping mouth or excessive salivation
• ‘Dead mouth’ – learned suppression of response

Rather than signs of resistance or bad training, these may be expressions of discomfort or, in some cases, early indicators of neuropathic pain.

The inside of the mouth

Equally important is what’s happening inside the mouth. The tongue, bars, and palate are soft, highly mobile structures, and most horses have less oral space than traditional bit design assumes.

Recent studies using pressure sensors and X-Ray imaging have shown:

• Double bridles can produce compressive forces of up to 400–500g on the tongue when rein tension is moderate, potentially reducing blood flow, causing pain and increasing sensitivity over time.
• Some bits compress the tongue against the lower jaw or hard palate, particularly if the horse has a thick tongue or low palatal arch.
• Horses with low or small palates, common in certain Warmblood lines, may have almost no space for bulky or multi-jointed bits.

Instead of achieving subtlety, such tack choices can lead to chronic tension in the poll, tongue, and jaw, affecting overall movement and frame.

What the research says

• A 2019 study published in Animals found that horses ridden in tight nosebands (less than one finger’s width clearance) had reduced oral behaviours, such as licking or yawning, a likely suppression of natural responses, not a sign of quietness.
• A 2020 study in the Equine Veterinary Journal confirmed that tongue pressure under curb bits exceeded known nociceptive thresholds (pain signals), particularly when reins were held tight for extended periods.
• Thermographic studies have shown reduced blood flow and heat signatures in areas under pressure from anatomical nosebands, despite their ergonomic design claims.

Rethinking the ‘correct frame’

The traditional dressage ideal – a flexed poll, jaw closed, steady contact – has long influenced the types of tack we use and how tightly it’s applied. But form doesn’t always equal function.

Truly correct contact should not rely on:

• Mechanical suppression of the mouth via flash or crank.
• Overuse of leverage from a double bridle.
• Bit pressure that restricts tongue or jaw mobility.

Instead, we should be aiming for contact that is based on consent, comfort, and biomechanics, not coercion. A soft mouth and still head should be responses, not forced due to restraints.

Fitting advice

To reduce unnecessary pressure and optimise performance, consider the following:

Bridle fit

• Opt for wide, padded crownpieces that contour over the poll and avoid pressure on the ears.
• Ensure nosebands are fitted with at least two fingers’ width under the front.
• Avoid layering multiple straps in the same area, e.g., an anatomical noseband over a thick crownpiece may cause unintended stacking pressure.

Bit choice

• Evaluate oral conformation. Enlist the services of a vet or equine dentist to assess palate height, tongue thickness, and bar sensitivity.
• If using a double bridle, consider whether the horse actually needs it, or if the snaffle alone is sufficient for communication.
• Experiment with softer metals, single-jointed designs, or tongue-relief bits if the horse shows resistance.

Observe your horse

Signs of improvement after changing tack can include:

• Increased salivation and licking.
• Softer, more consistent contact.
• Better stretching into the rein.
• Reduced head movement or fussiness.
• Improved ability to round through the back.

From welfare to performance

This conversation is not just about welfare, although that should be reason enough; it’s about performance, too. Horses working in comfort move better, focus better, and recover faster. They’re less likely to resist aids, evade contact, or develop compensatory patterns that lead to further soreness or injury.

By re-evaluating what’s considered ‘normal’ – tight nosebands, unexamined bit choices, double bridles as default – we make space for a more humane and effective approach.

---

What you can do right now

• Book a tack fit check with a qualified independent fitter.
• Loosen your noseband and observe changes over several rides.
• Investigate alternative bitless or hybrid bridles (for schooling or hacking).
• Educate yourself on cranial nerve anatomy and pressure zones.
• Trust your horse’s feedback, remembering that signs of tension are a form of communication.

---

Shifting the standard

The future of sporthorse tack is likely to be softer, smarter, and more science-based. We’re entering an era where informed riders and professionals are challenging long-held traditions in favour of comfort, biomechanics, and consent-based performance.

It’s time to shift the question from ‘What’s allowed?’ to ‘What’s ethical  and what’s effective?’