Analyze Diet
Equine veterinary journal2026; doi: 10.1002/evj.70333

Pass rates using the FEI noseband measurement device at British Dressage 2025 Championships.

Abstract: Appropriate fitting of equipment provides horse comfort and avoids compromising equine welfare. In May 2025, the Fédération Equestre Internationale (FEI) introduced an evidence-based measuring device that is passed beneath the noseband to ensure sufficient laxity. Objective: To study the use of the FEI noseband device during mandatory tack and equipment checks at British Dressage Championships. Methods: Observational. Methods: Noseband testing was observed for a total of 523 horses competing at the 2025 British Dressage National Championship, Middle Tour Championship and Area Festival Championship. During each inspection using the FEI noseband measurement device, five parameters were recorded: (1) measurement outcome (pass/fail), (2) noseband type, (3) bridle type, (4) horse compliance and (5) steward confidence. Frequency analyses and descriptive statistics were used to compare differences. Results: In the majority of horses (95%), the noseband had sufficient laxity to pass the noseband check. Horses ridden with nosebands most frequently used the Swedish (39%), followed by a flash (29%), cavesson (21%), drop (9%), and grackle (2%) nosebands. Horse compliance during insertion and passage of the FEI measurement device beneath the noseband was graded as 'compliant' by stewards in 96% of horses. Conclusions: No behavioural assessment carried out. Conclusions: This study found that a high percentage of horses were ridden with a noseband with sufficient laxity to pass the noseband check. Previously published data from competition horses reported much larger proportions of horses wearing overtightened nosebands compared with the data presented here. These differences may relate to improved education relating to the impact of noseband tightness or may be a consequence of the introduction of mandatory testing of noseband tightness.
Publication Date: 2026-10-05 PubMed ID: 42833626DOI: 10.1002/evj.70333Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

Overview

  • This study examined the use of a new FEI noseband measurement device to check the tightness of horse nosebands during the 2025 British Dressage Championships.
  • The research aimed to assess how many horses passed the noseband tightness test and to analyze associated factors like noseband type and horse compliance during testing.

Background and Purpose

  • Proper fitting of horse equipment, particularly nosebands, is important for horse comfort and welfare.
  • The Fédération Equestre Internationale (FEI) introduced, in May 2025, an objective measuring device designed to ensure nosebands are not overtightened by assessing sufficient laxity.
  • The main goal was to evaluate how this new device is used in practice and what pass rates occur during official tack checks at a major national championship event.

Methods

  • The study took place at the 2025 British Dressage National Championship events, observing 523 competing horses.
  • At the mandatory tack inspections, stewards used the FEI noseband measuring device on each horse’s noseband.
  • Five parameters were recorded for each test:
    • The measurement outcome: pass or fail based on noseband tightness
    • The type of noseband used (Swedish, flash, cavesson, drop, grackle)
    • The type of bridle
    • The horse’s compliance during the insertion and passage of the device beneath the noseband
    • The steward’s confidence rating regarding the test procedure
  • Data analyses consisted of frequency counts and descriptive statistics to summarize results and examine differences.

Findings

  • 95% of the observed horses passed the FEI noseband measurement device test, indicating sufficient noseband looseness.
  • The most commonly used noseband type was the Swedish (39%), followed by flash (29%), cavesson (21%), drop (9%), and grackle (2%).
  • Horse compliance during the noseband check was very high, with 96% of horses rated as ‘compliant’ by the stewards when the device was inserted under the noseband.
  • No behavioural assessments were made to evaluate stress or discomfort.

Conclusions and Implications

  • The study indicates that most competitors at the British Dressage 2025 Championships are using nosebands with appropriate fit and laxity, as evidenced by the high pass rate.
  • This contrasts with previous reports that found many horses wearing overtightened nosebands in competitions, suggesting a positive shift.
  • Reasons for this improvement may include:
    • Better education and awareness about the negative welfare impacts of overtight nosebands
    • The effect of mandatory use of the FEI measurement device and testing, encouraging compliance with welfare standards
  • The lack of behavioural assessment means the study does not address whether the testing itself or noseband tightness impacts horse stress or comfort directly.

Overall Significance

  • The research provides valuable real-world data on noseband fitting practices in a competitive equestrian setting using a new objective measurement technology.
  • It supports the FEI’s approach to improving equine welfare through enforceable equipment guidelines and may encourage broader adoption of such assessment tools.
  • Future research could add behavioural and physiological measures to better understand the welfare implications of noseband tightness and testing methods.

Cite This Article

APA
MacKechnie-Guire R, Clayton HM, Williams JM, Marlin D, Walker V, Murray R. (2026). Pass rates using the FEI noseband measurement device at British Dressage 2025 Championships. Equine Vet J. https://doi.org/10.1002/evj.70333

Publication

ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

MacKechnie-Guire, Russell
  • Department of Equine Sciences, Hartpury University, Gloucester, UK.
Clayton, Hilary M
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.
Williams, Jane M
  • Department of Equine Sciences, Hartpury University, Gloucester, UK.
Marlin, David
  • Animalweb Ltd, Kent, UK.
Walker, Vicki
  • Department of Equine Sciences, Hartpury University, Gloucester, UK.
Murray, Rachel
  • Ibikus Ltd, Bury St Edmunds, UK.

Grant Funding

  • Worshipful Company of Saddlers

References

This article includes 19 references
  1. Clayton HM, Williams JM. Know your noseband: an exploration of factors that influence riders' choice of noseband.. J Vet Behav 2022;47:1–11.
  2. Uldahl M, Clayton HM. Lesions associated with the use of bits, nosebands, spurs and whips in Danish competition horses.. Equine Vet J 2018;51(2):154–162.
  3. McGreevy P, Warren‐Smith A, Guisard Y. The effect of double bridles and jaw‐clamping crank nosebands on temperature of eyes and facial skin of horses.. J Vet Behav 2012;7(3):142–148.
  4. McGreevy PD, Doherty O, Channon W, Kyrklund K, Webster J. The use of nosebands in equitation and the merits of an international equestrian welfare and safety committee: a commentary.. Vet J 2017;222:36–40.
  5. Doherty O, Casey V, McGreevy P, Arkins S. Noseband use in equestrian sports—an international study.. PLoS One 2017;12(1):e0169060.
  6. Merkies K, Copelin C, Small N, Young J. Noseband fit: measurements and perceptions of Canadian equestrians.. Animals (Basel) 2022;12(19):2685.
  7. Visser EK, Kuypers MMF, Stam JSM, Riedstra B. Practice of noseband use and intentions towards Behavioural change in Dutch equestrians.. Animals (Basel) 2019;9(12):1131.
  8. Clayton HM, Murray R, Williams JM, Walker V, Fisher M, Fisher D. Facial pressure beneath a cavesson noseband adjusted to different tightness levels during standing and chewing.. Equine Vet J 2024;57(4):1127–1137.
  9. MacKechnie‐Guire R, Murray R, Williams JM, Nixon J, Fisher M, Fisher D. Noseband type and tightness level affect pressure on the horse's face at trot.. Equine Vet J 2024;57(3):774–788.
  10. Doherty O, Conway T, Conway R, Murray G, Casey V. An objective measure of noseband tightness and its measurement using a novel digital tightness gauge.. PLoS One 2017;12(1):e0168996.
  11. Murray RC, Guire R, Fisher M, Fairfax V. A bridle designed to avoid peak pressure locations under the headpiece and noseband is associated with more uniform pressure and increased carpal and tarsal flexion, compared with the horse's usual bridle.. J Equine Vet Sci 2015;35(11–12):947–955.
  12. . FEI Dressage Rules. Clean version.. 2025 [cited 2025 Jun 18].
  13. . FEI measuring device‐general protocol with discipline protocols‐clean.. 2025 [cited 2025 Jan 13].
  14. . British dressage rule book.. Meriden, West Midlands: British Dressage; 2025 [cited 2025 Jan 13].
  15. Pardee RL. Motivation theories of Maslow, Herzberg, McGregor & McClelland. A literature review of selected theories dealing with job satisfaction and motivation.. Washington, DC: Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), U.S. Department of Education; 1990.
  16. Lamperd W, Clarke D, Wolframm I, Williams J. What makes an elite equestrian rider?. Comp Exerc Physiol 2016;12(3):105–118.
  17. Braun V, Clarke V. To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample‐size rationales.. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health 2021;13(2):201–216.
  18. The Danish Animal Ethics Council. Statement on the use of horses for sport. Copenhagen: The Danish Animal Ethics Council/Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries; 2023 [cited 2025 Jan 13].
  19. Fialova S, Kuritkova D, Sobotkova E. Stress responses in dressage horses: insights from FEI noseband measurements across national competition levels. Animals (Basel) 2026;16(3):518.

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.