Addressing Hyperflexion and Judging Practices

If welfare rules already exist, why do some controversial practices continue to appear at the highest levels of dressage? One of the most talked-about examples is the ongoing use of aggressive hyperflexion, particularly in elite competition. From the outside, it can look controlled, polished, even expressive — but research increasingly suggests there may be a very different story behind what we see in the arena.

Studies observing Grand Prix riders have shown that horses ridden in hyperflexion are often rewarded with higher scores, despite the sport’s stated commitment to welfare principles. This creates an uncomfortable tension. The FEI’s own welfare guidelines identify forceful riding associated with hyperflexion as being in conflict with welfare regulations and call for judges to intervene, yet the position continues to appear at the top levels of competition.

Over the past decade, research has linked sustained hyperflexion to physical stress responses, including restricted vision, airway limitation, muscular strain, and elevated stress indicators. Supporters argue it can improve suppleness or strength, but the growing body of evidence suggests the issue may be less about training philosophy and more about how far is too far.

And perhaps that’s where the real conversation begins. Dressage has always balanced artistry, performance, and partnership — but when does a training position cross the line from demanding to excessive? At what point does collection become coercion? When do we move from strong riding into what the rules themselves describe as aggressive hyperflexion?

If judges, riders, and spectators can all look at the same moment and interpret it differently, then the challenge may not only be enforcement, but clarity. What is the defining moment when welfare concerns should override presentation? And who feels empowered to make that call in real time?

Until those questions are more openly addressed, the gap between regulation and reality risks continuing, leaving the sport navigating an increasingly important conversation about where its boundaries truly lie.

Join the conversation beyond this article. Click the link below and join the ongoing discussion on Threads to be part of the conversation.