# Pelham Converters?



## Supermane (Sep 23, 2007)

I unintentionally started some controversy on another thread, which lead to a debate on the merits of using a pelham converter.

For those unfamiliar with the mechanisms of a pelham bit it's pretty simple. A Pelhams has room for the attachment of two different reins, the bottom one activating the curb and the top activating the snaffle. Activating the curb puts pressure on the bars of the mouth, the chin, and the poll (and the roof of the mouth if it has a port). The snaffle works like any normal snaffle on the bars of the mouth. They are very much like a kimberwick, however they have more flexibility because you can choose when you use the leverage and when you don't.

Converters, to my understanding undermine the flexibility of the bit, as they always activate both the snaffle and the curb. In my experience they are used by beginner riders that find it too difficult to use double reins, which leads to a horse being in a harsh bit with inexperienced hands (Though that's opinion since I personally don't think leverage bits are appropriate for beginners). I could be wrong, as I have never actually looked into the much since they are illegal to use in the USEF shows.

I'd actually be interested in hearing if they do provide any benefits and how they differ from a kimberwick as far as mechanisms go. After people responded I looked online and was unable to find much about bit converters. I'd actually love to learn anything more about them.


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

c&p:

Who decides and defines "correct" versus "incorrect"? Surely not the inventor of the bit converter....

There is actual a significant difference in action between a "rounded" Pelham and a Kimberwick. Each have their merits, I suppose, but I'd far rather use the former. For example, it has a much better "presignal," giving the horse the opportunity to respond to lighter pressure and thus making it gentler.


----------



## Supermane (Sep 23, 2007)

bubba13 said:


> c&p:
> 
> Who decides and defines "correct" versus "incorrect"? Surely not the inventor of the bit converter....
> 
> There is actual a significant difference in action between a "rounded" Pelham and a Kimberwick. Each have their merits, I suppose, but I'd far rather use the former. For example, it has a much better "presignal," giving the horse the opportunity to respond to lighter pressure and thus making it gentler.


I don't understand how it would give a "presignal" at all since a single rein would activate the curb and the snaffle at the same time...?

As far as "correct" for bits I think changing the fundamental effectiveness of the bit would be using it incorrectly.


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

Because the Kimberwick is not a "loose jawed" bit, it has a tight juncture at the mouthpiece/shank connection. It swivels, but not much else, so pressure is either "on" or "off"--no in between, and no warning that a cue is coming. Roundings on a Pelham, however, provide additional weight and feel. You get more presignal and more room for subtlety. You do get some direct pull on the snaffle part, too. Yes, it is always coupled with the leverage effect, but it pulls directly back on the bars, lips, and tongue more than a Kimberwick will. Keep in mind, too, that even when riding with double reins or just the curb rein, poll pressure is _very_ minimal, and I honestly doubt that the horse even registers it most of the time.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

I'll pitch in again when someone states



> They should absolutely never be used.


my answer is

Because they like it

Because horses don't read books and don't know about refinement in bits and persist in liking certain things.

Because they were brought up with seeing people choose to use the pelham with roundings and just got used to it and see no reason to change.

Because in a free world you can :wink:


When it comes to it using the roundings is using the bit maybe not to it's best advantage, but it can be effective, and some horses just go well in it.


----------



## Supermane (Sep 23, 2007)

To my understanding poll pressure is directly linked to the length of the shanks. A pelham can vary greatly bit to bit in poll pressure depending on how it's made.


I understand that people can do whatever they would like, however, I'm more interested in learning any possible benefits to using it, as opposed to a pelham.


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

It's not really the length of the shanks, per se, that determines poll pressure.










Look at what has to happen for poll pressure to be applied. You pull back on the reins, with causes the shanks to rotate and move back. As the shanks move back, obviously, the purchase moves forward. When the curb chain tightens as far as it can, this movement stops, and you get the leverage effect in the mouth, pulling the mouthpiece down onto the tongue and bars. It's the forward movement of the purchase, however, which pulls downward on the bit hanger, this tightening the crownpiece and applying poll pressure. But how much does the purchase actually move? Well, not much....










No one sane uses a bit like the above photo shows. If you crank back that far and that hard, you can see how the headstall tightens behind the ears. But if you pull back with less force--or if you have the curb chain adjusted tighter--that can't happen. You'll get some poll pressure, but only a negligible amount. Look at the first photo, again, and see how their is curb rein contact (bit rotation), but still looseness (slack) in the bridle.

If you really want substantial poll pressure from a bit, use a gag/elevator/draw, which is designed specifically to have this effect, by shortening the bridle as the reins are pulled.










Edit: Great visual!


----------



## Sunny (Mar 26, 2010)

Subbing!

This is all very interesting information, especially the leverage mechanics. I'm not too familiar with pelhams, but I'd always heard it was bad to use a converter.

Looking forward to hearing both sides!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Supermane (Sep 23, 2007)

I was told it was the difference in the top and the bottom, which I'm pretty sure is just the physically cause of what you just posted. As it's the difference that causes the rotation.


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

You mean the ratio of shankurchase? The difference doesn't _cause _the rotation, but it would influence force delivered by the lever...but only if all other factors were equal. It doesn't say whether or not you're influencing with enough pressure for the horse to feel, anyway (keep in mind that on most horses you're going to have the stubble of a bridle path right where the crown is pulling down, which will allow for transmission of feel down the hair shaft, but also tend to absorb some of the impact).

Far more important factors are the height to which the bit is adusted in the mouth (tightness of bridle), tightness of curb chain (as discussed before--a properly adjusted/tight curb will not allow for much rotation, thus preventing poll pressure), and of course how hard/far you're pulling back on the reins.


----------



## SorrelHorse (Apr 9, 2009)

Subbing. I have limited experience with this bit. Rode in it a little just because I wanted to learn how. Interested to know what people say about the converters.


----------



## Wallaby (Jul 13, 2008)

I ride Lacey in a pelham, with two reins and no converter...

I really like it because the snaffle part encourages her to accept the bit but if she gets too forward, I can just give her a little "Hello" with the curb rein. Then I never feel like I'm being excessively harsh or deadening up her mouth because I'm using the least amount of pressure necessary to get the response I need. And I can work on her response to less vs more, but have an "E-brake" if need be.

I guess I just don't see the logic in putting a converter on a pelham. What's the point of a pelham with a converter? Doesn't that just morph it into your everyday curb type bit? 
I don't see how the converter would give that much pre-warning to the horse either. I can see how it might give the tiniest warning but really, the majority of the pre-warning should be coming from the riders SEAT, not the hands. Not saying it always does, of course, but in a more perfect world, the seat should be the majority of the "slow" or "stop" cue while the bit coming into play is like the last 10%. 

I have lots of thoughts on this but my words aren't working so well right now. Maybe they'll come together better tomorrow and I can try again. :lol:


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

I would not use a converter on your Pelham, Wallaby, as it's a much longer shanked version of a different type and a solid mouth (with loose ring, besides). It's an older style as opposed to the more modern and common one depicted above.

But using a converter does not change it into the run-of-the-mill curb, no. A regular curb bit still has pressure coming from only one location, namely at the bottom of the shanks, and not balanced between that and a ring at the level of the mouthpiece....

And the converter functions, in a way, like a Western slobber strap. You can lift your reins before ever beginning to pull back, and the horse can feel the difference, realizing that a cue is coming.


----------



## AlexS (Aug 9, 2010)

Dumb question - if the basis of a converter is to help riders learn to use the double reins, why not just connect two pairs to a snaffle and therefore not engage the curb with novice hands? 

I ask because I used to ride my former mare in a pelham, if I couldn't cope with the double reins, I wouldn't have used it. Isn't it that simple?


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

AlexS said:


> Dumb question - if the basis of a converter is to help riders learn to use the double reins, why not just connect two pairs to a snaffle and therefore not engage the curb with novice hands?


I don't think that is the reason at all, given that it wouldn't teach a thing, having only one rein. More along the lines of, it gives the additional option for a different type of action. It gives a little more control to a (young?) rider who may not yet have the ability to use a double rein but who does not need the severity of using a curb rein only. It introduces a horse slowly to curb action from a simple snaffle. It gives an intermediate option for horses who are spoiled to the snaffle and won't respond to direct pressure, but who respect a light touch on a curb (and I've ridden a number of that type).


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

Oh, and for those who think that riding with "incorrect" rounded Pelhams is for idiots and amateurs only: http://www.startinggate.ca/img/news/2006_Misc/EricLamaze_Hickstead1.jpg

Or how about curb rein only, and through a martingale, no less? http://www.equestrian.org.au/site/equestrian/image/fullsize/20770.jpg


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

Dang it, posted this on the other thread this morning, thought I was here, to confusing for an old woman.

puts on flamesuit











LOOK, out in the real world there are lots of people who just want to ride, their cues are not subtle, their equitation may not be great, but their horses are well cared for, they actually get on and ride even if it is just tooling around on trails. All these wonderful folk care about is being able to stop go and steer, and a single rein, with a pelham and roundings may just fit the bill. It may not be technically correct, but if horse and rider are happy then what does it matter.

Because of my previous choice in horses, I've ridden, worked with and owned several cobby type ponies, short thick strong neck, and usually thick tongued. Very often these sort of horses go well in a mullen mouth pelham, with roundings. I had one lying about here from a previous horse in the UK that fits Bert, Bert who hangs and bores through a snaffle, who hates and gets behind a curb, goes very nicely and lightly in a pelham, and yes I use the roundings, I have enough to think about when riding her without worrying about two reins.

As I say, I don't believe it's great equitation, but it suits both of us, and I don't think I'm harming her in any way. Last year I started Mr G in one after his winter lay off, just gave me that little bit of reminder that I needed for a few rides.


----------



## FoxyRoxy1507 (Jul 15, 2008)

i use a pelham on Swoop. If we're just doing flat work ill use the double reins but when we're jumping at shows i use the converters bc thats what he likes.. ive tried using multiple diff bits and he hates them all.. and its alot easier to use one rein when jumping then two.. now i have trained Swoop and we do a lot of dressage so there isnt much rein action when im riding him at all so not a lot of pull or anything like that so i dont worry about it as much


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

Pelhams with converters (and Kimberwickes for that matter) are about my least favourite bits used in English. I _marginally_ prefer a Kimberwicke to a Pelham with a converter but only in the rarest of circumstances. If the rider can't/won't ride with two reins so that the leverage action can be isolated, they shouldn't be using a leverage bit. The problem is (this is specific to English, assuming that the horse is ridden with a degree of contact) when either is ridden without any relief from the leverage.

Worst offenders I have seen are kids on ponies that need more 'stopping power'. Kids and/or ponies need more 'training power' in those instances.

The bit/design/set up is not to blame. The way it is most commonly used is wrong and the reasons for using it are wrong.

In _experienced_ hands in the jumping ring for example it can be a useful combination but I would bet squillions that those rider/horse combinations use a different bit/set up in their everyday flatwork/fitness regime, and the pelham + converter set up only comes out for the three minute go-round the SJ ring.


----------



## VelvetsAB (Aug 11, 2010)

_I didn't find it that hard to learn how to use a Pelham (properly with 2 reins, since I am far past "short stirrup" age). I left the curb rein really slack, and rode off the snaffle rein, to get the feel of how to work the two reins, without worrying about accidentally engaging the curb._

_Now that I have it mostly figured out, and with reins that fit more comfortably in my hands, I find it isn't much different then riding with one set of reins._


----------



## upnover (Jan 17, 2008)

I'm not a fan of the converters. I also think riders need to learn how to ride with two reins. But I hesitate to use words like "never" in the horse world. 

1) I know of quite of a few jumpers (like Eric Lamaze) who think it's simpler to ride with one rein rather then two. It that wrong? Eh, I don't think so. While riding with constant leverage seems rather harsh it is by far not the harshest thing jumpers are willing to put in their horse's mouth! 

2) I know of an older then dirt set in his ways pony who's been carting kids around the show ring for YEEEARS who only goes in a pelham with converters. (I wasn't aware they were illegal... he's been around the block but I suppose it's been mainly local shows and SS kids where there is more leniency towards "unconventional" bits). A trainer tried to change his bit and tried everything -including a kimberwicke- and he wouldn't have it. Put his head down and charged every time you touched his mouth. In a pelham with converters? Push button. Great for little kids to learn on. ones that aren't ready for 2 reins. Will it hurt if they accdiently hit him in the mouth? Sure, but so will a snaffle. And he sure seems happy doing his job. Soo.. why fight it? 

All that to say... I'm not going to encourage my students to go out and buy them, but I'm not 100% anti-converter. 

Also... I believe Kimberwickes are considered "unconventional" in the hunter world. Pelhams are not.


----------



## Tymer (Dec 28, 2009)

bubba13 said:


> Oh, and for those who think that riding with "incorrect" rounded Pelhams is for idiots and amateurs only: http://www.startinggate.ca/img/news/2006_Misc/EricLamaze_Hickstead1.jpg
> 
> Or how about curb rein only, and through a martingale, no less? http://www.equestrian.org.au/site/equestrian/image/fullsize/20770.jpg


Just going to be a bit of a devil's advocate here.

Pro show jumpers are really not a good example of...well..."correct" bit use. Oftentimes, they will school in a snaffle. A plain, old, metal snaffle just like the ones we all know and love. During a show, everything changes. Fences are often well over five feet high, a huge crowd around, and an insanely large arena. They never go through anything like this at home. Using, say, a gag bit with only the curb rein to help "hold the horse up" is understandable. They're just using this bit in a situation that cannot ever be schooled. Using a pelham with roundings is for when, I imagine, a horse gets strong in the arena and needs juuuust a touch of leverage to keep them in check. 

Obviously, this doesn't mean abuse is okay. Ripping on a horse's mouth, using a mule bit or a bike chain bit, and excessive whipping is STILL not okay. Slightly "harsher" bits are not cruel if used in certain, specific situations that cannot be controlled.

I know this only *slightly* had to do with your reply but I just wanted to bring that up. Back on track now. Sorry!


----------



## BarefootBugsy (Dec 30, 2010)

I use a pelham with converters on my newer ride. He's a very strong-willed character and will cart you round a jumping course in a regular snaffle, but is a dream to ride in that same bit on the flat. We tried every bit under the sun for jumping, you name it, we used it - french link snaffle, myler bit, dutch gag, running gag, etc - he was not happy with ANY of these bits. Used the portmouth pelham as a last resort, he didn't go well in the double reins (with multiple riders) however goes perfectly in a pelham + converters.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

BarefootBugsy said:


> he didn't go well in the double reins (with multiple riders) however goes perfectly in a pelham + converters.


LOL, another horse who hasn't read the book:lol::lol:


----------



## Corporal (Jul 29, 2010)

As a former owner of a well-trained elderly herd who passed away in my back yard...**sniffle**...I can tell you that a Pelham converter is really meant for riding your FINISHED horse on a Pelham bc he works well in it, where you are trail riding and you don't want to mess with 4 reins. Period. There is no way to riding with nuance with the converter, but convenience is why it was invented. =D


----------



## Allison Finch (Oct 21, 2009)

Yes, I agree. There is simply no subtlety using the converters. You have no choice of which part of the bit you are going to engage. hard pulls will allow the rein to slide to allow more leverage, but there is no way to use just the snaffle.

Yes, there are horses who may do well with it. I have yet to get a horse, or student, where a better option wasn't easily found.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

No problem with the fact that other combinations can be found, but my response is mainly based on this quote on another thread



> I cringe seeing the pelham with the converter. They should absolutely never be used.


Are they part of 'correct equitation'? no

Are there better options? A qualified yes.

Are they abusive? Personally I don't think so, cringeworthy, nope, not to me.

Could a person use this option quite happily, then yes I think they can


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

There are exceptions to every rule and as such I hesitate to use expressions such as 'never', 'impossible', 'can't' and 'won't'. However, in relation to this topic I would like to say this:

I understand that pelhams with converters make some horses easier to ride. They can alleviate the rider's nerves by giving them the feeling that they have more stopping power. They make a poorly trained horse more receptive to aides. They make a well trained but excitable horse more inclined to listen to aides. 

To say a horse 'prefers' them is a stretch. Preference is not always indicated by the horse's willingness to listen to the rider and be more responsive. That is the_ rider's_ preference.

I have been taking horses off the track and re-schooling them for almost 15 years and if a racehorse with basically no mouth, no training and is muscle upon muscle can learn to respond softly to a simple snaffle (I am a self confessed snaffle snob) then 99% of horses can also, especially for basic riding and training. It takes time and patience, and is not always easy, but it can be done if the _rider_ is willing.

I am not trying to say that I have all the answers, I don't. However, when I hear things like "he can't" or "he won't" in reference to horses that are unresponsive to the bit, I tend to assume that it is a problem with training rather than the functionality of a given piece of tack. 

To those that say they use whatever bit because it is their choice to do so and they have had success, power to you and I wouldn't ever suggest that using a pelham with converters is _cruel_, just to say that I fail to believe that it is the ONLY workable option; it's just the one that works best for _you_, the rider.


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

Why is it so necessary for every horse to go in a snaffle, though? If the rider has light hands and the horse is responsive and quiet in a curb (or a Pelham with roundings, or whatever), is that not actually the kinder options? Horses really do have preferences, and I can honestly say I've come across my share who much prefer the action of a curb bit.

http://www.horseforum.com/horse-tack-equipment/why-shanked-bits-utterly-evil-etc-101537/page2/


----------



## sarahver (Apr 9, 2010)

bubba13 said:


> Why is it so necessary for every horse to go in a snaffle, though? If the rider has light hands and the horse is responsive and quiet in a curb (or a Pelham with roundings, or whatever), is that not actually the kinder options? Horses really do have preferences, and I can honestly say I've come across my share who much prefer the action of a curb bit.
> 
> http://www.horseforum.com/horse-tack-equipment/why-shanked-bits-utterly-evil-etc-101537/page2/


Sure horses have preferences, I know that :wink: Just saying that sometimes people interpret preferences in the wrong way. A horse that stops easier with a harsher bit isn't necessarily preferring that bit over another, they are just more inclined to listen to it.

In regards to snaffles, sorry, I should have qualified the above statement in the same way I qualified my first one; this relates to English riding when the horse is being ridden with a degree of contact. Unless you are riding GP dressage then a leverage bit isn't suitable for a horse that is being ridden on contact.

I know shanked bits aren't evil and am not suggesting they are. As I said before, I don't have an issue with the bit itself, I have an issue with the way they are used. They have their place and in the right hands are wonderful instruments. That place is _not_ in the English world when they are being ridden 'on the bit'.


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

Right, and I can agree with that. Actually, I think this discussion went into much greater depth on the other thread.

http://www.horseforum.com/horse-tac...-between-pelham-bridle-snaffle-bridle-108183/


----------



## MIEventer (Feb 15, 2009)

While it is ok to use U.L.R's to look at for an example, lets try to understand where they are coming from. Yes, they are Upper Level Riders who do exceptionally well at their jobs, and of course to be admired - but lets stop pointing at them for the tack/equipment they choose to use while in the show ring.

Many U.L.R's spend hours apon hours working on their flat work/dressage at home, I know that many G.P level Jumpers jump very minimally in comparison to how much dressage/flat work they do. Heck, many of them only jump in the warm up ring at the comp itself - so Eric using Bit Converters has nothing to do with the education level or ability level of the rider or his horse - but because he wants to get the job done.

As David O'Connor says "Train at home in a snaffle, and at a comp, use what you have to use to get the job done". These competitors lives lay on the balance of winning and losing. That's their paycheque, that's their reputation at stake, if they don't represent and get the job done, they can't make money from sponsors or etc, etc. What they use in the show ring, is used to get the job done. 

As the old saying goes, and I am sure we've all heard it - "Don't go to war without all your weapons". It is far better to have equipment that will get the job done for those "just in case moments" that is fitted correctly and not need it, than to not have it, and soon discover that you needed it. None of us can speak for these riders/competitors until we are in their shoes. I myself, know that I have not ridden a powerful, Upper Level Jumper Mount, nor have I ventured out to ride a 5'0"+ course with my reputation at stake and the high dollar amount $$ that has been invested into the comp.


----------



## bubba13 (Jan 6, 2007)

I'm still not sure that that has any real bearing on the happy hacker using whatever equipment works....not everyone events, anyway. Look at the other discussion, linked above....


----------

