04-04-2007, 08:04 PM
Stirrups are a slippery business. I don't think their lack would result in more instances of men being pulled from the saddle, but it's an open point of debate how effective a refinement they really were. For my part, I don't consider them a huge advance, but I'm no expert.
mattthew wrote:
Stirrups have saved me many a time from coming off sideways...they act as a braced point. without them, its your leg strength to wrap yourself around the barrel of the horse, but then if you're being pulled from the side, and you hung on, you would simply roll sideways and find yourself under the belly, though still attached on...not possibly the best position to be in!
NOTE: for all the horse riding experts, stirrups used to brace you if falling off sideways, NOT gripping with your legs is how you stay on in normal riding.
I would put every dollar i have that a rider without stirrups would be pulled of a horse everytime than one who could pivot his weight againts a stirrup.
mattthew wrote:
Stirrups have saved me many a time from coming off sideways...they act as a braced point. without them, its your leg strength to wrap yourself around the barrel of the horse, but then if you're being pulled from the side, and you hung on, you would simply roll sideways and find yourself under the belly, though still attached on...not possibly the best position to be in!
NOTE: for all the horse riding experts, stirrups used to brace you if falling off sideways, NOT gripping with your legs is how you stay on in normal riding.
I would put every dollar i have that a rider without stirrups would be pulled of a horse everytime than one who could pivot his weight againts a stirrup.
Rubicon
"let the die be cast "
(Stefano Rinaldo)
"let the die be cast "
(Stefano Rinaldo)
