Competitive dressage has faced sustained welfare criticism over the use of hyperflexion training techniques, with scientific evidence and advocacy driving gradual but contested reform.
The rollkur debate in dressage illustrates the tension between elite sport performance pressures and evidence-based welfare standards. The welfare evidence against sustained hyperflexion is clear: compromised airway, muscle tension inconsistent with relaxation, and stress indicators measurable both physiologically and behaviourally. The regulatory response has been incomplete: FEI restrictions acknowledge the problem without effectively preventing the practice, particularly in warm-up arenas beyond steward visibility. Meaningful change requires rule reform that is enforceable, visible welfare monitoring including warm-up arena oversight, and culture change within elite competitive communities. The broader question of competitive dressage welfare extends beyond rollkur to include bit use, noseband tightness, spur use, and the general culture of performance over horse wellbeing that rollkur exemplifies.