What does Clinton Anderson say about gadgets and training aids that attach to the bit?

Clinton Anderson's position on gadgets and training aids — draw reins, running martingales, chambons, pessoa systems, and similar devices — is that they are tools with specific legitimate applications but that they are almost universally overused, used at the wrong stage of training, and used as substitutes for correct training rather than as supplements to it. His concern with draw reins specifically is that they put the horse's head in the desired position mechanically without requiring the horse to actually develop the balance, strength, and understanding to maintain that position independently. A horse trained primarily in draw reins learns to be light and soft when the draw reins are on and reverts to its original frame and response the moment they come off, because the underlying training — the response to leg, the self-carriage, the softness to the bit — was never developed. The draw reins did the work that the training should have done. For draw reins used correctly — as Anderson does use them in specific contexts — they are a temporary tool that guides the horse toward the correct frame while the rider's other aids develop the response. They are never the primary aid, always used alongside strong leg and seat, and removed frequently to test whether the horse is maintaining any frame independently. Parelli's position on gadgets is similar and more broadly stated: any device that produces a result without the horse's understanding and willing participation is producing compliance, not training. The horse that is compliant through a gadget has not learned anything — it has been managed. Management and training are not the same thing, and management that prevents the horse from developing its own understanding eventually produces a horse that is manageable only within the specific conditions the gadget creates.