# dressage headsets - horse and rider



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

I have never seen a ‘rule’ saying a rider should not look down! I will say I find it darn difficult not to, well I did, until I grasped some things..

For me, at my level:

Looking down also makes me lean forward, makes me dump Fergie on her forehand.
Looking down means it’s hard to plan where I am supposed to be going, so I can easily get off pattern.

I look at pics of me jumping as a kid, seems I have always been a looker downer! Just now gett8ng over it.

I cannot speak for any other riders, but I find sometimes I have to look at her head to check she is bent, and flexed, because I lack the skill to always feel it, I guess I like to watch the ears as well, such a great communication tool, is she listening? If so to me or someone else, is she relaxed, tense. Angry? I like to watch her, but am constantly fighting to improve my long range vision as well.

As for the horses head, yes the ideal is slightly in front of the vertical, but it is darn hard to tell 100% of the time the exact angle of the nose when you can’t actually see it. There is a vast difference in being a bit behind, and Rolkur, not sure why they are lumped together there. 

The head should be the last part of the puzzle, everything else should be in place first, is this always the case? Well no, but we do strive to produce what is asked for. Scoring is changing, slowly, long may it continue.


----------



## TXhorseman (May 29, 2014)

While we may understand the pitfalls of looking down at our horse, it is very natural tendency when we try to focus on what we are doing and what our horse is doing. We are more accustomed to paying attention to the use of our eyes and hands rather paying attention to what our other sense are telling us.

As our knowledge increases, we will hopefully learn to use our other senses more and focus more on our target than our individual actions. But this will probably be a constant struggle. Having someone observe our actions and give us feedback helps. We must be careful, however, not to defend ourselves too vigorously in the face of critical feedback lest we discourage those trying to help us.

Teaching people the subtleties of riding is a balancing act between getting them to realize the importance of little things while still focusing on the overall target. I have seen horses begin to move in slow motion as riders focus on feeling each movement of each step.

A common cause of over bending of the horse’s head is thinking that the goal is to get a good headset rather than understanding that the horse’s head position will take care of itself when the other aspects of riding fall into place. This problem is accentuated when we see so many images of over bending in advertisements and even articles. Novice riders are particularly vulnerable to believing that this is what they should be seeking.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Yes, I appreciate tendencies, novice riders etc, but I should have specified - that I'm talking about what I see in pics & vids of 'top' riders - eg those who compete at higher standards... so 'should' know better. And Golden, 'rule' being in inverted comas was meant to signify it's not a formal one, but a guideline. I think behind the vertical IS in the real rules tho.


----------



## gottatrot (Jan 9, 2011)

I think horses are behind the vertical at the top levels of dressage because it is highly rewarded, despite being supposedly against the rules. 
In my mind it is similar to some of the rules in western pleasure such not having the poll below the withers, which are not followed because breaking the rules is rewarded by the judges. 

In dressage many top riders look down. I was told the weight of the rider's head (10 lbs or so) is felt by the horse if the rider tilts it forward. In dressage the riders are going around a smooth arena so don't need to watch for obstacles, and also tend to counterbalance the weight of the forward head by leaning back farther than most riders. So that either balances it all out, or else the horse is not unbalanced because they have been used to riders going around with their heads tilted downward and have adjusted for it, IMHO.









One small mistake in bend can be costly, so they probably watch the horse's neck for the correct bend. When riding out, if the horse was BTV and rider looking down, it would lead to tripping and barging into trees.
http://www.endurance.net/030712/TevisRollkur2.jpg


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

gottatrot said:


> I think horses are behind the vertical at the top levels of dressage because it is highly rewarded


Hmm, that is what I suspected - if it was penalised, it wouldn't be done.


----------



## TXhorseman (May 29, 2014)

Professionals are not immune to the same tendencies of focus that we all deal with. In fact, competition can influence people to try too hard and forget the joy of riding without tension.

Judges cannot pay attention to everything at once. Like all of us, they can be distracted by spectacular movement and fail to notice what might be considered minor infractions. And it is spectacular performances that please the crowds (which attracts sponsors and their money) more than attention to details only noticed by those who are more focused and concerned with these.

Dr. Gerd Heuschmann wrote of this dilemma in his book, “Balancing Act: The Horse in Sport – An Irreconcilable Conflict?”


----------



## ApuetsoT (Aug 22, 2014)

I feel better when looking down especially when working of something requiring positioning like shoulder in. 

A lot of horses bred for dressage are built in s way that makes its easier to close the throatlach without losing the suppleness desired. Doesn't mean it's right, but when all the horses are doing it...


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

^Yeah TX, one big reason I don't compete, don't 'do' the whole 'horse as a sport' thing. Not knocking those (considerate) ones who do - I know full well there are good people out there - and I'd take a punt that includes vast majority I've had much to do with on this forum, I just can't stand to look at the rest.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians (Nov 14, 2010)

loosie said:


> Hello,
> 
> I'm curious why, when the 'rules' state that horses should not be 'behind the vertical', why just about every time I see an eg of dressage - here, on youtube, etc, they're almost invariably behind the vertical?? Despite seeing people so against 'roll kur'.
> 
> And despite the 'rules' stating the rider should be looking where they're going, not looking down at the horse - and instructors commonly preach 'don't look at his ears, they're not going to fall off', that riders commonly DO look down at the horse. Not sure if that's especially in dressage or that one is more wide spread...


I've been seeing "BTV" on more dressage test comments these days and seeing it get penalized. Not seen Roll Kur locally for some time, though I suspect there are plenty who use it in practice, just not at the shows. 

I never used to have a looking down problem, but now I seem to catch myself doing it more often. And Golden is right, it dumps me forward and the horse on the forehand every time. I try to remember that "Where you look is where you go.", which means if you look down, you're going to end up down on the ground.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

Looking down isn't against the rules - its just one of those things that doesn't benefit the horse. Dressage is judged on the way the horse performs so you won't lose points for looking down unless its having a big impact on the horse.
Being btv does get penalized but if you get scored up on other things it would cancel out on the final result.
A lot of 'still' shots are just one second in time so shouldn't be used as a means to judge an entire performance.
In an entire competition if a horse was btv all the time and still placed high then it could be down to poor judging or just as likely that the other competitors were worse
Its a bigger problem with horses that are really light mouthed and horses that are not very sharp off the leg and the rider is constantly pushing them on into the bridle while trying to get collection out of them. That's why top riders tend to go for the 'hotter' type of horse but a lot of average riders that still get to the higher levels simply can't cope with them.


----------



## SilverMaple (Jun 24, 2017)

It's a lot harder to 'not look down' on a young, spooky, or explosive horse. Many of these top dressage horses are on a hair trigger and are on the brink of an explosion a lot of the time. Watching the elite horses warm up at a big show is a lesson on how fast these big, athletic horses can really be when it comes to a spook, buck, rear, etc. I think sometimes the tendency, even among top riders, is to watch the ears and head closely to head off a disobedience or disaster before it starts. Even a tiny show of disobedience in the ring will ruin a horse's score-- far more than being BTV or overflexed or inverted, sad to say.

Dressage is a sport often ridden alone, too. Without someone reminding you to look up! it's easy to fall into watching the horse.


----------



## AnitaAnne (Oct 31, 2010)

jaydee said:


> Looking down isn't against the rules - its just one of those things that doesn't benefit the horse. Dressage is judged on the way the horse performs so you won't lose points for looking down unless its having a big impact on the horse.
> Being btv does get penalized but if you get scored up on other things it would cancel out on the final result.
> A lot of 'still' shots are just one second in time so shouldn't be used as a means to judge an entire performance.
> In an entire competition if a horse was btv all the time and still placed high then it could be down to poor judging or just as likely that the other competitors were worse
> Its a bigger problem with horses that are really light mouthed and horses that are not very sharp off the leg and the rider is constantly pushing them on into the bridle while trying to get collection out of them. That's why top riders tend to go for the 'hotter' type of horse but a lot of average riders that still get to the higher levels simply can't cope with them.


Agree with this. Some of those pictures show a horse slightly behind the vertical because it can happen at moments in time. But I haven't seen a horse ridden the entire test like that in upper levels. 

Rolkur is a very exaggerated position and have absolutely never seen it in competition, nor would anyone ride that way during a test. It was used for training purposes by some riders in the past and I have seen it in warmups 10 or so years ago but nothing recently. 

I think upper level Dressage is something that is very hard for an observer to understand the differences in performances if one does not have riding knowledge at that level. This is why Dressage judges have to be certified and cannot enter the judges programs without having competed at certain levels corresponding with the judging levels.


----------



## SilverMaple (Jun 24, 2017)

^ I have pics from the FEI last year in Omaha. All but three or four riders rode with rollkur for the entire warmup. Edward Gall's "Glock" horse had his chin touching his chest for a good 45 minutes..... most of the rest had the horses cranked in for at least part of the warmup. Only ONE rider warmed up on a loose rein and didn't have her horse BTV for a significant portion of her warmup. Most of the audience ride western horses-- and most english riders cringe at what they perceive as rough treatment of western horses (curb bits, etc.) but I heard so many people upset that those horses were ridden like they were.... don't even get me started on the draw reins in the jumper warmups with the horses' noses on their chests.


----------



## beau159 (Oct 4, 2010)

loosie said:


> *I'm curious why*, when the 'rules' state that horses should not be 'behind the vertical', why just about every time I see an eg of dressage - here, on youtube, etc, they're almost invariably behind the vertical?? Despite seeing people so against 'roll kur'.



Eh, I suppose it's the same reason why the peanut rollers still keep winning Western Pleasure......


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

SilverMaple said:


> Most of the audience ride western horses-- and most english riders cringe at what they perceive as rough treatment of western horses (curb bits, etc.) but I heard so many people upset that those horses were ridden like they were.... don't even get me started on the draw reins in the jumper warmups with the horses' noses on their chests.



Lol, and there was me watching the warm ups at a Western Show wondering why they are allowed draw reins on curb bits, that seems wrong to me.

Mind you I have a strange sense of humor...if that is the right term....as a Western Dressage Horse, riding at one show, there was a clause that any horse risked disqualification for using ear plugs....anywhere on the grounds! 

Show rules can be crazy....


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

SilverMaple said:


> ^ I have pics from the FEI last year in Omaha. All but three or four riders rode with rollkur for the entire warmup. Edward Gall's "Glock" horse had his chin touching his chest for a good 45 minutes..... most of the rest had the horses cranked in for at least part of the warmup. Only ONE rider warmed up on a loose rein and didn't have her horse BTV for a significant portion of her warmup. Most of the audience ride western horses-- and most english riders cringe at what they perceive as rough treatment of western horses (curb bits, etc.) but I heard so many people upset that those horses were ridden like they were.... don't even get me started on the draw reins in the jumper warmups with the horses' noses on their chests.


 That's interesting since the use of Rolkurr was banned by the FEI in 2010 - including in the warm up area.
One would have to ask why on earth it wasn't reported because even if the audience was mostly western riders there must have been judges and officials there as well as grooms and riders who don't approve of the use of it and are aware of the rule.


----------



## AnitaAnne (Oct 31, 2010)

jaydee said:


> That's interesting since the use of Rolkurr was banned by the FEI in 2010 - including in the warm up area.
> One would have to ask why on earth it wasn't reported because even if the audience was mostly western riders there must have been judges and officials there as well as grooms and riders who don't approve of the use of it and are aware of the rule.


Agree. Too many officials around not to have it reported by _someone_


----------



## beau159 (Oct 4, 2010)

But ..... getting back to the OP's question, if it is against the rules to have a horse behind the vertical, yet the horse still pins or places .... why is the rule not being enforced?


May be the same reason rollkurr is "allowed" in the warm up pen even though everyone knows its banned??


Obviously I was not at an FEI event nor did I witness anything FEI related. But I often wonder the same thing about the WP world. And the answer often is "politics". Judges still place the same ol' thing (most of the time, but not always of course) even though it goes against what the rulebooks say. 



***shrug**


----------



## ApuetsoT (Aug 22, 2014)

Being btv isn't even against the rules. Rolkur is. Btv is against the rules the same way sky gazing is. It's against the directives and won't score you as well as if you were slightly ahead, but if everything else about the ride was good, you'll still score well.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Dreamcatcher Arabians said:


> I've been seeing "BTV" on more dressage test comments these days and seeing it get penalized. Not seen Roll Kur locally for some time, though I suspect there are plenty who use it in practice, just not at the shows.


I thought of 'roll kur' as just a more extreme eg of 'BTV' (?)


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

loosie said:


> I thought of 'roll kur' as just a more extreme eg of 'BTV' (?)



It's not how I see is, roll kur is a deliberate over emphasis, putting head right against the chest. Most of I guess are trying to stay in a box, sometime a little in front of vertical, which is where my coach wants us, sometimes on the vertical, and sometimes behind.....because when you are dancing with a big animal sometimes the messages get lost....


----------



## 4horses (Nov 26, 2012)

I've been watching some 3 day events on tv and have not noticed the winning horses coming behind the vertical in dressage. I think being behind the vertical for too long should mean elimination. 

I don't care for the overly strong contact dressage riders tend to use. My friend used to raise warmbloods. One of hers later sold for $30k. I rode him before he sold and he held a good headset on an extremely light contact at age 3. I don't recall his trainers name, but it was obvious he was started by a professional and trained correctly from the beginning. I would have loved to intern under that trainer... but he was the same horse who jumped my fence at 4 months old, so obviously an extremely athletic horse! His half brother holds a very special place in my heart, as I started him and we had so much fun together.


----------



## AnitaAnne (Oct 31, 2010)

loosie said:


> I thought of 'roll kur' as just a more extreme eg of 'BTV' (?)


No, not anything the same. In Rollkur the head is bent so far inwards that the line from the nose to the ears is almost parallel to the ground. 

In looking for videos to show the technique, it was a reining horses that seemed to show it the best. Was not expecting that...:frown_color:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=198&v=YMr4oP6N1Mc


----------



## Dehda01 (Jul 25, 2013)

No, rollkur and btv are two totally separate issues. Rollkur is specific overbending for a muscle stretch and that also has a point of adding control of the horse and to put the horse into a submissive state. 

Rollkur is different that being ridden deep/low though can be easy to tiptoe on. 

Btv can be done by the horse or rider. Many horses will do it showing tension, conformation tendencies or because the rider is creating it through tension or excessive contact. 

Judges ABSOLUTELY remove points for being BTV. I have arabs and Friesians and they LOVE to go BTV particularly as young, under muscled horses because they simply don’t have the strength to carry themselves properly and so like to “fake it” rather than work through their back. 

So it isn’t a disqualifying thing to see, but you loose significant points when the judge doesn’t see the proper muscles and then being on the bit. 

That said. Pictures are a single moment in time. And while a horse could be BTV a few times during the ride, particularly when collection is starting as the horse shifts back. the good riders don’t keep them there.


----------



## DanteDressageNerd (Mar 12, 2015)

Horses are penalized for being behind the vertical but there are SO many other factors to consider, a judge cant always see the exact nose position of the horse from the angle they sit at. Also in speaking with a CDI *** judge someone asked him about judges scores and he said a lot of people fault behind the vertical and as judges we do too, however we also have to look at suppleness and degree of angle, how the horse responds to aids, etc. A horse that is compliant, supple and on the bit, properly over it's back with correct bend will outscore even behind the vertical over a horse that is at or in front of the vertical and not over it's back, stiff and hollow. I'll also say as a dressage rider, I'd rather see a horse a little behind the vertical but soft, over it's back and working into the contact happily than a horse held and bracing against contact with a stiff underneck but at or in front of the vertical. 

A lot of developing horses will get behind when they're learning and gaining musculature and certain conformations actually need to ride a bit before they're strong enough to carry at verticle. I know an ewe necked horse like that, a BHSI instructor who is VERY correct said that it's not ideal and we will correct him when he gets behind but the fact that he's there is no a symptom of bad riding, it is because it's how he has to carry himself while he develops that muscle. Eventually he no longer did this but it was quite the effort to get correct bend in the rib cage, him lifting up over his back, through his wither and over his neck. We had other things to focus on besides his nose position. The place the nose falls is supposed to be based on the overall outline from the entire horse in connection to the bridle. 

Like this is not ideal at all. The horse doesn't really take the contact or really swing over it's back. They just stick their head down. And when they come up to "collect" they do not "sit" or flex their croup or bring their hocks under with a rounded back. hip and pelvis out behind. Even the long and low is not particularly a good stretch because the stretch is just stretch without connection.






Even Valegro has brief moments of being "behind" but the harmony, throughness, ease of transitions and beautiful, empathetic riding over comes that by far. This is a horse truly over it's back true in the contact. 






You want to see a horse lifting up from the base of their withers, over their back with the whole back engaged and pelvis brought under. True engagement is not marked by tracking up but swing of the back and engagement of the hocks. 

This is rolkur and very bad for the horses health, it is holding the horse against the bit to such an extent that you lose the back and the hind end goes out behind. 









Anky. I used to be super hard on her and I still dont love how she rides, it's not how I want to ride but I find it impressive that she's able to keep performance horses sound into their late teens





This is also really beautifully ridden. I love how fluid she is with the horse clearly connected in the whole body


----------



## 4horses (Nov 26, 2012)

That first Anky video is downright painful to watch. I just want to yank the reins away.


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

4horses said:


> That first Anky video is downright painful to watch. I just want to yank the reins away.



That's what I thought too. Like what's the point, to push the horse to the breaking point? He's clearly very irritated and the rider doesn't care. If my horse was swishing his tail like that, I wouldn't keep pushing him. And if I did, and he flipped out, I would figure I was asking for whatever he gave me. I mean, it's like she's blind to the horse's emotions.


If that's all she wants to do, is bob up and down, maybe she should just get a pogo stick instead of making a horse miserable. The horse wants his head and the horse wants to move forward, like normal people do. :icon_rolleyes:


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

For it to truly be considered Rolkurr there has to be what is considered as excessive force used to pull and hold the horses head in a position that's on or close to the chest for a considerable length of time
@4horses - when you see a rider having a very strong contact you'll usually find its because the horse is very hot and forward going. European dressage horses tend to go a lot stronger into the bridle than a typical US dressage horse and can take way more holding on too than a horse that's needing constant leg, leg, leg to keep it going forwards 
On the whole there's far more of a backlash in the dressage world against rolkurr - its illegal in competition and in the warm up rings and in Switzerland its illegal to even use it at home - than there is in the reining world where popular trainers like Clinton Anderson regularly use and display the use of working a horse in deliberate over-flexion as part of their training program


----------



## 4horses (Nov 26, 2012)

I don't care how "hot" a horse is, you should not need a death grip on the reins! My Paso was nearly explosive when I first got him. I did lots of circles with his nose nearly to his shoulder, always timing the release when he slowed down. I specifically worked on riding with loose reins. Once we have walk, trot, canter, change directions, and stop/back, then we can start working on collection. 

Being hot is not an excuse for being in your horses mouth all the time. Being in the horses mouth all the time will make an explosive horse even more explosive. This is a training issue and a rider issue. Timing the release is just as important in dressage, as it is in western riding. Riding with contact should not mean abusing your horses mouth.


----------



## DanteDressageNerd (Mar 12, 2015)

I think what Jaydee meant is that a lot of mainland europeans ride this way and ride very strong. I think she was trying to explain the difference in how the horse's are trained, not that it is necessarily "right" but what they're doing. When the riders are so strong against the horse's the horse's unfortunately get used to it and lose such a soft mouth because they rely almost purely on the bridle for softness, rather than using the rider's body and aids to mold the horse's body. The bridle assists but isn't the creator of softness.
@4horses I agree. A death grip on the reins does not work well with a very hot horse. Exhibit Wonder horse. Can't get strong in the bridle on him and he is VERY VERY hot and VERY VERY strong. He has torn my core before, had to run him into the wall many times a ride for a long time. Installing a half halt and brakes was quite the challenge and it requires me to be VERY strong and athletic but having him work in cooperation and with me, rather than fighting his eagerness makes me happy. But he is VERY VERY hot and sometimes I feel like all we do is circles and laterals to keep him on his hind end, rather than launching forward. And I have to be careful in the bridle on him, he is tricky about certain things and if a rider holds for too long or is too strong in the bridle. He really has a come apart about it, before his teeth were done he'd try to hit me in the head. Or I wouldn't let him pull on me and bolt, so he pulled me out of the saddle from sitting trot up onto his neck (only horse I've ever had do that). Had to set my hands on our bucking strap for a while and let him fight himself when he'd try to take control like that, still have to be careful in time. If he goes out the shoulder he tends to do as he pleases. After I think he'd rear and flip on someone who used force like most of the german riders I've seen use or put excessive force on the draw reins. He's perfectly agreeable if asked and if treated with respect but fights with everything he has if forced or pressured. I've ridden a few warmbloods like him but not to the same degree of quirkiness or heat as Mister Wonderful. 

When you take contact, you're asking the horse to trust you with a very delicate part of it's face and allowing you access to influence them. I've had a lot of work convincing horses from mainland Europe to trust me in the contact, a lot of horses do not trust a rider's hands and do not properly soften or respond to the bridle. Holding back against the bridle strong like a lot of european riders do blocks the horse from coming through and over the back. They miss the part of where the horse stretches and reaches into the bridle. Most mainland europeans seem to hold the horse against, rather than encourage the horse to accept and reach through with it.


----------



## seabiscuit91 (Mar 30, 2017)

Top riders still do get penalized for being BTV, just because we see it doesn't mean they 'get away' with it. 
I follow plenty of FEI riders, some whom often post their tests after and they get comments on their cards just like anyone 'dipped BTV' / 'BTV' etc etc. BTV is completely different to rolkur.

It's one thing to have a nose dipped behind the line for movements, obviously with so much else being judged as well, and it's not the easiest thing to tell from your seat it's quite common.
I agree, any horse going round significantly bent and being held by the rider should indeed be heavily penalized. 

But as for dipping and ducking behind, they do get comments/lose points for doing so.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

4horses said:


> I don't care how "hot" a horse is, you should not need a death grip on the reins! ...Being hot is not an excuse for being in your horses mouth all the time.


Yes, well said. That is just not 'contact' - contact is a soft feel, that the horse *willingly* accepts, not something it's forced into. And someone said part of the definition of rollkur is excessive force - which is why, when seeing 'strong contact', I don't see a lot of difference between that & rollkur, except in the degree.

And knowing what I'd see, I didn't watch any of those rollkur vids. But knowing I'd also see something horrible from that horrible man, I'm grinding my teeth after watching part of the CA one... Agreed, that should absolutely be classed as rollkur & treated as such.:icon_rolleyes:


----------



## trailhorserider (Oct 13, 2009)

loosie said:


> And knowing what I'd see, I didn't watch any of those rollkur vids. But knowing I'd also see something horrible from that horrible man, I'm grinding my teeth after watching part of the CA one... Agreed, that should absolutely be classed as rollkur & treated as such.:icon_rolleyes:



What's funny is he's talking about kicking the horse's *** and I'm thinking HE needs his *** kicked, lol! He's as full of himself as any stud colt. 

I know studs are serious business, and yes, I suck at horse training, but I sure wouldn't want my horse intimidated by the bit like that. And any slight infraction, you are getting your mouth jerked to heck. I am often hard on english riders riding in constant contact. But this is just as bad. 

I don't know. The more I see some of these "top" horse trainers, the more I just want to go quietly down the trail (apparently that makes me a stupid tree huger to CA.......oh well!). I don't have horses because I want to be a dominatrix. If that's what it takes, it's not for me.


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

trailhorserider said:


> What's funny is he's talking about kicking the horse's *** and I'm thinking HE needs his *** kicked, lol! He's as full of himself as any stud colt.
> 
> I know studs are serious business, and yes, I suck at horse training, but I sure wouldn't want my horse intimidated by the bit like that. And any slight infraction, you are getting your mouth jerked to heck. I am often hard on english riders riding in constant contact. But this is just as bad.
> 
> I don't know. The more I see some of these "top" horse trainers, the more I just want to go quietly down the trail (apparently that makes me a stupid tree huger to CA.......oh well!). * I don't have horses because I want to be a dominatrix. If that's what it takes, it's not for me.*





That gave me a good laugh! and , an image of a dominatrix. . . . . no thanks.


Yes, I find CA very hard to watch, and listen to. I don't care that he has a high opinion of himself. But his approach to horses is , well, ugly.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

trailhorserider said:


> What's funny is he's talking about kicking the horse's *** and I'm thinking HE needs his *** kicked, lol!


Oh don't let me at him, I wouldn't be able to stop... 'the more you kick 'em, the quieter they get' isn't it?? I didn't hear that because I didn't feel the need to hear his voice too - sound was off.



> The more I see some of these "top" horse trainers, the more I just want to go quietly down the trail (apparently that makes me a stupid tree huger to CA.......oh well!). I don't have horses because I want to be a dominatrix.


Hear you, loud & clear! But I don't think, regardless of our skill, we'd get any real respect from CA anyway, from what I've heard him say about women... and if you ride bitless, you're just an idiot... like all those idiots in the Houston Mounted Branch for eg... So I'll just remain a tree hugging idiot woman & look out if I ever run into him... What happened to the haloed smilie?? This one will have to do... :cheers:


----------



## SilverMaple (Jun 24, 2017)

Most of the other trainers can't stand CA either. Nor can those who worked for him... His method tends to be geared toward getting your horse too shut-down to think for himself


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Since this has veered away from dressage and into Clinton Anderson, I'll point out my horse was trained by a guy who was trying to follow Clinton Anderson's DVDs because CA was so much GENTLER than the local trainers he knew. For my tastes, he had spent too much time flexing the head and too much time riding the horse in a "Do it or else!" fashion...but CA was still easier on the horse than most of the local trainers.

I swapped Mia for my current horse. When I saw how Bandit behaved after being ridden that way, I was afraid for Mia. Happily, I think Mia taught her new owner a few things about horses. He mentioned early on how responsive she was. When we met last spring, he said when he got off work and daylight was fading, he'd toss a halter on her, jump on her bareback and they would go out for a gallop across the countryside together, returning after sunset. I got the feeling Mia had taken him well beyond the Clinton Anderson DVDs.

Bandit? I don't know if he needed a different approach, a chance to be ridden without racing, more groceries, or a bit of all three. He'll never be as "soft" as Mia could be, but he's turned into a good thinking horse. He doesn't have a subtle bone in his body. Don't know if that was how he was born or if it has to do with his initial training. Or maybe it is a mustang gelding versus Arabian mare thing. A much better match for my riding than Mia, actually. I'm not real subtle either. I trust Bandit now doing things I never attempted on Mia. Don't know if it is Bandit or if Mia and I would have gotten here with an extra 3 years of riding.

I have no desire to follow CA. Never have. But in his defense, he may be good for some of the push-over type riders who let their horses get away with murder. The folks on this thread all know about setting clear, consistent rules. I've met people though who wanted to ride a horse without imposing any sort of rules at all. I think that is CA's target audience - the folks who expect a 1200 lb ranch gelding to turn into Shadowfax overnight because they've seen YouTube videos on bitless riding. The folks who took up riding 6 months ago, without lessons, and wonder why their horse isn't a dog. When I took up riding, my personality was too harsh to be a good rider. I had to learn to soften. Others start at the opposite end of the spectrum and need to toughen up.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

4horses said:


> I don't care how "hot" a horse is, you should not need a death grip on the reins! My Paso was nearly explosive when I first got him. I did lots of circles with his nose nearly to his shoulder, always timing the release when he slowed down. I specifically worked on riding with loose reins. Once we have walk, trot, canter, change directions, and stop/back, then we can start working on collection.
> 
> Being hot is not an excuse for being in your horses mouth all the time. Being in the horses mouth all the time will make an explosive horse even more explosive. This is a training issue and a rider issue. Timing the release is just as important in dressage, as it is in western riding. Riding with contact should not mean abusing your horses mouth.


When you've ridden a horse that has a tendency to want to pull your arms out of the sockets you can come back and make an informed post about it
Being explosive has nothing to do with being strong, that is about a horse being over excitable/over reactive/lacking in self control in certain situations
You can hardly compare a little Paso Fino with a 16.2+ WB in terms of the body power they've got to use against you if they feel like, you also can't compare what you're doing with your horse to the demands of upper level dressage
Do you really believe that these riders reach the upper levels of dressage without being able to train a horse?
All of the circles in the world won't stop a horse that's strong in the bridle being strong in the bridle, particularly when being asked to perform the more extreme levels of collection that require the rider to push the horse forwards while at the same time restricting that forward action to get the required elevation without the horse running through your hands
I would much rather have a dressage horse that's strong in the bridle and takes a bit of holding than one that has to be constantly nagged and kicked to keep it going, because they're much harder work.
There's a huge difference between being abusive to a horse's mouth and containing forward movement in collection


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

jaydee said:


> When you've ridden a horse that has a tendency to want to pull your arms out of the sockets you can come back and make an informed post about it...
> 
> ...All of the circles in the world won't stop a horse that's strong in the bridle being strong in the bridle, particularly when being asked to perform the more extreme levels of collection that require the rider to push the horse forwards while at the same time restricting that forward action to get the required elevation without the horse running through your hands...
> 
> There's a huge difference between being abusive to a horse's mouth and containing forward movement in collection


It would be interesting to know if the HORSE sees it very differently!

A French dressage rider, Racinet, argued your description of collection is based on false principles. He points out - because I think the science is clear - that "collection" involves a REDIRECTION of energy, not containing it:








​ If I understood him correctly, he views much of modern dressage as a heavy-handed imposition of the human's will on a horse to create false movement, rather than teaching the horse to use its energy in a way both horse and rider can enjoy. The Slinky Theory of collection - push the hind end forward while holding back on the front end, rounding the horse up in between - frustrates the horse and creates resentment and tension.

I obviously don't train in dressage, but I think the mechanics of a horse's movement make it clear that they can re-direct their energy to create lift, but cannot constrain it at both ends and round up between.

"_This of course requires that the horse is well contained between the pushing aids and restraining aids, because this relatively high basic tension which is necessary for collection can only be obtained in this way...Prolonged collecting work is very strenuous for the horse._" - Balance in Movement, The Seat of the Rider by Susanne von Dietze, page 120

Jean Claude Racinet would argue it is very frustrating to the horse as well. If the rider has to FIGHT to get the horse collected ("_want to pull your arms out of the sockets_"), then it seems to me there is something very wrong. Maybe the horse needs to try a different sport than dressage. Or maybe the rider needs to concentrate on asking for willing lift instead of "_requir[ing] the horse to be closed in between the driving reins and restraining aids_". (Balance in Movement)

https://www.amazon.com/Another-Hors...536937364&sr=8-2&keywords=jean+claude+racinet

https://www.amazon.com/Racinet-Expl...536937364&sr=8-5&keywords=jean+claude+racinet


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

bsms - If you want to compete in modern dressage to have success then you ride in a way that will get you that success, not following old principles or methods that aren't in tune with todays requirements


I think if you want to understand and give opinions then you would be better taking some lessons on a strong dressage horse and moving up the levels so you can speak from experience and not from books.


In point of fact, when you contain the energy you are also redirecting it - instead of the energy running out through the hands so the horse is 'running flat' you're asking that energy to go forwards AND upwards which results in elevation'
I found some 'stills' of the author and to be honest I'm not seeing anything at all to be desired or that would gain success in the modern dressage test. The necks cranked up in a really uncomfortable outline that's restricting the windpipe and the backs hollow. Not a pretty site.
The other video is of his 'followers' - one of the most noticeable things is that so many of the horses are overdeveloped on the underside of the neck which is an indicator of bracing and incorrect movement.
Maybe the demo by Charlotte will explain things more clearly - though this is a horse that's light in the bridle


----------



## Tihannah (Apr 7, 2015)

@bsms - I think your understanding of dressage is skewed, as it is for most people that don't ride it. Recycling the energy, what you described, is EXACTLY what dressage is about. Not forcing the frame, or heavy handed restraining. The heaviness that I think Jaydee is describing is coming from the horse and not the rider. This is something that has taken me some time, as a novice dressage rider to understand as well. 

Depending on the type of horse you are riding, his training, etc., the situation can be different.

I had that 17h+ strong WB that used his strength and power to resist ANY contact. Yet without contact, he owned the ride. And he was big enough, with huge suspended strides to toss you out of the saddle with each step. He used forward as an evasion and all he needed to feel was an ounce of contact before you were off and running.

Now I have a 16h TB baby with no tricks or bad training to work through and the dressage method makes total sense with him. I can use my seat an legs and ask him to round and lift through his back while still having a soft contact. He respects the boundaries that you give him and doesn't try to over power you or pull the reins through your hand.

Below is a picture of my TB in one of his first rides with my friend. Notice the big loop in the reins. She is using seat and legs with him only and asking him to carrying himself forward. He is lifting through the back, therefore dropping the head. Loop or no loop, my WB would have ripped those reins from her hands and plowed forward in a speeding trot with his nose pointed to the sky and hollowed out. The take and release meant nothing to him and the below picture is something I, nor any trainer that has worked with him have ever been able to duplicate. There are many great ideas of what 'should' be, but there is no one fits all with horses.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

jaydee said:


> When you've ridden a horse that has a tendency to want to pull your arms out of the sockets you can come back and make an informed post about it
> Being explosive has nothing to do with being strong, that is about a horse being over excitable/over reactive/lacking in self control in certain situations
> You can hardly compare a little Paso Fino with a 16.2+ WB in terms of the body power they've got to use against you if they feel like, you also can't compare what you're doing with your horse to the demands of upper level dressage
> Do you really believe that these riders reach the upper levels of dressage without being able to train a horse?
> ...


Makes sense to me, good post. 

Having hunted in my younger days, and sweet quiet plodding school horses, who got ‘bitted up’ when out, it was shocking to find that these sweet horses turned into fire breathing chargers when out with a ‘herd’ of galloping horses.

Back to Dressage, i agree, easier to ride a forward horse, than try and push on the whole time, and YES big difference between being abusive and creating that ‘circle of energy’ yes we can find bad examples, but there are crappy riders in every single sport, the best examples is what we should all aspire too. 

Back to the title, we should ban the use of the term ‘head set’ unless you are on a plane with the attendant handing them out.


----------



## 4horses (Nov 26, 2012)

Jaydee- I grew up riding big 17 hand warmbloods. My neighbor bred and raised them. In exchange for helping her train them, i would get free riding lessons 3x a week. I was about 110lbs so there is no way a little rider like me could force those horses to do anything. They all had very nice minds and none required holding like you describe. They were started correctly, never over faced or mistreated in any way. I'm not sure what people are breeding for these days, or what training methods they are using, but i suspect they are doing something wrong. Even the hottest horses can learn to be soft in the bridle. 

A horse that wants to pull my arms out of the socket, does not sound very fun to ride. It sounds like a horse that needs a great deal of re-training. I can not win a tug of war with a large horse, I'm too petite. If a horse wants to pull on me like that we will circle down and try something different.

There is an excellent book called Lessons in lightness by Mark Russell. It explains how to create collection while maintaining light contact. 

If a horse is pulling your arms out of the socket - that horse has never been trained to give to pressure appropriately. It is poor riding because if you maintain that strong of a contact, the contact stops being an aid. In other words you are teaching the horse to be hard mouthed, and to ignore the harsh mouth contact. If i get in my horses mouth, just for a moment, it means "listen here, i want you to slow or collect." I expect my horse to respond immediately , and the pressure is released. That is how i train my horses. 

A horse that leans in the bridle or rushes off is evading. I have no problem with some contact, but there is a fine line between acceptable levels, and excessive levels of contact. 

Horses are highly adaptable. If you ride with strong hands, that is what they will require, unless they are taught differently.


----------



## DanteDressageNerd (Mar 12, 2015)

But there is a very big difference between loading a spring and trying to hold the spring in place. I've been to several barns that all they do is hold and lock without using the bridle as a means of communication but just to lock and hold back against the horse. I always wish I could set people on horses that are not conventional to understand. 

I've had a few try to pull my arms out of my sockets, my job was breaking and developing young warmbloods for a few years. I would set my hands on the bucking strap and hold when they went to plant or pull my arms out of the socket because that means they don't respect the hand-bit barrier which to me is a connection of communication. The line goes as they don't pull on me but willingly accept contact and I don't pull on them, too light is not acceptance of contact but avoidance. Leaning, too light, running is evasion. Not all horses can be fixed, I've found if horses are psychologically and emotionally damaged you either bring them back but they'll have quirks or they can never be used in the choice discipline again. 

I've also had to retrain multiple horses from strong man style riders and they are dead in the mouth. I rode a GP horse in Germany that was SO SO hard in the jaw and braced in the whole neck and body that it would have taken months to untrain that, so instead of trying to ride through and correct I just played with the tricks. I use a lot of laterals to loosen up horses that are used to that tight, strong man hold. I also rode an FEI german riding pony who was trained in Germany, Denmark and the UK who was very used to the strong man, iron grip. It is amazing to me how much the movement changes when the horse learns how to actually accept contact, trust the rider's hand and move. I rode a mare for a sales video who was ridden by one of the top trainers in the area and when I rode her she was like huh she moves like a totally different horse and it's because she finally had the freedom over her back and shoulders and wasnt being so crunched up in the front and body that is shut down her movement. I hate watching the strong-iron man grip or when people make a horse so light the horse is off the bit and not accepting it.

When I ride something very tricky, quirky or electric, over reactive, I didn't find I needed more bridle (though a stronger outside rein half halt and firmer elbows into my rib cage) but more core and a lot more organization. My horse when I came back from Denmark I had to run into the wall at least 10 times a ride and rode him 2hrs a day 6 days a week. In all the dressage barns I've worked in, I have never seen or met a horse like him. Even the olympic rider I worked for was like that's nuts. But the trick wasn't being strong against Wonder but setting the barrier and teaching him to respect contact which I had to do by grabbing the bucking strap because there is NO way to keep him from pulling you out of the saddle otherwise. He is in his own league of strong and I've ridden 18+h really strong wbs that were well bred, not even close to Wonder strong. The more strength you gather on a strong, hot horse the more strength and power they muster against you. The best way to harness that energy is to redirect it into something productive like laterals or circles or something that requires them to cross those hind legs. You don't spin them but you use the turn and changes of direction to help rebalance them and keep the tempo. I have to resist so much in core on that horse, it's all about core and teaching them to come back. It's not that you're never strong, there are DEFINITE moment to be strong but it's not constant, it's like STRONG get reaction and back to neutral. My issue with a lot of mainland european riders is they have the strong hold down but not the release.

What I love about dressage is the poetic understanding between horse and rider. I like seeing the development and changes in the horse's attitude, confidence, understanding of the aids, changes in posture, soundness and way of going. I loved rehabbing horses and making mechanically lame horses almost entirely sound looking (mechanical lameness is a shortness caused by old injury, not pain). Or re-developing a horse with severe EPM and seeing him go from uncoordinated with the hind end to within a year being unable to tell he ever had EPM. There is a lot of good that comes from good riding and good training. However it saddens me when so many disrupt that. The thing with contact is a rider has to be so skilled, so sensitive and so intune with the horse to do it properly. It is very easy to make mistakes and we ALL make them and more so when we're learning. I think people want to bypass the sensitive understanding of contact and connection and how to be effective with it, rather than correctly learn how to use it. It's easier to simply hold back or drop the contact than to find that delicate place of elastic feel. And we do take contact. It's not always that perfect delicate feel but that is the goal. With some horses being far easier in the contact than other. Wonder isn't something you can just flop the reins over and say here balance yourself and be safe.

Charlotte always trains them to respect that bit boundary, she is not a heavy handed. Pull against, muscle them type rider. There are moments to be strong, no doubt about that but to do it constantly eliminates meaning.


----------



## TXhorseman (May 29, 2014)

The methods used by a rider should be influenced by the rider’s interaction with the individual horse. The rider should adjust his method depending on both the conformation of the horse – which can influence what the horse is capable of performing – and the temperament of the horse – is the horse timid, demanding control, etc.

The desire to win specific competitions greatly complicates things. Rules in competition can greatly favor one horse over another. For example, the conformation of a horse can have tremendous influence over whether the horse can better perform a piaffe or an extended trot.

Attitude is another important factor in the interaction between the rider and the horse. Does the rider want to control the horse? Does the rider want to influence the horse? Does the rider want the horse to do what the rider demands? Does the rider ask the horse to work with him in performing a particular movement?

Again, competition can complicate the situation. Are judges, spectators, sponsors, etc. expecting spectacular performances that give the impression a rider is in complete control of a strong, powerful, and demanding horse? Or, does it appear that the horse is doing everything right although the rider does not appear to be doing anything? 

In the end, the relationship between the rider and the horse should not be influenced by competition with others. The ultimate goal should be that the horse and rider understand and respect each other. In harmony, they should seek to develop the best relationship possible between two differing species.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

I'm sorry Jaydee but I very much disagree with you on many levels.



jaydee said:


> When you've ridden a horse that has a tendency to want to pull your arms out of the sockets you can come back and make an informed post about it


I suspect any of us who have had much experience riding many different horses in different situations & levels of training & reactivity have indeed experienced that. I certainly have.



> Being explosive has nothing to do with being strong, that is about a horse being over excitable/over reactive/lacking in self control in certain situations
> You can hardly compare a little Paso Fino with a 16.2+ WB in terms of the body power they've got to use against you if they feel like,


I don't care what you're asking/riding, but a rider shouldn't be hanging off the reins strongly. Period. If you 'need' to do that, something's fundamentally wrong with the picture IMHO. No matter how commonly accepted(trendy) it is.

As for the 'little' Paso/WB comment, no exp with either of those breeds, but I don't think that comment is at all reasonable - the whole point of controlling a horse with a piece of metal in their sensitive mouth is that you can, because it is potentially very painful, when strong pressure is applied. If 'hot' and 'strong' horses like 'little' TB's or Percherons(for eg) can be controlled, I don't see that breed/size/strength of horse has the remotest bearing. Again, the entire POINT of a bit is that you can control powerful animals without muscle. And the point of training is to teach them to *yield* to pressure, to learn by *negative reinforcement* how to *avoid* that pressure. 



> you also can't compare what you're doing with your horse to the demands of upper level dressage
> Do you really believe that these riders reach the upper levels of dressage without being able to train a horse?


As said, I am not personally very exp'd at dressage at all. But when I've seen horses are performing on light contact, I don't believe constant heavyhandedness is a necessity of dressage. Which is, after all, in theory at least, meant to be about training in harmony with the horse. Of course, you can train a horse to put up with that, just as you can train them to be 'hard mouthed' in other situations.



> There's a huge difference between being abusive to a horse's mouth and containing forward movement in collection


And that is, respectfully, obviously very much a matter of perception & opinion, when we're talking heavy handedness with a bit.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

loosie said:


> I'm sorry Jaydee but I very much disagree with you on many levels.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Loosie, I could say a lot on this but I can hear the frustration through your post.


A bit is not breaks. A bit is to create a connection, a contact, to "speak" to the horse. For eons humans have been able to stop, start, and control horses without bits. You will never ever be able to stop a horse who does not like you, trust you, respect you, or want to be with you. A horse who does not have this "magikal" components will listen to you about as well as a rock. Using tack to inflict pain and/or fear to create dominance is not what horses are about. 



A bit is what sign language is in humans. Verbal-less communication.


I don't disagree with the fact that the communication so many dressage riders want to have with their horses is the equivalent of screaming in human language. all the time. And these horses, after a while, go deaf to it all. Horses are extremely good at coping with stressful situations. They are, after all, prey animals and turning off is part of the survival mechanism. 



But to think all training is is to move away or SUBMIT from pressure (read: pain) is very archaic. We train to help the horse find a way to communicate with us and to communicate with them in a language we both can understand and agree upon. 



Some people claim the german/dutch systems still focus too much on "yielding to pressure" (read: PAIN), a la rollkur, a la heavy contact, a la huge spurs, a la deep seat, a la whip. NONE of these tools are bad but the more you use the more you are basically YELLING at a deaf person. They will never understand what you are saying and, at best, can learn to read your lips after a while. But the analogy remains the same.


The goal in dressage is to create a language for horse and rider. Some trainers and riders have lost that over the decades in favor of creating a language barrier so that the horse is constantly in a state of "learned helplessness" in order to control and pacify them. But real dressage people and real horsemen know very well who these men and women are, and can pick them out quickly and dismiss them without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.


edit to say: I find dressage, at its core, a language of love. Some don't see it that way, and they tend to be the types who are out there for the medals and the ribbons and the glory. But you have that in EVERY sport, as we all have heard time and time again.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

jaydee said:


> bsms - If you want to compete in modern dressage to have success then you ride in a way that will get you that success, not following old principles or methods that aren't in tune with todays requirements
> 
> I think if you want to understand and give opinions then you would be better taking some lessons on a strong dressage horse and moving up the levels so you can speak from experience and not from books.


IF the first paragraph is correct, that is one reason I have absolutely no desire to compete - whatever the level. I strongly disagree with the principle of riding with 'heavy hands', especially on a painful device like a bit(when used that way) no wonder these riders need to tie the poor horse's mouths shut!

On the second note, no, I disagree thoroughly. It just doesn't make sense to say, that to have/give a reasonable opinion on this you have to do it. That's like... saying you can't make an opinion on an elephant being 'trained' with a sharp stick unless you have a go! Or opinions on racing babies until you've been a jockey on a 2yo.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

I would argue an outsider's opinion can be more valid than an insider's. When rollkur was winning, it was outsider's who drove questions about it - questions which many dressage riders took to heart. I still have issues with WP, but it was the revulsion of outsiders for peanut rollers that has driven at least some improvement. When a German Shepherd won a top show moving around like he had worms, it was the unwashed masses who led the outcry. Too often, those in the Echo Chamber of Competition are willing to harden their hearts, to the unnoticed detriment of their companions.


> There is another term which is somewhat more definite a "horseman." The very word implies the cooperation of two beings and it always sounds to me as if it designated some sort of partnership between them, instead of the mere mastery of the one by the other. To me a horseman is not necessarily a man who uses his aids artistically, but rather a human being who practices his riding on the basis of complete consideration of his mount's abilities and limitations. If one accepts the term horseman in this sense then a High School rider may be a horseman and may not be; the same applies to the primitive tribesman and the latter, despite the simplicity of his aims, may happen to be a better horseman than an educated rider of the Western world. For instance, a man who cripples his horse in a supreme effort to win in a competition may be considered a sportsman (at least by some), may be a good rider, 'but his lack of consideration of the horse deprives him of the right to be called a horseman...
> 
> This definition seems to imply that, for instance, clearing a 4'6" course while making the horse nervous and over-jumping every fence is not good riding. But, judging by the applause which normally follows such a winning round, the spirit of this definition obviously is not shared by all; a horseman's appreciation of riding is not general, while a competitor's point of view is common and although we refer, in prose and verse, to the horse as a "noble animal" our feelings toward him often go no deeper than beautiful phrases. - VS Littauer, Common Sense Horsemanship


"*I think if you want to understand and give opinions then you would be better taking some lessons on a strong dressage horse and moving up the levels so you can speak from experience and not from books.*" - @jaydee

Let me use Bandit as an example. His previous owner raced him in relay races, with Bandit covering 10+ mile sections. He told me, shortly after we swapped horses, that I should just whip him past things. Bandit would resist, of course, but if I could ride it out, he'd accept my will. Made me worried about Mia's fate, although I think Mia has since taught her new owner a thing or two about riding!

Still, I refused to ride Bandit that way. And Bandit regressed, becoming very spooky. VERY tense, and he'd spin or buck at the drop of a hat! But then we started working our way through those spooks, by teaching instead of whipping. 3+ years later, I'm often riding him places with nothing more than my voice urging him on. And I'm often riding without a helmet, and letting him run along trails when he feels like it because I trust him.

Just because whipping him on HAD worked, didn't mean I needed to ride that way or that it was what worked best!

I freely admit I am totally unqualified to discuss how to teach collection. And I wouldn't be surprised if SOMETIMES those lessons looked ugly. Some of my rides with Bandit sure did! A horse bucking and cantering down a trail with a rider trying to tell him that was unacceptable - well, it looked and felt ugly!

But the PRINCIPLE remains, and it remains true across disciplines. If the horse wants to rip the reins out of your hands, and if you feel like he is pulling your arms off, then SOMETHING needs to be looked at! I stand by what I wrote: "If the rider has to FIGHT to get the horse collected ("_want to pull your arms out of the sockets_"), then it seems to me there is something very wrong. Maybe the horse needs to try a different sport than dressage." The fact that some winners apparently accept that - according to you - is no sign that it qualifies as good riding!

Here is another old quote, from a dressage rider 128 years ago:


> "We should keep calm, and at the slightest sign of cadence, that is to say, at the first, or later on, at the second time, we should stop using the "aids", pat the horse's neck, give him time to become quiet, and begin again.
> 
> A horseman who has great delicacy and tact, will stop the animal at the first time and pat him. But the less tact he has, the less capable is he of judging if the time is in cadence. Such a man will continue in his attempts to catch the cadence, and will succeed only in upsetting the nerves of his horse. *These remarks explain the fact that a clever and tactful horseman will obtain all he wants from his mount, without making him either vicious or unsound.* Being able to recognize the slightest sign of obedience, he immediately stops the work, in order to make the horse understand, by pats on the neck, that he has done well. *The quickness with which he perceives the slightest signs, saves him from overtaxing and disgusting the horse, and provoking him to battle, which will wear them both out.
> *
> ...


 Of course, the riding James Fillis did wouldn't win him any medals in 2018. But what he wrote about dressage was my very first lesson - one I read in a book - about HOW to approach riding my horse! The principle remains, be it trail riding or dressage or reining or WP or jumping: If you have to fight your horse, if he is resisting you with all his strength, ASK WHY! As James Fillis put it 128 years ago: "*In place of first putting the blame on the horse, which is only natural,the rider ought perhaps begin by trying to find out if he himself is not the culprit.*"

If winning in modern dressage requires riding "_a horse that has a tendency to want to pull your arms out of the sockets_", then maybe dressage ought to listen to outsiders who ask, "Why?" As a rule of thumb - coming from a trail rider - the hotter the horse, the greater the need for equine tact instead of brute force. Find the back door instead of trying to smash down the front!


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Tihannah said:


> @*bsms* - I think your understanding of dressage is skewed, as it is for most people that don't ride it...
> 
> I had that 17h+ strong WB that used his strength and power to resist ANY contact. Yet without contact, he owned the ride. And he was big enough, with huge suspended strides to toss you out of the saddle with each step. He used forward as an evasion and all he needed to feel was an ounce of contact before you were off and running...


I appreciate your post and agree with much of it. I'm sure much of my understanding of dressage IS skewed. I also think those who immerse themselves in dressage may also have a skewed view, and listening to both sides may help find the truth. And certainly horses vary greatly, and I've ridden very few!

As for the WB resisting contact...when Mia got excited - for a variety of causes - she would take off. She then tried to take total control. I screwed up correcting it in a snaffle. I tried to use pressure, and holding her back, to solve it. Made it worse. Eventually went to a curb bit and used it, not for contact, but to set an upper boundary. Once I could set an upper boundary, I could adjust where that boundary fell. And in time, she went back to a snaffle, although she genuinely seemed to like curb bits better.

Admittedly, that is different from the goals of dressage, with contact being needed almost continuously to generate a different type of motion and balance. But if the WB was resisting contact that much, then perhaps he needed to go back and learn to trust contact. Mia did, frankly. And Bandit certainly did. His experience with bits was that any pressure on the bit meant slam on the brakes, and our first few rides got kind of interesting! In the end, he had to learn to trust my hands before he could listen to them. And for my non-dressage goals, once he could listen to my hands, we could then move on to not needing them - but that is another story.

I'd ask two questions:

What did the horse gain from RESISTING contact?

How can I make the horse find gain in ACCEPTING contact?​ 
It seems to me a horse who fights contact has issues that need to be addressed before attempting any steps toward collection. Or control.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

DanteDressageNerd said:


> ...Not all horses can be fixed, I've found if horses are psychologically and emotionally damaged you either bring them back but they'll have quirks or they can never be used in the choice discipline again.
> 
> ...But the trick wasn't being strong against Wonder but setting the barrier and teaching him to respect contact which I had to do by grabbing the bucking strap because there is NO way to keep him from pulling you out of the saddle otherwise...The more strength you gather on a strong, hot horse the more strength and power they muster against you...
> 
> What I love about dressage is the poetic understanding between horse and rider....There are moments to be strong, no doubt about that but to do it constantly eliminates meaning.


Beautifully put! Before I bought Mia and took up riding at 50, my experience was on a variety of ranches (as a visitor) when I was in my early 20s. I came from a "muscle them" frame of mind. Thankfully, Mia had no interest in that style and taught me I needed to work with her, not at her. Her current owner and I talked last spring, 3 years after swapping horses. I got the feeling she had taught him the same thing.


----------



## Tihannah (Apr 7, 2015)

bsms said:


> I appreciate your post and agree with much of it. I'm sure much of my understanding of dressage IS skewed. I also think those who immerse themselves in dressage may also have a skewed view, and listening to both sides may help find the truth. And certainly horses vary greatly, and I've ridden very few!
> 
> As for the WB resisting contact...when Mia got excited - for a variety of causes - she would take off. She then tried to take total control. I screwed up correcting it in a snaffle. I tried to use pressure, and holding her back, to solve it. Made it worse. Eventually went to a curb bit and used it, not for contact, but to set an upper boundary. Once I could set an upper boundary, I could adjust where that boundary fell. And in time, she went back to a snaffle, although she genuinely seemed to like curb bits better.
> 
> ...


Hahaha, trust me. I fought every inch to get to the bottom of his issues. Vets, chiropractors, osteopath, top dressage trainers, a Rolex eventer, and yes, a natural horsemanship trainer to start over from the ground. He jumped out of the round pen on that guy. I also tried every bit from a curb to a soft rubber Nathe. In the end, I retired him. He was the rock that everyone broke themselves against. 

Dressage done correctly is meant to be done with contact, but soft contact, and the bit is meant to be used as nothing more than a communication tool. Correctly trained upper level dressage horses are trained from the seat and legs and the reins or bit are used to clarify what is being asked. The bit or reins help to establish the recycling of energy to the degree the rider is seeking. Your horse trots? The well trained dressage horse trots - working trot, medium trot, extended trot, because through that recycling of energy, the bit extension tells him how big or small to perform that gait, if that makes sense. It is not meant to confine or restrain the horse, but to teach him how to use himself in different ways. As with any discipline, the concept can get lost between horse and rider because it is not an easy thing to learn.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

Tihannah said:


> The bit or reins help to establish the recycling of energy to the degree the rider is seeking. Your horse trots? The well trained dressage horse trots - working trot, medium trot, extended trot, because through that recycling of energy, the bit extension tells him how big or small to perform that gait, if that makes sense. It is not meant to confine or restrain the horse, but to teach him how to use himself in different ways. As with any discipline, the concept can get lost between horse and rider because it is not an easy thing to learn.



Fake news don't you know, there is no 'cycle of energy' no matter how often you, me, any other dressage rider 'feels that' it doesn't exist....so I've been told.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

thecolorcoal said:


> A bit is not breaks. A bit is to create a connection, a contact, to "speak" to the horse. For eons humans have been able to stop, start, and control horses without bits.


Yes, agreed. And from the way you took that, I think I put it badly. My point was, that strong bit use causes pain to the horse, which _WAS_ the initial reason for controlling them with metal in the mouth, but these days(& for eons among good horsepeople), most seem to agree that it _should not_ be used in this manner.



> You will never ever be able to stop a horse who does not like you, trust you, respect you, or want to be with you.


I don't believe that is true in the least - horses have been controlled, made to do stuff that humans want, for 1000's of years now, and it's only (largely - I know there were always some) in the last century or so that people even considered they had feelings(some still don't believe that somehow, or think they're sentient creatures) & should be treated 'humanely'.



> Horses are extremely good at coping with stressful situations. They are, after all, prey animals and turning off is part of the survival mechanism.


Which is, I believe, partly why they're so easily trainable(generally speaking), regardless of the 'archaic' or otherwise methods used.



> But to think all training is is to move away or SUBMIT from pressure (read: pain) is very archaic.


Absolutely agree that not all training should be about negative reinforcement(pressure/release), and that using pain to train is 'archaic' (as a general rule - never say never & occasionally painful punishment is warranted IMO). You'd know that if you've read much of my training opinions here. I do wonder, how do you think 'communication' with a bit happens without pressure/release though? The 'trick' of English riding is to get them to accept 'contact' too. But I do not agree with 'readain', that 'pressure' necessarily means pain at all(maybe that's why you disagree, because you do see 'pressure' as always painful?), and that is precisely what we are discussing - use of *gentle* bit pressure v's strong/hurty. 



> edit to say: I find dressage, at its core, a language of love. Some don't see it that way, and they tend to be the types who are out there for the medals and the ribbons and the glory. But you have that in EVERY sport


As said, not exp'd with dressage personally, but yes, agreed, and the *principles* and some practice I've seen(Karen Rolfe comes to mind) are good & about harmonious communication. And as said, absolutely agree with your comments about medals & sports too, which is why I personally don't 'do' horse sports as a rule. (Tho I've recently discovered an 'Extreme Cowboys' club here which focuses first & foremost on horsemanship & horses enjoying the 'games' as much as their riders) **And BTW, in case someone interprets as such, that is NOT at all trying to say that anyone who competes doesn't care, is inhumane, whatever.


----------



## TXhorseman (May 29, 2014)

The post by thecolorcoal illustrates something we should always remember and consider when listening to others. The same term can mean different things to different people. What brought this to mind was the statement: “‘yielding to pressure’ (read: PAIN)”. 

Indeed, some people seem to relate pressure to pain. It is common to use gentle sounding words that have become popular to describe much stronger actions.

But pressure can vary tremendously. Unless dancers simply follow carefully choreographed movements, the leader will be using pressure – however slight – to direct his partner. If the two are comfortable and relaxed, this pressure may simply be the result of the leader’s movements and not even perceived as pressure by his partner. The same can be said of riding.

When horse and rider work together without tension, the horse can easily follow subtle movements of the rider in such a way that spectators may not observe. A skeptical viewer may assume’ the two are performing a routine that has been developed over hundreds of hours until it has become simply a habit. They may be astonished when someone directs the performers to alter the routine and the interaction between the two remains seamless. This is where “sport” become “art”.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

thecolorcoal said:


> A bit is not breaks. A bit is to create a connection, a contact, to "speak" to the horse. For eons humans have been able to stop, start, and control horses without bits. You will never ever be able to stop a horse who does not like you, trust you, respect you, or want to be with you. A horse who does not have this "magikal" components will listen to you about as well as a rock. Using tack to inflict pain and/or fear to create dominance is not what horses are about.
> Some people claim the german/dutch systems still focus too much on "yielding to pressure" (read: PAIN), a la rollkur, a la heavy contact, a la huge spurs, a la deep seat, a la whip. NONE of these tools are bad but the more you use the more you are basically YELLING at a deaf person. They will never understand what you are saying and, at best, can learn to read your lips after a while. But the analogy remains the same.
> 
> .



Bits aren't brakes and can't be compared to brakes because a correctly functioning brake is a physical thing that when applied actually prevents the vehicle or machine from proceeding.
The bit or nosepiece or even a neck strap or voice is a connection with a horse that involves training the horse to know how to interpret it.
In dressage the horse is trained to 'seek' the contact. If it can't seek that contact then its going to fail - dressage with no contact isn't dressage because you can't achieve true collection and elevation without a means to contain the energy. What you would have instead is self carriage.
Nothing wrong with self carriage because its part of the pyramid that leads to collection


In a perfect world there would be no horses that ever tried to run through your hands when you asked them to move forward into your hands but there are and many of them are extremely talented horses.
Having a stronger hand on a dressage horse to tell it where the boundary is has nothing to with abuse or rolkurr


Rolkurr is banned - if a rider is seen using it in the ring they'll be out of there. Its also banned in warm up rings - if it doesn't get reported then the blame lies on those ignoring it. There are people who use it at home but a horse trained using rolkurr isn't going to be placed so well in today's dressage arena because judges are more astute to the different way a horse that's trained to have a fixed headset performs - in general their back leg action is poor. 
A strong hand isn't essentially a forceful abusive hand - you want the horse to go forward fluently and it won't do that if the rider is forceful and causing pain
Rough hands would result in bleeding in the mouth and elimination


The use of whips is very much restricted in dressage and over use of one in any class where it was permitted would be instant elimination
People might use them at home but forceful use of a whip would be to no advantage at all as the horse would become reliant on its presence so would be a fail in competitons where whips aren't allowed
Spurs in dressage have to be blunt, the shank has to be turned downwards, rowels have to be smooth and free moving. 2 inches is the max length permitted so your alleged use of 'huge spurs' is a huge exaggeration. Again - a rider might use them at home but that would them create a horse that's dependent on them so another fail in the ring.
I fail to see whats wrong with having a deep seat. A dressage saddle encourages a deep seat and a deep seat gives you more stability in the saddle whatever you're competing in


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Tihannah said:


> Hahaha, trust me. I fought every inch to get to the bottom of his issues. Vets, chiropractors, osteopath, top dressage trainers, a Rolex eventer, and yes, a natural horsemanship trainer to start over from the ground...In the end, I retired him. He was the rock that everyone broke themselves against.
> 
> ...The bit or reins help to establish the recycling of energy to the degree the rider is seeking. Your horse trots? The well trained dressage horse trots - working trot, medium trot, extended trot, because through that recycling of energy, the bit extension tells him how big or small to perform that gait, if that makes sense. It is not meant to confine or restrain the horse, but to teach him how to use himself in different ways...


 Some horses end up having issues that just don't resolve. Cowboy had bad experiences as a lesson horse. Almost 5 years later, that excellent little trail horse melts down if asked to ride around in an arena. I view some mental and emotional issues like scar tissue - you can remove some scars, and make some scars more flexible, but deep damage may be permanent.

As for the circle of energy...if someone wants to use it as verbal imagery, to help them understand what they are asking the horse to perform...fine. Whatever works! I certainly have no business telling a dressage rider how to achieve a dressage goal, although I think I retain the right to find SOME techniques questionable.

Verbal imagery: I sometimes think of my horse's mind & my own joining together at the withers, about where my hand is, so that we look at things as one animal. That is biomechanical rubbish, but the image helps me understand I need to yield to my horse some, and he needs to yield to me some, and the resulting decision needs to be one we both support. And if we both support it, then we can act as one. But it is just a mental image. Not reality. And I accept that other riders, with other goals, might not benefit from my mental picture.

"_Fake news don't you know, there is no 'cycle of energy' no matter how often you, me, any other dressage rider 'feels that' it doesn't exist....a reader of books learned me that one..._" - @*Golden Horse* 

I'm often amazed at how many people believe their pixelated words on a computer screen are worth reading, but the printed words of great riders is worthless. Or that we should ignore what science says horses CAN do and rely instead on what we WISH they could do.


> "Because of the widespread preconception that you can only learn, in a sort of intuitive way, by doing, and that reading or even thinking seriously about riding is rather pointless, too many young riders are doomed to groping too long in a forest of problems solved long ago. I can recall my astonishment, when I first began to collect books on the techniques of riding, at finding, in books written two or three centuries ago, minute descriptions of "discoveries" that I had made for myself only after a long period of trial and error...*Once we become interested in learning about riding, and are not content to repeat interminably the same errors, there is much that we can learn.*" - William Steinkraus, Riding and Jumping, 1961.


----------



## DanteDressageNerd (Mar 12, 2015)

I agree with asking questions. My trainer in the US was a GP dressage rider and also trained a lot of hunters (more money in hunters) but she said in hunters you never see the amount of psychological abuse that you do in dressage. Even saddleseat. People think saddleseat is so rough but I've never ridden a saddle seat horse that felt emotionally and psychologically damaged. I've also NEVER seen warmups that made me cringe like in western pleasure or local dressage arena. It is sad, where Id have a hard time watching sales videos even from FEI trainers because they were SO heavy handed and didn't communicate with the horse, so the horse was just locked up in a very artificial muscled together frame, confused and just doing it's best to get through it. It's a big part of why I can never sell Wonder, a horse like him would likely be written off as bad and abused or put down. Dressage barns and trainers are hit or miss. When done well it is SO rewarding for horse and rider and build a strong partnership, when done poorly it is abusive and cruel but I suppose that can be said about any discipline.

Like Tina's Forrest, I can't imagine what he's experienced in his life to be so shut down and resistant. It happens and some of them there is nothing you can do once they reach that point. You can make it better but they wont be "fixed." I knew a mare named Gracious who had callouses the size and thickness of the palm of my hands from spur marks. They always rode her in a double but INCORRECTLY. She was also not a very smart mare but we tried to "fix" her, gave her time off, she had two babies and in the end the best thing for her was to retire her as a trail horse. BIG moving, powerful mare but she was happy as a trail horse and the guy that has her absolutely loves her. Some you just cant fix no matter how good or how much time is put in. 

You cant drive a truly hotter type horse into the bridle, most of the warmbloods you can make appear hot aren't really hot but forward. On something truly hot it's a lot of rhythm control and not letting their exuberance become tension which it becomes if driven into the bridle for more expression. The hot horse needs to be a kept a bit slower and there are quite a few horses who depending on conformation can't really be "driven" into the bridle. I've owned a few like that (Dante and Wonder), as well as developed a few warmbloods like that. It's a lot of rhythm control and keeping him a hair slower than Id want him to be in competition. A behind the leg type you keep a hair ahead and in front of the leg about to blast off type you keep a hair behind, like you're constantly reloading that spring and then teach it how to organize itself when you do unleash it. You can push a wb up into the bridle and get bigger movement but on something like my tb he just becomes irregular and unorganized because he's naturally a tense horse.

This is the strong man style riding, I understand this is a young horse but you can tell the rider doesn't really have feel for the mouth or how to organize. You see it a lot in riders who have only ridden quality of horses, you can also tell by development of the neck and body. Almost every horse that was imported was like this and it may not look as bad to some people but when you've ridden horses trained in this fashion. They have NO concept of how to collect off of the seat and NO concept of how to truly bend through the rib cage, they're used to being ripped on, muscled and pressured. And they're quality enough horses you can get away with this, you do it on something not quality like Wonder and it'd look like sh!t. Same with Frankie, I've seen her ridden in this style and she looks like junk that lost all her uphill momentum and was on the forehand and gross. I can really see it in these video, the moments where they could use core to bring the back up and rock the horse back, they go to pulling more with the hand, wiggling the bit or trying to hold the horse onto the hind end from the bit, very opposite of what Carl or Charlotte do. However these horses correct enough built and quality enough you can get away with things on them you can't on something of less quality like say my Dante or Wonder. These horses also have a temperament that allows this, horses that don't tolerate this system are kicked out. I've ridden rejects from this system of training and they are NOT naughty or bad horses but horses that won't tolerate rough riding or methods that are meant to shut a horse down and become submissive. Learned helplessness. I also wonder if this is why a lot of dressage riders don't really know what a horse is. They think a hot horse is something that is forward and reactive. I had a dressage trainer describe my mare as firecracker hot and almost fell over laughing because she's not hot at all but she is responsive and reactive but doesn't have the tension or nervous anxiousness or ongoing mind of a hot horse.











Vs look at Charlotte ride a VERY strong, slightly downhill, powerhouse of a mare. She's never hauling against the mare's mouth but pushing her up and to it and asking her to respect the bit boundary, rather than lean or pull against it like the danish and german riders. I guarentee this is a hard, forward horse to ride. More difficult than the above two.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

jaydee said:


> Bits aren't brakes and can't be compared to brakes because a correctly functioning brake is a physical thing that when applied actually prevents the vehicle or machine from proceeding.
> The bit or nosepiece or even a neck strap or voice is a connection with a horse that involves training the horse to know how to interpret it.
> In dressage the horse is trained to 'seek' the contact. If it can't seek that contact then its going to fail - dressage with no contact isn't dressage because you can't achieve true collection and elevation without a means to contain the energy. What you would have instead is self carriage.
> Nothing wrong with self carriage because its part of the pyramid that leads to collection
> ...


I think some riders take all of this to the extreme. I personally was trained in a way where pressure WAS pain, as @TXhorseman mentioned. My old trainer was the "strongarm" type of rider - I had two of those. the new lady i work with is the exact opposite and i am finding it very hard to adjust my own expectations, having been schooled so strongly in "making" the horse do something.

loosie, i agree horses have been forced to work for humans for generations, eons, etc., but with new understandings of equine physiology and psychology, i am not sure these traditional methods can or need to stand the test of time. i try not to be a backyard hooligan and hippie, but as i delve into research and as i read about alternative thoughts and theories i wonder if the "crank and spank" or "get over it" relationship between horse and rider are really necessary... 

I still believe a relationship is required to get 110% out of your mount. If Charlotte and Freestyle or Laura and Diddy didn't have a relationship and were able to score 81% at WEG, that pretty much flies in the face of what dressage is all about, which is harmony between horse and rider. and can that really be achieved by force? :frown_color:


----------



## greentree (Feb 27, 2013)

The neck should be like a strong piece of elastic. To be this, connected to the horse’s mouth, and jaw with a rein, occasionally requires that the elastic be stretched, and thus there is some (considerable, when speaking of an 18h horse) weight on the riders upper body.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

thecolorcoal said:


> I think some riders take all of this to the extreme. I personally was trained in a way where pressure WAS pain, as @*TXhorseman* mentioned. My old trainer was the "strongarm" type of rider - I had two of those. the new lady i work with is the exact opposite and i am finding it very hard to adjust my own expectations, having been schooled so strongly in "making" the horse do something.
> 
> loosie, i agree horses have been forced to work for humans for generations, eons, etc., but with new understandings of equine physiology and psychology, i am not sure these traditional methods can or need to stand the test of time. i try not to be a backyard hooligan and hippie, but as i delve into research and as i read about alternative thoughts and theories i wonder if the "crank and spank" or "get over it" relationship between horse and rider are really necessary...
> 
> I still believe a relationship is required to get 110% out of your mount. If Charlotte and Freestyle or Laura and Diddy didn't have a relationship and were able to score 81% at WEG, that pretty much flies in the face of what dressage is all about, which is harmony between horse and rider. and can that really be achieved by force? :frown_color:



You need to be able to differentiate between using your body strength when needed and using abusive techniques.
Working for a long time, since a was a teenager, at various places and for myself, where horses were bought (or bred) to sell I can say from experience that many horses that were problems got that way because they spent some time with rough abusive riders but just as many, if not more, got that way because they spent some time with riders who were too soft with them on the ground and in the saddle.
I've worked with and owned some wonderful ponies and horses that you could almost put them in charge and they'd never take advantage but I've had just as many that if you gave them an inch they'd take as many miles as they could. The latter should never get into the hands of riders who are afraid or incapable of using their own strength to keep the horse where it should be. They are the sort of riders that produce horses that end up needing harsher and harsher bits until the day they get labeled as too dangerous.
If you breed or have a horse from a foal then its so much easier to do everything right but not all owners enjoy that privilege 


Charlotte is doing a great job with Freestyle but the credit for mare's good attitude to work should go to Emma Blundell who bought her as a foal and produced her up to British National standards when Charlotte took her over as a 5 year old. 


One of the most honest jumping and hunting horses I ever rode and was fortunate to also own was so strong that you could never let him go once you got into canter but he never spooked, bucked, reared or refused a jump so was worth the negative for all the positives. It wasn't a rough forceful rider that made him that way - it was a weak one.


----------



## Tihannah (Apr 7, 2015)

@jaydee - my friend's TB mare is kinda like that. I could never ride her as soft as I do my own. She would take over. She simply demands a firmer hand and finds security in it, if that makes sense. Not holding or strong arming. She's not a horse you can hold. The ride will go downhill quickly, but she needs a firm boundary or you simply can't win her over.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

Tihannah said:


> @*jaydee* - my friend's TB mare is kinda like that. I could never ride her as soft as I do my own. She would take over. She simply demands a firmer hand and finds security in it, if that makes sense. Not holding or strong arming. She's not a horse you can hold. The ride will go downhill quickly, but she needs a firm boundary or you simply can't win her over.



I'm finding mine is like this too, but there is a difference between "setting boundaries" and being a bully, and it's very easy to cross that line if you aren't aware of how far you can push it. My horse knows when I am being self-righteous and arrogant, and demanding more than she can give me or asking in an unfair way (which, sadly, I tend to do too much and she punishes me for that...).


I am finding in my own riding very, very hard to drop the "you MUST do it because you are a horse and i am a human." As the years go by I am able to sit and reflect on a lot. I think it is good, though, that I can acknowledge my shortcomings because you can't fix what you don't know is broken. I always thought I was doing it right, but I am working with someone new and totally different from what I am used to and I am really struggling to balance the "lets do this together" and the "i know you may not understand right now, but you need to do it my way and you will see why in time." Whereas before the conversation was always "you WILL do it you don't have a choice." 



I no longer like riding this way.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

There are horses out there that need to be told that they MUST do things in a very black and white way - if they see a grey area they'll either get confused or make the wrong decision
There are very few times when I'll give a horse a choice. If the horse is trained to do a half pass then I expect it to do a half pass when given the correct cues. I'm not going to let the horse choose between doing it or doing something else because thats a pretty sure way to end up with a horse thats calling the shots.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Because I can't 'love' this or like it twice...


thecolorcoal said:


> I'm finding mine is like this too, but there is a difference between "setting boundaries" and being a bully, and it's very easy to cross that line if you aren't aware of how far you can push it. My horse knows when I am being self-righteous and arrogant, and demanding more than she can give me or asking in an unfair way (which, sadly, I tend to do too much and she punishes me for that...).
> 
> 
> I am finding in my own riding very, very hard to drop the "you MUST do it because you are a horse and i am a human." As the years go by I am able to sit and reflect on a lot. I think it is good, though, that I can acknowledge my shortcomings because you can't fix what you don't know is broken. I always thought I was doing it right, but I am working with someone new and totally different from what I am used to and I am really struggling to balance the "lets do this together" and the "i know you may not understand right now, but you need to do it my way and you will see why in time." Whereas before the conversation was always "you WILL do it you don't have a choice."
> ...


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

jaydee said:


> There are horses out there that need to be told that they MUST do things in a very black and white way - if they see a grey area they'll either get confused or make the wrong decision
> There are very few times when I'll give a horse a choice. If the horse is trained to do a half pass then I expect it to do a half pass when given the correct cues. I'm not going to let the horse choose between doing it or doing something else because thats a pretty sure way to end up with a horse thats calling the shots.



I understand your POV and argument Jaydee.


But I will pose this alternative: if the horse isn't doing the half pass, there could be multiple reasons as we all know, because we are on this forum and there is always more than one answer to any problem.


1) pain
2) misunderstanding


So let's say horse is physically fine, and knows how to do a half pass. I think there are some horses who are more agreeable than others. perhaps there is a cyote in the corner of the ring and the horse doesn't want to go to that corner because of danger? Perhaps there is a strange pressure point on the saddle and every time the horse moves left/right, it digs into him? Perhaps you had a bad day at work, come to the barn annoyed, and are asking too loudly and harshly for the leg yield and this horse knows this is not the time for you to be riding, so he politely declines your offer?


I know we can jump very quickly into the realm of "horse takes advantage" but in my (albeit limited) experience horses do not "take advantage" like we were made to believe. Enough times of him coming up with excuses not to leg yield and you "yielding" (lol) to him will teach him the aids are optional, but sometimes there is a very good reason why a horse is refusing a request.


The clearest example I can think of is on a trail. I cannot imagine riding an ever-obedient, dull, monotonous horse through a dangerous, thickly densed trail. You need two sets of wits about you. I'd prefer a horse with a bit more independence than a very, very submissive horse. Like i've said, we are not as close to nature as horses are, so I would trust a smart horse's judgment more than my own in these conditions.


If your reliable mount is suddenly unreliable it might be time to stop and reflect on "why?" rather than force them to comply? I know, as a human, I hate people ordering me around and not taking into account my independent issues/pain/lack of understanding. I think we've all experienced situations where we had to shut down and shut off to emotionally protect ourselves from someone who was not taking us into consideration?


I don't believe we should be treating horses, who are INHERENTLY more willing and giving than humans, like that.


----------



## Tihannah (Apr 7, 2015)

thecolorcoal said:


> I know we can jump very quickly into the realm of "horse takes advantage" but in my (albeit limited) experience horses do not "take advantage" like we were made to believe. Enough times of him coming up with excuses not to leg yield and you "yielding" (lol) to him will teach him the aids are optional, but sometimes there is a very good reason why a horse is refusing a request.


This would be ideal in an ideal world, and whether you want to believe it or not, horses DO exhibit behaviors that are not related to pain or fear. I described this exact situation with my own horse the past couple days and I've seen it many times with other horses.

We had a haflinger lesson pony at my old barn. She was a saint and often used for a couple of our handicapped students. One day, she got legitimately spooked by the annoying neighbor low flying his drone above the riding area and the student came off. That was all it took. She realized that that was how she could get people off, and after that, she dumped 6 more riders, including 2 experienced adults, one resulting in a hospital visit. That rider wasn't even riding at the time. She was merely practicing mounting and asking her to stand. Never even got all the way in the saddle. She would bolt sideways and run back to the barn. I was with one of the adults when she did it, and I warned her that the pony would try to get her off. She tried a couple times, but the rider was prepared and handled it well. At the end of the ride, the rider relaxed and patted her, and she saw her opportunity and took it. Rider came off and fractured an ankle. She could no longer be used in the lesson program after that and was sold to an upper level trainer who loved working with non-traditional breeds and has a 4th level Paint. She fell in love with the haflinger and is training her in dressage, but she is not the kind of rider that little pony could "take advantage" of and she is doing quite well now.


----------



## jaydee (May 10, 2012)

thecolorcoal said:


> I understand your POV and argument Jaydee.
> 
> 
> But I will pose this alternative: if the horse isn't doing the half pass, there could be multiple reasons as we all know, because we are on this forum and there is always more than one answer to any problem.
> ...


I think your going to extremes and rather than looking for reasons why a horse might not perform well you're in danger of making excuses to suit your way of thinking.
Be careful or your horse will soon have you wrapped around his hoof.
To start with I said 'if the horse knows how to do a half pass and the rider is giving the correct cues' so that immediately throws out misunderstanding
A good rider will recognise that a horse is in pain or discomfort because the horse won't be performing as it should. 
If I can see a coyote in the corner of my ring I'm going to get off remove it in one way or another, though none of my horses are afraid of coyotes. They just regard them in the same way they regard dogs.
A horse that competes has to learn to deal with stuff that's unusual or you're wasting your time and money as they'll spend the entire time in the ring spooking at flags or flower boxes.
By all means use the scary thing as a reason but never use it as an excuse
If you're the type of rider that can't put aside your days problems when you get on your horse then maybe riding isn't the thing for you. 
Horses are a species that need a leader, if you aren't the leader they will take over that position


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

Paraphrasing Foxhunter in another thread, you need to know the difference between

I am afraid
I don't understand
I don't feel like it

These all demand a different response. Firm But Fair means just that.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

Jaydee, I don't ride horses to be dominant over them.
I don't ride horses to be in control.
I don't ride horses to be a dictator for a day.


I know many, many people who choose horseback riding for the above-mentioned reasons: control and power they don't get in their day-to-day life.


Horses are so easy to abuse, take advantage of, and mistreat, because they are naturally a submissive animal. Much like certain breeds of dogs.
That is why "natural horsemanship" has become so popular - it's called out the harsher methods of training and working with horses. I don't think its methods are any better but at least it called people out on their crap, or at least made them aware and reflective.


I ride to have a partnership. I ride to have a conversation. I ride to be allowed into another creature's life, on its back, of which I am not naturally supposed to be. I am always grateful for every opportunity and privilege I get to ride my horse. It's not a right, and she can take my opportunity to ride her away as quickly as she gives it to me if I am not tactful, kind, and grateful of her.


That's just how I see horses. I started out a lot like you, Jaydee, thinking it was "me here, you there," and now I don't feel that way anymore.


----------



## Tihannah (Apr 7, 2015)

thecolorcoal said:


> Jaydee, I don't ride horses to be dominant over them.
> I don't ride horses to be in control.
> I don't ride horses to be a dictator for a day.
> 
> ...


I don't think there's anything wrong with your idea of building a relationship with your horse. All good riders do. But I think your perception of what Jaydee is saying is wrong. You are seeing dominance or bullying in what she is saying, I am seeing gaining a horse's respect. 

Its the same in a herd dynamic. One must be the alpha or more "dominant" in order to gain respect within the herd. I've worked with a horsemanship trainer and one of the first things they do when they get in the roundpen with a horse is to establish dominance. When I ask you to move, you move, and you move in the direction I tell you too or you will keep working. It is a dominance proces, no doubt, to gain respect from the horse. Their motto is that the horse's focus should always be on them, not when they feel like it, so the comparison is contradictory.


----------



## DanteDressageNerd (Mar 12, 2015)

I think you misunderstand natural horsemanship. You're still the "leader" it is absolutely critical that the horse sees you as a "leader" for respect and honestly safety. It's very important in natural horsemanship that the handler/rider establishes themselves as the leader. However the focus is on communicating this in a way the horse understand and adjusting your methods to suit the horse. I've ridden a lot of "spooky" horses who absolutely need a clear leader or they get even more nervous and scared. It's about evaluating the individual horse and earning their respect. If a handler/rider is always submissive and insists on simply carrying a conversation without ever drawing the line in the sand or going the extra degree to educate the horse then you can run into serious problems. If you're with a typical stallion type horse, you'll like get killed. With a stallion some of them there is NO grey area, no well I'll just pat you and it'll all be okay unless you want a hoof to the head. I've handled stallion where someone didn't establish ground training, earn the horse's respect or put the stallion in line and so when handled ALWAYS in a chain and with a whip unless you wanted your head kicked in or your body smashed against a wall. There is a place to be firm and draw the line in the sand for respect. It DOESNT mean being a bully or aggressive but it does mean "firm but fair." 

I would not describe horses as naturally submissive, I'd say you haven't worked with enough horses if that's your assessment. I've known stallions in Germany who have ripped people's faces off because the handler was a second off in their timing. And that stallion was NEVER abused or mishandled. Elite stallion. Quite famous now. Some horses you can ride and have a conversation and that is always the goal but there are others where if you ride and train that horse that way you're going to get someone hurt. There are moments to be firm and direct and say here is the line, here is my expectation and make the expectation clear to the horse. 

I've found a lot of riders who never draw the line in the sand end of confusing and making a horse more frustrated. I tried one on Wonder and it was a disaster. Wonder had no respect for the rider and couldn't steer him at all. He just did as he pleased. Now when I ride Wonder I feel like we have a conversation but there are moments where I'm like hey you're taking advantage. Here is my expectation firm and clear and as long as it's fair, he's alright. However same horse if a rider tried to bully or dominate him I think he'd rear up and flip over on them. But there are degrees and moments that require a different approach. Horses are individuals, a one size fits all program or system doesn't work. My mare likes a firmer rider who makes it VERY clear the expectation. It's still a conversation but it's more insistent. She's happier if I ride her firmer and more assertively than I ride Wonder. A rider and handler have to adjust to the horse they're working with and be who that horse needs.


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

I don't know very many people who ride "in order to be dominant" over a horse. That's just a false argument, particularly against Jaydee. 

There are a myriad of threads about how mean and cruel everyone is to their horses except for the poster with their particular method. Most of them are in the Natural Horsemanship forum, and almost all of them end up being about somebody who doesn't have the respect of their horse. I'd be sorry to see this one derailed to that level.

My opinion is that belief systems, when it comes to animal training, do nothing but cause problems in your training. All belief systems. If your belief is that your horse should adore you, or that it should cower in fear, makes no difference, your outcome is going to be crappier because of it. Why? Because your horse never read that book, and trust me, doesn't give a hoot about what you believe. 

Horses respond to FAIRNESS, CLARITY, and LEADERSHIP. Those are not beliefs, they are just realities. They learn through RELEASE OF PRESSURE. Nothing abstract about that either. Which means you have to apply it, in order to release it. Notice none of this is about love. It isn't about fear or dominance either. One of the things you are doing with training is teaching a language to a horse. You teach them that the way to get relief from pressure is to move away from it (this is the opposite of what is innate, by the way, animals lean into pressure naturally). Now you have a cue. Now you can lighten and lighten the cue until it feels to you like no more than a thought. Thoughts go both ways -- be light enough and you can also receive and respond to your horse's thoughts. A language is a means of conversing. 

When a real master rider tells me that because of the love their horse bears for them it does whatever he asks, I may change my mind. But maybe he's Gandalf, talking about Shadowfax.


----------

