# Clinton Anderson on Buddy Sourness



## Aprilswissmiss

Well, this is one way to "fix" a buddy sour horse, I guess.

My issue with this method is that the horses are not learning that their choices affect how they are ridden, but rather they are simply complying with Anderson's insistence upon loping a tight circle. And while they're doing exactly what he's asking them to do, he says things like "get the darn thing to lope" and "whoop his bum."

I like Schiller's methods, make them work if they choose to do the wrong thing, but give them the option to choose the right thing and be rewarded for it should they make that decision.

Anyone else's opinions, agreeing or disagreeing?

*Mod* *note* Warning - This video contains some language that parents might consider unsuitable for their children.
Jaydee.


----------



## The Equinest

I'm not really a Clinton fan. I think he has good basics, and a decent understanding of horses compared to a lot of "trainers" who really don't think past the tip of their own nose, but he's too aggressive and "one size fits all" with horses for my taste. I also don't like his tendency to _really_ flex the heck out of his horse's necks. (I can't imagine that's super comfortable - flexing has it's place, but I don't think it should be used that excessively.) 

Yeah. He's not my thing. I'll mix and match some of his methods with other trainer's methods depending on the horse I'm working with, but typically I'm dealing with highly sensitive horses and Clinton's methods just don't seem to mix well with that type of horse. I have used some of his techniques on my very pushy, in-your-face gelding(who is sweet as sugar, but has absolutely _no_ concept of personal space), and they're worked with varying degrees of success. 

Overall, I don't really like many of the "top trainers" such as Clinton, Parelli, Westfall(I don't know if you'd consider her a "top trainer" but she's decently popular). Anyone who thinks a horse is "out to get them" needs a re-think on what horses are and how they think, because I assure you - the horse's only concerns in life are eating, sleeping, making little horses, and staying alive. Anthropomorphism is where a lot of people wrongly assign emotions and motives to animals that simply do not have them, and that's where a lot of training goes wrong. Horses don't plot revenge or purposely forget things, and likelier than not that issue that they have is something _you're_ causing, not something they're just coming up with. 

One thing I can appreciate from Clinton is his bluntness with people. If someone's being stupid, he calls them out. I don't like some of his horse methods, but I think it's high time we stopped tip-toeing around people when they're doing something that can end up with either them or the horse(or both) getting killed. It's not funny or brave, some things are just plain stupid and ignorant.


----------



## AtokaGhosthorse

I think in the cases where a horse has been previously well trained, but allowed to become a spoiled, dangerous, jackwagon, as in the Running Scared and Once Bitten, Twice Shy vids, CA does what he knows and it works. It slaps a hard factory reset into a horse's brain when they've been allowed to become rude, disrespectful, and dangerous. 

His method on getting a horse to load is fantastic - I've seen it work... but on horses that already KNEW the drill and just wanted to be patooty heads - chief among them, Gina and Sarge. I have videos of the final result.

I don't like his 'method' used on a young horse that has no idea what's being asked of them. That same method to get a horse to trailer utterly failed with Outback. She was confused, no closer to learning what was being asked of her, and she closed off - it was like watching the shutters on a window close in her eyes. She was nothing but emotion and instinct. His method of being aggressive on a horse that gets in your space while being led sent Oops straight into the air and she came no closer to learning to not run over the back of a person or stopping when they stop. She. had. no. idea. what was being asked. In both cases, both horses were 2 at the time... babies... and honestly ignorant. In both cases they were being treated like adult horses that knew better. Was this a failing of the person using his method or was it a failing of the method on these two horses given their young age and lack of education? I have no idea... but I don't want it used on my youngsters again.

On being buddy soured - and again I'm no trainer, my experience is limited to my horses and mine only - I found what worked is to take them away from home to ride them and ride with people and horses they don't know. 

For Trigger specifically, I had to redirect his attention back on me. He goes to hollering at or for other horses - I have to talk to him, turn his head, maybe even get out of the saddle and redirect his attention to me. I tell him often: Nooo, you're with me... lean forward and scratch his neck, snap my fingers, whatever it takes to get his ears to swing back to me so I know he's listening or get his head to turn just a bit so he's looking at me. If he tries to hook on to other horses on the trail... we do circles at the pace he chooses. I have had to get out of the saddle before, and lead him off in another direction while the other riders go on down the trail. It's worked for him. I'll keep doing it.

I think there's more than one way to skin a cat and I'll keep working to learn what works for my horses and what doesn't. I really like Warwick Schiller - he's humble enough to admit he's been wrong in his way of thinking in the past, and he's willing to try something new - I mean the man taught a chicken to lunge... he seems like a gentle soul, and think he's probably a genuinely nice guy. I like Gord Searle - he's unflappable and makes the showing out a naughty horse does sound like no big deal. Just a horse being a horse: Oh lookie there - you just ran into my elbow. Huh. Wonder how that happened? 

CA strikes me as an arrogant tool... but I think there are times his no nonsense, 'I'm the boss, you aren't' approach is useful, specifically for a horse that knows better and has been allowed to get away with murder. He gets their attention and demands their respect immediately and I think some horses need that.


----------



## loosie

Yeah, seen that once April, and like other CA stuff I've seen, have no desire to see it again. He wants a 'mechanical' horse slave, who does what it's told regardless, who is not allowed to think for itself. In his words, 'the more you scare him, the quieter he will become' ~ which means the horse has become mentally 'shut down', shell shocked, 'broken' of spirit. If that's what you want of a horse, unfortunately, IMHO, it's your call. But it's far from what I want - I'm into horses because I love HORSES, not just what they can do for me, and as such, I don't just want an 'obedient' beast of burden. 

While there is absolutely value in 'make the wrong things difficult' principle, I think we've got to be careful not to use that as the 'be all' kind of approach, esp when fear/anxiety is involved. And for something like 'buddy sour', it often is. So, if your approach is just to make it unpleasant for the horse when he's near his buddy/at home/whatever, remember that leaving his place/buddy of security is often 'hard' too, so his choice is then between a rock & a hard place. He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. Choice becomes only the 'better evil'. Rather than focussing on & teaching him that it's OK to go out with you, that he can trust you to keep him safe, that it's fun & rewarding to go out...

The other thing with 'working' a horse as punishment is a) it associates that work with punishment. I personally want to teach the complete opposite, for horses to ENJOY their 'work' & see it as fun. b) it associates YOU strongly with punishment/unpleasantness. c) It DOES NOT cause his buddy/place of security to feel any less secure, to make the Big Wide World less scary/unpleasant.

And I won't go into his 'whooping butt' of a horse who's already doing what it's told, or his lack of release & poor timing I've seen in vids which cause far more confusion & fear. But hey, I suppose when you want them 'quiet' from frightening them...


----------



## Aprilswissmiss

loosie said:


> The other thing with 'working' a horse as punishment is a) it associates that work with punishment. I personally want to teach the complete opposite, for horses to ENJOY their 'work' & see it as fun. b) it associates YOU strongly with punishment/unpleasantness. c) It DOES NOT cause his buddy/place of security to feel any less secure, to make the Big Wide World less scary/unpleasant.


I think it depends on how you use it. Rather than using "work" as a punishment, "work" is just the thing we do and may be fun on its own, and resting is the reward for doing something particularly special. Like a job for us is not meant to be a punishment, just something we do, and a bonus is a reward for doing our job particularly well. Even then, it only works on rest-motivated horses. It does not work on my horse whatsoever. She _loves_ to work. She will happily stand still if asked, but will not do it of her own accord and will not see it as a reward. On the other hand, I've taught horses in five minutes to use the whole ring on their own (as opposed to reverting back to one side) by trotting at their favorite spots and walking at their least favorite spots. Totally depends on the horse.


----------



## loosie

Yeah, coming from a behavioural psych background...



Aprilswissmiss said:


> Rather than using "work" as a punishment, "work" is just the thing we do and may be fun on its own, and resting is the reward for doing something particularly special.


I'm using 'punishment' here to mean something unpleasant that is done *at the time of* an undesirable behaviour in order to weaken it. So, when you use 'work' to 'make the wrong thing hard' punishment is precisely what it must be - no point in trying to punish a horse with something he loves doing. And there is no reinforcement to be had from 'resting' from something if he loves it either.

And 'rest' or cessation of 'pressure' is NOT the same as reward/positive reinforcement. Rest/pressure release is an eg. of 'Negative reinforcement' - removing something unpleasant in order to strengthen a behaviour. It is indeed a valuable tactic, but not the same. Many see this just as semantics, but I do believe there is a very different attitudinal outcome if you use actual rewards(something the horse desires) as opposed to just removing the unpleasantness, as reinforcement.



> Like a job for us is not meant to be a punishment, just something we do,


Yes, it's not strictly punishment in the sense that it is 'applied' for the _purpose_ of weakening a behaviour. And certain people in certain jobs actively enjoy their 'work'. But there's a reason 'work' & 'play' aren't interchangeable words. We don't generally work just because we enjoy it, we work because a)we're paid for our work, b)we need to work to survive and c)it is drummed into us morally as something we 'should' do. Horses don't 'do' any of that, except partly the first one, if someone uses positive reinforcement(reward) well.



> Even then, it only works on rest-motivated horses. It does not work on my horse whatsoever. She _loves_ to work. She will happily stand still if asked, but will not do it of her own accord and will not see it as a reward.


Yep, whether we're talking reward, punishment, negative reinforcement... it's all so individual to the particular horse & situation. And rest/negative reinforcement, and working as punishment works for most horses, because they DON'T like 'work', no one's taught them to enjoy it.


----------



## carshon

I think CA was good for the older people that have lost confidence - his step by step approach really gave the people something to do when working with their horses. Also good for beginners. My issue has always been that it is just badgering the horse - constantly badgering them. We have a mare that ridden by a novice and he loved the CA method. But now 15 years after we purchased her if you get after her for anything she will still swing her head to her side like CA's one rein stop - it is scary and annoying when you are riding down the trail!


----------



## Ridingthatgrey

i went to a walkabout tour for CA because I wanted to see his methods and i have to say i wasn impressed but the liberty and the trailer loading was good 
and also i heard that he made a lunge whip that a horse cant see the color i seen it around online


----------



## SilverMaple

This works fine if the horse is stubborn. It does NOT work fine if the horse is buddy sour because he's anxious and seeks security with others. My Paso would gladly have worked near his friends until he dropped dead before standing and catching his breath away from them. All Clinton's method did was make him more worried and worked up.

Once we addressed the anxiousness, most of they buddy sourness disappeared altogether. Now he only makes a fuss if the other horses both leave, and he's alone, which is not anything unusual with horses.


----------



## AtokaGhosthorse

classybarrels said:


> i went to a walkabout tour for CA because I wanted to see his methods and i have to say i wasn impressed but the liberty and the trailer loading was good
> and also i heard that he made a lunge whip that a horse cant see the color i seen it around online



Well. Horses see blue... and his carrot sticks (he calls them) are blue... so...


----------



## loosie

classybarrels said:


> i went to a walkabout tour for CA


Is he aboriginal, to be calling it that?


----------



## loosie

carshon said:


> Also good for beginners.


I disagree extremely strongly on that. He seems impressive, for those who don't have the experience to understand fully what they're seeing, or for those who don't care. But I seriously think teaching beginners who don't have a clue such aggression, such disregard for the horse is a terrible thing.


----------



## COWCHICK77

Clinton admits his methods are directed to the middle aged gals who bought a horse and let it walk over the top of them. 

I am in agreement that he is not my cup of tea and I currently own a mare who wouldn't deal with that style of handling. She is ouchy on the ground, sensitive and her bubble is pretty big.


----------



## dogpatch

COWCHICK77 said:


> Clinton admits his methods are directed to the middle aged gals who bought a horse and let it walk over the top of them.
> 
> I am in agreement that he is not my cup of tea and I currently own a mare who wouldn't deal with that style of handling. She is ouchy on the ground, sensitive and her bubble is pretty big.



I went to one of his "Walkabout" (snort) presentations and it was utterly embarrassing, how he was egging those middle aged women on. If he'd have stripped, they'd be throwing money at him. I unfortunately sat behind a woman who chanted every word he was going to say before he said it. He didn't "perform" so much as he just whipped the women into a frenzy. And sold stuff.

I'm not bashing him personally but I have watched one of his videos about "curing" the barn sour horse, which was based on the widespread practice of working the horse to death at the barn. What I saw was basically a good technique for making a horse hide in the corner every time you came in to its stall. Nobody ever explains to the horse WHY it is being worked to death at the barn, so it's very hard for me to see how a horse is expected to make the connection between its behavior away from the barn and the too-late punishment of hard work in a place where it used to feel safe.

Not that I'm a trainer, but I kind of subscribe to the "what's in it for the horse" type of training. I've "cured" bolting for the barn by spending the walk back to the barn "moseying" (a concept from another popular clinician) from one tasty morsel of grass to another (but I do this methodically). I use the time to practice the halt from a faint cue heavily, and rewarding a good response with a chance to snatch some yummy grass (on cue), or using the clicker training concept, with the reward for the halt being "clicked" and rewarded. My mare frequently prefers the clicker treat to the grass! If she cons me out of both, so much the better in her mind! However, the constant halts and subsequent rewards means her mind is NOT on running back to the barn, but anticipating the halt and reward, which automatically slows her down and makes lingering away from the barn more fun than getting there. I ride her away from the barn now and she has nary a backward thought, despite her buddy yelling for her in the barn.

I know it wouldn't work in all circumstances, (especially if the rider doesn't "get" the concept of operant conditioning) but the difference is, the horse anticipates rewarding behaviors from ME when we go out together, not relentless, punishing work for reasons she doesn't understand, which would add to her overall anxiety and certainty that she's in mortal danger from me when we go away from the barn.


----------



## dogpatch

loosie said:


> Is he aboriginal, to be calling it that?



Loosie, anything Australian sells in the US. It's the land of Snowy River, Crocodile Dundee and Quigly Down Under.


----------



## loosie

Wth is Quigley down under?? No clue about that one! 'Walkabout' is an aboriginal term, so it could be said to be a little... Disrespectful for an Anglo man to use it. But who knows, he could be Koori.

As for the 'whipping middle aged women to a frenzy', I'd say he focusses on that group because he can have the hero worship. A previous client is like that about Parelli, his word is gospel. In her 60s she got full arm tattoos of his logos...


----------



## COWCHICK77

loosie said:


> Wth is Quigley down under?? No clue about that one! 'Walkabout' is an aboriginal term, so it could be said to be a little... Disrespectful for an Anglo man to use it. But who knows, he could be Koori.
> 
> As for the 'whipping middle aged women to a frenzy', I'd say he focusses on that group because he can have the hero worship. A previous client is like that about Parelli, his word is gospel. In her 60s she got full arm tattoos of his logos...



I grimaced reading Parelli tattoos. Uffda!


I am not a CA expert I just happened to listen to a podcast awhile back, Andrea Fappani interviewed him. He got into because he knew he could make money from the middle aged woman dynamic. He worked for another trainer down the road from one I worked for in California. When that didn't pan out he was giving little horsemanship, problem solving lessons. I met the gal that started to help him market him to that crowd. He came to the US to be a reining horse trainer.


----------



## dogpatch

loosie said:


> Wth is Quigley down under?? No clue about that one! 'Walkabout' is an aboriginal term, so it could be said to be a little... Disrespectful for an Anglo man to use it. But who knows, he could be Koori.
> 
> As for the 'whipping middle aged women to a frenzy', I'd say he focusses on that group because he can have the hero worship. A previous client is like that about Parelli, his word is gospel. In her 60s she got full arm tattoos of his logos...





loosie said:


> Wth is Quigley down under?? No clue about that one! 'Walkabout' is an aboriginal term, so it could be said to be a little... Disrespectful for an Anglo man to use it. But who knows, he could be Koori.
> 
> As for the 'whipping middle aged women to a frenzy', I'd say he focusses on that group because he can have the hero worship. A previous client is like that about Parelli, his word is gospel. In her 60s she got full arm tattoos of his logos...


It's a Tom Selleck movie. 

"Walkabout" got popularized in the US when Crocodile Dundee used it in the movie. He was a white guy, so who knew in the US. An immigrant would know, but Australian "sells" here. So, good marketing.


As for Parelli tatoos, just...ick.


----------



## loosie

^Oh, Tom Selleck, so Australian! Yeah, the walkabout thing, I just wondered, political correctness & all. The 'town' was called Walkabout Creek in CD. If it were a real place, I'd guess it was either the place they left from, or the destination of the local tribe. 

I think WS went to US to be a reining trainer too, if I remember what he said right.


----------



## COWCHICK77

"Dingo ate my baby"

Famous Quigley Down Under line..

Tom Selleck wasn't an Aussie in the movie, he was an American sharp shooter hired to go to Australia to find out he was hired to shoot Aboriginals.


----------



## loosie

^Oh. 

Spose you saw the Azaria Chamberlain movie with Merryl Streep years ago? Apparently there was a coverup about tourist operators & rangers there hand feeding dingoes, and they'd been known to bite kids before... Anyway, sorry OP, we should keep this thread on track.


----------



## loosie

^Oh. 

Spose you saw the Azaria Chamberlain movie with Merryl Streep(as an Aussie) years ago? Apparently there was a coverup about tourist operators & rangers there hand feeding dingoes, and they'd been known to bite kids before... Anyway, sorry OP, we should keep this thread on track.


----------



## COWCHICK77

I did not see it but yes agree, we went way off track.


----------



## Aprilswissmiss

LOL, it's no problem, I enjoy digressions.

This reminds me of a mare at my stable that, now that I think about it, was probably trained with CA methods. Ironically, her current owner is a middle aged woman, but certainly not the one who put the training on her to begin with. I know she was run through the auctions at some point.

I have ridden her probably half a dozen times. The owner is not 100% confident with her. Probably because she has a history of being "explosive" in previous homes. In the times I've handled and ridden her, she just feels very shut down. She does not particularly enjoy human company, but will tolerate it. If you go out to the pasture and approach her, she'll stand and pretend you aren't there, but nonchalantly turn away and leave if you go to pet her. The most I've seen her do is flick her ears forward when she suspects a treat. She rides like a robot in the arena. She will walk/trot/canter/turn whenever you ask her to. But each gait is automatically set to only one speed, and she will completely ignore absolutely everything that is not a transition or turn command. She will never reach down and stretch, will never raise her head. 

When I take her out on the trails, she is robotic until she's not, and then suddenly she's cantering sideways through a corn field or into traffic and completely evades and ignores any aids. This is probably the closest I've ever seen her to "explosive" as she was described by previous trainers.

It's a shame because she really is a cute mare with good movement. I don't like horses that have learned to just shut down and selectively listen. She has just learned too much that humans don't care to hear what she has to say, so she keeps quiet and willingly obeys right up until she sees a way to escape.


----------



## loosie

Aprilswissmiss said:


> When I take her out on the trails, she is robotic until she's not, and then suddenly she's cantering sideways through a corn field or into traffic and completely evades and ignores any aids.


Poor baby. Yeah, sooo many 'well trained' horses I've met are like that, including a little brumby I have, tho my son who has become an excellent & respectFUL horseperson has largely got him out of his shell & he's no longer 'robotic' with him... and less so with me, though I haven't spent much time on him myself & he's still hesitant & a bit of a brick with me sometimes. 

I don't look at it as 'evading' or 'ignoring', when they 'blow up' which implies conscious, purposeful thought, but it's just panicking and reacting on instinctive level & when they get like that they can't even 'hear' the 'aids'.

I love the analogy of stress being like drips from a leaky roof. You can put a bucket under it, contain it and minimise it to only a drip at a time, but if you don't empty the bucket, it will still eventually become too much for the bucket & overflow. Furthering that analogy, stress/reactivity to a 'shut down' horse is like those drips going into a... jerry can, where you can't see them. You don't know how full it's getting, until 'suddenly, out of the blue' it overflows. That's why they can 'explode without warning'. So short, easy 'sessions' are best.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians

There are some things that CA does that I like very well and others.......not so much. The new mare that I just got is a victim of over using a chain. Instead of training her to be respectful on the ground, they have trained her to stand up at halter and then just shanked the living tar out of her for anything else. So every time we would use a tug on the lead rope, she threw her head up and her front feet would pop up off the ground, even a couple of full on rears for tugging (and I mean gentle tugs rather than yanks)on the lead rope. She started acting out and being difficult, so I had hubby and my assistant lead her around and let her play up in response to various cues and corrections while I watched what her reactions were. Now at the time we were using a soft, nylon web halter that was humongous on her, literally she could have thrown her head hard and slipped right out of it, no chain and just a regular cotton lead rope. No chain. But she was expecting pain, so was trying to avoid it by popping up. Yes, she was being pushy and bratty, but not to the extent where a chain was needed to stop that behavior. 

So, we switched to a stiff rope halter and a 12 foot lead line, and started doing some ground work that was based on redirection rather than punishment. We started walking and if she wanted to bolt on past, we just turned around and walked the other direction so that she was following us no matter what she did. She found that in order to keep up and avoid constantly hitting the end of the line, which of course bumped her nose with the rope halter, then she had to pay attention and stay respectful and focus on us and what we were asking of her. She's a 'delicate little flower' and the stiff rope is a little too harsh, rubbed some fur off, so I'm buying her a soft rope halter and a web halter that fits her, so we can stop rubbing fur off. 

In the week since we started the minor ground work her attitude has done a complete 180, she's been respectful, much more mindful of OUR personal space, and a lot less testing and pushy. She's getting the idea that we're not going to beat her or shank her for punishment, we're just going to redirect her thoughts and feet. She's also gone from not giving us 2 eyes and ears to looking at us and focusing on us with her ears. She's not afraid of the whip, so that wasn't used on her in her previous situation (thank God for small favors) and now is getting the idea that if she stays by my shoulder and doesn't try to take me dirt skiing, we're good. If she does, and it's more than an "I'm startled" response, then we switch directions and keep on walking. She's very smart, catches on to things super quickly, is a little reactive to things yet but has improved a HUGE amount and most of her reactivity has calmed down. Most of the reactive behavior was in response to trying to give us what she thought we wanted rather than waiting to be asked or directed, again a case of too harsh training. I can only imagine how this one would take to CA's training methods, she would blow like a powder magazine that a Molotov Cocktail had been tossed into. Gentle is definitely the way she will learn best. 

She's a prime example of "no learning takes place when fear is in charge" and showing her that she's a part of the team and her opinions matter is key to setting her up for success. She's learned that being naughty on the lead line is going to get her worked, we can walk and switch directions as many times/long as it takes for her to connect the dots. She also connects the dots and they stay connected, for good or ill. I also use what I call "her currency" to reward her slightest try. I made it my business to find out where all her favorite scritchy spots are and when she gives me a try, she gets a reward using her currency, a good scritch on her neck. I've also spent time in her stall just walking around her and scratching her favorite spots and then walking out so that she's left wanting more. She loves attention and that has been a wonderful way to get her past the naughties. I also carry a soft rubber curry in my back pocket so I can give her a quick scrub with the curry, another of her favorite things.


----------



## loosie

Dreamcatcher Arabians said:


> She's a prime example of "no learning takes place when fear is in charge" and showing her that she's a part of the team and her opinions matter is key to setting her up for success.


Can not be said enough!

Of the first bit, yes, think how even people get when they panic, just reacting, they *can't* think clearly in that state. To the second, yeah, focusing on *successes* and setting it up to make them most likely/easiest, rather than what so many do - focusing on what needs 'correcting' and just 'getting on with it' when things are good.


----------



## tinyliny

Aprilswissmiss said:


> LOL, it's no problem, I enjoy digressions.
> 
> This reminds me of a mare at my stable that, now that I think about it, was probably trained with CA methods. Ironically, her current owner is a middle aged woman, but certainly not the one who put the training on her to begin with. I know she was run through the auctions at some point.
> 
> I have ridden her probably half a dozen times. The owner is not 100% confident with her. Probably because she has a history of being "explosive" in previous homes. In the times I've handled and ridden her, she just feels very shut down. She does not particularly enjoy human company, but will tolerate it. If you go out to the pasture and approach her, she'll stand and pretend you aren't there, but nonchalantly turn away and leave if you go to pet her. The most I've seen her do is flick her ears forward when she suspects a treat. She rides like a robot in the arena. She will walk/trot/canter/turn whenever you ask her to. But each gait is automatically set to only one speed, and she will completely ignore absolutely everything that is not a transition or turn command. She will never reach down and stretch, will never raise her head.
> 
> When I take her out on the trails, she is robotic until she's not, and then suddenly she's cantering sideways through a corn field or into traffic and completely evades and ignores any aids. This is probably the closest I've ever seen her to "explosive" as she was described by previous trainers.
> 
> It's a shame because she really is a cute mare with good movement. I don't like horses that have learned to just shut down and selectively listen. She has just learned too much that humans don't care to hear what she has to say, so she keeps quiet and willingly obeys right up until she sees a way to escape.





oh, wow. This is an interesting post! I have a lot to say on this.




The concept of 'making the wrong thing difficult, and the right thing easy' is fundamental to horse training. The thing NOT shown in that posted video of CA's is that the horses did not CHOSE the wrong thing, and that is absolutely essential. All of this is about CHOICE. The horse has to make a choice that you consider the 'wrong' choice. After the horse has made that choice, you then make that choice feel not so comfortable. It should not be punishment so much as not what the horse was expecting. They though getting back to the barn would mean unsaddling, food, and rest. You just change that up to mean work, and more work. It doesn't have to be extra hard, or frantic. Just no rest.


I want to say here that because CA was filming a video to show how to make things 'difficult', he did not have a situation where his horse actually CHOOSE to go there. He just went straight to the making it difficult part. He sort of had to, in order to demonstrate the techneique, so don't blame him for that.


But, a person needs to know that there is a very important step in there that he is not talking about: CHOICE. again: CHOICE.


your horse chooses to look for security where he thinks it will be. You LET him choose. But, make that choice uncomfortable. And, you keep offering him the choice to leave that uncomfortable place. 



Here's where things differ strictly from CA's stated method; You watch your horse, and keep that window open . . . "hey, how about we go over there?" and if your horse is ready, he will take that, for as long as he can emotionally handle it. You let him go, (do NOT MAKE HIM GO), and if he gets so worried he thinks he has to go back to that other horse, why you let him, but once he makes that choice, you make it uncomfortable. But, you keep looking for your horse's tentative thought of ' Maybe I should try going over there instead'.


It is this process of allowing him to choose, and choose , and choose again, finding for himself what works, that has him learning.




Part two of my response: Regarding becoming shut down emotionally/mentally. I read an article somewhat reacently about this . The writer said that MOST of all performance horses are pretty shut down. Most ranch horses, most reiners, dude ranch strings, etc. Their training has made them very responsive to cues and routine, and as long as the person continues to ride them in this way, and is fair to them, the horse finds a system for living that keeps him out of punishment, and he has 'peace' in his life. As long as he always responds in that 'correct' way, and quickly, he gets his job done, he gets to rest, is fed, and wakes up the next day to do a KNOWN job. He may not be very aware of things, emotionally outside of what is part of HIS job, but he is a great working 'machine'.



The writer said that it is actually unfair to such a horse to take them out of such a lifestyle and start expecting them to be 'awake and aware', and feeling/touchy, connected emotionally, etc. This puts them into a place of anxiety, where they are suddenly left to make decisions on their own. Horsemanship activities like liberty work become very stressful for such horses.


Additionally, if they do find themselves in a place where they are not being 'told' to do something, and something comes up, like a scary thing on the trail, they have no experience in making decisions on their own about how to react. They have been 'woken' by different handling methods, but now that they are 'awake' to what's around them, their true nature may come out, and it may be very powerful, and much more focussed on making their own decisions about self preservation. And, I think that describes what Swissmiss was talking about.


----------



## COWCHICK77

Can you link the article you mentioned @tinyliny?


----------



## tinyliny

COWCHICK77 said:


> Can you link the article you mentioned @*tinyliny* ?





I think it was in Eclectic Horseman . . an old issue. But I'm not sure. Will share if I can find.


----------



## Aprilswissmiss

tinyliny said:


> The writer said that it is actually unfair to such a horse to take them out of such a lifestyle and start expecting them to be 'awake and aware', and feeling/touchy, connected emotionally, etc. This puts them into a place of anxiety, where they are suddenly left to make decisions on their own. Horsemanship activities like liberty work become very stressful for such horses.
> 
> Additionally, if they do find themselves in a place where they are not being 'told' to do something, and something comes up, like a scary thing on the trail, they have no experience in making decisions on their own about how to react. They have been 'woken' by different handling methods, but now that they are 'awake' to what's around them, their true nature may come out, and it may be very powerful, and much more focussed on making their own decisions about self preservation. And, I think that describes what Swissmiss was talking about.


That's very interesting, I hadn't quite thought about it like that before. I understand where this writer is coming from, and I believe I may agree with that to a certain extent. I have certainly seen dressage horses that are completely geared for their job and only their job, and as soon as you drop the reins and stop giving cues, they do not understand and run around like a chicken with their head cut off. But I have found with these horses that often times it takes some riding through this stage, and then they reach a greater point of relaxation when they begin to learn to make their own decisions. I guess it would depend on the individual horse and whether or not they are capable of finding that relaxation and confidence amongst themselves without direct instruction. It might simply take a whole new level of training to achieve that confidence in their own decisions.

But at the same time, I believe that there is a difference between being shut down while doing their job and being shut down while interacting with humans on the ground. I know horses who are very in tune with their job and don't have a single word against it, ridden like robots, but are absolute curious love bugs once you get out of the saddle. And there is also a difference between doing a set job well and enjoying it without a word of complaint versus being truly shut down.

It made me think of this Warwick Schiller video.


----------



## tinyliny

Yes. absolutely. being ok, even happy with ones job, is not evidence of being shut down. 



I do not think I worded my response well. I wish to goodness I could lay my hands on that article. She/He was talking about horses that are great at one thing. They are good because they learn that if they do what is asked, they get the reward. No concern or thought is given for how THEY feel about what they are doing. They become very inured to pain, or discomfort, and just do a good job to earn their rest. They find a comfortable, reasonable life in this.


But, if someone starts asking them to make decisions on their own, they become emotionally undone.


I wish I could find that article. IT was so interesting, and so odd to me in the sense that it was saying that it's best for such hroses to keep them in a life where they know exactly how to respond, and never have to make decisions on their own. they are actually better off ridden that way.


----------



## KigerQueen

jumping in late here. i like CA's Ground work as it is decent. still can be very aggressive but if done by someone who understand how to not go straight to violence it can work well. my arab loves it as its clear for her. my paint is a different story. you want them to trust YOU. they want their buddy because they are pray animals and single animals are food. their entire genetic makeup is saying "you will die if you are on your own!" if you teach them they YOU are their other, that because you are there they are NOT alone, then they calm down. they get emotional and stop thinking. you need them to calm down and realize they are NOT going to die and that they are not alone. making then lope the smallest circle untill they hate their buddy and think being eaten may not be so bad. 

so like i said hes ground work and basics are like "horse training for dummies". works for most. easy to fallow, enfranchises human safety. dose not make him perfect and dose not make it the best way.


----------



## tinyliny

When I first started watching different trainers , mostly via videos, I was hooked and amazed at the ‘natural horsemanship’ activities. How you could make them turn and run, or stop, or back up without even touching them. It was amazing. I then sort of fell into learning from a different trainer, face to face, and I was confused. 



At a clinic, another student was having trouble following the teacher’s instructions in the round pen. The student wanted to show us how she normally did things, as far as using the round pen and having her horse run one way, then the other, with some darn snappy turns and take offs.


Teacher said she didn’t really like how Clinton Anderson horses were trained, and didn’t advocate it. She did not ‘dis’ the man, just said that there was something missing in it, as an approach to horses. That thing is the horse’s ‘thought’.
The approach she is using is all about seeking, earning, drawing, and sending the horse’s thought, because where goes his thought, go his feet. In nature, a horse’s thought and his feet are always united. However, when we ride them, we are often moving their feet literally counter to where their thought is focused. We are often oblivious to this because we ARE moving the horse. We don’t even notice where his thought is. That disunity causes discomfort to the horse. He is being PUSHED around against his own intention. That is often expressed in him bracing his body, leaning on a bit, running through a bit, dragging his feet, etc. 



When the horse was charging around the round pen in an impressive display of activity, the horse was not really THINKING so much as he was reacting; anticipating, and worrying about fleeing the human. He was not listening so much as assuming and obeying. He is not waiting to hear you, if you chose to ‘whisper’ something different from “RUN, CHANGE, Run”. People say, ‘but look how immediately he turns. Look how he comes running toward me if I back up, look how he immediately disengages and faces me when I point the stick at his haunches.” Pretty impressive, no?’


Yes, in a way. But, can that horse turn slowly if you want him to, or is it him just snapping around and running up? Can you send him out to the edge of corral and ask him to just stand there and wait? or will he assume that as soon as you send him away, he is supposed to run his hind end out of there and get busy, or else!


You see, this sort of work is all about driving a horse. pushing on his hind end. Even getting him to face up to you you are told to push on his hind end, to force it away from you so that his head ends up pointing at you. (you bend over, ‘look’ at his hind end, or point the stick at it. ) But, I ask you, do you know where the horse’s thought is when you do that? Not on you, but on the pressure you just placed on his hind end, and how to get away from that pressure. He is in ‘fleeing’ mode and he feels like he’s in ‘trouble’. But, he stopped and squared up to face you, right?


You can get a better turn, softer, more balanced, less abrupt by drawing his thought TOWARD you. When he does this, he will be focused ON you, and will set up his own body to follow that draw, not fleeing his hind end away. His thought comes first toward you, then his feet follow up on that. His feet and his thought are united. The result is quite different in the horse’s mind. He will want to connect WITH you, rather than want to avoid trouble. 



Once you start to watch a horse and see his thought, openly expressed in his eyes and ears and body, you start to see where it is going, when it’s not with you, even if his feet are moving along. When his thought comes to where you are asking his feet to go, he becomes very light and soft. But, the thought comes first. 



If you look at so many problems we have with horses it boils down to us trying to move their feet somewhere, when their thought is somewhere else.


There is even a difference between ‘pushing’ and ‘sending’. Pushing is pressure on the hind end, or sometimes shoulders. The horse moves away from it, but will often stay mentally focused on the source of the push, either in resentment or fear.


‘Sending’ is more about getting the horse to move his thought ‘out there’ somewhere, and then encouraging that intention so much that the horse decides he wants to go there. He is focused on his destination, not on the driving force making him go away. He is focused toward something, rather than away from it. To the horse, it is a big difference.




I hope I'm not going to regret posting this long, verbose bit of yammering. I am so NOT an expert on horse training, I hesitate to post anything about this, since I don't understand it fully. But, I do know there's a whole different feel to my trainer's way, and CA's way.


----------



## loosie

Tiny aka 'so not a trainer' :lol: that is something that I could not have put into words myself, but I feel YES! Is so important! Thank you for sharing!

And don't underestimate yourself, your experience combined with your respect & consideration for the horse, combined with your analytical brain that you keep filling with info from many sources to consider & discuss...


----------



## tinyliny

if you watch trainer like the Frenchman, what's his name . . Pignot? Something like that. They focus way more on drawing a horse's thought toward them than sending the horse away. And even if the 'send' the horse away, the bond is still unbroken. The horse moves away, but keeps part of his attention 'listening' for the next direction of his thought. He doesn't BREAK away, he stretches away, still available to be drawn back with ease, without interruption.


If you DRIVE a hrose away, you will create a pretty strong break. There are times when you may want that, such as when a horse is really crowding you , or being aggressive. 

Sometime you have to do that; you have to break the horse's thought off of you because his thought on you is hard, and it's him 'taking over', rather than him listening and asking. Once you have driven him off firmly, he will often feel uncomfortable having had the connection broken, and he will turn and seek to reconnect, on YOUR terms.


----------



## loosie

tinyliny said:


> If you DRIVE a hrose away, you will create a pretty strong break. There are times when you may want that, ...
> ... on YOUR terms.


Yeah... and no, I reckon. :lol: If you drive a horse away, _*it will often*_ create a 'break' but not always - depends how you do it, how good a 'language' and relationship you have with them, I reckon. I can only 'drive' 2 of my horses pretty strongly (cantering circles or away & back or such) and have them *often*(depends if they want to play, not reliable tho) stay 'connected' and in control(in an open area, not roundpen or such). Of the others, I _wouldn't_ do it with the brum, there being no actual need, & him having a long & bad association with 'round penning'(he's better on a lead), still a bit 'shut down' about it... he doesn't work well being 'driven'(or rather, he actually _*works*_ well... in a very robotic, 'not quite there' way...) and just haven't done much of it with my mare. The pony I've leased to someone LOVES to play games like that with you!

Oh and 'on your own terms'... Yes, necessary most of the time, and I think it pays to present it in a way, as often as possible, that it's *also* on the horse's terms too. Set it up for 'Right' behaviours to be a _win/win_. I guess you could say that's my basic premise I work to, in getting a horse to *want* to play my games, take me for a ride, etc. As much as is possible(of course, some things gotta be done regardless...). 

I want them thinking 'oh boy!' when I want to play with them, not just 'ugh, OK...' And if you 'practice' too much of the stuff that gets 'ugh, OK', they will get in the habit of it & it can 'rub off' in other areas. BUT if you 'practice' too much of the stuff that gets 'oh boy', they'll get habitual about _that _attitude instead! :happydance:


----------



## COWCHICK77

> Part two of my response: Regarding becoming shut down emotionally/mentally. I read an article somewhat reacently about this . The writer said that MOST of all performance horses are pretty shut down. Most ranch horses, most reiners, dude ranch strings, etc. Their training has made them very responsive to cues and routine, and as long as the person continues to ride them in this way, and is fair to them, the horse finds a system for living that keeps him out of punishment, and he has 'peace' in his life. As long as he always responds in that 'correct' way, and quickly, he gets his job done, he gets to rest, is fed, and wakes up the next day to do a KNOWN job. He may not be very aware of things, emotionally outside of what is part of HIS job, but he is a great working 'machine'.
> 
> 
> 
> The writer said that it is actually unfair to such a horse to take them out of such a lifestyle and start expecting them to be 'awake and aware', and feeling/touchy, connected emotionally, etc.  This puts them into a place of anxiety, where they are suddenly left to make decisions on their own. Horsemanship activities like liberty work become very stressful for such horses.
> 
> 
> Additionally, if they do find themselves in a place where they are not being 'told' to do something, and something comes up, like a scary thing on the trail, they have no experience in making decisions on their own about how to react. They have been 'woken' by different handling methods, but now that they are 'awake' to what's around them, their true nature may come out, and it may be very powerful, and much more focussed on making their own decisions about self preservation. And, I think that describes what Swissmiss was talking about.



I get what you are talking about and really would like to read the article.
I don't find performance and ranch horses to be shut down but more of internalizers.



In my opinion, there is a difference between a horse who internalizes his emotions and a horse that is shut down. A horse who has a tendency to internalize has more to do with his own personality in combination with the training style not neccesarly him being a performance or ranch horse. However there is a similarity in a need for a horse to be able to go to work within a timeline and get a job done which lends to pushing on a horse more than say the backyard training enthusiast. (I am not speaking ill of either end of the spectrum)

A horse who is shut down is one that has had his plug pulled. One of the main differences between one who internalizes and a shut down horse is the ability to bring the horse back out through a different job/training technique. A horse who internalizes still takes work and definitely conscious effort on the trainer/handlers part but a shut down horse is beyond. I have rarely seen a horse come back that has had his plug pulled. It is not as simple as a turn out for a year or two, a job change or change in trainer and style.


I may get thrashed for this but I don't think internalizing is as bad as the new wave of natural horsemanship thinks it is. There is a bit of a safety net in it for the horse and the trainer BUT only if the trainer understands where the threshold is. If the threshold is pushed beyond it's point then that is when it becomes explosive and then the big problems get set in. I am just speaking from my personal experience not from a clinician theory, but on some of the hotter performance or work horse bred horses where the sensitivity and the bubble is large the internalizing gives a starting point to get things done and the internalizing can be fixed later. I should also mention that there is a difference in handling the sensitive/big bubble and the sensitive/small bubble horse. I find the sensitive/small bubble horse doesn't tend to internalize like the sensitive/big bubble horse and that is another reason you can't throw most performance and ranch horses into the same "shut down" category.


----------



## tinyliny

I absolutely agree. the point the writer was making was that horses that are trained to do a specific job, with extremely clear parameters, and how they 'feel' about a job is not really of concern, they adapt quite well to their job. They are actually some of the BEST riding horses. They get the job done and are quite dependable.


The article was more about allowing a horse to stay in that form of living, if that is what has worked for him. And, being aware that if you really 'wake up' your horse, you may not like what comes out.


I think her/his point was not to think less of a horse that has learned a job in an automatic manner, and has come to peace with that. And that such a horse is happier if his life continues about like he has adapted to. And, if you start asking the horse to think outside what he has learned to react to in a set manner, you may not like what comes out.


I am really sorry I don't remember where I saw that article. Like I said, it might have been Eclectic Horseman . . . or something I linked to here. I should have noted the source at the time.


----------



## Joel Reiter

I just can’t read these threads about Clinton Anderson without wanting to scream. Yes, you saw him get tough with a horse on YouTube. You didn’t like what you saw. You think you could do it better. Fine. I believe some of you probably could.

What bugs me is you have leaped to the conclusion that CA’s methods wouldn’t work on your horse or some horse because his methods are too rough. It’s even more disturbing when you start speculating that every horse that you encounter that has certain issues was “probably” trained with CA’s method. 

I wish one of you would watch one hour of the 26 hours of the Colt Starting series so you could realize how much of what you say about Clinton Anderson’s training methods is hideously, slanderously wrong. The idea that his cure for a buddy sour horse is to ride him to exhaustion so he can be pushed through some kind of panic about leaving his buddies is just crazy. The whole foundation of his approach is to turn around BEFORE the horse ever gets to that emotional state. 

I love you guys and this forum but the Clinton bashing that goes on here is unconscionable. Warwick Schiller is an interesting guy with some nutty ideas about sitting in cold water and Mark Rashid’s books can make me cry, but I’ve watched them both in person and they train horses just like Clinton does, only slower. And if I had to go by what they teach, I would have missed the last 15 years with my gelding. Clinton Anderson got me back on my horse.

It’s funny to me how many people here think it’s ridiculous to spend $600 on a dvd series, but every time somebody has an issue with their horse, the first word of advice is to hire a trainer. $600 is a mouse pee in the ocean compared to what a trainer costs, and if you’re a beginner who needs a trainer, how are you supposed to pick one? CA’s Colt Starting and Fundamentals series have helped thousands of people with their horses, avoiding the injuries and issues that create former horse owners and auction bound horses. And I am one of them.


----------



## tinyliny

I'm hardly bashing anyone. I'm glad you and your horse were helped. 
The example I raised was one where the young owner HAD worked with CA, I hadn't just assumed it. 

Obviously he gets success in many circumstances Based on every video of him I've ever seen, I see a trainer that operates from a paradigm of working with horses that is NOT the same as what I seen from several other trainers , such as Warwick Schiller and Harry Whitney and his offshoots. However, I wish I could see that series without buying it. 

And, yes, I personally am not a skilled trainer, much less rider. I'm just a good observer.


----------



## loosie

Joel Reiter said:


> that CA’s methods wouldn’t work on your horse or some horse because his methods are too rough....
> I wish one of you would watch one hour of the 26 hours of the Colt Starting series so you could realize how much of what you say about Clinton Anderson’s training methods is hideously, slanderously wrong.


Joel, we've been here before. I'm glad you've found someone who has helped you. By all means, if you want to share some of his stuff that he doesn't show publicly, which may give people a different view of him, go for it. I'd be interested to see. 

But again, what _HE_ puts out publicly on Youtube is indeed all most of us see(at least those who aren't impressed & so therefore wouldn't fork out for his 'courses'). It is NOT in the least wrong that *in many people's opinion* he is too aggressive and has no respect for the horse in his vids. It is NOT 'hideously', far from 'slanderously' wrong, that HE gives people that picture of himself. It is what _HE_ puts out there as egs of himself and his philosophy. If he doesn't put out an accurate picture about what he's about, it's not about, please don't lecture us, as if it's our fault we supposedly have the wrong end of the stick.



> The idea that his cure for a buddy sour horse is to ride him to exhaustion so he can be pushed through some kind of panic about leaving his buddies is just crazy. The whole foundation of his approach is to turn around BEFORE the horse ever gets to that emotional state.


I don't know anything about the assumption of working to exhaustion or such, just IMO in a nutshell, what *he shows* in this vid is simply about working a horse hard, whenever the horse is with his 'buddy' and this is a philosophy, for reasons explained, I disagree strongly with.



> I love you guys and this forum but the Clinton bashing that goes on here is unconscionable.


I don't believe 'bashing' is the appropriate word for it at all. We're not getting personal about him, but we are making comment/giving opinions on what he _SAYS & DOES, publicly_, which is, IMO an entirely reasonable thing to discuss.



> Warwick Schiller is an interesting guy with some nutty ideas about sitting in cold water and Mark Rashid’s books can make me cry, but I’ve watched them both in person and they train horses just like Clinton does, only slower.


Interesting. So if those others teach the same stuff, I'm curious why do you give credit to CA & not them?? Is it because CA has a vid series you got into? I saw Mark Rashid in person twice, at least 20 years ago, so while I remember he seemed very gentle & respectFUL to the horse, I don't recall details. WS I've only seen very recently, and he was extremely 'low key' and respectful too. Apparently WS has changed his ways drastically, recently, so I don't know if what I've seen of him was 'like CA' in your eyes or not. I'd really like to see some of that side of CA if he is comparable to those 2. I have to ask tho, why on earth would he put out such a drastically different - in your eyes incorrect - view of himself & his philosophy if that's not what he generally does/believes?



> It’s funny to me how many people here think it’s ridiculous to spend $600 on a dvd series, but every time somebody has an issue with their horse, the first word of advice is to hire a trainer. $600 is a mouse pee


Yes, I don't think watching vids & 'going it alone' is really comparable at all with hands on help. However, yes, it's cheap in comparison with having a bucketful of lessons with some trainers(that would pay for 12 hour long lessons with the girl I used to employ to give my kids lessons...), and there are indeed lots to be learned from some vid series. And many people don't have the opportunity of a good trainer. Therefore, I can absolutely see value in vid courses, just that, why on earth would I invest that much money(or anywhere near) on a trainer who, from what I've seen of him, I can't stand, who, according to you, puts out a false idea about himself publicly??


----------



## Joel Reiter

loosie said:


> So if those others teach the same stuff, I'm curious why do you give credit to CA & not them??



Very simple. Clinton Anderson has dedicated himself to creating a comprehensive training program with a single focus of making it understandable for the people who came to his clinics with the same problems. Nobody else has anything like it. I didn't start with a video, I bought his book, _Clinton Anderson's Downunder Horsemanship: Establishing Respect and Control for English and Western Riders_. It's been out there for 15 years. $13.99 on Kindle. Used copies for ten bucks. I read everything I could get my hands on for the first seven years I had my horse and this is the one that got me over the hump. The only thing even remotely comparable that I have found is_ Building Your Dream Horse: Charles Wilhelm's Ultimate Foundation Training._

In other words, I give credit to CA and not Schiller or Rashid because neither of them have even attempted to do what CA has done.




loosie said:


> I can absolutely see value in vid courses, just that, why on earth would I invest that much money(or anywhere near) on a trainer who, from what I've seen of him, I can't stand, who, according to you, puts out a false idea about himself publicly??




I don't accept your premise that he puts out a false idea of himself. He shows how he would deal with an extreme situation as a marketing tool. There's nothing in that to support the statement I keep reading here that he trains every horse the same way. From what I've seen in the years I've been on this forum, CA is the best hope of help for the majority of issues that members here have. And over and over again, they are being discouraged from investigating what might be the best resource for solving their problem. If I had found this forum before I found Clinton Anderson, I never would have given him a look. It's like people are dying of thirst and when they come here you say, "don't drink that water because I don't like the way it tastes."


----------



## Hondo

My prediction is that pressure/release and positive punishment will largely be gone in 50 years. Will not be around to see if I'm right but that's what I believe.


----------



## Aprilswissmiss

Joel Reiter said:


> In other words, I give credit to CA and not Schiller or Rashid because neither of them have even attempted to do what CA has done.


Schiller also has an enormous online library of training help videos and instructions for people to subscribe to and watch, just like CA.


----------



## tinyliny

All I had to do was rewatch this video




 to feel ok about my 'slanderously wrong' comments about CA's methods. The video is incessantly about 'pushing', 'driving'. It is exactly what I was talking about; driving the horse's hind end, putting him into a fleeing you frame of mind, pushing and driving instead of drawing. Moving so quickly that the handler never takes the time to see if he can get the horse's mind on him before asking something. It's jerky, demanding, blind flailing of sticks and yanking of metal shanked ropes. There is no instruction of the human to look at his horse , observe his thought, consider that at all.


Yes, it works. it does. But there is so much more .


----------



## ACinATX

tinyliny said:


> Part two of my response: Regarding becoming shut down emotionally/mentally. I read an article somewhat reacently about this . The writer said that MOST of all performance horses are pretty shut down. Most ranch horses, most reiners, dude ranch strings, etc. Their training has made them very responsive to cues and routine, and as long as the person continues to ride them in this way, and is fair to them, the horse finds a system for living that keeps him out of punishment, and he has 'peace' in his life. As long as he always responds in that 'correct' way, and quickly, he gets his job done, he gets to rest, is fed, and wakes up the next day to do a KNOWN job. He may not be very aware of things, emotionally outside of what is part of HIS job, but he is a great working 'machine'.
> 
> The writer said that it is actually unfair to such a horse to take them out of such a lifestyle and start expecting them to be 'awake and aware', and feeling/touchy, connected emotionally, etc. This puts them into a place of anxiety, where they are suddenly left to make decisions on their own. Horsemanship activities like liberty work become very stressful for such horses.


Wow. That's my Teddy in a nutshell. He just wants to know what the rules are, and he will follow them. He has a job that he understands, and he wants to do that job and then be done with it. He doesn't want to make choices, as he's afraid he will get punished if he makes the wrong choice. 

I'm trying to get him to where he is OK making decisions and trying new things, but I'm not sure that will ever happen. Maybe I should just let him be happy where he is. After reading this, I'm thinking about it. Maybe he will never be a trail horse and that's OK. He's perfectly happy working in the arena.


----------



## loosie

Joel Reiter said:


> I don't accept your premise that he puts out a false idea of himself. He shows how he would deal with an extreme situation as a marketing tool. There's nothing in that to support the statement I keep reading here that he trains every horse the same way.


It is you who are saying his 'real' training principles are not as he shows them on Youtube. I believe I said something like IF this were the case then he is putting out a false idea. And as a 'marketing tool' the youtube vids are what is... unselling him to me.



> From what I've seen in the years I've been on this forum, CA is the best hope of help for the majority of ...
> It's like people are dying of thirst and when they come here you say, "don't drink that water because I don't like the way it tastes."


Yes, I get that the first is your opinion of him. And I'm not trying to imply that's wrong, tho it's different to mine. How about, if you want to 'sell him' to people & you believe we are incorrect in our assumptions, you can address the specific concerns we have raised here, give us reason to believe he is not as he seems to us? Show us a vid of him being quiet & respectful with a horse maybe?

To the second bit I quoted, I personally do try to give _reasons_ for _my_ beliefs, when I give opinions or advice - "This is why _*I*_ don't drink that water..." People may always find 'water' tasty when I don't, I'm just telling them my opinion.


----------



## loosie

There are also quite a few different trainers who have (copied?) Parelli style 'training vid/programs'. CA is by far not alone in that.

Tiny, I managed half of that vid before I turned it off. Around the 9.50 mark, what is going on there?? Seemed to be a bit of that sort going on. The horse backed up when asked, the person stopped and rubbed him on the head with the stick, and then jerked on the leadrope sporadically.


----------



## tinyliny

loosie said:


> There are also quite a few different trainers who have (copied?) Parelli style 'training vid/programs'. CA is by far not alone in that.
> 
> Tiny, I managed half of that vid before I turned it off. Around the 9.50 mark, what is going on there?? Seemed to be a bit of that sort going on. The horse backed up when asked, the person stopped and rubbed him on the head with the stick, and then jerked on the leadrope sporadically.





Yes. I saw that. I fault the trainer for not asking his students to have some control of the rope, itself. If you seek to build responsiveness in a horse that is lighter than a whack on the rope, you have to start light, and return to light as soon as possible. Those people are learners, so one should not expect to see things done perfectly. They are trying and learning. What is not ever mentioned , in as much as I can see, is what you are supposed to be looking for, and how to be developing a sense of feel so that you ask lightly, first, every time, and you don't make random jerky motions with the rope that are confusing and distressing to a horse.


Make not mistake , you do have to get pretty 'loud' at times. But, then you return to being 'quiet'. I don't see any mention of that, any reminder to keep looking for the places where a whisper will work. There is so much focus on shouting with the rope, the student forgets this should be temporary.


There are people who do not realize how dull they are, and they need to be taught to be able to dial it up in order to get the horse's attention and obediance. But, once they do, they need to be helped to start looking for where they can get lighter, and not have to go to high pressure. They need to start improving their ability to see where the horse has answered their request and they can stop 'asking' vigorously. Timing and feel. I don't see that being taught at all.


I have seen dull horses worked by Harry Whitney, that once they realize he is worth paying attention to, and that my have involved him getting pretty big for a bit, he can then move them back by a faint motion on the rope, just lifting it and advancing his hand toward the horse, ever so slightly, the barest intention being sent down the rope. He does not need to march into them, stick waving.


Again, I realize that these mechanics can help, initially. I just don't hear or see CA talking to his students about what to do next, what to look for that shows your horse is ready for you to try whispering a cue and seeing if that will work. working toward lightness. 

He is teaching all shouting, and no dialoguing. 



Again, I am sure that a lot of people are helped by the mechanics alone. Some will find that sufficient. some will see things differently once they have seen a different approach.


----------



## Joel Reiter

Aprilswissmiss said:


> Schiller also has an enormous online library of training help videos and instructions for people to subscribe to and watch, just like CA.




No, not at all like CA. The only person who has a comprehensive step by step even close to CA's is Parelli, who is equally hated. The difference is CA's is easier to understand and follow. The whole advantage of CA, and one of his main talking points, is if you follow the steps from the beginning, you don't have to always be fixing problems. Everybody has videos about trailer loading and buddy sour and spooking because those are the issues people are having with their horses. CA says over and over again, if you follow the steps from the beginning and don't take shortcuts, you won't have those problems in the first place.


----------



## Joel Reiter

tinyliny said:


> All I had to do was rewatch this video https://youtu.be/JwoyxETo-t0 to feel ok about my 'slanderously wrong' comments about CA's methods.



Tiny, I don't remember you saying anything slanderously wrong. 





tinyliny said:


> The video is incessantly about 'pushing', 'driving'. It is exactly what I was talking about; driving the horse's hind end, putting him into a fleeing you frame of mind, pushing and driving instead of drawing. Moving so quickly that the handler never takes the time to see if he can get the horse's mind on him before asking something. It's jerky, demanding, blind flailing of sticks and yanking of metal shanked ropes.



Right, because it's showing a bunch of people trying to follow verbal instructions while they try to apply the techniques. Some of them admit that all they know of his methods is what they've seen on RFD TV and they've been doing things wrong for a long time. Have you ever been to a group dog training class? There's a lot of jerky, demanding, blind flailing and yanking of leashes on the first day. CA describes how difficult it is to keep up with everything that's going on at 4 minutes. He says, "you have to be aware of when to apply pressure and when not to apply pressure." That's not showing up on the first try. And for what it's worth, I don't like metal shanked lead ropes either. There is no metal in my halter and lead.




tinyliny said:


> There is no instruction of the human to look at his horse, observe his thought, consider that at all.



You didn't see it here, but Clinton rehearses to death all the signs of when a horse is relaxing, getting it, processing the lesson. At 20 minutes he gets stern with a horse one time, and the very next try the horse does what is asked without pressure.


The reason these videos are so abrupt is that if he shows 24 minutes of the colt starting or fundamentals video it would put everyone to sleep. People don't want to work that hard or put that much time in with their horses. That's why at the end of the video you linked he stresses the importance of consistent repetition.


----------



## Aprilswissmiss

tinyliny said:


> All I had to do was rewatch this video to feel ok about my 'slanderously wrong' comments about CA's methods. The video is incessantly about 'pushing', 'driving'. It is exactly what I was talking about; driving the horse's hind end, putting him into a fleeing you frame of mind, pushing and driving instead of drawing. Moving so quickly that the handler never takes the time to see if he can get the horse's mind on him before asking something. It's jerky, demanding, blind flailing of sticks and yanking of metal shanked ropes. There is no instruction of the human to look at his horse , observe his thought, consider that at all.
> 
> 
> Yes, it works. it does. But there is so much more .


I had to stop watching at 5:15-5:30. What in the world is that supposed to teach? The horse took a small sideways step while she was rubbing a stick on it, and got the daylights popped out of his face. I reserve that sort of response to a horse that is acting aggressive or pushy. Not a horse who doesn't understand the answer, and is trying hard to think about what the owner wants, but can't figure it out because the owner never gave it the tools to answer the question.

I'm watching without audio, so perhaps I missed something, but if I couldn't understand without audio, what about the horse?


----------



## lostastirrup

I'm kinda in a mixed bag with CA because of a couple things

1. His methods are way too aggressive by half and I don't find them remotely humane from assessing the way the horses respond. Quite frankly the high intensity "flooding" is concerning. 

2. I pretty much did his trailer loading method and found it ineffective, stress inducing for my horse and only functional when my horse was exhausted to tears and convinced I was willing to be on the fight with him for 5+ hours. This is a horse I can lead and ride bridleless and is one of the most attentive and well broke horses on the ground that I've had the pleasure of making. It wasn't an issue of leadership, it was one of fear- which is I think where CA tends to fail- for horses who are already sensitive and fearful. (End of story he loads like a dream after introducing +R method) 

3. I've seen bully and belligerent horses become respectful and still "awake" members of society that became so through owners that followed his method. But these owners (one in particular comes to mind) were already really good animal handlers and had an excellent eye for timing and what was a good enough response in the animal, just hadn't had much experience with horses yet. 

4. I frequently work with horses short term who are bullying and belligerent. And some major high intensity "bomb going off if you don't notice me" often has to be where I start to get the job done. But usually these are well broke horses that just haven't havent been worked consistently and have gotten away with murder on the orient express. 




So I can see some practical applications of his style, however it's not something I would immediately gravitate to when bringing up a horse. But my "type" (for both men and horses truthfully) is intelligent and anxious, which I think is the square peg to CA's round hole. 


On buddy sourness. I've had good luck lunging nearby with the "overfocused" horse being allowed to stop, rest and graze for little things initially like turning an ear on me or shifting their gaze. That's about as intense as I like to get with pressure- and I'd prefer to take small offerings from the horse rather than demand particular actions in such a way that I'm chasing and whipping to get what I want. I've had pretty good success, so I can't say that keeping the intensity of pressure low is detrimental to gaining respect. Theyre people not robots- we can certainly allow some level of choice and creativity in our animals- especially if the work we ask of them is going to have to mean us either allowing them to make mistakes (all riding ever) or asking them to try something new (training piaffe comes to mind- "I just need you to give me something, not a lot, not even correct, but I need you willing to go out on a limb and try something new without panicking").


----------



## Hondo

ACinATX said:


> Wow. That's my Teddy in a nutshell. He just wants to know what the rules are, and he will follow them. He has a job that he understands, and he wants to do that job and then be done with it. He doesn't want to make choices, as he's afraid he will get punished if he makes the wrong choice.
> 
> I'm trying to get him to where he is OK making decisions and trying new things, but I'm not sure that will ever happen. Maybe I should just let him be happy where he is. After reading this, I'm thinking about it. Maybe he will never be a trail horse and that's OK. He's perfectly happy working in the arena.



This is so sad. I've seen flooded shut down horses. To me, they make me think of a prisoner that has adjusted to prison life and can't adjust to freedom and would prefer to just be back in prison.


In the old days a horse was just tied to a post in a corral and left to buck it out. More than once. That method has been used effectively for hundreds of years. Works almost every time I'm to understand. In terms of an obedient horse. Very easy to understand and apply.


Doing it right is what takes a lot of understanding and is difficult to successfully apply.


I'm working on it. Not there yet. Most of the difficulty consists of my own internal make over.


----------



## SteadyOn

Joel Reiter said:


> No, not at all like CA. The only person who has a comprehensive step by step even close to CA's is Parelli, who is equally hated. The difference is CA's is easier to understand and follow. The whole advantage of CA, and one of his main talking points, is if you follow the steps from the beginning, you don't have to always be fixing problems. Everybody has videos about trailer loading and buddy sour and spooking because those are the issues people are having with their horses. CA says over and over again, if you follow the steps from the beginning and don't take shortcuts, you won't have those problems in the first place.


Warwick Schiller does have a comprehensive, from scratch, step by step plan for training without holes. A plan anyone can follow. He even has multiple branches of it now, for people who want to come at it from different angles, but that all build a good relationship and a solidly trained horse. His unofficial catch phrase is "Stick to the dam plan." There's absolutely a plan.


----------



## loosie

Joel Reiter said:


> No, not at all like CA. The only person who has a comprehensive step by step even close to CA's is Parelli, who is equally hated. The difference is CA's is easier to understand and follow.


Only just recently looked into WS after auditing at a clinic of his. Seems as well as his video 'library' he has a 'program', but it's not a 'colour by numbers' like CA. All horses & their people are different, so WS tailors his 'program' to suit the particular case.

I know nothing about Parelli these days - lost interest many, many moons ago. I do believe it got more... convoluted as it went along, perhaps with Linda's 'help'. I'm only really familiar with his early stuff. But originally, I and many I knew found him very clear and easy to understand. The difference I see is that he teaches that you start 'soft' and only get strong if/when need be, accept the 'smallest try' and then start soft again... etc. He was very good at pointing out 'there! that's the moment to release' etc.

Yeah Tiny, I get that these people in that vid were beginners, mistakes are made... but yeah, I had a problem with this 'marketing vid' not explaining that this was what we were seeing, that that was not desirable, that the aim was to *minimise* 'getting as strong as necessary'...


----------



## ladygodiva1228

There are some things that CA does that has helped me. I have his older set of Colt Starting DVD's when he was younger and not so cocky as he is now. I think fame is going to his head a bit now. 

Anyways his trailer loading video helped me out when I had 1 month to trailer train my 6 year old mare so she could go to the trainers. I was able to get her to comfortably load in my step-up with out much fuss. She was a bit nervous the first time she saw the trailer and the first time she was fully loaded in the trailer, but that was it. 

I have watched Warwick Schiller, Buck Brannaman, Clinton Anderson, Mark Rashard, and they all have their "own" style of training, but if really watch the videos you can tell there are some similarities in how they train.


----------



## Joel Reiter

SteadyOn said:


> Warwick Schiller does have a comprehensive, from scratch, step by step plan for training without holes. A plan anyone can follow. He even has multiple branches of it now, for people who want to come at it from different angles, but that all build a good relationship and a solidly trained horse. His unofficial catch phrase is "Stick to the dam plan." There's absolutely a plan.



I apologize for not being aware of that; I thought I had investigated his offerings more thoroughly than I had when he was here last April. When I went back to the website I found "The Principles of Training online course", but he says it "does not give you a step by step plan to progress through -- that is what the Online Video Library does.


But when I go to the online video library I see a relationship path and a skills path and a ridden work path and a catch-all called additional videos. Is that what you're talking about?


----------



## rambo99

I'm not a CA fan but I'll give credit where credit is due. I watched a video of his on a dangerous bucking horse. That was brought to him by his owner. The lady was scared to ride horse. If I recall right I think horse had hurt her. 

Video showed how explosive horse was he'd buck hard and flat run you over when you were on the ground. He'd run into fences when rider was on him bucking like crazy.

CA got this horse under control with his ground work, lunging. He also was very good at explaining, to horses owner what he was doing and why. At the end owner rode her horse with no issues with bucking.

Actually it was one of CA trainers that worked with horse. CA stood with owner explaining what trainer was doing.

But CA gave her the tools to be able to ride her horse and be successful. This was this owners last resort to fix this horses serious bucking problem. 

I don't always like how he does things but I also see the good in things he does. Think he gives owners of problem horse the tools to be successful. Like lady of bucking horse. 

Yeah he can be hard on a horse,but I think there are times it's needed.


----------



## loosie

rambo99 said:


> Yeah he can be hard on a horse,but I think there are times it's needed.


Yep, I don't know that anyone has denied that, except Hondo, who reckons negative reinforcement as well as punishment should be out(get your point Hondo, just don't think it's necessarily a prob or bad). The prob I see is that that is the only 'model' he portrays.

As for people saying other trainers 'do the same', yes, most trainers(unless positive reinforcement based) use the same underlying premises - that of negative reinforcement - pressure/release, 'make the wrong thing hard', etc. And that's whether they're English, Western, so called 'Natural'... But there are many other considerations & factors that come into play, aside from the basic training principles, that people do/understand differently.


----------



## Joel Reiter

loosie said:


> How about, if you want to 'sell him' to people & you believe we are incorrect in our assumptions, you can address the specific concerns we have raised here, give us reason to believe he is not as he seems to us? Show us a vid of him being quiet & respectful with a horse maybe?


OK, but stop and think about it. The only thing that many CA disparagers know about Clinton Anderson is his most controversial videos. And the reason they've seen those is because their fellow CA disparagers send them links. It's like all the Facebook political crap where the righties and lefties share links that make the opponent look bad. It doesn't give a fair picture of the candidate.

He did a series a few years ago with a rescue horse. You've probably never heard of it because it didn't suit anyone's purpose to make Clinton Anderson look bad. Here's a link to the second episode of the series where he puts a halter on the horse and works through a little bit of desensitizing, ending with some tips on handling a horse's feet. Note that he stresses that if your horse has a problem with his feet, the place to start is back at step one, and if you follow the steps, by the time you get to the feet, it won't be such a problem.


I would also suggest you watch his series on retraining an off the track Thoroughbred, where he goes into some detail on how you apply his method differently to different types of horses.


----------



## tinyliny

I didn't watch the whole thing. I didn't get the feeling that anything would change after the first 17 minutes I watched. 



I understand that this is more informative as to why you do this, or stand here, or don't do that. But, I say again, never once does he ask you to consider how the the horse is thinking, where it's thought it, and the value of having it with you. 



That horse is learning to stand still with the string and rope and stuff, but it isn't feeling very good about it. It isn't feeling very good at all about being near Mr. Anderson. 

I suppose that doesn't matter in the system. I see that CA's system can be very helpful to get people to get a functioning horse. There's a reason it is so successful financially. But, once you look a bit further, you cannot really ever go back to seeing the superficiality of this approach.


The masters I have seen take the time to get the horse to realize that the 'good' place is near them, with them. They go back to this repeatedly, after the hrose has gone through a bit of stress and needs some time to 'soak' on it. CA doesn't offer that to the horse. If it weren't for the line, that horse would be out of there so fast.


I'm not saying CA's system doesn't 'work'. I'm sure it does. But, it is very sad, and even repellent to me to watch how he plows right over the horse, itself. You may say I'm being too 'woo-woo' to consider how the horse feels about things. But, it makes all the difference in the world.


----------



## Joel Reiter

I don't think you're being too woo-woo, as I'm guessing you intend it. We all want a bond with our horses, and we want our horses to want to be with us. I wish I could understand trainers like Tom and Bill Dorrance, but I can't. They invested their time in a few disciples, and one of them was Pat Parelli, and I can't even understand him. What I can't understand, I can't explain, and I can't help with what I can't explain. And there any many thousands of horses and owners out there who need help. So the bottom line to me is which do you like better, a simple and flawed system or neglected horses and injured owners? Because let's face it, 90% of horse owners will never hire a trainer, let alone get instruction from a master.


----------



## loosie

Joel Reiter said:


> The only thing that many CA disparagers know about Clinton Anderson is his most controversial videos. And the reason they've seen those is because their fellow CA disparagers send them links.


Mate! Please! To say that, after lecturing _us_ on 'slanderous' comments... _DO_ 'many people' only look at the worst egs? How do you know that? Or could it just be you assume this because you can't understand what we're seeing that's a problem? 

Anyway, _I have_, over the years, watched many CA vids, after people have raved_(in a good way)_ about him. Just I haven't found anything that has negated my 'slanderous' opinion of him. I can't recall seeing a young horse training vid(unless it was just filed in my brain as 'more of the same') but I do recall one where he worked with a newly caught brumby, which greatly disturbed me - same rough tactics as in his 'extreme' egs working with 'spoiled' horses.



> He did a series a few years ago with a rescue horse. You've probably never heard of it because it didn't suit anyone's purpose to make Clinton Anderson look bad.


Did you even ask me, before jumping to that conclusion? If you expect me to take you seriously, do not make unfounded assumptions/comments about me.



> I would also suggest you watch his series on retraining an off the track Thoroughbred, where he goes into some detail on how you apply his method differently to different types of horses.


For the sake of your insisting it is so different to what I've seen to date, I will watch the vid you linked(not now, about to go enjoy my horse). Please put a link here to the TB one if you want me to watch that too. If I find the vid you posted here to be... a refreshing change, I will watch the other.


----------



## tinyliny

pretty much all these trainers started off relearning old training techniques from Tom and Bill Dorrance, and Ray Hunt. A lot of the physical techniques are drawn from old horse training, but the thought process is newer, in the sense that it got lost in centuries of training horse quick and fast to fill a never ending need for mounts Out West (in US).


And, of the people who watched the Dorrances brothers, and Mr. Hunt train, each came away with their own interpretation. Then, in order for them to re-present it to an audience who has not actually witnessed ALL the processes and thinking that they did, these trainers decided what to teach, and how. They basically 'cherry picked' out some things, and put new names on them and ordered them, and sold them.


Add in the element of how each viewer/student brings in their own preconceptions, and things get pretty warped , quite often. That's why you end up with Parelli horses that , far from being happy about 'playing' a game, are irritable and often dull, and pushing back on the owner , even while running through the steps.


You get some CA method trained horses that are so worried about being 'in trouble' that they jump from you in the round pen and get busy running before you've even indicated that they should run. They struggle with slowing down and letting you ask them through things step by step, especially something they know by rote. They can be very automtatic, and worried horses.


Is it the method, or the fact that the student didn't learn it 'right'? We each have our own ideas.


The long and the short of it is, that ground work, and ridden work, really requires a real human there, modeling and explaining things. It so important to have them there to help you develop real 'feel', which is very hard to transmit via video.


----------



## charrorider

I've never watched a single second of one of CA's videos. I'll be the first one to admit that my experience with his methods is limited. But what I've experienced, I don't like. I have a horse I bought from a horseman who uses CA's methods. Ibn behaved alright in his arena. But once I got him home, he was a basket case. Didn't trust anyone or anything. He was always ready to jump out of his skin. It was suicidal to ride him. My wife pleaded with me to sell him. It took me four months of not retraining ("retraining" isn't the right word), of bonding, of convincing him that he could relax and live a normal life, that I was not his enemy, to make a safe horse out of him. My second experience with his methods was at a demonstration put on by one of his disciple. She was working with a stunning looking, young Appaloosa gelding. I walked out about 20 mins into the clinic. I thought it was abusive and I can see how that Appy would've ended up being one of those 'worried' horses, tinyliny mentions, at the very least, or a basket case like my Ibn.


----------



## Joel Reiter

loosie said:


> How do you know that? Or could it just be you assume this?
> Did you even ask me, before jumping to that conclusion? If you expect me to take you seriously, do not make unfounded assumptions/comments about me.



In retrospect, you are absolutely right, I am guilty of the very thing I accused you of. I apologize. If you're still talking to me after this, I wanted to ask some advice about trimming a miniature donkey.


----------



## Joel Reiter

loosie said:


> Please put a link here to the TB one if you want me to watch that too. If I find the vid you posted here to be... a refreshing change, I will watch the other.



I'm sorry, that series is not currently available on YouTube.


----------



## loosie

First, I must comment that I'm surprised to hear that you find CA makes sense but you couldn't follow Parelli Joel - because I find CA talks a LOT like Parelli, even puts many things word for word like Parelli(which is I believe the origin of CA's training). But as said, I'm only familiar with Parelli of decades ago & maybe he's got harder to understand these days... I'd be interested to hear what you think of Parelli's '7 Games' vid if you've seen it - the old version, if he's since done a new one.

OK, lets discuss what exactly he's doing in that vid that I find problematic, or at least questionable... 

He _says_ what he is doing is 'approach & retreat', which I personally agree is a great tactic for 'desensitising'. But what he is _actually_ doing for the most part is 'approach approach approach...' - aka 'flooding' in behavioural terminology. I do appreciate a lot of 'NH' people call his kind of tactic 'approach & retreat'. 

IMO it depends on the reactivity, the fear level of the horse, whether I'd keep up the 'approach' until the horse stopped moving/relaxed, and if the horse were that reactive about it, I'd very likely 'retreat & approach, retreat & approach...' well before that point. I want to *avoid* causing a horse to become more fearful of me/my tools/my games, not cause more fear/reactivity in the name of 'desensitising'.

One vid I saw, think I mentioned in this thread already, he explained how he WANTS to scare the horse, because "The more you scare him, the quieter he gets" - yes, behaviourists have long recognised that is what happens when you 'flood' someone with a stimulus. But it is a kind of 'shell shocked' 'quiet' and does nothing to promote trust or confidence, just the opposite in fact. You might want to read up on 'flooding' and it's well documented psychological effects Joel, before promoting the tactic.

When the horse stops moving but is very obviously still worried & 'on guard' by what he is doing, she licks her lips & he states this means she is relaxed & quits. IMO she was very obviously far from relaxed, but I would have probably 'released' then too, if not before(rather than waiting some proscribed 15 seconds - what's the rationale behind that proscription?) explaining that while she wasn't relaxed, that was a good place to 'retreat'. 

I noticed at one point he says you should reward the horse for stuff, but not once have I ever seen him do so. He does like to rub his stick on the horse's forehead though - I wonder if he somehow perceives that as a reward.

I find it interesting that a lot of what CA *says* I agree with, but as like the above, he often doesn't actually 'walk' what he 'talks'. Eg. at about 34 mins, he goes on about 'retreating' the instant a horse does something 'good', don't keep at it. But his egs, as earlier described, very often show him doing just the opposite.

My son walked past at one point when CA was saying 'you must desensitise all 3 sides of your horse' & went 'wait - what?? You told me I was good with horses & I didn't even realise they had 3 sides!' :lol: :lol:

I also thought it was funny that at somewhere around the 30 minute mark, as I was 'flicking' through one of the umpteen ads he puts in all his 'marketing vids' that there was one for his 'very own design of Aussie Saddle'... that was a Western, NOT an Aussie stock saddle at all.

And then, I thought it had finished, but flicking to near the end, at about 45 mins, he explains how a rope halter should be low on the horse's nose, so the knots 'work better'. As someone who doesn't like to use pain to train, I'd advise the exact opposite... and not having knots on the nose piece of the halter either.

Oh and at the very end, something that was NOT what Parelli preaches(ed)... While Parelli is a great salesman, I've heard him explain that while he finds the specific tools he uses helpful, it is not the tools or lack of, that make for success. But CA says something like 'you _need_ my tools and they will ensure your success'.


----------



## tinyliny

the second part of that video is much better; just basic common sense of how to handle the feet.


----------



## Joel Reiter

loosie said:


> First, I must comment that I'm surprised to hear that you find CA makes sense but you couldn't follow Parelli Joel - because I find CA talks a LOT like Parelli, even puts many things word for word like Parelli(which is I believe the origin of CA's training). But as said, I'm only familiar with Parelli of decades ago & maybe he's got harder to understand these days... I'd be interested to hear what you think of Parelli's '7 Games' vid if you've seen it - the old version, if he's since done a new one.


Somebody loaned me a Parelli "level one" kit before I ever heard of Clinton Anderson. I played the seven games and followed it the best I could. After I saw Clinton Anderson at our Horse Expo and bought his book I had the great breakthrough with my horse. Since then both Parelli and CA have been to St. Paul multiple times and I've watched them both. You're right, there are a lot of similarities, but what Parelli was doing didn't make sense to me until after I learned from CA. And while it is possible that CA borrowed some language from Parelli (since he buys and studies material from all trainers) he totally credits his method to his mentors, Gordon McKinlay and Ian Francis, and credits Kell B. Jeffery for part of the colt starting methods he used while working with his mentors. All three were Australians. I think if CA really got something from Parelli, it was how to market himself.



loosie said:


> He _says_ what he is doing is 'approach & retreat', which I personally agree is a great tactic for 'desensitising'. But what he is _actually_ doing for the most part is 'approach approach approach...' - aka 'flooding' in behavioural terminology. [It results in] a kind of 'shell shocked' 'quiet' and does nothing to promote trust or confidence, just the opposite in fact.


I'm familiar with flooding since it is one of the therapies used for treating OCD. In horse training I've always associated that with the old school methods of "sacking out" while a horse is tied solid to a post, or what I saw in a Monty Roberts colt starting video where he trapped the horse behind some corral panels and reached in with an artificial hand and kept touching the horse until it until it stopped reacting. More recently the practice of imprint training in foals has been discouraged as flooding. At its worst it results in learned helplessness and depression.

By letting the horse move during the exercise, Clinton is letting the horse decide that the stimulus is not a threat. In my experience, if you're doing approach and retreat with a horse on a lead, if you get too aggressive, you are no longer holding the lead rope. I agree that CA usually seems to be in a hurry. I think that comes from his first three years with McKinlay, whose income depended on turning brumbies into saddle horses as quickly as possible. I guess I don't understand where the line is between approach and retreat and flooding -- if you have a link that shows a proper example of approach and retreat I'd like to see that.



loosie said:


> I also thought it was funny that at somewhere around the 30 minute mark, as I was 'flicking' through one of the umpteen ads he puts in all his 'marketing vids' that there was one for his 'very own design of Aussie Saddle'... that was a Western, NOT an Aussie stock saddle at all.



Except that is has Mickey Mouse ears sticking out the sides of the pommel and angled like the knee pads of an Australian saddle.



loosie said:


> Oh and at the very end, something that was NOT what Parelli preaches(ed)... While Parelli is a great salesman, I've heard him explain that while he finds the specific tools he uses helpful, it is not the tools or lack of, that make for success. But CA says something like 'you _need_ my tools and they will ensure your success'.


He says "Very important to have the right tools to get the job done. Make sure you have your Classic Equine Legacy boots on your horse so that they don't hit their legs and hurt themselves when you're working with them, make sure you've got the halter and lead rope the right length, the right materials, and your stick and string. By having the right tools, it will ensure that you and your horse will make a lot of progress in a very short amount of time."

The Legacy Boots are available from any tack shop or equine catalog. As far as halters, he says in the first episode you can do everything he demonstrates in a web halter, but it will take a lot longer. He has mentioned the advantages of a 14' lead rope several times. He doesn't even say use MY halter, lead, stick, or string. He strongly recommends Pyranha fly spray multiple times and he doesn't even sell it. He is a relentless salesman, but I've never heard him say you can't succeed without using his products.


----------



## kiwigirl

I think a big part of the problem with the CA, Parelli type salesman/horseman is that they want people to feel like they can't take a step without them. I watched the video that Joel posted and what made me sad/mad was the point where he wanted to put the boots on. There was no need to to go through that scare process again at all, no need to introduce them to her by flapping them around stupidly. I bet you anything you like that CA could have quietly held those boots out to that little horse, stroked her gently with them all the way down her legs and had them on her with none of the reactivity that he got by deliberately frightening her with those boots. And that is why people struggle to like him. Because once you understand that he is creating unnecessary fear and stress in the first place, then you are left with no choice but to question his methods and motivation.


----------



## tinyliny

Yes, another example of that. He could have slapped the whip on the ground a few times with the horse loose, in teh round pen, off to one side, and just let the horse observe, and soak and think on this. He could have walked around the arena a bit and allowed the free horse to actually follow him as he whipped the ground rythmically. Horses know when there is intention in a whip, and none, but it helps to first show them this thing with no intention in it all. 



but that takes TIME, and these videos need to show techniques in as little time as possible (gotta save a good amount of it for the self-promoting adverts, too!)


----------



## loosie

Joel Reiter said:


> possible that CA borrowed some language from Parelli (since he buys and studies material from all trainers) he totally credits his method to his mentors, Gordon McKinlay and Ian Francis, and credits Kell B. Jeffery for part of the colt starting methods he used while working with his mentors. All three were Australians. I think if CA really got something from Parelli, it was how to market himself.


Oh right. Yeah, familiar with Frances & Jeffrey. Perhaps it's just that he SOUNDS so Parelli to me & I've crossed wires - praps he thinks to 'talk that talk' is a good marketing tactic - he & Parelli are both obviously doing THAT very well!



> I'm familiar with flooding since it is one of the therapies used for treating OCD. ...At its worst it results in learned helplessness and depression.


Interresting! I didn't know it was used in OCD(presume not Osteochondritis Dessecans).Maybe a bit of a homeopathic principle in that treatment?? I don't know if I'd say 'at it's worst' it can cause those issues, but that's about the best it does. Not that either of those things are good either IMO. It also can cause serious anxiety, OCD's, etc. Soldiers who have been 'shell shocked' is one eg. People who have been tortured or abused beyond their endurance is another.



> By letting the horse move during the exercise, Clinton is letting the horse decide that the stimulus is not a threat.


Nope, no 'deciding' involved. The horse is on a lead, forced to stay, cannot escape. Yes, I agree that letting a horse move around helps 'diffuse' some of their worry, so is helpful IME. It is still flooding though.



> In my experience, if you're doing approach and retreat with a horse on a lead, if you get too aggressive, you are no longer holding the lead rope.


Huh? Don't get what you mean. As for difference between A&R & flooding, perhaps someone else has a good vid eg you might understand. Essentially, 'flooding' is introducing a stimulus & just keeping on doing it, regardless of the horse's response or level of fear, until the horse quits reacting to it - for eg yes, 'sacking out' or CA's eg with that pally. Whereas A&R introduces a stimuli at a level the horse can stand without outright fear & reactivity, and takes it away again. Repeatedly, until the horse is blase about it. 



> whose income depended on turning brumbies into saddle horses as quickly as possible.


Ah. Yeah, there were a LOT of 'speedy' horse 'breakers' out there in the past. Station horses(not feral brums, though there is no effective difference) are usually left to their own devices on 1000's of hectares stations, until they're needed, then they're rounded up & 'broken in' and typically horse breakers are paid per horse & often pittance. Therefore, they only made decent money if they could turn out many, many horses per week. Typically it just meant making sure a horse was 'sacked out' & 'bucked out' and controllable with the bit.



> Except that is has Mickey Mouse ears sticking out the sides of the pommel and angled like the knee pads of an Australian saddle.


Oh, praps I didn't have my glasses on! So it's a 'half breed' or 'cross breed'(half western, half stock) style. Or essentially a Western but with knee rolls instead of 'swells' or whatever they're called on a Western.


----------



## Joel Reiter

loosie said:


> A&R introduces a stimuli at a level the horse can stand without outright fear & reactivity, and takes it away again. Repeatedly, until the horse is blase about it.



So more like what CA was doing with picking up the horse's feet was approach and retreat -- to always retreat before the horse pulls his foot away. I've seen him do that when teaching a horse to accept being clipped.


----------



## kiwigirl

I am no expert horse person but through years of some successes and more failures, some disasters and a couple of out right tragedies I have _*finally*_ learned to recognize what a horse looks like when it has learned to tolerate the things we do to them and a horse that actively seeks to be part of the training process. 



That pretty little mare was learning to tolerate what CA was throwing at her for sure. However I prefer the way _my_ little mare actively seeks to interact with new things that I introduce to her. Every time I walk into her paddock with something new her head goes up, her whole body goes into high alert and then she prances over - exactly the same way a dog acts with their favorite throw toy. Her whole demeanor screams "What new fun is this thing?? This is so exciting!!" 



There can be so much more joy and fun to be had in a relationship with a horse than CA actually shows.


----------



## loosie

Yes Joel, she wasn't reactive about it, and he 'a&r'ed with her feet.

Yes exactly Kiwi. There is no doubt that you can 'desensitise' horses that way, make them _tolerant_, but there is so much more...


----------



## Joel Reiter

Back to the subject of buddy sour -- my own prescription, and part of my upcoming book Chickens on Horses (we should write on what we know, and I have 66 years of being afraid of horses) is to just go lead your horse away from the herd. I go 3-5 miles on my outings. We get to see all the neighborhood horses in their spring hysteria, get up close and personal with rattling trailers and flapping tarps on moving vehicles, and we get a nice long session to refine our leading manners. By the third day the dancing and rearing is all gone, and soon after we can start riding again. Even us chickens.


----------



## egrogan

Joel Reiter said:


> Back to the subject of buddy sour -- my own prescription, and part of my upcoming book Chickens on Horses (we should write on what we know, and I have 66 years of being afraid of horses) is to just go lead your horse away from the herd. I go 3-5 miles on my outings. We get to see all the neighborhood horses in their spring hysteria, get up close and personal with rattling trailers and flapping tarps on moving vehicles, and we get a nice long session to refine our leading manners. By the third day the dancing and rearing is all gone, and soon after we can start riding again. Even us chickens.


I could write a chapter or two in that book :wink: Total agreement with you on all this ^^. Long handwalks have been a great tool in my own training- and by "my own," I mean, literally, me. Realizing that I was the limiting factor in what I wanted to be able to do with my horse was key, and then learning some tools to help my horse understand what good she gets out of spending time with me was the next piece to fall into place. For me, all that "getting big" and "driving away" from the trainertainers was never going to accomplish what I wanted, which was the opposite: drawing her in and getting her interested in a partnership.


----------



## tinyliny

Joel Reiter said:


> Back to the subject of buddy sour -- my own prescription, and part of my upcoming book Chickens on Horses (we should write on what we know, and I have 66 years of being afraid of horses) is to just go lead your horse away from the herd. I go 3-5 miles on my outings. We get to see all the neighborhood horses in their spring hysteria, get up close and personal with rattling trailers and flapping tarps on moving vehicles, and we get a nice long session to refine our leading manners. By the third day the dancing and rearing is all gone, and soon after we can start riding again. Even us chickens.





such good advice! I remember watching a show about how they train the Lippizan horses, and they do a lot of just taking them out for walks. They are gentled in the most natural and non confrontational manner. It's amazing. Those horses also get years to be out in a herd, running free, to grow up, before they are asked to work. They are constantly petted and loved on, handled, taken for walks, etc. and these are STALLIONS.


----------



## Joel Reiter

egrogan said:


> I could write a chapter or two in that book :wink:



Oh, you already have. :loveshower:Everybody here has been a part of it. From the people who write in with their problems to all the wise answers to the lecturing, this forum has been an enormous help to me. I wish I had gotten it written in time to have our dear departed Smiley review it, because she was staunch advocate of solving everything while mounted, and I wanted her to see it through my panic-stricken eyes.


But Egrogan, all ideas are welcome!


----------



## rambo99

There is nothing wrong with getting off a horse when things are going bad. I've lead my horse two miles, down the trail because he was having a melt down.

Nothing I did from on his back was working. It was safer to get off and lead him till he settled down. When I got back on he was fine and rode like he normally does. 

I've ridden with people that had barn sour horses. The one gal when we got to about a mile from home she'd get off and lead her horse. The mare would otherwise try to take off, buck ,rear and just be dangerous. In time she stayed on an I ponyed her home. 

I rode with her for a entire summer every day ,this gal lead her horse out about a mile,then got on. It progresed to me ponying her horse out. 

By late fall horse got to where she could ride out and ride home no issues. 

No working the snot out of mare no harsh bits ,no crops,just plain patients and miles. Owner was not the bravest didn't want to get hurt. No one else would ride with her, because of her mares barn sour ways. 

Better to be a chicken and get off ,then be a hero and get seriously hurt.


----------



## kiwigirl

I too have learned the value of hand walking. I love taking my youngster out for walks, we take our time, she gets to stop and have a look at anything that is of particular interest, once she is done looking she gives me a nudge for a pat and off we go again. This is also on of the reasons I prefer to ride on my own. I can get off at any time and walk or just sit on a bank while the horse has a think about things. One of my favourite things is to sit quietly on or as near too the object that is creating fear until my horse starts thinking again - I always have my 12 foot line with me so I can do this.



I used to be more about doing things from the horses back but I am getting older and less and less bouncy (though ironically I have so much padding lol), my time with horses is now about mutual enjoyment rather than proving to others (and maybe myself) that "I have what it takes and know what I'm doing!"


----------



## Joel Reiter

kiwigirl said:


> This is also on of the reasons I prefer to ride on my own. My time with horses is now about mutual enjoyment rather than proving to others (and maybe myself) that "I have what it takes and know what I'm doing!"



Sadly, one of the main points in my outline is "listening to your friends will get you hurt." I think the worst advice we've all heard from childhood is "if your horse bucks you off, get right back on." Well, if your aren't injured already, that's the best way I can think of to ensure that it happens. There are many reasons a horse might have dumped you, from a simple spook to not feeling like cantering just now. If you don't understand the reason, solve the problem, and improve your seat, chances are excellent you will be right back on the ground. But all your experienced friends will tell you not getting on is spoiling your horse. Ride alone, find like minded companions, or develop thick hide to handle the criticism.


----------



## EmilyJoy

Just had some thoughts on this subject.

One of the best things about Clinton Anderson that I have found is that his method gets people out working with their horses and riding them. How much better to be out doing something with your horse and learning what you like (or don't like) then to spend zero time with your horse because, potentially, your horse frightens you, or is disobedient, or a number of things that is wrong with him/you (hence the reason you would be looking into a training program). Clinton Anderson's program is a straight-forward, step-by-step method that provides a lot of different folks the ability to do something with their horse in an constructive manner. The great part about his method is that you really do not need to put as much pressure on your horse if you feel it is too much. Believe it or not, you are capable of tailoring his training program to suit your horse (meaning alter it, improve it, evolve it over time into what you learn over time). It's not a matter of using his program 100% or not at all, you can use him for a base of sorts and then hive off to greener pastures. If you use his training program as a base, at least you have something to go off of, I haven't found a ton of programs that have enough "raw" material in them that applied to my situation to look into them. Some programs required things I didn't have access to, some trainers were too wishy washy for my taste, some seemed to never get to the point...but I know my personality reflects what I would want to train. Some people are okay with their horse pushing into them because they know that their horse "loves" them.

If you work with your horse, hopefully you are learning, you are learning what works and what doesn't, but guess what? You are learning more than if you were scared of your horse and spent your time inside on the internet looking for online instruction. Clinton Anderson may not be the best, there may be things he doesn't do exactly right, but if you followed his methods correctly (riders generally are at fault, not the horse) you would probably have a decent horse to ride. Your hands, your legs, your timing, your body language reading skills, your training abilities, and your common sense or lack thereof would decide how good of a horse you would end up with and that's with any program. 

I, too, was given a book by Parelli and could not, as a youngster with a green horse, understand what he was getting at. Clinton Anderson, on the other hand, gave enough of a no messing around, step-by-step approach, (safe! I learned to keep my horse from running me over!) that I could use to now have a decently broke horse that nearly everyone I put up on him could ride. Was his method truly magical? No, knowledge is power, and once I had some knowledge that made sense, I went out and started working with my horse and that is where the "magic" started. I did not use all of his exercises, and actually my horse does not know much more than basic cues under saddle, but what I trained was more respect and trust than anything. I definitely did things wrong in the beginning but went back and studied what went wrong and why and then tried again. Guess what? I was out there having (mostly!) fun with my horse. I could direct his feet in many directions; "send" him over things and I now appreciate the ability to send my horse through a gate or that he's responsive enough to do what I ask of him. Dead head? No. Decently obedient? Yes! Can I ride him now without worry? Yes!!!! Just because CA gets aggressive to some of the horses does not mean that you would have to take it that far. My horse responds with just a look or touch, do I beat him? Nope, but he respects me enough to do what I want when I want because of the work I put into him. 

I don't think that anyone who decently trains horses really needs CA. If you have something good going on already, then you already have a base of sorts that works for you, why bother with a guy you don't like? On the other hand, if you were like me, who didn't grow up with horsey parents or knew virtually nothing about horses, then CA probably would be good for you as a start at least. 

For those that say of a truth that his method didn't work on their horse for loading into a trailer, I would have to ask how they were doing it? You have to judge how much pressure to put on and when to back off AND decide how much the horse can take in a day (with his or any program!). Maybe your goal of getting him all the way into the trailer in one session isn't going to happen but you could get him resting beside the opening on the first session. For a horse that had no knowledge of loading, you might want to just work him by the trailer for a time (whether a training session, or a day etc) until he wasn't frightened of the outside. Maybe you would want to put some hay in the trailer and work on loading him at the end of a training session so that there isn't as much "fresh" on him, and once he got in he would not only get a rest, but a little something to munch on. Work on the outside and rest on the inside (or as close to the opening as I could get the horse to be) has worked to load more than one horse for me. Patience here is key and knowing not to overload the horse with too much pressure is vital. Once you can read your horse, there will be more times you get things right than wrong. 

Anyway just thought I'd add my two cents, of little value as they may be. :smile:


----------



## m.of.bmbaf

The Equinest said:


> I'm not really a Clinton fan. I think he has good basics, and a decent understanding of horses compared to a lot of "trainers" who really don't think past the tip of their own nose, but he's too aggressive and "one size fits all" with horses for my taste. I also don't like his tendency to _really_ flex the heck out of his horse's necks. (I can't imagine that's super comfortable - flexing has it's place, but I don't think it should be used that excessively.)
> 
> Yeah. He's not my thing. I'll mix and match some of his methods with other trainer's methods depending on the horse I'm working with, but typically I'm dealing with highly sensitive horses and Clinton's methods just don't seem to mix well with that type of horse. I have used some of his techniques on my very pushy, in-your-face gelding(who is sweet as sugar, but has absolutely _no_ concept of personal space), and they're worked with varying degrees of success.
> 
> Overall, I don't really like many of the "top trainers" such as Clinton, Parelli, Westfall(I don't know if you'd consider her a "top trainer" but she's decently popular). Anyone who thinks a horse is "out to get them" needs a re-think on what horses are and how they think, because I assure you - the horse's only concerns in life are eating, sleeping, making little horses, and staying alive. Anthropomorphism is where a lot of people wrongly assign emotions and motives to animals that simply do not have them, and that's where a lot of training goes wrong. Horses don't plot revenge or purposely forget things, and likelier than not that issue that they have is something _you're_ causing, not something they're just coming up with.
> 
> One thing I can appreciate from Clinton is his bluntness with people. If someone's being stupid, he calls them out. I don't like some of his horse methods, but I think it's high time we stopped tip-toeing around people when they're doing something that can end up with either them or the horse(or both) getting killed. It's not funny or brave, some things are just plain stupid and ignorant.


It is a good idea to mix methods, me and my sister did that, too, with our mare  I like Clinton Anderson, he works well with horses and his method really improved our mare


----------



## loosie

Hi & welcome Gordon,

If you've read the whole thread, you will see that what CA teaches(horses & people) is not, on the face of it, really much different to what everyone else(as in, conventional 'natural' horsemanship trainers) does. So if you agree with those _principles_, then you agree(mostly) to CA's principles. His(their) methods ARE effective in most cases, there's no doubt about that. But it is the *principle* of making a horse work hard(or whatever other punishment) whenever they're not doing as you tell them, that tends to lead to 'slaves', not that just some horses are turned into slaves by CA.

Not that, IME CA always follows those principles, and he does, IME take things to extreme compared to many trainers. But it is the principles that lead to the practices/methods. So... couldn't really tell you what 'methods' he does that could not lead to 'learned helplessness'.


----------



## lhpyeqjmkxqhbczmif

jumping in late here. i like CA's Ground work as it is decent. still can be very aggressive but if done by someone who understand how to not go straight to violence it can work well. my arab loves it as its clear for her. my paint is a different story. you want them to trust YOU. they want their buddy because they are pray animals and single animals are food. their entire genetic makeup is saying "you will die if you are on your own!" if you teach them they YOU are their other, that because you are there they are NOT alone, then they calm down. they get emotional and stop thinking. you need them to calm down and realize they are NOT going to die and that they are not alone. making then lope the smallest circle untill they hate their buddy and think being eaten may not be so bad.

so like i said hes ground work and basics are like "horse training for dummies". works for most. easy to fallow, enfranchises human safety. dose not make him perfect and dose not make it the best way.


----------



## jgnmoose

The principal of what he is showing is valid, if not very common in horse training. The horse wants to go back to the barn, pasture, or stand with their buddy because that is where they get to chill and hang out. So you change that way of thinking by making it more work to be near the buddy, or when you are headed in the direction of the barn and before long they don't think of it as the resting spot while you are riding. In principal it is the same reason you don't get off at the gate every time.

I think you have to put most of what he says in context. His average customer is a middle aged inexperienced horseman that isn't a very good rider that either created a spoiled brat horse or bought one. He talks to people at a 10 knowing they will do what he tells them at a 3 or maybe a 4. If you see the people who show up at clinics some of them literally are not even in control of the horse, it is doing whatever it wants to and the owner has no idea what to do and is just along for the ride.


----------



## jgnmoose

GordonnotRamsay said:


> I saw his posts and I agree that it turns some horses into slaves, but some of his methods seem reasonable enough. Can anyone suggest what methods he did turned out to be effective? Thank you! :smile:


Generally they all do, and I'd say he doesn't do anything that isn't pretty standard stuff. Keep in mind he apprenticed with the best colt starting guy in Australia for 2 years starting hundreds of colts, then apprenticed with the best Performance Horse trainer in Australia for another 3 years, competed at the top level of the Australian Reining Horse world before coming to the states and working for some top Reiners all before starting Down Under Horsemanship. 

So what he is showing you is not something he made up but what he learned from the best people in horse training at the time he learned it. "The Method" really is just all that stuff organized into progressive steps with clear uncomplicated instructions, repetition and teaching the pressure and release and timing aspect of horse training. He is quick to credit everything to those people and say that he just arranged it in a way that is easy to teach. 

If you see some of his female clinicians doing the same thing with a reasonable minded horse it flows easily from one thing to another and the horse seems to be learning quickly. Clinton Anderson himself is the same way with a horse that isn't a butthead that I have seen, but a lot of the time you are seeing someone's pet monster that they brought him to fix instead. A lot of the clients he is helping are at a 1, so he talks to them at a 10 to try to get the point across and they need that in my opinion. 

As for Clinton himself I think he burned out on teaching a long time ago and it is good he retired. If you see anything of his from 20 years ago his whole demeanor is different at least on camera.


----------



## COWCHICK77

> As for Clinton himself I think he burned out on teaching a long time ago and it is good he retired. If you see anything of his from 20 years ago his whole demeanor is different at least on camera.


I listened to an episode of "Along for the Ride", Andrea Fappani's podcast about a year ago where he interviewed Clinton. 
Clinton admits this wasn't his dream and at one point he was bankrupt due to people mismanaging his money and had to continue in order to get himself out the hole. 
He was already burnt out and like you said you can see it in his demeanor. 
I haven't been a fan of Clinton but I really enjoyed the interview. If you ever get bored it is worth a listen.


----------



## tinyliny

I think that when I saw Buck Branaman at a clinic about 3 years ago, he, too , was burned out. He was only making an appearance, but wasn't mentally really there. It was kind of sad, not the least of why because he lack of presence went unnoticed by so many of the participant/sycophants.


teaching is hard. The biggest challenge, I think, is keeping you ego from taking over.


----------



## AragoASB

Back to the subject of barn soured horses, what about this old timey technique? Horses like to go back to the barn because that is where they get unsaddled, rested and fed. So when you go back to the barn do not immediatly unsaddle them but let them stand tied. You never feed them at the barn. Instead you put their feed out in various places along the trails, all away from the barn. Flakes of tasty hay are 'found' by the ridden horse, all away from the barn. This takes time but it is not negative and it works.


----------



## loosie

^Arago yes, whether it's feed, meeting mates, get off & give an itchy horse a good scratch or roll, whatever Good Stuff you can do when out is also helpful. Just won't work if the reason the horse is 'barn sour' is due to fear of going out - that trumps Good Stuff.

Not tying them up at home, not unsaddling them, etc is also far less of a reward than BEING home in the first place tho. And as we know horses can't associate cause & effect unless it's instant, there's no point in any punishment or reward if it's abstracted from the behaviour we want to effect by more than a second or 2.


----------

