# Where to put my heels? (Western)



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Heels down is your choice. I prefer heels down. My daughter doesn't. As long as you use a boot with a good heel, it isn't a big deal.








​ 
A good book on western riding is JP Forget's "The Complete Guide To Western Horsemanship" - under $5 with shipping from Amazon.


----------



## Corporal (Jul 29, 2010)

I like your seats. I can't tell exactly where your feet are, because of the camera angle. Here is the test: Drop your stirrups and let your legs hang down. Pull your toes up. What you see should be just the tips of the toes of your boot. To be Balanced, you need to have a weighted seat, a long leg and the shoulder, hip and heel lined up, perpendicular to the ground. Many Western saddles force riders to ride with a "Chair Seat", where your feet are too far forward. It inhibits good balance.
Keep the ball of the foot centered on the stirrup, and this is ANY stirrup of ANY saddle. This allows flexibility of the ankles, which absorb shock of the rest of your body while riding.
I hope this helps. =D


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"_To be Balanced, you need to have a weighted seat, a long leg and the shoulder, hip and heel lined up, perpendicular to the ground._"

Disagree. It all depends on balanced for what. This is NOT unbalanced for what he is doing:










I would argue that I'm not unbalanced in the photo in post #2, either. The English saddle is designed differently than a western saddle, and much of English riding has a different goal than western riding.

"_Keep the ball of the foot centered on the stirrup, and this is ANY stirrup of ANY saddle._"

Disagree again. Even in English riding, putting it on the ball of the foot is a modern convention. Putting it all the way in the stirrup was strongly preferred by Gen Harry Chamberlin, who largely wrote the final US Cavalry manual. It is also very common in western riding, where the rider is not jumping fences and doesn't need to use his ankle for a shock absorber.

The "home" position is very common in cutting, reining and yes, trail riding. It is also common in polo and steeplechasing and campdrafting.

Many of the English "rules" don't apply to western riding. Different gear, different goals, different philosophy.


----------



## Corporal (Jul 29, 2010)

Gotta politely disagree. When you sit with your weight leaning forwards you are applying the weight cue to move out. Then you settle back deep in the saddle. 
The stirrup originated sometime in China. The Mongols introduced it to Europe ~400 AD, and it's only a convenience that we enjoy to reduce fatigue. "Riding Home", which is term for shoving your entire foot to the heel into the stirrup can be very dangerous. If you do not a muscled up physique and won't ever lose your seat and fall off when a horse acts up, the "riding home" will KEEP your foot in the stirrup and you can be dragged. The Western covered stirrup was designed to preVENT people from "riding home". It doesn't _allow you_ to put your foot further forward than the ball of your foot. English saddles do not HAVE covered stirrups. (Don't confuse an English saddle with the modern day "Aussie Saddle", as sold in catalogs sometimes with a covered stirrup.) 
In my study and in my 26 years of Civil War Reenacting I discovered that it was best to do what the majority of our ancestors did, vis a vis uniforms and riding equipment, and the average quartermaster did NOT equip the average Cavalryman with anything but a McClellan WITH covered stirrups. Every officer could do as he wished. Custer paid for his Uniform, made (I think) in Philadelphia, and he rode into his first battle in it. 99% of the other officers wore the Union Officer's uniform.
The best thing that you can do for your seat is to ride withOUT your stirrups. If your horse is a little hot when you start, drop them when you cool down. You cannot read about a deep seat. You must experience it. Stirrupless teaches your body to loosen up and follow the horse and move in sympathy. It adds the dimension of learning to cue with your weight, in concert with your legs and rein aids.


----------



## beau159 (Oct 4, 2010)

KateM said:


> Hi there! I've been riding horses regularly for around 6 years, and have never gotten formal riding lessons. But my sister and I have always tried to improve our riding in any way we can learn how.
> We've heard all about "keeping your heels down", so that's what we've practiced.
> But now, I'm not sure about it. We would LOVE formal lessons, but don't have the time and funds for it.
> So what would be the safest and best way for a Western rider to keep


In your newer picture, I would say you are over-doing it. :wink: Yes, you want the "heels down" but they don't have to be excessively down. 

If you want to "check" if you are riding with balance, as you are riding along, suddenly remove you feet from the stirrups. Can you still continue riding as you were? If you were "bracing" your feet into the stirrups (aka "forcing" the heels down), you'll lose the support you were bracing against and you'll have to readjust. But if you can seamlessly drops your stirrups and pick them back up with no change in your body position, then you know your feet are in a good place. 

Don't expect your body position to be perfect 100% of the time. But strive to keep your legs under you (not out in front of you in a chair seat), keep your weight "light" on the ball of your foot. And yes, your saddle design will influence your body position.

On a side note, bareback riding is a GREAT way to develop a good seat and balance!




bsms said:


> Disagree. It all depends on balanced for what. This is NOT unbalanced for what he is doing:


With your weight shoved into the stirrups like that, way in front of you? I don't even see how he can cue his horse correctly in a position like that. 

Not balanced in the slightest. He's using the stirrups as a crutch and bracing on them.


----------



## poundinghooves (Aug 5, 2010)

I was always taught to have the ball of your foot on the stirrup. If you shove it all the way in, your foot can be caught if you fall and then you would be drug. I was always, always told to put my heels down, as well.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

1 - There is no such thing as a weight cue to move out other than what a horse is taught. Leaning forward is NOT a cue to move out. When I lean forward, it is more likely to scratch my horse's neck than to ask him to move out.

2 - Riding "home" is not extremely dangerous. This is an old thread:

http://www.horseforum.com/horse-riding/question-stirrup-position-ball-foot-mid-74556/

Chamberlin - Olympic gold medalist, equestrian team captain, graduate of both the French and Italian Cavalry schools and an instructor at Ft Riley, wrote:"...the foot is placed well home, so that the tread rests under the instep, and not against the ball of the foot. The almost universal habit of putting the ball of the foot on the tread is very faulty...for cross country work, polo, jumping and other real riding, the foot belongs well home in the stirrup where it will not jar out at the least mishap, and endanger or momentarily incapacitate the rider."​Of course, many modern instructors disagree. It is OK to disagree. But the fact is that many highly qualified riders have preferred it, and it is most commonly found in sports involving lots of action. It is very common with western riders.

Neither is "wrong". My youngest rides fine with the stirrup on the ball of her foot, and riding with my foot deep has never caused me a problem. If it was dangerous, there would not be so many good riders who do it, particularly in rough riding.

3 - The Western covered stirrup was NOT designed to prevent people from "riding home". It was invented to keep the stirrup from getting caught on brush. I've never met a western rider who used covered stirrups, although I know they exist.

"In my study and in my 26 years of Civil War Reenacting I discovered that it was best to do what the majority of our ancestors did..."

In western riding, that would mean riding like this:










You would be hard pressed to find a picture of a western rider prior to 1960 riding with the stirrup on the ball of his foot. But it isn't "wrong". Part of the fun of western riding is that each person decides what they are comfortable doing, and rides that way.

"_Not balanced in the slightest. He's using the stirrups as a crutch and bracing on them._"

Since he was probably in the saddle 12 hours a day, I doubt he was bracing. If he had, it would have killed his knees. And with that long of a leg, it is darn near impossible to brace.

However, it does help if your horse makes a sudden, unannounced stop. But he is balanced in the seat, given that A) moving his leg forward pulls some of his weight forward, and B) a western saddle tree extends well behind the cantle - unlike an English saddle tree.

It was the universal way of riding a western horse thru the 1930s or so. About then, riders started bending the leg more, but the stirrups stay somewhat forward for many western riders - and it doesn't hurt the rider or the horse. There is no requirement in western riding to put the heel under the hip - except for western pleasure, which looks neither western nor pleasurable to me. ​


----------



## Corporal (Jul 29, 2010)

Horseback Riding Basics: Using Your Aids, Part 1 – America’s Horse Daily
_"The knowledge of seat, legs, hands and voice as the four basic aids goes back thousands of years and is the basis of classical horsemanship. I like to build on that a little bit by pointing out that there are actually three additional aids: your eyes, breathing and brain."_
Just because we can find _pictures_ of 19th century cowboys doesn't mean they are sitting with balance. This is why I am not a fan of most Western saddles. They make it too easy to brace your legs and give you a false sense of security about your seat.
Look at:
http://www.horseforum.com/new-horses/arabian-horse-please-share-your-personal-625106/page3/
post#21, 2nd picture, where phantomhorse13 rode across the finish line in an endurance race withOUT her girth. If she was bracing her weight against the stirrups she would have slipped off. THAT is the example you should emulate when you ride any saddle. The saddle itself is just another convenience to help us stay on the horse, but it can be compromised and then you fall off. We are not trained like the 19th century Hungarian Cavalry to ride saddles sans girths!
bsms, I really wish that I can stop by with my gaited mare and give you a riding lesson. **hugs** I know that your horse Mia wasn't a good fit, and I think that she spooked you a little. Your seat in the pictures on this thread looks defensive to me. My mare, "Warren's Cindy", 17yo KMHSA is safe and reliable and I could easily control her by my voice to go slowly. I used her to teach a beginner HS rider a few years ago. This girl was exhausted by an hour of riding without stirrups, but she had fixed her seat. The girl had spent much time spent in 2 point and out of the saddle, and she was sucking in her back going concave, so she wasn't reining correctly either.
You have to push your legs away from your body. WhenEVER you pull your legs up to your chin, you are reacting as we humans do, to curl up into a fetal position. It isn't the same as the showjumper who is really crouching while in the saddle and reaching forward to give the horse freedom of rein/control. (Many showjumpers are VERY forward and can run away with the riders.) 
http://keyassets.timeincuk.net/inspirewp/live/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2014/05/Animo-01.jpg
http://www.horseclub.co.uk/news/robert_whitaker_wall08.jpg
When you race in a Western saddle, you should also reach forward with your reins to give your horse freedom.
Here, no heels down, but the balance is correct:
http://img03.deviantart.net/db1d/i/2012/081/4/c/going_for_a_gallop_by_mustang_93-d4tkebx.jpg
Here, properly weighted seat:
4bd4a33f.jpg Photo by riosbravo | Photobucket
The heels are only an INDICATION of a good, deep seat. Here is a great seat, and the rider has complete confidence in the horse:http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R1iLdzZUf...1600/293661_10150792488790024_541306798_n.jpg
This is a chair seat, and the rider has pushed herself up and out of the deepest part of her saddle and is partially resting on the cantle:
https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/h...e15/11264601_478939925613905_1461726140_n.jpg
I'd like to see this young rider's foot just a little bit further back, but the seat is solid:
http://nebula.wsimg.com/a47d4f2730d...4B813B9C16DD342D6&disposition=0&alloworigin=1
Correct at the gallop:
http://pd.blue1023.server-cp.com/pd...ario , Canada'&website='Photographers Direct'
Nice, deep seat:
http://usercontent2.hubimg.com/4780235_f520.jpg


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"Just because we can find _pictures_ of 19th century cowboys doesn't mean they are sitting with balance."

You mean, like this:










At times I wonder what constitutes evidence. I can cite my experience, and be told I don't know enough. I can cite an Olympic champion and chief instructor at Ft Riley, and be told that is just a book. I can show pictures or videos, and those are just pictures.

" If she was bracing her weight against the stirrups she would have slipped off."

Ummm...since I can mount my horse without a cinch, with all my weight initially on one side, does that mean my saddle fits well or does it mean I am balanced before I even get in the saddle?

I use a lot of weight in my stirrups. That is how I was taught - by Littauer, after he died. Happily, he wrote well and often! And the only time I'm come off my horse was during a dismount. Bandit isn't as spooky as Mia, and he gives more warning, but he's hardly a phlegmatic mount. Sometimes I have weight in the stirrups with him, and sometimes not. Weight in your stirrups does NOT make you unbalanced.

"Your seat in the pictures on this thread looks defensive to me."

Hmmmm....whatever...









"You have to push your legs away from your body. WhenEVER you pull your legs up to your chin, you are reacting as we humans do, to curl up into a fetal position."

I have no clue what you are talking about. This is NOT curled up with legs to my chin, nor have I ever ridden that way:










"When you race in a Western saddle, you should also reach forward with your reins to give your horse freedom."

Umm...whatever my faults are, failing to give my horse freedom with the reins when appropriate is not one of them. There are also times to be very directive of a horse, and then you do not use slack reins.

The fact remains that it is OK to have your feet forward from your hips in western riding. MOST western riders do. It is not a fault or a badly designed saddle. It is also OK to have your feet deep in the stirrups. It is OK English, and OK western.

Take a look at Craig Cameron riding:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg3nlPLe95Q&feature=related

Watch Larry Trocha sometimes.










At some point, folks need to figure out that the dressage masters of the 1600s were riding a different horse with different tack and different goals than most western riders. The "rules" developed for dressage may or may not have any application for western riding. But speaking of dressage - it teaches a level foot, not heels down.

So for the OP: you can go with heel down (or "toes up"). Or not. Your choice. Your foot can be well into the stirrup, or not. Your heel can be under your hip, or not. Experiment and do what works best for the riding you do. The book I recommended is cheap and has good advice. I don't follow all of his advice, but none of his advice is "bad".


----------



## Corporal (Jul 29, 2010)

I urge you to start watching Dennis Reis (RFD.tv series on horsemanship and horse training.)
http://www.reisranch.com/Galleries/nodusttour/2006/huntsville/ks4k7680_std.jpg
I agree that your photo of the cowboy chasing a cow is a deep, balanced seat. Take away the horse and he could be standing on the ground in ballet second position. He is shifting his weight to stay upright.
bsms, I want to pull your shoulders back about 6 inches and your DD's shoulders back about 4 inches. You are very kind to your horse's mouth, but too many people think that the saddle horn is there to grab in case you feel like falling off. It isn't.
Notice in this video, how the riders are all sitting very deep in their western saddles while the horse is at the halt. You DO encourage your horse to move out and to speed up when you do NOT sit deep. I don't lecture this, I practice it, and I taught it.
I do not have Julie Goodnight's expertise, or Dennis Reis' expertise, so I'd like you watch THEM.
Every good trainer has taken a lot of falls and like, me, do not wish to lose their balance. NOTHING on the saddle should be keeping you on the horse. YOU keep you on the horse. Your saddle should never be a crutch.
When I took Huntseat/Jumping lessons, we posted the trot 3x on each rein (3x around the arena in each direction) without stirrups, as part of our regular warmup to teach us to NOT depend upon the saddle to keep us there.
I do not have prejudice against western saddles, except nobody seems to produce western saddles without the horn, and most western riders don't chase cattle and have no need for it.
I don't ride as often now as I wish--worked this year to buy a new roof for my barn--and I prefer my McClellan saddle when I trail ride. It has lots of rings to hang stuff on and it's depth helps you on when your horse does something unexpected. Otherwise, at home, I do prefer my English saddle, and I do like to warm up on my gaited mare without stirrups.
It isn't a show thing, either.
Something else that really helps are very long trail rides, like 4hours+. You just don't have the energy to fight pushing yourself out of the saddle after riding that long, and you teach your body to sit deeply.
Here is an excellent video where Julie is working with a horse who likes to speed up, and she demonstrates a deep seat and using your weight:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXZKDMkIyRo
Watch this without any sound and you will see the horse react to her weight, even she is retraining him to listen better. =D


----------



## enh817 (Jun 1, 2012)

I try to keep just enough weight in my stirrups that I could hold a silver dollar under my foot, but not more than that. I also try to think of it as lifting my toes up, rather than pushing my heels down. Pushing too much weight in your stirrups will cause your feet to swing forward and your but to push back against the cantle. Which might feel secure, but is setting a person up to be left behind. When I look down at my feet, while riding I only want to be able to see the tip of the toe of my boot. If I can see more than that (which I often can... I have a bad habit) my feet are too far forward. I've been working on improving my equitation under the guidance of my boss, who is a very experienced and accomplished cowhorse trainer. If anyone understands how to sit balanced in a western saddle, it's the cowhorse guys that are running and turning and moving with a cow at very high speeds. 
Generally everyone who rides with the BossMan the first time is told to shorten their stirrups. Everyone wants to go long stirrups on a western saddle. While I understand it is more comfortable when riding long periods of time on a trail or whatever, but if you're reaching for your stirrups, you aren't able to be as balanced in the saddle for the quick maneuvers that occur when working cows at high speed. When working a cow at high speeds, there is going to be stops occurring at high speeds, shoulders had better be behind the hips, unless you want to take a nose dive over your horse's ears. Shoulders back will give you more of a 'chair seat' look. But if the feet are shoved too far forward, with too much weight in the stirrup, there is a lot of tension through the legs. No matter what the feet/legs are doing, I think it's most important that they are relaxed and loose, not bracing in any way, because the tighter you are the more you'll get popped out of the saddle. 
If you look at pictures of guys making big fence turns, you'll often see that the feet have swung back behind the hips. You never see pictures of guys with their feet shoved out in front of them though. If you're bracing in your stirrups with your feet out in front of you, when the horse goes to make that big fence turn, you will either be hung out to try off the side of him, or get left behind when he takes off down the fence after the cow and get ejected out the back.


----------



## Saddlebag (Jan 17, 2011)

Two thoughts - heels down or toes up. If your focus is on keeping your heels down, tension is created in the ankle, knee and hip and may cause your leg to move forward. If your focus is toes up, the leg remains relaxed and in position. Just a mind game but it's effective.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"_Bsms, I want to pull your shoulders back about 6 inches and your DD's shoulders back about 4 inches_."

No. I like a forward seat. In a forward seat, you do NOT ride around with your shoulders over your hip. It is called "forward" because you shift your center of gravity forward to match your horse instead of asking your horse to shift his balance back to put it under you.

"_Every good trainer has taken a lot of falls and like, me, do not wish to lose their balance_."

I've never understood boasting about falling. Staying ON the horse is, by definition, the most essential part of riding. And since I've ridden out uncounted hundreds of spooks and quite a few bolts without falling off, it follows that I cannot be too "unbalanced" on my horse. If I were, I'd have fallen a lot too.

Since 90% of my riding is either on pavement or in the desert, falling is simply unacceptable. Any fall could kill me.

"_I do not have prejudice against western saddles, except nobody seems to produce western saddles without the horn, and most western riders don't chase cattle and have no need for it._"

If you don't ride western, then why are you critiquing it? If you use an English saddle, you are using a different saddle tree which distributes weight differently than a western saddle does. The McClellan saddle also has a very different saddle tree. 








​ 







​ 
"_too many people think that the saddle horn is there to grab in case you feel like falling off_"

Nor do western riders ride around holding on to the horn to stay in the saddle. It can help when things get really rough. But oddly enough, when things get rough, I don't have TIME to grab the saddle horn. If my horse is spinning around or thinking of bolting, I have both hands on the reins. I need them there to direct my horse.

"_You just don't have the energy to fight pushing yourself out of the saddle after riding that long, and you teach your body to sit deeply._"

Who in the heck is pushing themselves out of the saddle? In two point, I have about an inch of clearance between my crotch and the saddle. This picture was taken with me standing in the stirrups to encourage Bandit to use his back - see how high I am above the saddle? Me neither:








​ 
And no, I do not ride trails in two point very often.

"_Pushing too much weight in your stirrups will cause your feet to swing forward and your but to push back against the cantle._"

If your stirrups are under your center of gravity, then you can stand in the stirrups and not have your legs go forward or your butt back.

"_If anyone understands how to sit balanced in a western saddle, it's the cowhorse guys that are running and turning and moving with a cow at very high speeds_."

Larry Trocha teaches and trains reiners and cutters. He says the stirrups should be hung as far forward as possible, and he likes a shorter stirrup length than most - shorter than I use. I don't want to reach for my stirrups, but neither do I want to be able to push myself very far out of the saddle, either. His point is that if you can barely touch your stirrups, you are too likely to lose them when things get exciting. He's right, but none of my horses are as "exciting" as a top cutter or reiner.

I think the position of your lower leg depends on what you are trying to do. It should be *ACTIVE*. When my horse is getting nervous about something ahead, sliding my feet forward some helps steady him. If I anticipate a sudden stop, then feet a little forward helps. If I anticipate sudden acceleration, then I want my heels under me. For general riding, I want them in between - the back of my heel in line with my belt buckle. That way I can quickly adjust instead of being caught at an extreme. That is also where my legs are most relaxed.

"_No matter what the feet/legs are doing, I think it's most important that they are relaxed and loose, not bracing in any way, because the tighter you are the more you'll get popped out of the saddle._" 

I mostly agree. If I want to be in two point, that is different. But bracing is static and rigid, and static and rigid is almost always harmful. Weight in the stirrups does not imply rigid or braced:"_11) For better gripping and in order to bring the upper calf in contact with the saddle:- a) keep your toes open about 30 degrees...The three hinges ...are completely free in their motions, just as free as the ball bearings in some highly sensitive and well greased machine...If anything were to happen, the rider in a split second would have a very strong position by stiffening from the waist down-thighs, knees, calves will then grip strongly- but while just walking quietly the rider relies mostly on his balance. To see whether he is really in balance with the horse, the rider should try the following experiment; without increase in inclination in his torso and without any lurching up or forward he rises slightly in his stirrups and stays up while the horse walks, without toppling forward or collapsing backwards. The rider's weight is then supported by the stirrups, and this attitude is given stability by the tension in the three springs...This incidentally, is also the rider's position during the upward beat of the posting trot and at the gallop..._" - VS Littauer, Common Sense Horsemanship​However, Littauer was mostly focused on horses that go forward. In most cases, a spinning horse or extreme turn were not anything he wanted to plan for - nor do I, normally.

------------------------------------------------------

For the OP: You can see there are different opinions. I actually asked the question about weight in the stirrups a couple of years ago. I think the best response was this one:

"_This may not be correct but what I figured out. If you are losing your stirrups often, either they are too long or you aren't putting enough weight into them. If you are bouncing out of the saddle, the stirrups are too short or you're putting too much weight into them_." - usandpets, post #6

http://www.horseforum.com/western-riding/weight-stirrups-western-riding-yes-no-333226/ 

For heels down...same thing. If you get heels down with a relaxed leg, it is fine. If you find yourself shoving your heels down, you are probably doing more harm than good. I like the way low heels feel, so I've worked to get there. My youngest daughter does not, so she rides with a level foot, if she even has it in the stirrup at all. Both of us seem to stay on the horse fine, and both of us seem to have happy horses.


----------



## beau159 (Oct 4, 2010)

bsms said:


> However, it does help if your horse makes a sudden, unannounced stop.
> 
> ​


And you'll go flying out the "back door" when your horse makes a sudden burst forward. 

Again, not balanced.



Corporal said:


> Take away the horse


This is a great way to envision if a rider is balanced or not. 

If you remove the horse, could the rider still stand on their own two feet?

In the picture I reposted above, the guy would fall on his **** if we removed the horse from the equation.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

I've tried riding like that - for several months. It puts much of your weight into your thighs, somewhat less on your butt. If the rider anticipates sudden acceleration, he simply leans forward a little and he'll be fine. When on a cattle drive, the horses were not supposed to launch themselves forward without being asked.

The assumption that is unbalanced - in spite of millions of riders doing it successfully - is based on stick figure engineering, where someone draws some lines and assumes that is relevant. It isn't.

It also is not how I choose to ride. But it distributes weight well, and worked in a day where any fall could kill the rider. Probably not good for barrel racing or jumping. This is a description of how it was ridden, from a long ago thread:



xxBarry Godden said:


> Years ago I was taught to ride 'Western' by an old, bent bow legged Canadian cowboy who had been involved with horses since he was a kid. In the 1930s he had been a winning rodeo rider. By the time I met him he had formed a Western riding club in Surrey, where anyone who rode horses used the English hunting seat. Kennie's first job with new members was to teach them how to ride Western on his Western schooled horses.
> 
> The first lesson was to adjust the stirrups so that the leg was carried almost straight. Enough bend was left in the knee to just lift the butt off the seat of the saddle even at the trot.
> The second lesson was to learn to ride with signficant weight carried on the stirrups at all times.
> ...


There is more than one way to ride a horse safely and effectively.


----------



## greentree (Feb 27, 2013)

One of the BEST things learned while riding 100's of miles in endurance rides: as long as the HORSE is happy....it Does NOT matter HOW you ride....where your hands/heels/rear ends are.


----------



## AnrewPL (Jun 3, 2012)

Just how to position your heels, as you can guess from the debates happening here, can be a matter of the type of riding you do. Recently I have had the benefit of being a riding instructor in “English” riding, though my background is in “western” and, though I disregard it as complete rubbish “Australian” as well, so I can compare them a little. 
In each way of doing it the feet, heels and legs are a bit different. As I learned the “Australian” way of riding the feet are shoved out in front of the horse’s shoulders (almost to the extent of looking like you are marking out for a saddle bronc ride) you have your thighs wedged under the kneepads of the saddle and your backside pressed up against the cantle and you slouch like you are in a recliner lounge chair. And in this way of doing it people tend to have the ball of their foot on the stirrup. Overall it’s a terrible way of riding. 
When I learned “western” I was taught to keep the shoulder, hip heel line however the stirrups are fairly long, you sit straight but relaxed through the shoulders and though your legs shouldn’t be sticking out to the sides, they aren’t necessarily engaged on the horse’s sides with your lower legs constantly either, and I was taught to ride with my feet ‘home” doing that. At times when I ride like this, my preferred way, my feet may creep a little forward of that line, but not much. 
When I learned “English” funnily enough along the lines of the German Equestrian Federation, so very “English” I learned the shoulder, hips heel line, the stirrups are much shorter than “western” and the lower leg is always engaged, even to a slight degree, on the horse’s sides and most definitely only the balls of the foot (and I have heard people teach only the toes too) should be on the stirrups. 

I think that the major differences in the purpose and methods of riding tell in how they are done differently. The Australian way of riding is, according to the guy who taught me “western” is a result of a bunch of peasants and convicts coming from the UK, coming to a country half the size of Europe and horses being fairly available, not knowing one end of a horse from another, and muddling their way through figuring out how to ride without getting killed; and that’s why the invented the Australian saddle. It’s not a saddle that’s well designed for stock work, if it were it would look more like a western saddle, (after all, Australians also roped cattle in the old days, they just tied the rope onto the saddle rigging) it was just an English saddle with little adaptations to help keep you from falling off. And the Australian way of riding is appropriately a terrible way of riding. 
The “western” way I was taught comes from the Vaquero tradition and finds its origins with the conquistadores and was adapted by people working cattle and spending LONG hours in the saddle working with a rope. The ques and methods and the equipment reflect this, and it’s a much more refined and balanced way of riding than the Australian style.
The “English’ way I learned (well actually German) is all about dressage and to be honest I would hate to try to spend upwards of 10 hours in the saddle (as I have in the past) riding like that, it would be exhausting. The leg to hand ques are kind of the opposite of the “western” ones I learned, the horse moves kinda differently, and the posture kinda fits with the differences strangely enough. 
And after all that the equipment is different, for me for example, if I ride in an Australian saddle with four bar steel stirrups, I hate riding with my foot home, riding in an English saddle, with the little steel stirrups, same, hate having my foot home, just feels wrong. When I ride in my Wade saddle with roper stirrups, or my charro saddle with the ox bows, it feels wrong not to have my foot home.
BUT, in all of it, heels should have a downward intention (or toes an upwards intention) if not actual position


----------



## Saddlebag (Jan 17, 2011)

Because of a minor car accident as a teen, I have to ride with a long stirrup, English or western. The bottom of my stirrup has to hit just below the ankle bone or I can't keep my feet in more than 15 min. I have no trouble riding shoulder-hip-heel in my roping saddle.


----------



## TXhorseman (May 29, 2014)

KateM said:


> Hi there! I've been riding horses regularly for around 6 years, and have never gotten formal riding lessons. But my sister and I have always tried to improve our riding in any way we can learn how.
> We've heard all about "keeping your heels down", so that's what we've practiced.
> But now, I'm not sure about it. We would LOVE formal lessons, but don't have the time and funds for it.
> So what would be the safest and best way for a Western rider to keep their heels?
> ...


I find that, when a rider releases any unnecessary tension in his muscles, his horse tends to release unnecessary tension in its muscles. Then, both rider and horse can respond more quickly and smoothly when necessary. Cues and responses become more subtle. Such tension free riding allows the rider a lower center of gravity and greater stability.

Any use of force in positioning the heels would increase rather than decrease muscle tension.

If a rider releases unnecessary tension in his muscles and lets gravity do its job, the stirrup would stop the downward motion of the ball of the rider's foot. The unsupported heel, however, would naturally be pulled lower by gravity. The length of the muscles and tendons in the rider's legs would determine how far the heels would descend. This, of course, assumes proper length adjustment of the stirrup straps. 

When riding without stirrups, there is nothing to stop the pull of gravity on the rider's foot. Therefore, the rider's heel which is closer to the leg would end up being higher than the rider's toes.


----------



## waresbear (Jun 18, 2011)

You want to improve your riding, not just OP, but everyone? Think toes up, not heels down, it will make a big difference.


----------



## updownrider (Mar 31, 2009)

Corporal said:


> I urge you to start watching Dennis Reis (RFD.tv series on horsemanship and horse training.)
> http://www.reisranch.com/Galleries/nodusttour/2006/huntsville/ks4k7680_std.jpg
> I agree that your photo of the cowboy chasing a cow is a deep, balanced seat. Take away the horse and he could be standing on the ground in ballet second position. He is shifting his weight to stay upright.
> bsms, I want to pull your shoulders back about 6 inches and your DD's shoulders back about 4 inches. You are very kind to your horse's mouth, but too many people think that the saddle horn is there to grab in case you feel like falling off. It isn't.
> ...


corporal - I must have missed where bsms asked you for a critique of his riding.


----------



## enh817 (Jun 1, 2012)

TXhorseman said:


> I find that, when a rider releases any unnecessary tension in his muscles, his horse tends to release unnecessary tension in its muscles. Then, both rider and horse can respond more quickly and smoothly when necessary. Cues and responses become more subtle. Such tension free riding allows the rider a lower center of gravity and greater stability.
> 
> Any use of force in positioning the heels would increase rather than decrease muscle tension.
> 
> ...




THIS! 

I catch a lot of flack from people who see me when I ride bareback, because I always let me toes hang down. I just find it so much easier to stay centered on the horse, when I ride like that, rather than when I try to ride bareback with heels down. 


I catch myself all the time, riding with tight muscles, especially through my butt. I'm sure it's the reason I have a 'hot seat', I always seem to spark horses up just by sitting on them. I constantly have to make myself relax my muscles.


----------



## TXhorseman (May 29, 2014)

enh817 said:


> I catch a lot of flack from people who see me when I ride bareback, because I always let me toes hang down. I just find it so much easier to stay centered on the horse, when I ride like that, rather than when I try to ride bareback with heels down.
> 
> 
> I catch myself all the time, riding with tight muscles, especially through my butt. I'm sure it's the reason I have a 'hot seat', I always seem to spark horses up just by sitting on them. I constantly have to make myself relax my muscles.


If someone gives you flack about having your toes down when riding bareback, asked them to explain the purpose of riding with the heels down when riding without stirrups. My guess is that their only answer will be something like: “Everyone knows you should always ride with your heels down.”

Admonishments to ride with heels down when using stirrups, on the other hand, may be motivated by other causes. I have seen children end up with a stirrup around their ankle after their foot slipped through the stirrup, because they did not keep their heels down. Heels higher than toes may also be an indication that a rider is trying to hold on to the horse with his heels. It may also indicate that the rider is trying to “lower his weight” by pushing down on the stirrups; such action actually raises the rider’s center of gravity.

Riders and medical doctors Heinrich and Volker Schusdziarra, in their book “Anatomy of Dressage”, point out how tight muscles in the area of the crotch prevent a rider’s seat from settling deep in the saddle. The rider’s center of gravity becomes higher and the rider becomes more unstable. 

Your tight butt muscles do probably “spark up” your horse. Horses are generally taught that leg pressure means “Go.” Leg pressure is achieved by the tensing of a rider’s leg muscles. Therefore, a horse may interpret any tensing of the rider’s legs as a sign to go forward. This includes tension in any muscles in contact with the horse’s body.

In addition, the doctors mentioned above point out that it is common for riders to tense the muscles of their crotch as a defense mechanism against the impact they feel when sitting the trot. Such tension, however, has the effect of causing them to bounce more since their body has become more rigid. Additionally, the rider’s horse usually responds to such tension in the rider by tensing its own muscles. As a result, the motion of the horse becomes more rigid producing a greater bounce.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"Heels down" was not meant to prevent the foot from going thru a stirrup. A proper sized stirrup and a good boot do that. Why?

I've come off a horse one time, using an English saddle shortly after I started riding. My horse had bolted, I got her stopped, figured she was about to bolt thru an area filled with rocks where I was likely to fall off, so I tried to dismount.

Halfway thru the dismount, with my right foot above her rump, she exploded. I went flying. Landed back first on a small rock and have had back problems ever since.

But here is what I noticed about stirrups: As part of dismounting, I move my foot back to the toe and my heel is down. The idea is/was that I want any movement to result in my foot coming out immediately. So what happened?

Based on the bruises across my foot, when Mia exploded, spinning, half-rearing and then flipping out, my foot went all the way into the stirrup - up to the heel of my boot. My foot then forcibly came out, hard enough to leave a line of bruising across my foot. The only way to match the bruise with the stirrup was to put my foot in it as far as it would go. But because my stirrup was the right size, and I had a boot with a good heel, my foot would not go thru the stirrup.

The same is true of the western stirrups I now use. If I rode in my socks, then a hard shove would get my foot thru the stirrup. But with any kind of boot on, it is not possible for my foot to go through. If it was, I'd change stirrups.

If you look at pictures of the Old West, the cowboys not only wore boots, but they had their feet forward and heels down (very easy to do if your feet are forward). That would save them if their horse suddenly stopped, or hit a gopher hole.

Riding a bronco looked more like this:








​ 






​ 
Erwin E. Smith Collection Guide | Collection Guide​ 
Click on the pictures to see them full size. When things get wild, one's foot position goes...well, it just goes.

Personally, I don't worry about coming off a horse who is just running or farting around. I don't do barrel racing or jumping, so I assume any fall will come when things are getting wild. When things get wild, the way to be sure my foot doesn't slide is to combine a good boot with a proper size of stirrup.

So why "heels down"?

Harry Chamberlin, an Olympic medalist in show jumping and eventing & US team captain, AND the chief instructor at the Ft Riley riding school in the final days of the US Cavalry, gave two reasons.

1 - If the horse suddenly balks or stops, the lower heel helps prevent the rump from sliding forward in a flat jump saddle. It acts as a brace against sliding forward. I no longer own a jump saddle, but my western saddle is a "hard seat" "A-fork" - which is also known as a "slick seat" "slick fork". Smooth, polished hard leather with a flat seat and minimal swells - yeah, "slick" describes it! Heels down and feet slightly forward helps me to have something to brace against.

By combining it with the "home" position, the stirrup strap/fender is also braced against my lower leg, adding stability. That is the main reason I like the home position - it wraps leather around my lower leg so my entire lower leg is supporting me in a sudden stop. My current riding horse, BTW, was taught to _*STOP!*_ at the slightest pressure. It is something I'm trying to unteach him. When I trot him in two-point in my slick western saddle, which we do regularly, and then ask him to slow...well, sometimes he throws on the emergency brake. At times like that, I need all the help I can get.

2 - When your heels are down, the calf muscle it pulled taunt. It isn't flexed, which gives a rounded shape, but it is pulled and stretched to be both firm and flat. This helps the rider to grip the horse, and either drive him forward or maintain his position when the horse is acting up. 

For riding without stirrups, Chamberlin recommended letting the foot hang loose UNLESS things got hairy. Then and only then did he recommend the rider pull their toes up, stretching the calf muscle and giving them something firm and flat to use in hanging on.

I'm just a backyard rider who reads. I have tried what Chamberlin wrote, and it matches my experience exactly. About half of my riding experience was in an Australian saddle - a design that is very English but that has no knee rolls to aid the rider. Most of my western riding is done in a slick seat.

I'll add that a lot of western horses are not used to being ridden with lower leg contact. Trooper is an ex-ranch horse who was spurred bloody. I think one of the reasons he doesn't like me is that I do ride with lower leg contact. My other western horses have all adjusted to me on this issue. I think Trooper still dislikes it. Since he still has scars on his sides, perhaps his feelings are understandable.


----------



## KateM (Jan 3, 2014)

I thank all of you for your input! You all have a lot more experience then me in these matters! 
My sister and I are always trying to improve our riding, and will consider everything that was said. A lot of the things, we've learned by just having to muddle through them, or read up on the internet, or watch videos. 
When we talk to people in person, there are a lot of different opinions, too, so discernment is needed to sort them all out, you know. Lol! 
I had no idea this was such a controversial topic, and I could see the logic behind each argument.


----------



## jenkat86 (May 20, 2014)

OP, I would suggest, like other's on this thread that if you really want to improve your riding, get rid of the saddle and relax those muscles. Unless you are showing, it really doesn't matter how you look up there. You will naturally find your balance and a good seat


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

bsms
don't judge foot position by a photo taken in the middle of a crazy buck.

I think heels down has more to do with utilizing your stirrup to it's most potential.

you can put weight down onto the stirrup by "pushing" into it, but when told that, most people push from the knee downward, the same way they might peddle a tricycle, or bush a heavy object away from you when you are seated in a chair; from the KNEE down/outward. that is the wrong way to put weight down into your leg or put your heel down.

you want weight going down into your heel to start from you hip, so that your WHOLE leg goes downward. more like it would be if you did a backward "lunge" type excersize. since you put weight down through your whole leg, you may even feel your thigh pull downward on the saddle, or slide downward if the saddle is slippery. the stirrup keeps the ball of your foot from going down, but your heel keeps going. that's why I like to think of it as "your weight goes PAST the stirrup".


the photos in many cases of a lot of western riders show a person pushing forward against the stirrup, thus the whole lower leg from knee downward goes off the horse. while it might help you if you are doing lightening fast stops/turns working cattle, it's not going to encourage a long, relaxed forward stride from the horse.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

TL, that was the point - when things get wild, the foot goes most anywhere. Since my riding does NOT include jumping, barrel racing or other more extreme forms of riding, the only time I'm likely to have a problem with when things get wild. And at times like that, heels down won't help me because they probably won't be down.

Weight in stirrup: I like it. Many western riders do not. I've had experienced western riders tell me I should ride as if there is a raw egg between my foot and the stirrup. That is the way my daughter was taught, although not for dressage. Level foot, little weight.










When I have ridden using this approach:










my leg is not braced nor is there significant weight in the stirrup. The leg is so long that it precludes much weight in the stirrup. The heel is down because the leg is forward. Try having a low heel when you let your leg go forward, then compare to under the hip. You can do it seated at your computer - slide your heel back under your hip, and see how hard it is to get the heel low. 

It is not comfortable for a fast trot. It works quite well - very relaxed - at a western jog. It is also a very easy position to canter in. It did not require me to push against the stirrup. Just slide it forward and relax - kind of like in this picture pulled from the Internet:










It was the universal western riding position at one time. It may explain the western jog, and switching to a relaxed canter instead of an extended trot.

Also - many western riders DO ride with the lower leg either off the horse or barely touching. It is not how I like to ride, but it works. Which is really my whole point on this thread: There is more than one effective way to ride.

I don't like my daughter's position, but she's content to canter Trooper without stirrups or reins - and Trooper is content, too:










She's also been known to canter Trooper after the cinch came off, with neither of them seeming to notice it had happened. It drives me nuts to watch her ride - but she works with Trooper a heck of a lot better than I do.

Unless one is riding for show or for a sport, how one rides western is largely up to the rider and the horse. Most stick with whatever they were first taught. I've tried a lot of different approaches, and found most work OK. Heck, I cantered Mia in a jump saddle using the position of the old cowboy above - and it worked fairly well.

But for my own riding, I tend to revert to how I first learned - using the approach taught by Littauer and Chamberlin. But I'm a backyard rider and no one has to imitate me. My own daughter sure doesn't...:icon_rolleyes:


----------



## beau159 (Oct 4, 2010)

bsms said:


> ​
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Heels down aside ... if you remove the horse from either of these pictures, the cowboy would easily be able to stand on their own two feet. That's good body control (and _balance_) despite a bronc ride!


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

^^ Maybe they were just getting ready for WHEN the horse disappeared out from under them...


----------

