# lessons: dressage vs. "plain English"



## TrailDustMelody

I have been riding horses for about three years now, mostly on my own. I feel pretty competent with the basics, but I often get frustrated by my lack of finesse. So I want to take lessons. I'm wondering what the differences are between beginning dressage lessons and generic English lessons (English pleasure?). I've heard that dressage is good cross-training for endurance (which is what I ultimately want to do), and I want to be able to do it with my current and future horses. Sorry, I don't know that much about the different types of English riding...I'm just trying to figure out what kind of lessons I should take.  Any advice or insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!


----------



## BornToRun

I think dressage is good for any kind of riding, reeally


----------



## tlkng1

The issue with english is the different types of seats...more forward for hunters/jumpers/eventers and pleasure, more balanced/deep for dressage. In truth you can't go wrong in learning either one at your current level and dressage is used in basic hunter/jumper/eventer training in any case. If you ride in a dressage saddle and later go to an event saddle, the change won't be too severe, but, if you go from a dressage saddle to a flat english saddle, like an equitation version, the change may be more dramatic.

Isn't endurance riding usually done in a western saddle?


----------



## TrailDustMelody

tlkng1 said:


> Isn't endurance riding usually done in a western saddle?


Sometimes, though not really at higher levels. I've seen mostly endurance saddles, specialized, or dressage, but that's in my very limited observation.  I think I read that Western saddles generally put weight too far back for long distances.


----------



## core

I personally think dressage basics would be more beneficial. it helps develop a rider to sit evenly on yhe horse, it helps the rider understand hiw your weight affects the horse, it helps thr horse learn to move away from subtle pressure, and teacges the horse to carry its weight more evenly balance (instead of dragging itself around on the forehand). 

I've found that dressage helps significantly on trails. I shift my weight and we can bypass the tree limbs sticking out, or I can balance my horse with some small half-halts with just my seat before the steep hill so my horse doesn't trip. I watch my friends on their horses and they struggle to control the horse to go through or around obstacles. 


I've found that there are a lot of people without the skills that call themselves hunter or huntseat trainers. The dressage trainers aren't too much better, but at least you can look up their show records on centerline scores, or check their trainer certs, to verify what they tell you. I recently met an HJ trainer that has never ridden english, ever. Never jumped. She teachea kids to jump. I question how much someone knows when I see something like that.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TrailDustMelody

Thanks for the reply, core.  I would definitely appreciate that subtle control on trails as you mentioned.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Clava

For me dressage is flatwork and jumping is jumping...I don't have any other form of English to worry about. Flatwork is essential general riding and for balance in jumping and so is the basis of all riding for me. Dressage is just the refinement of the ridden aids.


----------



## jaydee

We UK people (and Europeans in general) that are taught in approved riding schools or in an approved way start out in what you call basic dressage seat and for me its the foundation for everything else - you then adapt that general style for jumping or higher level dressage if you decide to go in that direction
Not sure how it relates to endurance though I have a friend who competes in both dressage (lower levels) and endurance on the same horse


----------



## Teekin

Good basics are pretty much the same no matter what name they are taught under. The basics for the horse are the foundation that leads to specialization and the Basics for the rider allow for specialization. Without solid basics both horse and rider will come undone, it is just a matter of when and how spectacular the crash will be. 

There are a Lot of jumper riders who can ride `dressage` coaches under the table. They are beautiful to watch, and their horses do so well. I personally think Eventers know more about real riding than Dressage ( as in Big D Dressage) riders do. I would look for a coach who has students and horses in all 3 disciplines. Has a Happy, freindly, welcoming barn full of content riders and fat, shiney, sound, happy horses. Get some Good Solid basics. I also want to say that just because they can ride does NOT mean they can teach.


----------



## core

Teekin - The upper level eventers are just as good at dressage because they take dressage lessons from qualified dressage instructors. It's not a closed system where eventers only train with eventing coaches. They'll use whatever trainer (dressage or eventing) will help them succeed the most. 

If the OP doesn't want to jump, why would taking lessons from trainer who's entire barn jumps be ideal? Or were you trying to imply only eventers know dressage?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## core

TrailDustMelody - I know this lady that did endurance riding for a long time. 100 milers and stuff. She recently switch to dressage. You might want to talk to her about what the best road to start on would be. 

Her blog is: BakersfieldDressage.com

I believe you can email her from the blog. She's super nice.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Fayewokf

This is really dumb, in very early stage of learning, are there difference already? Or just general English riding?
When I looked for a barn, I was only offered English vs western, never dressage or hunter jumper....

While this time around I'm barn shopping, I did tried a dressage barn and its very diffent, but it could also be their teaching method. I'm still on the longe line so who knows what their regular lesson is like.


----------



## Zexious

I think lack of specificity gestures toward incompetence. I rode very briefly at a barn that taught "English" (as opposed to Hunter/Jumper, Dressage, etcetera). It was a mess. The students could not equitate, were jumping higher than was safe for them or their YOUNG horses... It was your typical, dysfunctional, backward business.

I think you can go either way: Dressage or Hunter (or if you're interested in Saddleseat sort of things, but that was never mentioned). I think the important thing is to find a reputable, professional trainer.


----------



## Teekin

Core- I would suggest the OP look for a Coach who can train both horses and riders across all 3 disciplinces because it shows he/she has been around the block and has a well rounded equestrian education. They also will have enough time in that their ego isn't in play. < That is important! The students should be the focus, they are the person paying for the service but it many cases with younger or insecure coaches it becomes about the coaches Ego. If the student fails to understand a technique it is because the student is " stupid" or "lazy" or their horse isn't good enough. A more mature coach knows that if a student does not understand one method then it is their job to find a different way of communicating that information, not the students fault or the horses fault. It also will cut down on the likelyhood she will be dealing with both wannabes and the coaches who don't give very much of their time or attention to those clients who won't be dropping 50K on a horse and doing the full show circuit. ( paying for that as well) A well rounded rider who can teach, has nothing to prove and is now concentrating on the success of her students is a prize. They are also likey full to the rafters but this is the very best start for anyone wanting to be able to gain solid serious basics. 

I like Eventers because they have been forced to learn how to ride effectively! You can ride a well trained hunter, point and shoot, around a course. A poor rider can be carried by a good horse through a dressage pattern. A poor rider will die on a X-country course on a good 3 day horse. You actually have to be able to Ride to complete that phase. 

Eventing dressage is modified from classical as it should be. The horses are not built or trained the same, thus the reqirements are not the same. I wouldn't ask my dressage horse to get around the X-country phase, they can't ask their 3 day horse to execute GP collection. Oranges and Apples, both fruits but not the same.


----------



## core

Teekin - I'm not debating the quality of training from a good eventer. I'm saying you're wrong that eventers train in some kind of closed bubble where they don't seek training from qualified big D dressage trainers. Take Silva and Boyd Martin for instance. Silva is well known as a big D dressage rider, yet eventers go to her for training. She's not the only one. My trainer routinely gives dressage lessons to 3 day eventers in my area. And not just one or 2 people, but half a dozen 3 day eventers tke dressage lessons from her. 

Plenty of dressage trainers teach the classical, or even french, style of training. Not every dressage rider trains the German style of dressage training. 

I guess I just don't understand what you're saying, Teekin. Good dressage basics are good dressage basics across the board. Eventers do not own the sole title as the only riders around with good dressage basics. 

Now, as far as open minds and nore tolerant of differences... then yes, eventers are usually wonderful about that. some bad apples like every group has, but I aslo think there are tons of big d dressage trainers that have no issues offering training to someone who's ultimate goal is not upper level dressage.

I'm kind of done with this now Teekin. You have your view, and I agree, an eventing trainer would work too. I'm also saying a dressage trainer would work. It's just the basics... either path will work.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Teekin

Core; we are indeed talking past one another. I agree entirely with what you are saying. I think we just have a communication problem. I indeed think there are ways other than the German method, which I don't really use. I am much more French with a smattering of Dutch. There are many roads to Rome.


----------



## TrailDustMelody

Hey everyone, thanks for all the ideas and advice. I really appreciate it!

So my sister takes lessons (Western) at a barn that's a 25 minute ride from our house. It turns out that there's a lady there who teaches English lessons. I don't quite know the details of her showing experience, but my sister's teacher, whose opinion I trust on just about everything ('cause she is knowledgeable and awesome), says this lady is good and can give me a good foundation. So I will be riding my horse to the barn for a lesson every other week. My first lesson will be this Friday. I'm hoping all goes well and it's a good fit!


----------



## TrailDustMelody

Well I had my first lesson last week. It was good. I worked on two point at a walk and trot, some posting exercises, and getting my floppy body and lazy horse to work together and canter.  If I had a nickel for every time my teacher had to tell me to put my heels down, I could buy a nice new pair of breeches. All together, it was great to get some instruction. My only concern is that this teacher does hunt seat, whereas I ride in a dressage saddle on my mare...it was a really weird feeling going between those two saddles. I still think I want dressage lessons, but I'll stick with this teacher at least until I get my license and can drive myself to another barn.


----------



## Corporal

It's great that you want to take lessons. Since you've already ridden horses without them, I would advise that you start English Pleasure at the barn where you sister takes Western, if she likes the barn. Part of horses as a hobby is a social element and you two could travel to lessons together and encourage each other.
Yes, the longer any of us rides/trains that more we appreciate Dressage. It's just a fancy title to define the obedience and gymnastic training of horse and rider, made sometimes snobby by an emphasis on the first syllable. =b
Speaking as a past riding instructor, there are probably some bad habits that you will need to eradicate before you tackle Dressage. You probably have a chair seat, no feel for the horses mouth and no understanding of a deep seat and weight cues. UNLESS you can find an academy that starts you on the lunge for 6 months to train your seat and keep your hands away from the reins--you might not like that right NOW--I wouldn't want to teach you basic Dressage on "Corporal" (1982-2009, RIP) if he was still around, bc you're not ready. You REALLY have to be dedicated to begin your lessons like this, and I get the impression that you want to learn to ride AND have fun. I believe that you can do both, and then see where you want to go with your riding. There is NO perfect form of riding and lots of us like to use our horses for multiple sports. If there is a Dressage academy close by, it will still be there later if you want to take lessons there.
I forgot the name of which Itnl USET Jumper, but he rode Showjumpers in two Olympics and then switched to driving Racing Standardbreds for 30 years. It's like that with musicians where someone begins with one instrument, then sometimes switches to a different one and finds that's where they want to stay.
Enjoy, whatever you do. =D


----------



## Teekin

Dusty, instead of thinking " push your heel down" which will cause you to lock your hip think " *point your toe up"*and relax your leg from the hip down. It will help to walk a couple rounds with your leg hanging loose from the stirrup without the iron. Also ask the coach to pull your leg away from the saddle and position it correctly in the iron. This will help create the correct "feel". You are paying for these lesson, get the very Most you can out of every single one.


----------



## updownrider

Corporal said:


> I forgot the name of which Itnl USET Jumper, but he rode Showjumpers in two Olympics and then switched to driving Racing Standardbreds for 30 years. It's like that with musicians where someone begins with one instrument, then sometimes switches to a different one and finds that's where they want to stay.
> Enjoy, whatever you do. =D


Neal Shapiro is who you are talking about. He competed in one Olympics, at Munich in 1972, and won the team silver and individual bronze for show jumping. He is out of racing and has been back in show jumping for about 15 years in NJ. A very nice man and great trainer.


----------



## bsms

Take lessons and have fun. If it were me, I'd much prefer hunt seat lessons to dressage lessons. I prefer the balance and feel of a forward seat and have no desire to ride in the style of dressage. But you may be different - so take lessons, ask lots of questions from your instructor, learn the hunt seat style of riding, and feel free to try something else when the opportunity arises. Good luck!


----------



## deserthorsewoman

Corporal said:


> It's great that you want to take lessons. Since you've already ridden horses without them, I would advise that you start English Pleasure at the barn where you sister takes Western, if she likes the barn. Part of horses as a hobby is a social element and you two could travel to lessons together and encourage each other.
> Yes, the longer any of us rides/trains that more we appreciate Dressage. It's just a fancy title to define the obedience and gymnastic training of horse and rider, made sometimes snobby by an emphasis on the first syllable. =b
> Speaking as a past riding instructor, there are probably some bad habits that you will need to eradicate before you tackle Dressage. You probably have a chair seat, no feel for the horses mouth and no understanding of a deep seat and weight cues. UNLESS you can find an academy that starts you on the lunge for 6 months to train your seat and keep your hands away from the reins--you might not like that right NOW--I wouldn't want to teach you basic Dressage on "Corporal" (1982-2009, RIP) if he was still around, bc you're not ready. You REALLY have to be dedicated to begin your lessons like this, and I get the impression that you want to learn to ride AND have fun. I believe that you can do both, and then see where you want to go with your riding. There is NO perfect form of riding and lots of us like to use our horses for multiple sports. If there is a Dressage academy close by, it will still be there later if you want to take lessons there.
> I forgot the name of which Itnl USET Jumper, but he rode Showjumpers in two Olympics and then switched to driving Racing Standardbreds for 30 years. It's like that with musicians where someone begins with one instrument, then sometimes switches to a different one and finds that's where they want to stay.
> Enjoy, whatever you do. =D


Alwin Schockemöhle did it too


----------



## TrailDustMelody

Yes, I know I have bad habits. =P I think my main problem is that my shoulders and arms are stiff. I tend to hunch over, I guess. And I'm still trying to find the sweet spot for contact...there's so much to think about! *brain explodes* Anyways, my teacher said I have a good position having not taken many lessons, the main things to work on are my upper body stiffness and heel position.

Thanks for the tip about keeping my heels down, by the way! I'll have to try that next time I ride.

Good analogy with the musical instruments. I played violin for 4+ years before switching to viola. I guess it's the same principle. 

I'm going to see if my instructor would let me have my lesson on my mare sometime. We both need training. :lol:


----------



## updownrider

deserthorsewoman said:


> Alwin Schockemöhle did it too


I was thinking USA team members, but should have remembered Alwin Schockemöhle. 

Back to the original topic...


----------



## frlsgirl

Oh boy....don't get me started on that...I also took generic English lessons first and then switched to Dressage and found out that I don't know how to ride at all......my toes were turned out which is a no-no in Dressage...I was posting behind the vertical....another big no-no....I had piano hands...huge no no in Dressage....

It's almost as though generic English is a sloppier version of Dressage (no offense) but then again it depends on your instructor as well...

The good news is that this can all be corrected with a great Dressage Instructor...look for someone who has had proper training (USDF training/certification, trained by European master instructors etc).


----------



## Corporal

frlsgirl, _your instruction was poor,_ NOT English Pleasure, in general. I taught WP, EP, Beg. Jumping, Beg Dressage, and Military (bc we were CW Reenactors for 26 years.)
I taught my EP students to be balanced at the posting trot and NOT behind the vertical. I am a pianist and can differentiate between correct hands at the keyboard (cupped and weighted at the heel of your hand) and riding (soft with thumbs up.) I pushed correct hands, the width of the bit, and soft--I had many ways to retrain this bc too many students started EP somewhere else and had really no feel. I nagged about toes forward until I was blue in the face, OR, they trained their toes forward. I explained the whys of everything I taught. ALL, with lessons year round outside--I had no great place to teach for 10 years.
I'll say, again to the OP. Take a group of EP lessons at the place where your sister takes lessons. Review your progress and consider your next step. You don't have to sign up for a whole semester, like in college. You can start and stop at any time. If you find a trainer that is also an instructor, that's a great idea, too.
Understand that I LOVE Dressage, as a means to an end. I'm not as excited about just riding Dressage bc I have other horse aspirations, including driving in my future.
Not everyone who hangs out a shingle knows how to teach it. I recommend to the OP that she spend some time REALLY looking into a qualified Dressage program before just jumping into it. Also, I wouldn't worry too much about the actual discipline that a rider studies. When I see someone ride _any_ style correctly and beautifully, I would love to take a few lessons from that someone even if it's SaddleSeat, or Reining, or Calf-roping, which are some disciplines which have never really excited ME, bc *ALL riding disciplines show just how much your horse gives back when trained and ridden correctly.*
I _think_ that is what the OP really wants.


----------



## frlsgirl

Corporal, I'm glad that you are clearely a great English instructor who works on all those important details. Most English instructors in my area, are not like that. They think that if you can sort of sit on a horse in all three gaits, then you are a good rider


----------



## Corporal

Thanks. My teacher was pretty great and I didn't want to let him down.
Where do _you_ live?


----------



## frlsgirl

Corporal - I would rather not say...but the area is heavily dominated by cowboys in Western saddles


----------



## Corporal

Where there is a will, there is a way.
I suggest you look to books and videos and get someone to track your progress with a camera.
I retrained my toes forward and taught myself to have a super deep seat bc I studied this book: 
Complete Training of Horse and Rider: Alois Podhajsky: 9780879802356: Amazon.com: Books
Even with a great teacher, I was still limited to 1 hour/week of riding until I owned my own horses.
Plus, I have seen some excellent equitation with some "cowboys", so you might find a WP teacher who cares about your position, too.
Do you have RFD.tv? Dennis Reis demonstrates Vaquero techniques, which are the Spanish basis for WP riding, and are, IMHO a form of Dressage.
I love to study all types of riding! I never know what I'll pick up when I listen and read. 
We never stop training our horses and we never stop learning. =D


----------



## Fulford15

Like other posters, until I started riding Dressage, I realized I had no clue how to ride _effectively_. 

I took Hunter/Jumper lessons for 9 years before starting Dressage, all I knew was jump, jump, jump, arch your back, arch, arch, arch, heels down, heels down, heels down, close hip, close hip. Quite honestly, your not going to jump any higher then 3'0 with that training without falling off. 

Dressage gets you to sit down and open your hips, which most of the time (at least the area I showed in), it was "hover in your seat and hope you dont fall". I now encorporate my Dressage with my Hunter/Jumper style and have for 6 years now. Like Corporal, I had to "retrain" myself, with my toes, my hips, shoulders, and wow, the difference it has made on my position and equitation is amazing. 
Big names like Ian Millar, Eric Lamaze, etc, all ride Dressage. I love Dressage, and fully encorage it for any rider of any disipline. I am lucky enough to have a Level 3 Dressage, and Level 2 H/J coach, Gina Allan-Belasik.


----------



## bsms

Corporal said:


> ... I nagged about toes forward until I was blue in the face, OR, they trained their toes forward...


For dressage, correct. For other styles, including hunt seat, incorrect - toes out, 15-45 deg. US Cavalry manual: 45 deg out.

IOW, it depends on what you are trying to do and why. That is why explanations are important. Explanations allow someone to adapt the principles involved to the riding they do.


----------



## Corporal

Actually it is some "toes out" _acceptable_ when jumping an obstacle. Yes, some people cannot get those toes parallel to the horse no matter what, but if you practice with your toes routinely out, you lose you ability to grip the horse, which we all do when we ride. It is very much like squeezing a ball to strengthen your arms. You squeeze-release, etc. when you ride, a little at a time and this is why your inner thighs get sore.
I know that we often disagree here on the HF about this, and about how stirrupless riding corrects so many riding faults.
I don't argue this bc I'm stuck on perfect form. I have jumped enough to know that gripping with your calves while going over a jump isn't secure like gripping above the knee, through the knee and below the knee. Toes out teaches jumpers to grip with the calves. You cannot grip correctly and twist your toes out at the same time. You wil torque your leg.
Like in ballet, the leg follows the toes and foot, which is why, when dancing, the toes lead.
bsms, you spend a lot of hours riding and I realize that you have a good seat. I don't intend to talk you out of your riding position, if you ride with your toes out. You look comfortable and happy.
IMHO it's a bad habit, but for pleasure riding I can accept it. For really hard core riding I think the rider needs to learn correct form.
I think we've hijacked this thread. =b


----------



## TrailDustMelody

No, I love it!! I'm learning so much. Please hijack to your heart's content. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## updownrider

Corporal said:


> Actually it is some "toes out" _acceptable_ when jumping an obstacle. Yes, some people cannot get those toes parallel to the horse no matter what, but if you practice with your toes routinely out, you lose you ability to grip the horse, which we all do when we ride. It is very much like squeezing a ball to strengthen your arms. You squeeze-release, etc. when you ride, a little at a time and this is why your inner thighs get sore.
> I know that we often disagree here on the HF about this, and about how stirrupless riding corrects so many riding faults.
> I don't argue this bc I'm stuck on perfect form. I have jumped enough to know that gripping with your calves while going over a jump isn't secure like gripping above the knee, through the knee and below the knee. Toes out teaches jumpers to grip with the calves. You cannot grip correctly and twist your toes out at the same time. You wil torque your leg.
> Like in ballet, the leg follows the toes and foot, which is why, when dancing, the toes lead.
> bsms, you spend a lot of hours riding and I realize that you have a good seat. I don't intend to talk you out of your riding position, if you ride with your toes out. You look comfortable and happy.
> IMHO it's a bad habit, but for pleasure riding I can accept it. For really hard core riding I think the rider needs to learn correct form.
> I think we've hijacked this thread. =b


McLain Ward jumps really big jumps over and over and over again, on many different horses. He has classic form. Note his toes are turned slightly out which allows him to drop the weight in his heels, and anchor his leg. His toes are not parallel and he does have his calf properly on his horse. It is important for the rider to use their whole leg. If they do not use their calves while in the air, they have no contact with the horse. 

Mclain Ward - Zimbio


----------



## Corporal

updownrider said:


> *It is important for the rider to use their whole leg. * If they do not use their calves while in the air, they have no contact with the horse.


Agreed. I already said this. I guess I forgot one word, "only."


Corporal said:


> Actually it is _*some*_ "toes out" _acceptable_ when jumping an obstacle..I have jumped enough to know that gripping with your calves while going over a jump isn't secure like gripping *above* the knee, *through* the knee *and below* the knee. Toes out teaches jumpers to grip with _*ONLY*_ the calves.


I speak from my personal experiences, not from a textbook only. Riding horses is one of the few hobbies I have pursued in my life that the theory is proven out by practice, and the fads are also proven false by practice. Music is another field in which this holds true.
All other pursuits have opinions and theories taught by theorists who have often never practiced, like my DD's Law Professors, and a lot of BS ensues.
In short, bad habits become very hard to break, so why learn poorly to begin with?


----------



## bsms

FWIW, George Morris recommends toes 15-45 out. VS Littsauer recommended 30 deg out. I quote texts because I've never jumped. :wink:

However, I HAVE taken up riding when I was 50, and one thing I believe I learned is that a relaxed leg is more desirable than a specific toe position. Even now, toes to the front would require a lot of tension in my leg, and that would hurt my riding far more than it helps. And since all the English riding books I own (other than dressage) recommend something ranging from 'some toe out' up to '45 deg out', I think it is a safe bet that a conscientious and well-intentioned rider can ride English without having his toes straight ahead.

That would be bad for dressage because of the goals of higher level dressage. But those goals are not shared by all other English (or Australian) riders, so other priorities can take over. I think VS Littauer, as quoted in my signature, was correct:

*"...there are only two criteria of your position; a) are you in fluid balance and rhythm with your horse or not? b) does your seat enable you to control your horse efficiently?"*​


----------



## updownrider

Corporal - when you say toes out, do you mean sticking straight out like a (forgive me, I know I am saying this wrong) ballerina's toes in first position or just anything that is not parallel to the horse?

By the way, I speak from personal experience, too. I've been jumping horses for over 45 years.


----------



## jaydee

Don't forget that sometimes when you see a riders toes out - especially when approaching a fence they're actually giving a the horse a good dig with their heels/spurs
If you get a horse that's a bit hot and you have a habit of riding with your toes turned out a bit too far you are constantly niggling at it with your heels without maybe realizing you're doing it


----------



## Corporal

I guess you could try an experiment. Get on bareback on a safe horse and try riding the trot with first your toes turned out 45 degrees and then with your toes pointed forward and parallel. See which makes _you_ feel more secure.
In my experience, I ride better with a long leg, toes forward, shoulders back. I am confused as to a recent phenomenon, that is, the idea that you should depend upon your saddle for security. It is a means to an end, IMHO, and an experienced rider should be able to hop on bareback and perform well. I can comfortably ride at a walk while readjusting a stirrup if necessary, and I credit my teacher for this skill.
When I jumped, which was years ago, I felt secure gripping the horse and, at the same time, sinking my weight into the stirrups. Still, MY instructor taught us confidence without stirrups so that we'd still stay on if we dropped one or both going over an obstacle. I still believe this to be true.
When it comes down to it, I don't think anyone should measure the degree of turnout on someone's foot. Still, if you imitate what you _think_ is correct, instead of using exercises that teach your body balance while riding, it can be an exercise in semantics.
We haven't even touched on how you cannot control a spur with a foot constantly pointed outwards.
Guess we'll just have to disagree on this point. =D


----------



## verona1016

I don't think there's necessarily wrong with picking starting out with dressage vs any other English discipline, as long as they're teaching a solid, independent seat before moving on to more advanced concepts. 

When I started riding, all I knew was that I wanted to ride English, and I got lessons at a jumping barn. They had me jumping by the end of the summer when I had to go back to college, even though looking back at it I was in no way ready to be jumping. I started lessons again a few months later after I graduated (at a different jumping barn in another state) and had pretty much the same experience. The sad thing was I didn't really know any better at that point. When I moved again, I happened to end up with a dressage instructor and was actually really glad to spend some more time focusing on learning my balance and controlling the horse. I realized I had only ever been taught to canter in two point (sitting the canter felt weird for a long time!) It's now been 7 years since I first started riding, and last winter I returned to jumping with my horse who hadn't ever been trained to jump. It's so much better this time around now that I'm not just hanging on for the ride!


----------



## updownrider

Corporal said:


> Guess we'll just have to disagree on this point. =D


If this is addressed to me, you didn't answer my last question and I have to wonder if you looked at the picture in the link I posted. McLain's toes are not at 45 degrees. I've never said 45 degrees. That was mentioned by someone who read that in a book and does not jump. Back to McLain, his toes are slightly turned out so he can drop the weight in his heels to anchor his leg. Classic leg position for an American Forward Seat. 

Sorry for the thread hijack.


----------



## bsms

Corporal said:


> ...When it comes down to it, I don't think anyone should measure the degree of turnout on someone's foot. Still, if you imitate what you _think_ is correct, instead of using exercises that teach your body balance while riding, it can be an exercise in semantics.
> We haven't even touched on how you cannot control a spur with a foot constantly pointed outwards.
> Guess we'll just have to disagree on this point. =D












OK, I don't jump. I DO ride a sometimes jumpy horse.

If I wanted to give a highly trained horse discrete cues using spurs, I'd train to get my toes forward. But I don't, and there are other reasons for allowing toes to go out. Those of us men who started riding at 50 don't even have the option of toes front. That would result in pinching with the knees. Period. It would also require a LOT of tension in the legs, straining to hold toes in. Tense, rigid legs are NOT helpful. That may be why the US Cavalry taught 45 deg out. For an average male starting riding as an adult, 45 might be good. With time and experience, 30 might be better. Zero degrees, however, has somewhat limited use.

It is NOT sloppy to teach a compromise. Riding involves a lot of compromises. If a beginner gets on MY horse, I tell them to keep some slack in the reins. If they don't, I'll plan on getting them off before my horse decides to get them off. That doesn't make slack in the reins the height of good riding - but neither is it inconsistent with good riding. It just depends...

Shoulder-hip-heel in a vertical line is another fallacy. It works great for some types of riding, but not so hot for other types. Too many instructors will squawk, "Chair seat" without ever understanding that the heels CAN be in front of the hip because they should be for that style, or for what you are about to ask the horse to do.

There is no one, correct way to ride a horse. A good one will explain, "For now, do XYZ because it will help you do ABC later on."


----------



## Corporal

updownrider, I _did_ look at you link. McClain Ward does have his toes forward. There are directly underneath him. If you erase the horse in the picture he could be skiing.
I really need to check the US Cav Manual. There are many things in it that describe in detail bc the Army needed it that way, like how many stitches per inch in a uniform. I have just never seen the 45 degrees toes pointed out, but it is a LARGE manual.
I believe that exercises and time spent in the saddle teach you how to ride correctly. I had a violinist friend who was in college with me and had to spend her first college year re-learning how to bow bc she was taught incorrectly for 5 years. It is the same thing. Balance and strength teaches you to ride, just like balance and strength teaches the horse to carry you and to perform in a sport.
Ward is quite a rider and has turned around at least ONE mare whose training was rushed. Please, OP, take your time. =D


----------



## updownrider

Corporal said:


> updownrider, I _did_ look at you link. McClain Ward does have his toes forward. There are directly underneath him. If you erase the horse in the picture he could be skiing.
> 
> .....
> 
> 
> Ward is quite a rider and has turned around at least ONE mare whose training was rushed. Please, OP, take your time. =D



If you think McLain's toes are pointing forward then you and I have very different definitions of toes pointing forward. I think McLain's toe in the picture I posted is not pointing straight forward, but is slightly angled. Certainly not at 45 degrees, but again, I never said that number. I also like the picture bsms posted above, which shows a rider with their ankle flexed and toe slightly turned out so he can drop the weight into his heels to anchor his leg. That rider does not have his toes at 45 degrees either.

Editing to add- there is a way to way to keep your heels down, toes slightly angled and not keep the spur constantly in your horse's side. I rarely ride without spurs, but do not always use them, and I have never marked a horse.


----------



## humblerumble811

Dressage
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Fayewokf

I'm learning at a hunter/jumper barn, my trainer told me to keep my toes slightly out I order to maintain my calves contact ... Is this right or wrong?? I'm confused...she never mentioned the degree.. But I order for the contact to happen, I don't see how my feet can be pointed straight, is it because I'm not a kid/teenager?


----------



## Kotori

I used to take lessons from a dressage trainer, and she told me to keep my feet parallel. she also upped my speed nearly every lesson, with no detail to my hands, legs or overall seat past heels down. It resulting in me having hysterics every time I went into a canter because I felt so insecure, and couldn't push a horse over very effectively. Parallel legs, I had exactly one point of contact- my knees. I had to pull my heel up to nudge his side.

Now I'm taking lessons from an ex-boarder who normally doesn't give lessons, and I feel so much more secure, it's not even funny. She has me turn my toes out to give me more contact with the horse's side, and I can do all sorts of things I couldn't before- like trot in a two-point. I can ride a horse and know he can't ram me into a fence (one of my worst fears is I'll catch my leg.) She uses spurs constantly, even if they're just along for the ride, and her horses are still very soft to the leg- her spurs aren't senselessly rammed into his sides.

I don't know if it's what I'm supposed to do, but I've not had breakdowns or disappointing lessons, and my tests don't have any markdown for it.


----------



## jaydee

I do find that some of these things can get out of proportion
Our ideal leg position while sitting or at a straight walk, trot, canter are going to be very different to where our leg and foot position will be when we're giving cues/aids for impulsion or lateral movements
My thinking of where the calf of the leg is places it to the back of our legs and if you're gripping there - which will turn your toes right out - will also force you to hollow your back in an effort to still sit upright and tilt your seat onto a part of your anatomy where you don't want to be sitting
I'm confused with *Kotori'*s idea of getting her 2 point right. The mistake most people make in that position is to lean too far forward when in fact you should only be just a little forward of the normal 3 point position, your heels should be down but not braced or forced into the stirrup and legs against the horses sides but relaxed - you should resist any urge to squeeze with any part of your leg as this will be sending messages to a responsive horse to increase speed. You hold yourself into position with your thigh and core muscles - not by gripping with your knee or lower leg
I would never look at an example of where someones legs or feet are over a jump as being one to copy - you will see them in some really odd places in even the worlds best!!!!
I would class this pic of a general purpose (not jumping or dressage) English seat as close to perfect


----------



## bsms

In one of George Morris's books, he comments that how much the toe should go out depends on the horse, the rider, the saddle, etc. The Cavalry manual explains it thus:

"Toes turned in stiffen the ankles, force the heels out, and cause loss of contact of proper parts of the calves of the legs. This fault reduces the security of the rider and makes the correct use of the legs impossible. Excessively turned out toes stiffen the ankles, put the knees out of contact, place the rider on the back of his thighs and disrupt the seat." In another passage, it says 20-45 deg toe out.

I don't jump, but some of the same principles work well with a horse who shies or jumps sideways unpredictably (although my mare hasn't done that for about a year now). Riding in an Australian saddle, which is based on the English style, doing what the Cavalry manual says makes me feel more secure. And since the only time I've been dumped by Mia was when she bolted during a dismount, I'd have to say it seems pretty effective.

The point of dressage is NOT to show you can stay on a horse who spooks. It is to show off a well trained horse and skilled rider, riding collected on the flat, so it weighs the concerns a bit differently. All the dressage books I've got recommend toes front. When I ride, I find my body reacts the way the Cavalry said it would - but then, I'm a recreational rider, not a highly practiced and skilled athlete.

Looking the other day, I'd guess my right foot sticks out about 30 deg and my left about 45. That happens when I jog or stand in the shower too - my left foot always sticks out further than my right. I consider that reasonable evidence that some of the 'right' answer depends on your body. When I started riding, my toes pointed out more. Why? Because I had tight thighs and stiff legs, and lacked the flexibility to do anything different without bracing my leg and twisting my knee into the horse - both bad. It is reasonable for an instructor to tell someone to work to get their toes in some (I think all will agree my initial 60+ out was not good). It is also reasonable for an instructor to tell someone who CAN ride with toes straight that if they want to jump, they need to modify things a little. That is also why VS Littauer used a system with 3 degrees of riding - because a beginning rider CANNOT ride the same as an experienced one, and trying to force him to do what he cannot is harmful to both horse and rider. He went further and argued many recreational riders, riding a couple of hours/week tops, may need to accept they will NEVER ride like a top rider, and not try. They lack the physical conditioning that is needed to ride like a top rider.

That is me. And it is a lot of other riders, particularly older riders who lack the flexibility of a teen. There was a 60s western TV show where one of the stars was a champion bodybuilder. The guy who helped him learn to ride said they had to modify how they taught him because the guy had such muscular legs. There was no way a guy who spent ten hours lifting weights for every 20 minutes he spent on horses could ride 'properly'. They had to be content with getting him to a point where he was safe on the horse, and the horse was comfortable carrying him. 

For those of you on this thread who have spent a lifetime riding, my plea would be to understand that many riders have not and will not ever ride like a top rider. If someone understands the principles, however, they can adapt for what they are capable of now, and consider how they might want to change if they want to ride competitively later on.


----------



## updownrider

jaydee said:


> I would never look at an example of where someones legs or feet are over a jump as being one to copy - you will see them in some really odd places in even the worlds best!!!!


I was careful in my selection, and it why I used the picture of McLain Ward, he maintains the almost perfect form over every jump. I did not use, for example, Richard Spooner or Roger-Yves Bost, both world class riders but each with a unique style.


----------



## jaydee

Its difficult to find a perfect leg position over a fence because people are all unique, some of the best and worst seats are in cross country eventing - maybe because they have to 'sit tighter' like the person in this pic

If want really extreme styles then there can be none better than Annette Lewis (UK) but before anyone leaps in to criticize - she had a really successful career at top level.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOjL0dYM3Uk


----------



## updownrider

I would not criticize that rider's lower leg in that picture over a cross country course. Her leg is tight and in the correct position, her ankle is flexed and her heel is down. I won't comment on her release because I have no idea what the landing of this jump is like and what is coming immediately after this jump. 

The picture in this link is what I'd call a unique style, and not classic. I am also not criticizing it as he is one of the best in the world.

HorsemenOnline.com » Blog Archive » Spooner Wins Fidelity Investments CSI 3* Grand Prix


----------



## Fayewokf

updownrider said:


> i would not criticize that rider's lower leg in that picture over a cross country course. Her leg is tight and in the correct position, her ankle is flexed and her heel is down. I won't comment on her release because i have no idea what the landing of this jump is like and what is coming immediately after this jump.
> 
> The picture in this link is what i'd call a unique style, and not classic. I am also not criticizing it as he is one of the best in the world.
> 
> horsemenonline.com » blog archive » spooner wins fidelity investments csi 3* grand prix


lol lol!!!


----------



## jaydee

LOL - I think he must have gone to the Annette Lewis school for jumping!!!
I think Eddie Macken had one of the best leg positions in showjumping - but when you look at them all it really is about getting from one side to the other with the fence still intact, rider still in control and on board, heading for the next jump isn't it!!!


----------



## malo

I think it's a mistake to focus on the toe. We don't care if the toe is pointing forward or 30° or 24.5°, we need to focus on the balance and the whole leg, either we're riding dressage, jumping or trail riding.

English riding has always the same basics. If you want to jump, you need to start with dressage. You can't train a horse to jump without practicing dressage first and it is the same for the rider. If you want to stay on your young horse on his first trail rides it's better to have a good balance and dressage is the way to practice that in english riding.

Whatever the seat or the teacher, the objective should be the same: the balance.

To get the better balance you need the optimal position and we're lucky because this position has been described by many masters in the past.

Here is an example with Oliveira:









He seems to stand up. He doesn't need his leg to stay on the horse. Everyting is relaxed and he doesn't sit on his bottom but on the crotch. 

So if we want the best position we should not look at our feet but focus on our feeling and our seat. If the seat and the thighs are well the calves and the ankle will be good as well. Everything comes from the middle. 

And it's the same when you're jumping: it doesn't come from the stirrup or the ability to hook on the horse, it's the ability to follow with the right balance.

Hope I have been clear enough, sorry for the writing it's my second post in english lol


----------



## Corporal

No, you are VERY clear and I agree that you shouldn't have to keep your leg on your horse for balance. He should self-propel himself through correct impulsion.
We've certainly given the OP a LOT of food for thought.
Still, I think the OP is more in training wheels phase and should start with the very basics. Unfortunately, in the US, you cannot always find someone to teach you basic Dressage. Most often, a good lesson program fairly close to home will be an English Pleasure class.
Relaxation, deep seat and soft hands take a lot of time to learn. Fortunately, the OP also owns a horse, so she can practice at home.


----------



## malo

What is the difference between english pleasure and dressage?


----------



## Corporal

In the US "English Pleasure" should teach the rider the very basics of controlling the horse and controlling your body.
Today we have a very serious Dressage community and, as I understand it, they would want a new rider to spend time only on the lunge before tackling reining and cues.
In English Pleasure the preparation can get you from the class to the trails in a fairly short time, or from the class to the Equitation show ring shortly.
IMHO, the beginning rider needs to spend a lot of time in the saddle learning to relax and sit deep. At the beginning the reining is much less important. I have trained all of my horses over the last 28 years to both direct rein and neck rein and they have all been pleasure horses that can be trusted trail riding, no easy feat.
I think I have a problem with just taking Dressage Lessons or training your horse for Dressage bc I know that the horse needs to be in top shape to avoid pain in collection. My older herd, which were also my lesson horses for 10 years were ridden constantly and they WERE in shape. When I would ask my Arab, "Corporal" (1982-2009, RIP) for collection he could do it. He even, out of boredom, spent the last CW battle I rode him in (2008) at the Passage for a full hour bc he was SOOOO bored that our commander had nothing for the two of us to do. He was like a revved up motor and that tensed spring creates the movement everyone is looking for. I just don't think RIGHT NOW the OP should be riding Dressage. Just too many things to learn and remember all at once.


----------



## malo

Thanks for the explanation. 

Don't you think that lunge riding would be the fastest way to teach a new rider how to relax, sit deep and be ready for everything?


----------



## bsms

With a good lesson horse, you could teach a person to ride while letting them hold the reins, which is about all they need to do on many horses. If the horse can neck rein, you could easily put the horse in a rope halter and let the rider learn without doing any harm to the horse's mouth or overtasking the rider.

A lot of riding well just comes with time in the saddle. You can no more ride a horse with your conscious mind than you can a bicycle. I can't imagine how boring it would be to do lunge work until you had it down pat.


----------



## TrailDustMelody

Yes, lots of food for thought. Thank you! I love it. I'm here to learn.


----------



## Kotori

Well Corporal , this was how it was explained to me: The horse's body is round. You need to stretch around him (in an arch shape) and the best way to do that is having your toes turned slightly out.

By the 'proper' two-point, I just meant one that didn't feel like I was going to fall out. Last trainer told me to just hold myself up as if I was posting, and lean forward. I couldn't hold it at a trot, which she expected me to do immediately.


----------



## bsms

One of the reasons I like the Cavalry manual is that it includes explanations. The last couple of rides, I spent some time walking and trotting while experimenting with pushing my toes more forward and rolling them further out. The manual explains:"_Toes turned in stiffen the ankles, force the heels out, and cause loss of contact of proper parts of the calves of the legs. This fault reduces the security of the rider and makes the correct use of the legs impossible. Excessively turned out toes stiffen the ankles, put the knees out of contact, place the rider on the back of his thighs and disrupt the seat._" ​What I found in my playing around was exactly what it said. As I twist my feet forward, my ankle starts to lock up on the inside of my ankle, and I lose some flexibility in that hinge. For me, around 15-20 deg was a good estimate of when my ankle started to stiffen, and my right foot could go further than my left. It also caused my ankle and lower leg to start pulling away from my horse and forced my foot to become more level.

Going in the opposite direction, at around 40-50 deg, it pulled my knee out of contact and started rolling my thigh so that the back of my thigh - a rounder & thicker area - was against the horse. By about 60 deg, as far as my foot could go without totally losing leg contact, my ankle stiffened in the opposite direction.

All of this was a matter of degree. Toes front stiffens my ankle. How much? Well...enough to lose some of that shock absorbing hinge, and someone jumping may want all the 'hinges' they can for absorbing shock. Someone on the flat might not value it that much. Toes out will cost my contact with my lower leg. But I have a western saddle (Circle Y Mojave) that give me NO lower leg contact without bending my knee. And I have a ranch-trained gelding who interprets any lower leg contact as 'go faster'. But then, western saddles are not designed with jumping in mind. And a dressage rider might be glad for a small pulling away of the lower calf. Brainstorming in public here, but it might give a rider more options for precise cueing with spurs than greater contact does.

So what is the 'right' answer? I think it depends on what your end goal is. If I was hoping to do endurance riding, like the OP - "_endurance (which is what I ultimately want to do)_" - I think I'd prefer more range of motion in my heels, the option of more leg contact with my horse, and not worry about how detailed my cueing is with spurs, which I might not wear at all. But if my toes pointed out 60 deg, like mine used to do (and my left still sometimes does ), I'd be worried that I'm actually riding with my thigh twisted around and the softer and rounder part of the thigh is carrying the weight, giving a less secure seat.

And while riding, I now think that if I see my toes drifting out much past 30 deg, which in honesty happens to me regularly, then I need to be concerned about my thigh position because you cannot have a secure seat if you are riding on the thick, rounded and fleshy part of the thigh.

VS Littauer wrote:










Dressage doesn't have the goal of 'cover as much ground as possible with the least effort to the horse'. That doesn't make dressage wrong. It just has a different goal than covering ground. It is ballet, not cross-country.


----------



## jaydee

malo said:


> Thanks for the explanation.
> 
> Don't you think that lunge riding would be the fastest way to teach a new rider how to relax, sit deep and be ready for everything?


 While I personally believe that all riders should start out on the lunge as they then learn from the 'get go' to ride with their legs, body and establish a sound balance and not rely on reins - much easier than trying to break bad habits further along the road - but that also demands a horse that's trained that way and the money to afford to do it. Most people even in the UK where we ride with the basic low level dressage seat from the start are only interested in riding for pleasure so will most likely learn in a group of other riders with people leading them until they have a grasp of stopping and directing the horse and not falling off when they trot
*bsms* - While older riders might find it stiffens to ankle or leg to have their toes going forwards or at a smaller angle its not the case with children or teenagers starting out - that's more related to the joint restrictions of older age. My first husband was in the Household Cavalry and they were certainly trained to have a more forward toe style - but again when you're riding you're legs should be working so wont remain static and that will change the angle of the toe all the time depending on what you're doing


----------



## Corporal

Just for the record, I have thoroughly enjoyed the conversation on this thread. I've got no bone to pick, no dog in a fight.
I think the misunderstanding about "toes forward" is that people out of shape and new to riding, which IS A PHYSICAL EXERTION, will often be sloppy and let their toes turn WAAAYYYY out. This is counterproductive and if practiced and if it becomes a habit you limit your riding disciplines to pleasure riding.


Kotori said:


> Well Corporal , this was how it was explained to me: The horse's body is round. You need to stretch around him (in an arch shape) and the best way to do that is having your toes turned slightly out.
> 
> By the 'proper' two-point, I just meant one that didn't feel like I was going to fall out. Last trainer told me to just hold myself up as if I was posting, and lean forward. I couldn't hold it at a trot, which she expected me to do immediately.


You really must train yourself to point your toes forward in order to sit well. I personally believe that people who ride for more than 4 hours/day do just this. When you relax and just let your foot hang the toes don't point outwards. It's when you pick up your stirrups and use them as a crutch for balance that the problem arises.
You don't have to have your toes pointed directly in front of you, 100% parallel when you jump a fence, but it helps to have them as close to that as possible.
When you ride w-t-c you SHOULD sit as deep WITH stirrups as you ride w-t-c without them, and that is how I was taught to sit and that is how I taught others to sit, using exercises, instead of just words to teach the concept.
New riders have to train themselves to NOT curl up into a fetal position when they start to lose their balance. We train ourselves to push our arms in front of the pommel, sit back and deep and sink our feet and weight into the stirrups. It takes a LOT of time and practice and hours to accomplish so that you have muscle memory, just like when you learned to balance and ride a bike.
Certainly if you try to ride a side saddle and do not sit back you WILL lose your balance. I find it amazing that some women *jump* side saddle, though I've been aware of this for some time, but it still is impressive.
You might not know this, but stirrups originated in east Asia. The Ancient Greeks and Romans rode without them. The Hungarian Army, it is said, also rode a saddle withOUT a girth. True muscle men.


malo said:


> Don't you think that lunge riding would be the fastest way to teach a new rider how to relax, sit deep and be ready for everything?


True, but I didn't want to do this when I was 14 and taking Hunt Seat lessons. I just wanted to ride and jump fences. NOW, I'd love to take a few lessons from a master and see what I could learn. Robert Dover has said he spent his first 6 months of Dressage lessons learning just this way, but I will bet that he rode horses before this. I don't see a problem with getting your feet wet before you take lessons.
I will also repeat myself and suggest you try riding bareback, where your balance is key without the benefit of a swell or knee rolls to help your grip and stay on the horse. If, when riding bareback you do NOT sit back you will lose your balance. If you ride bareback with your toes turned out ~45 degrees you will try to grab onto the horse's barrel with side and back of your calves and eliminate the most important part of your leg to keep you on the horse, that is, the inside of your lower thigh, the inside of your knee and the inside of your upper calf.
Annie Oakley once complained about the poor conditions of the equipment in the Wild West show. She walked over to her horse, pulled on the girth, and it ripped in two. I had a lesson where a girth starting ripping. I instructed my student to quietly halt, and slip off of the saddle. I never used canvas English girths after that bc of quality. This can happen, so we clean often to inspect the condition of leathers and girths. I do NOT rely on my saddle to keep my mounted. By turning the toes way out, especially in a Western or Western type of saddle, the rider braces weight against the stirrups, and stirrup leathers can wear out and rip while riding. I do not depend upon a saddle alone to keep me on my horse.
The saddle helps us to ride Better, but it Can create some unneccessary habits. I do use spurs to train my horses. The leg is first, and if my horse doesn't listen the spur comes next and the training improves quickly. My favorite spurs are Prince of Wales, but I do own Dressage rowels and Cavalry rowels, the latter being just for show. Horses are ALWAYS trying you. Just yesterday, when I was de-burring my 16'3hh gelding, he got impatient and stepped on my toes. I immediately kicked him in the "shins" (cannon bone.) You have to respond immediately to disobedience, but my kick is NOTHING is comparison to another horse kicking him. I cannot tolerate small disobediences.
For a beginning rider it is the job of your _instructor_ to help you to learn standard cues and a basic, good seat. The horses should be slightly dull so the students aren't frightened, and the instructor, IMHO, should be standing in the inside of the arena with a whip to encourage the horse to do what you asked for, if he wants to be lazy. That is how I taught, and probably that is why when others rode my horses with me the other horses were watching ME for what to do next. I truly became the head broodmare to my herd.
We all make mistakes and often have angels keeping us from getting killed by our horses. When I first got my OTTB, he wouldn't do "something"--memory escapes me as to what is was, today--and I yelled at him in his stall. He turned around SO FAST and kicked the front wall of the stall, instead of my head. It was eye opening and frightening JUST HOW FAST a horse can react. 
To the OP, whereEVER you take lessons, do NOT take them on reactive horses. You don't have to be hurt to learn. Fortunately, I come away, after 28 years of horse ownership, and the 3 years of lessons, ~10 years before this, with healed stitches above my left eye and a healed RH humorous. I have met horse owners with a history of trips to the ER that they are proud of. 
Slow and steady is the best way to learn.


----------



## bsms

Corporal said:


> ...You really must train yourself to point your toes forward in order to sit well...You don't have to have your toes pointed directly in front of you, 100% parallel when you jump a fence, but it helps to have them as close to that as possible...
> 
> ...By turning the toes way out, especially in a Western or Western type of saddle, the rider braces weight against the stirrups, and stirrup leathers can wear out and rip while riding...


Well, there are some well respected jumpers who disagree. Your thigh affects your seat. Your toe does not. Your calf may or may not affect your riding, depending on style and saddle. If 15-45 out works for George Morris and VS Littauer & the US Cavalry, then MAYBE it is possible to do so and still "sit well" on a horse. If you are riding on the back of your thigh, you will be less secure - the muscle is too thick there, and too rounded.

Turning the toe out, western or otherwise, does NOT cause bracing. Forcing the leg into an uncomfortable position results in muscle tension and bracing, but that is as true of toes forward as toes anywhere else. 

The difference is that I've never heard of anyone straining to put their toes 60+ degrees out, but I've had instructors tell me to force my toes forward - stiffening my entire leg, pressing my knee into the horse, creating a pivot point and making my ankle rigid. But they told me, because someone told them, and they didn't understand the pros and cons of a given position.

I don't know what kind of western saddles folks have been riding, but my well-used Circle Y has stirrup leathers that will probably outlast the tree. Thick, heavy leather reinforced by thick nylon. And we have a 'sticky thread' on turning western stirrups because western stirrups tend to force the toe IN, not OUT. Even I cannot get my toes pointed more than 45 out in our western saddle, and I'd be scared of anyone with the leg strength to do so.

FWIW, the old style of western riding made it easier to have toes forward due to the position of the lower leg - forward, and around the narrowest part of the horse. When you stretch the leg out long and in front, the toe naturally falls more forward. When I ride in a similar position - which I've done often enough - a relaxed leg with heels down and toes forward just happens. And given the size of the spurs some guys rode with then, that might be part of why they did so. Notice Jack is in no danger of accidentally spurring his horse:








​ _Jack Woffard of the Shoe Bar outfit flanking the trail herd. Shoe Bar Ranch, Texas_, 1912​ 
Erwin E. Smith Collection Guide | Collection Guide

Jack wouldn't win many dressage competitions like that, and I don't think he tried to jump many fences like that, but I'd wager he knew something about staying on a horse and riding for 12+ hours/day. :shock:


----------



## Clava

bsms said:


> Your thigh affects your seat. Your toe does not. .


 
Simply not true by pointing the toe forward the way your thigh is positioned changes and that can make a huge difference to how you use your seat and which muscles are in close contact with the horse. My dressage lessons are all about how we position ourselves and how that affects the horse, right down to moving a big toe :lol:


----------



## bsms

Your toe does not CONTROL your thigh. You toe is an INDICATOR of your thigh, although an imprecise one. And while toes front may be right for dressage, it apparently is NOT right for many other styles of riding. That is because your thighs affect your seat, but your toes do not. When my left & right thigh are in the same position, my left & right feet are not. My left always points out 15-20 deg more than my right. And that is true standing in the shower or out jogging on our trails - and I've got 55 years of experience doing that (40+ for jogging)!

Most beginners told to point their toes forward do so by stiffening and twisting their lower leg, while doing nothing with their thighs. You don't collect a horse by its head, and you don't improve your seat with your toes.


----------



## Clava

bsms said:


> Your toe does not CONTROL your thigh. You toe is an INDICATOR of your thigh, although an imprecise one. And while toes front may be right for dressage, it apparently is NOT right for many other styles of riding. That is because your thighs affect your seat, but your toes do not. When my left & right thigh are in the same position, my left & right feet are not. My left always points out 15-20 deg more than my right. And that is true standing in the shower or out jogging on our trails - and I've got 55 years of experience doing that (40+ for jogging)!
> 
> Most beginners told to point their toes forward do so by stiffening and twisting their lower leg, while doing nothing with their thighs. You don't collect a horse by its head, and you don't improve your seat with your toes.


 
But you can improve your seat by changing your toes  I have done exactly that. Toes are connected to seat so of course changing one changes the other.


----------



## jaydee

Clava has already said what I wanted too
I can only add that every part of our body hinges onto another part and when you change the position on just one thing it will have a knock on effect on everything else and make those parts either work better or reduce the effect they have.
Its something that you see mostly though when you want to do something more than sit (or stick on) a horse and trail ride.
You cant expect to get results and ease of a new position overnight and for older riders it may never be possible if they have joint problems such as arthritis


----------



## bsms

Moving your toe will affect your ankle. Your ankle can affect your calf. Your toe will not affect your thigh, but your thigh will affect your toe because it is 'upstream'. So your toe can indicate how your thigh is resting against the horse, but turning your toe will not turn your thigh. If you disagree, rotate your toe while keeping your thigh still against your horse. It is easy.

Turning your toe straight ahead will tend to cost you contact because it will pull the ankle out. That is probably a good thing for dressage. It apparently is not a good thing for jumping, and for a secure forward seat. In many western saddles, it simply would not matter because the saddle will prevent constant contact between calf and horse.

I realize I'm writing as an old guy who took up riding late. That isn't all bad. Unlike many young teens who learn, I wanted to know the reason WHY for everything. And something that I like about the Cavalry manual and someone like VS Littauer is that they explain exactly WHY doing something helps for their activity, rather than claim it is the only way to ride.

The guy who wrote the final Cavalry manual was generally considered one of the finest horseman the US Cavalry ever produced. So when someone says you must have your toes forward to sit well on a horse...I'm not the only one throwing the BS flag. And the instructors who tell their students to get their toes forward, without understanding what it may cost the student, do no favors to their horses or students.

I think it was our fellow poster Foxhunter who told me I should reach behind me, grab the rear of my thigh and twist my thigh to get it twisted as far to the front as I could, particularly near the beginning of a ride. THAT is good advice. But I guarantee you that I, like many other students, can twist my toes forward without it having ANY effect on my thigh.

Again - anyone who disagrees can go sit on a horse and practice rotating their toes without moving their thigh. If my aging, jogging-stiffened legs can do it, anyone can. "Toes forward" is like "headset" - it focuses on the irrelevant while ignoring the critical.


----------



## jaydee

Sorry bsms - but there is no way that I can move my toe direction either standing, sitting on a horse or sitting on a chair without it altering the position of my thigh. If I turn my toe more forwards when I'm riding it puts the part of my thigh (and the whole leg in general) where I have most strength closer to the horse - you must have very flexible ankles!!!


----------



## Clava

bsms said:


> Movi "Toes forward" is like "headset" - it focuses on the irrelevant while ignoring the critical.


Seat position is critical, absolutely critical to the finer points of riding, not to stickability or comfort or to a jumper, but it does make a huge difference.

Turn your toes forward and your knee turns in to which in turn affects the position of the long muscle down your thigh (my RI would tell me which they are, but not something I remember). If I rode with my toes outward I would not be able to use my seat correctly and nor would my heel be light and able to give the aids I require of it. 

Toe, heel, leg and thigh position all affect the seat which is our largest contact with a horse and how we can communicate in minute detail. Horses are supremely sensitive and can certainly feel the difference even if it makes no difference to you.


----------



## bsms

Dang! Whoever thought a 55 year old guy would have unheard of flexibility! Guess I'll go thru the rest of the day feeling like a young gymnast instead of an old fat fart.

For the OP: Sit on your horse and see if you can move your toes around without moving your thigh. You don't even need the horse. Sit in front of your computer and move your toes +/- 20 deg and see if your thigh twists with it.

However, if this is true: "_Turn your toes forward and your knee turns in_", then you can guess why I think toes forward can lead to gripping with the knee, which is normally a fault. That is one of the reasons given by Littauer & the Cavalry manual to leave your toes out some amount - because if you keep your ankles loose, then turning the toe in will eventually press your knee in while pulling your ankle & calf away.

Also for the OP: if you want to know how to ride endurance, then ask endurance riders and/or go to some endurance events and see how they ride.

7 Characteristics of a Great Endurance Horse – September 2011 | Perseverance Endurance Horses

"_If I rode with my toes outward I would not be able to use my seat correctly and nor would my heel be light and able to give the aids I require of it._"

Odd, isn't it. Many great riders have managed to use their seat correctly while having their toes out 15-45 deg. Now, is their heel "light"? Probably not, since a forward seat puts weight into the heel. Is their heel ready to give cues in a way that would be effective in a dressage competition? Maybe not. So should a dressage rider put their toes out 20-30 degrees? Probably not. But if cowboys and jumpers stay on horses with their toes pointing out, then it is hard to avoid the conclusion that it has nothing to do with the security of your seat.

Dressage is a subset of riding. It values covering the smallest distance with the most effort to the horse. Like ballet, it isn't about efficiency. And like ballet, it isn't wrong - unless you are running a race. So if the OP wants to move into endurance racing, she would probably be better off thinking about how to cover ground efficiently rather than spectacularly.


----------



## jaydee

I could cope - and frequently do find my toes at anything up to 30 degrees depending on how much drive I'm having to give the horse I'm riding. I wouldn't feel good at 45 degrees
A lot depends on how you are trained to start off - I took this pic of Beezie Madden at the weekend and she tends to mostly have a forward toe. She and the men who came first and second had similar styles.


----------



## Clava

bsms said:


> Dressage is a subset of riding. It values covering the smallest distance with the most effort to the horse. Like ballet, it isn't about efficiency. And like ballet, it isn't wrong - unless you are running a race. So if the OP wants to move into endurance racing, she would probably be better off thinking about how to cover ground efficiently rather than spectacularly.


 
I'm not talking just about dressage, I'm talking about general riding and I ride the same out hacking or schooling. Turning your knee in is not about gripping with it (and my RI refers to a snug hug with the knees:lol:, gripping is only a fault if it impacts upon the lower leg and the use of the seat), but turning your toe out lessens the whole effectiveness of the thigh muscles for general riding. We will have to agree to disagree because if you have never been shown the difference and felt the difference I don't think you'll see / feel what I'm getting at.


----------



## bsms

I'm not trying to convince anyone to ride with their toes out 45 deg. If you don't need to, then don't. My guess is that on a really wide horse, my feet would be driven out by my inability to get my thighs wide enough, and I would end up riding on the back of my thighs just to get my legs around the horse. My horses are both slender, and I ride an Aussie or English saddle because it doesn't force my legs way out like our western saddle does. But I would never TRY to make my feet go out 45 degrees.

There are a lot of different approaches to riding. If I had a horse with aptitude for dressage, and if I also had an interest, then I would try to learn how to ride like a good dressage rider does. But my horse & I both lack patience, and we both like to go fast, and she acts happier when I ride her with a forward seat - so that is my goal. Unless we are on a trail, in which case she relaxes more if I have more weight in my seat and a further aft center of gravity. Since our trail rides are all about calming her down, that is how we ride the trail.

One of the joys of owning a horse is being able to adjust my riding for what both of us like to do. I have a lot of respect for a good dressage rider, and I enjoy watching them ride. I also like to watch videos of cutting horses, although I'll never work cattle and don't follow their style of riding. That is why it is important for instructors to explain WHY they want a student to do XYZ. Once you know the why, you can adjust if needed as your interests or abilities change.


----------



## bsms

Clava said:


> ...We will have to agree to disagree because if you have never been shown the difference and felt the difference I don't think you'll see / feel what I'm getting at.


As long as we can also agree that some great riders with impressive records also disagree with you. The US Cavalry disagreed with you, for goodness sakes. That ought to suggest a certain amount of flexibility in thought might be in order...


----------



## KatieQ

Dressage simply means "training", in french. So in my opinion it is a good foundation for any discipline or style of riding. It is also a good foundation for training a young horse, as it teaches them flexibility and engagement, using their muscles in a more efficient way to move forward.


----------



## olympustraining

Dressage is the foundation of all riding, a correct seat, and communication with your horse. It will help you with ANY discipline. Dressage is still english, so it's really not that different from h/j or eventing. You sit up instead of forward and it will vary between trainer to trainer, but it isn't all that different really.


----------



## bsms

olympustraining said:


> Dressage is the foundation of all riding, a correct seat, and communication with your horse...


No, it is not. It is not the foundation of any style of forward riding. It is not the foundation of 'on your pockets' western riding. It is not right for barrel racing, cross-country, polo, steeplechase, cutting cattle, reining, etc. It is not the foundation for any style that favors covering the most ground with the least effort, just as ballet isn't the basis for jogging.

It is, however, the only subset of riding that BELIEVES it is the foundation of all good riding...:evil: The position taught in dressage is the best position for riding a horse in a high degree of collection. But since that is not the goal of every style of riding...


----------



## Clava

bsms said:


> As long as we can also agree that some great riders with impressive records also disagree with you. The US Cavalry disagreed with you, for goodness sakes. That ought to suggest a certain amount of flexibility in thought might be in order...


 
There are many riders with special talent, but that does not take anything from my points for general riding.

I have no idea why you hold the US cavalry is such high esteem in terms of actual equitation skills. Being able to ride into battle is not about great riding and perfect skills, dressage may have started out as a means of training horses as weapons, but it has become simply the balance and refinement of the aids to be in harmony with the horse.

The UK cavalry were also fantastic but I wouldn't want most of them riding any of my horses in the past or even now - although I think they are hugely improved from this.

Cavalry Training - ALL OUR MOUNTED TROOPS ARE BUSY GETTING READY FOR GREAT ADVANCE - British Pathé


----------



## Clava

US cavalry stopped using horses after the second world war (I think?) but I would be happy to see any video footage you have of them, all I could find was
http://www.britishpathe.com/video/national-horse-show-in-new-york/query/Cavalry+US

So yes the Cavalry could ride but that doesn't mean they are an ideal to aspire towards. There are lots of unbalanced riders who can ride and make the horse do things, but that is no reason to ride in that way.


----------



## bsms

There is also no reason to ride like a dressage rider if dressage is not your goal. There are many dressage riders who are terrible riders. Think of how many threads we see on 'collecting your horse's head'! I've watched dressage students riding with their backs braced as they pull on their horse's mouth, restricting their horse's ability to balance, to move, and to see.

Bad riding and bad riders exist in all subsets of riding. Good riders and good riding exist in all subsets of riding. So a rational person, interested in riding, should pick a style appropriate for what they want to do, and learn how to ride that style well - whether it be dressage, jumping, barrel racing, cutting, endurance (which is what the OP was interested in, IIRC), trail riding, etc.

I have only seen one set of riders take offense at the idea that there is more than one way to ride a horse, and that is dressage riders. Not ALL dressage riders, but SOME. I've never seen a post by a barrel racer, cutter, or endurance rider saying that "XXX is the foundation of all riding, a correct seat, and communication with your horse".

There is nothing wrong with dressage. It is a valid approach to riding, and I wish those who pursue it happiness and success in their goals. I just wish some dressage fans would understand it is not the end-all of riding...


----------



## deserthorsewoman

I have to jump in now too
Where does dressage originate? In Europe. Now it has swamped America, but without, hmm, let's say, the tradition with it. Here, dressage is seen as a branch of equine sports, like cutting, reining, jumping, hunter etc. In Europe EVERYBODY starts out learning basic dressage and eventually branches out. One goes towards jumping, another wants to go higher up in levels in dressage, the next one likes cross country. The base for all that is dressage. Young horses are started with dressage principles, then, according to talent, learn to jump, a series of obstacles in an arena or outside, with natural ones. But they're still doing their dressage schooling daily. Every time there are communication problems between horse and rider, guess what....back to dressage work until everything is back to par. All Olympic level jumpers are capable of doing a pretty decent upper level dressage test, riders and horses. And eventers, guess what, part of their test is dressage. Why? Because it will develop a handy horse. A horse which can be controlled in any situation. A rider who doesn't have to pull like crazy to slow down enough if the distance to a jump is not quite right, or has to close his eyes and trust in the guy upstairs. 
Dressage in Europe is not the elite sport it is here. Upper level, yeah, just like any other sport, because equipment( I.e. the horse) is more expensive. 

So anybody who says dressage is not needed, better go ahead and demonstrate how handy his or her horse is, regardless of tack. No cheating with bigger bit and the like, tho. 

Oh yeah, and military......European riding academies were military initially. Because you need a handy horse. The above mentioned close your eyes and trust in the guy upstairs would most likely get you killed.

And if you compare higher level dressage and Vaquero/ californio style or the Spanish vaquero........guess what...lots of similarities. 
So, no need to re- invent the wheel ......


----------



## core

bsms said:


> There is also no reason to ride like a dressage rider if dressage is not your goal. There are many dressage riders who are terrible riders. Think of how many threads we see on 'collecting your horse's head'! I've watched dressage students riding with their backs braced as they pull on their horse's mouth, restricting their horse's ability to balance, to move, and to see.
> 
> Bad riding and bad riders exist in all subsets of riding. Good riders and good riding exist in all subsets of riding. So a rational person, interested in riding, should pick a style appropriate for what they want to do, and learn how to ride that style well - whether it be dressage, jumping, barrel racing, cutting, endurance (which is what the OP was interested in, IIRC), trail riding, etc.
> 
> I have only seen one set of riders take offense at the idea that there is more than one way to ride a horse, and that is dressage riders. Not ALL dressage riders, but SOME. I've never seen a post by a barrel racer, cutter, or endurance rider saying that "XXX is the foundation of all riding, a correct seat, and communication with your horse".
> 
> There is nothing wrong with dressage. It is a valid approach to riding, and I wish those who pursue it happiness and success in their goals. I just wish some dressage fans would understand it is not the end-all of riding...


I agree that dressage is not the only path to good basics. However, you don't see a huge amount of upper level dressage trainers who teach bad basics. You see bad basics from bad riders who think they can teach. Normally, those people are stuck below 2nd level. 

I think mainly I encourage dressage over other disciplines because we do have a few ways to verify that the instructor isn't a complete fraud. we have centerline scores, USDF medals where you have to get X number of scores that demonstrate at least a grasp of the basics, we have instructor certificatiin, L judge certification (which again can help show a grasp of the fundamentals), USDF University credits, etc. Maybe they have something similiar to these in other disciplines, but all I know to tell a newbie when looking at non-dressage trainers is to check show records and watch other students... but that's a crap shoot if you don't know what's good or not good riding.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bsms

"Where does dressage originate? In Europe. Now it has swamped America, but without, hmm, let's say, the tradition with it."

You mean, folks were riding horses in America without learning dressage first? How dare they! That would mean, if dressage is the basis of all good riding, that no one rode well in America until recent times.

"So anybody who says dressage is not needed, better go ahead and demonstrate how handy his or her horse is, regardless of tack. No cheating with bigger bit and the like, tho."

Feel free to watch a cutting competition. Please explain how the Plains Indians were such admired riders, riding without European instruction in "the foundation of all riding, a correct seat, and communication with your horse".

Feel free to explain how cowboys existed. While many rode poorly, many others rode well. Please explain how the US Cavalry rode hundreds of miles in a week, and rode in combat with their hands filled with weapons, while NOT being able to ride, sit, or communicate.

And while you are at it, please explain the rotten dressage riders. Because rotten riders exist in all disciplines.

Please stop making assertions, and attempt to refute the argument that millions of riders rode well without ever reading a dressage manual, and continue to do so today. Please refute the argument that many riders do a variety of sports well while NOT riding in a dressage position. Indeed, how did the Chinese learn to ride, and how did riders learn to ride prior to 1600? Were they all incompetent? I rather doubt it...

Dressage is *A* way of riding. It just is not the *ONLY* way of riding.


----------



## Clava

bsms said:


> There is nothing wrong with dressage. It is a valid approach to riding, and I wish those who pursue it happiness and success in their goals. I just wish some dressage fans would understand it is not the end-all of riding...


It is not the end all...it is the start and the foundation.


----------



## deserthorsewoman

bsms said:


> "Where does dressage originate? In Europe. Now it has swamped America, but without, hmm, let's say, the tradition with it."
> 
> You mean, folks were riding horses in America without learning dressage first? How dare they! That would mean, if dressage is the basis of all good riding, that no one rode well in America until recent times.
> 
> "So anybody who says dressage is not needed, better go ahead and demonstrate how handy his or her horse is, regardless of tack. No cheating with bigger bit and the like, tho."
> 
> Feel free to watch a cutting competition. Please explain how the Plains Indians were such admired riders, riding without European instruction in "the foundation of all riding, a correct seat, and communication with your horse".
> 
> Feel free to explain how cowboys existed. While many rode poorly, many others rode well. Please explain how the US Cavalry rode hundreds of miles in a week, and rode in combat with their hands filled with weapons, while NOT being able to ride, sit, or communicate.
> 
> And while you are at it, please explain the rotten dressage riders. Because rotten riders exist in all disciplines.
> 
> Please stop making assertions, and attempt to refute the argument that millions of riders rode well without ever reading a dressage manual, and continue to do so today. Please refute the argument that many riders do a variety of sports well while NOT riding in a dressage position. Indeed, how did the Chinese learn to ride, and how did riders learn to ride prior to 1600? Were they all incompetent? I rather doubt it...
> 
> Dressage is *A* way of riding. It just is not the *ONLY* way of riding.


No, you don't understand what I was trying to get across. Don't see dressage as the competition with hard hat and pretty black frock coat and shiny black boots as dressage. This is competition, just like a reining or cutting futurity, for example. It's about as exaggerated as jumping a 6 foot wall or a 30" sliding stop, where, in the real world, the cow would be long gone laughing all the way. 
Basic dressage, as an example, is being precise. Doing a perfect circle, turning exactly at the circle points, coming back on track on an exact point, take off in a canter from a standstill, stopping from a trot on a given point, being able to control your horses front and hind at all times without inflicting pain, gymnastizining your horse so it can perform more difficult maneuvers, building the strength and suppleness to carry more weight on it's much stronger hindend. And strangely, with that comes the" headset". 
And speaking about cowboys....who were the first cowboys? Yes, western riding evolved into something almost entirely different over time, at least some of it. But still, good western riding requires a light, responsive, " ridable " horse. This is being achieved how? Exercises. So I guess dressage is exercising. 
Oh, and tradition....here the vaquero tradition is alive and finding more and more followers. And many of these followers ride horses for a living.


----------



## jaydee

I'm sure the difficulty some members have in understanding why the basics of dressage were the foundation stones for other disciplines is because they only see dressage as something at upper level and not as we Europeans see it.
Just because the sitting position, leg position etc changes to suit the need the base is still the same - unless you're just someone who wants to be a passenger and leave it all to the horse - the traditional cues/aids produce the same results
In the UK many dressage riders will start at Pony Club level - and it will look very different to the sort of thing you see in the Olympics - but its still called dressage and its where we begin. This young rider isn't on an expensive high trained pony, she doesn't have 'long' stirrups and is posting/rising to the trot.
She could take what she's learning from this to jumping, gymkhana, hunting, or any of the western riding sports because she's gaining a knowledge of how to make the pony do what she asks it to do and if you can do that you can turn your hand to just about anything if you want too with just some small changes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcN3JorCLEM


----------



## updownrider

jaydee said:


> I'm sure the difficulty some members have in understanding why the basics of dressage were the foundation stones for other disciplines is because they only see dressage as something at upper level and not as we Europeans see it.


Hey, it is not only the Europeans that can see it.  Besides, aren't you living here now so you are one of us? :wink:


----------



## deserthorsewoman

updownrider said:


> Hey, it is not only the Europeans that can see it. Besides, aren't you living here now so you are one of us? :wink:


That's why she said ' some '..;-)


----------



## swordwhale

I had the good luck to fall into a 4-H horse club whose leader and family members were into dressage and three phase eventing (and Pony Club). I did not have access to trails, and drressage gave me more schooling exercises, more variety, and a better understanding of horsemanship in general (my patient half-Arab gelding did everything from dressage to pole bending to swashbuckling in a medieval faire). I highly recommend at least the lower levels... and if it sounds intimidating, just remember, it's a fancy French word for training. Just training. That's all.


----------



## bsms

jaydee said:


> I'm sure the difficulty some members have in understanding why the basics of dressage were the foundation stones for other disciplines is because they only see dressage as something at upper level and not as we Europeans see it.
> 
> Just because the sitting position, leg position etc changes to suit the need the base is still the same...


Being the SOME, I do not see dressage only as upper level performances. But:

There are many great riders and superb horsemen who have never taken a dressage lesson or read a dressage book. Thus their great riding / horsemanship is independent of "dressage". The Plains Indians rode well - with an excellent seat, communication, etc - without taking any lessons from dressage or reading any dressage theories.

Indeed, that may have helped them, since the dressage theory of the 1800s was that a balanced horse had equal weight on each leg - a theory we now know is incorrect.

Dressage and its practices are not the basis of good riding. Good riding is the basis of dressage, with dressage being a specific area of interest by the rider.

Thus "Toes Front" has nothing to do with good riding, unless you first define "Good for what?" It is good for cueing a well-trained horse who isn't going to suddenly stop, balk, spin, etc. It is not so good for jumping or other activities on horses likely to stop without warning.

The shoulder-hip-heel in a vertical line rule is also a fallacy, UNLESS you define good for what. It is good for when the horse's effort involves vertical motion, as dressage level collection does. It is not good for jumping, polo, cutting, etc because it would set you up for failure. 

A level foot is used in dressage, and makes sense for the goal. Heels down works well in jumping and most western riding. It helps keep you secure in a sudden stop.

Someone can learn a forward seat and ride it their entire lifetime and ride securely, efficient, and in control of their horse. Arguably, forward riding is BETTER for the horse than a dressage seat, since it frees up the back better than a central balance, and is already in synch with the horse's natural balance.

A western saddle distributes weight differently than an English saddle, so western riding 'on the pockets' works well in a western saddle, but not so well in an English one. I know ranchers who ride in an old west style, and they stick on their horses thru things no dressage horse is tested on, and ride in country that makes me wet myself with fear just to look at, and do so with an enthusiastic, cooperating horse - all 'on their pockets'.

My Appy Trooper's sire was known as a stallion you could ride 50 miles a day 3-4 days running, and he would still be ready to roll the next day. My friend said it sometimes took 10 miles of riding just to settle him. That style of riding is not wrong or unbalanced. It does not make for a 'bad seat', nor does it distress the horse. A dressage instructor would not look at the guy below and compliment him, but it worked in 1900 and it works now:










Seems to me SOME of our European friends are the ones who are blind. They assume their tradition is the only one that works, and refuse to look at the millions of horses ridden and ridden well without reference to their tradition. They claim dressage is the basis for a good seat, yet the more violently moving sports, such as polo, jumping, cutting & reining reject it. So how does a cowboy cut cattle with an bad seat? Good question, but one our dressage fanatics ignore - because it doesn't fit their world view.

This will be my last post on this thread. For those who believe dressage is the basis for everything...well, you remind me of this story:

A man arrived at the Pearly Gates & was admitted by St Peter. St Peter takes him on a tour of heaven, pointing out a Catholic suburb, and area that is mostly Methodist, etc. After pushing past the hollering Pentecostals, they enter a large field and approach a small area with a large wall around it. St Peter tells the newcomer to walk carefully and make NO NOISE.

The newcomer asks why.

St Peter says, "We're approaching the Baptists. They think they are the only ones in heaven, and we don't want to spoil their happiness...now, QUIETLY!"

Have fun riding dressage. Please try not to notice the many fine riders who also are in riding heaven. For core and others who are a bit more accepting...finding a good instructor is tough. Dressage may well do a better job of credentialing good ones, or make it easier to know if someone is good. Someone with experience can watch an instructor ride or view their horses and lessons, but a newbie in western riding takes his / her chances. My youngest daughter took lessons for a few years in western riding, but we went thru 3 or 4 poor instructors before finding someone who understood horses and how our riding affects them. And she came from a barrel racing background...:shock:

I wish those who love dressage well, and hope they all enjoy their riding. I particularly thank those who enjoy dressage without looking down on others.


----------



## jaydee

updownrider said:


> Hey, it is not only the Europeans that can see it. Besides, aren't you living here now so you are one of us? :wink:


 I did underline the 'some' so I didn't offend the many of you that I know totally get the concept of dressage at lower levels!!!
Thank you very much for acknowledging me as 'one of you' though - I really appreciate that - for the better (and sometimes the worse) this is our home now


----------



## existentialpony

Wow. bsms... Why the constant crusade against dressage? It's every thread! How can you state "forward riding is BETTER" --an opinion, by the way-- yet adamantly insist dressage is horrible because of the belief that dressage is correct riding? You can't argue opinion with opinion as if they are facts. 

I love dressage, dressage has improved my riding and my horse's movement. I say the proof is in the pudding, no matter what your flavor might be.


----------



## olympustraining

bsms said:


> No, it is not. It is not the foundation of any style of forward riding. It is not the foundation of 'on your pockets' western riding. It is not right for barrel racing, cross-country, polo, steeplechase, cutting cattle, reining, etc. It is not the foundation for any style that favors covering the most ground with the least effort, just as ballet isn't the basis for jogging.
> 
> It is, however, the only subset of riding that BELIEVES it is the foundation of all good riding...:evil: The position taught in dressage is the best position for riding a horse in a high degree of collection. But since that is not the goal of every style of riding...


I respectfully disagree with this. 

A good dressage instructor will teach you how to ride with a forward, centered, and deep seat and stay balanced through each one. I have also trained Western, and found that dressage training is the best way to get a horse to job properly. Afterall, this is just a very collected trot! Dressage riders also sit mostly "on their pockets" in movements such as piaffe. It can also help horses cover more ground quickly. Extension movements in dressage come out of slow gaits and the horse has to cover a ton of ground quickly as well! It developes the hind quarters which is what gives a horse power to take off quickly.

Also, a good dressage program will teach a horse to balance through all gaits, transitions, and movements without a high degree of collection. Every dressage rider and horse should be able to perform basic riding without a lot of collection.

The goal of every discipline is to have a horse that is balanced, supple, athletic, and drive weight from behind without falling onto the forehand. This includes, western, jumping, saddle seat, eventing... I cannot think of a disciple that does not!

Also, ballet may not be the "basis" for jogging per se, but developing finesse and a nice gait would improve your jogging tremendously!


----------



## olympustraining

Clava said:


> I'm not talking just about dressage, I'm talking about general riding and I ride the same out hacking or schooling. Turning your knee in is not about gripping with it (and my RI refers to a snug hug with the knees:lol:, gripping is only a fault if it impacts upon the lower leg and the use of the seat), but turning your toe out lessens the whole effectiveness of the thigh muscles for general riding. We will have to agree to disagree because if you have never been shown the difference and felt the difference I don't think you'll see / feel what I'm getting at.


This is entirely correct! You do not want to pinch with your knee, but you do want to have contact through the knee. In fact, the knee is the pivital point for your leg in a jumping saddle. Having it locked by either pinching it or bowing it out away from the saddle will create tremendous imbalance and lack of synergy with your horse.


----------



## tinyliny

the alignment is only shoulder - hip- heel (really ankle) if the rider is in a sitting trot or walk. Even at canter, the alignment will move from perfectly in line to out to in to out , as the horse cycles through the canter and the rider adapts slightly to the swing of the gait. in such a case, the shoulder will still be over the ankle, but not with the hip as a midpoint. not like three points in line on a board. Balance, however , is still maintained.
At the posting trot, the rider will move the shoulders a tiny bit more forward as they must do in order to rise, and so the feet will, too. tiny. 
It's not that those 3 points are always in exact alingment, on above the other, but rather that they stack up in balance, centered over /under the rider's center of balance, and THAT is centered over the horse's center of balance. 

IF the horse is going faster, that point will be further forward because the horse is , in effect, falling forward constantly. The rider that wants to encourage a good forward motion will move forward to stay united with the horse's center of balance that is now moved forward. If the rider wants to inhibit that free falling forward motion, they will not lean forward as much, and by staying more upright, with their balance less forward, they encourage the horse to become more upright, to bring his balance more under the rider's balance.

Pair that with developing strength in the back legs to carry more weight and push, and you develop a horse that can be extended and contracted and still maintain balance. That is a big part of what dressage is working toward, the adaptable horse. Such a horse would be more useful where you need a horse that can adapt to changing speed/terrain, rather than a horse that just needs to run pellmell forward on the flat.

I am sure you can be a good rider without ever taking a dressage lesson, though. So many cowboys or other 'working' riders learn by doing, and doing it , alot. That's all good and well. For those that don't have access to that lifestyle, there's lessons, and if one can only do one type of lesson to start with, dressage will be your best bet to help you in any further riding you might wish to do.


----------



## bsms

existentialpony said:


> Wow. bsms... Why the constant crusade against dressage? It's every thread! How can you state "forward riding is BETTER" --an opinion, by the way-- yet adamantly insist dressage is horrible because of the belief that dressage is correct riding? You can't argue opinion with opinion as if they are facts.
> 
> I love dressage, dressage has improved my riding and my horse's movement. I say the proof is in the pudding, no matter what your flavor might be.


REALLY my last post on this thread. Here is what I wrote:



bsms said:


> There is nothing wrong with dressage. It is a valid approach to riding, and I wish those who pursue it happiness and success in their goals....*Arguably*, forward riding is BETTER for the horse than a dressage seat, since it frees up the back better than a central balance, and is already in synch with the horse's natural balance...
> ...Have fun riding dressage...I wish those who love dressage well, and hope they all enjoy their riding. I particularly thank those who enjoy dressage without looking down on others.


I bolded the "Arguably", since that sets out what follows as an opinion. I then gave reasons why someone could argue that side: "it frees up the back better than a central balance, and is already in synch with the horse's natural balance". You can see that argument made fuller in V.S. Littauer's "Commonsense Horsemanship", on why he concluded the forward seat was the most horse friendly way to ride (chapters 3 & 4)

I have also repeatedly said that dressage is a valid and admirable sport and a perfectly valid way to train and ride - IF your goals are in synch with the goals of dressage. After all, one doesn't use a hunt seat to cut cattle, because the goals of the style are not the same.

My ONLY objection to dressage has been the snobby attitude that "_Dressage is the foundation of all riding, a correct seat, and communication with your horse..._" The idea that Europeans in the 1600s & 1700s found the foundation of all riding would come as a shock to Chinese who rode horses for thousands of years, the famous Mongol cavalry, the Plains Indians, champion cutters and reiners and expert horsemen among the cowboys. The idea that someone cannot start by learning the hunt seat and ride well and communicate with their horse is pretty darn snobbish. Someone going over a 6' oxer impresses me more with their ability to ride a horse than someone who trots a circle.

Remember, this thread got hot & heavy with the argument that everyone should ride with their toes forward. Just because that is 'right' for dressage does NOT mean it is right for any other style. Foot level vs heels down - there is a REASON for each, and NEITHER is wrong or 'bad riding'. It just depends on what you are doing.

It boggles my mind that ANYONE could object to the idea that there are many effective ways to ride a horse, and that dressage is not the basis nor the ultimate expression of all horsemanship. I find it terribly sad that a handful of folks would be so bigoted about other riders as to look down on other approaches. I find it amazing that some folks think George Morris doesn't know how to ride well, or that cutting horses are poorly trained because they don't perform sustained collected gaits or practice riding perfect circles.

NOW! THIS is my last post on this thread. I don't think I could make my position any clearer if I used a large crayon. Dressage is an admirable sport and a fine way of riding. It is NOT the only way to ride well, and for thousands of years folks have ridden well without it.


----------



## deserthorsewoman

I really don't see anything snobbish in explaining how riding is being taught in other countries, and why and to what effect. 
Anybody can ride how he/she sees fit, as long as the horse doesn't get hurt. Heels up or down, toes in or out forward, backwards, whatever. We all have our opinion, some from hands on experience, others from watching, reading, thinking. IMO, good horsemanship is what counts. And an open mind and the willingness to try something different.


----------



## Clava

deserthorsewoman said:


> I really don't see anything snobbish in explaining how riding is being taught in other countries, and why and to what effect.
> Anybody can ride how he/she sees fit, as long as the horse doesn't get hurt. Heels up or down, toes in or out forward, backwards, whatever. We all have our opinion, some from hands on experience, others from watching, reading, thinking. IMO, good horsemanship is what counts. And an open mind and the willingness to try something different.


 
I can only write from my experience, and here it is the foundation of all good riding which includes cross country, jumping, eventing, and polo. having an understanding of correct balance and seat is essential, how you then take that information on into other sports is up to you, but you cannot get away from the understanding of what you do in the saddle affects the way a horse moves....and that includes the pointing of toes or the angle of your heel - but how much it impacts on what you are trying to do is another matter, if galloping at speed and stopping sharply is the requirement then such things as overall balance and independent hands will be more important to achieving the goal (but balance and independent hands still come from a basic foundation of correct riding).


----------



## jaydee

I don't see anyone trying to be snobby here - we are mostly all riders who either began in the low level dressage style of riding or had lessons further down the line and have learnt that we can adapt that style really easily and effectively to suit any other form of riding - including western
Now what I do see as snobby are the dressage riders who think that what they do is unique to them and has no place at all in any other form of riding.
Dressage is still dressage whether you are the little child in the pony club doing her novice test or Charlotte Dujardin at the top of the tree.


----------



## Zexious

I think Dressage riders get a bad rep. I have never actually met one that was snobbish... 

Back to the whole purpose of the thread, so long as OP (who hasn't posted in a minute xD) finds a reputable trainer, they can do any type of riding they like and it will be highly beneficial.


----------



## updownrider

bsms said:


> I find it amazing that some folks think George Morris doesn't know how to ride well


Please show where folks (plural) said - or think - George Morris (specifically) doesn't know how to ride well.


----------



## existentialpony

bsms said:


> Someone going over a 6' oxer impresses me more with their ability to ride a horse than someone who trots a circle.


You got me there. I can't believe I spend all of my time practicing unimpressive circles at the trot with my silly impeding deep seat and forward-facing feet. Well, I'm done here. Gotta go build a 6' oxer and do something useful.


----------



## Clava

existentialpony said:


> You got me there. I can't believe I spend all of my time practicing unimpressive circles at the trot with my silly impeding deep seat and forward-facing feet. Well, I'm done here. Gotta go build a 6' oxer and do something useful.


 
But the impressive person going over the 6' oxer will, at least in this country, have practiced those unimpressive circles in trot and canter to develop the flatwork skills required to be a great jumper.  The two are closely linked. You cannot control your horse towards and over those big jumps without the fundamental skills.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

The popularity of dressage riding in Europe and perhaps also the ever popularity of show jumping has much to do with the undoubted fact that riding out in the community - even in the countryside areas is now dangerous. Newcomers to the sport especially want to learn to ride but most novices do not have the skills - or the calm horse to tackle the hurly burly of riding in the community.

The difference between the forward style of riding (as per Littauer) and the basic grade dressage method (as per dressage) can be explained but the two systems are designed for different usages of the horse.

However there is absolutely no reason why any rider cannot learn both methods and neither is there any reason why the horses used cannot be ridden in both styles. Indeed an English trained horse can be ridden in Western tack and the rider who bothers to learn the Western way of riding can ride the horse out on the trails.

No one system of riding or training is better than the other - the different traditions are designed for different purposes.
BG


----------



## TrailDustMelody

Wow, you all have really had it out over here. xD Thanks for all the information, I guess. Right now I'm taking from a hunt seat trainer (I think I already said that). I'm used to trail riding in a dressage saddle, so it's a big change. I feel like my knees are crunched up to my stomach.  I'm still figuring out if I want to do this or just bite the bullet and find a dressage trainer.


----------



## jaydee

Good luck with your progress.
Can I just say that in the UK at least - where 'English riding' comes from!!! - the only time we ride with short stirrups to the extent you're describing that feels like you're knees are scrunched up is when we're actually jumping and the really long stirrups for in more advanced dressage when you're working in sitting trot (no posting at all). The remainder of the time we use a 'general purpose seat' similar to this


----------



## Corporal

TrailDustMelody _you might just change to a Dressage Trainer._ I'm not sure that people that begin HS are understanding that 2-point is a crouched and low-to-the-saddle position. Too many of them are reaching and too far out of the saddle, perched in precarious positions that can cause you to lose your balance and fall while jumping. It is just like the root of the phrase "reaching", as in reaching too far, as what you should NOT do while high up on a ladder.
The shorter stirrups are to create a spring in your legs, but, just like a frog, you should be balanced at every level of the spring. It is also more physically demanding than a very long leg and that is why, I believe* I* now prefer a very long stirrup, being 55yo and less athletic than in my physical prime as a 27yo.


----------

