# Dr Deb anyone?



## clairegillies

I think she's fabulous. 

rude? hmmm, I think I would say opinionated. and I believe she has the life and horse experience to back up her every opinion. 

Claire


----------



## tinyliny

I have read some of her books. Probably goes better to read her stuff and stay off her forum, 'cause I have heard she is not the easiest to deal with.


----------



## equiniphile

I've never watched her work with horses or read much about her training, but I recently wrote a lengthy paper on the prevalence of conditions such as DMD and atrioventricular valvular refurgitation murmurs in Thoroughbreds started too young and cited her work several times. I agree with most of her work that I read.


----------



## bsms

I like some of the stuff she has done, and have quoted her several times on this forum. However, I think she also sometimes speaks in areas where she doesn't have any actual expertise, or draws conclusions that go beyond what the studies show. For example, she writes that one of the fundamental rules is:

"Total weight of rider plus tack must not exceed 250 lbs"

Using a typical western saddle, that means no man over 215 should ever get on a horse. Any horse. Anywhere. But that ignores the real world, where horses carrying cowboys manage to work and live and perform just fine even if the cowboy is over 200 lbs. At 180, it probably means I'm abusing Mia's 900 lbs every time I get on her, although Mia seems to enjoy getting together with me and doing something.

She is vastly more knowledgeable than I am, but she seems to draw conclusions that I think go beyond the evidence. Just IMHO.


----------



## Palomine

She is well respected in the horse world, and has always had reputation of being blunt too.

She's not a sugar coater, that's for sure.


----------



## Paintlover1965

Never heard of her. Now I'm intrigued and will likely investigate a little. Thanks!


----------



## ~*~anebel~*~

Well according to her, she poops gold.

I find her to be quite closed minded and condescending, and after asking for advice and getting quite a hauty, rude answer, have not gone back.
And then, checking her "qualifications" her doctorate is in Vertebrae Paleontology - meaning the classification of fossils. With some extra horsey stuff thrown in in "interests". She is not the queen of riding and dressage and knowing it all and after watching some of her videos and looking at pictures, has a really back assward view of "collection" and really no idea what she's talking about when training horses.

Dr Hilary Clayton is far, far superior in knowledge, application and not being a crazy person. And she has fun letters like BRCVS, PHD, MRCVS behind her name, which indicate actual qualifications.


----------



## livelovelaughride

Who also is very interesting is Jean Claude at Horse Trainer,Lameness ,Dressage Jumpers and 3 day event Horse Training
He's an original thinker and has good bio mechanic studies. As well he demonstrates through proper riding and movement how to heal lameness injuries on his web. I would love to audit or attend his classes. Food for thought. 

I'm sure any number of these professionals have some bias/read strong opinions because they're all so passionate about what they do!

Hmmm. had no idea the link would be so clickable. interesting!


----------



## bsms

Here is a comment from her about western saddles:

"And yes, very many Western saddles are built so that the stirrups are hung 'way out to the front. Originally these saddles were intended for one purpose, and that was gymkhana events such as keyhole race, pole bending, or barrel racing, which are the "Western" equivalents of "English" jumping. These saddles, exactly like those meant for jumping, have the stirrup hangers far to the front because during the time the saddle is being used for what it it meant for, the rider stands or half-stands in the stirrups. When you stand or half-stand, you bring your hips over your feet."

No. Originally, stirrups on western saddles were out front because most western riders rode like this:










That was the almost universal western riding position around 1900. I have no desire to argue about the rightness or wrongness of that style, but it is pretty obvious why western saddles used to have stirrups hung forward - and it was NOT so they could stand up in the stirrups!

Vertebrae Paleontology doesn't give one knowledge of all aspects of riding.


----------



## ~*~anebel~*~

bsms said:


> Here is a comment from her about western saddles:
> 
> "And yes, very many Western saddles are built so that the stirrups are hung 'way out to the front. Originally these saddles were intended for one purpose, and that was gymkhana events such as keyhole race, pole bending, or barrel racing, which are the "Western" equivalents of "English" jumping. These saddles, exactly like those meant for jumping, have the stirrup hangers far to the front because during the time the saddle is being used for what it it meant for, the rider stands or half-stands in the stirrups. When you stand or half-stand, you bring your hips over your feet."
> 
> No. Originally, stirrups on western saddles were out front because most western riders rode like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was the almost universal western riding position around 1900. I have no desire to argue about the rightness or wrongness of that style, but it is pretty obvious why western saddles used to have stirrups hung forward - and it was NOT so they could stand up in the stirrups!
> *
> Vertebrae Paleontology doesn't give one knowledge of all aspects of riding.*


Or common sense, apparently.


----------



## COWCHICK77

Never heard of her....



bsms said:


> I like some of the stuff she has done, and have quoted her several times on this forum. However, I think she also sometimes speaks in areas where she doesn't have any actual expertise, or draws conclusions that go beyond what the studies show. For example, she writes that one of the fundamental rules is:
> 
> "Total weight of rider plus tack must not exceed 250 lbs"
> 
> Using a typical western saddle, that means no man over 215 should ever get on a horse. Any horse. Anywhere. But that ignores the real world, where horses carrying cowboys manage to work and live and perform just fine even if the cowboy is over 200 lbs. At 180, it probably means I'm abusing Mia's 900 lbs every time I get on her, although Mia seems to enjoy getting together with me and doing something.
> 
> She is vastly more knowledgeable than I am, but she seems to draw conclusions that I think go beyond the evidence. Just IMHO.


Exactly bsms, this is a rather unrealistic figure.
Just like some have pointed out in another thread there are some "big" boys riding the smaller framed reining horses and doing a fine job of it. It is about how the weight is carried on the horse!
My husband weighs about 250 now then add a saddle and gear totaling about 300 lbs+ and riding a 14.1 mare in tough country. My husband is a great rider/cowboy and his horses never complain/hurt. If so, I don' think they would have the work ethic they have and would be difficult to catch in the mornings...





bsms said:


> Here is a comment from her about western saddles:
> 
> "And yes, very many Western saddles are built so that the stirrups are hung 'way out to the front. Originally these saddles were intended for one purpose, and that was gymkhana events such as keyhole race, pole bending, or barrel racing, which are the "Western" equivalents of "English" jumping. These saddles, exactly like those meant for jumping, have the stirrup hangers far to the front because during the time the saddle is being used for what it it meant for, the rider stands or half-stands in the stirrups. When you stand or half-stand, you bring your hips over your feet."
> 
> No. Originally, stirrups on western saddles were out front because most western riders rode like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was the almost universal western riding position around 1900. I have no desire to argue about the rightness or wrongness of that style, but it is pretty obvious why western saddles used to have stirrups hung forward - and it was NOT so they could stand up in the stirrups!
> 
> Vertebrae Paleontology doesn't give one knowledge of all aspects of riding.


Again, I disagree with Dr. Deb. Even barrel racing you don't want your feet in front in a chair seat. You will get "left behind" the motion of the horse therefor hindering his movement.
Lumping all western saddles into one category is like lumping all pickups into the same category. It doesn't work like that. 
Different styles, trees, riggings, stirrups, skirts, horns, seats, cantles, forks...etc. make for a saddle that works for both the horse, rider and situation. 
Recently I rode with a Dressage trainer in one my ranch saddles on my horse. She was trying to get me to but my legs back underneath me and I used the excuse of my saddle fenders hang forward. Didn't work, she made get off let my stirrups down two holes and made me look where they hang naturally on my horse....hmmmm...then I had to ride the remainder of my lesson stirrupless...LOL! 
But yet I have saddles that the stirrups do sling out in front and those are the ones that I have found are the best for riding colts/green horses and long days. 
It really depends on the configuration, not all saddles are created equal and/or for the same job.


----------



## waresbear

I never knew she had a forum or gave advice about anything, other than confirmation. I read her confirmation clinic years ago in Horse & Rider magazine. She would critique a horse and explain why everything was considered good or bad. I liked that, but anything else, I can't comment but I am headed to her forum to check it out.


----------



## SaddleOnline

I have seen some of her articles/videos on conformation, but not much more...She did come across as very close minded and opinionated, She has some good points, but I think if you can't admit mistakes or allow for some common sense to prevail....then you may not be as smart as you say you are


----------



## Farmchic

I have her books on conformation and love having them as a resource. Didn't realize she had a forum.


----------



## Sahara

If you really want to get an insight into what Dr. Deb has to offer, I would suggest you get your hands on her series in Eclectic Horseman. You can purchase the back issues on line at the Eclectic Horseman website. Everybody can benefit from these articles. 

She has an online forum that is basically set up like a classroom. She is the teacher, you are the student. If you can't handle that, then it probably isn't for you.


----------



## Northern

I find her to be a bewildering mix of solid horsemanship knowledge & total "horsemanship" nonsense!

On the plus side, she rode under Tom Dorrance, Bill Dorrance (or at least saw Bill on his mare, Beaut, & reported that Beaut was THE most deeply-ok inside horse she's evern seen (Beaut was ready for the dog food factory before becoming Bill's project), Ray Hunt, Harry Whitney, Buck Brannaman, & a handful of other NH teachers whom she recommends on her site. In other words, she knows the difference between _making_ the horse comply & being a kind leader & _partner_ of the horse, & she witnessed the better way from the best.

Imo, she also has a major credit for her "Birdie" theory (Birdie Book, which I've not read, but her posts explain the basics): that the only thing that matters is that the horse be deeply-ok inside, & that's only possible when his "birdie" or attention, is within himself, with his handler, or somewhere in between. When it flies out yonder, the horse is no longer ok. 

Then it gets dicier, as anabel & others have explained. Her "True Collection" has been criticized by an advanced dressage rider on another forum, & I gleaned from reading the criticism that she knew whereof she spoke (including Deb's claim that the horse is the only teacher you need). 

She also has been criticized by dressage riders for presuming to undertake a translation of Baucher's book (old master, French), since she's unqualified to do so.

George Morris, jumping teacher legend, invited Deb to lecture to his students over a recent several-day clinic, so that was a feather in her cap, but I find his decision confusing, due to Deb's mix of good & bad stuff.

I'll add one more plus: Deb's care resulted in both of her horses being happy & long-lived.


----------



## Sahara

Not one of those names you mentioned would consider themselves natural horsemanship trainers.


----------



## Northern

The real point isn't what you _call_ the Dorrance's way, it's what's being done with (& for) the horse, imo. I use "NH" to mean students of the Dorrance's way, admittedly loosely. I know Buck doesn't like to use the term, & I would respect that in a conversation with him.


----------



## tinyliny

true, yet they are the one from whom the others, who created the marketing methods , (things like renaming things, dividing things down into games, and making it all about your horse "respecting" you)


----------



## COWCHICK77

tinyliny said:


> true, yet they are the one from whom the others, who created the marketing methods , (things like renaming things, dividing things down into games, and making it all about your horse "respecting" you)


I agree, and unfortunately they get lumped into the same category.


----------

