# Back in the good old days.



## Saddlebag

Many ranchers had cattle carrying spanish blood. These cattle didn't rise to their feet like a Hereford, they were up like deer and running. It was imperative that everything was done to keep the cattle calm to prevent a stampede. The hard stop in Hollywood was done for drama. Next time check how many horses have their mouth wide open. I watched a western whereby about 20 riders were galloping in desert country with rock and cactus. The camera was filming from a distance to get all the riders. I realized that the extras were not very skilled as riders and the horses turned into runaways, the cowboys glued to the horn.


----------



## Ladytrails

From what I have read, the wranglers providing horses for Hollywood riders often use(d) American Quarter Horses or crossbred QHs because they were tolerant of the riders. In other words, they would do their jobs despite the poor riders. The wranglers get a couple of hours with the riders to teach them how to stay on. I think it's rare that the actors are already good riders.


----------



## nrhareiner

John Wayne was actually a good rider. 

Keep in mind that the way prople rode back 50 years ago is not who they ride today. You can see this in just watching videos of shows from back then to now. So you can not judge good or bad riding based on what you see in these shows. One they are just that shows. Then add in it was just a different time and way of training.


----------



## bsms

Actually, that was fairly close to how things WERE done. See the pictures below from around 1900-1910:





































All pictures from Erwin E. Smith Collection Guide | Collection Guide

The Erwin E. Smith Collection is the best collection of photographs I've seen of working cowboys from that era. It is well worth browsing - but you will see a lot of high held hands, high heads, etc.

Now, they didn't race up and suddenly stop and dismount mid-stop just for fun. THAT is Hollywood! And much of the time on a cow pony was walking:










But they were not dressage riders, and many were not interested in fine riding. Most cowboys of the day were young. They had a hard life, and their animals shared it. Teddy Roosevelt, writing about ranching in the 1880s, distinguished between horses you owned personally and broke for your use, and ranch horses supplied to the cowboys - that were broken in 3-4 rides in a few days by professionals.

In their defense, I doubt they were all that abusive of the mouth. There was a lot of slack rein time. But when they wanted to stop, the horse had better stop. And given what could happen if a horse didn't stop, I don't blame them.

Also, the dressage idea of collection isn't really the end all of riding. I've never seen any empirical data showing that collected gaits make a horse live longer or function better. Nor is a dressage headset a good idea covering rough ground at speed.

It might be that we know better now, but it also might be that the riding style they used was appropriate for the type horses they had and the work conditions they faced. I've never tried to push 2,000 steers thru unknown country for hundreds of miles. I've never ridden a half-broke horse for 24 hours straight in pee-poor weather, knowing that a fall could kill me. I'd be very careful before assuming we know vastly more than they did then. In some areas (jumping comes to mind), we DO know a lot more than a rider in the 1860s. But what most of us do not know is what the riders of the time really faced, day-to-day.


----------



## MHFoundation Quarters

Good point on the differences in training nrha. I was looking at old issues of the QH Journal & Western Horseman (50's to current) of my grandfather's not too long ago and the difference in reining horses then and now is miles apart. Then they stopped with their heads in the air and much heavier handed riders. Evolution of the sport in photos is pretty cool to see.


----------



## bsms

Another neat picture:

_Cowboy rounding up a cow and her calf somewhere in the "cow country"._, 1906-1910


----------



## QHriderKE

Not much has changed from those pics to stuff I see around here.

You gotta give those old time cowboys credit. They got a horse that didn't know anything and HAD to get a job done. They didn't have weeks to train the horse, they didn't do weeks of groundwork before getting on, they didn't worry about headset, they didn't care about proper leads or any of that. They cared about their next paycheque. 

My dad, for an example, is stuck in old western cowboy mode. He's a great rider, has a super duper seat, but he rides with that now frowned-upong heavy hand that all cowboys used to ride with.

Here's a 2 year old he broke:


----------



## nrhareiner

I do not think those cowboys where as heavy handed as you might think. Did they ride like we do today? No by todays standards they might be heavy handed but in reality I doubt they really where.

Just take a look at horses from 50 years ago compaired today. It really is hard to compair them. I would look at it like this. Babe Ruth it has been said that he was the greatest B-ball player ever. I would argue that while he was a great player and little doubt he was the best of hie era. If you took him and put him in a lineup today I would bet good money that he would have a very hard time even hitting the ball today. It is a different game in many ways today. Same goes for horses.


----------



## Northernstar

QHriderKE said:


> Not much has changed from those pics to stuff I see around here.
> 
> You gotta give those old time cowboys credit. They got a horse that didn't know anything and HAD to get a job done. They didn't have weeks to train the horse, they didn't do weeks of groundwork before getting on, they didn't worry about headset, they didn't care about proper leads or any of that. They cared about their next paycheque.
> 
> My dad, for an example, is stuck in old western cowboy mode. He's a great rider, has a super duper seat, but he rides with that now frowned-upong heavy hand that all cowboys used to ride with.
> 
> Here's a 2 year old he broke:


What a neat photo of your dad! He looks like a stellar individual. Was this taken in Canada? Looks like photos I've seen of the west in the US - I'm in the north woodlands of MI, and for some reason I've always pictured most of Canada the same....


----------



## xxBarry Godden

QH's Dad reminds me of the Canadian rodeo rider who taught me to ride Western - a man called Kennie Ross who came over to the UK in 1942 to fight in WW2 and never went back.

Look at QH's Dad's hands - two hands holding the rope reins. Held high up the chest by English standards. His legs are kept long and pushed slightly forwards. But his back is upright - even though his shoulders are bent (perhaps from ageing). 

He obviously looks comfortable in the saddle.

To my eye the reins have a droop and allow the horse free movement of its head in what looks like a slow relaxed canter/lope to the right.
The back of the saddle, behind the cantle, appears to have risen off the horse's back???

There is nothing new in horse riding. The golden age of the horse in society was probably in 1914 before the combustion engine started to make its presence felt. We can learn back from those guys back then who rode for a living either on the prairie, the countryside or the battle field.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

BSMS, a lovely group of photos - thank you for posting them.

Littauer was almost born for the saddle - his life was that of a privileged officer in a fancy cavalry regiment. His own mount(s) would have been superior to that of the other ranks. He would have been concerned for himself always to appear elegant in the saddle

In Europe in times of war the problem was to keep ready a herd of horses (the remounts) ready to replace those lost in combat. The horse had to match the level of competence of the trooper - hence a common system of riding was devised and taught by the military. Remounts would have received a certain minimal level of schooling so as to be usable within the troop in the shortest space of time. The trooper will have been taught by the sergeants by rote. 

In Britain this military system of riding was passed down to the civilians who were rich enough to own a horse kept for riding.

In the US, the cowboy may often have been a recent immigrant who had never ridden a horse before unless he'd been in the army or worked on the farm. Mostly he learned to ride in the saddle on the job. The horses used were expendable and relatively cheap to replace. Anyway - the horse meat could be eaten. Presumably the system of riding will have tended to be the same - after all, one cowboy would have taught the other. The cowboys rode one handed so as to leave the other free to work the rope.

For me, what is interesting is that two fundamentally different systems of riding emerged - 'Western' from the cowboy and 'English' from the cavalry. The reason for the difference can only be the horn - the soldiers did not herd cattle and therefore did not need a horn. 

The US Mclellan military saddle is essentially a padded version of an English saddle tree - and was designed to fit a wide range of horses.


----------



## bsms

Barry Godden said:


> ...For me, what is interesting is that two fundamentally different systems of riding emerged - 'Western' from the cowboy and 'English' from the cavalry. The reason for the difference can only be the horn - the soldiers did not herd cattle and therefore did not need a horn...


The horn may be part of it, but the drawings I've seen of cavalry manuals from the mid-1800s would probably look fine to QHriderKE's Dad. Even dressage riders had some points in common:










Look at the long leg, somewhat forward, hips back, feet forward in the stirrups...

Cavalry (if he would just 'home' his feet in the stirrups):










This rather famous US General:










Heels at or in front of the belt buckle would seem pretty normal, as was the long leg.

A sheriff, probably around 1920-30:










This photo has a good story to it:

""This is my Grand-dad Alex McDonald on 'Old Paint' with his son Fred on the back and a neighbor boy. About 1929-30. When he would go to work at the meat packing plant he would give Old Paint a good slap and Paint would go home so the family could use him. At the end of the day a slap would send him back to get Alex."

Historical Horse - Home











And WAIT! Who is this fat guy on the little Appy?


----------



## trailhorserider

I like to ride with a long stirrup and slightly forward legs too. I thought that was normal for western. Or at least it's normal for me. :lol: 

And I was reading somewhere about how dressage riders should aspire to have long stirrups too, and that an accomplished rider should be able to ride with just their toe-tips in the stirrups. Well, I may not be dressage caliber but I do find myself frequently with just my toes in the stirrups by the end of the ride. I am frequently re-claiming my stirrups as I ride because I am mainly riding off of balance and don't put a lot of weight in my stirrups.


----------



## trailhorserider

What would you guys consider "normal" for a western rider?


----------



## Country Woman

I like How Robert Redford rides horses nice an quiet


----------



## QHriderKE

I'm in Sask. Canada. (For who asked)

Well, that is an exceptionally good picture of my dad.

Here's the first ride on another filly: 








I'm ponying on the black. Not a pretty picture.

Here's a roping pic:









And now compare those to my riding:

This is my first time ever breaking a horse:









And the same horse a year later:






























Roping: (I'm on the sorrel)




























I can only ride with my feet in the stirrups for so long. If I'm riding for longer than an hour, I ditch my stirrups and ride without them for a while.

So, now that I've completely bombarded you with pics... moving on...


----------



## nrhareiner

trailhorserider said:


> What would you guys consider "normal" for a western rider?


 
It would depend on the discipline. A roper is not going to ride like a reiner who is not going to ride like a WP rider who is not going to ride like a cutter who is not going ride like they are out on a trail ride and so on.


----------



## bsms

One of the things that attracted me to western riding was that, since I don't do any horse sports, I was free to ride in whatever way worked best for me and my horses. I had read mostly dressage books before then, and the whole thing of 'twist your hip bone here, and support with the thigh while turning your head just so' approach was driving me nuts.

I asked a western rider how he cued his horse for a turn...he looked at me kind of odd, and replied, "I just look where I'm going. Mostly the horse figures it out."

There can be much more to it if one wants, and I've since learned to use my legs before reins...but the simplicity sure was nice. It was also a bit deceiving. It is like the guitar - very simple to learn, but a lifetime isn't enough to learn it all.


----------



## bsms

trailhorserider said:


> What would you guys consider "normal" for a western rider?


Hmmmm:










_Edwin Sanders, cousin to the photographer Erwin E. Smith, on the Three Circles Ranch in Texas. Three Circles Ranch, Texas._, 1906










Who am I to argue? Besides, the fellow in the second photo might shoot me...


----------



## trailhorserider

nrhareiner said:


> It would depend on the discipline. A roper is not going to ride like a reiner who is not going to ride like a WP rider who is not going to ride like a cutter who is not going ride like they are out on a trail ride and so on.


So they are all going to have a different seat position? I guess I never really thought of it that way. I mean, I know a roper might stand up more in the stirrups and a cutter might be sitting back on his bottom more.......I guess. I suppose I always thought most western riders had the same basic "home" seat position when sitting on the horse or at a walk and then they shifted their weight if they were in action- like a roper for instance. 

I would guess a reiner would be in sort of a "normal" position since he or she is neither roping or cutting. I would think reining would be a good example of western riding, at least from what I know about it. I don't know about WP. I really dislike how the horses move and the riders look pretty rigid as well, so I wouldn't really use it as an example of western riding. It is more of a beauty contest on horseback. I would never use that as an example of how an actual horse and rider are supposed to look out in the real world. :lol:

So do you guys think in general most western riders have a similar "home" position or not?


----------



## trailhorserider

bsms said:


> Hmmmm:
> 
> 
> 
> _Edwin Sanders, cousin to the photographer Erwin E. Smith, on the Three Circles Ranch in Texas. Three Circles Ranch, Texas._, 1906
> 
> 
> 
> Who am I to argue? Besides, the fellow in the second photo might shoot me...


Cool! 

I do think people tend to ride with shorter stirrups (in general) nowadays. And having your feet out in front of you is frowned upon. I have tried riding more with my legs under me as English riding books suggest is correct and I always end up back in my regular, comfy position. I don't know how much of that is me, and how much is my saddle(s). Maybe riding position is as much a result of the saddle as anything else. 

Different saddles definitely sit you differently. I like a saddle that lets me balance in a particular way on my seat bones (not a saddle that forces me back on my tail bone or against the cantle). Some saddles try to force you against the cantle and I dislike that.

I don't think we as modern riders are quite as forward with our legs as the old cowboys. Even as I look at my own picture, my leg is at about a 90 degree angle to the ground (the ****** make it look more forward). And in the photo of you, BSMS, your leg is at about a 90 degree angle as well.

Some of the guys in the old photos are much more forward than that. 

Now the drawing of the Calvary guy looks like the way I like to sit. And General Robert E. Lee looks pretty good, but are his toes pointed straight downward?


----------



## trailhorserider

bsms said:


>


I personally think this looks like an ideal body position for almost any rider other than someone racing, jumping, etc. But for trails, western, dressage, what-have-you, this is what I would consider "home" position. What do you guys think?


----------



## xxBarry Godden

BSMS, lovely photos

Re Stuart era cavalry - I always think drawings of this type are inaccurate for several obvious reasons and some less obvious. The body of the horse is massive and represents more a driving horse - perhaps a Suffolk Punch, than a lighter cavalry horse.
The rider is wearing a ‘rough’ as a collar which is more appropriate for the earlier Tudor era.
The human somehow is out of proportion with the horse.

Re Old Guard French Cavalry Corporal - that could almost be a modern day painting. The toe is in a position which would be applauded by a modern dressage rider, except it does not run parallel with the side of the horse. There’s no weight in the rider’s feet - the weight is all in the seat. The man sits bolt upright as if on parade - which well he may have been. He’s holding a regimental Eagle. 
My guess is that this drawing was to illustrate the uniform rather than the rider’s position.
Perhaps the saddle and the girth are set too far back. 
A lovely drawing, never the less.

General Lee certainly sits bolt upright - but again he is posing with his toes slightly down - perhaps to hold the horse still. My guess is he sitting on a military saddle, which would have been English - perhaps even made in England since the Brits were trading with The South in return for cotton.. The horse looks ‘tucked up’.

Your Sheriff is also posing. I suspect he is ‘holding’ the horse still for the photo by pushing down on his stirrups. He didn’t want to spoil the line of his position or his hands which are resting on the top of the horn. 

Your Grandad
Lovely, lovely, lovely and the story line too. Talk about giving the horse the credit of intelligence.
PS I must say you have changed

& The Boyo himself. BSMS, you could easily be sitting on an English saddle in that seating position - except you are allowing the horse more rein than we would but there again it has not been fitted with a bit. Again you are posing for the camera.
The horse looks young to me, it is still a touch croup high. Did it grow more? What age was it in this photo? We Brits would probably have waited to back it at three, earliest.

bsms, You’ve got a few heirloom photos there for future generations. Sadly there are no generations of young horse riders following me on but at least nowadays the photos can be stored ‘in the cloud’.

Barry G


----------



## xxBarry Godden

*Pictures for posterity*

Well, I suppose I'll have to chip in with the photos - forget riding style we are now talking history.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

Guys, you've lost the titles - that's my laptop's mistake

But they are all photos of some special occasion of horses we have owned over almost 40 years. The horses rest in my mind as they were and will always be. 
But look at me, who would have dreamed that a sprightly young man, such as myself would have grown into suc a decrepid old man?


----------



## xxBarry Godden

THR - The Old/New Guard Hussar - yes I agree the seat is drawn in a modern style - except the toes are pointing outwards. 

But the draw back to the trooper was that the seat was not good for cross country work when some jumping would be called for to get over logs, ditches and hedges. Then the legs are kept too long and the huge benefit which the stirrup irons and the flexation of the knee give was lost to the rider.
The seat drawn is a parade seat.

Most of Napoleon's cavalry were Polish and for that reason they would have ridden 'forwards'. Littauer refers to the Poles as being 'natural' horsemen akin to the Russian Cossacks who were their arch rivals. The Cossacks still ride 'forwards' as per Littauer, Capt Caprilli and et al.

In that early nineteenth century era, preparation for war was dressing up in a fine & fancy uniform and parading in public squares. An English Duke or Earl, would 'create' his own regiment and equip them with saddlery, horses and uniforms from his own pocket - all for his personal agrandisment.

This era of attire was when the Duke of Wellington won against the French, first in Spain and later at Waterloo, where Napoleon lost and was finally exiled to St Helena.

In Saumur at the St Cyr Academy, that is the seat the Cadre Noir would nowadays adopt to perform 'military' dressage - but it is all flat work on sandy soil in an enclosed arena for the benefit of the tourists. 
So the 'dressage' seat is utilised. The French don't do the 'work above ground' as does the Spanish Riding School in (Austrian) Vienna on a Slovenian horse ie the Lippiza (a breed formed on the Spanish Andalucian horse).


----------



## xxBarry Godden

I've read back to myself the comments I have made. I can put my thinking more simply:

The cowboy rides to work cattle.
The dressage rider works to display his/her prowess in an arena.
The forward rider rides to travel cross country.
The jumper rides to jump - whatever.
The racer rides to win
The polo player rides to play ball
Each category uses a specially devised saddle.

Each rider utilises a different riding technique but the limit is always that the human has only two legs and the horse four.

All seven ways of riding must be judged by their fitness for purpose.


----------



## nrhareiner

trailhorserider said:


> So they are all going to have a different seat position? I guess I never really thought of it that way. I mean, I know a roper might stand up more in the stirrups and a cutter might be sitting back on his bottom more.......I guess. I suppose I always thought most western riders had the same basic "home" seat position when sitting on the horse or at a walk and then they shifted their weight if they were in action- like a roper for instance.
> 
> I would guess a reiner would be in sort of a "normal" position since he or she is neither roping or cutting. I would think reining would be a good example of western riding, at least from what I know about it. I don't know about WP. I really dislike how the horses move and the riders look pretty rigid as well, so I wouldn't really use it as an example of western riding. It is more of a beauty contest on horseback. I would never use that as an example of how an actual horse and rider are supposed to look out in the real world. :lol:
> 
> So do you guys think in general most western riders have a similar "home" position or not?


All these differnet disciplines have their own staddles. Reason being that they each have their own position that the saddle will sit you in. A WP saddle will sit you upright more with your legs back a bit to help you sit correctly for WP. A reiner have the stirups more foward and again sit you in a position that makes it easier to cue the horse properly. You would be very hard pressed to exchange these 2 saddles and be able to ride correctly. They just put you in a different position which is needed for each event.


----------



## QHriderKE

I naturally ride forward. Even western, I ride in a "forward seat" 90% of the time. I've tried to not do that, but no matter what, it's my comfy position. When I'm riding English, my "forward seat" is a bit unstable right now, but it's getting better.
Also, I like my stirrups shorter than what many people would call "normal". 
I was taught to carry my weight on my feet. I took that literally, and now it's habit that I ride with most of my weight balanced on my feet.

I've been riding in a roping saddle most of my life too, that that makes a huge difference. They push you up and forward, making you stand up. I just got a barrel racing saddle, and it doesn't do that.

I pretty much have an english position in a western saddle.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

Quote: "I pretty much have an english position in a western saddle"

Well what's wrong with that??? It will enable you to ride most horses.


----------



## QHriderKE

You have a point, and I mean... I don't show other than rodeo events, so my western equitation doesn't really matter. It's just not typical western riding. 

I've found some more pics:


























I ride totally different than my dad. He likes his stirrups longer, heels waaaaay down and feet waaaay forward.


----------



## bsms

I also tend to ride a forward position in a western saddle. When I took lessons, it resulted in my hearing "Get on your pockets!" a lot. So I also learned to ride on my pockets...but a forwards seat just feels good to me. My horses all have short backs, and I think they respond well to a forward seat.

Still, nrhareiner is right about the effect of a saddle. I tend to ride forward in my Circle Y Arabian saddle, but I'm fighting the saddle to do so. That may be why 90% of my riding is now in my Aussie-style saddle...the saddle is designed to do what I like to do. Why fight it?

The forward leg seen in many of the cowboy pictures isn't used much now, but the saddles were designed with that in mind at the time. I still use it sometimes. If I want my mare to relax a little, I can shove my feet forward, settle on my pockets, and she usually responds by taking a notch off the pace.

If my horses get wound up, their heads come up. Then I usually raise my hands with them, settle into the seat, feet forward - and I start to look a LOT like the old-time cowboy pictures.

Something V.S. Littauer's book taught me - and it probably is obvious to everyone else - is that your seat is fluid. We look at pictures, frozen in time, with no momentum, and judge a position. But the horse is moving, what you want to do next is changing, and thus your seat, legs, and hands need to be changing to match your horse and your goal.

On rocky trails, surrounded by cactus, I ride with a long leg. I'm not jumping ANYTHING! If I'm in a place where a gallop might make sense, my stirrups may come up some, and I'll be ready to ride forward. But if I want a tight turn, my shoulders go back, my pockets are under me, and my horse will dig in and turn faster with better balance.

V.S. Littauer also makes the point that certain individuals, because of how their body is put together, may find they have better balance when they are doing something 'wrong'. I have very tight hips, and I'm sure some of what I do is in response.

With regard to the thread, the saddles of the day had cantles up to 8 inches, IIRC. I also believe their stirrups were further forward. The horses were built more like my little Appy - 14.3 hands, 840 lbs. The work was dangerous, no hope of medical help if things went wrong, and done by men in their late teens or early 20s, on horses that were barely broke at the beginning of the season. 12 hours in the saddle was an easy day. I'm willing to bet they rode the way they did because it made sense for what they were doing.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

QH, your Dad is not thinking to jump his horse, so he can take the shock of uneven ground easily enough with a straight leg but by adopting the straight leg he loses the shock absorbing capability of the rider's knee and the ankles.

To jump, at take off he must rise off the seat of the saddle and lean forwards
whilst the horse is in flight. He needs a bent knee to do that. Likewise when the horse lands, if the rider's leg can bend at the knee, it will reduce the shock of landing.
In Europe the rider must be able to jump the hedges but there are no hedges in
the broad expanses of the prairies.

It is all a matter of horses for courses.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

BSMS, Another book you might enjoy is:

The Schooling of the Western Horse by John Richard Young
ISBN 85131 182 2 (1973)

He comes at western riding from the American point of view.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

*Where's the stye all gone?*

This photo shows me racing along a lagoon down by Cape Trafalgar.
Look carefully and you'll see the ears and nose of the other horse.

My horse is an Andalucian. The saddle is English.
We are at full gallop but we can't see what holes are coming up because the water is disturbed. Spray was everywhere 

I am leaning forwards - naughty boy - the locals ride in 'DOma Vaquera' ( 'countrystyle) and sit upright at the gallop.
The horse has full use of its head.

I am on my fork - legs straight down , toes are pointed outwards. I am trying not to disturb the action of the horse - I must have done so because I won the race.


PS There was an old lady all dressed in black, sitting on ther beach by the edge of the lagoon. She was sewing. I was aiming straight for her. 
She sat where she was, calm as a cucumber - expecting me to stop in time. Talk about a one rein stop -luckily my the horse knew how to do it. We stopped so close in front of her that she was soaked by the spray.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

*The reasoning behind riding with a bent knee*

This is my DiDI practising jumping. 
You can see why her rider needs shortened stirrups


----------



## kevinshorses

If you look in the right places you can always find good horsemanship. When George Washington was crossing the Delaware on one side of the continent the spanish vaqueros in california were using the bosal and spade to create some of the lightest horses to ever be ridden. That tradition continues even today. There are fabulous horsemen all over the country that are putting our horses that will never gape a mouth or throw thier head. You probably won't see them on a movie screen and only rarely will you see them in an arena but when you do you'll notice them and it won't be because they have teh flashiest colored horse or the fanciest truck and trailer. You'll notice because that horse will be moving like the man has grown down into it and taken control of the legs. It's poetry and it will not be forgotten and if you happen to be so luck as to feel it for one second you'll strive to get it for the rest of your life.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

There is a dog trainer I know who has a magic way with dogs. He was once a trainer of both police dogs and handlers. He could calm, soothe and instruct dogs within a few minutes of their meeting him. Magic to watch

Thinking back I only remember one horseman with that degree of ability with horses. Even so called professional trainers have come up short in comparison. That one man was Lord Loch deceased. Interestingly he was a self declared and recovering alcoholic but he had a way with horses. 
That one man was Lord Loch deceased.


----------



## cowboy bowhunter

Here is how i see it. Back in the day they didnt have this natural horsemanship. Round penning. You hop on and let her buck. There horses were not all broke when they were using them. They would get on the horses and some would buck and be hot all day. There horses werent for pleasure, or show. They didnt care where there head was as long as the job got done. 
You mentioned height and weight and build. They wanted as strong and big of a horse to be able to hold them big wild cattle. And they didnt care about blood as much as breeding the best ones that could do the job.


----------



## bsms

The horses used for cattle back then were smaller than now. The picture below is pretty typical...add in that the average height of an American soldier in 1940 was under 5'8", and it is obvious they did not use large horses:

_Pink Murray, famous wagon boss of the OR ranch in southern Arizona, mounted on his favorite horse. Navajo Indian blankets were used as saddle blankets, and "Pink" had a good one. OR Range, Arizona_, 1909










Erwin E. Smith Collection Guide | Collection Guide


----------



## mildot

bsms said:


> The horn may be part of it, but the drawings I've seen of cavalry manuals from the mid-1800s would probably look fine to QHriderKE's Dad. Even dressage riders had some points in common:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the long leg, somewhat forward, hips back, feet forward in the stirrups...
> 
> Cavalry (if he would just 'home' his feet in the stirrups):


Uhhhhh, no.

Instead of taking some old illustrations as proof that the classical seat is some modern invention, why don't you read some books by de La Gueriniere and see what he had to say about it in the 17th century?

He was most definitely NOT talking about riding in a chair seat with the feet home.


----------



## bsms

mildot said:


> Uhhhhh, no.
> 
> Instead of taking some old illustrations as proof that the classical seat is some modern invention, why don't you read some books by de La Gueriniere and see what he had to say about it in the 17th century?
> 
> He was most definitely NOT talking about riding in a chair seat with the feet home.


Probably because this thread isn't about dressage, and I said SOME points in common. I did not at any point even suggest that I was trying to prove "the classical seat is some modern invention" ...

But the classical seat is classical only for some types of riding, and it certainly was NOT practiced by the US Cavalry or by many cowboys of the 1800s. The dressage seat is ill suited for roping and cutting, which is why it isn't used by ropers or cutters today, either. It is *A* style of riding good for *SOME* purposes, most of which don't involve cattle and rough country.


----------



## mildot

bsms said:


> The dressage seat is *A* style of riding good for *SOME* purposes, most of which don't involve rough country.


A balanced seat is superior to anything else when the going gets rough. Not theory, real world experience. 

I couldn't care less about working cows though.


----------



## QHriderKE

I just sit on the horse and do whatever I can to make the experience good for both me and the horse. It just happens to be that I ride forward to accomplish that.


----------



## bsms

Well, I'll wait and hold my breath until the ropers and cutters start riding like dressage riders. Then again, maybe I won't...

Balanced is not interchangeable with 'dressage seat'. Cutters, reiners & ropers are balanced without using "the classical seat". Same for jockeys, polo players, steeplechase riders. Balance IN MOTION...and appropriate for the activity, horse & terrain.


----------



## QHriderKE

I believe being balanced is being able to ride the horse doing whatever, dressage, jumping, roping, racing ect ect... without falling off. It's just different seats are practical for each circumstance.


----------



## cowboy bowhunter

bsms said:


> Probably because this thread isn't about dressage, and I said SOME points in common. I did not at any point even suggest that I was trying to prove "the classical seat is some modern invention" ...
> 
> But the classical seat is classical only for some types of riding, and it certainly was NOT practiced by the US Cavalry or by many cowboys of the 1800s. The dressage seat is ill suited for roping and cutting, which is why it isn't used by ropers or cutters today, either. It is *A* style of riding good for *SOME* purposes, most of which don't involve cattle and rough country.


 
I agree. That is why how the cutters ride is called cutters slouch.


----------



## COWCHICK77

This is my take on the subject....

Giving that I have both cowboyed on the same horse all day 12 hours and rode 12 head a day in the arena.

If I am riding horses in the arena and "training" on them, switching horses every half hour or so, I shorter stirrup is perfect. But when cowboying, I like a long stirrup, I let them out a couple of holes. There is a big difference between riding a pile of horses in an arena and staying on the same one all day, even if you if its the same amount of hours. A longer stirrup is much more comfortable for long hours and easier to rope out of.

Someone mentioned that the horses were smaller, yes they were, but so were the people. My father in law has a set of boots from a relative who was Calvary soldier from the Civil War(I believe, I might have this wrong) They are tiny! But that was the average size of a man back then. So I think the size of the horses may irrelevant. I think it was more of a comfort thing IMO.

The idea of a good cowboy back then was different as well. A cowboy was judged on his ability to ride tough horses and buckers and get the job done on that type. They bred horses for their hardiness, not its ease of train-ability. The horses were way tougher. Now it's different, good cowboys are considered by their ability to be a good cowman and horseman, to be able to make a good solid quiet horse while getting the job done. And we are breeding better horses, instead of riding these big feather footed broncs, they found out that riding a good mind horse is actually much more efficient. Work smarter, not harder.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

*Classical riding styles*

I have copies of line drawings of 17th century riders, but they are drawings and as such are prone to artist's licence.

I enclose herewith a very good print of Baucher - one of the most influential of the Parisien instructors.

and (hatless) D'Oliviera - arguably the most famous classical horsemaster of the twentieth century. (Read how Synthia Loch describes him)

But these two men were at the very pinnacle of their profession and they are each showing off a horse of exceptional ability. They both rode to demonstrate what could be achieved by a highly accomplished rider on a very well schooled horse. . 
The old horse circuses were a form of amusement for the aristocracy and the wealthy - in comparison, we modern riders might watch a dressage performance at the Olympics.

I still believe the coloured picture of the Hussar was drawn to illustrate a uniform and I very much doubt if a mere Lance Corporal was a top level rider of classical dressage. Someone drew the unifrom with a man fitted inside. 

But Baucher's seat as drawn is what today most dressage riders would die to achieve in the competition arena.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

*From a different era*

Here are two more drawings - on which the position of the leg has changed. Both are probably early eighteenth century etchings when the leg was ridden longer.


----------



## kevinshorses

mildot said:


> A balanced seat is superior to anything else when the going gets rough. Not theory, real world experience.
> 
> I couldn't care less about working cows though.


Riding with anything but a balanced seat in rough country will sore your horse and may cause you to sing a nice soprano. With the exception of arena cutting a balanced seat is the best for every situation. You don't see many team ropers with a balanced seat because most of them are gunsels that know as much about horsemanship as they do about quantum physics. If you don't believe me go to a jackpot roping and look around. Most of the time if a person is getting really sore in thier saddle it's the fault of thier seat as much as thier saddle.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

When looking for the photos I have posted I went to my library of horse books and picked out:
*Reflections on Equestrian Art by Nuno Oliveira* - the Portuguese Horsemaster of recent times. 
His book was printed in 1976 ISBN 978 0 85131 461 7

The jacket of the book was unmarked. I opened it and looked at the contents by which a trainer can bring out in a finely schooled horse 48 different moves starting from: The Rider's Position to The School Levade.
For example if you want to know how to teach the Counter Canter then a description and the instructions start on page 101.

I asked myself why I had forgotten the book and the answer came back to me. At the time of purchase I could not find someone to read the book along with me and without someone else there was no way by which I could read and understand the contents.

Most riders do not need, nor aspire, to even want to know how to do the high school movements but just being able to do properly the basics like walk, trot and canter is important. Nowadays with video and the internet it should be much easier to dispense the knowledge of how to properly ride a horse. The knowledge is well established in literature.

We should in this century be teaching the theory of riding and not just the practicalities. 
I am sure the ghost of Msr Baucher would agree.


----------



## bsms

How do you define a balanced seat on a moving horse?


----------



## kevinshorses

The easiest way to describe it for me is to tell you to sit in your saddle, close your eyes and hold your arms out to your side. Then take your feet out of the stirrups and point your toes. Feel where your body is touching the saddle and ride like that.


----------



## mildot

bsms said:


> How do you define a balanced seat on a moving horse?


Kevinshorses explained how to find it.

The effects of it are that I have been able to stay centered and balanced in the saddle while my horse tries to recover her balance after stumbling at a canter. A gyroscope is the ideal.

The classical seat is not static, despite misunderstandings to the contrary.

If you want a visual, just look at SRS riders doing airs above ground.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

*The importance of balance,*

Herewith an attempt, repeat attempt, to explain the importance of balance.

An undamaged mature horse moving without the weight of the rider or tack will be in near perfect balance and the animal will use itself to best performance. Immediately the horse is loaded by a weight on its back, the horse has to readjust the way by which it supports that weight in order to regain perfect balance.

The good rider will ensure that he always first settles his weight on the horse as evenly as possible - front to rear, side to side. What is more that rider must maintain that balance when the horse is moving despite the forces of motion and gravity. If weigh scales were incorporated into a saddle cloth which were then placed under the saddle, the rider could read just how difficult it is for him to constantly retain perfect balance. Even a turn of the rider’s head will disturb the equilibrium. Most riders readjust their seat and compensate by exerting pressure on the stirrup bars or via the butt onto the saddle. 

Remember the horse’s back is so sensitive that it can feel the weight of a fly on its coat. Any imbalance by the rider has to be compensated by the horse - which is visibly evident even when horse and rider are at halt. 

In order to achieve perfect balance on horseback the rider must sit perfectly upright. The spine must adopt its natural curved posture, the rider’s bottom should be evenly spread front to rear, side to side in the saddle, which itself should be perfectly positioned on the horse’s back Both legs and feet should hang down on either side of the horse’s flanks, acting partly as pendulums. In theory the stirrup irons are there as a guide to hold the feet in position during movement and not to support the bodyweight of the rider. 

OK, fine - but then the horse moves - and to do so the horse must lift the leading leg off the ground so that the horse’s opposite hind leg can move forwards. Immediately both horse and rider must compensate for the loss of equilibrium.

Yes, the horse has an innate ability to readjust itself to the forever shifting load of the rider but it loses energy and efficiency in doing so. A rider who can ‘perch’ on the saddle with the minimum of pressure exerted on the stirrup bars is sitting in balance - until the horse moves.

Many riders have problems with balance, partly because they themselves are out of balance, perhaps through accident. Others have problems with the human balancing mechanism either in the ear or with vision. Some humans have developed physically more on one side than others. Such riders learn to compensate by deliberately sitting off balance or by exerting pressure on the stirrup bars. A rider’s style of sitting on a horse is as recognisable as that rider’s way of walking. But to the horse, the load of the imbalanced rider feels badly out of balance and it has to compensate - constantly.

As a human try picking up a six foot long, four inch diameter, oak log . Try to walk with it ‘out of balance’. You will not get far.

A simple test by a rider is to sit on the horse at a halt for a few moments and check to see if the horse stands four square or whether it shuffles about and adjusts its leg and foot position.
B G


----------



## mildot

Barry Godden said:


> A simple test by a rider is to sit on the horse at a halt for a few moments and check to see if the horse stands four square or whether it shuffles about and adjusts its leg and foot position.
> B G


Hence the importance of the halt at X :wink:


----------



## bsms

My point is that balanced is NOT defined as "all weight going into the pelvis". Nor is it defined as having heels under the hip at all times. You can be well balanced on a horse AND have your feet forward of your hip. If you are doing something that involves sudden deceleration, feet forward can help.

The classical dressage seat is designed for collected gaits - something most horses don't do for long. It is not intended for riding a horse that is trying for maximum speed, or jumping.

Further, when I sit in a saddle (or a chair), a significant part of me weight is carried in my thighs. Maybe I'm the only person whose crotch is an inverted V instead of an inverted "U", but it is impossible for me to sit in a saddle without weight carried by my thighs. Thus my balance point should be not my 'seat' alone, but my seat in conjunction with my thighs. And that balance should shift constantly with what I'm trying to do as a rider.

Thus V.S. Littauer asked "are you in *fluid balance and rhythm* with your horse or not? b) does your seat *enable you to control your horse efficiently*?"

And the fluid balance of a dressage rider riding a collected gait would be different than a polo player accelerating to the ball, or a barrel racer, or someone chasing a steer.

Good or bad, I learned to ride on Mia, and that meant learning to ride a horse who sometimes jumped sideways, or who would spin 180, jump, spin 180, and then back up - all without any input from me. And my balance must be OK, because my only falls off of her have come when she exploded in mid-dismount. When you have one foot above your horse's rump, and they spin and leap...well, that describes both my falls.

It never occurred to me this would turn into a thread on the 'classical dressage seat'. It is ONE way of riding, and adapted for riding, well balanced, on a horse with collected gaits.

In my first post on this thread (#5), I wrote, "It might be that we know better now, but it also might be that the riding style they used was appropriate for the type horses they had and the work conditions they faced. I've never tried to push 2,000 steers thru unknown country for hundreds of miles. I've never ridden a half-broke horse for 24 hours straight in pee-poor weather, knowing that a fall could kill me. I'd be very careful before assuming we know vastly more than they did then. In some areas (jumping comes to mind), we DO know a lot more than a rider in the 1860s. But what most of us do not know is what the riders of the time really faced, day-to-day."

I wouldn't suggest thinking the Texas cowboys of 1876 were incompetent just because their style of riding differs from most modern riding - or that all riders with their feet forward today are incompetent. The horse, the saddle, the rider's build, the goal, what the horse IS doing and what you want him to do next - all those affect how you ride a horse.

BTW - my horses stop with their four feet in the corners, and they stand their happily without shuffling. Just prior to the stop, my feet are often forward. At the stop, my heels are beneath me. Fluid.


----------



## Saddlebag

As a kid I rode with old cowboys and was even on a cattle drive. These weren't longhorns, but herefords. The pace was slow as we were in difficult country. I was on a well trained horse so had to keep a good grip on the horn. If a calf ducked away, that horse was instantly moving to turn it back. I was just a passenger. I was always eager to hang around these fellows as I learned so much and not always with what they said. They didn't talk much.


----------



## mildot

bsms said:


> The classical dressage seat is designed for collected gaits - something most horses don't do for long. It is not intended for riding a horse that is trying for maximum speed, or jumping.


Before Caprilli came around, how do you think people galloped and jumped horses?


----------



## bsms

mildot said:


> Before Caprilli came around, how do you think people galloped and jumped horses?


Inefficiently.


----------



## mildot

bsms said:


> Inefficiently.


You do realize that even in a forward seat, the line between the rider's CG and his heels HAS to be vertical for maximum stability. The complete opposite of the beloved chair seat, which is just using stirrups as a brace.


----------



## kevinshorses

I think those old cowboys did the best they could with what they knew. They didn't know that bracing against the cantle was really going to let that bronc get some leverage on you when it bucked. They had been taught to sit like that and keep spurring and pulling. There were probably many of them that rode in a balanced seat because it was natural for them. I've never had a problem with a balanced seat but I know several people that do and many of them compensate by bracing against the cantle with thier feet out in front of them.


----------



## bsms

mildot said:


> You do realize that even in a forward seat, the line between the rider's CG and his heels HAS to be vertical for maximum stability. The complete opposite of the beloved chair seat, which is just using stirrups as a brace.


I realize that CG & balance are not defined by heel position. Nor is a chair seat using the stirrups for a brace. A chair position simply means the feet are forward of the hip.

The cowboys in the photos are NOT riding with their feet braced in constant tension for 18 hours days in the saddle. I sometimes ride with my feet forward in that style just for fun - and my feet are light in the stirrups. My weight is then carried almost entirely in my thighs and just a little on my butt.

If you look in some earlier posts on this thread, another rider who rides with her feet forward also mentions that her feet are barely touching the stirrups.

And while I joked "Inefficiently", that wasn't entirely true. For maximum performance, the forward seat is required. But for most of us, the difference between 100% best and 90% best in a canter or gallop probably doesn't mean much. And in the real world, there isn't a lot of need to jump 6' fences. Thus the seat used by the cowboys (or US Cavalry) worked OK for much of what they did. That is why they never abandoned the McClellan saddle - because the security it gave the average trooper was more important than any performance gains in normal riding.

Kevinshorses is 6'8", IIRC. I might hit 5'8" if I stand straight. On my 13 hand pony, my feet would interfere with my horse if I let them drift forward. On a 15 hand horse, they do not.

My point all along has NOT been that dressage riders are bad or stupid, but that we ought to be careful about criticizing folks who rode different horses under different conditions using differently designed saddles for not riding like a modern rider.

The California cowboys rode very differently from the Texas ones - but the ranch model was different. Teddy Roosevelt distinguished between the horses you bought for your own use, and the ones provided by the ranch in the Dakotas. What I don't understand is assuming one style of riding is the end-all of riding.


----------



## bsms

At the risk of using myself as an example again, look at the photo below. It was NOT posed...about once a year my wife comes out and takes pictures of me riding. I have no idea when she is pushing the button. BTW - the second photo was Trooper's second time cantering in a year. My second, period. We both do a lot better now, and Mia will actually canter collected, which was a shock to me.

















My heel is at my belt buckle. That is a mild chair seat. If my horses get a bit wound up and too forward, I usually put my feet further forward, continue to carry a lot of my weight in my thighs, but settle more of it on my pockets. My horses, maybe because they know me, will usually start to slow. When they are at the pace I want, my feet return to this position.

But if I want them to turn sharply, my feet come back. My heels are all the way under my hip. I get a sharper and better balanced turn out of them that way. But if I want them to extend, my feet move at least this far forward, I roll more into my thighs, my butt is light in the saddle and my CG is forward - where I want the horse to go. And if I move in synch with them, that gets me a faster and happier horse, extending with his head & ears forward.

I'm not suggesting anyone follow my example. I ride the same three horses, and they are used to me and I'm used to them. But my goal is in my signature...


----------



## Allison Finch

I think riders who spend hours in the saddle traditionally rode with longer stirrups with the feet slightly forward. It was much less fatiguing than riding with shorter stirrups. Just like the old foxhunters...much like the old cowboys.




























It was difficult to remain in harmony with the horse when jumping this way. So, Caprilli developed the shorter stirrup so that the rider could get up and out of the saddle to stay balanced with the horse. However, when you ride with these shorter stirrups for very long......it is quite uncomfortable. Even today's foxhunters will often ride in the old legs forward and longer (though not as long as the old days)to save themselves.


----------



## tinyliny

I think the reason the Californios ride different from the Texas style cowboy is that they have the tradition of riding in a balanced seat passed down from when that area was governed by Spain. Many Texas style cowboys came from the eastern US, originally, comeing westward, and they rode by "the seat of their pants" for the most part. Both methods are functional.

When a person has their legs out in front of them , in a chair seat, they may be sitting up really straight on their seatbones, but LESS weight is carried through the leg (thigh and down into the stirrup) all of it rests down on the seat bone, which are often pushed far back into the cantle. Since the horse's center of gravity is closer to its' withers, this mean that the rider's weight is pressing down behind the cg of the horse, and further back where its' back is weaker. 

When the rider braces himself between the stirrup and the cantle, kind of wedging himself in there, it makes it harder for the horse to move forward. IT's a bit like the resistance you apply with your core to slow or half hald the horse. But in this case, the horse works against the rider, every single step.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

To me, why this thread is of interest is that it gives cause for some of us to think about how we do ride our horse(s). To write our own method down requires for us to work out what we actually do in practice .

The horse, ridden western or english, is a common factor, but how we as humans cope has developed individually. Most of us aren't going in for a dressage test of style anyway - are we? But in order to show other less experienced riders, we need to understand what we ourselves are doing when in the saddle.


----------



## QHriderKE

I ride young horses differently than more experienced horses. 

On a greenie, I like to have a deeper seat, sitting on my pockets and in as much of a relaxed form as possible. 
For example, here's me riding my 3 year old: 
















I have a relaxed seat, calm hands, ect ect, so I can't be giving body cues she doesn't understand. I have that desireable line from my elbow straight to the bit, following her head.

Here's a pic from very recently. I ditched the snaffle, and went into a mild curb. At this point, I was working on some more complex things, I believe that was the day she got her lead changes. So, I have my body a bit more forward, because in my books, she isn't a greenie anymore. I'm starting to ride her like one of my broke horses.










Now, here's a pic of me on a 6/7 year old mare. I've been working on getting her to accept contact and working on learning how to ride English myself. This is the best pic I have of me actually bebing able to translate my forward seat in a western saddle into an english saddle. 










if you spent a day riding with me, you'll find I ride each horse differently.


----------



## tinyliny

you say you sit deeper on a green horse? This is counter to the advice in most classical training texts. The green horse needs a lighter seat, so the rider should roll forward onto their thighs a bit to take weight off the back . Sitting deeper puts more pressure on the horse's back , and a green horse is not ready to deal with that.


----------



## COWCHICK77

tinyliny said:


> you say you sit deeper on a green horse? This is counter to the advice in most classical training texts. The green horse needs a lighter seat, so the rider should roll forward onto their thighs a bit to take weight off the back . Sitting deeper puts more pressure on the horse's back , and a green horse is not ready to deal with that.


I think what she is getting at is that on a colt you sit a little more on your pockets. I do as well, if he makes a quick move or decides to buck I want to be able to sit it. If you are sitting forward on a colt and he takes a jump your going to get dashboarded.


----------



## kevinshorses

tinyliny said:


> you say you sit deeper on a green horse? This is counter to the advice in most classical training texts. The green horse needs a lighter seat, so the rider should roll forward onto their thighs a bit to take weight off the back . Sitting deeper puts more pressure on the horse's back , and a green horse is not ready to deal with that.


Gravity determines the amount of pressure on the horses back. How you sit only moves that pressure around. In an english saddle that would probably be a lot more noticable than on a western saddle due to the bars and the way it's made.


----------



## Ian McDonald

I've noticed from watching movies that some actors are noticeably better riders than others. Some of them seem to have about as much experience as a tourist on a guided trail ride, aka the graduates of the 5-min course in horsemanship. 

Some of the good ones include Vigo Mortensen, Tommy Lee Jones, Yul Brynner and Brad Pitt.


----------



## COWCHICK77

Ian McDonald said:


> I've noticed from watching movies that some actors are noticeably better riders than others. Some of them seem to have about as much experience as a tourist on a guided trail ride, aka the graduates of the 5-min course in horsemanship.
> 
> Some of the good ones include Vigo Mortensen, Tommy Lee Jones, Yul Brynner and Brad Pitt.



True, I have noticed as well that Tommy Lee Jones is a decent rider for an actor...The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada...is one of my all time favorites!


----------



## boots

When I think of actors who ride well, Robert Taylor, Lee Marvin, Audy Murphy, James Caan, and Richard Farnsworth jump to mind.


----------



## kevinshorses

COWCHICK77 said:


> True, I have noticed as well that Tommy Lee Jones is a decent rider for an actor...The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada...is one of my all time favorites!


 
Don't forget The Good Old Boys!!


----------



## QHriderKE

Viggo Mortensen is amazing. He was awesome in Hidalgo. He's just the best. Y'all should look up "Aragorn goes fishing" on YouTube. He went fly-fishing in full Lord of the Rings costume, cause he's awesome.


----------



## Tazmanian Devil

QHriderKE said:


> Viggo Mortensen is amazing. He was awesome in Hidalgo. He's just the best. Y'all should look up "Aragorn goes fishing" on YouTube. He went fly-fishing in full Lord of the Rings costume, cause he's awesome.


Add to the list Kevin Costner who seems to be a pretty good rider.

While Viggo may be a good rider, I think I would classify fly-fishing is full LotR costume "creepy" rather than awesome.


----------



## kevinshorses

Julia Roberts is an excellent horseman and has ridden in many of her movies. Many of the old time movie greats rode well. Clark Gable, Gregory Peck and another guy I can't think of that was in a lot of B and W pirate movies were on polo teams in California.

Another good movie if you want to see a lot of semi-famous actors that ride pretty well is Monte Walsh. Tom Selleck plays the lead and it has George Eads from CSI and the guy from the kung-fu western in the 60's and several other character actors and A LOT of nice horses. I highly recommend it.


----------



## COWCHICK77

Oh yeah! love Monte Walsh and the Good 'Ol Boys!


----------



## Rawhide

Most of you's too young to remember but let's not forget *" LADY GODIVA " ! :wink:*

Rawhide


----------



## jagman6201

A little off topic, but I just wanted to throw something in that came to mind after reading through this thread.

Being both a recreational rider whose personal horse is solely a trail horse and a competitive "western" (WP, Horsemanship, etc) events riders as well as incredibly active and interested in all types of seats (including dressage, huntseat, saddleseat, etc) this thread was immensely interesting to read over.  

Now, earlier - someone made a comment about Western Pleasure and how they weren't even going to touch on their style of riding and how the riders look stiff (I can appreciate that many people don't like/understand GOOD pleasure), then the dressage rider was talking about the classical seat and showed a video of a horse and rider doing an airs above the ground movement (can never remember how to spell it!) and briefly touched on how the rider is very much mobile, though he looks still... 

Now, I was just curious - am I the only one who has always thought that dressage and western event riders seats are suspiciously similar?  

Just food for thought.


----------



## xxBarry Godden

I always think that there is a lot of similarity between the Spanish way of riding and Western - even down to the design of the tradtional Spanish saddle.

There is also the Doma Vaquera system utilised by the farmers

The Parisian syle developed for riding in the city - all very much focussed on image and 'look at me' - whereas out in the countryside they were more concerned with working from horseback.

Airs above ground were restricted to showmen and only a few carefully selected horses, who could perform the movements.

At the ferias (fairs) it is still the men who 'parade' their stallions and the ladies wear pretty dresses and often ride side saddle. 

In Britain the major influence, until quite recently in relative terms, has been the cavalry and the hunt.


----------



## Skipsfirstspike

Jag6201 said:


> A little off topic, but I just wanted to throw something in that came to mind after reading through this thread.
> 
> Being both a recreational rider whose personal horse is solely a trail horse and a competitive "western" (WP, Horsemanship, etc) events riders as well as incredibly active and interested in all types of seats (including dressage, huntseat, saddleseat, etc) this thread was immensely interesting to read over.
> 
> Now, earlier - someone made a comment about Western Pleasure and how they weren't even going to touch on their style of riding and how the riders look stiff (I can appreciate that many people don't like/understand GOOD pleasure), then the dressage rider was talking about the classical seat and showed a video of a horse and rider doing an airs above the ground movement (can never remember how to spell it!) and briefly touched on how the rider is very much mobile, though he looks still...
> 
> Now, I was just curious - am I the only one who has always thought that dressage and western event riders seats are suspiciously similar?
> 
> Just food for thought.


-
I will be the first to admit that I don't understand WP. Not the idea of it, but the way the horse is required to carry itself. To me, the dressage rider in your pics looks so much more natural and flowing, because, well, her horse is moving well, lots of 'contained' energy.-
The rider on the WP horse looks (to me) stiff and awkward, because the horse she is on radiates zero energy.-
And this coming from a western rider, btw.


----------



## bsms

When people compete on their horses, it becomes easy for fads or the need to 'stand out' to the judges to replace the basic riding underneath.

Western Pleasure was supposed to show how a person's horse could be fun to ride because of its controlled, relaxed gaits.

My mare could never do WP...she's an excitable, snorting Arabian. But her jog is a great slow trot. Covers the ground faster than a walk, but in a very smooth, floaty manner. When I'm walking her, and she gets a bit nervous, she transitions to an even slower trot. If I'm leading her, she trots with her head at my shoulder as I stroll along. From her back, I'm pretty sure I could drink a cup of coffee while she does it.

In theory, it would be a perfect WP jog - slow, very enjoyable to ride, very comfortable - but her head is up and she may add a few snorts just for effect.

We're working on cantering. Her extended canter is too fast for the space I have to work her, so I'm trying to get her to slow down at a canter. When she does, she actually covers ground quickly, but in a very smooth & collected canter. Her relaxed canter is too fast to win in WP, but in theory it is exactly what a WP rider should want - very comfortable to ride, showy, and just plain fun.

In some ways, she would also be a good fit for dressage. She actively seeks interaction with her rider, and is the only horse I own that likes to be ridden without slack in the reins. But she would never tolerate having her head at the vertical. And there would be a high probability that in any given competition, she would decide part way thru that she needed to get rid of her stress by RUNNING!

I doubt either WP or dressage would approve of a horse bolting, and running 3-4 laps at full speed because life is exciting!

However, the basic riding style of WP & dressage seems very similar to me, possibly because it is meant for a collected horse moving in an arena. It isn't a style meant for covering a lot of ground, or moving along a rocky trail. It isn't meant for roping a steer, or jumping a fence. But in theory, at least, both WP & dressage riders should be having fun riding a collected horse under complete control of the rider - so it makes sense that, if form follows function, the form should be similar.

Of course, I ride neither, so I'm sure those who do compete can find fault with my outside opinion...


----------



## cowboy bowhunter

Skipsfirstspike said:


> -
> I will be the first to admit that I don't understand WP. Not the idea of it, but the way the horse is required to carry itself. To me, the dressage rider in your pics looks so much more natural and flowing, because, well, her horse is moving well, lots of 'contained' energy.-
> The rider on the WP horse looks (to me) stiff and awkward, because the horse she is on radiates zero energy.-
> And this coming from a western rider, btw.


You forgot about the GOOFY peanute roller lope that isnt natural.


----------



## jagman6201

cowboy bowhunter said:


> You forgot about the GOOFY peanute roller lope that isnt natural.


A piaffe and passage are certainly not natural - nor is jumping a course of 5ft fences. Equestrian sports aren't natural! 

Plus, while yes - WP has been in some dark places (but what discipline hasn't?) - it has made some pretty significant strides to improving the sport. Peanut rolling is not only ugly, it is pretty well frowned upon. I would like to say a testament about how WP is NOT just about who goes the slowest. Just a month ago I was at March to the Arch which is a pretty fair sized AQHA show that draws some top name trainers. I was watching the Sr. Western Pleasure class and smiled as one of the riders took the quarter line at the walk and his horse just flew by the other competitors (about 30 in the class). The horse was taking comfortable, natural walk strides that just happen to swing forward a lot. His jog was at the same pace as the other competitors as well as his lope (all gaits which were relaxed and gorgeous to watch). And guess what, he won under 3 judges and got a 2nd under the fourth! I wish I could have video taped it because I was grinning ear to ear.


----------

