|
|
Post by jimmy on Mar 7, 2016 3:17:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by horseguy on Mar 7, 2016 14:32:29 GMT
eclectic-horseman.com/the-definition-of-on-the-bit/from the article "... even going back to the 15th and 16th century, you do not find any expression equivalent to “On the Bit" ... It is well expressed in the German Federation statement that the horse seeks the contact and the rider provides it, not the other way around, since pulling the horse into a vertical head position has nothing to do with collection. On the contrary, it prevents engagement and develops nothing but an insensitive, unresponsive horse on the forehand and does not allow for an expressive movement in self-carriage ... Allowing the horse to seek the aids as the older Germans said, or the coordinated aids, aids coming through the back, non-interfering aids, weight aids, seat aids, supporting aids, leg aids, etc. with the horse determining the contact would probably better represent what we really should aim for in Dressage."
"Allowing the horse to seek the aids ... with the horse determining the contact" This is what I most take away from the great article Jimmy posted. Thanks. It is a lot like the Wynmallen quote, "Let the horse move you" and in this case it is let the horse move your hands and arms.
Instead, especially when I have had horses for sale and American dressage riders come to try the horse, we see the opposite. I once witnesses an instructor and student literally pull my pony to the ground as the instructor chanted "five loving pounds in your hands" to the rider. What he heck does five loving pounds mean? I was watching a student, by the look of her who had been riding maybe four or five years. She had no sensitivity in her hands and believed that every word out of her misguided instructor's mouth was gospel. This rider had the tightest elbows and wrists imaginable, resulting in the pony stumbling into each trot stride as this rider cranked the neck down to limits of movement the poor pony could not stand. Eventually in a tight bend the horse went down briefly in front, dropping one knee, at which time the rider lost balance enough to losen her grip on the reins (this rider stayed on by hugging the pony's neck) so the pony could get free enough to get back up, only to endure more of the "five loving pounds" from this rider's clenched elbows and wrists.
Even after seeing the dramatic results of their flawed ideas of contact and collection in a stumbling fall, this pair of "dressage riders" were undaunted in their idea of "on the bit", which they explained to me afterward my pony obviously had not been trained to "accept". At these moments you want to scream at their idiocy, but the fact that they are simply mislead and misinformed provides some compassion.
So many American students, typically taught by part-time instructors, young or otherwise untrained, inexperienced and unprofessional teachers, who maintain wildly false beliefs about equine movement, impulsive power and balance. I have been "corrected" by so many of these instructors, the most typical of which own a barn and arena, one or two horses and have a few boarders that they "teach" to help pay their overhead. Very often, these instructors, who would never pass any organized level of tested standard to teach, have been instructed by a similarly untrained instructor. Therefore so it goes, a lie repeated often enough becomes truth.
The bottom line is that riders must have developed good hands before they can begin to feel "a horse trying to determine the level of contact". These riders have not yet gone beyond the beginner tension in their upper body, particularly in their arms, wrists and hands, enough to allow them to feel a horse exploring their hands to find a medium between the horse's need to feel the rider and the rider's need to feel their mouth. Instead, these riders experience a horse as simply tossing its head as the rider tries to find a way to follow the horse's head and neck. Without developed hands a rider cannot begin to follow their horse as its neck moves up and down during the normal balancing of each stride. When you try to teach many of these riders who have had incorrect instruction they believe to be correct, you meet resistance against letting the horse develop their standard of self carriage, which again is something these poorly trained riders have never experienced.
We as an equestrian nation should not have well qualified instructors spending so much time undoing poor instruction. We should not have so many riders essentially torturing horses and ponies with mechanically interfering hands, but we do. And the internet where you can find out anything does not help. Jimmy has found a very good article. It is correct in so many ways. Thanks again. Still, a self-righteous student could go on google anytime and find ten incorrect articles to counter this sensible piece of writing. Why is this flawed aspect of riding information so pervasive in the US but not in Germany or France? Because those countries have Federations that set high quality standards of riding, while our US Equestrian Federation acts more of a business lobby enterprise to make its commercial sponsors profitable.
|
|
|
|
Post by rideanotherday on Mar 7, 2016 15:30:07 GMT
5 loving pounds - what does that even mean?  ? When a child is asked to draw themselves, often there will be a face and hands. The hands might not be connected to the face by arms. This is normal and emphasizes how important hands are to humans. The problem with being tool users is sometimes the tools we use aren't the most effective method of achieving a goal. Riders focus on the head and headset because its easy to see. What a horse that is "between the aids" feels like is so much better than a horse that is having his "headset" forced. The movement is much freer and relaxed. I'm sure the horse prefers it as well. I've heard a few people mention that they don't use leg cues, that all of their riding communication is done through the reins. One of those people is John Lyon. I've seen him at clinics before and he can get a lot done that way. I don't feel like that works for me. There's so much left of the horse to ride and it just seems to me that it's a waste to ignore that. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Mar 7, 2016 16:03:40 GMT
The description of the process with a caveson is similar to the vaquero tradition I am fond of. The idea of the hackamore is to protect the mouth. Most of the training is done with the hackamore, while you gradually introduce the horse to a bit via the two rein. The process is designed to protect the mouth. Even the spade is designed that way, contrary to some opinions on it.
As to leg cues.
The use of the reins cannot be understated. When someone says, I just use my reins, many people immediately visualize pulling.
In my stock horse training, I want the reins to be primary, and the legs secondary. Because it is called a "reined horse" for a reason. (not to be confused with a "reining horse") It is important to understand the difference.
We are not "putting the horse on the bit" or even having him seek contact. He learns to carry the bit comfortably, without brace. The bit acts as an amplifier of our fingers and hands.
It is still based on a direct or leading rein. But the idea is all it takes is a tip of the nose, and you get action. But of course, the legs will back up the action. Many times these horses get so sharp, they do not wait for the leg. They go and turn and stop at the suggestion from the hand.
This is very different from some saying that the ultimate goal is to have a horse where he works soley off your legs. I disagree. When it comes to the "reined" stock horse, he must respond to the touch of the reins. Yes the legs aid and assist, and a horse must know the meaning of leg. When I put both legs on, he will move straight forward. That will still always be primary, of course.
I separate the two ideas of legs primary or reins primary. When legs become primary, it is too easy to use the reins soley as a corrective measure, for not following the action of the legs. So many times, the reins are used too punitively.When the reins are primary, you will tend to be much more careful how you present them to the horse. The legs help tell him the meaning. But the idea is, he only will need a very light rein action.....
|
|
|
|
Post by rideanotherday on Mar 7, 2016 16:37:04 GMT
The description of the process with a caveson is similar to the vaquero tradition I am fond of. The idea of the hackamore is to protect the mouth. Most of the training is done with the hackamore, while you gradually introduce the horse to a bit via the two rein. The process is designed to protect the mouth. Even the spade is designed that way, contrary to some opinions on it. As to leg cues. The use of the reins cannot be understated. When someone says, I just use my reins, many people immediately visualize pulling. In my stock horse training, I want the reins to be primary, and the legs secondary. Because it is called a "reined horse" for a reason. (not to be confused with a "reining horse") It is important to understand the difference. We are not "putting the horse on the bit" or even having him seek contact. He learns to carry the bit comfortably, without brace. The bit acts as an amplifier of our fingers and hands. It is still based on a direct or leading rein. But the idea is all it takes is a tip of the nose, and you get action. But of course, the legs will back up the action. Many times these horses get so sharp, they do not wait for the leg. They go and turn and stop at the suggestion from the hand. This is very different from some saying that the ultimate goal is to have a horse where he works soley off your legs. I disagree. When it comes to the "reined" stock horse, he must respond to the touch of the reins. Yes the legs aid and assist, and a horse must know the meaning of leg. When I put both legs on, he will move straight forward. That will still always be primary, of course. I separate the two ideas of legs primary or reins primary. When legs become primary, it is too easy to use the reins soley as a corrective measure, for not following the action of the legs. So many times, the reins are used too punitively.When the reins are primary, you will tend to be much more careful how you present them to the horse. The legs help tell him the meaning. But the idea is, he only will need a very light rein action..... Ideally, I do less (reins, legs etc) and the horse does more. I'm familiar with bridle horses but I've never taken one that far. Someday I'll have the time and money to support my horse habit, but that day is not today. Legs, weight shifts etc should be supportive of rein aids. I think it's very much like a musical score, each thing has their part to play. I am bothered by what reining has become. Often, the horses go around with their heads so low and their chins on their chest. They can't see with that way of going. Reining is getting very similar to western pleasure with the "headset" being a focal point. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Mar 7, 2016 17:38:16 GMT
Ray Hunt would often say to someone, "You need to do less sooner instead of more later."
Horseguy, you will like this:
I was listening to a dressage coach years ago instruct her student at a show. She said, "Get him to put his head down more. Make him look relaxed."
It has been hard embrace dressage for me, because of the instruction you see people receiving.
More recently, I have been exposed to Classical Dressage, in the form of the Working Equitation Horse. The Portuguese have a very good school of horsemanship. I have ridden with a couple of Portuguese dressage trainers, and was able to benefit and understand dressage a lot better.
|
|
|
|
Post by horseguy on Mar 7, 2016 21:53:43 GMT
Ray Hunt would often say to someone, "You need to do less sooner instead of more later." Horseguy, you will like this: I was listening to a dressage coach years ago instruct her student at a show. She said, "Get him to put his head down more. Make him look relaxed." It has been hard embrace dressage for me, because of the instruction you see people receiving. More recently, I have been exposed to Classical Dressage, in the form of the Working Equitation Horse. The Portuguese have a very good school of horsemanship. I have ridden with a couple of Portuguese dressage trainers, and was able to benefit and understand dressage a lot better.
"Make him look relaxed" Perfect. When they hear themselves say things like that, can they hear themselves?  That's the essence of contemporary American dressage. "make him look ..."
It's not at all about how it looks. It's about the energy moving through the horse. If you cannot see that energy or feel it, you have no business teaching it or judging it. A big problem is that many well motivated students want to succeed and succeed quickly, so they fall for the idea of seeing it in some form like a head set. It's not a form, but many teachers and judges, for lack of the ability to see or feel the unique energy of high self carriage in a horse, settle for forms and then they teach them.
I suggest looking at bull fighting horses to see that energy as it probably was centuries ago when warfare demanded horses, and cavalrymen demanded well trained agile and powerful horses. That was a time when dressage could keep a soldier alive in a battle. To see that reduced to some postcard image is pathetic.
Ray Hunt, "You need to do less sooner instead of more later." (thanks for that one, Jimmy)
You basically need to do only one thing, achieve unity. After that, 90 plus % of horses will listen so well that you hardly have to do much else. But if you start chasing forms, you will never get there. |
|
|
|
Post by horseguy on Mar 12, 2016 13:51:39 GMT
Etienne Beudant trained horses for the French Army. He was not a fan of the German heavy rein pressure approach to collection. Here we see him riding "on the bit" on a lose rein.   I think these pictures along with what Beaudant has written tell us that if we show a horse and effective comfortable balance, they respond with certain elements of balance, like flexing the poll, and dock and relaxing their jaw. The key word there is show. It is not the same as insisting on the visible forms like head set that seem to be the goal but are instead just effects of a broader more whole goal of dynamic balance. |
|
|
|
Post by rideanotherday on Mar 14, 2016 11:28:14 GMT
Interesting. I'm going to see if I can find some more pictures of him. In that first picture, I don't see much "lift" in the back or tilt to the pelvis that will really allow athletic use of the hindquarters. Photos are just a moment in time and not dynamic though. It could just be the timing of the photo.
|
|
|
|
Post by horseguy on Mar 14, 2016 14:49:04 GMT
Interesting. I'm going to see if I can find some more pictures of him. In that first picture, I don't see much "lift" in the back or tilt to the pelvis that will really allow athletic use of the hindquarters. Photos are just a moment in time and not dynamic though. It could just be the timing of the photo.
When Beaudant served in the French Cavalry, French forces were engaged in north Africa. You can see the landscape in the photos. That environment caused the French Army to select Thoroughbred/Arabians, often called Anglo Arabs at the time, as their primary mount for service in the area. Neither breed Arabian or TB has the tendency or need to "cock" their hips as the Warmbloods do. We are by now very used to looking at the Warmblood version of collection as the dressage standard, from which their style of athletic movement can take place. Arabians, in particular, can move athletically from a much wider range of prior movements. It could be argued that TBs can as well.
In other words, Warmbloods were bred to haul heavy aristocratic carriages (thus their attractive action) in peace time while they waited for military service as heavy cavalry horses. They were not bred to be "ballerinas". Therefore, their type requires a different posture from which they move best into high school dressage movements. Not so of the lighter breeds that are bred for general agility as well as speed. Beaudant trained horses for battle with Bedouin tribesmen, not for breaking through fixed battle lines on the plains of Europe. Therefore the "look" of the application of Saumur principles in an Anglo Arab would be different than what we are now used to seeing in dressage today.
One funny story about dressage judges and how a breed looks to them doing dressage. We had a Mustang named Kevin who was your typical Mustang, somewhat muscle bound, stocky, low to the ground kind of guy. A student was preparing him for a dressage test and we had a dressage specialist come to the farm to "judge" and teach the students before the competition. When the judge saw Kevin she immediately said he was lame. Someone came to the barn from the dressage arena to tell me. I went up to the arena and Kevin looked like good old Kevin, but the rider was in near tears over the news. I watched him for a while and said he was fine.
The judge argued he was lame and the rider could not compete him. Long story short, the judge had never seen a Mustang move. I suspect also that she had not spent much time watching ponies move either. Kevin's Mustang gait was visually offensive to her and she wanted him out of her sight. Contemporary dressage judges have determined that the gaits and movement of a Warmblood is correct and all others, TB, Mustang, whatever are some level of substandard in their movement, all the way to lame in Kevin's case. That's simple breed branding/prejudice and it's wrong. Look back at 1920s and 1930's dressage and you see military light cavalry horses with a lot of TB in them and they do not look like the Warmblood dressage of today. German officer horses of the period do look more contemporary, due to the strict German system of breeding, but more breed diversity is obvious overall from that past time. I, of course, would like to see the return of diversity of breeds in dressage. After all, the last time US military forces rode horses into battle was in Afghanistan, and they were mounted on Buzkashi horses not huge Warmbloods.
The dressage community claims it is very traditional. The tradition is military based and it would follow that we now need more Afghan ponies in dressage. 
|
|
|
|
Post by rideanotherday on Mar 14, 2016 16:27:12 GMT
I owned an Arabian. I've rode a few. I've ridden warmbloods, stock horses and TB's. I'm more than a little obsessed with movement. I wouldn't hazard to talk to anyone about gaited horses. I don't really care for their way of going and really haven't spent much time watching or riding them. (mostly, they look lame to me! =P)
I know an arabian is not going to look like a traditional warmblood, nor is a TB going to look like a warmblood. Physics and geometry aren't spectacularly different though. (Now, if you wanted to tell me ponies are different...I would absolutely agree). The fact that the pelvis will need to tilt to engage the hindquarters and lift the back and ribcage doesn't change...the degree to which it will tilt or needs to tilt to be effective is all dependent upon the conformation of the horse, not the breed. Some horses are more flexible, some are not. With the understanding that Arabians have fewer vertebrae than other breeds, it follows that the degree of tilt of the pelvis necessary to achieve the same amount of lift of the back bone will be less than that of a different breed.
I evaluate horses based on what I perceive as breed characteristics and individual conformation. I do not expect a Friesian to move like a warmblood, since they are really built to be a cart horse. People like looking at the flash and hair, but that upright neck/shoulder connection really doesn't make for the world's best ride. I also don't expect a warmblood to be good at the catty movements required of a cowhorse. Does that mean they can't? No, it just means that they won't be as good as a quarterhorse because of differences in build. Probably won't have the instinct or "cowiness" either, but that's an entirely different topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by rideanotherday on Mar 15, 2016 11:55:48 GMT
I found an interesting pictogram. This discusses the extended trot, and I'd like to point out the arc of the back as shown by the green line. No breed is called out in this pictogram. The correctness of movement is. I think it shows better than I've been able to explain what I wanted to convey earlier. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by rideanotherday on Mar 15, 2016 12:07:48 GMT
Ok. This picture shows even better what I referred to about the lift to the horse's back. If you look at the diagonal pairs of the horse in the first picture you posted Horseguy, The angles of the foreleg and the hind leg in action do not match and the back is concave, or hollowed. The second horse has much closer angles of foreleg and hind leg and shows a lifted posture to his back. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by horseguy on Mar 15, 2016 14:41:25 GMT
... The fact that the pelvis will need to tilt to engage the hindquarters and lift the back and ribcage doesn't change...the degree to which it will tilt or needs to tilt to be effective is all dependent upon the conformation of the horse, not the breed. Some horses are more flexible, some are not. With the understanding that Arabians have fewer vertebrae than other breeds, it follows that the degree of tilt of the pelvis necessary to achieve the same amount of lift of the back bone will be less than that of a different breed... I evaluate horses based on what I perceive as breed characteristics and individual conformation. This is an interestingly point. On one hand you say, " ... the pelvis will need to tilt to engage the hindquarters and lift the back and ribcage doesn't change ... the degree to which it will tilt or needs to tilt to be effective is all dependent upon the conformation of the horse, not the breed." and then you say, "... Arabians have fewer vertebrae than other breeds, it follows that the degree of tilt of the pelvis necessary to achieve the same amount of lift of the back bone will be less than that of a different breed..." I would say that conformation and breed are nearly seminomas. Breeders breed for a specific conformation. This is particularly true in Europe where you can have a both a registered Warmblood stud and the same for the mare mare, but that does not necessarily mean you can register the foal in the same breed. This is because the European Warmblood foals must pass one or more conformation judgings to receive approval for registry. So, it would follow, if you accept this idea of breed = conformation, and I know that is not true of many American breeds, then you must accept that breeds have certain unique movements like the one you explain about Arabians. That's my point about Warmbloods and the Warmblood " dressage look" in their movement. They were bred for centuries as carriage horses. They were and are built to move efficiently and to pull substantial weight in the most elegant fashion. Aristocrats had to keep them around to send to the King in time of war as heavy cavalry mounts. In peacetime they had to be feed and cared for, therefore the aristocrats who had to support them wanted to use them. They were too light for draft work and too heavy for good riding horses, so they hitched them to carriages and bred them to look more like BMWs than Fords. They have a certain movement that produces the contemporary " dressage look". Their look comes from the use for which they were bred. The English bred TBs for general riding, racing and sport like fox hunting. TBs therefore have a very different bred conformation and movement. Arabians you explained. Breed matters in terms of movement and self carriage, and today one type of breed matters in dressage but that was not always true. It is marketing genius that the European breeders achieved such a protected branding of their breeds in dressage. They have done so through rule changes and fashion. They methodically achieved a monopoly. I think through the " dressage look" movement, which is a direct result of their bred conformation. |
|
|
|
Post by rideanotherday on Mar 15, 2016 15:20:14 GMT
Both of these horses are registered quarterhorses. The shorter of the 2 is a reiner, the taller a "hunter" style. Breed characteristics have "ranges". This is where individual conformation will make a huge impact on what the horse will look like as it moves. Breed and conformation are not synonymous. Breeders are shooting for a "type". Genetics play a large roll in conformation, but environment plays a part as well. You can have a really well bred but poorly fed warmblood that may end up short whereas the stud and mare were both tall. The distance between joints impacts muscling and movement. Breeding is only part of the equation. You can certainly stack the deck in your favor for getting particular traits. I agree that warmbloods have done a good job of selecting for a type, but genetics are still a crapshoot. Attachments:
|
|
?
