Different riding disciplines...
jsaranac
After two years riding huntseat, I took a dressage lesson.
All of the sudden, my years of thinking I am sitting back are completely
revised. I adopt a posture that feels like the leaning tower of Pisa, only
to be told that I am "correct and straight".
I also take contact that feels like I could be killing my horse, and makes
him initially throw his head, only to be told when he puts his head down and
goes round and seems to be using his hind end, collected, that he is
"accepting the bit" and collecting up.
"What's not to accept?" I think to myself. "Did the Jews accept Auschwitz,
if they "willingly" walked into the ovens?"
Yes, I know that is very harsh, but it still took a while for me to accept
that my horse could be accepting such strong contact. I have truly been,
and remain, confused. I don't know whether it is just a difference in
disciplines, or have I been doing it all wrong, all along?
I have never had that kind of contact. Usually when i ride, I have the
slightest amount of contact that is still (in my mind) contact. When I
gently touch on rein and then the other (which I don't do often), Pal lowers
his head. It's almost a non-gesture, it's so light. With the dressage
instructor, by contrast, it almost became a show of strength at first, until
the horse "lightened it" by "not resisting".
I am of the school that would love to ride bridle-less and saddle-less if I
could. But I accept that most horses have to learn that Stacy Westfall
look. She did an awful lot of training with horses who were alone with just
them and her. I guess I'm just a wee bit confused. I am told that without a
firm leader and firm contact I am not doing Pal any favors, yet I guess I am
wondering whether light contact is any firmer than firm contact, with an
animal that is so sensitive he can feel a fly landing on his flank?
On the other hand, he didn't seem unhappy after my dressage ride, at all.
He almost seemed happy to have worked "harder" and (since Pal is your
consumate treat whore) looking forward to the "okay, what do I get now, for
doing so well?" reward.
He really, I must admit, loves his rewards. I had a friend ride him this
past week while I was in CA and she pronounced him a complete addict.
jsaranac
"jsaranac" <jsala...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:482a4ef9$0$20190$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> I am of the school that would love to ride bridle-less and saddle-less if
> I could. But I accept that most horses have to learn that Stacy Westfall
> look. She did an awful lot of training with horses who were alone with
> just them and her. I guess I'm just a wee bit confused. I am told that
> without a firm leader and firm contact I am not doing Pal any favors, yet
> I guess I am wondering whether light contact is any firmer than firm
> contact, with an animal that is so sensitive he can feel a fly landing on
> his flank?
That should be, whether light contact is "any less firm" ....
cindi
> I also take contact that feels like I could be killing my horse, and makes
> him initially throw his head, only to be told when he puts his head down and
> goes round and seems to be using his hind end, collected, that he is
> "accepting the bit" and collecting up.
>
> "What's not to accept?" I think to myself. "Did the Jews accept Auschwitz,
> if they "willingly" walked into the ovens?"
>
> Yes, I know that is very harsh, but it still took a while for me to accept
> that my horse could be accepting such strong contact. I have truly been,
> and remain, confused. I don't know whether it is just a difference in
> disciplines, or have I been doing it all wrong, all along?
Contact should be offered by the horse, and there should never be any
pulling. When teaching a Western horse what to do with the bit, we
put some pressure on it, lightly, and wait, and when he gives to the
pressure, we release. When just chillin' we have a loopy rein. When
doing more complex or advanced stuff like a turn on the forehand/
haunches or a roll back, we ride with the slack out of the reins so
that if we need to provide more than just the absense of slack, we are
ready, but at all times we want it to be subtle and no pulling. If
the horse doesn't know how to respond, we just set it up and wait - we
don't pull harder. I don't see any problems riding those horses with
no slack at all times when we practice getting ready to make our big
Western Dressage Schooling Show Debut. :-) I do, however, see a TON
of problems with some English horses who have simply learned to
tolerate their rider pulling on the reins in the name of contact.
You are right to wonder if the simple fact that Pal tolerated it means
it's OK. And don't be swayed by any big name instructors or big name
dressage riders who tell you to shorten the reins regardless of what
the horse is doing. On a horse who's trained for it, shortening the
reins does not result in pulling because he knows what to do with his
head and neck when you shorten the reins. If there is any pulling,
the horse isn't ready, and is being jammed.
The question now becomes, did she have you pulling on him?
> I have never had that kind of contact. Usually when i ride, I have the
> slightest amount of contact that is still (in my mind) contact. When I
> gently touch on rein and then the other (which I don't do often), Pal lowers
> his head. It's almost a non-gesture, it's so light. With the dressage
> instructor, by contrast, it almost became a show of strength at first, until
> the horse "lightened it" by "not resisting".
Since you say show of strength, I assume there was pulling.
> I am of the school that would love to ride bridle-less and saddle-less if I
> could. But I accept that most horses have to learn that Stacy Westfall
> look. She did an awful lot of training with horses who were alone with just
> them and her. I guess I'm just a wee bit confused. I am told that without a
> firm leader and firm contact I am not doing Pal any favors, yet I guess I am
> wondering whether light contact is any firmer than firm contact, with an
> animal that is so sensitive he can feel a fly landing on his flank?
Firm contact does not automatically equal firm leadership. Not at
all. In general you are the leader when you are able to influence
where the horse goes and at what speed - those are feet issues for the
most part. Eventually you can come to influence the body parts:
shoulders, hips, barrel, back, neck. But you don't do that by holding
or forcing or having a contest of strength. It's just repetition: no,
put it there please, thank you. No, put it back there please, thank
you. You can even decide to micromanage the placement of his head
without keeping any sort of firm contact. That's how the Western
riders do it - when the horse puts the head where we don't want it, we
put it back, and then immediately give back some slack, how much
depending on what we are doing... I hate hate hate to stereotype but I
have met countless English riders who believe in holding the horse in
position and in gait and in speed within the gait. There is no self
carriage in that, even if the horse is tracking up and rounding his
back and breaking at the poll. Self carriage is only there if you can
let up on your holding and your nagging and the horse continues to do
what he was asked to do. But we humans can't seem to stop trying to
control every little thing!
So to summarize, if you can shorten your rein and Pal corresponds
without becoming heavy in your hands, then cool. If he shortens the
distance from your hands to his mouth himself because of correct work,
and you shorten your reins to take out the slack, even better. In
both instances the reins are short enough that he can feel the
slightest movements of your hands, and you are therefore riding on
contact. But there is no pulling. Pulling isn't contact, it's just
pulling. :-) I'd be very wary of a dressage instructor who wants you
to pull on a horse. I do not find it odd that a dressage instructor
would tell you to: I've audited and taken dressage lessons and I've
been told to. Some people think it's correct riding. I don't.
The thing of it is this: it is so much easier to teach holding reins a
certain length than it is to teach the correct feel for you to come to
learn how long your reins should be, and even harder is teaching you
how to bring your horse along so he can accept a shorter rein and
adjust his body fluidly and without resistance if you need to remind
him. It is easier to teach pull than *feel*. It can be frustrating
trying to get these tenuous higher level concepts across to students,
so it is very tempting to just say "kick him every fourth stride to
keep him going" or whatever... but it's not correct riding.
> On the other hand, he didn't seem unhappy after my dressage ride, at all.
> He almost seemed happy to have worked "harder" and (since Pal is your
> consumate treat whore) looking forward to the "okay, what do I get now, for
> doing so well?" reward.
You can work him harder without pulling on his head. :-) I mean, if
he really likes hard work, there are tons of things you can do to
challenge him. I'm sure you know this... Also keep in mind, horses
put up with a lot. Some horses put up with way too much. It is in
their nature and a big part of why they have made such good partners
for humans. We need to be really sure we don't push them into more
than they should have to put up with just because they are
agreeable. :-)
take care, keep the updates coming!
cindi
jsaranac
"cindi" <alliso...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9052f09f-d161-4be1...@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
take care, keep the updates coming!
cindi
------
Thanks Cindi.
I wouldn't define what I was doing as pulling. It was more a matter of
pounds of pressure asserted by him in resisting. It was like he gave
initially till I was holding the reins shorter and then while riding he was
still resisting initially as I kept them at that shorter length, still
moving my arms to give and take with his movments though, but it was
somewhat harder for me to hold them in that place as we started going, but
then he made it easier. I was not pulling, if anything he was pulling away
initially, stopping himself and then giving in to a shorter rein. He wasn't
behind the vertical or really cranked, and I was told he was nicely
collected, but I don't know. I know this sounds very naive on my part, it's
just I felt as though I was starting all over again it was so different from
huntseat. I enjoyed the lesson, I just want to make sure it was good for
him.
I don't know. It felt funny but the jury is still out.
Ocean of Nuance
It's impossible to tell if you are getting good instruction from your
report.
The comment about a horse collecting on the first dressage lesson
doesn't bode well, though. But again, it's impossible to tell.
Maybe ask some dressage people if they like the instructor and
especially why or why not. Post those comments here.
sharon
KMSmith
wrote:
> The comment about a horse collecting on the first dressage lesson
> doesn't bode well, though.
Why?
--Karen Smith
Bill Kambic
wrote:
<snipped for brevity>
>After two years riding huntseat, I took a dressage lesson.
>
>All of the sudden, my years of thinking I am sitting back are completely
>revised. I adopt a posture that feels like the leaning tower of Pisa, only
>to be told that I am "correct and straight".
Good riding is good riding. Have somebody videotape you so YOU can
see what you are or are not doing. It's a humbling experience, but
very valuable.
>I also take contact that feels like I could be killing my horse, and makes
>him initially throw his head, only to be told when he puts his head down and
>goes round and seems to be using his hind end, collected, that he is
>"accepting the bit" and collecting up.
If your reins have the tension of violin strings then something is
amiss. Again, video will help a lot. As far as the horse "accepting"
or "offering" remember that you're trying something new and the horse
is likely a bit "confused." That will take a couple of lessons and/or
practice sessions to work out.
It's VERY easy to fall into the trap of "holding up the horse's head."
How are you asking for collection? What's the response? If you don't
know now, delay the answer until you can ride again and NOTE what
you're doing and how the horse responds.
>I have never had that kind of contact. Usually when i ride, I have the
>slightest amount of contact that is still (in my mind) contact. When I
>gently touch on rein and then the other (which I don't do often), Pal lowers
>his head. It's almost a non-gesture, it's so light. With the dressage
>instructor, by contrast, it almost became a show of strength at first, until
>the horse "lightened it" by "not resisting".
You might want to reconsider instructores.
>I am of the school that would love to ride bridle-less and saddle-less if I
>could.
This is a chimera except for professionals or amatuers with very rich
significant others. For most of us the question is the most efficient
use of the standard tack items available. Dismiss the chimera from
your mind; it will just distract you. Remember that "perfection" is
the enemy of excellence.
Assessment of "equine happiness" is another chimera. Don't worry
about it. Ride correctly in tack that fits and works and make sure
the beast has enough to eat. That will guarantee it's "happiness."
:-)
KMSmith
>
> I wouldn't define what I was doing as pulling. It was more a matter of
> pounds of pressure asserted by him in resisting. It was like he gave
> initially till I was holding the reins shorter and then while riding he was
> still resisting initially as I kept them at that shorter length, still
> moving my arms to give and take with his movments though, but it was
> somewhat harder for me to hold them in that place as we started going, but
> then he made it easier. I was not pulling, if anything he was pulling away
> initially, stopping himself and then giving in to a shorter rein. He wasn't
> behind the vertical or really cranked, and I was told he was nicely
> collected, but I don't know. I know this sounds very naive on my part, it's
> just I felt as though I was starting all over again it was so different from
> huntseat. I enjoyed the lesson, I just want to make sure it was good for
> him.
Your report is similar to my learning to ride Stasia, as opposed to
the diehard western horses I'd always ridden. I didn't realize that I
was leaning forward and I still have to be reminded to sit back on my
pockets..."Lean waaaaay back, Karen!" Yes, it feels like I'm the
leaning tower of Pisa, but the mirror shows a different--and better--
vision. I learned that Stasia needs contact. I can hang off her face
if I want to and she'll tolerate it, but I cannot ride her without
contact if I want any semblance of control. I've learned there's a
fine line between just enough contact and not enough contact--and,
truly, it doesn't take much, but what is there must be firm. That
probably doesn't make any sense, though.
Of course I wasn't trying to cross disciplines so much as trying to
convert an English pleasure (saddleseat) horse to western. We've come
a long way.
--Karen Smith
ObH: Luke's home from the trainer. And we've had rain, rain, rain. Ugh.
Jim Casey
> I also take contact that feels like I could be killing my horse, and makes
> him initially throw his head, only to be told when he puts his head down and
> goes round and seems to be using his hind end, collected, that he is
> "accepting the bit" and collecting up.
This sounds harsh and forced. A horse that has been ridden hunt seat is
probably not going to collect in half an hour.
The fact that a horse tolerates something does not mean it's the best way
to go.
However, you have a live instructor as opposed to Usenet kibitzers who
can't see what's going on.
- Jim
jsaranac
"Jim Casey" <sea...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
news:o5ednTn38Jp1RLfV...@comcast.com...
Thanks.
I do think I've ridden him collected before. I can tell by how light he
feels, it's totally different than when he's plodding along on the forehand.
I was probably being a bit exaggerative in the "feels like I could be
killing my horse", but I'll see how the next lesson goes.
jsaranac
"KMSmith" <smi...@dma.org> wrote in message
news:df748877-b3b6-4f68...@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
--Karen Smith
--------
Hi Karen,
Glad to hear your report. Yes everyone told me I looked much better and
straighter even though I felt I was leaning way back. Then when I watched
the huntseat instructor trying to get a lesson from the Really Experienced
dressage teacher (not the one I rode with) I saw how she looked so hunched
forward and could not get the hang of being really vertical either.
We'll give it another shot.
jsaranac
"Ocean of Nuance" <lizzardw...@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:68vuu8F...@mid.individual.net...
>
> It's impossible to tell if you are getting good instruction from your
> report.
>
descriptions too.
> The comment about a horse collecting on the first dressage lesson doesn't
> bode well, though. But again, it's impossible to tell.
That really is a non issue. I've ridden Pal collected on other occasions
even in huntseat lessons, trying to train his body.
We'll try another lesson and see how it goes.
jsaranac
"Bill Kambic" <wka...@vic.com> wrote in message
news:3jkl24hvcct2i1uf8...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 13 May 2008 22:31:23 -0400, "jsaranac" <jsala...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> <snipped for brevity>
>
>>After two years riding huntseat, I took a dressage lesson.
>>
>>All of the sudden, my years of thinking I am sitting back are completely
>>revised. I adopt a posture that feels like the leaning tower of Pisa,
>>only
>>to be told that I am "correct and straight".
>
> Good riding is good riding. Have somebody videotape you so YOU can
> see what you are or are not doing. It's a humbling experience, but
> very valuable.
Yes, for sure. We did it once during riding camp last year but the tape got
taped over and I never got to see.
>
>>I also take contact that feels like I could be killing my horse, and makes
>>him initially throw his head, only to be told when he puts his head down
>>and
>>goes round and seems to be using his hind end, collected, that he is
>>"accepting the bit" and collecting up.
>
> If your reins have the tension of violin strings then something is
> amiss. Again, video will help a lot. As far as the horse "accepting"
> or "offering" remember that you're trying something new and the horse
> is likely a bit "confused." That will take a couple of lessons and/or
> practice sessions to work out.
>
> It's VERY easy to fall into the trap of "holding up the horse's head."
> How are you asking for collection? What's the response? If you don't
> know now, delay the answer until you can ride again and NOTE what
> you're doing and how the horse responds.
>
>>I have never had that kind of contact. Usually when i ride, I have the
>>slightest amount of contact that is still (in my mind) contact. When I
>>gently touch on rein and then the other (which I don't do often), Pal
>>lowers
>>his head. It's almost a non-gesture, it's so light. With the dressage
>>instructor, by contrast, it almost became a show of strength at first,
>>until
>>the horse "lightened it" by "not resisting".
>
> You might want to reconsider instructores.
She showed me, holding the reins between us, how it is supposed to feel. I
wouldn't say that it was a guitar string about to snap, but it was
definitely firmer than I am used to.
>
>>I am of the school that would love to ride bridle-less and saddle-less if
>>I
>>could.
>
> This is a chimera except for professionals or amatuers with very rich
> significant others. For most of us the question is the most efficient
> use of the standard tack items available. Dismiss the chimera from
> your mind; it will just distract you. Remember that "perfection" is
> the enemy of excellence.
Well I do have fun popping around on Pal tackless. I just make sure no
other rider is in the ring : ).
>
> Assessment of "equine happiness" is another chimera. Don't worry
> about it. Ride correctly in tack that fits and works and make sure
> the beast has enough to eat. That will guarantee it's "happiness."
> :-)
Especially the eating part : ).
cindi
Well, she mentioned it when describing whether or not she was pulling,
and what Pal was doing with his head and neck, and it's a very common
fallacy to call a lowered or tucked head or a horse being "on the bit"
as a horse who is collected. In reality, collection comes from
behind... So it just sounds suspicious for an instructor to comment on
it wth respect to the head. I know a TON of trainers and instructors
both western and English who will say "collect him" when they mean
"ask him to lower his head with a rein aid." So it's certainly easy
for folks to be uncertain what it all means.
cindi
Mary Healey
> I was probably being a bit exaggerative in the "feels like I could be
> killing my horse", but I'll see how the next lesson goes.
A suggestion - when the instructor has you pick up the reins, just take the
slack out of them and use one finger of one hand to vibrate a rein.
Honestly, though, IME the horse is the one who determines the length of
rein. Get him working from behind and the distance from his mouth to your
hand gets shorter, thus, a shorter rein.
More important than a shorter rein is keeping him working butt-to-brain and
keeping everything relaxed and mobile.
(Oh, and on the "tower of Pisa" thing -- remember that the front end of the
horse needs to lift *up* and out, and the more you lean over the withers
the harder it is to get that "cigar boat" effect.)
--
Mary & the depleted Ames National Zoo
(Ranger, Duke, Rhia-cat)
cindi
> I do think I've ridden him collected before. I can tell by how light he
> feels, it's totally different than when he's plodding along on the forehand.
Well.... Lightness can be self carriage. Horses can be in self
carriage in an extended gait or a collected one. The definition of
collection is a shorter, more compressed stride, with more elevation,
and more weight shifted to the hind quarters. Hopefully lightness is
there also!
> I was probably being a bit exaggerative in the "feels like I could be
> killing my horse", but I'll see how the next lesson goes.
Well, you did have that Jews at Auschwitz comment... :-)
cindi
Tamara in TN
>
> All of the sudden, my years of thinking I am sitting back are completely
> revised. I adopt a posture that feels like the leaning tower of Pisa, only
> to be told that I am "correct and straight".
>
> I also take contact that feels like I could be killing my horse, and makes
> him initially throw his head, only to be told when he puts his head down and
> goes round and seems to be using his hind end, collected, that he is
> "accepting the bit" and collecting up.
if it makes you feel any better, the one time I rode a bona fide-eee
4th level
horse I was told to assume as much contact for a half pass right as
I
had to assume at the equally most unpleasant ride of my life,the
single
time I rode a padded walking horse....both times the instructors went
on
and on about how wondeful I was riding but I just felt like I wanted a
bath....
Tamara in TN
KMSmith
Sharon's comment, to me, sounds prejudiced: only seasoned dressage
horses can collect. I am still curious as to whether she really meant
that.
--Karen Smith
cindi
> "cindi" <allisonac...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9052f09f-d161-4be1...@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> take care, keep the updates coming!
> cindi
>
> ------
>
> Thanks Cindi.
>
> I wouldn't define what I was doing as pulling. It was more a matter of
> pounds of pressure asserted by him in resisting. It was like he gave
> initially till I was holding the reins shorter and then while riding he was
> still resisting initially as I kept them at that shorter length, still
> moving my arms to give and take with his movments though, but it was
> somewhat harder for me to hold them in that place as we started going, but
> then he made it easier. I was not pulling, if anything he was pulling away
> initially, stopping himself and then giving in to a shorter rein. He wasn't
> behind the vertical or really cranked, and I was told he was nicely
> collected, but I don't know.
Here is the training scale:
http://www.artofriding.com/articles/trainingscale.html
Until you have rhythm, suppleness, contact, impulsion and
straightness, it's not cool to try to work on collection. But that is
what everybody wants because it is the end product - so they hold the
head and try to make it look like the horse is doing the right thing.
From the sound of it, there wasn't much suppleness (you mentioned
resistance) nor appropriate contact (again, the resistance, him
pulling away.) You might tell your instructor you don't mind starting
at the foundation and moving up slowly and properly; maybe she is
afraid you are like most other people and you want the end product
right away.
> I know this sounds very naive on my part, it's
> just I felt as though I was starting all over again it was so different from
> huntseat.
It doesn't sound naive in a bad way - of course you'd be naive about
something you don't have experience with.
> I enjoyed the lesson, I just want to make sure it was good for
> him.
>
> I don't know. It felt funny but the jury is still out.
Yeah.
take care
cindi
J. Z. M.
(riding without tack)
> This is a chimera except for professionals or amatuers with very rich
> significant others. For most of us the question is the most efficient
> use of the standard tack items available. Dismiss the chimera from
> your mind; it will just distract you. Remember that "perfection" is
> the enemy of excellence.
So well said:::::Hipp-hipp-horray! Jolly roger.
Jody
jsaranac
Yeah.... I definitely should avoid posting after a couple of glasses of wine
: (.
Ocean of Nuance
I think this yet another case of folks in different disciplines using
the same terminology for different things (e.g., western extended trot
=/= dressage extended trot).
sharon
Robin Ryan
I have learned there is a big difference between pulling and never
giving (i.e., trying to force the horse into a frame via the "kick and
pull" school) and riding with too light of contact, never asking the
horse to give in the bridle and be through.
When I ride Calibra, I at times have very firm contact and have to
"sponge" the rein(s) to get him to give in the jaw and go round.
However, the goal is to immediately GIVE when he responds, then ride him
forward into the reins (which have steady and relatively light contact
unless asking for roundness). He should reach for the contact. My
instructor says we should be seeking to hold each other's hands.
Having said that, Calibra (nor I) aren't perfect. So, you will see me at
times with a heavier hand than I should have, and you'll see Calibra
toss his head up on a downward transition and/or suck behind the leg and
bit or lock his jaw. The cure to this isn't to lock the forearm and
pull!! There is no simple answer. It's riding back to front (forward
first!), then showing the horse where to be with tactful (but sometimes
quite firm) hand, seat and leg aids.
If your instructor's forearm is locked and hard and the contact is
steady hard, then your instructor isn't like mine. My instructor is
ALWAYS LOOKING for Calibra to give, so that she can give in return, so
that the ideal ride is a partnership.
Again, having said that, she has used aggressive hand aids at times to
get him to give! You can't just ride around for years hoping the horse
learns to consistently carry himself round and through. You have to ask
and yes, sometimes demand!!
I think you should ask the instructor to hop on and show you what she's
meaning by the "show of strength at first, until the horse "lightens it"
by "not resisting". Ask her to talk you thru what she's doing. You
should see it! It may be hard for you to do it, but it shouldn't be hard
for her. If you see her doing what she's saying, then she sounds like a
good instructor from what you've described. OTOH, I've seen dressage
instructors/riders TALK about giving, but what you see is a kick and
pull ride!!
Hope this helps,
Robin
--
Robin Ryan
Splash
I agree, brilliantly put Bill.
I am the cross-over queen, grew up riding western, trained for my BHS
and I had ridden alternate disciplines over the years BUT I am
completely incapable of doing both in the same day, week or even
month. The use of my weight, seatbones, legs and yes, hands are
COMPLETELY different in each discipline.
My english instructor has put it to me like this "those reins are a
way to communicate with your horse. When you do NOT maintain contact
it is like someone dropping the phone on the other end, the
communication is lost. Please don't do that to your horse". Sox is
frankly lost and confused without that contact while we are
schooling. YES he is capable of moving out on a loose rein but we
don't "school" on a loose rein. But that is because he was trained to
have the contact. I can "feel" him in my hands, I can feel when he
gets heavy and I do NOT pull, but that is unacceptable so I maintain
contact and add a half halt until he lightens in my hands again. I
can definitely "feel" when he is light and relaxed in my hands. It
is, after all, our goal.
We have a level 2 Equine Canada Western Coach here doing a clinic this
weekend. I am very excited to watch (and I am doing a training class/
ground work with the BO's two year old!!) but as I have committed to
riding Sox english I will NOT subject him (or myself) to a change of
discipline for a weekend. There may be horses out there that can
handle it but Sox ain't one of them.
I cringe to see our western schooling ponies used for english lessons,
they simply can't (and often don't) accept the level of contact that
is common in a "dressage" horse. It is like trying to get them to
communicate in some strange foriegn language, not really fair unless
they have been taught or brought up in that language.
So yeah, I "get" that the whole "contact" thing can feel foreign at
first. But if Pancake is good with it and this is the direction you
want to go in the future, trust me when I say you will get the hang of
it. And it will feel less foriegn and more natural with each lesson
and Pancake will get lighter with each lesson.
And yeah I have avoided the whole dressage label cause I am anti-
competitive and ride and school english for the pleasure of building
myself a nice athlete. That said, I ride ONLY on the flat so you can
take that anyway you want ;-)
Splash
Ocean of Nuance
(snip)
> So yeah, I "get" that the whole "contact" thing can feel foreign at
> first. But if Pancake is good with it and this is the direction you
> want to go in the future, trust me when I say you will get the hang of
> it. And it will feel less foriegn and more natural with each lesson
> and Pancake will get lighter with each lesson.
Believe me, Pancake is "good with it." He has never been ridden western
in his life. I bought him from the girl who broke and trained him. He
has done only dressage and trail riding and a bit of jumping for fun.
sharon
Ocean of Nuance
ps. He can get too light. He must maintain the drawing on the bit in
the more advanced frame. We are working on that right now, having him
stay out to the hand and keep the same connection no matter where his
neck is and to not shorten the neck. The slower the rehab the faster he
rehabs.
s
Splash
wrote:
And of course there is the dreaded "behind the bit" where the horse
ducks his head to his chest to avoid all contact.
Splash
Splash
>
> - Show quoted text -
P.S. Sounds like Pancake is the perfect candidate for this kind of
job :-D.
Ocean of Nuance
BTV
curling
sucking back
shortening the neck
not drawing
not carrying
not coming from behind evenly (i.e., not driving)
grabbing a rein
leaning
"something" but not a correct "something"
against a leg
through the should
losing the haunches
not straight
not forward
not adjustable
not through
etc.
If it was easy we would all be riding GP.
sharon
Ocean of Nuance
I think you have confused Pancake with someone else's horse... he has
always done dressage. He has never done western or been ridden off
contact when working. He is a dressage horse... showed a year at second
and training third when I bought him. If he isn't a dressage horse then
I grossly over paid. ;)
sharon
cindi
> I think this yet another case of folks in different disciplines using
> the same terminology for different things (e.g., western extended trot
> =/= dressage extended trot).
But you didn't answer Karen's question: do you mean to imply only
seasoned dressage horses can collect?
cindi
Bill Kambic
AAARRRRGGGGHHH! :-)
Ocean of Nuance
Not even the most known-est, most quantity-est, known quantity can
answer that question until Karen defines what she means by "collection."
That's my point. I think there is more than one definition floating
around out there exactly like in the case of "extended trot."
sharon
Robin Ryan
>
> BTV
> curling
> sucking back
> shortening the neck
> not drawing
> not carrying
> not coming from behind evenly (i.e., not driving)
> grabbing a rein
> leaning
> "something" but not a correct "something"
> against a leg
> through the should
> losing the haunches
> not straight
> not forward
> not adjustable
> not through
> etc.
Hey Sharon, have you been secretly auditing my lessons, or something???
Many of these terms sound familiar to me, but only in Kelly's voice:)
cindi
wrote:
> Not even the most known-est, most quantity-est, known quantity can
> answer that question until Karen defines what she means by "collection."
> That's my point. I think there is more than one definition floating
> around out there exactly like in the case of "extended trot."
>
> sharon
Oh, got it. I'm sure you could answer her question by providing your
definition of collection first.
I don't see "extended trot" as having different definitions. I see it
as having different manifestations: Big strided English horse, tiny
shorter strided cowhorse. They can both be in an extended trot but
they're going to look a bit different from each other. But the
definition is still the same.
cindi
Ocean of Nuance
Hey Babe, I'm writing that book. Please don't crib! It's a long road.
Nobody gets out alive.
sharon
Ocean of Nuance
> On May 14, 2:26 pm, Ocean of Nuance <lizzardwomanRM...@nc.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Not even the most known-est, most quantity-est, known quantity can
>> answer that question until Karen defines what she means by "collection."
>> That's my point. I think there is more than one definition floating
>> around out there exactly like in the case of "extended trot."
>>
>> sharon
>
> Oh, got it. I'm sure you could answer her question by providing your
> definition of collection first.
Look at the quotes I posted.
> I don't see "extended trot" as having different definitions. I see it
> as having different manifestations: Big strided English horse, tiny
> shorter strided cowhorse. They can both be in an extended trot but
> they're going to look a bit different from each other. But the
> definition is still the same.
Some things that are likely to differ considerably between a western
extended trot and a (third level) dressage extended trot include:
1. total calorie expenditure
2. strength required
3. degree of collection required
3. musculature developed
4. look of the movement
5. impulsion in the movement
6. straightness of the movement
7. throughness of the movement
Remember, a very large majority of folks IN REGULAR DRESSAGE LESSONS
OVER YEARS never make it out of second successfully before they die.
sharon
Sharon Potter
Extended trot has very different definitions, depending on who says it.
To an AQHA hunter, it means move out of a jog ;-) and get to a normal
trot. No real extension involved. While a cowhorse will certainly move
and look different than a warmblood dressage horse, for example, the
gait should be the same. The cowhorse is not likely to have the
extravagant movement that the warmblood will, *but both should show
maximum reach and lengthening of the stride and be up and through their
back*. What many western types call an extended trot is anything faster
than a jog.
Let's look at it this way: Comparing a western version of "extended
trot", which is not truly an extended trot but a slight lengthening of a
normal trot would be like saying a dressage pirouette is a reining
spin. Apples and oranges. And I'm sure the western folks would quickly
point out the difference between a real spin and a dressage pirouette,
just like the dressage folks point out that a western extended trot is
not truly extended. ;-)
Sharon Potter
Red Branch
KMSmith
wrote:
>
> Not even the most known-est, most quantity-est, known quantity can
> answer that question until Karen defines what she means by "collection."
> That's my point. I think there is more than one definition floating
> around out there exactly like in the case of "extended trot."
Sharon, you brought up the point about collection--without a
definition--in the first dressage lesson and that such collection did
not bode well. My question is why? The definition of collection is not
the issue, which you are evading. The issue is whether I inferred,
accurately or not, your meaning.
--Karen Smith
Ocean of Nuance
No known definition of collection known to me fits within the scenario
presented. That's why I assume you have a different definition. We
can't communicate if we are using the same words for different things.
Do you think autodidacts exist among riders?
Do you think autodidacts exist among horses?
sharon
Robin Ryan
If she had used the term "relative collection" would it have fit the
scenario? Can a horse be "relatively more collected" and not be
"collected" (using your definition)? Or is it either/or?
I read for context and not for literality (is that a word??) and got the
gist of it. She was concerned/confused about the aids she was instructed
to use to ask for a more collected gait than she was used to riding. I
think it's possible to give her good advice without necessarily having
definition wars:)
FWIW, as usual,
Ocean of Nuance
> Ocean of Nuance wrote:
>> KMSmith wrote:
>>> On May 14, 5:26 pm, Ocean of Nuance <lizzardwomanRM...@nc.rr.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Not even the most known-est, most quantity-est, known quantity can
>>>> answer that question until Karen defines what she means by
>>>> "collection."
>>>> That's my point. I think there is more than one definition floating
>>>> around out there exactly like in the case of "extended trot."
>>>
>>> Sharon, you brought up the point about collection--without a
>>> definition--in the first dressage lesson and that such collection did
>>> not bode well. My question is why? The definition of collection is not
>>> the issue, which you are evading. The issue is whether I inferred,
>>> accurately or not, your meaning.
>>
>> No known definition of collection known to me fits within the scenario
>> presented. That's why I assume you have a different definition. We
>> can't communicate if we are using the same words for different things.
>>
>> Do you think autodidacts exist among riders?
>>
>> Do you think autodidacts exist among horses?
>>
>> sharon
>
> If she had used the term "relative collection" would it have fit the
> scenario? Can a horse be "relatively more collected" and not be
> "collected" (using your definition)? Or is it either/or?
Thee are degrees of collection. The lowest one starts in around second.
> I read for context and not for literality (is that a word??) and got the
> gist of it. She was concerned/confused about the aids she was instructed
> to use to ask for a more collected gait than she was used to riding. I
> think it's possible to give her good advice without necessarily having
> definition wars:)
I associate myself with these remarks...
"Collection in any gait is not about just shortening the stride, it is
about increased flexion of the joints, a higher shorter arc. This is
rarely seen because most riders just shorten the stride, or block it."
-- galopp
Robin, do you agree agree or disagree with this comment?
"Actually I do not think they are obsessed enough with how to DEVELOP
[collection]. Most of the time 2nd level is where scores TANK. The rider
either understands it or they just shorten the strides, go sideways, and
have no amplitude. And many europeans who come to this side of the pond
tend to agree." -- gallop
Do you agree or disagree with this comment? In my spectating and
auditing adventures, I cannot disagree with this. Galopp is a known
quantity, real person, who has more experience that many people her put
together.
If it was easy we would all be riding at GP (or even mastering second).
Some 80% of dressage folks never master second. It is no
coincidence that collection comes into the picture at that level. That
is not my original idea... it is cribbed from folks like galopp.
sharon
Robin Ryan
Of course I agree with those statements in your context because I've
read enough of your posts to understand what YOU mean about collection,
which is in a totally dressage context. But I also understand that
others can use the term and mean something not quite so
pristine/technical, and I can still have a conversation with them:)
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
<s_pi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
snip
>
>I am the cross-over queen, grew up riding western, trained for my BHS
>and I had ridden alternate disciplines over the years BUT I am
>completely incapable of doing both in the same day, week or even
>month. The use of my weight, seatbones, legs and yes, hands are
>COMPLETELY different in each discipline.
See, I do cross-over within weeks, even days of each other, and I
don't have that problem. I could easily school Mocha in one set of
tack, then swap it out, and I don't find that the use of weight,
seatbones, legs are that different between disciplines.
Case in point: I have literally gone a couple days between a lesson
at a top flight BHS school (Grand Cypress, in Florida) in hunt seat,
including jumping. Then I've come home and ridden both schoolies (in
an earlier setting) and Mocha (last time) with no discernable
difference.
My horse understands the difference between tack.
I really, really have to disagree that the use of these aides are so
completely different between disciplines--and I used to switch back
and forth between disciplines in lessons during the course of a week,
back when I was riding at the hunt seat barn, then at the Western
barn. Same for the short period at the dressage barn. What I found
was the determining factor was the quality of the instructor. Better
instructor who'd ridden more disciplines--minimal problem. Instructor
who'd only ridden one discipline--problem.
The BHS instructors at Grand Cypress had no issues with any particular
Western elements of my riding, it was lower level hunt seat and
dressage people who got snooty about the Western stuff. If anything,
the BHS people tended to tell me things that matched my Western
instruction (which is why I am at this Western barn and have been for
years).
snip
>We have a level 2 Equine Canada Western Coach here doing a clinic this
>weekend. I am very excited to watch (and I am doing a training class/
>ground work with the BO's two year old!!) but as I have committed to
>riding Sox english I will NOT subject him (or myself) to a change of
>discipline for a weekend. There may be horses out there that can
>handle it but Sox ain't one of them.
Perhaps. But it is also a training issue.
>I cringe to see our western schooling ponies used for english lessons,
>they simply can't (and often don't) accept the level of contact that
>is common in a "dressage" horse. It is like trying to get them to
>communicate in some strange foriegn language, not really fair unless
>they have been taught or brought up in that language.
Um--wrong. Seriously. Something's not going right. There should be
no problem for a broke horse to accept a different level of contact in
a different bit. Too many people have the mindset that a horse that's
once in a curb can only do English in a kimberwick. Wrong. But you
have to school the horse to it.
My trainer will get after me if I ride Mocha in too loose a rein in
English tack. That said, we also ride in a steady contact in Western.
But it is a different level. We school the difference regularly. She
goes in a French link in English and a short-shank correction bit in
Western, with a very soft romal. I notice a slight difference in
carriage in Western which I attribute to the balance of the curb in
her mouth.
jrw
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
wrote:
>jsaranac wrote:
>
>> I also take contact that feels like I could be killing my horse, and makes
>> him initially throw his head, only to be told when he puts his head down and
>> goes round and seems to be using his hind end, collected, that he is
>> "accepting the bit" and collecting up.
>
>This sounds harsh and forced. A horse that has been ridden hunt seat is
>probably not going to collect in half an hour.
Yep.
>The fact that a horse tolerates something does not mean it's the best way
>to go.
There's putting the head down, and then there's softening on the bit.
Two vastly different things.
jrw
jsaranac
"Robin Ryan" <ro...@robins-site.com> wrote in message
news:MPmdnSsyCOVFG7bV...@comcast.com...
>
> I read for context and not for literality (is that a word??) and got the
> gist of it. She was concerned/confused about the aids she was instructed
> to use to ask for a more collected gait than she was used to riding. I
> think it's possible to give her good advice without necessarily having
> definition wars:)
>
> FWIW, as usual,
Thank you for lending some intelligent, nonpretentious benefit-of-the-doubt
to your interpretation, Robin (and good luck at your show!)
My experience with Pal collecting (or relatively, doing so) really has
nothing to do with his headset other than incidentally. I do know that
cranking a horse's head to his chest does not mean he is collected, merely
that he is uncomfortably cranked. I'm talking about a different feel that I
get with Pal under me where it is light and effortless instead of feeling
like he is on the forehand... he is in a frame, it feels like there is
power/impulsion from his hind end that is making his back arc up under me
much more so than normal and his long body becomes shorter due to that arc.
I can't keep him that way (or should I say, he can't keep himself that way?)
for long periods of time, it's usually less than a minute at a time and
sometimes it's only a matter of ten or fifteen seconds, but I have
definitely felt it, even at canter for short periods, and sometimes as long
as once around our large indoor (usually I fall apart, unable to continue
supporting him, and then he goes out of it) but I don't think yet ever more
than that. The way I can best describe it is that it feels effortless, like
there is awesome energy and strength underneath me with a happy mind of its
own and I'm not a weight on his back any longer, just something that happens
to be there that he can easily carry.
I repeated the instruction of the dressage lesson tonight, without the
instructor, and found that I could have contact getting me the same result
pretty much, without having the reins quite as short and feeling quite so
much pressure, and Pal still went very well. Thn tonight I got more of a
centered riding lesson, rolling the ball and such, riding with one hand
stretching up and trying to feel the different parts of your stomach, back,
and how they can extend and stretch differently. It was neat.
Dana Compton
So what is YOUR definition of an ideal extended trot ? I agree with
sharon there
are different Ideals for different disciplines.
Dana (who will be gone from thursday night until late monday)
Dana Compton
wrote:
> Remember, a very large majority of folks IN REGULAR DRESSAGE LESSONS
> OVER YEARS never make it out of second successfully before they die.
>
> sharon
Thanks for pointing that out you made my day.. NOT.. I guess as long
as I don't get past 2nd level I can't die? That works better for me.
LOL
Dana
Dana Compton
> >>> Sharon, you brought up the point about collection--without a
> >>> definition
Well here is mine just for the hell of it.
Collection at the trot is the product of changing the correct working
trot by compressing the horse's energy between front and back so as to
bring the horse upwards rather than forward just enough to encourage
the energy of the trot to increase but not the rate. This will result
in the trot becoming more energetic with more flexion/spring in the
joints, more swing to the back and more lift to the gait.
Collection at the canter is the same substituting the canter words
where they should be :)
Dana :)
Ocean of Nuance
You get it.
sharon
Ocean of Nuance
Excellent!
It's very hard to wrap your mind around the fact that yes, it *IS*
harder than you can even imagine. Half the battle for me has been
forcing my mind to accept that as hard as it is now, it is harder than that.
This quote:
"Collection in any gait is not about just shortening the stride, it is
about increased flexion of the joints, a higher shorter arc. This is
rarely seen because most riders just shorten the stride, or block it."
-- galopp
should be scary for all the boys and girls because is almost certainly
written about about dressage students that have been lessoning for
years. Recall some large percentage of folks never master second
despite all efforts.
Galopp has not only trained several horses to GP herself but has several
students who themselves have trained GP horses, multiple in some cases.
That's a definition of a known quantity.
Now map that on to the general riding public who are lessoning in some
other discipline like hunter, NOT another balance seat discipline such
as reining. Obviously, the percentage of those folks working in any
degree of collection is vanishing. It's almost a science experiment.
sharon
Robin Ryan
Yep, you get it:) You describe this very well. I have been working on
canter half pass lately, and when it's RIGHT it feels the way you
describe. The sideways movement is floaty and effortless because he's so
balanced and working from behind.
>
> I repeated the instruction of the dressage lesson tonight, without the
> instructor, and found that I could have contact getting me the same result
> pretty much, without having the reins quite as short and feeling quite so
> much pressure, and Pal still went very well. Thn tonight I got more of a
> centered riding lesson, rolling the ball and such, riding with one hand
> stretching up and trying to feel the different parts of your stomach, back,
> and how they can extend and stretch differently. It was neat.
On a more highly trained dressage horse, you shorten the reins more for
more collection, but only if there is sufficient "back to front"
impulsion. It feels like the front end is lifted, not curled back or
under:) As Sharon has said, it take a lot of effort and strength from
the horse, so most can't do this correctly until they're at higher
levels. Have fun!!
KMSmith
wrote:
>
> No known definition of collection known to me fits within the scenario
> presented. That's why I assume you have a different definition. We
> can't communicate if we are using the same words for different things.
Sharon, you are deliberately obfuscating and evading my question. The
definition of "collection" is not important to the question posed to
you. The concern is WHY (as you stated) a horse collecting in a first
dressage lesson "does not bode well."
--Karen Smith
Lynn Tucker
"Splash" <s_pi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c90cbdaf-d566-4098...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
We have a level 2 Equine Canada Western Coach here doing a clinic this
weekend. I am very excited to watch (and I am doing a training class/
ground work with the BO's two year old!!) but as I have committed to
riding Sox english I will NOT subject him (or myself) to a change of
discipline for a weekend. There may be horses out there that can
handle it but Sox ain't one of them.
Splash
Who is the EC level 2 coach that is doing the clinic? I may know her.
Lynn......Ontario, Canada
Lynn Tucker
collection and they differ somewhat between disciplines. The commonality is
that in all disciplines we strive for some collection.
Last week I watched a well trained western horse. He was moving well under
himself, definitely weight shifted more toward haunches, shoulders were up
and he was working on a loose rein taking all his queues from the riders
weight and leg. His jog and lope had rhythm and impulsion. His flying lead
changes were light with no increase in speed or change in rhythm. His pole
was even with his withers and face perpendicular to the ground. No over
bending or nose to the ground. He is not used for WP but for Western Riding
and Trail classes. For a western horse I would say he was collected
But was he as collected as a Grand Prix dressage horse? No. Did he have the
impulsion to do a passage or piaffe? I don't think so.
Then look at an open jumper. They have to be able to collect as well to take
a big vertical jump, but it certainly doesn't look like a Grand Prix
dressage horse either. Nor is the horse expected to hold that extreme
collect for many strides. The purpose is different.
Lynn......Ontario, Canada
--
Lynn Johnson
Ocean of Nuance
Look at the training pyramid.
sharon
cindi
> So what is YOUR definition of an ideal extended trot ? I agree with
> sharon there
> are different Ideals for different disciplines.
There are definitely different ideals for different disciplines.
Those I consider different manifestations of the same thing - it's not
like you say "extended trot" in one discipline and they do a
rollback. It always means to lengthen the stride.
In dressage it means to lengthen the stride as much as the horse is
physically able, in a hopefully expressive manner with impulsion and
purity of gait and the same rythym/tempo as the working trot and
collected trot... other disciplines are happy with extension meaning
simply showing a more lengthened stride than in a working trot or
jog. But that is a continuum, not a different definition. I say that
you can take any horse of any breed and teach him to do an extended
trot under saddle, but the warmbloods who are bred for a huge
extravagant stride are going to have more capacity for it.
cindi
KMSmith
wrote:
>
> > Sharon, you are deliberately obfuscating and evading my question. The
> > definition of "collection" is not important to the question posed to
> > you. The concern is WHY (as you stated) a horse collecting in a first
> > dressage lesson "does not bode well."
>
> Look at the training pyramid.
You still have not answered the question.
--Karen Smith
Dana Compton
The difference is a correct trot in the dressage ring is not the same
as
a correct trot in the western rail class. IMHO it's not possible to
execute a correct extended trot using only a leverage bit. In the
Double
Bridle yes in a curb no. When I ask a horse to extend into a true
extended trot I am going to allow the horse to move forward giving
with
my hands a bit(in the double shifting to the snaffle). I am not going
to push
the horse forward onto a leverage bit. The horse has to be
moving with forward impulsion to begin with and be on the bit to
achieve
a correct extended trot.
There is a great deal of difference between the "ideal" extended trot
movement of a dressage horse and a horse who is shown in rail classes
(without dressage training).
A dressage judge would find the extended trot of the western horse
incorrect. The rail judge would find a dressage horse extended trot
in a western class incorrect.
In rail classes it is not penalized if the horse is slightly crooked,
the extensions of the
legs are somewhat higher in front or the horse does not actually
over reach back to front each stride. The technical requirements and
expectations are much lower for these disciplines than for the
dressage.
So I guess it depends on who you ask what "correct" is. But if you use
the ideals of competition and what is being judged as correct there
are HUGE differences in definition.
Dana
cindi
> The difference is a correct trot in the dressage ring is not the same
> as a correct trot in the western rail class.
Er, that is true. I don't do rail class stuff but yes, that is true.
The rail class horses do not have to extend *as much* as a dressage
horse is expected to (eventually) do.
> IMHO it's not possible to
> execute a correct extended trot using only a leverage bit.
Given the constraints of showing in a dressage class, where you are
expected to ride on contact, and leverage bits are used only in the
context of a double bridle, yes. But let's not forget that horses can
do lovely extended trots at liberty. The pure defintion is met: their
stride is lengthened. They also can do it with impulsion, expression,
purity of gait and steady rythym and tempo, at liberty - with no
bit.
> There is a great deal of difference between the "ideal" extended trot
> movement of a dressage horse and a horse who is shown in rail classes
> (without dressage training).
I most certainly agree.
> A dressage judge would find the extended trot of the western horse
> incorrect.
I don't know about that - if you mean a rail class trot, yes, but if
you mean simply a western horse, then not necessarily. Quarter horses
and Arabians and other smaller, more compact breeds, do dressage, and
while it is very rare to see them at the upper levels, they are very
capable of performing an extended trot that is as good as it can
possibly be given their conformation. And that is how they are
supposed to be scored in dressage anyway.
> The rail judge would find a dressage horse extended trot
> in a western class incorrect.
After they had a heart attack. ;-)
> In rail classes it is not penalized if the horse is slightly crooked,
Right.
> the extensions of the
> legs are somewhat higher in front or the horse does not actually
> over reach back to front each stride.
I don't see many smaller compact horses overstriding. They can still
be in extension to the best of their ability.
> The technical requirements and
> expectations are much lower for these disciplines than for the
> dressage.
I agree, and again, that's got nothing to do with the defintion. That
has to do with the requirements to show successfully in a specific
discipline.
> So I guess it depends on who you ask what "correct" is. But if you use
> the ideals of competition and what is being judged as correct there
> are HUGE differences in definition.
Dressage judges do not impress me in general. Upper level dressage
does not impress me in most cases. So I couldn't care less what they
decide is the idea for competition. There is an underlying purity
that I'm interested in that exists outside of dressage competition.
ANY horse can do an extended trot at birth and ANY horse can learn to
do one under saddle, one that is as extragavant as possible given
their conformation.
People who do dressage sure seem quick to point out that other people
can't come close to what they are doing - so excuse me... ;-) It's
just like jumping. My horses jump, Sue's horses jump. Hers jump much
better than mine, but they both jump. Nobody looks down their nose
and says oh, but that's not jumping! It is, it's just not as far
along the continuum.
cindi
>
> Dana- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Emily Brooks
"cindi" <alliso...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:61bb2828-6210-4cca...@1g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
People who do dressage sure seem quick to point out that other people
can't come close to what they are doing - so excuse me... ;-)
cindi
----------------
Make that *some* people! :-) There are elitists in all disciplines.
Emily - dressigista but not snooty about it
cindi
> Make that *some* people! :-) There are elitists in all disciplines.
>
> Emily - dressigista but not snooty about it
You are absolutely right and I apologize; I did not mean to make it
sound like all dressage people do this.
cindi
Emily Brooks
No offense taken at all, Cindi. Absolutes in statements invite folks to
think you see the world in black-and-white, which I know isn't true of most
of us.
Emily - no, I can't spell "dressagista"
Sue Leopold
> Now map that on to the general riding public who are lessoning in some
> other discipline like hunter, NOT another balance seat discipline such
> as reining. Obviously, the percentage of those folks working in any
> degree of collection is vanishing. It's almost a science experiment.
Show ring hunters should *never* be collected. It is counterproductive
to producing the performance and the jump for the show ring hunter.
They need to be ridden in a neutral balance. Note that that does
not necessarily mean on the front end though certainly many show
hunters canter around "on their noses."
Show jumpers, OTOH, are ridden in collection at the higher levels.
It doesn't particularly look like the collection you see on dressage
horses because they perform at a higher rate of speed - more
meters per minute to make the times. But they exhibit many of
the benchmarks of collection, especially if you spend some time
watching the truly advanced riders working on te flat.
One of the challenges Choccie faces in his job switch is to
perform in the neutral balance of the hunter rather than the
more collected balance he used in the jumper ring. Fortunately,
he seems to think it is fun.
I have a good video of a friend's small junior horse who wins
a lot on the AA circuit. He's a good example of the balance
a good show hunter performs in. I will upload it to Youtube
and link it here.
Sue Leopold
> In dressage it means to lengthen the stride as much as the horse is
> physically able, in a hopefully expressive manner with impulsion and
> purity of gait and the same rythym/tempo as the working trot and
> collected trot... other disciplines are happy with extension meaning
> simply showing a more lengthened stride than in a working trot or
> jog. But that is a continuum, not a different definition. I say that
> you can take any horse of any breed and teach him to do an extended
> trot under saddle, but the warmbloods who are bred for a huge
> extravagant stride are going to have more capacity for it.
I agree, but think it is important to note that in dressage an
extended trot is developed from collection. Until you have
collection, anything you do with the trot is lengthening the
stride.
jsaranac
>
> On a more highly trained dressage horse, you shorten the reins more for
> more collection, but only if there is sufficient "back to front"
> impulsion. It feels like the front end is lifted, not curled back or
> under:) As Sharon has said, it take a lot of effort and strength from the
> horse, so most can't do this correctly until they're at higher levels.
> Have fun!!
Thanks Robin. Yes the trainer that we like has said that if you are simply
holding the horse's head on a shorter rein and there is no impulsion back to
front, it can be painful for the horse. She has shown me how to have a
"driving seat" that gets the horse moving lighter in front and I have felt
the difference for example at canter, between being "front to back" and
"back to front" (and can see the difference too when others ride.)
November will be three years with my guy, and I feel as if I am _just_
beginning to not be completely brain dead. But, I have also not had good
instruction IMO till now (and i am only getting minilessons from the
new-instructor-to-be, until we can officially change over. But I watch, and
learn, and I also had Pal ridden the week I was in CA by a friend who's a
very good rider and she pronounces him as being incredibly willing to learn,
incredibly smart, and full of enormous potential. She and the trainer gave
me a birthday present of six weeks of free training for him, they like him
so much, to get his canter even more steady and rhythmic... lucky me, I have
got some wonderful friends!)
I'm keeping fingers and toes crossed for you and Calibra!
Ponai Mahone
While I agree with the quote from galopp, re: the reflection of how movement
should be affected by collection, I have to remind you,
> Galopp has not only trained several horses to GP herself but has several
> students who themselves have trained GP horses, multiple in some cases.
> That's a definition of a known quantity.
. . . not to believe everything you read on the internet.
Local word does not match your assessment.
Cheers, Deb
PS Hope all is well with the rec.
Ocean of Nuance
I know you are in the same area. IIRC, someone else claimed that of
her. If she corrected them, I didn't see it. Certainly nobody else
corrected the comment.
She certainly appears to know what the hell she's talking about on every
possible issue, yes?
I've posted several of her quotes over the years... I'd like to know if
nay were wrong. I bet none were.
sharon
sahron
AKogler
wrote:
Translate:
Sharon likes Gallop. Gallop is nice to Sharon on UD and they have a
nice little friendship going. Gallop posts things that sound correct
(and are). Ergo, Sharon thinks Gallop is It.
Sharon has not seen her, met her, or seen her horses.
Once again, Science Trumps Emotion!
<snerk>
Abby
Dana Compton
> Dressage judges do not impress me in general. �Upper level dressage
> does not impress me in most cases. �So I couldn't care less what they
> decide is the idea for competition. �There is an underlying purity
> that I'm interested in that exists outside of dressage competition.
> ANY horse can do an extended trot at birth and ANY horse can learn to
> do one under saddle, one that is as extragavant as possible given
> their conformation.
>
Above snipped bigtime,
LOL I'm sorry Cindy I didn't realize that there is "Cindy Standard" ..
I'll try to
remember that in the future.
Dana (who just got back in town )
cindi
> Above snipped bigtime,
>
> LOL I'm sorry Cindy I didn't realize that there is "Cindy Standard" ..
You did ask me to give you *my* definition, remember? By that I
assumed you meant MY defintion. Silly me.
> I'll try to remember that in the future.
Oooooo-kay.
cindi