Adelinde Cornelissen - A Rant!!

Pompidou said:
I and thats MY opinion, think horsebackriding in general is cruel to horses.
Click to expand...

Then don't ride horses. But coming on here and with your first post telling other members they are cruel to ride their horses is not going to get you a good reaction and is plain insulting. Now please go away and close the door on your way out.
 
Pompidou said:
I'm not campaigning to release the domestic horses. That would be a pefect world to me, but humanity destroyed the natural habitats of the horse
Click to expand...

You are seriously crazy. I live in a huge National Park of wide open scrub moorland, the natural habitat of the horse, one of many in this country. Some of the others support herds of wild native ponies. You are entitled to your opinion, but correct it is not!

You are either a troll having fun or seriously short of brain power. Either way, it would be nice if you would shove off, to be honest. Only my opinion.
 
I do feel better voicing here my opinion just like you have an opinion about Adelinde. You think she is cruel ... I just take it a step further. I agree that her ridingstyle/ method is cruel ... and horsebackriding.

I'll leave you now, back on topic: Rant about Adelinde, such a mean and cruel person :p


And .... never feed the trolls ;)
 
Pompidou said:
I do feel better voicing here my opinion just like you have an opinion about Adelinde. You think she is cruel ... I just take it a step further. I agree that her ridingstyle/ method is cruel ... and horsebackriding.

I'll leave you now, back on topic: Rant about Adelinde, such a mean and cruel person :p


And .... never feed the trolls ;)
Click to expand...

I'd love to call you an idiot but TFC might tell me off :(:rolleyes:
 
On the subject of the Iberians gettig harshly marked, I don't actually think Fuego was, his extended work WAS weaker than others, and there was also some loss of rythm, his test just did not flow well. Rubi, on the other hand, I do feel was harshly marked, his piaffe was the most correct of the lot, although his mouth was, at times, open.

I breed and compete Iberians and am huge fan of Fuego, I must admit to being a little disappointed with his test in the flesh.

To whomever said Ed Gal does not use rolkur - oh yes he does but the man is a God nontheless. As for Adelinde, ugly ugly ugly riding!
 
I find Pompidou's post very interesting and very similar to other people's posts on rollkur. As I mentioned in the Patrick Kittel thread (and many threads before that) if we allow mere sentiment to guide what we ban (in this case rollkur) the argument can be easily extended to banning all of riding as there are some people who find that all of riding looks harmful and upset.

Either we should demand greater standards before we consider banning anything (concrete evidence from scientific studies) or we should allow everyone's feelings to govern what is banned and riding is banned along with rollkur.
 
I think pompidou is winding you lot up, I believe the poster is a well known rider who doesn't have the beliefs stated in the post but was having a laugh with you! And everyone has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. I may be wrong but I have my suspicions:-)
 
charlie76 said:
I think pompidou is winding you lot up, I believe the poster is a well known rider who doesn't have the beliefs stated in the post but was having a laugh with you! And everyone has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. I may be wrong but I have my suspicions:-)
Click to expand...

I agree - the final words in his/her last post were

"And .... never feed the trolls ;)"

I suspect Pompidou might have a touch of indigestion this morning...:D
 
charlie76 said:
I think pompidou is winding you lot up, I believe the poster is a well known rider who doesn't have the beliefs stated in the post but was having a laugh with you! And everyone has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. I may be wrong but I have my suspicions:-)
Click to expand...


But it's fun to feed the trolls :D And there are people who genuinely hold the view that humans should not keep animals at all, so it's an interesting discussion even if Pompidou was useless at it.

Booboos said:
I find Pompidou's post very interesting and very similar to other people's posts on rollkur. As I mentioned in the Patrick Kittel thread (and many threads before that) if we allow mere sentiment to guide what we ban (in this case rollkur) the argument can be easily extended to banning all of riding as there are some people who find that all of riding looks harmful and upset.

Either we should demand greater standards before we consider banning anything (concrete evidence from scientific studies) or we should allow everyone's feelings to govern what is banned and riding is banned along with rollkur.
Click to expand...

It is not "mere sentiment" to ban rollkur and that is why the FEI have already done it, but they fail to police it. The physical detrimental effects of squashing the hyoid bone and the parotid glands can be demonstrated, as if the blue tongue and the fact that horses in rollkur are blind to the front and rear was not sufficient evidence that it is different from acceptable riding practices.

Your argument is like saying that no-one should be allowed to ride because some people use spurs until their horse bleeds.
 
cptrayes said:
It is not "mere sentiment" to ban rollkur and that is why the FEI have already done it, but they fail to police it. The physical detrimental effects of squashing the hyoid bone and the parotid glands can be demonstrated, as if the blue tongue and the fact that horses in rollkur are blind to the front and rear was not sufficient evidence that it is different from acceptable riding practices.

Your argument is like saying that no-one should be allowed to ride because some people use spurs until their horse bleeds.
Click to expand...


I don't for one minute think that Boosboos suggested that banning rolkur was 'mere sentiment', I am sure that she will correct me if I am wrong but I think what she meant was that we need to be sure of the FACTS, for instance, the FACT that the photo in this thread does not show rolkur.

The FEI have not actually banned rolkur (FACT) their directives are that it can be used but in moderation and in the right hands.

don't get me wrong, I would love to see it banned altogether, but am with Booboos on this, people need to stop being so hysterical and a little more centred.

It does not help the cause when some of the people who are shouting the loudest are some of the worst riders I have ever seen (I am talking Rl here btw) and cause their own horses untold pain through their awful riding :(
 
cptrayes said:
It is not "mere sentiment" to ban rollkur and that is why the FEI have already done it, but they fail to police it. The physical detrimental effects of squashing the hyoid bone and the parotid glands can be demonstrated, as if the blue tongue and the fact that horses in rollkur are blind to the front and rear was not sufficient evidence that it is different from acceptable riding practices.

Your argument is like saying that no-one should be allowed to ride because some people use spurs until their horse bleeds.
Click to expand...

I would be grateful for references to the studies that have proven all this.

No, my argument is not that at all. I am not saying that if part of a practice by some people is harmful then all of it should be banned. I am saying that if we argue for banning X on the grounds that it feels wrong, then other people are equally entitled to call for banning Y on the grounds that it feels wrong to them. This is one of the reasons why feelings should not be used to restrict other people's liberty. If there are hard facts on the harm caused by rollkur I would be very interested to hear them (published in peer reviewed, science journals - no claims please that it is evident, that I should open my mind, look into the eyes of horses, etc.).
 
cptrayes said:
But it's fun to feed the trolls :D And there are people who genuinely hold the view that humans should not keep animals at all, so it's an interesting discussion even if Pompidou was useless at it.
Click to expand...

Yes my knowlegde of English is not good enough to put my thoughts about this subject on this forum.

charlie76 said:
I think pompidou is winding you lot up, I believe the poster is a well known rider who doesn't have the beliefs stated in the post but was having a laugh with you! And everyone has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. I may be wrong but I have my suspicions:-)
Click to expand...

I'm not a well known rider, but I indeed used to ride horses, because my father had is own stable. When I grew up, I realy started to think about horsebackriding and owning horses (and other animals).
My english is not good enough but I found this post, exactly describing what I feel. It's a good read:

Horses belong in the wild. Domesticated horses should be lovingly cared for the rest of their living days and prevented from further breeding into the horse industry. Domestic horses should not exist. Millions of unwanted horses are slaughtered. Many horses experience abuse and neglect from their owners. Taking good care of a horse is no justification for ownership. Horses, like all other animals should belong to themselves, experience self determination by finding their own food, travelling where and when they want to, choosing their own herd and mate and being free. None of this is possible under house arrest in a paddock or stable. Slave horses must do everything their master requests of them -go left, stop, run, sleep, wake, eat now, do this, do that. No matter how happy they are, they are not free. They cannot see their mother if they want to, nor their children, or visit a stream, or leave their enclosement at anytime they choose to.

Adding to this, it is immoral that we humans have altered their biological make-up to suit our egotistical desires and fetishes. The true original horse from which all domestic horses derived from today is the Mongolian horse who is now on the brink of extinction. We have mutated this beautiful wild animal's DNA through forced breeding to cause them to be docile and submissive, larger, stronger, cuter, colourful, faster and whatever else we wanted them to serve us for. If horses really wanted to be with us, we should ask the non-adulterated, non-mentally conditioned wild Mongolian horse to come with us and leave his family and his wild home so that we may ride on his back and kick him around.

I used to be a "horse lover", but now I am a "horse respecter". I spent all my non-school hours playing with my horses and riding them in the rocky desert hills until after dark. The horses were my love and my life. Then when my new partner explained to me that my beloved horse was my slave, I argued back angrily that we humans share a natural symbiotic relationship with animals and share a mutual benefit and friendship. Jeff explained that the benefit is not mutual, as in nature, because the horses does not need us to survive. Nor do we need them to survive. The definition of a symbiotic relationship is a scientific one where two species depend on each other to survive. In other words, one species could not live without the other one. Horses do not need us at all. Our use of horses is purely for our benefit, pleasure, companionship, sport, amusement, profit, and gambling addiction. When free horses become annoying or interfere with profit-making animals and when the race-exploited horses don't run fast enough anymore they become dog meat. After long discussions with Jeff I came to the enlightening discovery that my horse really is my slave. This really shocked me, but now that I know, I can’t believe I couldn’t see the obvious.

Even if the domestic animals could be made to be happy whether they be bred for food, transport, or companionship, they are still property, they are never free. It comes down to rights. Slaves/property have no rights. Happy animal slaves are still slaves.

Some African slaves in America were much loved by their masters and even considered to be a member of the family. They were treated very well, got medical care, good food and bedding and even company. A slave man cannot leave the property in search of social company. He has no access to relatives. He cannot make any free choices of his own. He is completely dependent on his masters as if he were a child. The same goes for other animals on farms in or in our homes as companions. Even if the slave is very happy, he is still a slave.

Slavery is immoral, no matter how happy the slaves are. All slavery of humans and non-human animals should be abolished.
Of course horses are different to human slaves. It is an analogy to reveal similarities in their exploitation.
 
Pompidou said:
The true original horse from which all domestic horses derived from today is the Mongolian horse who is now on the brink of extinction. We have mutated this beautiful wild animal's DNA through forced breeding to cause them to be docile and submissive, larger, stronger, cuter, colourful, faster and whatever else we wanted them to serve us for. If horses really wanted to be with us, we should ask the non-adulterated, non-mentally conditioned wild Mongolian horse to come with us and leave his family and his wild home so that we may ride on his back and kick him around.
Click to expand...

This isn't true.

The Przewalski is genetically distinct from the domestic horse - they even have a different number of chromosomes. Genetically distinct, but sharing a common ancestor. Our domestic horses are descended from another type of wild horse, long extinct, and presumably more docile than the Przewalski.

The only way that the Przewalski has survived is in zoos, though they are now being released back into the wild.

Domestication is an evolutionary bonus for horses as it is for dogs - there are considerably more dogs and domestic horses than there are wolves and Przewalskis. Left undomesticated, horses would have become extinct in the 1960s.
 
SusannaF said:
Left undomesticated, horses would have become extinct in the 1960s.
Click to expand...

Lol, this is very exact in a evolutionary timescale, maybe they just couldn't take the era of free love?! :D

I'm sure I read somewhere that they would have become extinct over 10 000 years ago had they not been domesticated :)
 
Stencilface said:
Lol, this is very exact in a evolutionary timescale, maybe they just couldn't take the era of free love?! :D

I'm sure I read somewhere that they would have become extinct over 10 000 years ago had they not been domesticated :)
Click to expand...

Nah, the last truly wild Przewalski was spotted in the 1960s or something. There were later, unconfirmed sitings.

The last tarpan (possible wild horse ancestor of our domestic horses) died in the nineteenth century, I think. :)
 
Stencilface said:
Lol, this is very exact in a evolutionary timescale, maybe they just couldn't take the era of free love?! :D

I'm sure I read somewhere that they would have become extinct over 10 000 years ago had they not been domesticated :)
Click to expand...

That might be the case, one day the human will extinct as well... just like other animals, and plants. It still doesn't justify to exploit horses.
 
I think you have to look at it as an symbiotic relationship, we feed, care for and protect them. They help with winning wars, transport and managing land to provide crops.

There are thousands of symbiotic relationships in the animal kingdom, everyone is exploiting everyone for something they cannot provide for themselves :)

Susannah - but maybe without any domestication, extinction would have happened alot earlier? Maybe the przewalski's were riding the domesticated wave without any of the downsides? :)
 
Stencilface said:
I think you have to look at it as an symbiotic relationship, we feed, care for and protect them. They help with winning wars, transport and managing land to provide crops.

There are thousands of symbiotic relationships in the animal kingdom, everyone is exploiting everyone for something they cannot provide for themselves :)

Susannah - but maybe without any domestication, extinction would have happened alot earlier? Maybe the przewalski's were riding the domesticated wave without any of the downsides? :)
Click to expand...

Yes and no :) They were hunted as game for a long time (as were Tarpans). People only really got interested in them after the Enlightenment when they started collecting specimens of animal species, but this wasn't great for the Przewalskis either as they were so hard to catch that entire herds of adults would be slaughtered in order to get hold of the foals.
 
Stencilface said:
I think you have to look at it as an symbiotic relationship, we feed, care for and protect them. They help with winning wars, transport and managing land to provide crops.
Click to expand...

I see your point. I do recognize special bonds between human and animals. But it don't see horsebackriding as one of them.

So many thoughts for me ... I'm not sure yet were for me is the 'line'...
Like we all agree we don't like the style of Adelinde ... the rollkur is cruel... but I see so many riders who don't use rollkur but do pull the bridle to hard, painfull to watch. The use of whip and spurs ... especially youngsters still learing to ride is an awfull watch.
No horse is born to ride on. They just give up at a sudden point. Their will is broken before they eventualy accept the saddle, the bridle and a human on their body.
 
posted by Amaranta
I don't for one minute think that Boosboos suggested that banning rolkur was 'mere sentiment',
Click to expand...


So why did s/he write " if we allow mere sentiment to guide what we ban (in this case rollkur)" ?

posted by Amaranta
The FEI have not actually banned rolkur
Click to expand...

My understanding is that long deep and round is allowed for short periods but that hyperlexion/rollkur created by the excessive use of force is banned altogether. There is an illustration of LDR in the German training manual and while the horse is well overbent it is not hyperflexed.

Booboos as a matter of interest, do you use hyperflexion in your training? I ask because if don't see with your own eyes that it is wrong, then I am puzzled as to what your motivations are for appearing to defend it? Do you think that the riding in the Epona Olympic warm-up video was acceptable?

What people are justifiably outraged about is that this style of training in public has been banned and yet nothing is being done by stewards to prevent it and the Olympic warm-up area appeared to be excessively guarded to stop the public seeing that it was happening.
 
Last edited:
I think my position on rollkur is fairly well known, but happy to repeat it:

I don't 'see' anything wrong with it as such and I find calls for it to be banned purely on how people feel about it to be deeply unfair and very worrying as a type of reasoning. I can't find any substantial evidence that it is harmful to horses, but would be very interested in seeing any if you know of any I have missed (I have asked on several threads on this and discussed ideas with a number of people). Lacking any evidence that it is harmful, I see no reason why people cannot practice it if they wish.

As for myself, I am a very crappy, novice rider and my main problems are keeping the horse in front of the leg and maintaining a decent position, so I don't think rollkur would work for me. Like all training techniques it can be misapplied and in this case I think I would end up using too much hand and not enough leg (Anky's horses were positively electric to the leg and super engaged when I saw her at the BD convention). At the same time I don't think Baucherite flexions/school of legerite would work for me either for exactly the same reasons.

I think the FFE ban is a step back on the whole debate. It is vague, ambiguous and was only introduced to give a semblance of having addressed the issue rather than doing so. The only thing that will actually address the issue is research on the effects of this type of training (and loads of other types of training if we are going to be fair. For example Dr H claims that riding horses hollow is more harmful than rollkur, but conveniently (given the millions of crappy riders like yours truly who ride their horses hollow) no one has taken up that call to arms! Not to mention that Dr H's own Baucherite flexions look as forceful as rollkur. So all this needs examining properly.).
 
Sorry perhaps I didn't answer all your questions: my motivation for defending it is that it deserves defending from what I perceive to be an unfair attack. I don't particularly like poor reasoning and I don't like how some individuals are picked on (Patrick Kittel but not Edward Gal for example). I have spare time to write on fora so that's that I suppose.
 
Thanks BB, that's a thought provoking and interesting reply. I confess that I had assumed that the FEI had clear evidence that it was physically and/or mentally harmful before they banned it and I was surprised when I could not find their justification. I agree with you "because the public don't like the look of it" is not good enough for an international body, especially if they are then not going to enforce their ruling. They just make themselves look weak and two-faced.

As far as I can see, the difference between Patrick Kittel and Edward Gal is that Patrick did it in a place where the FEI have banned it, and Edward has not. I think this is reasonable, the practice is not illegal it's just against FEI rules. The FEI need to pull their finger out and enforce them, or withdraw the rule. But then again, they need to stop giving high marks to overbent horses, which have clearly been trained overbent, and then the practice will not win competitions and it will fade out. Pigs might fly sooner.

It is, however, good enough for me to see the horses eyes, demeanour, bulging parotid glands, excessive neck bend and occasional blue tongues. I ride a horse who is of the breeding, and hopefully possibly the calibre, of GP dressage horses. I would no sooner put him into hyperflexion, than I would poke needles in my eyes. I'm no tree hugger, I had him in draw reins this morning to curb some over-dominant behaviour on his part, but hyperflexion looks too much like abuse to me.
 
The FEI rule is very ambiguous and it's not clear at all what is banned. While it has been reported as having banned rollkur the exact wording of the rule is not that clear. It can be read as either banning any low position other than the three illustrated, or it could be read as banning any hyperflexed position that is kept for more 10 minutes and is achieved through force, in which case rollkur is NOT banned, just doing it forcefully (what is that and how are stewards supposed to consistently recognise it?) and for too long (are stewards supposed to keep stop watches and monitor multiple horses' positions through time?).
 
Have you seen the Epona video? It's fairly clear to me that both those horses are being ridden in a banned fashion; that both of them are being pulled into and forcibly held in that shape.

I think that's what raises the blood pressure so much. Banning it and then hiding it so their pet top riders can continue to do it.

For illustration, I think it is perfectly clear in the FEI rules, that this is banned in warmup

http://everyrider.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/6713closeupf.jpg

and yet it is still in common usage, ignored by stewards. I am also pretty surprised that anyone feels happy to look at a picture like that and accept that it is an acceptable way to train a horse. You must be seeing something different from me.
 
I agree that riding horses when hollow is also a bad idea and could cause damage.

All horses go btv at times. Most reasonable people accept this, especially those who do dressage.

Some also are proponents of the LDR position and can justify why they use it from a bio mechanical point of view that appears to make sense from what we know about muscle function and arthrokinematics, and what we can extrapolate logically from what is known. Furthermore it is possible to put a horse into LDR with correct riding, that engages and lifts the back, without much force on the bit and when using a snaffle

But that isn't what we' re talking about with Rollkur. I would like proponents to look at the pictu posted by CPtrayes and tell me how you can put a horse into Rollkur without a reasonable pressure applied to a curb bit. And then tell me how this isn't force?

I also would love an explanation of how this is beneficial? I don't mean some waffle about how it 'engages the hind legs' I mean proper anatomical and bio mechanical explanation.

BooBoos, what did Anky and Sjef Janssen say when you saw them?
 
My unhorsey dad (he is a German, lol) LOVED Adelinde's Kur. He never saw Charlotte on Valegro as he left the room, and couldn't believe someone outperformed the Dutch woman, let a Brit. I had to tell him that Charlotte's test was far better, and beat Adelinde by nearly 2%.

I didn't really look at the details, as I was doing other stuff at the time, but I noticed hos Charlotte and Valegro looked very soft and together, and Valegro was such a bouncy horse. It was just nice to watch, while with Adelinde, it really looked stiff though technically, the horse's feet did what they were meant to do. It was a bit like watching someone who dances out of joy but may not have been technically perfect, compared to someone who sees it as "a job" though is technically up there.
 
chestnut cob said:
My unhorsey dad watched a bit of the dressage and said (without any input from me)... "it would all look a bit nicer if they let go of the horse's necks a bit and weren't clinging on"!!
Click to expand...

Lol... my dad is not known for being soft even on his kids, so I sort of expected him to not notice that sort of stuff. My OH on the other hand hates any kind of overbending, and I tell him constantly that his reins are a bit to lose (he's learning to ride).
 
BeesKnees said:
BooBoos, what did Anky and Sjef Janssen say when you saw them?
Click to expand...

Well it was a few years ago at the BD convention so to the best of my recollection:

Part of the two days was spent on teaching guinea-pig rider/horse combinations at various levels. I cannot quite remember who the riders were but I think Andrew Gould with Cadre Noire may have been the advanced combination. They didn't suggest rollkur for any of these riders.

On day one they worked with everyone on the warm up (they requested horses come in 'cold'). They suggested that all the horses should be more responsive to the leg and should move off sharply in transitions between paces and within the same pace. They advised the riders to use a very light aid, but then react immediately if the horse didn't respond to this aid with a stronger leg aid and by sending the horse really forwards (very similar to Carl Hester's general way of warming up). They questioned everyone who rode in with a whip and asked them to drop it and they also questioned quite a few curb chains as being too tight. They did an interesting 'test' with Cadre Noire who was having trouble with his pirouettes, they asked AG to do a simple 20m circle in trot and then give the inside rein...the horse curved seriously to the outside demonstrating that he was not in true balance. They suggested the horse needed to go back to basics before attempting pirouettes (the partneship was very new at that stage).

On day two they worked on more advanced movements. For the pirouettes they asked rider to try one or two steps and immediately come out of the pirouette the moment the horse fell behind the horse's leg in order to re-establish a forward canter. For the piaffe/passage they asked a few combinations to ride in a more open frame and not shorten the neck.

Part of the demo was Anky riding Krack C and Painted Black, although she was 5 months pregnant. For Krack C she asked the audience to keep a bit quiet as he is fiery and she was pregnant. She rode him with the neck curled but with an extremely active back end, she hardly had to touch him with the leg and he would react immediately. With Painted Black she said we could make as much noise as we wanted! She rode him in a more competition frame and showed a really promising piaffe/passage even at that stage (he was quite young at the time).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top