Can 'shortcuts' result in greater longevity?

[Lolo]

Following on from the draw rein discussion, something TarrSteps said made me ponder.

If you can use an artificial training aid, like draw reins or a bungee or similar, and achieve the desired outcome in 3 sessions, is that better for the horse's general wear and tear than having to work at it for 10 sessions? So if they won't work into the contact into canter, is using draw reins to encourage them/ force them to try it (my phrasing is off there, sorry) and thus achieving them being able to do it in a shorter time frame better for the horse?

I'm rambling and struggling to articulate what I'm actually meaning... Sorry! Does anyone even understand what I'm trying to ask!?

 

[dafthoss]

I understand what you are trying to say.

For me I think also the benefits would be that there is less to unlearn, if that makes sense? The less time the horse does it the less likley it is to become habit. As well as the less physical wear and tear due to less drilling.

But I also think mental longevity has to be considered, do training aids that mean the horse can only work in a certain way make him less willing to try? If it makes it harder and maybe uncomfortable to start with will they only do it when they have no other choice?

There we go more random ramblings on the subject with no real answer for you

 

[snooples]

If you took up yoga and couldnt flex enough to do a move would you rather someone pulled, pushed and held you into the correct shape over three sessions or let you gradually teach your muscles to do it over ten sessions

I know what Id prefer!

 

[Jnhuk]

I think a lot of it depends on the person using the artificial aid.

Took me awhile to correct my horse's way of going following on what me and my instructor took to be draw rein usage after I got him as 'unspoilt' four year old who had been broken in the previous winter then turned away.

This took me a lot more time and effort and probably put more wear and tear on his joints than if the problem hadn't been created in the first place.

 

[maccachic]

Those gadget don't make the horse use it back corectly so you are not actually achieveing anything other than pulling the horses nose in, back issues would be my concern.

 

[TarrSteps]

If you took up yoga and couldnt flex enough to do a move would you rather someone pulled, pushed and held you into the correct shape over three sessions or let you gradually teach your muscles to do it over ten sessions

I know what Id prefer!

If you had developed a pathological form of movement or a significant proprioceptive issue would you rather your physio allow you to continue, maybe making some minor changes on your own but almost guaranteeing long term physical damage from wear and tear, or effectively "forced" you to make changes using physiotherapy practises which can be, in the short term, pretty unpleasant? People KNOW why they need to make changes for the better and in many cases can't push themselves enough to make them. The problem with horses is you have to show them what "better" is and why they have to try to get there consistently because making changes is almost never the most obvious or pleasant option.

The fact is. . .there is no one answer! As I said in the other thread, skilled hands using tools to teach a lesson the trainer understands thoroughly is not the same thing as someone without understanding using the same tool to produce an incorrect facsimile of something they might have seen but have not felt. Leverage devices used with ego or anger can mete out horrific punishment. The same tools used to get pin point accuracy at the outer reaches of sport or to save physical wear and tear on a rider who rides half a dozen or more strong, fit, athletic horses a day is not the same situation. Of course these same skilled riders might be driven to take the short cuts less often, as their skill and experience is already streamlining their training and giving them more tools - literal and metaphorical - to work with.

The fact is, everything that exists was invented because someone, somewhere found it useful. That doesn't mean it's always or only useful. Context is everything. And personal choice comes into it - there are things I would never use/do as they don't suit my style or they make me uncomfortable or I feel I do not fully understand how to do it correctly with maximum reward and minimum risk. And there are things that I did in the past I would not do now. And things I would not do now that I might consider next week, with a problem I haven't seen before or in light of new information.

So, does anything that gets to the right place with less wear and tear have value? Yes. But, obviously, if the practice causes damage or then necessitates a situation that needs MORE work to sort out, then that's not valuable.

I know people would love to have someone say, "This is always right and this is always wrong," but in fact there are not that many situations in horse training where you can say "always" and "never" outside of the obvious cases or abuse, motivation by ego etc. You may think you know it all today and tomorrow you will meet the horse who proves you don't.

 

[GreyCoast]

As riders, we have limited ways of communicating with horses. Artificial aids are an extra tool in the box and any tool (hands and legs and seat included) may not be used correctly or may simply be the wrong tool for the situation. I think showing the brain what the body can do, or what you're asking for, using a short-cut can certainly help with longevity if it takes less time to go from incorrect to correct - note the key words. Why not? I think the argument really comes in when we ask if artifical aids can create correct work.

My first horse really struggled to accept a contact and we used draw reins to help him unlock his jaw and poll and soften into the hand. The extra reins were only there for half halts and really helped both of us understand what soft but existent contact felt like.

Of course I think that getting him moving properly as quickly as possible helped his longevity. Reducing teeth grinding maybe allowed him to keep his teeth a bit longer in old age. Reducing the chronic rearing maybe reduced the wear and tear his hind legs copped. All benefits of improved contact, achieved with draw reins, but who really knows?

Of course, if he'd been born perfect in a perfect world and owned by perfect people and came to me, a perfect rider, as a perfectly trained horse that would have been the best. But that's not the question, is it?

 

[snooples]

Its unlikely that the majority of training aids are preventing a long term phyisical issue. My opinion is that horses should be trained not forced.

I use artifical aids if neccessary but sparingly and rarely. I have probably used all artificial training aids at some point but don't particularly like them, I prefer my horses to be without nosebands (besides cavesson), martingales, whips, spurs and in a snaffle if possible. Things take a bit longer but I enjoy the experience of training them.

 

[Marydoll]

For me the muscles need time to properly develop to allow the horse to carry himself effectively a quick fix with a gadget is just that, and imo usually ends up in a sore resentful horse at some point, because theyre to easy for some to abuse rather than use, but the gadgets are out there for those who wish to use them, id rather take the slower path allowing a natural build up