Burnttoast
Well-Known Member
Hadn't seen this when I commented just now but absolutely.
CDJ withdrawn from paris
- Thread starter Zoeypxo
- Start date
Burnttoast
Well-Known Member
You do see lots of riders with ostensibly good 'riding conformation' in a chair seat nowadays - is this the main cause? I remember lusting after the position of GP riders in my youth, but these days they often don't look any better from a basic angles perspective than I did on whatever horse/saddle combination I was lucky enough to be able to muster. And sometimes worse! (and I have awful riding conformation, sadly
)Also interested in the pressure plate research - I will look for it but doubt I'll find it given the date - do you remember whether she looked only at modern dressage horses or any baroque breeding or training?
ETA I forgot that 20 years ago wasn't the Dark Ages
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7915051/ETA so more than 50% baroque breeding, but not necessarily 'classical' training
Last edited:
I'm Dun
Well-Known Member
You do see lots of riders with ostensibly good 'riding conformation' in a chair seat nowadays - is this the main cause? I remember lusting after the position of GP riders in my youth, but these days they often don't look any better from a basic angles perspective than I did on whatever horse/saddle combination I was lucky enough to be able to muster. And sometimes worse! (and I have awful riding conformation, sadly
Also interested in the pressure plate research - I will look for it but doubt I'll find it given the date - do you remember whether she looked only at modern dressage horses or any baroque breeding or training?
Those horses winning are bloody horrid to ride. Huge bouncy paces. The very best way to deal with it is to go back into a chair seat. Ironically, if you ever see a traveller hammering down the road bareback on a bouncy cob, they do exactly the same, lean back and hang on the reins. One is dressed up better but theres fundamentally no difference.
palo1
Well-Known Member
You see an exaggerated version of exactly this too in some Arab endurance racing. The extreme leaning back onto the horses loin at least, if not hanging on for grim death at the front - probably because the aim is just to make your little Arab horse go as fast as possible whether hammering on the forehand or not. It's totally inappropriate for a horse's physiology however dressed up or not you may be.
Burnttoast
Well-Known Member
Well yes, but they don't all do it. And I didn't always do it even as a twice a week rider on horses that had too much movement *for me* if I was in a certain saddle. In an old Prestige at my last yard I could maintain a hip heel alignment in practically any circumstances and my preference for riding the horses that saddle fitted was a yard joke.
reynold
Well-Known Member
Something occurred to me in regard to 'rehab' of these riders that are abusing their horses with so much compression and chair seating/bracing.
I'm one of the oldies on here and I'm still learning (no longer riding but observing). My YO whom I still go to her training and competitions is 30 years younger than me and says the same:
'You are never too old to learn in regard to horses' (and obviously other things in life). However you do have to be open to new thinking/learning.
I was trained in the 60s, 70s and 80s mainly and I'm learning new things with more modern practices from my YO. Things about horse care, riding, vet treatments. Basically 'new thinking'.
So in regard to these awful dressage riders today there is room for them to learn new ways of riding their horses - they just fundamentally don't want to and cannot (due to the judging) see any point in changing.
In the case of riding they do need to look a bit to the past (thinking Reiner Klimke here e.g.) and realise it doesn't HAVE to be the way it is now. That it IS possible to do better by the horses.
In regard to Gio in going from CDJ to Helgstrand I doubt he is suffering any more in regard to riding. However due to the reports of cruelty in the horse care as well as riding in regard to Helgstrand I doubt that his care is as good as it was at CHesters.
I'm one of the oldies on here and I'm still learning (no longer riding but observing). My YO whom I still go to her training and competitions is 30 years younger than me and says the same:
'You are never too old to learn in regard to horses' (and obviously other things in life). However you do have to be open to new thinking/learning.
I was trained in the 60s, 70s and 80s mainly and I'm learning new things with more modern practices from my YO. Things about horse care, riding, vet treatments. Basically 'new thinking'.
So in regard to these awful dressage riders today there is room for them to learn new ways of riding their horses - they just fundamentally don't want to and cannot (due to the judging) see any point in changing.
In the case of riding they do need to look a bit to the past (thinking Reiner Klimke here e.g.) and realise it doesn't HAVE to be the way it is now. That it IS possible to do better by the horses.
In regard to Gio in going from CDJ to Helgstrand I doubt he is suffering any more in regard to riding. However due to the reports of cruelty in the horse care as well as riding in regard to Helgstrand I doubt that his care is as good as it was at CHesters.
tristars
Well-Known Member
Riders need a saddle that they can sit in where they are most effective according to the work they are doing, not a saddle that fixes them in one place, open wider seat or flatter seats can work
At the mo i am riding one horse with a widish flatish ansur that has no thigh or knee rolls at all, cos someone lost them, i have some could put on but find i dont need them
sbloom
Well-Known Member
Interesting as I'd remembered it as all wb types.
And yes, saddle design has gone hand in hand with the poor decisions made with training and breeding. All of it ignores the fundamentals of healthy movement.
Forgive me but no it's really not the best way.
Dealing with forces best requires stability, leaning back is a compensation and is destructive to healthy tissues of both horse and rider. Many top riders are compressing their lower backs and surviving on a diet of painkillers.
Leaning back (if in actual posterior tilt but not only...) places all the weight on the seatbones which sit on a more sensitive part of the back, an area which affects how well the horse can access the pelvis. Accessing the pelvis is critical to be able to generated decelerative forces which stop the horse falling forwards. Hence the dropped lumbar region and even GP horses being on the forehead.
A rear balance point makes this more likely and couple it with a high cantles you have more likelihood of anterior tilt for the rider and then leverage placed onto the horse's back. Panel shape can only do much - longer panels will support a high cantle better but inevitably take the weight bearing area onto the psoas etc, that "access pelvis" area.
Look at how long the forefeet stay grounded under the rider...breaking all the rules of efficient movement relating to centre of mass (combined horse and rider) and making it look like it's just a break over problem ie hoof balance. It's everything.
Saying that leaning back is the way to deal with these challenging physical forces is a bit like saying a high knee trot is best because it wins.
These horses are horrid to ride because they are dysfunctional. Change the training (and management), get a saddle that gives the rider stability from the pelvis (which means a more mid to forward balance saddle and sitting at the base of the wither and over our feet) and sitting trot becomes transformed.
Whether all of these hypermobile horses can ever be truly healthy is another matter.
@tristars an open seat will be better than an ill fitting deep seat but we know better now. We also have riders how aren't able to do a years daily lunge lessons. We also understand what tension in the body and seat does, and if you're holsing our pubic arch up or otherwise fighting a saddle that tension affects both of you.
An open seat (which I always had) can leave me desperately unsupported in front as I need a large seat size, traditionally, but have a short wide pelvis which needs a wide twist, not only not too high a pommel. The larger the seat size, all other things being equal, the narrower the twist. And that's without addressing the waist, the inner thigh area that can be most affected by saddle construction and panel shape. It all matters.
tristars
Well-Known Member
I do remember watching Rembrandt (and others) as a teenager and being amazed at the invisible aiding, and thinking it seemed like magic. Well, you can certainly see how it's done now and it doesn't look like magic
Oh i got people on here to look at rembrant and others by videon
They pulled the horses performances apart, toe dragging was mentioned, i had to laugh
tristars
Well-Known Member
No, people need to ride better !!!!!! We knew better before and have lost so much
Most modern saddles work against the rider being able to free the horse
I hate them!!!!!!
We need to learn to support ourselves and follow movement
A saddle is a seat to sit upon unimpeded it should conform to horse then its up to the rider to get out out of the horses way and allow it to move
Just my humble opinion
sbloom
Well-Known Member
Yeah, it might have been much more subtle, but NUB was using every trick in the book to keep him under control. The origins of modern rollkur lie with her.
And it used to be mine. I firmly believe that the best riders in the past, the ones who could truly enjoy it and progress, had saddle shaped pelvises. They were more effective and didn't suffer the pain that many of the rest of us did.
And riders should ride better, of course, but with my (as taught to me) approach being proven over thousands of pelvic and rider assessments and fittings it's time classical training admitted that we can't discount all modern findings. And ultimately should horses suffer because riders sit at desks and in cars all day and can't afford to be on the lunge for a year?
Maybe read what I wrote again.
And it used to be mine. I firmly believe that the best riders in the past, the ones who could truly enjoy it and progress, had saddle shaped pelvises. They were more effective and didn't suffer the pain that many of the rest of us did.
And riders should ride better, of course, but with my (as taught to me) approach being proven over thousands of pelvic and rider assessments and fittings it's time classical training admitted that we can't discount all modern findings. And ultimately should horses suffer because riders sit at desks and in cars all day and can't afford to be on the lunge for a year?
Maybe read what I wrote again.
Burnttoast
Well-Known Member
Even to a layperson it's obvious that saddles both old and new vary hugely in their suitability for both individuals and people in general.
sbloom
Well-Known Member
Horses are ill prepared, skeletally, to carry a rider. We owe it to them to load each individual rider onto each individual horse, in the best way possible. I'm sorry but that will never mean a generic wide, open seated saddle in 18" if the horse can take it.
The horse can carry us best if we are loaded at the base of the wither, can sit without effort or discomfort in neutral because of the support BELOW us, with a stacked spine, draped and forward rotated leg and our foot beneath our hips. To do this without tension means individualised saddle fitting for the rider. I have seen how it transforms how a rider CAN sit and how much more they can help their horse. Suddenly they can decorate the ribcage and they experience lightness such as they've never felt before. It doesn't mean they don't have to develop their equitation over a lifetime but it does mean they have a fighting chance.
Every photo of me riding, pretty much, despite years of classical(ISH) training, including lunge lessons, TTT lessons, auditing classical gods, shows me in posterior tilt, and therefore sitting behind my feet, to avoid pain.
And like I say, if you're well shaped for traditional saddle design, and yes, men are slightly (though not massively) better catered for here, then you can't even imagine what it's like to not be saddle shaped in a fundamental way. I mean if you're also less fleshy you have fewer issues....the fleshier your delicate bits the more likely you are to be "showering off" your underwear because the dried blood stops you taking them off. It shouldnt be about skeletal genetics, just as dressage should benefit the horse so it should benefit the rider.
I work with this daily, weekly, and it p*sses me off when good riders and trainers who put the horse first can't understand how helping the rider sit better is ethical for both parties and IS important. Purity for its own sake isn't a good look.
The horse can carry us best if we are loaded at the base of the wither, can sit without effort or discomfort in neutral because of the support BELOW us, with a stacked spine, draped and forward rotated leg and our foot beneath our hips. To do this without tension means individualised saddle fitting for the rider. I have seen how it transforms how a rider CAN sit and how much more they can help their horse. Suddenly they can decorate the ribcage and they experience lightness such as they've never felt before. It doesn't mean they don't have to develop their equitation over a lifetime but it does mean they have a fighting chance.
Every photo of me riding, pretty much, despite years of classical(ISH) training, including lunge lessons, TTT lessons, auditing classical gods, shows me in posterior tilt, and therefore sitting behind my feet, to avoid pain.
And like I say, if you're well shaped for traditional saddle design, and yes, men are slightly (though not massively) better catered for here, then you can't even imagine what it's like to not be saddle shaped in a fundamental way. I mean if you're also less fleshy you have fewer issues....the fleshier your delicate bits the more likely you are to be "showering off" your underwear because the dried blood stops you taking them off. It shouldnt be about skeletal genetics, just as dressage should benefit the horse so it should benefit the rider.
I work with this daily, weekly, and it p*sses me off when good riders and trainers who put the horse first can't understand how helping the rider sit better is ethical for both parties and IS important. Purity for its own sake isn't a good look.
Last edited:
Burnttoast
Well-Known Member
A
) and a horse it would fit...
At least part of the reason I started to lose interest in riding (aside from my medical issues) was because I met the right saddle (the one mentioned above - and that was the first good saddle for me after about 40 years of riding, which makes me weep). Once I realised it made a life-changing difference to me, as a rider not well-made to ride, I didn't really want to ride in anything else. Unfortunately it wasn't my saddle and the horses it went on weren't mine, and I started to hate riding in something I knew made me a worse rider than I could be. With unlimited health and funds I might have bought it (it wasn't for sale
) and a horse it would fit...
sbloom
Well-Known Member
A
At least part of the reason I started to lose interest in riding (aside from my medical issues) was because I met the right saddle (the one mentioned above - and that was the first good saddle for me after about 40 years of riding, which makes me weep). Once I realised it made a life-changing difference to me, as a rider not well-made to ride, I didn't really want to ride in anything else. Unfortunately it wasn't my saddle and the horses it went on weren't mine, and I started to hate riding in something I knew made me a worse rider than I could be. With unlimited health and funds I might have bought it (it wasn't for sale
Amen.
The perfect saddle for me, the lightbulb moment and something that was part of me spending a LOT of money on demos for a brand that has ultimately not worked out for me (and therefore cost me a fortune) was never going to be able to carry my weight.
I literally realised that the three point seat IS achievable for me and therefore many other riders, and that Sylvia Loch was indeed talking a universal truth on that simple point. We create a better area of pressure for the horse to push up into, better contact with the inner thigh, the tunnel for these "into pressure" animals to lift and expand into.
I'm really hoping to be able to ride in the saddles I now offer, it's a matter of finding a suitable sized customer horse or similar (5'8 and size 14-16 not all horses can take me, and I've not been on a horse in nearly 10 years!). I'm sure there's a solution to a short wide pelvis in a heavier, taller rider, and I'm pretty sure I have one or two.
tristars
Well-Known Member
tristars
Well-Known Member
The saddlers who make them mainly dont ride or train!
Well i would not be asking a layperson anytime soon
Sorry but ive seen so much crap around saddlefitting,
IrishMilo
Well-Known Member
I mean people said all this about CDJ 5 years ago.
Burnttoast
Well-Known Member
I'm talking literally about my own experiences (as a layperson, neither saddler/saddle fitter nor trainer) riding in saddles that did and didn't suit me. I am a funny shape, perhaps you aren't. But in the right saddle I was an easier load for the horse to carry and a far softer and less intrusive rider. I didn't want to be a burden (lol) to the horses I rode so I preferred not to ride in saddles I hated and that put me in a horrible place. I would have thought you would approve of that. As far as the rider goes, it doesn't matter what a saddle costs (in reference to your last post that I can't quote), it matters that the shape of it suits the rider.
sbloom
Well-Known Member
Me too. I've found a better way. £1500 for a brand new saddle and all accessories and a bit of my time to custom cut some rider shims
I've heard so much training BS over the years, as have you, but it doesn't mean I reject trainers as a profession, and nor do I reject trainers who add to their historical, classical backgrounds such as Jean Luc Cornille. I've stayed open minded, reject the obviously harmful, embrace what is clearly progress in terms of long term equine soundness.
17 years of saddle fitting on top of 10-15 years of classical riding training I'd say is a decent enough combo to give me a valid voice.
Saddlers don't need to ride themselves. Designers are a different matter, and both designers and fitters need to at least have the right paradigm and acknowledge what we're discussing in this thread. Acknowledge not only the industry's part in it but also realise that even the most "advanced" players in the industry, as I mentioned above regarding the research, are headed down a cul de sac as long as they base their work on "top" dressage horses.
The industry as a whole sucks, as does breeding and training, and I regularly say as much but there's a big difference between the industry that DOES shove riders into these appalling saddles and those of us not only trying to do better, and mostly doing better. Just as there's a big difference between JLC and Sjef Janssen.
Dismissing me, knowing how I approach the ethics of the horse, in this way is pretty distasteful.
Last edited:
tristars
Well-Known Member
sbloom
Well-Known Member
Which bits don't you understand? Be an easy load for your horse to carry. If you can't find a saddle that you're not fighting, you can't be an easy load to carry.
What works for you works only for a minority. If I rode in a wide, open, large enough seat and sat in neutral I would bleed. A lot. And have done in the past. And my legs would probably swing behind me on anything other than a wide ribcage.
Is that simple enough?
Burnttoast
Well-Known Member
Really?
If I've had a stroke and started writing in French could someone let me know?
sbloom
Well-Known Member
tristars
Well-Known Member
I find much of the modern horse world distasteful
You know nothing of my experience and i will not enter into a competition of who is better qualified
I genuinely only comment where i have experience of factors that may be of use to others or they may find interesting
sbloom
Well-Known Member
And there's me thinking we normally agree on so much.
Burnttoast
Well-Known Member
I must admit I'm starting to find this particular conversation distasteful. Hinting at your own omniscience while dismissing (a) poster/s who frequently offer concrete, useful information and help to others on here is a bit unpleasant.
Matafleur
Well-Known Member
Agreed. SBloom's posts are always well thought out and come from a place of good intention and thoughtfulness.
Not so some others, which appear very odd, at best. And, frankly, completely bonkers if I'm being less generous.
Ambers Echo
Still wittering on
This. Why the beef? Seems entirely unnecessary, patronising, arrogant and rude. For no obvious reason
If someone has an issue with a specific bit of advice, critique it. Don't just imply you have superior knowlege, give the poster a bit of a kicking, then disengage.
SEL
Well-Known Member
I definitely saw him come into arenas looking a lot happier than many others and I don't see the same level of enjoyment in Glamourdale despite what CF says. He does look stressed to me. At London 2012 Valegro struck me by quite how different he was in his attitude in the team competition to everyone that had gone before and I wasn't expecting that. I'm not sure I saw him much after 2012 so perhaps it went downhill but there was nowhere near the tension that I have seen Charlotte ride with since. I got the sense when she was riding Pumpkin that she was searching for that same feeling, but not every horse can deliver. I think there will always be a certain level of tension at competitions but some horses do rise to the occasion (I have a 13h pony who lights up, but somehow I doubt she's Olympic material!)
Carl was very generous with him for charities and I know a lady who had the privilege of being allowed a play and said he came alive when people were watching.