classical dressage v "regular" dressage!

S

showqa

Well-Known Member
Joined
26 February 2008
Messages
827
Visit site
Can someone explain the difference to me - between classical dressage and the variety that we watch at Grand Prix Level, IF there is indeed much of a difference? Thanks.
 
Quote taken from the Classical Riding Club webpage :

'We suggested more appreciation should be given to the overall way of going. After all does it really matter so much if you wiggle once on the centre line or if your circle starts one metre after B? Surely it matters more that your horse moves happily forward on a light contact and that your circles show your horse nicely bent around a correctly placed inside leg?'

smile.gif
 
Put very, very simply (as that is all my inferior brain can cope with), classical dressage requires more collection and relaxation than modern level, with a higher forehand, more weight on the hocks, a true contact and the horse slightly in front of the vertical.

Modern GP dressage has more 'flash' and a growing emphasis on big moving paces.

GP dressage does not require 'airs above the ground' (although it isn't uncommon to see your average Wolfgang Don Hit III performing a nifty capriole
wink.gif
), which are seen at the upper levels of classical dressage.

I'm afraid thats the most diplomatic explanation I can give, and it is still open to debate
wink.gif
 
It's a way of riding to ensure your horse 'goes' a certain way....supple, bending properly.....I guess it's striving for the ultimate in horse working with rider!
 
I beleive classical dressage aims to train the horse from back to front, so developing the hindquarters and then allowing the head position to come naturally. CD methods tend to take longer than MD methods, but aim to get the horse working completely correctly. CD is often anti-gadget, the paces are also not trained to be as showy as is seen in modern dressage. I think you could write a whole book on the concept of CD and still not cover it all
smile.gif
Although Tug of War by Gerd Heuschman is really good

xxx
 
I have lessons with a classical instructor, the only difference is that they focus so much more on the riders position and how it influences the horse.
Once your position is 'correct' the horse is able to work correctly himself.
We do a lot of collected work and stretching over the back. Once this foundation is in place you can more or less get your horse to do anything. He has all the correct muscles and it's very easy for them to work in this way, with actually very little effort from the rider.
 
Thanks Guys, that has certainly clarified some points. I'm interested in learning more. Do you think it's pretentious to say that CD is rather more artisitic/creative than MD?
 
In my opinion MD is completly inferior to CD. CD allows the horse to mentally and physically build up to the work required without any pressure, evetyhing is done at the horses pace, everything comes naturally through correct riding. Proper old fashioned trainers will not sit on a horses back untill it is 4 years old, spend about a year focusing on the natural balance of the horse, encouraging him to work long and low but never collected, and will aim to be heading towards the highest levels by the age of 8, but never before, even if a horse is 'willing' as they believe the body is not physically capable untill it is fully matured.

MD does not consider any of this, Its main aim is to produce a horse for the show ring as quickly as possible with very little regard to its phsyical and mental capabilities of carrying out this work, and will very often already have a 4 yr old in an 'outline', it can become, but is not always, focused very much on the head and neck fixture, and creates very strange techniques in order to get this right, very often you will see horses working with disengaged hind quaters, no lift through the back, bad paces and a round neck.


(edited to remove extra will... really should read through posts before i send...)
 
Classical dressage is horse-centric. We train with the horse's welfare (physical and psychological) as paramount to everything we do. This sounds like common sense, but when you consider some of the practices and methodologies of modern dressage, it starts to come into question.

The training, as someone else said, focuses on riding from back to front; with the appreciation that until everything is engaged behind and the back starting to lift, the outline will not be there. The training of the horse to work in an outline is due to this being the best way, physically, for a horse to carry a rider without causing damage to the horse. For the horse to carry a rider correctly, the back has to be rounded. A horse with a hollow back is going to damage itself long term.

So from a classical point of view, the aim is to train the horse to carry the rider in a way that doesnt hurt itself and preserves its own physiology. The outline is a result of this. The horse only produces the correct outline through its front end (i.e. the poll as the highest point, the nose on the vertical) when everything else is in place. Its a bi-product if you like.

In modern dressage, the head being "in its place" is the aim. Many modern day practices ignore the significance of the hind quarters and the back and purely focus on what the head is doing. Many people are ignorant of what the rest of the body should be doing. They assume if the neck is arched, the horse is working correctly. More often, the horse is overbent which is as bad an evasion as a star gazing horse.

Classical training tends to take much longer than producing a horse to GP via modern methods.

The difference at the higher levels is very noticeable. Classical horses will take much more weight onto their quarters as they've been taught, correctly and gradually, how to collect. The piaffes and passages are correct and of higher quality. It should be remembered that in classical training, piaffe and passage is a pre-requisitite for levade (where the horse stands on its hind legs).

When you compare this with the piaffes and passages seen in competitive dressage, theres no contest. Many of those horses dont show any collection in these movements because they cant. Instead, they propel themselves off the ground with their shoulders and quarters; punching the ground and creating an almost waddling goose like step. No weight is shifted. They just stand there and stamp.

The difference, imo, is getting larger. There has been a lot of call from classical circles for a completly seperate dressage test system to be developed and i know a few individuals are trying to organise something like this, but its a massive undertaking.

Sooooo, for me, the fundamental difference is that we train with the horses' well being as paramount at all times. Understanding how the horse works on a physiological level also helps to teach how sitting slightly different has such a profound effect upon the horse and how tiny changes in the way we carry our weight will equally effect the horse. We're working with animals that feel the touch of a fly on their sides and yet, when you watch some modern techniques, you'd think you were dealing with a lump of steel. Surely we, as horse lovers, should do everything in our power to ride our horses in a way that doesnt cause pain and also teaches them to work in a way that minimises physical wear and tear???

Incidently, theres some various "stuff" on my blog about modern training techniques; specifically focused on rollkur. The link is in my signature if you'd like to take a nosey.

ETS imo classical dressage is an ethos about horse training and handling in general. It goes beyond a "way of riding" and goes much deeper than that. Its about having the upmost respect for the animals we deal with that fighting to give them a better quality of life.
 
I have classical dressage training on my pony, she does not have the best conformation, however with classical training which works with the biomechanics of the horse, we have been able to train her muscles to work correctly, & change gradually her natural way of going, ie she is croup high so built on her forehand, as she has got stronger she has been able to take more weight back, & achieved better balance. CD is a longer training process than MD, but I truly believe if I had been in a hurry & taken the more forceful MD route, my pony would be unsound.
 
I'm very interested in developing an education in CD, but I can imagine that teachers are few and far between in the UK. I'm going to book some sessions with the Pendleburys in North Wales, but does anyone know of a trainer who is prepared to travel to north Wales on a freelance basis?
 
The Pendlebury's are fantastic and you will learn every minute spent with them-I've had a fair few lessons with Janine and she really does put you in the mindset to think before you do (and as you do) and you will not find a better school with horses of their calibre, IMO.
I don't think there are many up North Wales area, but I do know one or two -it just depends where you are as the freelancer's I know are very local. drop me a PM and I will see who fits the bill.
Kate Taylor (nee Negus) is in Cheshire/Flintshire/Wrexham,not strictly classical but always has the horse in mind.
There's Tori Peter in Chester/Cheshire way and she is good.
I know of a few more but they don't travel far.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top