Dressage German based v French based training

Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 October 2016
Messages
7,655
Visit site
Or if the western horses were taking rein contact would they stretch down to meet the riders hands like in a free walk or stretchy trot?
 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
56,533
Visit site
I don't have an axe to grind on either side, but I think you have to look at both ends of the reins to assess the quality of the contact.
You don't often see tense or open mouths against her hand. I don't have a problem with a secure contact, I would have a problem with the absence of one or a tooth-grinding gobbing mouth :) I think few riders are as secure in their core as Charlotte and that can make her look forced sometimes by comparison.

But if you look at photos of her horses they all have a callous on the nose where the noseband has been, so it's either done up pretty tight or they are bracing against it.

I don't get why it would be wrong to have no contact if the horse is balanced and doing the movements. Except that it doesn't meet some arbitrary rule that you need to meet to win competitions. In some tests I've watched recently of Fuego he is doing piaffe or one time changes with the reins in loops.
 
Last edited:

PapaverFollis

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 November 2012
Messages
9,544
Visit site
I see contact as the horse and rider being engaged in conversation... not necessarily as a physical bit to hand thing.

No contact means they are not talking because they haven't realised you are there. Light contact is a mutually respectful conversation. A heavy contact... they aren't talking because you are shouting over them and, in some cases, have gagged them as well.

A loop in the reins and the horse in self carriage is desirable to me, something to work towards and aspire to. You can have contact and connection with a loop in the reins. But you have to work up to it...

It's late, I've had whisky, I don't know what I'm talking about... I plobble around a sandschool in the far north of Scotland on my Irish bog horse and think noble thoughts about connection. :lol:
 

Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 October 2016
Messages
7,655
Visit site
I see contact as the horse and rider being engaged in conversation... not necessarily as a physical bit to hand thing.

No contact means they are not talking because they haven't realised you are there. Light contact is a mutually respectful conversation. A heavy contact... they aren't talking because you are shouting over them and, in some cases, have gagged them as well.

A loop in the reins and the horse in self carriage is desirable to me, something to work towards and aspire to. You can have contact and connection with a loop in the reins. But you have to work up to it...

It's late, I've had whisky, I don't know what I'm talking about... I plobble around a sandschool in the far north of Scotland on my Irish bog horse and think noble thoughts about connection. :lol:

I'm a bit like that too (minus the whisky) ;) I love the learning aspect of dressage. It's something that really makes me think. There's all different layers to it. You figure something out and then see there's much more to it and unwrap another layer.

I love being with my horse alone in the school figuring stuff out. I suppose it helps that I'm curious as well as patient.

I've found contact the most difficult to get. By nature I'm more comfortable with long loose reins held in one hand. Probably was a cowboy in a former life ;) Taking a short contact took me a lot of time to get.
 

Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 October 2016
Messages
7,655
Visit site
The so-called French school is actually the original way of training horses (dressage is a French word, which means "training"), the German way is much later and based on the campaign method. The purest dressage, in my opinion is still found in Spain and Portugal. I know which style I prefer (and I have done both to FEI level). If I was still interested in competing I'd have to do a bit of "German" to gain top marks, but for my own conscience, pleasure, interest and sensibilities I am happy to ride Alta Escuela and Doma Vaquera, or try my very best at least.

In the wise words of one of my riding masters in Spain: "doma es doma" or "training is training", which means good training works, no matter what you call it, and the principles are the same.

I like the look of Doma Vaquera. Does anyone in Ireland teach that style of riding?
 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
56,533
Visit site
I think there's really no such thing as 'no contact' as long as you have reins. The horse can feel a fly land on it, it's well able to know if you have moved your hands on the reins even if the reins are in loops. You're still communicating with the horse, just in a different language.
 

Cortez

Tough but Fair
Joined
17 January 2009
Messages
15,148
Location
Ireland
Visit site
I think there's really no such thing as 'no contact' as long as you have reins. The horse can feel a fly land on it, it's well able to know if you have moved your hands on the reins even if the reins are in loops. You're still communicating with the horse, just in a different language.

You are right; there is no such thing as no contact, nor is it desirable. <<<See my profile pic over there? That horse came to me as unrideable with the most traumatised mouth I've ever seen (massive scar tissue and now melanomas in the mouth): you CANNOT take a contact with him, but if you so much as whisper on the rein he knows and follows. I adore riding him because I HAVE to ride at the top of my game, with everything except the hand involved, and this translates and benefits every other horse I have ridden since.
 

ycbm

Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
Joined
30 January 2015
Messages
56,533
Visit site
You are right; there is no such thing as no contact, nor is it desirable. <<<See my profile pic over there? That horse came to me as unrideable with the most traumatised mouth I've ever seen (massive scar tissue and now melanomas in the mouth): you CANNOT take a contact with him, but if you so much as whisper on the rein he knows and follows. I adore riding him because I HAVE to ride at the top of my game, with everything except the hand involved, and this translates and benefits every other horse I have ridden since.

I can only aspire to that level of riding, longingly.

But I've had some fantastic light work from my Clydex since I stopped trying to ride him like a German and went back to being a French Spaniard after an unhappy lesson last week.
 

cundlegreen

Well-Known Member
Joined
5 February 2009
Messages
2,224
Location
Suffolk
Visit site
I see contact as the horse and rider being engaged in conversation... not necessarily as a physical bit to hand thing.

No contact means they are not talking because they haven't realised you are there. Light contact is a mutually respectful conversation. A heavy contact... they aren't talking because you are shouting over them and, in some cases, have gagged them as well.

A loop in the reins and the horse in self carriage is desirable to me, something to work towards and aspire to. You can have contact and connection with a loop in the reins. But you have to work up to it...

It's late, I've had whisky, I don't know what I'm talking about... I plobble around a sandschool in the far north of Scotland on my Irish bog horse and think noble thoughts about connection. :lol:

I just call it the weight of the rein. The lightest contact but with feel if you know what I mean.
 

milliepops

Wears headscarf aggressively
Joined
26 July 2008
Messages
27,538
Visit site
I don't get why it would be wrong to have no contact if the horse is balanced and doing the movements. Except that it doesn't meet some arbitrary rule that you need to meet to win competitions. In some tests I've watched recently of Fuego he is doing piaffe or one time changes with the reins in loops.

nothing is intrinsically right or wrong provided the horse's welfare is not compromised IMO, but personally I DO want to take part in competitive dressage (and so does CDJ clearly) so therefore we have to go with the arbitrary rules set by the sport. Or else accept we won't do very well :) tis a personal choice. I like training for the sake of it, I also like competing, the 2 are not mutually exclusive and I don't think you have to go to a push-me pull-you old-fashioned style of training to do either, the art (for me) is in taking the bits you like from everyone.
 

tristar

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 August 2010
Messages
6,586
Visit site
another french spanish here.

i too have a horse, not traumatised,but that i had to ride in such way that it improved my riding which translates to to other horses.

i believe that when a horse is truly collected through gymnastic training it is a criterea to have the almost no contact as prove of training, ie the horse looks like it is doing it with no help from the rider, `with reins attracted only by gravity`, quote

maybe thats where comp dressage needs to look, it would sort the wheat from the chaff where training is concerned, set a new standard to aim for.

descente de main, giving of the hand to a correctly working horse as opposed to ramener, `bringing back the horses head by direct intervention of the riders hand``, (oliviera)

doma vaquera is great fun, if you have a horse with natural inclinations , the first time i cantered sideways i nearly exited out the side door, i was so shocked at how easy and fast it was for a horse bred to do it
 

tallyho!

Following a strict mediterranean diet...
Joined
8 July 2010
Messages
14,951
Visit site
Here is my issue.
Does she sacrifice balance for forwardness? In the eyes of a dressage judge what would they rather see? A slower more balanced routine or a forward going pony but a little less balanced.??? The problem with changing to this way means she will loose out on some pace?

Thanks for reading.

You sacrifice neither balance nor forwardness in french classical. Only TIME. If you have no time to wait for a perfectly balanced forward way of going then go back to the german way - let the horse pull itself along on the forehand as it gets heavier and heavier on your hands.

Contact is a two way thing, you ask for something (e.g. a bend/a flex), the horse responds, you say thank you (descent de main).

The judge should see the training you have done with the horse at the particular level you want to test and that he/she is judging at. How you get there is up to you. You can either rush the job and go with a "heavy" horse or wait a bit and get there with a "lighter" horse.
 

Orangehorse

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 November 2005
Messages
13,200
Visit site
I only had a "taster" weekend of the "French" method and my horse had never, ever gone better, I could really feel him working correctly, it was completely brilliant. So sad that there wasn't an instructor anywhere near me, as I think the normal "german" school is so ingrained it would have needed an instructor to keep me on the straight and narrow.

In our discussions on what we were learning what resonated with me is that the German method is wonderful if you have a lovely dressage, warmblood, type built for dressage, but the French method works with any horse that doesn't fit that description! The end result is the same, straightness, lightness, balance and you can't get collection unless there is straightness. There is also a great danger of seeing, say a demonstration, having one lesson, and coming away with an idea that there was something there that is a fix, and concentrate on that and not see the whole picture. Which is why an instructor with wide experience is so necessary.
 

greybadger_19

Active Member
Joined
6 January 2013
Messages
35
Visit site
I think those that are saying you can't ride competitively with lightness really miss the point; there are plenty of examples of tests scoring highly that are perfectly engaged and light. As people say - this needn't be completely throwing away the contact, it's degrees of refinement.

Now, what does vary is how riders get to this point with their horses. Many roads lead to Rome, but they are not necessarily the correct way there. Not all are right, but some are definitely wrong! For example, I've ridden horses schooled to Advanced level which are an absolute pig to warm up because they expect a really strong contact, which is then used to start working the horse through to. They get the lightness in the end, but it's absolutely not how I would school them to work.

It's interesting the talk of the German system being heavy; perhaps true of some bastardisations of modern riding. If you read Gustav Steinbrecht's Gymnasium of the Horse, like all correct routes it speaks of lightness through an engaged, relaxed, and gymnastically relaxed horse. Likewise Decarpentry's Academic Equitation - from the French school - all about the same. I see someone above has quoted Oliviera too - his book Reflections of Equestrian Art is full of such thoughts of engagement, response and lightness. Perhaps what has happened is a disconnect between correct training (with whatever small variations exist) and people pushing to rush to get results, which has been noted above takes time.

I think the bottom line is that all these systems (German / French / Portugese / ...whatever) taken in their original and pure forms are all much of a muchness (they used to be different - Alois Podhajsky has a very interesting discussion on it in The Complete Training of Horse and Rider) - what has happened is people misunderstand them, want results quickly, and then label what they are (incorrectly) doing as coming from a particular school.

For what it's worth, I have been taught what I suppose is a system that one doesn't hear of often - that of Sweden from the 1940s to 2000 or so - most famously taught by Baron Hans von Blixen Finecke to Chris Bartle. If you listen to Chris, it is fundamental in his way of teaching. It's all about ensuring you have a quick response to the aids, working the horse through straightness to a light hand, with an acceptance of all degrees of flexion and counter-flexion. It's a really natural system, and fits absolutely within classical teaching. Horses just tend to pick it up quickly even if they haven't been schooled along it (for two reasons - 1. all these systems are closer than we may like to admit, and 2. it's totally motivated by and works to the biomechanics and psychology of the horse).
 

DabDab

Ah mud, splendid
Joined
6 May 2013
Messages
12,572
Visit site
Great post gb19.

And I think that there is a tendency to find all the 'obvious' faults with the way a person teaches, trains and rides when you've found that it doesn't work for you/your horse.

I don't think the rise in competition standard at the lower dressage levels helps with respect to people wanting quick results. It is very easy to look at a purpose bred 4yo warmblood floating around a novice test for 70+% and think that that is normal. When in fact it's not normal for most horses, and they need more time to strengthen, develop and understand.
 

Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 October 2016
Messages
7,655
Visit site
Another thing I find with dressage is everyone talks the talk, the horse should reach for the contact etc, but some of these same people saw on the reins and hold the horse in a frame.

A problem imo is how some authors make dressage out to be mysterious and really complicated in their descriptions, when it's not mystical, it's training.
 

DabDab

Ah mud, splendid
Joined
6 May 2013
Messages
12,572
Visit site
Another thing I find with dressage is everyone talks the talk, the horse should reach for the contact etc, but some of these same people saw on the reins and hold the horse in a frame.

A problem imo is how some authors make dressage out to be mysterious and really complicated in their descriptions, when it's not mystical, it's training.

Yep. I've had lessons with a couple of trainers where I didn't understand half of what they were gabbling on about - they would talk philosophically while I trotted around aimlessly, and 5 minutes later I would still be none the wiser as to what they actually wanted me to do. They were clearly very competent riders but I don't believe for a second that they had all the philosophising going on actively in their head while they were riding.
 

Mule

Well-Known Member
Joined
27 October 2016
Messages
7,655
Visit site
Yep. I've had lessons with a couple of trainers where I didn't understand half of what they were gabbling on about - they would talk philosophically while I trotted around aimlessly, and 5 minutes later I would still be none the wiser as to what they actually wanted me to do. They were clearly very competent riders but I don't believe for a second that they had all the philosophising going on actively in their head while they were riding.

Yep, mabey some day I'll get all that stuff but I'm one for step by step, clear instructions. One of the things that I do like about dressage is that I constantly get surprised when A + B doesn't equal C (if that makes sense). I think that's where 'feel' comes in to it.
 
Last edited:

greybadger_19

Active Member
Joined
6 January 2013
Messages
35
Visit site
Spot on with floaty youngsters - in reality how many of these do we see going on to top levels? Not many - I think down to 2 reasons: There seems to be a marked drop-off with people's ability to produce horses above Medium level, and lots of the get over-produced / over-ridden early and break down. Just because it can do a big floaty trot doesn't mean it should, or that it has the physical and gymnastic ability to do more earlier.

But, I must say I disagree with the philosophising point. I think most people do do this (i.e. have it all going round in their heads), but it becomes second nature. It feeds in to both 'feel' and how one responds to what is being felt. Do you ignore a mistake? How quickly do you correct a lazy response? What particular ingredient are you happy compromising with when focussing on something else? Etc etc - all the thousands of little decisions we make when schooling (mule made the great point above that dressage is just training!) are absolutely underlined by our own adopted philosophies.

And it is funny how that can work. I always recall a pivotal moment in my riding, when I was moving to riding sequence changes. I was learning on a schoolmaster who used to find them incredibly exciting; he'd generally accelerate in to them and squeal his way through changes. I just couldn't contain a single change on him, let alone a sequence. One day, when I had started studying riding literature properly, I came across Nuno Oliviera's book. I read it in one night flat - an amazing collection of little snippets, most of which is not about the technicalities of riding movements, but the way (i.e. the philosophy) we should have when training. The next day, I went to the stables and borrowed the horse. After about 10 minutes warming up, I cantered him across the long diagonal, and rode a relaxed line of 3-times, then a line of 2-times. Gave him a big pat, walked him off, and put him away.

Just internalising some of those thoughts of subtlety and relaxation, and modifying my way of riding, had a marked difference on this horse's way of going. I still think back to that moment fondly, and use it as an example with people of how it's not all just mechanistic in riding, but how one's 'philosophy' is important.
 

DabDab

Ah mud, splendid
Joined
6 May 2013
Messages
12,572
Visit site
I'm not talking about carefully penned works written by someone like Oliviera. I'm talking about good riders who are trying and failing to find the key pieces of information (the key aspects to feel) to impart to someone they are teaching, so they ramble stuff that sort of sounds good. There are many people who are good riders simply because they always have been. Their way of doing things is ingrained, they're not sure where it comes from and it's just how they've always done it. And they tend to ride the same type of horse over and over again. If they've consistently been successful in competition then why would they ever question it.

The really brilliant trainers I've found have been the ones that have gone through (and are still going through) a fair amount of process with their own riding. And those come from sometimes the most unusual walk of life, and not necessarily from one school of thought or another. As said previously, good training is good training.
 

tristar

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 August 2010
Messages
6,586
Visit site
philosify, can`t be bothered to spell it right, must seem like a daunting word to a pupil wanting to strip away the undergrowth and see the simple truth, that most horses can show us.

warmbloods are floaty as its their inbred movement! training is what happens when a horse is ridden and the movement develops.

i can`t see how anyone can be a good trainer unless they can do it themselves, ie. understanding how to get there by having trained horses to get there.

if horses can`t go past medium, is it an indication that the preparatory lower grades standards of what is is good is in fact stopping them, in other words the system of dressage is wrecking the training instead of setting up the horse for future success and realization of its potential.

how people can make something relatively simple so complicated is amazing.

personally i think all dressage instructors should be have to prove they can train a horse from unbroken.
 

milliepops

Wears headscarf aggressively
Joined
26 July 2008
Messages
27,538
Visit site
you see, this is where I really struggle with the idea of sticking with one school or another. I think someone has completely misread my comments earlier and concluded that I think that competitive dressage has to be all heavy shoving and pulling - which is absolutely NOT what i said, to me, the dressage test sheets and judge training is clearly referencing the scales of training which in turn obv fit closely with the "german school" but also what is commonly taught by dressage trainers in the UK. For me it's clear that the scales of training should be helping to develop a harmonious light way of going that is pleasant to watch but perhaps some people don't agree.

dunno. Perhaps you can stick to one school or the other if you are starting out with a blank canvas, but if, as many of us are, you start with a horse that knows something that may or may not be useful, then IMO you have to pick and choose elements at different times to help them to learn to respond and use their bodies in the desired way.

My young WB is not naturally floaty, she can passage in excitement but under saddle she's a reactive but dozy dobbin. For now, she has to go faster to balance, theres a sweet spot clearly, but if we slow down she falls over her own feet because she doesn't yet know how to be active unless she's really travelling. I'm also not in control unless she starts to pull into the rein positively, if she's too light then I know she's not concentrating. She has been badly started, perhaps we could go for slowly slowly super lightness if I'd had her before she was sat on and before she knew anything. On the flip side, my welsh HAS to be light in the contact in order to be expressive, if she's not then it's all on the shoulder and we can't do a thing. horses for courses.

I agree wholeheartedly with DabDab that good training is good training, by necessity with my horses i seek out people that can train all kinds of types of horse and have a vast amount of experience and are good at thinking outside the box to help get the best from them :)
 

DabDab

Ah mud, splendid
Joined
6 May 2013
Messages
12,572
Visit site
philosify, can`t be bothered to spell it right, must seem like a daunting word to a pupil wanting to strip away the undergrowth and see the simple truth, that most horses can show us.
.

Hmm, yes. A perfect example there of random nonsensical comment that sounds good.
 

HufflyPuffly

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 October 2012
Messages
5,432
Visit site
I'm with MP on this one, I take notice of all training ideas if they can help the horses I'm riding.

Topaz came to me and then spent the next few years jumping, dressage training and contact had never been considered. She has to be ridden into a firm contact when being spooky, or nervous to keep her on the aids and give her confidence. When she's feeling brave and comfortable, self carriage and lightness in the contact can be achieved. So we aim for lightness, but to get there she needs her hand holding. I had a lesson in a more French/ Spanish style and it was hopeless as she felt abandoned, she is a quirky mare and we've found what she needs and so I'll stick with it.

To be honest I'm not really sure what 'style' my current trainer is (I just go with if it works then I'll stick with it), but she understands the horse in front of her and has been fabulous for us.

Skylla I backed myself and she is the complete opposite, brave as a lion and very easy to ride on a light contact without being bogged off with or having an unexpected teleport with spin happen :eek:. I think getting too hung up on sticking rigidly to a training philosophy can sometimes be why people get stuck in a rut not progressing (personal experience here!). Skylla has had to slow down and listen to a light aid, as she's so gung-ho she runs onto her forehand (which is easier to feel than see as she's built so uphill), so balance is much more important for her to coordinate herself.

Interesting discussion :).
 

Caol Ila

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 January 2012
Messages
7,517
Location
Glasgow
Visit site
Good thread. I spent years and years being frustrated with my horse because I was with a series of trainers who had the approach of using strong leg and seat aids to drive her into a solid contact. The horse being a Shire-TBX, this made her heavy on the shoulder and you couldn't do anything. It also frustrated the horse; she learned to tune out the aids and would just potter around behind the leg and on the forehand. That was us for years.

Then I came across Nuno Oliveira, Philippe Karl, etc., and also started reading all Mark Rashid's books. Mark's obviously a western guy, not dressage, but in terms of how you train the horse he gives the same underlying principles as the classical guys. I started riding like that, as best I could on my own anyway, and it transformed the horse. Almost immediately, she lifted the forehand and offered correct engagement. Like she was saying, "That's how you're supposed to do it. I've been waiting for years for you to figure it out, stupid human." She is very forgiving, a very good horse. Ever since, she has always been willing to offer correct collection and engagement if you ride in a way that enables her to do so. If you're having a bad dressage day, she will putter about on the forehand. But that doesn't mean she won't be uphill and engaged the next day if you remember how to ride. The perfect schoolmistress, really.

I think the day in class that many people, including (unfortunately) some professionals miss when they are training the so-called German school is that they don't offer the horse a release or softening when it does the thing they want. Obviously the best and most effective trainers, no matter what school or philisophical approach, will release, reward, but I see lots of riders -- and trainers too -- scrabbling at the lower levels, driving the horses into a heavy contact and *never* releasing, just holding them there. The horse therefore doesn't have a clear picture of what the rider wants him to do, because they are applying pressure all the time. All but the most stoic horses will act out their frustration in some way, and then people wonder why he's being "cheeky." I don't think any trainer of any school who *deeply* understands how horses learn advocates this approach, but I think the idea of 'driving the horse into a contact' is frequently misintepreted to mean 'drive him into the contact and then hold him there with everything you got.'
 
Last edited:
Top