Have we got it wrong?

[milliepops]

But most people here have never, ever ridden a properly trained horse! If once you have felt what a really balanced, collected, supple, powerful, responsive horse feels like you would NEVER go back to the poor confused, staggering beasts that most people "enjoy".

This, 100% this.
Lots of people think their horses are trained because they will go on the bit and they can steer round a prelim. If only they knew. I agree with an earlier poster, once you feel the difference it's addictive. And I also find it deeply fulfilling

 

[milliepops]

Thats what I mean, there is such a lot to learn and I've only just scratched the surface. Some friends of mine are very competitive and it's all about getting to qualifiers for this age group, that age group, level etc... I find it so so tiring now. Don't get me wrong, I still want to compete the newbie but not at the expense of correct training... not rushing them through just doing the bare bones of dressage. Where is the soul in that? Where is the spirit?

I suspect it's something they will either figure out, and come back to, bashfully.... or they will continue in blissful ignorance.
I was lucky that the first horse I attempted to 'do dressage' on is a very forgiving and generous mare who tolerated me flailing around in the dark until I hit on what I thought must be the Right Thing. After a while I figured out where I'd been going wrong, went back to basics and started again with more knowledge. We'd done OK, papering over the cracks, doing the bare bones... but what a different experience when you do it with understanding and feeling

Competition and 'soul' are not mutually exclusive... the one I'm competing now is doing more in the way of qualifying etc than anything I've ridden before but I can also honestly say it's the most correctly produced horse I've done Also the most unlikely dressage prospect, but without her correctness she'd be HOPELESS in the ring. I hope and pray she stays sound long term because I think I've laid good enough foundations for her to go up the levels, despite her apparent lack of sportiness!

I do think that demonstration of correct training is rewarded, it's a shame at the lower levels that amazingly bred animals can out-bling a correctly trained ordinary horse but such is life, and the higher you go, the less attention is given to naturally astounding paces, and training becomes more influential. Would help to have both, one can dream. I do honestly think the top of the sport is changing in a good way. Harmony appears to be winning out. The dutch have fallen off the pedestal, and the old german style of pushing and holding is becoming less noticable. And even at novice, my cob had some pleasing comments in tests about correct training etc.

 

[milliepops]

Sorry. was thinking about trainers. I have to be honest, I think people are failed in this regard by what I would describe as BHS-y instructors. Great for beginners, great for nervous people, great for getting people going, but what I see is that the ones who have come up through those qualifications but gone no further can lack the depth to go beyond a transactional way of teaching. kick, pull, turn left, turn right etc. Don't think I'm making a blanket statement, my own trainer is FBHS but it doesn't stop there

TBH I learnt to look beyond the very basics to assess a horse's way of going from a friend who had trained in germany many moons ago. I never heard an instructor in this country talk about a horse's back swinging, or the scales of training, for example When I'd had my eyes opened, I knew what to look for in a trainer and never looked back.

However, I do think you need to have it in you as a rider, to want to move beyond that. I am a reflective person, and i think that's the personality that you need. Not self doubt, but the ability to reflect on something and learn from it. You can't teach feel, really, if a person doesn't have that inclination.

 

[Wheels]

This is a difficult one for me

In some cases I think behavioural problems can come from poor handling, some from pain, some from uncomfortable tack - whether we're an owner / rider / trainer / teacher / equine professional we all need to work together to make things better for the horse. Some people I know think behavioural problems are 'almost never' to do with pain, some people think behavioural problems are 'almost always' to do with a pain or discomfort issue. For me it's somewhere in the middle.

Professional riders can push the horse through a lot of issues and still get a tune out of a horse that is not at their physical peak. I've visited 2 professional yards in the last week where the horses are clearly sore or at least annoyed by their saddle, horses have atrophy behind the withers but because the horses are super talented and the riders super talented the horses still go OK and still perform and still score well and jump well. Any behavioural type issues are put down to high jinks or quirkiness when in reality if the saddles were a better fit and the muscles were full and not atrophied then these horses and riders would both have an easier and more pleasant life

 

[teapot]

TBH I learnt to look beyond the very basics to assess a horse's way of going from a friend who had trained in germany many moons ago. I never heard an instructor in this country talk about a horse's back swinging, or the scales of training, for example When I'd had my eyes opened, I knew what to look for in a trainer and never looked back.

Sadly I'd put money on many people never having had the scales of training ingrained in their brains. You must have met some pretty poor instructors though to have never heard them talking about either of those things.

It's reading threads like this that make me truly appreciate just how good my lessons where when I first started to ride, and now having them again ten years on, how fantastically good new instructor is. Not in any way an experienced rider compared to most on this forum but at least I've been trained from the beginning in the correct way. Guess I'm one of the lucky ones

 

[Wagtail]

This is a difficult one for me

In some cases I think behavioural problems can come from poor handling, some from pain, some from uncomfortable tack - whether we're an owner / rider / trainer / teacher / equine professional we all need to work together to make things better for the horse. Some people I know think behavioural problems are 'almost never' to do with pain, some people think behavioural problems are 'almost always' to do with a pain or discomfort issue. For me it's somewhere in the middle.

Professional riders can push the horse through a lot of issues and still get a tune out of a horse that is not at their physical peak. I've visited 2 professional yards in the last week where the horses are clearly sore or at least annoyed by their saddle, horses have atrophy behind the withers but because the horses are super talented and the riders super talented the horses still go OK and still perform and still score well and jump well. Any behavioural type issues are put down to high jinks or quirkiness when in reality if the saddles were a better fit and the muscles were full and not atrophied then these horses and riders would both have an easier and more pleasant life

Totally agree. Professional riders can get a tune out of horses even when they are uncomfortable. The atrophy is all too common. I remember years ago we all used our favourite saddles on all the horses and they went hunting, show jumping and yes they may have had a nap or a buck or even a rear and we'd put it down to them being fresh. I still see this happening in some professional yards.

 

[ycbm]

I find the idea that applying the scales of training are any guarantee that a horse is not working in pain pretty odd. The last research I saw about horses trained in Germany, the home of the scales of training, for a dressage career, showed a pretty devastating wastage rate by the age of seven.And few horses seem to compete at top level beyond their early/mid teens, even Carl's.

I totally agree that a mentally strong and competent rider can make a horse perform in spite of issues. In retrospect, I've done it to at least one, possibly more.

 

[Mike007]

Sorry. was thinking about trainers. I have to be honest, I think people are failed in this regard by what I would describe as BHS-y instructors. Great for beginners, great for nervous people, great for getting people going, but what I see is that the ones who have come up through those qualifications but gone no further can lack the depth to go beyond a transactional way of teaching. kick, pull, turn left, turn right etc. Don't think I'm making a blanket statement, my own trainer is FBHS but it doesn't stop there

TBH I learnt to look beyond the very basics to assess a horse's way of going from a friend who had trained in germany many moons ago. I never heard an instructor in this country talk about a horse's back swinging, or the scales of training, for example When I'd had my eyes opened, I knew what to look for in a trainer and never looked back.

However, I do think you need to have it in you as a rider, to want to move beyond that. I am a reflective person, and i think that's the personality that you need. Not self doubt, but the ability to reflect on something and learn from it. You can't teach feel, really, if a person doesn't have that inclination.

Ahh ,the BHS way, I have struggled with one particular horse for years . Learn to ride Mike I hear you say , true , but the other riders I have sat on him have varied from a professional eventer to a stage 4/ A test rider. All have said he is difficult ,too clever ,willing to please ,but ultra sensitive. The breakthrough came from a session with a Canadian instructor ,former olympic squad way back in the dark ages. His efforts cracked the glass ceiling we had . A truly sensitive and intuitive instructor, yet he failed his stage 4 BHS recently. Daft ! The guy was a better rider than all those assessing him and had the track record to prove it!

 

[tallyho!]

Sorry. was thinking about trainers. I have to be honest, I think people are failed in this regard by what I would describe as BHS-y instructors. Great for beginners, great for nervous people, great for getting people going, but what I see is that the ones who have come up through those qualifications but gone no further can lack the depth to go beyond a transactional way of teaching. kick, pull, turn left, turn right etc. Don't think I'm making a blanket statement, my own trainer is FBHS but it doesn't stop there

TBH I learnt to look beyond the very basics to assess a horse's way of going from a friend who had trained in germany many moons ago. I never heard an instructor in this country talk about a horse's back swinging, or the scales of training, for example When I'd had my eyes opened, I knew what to look for in a trainer and never looked back.

However, I do think you need to have it in you as a rider, to want to move beyond that. I am a reflective person, and i think that's the personality that you need. Not self doubt, but the ability to reflect on something and learn from it. You can't teach feel, really, if a person doesn't have that inclination.

Ahh ,the BHS way, I have struggled with one particular horse for years . Learn to ride Mike I hear you say , true , but the other riders I have sat on him have varied from a professional eventer to a stage 4/ A test rider. All have said he is difficult ,too clever ,willing to please ,but ultra sensitive. The breakthrough came from a session with a Canadian instructor ,former olympic squad way back in the dark ages. His efforts cracked the glass ceiling we had . A truly sensitive and intuitive instructor, yet he failed his stage 4 BHS recently. Daft ! The guy was a better rider than all those assessing him and had the track record to prove it!

Glad you've both pointed out the elephant....

Well all I can say is that the Canadian instructor didn't ride according to the BHS Riding Bible... basically, computer said NO!
If my own BHS examinations were anything to go by, riding to preserve the horse wasn't on the syllabus.

 

[milliepops]

I find the idea that applying the scales of training are any guarantee that a horse is not working in pain pretty odd. The last research I saw about horses trained in Germany, the home of the scales of training, for a dressage career, showed a pretty devastating wastage rate by the age of seven.And few horses seem to compete at top level beyond their early/mid teens, even Carl's.

I totally agree that a mentally strong and competent rider can make a horse perform in spite of issues. In retrospect, I've done it to at least one, possibly more.

you do manage to draw some odd conclusions from things people say
I thought the discussion had moved beyond the pain/behaviour thing, but in any case I do think there is a relevant link to the scales of training. For me, the point of the SoT is Throughness - that intangible quality where the horse can perform his work effortlessly and without a hint of resistances. I do not think it is possible for a horse to be truly through, if it has pain somewhere. True, a good rider could make a horse *more* though despite a physical problem, but not truly through, because it would require such help from the rider that it would lose the effortless quality.

And for me, a horse should be through at each level of its training, it's not something to aspire to... but should be possible at each stage, otherwise something is lacking. A horse working at prelim should be through, as should one at GP, it's just the GP horse needs to be more developed in other areas to deliver the throughness in that GP way of going.

In addition, what are people feeling when they notice an issue that might point to a physical cause, but a deficiency in one of the scales of training? Horse naps, or can't do a transition or whatever... what's happened? The contact has gone up the swanee. Or the submission has gone to pot. Or the horse can't be straight, or supple or whatever. It's an element of the scales of training that the rider has noticed, just may not be thinking about it in that explicit way.

I totally agree that the old school 'german' way of pushing and holding is not something that should be held up as a beacon of training perfection, but I also think that way of riding is waning - look at those at the top of the sport now, say, Kristina Sprehe, who is much more in the harmonious camp than the old pushing and shoving camp. There's a reason why she's at the top and able to challenge CDJ & Valegro... and that's because she's been rewarded up the levels in Germany, for showing that way of going.

 

[DanceswithCows]

I think the work that horses are asked to do is more concentrated, lots of riding in circles on non natural surfaces. People ride at shows, are on their backs for hours but perhaps have only ridden very little in the week, or its been on a walker, and then they wonder why its starts to say no, and that hoping the animal is physically well.
There is a theory that all horses are lame, in the fact like people they will always favour one limb, but through exercise and training of horse and rider you develop both sides. The trouble is most riders, even those that have ridden for years have no idea they favour one side, always ride on the same diagonal, and do not work the horses evenly.
So you start with an animal that is not perfect but functionally sound, work it spasmodically and unevenly and when it can not cope and starts napping its the horses fault. So you stick a gadget on it, which usually compresses its frame and prevents it from using its body to compensate, which with regular drilling in the school makes it mentally sour and exacerbate any physical problems it may have had or is developing. By this time you 'need' a saddle fitter, back man, teeth done and spend x amounts on vets.
No, its not all the riders fault, but horses are basically built to go in straight lines and graduated turns, and have a basic natural level of fitness, so to make them function well we build on that gradually, like the old hunter fitting work. They will put up with a lot if they are happy, you only have to go to PC to see ponies that will put up with almost any thing and still do their job. As people if we are happy mentally we will ignore pain.
I have had many animals over many years, most I keep for life and never had one lame apart from the odd kick, most competed did PC hunted etc. Even the horse I got already with diagnosed navicular I managed to keep sound and in work to the point of cub hunting, but as someone else has said this all takes time, which nobody seems to have. Its easier to buy another rug, or gadget and say there is something wrong with the horse.

Agree with this

 

[DanceswithCows]

But it would be a sad day if horses became the preserve of 'the chosen few' - those of a saintly, well-balanced disposition who have also had the benefit of that rare thing - a solid equestrian heritage, knowledge, experience and expertise.

Weeell, this I actually disagree with. I know it will probably rankle a few, but I've spent many, many hours observing people, horses (and other animals ) and chewing over the ethics and history around all this stuff. Gawd knows why, but anyway - I think some people have it and some people don't, and if you don't, you can't be taught. You could be taught to go round a riding school in an acceptable fashion perhaps, but buying, owning, bringing on and successfully riding your own youngster? I think that takes a special type of someone who has 'IT'.

If you look to the past, yes a lot of people 'used' horses, but the trade of the breeding and training and upkeep of the horses was the specialised job of a recognised 'horseman'.

I firmly do not believe it's about heritage though, I think it's just a quirk of genetics and character that gives you the passion to do it and the understanding. There's plenty of awesome horsemen out there that don't come from particularly horsey backgrounds (and I'm sure vice versa!).

I see it in myself. I did not come from a farming background one little bit, my family are mostly scared of cows, truth be known. But I had this inexplicable fascination with them and when I finally got my hands on some, just found this kind of 'synergy' (or something). I feel plumbed into cows, I know what they're going to do before they do it, it feels effortless. I would be 100% confident to take ANY cow anyone would care to pick and train it. I have trained cows to do crazy things no problemo, and I've *tried* to teach other people to do it...but I just can't, unless they have 'it', in which case they don't need me. doesn't matter how many hours I spend trying to dissect it and break it down (and I have spent many...), some people just can NOT fathom the mindset of a cow, they will only ever achieve a rudimentary kind of working relationship. And tbh, most seem delighted with themselves over that *rolls eyes*

I'm pretty good with other kinds of stock too, I can competently handle them all, even horses; they're pretty similar in a lot of ways. But, I recognise I'm not as good with horses as I am with cows. I can't predict them or understand them as well. Just don't have 'it' and I wouldn't pretend to. I'm perhaps a level up from that rudimentary one I talked about simply because I know my own limitations and use what of my cow sense I can on a horse. I'm not brilliant with dogs either - rudimentary, yeah, fine, but there's people out there that can get a dog to do ANYTHING - they have the 'it', but with dogs.

So, I think you can be taught but really unless you have that spark of something to begin with, that instinct, you're never going to be a true 'horseman' and perhaps the breeding and training etc should be left to those guys. Do we all need to admit that, sad as you may personally find it, horses *aren't* for everyone, even most people, and that having that genetic quirk is a recognisable, rare skill? Horses are cheaper and more accessible than ever - livery yards abound, rugs and all the junk is dirt cheap thesedays (even when I was a kid a rug was over £100, can pick one up for 30 thesedays brand new!) and the populace is more affluent, despite how much we moan about it . For horses, that's kinda unprecedented. Is it a good thing? I think maybe not

Sorry for the essay, thanks for the mindfodder!

 

[Alexa123]

A great thread – for those that care to engage in these difficult, demanding questions, anyway. (And a great thread for Michael Peace – who, inadvertently, got over 5,000 views for free )! BUT (always BUTS), we cannot ignore the fact that people like him will always eschew the physical because his childrens’ school fees, or whatever, depend on it, and at the same time, the ‘physical’ is the very bread and butter of veterinary practice (my own niece has given up veterinary practice due to the ‘financial driver’. How often is “Is it insured?” the first thing they ask). Gah!
(DanceswithCows – you seem like a wise old soul, for sure; but some of us who don’t quite have ‘it’ in spades, maybe NEED our animals just as much, if not more than you).

 

[tallyho!]

Weeell, this I actually disagree with. I know it will probably rankle a few, but I've spent many, many hours observing people, horses (and other animals ) and chewing over the ethics and history around all this stuff. Gawd knows why, but anyway - I think some people have it and some people don't, and if you don't, you can't be taught. You could be taught to go round a riding school in an acceptable fashion perhaps, but buying, owning, bringing on and successfully riding your own youngster? I think that takes a special type of someone who has 'IT'.

If you look to the past, yes a lot of people 'used' horses, but the trade of the breeding and training and upkeep of the horses was the specialised job of a recognised 'horseman'.

I firmly do not believe it's about heritage though, I think it's just a quirk of genetics and character that gives you the passion to do it and the understanding. There's plenty of awesome horsemen out there that don't come from particularly horsey backgrounds (and I'm sure vice versa!).

I see it in myself. I did not come from a farming background one little bit, my family are mostly scared of cows, truth be known. But I had this inexplicable fascination with them and when I finally got my hands on some, just found this kind of 'synergy' (or something). I feel plumbed into cows, I know what they're going to do before they do it, it feels effortless. I would be 100% confident to take ANY cow anyone would care to pick and train it. I have trained cows to do crazy things no problemo, and I've *tried* to teach other people to do it...but I just can't, unless they have 'it', in which case they don't need me. doesn't matter how many hours I spend trying to dissect it and break it down (and I have spent many...), some people just can NOT fathom the mindset of a cow, they will only ever achieve a rudimentary kind of working relationship. And tbh, most seem delighted with themselves over that *rolls eyes*

I'm pretty good with other kinds of stock too, I can competently handle them all, even horses; they're pretty similar in a lot of ways. But, I recognise I'm not as good with horses as I am with cows. I can't predict them or understand them as well. Just don't have 'it' and I wouldn't pretend to. I'm perhaps a level up from that rudimentary one I talked about simply because I know my own limitations and use what of my cow sense I can on a horse. I'm not brilliant with dogs either - rudimentary, yeah, fine, but there's people out there that can get a dog to do ANYTHING - they have the 'it', but with dogs.

So, I think you can be taught but really unless you have that spark of something to begin with, that instinct, you're never going to be a true 'horseman' and perhaps the breeding and training etc should be left to those guys. Do we all need to admit that, sad as you may personally find it, horses *aren't* for everyone, even most people, and that having that genetic quirk is a recognisable, rare skill? Horses are cheaper and more accessible than ever - livery yards abound, rugs and all the junk is dirt cheap thesedays (even when I was a kid a rug was over £100, can pick one up for 30 thesedays brand new!) and the populace is more affluent, despite how much we moan about it . For horses, that's kinda unprecedented. Is it a good thing? I think maybe not

Sorry for the essay, thanks for the mindfodder!

Cowgirl, I think you have a point. I'm not entirely sure riding is the preserve of the few, however, I believe there are premises where owners have very *few* horses that need extra peripheral care... there are few who know how to do that. It's a shame not everyone seeks it. No-one seeks to preserve a horse, lets admit that. The aim of competition is to win the admiration of the day whatever that may be. No judge looks at a team and asks "now, is what they are doing preserving that horse?". Tell me I am wrong please!

 

[ycbm]

Cowgirl, I think you have a point. I'm not entirely sure riding is the preserve of the few, however, I believe there are premises where owners have very *few* horses that need extra peripheral care... there are few who know how to do that. It's a shame not everyone seeks it. No-one seeks to preserve a horse, lets admit that. The aim of competition is to win the admiration of the day whatever that may be. No judge looks at a team and asks "now, is what they are doing preserving that horse?". Tell me I am wrong please!

With you completely here TH. I hear people say and write that if we train horses to carry themselves correctly they will last longer. But there is absolutely no evidence that I know of to prove that. And no research that tells us which of the many ways of riding a horse (western, dressage, English chair seat hunter, slop along hacker, knees in armpits jockey) is the 'correct' one for longevity, if indeed any of them are.

What's worse is that I think it probably varies from horse to horse! Or at the very least, breed to breed.

Sometimes I just wish they could talk!

 

[Slightlyconfused]

With you completely here TH. I hear people say and write that if we train horses to carry themselves correctly they will last longer. But there is absolutely no evidence that I know of to prove that. And no research that tells us which of the many ways of riding a horse (western, dressage, English chair seat hunter, slop along hacker, knees in armpits jockey) is the 'correct' one for longevity, if indeed any of them are.

What's worse is that I think it probably varies from horse to horse! Or at the very least, breed to breed.

Sometimes I just wish they could talk!

I have two very different horses and the way they naturally carry themselves when working right is very very different due to their conformation which I also a lot of people don't take into the consideration when schooling or know that it is an issue/think to thing about.

My younger appy has tb in him and he his put together and set in the neck and shoulders differently than my other appy who I think has rhino in him. When asking for a nice contact both will be "on the bit" (I hate that term for some reason) but both will look completely different but both will be working correctly within their conformation limitations.

I am currently have lessons with quite a few liverys with a bio mechanics instructor who is classicly trained and oh my goodness the difference in our positions, just tiny adjustments most of the time, and the horse just changes and moves so much better and you can feel how freer they are.

 

[ycbm]

I have two very different horses and the way they naturally carry themselves when working right is very very different due to their conformation which I also a lot of people don't take into the consideration when schooling or know that it is an issue/think to thing about.

My younger appy has tb in him and he his put together and set in the neck and shoulders differently than my other appy who I think has rhino in him. When asking for a nice contact both will be "on the bit" (I hate that term for some reason) but both will look completely different but both will be working correctly within their conformation limitations.

I am currently have lessons with quite a few liverys with a bio mechanics instructor who is classicly trained and oh my goodness the difference in our positions, just tiny adjustments most of the time, and the horse just changes and moves so much better and you can feel how freer they are.

I'm going through the same, two horses of the same age but totally different build. One who is 'on top' of his legs, and the other who would, by choice, tip forward to push into a collar.

Personally, I'm pretty convinced that shoulder/hip/heel alignment in the rider is 'right' because of what I feel under me when I do it. I just wish we had more solid evidence.

 

[Slightlyconfused]

I'm going through the same, two horses of the same age but totally different build. One who is 'on top' of his legs, and the other who would, by choice, tip forward to push into a collar.

Personally, I'm pretty convinced that shoulder/hip/heel alignment in the rider is 'right' because of what I feel under me when I do it. I just wish we had more solid evidence.

Oh yes my big spotty likes to be behind the vertical just ever so slightly and we are just starting to see him stretching forward into a more lower longer frame while getting him forward in a nice even rhythm and then when stronger to get up a collected but that will be at least six ish months of strengthening before we ask that of him.

The rhino on the other hand likes to naturally go in a more lower and longer frame and we are just about getting him up and off his shoulders but again it's a long slow process as muscle memory takes a long time to change.

I have a habit of tilting my pelvis forward and that in turn makes big spotty rush and go flat but if I sit nice on my tail bone he relaxes nicely so I'm very aware if they aren't going right what am I doing wrong to block them.

I also wish more horse owners will have a basis understanding of anatomy and physiology of the horses especially building muscle.
And hour hard schooling with no walk breaks is not going to build muscle you need short and sweet with plenty of walk breaks to allow the muscles to get oxygenated and allow them.to repair and remember.

 

[DanceswithCows]

(DanceswithCows – you seem like a wise old soul, for sure; but some of us who don’t quite have ‘it’ in spades, maybe NEED our animals just as much, if not more than you).

Interesting! What do you mean? In a career sense, or a spiritual one? On a career front it could always be argued that there's choice behind that in this day and age. For the 'spiritual' one, there are still options but they do all tend to start with admitting some perhaps painful home truths to oneself! Just as in the past many people used horses but weren't horsemen, today you can get a horse fix without being in sole charge of it's handling and training. Or, if you feel you must own, always buy schoolmasters, accept help or just have them as pets (which is basically what mine are).

I have a herd of conservation grazing exmoors - I can go and look at them, think about how ancient they are, how beautiful they look in the landscape and enjoy a warm fuzzy glow. Don't have to ride 'em though. Other than that, I hop on someone else's horses; hunt horses, stunt horses, trekking horses, friend's horses. Horses they train, assess and handle and I just enjoy temporarily without being responsible for them! Even at a riding school you can request to ride the same horse every time if you want to build up a bond?

 

[DanceswithCows]

Cowgirl, I think you have a point. I'm not entirely sure riding is the preserve of the few

Riding no, but owning/breeding/training, imo, yes!

 

[tristar]

if you train a horse correctly it will last longer, if fact training of the horse evolved in a time when veterinary science was in its infancy, and preserving the horse was economic, and horse management was a way of life.

but more importantly if you can`t ride the thing correctly you`re going no- where, flashy p`s post i liked very much about not underestimating the effort involved in training a horse from scratch, but an enormous amount of effort is needed to ride well, and this i see as a great downfall today.

i train a horse to the horse`s benefit, it may take years, but i love every moment, and as they get older they become better and better to ride and stay sound, they become almost priceless, because you know their uniqueness and that a horse like that cannot be bought for money, the training is like a huge investment that pays off ultimately, you do it for the horse and one day the horse pays you back, and you arrive at a point where you realize that the horse has trained you to be a better rider, because you were willing to listen and give him the chance.

it needs people like michael peace to say things to shock and shake things up, some people need to look at themselves bigtime and get their finger out where their riding is concerned.

years ago many horses lived into their late twenties, we have documentary evidence of this from stud books

 

[Goldenstar]

I just wonder other people are doing if anything in that video shocked them or shook them up.
It just seemed to be stating the blindingly obvious .
What on earth are people being taught if a video like that contains surprises .

 

[ycbm]

years ago many horses lived into their late twenties, we have documentary evidence of this from stud books

how old are you tristar?

When I first started riding, all horses over ten were described as aged. When I started sorting out other people's cock-ups and selling, the maximum price for a riding club type horse was at eight and nine. From ten onwards they were worth less each year. It was not possible to insure a horse over the age of fifteen for vets fees at all.

When I learnt to ride, there were no indoor schools. You started on a lead rein ride around the roads, then a walk and trot, then a full wtc ride. Training these days is better than it has ever been in my lifetime. I think you have some exceptionally rose tinted glasses about the recent and the far past. If a horse gave too many problems, they shot it and got another.

I'm sure there are FAR more horses working in their twenties today than ever before.

if you train a horse correctly it will last longer

Prove it. And define 'correctly'. I've hunted alongside two horses well into their twenties ridden by men who ride in a chair seat, with dreadful hands, and never schooled one single hour in their entire lives. Neither rider nor horse would know what 'on the bit' meant. Conversely I've watched a ton of 'correctly' trained dressage horses break down before their mid teens because it just isn't natural for a horse to carry so much weight on the hocks.

Horses are naturally weighted into the forehand. How much distribution of that weight further back is optimum for a long life carrying a rider? I wish I knew but afaik that research simply doesn't exist.

 

[ycbm]

I just wonder other people are doing if anything in that video shocked them or shook them up.
It just seemed to be stating the blindingly obvious .
What on earth are people being taught if a video like that contains surprises .

With you there.

 

[milliepops]

how old are you tristar?


Prove it. And define 'correctly'. I've hunted alongside two horses well into their twenties ridden by men who ride in a chair seat, with dreadful hands, and never schooled one single hour in their entire lives. Neither rider nor horse would know what 'on the bit' meant. Conversely I've watched a ton of 'correctly' trained dressage horses break down before their mid teens because it just isn't natural for a horse to carry so much weight on the hocks.

there are too many variables here though... the hunters are likely to have worked on a variety of surfaces and different terrain, whereas we know that too much work on artificial surfaces can be detrimental to horses and long term soundness...

 

[Goldenstar]

Horses are working much much longer when I first worked I looked after an eighteen yo hunter people used to come and look at him because he was so unusual.
I do think correct training will make a horse last longer but it's defining correct training for longevity that makes it a bit more complicated .
And of course there are always horses that buck the trend who despite all sorts of disadvantages go on and on and there will be always ones who despite careful treatment don't last .
I don't like to work my horses on surfaces much I avoid it and set my system around limiting the time they work on them .

 

[Cortez]

I just wonder other people are doing if anything in that video shocked them or shook them up.
It just seemed to be stating the blindingly obvious .
What on earth are people being taught if a video like that contains surprises .

Agreed. What on earth has happened to the teaching of riding in the UK? Things are dire enough over here, when I go over to competitions in England I am really shocked at some of the riding (sorry to say it....).

 

[Goldenstar]

Agreed. What on earth has happened to the teaching of riding in the UK? Things are dire enough over here, when I go over to competitions in England I am really shocked at some of the riding (sorry to say it....).

Like I said above I am no longer sure what lots are people are being taught or is that there's a large group who don't have the training bug I love being trained it's my favourite thing .

 

[ycbm]

there are too many variables here though... the hunters are likely to have worked on a variety of surfaces and different terrain, whereas we know that too much work on artificial surfaces can be detrimental to horses and long term soundness...

Of course there are too many variables. I used those examples to show how pointless it is for anyone to say 'I train my horses correctly and they never go lame'. Samples of one or three or ten are useless. We need proper research, but we aren't going to get it because it's too expensive to control the variables over the time period that would be necessary.

 

[Goldenstar]

You see I think too much research might even be part of the problem too little development of proper feel ( back to the teaching thing ) and too much dependance on others rather than really grafting hard yourself .