How do you know how good you are at riding!!

:D Kettle of fish.

Depends what aspect you look at it from really, how high your personal stars are.

Some people just want to be good enough to ride on a hack and to have the ability to w/t/c without falling off or abusing the horse is enough for them. Some want to shine in the spotlight and train jolly hard to get there.

Me, I am quite capable of riding a reasonable dressage test, of jumping XC or SJ, of teaching how to do the same, I can also hunt, all day, over any terrain, exercise race horses on the flat or over sticks, ride endurance races, I even had my ticket to race ride. I have no desire to do any of that anymore.

My personal stars are simply to stay on, I don't compete any longer, and I don't care what others think of my style of riding, my horses like me and don't run and hide when they see a saddle coming.
 
Last edited:
A good rider understands how to get the best tune possible out of a horse. If you look at some well known people, Michael Peace for example. He does not LOOK like a good rider. He is not elegant and he rides with his feet too far into the stirups etc etc. But he knows how to block a horse's shoulder. He knows how to redirect its energy to prevent it napping, and how to get the horse relaxed and working through its back, and most of all, he gives out good vibes to the horse. But he wouldn't win any prizes for being a classically 'good' rider. On the other hand, I have known riders who really look the part, hardly move in the saddle, elegant, nice still hands etc. but just don't 'get' how to ride a horse.

It's a very interesting question that the OP has asked. Some people are just poor riders, plain and simple and no amount of training is going to make them good. Others are naturals and have raw talent. The rest of us are somewhere inbetween.
 
Wagtail said:
A good rider understands how to get the best tune possible out of a horse. If you look at some well known people, Michael Peace for example. He does not LOOK like a good rider. He is not elegant and he rides with his feet too far into the stirups etc etc. But he knows how to block a horse's shoulder. He knows how to redirect its energy to prevent it napping, and how to get the horse relaxed and working through its back, and most of all, he gives out good vibes to the horse. But he wouldn't win any prizes for being a classically 'good' rider. On the other hand, I have known riders who really look the part, hardly move in the saddle, elegant, nice still hands etc. but just don't 'get' how to ride a horse.

It's a very interesting question that the OP has asked. Some people are just poor riders, plain and simple and no amount of training is going to make them good. Others are naturals and have raw talent. The rest of us are somewhere inbetween.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with this.
 
By eyeing yourself up in the reflection in peoples windows as you go past....best reason for riding through estates:D

Other people always think I'm better than I actually are....must be an illusion lol......

Hard to say. I agree with Wagtails post.....
 
a good rider is someone who makes a good horse.

If you can make the horse anyones ride, then thats the epitome of being a rider for me.

putting the buttons in the right place is far more important than just being able to find them, what you look like is important though, that peace guy looks terrible :o
 
I don't think you ever do know. You never stop learning, and are always coming up with habits and finding more things to do. It also completely depends, I have a friend who seems to gauge how good a rider you are by how high you jump and whether or not you can get the horse to go over it, and whether or not the horse looks like it's tricky or not. In my opinion, it's how you ride the horse, how you can improve the horse, and how well you can get the horse to go for you, and whether or not you can adapt that to other horses.. xx
 
Enfys said:
Most importantly, I forgot to say that all that doesn't make me a good rider, I'd never class myself as that, I am competent, not pretty, and I know that I couldn't ride one side of an awful lot of horses.
Click to expand...
 
someone, i forget who, once said that to be a good rider who looks unelegent, would be unfortunate, and also to look elegant and be a poor rider the same.

when the horse sees you coming with the saddle and looks pleased is a good sign, and when you feel elated after a ride or schooling session you know has gone well, and very importantly, that your horse becomes more beautiful as his training progresses and his musculature develops in all the right places is physical evidence of good riding
 
I think it's an interesting question, and the answers above even more so.

See, I think it's a question of "horses for courses", though I agree with wagtail about effectiveness being more important than looking pretty. It's not, imo about how big you jump, or whether you can ride flying changes, because the folk who think that are (again ime) just passengers on honest, well schooled horses.

Some people are excellent riders who can ride a tricky horse round a course of large show jumps, or produce nice high level dressage, but aren't necessarily the best people to sort out a problem horse. The trainer who you'd want to bring on your youngster may not be the person to jump your eventer round badminton, or ride your race horse in the grand national. Just because they're different, doesn't mean they're less good. And as an extrapolation from that, bringing on a horse to be a calm, well mannered novice hack is a different ball game to bringing one on to event, so just because someone rides a cob rather than an ex-racer doesn't mean they're less good, just different. Horses for courses.

I'd be at a loss on an ex-racer, but on a cob, native, small TBx type I can do a reasonable impression of a competent rider (I wouldn't say good by any means though!).
 
I think I felt i was getting better at riding when I realised how bad I was! What I mean is when I started to be able to feel all the little things, tension through the back, or slightly losing the horse through the shoulder, really feeling at one with the horse and feeling whst was right and wrong with me and her etc. I drive my instructor nuts now becuase I spend the whole the lesson telling him what I and my horse are doing wrong before he has the chance to open his mouth! I'll be saying I'm losing her through the shoulder or she is hollowing out - and he'll just be tutting at me, 'well do something about it then!'
When I'll be a really good rider is when I can catch and correct it before it goes wrong!
 
Mmmm, think I go along with "Wagtail" a few posts above: agree that Michael Peace (bless him!) rides a bit like a sack of ferrets, BUT by god he knows how to deal with horses that everyone else has all but given up on and make them go well for him.

So I think my definition of a "good" rider would be someone who can get the best out of ANY horse no matter what the perceived vices and/or circumstances. A good seat, nice soft hands, and an ability to empathise with whatever horse they're riding and adjust their riding style accordingly.
 
For me the key is that I am never going to be a good enough rider to deserve my horse. It's not that she is a particularly difficult horse, more that she's a particularly kind and nice horse and she deserves a particularly light, balanced, sensitive rider who understands her psychology, gives clear, light, consistent aids, teaches her interesting new things, plans fun schooling sessions which will develop her physically to help her with her stiff hocks and to stay sounder longer... I am probably never going to be all that but I am going to work bl00dy hard on it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top