How The Back Actually Works

Equilibrium Ireland

Equilibrium Ireland

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 July 2010
Messages
1,799
Visit site
http://scienceofmotion.com/equine_back_research.html

I hope that everyone reads this and does some more research.

From a personal view it means a great deal to me. I read threads on here and it seems like every horse is diagnosed with KS. I also have struggled with the positions we want our horses to go in as the normal. And that it's good for them. As a side note I've struggled with a mare who has had issues. This year before starting her back I decided that the perfect way for her to carry herself was where she is happy. This is not tucked in and not doing long and low. I'm letting her come into her own. She is developing muscle like never before. She seems much happier. I will also do more straight line work and not get fussed with her being perfect as viewed by others.

I read on here a variety of reasons that horses are having a variety of back issues and yet none of it is in relation to position of how we expect horses to carry themselves. Saddles, ex-racehorses, weak, and on and on. I also remember when galloping racehorses if one carried his head too low I figured hocks were at him and I also did exercises to get his/her head up into a more level position. One where they could carry themselves free and easy. I've never really bought into this long and low stuff. To me it seemed counter productive. But you know when you switch disciplines you go with the tried and true methods and don't give it a second thought. Well I am now and am going to try and work my horses differently.

I'm sure people are going to rubbish the whole thing. I mean why not, vets are very into this long and low. Same as they are rehabbing problems in shoes. But when we dare think outside the box sometimes improved thinking becomes the way.

Terri
 
from what I have observed over the years and also the mistakes I have made, is that people concentrate too much on the front of the horse and never the "engine". I have found that the true "classical" methods is the only discipline that respects this...

Thanks for posting it Terri.
 
Last edited:
Sadly the arched neck, 'on the bit' is what so many people think is the correct way of going, it looks good, it looks correct but sadly far from it. I was watching a prelim dressage test yesterday and the rider was so fidgety in her hands , sawing and fiddling trying to get the 'correct' head position, the poor horses mouth was all over the place even though his nose was on the vertical and you could see the tension through the neck and back and it was barely shuffling forward whilst being dug in the ribs with spurs at every stride. Wasn't nice viewing.

In contrast, a youngish rider came in on her pony. She had lovely neat soft hands and they trotted around full of energy, nice and relaxed, and a nice accurate test. Much happier partnership. Much nicer fluid test to watch even though the pony wasnt technically on much of a contact. Sadly didn't see the results
 
Equilibrium Ireland said:
http://scienceofmotion.com/equine_back_research.html

I hope that everyone reads this and does some more research.

From a personal view it means a great deal to me. I read threads on here and it seems like every horse is diagnosed with KS. I also have struggled with the positions we want our horses to go in as the normal. And that it's good for them. As a side note I've struggled with a mare who has had issues. This year before starting her back I decided that the perfect way for her to carry herself was where she is happy. This is not tucked in and not doing long and low. I'm letting her come into her own. She is developing muscle like never before. She seems much happier. I will also do more straight line work and not get fussed with her being perfect as viewed by others.

I read on here a variety of reasons that horses are having a variety of back issues and yet none of it is in relation to position of how we expect horses to carry themselves. Saddles, ex-racehorses, weak, and on and on. I also remember when galloping racehorses if one carried his head too low I figured hocks were at him and I also did exercises to get his/her head up into a more level position. One where they could carry themselves free and easy. I've never really bought into this long and low stuff. To me it seemed counter productive. But you know when you switch disciplines you go with the tried and true methods and don't give it a second thought. Well I am now and am going to try and work my horses differently.

I'm sure people are going to rubbish the whole thing. I mean why not, vets are very into this long and low. Same as they are rehabbing problems in shoes. But when we dare think outside the box sometimes improved thinking becomes the way.

Terri
Click to expand...

I am now going to read te article, but what you have written, every word of it, is EXACTLY, how I feel. I never have people to bounce ideas off, because nearly everyone around me sticks to the "proper" way. We do not look at horses individually enough - correct for one is not correct for another, and I am convinced training techniques, coupled with poor riding, is responsible for a massive proportion of the problems.
 
Thanks for this I shall be reading the article in my break.

I too agree with what you say and I was having the exact same conversation re kissing spine with a friends but days ago. How can it be that a horse can race and be unaffected and then 'bingo' it is retrained as a riding horse and diagnosed with KS. It doesn't make sense and I think as you rightly point out the style of riding must play a huge part in this. KS is the new 'ulcers' diagnosis it seems. I cannot believe the seeming proliferation of KS.

I also agree with tallyho that the classical methods start with correct training of the 'engine' not looking at the front end.
 
Interesting reading, however there are a few blurry points for me.

This is false: "All these explanations are attempting to describe forces, which is an abstract concept." Forces are not abstract at all, they can even be mesured. One then has to question the scientific understanding of the person writting the text?

and I wonder about: "Uneducated riders argue that the study was made on cats. Carlson’s study was effectively effectuated on cats, which demonstrates in fact,...", I guess that wouldn't be being uneducated, but a good point to keep in mind?

How long and low is long and low?
From personnal observation, when my mare stretches and lower her neck (head about level with withers), I can see her back muscles relax and her abdominal muscles contract. When she trots with her head up in the air (giraffe impression), her back muscles are really stiff and she travels hollow. There is actually more "back movement" felt when she travels stiff and hollow. The swinging felt when she travels long and relaxed is the power from the hindquarters that goes through the back muscles. I don't think that can be obtained by movement of the rider's seat, but by the horse relaxing his back and being forward.
I think there is a bit of a confusion here when we talk of a back mover vs. a leg mover, it doesn't mean that the back mover has his spine moving back and forth with each stride, but that he is taking more weight on his hindlegs and therefore stabilising the spine to support the added weight of the rider.

So basically, I find the scientific studies quoted interesting but am not sure about the interpretations of the person writing the text, there is a bit of room for confusion IMO.
 
This is such a good thought provoking post - I have always been of the opinion that when buying a horse for a certain discipline that more emphasis should be given to confirmation and how the horse moves and uses itself. You are certainly going to compromise a horse who's confirmation and movement is not suited to what you want to do with it. People are then tempted to bring out the artificial aids and the short cuts to try and force the horse into a certain way of going hence increased chance of lameness and other problems. Horses are all individuals and should be brought on as such. What works for one horse does not automatically work for another.
 
Hollywood said:
This is such a good thought provoking post - I have always been of the opinion that when buying a horse for a certain discipline that more emphasis should be given to confirmation and how the horse moves and uses itself. You are certainly going to compromise a horse who's confirmation and movement is not suited to what you want to do with it. People are then tempted to bring out the artificial aids and the short cuts to try and force the horse into a certain way of going hence increased chance of lameness and other problems. Horses are all individuals and should be brought on as such. What works for one horse does not automatically work for another.
Click to expand...

The thing is the aim of dressage is to improve the horse's way of going and his ability to carry a rider properly so the horse can have a long and sound working life. You can teach a horse to use itself, that's the beauty of the art (note I didn't use sport ;)).
 
I am very much a beginner but because i tended to question what I was being taught it led me to Philippe Karl and his book The Twisted truth of Modern Dressage. I would highly recommend it .. Great read. It was totally eye opening for me as were the lessons I had with a trainer who'd been trained by PK and who took the time to explain the horse's biomechanics and how what we do affect their carriage and movement.
Very interesting article EI will read in more depth when my brain wakes up:)
 
Yes the goal is to get horses to use themselves better hence the Classical comments above. The article also talks about the optical illusion of back and neck stretching. I'm not saying this is gospel. For me this ties in with a lot of my own thinking and some confusion I've had over the years.

I know many on here feel racing is a horrific sport. So it's like talking to people with their fingers in their ears. In my time as a gallop girl, 3000 plus horses, I can tell you it was an art form. Over the years you learn a lot of feel. From that I've learned that possibly what I'm asking is giving me a false sense of how the back is engaged properly. Where as when I galloped I knew what was working. I know I'm not explaining well. I also knew every one of my movements had to be beneficial to the horse. From mouth to how my weight was distributed over their back. We had very few back issues.

I start horses too. Forward and ease of carrying me and movement are all I worry about. But there are times when I see sporthorses all trussed up in the very beginning stages that I think, hey maybe I'm doing it wrong. I reasoned that every horse in SJ warm up in draw reins got them better able to handle jumping. Gone it seems were the days of adjustability through proper work and gymnastics. As in letting the strength come besides forcing a falseness. So yes I believe I have failed my mare on every level possible. I hate that.
 
Equilibrium Ireland said:
But there are times when I see sporthorses all trussed up in the very beginning stages that I think, hey maybe I'm doing it wrong.
Click to expand...

No you are not!

The posts in TR, here make me sad, especially the ones where they ask for what stronger bits or flashes or gadgets to make a horse not "tank" in canter. The rise & rise of the pessoa system shows everything that is wrong with modern horse-training. Everyone *thinks* it engages the hindquarters... it does exactly the very opposite.

It's simple when you understand how the lever/pulley system of a horse works to realise that pulling in the "crane" at the front will not help a horse slow down... it's about getting it's back and hindquarters engaged and "under" itself that will get a horse balanced enough NOT to tank off! You have to TEACH a horse to do that... that is what equitation is all about...

Nothing to do with the current competition of "how much leather and metal can I possibly get on this horses mouth and head?"
 
doriangrey said:
You might find this interesting. I came across it the other day when I was doing a bit of looking into kissing spines as it seems so common now. This is the same guy, this horse with kissing spines was rehabilitated without surgery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qY3zbCozTU
Click to expand...

This is extremely interesting. My horse has chronic sacro illiac dysfunstion and had 18 months turned away after osteopathy and physio treatment.
I now have a trainer who works on straightness in rehab horses as well as non-rehab and the change in my horse's attitude as he realises that he can move in a much more comfortable wy than the compensatory way he was accustomed to is amazing. He is for now just working in-hand and I hope he will progress to ridden work soon. The principles are just as with the inhand work in the video link you gave.
 
Equilibrium Ireland said:
http://scienceofmotion.com/equine_back_research.html

I hope that everyone reads this and does some more research.

From a personal view it means a great deal to me. I read threads on here and it seems like every horse is diagnosed with KS. I also have struggled with the positions we want our horses to go in as the normal. And that it's good for them. As a side note I've struggled with a mare who has had issues. This year before starting her back I decided that the perfect way for her to carry herself was where she is happy. This is not tucked in and not doing long and low. I'm letting her come into her own. She is developing muscle like never before. She seems much happier. I will also do more straight line work and not get fussed with her being perfect as viewed by others.

I read on here a variety of reasons that horses are having a variety of back issues and yet none of it is in relation to position of how we expect horses to carry themselves. Saddles, ex-racehorses, weak, and on and on. I also remember when galloping racehorses if one carried his head too low I figured hocks were at him and I also did exercises to get his/her head up into a more level position. One where they could carry themselves free and easy. I've never really bought into this long and low stuff. To me it seemed counter productive. But you know when you switch disciplines you go with the tried and true methods and don't give it a second thought. Well I am now and am going to try and work my horses differently.

I'm sure people are going to rubbish the whole thing. I mean why not, vets are very into this long and low. Same as they are rehabbing problems in shoes. But when we dare think outside the box sometimes improved thinking becomes the way.

Terri
Click to expand...

Interesting read and agree with everything you've put
 
As soon as I'm on the computer,and not my phone, I will look at the video. I'd love some in hand stuff to incorporate too.

My mare is actually quite talented. I am hoping to get her back to jumping this year. I'd love her to finish up doing the 1.20's and hopefully a couple 1.30's before she is a broodmare. That was the plan. To have a competition broodmare. A good one. If she's not good enough than she won't be.

Terri
 
Equilibrium Ireland said:
But there are times when I see sporthorses all trussed up in the very beginning stages that I think, hey maybe I'm doing it wrong. I reasoned that every horse in SJ warm up in draw reins got them better able to handle jumping. Gone it seems were the days of adjustability through proper work and gymnastics. As in letting the strength come besides forcing a falseness. So yes I believe I have failed my mare on every level possible. I hate that.
Click to expand...

This reminded me of the Italian rider at Olympia (I think) who jumped his horses without martingales or flashes/drops/grackles etc, no strong bits and the horses going as nature intended-not in an 'outline' as such.

He must be getting something right, surely? Or else he wouldn't have been jumping at that level.
 
Equilibrium Ireland said:
As soon as I'm on the computer,and not my phone, I will look at the video. I'd love some in hand stuff to incorporate too.

My mare is actually quite talented. I am hoping to get her back to jumping this year. I'd love her to finish up doing the 1.20's and hopefully a couple 1.30's before she is a broodmare. That was the plan. To have a competition broodmare. A good one. If she's not good enough than she won't be.

Terri
Click to expand...

There's quite a few videos on the original link you posted Terri (including the kissing spines one I think).
 
Yes, good point Beau since I was highly critical of this combination! More shame for me I'm afraid. I do have to say when I was working for a well known jumper rider in the States, he did not use draw reins and everything went in a pain snaffle for most work. They may have jumped in competition in something stronger but plain at home including nosebands.

Terri
 
Just looked through said jumpers riders photo from France last week. The rider I used to work for. He was just in schooling. Plain bridle, no martingale, and no gadgets. Horse in a relaxed and happy manner.

Terri
 
It would be interesting to compare incidences of KS in eg. endurance horses and horses expected to work in a more 'rounded' frame. How many happy hackers develop KS? Surely, if working long and low and 'correctly' is supposed to be beneficial to the horse, then wouldn't these lesser schooled horses have more problems?

Interesting bit of that article (it's all interesting!) is where he mentions lateral bending. Too many youngsters doing too many circles? A lot of racing yards have walkers these days and many people, as you say Terri, trussing up sporthorses in the early stages of their training. And beyond.

Personally, I'd rather long-line, back and start hacking youngsters out before even considering lunging. I don't start lunging until horses are around five.

Thanks for posting the link. Funnily enough, earlier this week I was told by a second vet that my big ex-racer has almost certainly got a degree of KS and/or spinal fusion due to his conformation. I'm not sure, as he has been ridden without any bother; he's pretty much retired now. He was trained in a way that encouraged him to canter with his nose tucked in. Wonder if that has any relevance
 
Last edited:
I'm not really sure if I understand the article, (in fact I'm pretty sure I don't, too technical).
But judging from some responses here and the linked videos have got a better idea I think.

What I would say is that years ago, ordinary riders knew their limitations and seemed to be more in touch with what their horses/ponies could do.

You hacked for fitness, you schooled for control and it was what you and your horse could do that dictated what you were trying to achieve.

The simple stuff was worked on a lot because we didn't have endless information being fed to us about the advanced stuff. And few gadgets.

No videos, no internet telling you about the latest gadget that gave a short cut to a level that there was no realistic chance of achieving when looking at your horse.
 
Aarrghimpossiblepony said:
I'm not really sure if I understand the article, (in fact I'm pretty sure I don't, too technical).
But judging from some responses here and the linked videos have got a better idea I think.

What I would say is that years ago, ordinary riders knew their limitations and seemed to be more in touch with what their horses/ponies could do.

You hacked for fitness, you schooled for control and it was what you and your horse could do that dictated what you were trying to achieve.

The simple stuff was worked on a lot because we didn't have endless information being fed to us about the advanced stuff. And few gadgets.

No videos, no internet telling you about the latest gadget that gave a short cut to a level that there was no realistic chance of achieving when looking at your horse.
Click to expand...

Amen! Those videos are interesting! Well sat that man, looked like the horse was going straight over at one point, eek!
 
Aarrghimpossiblepony said:
I'm not really sure if I understand the article, (in fact I'm pretty sure I don't, too technical).
But judging from some responses here and the linked videos have got a better idea I think.

What I would say is that years ago, ordinary riders knew their limitations and seemed to be more in touch with what their horses/ponies could do.

You hacked for fitness, you schooled for control and it was what you and your horse could do that dictated what you were trying to achieve.

The simple stuff was worked on a lot because we didn't have endless information being fed to us about the advanced stuff. And few gadgets.

No videos, no internet telling you about the latest gadget that gave a short cut to a level that there was no realistic chance of achieving when looking at your horse.
Click to expand...

Very true indeed!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top