Jumping article (stolen from LEC)

[TarrSteps]

LEC posted this on another thread but it should be required reading for anyone interested in jumping horses.

http://equisearch-media.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/PRHP-130800-DMARKS.pdf


So much of jumping is based on physics, engineering and biological imperatives, not what we *think* we can influence or not. It's worth knowing what can be altered and how, vs what just "is".

Btw, Practical Horseman is still, often, a very good magasine. Perhaps not the industry standard it was a few decades ago, but they make up for the increased fluff level with pieces like the one above. The digital edition is definitely worth a look for anyone interested.

 

[almostthere]

Thanks TS. Really useful and good article. Always learning...

 

[JFTDWS]

Page 4 won't load for me...

Depends what you expect people to take from it. I've reached page 6 and currently I'm more interested (amused) that Fergs apparently jumps like Milton. Well, I was of the generation that read Pony magazine when they were obsessed with him, so it's not unsurprising that I subconsciously bought myself a mini-version...

(I'm sorry, I know you were hoping for a more serious and useful discussion than this. It's rarely in my nature to comply with the concept of "seriousness"...)

 

[quizzie]

It would be fascinating to know if the same conformational analysis would hold true for top event horses.

I suspect there would be a greater range of conformation types/proportions....even more interesting would be to link this to longevity in the sport?

......research project anyone?

 

[TarrSteps]

Page 4 won't load for me...

Depends what you expect people to take from it. I've reached page 6 and currently I'm more interested (amused) that Fergs apparently jumps like Milton. Well, I was of the generation that read Pony magazine when they were obsessed with him, so it's not unsurprising that I subconsciously bought myself a mini-version...

(I'm sorry, I know you were hoping for a more serious and useful discussion than this. It's rarely in my nature to comply with the concept of "seriousness"...)

Too each, their own. I wasn't hoping for anything, just thought it was an interesting article about a discussion that comes up on here from time to time.

 

[LEC]

It would be fascinating to know if the same conformational analysis would hold true for top event horses.

I suspect there would be a greater range of conformation types/proportions....even more interesting would be to link this to longevity in the sport?

......research project anyone?

If you type in conformation on E-Venting some very interesting articles in a similar vein come up. Mostly about the importance of the shoulder and humerous *I think!!*

 

[TarrSteps]

This is also a great resource: http://jwequine.com

 

[TarrSteps]

Page 4 won't load for me...

Depends what you expect people to take from it. I've reached page 6 and currently I'm more interested (amused) that Fergs apparently jumps like Milton. Well, I was of the generation that read Pony magazine when they were obsessed with him, so it's not unsurprising that I subconsciously bought myself a mini-version...

(I'm sorry, I know you were hoping for a more serious and useful discussion than this. It's rarely in my nature to comply with the concept of "seriousness"...)

Actually, upon thought, I am interested, as these discussions are always about practical application not just theoretical knowledge.

On what basis do you make that inference? Conformation/physical measurements? Observation? And, more importantly, how does it affect your own program? Does knowing your horse's strengths and weaknesses affect how you produce and ride him?

 

[JFTDWS]

On what basis do you make that inference? Conformation/physical measurements? Observation? And, more importantly, how does it affect your own program? Does knowing your horse's strengths and weaknesses affect how you produce and ride him?

On the observation in the article that Milton jumped from his hind legs more as his was weaker in front and tended to prefer a close spot (if I've read it correctly). F thrusts himself vertically into the air from his back end because his general approach is so... peculiar, and prefers a deep spot. It was an entirely facetious comparison as those (reasonably generic factors) are about the only thing the two of them have in common, beyond standard horsey biology, four legs and a head.

However, yes, knowing that F likes to sit under a fence and throw himself over means that I've spent 2 summers doing very little beyond grid work to encourage him to take a sensible stride, working on maximising his canter and, more recently over the last summer, trying to get him to jump less vertically and tackle spreads without taking out the back bar. All with the standard limitations that I am also trying to deal with my own lack of skill as well as his. Believe it or not, he has improved, even if we may seem to be outwardly hopeless. (and obviously, literally hopeless by comparison with the likes of Milton...!)

I am slightly tempted to measure his joint angles and ratios, relative to my other highland. D has always taken fences equally ridiculously, but from the opposite approach. F has always got underneath and jumped vertical. D takes fliers and lands a good (fergs) stride from the fence. They couldn't be further from each other conformationally. Anecdotal comparison, naturally.



eta - if nothing else, you may consider this entirely uninteresting ramble a bump.

 

[Bernster]

You know what, TS, I think I love you. In a purely platonic, horsey sense that is.

Do you teach and would you ever come to Herts to do so?!

 

[TarrSteps]

On the observation in the article that Milton jumped from his hind legs more as his was weaker in front and tended to prefer a close spot (if I've read it correctly). F thrusts himself vertically into the air from his back end because his general approach is so... peculiar, and prefers a deep spot. It was an entirely facetious comparison as those (reasonably generic factors) are about the only thing the two of them have in common, beyond standard horsey biology, four legs and a head.

However, yes, knowing that F likes to sit under a fence and throw himself over means that I've spent 2 summers doing very little beyond grid work to encourage him to take a sensible stride, working on maximising his canter and, more recently over the last summer, trying to get him to jump less vertically and tackle spreads without taking out the back bar. All with the standard limitations that I am also trying to deal with my own lack of skill as well as his. Believe it or not, he has improved, even if we may seem to be outwardly hopeless. (and obviously, literally hopeless by comparison with the likes of Milton...!)

I am slightly tempted to measure his joint angles and ratios, relative to my other highland. D has always taken fences equally ridiculously, but from the opposite approach. F has always got underneath and jumped vertical. D takes fliers and lands a good (fergs) stride from the fence. They couldn't be further from each other conformationally. Anecdotal comparison, naturally.



eta - if nothing else, you may consider this entirely uninteresting ramble a bump.

See, now I think that is interesting and exactly the sort of thing knowledge should help with, regardless of specific goals. As the article states a number of times, there is a lot more too it than just how a horse is built, but I think understanding the various limiting factors helps us make the best choice possible for our horses.

Milton's early training would have included work in a jumping lane as Caroline Weeks was a known fan. One wonders if this early practice in using himself well without a rider maximised his ability later.

It is always interesting to compare similar types and horses from the same program, to see how patterns emerge. Or don't.

 

[stencilface]

Really interesting article, thanks for linking . I especially like the bit about 'smaller fences (for example those under 4 foot)'

I really hope I am back jumping in the new year, I miss it so much!

 

[Bernster]

Really interesting article, thanks for linking . I especially like the bit about 'smaller fences (for example those under 4 foot)'

I really hope I am back jumping in the new year, I miss it so much!

Haha yes, I saw that too. And that horses don't really jump until it gets over 3' - I really should bear that in mind when I baulk at fences when my horses just pops over them like they're nothing !

 

[TarrSteps]

You know what, TS, I think I love you. In a purely platonic, horsey sense that is.

Do you teach and would you ever come to Herts to do so?!

Aww, that is very nice of you to say.

I am not in the Herts area but as far as a visit, never say never. . .

 

[stencilface]

Haha yes, I saw that too. And that horses don't really jump until it gets over 3' - I really should bear that in mind when I baulk at fences when my horses just pops over them like they're nothing !

Yes I shall bear that in mind when I'm being completely wet when faced with a 2'9 oxer

 

[slumdog]

The Role Conformation Plays
most of a horse’s natural physical talent depends on his conformation. the best jumpers are usually balanced (withers and croup relatively level)

This bit made me smile, mine has huge pointy withers and a roach back so I suppose he's balanced lol!

 

[JFTDWS]

See, now I think that is interesting and exactly the sort of thing knowledge should help with, regardless of specific goals. As the article states a number of times, there is a lot more too it than just how a horse is built, but I think understanding the various limiting factors helps us make the best choice possible for our horses.

Milton's early training would have included work in a jumping lane as Caroline Weeks was a known fan. One wonders if this early practice in using himself well without a rider maximised his ability later.

It is always interesting to compare similar types and horses from the same program, to see how patterns emerge. Or don't.

You know that Henry Ford quotation, "whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're probably right"? I have my own version: whether you think you're interesting or you think you're not, you're probably wrong. It's never failed me yet

D has spent a lot more time jumping down lanes on his own (partly as he takes himself over fences sometimes for fun) than F, and I imagine that's a factor in his style. I think one of the mistakes I made with F was not to free jump him first, as he's improved since I've done more of it (though this is coincidental to the changes in how I ride/train him over the past couple of years).

I have half a recollection of seeing an article about setting young horses up for the future by doing small amounts of what you want from them when they're still developing (running down a lane / in hand lateral work etc) to help them develop muscultature etc to support that. There is an argument about the role of innate conformation vs that which is affected by work, too I'd think.

I made a lot of mistakes with F. I think I killed forwards before I even pointed him at a fence, and then started jumping from a very conservative, backwards approach, rather than encouraging him to move over them confidently with more impulsion and forwardness. Coupled to his naturally laid back manner, we've been screwed ever since! My main concern is not to repeat those mistakes with D (and fix what I can with F, obviously). I digress, but your comments sent me off on a train of thought there.


BTW, also amused by the idea of small jumps under 4ft... Not in my world!