Ok, following on from the biting tongue thread!

C

cosmo_sam

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 November 2006
Messages
957
Location
Cheshire, UK
www.cosmohorse.com
I am in a philosophical and chilled out mood, and lately have been through a very open minded phase and had a bit of an epiphany
laugh.gif


Well...you wonder what on earth I'm on about!!

Basically, 2 weeks ago I went on the 1 week foundation course with Intelligent Horsemanship.

My reason for going on this has grown over the past few years, starting with watching a demo, bits of reading etc. Then 2 or so years ago, George began having serious loading problems and so I got my local recommended associate out, bought a dually and have never really looked back with him.

I've never considered myself a "disciple" of the cause or anything, but have definately found that I have a big, strong, obedient horse that is not aware he's stronger than me and goes wherever I put him. I definately attribute this on the ground to the leading techniques I began using and my dually.

Soooo, after having many a "debate" and seeing some genuine hostility to the IH methods I decided to do the foundation course to find out for myself the bigger picture/ethos behind it all.

Well I had a wonderful week. Had lots of wonderful conversations with very open minded people and had all of my questions answered.

I learned that the things often spouted on forums about IH etc are VERY misinformed and that the overal principles are things that would make common sense to 99% of us as horsemen/women.

I still don't feel the need to burn my bra and become a tree hugger
laugh.gif
but the week has helped me see areas of my own "energy levels" attitude etc affecting my horse and also given me new more lateral ways of thinking about problems I come across.

The entire week it was stressed VERY LOUDLY that the point of the training/work with horses is NOT the techniques we use, but the relationship with the horse - if something doesn't feel right, then don't keep persisting, change tack (and that goes for join up etc). They feel that problems arise when people become focused on the methods at the expense of the relationship and this is what leads to outsiders finding faults with the methods.

I was just wondering what opinions people had around this area, and what it is they've seen that helped them form them.

Please don't bite your tongue, I'm genuinely interested in the negative viewpoints as much as the positive
smile.gif
 
I think that IH is not a bad thing, it is the commercial way it is packaged and then becomes diluted as it is passed from person to person who don't perhaps fully understand how it works .

This comment from above

"I learned that the things often spouted on forums about IH etc are VERY misinformed and that the overal principles are things that would make common sense to 99% of us as horsemen/women."

Is exactly how I see IH, it isn't something new, it is 99% common sense but IH didn't invent it and some of the more zealous followers of IH would have you believe that they did.

If I had a horse that was difficult to handle and IH helped me I would 100% do it.
 
[ QUOTE ]

Is exactly how I see IH, it isn't something new, it is 99% common sense but IH didn't invent it and some of the more zealous followers of IH would have you believe that they did.

If I had a horse that was difficult to handle and IH helped me I would 100% do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

*applause*

TBH Kelly seemed to be of the mind that as you say the "zealous" types do much more harm than good to what they try to get across.

I'm sort of with you on the marketing side of it, but then again, I'm not sure how I would go about it if I were them. You do need marketing to get these things spread. Also the money they generate enables them to do more. It is a funny one to try and balance in my mind though.

One thing I would say though is that I do believe that I personally had my "common sense" and ability to watch and read my horse taken away from me with the various "rules" I was told I had to adhere to. I also had people have me think horses do things for the same reason we do (even though this never fully made sense to me).

The truth is horses aren't human, and we shouldn't apply our logic/intentions etc to them. That's where owners/handlers begin to take things personal and that leads to lots of ill feeling and confusion.
 
I don't dismiss IH methods - a lot of it is exactly that: 'intelligent'. If a method works and makes sense to me I would use it. What I do object to is that mental carrot stick waving....and that is not a misinformed opinion. I went to a demo some years ago for my own curiousity.... I stood there amazed that this people were making a fortune out of this stuff. I couldn't believe the queue at the end to spend £80 on the 'kit'. I then had to witness people on the yard spending hours waving sticks at bemused horses.....nothing good ever come of it. Most of them gave up quite quickly and those that didn't had naughty horses to deal with - it caused more problems than it ever solved.
So while I am always willing to listen and learn - if someone mentions the P word to me I'm afraid the tongue has to get bitten
grin.gif
 
IH = Intelligent Horsemanship = Kelly Marks
In other words it has nothing to do with carrot sticks or the P word.
I saw Kelly Marks in action recently and didn't like what I saw, but that doesn't mean that I don't respect everyone's right to choose, so if it works for you that is great.
grin.gif
 
I must admit I am interested in NH. It does sometimes seem to me though that you have to spend hours and hours on the ground pushing your horse backwards and forwards before you can actually do anything that will make a difference. I realise this is probably misinformed, so I will gladly be corrected! I also think that there are people out there who 'try it' and don't find out about it properly, leading to problems with their horses.

I agree that a lot of it seems to be common sense, but let's face it, common sense doesn't always come naturally to us without it being pointed out! I think it helps to have some guidance to keep you on the common sense track, if you see what I mean? I think they overcharge, though...

Saying that, I would be interested in going to soe sort of training clinic to see what it's all about, especially sinee I've been having probs with my horse. I don't agree with beating him into submission, but I'm not entirely sure what to try next
confused.gif
 
I do know what you mean, but I try not to judge. Certain things like that though do make me wonder "why?"

The only thing I was trully recommended during that week was the dually, but I'm well and truly sold on that anyway (from my own experience).

That was what was so good about the week. It was much more about the why's and THEN the possible how's and totally about teaching ourselves to stop (in my case breathe!) and watch how our own stress/aprehension levels affected the horses.

I am beginning to see though that some people are given the tools without fully thinking through the concepts. That can be very dangerous.
 
[ QUOTE ]

I agree that a lot of it seems to be common sense, but let's face it, common sense doesn't always come naturally to us without it being pointed out! I think it helps to have some guidance to keep you on the common sense track, if you see what I mean? I think they overcharge, though...

[/ QUOTE ]

I totally agree with the common sense guidance. It was amazing how many things seemed to obvious AFTER they had been pointed out to me!
blush.gif
laugh.gif


As for the charges, I think the RA's are worth their weight in gold. The amount of money I've spent on George on kit/farriery/dentists etc, her fees feel like the best value money I've ever spent on him


[ QUOTE ]

Saying that, I would be interested in going to soe sort of training clinic to see what it's all about, especially sinee I've been having probs with my horse. I don't agree with beating him into submission, but I'm not entirely sure what to try next
confused.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

I would personally say as your first point get an RA out. An hour with someone one to one (and then having someone on the end of a phone line if you need them) was invaluable to me.
 
I use both but it is made to suit my own system.
I event at 3* level and use i suppose more on ground training at younger ages.
I think the biggest problem with IH is more often than not it is practiced by people that have no idea what makes horses tick and therefore achive nothing useful through it, then jump on band wagon of 'everyone else is wrong and it's not natural' It's those kind of poeple that piss me off,the kind that think you have to be 'evil' to want to compeat.
mad.gif

I've said it before, parelli is a good concept (but a long way from new!) execllently marketed and aimed at people that need to feel part of something bigger than themselves.
smirk.gif

Equine security blanket if you like.
 
[ QUOTE ]
IH = Intelligent Horsemanship = Kelly Marks
I saw Kelly Marks in action recently and didn't like what I saw,

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand if you don't want to be defamatory on here, but if you can say, what was it you didn't like?

PM me if you like
smile.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
It's those kind of poeple that piss me off,the kind that think you have to be 'evil' to want to compeat.
mad.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

I've always hated that "them and us" mentallity too.

That is why I've liked have my RA as an example as she is an affiliated eventer. Her horses work and do their job very well.

I use her as an example though to my more "traditional" friends who say things like "it's ok for them, THEY don't want to compete and so they just play fairy games with their horses"

There are the closed minded zealots on both sides.

We need to hear more from people like you who balance both kinder/intelligent methods and competition
 
IH IS 99% common sense but I doubt that it is so for 99% of riders...
mad.gif
Which might explain in part why it is being marketed and claimed by the IH gurus to be their invention: Loads of ignorant, thick and gullible people out there (more than 1% of riders for sure !
smirk.gif
) If IH was so obviously common sense to most riders, we wouldn't see all the abuse, misreading, misuse and misunderstanding of horses as I'm sure all of us on this forum have witnessed on many occasions
crazy.gif
 
I agree. Well I sort of do.

I can remember having common sense thoughts as a child - questioning thoughts of things adults were telling me (but I did as a good child would and did as I was told).

Lunging was a classic one, I remember being taught to lunge and the instructor saying to me "if you point the whip at the fetlocks it means walk, if you point it at the hocks it means trot and if you point it at the quarters it means canter"

I can clearly remember thinking "who told the pony that?"

I had all creative thought taught out of me and only as I've come back to horses as an adult have I been given "permission" to stop following rules, and do what feels right.
 
There were some aspects of the demo that I found interesting, such as the explanation of Join Up using a "human horse". It reinforced my understanding of how Join Up works because Kelly explained it very well, and sort of confirmed for me that, although many find it a useful tool, I personally see no need for it. I also thought the bit where Pie did his stuff was nice, not spectacular, but pleasant to watch. And there was a loading demo which showed the principles used very well. I didn't like the young horse work at all, I had expected softness and a sympathetic approach, but to me it was the opposite. That's it really, just a personal opinion, lots of people watching thought it was magic (but judging by body language others didn't). It has been my experience that many IH people are hyper-critical of the natural type trainers, I left the demo feeling that people in glass houses can't afford to throw stones.
 
Blackeventer - just wondering if you are confusing IH with the natural horsemanship people like Pat Parelli? They are quite distinct and different approaches.
I know that Monty Roberts (the person who trained Kelly Marks of course) has quoted the people he claims to have learnt from in his books. Although he does have a story about inventing Join Up himself by studying wild mustangs...
wink.gif

Pat Parelli is at pains not to claim to have invented anything, he constantly quotes the people he has learnt from, and says "This is so old it's new". Personally I only respect the trainers who acknowledge their teachers.
 
Ah I see
smile.gif


I think though that if you had a conversation with Kelly she would say you're bang on.

The point is you have to feel comfortable with what you're doing or the horse won't be comfortable with you. You seem to be good at picking what you could happily work with, whilst still taking the time to think through the bigger concepts.

I would add too, that criticism of other methods was NOT recommended and was disuaded. Mud slinging was definately not part of the course. Sadly though you will always get some "followers" who enjoy making things them and us and enjoy a good slanging match!
 
"and do what feels right". Precisely my point
smile.gif
. True horsemanship is all about trying to get a positive response from the horse. "Cheval consentant"/consent vs "cheval soumis"/submission is my motto. But TBH I don't think this is obvious to all riders particularly after centuries of conditioning and thinking on horses through rules/principles inherited mainly from the military. Most of the notorious theoreticians laid the foundations of equestrianism to meet the need of using horses as weapons of war.
 
"I think though that if you had a conversation with Kelly she would say you're bang on."
No, she wouldn't. But anyway, whatever works for the individual horse is great.
 
[ QUOTE ]
But TBH I don't think this is obvious to all riders particularly after centuries of conditioning and thinking on horses through rules/principles inherited mainly from the military. Most of the notorious theoreticians laid the foundations of equestrianism to meet the need of using horses as weapons of war.

[/ QUOTE ]

It may sound dim, but I only recently discovered that as you say most ,if not all of our structured training guidlines (from BHS to BD formats) were taken from the military!! (not sure where else I thought they came from)

It does explain many of the rules (such as "it is unsafe to wear a ring, unless you a married!!
confused.gif
)

As you say, our needs from our horses are now very different.
 
Personally I don't agree with join up, effectively you are scaring the horse in order to make it come to you and I don't think this is right.

I am sure lots of people will tell me I'm wrong but i have watched this technique many times and never feel comfortable with it.
 
I went on the course with no real opinion on join up either way.

I've now done 5 and didn't once feel I was scaring the horses. I did feel I was influencing their direction, but I do that when I'm lunging too. Do you lunge as a matter of interest?

Sometimes though the horses did react by really running away from some of the people and that was about the persons energy levels/tension etc causing the horse to worry and run OR sometimes the person wasn't clear enough and "abandoned" the horse and the more sensitive ones would again run.

The horses clearly mirrored what you were feeling inside and that was the biggest lesson for me.

I now don't think join up is always necessary but I think if you are comfortable with it, and can get it right it can be a valuable tool.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
IH = Intelligent Horsemanship = Kelly Marks
I saw Kelly Marks in action recently and didn't like what I saw,

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand if you don't want to be defamatory on here, but if you can say, what was it you didn't like?

PM me if you like
smile.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

If you have ever watched the Barking Mad TV show that Kelly Marks did you would understand completley what that comment means.

I would take my horse to Monty Roberts, Richard Maxwell but never Kelly Marks
 
[ QUOTE ]
I would take my horse to Monty Roberts, Richard Maxwell but never Kelly Marks

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes agreed; I'd chose the organ-grinder over the monkeys any day.

I've been at this lark for a long time and I have to say I have found what works for me and my horses; I pick bits from everyone and use what is useful/helpful and discard what isn't. Join-up is a wonderful tool, but only in the hands of someone who understands it; so often it is misinterpreted and even more often, totally misunderstood. People who think it is all about "scaring" a horse either has absolutely no clue what it is about or has watched someone who has absolutely no idea what they are doing. Shame as it is a wonderful exercise.
 
I don't have any experience of NH or IH myself, but to my mind the biggest problem with them is the fact that so many practitioners feel the need to 'preach' about their discipline to all and sundry. A bit of preaching is fine, but in a lot of cases I find that these people won't take no for an answer, and try and insert their agenda even when it is not welcome/needed.

Most people are reasonable, but as in all cases, a few people can give the discipline a bad name.

I think that both NH and IH sound very interesting, and I would be interested in learning more about them. But I also think that they are not necessarily a cure for all problems.

Isabelle
 
[ QUOTE ]
But I also think that they are not necessarily a cure for all problems.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isabelle; I think you have hit the nail on the head here; so many people view this type of horsemanship as something they try once they have all but given up on the horse; or are having troubles. Unfortunately this is the marketing that a lot of these "named" training methods are getting themselves into - to me this is a silly stance to take, however if obviously works for them as they collect more and more money from people who don't have the gumption to figure their horses out themselves.

IH/NH, whatever you want to call it, is something that shouldn't be about "sorting out naughty horses" - it's a mind-set, it's a training/teaching method which anyone with any understanding of horses, should know and be doing; from Day 1.....and most trainers with any calibre, already do.

It has been placed into the public's hands, almost being proposed as a "last resort" - why? I can only assume that this is because all of the oldies, who learned from even older oldies, already know and understand all of this and wouldn't dream of paying the exorbitant costs that these people are trying to "enlighten" the world with.......because it really is nothing new. Granted, there may be some handy tips which can be picked up, but the whole philosophy has been around a very long time.

I do have to say though; one thing I do like about their marketing strategy with some of these people, is that they have opened the door for many people (without horsey-backgrounds) who are looking for a way to help them understand horses a bit more. Generally the books or videos or clinics are run in a manner which is easy for the general public to grasp......and yes I do think that this has to be a good thing for people with less understanding but with plenty of common sense.
smile.gif


I'm not sure whether I have explained what I am thinking very well - but hopefully you get the gist of it.

See Cosmo - sometimes my usual "way with words" goes right out of the window, LOL!!
crazy.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top