Sleipnir
Well-Known Member
Between Parelli and CA, I see CA as the worse one - his style is extremely dominant and aggressive, and he carries that over to his followers, IMO.
Parelli - yay or neigh?
- Thread starter Cheval Gal
- Start date
Between Parelli and CA, I see CA as the worse one - his style is extremely dominant and aggressive, and he carries that over to his followers, IMO.
Carrottom
Well-Known Member
I watched some of the programmes that were on horse and country tv a few years ago. What really struck me was that when PP was instructing someone handling their horse, if they waited for him to tell them what to do the timing was off. So they weren't successful, then PP would take over. If they just tried to do what they thought was right he would immediately suggest something else so throwing their timing off, then he could take over and look good.
TPO
Well-Known Member
I think it's too multifaceted to give a yay or nay answer.
Many people base their opinion of Parelli on the people that they have seen practicing it. I've been on a yard with a "Parelli" older lady and while she did ride her wee horse she spent hours waving all manner of things at the mare and putting hula hoops around the horse's neck. She would spend ridiculous amounts on clinics, branded equipment including an expensive bareback pad and went to Pat's ranch for a training course. She spent next to nothing on the poor horse who would be ridden until the shoes were as thin and sharp as razor blades, didn't pay for a saddle fitting or check (would have cost less than a quarter of her pad!) and fed the horse on the cheapest feed she could find supplemented with things like cabbage and potatoes... so from that I concluded that all Parelli people were batsh!t crazy clueless idiots. I was then on another yard when someone had a Parelli trainer out to help with their spoilt, bolshy and dangerous horse. The trainer honestly worked wonders (I'm not saying it's because she used Parelli, any good trainer could have possibly achieved the same results); as well as having completed her P training she obviously had a fair bit of horse sense. Last I checked that can't be bottled or sold.
At the core the techniques used in "natural horsemanship" pretty much all boil down to pressure and release. Simple but not easy as it's the required feel and timing that is difficult to teach if it's not there innately.
What people sometimes also fail to realise is that while Pat (Monty, Mark, Buck, Ray, Tom, Bill, etc) start a colt, fix a problem or what have you in one session that is the result of thousands of hours working thousands of horses. Most of the "natural horsemen" (as an aside, always men isn't it despite it being a female majority activity) have ranching backgrounds. The aim for the most part is to have horses that are suitable work vehicles for ranch work. What they do doesn't always translate to many in the leisure industry with one horse so it does matter if we make a mistake or mess it up. We can't just turn it away and pick from 200 others to start instead.
I also think another "lost in translation" that was mentioned earlier was that the starting and training of horses could be very rough indeed; it wasn't called breaking for nothing. We didn't really have that over here; yes you have your likes of Harry Evans who are just cruel and that eejit who thinks he's a rodeo rider (still not forgiven H&H for featuring him) but they aren't common practice in our horseworld and certainly not something that the majority of us find acceptable let alone a very regular occurrence unlike some of the techniques used on ranch horses.
My opinion is that you can't say a straight out "nay" because at the crux of it the P techniques, when carried out correctly, DO work as they are simply pressure and release. As someone else pointed out (Meowy?) the issue is when there is no release or mistimed releases that at best result in a confused horse and at worse learned helplessness.
Not that I hold myself up as any great shakes but sometimes I struggle with seeing the fine line between flooding, resulting in learned helplessness, and "good" P&R training. One particular example was at a demo by a well known horseman (not PP) who was introducing a dummy to a young horse. It started with P&R but then the dummy was semi-fixed on and the horse had to "accept" it. I personally thought that was a flooding technique but horseman assured audience that it wasn't and horse was accepting it. There have been examples of what I would describe as flooding posted on here and some of the people decrying Parelli/Natural Horsemanship were enthusiastic in their support of it.
I (very briefly...11 days "training") had my horse at a trainer when I hurt my back, I thought I'd done my homework but long story short I brought home a very mentally broken horse despite the very short duration. It's a long story (shocker) but I had been sent videos that I considered flooding. I was told that I was too soft with a spoilt brat of a horse and it was simply desensitising. Obviously I would say this but he was immaculately trained on the ground and soft as butter to move and work with. I'd "densensitised" him over the years with bags, tarps, ropes and what have you and it had all gone calmly and smoothly. This person was Monty trained, I've always had an immense dislike of Monty and his methods so I sent the horse there in spite of her being MR not because of. I'd gotten references from previous clients, spoken to her at length and had her out for a groundwork lesson to see her with him before agreeing to send him to her. I thought I had did everything right but sadly I got it very wrong and took home a completely changed horse who was so injured I had to get the vet out. So trust me I am not one of those "natural horsemanship is amazing" types.
I simply believe there is good and bad horsemanship and to do a blanket "poo-poo" of "natural horsemanship" is to exclude and miss out on some excellent horsemen and methods of working with horses. It's easy to have opinions coloured by whoever is carrying out the actions. I've been on livery with self proclaimed showjumpers and dressage riders and if they were the measure you'd never want anything to do with either sport.
As Cortez wrote Pat was "just" a horse trainer/breaker and starting to pick up international clinics when he met the marketing executive Linda. Similar is apparently true for Monty when one of his foster children worked in publishing so the story goes. Monty's who family rebuke his version of events and there is lots out there that he is a bit of a phoney however he got racehorses in stalls and that is what people wanted. It's also interesting (to me at least) that Richard Maxwell started out with Monty and then distanced himself completely.
"Natural horsemanship" evokes a lot of the reactions shown on this thread where it's completely dismissed and sometimes demonised. Personally that just shows a lack of understanding as to what it means. It happens on both sides because some of the "natural" folks have the only alternative as bad or forceful when that isn't the case. "NH" is often seen as wishy washy and for all these scared people when that isn't correct either. NH is pretty simple (again, not easy) in it's techniques with boundaries so the horse knows where it stands. It would be fine to comment negatively if our UK yards were full of perfectly well trained "traditional" horses but you just need to look at any page on here to find posts about bad mannered, ill trained horses that aren't "naturally" trained so it can't be NH's fault.
Look to the likes of Tom & Bill Dorrance, Ray Hunt, Buck Brannaman & Mark Rashid and then tell me that it's a gimmick. Most of them have produced books and/or DVDs but not in a programme/sign your life away manner but more to share their knowledge and expertise with those who can't travel to the clinics given how vast USA is. They are/were all top class horsemen.
As much as "we" mock these people who appear to be looking for a quick fix with their 10mins of carrot stick exercises often "we" aren't any different with our flash nosebands, pessoas, martingales etc. Getting to the root of an issue takes time, training a horse takes time but in society we seem to very much be a "I want it now". It shows itself in all manner of ways from people overhorsing themselves to signing up on programmes like Parelli that appear to keep some people on the same hamster wheel.
Re hats. Warwick Schiller is also very outspoken about not wearing a hat. There are a couple of videos on YouTube of his explaining his reasoning in his own words. My hot take is that he says his training system is so complete that he doesn't have to worry about being thrown so doesn't need a hat. Tell that to Courtney King-Dye... However different cultures different ways, your own head so your own decision at the end of the day.
Just spiraling off on another tangent... I had read a fair bit about Warwick Schiller and watched his videos when I went to watch a clinic back in 2014/15. I was disgusted by something he did to a horse that day and would have walked out if I hadn't come with someone else (discovered on the way home she wanted to leave too but didn't want to make me leave, must work on communication skills!) and several others did leave. I boycotted him after that and didn't read or watch any of his stuff. Someone that I respect as a trainer appeared to be a fan of his and advocate some of his stuff. In 2018 I think it was he was running more clinics and a couple of people I know went to watch, including one who'd left during the 2014/15 clinic. They both came back singing his praises and he was apparently a totally changed man. I started looking into some of his stuff again and he's very open about ending up in therapy after having some sort of breakdown and he has changed how he is with horses. The change is very apparent including how he speaks to people at his clinics. My point is people change so whilst I've no idea what PP is up to these days there is a slight chance he might have learnt from past mistakes and have worked at improving things. Not that what I say or do matters in the grand scheme of things but if I'd refused to accept that people change or given his revised training methods a shot I would have missed out on adding some new tools to the box that have proved helpful. My attempt at a point is that we should keep an open mind instead of automatically shutting down something that isn't known to us or is based on second or third hand experiences. To "hate" NH because you don't like PP or Monty R is throwing baby out with the bathwater.
Many people base their opinion of Parelli on the people that they have seen practicing it. I've been on a yard with a "Parelli" older lady and while she did ride her wee horse she spent hours waving all manner of things at the mare and putting hula hoops around the horse's neck. She would spend ridiculous amounts on clinics, branded equipment including an expensive bareback pad and went to Pat's ranch for a training course. She spent next to nothing on the poor horse who would be ridden until the shoes were as thin and sharp as razor blades, didn't pay for a saddle fitting or check (would have cost less than a quarter of her pad!) and fed the horse on the cheapest feed she could find supplemented with things like cabbage and potatoes... so from that I concluded that all Parelli people were batsh!t crazy clueless idiots. I was then on another yard when someone had a Parelli trainer out to help with their spoilt, bolshy and dangerous horse. The trainer honestly worked wonders (I'm not saying it's because she used Parelli, any good trainer could have possibly achieved the same results); as well as having completed her P training she obviously had a fair bit of horse sense. Last I checked that can't be bottled or sold.
At the core the techniques used in "natural horsemanship" pretty much all boil down to pressure and release. Simple but not easy as it's the required feel and timing that is difficult to teach if it's not there innately.
What people sometimes also fail to realise is that while Pat (Monty, Mark, Buck, Ray, Tom, Bill, etc) start a colt, fix a problem or what have you in one session that is the result of thousands of hours working thousands of horses. Most of the "natural horsemen" (as an aside, always men isn't it despite it being a female majority activity) have ranching backgrounds. The aim for the most part is to have horses that are suitable work vehicles for ranch work. What they do doesn't always translate to many in the leisure industry with one horse so it does matter if we make a mistake or mess it up. We can't just turn it away and pick from 200 others to start instead.
I also think another "lost in translation" that was mentioned earlier was that the starting and training of horses could be very rough indeed; it wasn't called breaking for nothing. We didn't really have that over here; yes you have your likes of Harry Evans who are just cruel and that eejit who thinks he's a rodeo rider (still not forgiven H&H for featuring him) but they aren't common practice in our horseworld and certainly not something that the majority of us find acceptable let alone a very regular occurrence unlike some of the techniques used on ranch horses.
My opinion is that you can't say a straight out "nay" because at the crux of it the P techniques, when carried out correctly, DO work as they are simply pressure and release. As someone else pointed out (Meowy?) the issue is when there is no release or mistimed releases that at best result in a confused horse and at worse learned helplessness.
Not that I hold myself up as any great shakes but sometimes I struggle with seeing the fine line between flooding, resulting in learned helplessness, and "good" P&R training. One particular example was at a demo by a well known horseman (not PP) who was introducing a dummy to a young horse. It started with P&R but then the dummy was semi-fixed on and the horse had to "accept" it. I personally thought that was a flooding technique but horseman assured audience that it wasn't and horse was accepting it. There have been examples of what I would describe as flooding posted on here and some of the people decrying Parelli/Natural Horsemanship were enthusiastic in their support of it.
I (very briefly...11 days "training") had my horse at a trainer when I hurt my back, I thought I'd done my homework but long story short I brought home a very mentally broken horse despite the very short duration. It's a long story (shocker) but I had been sent videos that I considered flooding. I was told that I was too soft with a spoilt brat of a horse and it was simply desensitising. Obviously I would say this but he was immaculately trained on the ground and soft as butter to move and work with. I'd "densensitised" him over the years with bags, tarps, ropes and what have you and it had all gone calmly and smoothly. This person was Monty trained, I've always had an immense dislike of Monty and his methods so I sent the horse there in spite of her being MR not because of. I'd gotten references from previous clients, spoken to her at length and had her out for a groundwork lesson to see her with him before agreeing to send him to her. I thought I had did everything right but sadly I got it very wrong and took home a completely changed horse who was so injured I had to get the vet out. So trust me I am not one of those "natural horsemanship is amazing" types.
I simply believe there is good and bad horsemanship and to do a blanket "poo-poo" of "natural horsemanship" is to exclude and miss out on some excellent horsemen and methods of working with horses. It's easy to have opinions coloured by whoever is carrying out the actions. I've been on livery with self proclaimed showjumpers and dressage riders and if they were the measure you'd never want anything to do with either sport.
As Cortez wrote Pat was "just" a horse trainer/breaker and starting to pick up international clinics when he met the marketing executive Linda. Similar is apparently true for Monty when one of his foster children worked in publishing so the story goes. Monty's who family rebuke his version of events and there is lots out there that he is a bit of a phoney however he got racehorses in stalls and that is what people wanted. It's also interesting (to me at least) that Richard Maxwell started out with Monty and then distanced himself completely.
"Natural horsemanship" evokes a lot of the reactions shown on this thread where it's completely dismissed and sometimes demonised. Personally that just shows a lack of understanding as to what it means. It happens on both sides because some of the "natural" folks have the only alternative as bad or forceful when that isn't the case. "NH" is often seen as wishy washy and for all these scared people when that isn't correct either. NH is pretty simple (again, not easy) in it's techniques with boundaries so the horse knows where it stands. It would be fine to comment negatively if our UK yards were full of perfectly well trained "traditional" horses but you just need to look at any page on here to find posts about bad mannered, ill trained horses that aren't "naturally" trained so it can't be NH's fault.
Look to the likes of Tom & Bill Dorrance, Ray Hunt, Buck Brannaman & Mark Rashid and then tell me that it's a gimmick. Most of them have produced books and/or DVDs but not in a programme/sign your life away manner but more to share their knowledge and expertise with those who can't travel to the clinics given how vast USA is. They are/were all top class horsemen.
As much as "we" mock these people who appear to be looking for a quick fix with their 10mins of carrot stick exercises often "we" aren't any different with our flash nosebands, pessoas, martingales etc. Getting to the root of an issue takes time, training a horse takes time but in society we seem to very much be a "I want it now". It shows itself in all manner of ways from people overhorsing themselves to signing up on programmes like Parelli that appear to keep some people on the same hamster wheel.
Re hats. Warwick Schiller is also very outspoken about not wearing a hat. There are a couple of videos on YouTube of his explaining his reasoning in his own words. My hot take is that he says his training system is so complete that he doesn't have to worry about being thrown so doesn't need a hat. Tell that to Courtney King-Dye... However different cultures different ways, your own head so your own decision at the end of the day.
Just spiraling off on another tangent... I had read a fair bit about Warwick Schiller and watched his videos when I went to watch a clinic back in 2014/15. I was disgusted by something he did to a horse that day and would have walked out if I hadn't come with someone else (discovered on the way home she wanted to leave too but didn't want to make me leave, must work on communication skills!) and several others did leave. I boycotted him after that and didn't read or watch any of his stuff. Someone that I respect as a trainer appeared to be a fan of his and advocate some of his stuff. In 2018 I think it was he was running more clinics and a couple of people I know went to watch, including one who'd left during the 2014/15 clinic. They both came back singing his praises and he was apparently a totally changed man. I started looking into some of his stuff again and he's very open about ending up in therapy after having some sort of breakdown and he has changed how he is with horses. The change is very apparent including how he speaks to people at his clinics. My point is people change so whilst I've no idea what PP is up to these days there is a slight chance he might have learnt from past mistakes and have worked at improving things. Not that what I say or do matters in the grand scheme of things but if I'd refused to accept that people change or given his revised training methods a shot I would have missed out on adding some new tools to the box that have proved helpful. My attempt at a point is that we should keep an open mind instead of automatically shutting down something that isn't known to us or is based on second or third hand experiences. To "hate" NH because you don't like PP or Monty R is throwing baby out with the bathwater.
Meowy Catkin
Meow!
A long and detailed post TPO. Thanks for taking the time to type it all. Some good things to think about there.
SBJT
Well-Known Member
I really don’t like CA approach. Actually was a follower of Buck Branaman and almost signed up for one of his clinics until I went to watch. 30 people in a small(ish) arena tightly together and he was on the harder side than I expected. And he yelled at a lady who asked a question about having him help someone who was having trouble. Seemed a little arrogant. Also when I met his buddy Shane at McGinnis ranch, he was arrogant too. Seems it might be a thing with a lot of horsemen as even JF was very arrogant at his last clinic and didn’t have any time for me and my horse cause we only attend 1 clinic a year and didn’t buy all his gear. I’m more about the smaller up and coming guys now. They seem to be more approachable and their ideas are still great.
Mule
Well-Known Member
The rope headcollars are also great for bargy types
Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
Forgive me if I restrain myself from watching
Mule
Well-Known Member
Who's JF?
SBJT
Well-Known Member
Jonathan Field, he’s a big Canadian guy who’s well known out west.
another one with slick marketing. He was good before he became so big as I went through his program.
https://jonathanfieldhorsemanship.net/
TPO
Well-Known Member
Can't believe I missed the Clinton Anderson comments. Cannot stand him, he is nothing more than a bully to horses and people.
I cant remember if the link was posted in here but there was a big thread on an American forum about his antics at clinics and his bullying of anyone who didnt kiss his backside.
I saw a few episodes of his programme pre 2009 when it appeared on H&C TV. It was awful, one of his horses was lame and after the programme there was a pot up saying that it had to be retired...no wonder! Just awful.
I had signed up for a Buck Aintree clinic too. I posted about it on here and the replies put me off so I quickly withdrew. I'll try and find the thread as there were some really interesting replies.
I've heard of Jonathan Field mainly because he is featured in Denny Emerson's book about good riders (& trainers). Tik Maynard also writes/speaks highly of him. I've never watched any of his clinics but he was on my list of people to find out about. That's really interesting that you have first hand experience of him. Are you in America?
SBJT
Well-Known Member
Oh god yes he’s such a bully and his method is so mechanical. I’ve avoided him at all costs. Thankfully he’s not a big deal around here.
Yeah good call with Buck. Make no mistake he knows horses but it’s still a lot of the old cowboy mentality so you have to be prepared for that especially if you’re used to the fluffy kittens and bonding with the horse mentality. Buck is more about ‘the horse has a job to do and they have to get there as quickly as possible’. Plus $650 for 3 hours with 30 other riders is not worth it. However his cow work is good.
Warwick Schiller is another one who I had heard bad things but he does look to have turned around and I’m more interested in him now.
With Jonathan I’m in Alberta, Canada and close to where Jonathan regularly runs clinics so I’ve been lucky enough to audit and attend a bunch with my guy. He is good and I’ve always done very well with his approach. But... I feel like he’s chasing the money more now than when I started with him 6 years ago which is a shame. So tread with a little more caution. At the last clinic I felt like an outsider with him and his posse because I don’t have the $$$ it would cost to attend all of his clinics and nor do I buy all his stuff including his saddle like others. But his method is sound and has done me and my horse very well.
Roxylola
Well-Known Member
Sorry, wrong thread stoopid phone
TPO
Well-Known Member
I reckon I'm ok with the BB "attitude"* but it was more the 30 other horses and you have to do as he says when he says even if your horse needs a break.
I had planned to go and watch on his previous visit but life got in the way. When I pulled out of riding at it I intended to watch vit again life got in the way.
This one time at band camp i.e. when i worked on cattle stations in Australia that was a similar take as in it was feral horses that we had to start and make into work horses in short periods of time. They wasn't time to faff but there was time to do a right job in most cases. No one would ever have uttered the word "bond".
* in theory. I may also have cried if he was mean to me ? I dont really have it in me to "fan girl" either and a few of the people that I vaguely know who've been before were huge fans, selfies with him as profile pics type thing. I cant do that ? not saying that Buck likes/wants/expects that but it does seem to be a "thing" to get "in".
If it's of any interest this was my Buck thread
https://forums.horseandhound.co.uk/threads/buck-brannaman-2019.768526/
@Ambers Echo wrote some really good posts about both Buck and Mark Rashid.
If you didnt mind it would be great to read some of your clinic notes and write ups.
Power corrupts... it does seem the more popular someone gets the more their system and persona change.
I've just bought a Ray Hunt "highlights" dvd so I'm interested to see what a clinic within looked like.
Caol Ila
Well-Known Member
I have no time for Rick Gore. Whatever nuggets of insight he offers aren't anything you won't hear from Tik Maynard or Mark and Chrissi Rashid, who are genuinely nice people. With them, you don't have to put up with the mysogynist crap slagging off female horse owners. I've seen a few Rick Gore videos and got so hung up on "what a dick" that I have no recollection of what he said about horse training.
Caol Ila
Well-Known Member
And while I sang the praises of Marty Marten in a previous post... I have a confession to make. You know how in another thread I posted about my difficulties in getting Gypsum past cows? Well, roughly 19 years ago, we did a four day cow clinic, with Marty Marten. Along with ten or so other people from my barn, we trailered in to his ranch near Boulder, the idea being that riders and horses would learn the basics of working cattle. I spent three long days going sideways, fast. Every time the cows turned towards us, Gypsum fired off like a rocket, spinning, speed half-passing, throwing in little bucks. It was fun. I don't remember what advice Marty gave as it was a long time ago, but it wasn't particularly helpful, and when a horse is doing that you're just holding onto your butt. She wasn't improving. And to add to the faff, I had a multiday regional championship dressage show the following weekend, and if we spent four days non-stop spinning and spooking and having meltdowns, I wasn't going to have much of a horse. So, for the final day of the clinic, I said, "f&ck it" and brought my quarter horse, who was on the market but hadn't yet been sold. She loved it. Thought it was the best thing she'd ever done, and she had some natural 'cow' in her. We both had a great time. Marty gave me some flak for not sticking with it with Gypsum, but I said I was tired of going sideways at speed.
So there we go... NH trainers can't solve all life's problems. We still go sideways at speed when we get too close to cows.
So there we go... NH trainers can't solve all life's problems. We still go sideways at speed when we get too close to cows.
Last edited:
SBJT
Well-Known Member
Lol that’s actually what happened to me at McGinnis. My horse was having a really hard time with the clinic and he couldn’t stand still and was ready to blow. When I asked Roby the head wrangler what to do he said work him. I then got a serious dressing down about being disrespectful. So yes that type of clinic is not for the faint hearted. I’d be happy to share my experiences just feel free to DM me.
I remember seeing that thread in 2019 but was a little nervous to respond as I was still pretty new. It was definitely a good read though.
southerncomfort
Well-Known Member
Fransurrey
Well-Known Member
Mine too. Also makes my shit itch. There's nothing natural about any sort of horsemanship, however you dress it up. The whole nomenclature gets on my chesticles, too. Misuse of terms such as 'reward'. I did attend a couple of clinics as a helper many years ago and saw trainers obsessed with 'space' and 'energy', turning calm horses into rearing and spinning terrified beings. I have photos of one of them somewhere and remember being asked what I thought. My answer was not popular amongst the paying guests. One horse in particular was standing calmly next to the trainer, but in the end was tight on the end of a rope, white eyed and in a dripping sweat. Nobody gave me a satisfactory answer when I asked what the point of that was and this was supposedly one of the best 'NH' trainers in the world.Actually the phrase 'natural horsemanship' really boils my piss.
MiJodsR2BlinkinTite
Well-Known Member
I saw a really nice promising young horse once, totally ruined by the owner's insistence that Parelli was the god-given way to proceed with it. It basically needed taking out and giving some exercise instead of faffing around in the school with carrot-sticks and "games"..........
Parelli was obviously not working for this particular horse & rider combination; but the "solution" given was to merely take the horse back to the last "game" (and pay hugely for it no doubt), and just repeat the process till the horse "got it".......
Owner frankly needed a kick in the pants. It was a shame, this was a decent youngster and it frankly deserved better.
Parelli was obviously not working for this particular horse & rider combination; but the "solution" given was to merely take the horse back to the last "game" (and pay hugely for it no doubt), and just repeat the process till the horse "got it".......
Owner frankly needed a kick in the pants. It was a shame, this was a decent youngster and it frankly deserved better.
TPO
Well-Known Member
That's kinda the point I was trying to make.
You've watched someone mess up using Parelli and therefore you dont have a high opinion of it.
There are so many factors that none of us will know but the bottom line is that you can't blame a whole system for the actions of an individual.
Similarly I've seen lots of horses "ruined" where the owner doesnt belong to any programme/system/"cult". If there was some way of totting up the number of horses in the UK and whether the training methods are "natural" or "traditional" (for want of much better classifications) of reckon a higher % of "ruined" horses weren't in the "natural" category.
I dont like the Parellis' as people and I dont like the videos with Linda or the Catwalk thing (as an aside where was RW or the horse's owners during that?). Howver at the bare bones of it what they are teaching, pressure and release, works.
You (generic) might not like how they package it or that they have monetized it but it works. What no one can control is how anyone interprets something and how they as an individual carry out what theyve seen.
In "traditional" training I know an excellent trainer and I know someone who's ridden and trained under them for over a decade. They are an awful rider with no feel or timing at all and they share "good" pictures that are far from for numerous reasons. So should this trainer stop teaching? Is this trainer bad at training despite personal success and lots of other successful pupils? Is it ok because they are a lone wolf and it only becomes an issue if they market and sell a Lone Wolf Inc training programme?
By all means have opinions but surely it's best to base them on fact. Take away the £££ and funny named sticks that cause so much offence and what is it that people disagree with specifically regarding the training (not how certain individuals perform it) methods, techniques and exercises?
I'm not a PP or LP fan, I've never spent a penny on their teachings; I have watched a free dvd that came with Horse magazine years ago and someone on here sent me a copy of 7 Games years ago. I could see exactly what was being asked of the horse and what they were hoping to achieve. The horses were shown thr answer before being asked the question and the progression of the exercises made sense.
There are good trainers out there who are P certified and they are doing things with their horses successfully. So how does that factor in to the "middle aged and too scared to ride" narrative?
Cortez
Tough but Fair
Define "successfully", and "works". And also please can somebody define what the actual point is of doing all that bag-waving, carrot-sticking, and feet-moving?
TPO
Well-Known Member
successfully
[səkˈsɛsf(ə)li]
ADVERB
in a way that accomplishes a desired aim or result.
"bag waving" to teach the horse calm coping methods to things that can't be replicated on demand e.g. a pheasant shooting out, wind blowing something into or near the horse
"carrot sticking" I don't see how the use of one "stick" differs from another be it whatever a "carrot stick" is "schooling stick" or "Lunge stick". The point would depend on what you hope to achieve but common uses would be to create pressure that the horse moves away from e.g. side passing, moving forward on the lunge or changing pace
"feet moving" is because if you don't have access to and control of the feet you don't have much of anything to be going on with, I don't know why you ever wouldn't want to be able to move their feet from the ground and from the saddle?
Not sure what the point of being facetious is, you already know the answers and nothing that you've questioned is solely a "Parelli" thing
Last edited:
Ambers Echo
Still wittering on
Thanks for a very long and interesting post TPO. This reply is not really about Parelli but more about the whole 'natural hosemanship' movement as I just find it all really interesting. My understanding of horses and horsemanship initially came from bored, shouty RIs of the show 'em who's boss variety. Even when I bought my first horse as a young adult I was on a yard/riding school where the chief RI was basically a bully. I was uncomfortable with it but knew no different. Moved to a DIY livery yard at the cheap end of the market and the vast majority of owners were similar. The horses were bargy, kicked doors, wouldn't lead well, were hard to catch and load and bridle. Not all of them had all the problems but in general the standard of horsemanship shown was shite and the horse's were poorly educated and ill mannered. There was lots of 'pack it in' yelling and slapping and very little effective management.
In that context I found Marks Rashid's Considering The Horse and and have been a follower of his ever since. I viewed this as nh (small n - I never had much time for PNH) vs traditional as a short hand for 'seek a partnership with your horse' versus 'make the horse comply'. Or horse-centred versus human centred - Ie collaboration not domination. I started using his ideas and my pony became well mannered & easy. I loaned an aggressive, bargy 3 yo who the owner was having huge issues with to practice this stuff on and he also became polite and well mannered and a pleasure to ride. I started helping people lead, catch, load including the horse of a freelance RI. She had not been out for over 2 years because the horse would not load. She'd been stuck at a show for 5 hours at a time. Took about an hour to sort him out permanently and he was never difficult to load again. So I decided that there really was something 'different' about this approach and became a huge advocate of it.
The problem was that for every 100 people there would be 100 different definitions of what nh meant and was Trad meant. And neither made any sense given that nh is not natural and trad is a long way from the traditional horsepeople with generations of wisdom and knowlege. Xenophon is traditional!
Since then I have moved to a yard where most people event and have produced their own event horses from 3 or 4 as we aren't in the price bracket of buying them made. And where all my instruction comes from competitor-coaches on my own horses and not from riding school RIs. Most of the owners and trainers seek partnerhsips with their horses. (Showjumpers not so much...) Most (in my view) show good horsemanship skills. All the horses on the yard are pretty well mannered and easy. You can't really stud up a rude ill mannered horse at a busy event after all. Some are interested in nh, most aren't.
So I do see what people mean by there is only good vs bad horsemanship and no need to have a new category. But as it happens the people I have seen work who I feel show the most skilled, sympathetic and effective horsemanship that I have come across, do come under the nh banner. Which is ironic as Tik, Mark Rashid AND Buck B have all said that what they do is not remotely 'natural' and the word makes no sense. (If anyone would care to re-define it, then that would be great!) And I do still regularly come across riders and trainers who I think seek to dominate and bully horses. And take training short cuts with gadgets etc. What would that kind of horsemanship be called then? Good vs Bad is subjective. Dominating horses can be very effective. So in the end it does come down to a preference about the nature of the relationship between you and your horse that you are seeking, and the training philosophy that you are comfortable with. There are differences in that I think though the differences are hard to categorise.
In that context I found Marks Rashid's Considering The Horse and and have been a follower of his ever since. I viewed this as nh (small n - I never had much time for PNH) vs traditional as a short hand for 'seek a partnership with your horse' versus 'make the horse comply'. Or horse-centred versus human centred - Ie collaboration not domination. I started using his ideas and my pony became well mannered & easy. I loaned an aggressive, bargy 3 yo who the owner was having huge issues with to practice this stuff on and he also became polite and well mannered and a pleasure to ride. I started helping people lead, catch, load including the horse of a freelance RI. She had not been out for over 2 years because the horse would not load. She'd been stuck at a show for 5 hours at a time. Took about an hour to sort him out permanently and he was never difficult to load again. So I decided that there really was something 'different' about this approach and became a huge advocate of it.
The problem was that for every 100 people there would be 100 different definitions of what nh meant and was Trad meant. And neither made any sense given that nh is not natural and trad is a long way from the traditional horsepeople with generations of wisdom and knowlege. Xenophon is traditional!
Since then I have moved to a yard where most people event and have produced their own event horses from 3 or 4 as we aren't in the price bracket of buying them made. And where all my instruction comes from competitor-coaches on my own horses and not from riding school RIs. Most of the owners and trainers seek partnerhsips with their horses. (Showjumpers not so much...) Most (in my view) show good horsemanship skills. All the horses on the yard are pretty well mannered and easy. You can't really stud up a rude ill mannered horse at a busy event after all. Some are interested in nh, most aren't.
So I do see what people mean by there is only good vs bad horsemanship and no need to have a new category. But as it happens the people I have seen work who I feel show the most skilled, sympathetic and effective horsemanship that I have come across, do come under the nh banner. Which is ironic as Tik, Mark Rashid AND Buck B have all said that what they do is not remotely 'natural' and the word makes no sense. (If anyone would care to re-define it, then that would be great!) And I do still regularly come across riders and trainers who I think seek to dominate and bully horses. And take training short cuts with gadgets etc. What would that kind of horsemanship be called then? Good vs Bad is subjective. Dominating horses can be very effective. So in the end it does come down to a preference about the nature of the relationship between you and your horse that you are seeking, and the training philosophy that you are comfortable with. There are differences in that I think though the differences are hard to categorise.
Last edited:
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
Yes, the ‘feet moving’ is essential. I’m sure that Cortez has that sorted without realising it. I thought I had that sorted too, until my mare went on strike about loading after someone used the traditional style ‘broom up the bum’ approach on her unasked.
It was handy breaking it down, getting the horse to move anywhere I wanted on the ground and then, very importantly, to stop and chill. We got her going back on the trailer, standing, backing out... kept going until it became routine, not in one session, but several.
Mucking out - still
Well-Known Member
I'm another one who isn't keen on Parelli - it's not just the two videos highlighted so far - I watched a couple of the training videos (courtesy of an aquaintance who did the whole programme) and there was stuff to like and stuff to really put me off. The waving the rope at the horse's head is one of the early lessons....I tried it with my horse who will walk all over you if allowed, and he fought back, big style!! I reverted to quieter but persistent methods and got more respect from him than waving ropes and various parts of my body at him!! That said,my aquaintance who did the whole programme and her work with her own horses was very impressive, so I wouldn't say it's all bad. Never saw her get on one of hers though
saalsk
Well-Known Member
I think that is a lot of the problem - people perceive it to be about waving stuff at horses, because that is what is shown, and known, and features highly on so many of the videos. They (parelli) never seem to make it clear that the end point is ( as another poster put very well ) that the owner should be able to simply point at the horses chest, and the horse should back up. The waving is the *consequence* of not listening to the earlier cues, because they are either given wrong, or not ever been taught. That is where I find watching the videos is uncomfortable - a handler who isn't sure what they are meant to be doing and when, and a confused horse given a whole new set of rules, that are both inconsistent, and baffling. As the above poster says, quiet and persistent works just fine, but there is also a case for making sure that doesn't turn into *pointless nagging* - I am sure the above poster hasn't, which is why their horse respects them for it, but there is a time when a simple *no* needs to be more reinforced. We have all seen the posts about pushy/bargy horses, and the nippy ones, and how making it clear that the behaviour is not acceptable is the way forward. No whips, no hitting, but a well placed elbow in the face to a nipper, so the horse headbuts it, rather than being hit, works wonders. I will swirl a rope in front of me to stop a horse getting ahead of himself, not hitting, not aiming, but the horse will walk into it if he tries to overtake me.
I find it just as uncomfortable watching the jumper horse video, as watching the *trainer* who seems to ride in a hockey mask, and enjoy horses rear/buck. To be fair, I also don't like watching pony club games, at places like HOYS, where the flailing legs of the jockeys on horses already going full tilt, seems pointless and not necessary. I like to see videos of horses looking happy in their work - Ryan's Son going around Hickstead in a snaffle. Desert Orchid taking about 3 strides out before a steeplechase fence, and clearing it by just as far. A clip of a load of hefty looking horses, all laying down and snoring/farting in huge indoor barns !
It is a real shame that basic horsemanship, handling skills and general skill in handling/riding horses has to be labelled in such ways - wouldn't it be nice if there were just good practices, and not so good, and we all realised the differences !
I find it just as uncomfortable watching the jumper horse video, as watching the *trainer* who seems to ride in a hockey mask, and enjoy horses rear/buck. To be fair, I also don't like watching pony club games, at places like HOYS, where the flailing legs of the jockeys on horses already going full tilt, seems pointless and not necessary. I like to see videos of horses looking happy in their work - Ryan's Son going around Hickstead in a snaffle. Desert Orchid taking about 3 strides out before a steeplechase fence, and clearing it by just as far. A clip of a load of hefty looking horses, all laying down and snoring/farting in huge indoor barns !
It is a real shame that basic horsemanship, handling skills and general skill in handling/riding horses has to be labelled in such ways - wouldn't it be nice if there were just good practices, and not so good, and we all realised the differences !
TPO
Well-Known Member
But taking the backing up point and expanding on it...
You dont just point at a horses chest and it backs up. Someone at some point has to train that response.
As with most things you would start small and increase the pressure to get the desired response then work on making the "ask" as small and refined as possible.
Pointing a finger is still creating pressure and the horse backing up creates the release from that.
Richard Maxwell demonstrates it perfectly with his circle work. How he starts sending a horse out on a circle is rarely how it ends although obviously the progress can differ depending on how over or under reactive the horse is at the start point.
You dont just point at a horses chest and it backs up. Someone at some point has to train that response.
As with most things you would start small and increase the pressure to get the desired response then work on making the "ask" as small and refined as possible.
Pointing a finger is still creating pressure and the horse backing up creates the release from that.
Richard Maxwell demonstrates it perfectly with his circle work. How he starts sending a horse out on a circle is rarely how it ends although obviously the progress can differ depending on how over or under reactive the horse is at the start point.
saalsk
Well-Known Member
Totally, TPO - the response is trained, and is pressure and release. Start small, get larger if needed, and refine to be small again.
I wonder how much the *I want it now* attitude of some people affects how they view training ? Take the time it needs, and it will be beneficial in the long run, but cut corners, and it won't benefit anyone.
I haven't seen Richard Maxwell, so off to YT to have a look ! (The benefits of working night shifts, and the time that leaves me to watchinteresting and brain expanding things kitten videos on the internet is fabulous ! )
I wonder how much the *I want it now* attitude of some people affects how they view training ? Take the time it needs, and it will be beneficial in the long run, but cut corners, and it won't benefit anyone.
I haven't seen Richard Maxwell, so off to YT to have a look ! (The benefits of working night shifts, and the time that leaves me to watch
Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
My horses know when I change my stance they must go from friend mode and back away .I learnt how to do from from watching a mare .
ycbm
Einstein would be proud of my Insanity...
TPO I get the point that you are trying to make, but I don't know any other packaged method that has the ability for practitioners to shut horses down while simultaneously believing that they are doing everything right.
The demo horses being used at HOYS were dead eyed shut down creatures when standing in the holding pen. If the people at national demo level had managed to do this, then I'm afraid I have no time for the method as a whole.
.
The demo horses being used at HOYS were dead eyed shut down creatures when standing in the holding pen. If the people at national demo level had managed to do this, then I'm afraid I have no time for the method as a whole.
.