Patrick Kittell..

[Fidgety]

it was a far better test than he has shown here on previous days, I still maintain the horse is woefully weak behind. I do wonder if the fact he darent, after all the publicity, work the horse in Rollkur in warm ups and training this week has infact improved the horses way of going today. An unscientific assumption of course...but in my eyes entirely possible.

I have to say that at the beginning of the test it did look like he was making a concerted effort to work the horse's outline more forwards (I even hoped that the outcry over the last few days had had this effect) but then it almost seemed like the horse was either unsure of working like that, or possibly incapable of sustaining it, the further on into the test it went.

 

[PolarSkye]

it was a far better test than he has shown here on previous days, I still maintain the horse is woefully weak behind. I do wonder if the fact he darent, after all the publicity, work the horse in Rollkur in warm ups and training this week has infact improved the horses way of going today. An unscientific assumption of course...but in my eyes entirely possible.

But it wasn't, was it . . . a far better test I mean. The horse got tired quickly, was weak behind and curled up more and more BTV the longer the test went on (possibly seeking its "comfort" zone - how sad is that?).

One can't improve a horse's way of going overnight . . . to move properly and freely that horse needs to be taken back to basics, taught to carry itself properly, engage its back end, use its stomach/back muscles and be happy to seek a relaxed and sympathetic contact. That will take many months.

P

 

[Vizslak]

exactly, it dropped BTV on the more testing movements, those that required a lot of strength behind and it definately got tired towards the end of the test which made it drop BTV and go on forehand.

 

[Kittykins]

4. If the question is "Is rollkur effective in producing winning horses?" then the success at international level of rollkur riders is appropriate proof, no scientific study is needed. The type of proof appropriate to each case is related to the kind of question one asks.

At a risk of being skewered somewhat, I'm going to agree with Booboos here. Seeing as Kittell is currently in third place, it seems that Rollkur is indeed effective in producing winning horses. I also agree that the type of proof required is related to the question asked. It's true, for example, that I love my daughter - but you'd be hard pressed to definitively prove that scientifically. To find out whether it was true you could a) take my word for it (but I could be lying) or b) watch me interact with her. b) would give you the answer, but wouldn't conform to scientific methodology as there could be no control experiment.

So to get back to Kittel, if the question is: 'Is rollkur effective at producing winning horses' and the evidence is that Kittel is currently lying third, then the answer seems to be 'yes'.

Which is a different question to "SHOULD rollkur be effective at producing winning horses?"

In a free society people should have the freedom to do as they please with themselves and with consenting others. The only limit to such freedom is where it affects others, and the effect has to be significant, e.g. substantial harm. For liberals, as long as choice is free, individuals can do whatever they like to themselves, i.e. expose themselves to risk (e.g. riding), expose themselves to harm (e.g. S&M) or even extreme and irreversible harm (e.g. suicide). They cannot, however, cause harm to non-consenting others, so my liberty does not extend to harming you. Harm is interpreted as substantial physical or emotional harm and not mere offence or disgust. This reasoning has been used in the UK to de-criminalise prostitution and homosexuality, which is why I referred to these kinds of examples.

If one wishes to restrict an activity one needs to prove that it is harmful. There is no evidence whatsoever that rollkur is harmful other than people's upset feelings, despite the fact that this question has been in the air for a while and a number of vets have considered it. Therefore there are no grounds to restrict the practice of rollkur.

I agree with this, but if we decide that society should not be constrained by laws other than those which prohibit harm to unconsenting beings (as, incidentally, I think we should), then responsibility for good conduct is passed from the law courts to the citizenry. In this instance, if the majority of knowledgeable riders agree that rollkur is thought to be a less effective way of training a horse for whatever reason (including the risk of harm) then it shouldn't be rewarded by high marks in dressage tests. Et voila, problem would be solved.

 

[camilla4]

At a risk of being skewered somewhat, I'm going to agree with Booboos here. Seeing as Kittell is currently in third place, it seems that Rollkur is indeed effective in producing winning horses. I also agree that the type of proof required is related to the question asked. It's true, for example, that I love my daughter - but you'd be hard pressed to definitively prove that scientifically. To find out whether it was true you could a) take my word for it (but I could be lying) or b) watch me interact with her. b) would give you the answer, but wouldn't conform to scientific methodology as there could be no control experiment.

Kittykins - I did answer this earlier and Booboos' assertion is just plain wrong. Much of what she says is accurate, well-reasoned and intelligent but this is just wrong! It is absolutely NOT proof - at best it is evidence that could be refuted. There is no way of knowing how well Scandic, for example, would perform without training using Rollkur- it is perfectly possible that he would perform even better with a different training method!

 

[JFTDWS]

At a risk of being skewered somewhat, I'm going to agree with Booboos here. Seeing as Kittell is currently in third place, it seems that Rollkur is indeed effective in producing winning horses. I also agree that the type of proof required is related to the question asked.

It's true, for example, that I love my daughter - but you'd be hard pressed to definitively prove that scientifically. To find out whether it was true you could a) take my word for it (but I could be lying) or b) watch me interact with her. b) would give you the answer, but wouldn't conform to scientific methodology as there could be no control experiment.

The thing is, you're grasping an innately non-scientific statements (non-testable, non-empirical) to explain why an innately scientific (testable, empirical) statement should not need actual proof. You're right - proof and evidence DOES depend on the type of question. But the question has to be analogous to the type of evidence that supports it. It would be equally flawed for me to say that I have empirical proof that I love my daughter, because love is an unempirical, abstract concept. (fwiw, I don't have a daughter!)

The fact that PK is in third is irrelevant. Would the horse have been in 1st if trained without rolllkur? Or in last? The Canadian's horse, which is down the board somewhat was also apparently trained by PK and therefore likely to have been rollkured too. Surely that's a salient point in your anecdotal evidence?

Fuego hasn't, I'm sure, been rollkured. His score is higher than PKs. Surely that means that rollkur is less successful than non-rollkur-based classical training, by your logic?

 

[Kittykins]

Kittykins - I did answer this earlier and Booboos' assertion is just plain wrong. Much of what she says is accurate, well-reasoned and intelligent but this is just wrong! It is absolutely NOT proof - at best it is evidence that could be refuted. There is no way of knowing how well Scandic, for example, would perform without training using Rollkur- it is perfectly possible that he would perform even better with a different training method!

The fact that PK is in third is irrelevant. Would the horse have been in 1st if trained without rolllkur? Or in last? The Canadian's horse, which is down the board somewhat was also apparently trained by PK and therefore likely to have been rollkured too. Surely that's a salient point in your anecdotal evidence?

But that's a different question. Does rollkur produce good results? Yes. Can other methods produce good results too? Also yes. Are other methods preferable to rollkur for whatever reason? That's a matter of opinion, although I would say yes, and I guess that most other people would too.


Which is my point. Booboos is not wrong, but if the equestrian fraternity doesn't like rollkur, it's up to judges not to reward it*. If they don't, then it's unsurprising if people use it.

*The fact that it's been banned and is still being rewarded is yet another issue!

 

[Vizslak]

also dressage scoring is subjective, so that throws a right spanner in the works. The evidence would be less circumstantial if dressage as a sport was less subjective, like SJ for example, but this is not the case. We have no way of knowing if the horse would not perform a lot better if not rollkur trained (which I strongly suspect would be the case)

 

[tallyho!]

And that is why so many people are disenchanted with dressage and people new to it are so confused!

Where's my spectacles.....

 

[tallyho!]

Did anyone else forget to breathe during CH's performance??? Magical!!!!

 

[_GG_]

Don't be too quick to use PK's being in third as part of any debate in favour of the argument, "does rollkur work"...as he is going further and further down the rankings!

 

[Kittykins]

On the other hand, the commentary was rapturous over Anky von Whatsernamey, and the judges seemed to like her too.

Not that I'm advocating it, just sayin'

 

[_GG_]

On the other hand, the commentary was rapturous over Anky von Whatsernamey, and the judges seemed to like her too.

Not that I'm advocating it, just sayin'

How could the commentators not be rapturous over a three time Olympic Gold Medalist without getting into the whole debate. They are commentating to a much wider audience than just the horse world.

As for the judges, no, I don't think they liked what they saw. Her test was almost faultless in its execution. As the untrained eyes of my other half said...it looked much better than the tests in the first group this morning...but she got a 74 and Carl Hester got an 80.

The judges are clearly marking down where they are seeing incorrectness and good on them for that!

 

[JFTDWS]

But that's a different question. Does rollkur produce good results? Yes. Can other methods produce good results too? Also yes. Are other methods preferable to rollkur for whatever reason? That's a matter of opinion, although I would say yes, and I guess that most other people would too.

Not at all, you're misrepresenting the nature of the question - because it's not as simple as one method vs another - there's a great deal of cross over and a rider who rollkurs also trains by other methods too - so there is not any reason to attribute the success to the rollkur - the rollkur could equally be detrimental to the success given that the horse also undergoes non-rollkur training.

I really don't get how people are struggling to comprehend this.

 

[Nightmare before Christmas]

I am not saying I agree with rolkur....but have you ever thought about dressage as a whole? They get horses to move limbs beyond normal flexion, build muscles they dont normally build and put alot of strain on tendons and ligaments...

Should we just ban dressage?

People are so obsessed with rolkur they seem to ignore what the rest of the horse is doing.

I notice as I am currently doing an equine sports science degree which looks into this. I am not saying what I think I am just saying maybe you should look at the rest of the horse and the strain and hyperflexion there and not just with the neck...

 

[JFTDWS]

For me, the ultimate dressage is practiced by the SRS etc. Their horses often have long, productive lives, working at high school levels into late teens and twenties. Same with many of Sylvia Loch's schoolmasters and similar. I feel that if dressage itself were truly harmful, it is unlikely so many of them would working for so long.

 

[tristar]

the whole point about good dressage,is that it enables the horse to perform to its maximum with the minimum of effort, giving a working horse longevity and even bringing horses back into work who have articular and muscle probs which could arise from working incorrectly previously.
i think sylvia loch's horse palomo worked till he was about 24 giving lessons at a high level.

 

[tallyho!]

I am not saying I agree with rolkur....but have you ever thought about dressage as a whole? They get horses to move limbs beyond normal flexion, build muscles they dont normally build and put alot of strain on tendons and ligaments...

Should we just ban dressage?

People are so obsessed with rolkur they seem to ignore what the rest of the horse is doing.

I notice as I am currently doing an equine sports science degree which looks into this. I am not saying what I think I am just saying maybe you should look at the rest of the horse and the strain and hyperflexion there and not just with the neck...

Not sure you can say dressage is not natural. Forced positions like rollkur are not natural and should be banned which they are.

See this horse moving naturally, with collection and extension. The JOY has certainly been lacking in dressage but I saw JOY in movement today in Carl Hesters horse and JOY in Fuego.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zq06bmJLt-U&feature=pyv&ad=10609930901&kw=dressage

The key is to capture it and ask the horse to use his body when we want to. That is what dressage is. Sadly, in top dressage, all we see are broken necked horses that can't move as nature intended. That is why it looks so ugly.

We should not stop doing dressage, we should start being true to it.

 

[Nightmare before Christmas]

Not sure you can say dressage is not natural. Forced positions like rollkur are not natural and should be banned which they are.

See this horse moving naturally, with collection and extension. The JOY has certainly been lacking in dressage but I saw JOY in movement today in Carl Hesters horse and JOY in Fuego.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zq06bmJLt-U&feature=pyv&ad=10609930901&kw=dressage

The key is to capture it and ask the horse to use his body when we want to. That is what dressage is. Sadly, in top dressage, all we see are broken necked horses that can't move as nature intended. That is why it looks so ugly.

We should not stop doing dressage, we should start being true to it.

Yes natural horses show extension and collection but when do you see their legs come up as high as they do in front in nature? When do you see horses piaffe in the wild with the elevation they do in dressage?

I like dressage but I think if you moan about hyperflexion of the neck you should probs moan about hyperflexion of the other joints too.....

 

[JFTDWS]

Yes natural horses show extension and collection but when do you see their legs come up as high as they do in front in nature? When do you see horses piaffe in the wild with the elevation they do in dressage?

I like dressage but I think if you moan about hyperflexion of the neck you should probs moan about hyperflexion of the other joints too.....

If they were forced, physically, to exhibit those ranges of motion, I imagine people would be moaning about them. It's completely different to breed expressive or excessive movement into a horse's paces and school it to exhibit those paces in the ring, to physically forcing the neck to hyperflex by use of curb pressure and extreme force.

 

[Nightmare before Christmas]

If they were forced, physically, to exhibit those ranges of motion, I imagine people would be moaning about them. It's completely different to breed expressive or excessive movement into a horse's paces and school it to exhibit those paces in the ring, to physically forcing the neck to hyperflex by use of curb pressure and extreme force.

They are trained to move that way, some is natural yeah but the rest is trained. They dont move that way is the field is all I am saying. I think dressage is one of those sports that is as it is

 

[tallyho!]

I am not convinced Totilas was trained to lift his legs so high...

A horse either HAS it, or he HAS NOT.

Those that have excel in dressage. A bog standard hacking pony may not.

 

[I love my Spanish horse]

They are trained to move that way, some is natural yeah but the rest is trained. They dont move that way is the field is all I am saying. I think dressage is one of those sports that is as it is

You havent seen my horse loose then clearly, he's the same breed as fuego and as such finds collection the easiest thing in the world. He thinks nothing of doing piaffe/ passage in the field, tied up being given a bath (rather frustratingly!) or under saddle whenever he gets tense I challenge anyone to come and watch him and say he's not doing it naturally, or is being in any way forced

 

[Nightmare before Christmas]

You havent seen my horse loose then clearly, he's the same breed as fuego and as such finds collection the easiest thing in the world. He thinks nothing of doing piaffe/ passage in the field, tied up being given a bath (rather frustratingly!) or under saddle whenever he gets tense I challenge anyone to come and watch him and say he's not doing it naturally, or is being in any way forced

In regards to this yes my horses 'dance around' on the spot when they cant move forward or are excited but it doesnt have the same power and elevation as expected from a GP dressage horse.

Im not saying they are forced or unhappy to do it. Yes they are naturally elevated but not THAT elevated. I know people who train hight level dressage horses and they do teach the horses to exaggerate their naturally elevated paces to be more expressive.

All im saying is its not just the strain of rolkur that is put upon the horses body, the movements also cause hyperflexion of the same extent, as with show jumpers and eventers. I dont think you are understanding the context of what im saying.

All I am saying is all top class sports horses bodies are on the brink of what it can withstand, and not natural. Just the same as rolkur. I dont understand why when people moan about that they dont have an issue with any other part of the horses body?

I have no problem myself, I am not that interested with dressage and find its just a matter of opinion and almost a fashion. I show jump, cant argue with if the fence is up or not!

 

[Marydoll]

For me, just because somethings effective doesnt mean its right

 

[I love my Spanish horse]

In regards to this yes my horses 'dance around' on the spot when they cant move forward or are excited but it doesnt have the same power and elevation as expected from a GP dressage horse.

Im not saying they are forced or unhappy to do it. Yes they are naturally elevated but not THAT elevated. I know people who train hight level dressage horses and they do teach the horses to exaggerate their naturally elevated paces to be more expressive.

All im saying is its not just the strain of rolkur that is put upon the horses body, the movements also cause hyperflexion of the same extent, as with show jumpers and eventers. I dont think you are understanding the context of what im saying.

All I am saying is all top class sports horses bodies are on the brink of what it can withstand, and not natural. Just the same as rolkur. I dont understand why when people moan about that they dont have an issue with any other part of the horses body?

I have no problem myself, I am not that interested with dressage and find its just a matter of opinion and almost a fashion. I show jump, cant argue with if the fence is up or not!

I diagree, i think a lot of the naturally expressive horses. Such as Fuego and Rubi find these movements extremly easy, and all it takes is a little training to refine them and do on the riders command. Perhaps some of the german and dutch horses that do not find the advanced movements this easy are the ones that have rolkur inflicted on them in order to short cut, and bring out the expression and elevation in that way. How they think it works i dont know as all i saw was tense and overbent horses. Also mine doesnt just 'dance' as you put it, he can properly sit and do a very correct passage or piaffe worthy of any gp horse, i cant ride it yet as tension is an issue and working on the basics is far more important. But i know that if and when i want to do they advanced work, he has nothing to learn or be taught as it comes so naturally to him, and im sure he's not the only one

 

[Nightmare before Christmas]

I diagree, i think a lot of the naturally expressive horses. Such as Fuego and Rubi find these movements extremly easy, and all it takes is a little training to refine them and do on the riders command. Perhaps some of the german and dutch horses that do not find the advanced movements this easy are the ones that have rolkur inflicted on them in order to short cut, and bring out the expression and elevation in that way. How they think it works i dont know as all i saw was tense and overbent horses. Also mine doesnt just 'dance' as you put it, he can properly sit and do a very correct passage or piaffe worthy of any gp horse, i cant ride it yet as tension is an issue and working on the basics is far more important. But i know that if and when i want to do they advanced work, he has nothing to learn or be taught as it comes so naturally to him, and im sure he's not the only one

Okay I give up. I am not saying what horses can and cant do and if they are forced or what I am on about the strain and damage done to the ligaments, tendons and tissues being as severe if not more so than rolkur.

 

[JFTDWS]

Okay I give up. I am not saying what horses can and cant do and if they are forced or what I am on about the strain and damage done to the ligaments, tendons and tissues being as severe if not more so than rolkur.

Ok but you have to accept that damage will be done to all tissue over time - everything has to stop functioning sometime. Even "immortalised" cell lines have a life span, on some level.

As some of us mentioned before, the longevity of some of these horses, whilst sound and working at a high level, implies that, done correctly, dressage need not necessarily lead to any more damage that is likely to occur to a horse not working at that level (a hack, hunter, jumper, a brood mare etc).

Take a step back and think about what you're saying, logically. Horses can incur soft tissue damage in many ways, in most disciplines and in the field.

I don't personally believe that dressage is a major risk factor in soft tissue damage, when the horse is managed and trained correctly.

 

[Pale Rider]

I had a horse who was an old hunter of mine. He was a fantastic character and if he'd been human would have been a comedian.
I remember one summer evening he was in the field in front of the house and decided he'd go through the whole gambit of dressage moves. He was 28 at the time and did all this on his own for the fun of it. He looked a million dollars.
That's what its about, all horses can do the moves, of course they can, they don't need showing how to do it.
The skill is getting them to do it on REQUEST, that's the key word, you will never get a decent dressage test by force, ever. You cannot breed it in either, warmbloods are just carriage horses, of course they can do the moves but so can every other breed.
Anyway, with Carl Hester's success, hopefully the European style of training through force, fear and restriction of movement and playing out time will be a thing of the past.
Trainers will be falling over themselves to do things Carl's way, shallow as we all are. Hopefully things will improve for the horse.

 

[JFTDWS]

They are trained to move that way, some is natural yeah but the rest is trained. They dont move that way is the field is all I am saying. I think dressage is one of those sports that is as it is

please note my acknowledgement of the importance of training, in my previous post - "schooled to exhibit those paces" - but I maintain that the excessive range of movement you describe are inherited. They are not forced to perform them, they are bred to do so and encouraged by their training. Completely different to rollkur.