Pretty riders or effective aids

A

Agent XXX999

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 October 2006
Messages
5,082
Visit site
Now I have just posted this...I dont know if I have expressed myself very weill, but I do believe it to be true - what do you all think?

now I am going to get shot down in flames here, but I really do believe there is a difference between an effective rider and one that looks pretty and has a good position. Yes - the basics are the same, but to me what is more important is the use of the aids - leg, seat, hands, etc than how good you look when you are doing them. If you concentrate on effective aids, your position should come naturally (becasue if you are being effective you should fall into a natural position)
 
I know what you mean, some people look great on a good horse but cant really ride very well, other people can look a bit lax but get a fantastic response from the horses. I know both sorts so know what you mean!
wink.gif
 
i think alot of it depends on the horse too. some horses need alot of convincing about what you want them to do and others are just push button ponies!!! o what i would give for one of thoes lol
 
I agree to a point.

The point where I stop agreeing is where you get ugly riders (usually hunced over) saying that they have to be in this position in order to help the horse/be effective.

If you're truly using your aids correctly then your position will be good and pretty to.
 
I agree that to be effective is more important than looking pretty. I don't necessarily think that prettiness follows effectiveness though. Pippa is probably a good example (shouldn't have said that should I?!), you don't event at that level without being effective, however she's not a "pretty" rider to watch.
 
I think effectiveness comes before prettiness, but to be truly effective you need to have a basically correct position if you understand me.

For example, some riders can look great sitting on a horse, but be incapable of getting it over a 2ft3 fence. On the other hand, a rider with a really really awful position will be unable to ride the horse the most effectively because their position will hamper them - ie. a rider with an extreme chair seat won't have effective use of their legs.

So to an extent I think the two go hand in hand - however assuming you have a basically correct position, then effectiveness is more important than winning an EQ class.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I agree to a point.

The point where I stop agreeing is where you get ugly riders (usually hunced over) saying that they have to be in this position in order to help the horse/be effective.

If you're truly using your aids correctly then your position will be good and pretty to.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I was thinking. Someone may be very effective when flapping their legs and arms about and hunching over the horse, but IMO that doesn't make them a better rider than someone who is slightly less effective but doesn't look as though they are doing anything and has a good position. However some brilliant riders are very effective/good but do not always ride textbook style.

I think the key thing is to always be in balance with the horse - think of para-riders - people who have one leg can not possibly ride using classical/convetional methods, but there are some amazing para-riders around. I think this is because they develop their own balance, which I suppose is what the good, effective but not classical riders do (if you see what I mean!)
 
I agree. For example, my instructor tells me that I have a good position if he were to take a still photo... legs, hands, body etc is all in the correct place, but that I don't move with the horse enough, am rather tense and consequently don't always get the best out of my horse. Sometimes when I get really relaxed my pony will start going much better even though I know my 'nice position' may have slipped a bit
grin.gif


On the other hand, i teach a boy with a pretty dodgy position, tends to sit a bit lazy with legs too far forward and a bit slumped but he gets our riding school ponies going forward beautifully. I'm always careful about 'bullying' him into the correct position because I don't want to ruin his natural feel for the horse.

I do think though that if you want to be able to get on any horse and make it go just that little bit better than the person who sat on it before and you work towards this, you'll end up in the correct position anyway because it is the position that enables you to communicate most effectively with your horse.

I guess that the BEST riders are the ones that sit correctly AND give effective aids. Everyone else does a mixture of the two but I'd rather see effective aids from a relaxed slightly inaccurate seat than a 'pretty seat' with the horse not really being asked to give his best - hence me riding without stirrups every single day in an attempt to fix my ineffective aids
blush.gif
grin.gif
 
There was a great moment years ago in a clinic in my native land. A well respected European dressage trainer came to help the Olympic event squad and one of the participants was an older man who sat in a very "old fashioned" seat and rode in what might be termed a slap dash manner. But he could get horses to go and they always looked perfectly happy about it. I rode a horse he'd jumped at Intermediate and it struggled at 2'6" with everyone else. The poor instructor tried to make what he thought were helpful corrections to his the guy's seat but he basically laughed him off. Finally the trainer said in frustration, "I don't understand! You sit so badly but your horses, they go so well!"
smile.gif
The proof, I guess, is in the pudding. Or the horses.

I think good position is a firm foundation to work from BUT it's not a hard and fast rule. Sometimes problem solving calls for creativity and feel more than rigid attention to form so in the moment what works may not alway look good. Plus, successful riders with good feel can tend to get lazy because, quite frankly, they don't have to care as much. I think a lack of proper form is much more detrimental in dressage though, where precision is everything and both the culture and the scoring penalises less than ideal postion far more than in other areas.

Then there is the fact that "correct" is situational not only between disciplines and styles of riding but on different levels of horses etc. And having a conformational position flaw is one thing, unneccessary gripping, sitting off balance, getting way in front or behind the balance (except maybe in an emergency) is another because those things affect the horse mechanically.

It's also really hard to sit well on horses that don't go well - it's a bit of a Catch-22 - so again, in the moment, things may not look perfect.

I look at riding like a check list - there are x number of things that need to happen in order for things to be perfect. But none of us are perfect so scratch that idea off the top. So then it becomes about how much you do "right" (sit in balance, have a suitable horse, use your leg effectively, get decent instruction - any number of things) vs. how much you do "wrong" (get in front of the motion sometimes, make poor training decisions, let fear paralyse you - again many, many possibilities). So everyone is constantly totting up their balance sheet at any given moment and the point is always to be trying to do more things right. Position is a relatively easy thing for novice riders to work on because it's mostly mind over matter so it tends to get emphasised. It's also SAFER to ride well, which is a bigger deal these days.

In the end you fix the things you think are worthwile. And that's different for everyone.

(By the way, I know many TOP riders who still work a lot on their position/fitness/strength with instructors. At that level, where everyone rides well, being just that little bit better is an edge.)
 
That is great, when I ride people's naughty horses I always say I will stay on but I may not look pretty - does that count? Somedays I feel I can ride well and look good but other days I ride like rubbish. Most the time I feel I may look ok but the horse goes like rubbish lol
 
I agree.
I have said for a long time, you can get riders at the top level that are only there because they look good on a horse and have a good horse.
My instuctor has had good horses all her live, anything hard to ride, naughty etc was sold. There for she can't ride my cobs as they are not the highly trainable tb types that she is used to.
On her horses is it all about looks, every gadget you can think of is used to make the apperance look good, even if it is false.
 
I am a little confused as to why you would let somebody who can't ride a difficult horse teach you?
confused.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top