I don't think CPT meant that as a criticism, but maybe just that there was a criticism originally?
I'd have seen Fig as a horse learning, not a horse evading and you and he are the proof in the pudding that it doesn't have to mean evasion or poor training....quite the opposite IMO
I agree with Ferdi and PS.
I didn't see it as a criticism (although there was indeed a criticism originally), I just gave an explanation.
And thank you - he is a remarkable little character who completely outwits me at times
You said categorically that judges are not told to judge eventing differently, and you were pretty blunt about me in doing so. And yet there it is in black and white on the BD website - the guidance as to how eventers are to be judged differently.
I do not need this explanation thank you. Though an apology for your incorrect and unfair criticism of my post might have been nice
on the BD website means something different to you than it does to me.
Why does this sort of thing always end up in a spat? Surely people train their horses in the way they see fit and proper so why would you even care what anyone else says or thinks, especially if you're having the competitive success you're aiming for.
Now I'm going to really piss you off . . .
There is an element of fashion in all of this (not to mention politics), it's not merely a question of "right" and "wrong". To the best of my knowledge no one has done a definitive scientific study comparing the various schools/systems of training and riding and their long term effects on the horse and, frankly, no one is going to. So we are going by people's opinions. Even if it's in a book, it's still an opinion. Now, everyone will say, "but the horse FEELS better" if you do x or y . . but that's subjective, too. Horses in other disciplines don't feel like dressage horses and they aren't "wrong" just different. The school of dressage that is currently in vogue, which influences everything from saddle design to breeding to acceptance of "normal", is one that dictates horses go a certain way and, of course, this means practices and attitudes will develop to meet this. After all, the point of competition is to win! I'm not saying this is "right" or "wrong" - see above - it just is what it is. Other people, in other schools don't necessarily feel the same. I don't think they should necessarily expect to have good competition results but that's another conversation.
I quite often joke that riding is like religion. People cleve very strongly to their beliefs and tend to assume they have come from on high, but really, they are just the work of man.
If you look at footage, photos and instructional tomes from, say, 50+ years ago, you will see a different picture - literally! The horses in Harry Boldts beautiful book are all "up and out" as a rule, and there is very little btv even in stretching work. Ditto Klimke's book. If you read more French Light/Spanish books you will see more horses with shorter necks but then some of that is because the type tends to be heavier in the crest and therefore "look" shorter even when correct, as Cortez's photo showed. Not "wrong" just different.
I am now old enough, and from a backwards enough place, to have ridden through the transition in dressage. We didn't ride "purpose bred" horses - I clearly remember the first German bred horse that came to our town - and most horses also jumped or evented. Almost every horse was naturally in front of the vertical because of the way they were built and the way they were ridden. In lower tests is was considered normal and therefore "right". And, you'll be shocked to know, I don't think those horses were, on average "worse" to ride. Just different. And, the thing is, I'm not THAT old - there are still lots of people around who were educated in those schools of thought and continue to want to train that way. I agree, if they want to be dressage stars, they need to move with the time, but not everyone agrees.
All I'm trying to say, in my usual rambling way, is that this isn't a simple conversation about "wrong" or "right" and to make it about absolutes is to miss the point. Train your horses the way you think best. (Btw, I think the FEI is a bit weak in this area because they pay lip service to the traditional thought - no one is going to say Boldt was "wrong" - but they don't always follow though. I'd rather they just admitted to the reality but that ain't going to happen.)
Is the horse toe first landing?
Is the horse toe first landing?
A young horse dipping BTV is surely very different to being pulled BTV and especially for extended periods.
Photos might be a moment in time but they do provide a powerful image, so I think taking extra care, when choosing them to illustrate points, is very important.
ps. .Good post Tarrsteps but until valid, longer term studies are done we wont know the right or wrong as far as horses are concerned! I believe we must err on the side of caution myself which in itself is subjective! lol
I'm sure they wont be done! Humans will continue to argue among themselves and fashion will change, horses will continue to do the best they can to win us medals, money and kudos ...in silence!But caution doesn't win medals.
And there is absolutely no objective reason for such a study, especially since it would take years. All the small
examinations of the subject have been done by people with an agenda. Plus I don't know how you'd control the variables or even decide on parameters. At the least, there is a good chance that what is good for muscles in the short term might be bad for joints in the long term. . .
