Promotion of Overbending in the Young Horse

[Patterdale]

Now, after reading through all of this, I have to ask again -

DID ANYONE ACTUALLY SEE THE ARTICLE IN QUESTION!?

If you did - you can't POSSIBLY say that it was a responsible article promoting good horsemanship? It made a few jaws drop on my yard!

 

[Fellewell]

Based on what reasoning? Isn't Working Equitation as a discipline about 10 years old? My understanding is it's basically an expanded, intentional version/conglomeration of what the Americans call Working/Reined Cow Horse competitions, to test the various stock working systems (and show off the traditional costumes).

Not heard of Xenophon then?

 

[Wheels]

Was he not Greek military?

 

[TarrSteps]

Not heard of Xenophon then?

I have a passing familiarity but have not read his thoughts on working cattle.

Seriously, read the guidelines for the discipline - they are quite clear that it is a competition to test the training and skills of stock horses from the various Spanish/Portugese/Iberian and derived systems.

I get that you are making a connection to the martial and then largely exhibition oriented schools of training in the French Light and Iberian traditions but that isn't what Working Equitation seeks to test. It's also only tangentially connect to the Modern German Competitive School, which is what we call "dressage" now, as Haute Ecole doesn't figure that prominently anymore outside of exhibition (which, to be fair, was what dressage was until recently). Working Equitation is, in origin at least, more in line with rodeo - cowboy competiions!

They are all related, of course, but that is a bit like saying humans have evolved from chimps because they have similar DNA. Same root, different branches.

Xenophon has lots of interesting ideas, many of them still pertinent today. Given his thoughts on things like bitting, though, I'm not sure how well he'd fit into the modern competitive scene.

 

[TarrSteps]

Now, after reading through all of this, I have to ask again -

DID ANYONE ACTUALLY SEE THE ARTICLE IN QUESTION!?

If you did - you can't POSSIBLY say that it was a responsible article promoting good horsemanship? It made a few jaws drop on my yard!

Nope, I have not. So I have not technically discussed the OP's question. But I have quite enjoyed the tangential discussion - that's what I like about forums, scope for exploration!

 

[oldie48]

Thanks, that's kind of you. Not the one I was thinking of but very interesting. I'm not a huge fan of Andulusians (sorry you Andulusian fans but we all have our preferences) I think they CAN look a bit shuffley behind but I think it possibly demonstrates that different conformation leads to different ways of going, so if big moving WBs are the gold standard, that's going to influence how judges mark. My (now retired) TB was active and correct but some judges loathed him, I was actually placed first and last in two tests on the same day by different judges (think the test with the lower mark was actually marginally better). My WB sometimes gets much better marks than we deserve because he's built for the job and looks the part and some judges miss the fact that despite his lovely paces, he's actually behind the leg! Sorry gone off on a bit of a tangent here!

As requested; a pretty grey horse


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ0vPX9QGqc


Enjoy.

 

[Cortez]

Surely the root of all dressage is in working equitation?

No, it's not. And Doma Vaquera is not Working Equitation either. Doma Vaquera is a separate competitive discipline based on the training of horses for working cattle, specifically Spanish fighting bulls, and it's not all that terribly old as a competition either - maybe 30 years? There is also a pairs event called Derribo y Accosto which consists of pushing a cow over with a stick (you'd have to be Spanish to appreciate that one

The root of what we call dressage is in court riding (or showing off your gentlemanly riding skills in front of the king), from the 16th - 18th centuries and there are several original texts from these times (what I think of as classical riding), authors such as Pluvinel, the Duke of Newcastle, de la Gueriniere, Gervaise Markham, et al. And at the basis of that is training for the cavalry (Xenophon).

What is interesting when researching historical texts and illustrations (which is what I do) is that probably the majority of horses are shown behind the vertical, extremely collected over the hocks.

 

[TarrSteps]

No, it's not. And Doma Vaquera is not Working Equitation either. Doma Vaquera is a separate competitive discipline based on the training of horses for working cattle, specifically Spanish fighting bulls, and it's not all that terribly old as a competition either - maybe 30 years? There is also a pairs event called Derribo y Accosto which consists of pushing a cow over with a stick (you'd have to be Spanish to appreciate that one

The root of what we call dressage is in court riding (or showing off your gentlemanly riding skills in front of the king), from the 16th - 18th centuries and there are several original texts from these times (what I think of as classical riding), authors such as Pluvinel, the Duke of Newcastle, de la Gueriniere, Gervaise Markham, et al. And at the basis of that is training for the cavalry (Xenophon).

What is interesting when researching historical texts and illustrations (which is what I do) is that probably the majority of horses are shown behind the vertical, extremely collected over the hocks.

That is what I find most interesting about the "classical = correct" camp and the idea that is somehow connected to having horses positioned in front of the vertical as a standard. You only have to read a bit and look at a few etchings to see that wasn't the ideal at all!

Ditto the idea that "lightness" is a function of weak - or humane, depending on who you ask - riding. I think a lot of people who view the past as a rosy place where no one was ever hard on horses might get a shock if they were actually dropped into it!

 

[Cortez]

That is what I find most interesting about the "classical = correct" school and the idea that is somehow connected to having horses positioned in front of the vertical as a standard. You only have to read a bit and look at a few etchings to see that wasn't the ideal at all!

Ha, ha, yes! And where did this "classical = all nicey-nicey" idea come from? Actually reading some texts about training would make most peoples hair curl! Fancy working a horse blindfolded, do we? Or in a 12" shank curb?

 

[TarrSteps]

I've edited. . .snap.

 

[Fellewell]

No, it's not. And Doma Vaquera is not Working Equitation either. Doma Vaquera is a separate competitive discipline based on the training of horses for working cattle, specifically Spanish fighting bulls, and it's not all that terribly old as a competition either - maybe 30 years? There is also a pairs event called Derribo y Accosto which consists of pushing a cow over with a stick (you'd have to be Spanish to appreciate that one

The root of what we call dressage is in court riding (or showing off your gentlemanly riding skills in front of the king), from the 16th - 18th centuries and there are several original texts from these times (what I think of as classical riding), authors such as Pluvinel, the Duke of Newcastle, de la Gueriniere, Gervaise Markham, et al. And at the basis of that is training for the cavalry (Xenophon).

What is interesting when researching historical texts and illustrations (which is what I do) is that probably the majority of horses are shown behind the vertical, extremely collected over the hocks.

You are using the term 'working equitation' as a proper noun and I am using it as a common noun (should I say adjective and noun). Therefore, as the latter it can cover all disciplines at all levels. Even a Shire, arguably the ultimate working horse, can perform dressage movements, the haze of feather is quite something to behold. I agree, the basis for this training is in the military, Xenophon's book is available in English and well worth a read, but on the subject of books: 'Many pens are broken, and seas of ink consumed, to describe things that never happened'.