Riding a horse in an outline - different methods of asking...

[Jingleballs]

depends who you go to... but mostly, no. it seems to be a very strong, holding contact that's taught generally, and also that, bluntly, we see winning at top levels.
i taught someone years ago who didn't have great balance and, when she lost her balance, i kept saying 'grab the mane not the reins!'... she told me her previous instructor (who had just won a Young Instructor of the Year award) was adamant that if your contact is intermittent because of rider balance issues, it is much better for the horse if it is too strong than too soft. I was gobsmacked - basically saying it's fine to balance yourself with the reins. HOW can a decent seat and balance ever be developed like that... ?! yet this instructor was lauded!

Sorry - perhaps my post wasn't clear - none of my trainers advise a strong contact - on the contrary it's all about having the elbows bend and being elastic with the rein while maintaining a contact.

What I meant was if I leg my boy have an longer than ideal rein and am not riding him up to the contact as such he is happier and therefore more relaxed but this does lead to comments such as frame to long or not working up into the bridle etc.

Re use of legs - I think of inside leg pushing into outside hand and I would never focus on using the hands along without the impulsion and bend generated from my legs.

 

[siennamum]

depends who you go to... but mostly, no. it seems to be a very strong, holding contact that's taught generally, and also that, bluntly, we see winning at top levels.
i taught someone years ago who didn't have great balance and, when she lost her balance, i kept saying 'grab the mane not the reins!'... she told me her previous instructor (who had just won a Young Instructor of the Year award) was adamant that if your contact is intermittent because of rider balance issues, it is much better for the horse if it is too strong than too soft. I was gobsmacked - basically saying it's fine to balance yourself with the reins. HOW can a decent seat and balance ever be developed like that... ?! yet this instructor was lauded!

I thinksome people are confusing a light contact with long reins (not you K) but it isn't uncommon for people to go around with loopy reins thinking their horse is lovely and light in front. I think a soft contact comes from the elbows/shoulders and from what Babybear is saying her horse is fine when she has little contact and has issues when she takes up a contact.

 

[Littlelegs]

Put far more eloquently than me but I agree with all halfstep has said & several others. Although different horses do require different methods, I haven't yet met one that benefited from see-sawing visibly back & forth. And maybe not at pro level, but ime about 90% of contact issues for the average rider & horse stem from the horse not actually moving forwards enough for the contact & incorrect riding. And I'm not just talking about at riding school level either. There seems to be little emphasis on a correct position or the horse moving forward, & far too much importance being attached to what you do with your hands. Too many people seem to forget the very old saying that only 1/3 of the horse is in front of you.
And don't get me started on people trying to replicate a competition position with the horses hocks in the next county.

 

[SpottedCat]

I think the problem with threads like this is that they advocate a 'light' contact, which less experienced riders take to mean that having a horse going forwards with it's nose miles in front of the vertical, its hocks trailing and a hollow back is in some way preferable to having a firmer contact on the reins and giving the horse something to work into - it's not, and it is just as damaging as 'pulling the head in'.

 

[Halfstep]

I think the problem with threads like this is that they advocate a 'light' contact, which less experienced riders take to mean that having a horse going forwards with it's nose miles in front of the vertical, its hocks trailing and a hollow back is in some way preferable to having a firmer contact on the reins and giving the horse something to work into - it's not, and it is just as damaging as 'pulling the head in'.

This.

 

[Caol Ila]

I think the problem with threads like this is that they advocate a 'light' contact, which less experienced riders take to mean that having a horse going forwards with it's nose miles in front of the vertical, its hocks trailing and a hollow back is in some way preferable to having a firmer contact on the reins and giving the horse something to work into - it's not, and it is just as damaging as 'pulling the head in'.

I see quite a lot of people riding with a *harsh* and heavy contact and no give, which stresses out the horse and teaches them to evade. I prefer a horse who is relaxed and in front of the vertical on no or little contact (which is how you'd ride a working cow horse, or your trail pony, say) than one who is being pulled in. While a hollow back and a strung out horse isn't ideal, everyone will go through a phase of riding horses that way as no one is born knowing how to collect a horse. However, I'd rather not see the horse get a hard mouth in process. I'm sure you would agree that while a firm but soft contact is needed in some cases, a bracing, heavy one is counterproductive.

 

[KatB]

Completely agree with spottedcat, and halfstep. I see more people who think they're being "soft" and so dropping the contact and just annoying the horse into dropping its head. Actually, taking a still and consistent but elastic contact is much softer on the horse and gives it something to work towards.
Equally, the "forward" brigade who will chase the horse round and actually pushes it onto the forehand, but gets the head lowering effect which means it must be correct.... Riding in balance I think is the main principle people struggle with....

 

[Perfect_Pirouette]

I think the problem with these types of threads is there are so many different methods/ways of doing things stated, it can lead to confusion and inconsistency.

I think that having fundamental objectives that have to be achieved in order to help form the ‘outline’ i.e forwardness, straightness, impulsion, balance etc is great and can probably be accepted as universal. BUT ways in which to achieve the above will vary for each horse and contact is one of these things IMO. Give one horse a lighter contact and it may accept it graciously, give another and it may abuse it. Likewise, one horse may not like a heavier contact and try and evade, another may get confidence from it. However with regards to contact, surely if a rider has their hands carried out sufficiently in front of them (with no loops in the rein) and has a nice bent soft elbow (no chicken wings) and forearms to a steady hand then this should be okay for the majority of horses? Surely with the above and all the above fundamentals in place, see-sawing should not need to occur?

 

[Lucyad]

I find this really interesting. I had trouble with my horse when more conventionally taught to push him on from behind while contain the energy via the reins, however this lead to him leaning on the contact, whihc got heavier and heavier as he gravitated onto his forehand. I apprecaite that with exercises to lighten his forehand such as leg yeilding and shoulder in etc. the contact and 'outline' got better, but using this proces, despite 'moulding' him into the corect way of going, he never really 'clicked' what I was asking him to do, so each time I would have to spend ages working using laeral moves, transitions etc. to acheive the lightness, which would then not be carried through into the next session / movement. A more experiences, educated, sensitive rider could use subtle releases, I am sure, to reinforce lightness, without loosing it, however for me this was difficult.

My 'lightbulb' moment was when an instructor got me to separate the aids, working firstly at halt, asking for softness and offering a complete release when it was acheived. Using this 'one thing at a time' approach my horse realised that if he softens to the hand, the hand will remain soft.

We can now do this at walk and trot, so to ask for an outline (when he is already working well forward), I can just flex my fingers and give a sponge on the rein, then soften. I combine this with a nudge with my inside leg asking for a more active hind, and for him to 'lift' his back. I also seem to get a good response if I sort of open my pelvis and almost give him space for his back to lift, if you know what I mean (this is pretty subtle, but seems to really improve how he is going)

Unforunately we are still a work in progress in canter - we just don't have the balance yes to acheive the same level - we are still working on me managing to slow the canter down enough before thinking about the front end too much!

Also unforunately, horse now resolutely refuses to put up with my hand if they aren't soft - thather than putting up with being pulled into an 'outline' as I used to try to do, he will tell me in no uncertain terms to 'bog off!' This results in hilarious dressage tests, when he can feel any tension that I might be carrying (hard to maintain a soft contact when your hands are shaking!).

When we get it right though, the feeling of the trot when he is holding himself up, rather than me doing it, is so lovely and effortless. Just need to get it more consistant now, and at all paces.

 

[kerilli]

I see quite a lot of people riding with a *harsh* and heavy contact and no give, which stresses out the horse and teaches them to evade. I prefer a horse who is relaxed and in front of the vertical on no or little contact (which is how you'd ride a working cow horse, or your trail pony, say) than one who is being pulled in. While a hollow back and a strung out horse isn't ideal, everyone will go through a phase of riding horses that way as no one is born knowing how to collect a horse. However, I'd rather not see the horse get a hard mouth in process. I'm sure you would agree that while a firm but soft contact is needed in some cases, a bracing, heavy one is counterproductive.

This, exactly. And when one thinks of the damage a misused bit can do to the bars, palate etc, surely it's a no-brainer to aim for lighter rather than stronger?
also, i do not really see how riding a horse loosely (maybe with its nose poking out etc) does damage - any more than the horse trotting loose around the field with nose poking does it damage. but trying to yank, lever, pull it into a position where its neck is curved and its nose is in (and let's face it, this is what a LOT of people seem to be happy with) is surely never going to be beneficial, is it?
of course the ideal - engaged hindquarters, soft back, ring of muscles working, horse stretching forwards to contact etc etc - is always going to be beneficial, but what i'm saying is that of the two main approaches to it, surely the lighter one does less damage if misapplied, mistimed etc...

 

[siennamum]

To me the issue when a horse is going on a nice loose contact in a relaxed frame and even if it is swinging along to a degree, is that that can mean there is no submission. So my reading of Babybear's issue is that her horse resists when she does pick up a firmer contact and ask for engagement. I may be reading that wrong BB.

 

[SpottedCat]

also, i do not really see how riding a horse loosely (maybe with its nose poking out etc) does damage - any more than the horse trotting loose around the field with nose poking does it damage.

Because a horse isn't designed to be sat on! It simply has a convenient place for a saddle But anatomically, the weight is carried by muscles/tendons/ligaments due to the nature of the skeletal structure of the horse - when it is at liberty in the field it isn't carrying any extra weight, and it doesn't have pressure on parts of it that were never designed to have pressure on them. Unless it engages and uses its muscles correctly (and by this I mean correctly in the sense of what is required to minimise the impact of carrying a rider), there is a very much increased chance of injury/pain simply because of how they are constructed anatomically. It's their bad luck that they happen to be a convenient size and shape to be ridden, and are temperamentally suited to domestication and training.

 

[SpottedCat]

BTW, and a bit off topic, but if people are interested in how a horse is put together (in actual real life - not a painted or horse or drawings), this series of dissection slides is fascinating! http://www.vet.cornell.edu/oed/horsedissection/

 

[Jingleballs]

To me the issue when a horse is going on a nice loose contact in a relaxed frame and even if it is swinging along to a degree, is that that can mean there is no submission. So my reading of Babybear's issue is that her horse resists when she does pick up a firmer contact and ask for engagement. I may be reading that wrong BB.

No you've got it right. He's happy and relaxed and swingy when he gets to pus his nose where he wants it but once you try and collect him a bit he tenses up or can lose impulsion.

 

[Caol Ila]

Because a horse isn't designed to be sat on! It simply has a convenient place for a saddle But anatomically, the weight is carried by muscles/tendons/ligaments due to the nature of the skeletal structure of the horse - when it is at liberty in the field it isn't carrying any extra weight, and it doesn't have pressure on parts of it that were never designed to have pressure on them. Unless it engages and uses its muscles correctly (and by this I mean correctly in the sense of what is required to minimise the impact of carrying a rider), there is a very much increased chance of injury/pain simply because of how they are constructed anatomically. It's their bad luck that they happen to be a convenient size and shape to be ridden, and are temperamentally suited to domestication and training.

Or good luck, as their other option would surely be getting eaten!

I started my last post by saying "the lesser of two evils" and then deleted that, thinking I would be mortally offending riders who happily let their horse amble along on a loose rein. There was a row on a more American-based horse forum I sometimes read, where dressage riders were discussing the importance of the "outline" and correct engagement, as per SpottedCat's post there, and then a bunch of Western riders got all up in arms about it. If you have a ranch horse, a cow horse, or various things like that, you don't even work the horse on contact. My experience of living in the American West is that these horses don't go lame any more or less often than dressage horses. So take that as you will.

I still think that riders who are learning independent aids and have not yet developed a consistent soft and elastic feel should err on the side of less contact. The horse may not be through, but a horse who's getting his face hauled on isn't going to be any more through but he will be more miserable.

 

[siennamum]

No you've got it right. He's happy and relaxed and swingy when he gets to pus his nose where he wants it but once you try and collect him a bit he tenses up or can lose impulsion.

Just out of interest have you tried lunging him in side reins?

 

[Jingleballs]

Just out of interest have you tried lunging him in side reins?

Never tried side reins but did try a pessoa type aid and he HATED it - for a horse that normally likes his nose to the ground he spend a lot of time with his nose in the air.

What I do use is the "Kerilli method" where I use side reins and a cavesson but the reins go across his wither and inbetween the front legs to encourage him to work long and low and get a stretch across his back - not surprisingly he's happy to work like that!

 

[siennamum]

Or good luck, as their other option would surely be getting eaten!

I started my last post by saying "the lesser of two evils" and then deleted that, thinking I would be mortally offending riders who happily let their horse amble along on a loose rein. There was a row on a more American-based horse forum I sometimes read, where dressage riders were discussing the importance of the "outline" and correct engagement, as per SpottedCat's post there, and then a bunch of Western riders got all up in arms about it. If you have a ranch horse, a cow horse, or various things like that, you don't even work the horse on contact. My experience of living in the American West is that these horses don't go lame any more or less often than dressage horses. So take that as you will.

I still think that riders who are learning independent aids and have not yet developed a consistent soft and elastic feel should err on the side of less contact. The horse may not be through, but a horse who's getting his face hauled on isn't going to be any more through but he will be more miserable.

I completely get where you are coming from when talking about the relevance of western style riding. I always insist people ride my horses as if they are on cow ponies, with minimal hand and all seat and legs. When we are starting youngsters I really like them completely controllable & steerable without reins as far as possible. I think dressage requires another level of elevation & power though. (as I'm sure you do) and that to acheive this you have to make demand involving a contact - you couldn't have it with a western bit I suppose as it would be too harsh, thogh I suppose the western vs dressage debate is a whole other thing.

 

[npage123]

Thanks for all the great advice.

All these tips on how to use your legs, seat, balance, hands, etc. does make me admire disabled dressage riders even more!

 

[tristar]

some of the old masters rode their youngsters in headcollars, so the young horse would not be afraid to reach forward and stretch.

the standard is not set by competition riders, for me anyway, but by people who show good work achieved by kind methods who take the necessary time to condition the whole horse, not just its head and neck, and i believe all riding schools and instructors should sign an oath: 'if it can't be done with kindness, then it won't be done at all'

 

[Halfstep]

some of the old masters rode their youngsters in headcollars, so the young horse would not be afraid to reach forward and stretch.

the standard is not set by competition riders, for me anyway, but by people who show good work achieved by kind methods who take the necessary time to condition the whole horse, not just its head and neck, and i believe all riding schools and instructors should sign an oath: 'if it can't be done with kindness, then it won't be done at all'

What makes you think that those who compete don't take the necessary time to condition the whole horse, as you put it?

And please note that some of the "old masters" engaged in practices that would make your hair stand on end. I promise you this.

 

[SpottedCat]

I still think that riders who are learning independent aids and have not yet developed a consistent soft and elastic feel should err on the side of less contact. The horse may not be through, but a horse who's getting his face hauled on isn't going to be any more through but he will be more miserable.

I wasn't really talking about riders who are educating themselves to ride with feel, which as has been said is impossible to describe and requires sitting on something educated, which people don't do enough in this country, and which is compounded by the twin problems of people being obsessed with a) buying youngsters to bring on and b) the idea that sending your horse to a pro for schooling is 'cheating'. I was talking about your average rider, who has the occasional lesson, who thinks that a light contact = letting the horse trundle around on the forehand, hocks trailing and back hollow, and then complains about being judged accordingly in their dressage tests - because it is 'bad' to have a contact on the horse's mouth. Unlike the western rider, they are trying to perform dressage movements, and they do put unnecessary stress and strain on their horse because they think they are doing the right thing by not taking up a proper, consistent contact.

 

[Caol Ila]

I wasn't really talking about riders who are educating themselves to ride with feel, which as has been said is impossible to describe and requires sitting on something educated, which people don't do enough in this country, and which is compounded by the twin problems of people being obsessed with a) buying youngsters to bring on and b) the idea that sending your horse to a pro for schooling is 'cheating'. I was talking about your average rider, who has the occasional lesson, who thinks that a light contact = letting the horse trundle around on the forehand, hocks trailing and back hollow, and then complains about being judged accordingly in their dressage tests - because it is 'bad' to have a contact on the horse's mouth. Unlike the western rider, they are trying to perform dressage movements, and they do put unnecessary stress and strain on their horse because they think they are doing the right thing by not taking up a proper, consistent contact.

Fair enough. I see what you're saying and of course understand how an elastic contact gets elevation and power from the horse. That said, I've seen riders get collection without contact, without even a bridle, but these are people who have an amazing and precise seat and leg. I'm definitely not good enough to ride bridleless. I've tried but my seat and leg are far from precise enough. It's like having a conversation but being told you can't use nouns. Poor horse is like "what?" I can ride her in a flat halter, however. Just not in a neck rope alone.

If I could ride like this (maybe foregoing the country music), I wouldn't care where my horse put her nose! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIvYRZkklT0

Also, I think a lot of your perspective is informed by who and what you see around you. Most dressage riders I see look like they're wrestling alligators. The people I know who let their horses trundle about are happy hackers. The latter are the ones who I ring when I need someone to ride my horse when I'm out town. I'd rather her trundle about for a week than get her face pulled off.

But don't listen to me. Listen to this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVOAX5Kz2Cs. One of my favourite trainers.

 

[kerilli]

Also, I think a lot of your perspective is informed by who and what you see around you. Most dressage riders I see look like they're wrestling alligators. The people I know who let their horses trundle about are happy hackers. The latter are the ones who I ring when I need someone to ride my horse when I'm out town. I'd rather her trundle about for a week than get her face pulled off.

This, exactly. But, dressage done nicely shouldn't ever be about the horse being forced into an outline, or having its face pulled of. I liken it to asking the horse to come out and dance with you. So, you're trying to get a Wallflower to dance... do you ask her politely and then encourage her carefully, or drag her out and rape her on the dancefloor?! Sorry for the analogy but when I see some riding it's the latter...

SC, I see your point, but I truly don't think horses trundling along suffer IF they are carrying a balanced rider of acceptable weight (whole new pit of vipers, that) on a well-fitting saddle. I bet the incidences of physical breakdowns are higher in horses which have been worked "on the bit" than not. I fully realise that this is over-simplistic though... the worked horses will probably have been drilled for longer, yadda yadda. A million other variables.

 

[tristar]

halfstep don't worry about my hair standing on end, its my eyes i'm concerned about when i see for instance, anky v grunsven and poor old toto etc, it makes want to cry.

caol I1a, the understanding between the western rider and her horse is a lesson to us all!

 

[TrasaM]

some of the old masters rode their youngsters in headcollars, so the young horse would not be afraid to reach forward and stretch.

the standard is not set by competition riders, for me anyway, but by people who show good work achieved by kind methods who take the necessary time to condition the whole horse, not just its head and neck, and i believe all riding schools and instructors should sign an oath: 'if it can't be done with kindness, then it won't be done at all'

Also agree with Tristar. I have lessons on a little cob who was written off as unrideable a year ago and donated to the school. Kindness patience and firmness has turned her into a well behaved and calm teacher of numptys like me.

And.. Caol Ila's point about beginners not being told to take a firm rein contact when they have no idea what they're doing AND still using the reins for balance to boot. I resisted, to my instructors annoyance, tight rein contact and only now after a year am I starting to shorten the reins as I'm beginning to feel the correct tension.

Interesting discussion this.

 

[mystiandsunny]

Interesting reading .

I train my lot with the first method - so impulsion + rhythm + basic straightness + contact = horse on the bit (or whatever you choose to call it!). Then you keep refining and refining with the added control of shoulders, back etc that being in a correct outline brings. If I pick up the reins on either of my older (more trained lol) horses, they follow the contact wherever it might lead. Not through any sort of force, but because that is what they has been taught to do. They understand that when the reins are shortened, they bring the head and neck up more, sit more behind and direct the energy upwards - then if they are lengthened, stretch forward with head, neck and stride length. The contact stays the same regardless, so long as I've kept them supple in all ways so it's easy for them to do.

 

[TarrSteps]

But don't listen to me. Listen to this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVOAX5Kz2Cs. One of my favourite trainers.

More out of curiosity than to start a debate. . .you said earlier, CI, that you leaned towards the "German" end of the training spectrum but that clip from Buck (who I think very highly off, for what that's worth) is positively "Baucherist"!

The discussion of how Western horses vs dressage horses go is quite and interesting one but very difficult without having sat on both. It's true Western riders are not big on "contact" but they are big on "self carriage" and sometimes, quite frankly, go about getting what they want (correct or not) in ways that would cause the aforementioned hairs to stand on end.

Also, even very good Western horses do not have the SORT of power behind than dressage horses. It's not better or ŵorse, just not the same. While I think there are useful things to be learned from other schools of thought, it's not always easy to make direct comparisons, especially as the work becomes more advanced. I've made that mistake many times!!

As far as horses being a pleasure to ride, I'd say my personal experience is probably that all the various groups have similar percentages. I can say I've sat on some "good" - read successful - Western horses that were no pleasure to ride even if they weren't hard in the hand.

As a point, for dressage purposes yes, there are really only the two main schools of thought but, of course, there are other schools of riding - Caprilli/Italian military, English "hunting" seat, a couple of Western branches, American jumping style (mix of French, Hungarian and some English), and more I know nothing about - all of which have their own "rules" for riding the horse to the hand and how it's "best" for horses to go. I actually think some of the problems come from people chopping and changing, and leaving out big chunks of the system, as much as from people adhering too rigidly to one method. If, for example, a system is based on regular use of cavalletti then working the horse by the rules of that system on the flat but NOT using the cavalletti work will not produce the desired result. Systems are whole cloth and it takes time and experience to learn which bits can be swapped out into other systems without causing problems down the line.

All of which is in no way pertinent to the OP. . See sawing is bad. It's bad because it doesn't do any of the things anyone really wants or needs to do to get a horse working correctly in any proven school. Bend/counter bend exercises are a different issue but again, if all anyone sees/wants is the head going back and forth they are missing the point.

Re successful riders' methods . . .some very good riders do some things wrong. They get away with it - if they do - because they do other things well enough (or so well) that they make up for what isn't so good. That doesn't make that wrong bit good practice or indeed, even an option for the rest of us mere mortals.

One point that hasn't been given enough press on this thread, if you ask me (which no one has but that's the beauty of Internet forums) is that it's actually the rider's job to "shape" the horse with their WHOLE way of riding, not just by doing x with the leg and y with the hand. That includes sitting in such a way that the soft rounded back has a space to come in to (even if that's metaphorical) which doesn't mean a light seat (although that may be the starting point) as that decreases connection. It means having the thigh relaxed enough not to block but toned enough to be used to shape turns etc. It means enough contact to receive but not so much as to constrict . . . . .blah blah blah.

 

[Moomin1]

Having read just some of the replies here, I have to say that I also find 'sawing' absolutely horrendous and it riles the hell out of me. I am not saying for one second that I have never done it - when I was a kid I thought that was the way to go about it - until I got told (very told) that was not the case. I am by no means a good rider, or experienced in schooling/training/dressage/bringing on youngsters, but I hate with a passion seeing horses being pulled and forced and having their mouths yanked from side to side to create a false outline. To me it's something that should be created over a long period of time (I'm still trying - but have taken lots and lots of inspiration from Pootleperkin on this one) and should not be forced or hurried. I have been to many a place who are backing youngsters etc etc and they are being hauled around by their sensitive mouths and forced into outlines when they should just be getting used to carrying people and learning to balance. Very sad.

 

[SpottedCat]

The other issue is the idea that no youngster should be asked to work in an outline in balance etc - Of course they should. After all, it is easier to work correctly from the outset than to be allowed to work incorrectly then suddenly required to change.