Rollkur - why? What does it achieve?

When I ride, my horse naturally works with a long neck and outline. Ie it feels like there's nothing in front of you and her head is just by the bottom of her chest ( not pulled in but its that low down, her nose is just below level to her chest) does this mean she works LDR? Its not forced, that is her natural way of going (when she brings her head round) and its not a sj style head positioning. Is that aa rollkur? And I'm a little confused. Is a rollkur a bit or a positioning of the head? I only have seen the term used when the horse is in a double bridle, or in that awful pic of the girl lunging.
 
Take an LDR and pull a bit harder on the curb .... What do you get?

That is a very blunt way of putting it but you get a hyperflexion, really go to town on it and hoik head up and you get full blown RK. Maybe a bit simplistic on my part granted ....
 
cptrayes said:
Well if hyperflexion really is also called "long (low?) deep and round" then that's completely daft, because hyperflexion is not long, it's contracted, and not deep, it's just crunched up in the middle. My understanding of long and low is that the head should be in front of the verticle. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in calling long and low and behind the verticle "long(low?) deep and round".

I'm not convinced that hyperflexion produces spectacular results. I think it's used to control spectacular horses who might well have produced even better results if they had been trained in a more humane fashion. Or might just have remained uncontrollable. I can't see that it's possible to take an ordinary horse and make it spectacular with hyperflexion. It might take longer without hyperflexion, but maybe if fewer people used it the average working life of an insured German dressage horse would be more than 5.5 years* :(

All IMHO of course :)




*statistic from Phillipe Karl from 1978, widely believed to be at least as bad if not worse these days.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you that the terminology is only further confused by the FEI diagrams!

For me long and low HAS to be behind the vertical otherwise you can't keep the contact, it's just loose reins. Although long and low is much longer and lower as a frame than rollkur. The 'long' bit in the hyperflexion refers to the back which is overextended from the back end to the head - one of the reasons Dr H doesn't like hyperflexion, but correctly included in the definition according to both proponents and detractors.

Well Phillipe Karl is another bugbear of mine. Just briefly what study did he conduct to come up with these results and where did he publish it? To my knowledge he has produced 0 horses to international competition level and trains 0 riders currently in international competition, so I take his claims to greatness with a pinch of salt. If the question is force, there is nothing quite as forceful as Baucherite flexions and I really don't see why forcing the horse's head/neck side to side is wonderful while forcing it down is awful.

AntxGeorgiax: it's a training method, not a bit. You could do it in a snaffle. Yes I entirely agree with you some horses naturally position themselves in rollkur, one of mine does this and it's very tough to get him to relax his neck.
 
Well... RK, L&L, LDR etc so far according to this thread focuses on the head, neck and maybe the back.

Where has the work on the quarters and back legs gone?

Does no one work the "engine" of the horse anymore? It's just that, when you do, you get elevation, you get 'round', you get collection... over time as the horse gets stronger.

with RK, it LOOKS like you have all that, achieved quicker. But it ain't correct. Completely false, and if you train classically, you can very much tell the RK'd horse from the one who is schooled correctly. One has a bulgy neck, frothy mouth and it's legs are still at home. The other is bigger in the back, the hindquarters and is looking where it is going... not at it's two front hooves.

A friend of mine is right... it's hard to find horses that were taught to go FORWARD these days as so many produced are RK'd to make the desired neck shape.

Whatever you do, you need to go forward, if the horse is going forward, properly - powering from behind, it is very hard anatomically to overbend whether you are going L&L, LDR or RK.

All I am saying is that, we should forget the head and neck, we should instead be talking about how we can raise the back from the quarters which will eventually sort out the head position.

I was once told to stand normally and tuck my chin in, it hurt quite a bit and I had to bend over slightly. Then, I was told to relax my knees, hold in my butt cheeks as if I was holding a winning lottery ticket in the wind, that stretched my lower back, which in turn, straightened my spine. My shoulders came back considerably. Then I was asked to tuck my chin in again. This time, it bent from the bottom of my skull, not from the base of my neck. It didn't hurt that time. That is the subtle difference.
 
Last edited:
Just thought about my post above... Sorry if it came across as teaching grandma to suck eggs but I felt that on this particular thread, there needed to be some balance on the focus of the topic because RK, LDR etc. isn't the be all and end all as it can seem. Hope that made sense. If not, sorry.
 
tallyho! said:
Just thought about my post above... Sorry if it came across as teaching grandma to suck eggs but I felt that on this particular thread, there needed to be some balance on the focus of the topic because RK, LDR etc. isn't the be all and end all as it can seem. Hope that made sense. If not, sorry.
Click to expand...

No you are completely right, but probably preaching to the already converted!!

Does anyone know if Gerd H has released his biomechanics animation into the public domain yet? As much as the guy is a prat, that animation is very very good at getting the point across.
 
tallyho! said:
Well... RK, L&L, LDR etc so far according to this thread focuses on the head, neck and maybe the back.

Where has the work on the quarters and back legs gone?

Does no one work the "engine" of the horse anymore? It's just that, when you do, you get elevation, you get 'round', you get collection... over time as the horse gets stronger.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can take a thread on the internet populated by people who do not evn practice the training method as the definitive word of how to do this type of training.

People who do use this training method do point out that engagement and responsiveness to the leg aids are absolutely crucial and it's not a 'hands first, no back end' method (see for example Anky at the BD convention or Edward Gal's demo at Olympia 3 years ago).

Anky's horses are electric to the leg, as are Edward Gal's and Parcival is if anything too forward going, so I don't really see the evidence that these horses are not working from behind (Parcival's piaffe/passage at the Olympics was criticised on other threads for being too active behind and not enough in front).
 
It wasn't "too active" behind, it was bouncing out the back door with NO sitting, nor bending of ALL the joints of the hind quarters, thus making the weight go on the front end, go low and putting the weight forwards - the exact opposite of what is required for correct piaffe where the hind end lowers, takes the weight over the quarters and LIGHTENS the forehand. It was AWFUL, HORRIBLE and totally WRONG.
 
Exactly Cortez!

If piaffe were the foundation to the levade.... It would not have come from that demonstration.
 
I wonder how many could ask for levade now without it being mistaken for "please touch your neck with your chin"....
 
Last edited:
Most of our horses will progress to a little demi-levade or lancade as part of their foundation training (we have mostly Spanish, Portuguese and Friesian horses and provide domonstrations of Baroque riding at historical sites), we also have a Connemara who does these. The only horses on the farm who absolutely CANNOT get above the ground are Warmblood, TB or modern "sportshorse". They can do the bendy neck think (RK) all day long if asked (we don't ask), they can lollop into spectacular lengthenings; they CANNOT sit like the Iberians.

Rollkur does not do what it says it can.
 
Booboos said:
I don't think you can take a thread on the internet populated by people who do not evn practice the training method as the definitive word of how to do this type of training.

People who do use this training method do point out that engagement and responsiveness to the leg aids are absolutely crucial and it's not a 'hands first, no back end' method (see for example Anky at the BD convention or Edward Gal's demo at Olympia 3 years ago).

Anky's horses are electric to the leg, as are Edward Gal's and Parcival is if anything too forward going, so I don't really see the evidence that these horses are not working from behind (Parcival's piaffe/passage at the Olympics was criticised on other threads for being too active behind and not enough in front).
Click to expand...

Any horse can be electric to the leg, but it doesn't mean they use that forwardness correctly, and really pushing from behind.

Think of racehorses, as electric as they come but often god awfully downhill.
 
Cortez said:
It wasn't "too active" behind, it was bouncing out the back door with NO sitting, nor bending of ALL the joints of the hind quarters, thus making the weight go on the front end, go low and putting the weight forwards - the exact opposite of what is required for correct piaffe where the hind end lowers, takes the weight over the quarters and LIGHTENS the forehand. It was AWFUL, HORRIBLE and totally WRONG.
Click to expand...

I really think this is key - too many people don't know what a proper using and lowering of the back end looks like. The love for the warmblood and TB type breeds has led to a much longer-framed dressage style. People see legs trailing out behind and think that's normal and 'active'.

I've seen people accuse horses of being triangulated in the piaffe because their hind legs came underneath them :(

Oh and my memory is that it was believed that Nicole Uphoff used 'deep' work i.e. Rollkur on Rembrandt because she couldn't control him, and to put him on the forehand so that when she brought his head up just before coming into the ring, he would, in theory, move his weight backwards. My memory could be wrong though, often is :D
 
Cortez said:
Most of our horses will progress to a little demi-levade or lancade as part of their foundation training (we have mostly Spanish, Portuguese and Friesian horses and provide domonstrations of Baroque riding at historical sites), we also have a Connemara who does these. The only horses on the farm who absolutely CANNOT get above the ground are Warmblood, TB or modern "sportshorse". They can do the bendy neck think (RK) all day long if asked (we don't ask), they can lollop into spectacular lengthenings; they CANNOT sit like the Iberians.

Rollkur does not do what it says it can.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with other methods. If you use a different method and have brought on dozens of horses to GP which compete successfully internationally, you have my hugest admiration! I don't think anyone claims that one method suits all horses and if your method brings a Connemara to GP that is brilliant! He/she sounds like a wonderful horse! What sort of scores is he/she getting? Do you think his marks are lower because he is a Connemara?
 
Jenni_ said:
Any horse can be electric to the leg, but it doesn't mean they use that forwardness correctly, and really pushing from behind.

Think of racehorses, as electric as they come but often god awfully downhill.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I didn't use the right words. Anky's horses were incredibly engaged and correctly forward. At the end of the day all I can say is what I saw though. Which ones of Anky's horses do you find lack forwardness?
 
Its just that the dressage world rewards the warmblood way of going. That seems to be the trend. That is why the Iberians are slowly being bred bigger and taller because looking like a warmblood wins prizes.

If dressage was about airs above the ground, then we would be in a different world. What do you think?

Ultimately, correct training does not produce GP horses because they do not overbend, they do not have mega extended paces, they do not look flashy. Classical dressage has been confined to realms of circus tricks almost and something only SRS can do. Which is total bunkum of course.

The dressage we see today has evolved and created by the FEI and is no reflection on what the original "training" was all about.

It's fine, the only thing I complain about is the way these horses are trained. It's incorrect, but it is what the GP judges want. What they want, is what every aspiring rider will try to produce.

Glad I was stopped when I was. No, I personally haven't gotten up to the dizzy heights, but I'm happy doing things the way i do and knowing that my horse isn't subjected to that sort of humiliation.

Charlotte and Carl are changing things for the better... Long may that continue.
 
tallyho! said:
Its just that the dressage world rewards the warmblood way of going. That seems to be the trend. That is why the Iberians are slowly being bred bigger and taller because looking like a warmblood wins prizes.

If dressage was about airs above the ground, then we would be in a different world. What do you think?

Ultimately, correct training does not produce GP horses because they do not overbend, they do not have mega extended paces, they do not look flashy. Classical dressage has been confined to realms of circus tricks almost and something only SRS can do. Which is total bunkum of course.

The dressage we see today has evolved and created by the FEI and is no reflection on what the original "training" was all about.

It's fine, the only thing I complain about is the way these horses are trained. It's incorrect, but it is what the GP judges want. What they want, is what every aspiring rider will try to produce.

Glad I was stopped when I was. No, I personally haven't gotten up to the dizzy heights, but I'm happy doing things the way i do and knowing that my horse isn't subjected to that sort of humiliation.

Charlotte and Carl are changing things for the better... Long may that continue.
Click to expand...

The GP test is an entire test, it is not just one movement, or one type of movements. It is indeed rare to find a horse that can perform all of them correctly and WB is just a huge number of different types of horses some of which have been specifically bred for the job. What are the judges supposed to do, award extra marks to horses that cannot do the movements to compensate for the fact that their breeding does not help them?

Well, yes and if the dressage test involved jumping solid obstacles over 6 miles then dressage horses would look more like eventers.

Of course experiences will differ and I am not generalising, but horse displays of classical riding with Iberian horses are extremely popular here and very often the level of riding and training is nothing short of horrific.

What is the original training whose purity must be preserved and who defines how far back we go? Xenophone's horses would have been more akin to native pony breeds and were bred for their endurance - is that what classical training is? During the agricultural revolution horses mainly pulled ploughs - is that what training is?

What is the motivation of the FEI, every international judge, every international competitor and every international trainer in producing horses whose training you claim is incorrect? What exactly do they gain from it?
 
Booboos said:
The GP test is an entire test, it is not just one movement, or one type of movements. It is indeed rare to find a horse that can perform all of them correctly and WB is just a huge number of different types of horses some of which have been specifically bred for the job. What are the judges supposed to do, award extra marks to horses that cannot do the movements to compensate for the fact that their breeding does not help them?

Well, yes and if the dressage test involved jumping solid obstacles over 6 miles then dressage horses would look more like eventers.

Of course experiences will differ and I am not generalising, but horse displays of classical riding with Iberian horses are extremely popular here and very often the level of riding and training is nothing short of horrific.

What is the original training whose purity must be preserved and who defines how far back we go? Xenophone's horses would have been more akin to native pony breeds and were bred for their endurance - is that what classical training is? During the agricultural revolution horses mainly pulled ploughs - is that what training is?

What is the motivation of the FEI, every international judge, every international competitor and every international trainer in producing horses whose training you claim is incorrect? What exactly do they gain from it?
Click to expand...

When you put it this way, I guess you can argue confidently why we ride at all.

My motivation is harmony and lightness in my riding. Sorry if that sounds corny. I won't get to the upper echelons of dressage this way, but it is not my dream to do so. The FEI don't seem to look for harmony and lightness... That is clear to see.

Your motivations are different to mine.

As far as purity is concerned... This is the 21st century. There is so much to learn from already, surely as the more intelligent of beings, you would think we could work out what is cruel and what isn't. Evidently not so for some.
 
Jenni_ said:
Well if there's one thing that will help shut down the use of Rollkur - it was the blinding performance of Team GB a few weeks ago. All 3 displayes tests full of self carriage, lightness, and their horses genuinely accepting the bit and working up and forward.

Charlotte managed to win with a few errors against Adelinde Crankyerheadin's foot pefect but tension riddled test.

And don't get me started on Yanky van Gruesome....
Click to expand...

Lol Sitting here chuckling at your response - I loved all the GB tests because they brought back the joy, beauty and grace back into dressage. I also noticed that Edward Gals horse didn't swish it's tail at all during the test - a sure sign the horse is comfortable, relaxed and in harmony with the rider.

An instructor once told me that Dressage should look like 'Horse Ballet'
 
Jump2It said:
it makes the horse more expressive infront for one..and its a submission thing
Click to expand...

I agree totally about the control but I would not describe it as submission, more suppression.

But I doubt that it genuinely increases the expression in the front end. The horses on which it is succesfully being used at top level are born hugely expressive in the front end. I own one. I could get more "submission", read suppression, if I put him in rollkur but his front end movement is natural and rollkur would, as it does with the other horses it is used on, damp the movement from the back end and tip him onto his forehand in the higher movements like piaffe.

Totilas used to look like two different horses in extended trot. Parzival's piaffe is bizarre.
 
Well Phillipe Karl is another bugbear of mine. Just briefly what study did he conduct to come up with these results and where did he publish it?
Click to expand...

He found a study of the write-off payments from insured German dressage horses in 1978. The average age at which a death or loss of use payment was made was after 5.5 years work.


To my knowledge he has produced 0 horses to international competition level and trains 0 riders currently in international competition, so I take his claims to greatness with a pinch of salt.
Click to expand...

He did not make any claims to greatness in the one book I have read, just claims to more correct training of the horse which I almost completely identify with at first reading. I am about to read it again.

If the question is force, there is nothing quite as forceful as Baucherite flexions and I really don't see why forcing the horse's head/neck side to side is wonderful while forcing it down is awful.
Click to expand...

In the book I have read he advocates neither of those things. And in rollkur the head is not being forced down, it is being forced back into the upright neck.


Yes I entirely agree with you some horses naturally position themselves in rollkur, one of mine does this and it's very tough to get him to relax his neck.
Click to expand...

I have a real problem believing this, sorry. In rollkur the underside of the jaw is lying so close to the underside of the neck that there is little or no daylight visible between them and the parotid glands bulge out either side of the neck. I've never seen a horse do that without rein pressure. Many horses position themselves overbent, I have one who loves it, but rollkur?; not something I have yet seen.

Booboos do you use the technique? If so can we ask who is teaching you to do it?
 
cptrayes said:
He found a study of the write-off payments from insured German dressage horses in 1978. The average age at which a death or loss of use payment was made was after 5.5 years work.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with rollkur then?


cptrayes said:
Booboos do you use the technique? If so can we ask who is teaching you to do it?
Click to expand...

You can most certainly ask although to be fair I have answered this question numerous times. No I do not train in rollkur, no I have never sat on a rollkur horse. Can't see why the opposite answer would affect my argument though, unless you feel I have some kind of bias in this discussion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top