Whipping horses to get over jump?

[skewby]

I think that one thing Andy is trying to suggest is that horses don't think in the same way we do, so how do we decide when they are being "naughty" and that they need a "smack"? Is a horse being naughty because it doesn't want to go over a jump? Do we have the right to basically beat them to force them to do that?

My horse is nowhere near "naughty" re going into a fence. The only time I have used my crop is hunting. For the sole reason, I have a fabulous capable horse that will munch up any fence you put him at. But when you're talking a big, full up, 3'6 high and wide stone wall mummy rider poos her pants. Horse is desperate to just get on with it, but also looks after me. If I'm not right there with him, much as he wants to, he won't jump. He needs me to be 2000%, we're going over that. Then he takes the fence seriously. About twice in the whole of last season have I used my whip, but that solely to mean "yes yes YES" when I am simply unable to rely on my body.

He doesn't seem to give a whatsit. Is just even more ecstatic than he was before (and believe me, from the second he sees it's a meet he's ecstatic).

So shoot me or even better, send Monty round to do it.

 

[JanetGeorge]

Tinypony do you jump yourself?

and

Andy are you a "natural horsemanship"/Monty/Kelly follower?

And these questions are relevant HOW??

Both posters made valid points regarding ABUSE of horses jumping. Whether Tinypony jumps - or whether Andy is an NH follower - in NO way invalidates their points!

I hardly leave the ground these days and I shudder now to think of the size of fence I happily jumped in my youth - and I'm certainly not a NH/Monty/Kelly follower, but I will still say with 100% certainty that 99% of the whacks delivered to horses/ponies out jumping are unjustified, and unproductive!

If a horse won't jump clear 99% of the time without being hit, then either he is badly trained, badly ridden, jumping out of his class, suffering from ill-fitting, overly severe tack, or unfit! And whacking a horse who stops for any of these reasons just helps to create either a horse who hates jumping and is more likely to refuse in future, or - in some cases - a horse who bolts into a fence (often from a rear) because he wants it over and done with!

About twice in the whole of last season have I used my whip, but that solely to mean "yes yes YES" when I am simply unable to rely on my body.

That proves my point! Just because a horse's adrenaline rush means he doesn't notice he's being whacked is really no justification for doing it when it sounds like you have a thoroughly willing and honest horse!

 

[Mondy]

I completely agree with Tinypony and JanetGeorge.


For the record, you may like to know that punishment (whipping or otherwise) has been prohibited by the Danish Riding Federation. Somebody else agrees that the horse should not be made the victim of an idiot jockey's mistakes or ineptitude.

 

[AndySpooner]

I think that Janet has nailed this one, and I'm really impressed by the Danish Riding Federation's attitude to punishing horses.

 

[xspiralx]

I think there is a clear difference between a horse that is stopping because the jockey messed up, or because it is afraid - and one that is deliberately misbehaving. I would never hit a horse in the first two scenarios, in the third, I would give it a reminder - and I'm not condoning beating a horse, I'm talking about one smack immediately after a refusal.

Horses are sentient beings, they have personalities - sometimes they do things that they know they shouldn't. I am also pro giving a child a smack if they're naughty too - so shoot me

The point is that there are shades of black and white - it is possible to accept that there is a time and a place for giving a horse a smack without that making you an evil horse abuser

 

[Saucisson]

But, don't you see lots of riders who take their hand of the rein to smack the horse and dropping the contact completely? The horse then gets confused or looses confidence and fluffs it up so the rider then feels it's necessary to wallop it at the next fence - it's a viscious circle.

I have heard one school of thought that suggests that the rider should never do more than a shoulder tap (and preferably not even carry a whip to resist the temptation) as using it puts them off balance and interferes with the contact.

 

[Fellewell]

Of course horses feel pain, just like anything else. If they screamed every time they got hit people would behave and not do it.

A horse is about the only pet you could buy a child, and a stick to hit it with.

This comment has just given me a sick feeling in the pit of my gut. They do scream. I was on a riding holiday and was given a pony but told not to worry if he squealed when beaten 'cos he always does'. I rode him all week without a whip and we both had a holiday, he was a total sweetie.

Janet George - you're a legend!!

 

[fburton]

Horses are very big animals that communicate with each other in a very physical way. Have you ever seen horses in the field? If they want to make a point they will kick and bite - a damn sight harder than a smack with a crop

Sometimes, yes. They are also capable of communicating in very subtle ways that people can miss if they're only seeing the very physical stuff. Given that communication is also possible without having to get rough and physical, maybe that's what we should all be striving for, if at all possible.

TBH, I have never liked the argument that says it can't be bad for us to whack a horse because horses do much worse to each other in the field. Besides, there are lots of things that horses do to each other that I wouldn't want to do myself, simply because I am not a horse!

There is a difference between sensitivity and pain - they have thick skin - unless someone really puts their strength into it, I doubt a smack with a whip even really causes a horse pain other than giving them a bit of a shock and a momentary sting.

Nevertheless, they must find it unpleasant for the punishment/correction to be effective. They may well have a higher pain threshold, but this is offset by a lower fear threshold - something it may be hard for us humans to fully appreciate about the prey animal mentality.

I'm not a horse beater - very far from it, as I virtually never need to use a whip - but there is definitely a time and a place for it. Giving a horse a well timed smack when they are misbehaving does not a horse abuser make

No, I agree. However, given that one sees quite a lot of poor (i.e. mis-timed, unfair and/or ineffective) punishment being meted out by people who should know better, it is perhaps better not to encourage the simple view that using a whip is fine full-stop - but rather put more effort into helping people to understand a) when it is appropriate to punish and b) how to do it fairly and effectively.

 

[TGM]

I think if you have to resort to using a whip frequently to get a horse to jump, then I agree there must be something wrong. However, I do think it is acceptable to give the horse one smack with the whip in certain situations. One example would be the horse or pony who jumps happily around a course when the jumps are heading towards the collecting ring, but then refuses to jump the fence away from the gate. He is not afraid, or in pain, but just would rather be with his mates and I think a reminder with the stick is quite in order then.

 

[kickonchaps]

Are we talking both hands still on the reins, light slap on the shoulder, or one hand off the reins, wallop behind the leg? Because I think there's a big difference between the two!!

I would have no qualms in tapping my horse on the shoulder on the way into a particularly big/spooky cross country fence, just as I'll tap him if he tries to fall out through his outside shoulder on a turn, as a back up to my leg aid. I don't see much difference between this and using a schooling whip if your horse ignores the leg in the school, or kicking hard with a pair of spurs on (both of which I also do!)

I'd far rather give him a slap to make him pick up and jump boldly, than have him scramble over a fence and wallop his front legs, or even worse put in a half-hearted cat leap and risk me jabbing him in the mouth. In my experience the latter does a lot more damage to a horse's confidence.

But I can't stand people who hit horses because it's the easiest way to make them go - I'm lucky that if my horse thinks I've hit him unfairly, he'll let me know!!

 

[Kenzo]

Well there's whipping and there's an clip or say a flick with a schooling whip to say hey, listen up, I'm on your case, get on with it.

But I've never had to whip a horse over a fence in my life nor have I set a about a horse with a whip after a refusal, it's not how I operate and I don't think horses learn postively from it neither, just tends the make the rider feel better in most instances I've seen as the horse usually ends up getting eliminated on another fence.

By the sounds of what the OP has explained in this case surely if the horse is being whipped over a fence there is something drastically wrong, either with their riding, physically with the horse or the horses lack of confidence and ability, I can't think of any other reason and neither of those should be punished, just needs to be worked on.

 

[fburton]

Horses are sentient beings, they have personalities - sometimes they do things that they know they shouldn't.

That horses know the difference between right and wrong is one point of view, though not one that everyone shares. In my opinion, that way leads to improbable notions of horses having a sense of morality, guilt, conscience, and various other anthropomorphic gubbins.

An alternative, that I personally think is much more plausible, is that horses tend to do what has, on balance, worked in the past. If the negative consequences of an action outweighed the positive, the likelihood of repeating the action is less. (And vice versa.) That may seem overly simplistic, but I have found it to be very helpful in explaining and predicting horses' behaviour.

I too believe that horses are sentient and have personalities - but horse personalities, not human ones!

 

[TGM]

An alternative, that I personally think is much more plausible, is that horses tend to do what has, on balance, worked in the past. If the negative consequences of an action outweighed the positive, the likelihood of repeating the action is less. That may seem overly simplistic, but I have found it to be very helpful in explaining and predicting horses' behaviour.

Agree with this!

 

[skewby]

And these questions are relevant HOW??

Both posters made valid points regarding ABUSE of horses jumping. Whether Tinypony jumps - or whether Andy is an NH follower - in NO way invalidates their points!

I think we all agree the kind of mindless, hideous temper filled abuse you'll see at any show is bang out of order. But those were not the only points they made, they made many others, about punishment, about disciplining horses in general.

I am interested to know whether they formulated their own ideas, or are of the brainwashed NH breed. If the former I'll be interested to hear more, if the latter I will not.

I also find it odd for people to pass judgment on an artificial aid used in a discipline they do not do. That's all.

That proves my point! Just because a horse's adrenaline rush means he doesn't notice he's being whacked is really no justification for doing it when it sounds like you have a thoroughly willing and honest horse!

Yes, I do. And he really looks after me. Which is why, if he's remotely doubtful that I really really want him to do it, I use my stick to make it really clear because if he is at all unsure he will keep me safe and remain on the ground.

 

[MagicMelon]

See this is where I am going to disagree with some posters - I am sick of seeing people 'punish' their horses for refusing fences when it is blatantly obvious that it was going to happen and 9 times out of 10 the rider is the one at fault / causing the refusal!

Totally agree with this. If your horse is refusing, IMO the rider is doing something wrong! I saw a great one the other weekend - young girls pony refused (she dropped all contact and had stopped kicking about 5 strides away) so she pelts him, he jumps it then what does she do but smack the pony again! Talk about confusing the poor thing...

 

[JanetGeorge]

I think there is a clear difference between a horse that is stopping because the jockey messed up, or because it is afraid - and one that is deliberately misbehaving. I would never hit a horse in the first two scenarios, in the third, I would give it a reminder - and I'm not condoning beating a horse, I'm talking about one smack immediately after a refusal.

Smacking AFTER a refusal is shutting the stable door AFTER the horse has bolted. If a horse starts throwing the anchors on 5 strides out from a fence then a good smack might change its mind and send it forward - but after it's stopped, the horse's mind moves on - he really doesn't have a clue what the whack is for!

When I did (failed) my Stage 4, I drew a horse which had stopped 3 times with its previous rider in the earlier part of the course and then slammed on the brakes for the last (a big spread of dazzle boards) throwing the rider. I rode it clear up to the last and it started throwing out the anchors 8 strides out. I gave it two good whacks behind the leg and it changed its mind - and flew the offending jump. The examiners failed me for excessive use of the whip! I was mightily pi**ed off at the time - I'd jumped a clear round on a horse who had stopped 4 times with the previous rider and thrown her with the last stop. But - with hindsight (wonderful thing, hindsight) they were right! One smack - or even just more leg - would have worked just as well!

 

[livetoride]

Smacking AFTER a refusal is shutting the stable door AFTER the horse has bolted. If a horse starts throwing the anchors on 5 strides out from a fence then a good smack might change its mind and send it forward - but after it's stopped, the horse's mind moves on - he really doesn't have a clue what the whack is for!

I agree that it is far better to get after the horse before it refuses, but in the case of a wilful disobedience more often than not in my experience it pays to teach it that stopping has consequences and is not an option unless the rider says so, as long as the horse is disciplined within 3 seconds of the refusal.

So I wouldn't normally let a horse get away with a refusal without a couple of swifts whacks, assuming that I felt the horse knew what I was asking it to do, was capable of it and that I'd given it a reasonable chance of making the jump. Stopping can be a dangerous disobedience.

 

[horserugsnot4u]

My daughter did a school dressage & showjumping event last weekend and although use of whips wasn't excessive, we did notice one competitor who used it when her horse wouldn't jump which was fair enough. BUT, after jumping the last two or three jumps okay, instead of patting her horse to say well done and encourage it, she whipped it when leaving the ring. I'm sure the poor horse wouldn't know what to do for the best.

 

[Kokopelli]

My daughter did a school dressage & showjumping event last weekend and although use of whips wasn't excessive, we did notice one competitor who used it when her horse wouldn't jump which was fair enough. BUT, after jumping the last two or three jumps okay, instead of patting her horse to say well done and encourage it, she whipped it when leaving the ring. I'm sure the poor horse wouldn't know what to do for the best.

I would have reported this to the organisers. At most events they are fairly proactive when a complaint is made.

There seems to be a lot of differing views.

Forgot to add regarding the person in my first example the owner has actually seen her videos and has taken the ride off of her. Its a shame in some ways as lessons would have fixed the problem but I suppose its for the best.

 

[AprilBlossom]

Gwas a top SJer in his heyday, and like the horse Janet George mentioned, has a 'look lady, ive got this' attitude to jumping. He has never stopped with me, but when approaching a big log or similar xc fence, I do give him a little tap on the shoulder just to get him to open up his stride a bit, as he's so casual about everything he worries me with his steadiness lol!

Now, I use a stick because he's a big chap and his reaction to a little tap on shoulder is far more efficient than me nagging wit my legs, or booting and losing my leg position to then hamper him whilst going over the fence.

Only when out do I use the stick, I have no need for it jumping sj, as to be honest I prefer the steady, wait for the fence approach in that atmosphere, but I carry one most of the time as I imagine G was whacked over some fences as he came to the end of his prime, sadly, but I know that by carrying a stick he moves better off my leg and I have no need to move to spurs if he's a bit sluggish.

I do agree though that often the whip is MASSIVELY misused by children, and do not think they should even be allowed one until they understand fully what is should and, mired importantly, should not be used for.

 

[Tinypony]

I think we all agree the kind of mindless, hideous temper filled abuse you'll see at any show is bang out of order. But those were not the only points they made, they made many others, about punishment, about disciplining horses in general.

I am interested to know whether they formulated their own ideas, or are of the brainwashed NH breed. If the former I'll be interested to hear more, if the latter I will not.

I also find it odd for people to pass judgment on an artificial aid used in a discipline they do not do. That's all.


Yes, I do. And he really looks after me. Which is why, if he's remotely doubtful that I really really want him to do it, I use my stick to make it really clear because if he is at all unsure he will keep me safe and remain on the ground.

How to put this politely... I think you're coming across as rude and confrontational in this post Skewby.

There aren't many people in the horse world who have formulated their own ideas, and I am sure that you are no different. We form our views based on what people teach us as we grow up in our horsemanship, the things we hear people say, the things we do, read, what we observe in horses... a whole host of things.

It sounds to me as if you know a lot about jumping. Would you agree with me on that? So your wide experience of jumping qualifies you to be rude about people who might disagree with you, or who maybe question what you have accepted as wisdom and fact for many years.

I don't need to prove myself to anyone here, and what would it mean? We could all be full of bullshit, posting fake photos, making wild claims about our experience, who knows?

For what it's worth, I have 45 years experience with horses. Hacking, jumping, dressage, all the usual sort of stuff. I've studied with "NH" type trainers. I've studied with classical riders. I have learnt a lot with equine behaviourists. I don't follow any one person.

I've been taught a lot of rubbish in the past, including that it was OK to smack horses that didn't perform as I wished over jumps. I realise now that most of the time the problems with the jumping were down to me, and not the horse's fault at all. And the rest of the time it was likely that I was experiencing the result of what had happened to that horse in the past. I can't bear to watch jumping competition any more because at least 90% of the time when I see a stick used I can see that there is a fairer alternative, and as someone said above, the use of the stick often just confused the horse. I think that many are using their sticks out of frustration and to compensate for a lack in their riding skills.

I'm not saying I will never touch a horse with a stick, I ride with a stick regularly and use it to touch the horse to reinforce aids.

There, that should really piss some people off (Skewby) and earn me a few more insulting comments.

So now you've questioned the credentials of myself and Andy Spooner, maybe you'd like to start on Fburton?

 

[WeeBrown]

This is a really interesting post with many views. I was only thinking of this issue a couple of days ago as quite a few posters recently have said they hate to see riders crop at a fence and would prefer a growl (which I actually don't like). My instructor has always told me (right or wrongly) to use the crop to back up my leg if the horse is not going forward enough but that 3-4 strides out leave alone and it is then down to legs and hands but that if he hesitates on take off then crop again then. Obviously if jumping a course and this is needed at every fence then something is wrong. We did spend whole lessons just perfecting jumping position (how I ached!), jumping with eyes closed to get feel and jumping smaller fences with no reins. We were taught to jump balanced with one hand so we could crop with no difference to our position - in fact he hated it if you compromised your position for anything and you'd get a good telling off. We were never allowed to have our reins with no contact, another whole lesson was spent on crop changing so that your reins didn't change length. I don't know if this is right or wrong, everyone has different opinions but I miss my lessons loads!!!