gunnergundog
Well-Known Member
Why do these threads always bring out the immaturity in people?
Care to elucidate??
Why do these threads always bring out the immaturity in people?
Realising this wasn't aimed at my post, but do want to emphasise that my query was genuine.
I know. I did type out a reply to your question (but deleted it) because to be honest, comments like the above just invalidate any genuine discussion.
In short, I give a firm 'No!', pull them up as soon as they run out and then get them to stand still for a few seconds. Depending on how much time I have, I'll then work for one or two minutes on opening and closing the horse up, having a short walk on a circle to regroup and then representing. It generally works. I don't like immediately smacking or getting in a tiff, especially when people bring a horse back to the fence and smack directly in front of it. To purposely have a horse associate the fence with a negative repercussion seems daft to me.
OP you are a fool of the highest order!
Surely the repercussion would depend on the REASON for the refusal? In your example, you mention 'run out'. This is a very different scenario to a horse backing off and ignoring the leg, therefore will have a different repercussion. Telling a horse 'NO', well, whatever floats your boat, but I think that's a waste of energy. So lets say a horse refuses (not run out) a jump in training, where the horse backed off, ignored your leg, missed the distance and stopped. What element do you need to correct? Surely the obvious one is the sharpness off the leg? Obviously, you'd know that you now need to school the reaction better, probably on the flat. However, there is a situation right now that you need to correct. If you take too long, the horse won't connect the correction with the event. The most logical reaction is to circle, and apply the leg in conjunction with the whip, so the horse is clear what his reaction to leg should be, and represent to the fence. WF was in a jump off situation, he didn't have minutes to carefully school the horse. He took the simplest method to correct the horse there and the. I'll bet my bottom dollar that he'll be upping the schooling of that horse over angled fences quite a bit now!I know. I did type out a reply to your question (but deleted it) because to be honest, comments like the above just invalidate any genuine discussion.
In short, I give a firm 'No!', pull them up as soon as they run out and then get them to stand still for a few seconds. Depending on how much time I have, I'll then work for one or two minutes on opening and closing the horse up, having a short walk on a circle to regroup and then representing. It generally works. I don't like immediately smacking or getting in a tiff, especially when people bring a horse back to the fence and smack directly in front of it. To purposely have a horse associate the fence with a negative repercussion seems daft to me.
I am fascinated by the idea that to reinforce the leg, one should raise the whip above your head and bring it down with force. If you are using the stick to reinforce the leg, then surely you use it just behind the leg to magnify the aid, if however you are wanting to take out your frustration on the horse, I think you may well raise the stick high and hit the horse somewhere along the side....
I think the main issue here is whether he infact DID raise it very high and bring it back this is all guess work from just one persons opinion. It could be he just took his hand off the reins and smacked behind the saddle and there was no bringing it above the head (which I think may not be allowed in show jumping) but could have been perceived as being worse then it was. I think we would need either more witnesses to the event or video evidence to make a true judgement.
Surely the repercussion would depend on the REASON for the refusal? In your example, you mention 'run out'. This is a very different scenario to a horse backing off and ignoring the leg, therefore will have a different repercussion. Telling a horse 'NO', well, whatever floats your boat, but I think that's a waste of energy. So lets say a horse refuses (not run out) a jump in training, where the horse backed off, ignored your leg, missed the distance and stopped. What element do you need to correct? Surely the obvious one is the sharpness off the leg? Obviously, you'd know that you now need to school the reaction better, probably on the flat. However, there is a situation right now that you need to correct. If you take too long, the horse won't connect the correction with the event. The most logical reaction is to circle, and apply the leg in conjunction with the whip, so the horse is clear what his reaction to leg should be, and represent to the fence. WF was in a jump off situation, he didn't have minutes to carefully school the horse. He took the simplest method to correct the horse there and the. I'll bet my bottom dollar that he'll be upping the schooling of that horse over angled fences quite a bit now!
Perhaps to make sure the horse knew to stay in front of his leg? Maybe it was a mistake and an impossible angle, or maybe it was an angle the horse has practiced many times both at home and in the ring?
Perhaps our time, efforts, thoughts and actions would be better placed in trying to help the many thousands of horses and ponies that are suffering a miserable existence around the UK at this moment in time.
I am sure the starving, mistreated and neglected equines would gladly swap their lifestyle with a horse in the Funnell yard.
Perhaps our time, efforts, thoughts and actions would be better placed in trying to help the many thousands of horses and ponies that are suffering a miserable existence around the UK at this moment in time.
I am sure the starving, mistreated and neglected equines would gladly swap their lifestyle with a horse in the Funnell yard.
Also bear in mind these guys are not out for a 'jolly' (as many of us are) - they are doing it to make a living and the difference in being placed or not has to have a financial impact'.
oh, that's alright then. If there's money at stake we have to make allowances for hitting horses a little harder than we may do otherwise.
OP said above horses head, not riders. As the horse was likely to have its head quite low this would have been raising the stick below the height of riders shoulder. Raising stick above riders head is not allowed in SJ at affiliated level and would bring an immediate discussion with the judges. It would seem he also used his crop once, not the allowed three times. hardly seems a case of horse abuse from an angry man.raised his stick, deliberately I think, over the horses head so he could see it, then brought it round and hit him with great force on his side.