ps - I hope this posts nicely, with line breaks
and whatnot. My recent posts have looked pretty
bad. I'm using the Google Groups Beta, and
sometimes it looks OK, sometimes it looks like
heck. So, apologies in advance.

Anyway, Western verus Dressage training...

As you may know, we hired a dressage trainer to come
work with some of our horses. One she's working
with was close to being a finished western horse, and
two others have had training on giving to the bit,
western style. These three do something that the
dressage trainer considers an evasion, but that all
western trainers I know believe is correct and all
finished or close to finished western horses I've seen
going will do.

Here is what it is: For a western horse, when the reins
are picked up and the horse can feel some tension, he
is supposed to break at the poll and put some slack back
in the reins. In a youngster, when he does that, the
trainer gives him some slack back as a reward, but
eventually the horse is expected to keep his nose in
a place that leaves a bit of slack in the reins at
least, and as he gets more trained, a lot of slack.
Finished reiners are asked to "bridle up" by the
rider picking up on the LONG loopy reins and giving
a "bump bump" (and usually there is a leg cue also.)
The horse responds by breaking at the poll (and
hopefully rounding his back) (and sometimes stepping
more underneath himself - which is how it SHOULD be
if you ask me but I don't see it as consistently as
the poll response) and then maintaining that position
on a long loopy rein.

So, when this dressage trainer puts some tension on
my horses' reins, they all respond by breaking at
the poll and putting slack back in their reins. The
trainer says this is an evasion of the bit - what
she wants them to do is learn to reach out and into
the contact she's offering. She is quite concerned
that they've all been trained to evade.

>From my perspective, I think they've been trained
correctly for a western horse. They are not supposed
to learn how to go on contact. They are supposed
to learn to round up, step more under, and break
at the poll on a loose rein. I don't care that they
are now learning the other method, the english method
or dressage method or whatever, as I think it's good
when horses can be very all-around in their talent.
My concern is that this dressage trainer doesn't
understand what they are doing, and that makes me
wonder if her experience is really all that well
rounded. She has also trained western horses -
trail class, I think, mostly, but she said she's
trained reiners too. I don't know how she does it,
maybe she trains them first to reach for the contact
and go on it, and then over time, learn to do the
same thing on a looser rein.

She's gone for the weekend so I'm just thinking out
loud and wanting to get y'all's perspective. What do
you know about how western horses are trained? Do
you think all of what I'm seeing is wrong? I am not
sure but I think in Cherry Hill's book, Making Not
Breaking, she starts them all the same and expects them
all to learn to reach for the contact and go on it,
and then if they are to be a western horse, eventually
they learn to go on a loose rein. I know I've read
from some of you hear the idea of setting up the
bit just ahead of where the horse is and letting
the horse learn to reach down and into it. What do
you think of the western way, where the horse drops
his head when the rein is bumped and he's given a
release - slack in the reins? If this is some
obvious fundamental difference between english/
western, why is this trainer so unaware of it?

cindi

From:	Catja Pafort
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:42:49 +0000

cindi wrote:

> Here is what it is: For a western horse, when the reins
> are picked up and the horse can feel some tension, he
> is supposed to break at the poll and put some slack back
> in the reins. In a youngster, when he does that, the
> trainer gives him some slack back as a reward, but
> eventually the horse is expected to keep his nose in
> a place that leaves a bit of slack in the reins at
> least, and as he gets more trained, a lot of slack.
> Finished reiners are asked to "bridle up" by the
> rider picking up on the LONG loopy reins and giving
> a "bump bump" (and usually there is a leg cue also.)
> The horse responds by breaking at the poll (and
> hopefully rounding his back) (and sometimes stepping
> more underneath himself - which is how it SHOULD be
> if you ask me but I don't see it as consistently as
> the poll response) and then maintaining that position
> on a long loopy rein.

To me, 'tucking the nose in in response to a bump on the reins (or other
cue)' sounds like an evasion - not necessarily of what is asked, but of
pain. 'If I do this, the pain will stop' is something horses will learn
quickly.

How is the green horse - particularly the not-so-athletic specimen -
supposed to learn to round his back and step under more when the
sequence _begins_ at the front, with the 'tuck your nose in' part?
That's riding front to back and _should_ be discouraged. Particularly as
it's a lot more difficult to get that activity behind and the supple
back once the head is winched in - by whatever method.(fiddling, draw
reins, expecting of pain on a 'loose' [and moving] rein)

> So, when this dressage trainer puts some tension on
> my horses' reins, they all respond by breaking at
> the poll and putting slack back in their reins.

'puts tension' (bad) or 'takes a feel' (good)? I've known horses duck
behind the bit the moment you take up the reins; and it's a Bad Thing
IMHO, for reasons I'll explain below.

> The
> trainer says this is an evasion of the bit - what
> she wants them to do is learn to reach out and into
> the contact she's offering. She is quite concerned
> that they've all been trained to evade.

As would I be. When the horse evades by ducking behind the bit, you lose
the connection from his hind legs over his back over his poll through
the reins into your hand - the 'circle of aids.'

> From my perspective, I think they've been trained
> correctly for a western horse.

But was it good Western?

> They are not supposed
> to learn how to go on contact.

That, I think, is an illusion. The 'contact' in English is a very subtle
affair, a feeling of the horse's mouth; nothing stronger. The 'contact'
in Western is different; but those differences get adjusted by the use
of different tack. For most purposes in Western, you do not throw the
reins away, you are merely using longer and heavier reins; but the fact
that the rider feels what the horse's mouth is doing remains the same.

The 'rounding up' of a dressage horse comes from the seat and the legs;
shortening the reins is a response (flapping reins are less kind to the
horse; contact allows communication). The 'rounding up' of a western
horse should equally happen from the seat and legs; only you don't
shorten your reins.

> They are supposed
> to learn to round up, step more under, and break
> at the poll on a loose rein.

They need to _learn_ that; and to learn they must be taught; and I am
pretty certain that good Western trainers use subtle rein aids to teach;
and the loose rein is an end product. In dressage, you're doing much the
same - the reins are never used to force the horse into a frame, just to
communicate what you wish him to do. The head posture _should_ come out
of the carriage of the whole body; it won't work the other way round.

>I don't care that they
> are now learning the other method, the english method
> or dressage method or whatever, as I think it's good
> when horses can be very all-around in their talent.
> My concern is that this dressage trainer doesn't
> understand what they are doing, and that makes me
> wonder if her experience is really all that well
> rounded. She has also trained western horses -
> trail class, I think, mostly, but she said she's
> trained reiners too. I don't know how she does it,
> maybe she trains them first to reach for the contact
> and go on it, and then over time, learn to do the
> same thing on a looser rein.

Probably. 'Reaching for the contact' means a horse that's active behind,
and supple in the back; that cannot be a bad thing, whatever your style.
And if she gets there in a timely fashion (say, 5-6 months mostly), does
it matter _how_ she teaches it, as long as the horse will voluntarily
adopt a good position?

> She's gone for the weekend so I'm just thinking out
> loud and wanting to get y'all's perspective. What do
> you know about how western horses are trained?

I don't think the gap between competent trainers is all that great; but
there are a lot of incompetents on both sides of the fence, and if you
are used to the shortcuts and quick fixes on one side of it, even good
training might look weird, and potential unproductive.

> Do you think all of what I'm seeing is wrong?

That depends entirely on the quality of your current and the horse's
previous trainers.

> What do
> you think of the western way, where the horse drops
> his head when the rein is bumped and he's given a
> release - slack in the reins?

I think it's a quick fix, because it replaces what should be the result
of a process (learning how to carry itself) with something that looks
similar to the layman's eye and helps the rider pretend that the horse
is 'on the bit'; with none of the accompanyments (supple back, active
hindquarters).

It's no less widespread in English riding. As long as the horse keeps
the head down, many riders are happy; but they are doing themselves no
favours.

Catja
and the Count (perfectly used to being worked on a loose rein)

From:	lizzard woman
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:54:36 GMT

"cindi" wrote in message
(snip)

| So, when this dressage trainer puts some tension on
| my horses' reins, they all respond by breaking at
| the poll and putting slack back in their reins. The
| trainer says this is an evasion of the bit - what
| she wants them to do is learn to reach out and into
| the contact she's offering. She is quite concerned
| that they've all been trained to evade.

(snip)

This is a standard dressage approach as far as I know. Horses traveling BTV
or otherwise holding their head to avoid contact is considered an evasion.
Reaching into a soft, elastic contact and working over their backs is the
goal. That said, it's probably not technically an evasion if the horses
were trained to go that way.

A horse will come mostly off the contact (or can be taken off contact with
no change whatsoever) when they are in self carriage. This can be confused
with evading the bit by curling or breaking excessively at the poll.

--
love,
la mangosteena

"The United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian
Religion" -- Treaty of Tripoli, 1797, ratified by Congress
"Religion did for bullshit, what Stonehenge did for rocks." -- The World
Famous Tink

From:	Joyce Reynolds-Ward
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 18:51:48 -0800

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:54:36 GMT, "lizzard woman"
wrote:

>
>"cindi" wrote in message
>(snip)
>
>| So, when this dressage trainer puts some tension on
>| my horses' reins, they all respond by breaking at
>| the poll and putting slack back in their reins. The
>| trainer says this is an evasion of the bit - what
>| she wants them to do is learn to reach out and into
>| the contact she's offering. She is quite concerned
>| that they've all been trained to evade.
>
>(snip)
>
>This is a standard dressage approach as far as I know. Horses traveling BTV
>or otherwise holding their head to avoid contact is considered an evasion.
>Reaching into a soft, elastic contact and working over their backs is the
>goal. That said, it's probably not technically an evasion if the horses
>were trained to go that way.
>
>A horse will come mostly off the contact (or can be taken off contact with
>no change whatsoever) when they are in self carriage. This can be confused
>with evading the bit by curling or breaking excessively at the poll.

And that's the rub....do we or do we not define this Western type of
contact self-carriage or no? Some would define it one way, others yet
another.

For example--I attain said soft rein by the use of my upper body and
seat, not by my hands. As I do so, I feel the hocks engage and the
back round up. So is that considered to be self-carriage, or not?
Definitions vary.

jrw

From:	Jim Casey
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:38:58 GMT

cindi wrote:

>>From my perspective, I think they've been trained
> correctly for a western horse. They are not supposed
> to learn how to go on contact. They are supposed
> to learn to round up, step more under, and break
> at the poll on a loose rein.

I agree, but what do I know. Let the flames begin.

- Jim

From:	Joyce Reynolds-Ward
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 18:47:31 -0800

From:	Eileen Morgan
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:34:07 GMT

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:38:58 GMT, Jim Casey
wrote:

>cindi wrote:
>
>>>From my perspective, I think they've been trained
>> correctly for a western horse. They are not supposed
>> to learn how to go on contact. They are supposed
>> to learn to round up, step more under, and break
>> at the poll on a loose rein.
>
>I agree, but what do I know. Let the flames begin.

Well, that is what a well trained Western horse is supposed to do. It
isn't what a well trained Park horse would do, or a dressage horse, or
my eventers. Different styles have different needs and goals. Nothing
wrong with that, right?

Eileen Morgan
The Mare's Nest

From:	lizzard woman
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:38:19 GMT

"Eileen Morgan" wrote in message
news:nvu7v09h1mkcvmro2hem0mtoqeo7mglcc1@4ax.com...
| On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 17:38:58 GMT, Jim Casey
| wrote:
|
| >cindi wrote:
| >
| >>>From my perspective, I think they've been trained
| >> correctly for a western horse. They are not supposed
| >> to learn how to go on contact. They are supposed
| >> to learn to round up, step more under, and break
| >> at the poll on a loose rein.
| >
| >I agree, but what do I know. Let the flames begin.
|
| Well, that is what a well trained Western horse is supposed to do. It
| isn't what a well trained Park horse would do, or a dressage horse, or
| my eventers. Different styles have different needs and goals. Nothing
| wrong with that, right?

Right. It's not sporting to take a horse that is obediently following one
type of training and labeling it evasion in another type. I'm not clear why
the trainer would do that.

--
love,
la mangosteena

"The United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian
Religion" -- Treaty of Tripoli, 1797, ratified by Congress
"Religion did for bullshit, what Stonehenge did for rocks." -- The World
Famous Tink

From:	cindi
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	24 Jan 2005 00:30:50 -0800

I hate this new google! I can't quote! What a pain. Anyway...

You said:
To me, 'tucking the nose in in response to a bump on the reins (or
other
cue)' sounds like an evasion - not necessarily of what is asked, but of
pain. 'If I do this, the pain will stop' is something horses will learn
quickly.

In my experience, it's definitely not about pain. In the beginning,
only the lightest feel is slowly put into the rein, and the moment the
horse gives to it, the reins are "thrown away" - all the slack is
returned to the horse. Several people I know do this first in a
halter, then in a sidepull, then in a plain snaffle. Eventually as the
horse starts learning to neck rein, the picking up and asking for the
horse to "bridle up" gets a bit quicker and of very short duration - a
bump. This is still in the snaffle... Eventually they transition to a
curb bit, or maybe a hackamore (not a mechanical hack, a bosal and
mecate). Here is where it starts to get different - some trainers put
what I think is too big a bump down the rein into a curb bit. But
others still keep with the slightest motion. It's more of a bump only
because the duration is so short. These sorts of trainers tend to be
the ones who are really good at using seat and leg, and they can get
the horse to bridle up from mostly seat and leg alone, which, when they
have a big ol' long shanked curb bit in their mouths, is the only way I
want to see it done.

You are right about western trainers using subtle rein aids to teach,
with the eventual goal being a loopy rein. But what I notice now is
that they don't ever want the horse to reach down and out and into the
bridle. When some of my horses started doing that for this dressage
trainer, she was all excited, and it was suddenly obvious to me that
this part is not part of the western training that I've seen. In
western training, it's all about get off the bit, stay off the bit.
I've never heard a single one say what the dressage trainer said: "Oh
my, look how nice she's reaching out and down with her neck into the
bridle."

Are you supposing that a good western trainer should go thru that phase
also, and then just keep working until the horse goes on a loose rein?
>From your description, I don't know if what you've seen as a western
loose rein is what I've seen. I am talking reins that loop to the
level of the elbow or maybe even lower. And any time the finished
horse loses his self carriage when it's being asked for, he gets put
back into it with a very short duration seat/leg/rein aid, and then
it's all back to loopiness. If this is what a western trainer wants,
is there a reason to ever go thru a phase where the horse learns to
reach for the bit? I can see how if you want to ride on english-style
contact, learning to reach out and down into soft offered contact is
much preferable to yank and crank. But if you never want to ride on
that sort of contact, is it an important step in the training of a
horse anyway? If so, why?

Very interesting conversation we are having here! I appreciate all the
responses and responses to responses.
cindi

From:	cindi
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	23 Jan 2005 12:34:04 -0800

Eileen Morgan wrote:

> Then you don't want dressage training on them, you want Western
> training. There are similarities, but it isn't the same thing.

I had talked to the trainer quite a bit before hiring her about this.
Three of the horses actually have dressage potential and were green
enough that moving them into proper dressage work would be a-OK with
me. One of the three spent a month at a western trainer's and was
already learning to "bridle up" when bumped and then given back a loose
rein, but that was the error, IMO, as I envisioned this horse as an
english horse from the get-go and that trainer also trains english and
was supposed to be having more of an english focus for her but
didn't... So getting her doing dressage-y work is better and closer to
what I wanted for her anyway.

But the remaining two horses are western horses through and through,
and the trainer and I had talked about how she'd keep that in mind and
work on tempo, purity of gait, and some lateral work with a western
focus, building on what they already have, and even though this gal
mostly does dressage stuff now, she does have experience with western
disciplines... So I was a bit surprised when she didn't seem to like
the training that was on them already.

> Well . . . you are asking them to do two things that conflict. It is
> evading in dressage to go on a slack rein; you don't want a lot of
> pressure, but you want to have a feel of the horse's mouths.

I guess I should talk to her on Monday and see if she is OK with
keeping the two more western horses on a more western plan. I don't
want them confused, but I would like them to learn to move out more
freely and be looser and swingier and all that jazz. They are both
pretty short strided and a bit stilted in their movements and don't
know how to lengthen their stride - only to speed up their footfalls.
She's only been on one once but the other she's been on a few times and
he's already looking really nice. I just don't want the way he reins
to be changed. Until the last day she rode him, she mostly rode on a
very loose rein and got him to relax and find his "magic tempo" as she
calls it with leg and seat only. But then she started wanting to add
in some more stuff, I guess, and picked up on his reins, and down came
his nose - not behind the vertical but behind the bit (although he
would go behind the vertical if that's how much she was picking up on
his reins, as he's been trained to stay off the bit.) I'd prefer if
she didn't mess with their faces - at least not these two. Maybe for
these two she should consider herself more of just an exercise rider...
Does this sound reasonable? I need to have a talk with her but I want
to be sure what I want is reasonable.

> I don't know that this is something that will translate well for the
> horse--when I am in Tack X I do this, when I am in Tack Y I do that.
> You have a conflict of cues here. It took me a long time to teach
> Moonlight to go into her bridle and 'hold hands' with me.
>
> Anyone have good experince switching back and forth? I've only taken
> horses from one style to another, not tried to do both.

I only have experience with one who really did it well. She was at a
place I took lessons. I rode english and western on the same horse,
and she'd go nicely on contact when asked and she'd do a slow western
jog for hours on a loopy rein when asked... I only rode her english
twice and then stuck to western, but I'd watch her in other lessons
doing english and she did great there too. And it wasn't the "contact"
like at that one place I had my one "dressage" lesson where I was told
to pull as hard as I could and she leaned on it. It was more proper,
with a certain amount of contact being offered by the rider and the
horse reaching into it.

thanks,
cindi

From:	Eileen Morgan
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:32:54 GMT

On 23 Jan 2005 09:22:24 -0800, "cindi" wrote:

>So, when this dressage trainer puts some tension on
>my horses' reins, they all respond by breaking at
>the poll and putting slack back in their reins. The
>trainer says this is an evasion of the bit - what
>she wants them to do is learn to reach out and into
>the contact she's offering. She is quite concerned
>that they've all been trained to evade.

>>From my perspective, I think they've been trained
>correctly for a western horse. They are not supposed
>to learn how to go on contact. They are supposed
>to learn to round up, step more under, and break
>at the poll on a loose rein.

Then you don't want dressage training on them, you want Western
training. There are similarities, but it isn't the same thing.

>I don't care that they
>are now learning the other method, the english method
>or dressage method or whatever, as I think it's good
>when horses can be very all-around in their talent.

Well . . . you are asking them to do two things that conflict. It is
evading in dressage to go on a slack rein; you don't want a lot of
pressure, but you want to have a feel of the horse's mouths.

I don't know that this is something that will translate well for the
horse--when I am in Tack X I do this, when I am in Tack Y I do that.
You have a conflict of cues here. It took me a long time to teach
Moonlight to go into her bridle and 'hold hands' with me.

Anyone have good experince switching back and forth? I've only taken
horses from one style to another, not tried to do both.

Eileen Morgan
The Mare's Nest

From:	Dawn J-L
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	23 Jan 2005 18:05:03 -0800

lizzard woman wrote:
>
> I ride at a competition dressage barn. I've only been there for about
1.5
> years but I have never heard anyone told to ride with a stranglehold.
I
> have heard people corrected for doing so on more occasions than I can
count,
> especially if you try that crap with the inside rein. You can't have
any
> forward if you're hanging on their mouth. You can have forward and
round if
> you have a soft elastic contact backed by seat and leg.
> (snip)
> love,
> la mangosteena
>

Ther is a lot of variance that I've seen on how heavy horses are ridden
at competition barns. I have seen some rather good competition
dressage riders who have some tack/feel and are *nearly* classically
light. And even at the most hamfisted of barns I've never heard anyone
claim to train for anything except lightness and self-carriage ;-)

I've frequented at least 6 dressage barns and one eventing barn over
the past 15 years. At each of those barns and at the dressage
competitions that I have attended, the amount of contact and driving
aids used by the lightest of the competition dressage professionals
were still noticeably heavier than what is used by the reining folks.

When I have ridden various horses trained for competitive dressage --
including a few that competed at the GP level, and one Olympic 3-day
event horse (Seoul), they required a heavier contact and a more driving
seat than I was accustomed to using. I could do it, but it felt wrong
to me. I like a degree of lightness that is closer to what is trained
for in western reining, not what is called lightness by the competition
dressage folks that I know.

The "classical" instructor with whom I ride teaches many riders who
were initially trained by various "competition" dressage trainers.
Those riders have to relearn what is truly light and what is not.

For those of you competition dressage folks, I recommend watching a
reining competition sometime. The lightness and soft responsiveness
shown by those horses and their riders is a joy to behold. I just
happen to think that a similar style of horsemanship can be applied to
the dressage movements. (And in the old days, it was. Some people
still follow the older tradition.)

FWIW, (I wish I could remember the source) I did hear that the late
Reiner Klimke once made a comment that he preferred the classical way
-- and often rode that way at home, but that it wasn't rewarded in the
show ring so he adapted his technique in the ring to suit what would
win. And win he did :-)

Dawn J-L

From:	Terry von Gease
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:11:45 -0800

"cindi" wrote in message
news:1106500944.608632.46980@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> ps - I hope this posts nicely, with line breaks
> and whatnot. My recent posts have looked pretty
> bad. I'm using the Google Groups Beta, and
> sometimes it looks OK, sometimes it looks like
> heck. So, apologies in advance.
>
> Anyway, Western verus Dressage training...
>
> As you may know, we hired a dressage trainer to come
> work with some of our horses. One she's working
> with was close to being a finished western horse, and
> two others have had training on giving to the bit,
> western style. These three do something that the
> dressage trainer considers an evasion, but that all
> western trainers I know believe is correct and all
> finished or close to finished western horses I've seen
> going will do.
>
> Here is what it is: For a western horse, when the reins
> are picked up and the horse can feel some tension, he
> is supposed to break at the poll and put some slack back
> in the reins. In a youngster, when he does that, the
> trainer gives him some slack back as a reward, but
> eventually the horse is expected to keep his nose in
> a place that leaves a bit of slack in the reins at
> least, and as he gets more trained, a lot of slack.
> Finished reiners are asked to "bridle up" by the
> rider picking up on the LONG loopy reins and giving
> a "bump bump" (and usually there is a leg cue also.)
> The horse responds by breaking at the poll (and
> hopefully rounding his back) (and sometimes stepping
> more underneath himself - which is how it SHOULD be
> if you ask me but I don't see it as consistently as
> the poll response) and then maintaining that position
> on a long loopy rein.
>
> So, when this dressage trainer puts some tension on
> my horses' reins, they all respond by breaking at
> the poll and putting slack back in their reins. The
> trainer says this is an evasion of the bit - what
> she wants them to do is learn to reach out and into
> the contact she's offering. She is quite concerned
> that they've all been trained to evade.

Do you have any evidence that this specimen is not a typical doofus who
couldn't ride a light horse if it stuffed a helium balloon up its ass.

Tell it that if it wasn't such a ham handed rider that the horse would just
naturally move up into its hand on the weight of the reins.

> >From my perspective, I think they've been trained
> correctly for a western horse. They are not supposed
> to learn how to go on contact.

Depends on what you mean by contact. If you mean hanging off the beast's
mouth with sufficient tension on the reins to enable one to be able to pluck
out upon them a merry tune, then perhaps not. If you mean having a
communication line open and at the ready waiting for messages, then they go
on contact.

>They are supposed
> to learn to round up, step more under, and break
> at the poll on a loose rein. I don't care that they
> are now learning the other method, the english method
> or dressage method or whatever, as I think it's good
> when horses can be very all-around in their talent.
> My concern is that this dressage trainer doesn't
> understand what they are doing, and that makes me
> wonder if her experience is really all that well
> rounded. She has also trained western horses -
> trail class, I think, mostly, but she said she's
> trained reiners too. I don't know how she does it,
> maybe she trains them first to reach for the contact
> and go on it, and then over time, learn to do the
> same thing on a looser rein.
>
> She's gone for the weekend so I'm just thinking out
> loud and wanting to get y'all's perspective. What do
> you know about how western horses are trained? Do
> you think all of what I'm seeing is wrong? I am not
> sure but I think in Cherry Hill's book, Making Not
> Breaking, she starts them all the same and expects them
> all to learn to reach for the contact and go on it,
> and then if they are to be a western horse, eventually
> they learn to go on a loose rein. I know I've read
> from some of you hear the idea of setting up the
> bit just ahead of where the horse is and letting
> the horse learn to reach down and into it. What do
> you think of the western way, where the horse drops
> his head when the rein is bumped and he's given a
> release - slack in the reins? If this is some
> obvious fundamental difference between english/
> western, why is this trainer so unaware of it?

Riding is riding. Riding well is riding well. Properly trained horses are
properly trained horses. Pretty much regardless of whatever label you might
want to paste on whatever it is you do with them as whatever hardware you
might affect. We should think that people hang these labels in some sort of
an attempt to be special. As if whatever it is they do is somehow different
in any substantial way than what others do and needs its very own special
name. Because, well, you know, we're all, it's like, special. [note that
that last sentence should really end in a query (?) if it were to capture
the true spirit of the modern yuppiescum]

It's been said many times before but it always deserves repeating...

Dressage is merely what one does to warm up in order to go off and do what
it is one actually does. Giving it a special name and making a competition
out of it does not alter this immutable fact, it just makes it even sillier
that it already is.

--
Terry

You can accomplish more with a smile and a gun
than just a smile.

From:	Dawn J-L
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	23 Jan 2005 13:50:31 -0800

Eileen Morgan wrote:
>
> Anyone have good experince switching back and forth? I've only taken
> horses from one style to another, not tried to do both.
>
> Eileen Morgan
> The Mare's Nest

Well, I don't have experience switching back and forth, but I waited a
*long* time to find a truly classical dressage instructor because my
original experience riding western made me cringe at the standard
competitive dressage style. I thought there must be a method of
achieving the stated goals of dressage that fit better with my own
instincts and experience as a horsewoman. I wanted the harmony and
softness that can lead to the execution of beautiful movements instead
of approaching the movements themselves as the be all and end all of
riding.

So I rode with a western horseman for a few years whose horses had the
kind of softness and responsiveness I wanted in my own horses, I read
old masters and practiced on my own until I found a local instructor
who used the old classical methods. It has been a real treat to have
finally found a classicist! I found that my western derived techniques
were not far removed from the classical horsemanship, it was more a
matter of refinement for me rather than a fundamental alteration. I
understood the concept of teaching the horse self-carriage. (Instead of
what is commonly taught in "dressage" as self carriage that is really
an *excessive* driving forward of the horse into an opposing a heavy
contact).

With my own horses I start them very much in the same manner as a
western horse in terms of softening and giving to the bit. I don't do
the "bump,bump, bump" because that technique seems rather nagging to me
when I can invoke the "ring reflex" with a bit more subtley, but the
response of lifting/rounding the back and breaking at the poll(when it
is a sign of softening the jaw) is actually pretty much what I want in
my own horses. Even with more advanced horses, I ride with slack in
the reins, but the horses *are* reaching for my hand. The contact is
incredibly subtle, but present, there just isn't any weight beyond the
weight of the reins. I've got one green mare who I just started under
saddle at 18 years old. Even with only a few rides she responds to the
lightest whisper of rein aids. The *tiniest* change in the contact
gets a softening of her jaw according to the manner of the request (ie:
left, right, longitudinal flexion, etc.) I'm really looking forward to
how she progresses!

In show ring western pleasure I do see horses that are so backed off
the bit that they *are* behind the bit while in most dressage
performances I see horses that are leaning on the bit. Neither one is
what I'm after. The "reaching for the bit" is itself the contact and
should be soft, but responsive so that if I vibrate, or open, or
(momentarily) hold a rein the horse responds immediately and willingly.

For a good book that demonstrates the use of rein aids in classical
horsemanship try to get your hands on a copy of Michael Schaeffer's
"Right from the Start". There are also plenty of photos of "dressage"
with draped reins!

Perhaps the style of riding I practice is best called classical
horsemanship instead of dressage since although it shares some
terminology and movements with modern dressage the techniques of the
two practices have diverged to be quite different. Personally, I see
more commonality between how I ride and train my horses with reining
training than I have seen with my horsemanship and competitive dressage
training.

--Dawn J-L
donning my asbestos suit

From:	jmc
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:13:57 +0000

Dawn J-L wrote:
> Eileen Morgan wrote:
>
>>Anyone have good experince switching back and forth? I've only taken
>>horses from one style to another, not tried to do both.
>>
>>Eileen Morgan
>>The Mare's Nest

I'm following this thread with great interest. I also come from mostly
Western riding, now I'm learning what's probably the basis of Dressage
here in England...

(A quick recap: I last took lessons 20+ years ago, both disciplines, in
college. Now I'm taking lessons again, after only spotty mostly-trail
riding in the intervening years.)

My first few lessons with younger instructors had me hanging on to the
bit for all I was worth. So much so that I got blisters - and was being
told to take a stronger contact. I hated it, and it just seemed so WRONG.

Fortunately, now I'm being taught by the owner, on a horse that also
hates that strong contact, and is being taught to reach for the soft
contact I'm re-learning to offer. Not loopy reins as in Western, but a
light, giving contact on a rein that runs straight from my hand to the
bit. Suits me much better.

If that stranglehold is what's expected in Dressage today, I guess I'll
never learn it. I can't imagine how one could possibly get a horse into
the correct frame hanging on to their mouth like that!

jmc

From:	Eileen Morgan
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:25:16 GMT

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:13:57 +0000, jmc
wrote:

>My first few lessons with younger instructors had me hanging on to the
>bit for all I was worth. So much so that I got blisters - and was being
>told to take a stronger contact. I hated it, and it just seemed so WRONG.

Yeah, that would probably flip my girls right over backwards.

>Fortunately, now I'm being taught by the owner, on a horse that also
>hates that strong contact, and is being taught to reach for the soft
>contact I'm re-learning to offer. Not loopy reins as in Western, but a
>light, giving contact on a rein that runs straight from my hand to the
>bit. Suits me much better.

Yeah, that's what I am afer with my girls--hooking pinkies as it were,
rather than a firm handshake, LOL.

Of course, as an eventer I also simply have to have a horse in front
of my leg and able to carry itself--otherwise I'd get killed XC.
Literally. And that horse has to be elastic and adjustable without me
interrupting or disrupting the natural power and rythmn.

So while I don't do what a lot of the incorrect dressage riders do
(every sport has it's 'common errors') in terms of head riding, I do
feel like I am pursuing the stated goals of dressage in general. I
also have to look hard for a trainer I want to work with--but they are
out there and doing well.

Eileen Morgan
The Mare's Nest

From:	lizzard woman
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:29:58 GMT

"jmc" wrote in message
news:35ilt4F4hoslnU1@individual.net...
| Dawn J-L wrote:
| > Eileen Morgan wrote:
| >
| >>Anyone have good experince switching back and forth? I've only taken
| >>horses from one style to another, not tried to do both.
| >>
| >>Eileen Morgan
| >>The Mare's Nest
|
| I'm following this thread with great interest. I also come from mostly
| Western riding, now I'm learning what's probably the basis of Dressage
| here in England...
|
| (A quick recap: I last took lessons 20+ years ago, both disciplines, in
| college. Now I'm taking lessons again, after only spotty mostly-trail
| riding in the intervening years.)

| My first few lessons with younger instructors had me hanging on to the
| bit for all I was worth. So much so that I got blisters - and was being
| told to take a stronger contact. I hated it, and it just seemed so WRONG.

You can't take up more contact that you have the leg/seat to back it up.
How were you able to move forward at all with that much contact??? Was the
horse moving?

| Fortunately, now I'm being taught by the owner, on a horse that also
| hates that strong contact, and is being taught to reach for the soft
| contact I'm re-learning to offer. Not loopy reins as in Western, but a
| light, giving contact on a rein that runs straight from my hand to the
| bit. Suits me much better.

That sounds much better.

| If that stranglehold is what's expected in Dressage today, I guess I'll
| never learn it. I can't imagine how one could possibly get a horse into
| the correct frame hanging on to their mouth like that!

I ride at a competition dressage barn. I've only been there for about 1.5
years but I have never heard anyone told to ride with a stranglehold. I
have heard people corrected for doing so on more occasions than I can count,
especially if you try that crap with the inside rein. You can't have any
forward if you're hanging on their mouth. You can have forward and round if
you have a soft elastic contact backed by seat and leg.

Forget frame. I think you are thinking of collection. You can't force
collection. Collection "happens" when you are doing everything else
correctly. Self carriage, the ideal, requires very little or no contact.

--
love,
la mangosteena

"The United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian
Religion" -- Treaty of Tripoli, 1797, ratified by Congress
"Religion did for bullshit, what Stonehenge did for rocks." -- The World
Famous Tink

From:	Joyce Reynolds-Ward
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 18:54:48 -0800

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:29:58 GMT, "lizzard woman"
wrote:

snip

>You can't take up more contact that you have the leg/seat to back it up.
>How were you able to move forward at all with that much contact??? Was the
>horse moving?

Sad, but this is actually a frightfully common instructional
experience. BTDT.

jrw

From:	Priscilla Dance
Subject:	Re: dressage versus western training
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:07:41 -0700

lizzard woman wrote:
> "jmc" wrote in message
> news:35ilt4F4hoslnU1@individual.net...
> | Dawn J-L wrote:
> | > Eileen Morgan wrote:
> | >
> | >>Anyone have good experince switching back and forth? I've only taken
> | >>horses from one style to another, not tried to do both.
> | >>
> | >>Eileen Morgan
> | >>The Mare's Nest
> |
> | I'm following this thread with great interest. I also come from mostly
> | Western riding, now I'm learning what's probably the basis of Dressage
> | here in England...
> |
> | (A quick recap: I last took lessons 20+ years ago, both disciplines, in
> | college. Now I'm taking lessons again, after only spotty mostly-trail
> | riding in the intervening years.)
>
>
>
> | My first few lessons with younger instructors had me hanging on to the
> | bit for all I was worth. So much so that I got blisters - and was being
> | told to take a stronger contact. I hated it, and it just seemed so WRONG.
>
> You can't take up more contact that you have the leg/seat to back it up.
> How were you able to move forward at all with that much contact??? Was the
> horse moving?
>
> | Fortunately, now I'm being taught by the owner, on a horse that also
> | hates that strong contact, and is being taught to reach for the soft
> | contact I'm re-learning to offer. Not loopy reins as in Western, but a
> | light, giving contact on a rein that runs straight from my hand to the
> | bit. Suits me much better.
>
> That sounds much better.
>
> | If that stranglehold is what's expected in Dressage today, I guess I'll
> | never learn it. I can't imagine how one could possibly get a horse into
> | the correct frame hanging on to their mouth like that!
>
> I ride at a competition dressage barn. I've only been there for about 1.5
> years but I have never heard anyone told to ride with a stranglehold. I
> have heard people corrected for doing so on more occasions than I can count,
> especially if you try that crap with the inside rein. You can't have any
> forward if you're hanging on their mouth. You can have forward and round if
> you have a soft elastic contact backed by seat and leg.
>
> Forget frame. I think you are thinking of collection. You can't force
> collection. Collection "happens" when you are doing everything else
> correctly. Self carriage, the ideal, requires very little or no contact.
>
Not only that, but the horse has to build up the strength.

Priscilla