Persianhorse
Grand Prix Poster
The picture is taken from a figure found carved on a bone 5000 years ago in ancient Persia.
Posts: 3,405
|
Post by Persianhorse on Jul 26, 2007 0:11:26 GMT 1
I am for the long line reining and totally against the lunging.
Lunging a Horse is only for the benefit of the Human not the benefit of the Horse. We lunge because we cant ride a Horse with that much Energy. We lunge because we didn't give the Horse the room to play (part from those which when you look into their eyes they are dead long time ago and they don't have any motion or movements what so ever) or run because of the box Arrest. I still don't know how do we control a green Horse full of energy by single line lunging!? I still don't know what is the use of single line lunging for the Horse!? I still don't know what kind of training could we give to the Horse by single line lunging!?
Single line lunging puts the Horse out of balance and the spine too if you look close you will see single line lunging a Horse the inside ear is closer to you standing in the middle than the inside nose. It will look like this ) X The ) is the Horse and the X is the lunger standing in the middle.
Lunging is bad especially for those Horses that they are not on the Hinds the Horses that they don't know how to use their hinds as the main source of the power and hands only for changing direction (Some where in this thread I read about this and it is right). We have to teach the Horse how to use the hinds as the main source of power because Horses Did Not Come To Life For Us Humans To Ride Them therefore if we want to ride them we have to teach them some of the things we want them to do for us or otherwise we have to learn from them all the time , we have to listen to them by our eyes and we have to Honor them respect them , gain their confidence and establish trust in them them we can make a good lasting bound with them. When we are with a Horse we have to become a Horse.
Take care.
|
|
Derek Clark
Grand Prix Poster
Olympic Poster
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by Derek Clark on Jul 26, 2007 9:23:28 GMT 1
Hi persianhorse,
I use both lungeing and long-reining from time to time. I believe that both methods can be useful in certain situations and that both also can have problems, depending on how they are carried out (there is an explanation on here from someone who's horse began to rear while being long-reined). I believe you have previously posted about hobbling your horses and were perhaps a little surprised that some people in the UK were not very happy about that.
Have you ever heard the idea that the world reflects our own beliefs back to us and then our own minds make them appear true. For example, if someone believes they have a difficult, nasty, dangerous horse - then that appears to be true (for that person). Everything the horse does will be "proof" to that person of what they believe, because of the way they choose to interpret the horse's actions. If another person believes that the same horse is actually gentle, frightened and just doesn't understand what to do - then, that will be true for them, because of the way they interpret the horse's actions...
You have very kindly shared some of your own beliefs:
Lunging a Horse is only for the benefit of the Human not the benefit of the Horse. We lunge because we cant ride a Horse with that much Energy. We lunge because we didn't give the Horse the room to play We as human always want everything for our own comfort not others (copied from your post on another board)
You state your beliefs as if they are "fact" and then say (on another board!) "It is the truth!".
I'm just wondering, how do you know this? Are they always "the" truth - and for everyone?
With best wishes and friendly thoughts,
Derek
|
|
|
Post by fin on Jul 26, 2007 10:40:54 GMT 1
I think what PH says is pretty true, actually. I mean, it doesn't HAVE to be like that, and in skilled hands lungeing can be very beneficial. But why do most people lunge? To get the bucks out, to exercise it if it's stabled and there's no time to ride, that sort of thing It's a bit like humans who park themselves on a treadmill for half an hour rather than go for a proper varied terrain run outside.....now you can hurt yourself pretty badly on a treadmill (just like you can hurt a horse lungeing) because most folks just plod along mindlessly watching tv at one speed rather than varying pace and incline and stride length etc like you'd have to if you were outside running. But I guess when it's snowing or raining or friday night and the great outdoors is full of jeering chavs, the treadmill (and indeed the lungeline) seems like the better option That's not to say treadmills (and lungeing) are bad--only that people make more bad use of them than good I must admit the only reason I've started to assume lungeing COULD be useful and not just mindlessly wearing the horse out, is because I've been lucky enough to talk to classically trained bods recently (including your good selves). But I guess in Iran (where PH is) and in lots of places even in Britain, Classical ideas of training aren't the norm at all. So I can see why lots of folks recoil at lungeing as being A Bad Thing
|
|
Derek Clark
Grand Prix Poster
Olympic Poster
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by Derek Clark on Jul 26, 2007 11:31:33 GMT 1
Hi Finn, Yes, me too ;D Very possibly! So, how can we help anyone living in "darkness" into a more "enlightened" place. My suggestion is that raising awareness of the advantages and disadvantages of any technique, practice or method gives each of us an opportunity to make "informed choices". Perhaps that might be more beneficial for horses and people in the greater sense than just labelling something as "bad" because that's how one person "currently" sees it. I mentioned on another thread the other day that when "experts" say something, or we read it in a book, their opinion can assume an air of "truth" that it doesn't necessarily merit. Each person's opinion is just that, their opinion. Haven't we all believed in certain things at some stage of our lives only to discover that what we'd been "told" or led to believe wasn't necessarily "the truth" after all...? Just to be clear, I'm not saying anything negative here about anyone who's written books ;D I just wonder if the authors really do intend for the reader to believe everything they say as "absolute truth". Is there really such a thing...? If we trace the history of any subject or discipline, it seems to pass through four phases: 1) Monasticism (the experts say how things are and the students agree without question) 2) Scholasticism (the teacher says how things are and the students ask certain questions within certain boundaries) 3) Empiricism (the students start to experiment for themselves and make discoveries, but their thinking is constrained within an existing belief system - the risk with science is that scientists "discover" what they are looking for) 4) Rationalism (the student considers that what they have learned is just one version of how things might be and begins to understand how that version of reality was formed and what other versions could be equally "true") Which of these most reflects the practice of " intelligent" horsemanship? Best wishes, Derek
|
|
|
Post by fin on Jul 26, 2007 12:38:46 GMT 1
Hi Finn, If we trace the history of any subject or discipline, it seems to pass through four phases: 1) Monasticism (the experts say how things are and the students agree without question) 2) Scholasticism (the teacher says how things are and the students ask certain questions within certain boundaries) 3) Empiricism (the students start to experiment for themselves and make discoveries, but their thinking is constrained within an existing belief system - the risk with science is that scientists "discover" what they are looking for) 4) Rationalism (the student considers that what they have learned is just one version of how things might be and begins to understand how that version of reality was formed and what other versions could be equally "true") Which of these most reflects the practice of " intelligent" horsemanship? Lol @ monasticism--I'm not entirely sure that was how medieval monasteries worked but I'll let that one go since I'm too sad a geek already and now's not the time to start a debate about that and besides, yes, I agree in general principle anyway I reckon all four approaches have their place in IH, you know. It depends where you are on the ladder and how much you know--or don't know, and what you need to know! And what situation you're in, of course. I had a drama teacher years ago who was a pretty harsh taskmaster, but he did say one day that he felt that if his students didn't eventually disagree with him, he hadn't done his job properly
|
|
Derek Clark
Grand Prix Poster
Olympic Poster
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by Derek Clark on Jul 26, 2007 12:53:35 GMT 1
Now there's wisdom! ;D
Derek
|
|
|
Post by fin on Jul 26, 2007 12:58:18 GMT 1
Or hedging my bets Having said that, that's never a bad idea either ;D
|
|
|
Post by suewhitmore on Jul 26, 2007 13:43:12 GMT 1
and also fail to see what is there in front of their eyes - and not just scientists. I fail to see why a tool should be labelled as bad because of the hands that use it - but then that would put rollkur in the same class as lunging - is it? I lunge horses when I want to see how they are moving or when I want to assist a rider. It has the benefit of being able to be used anywhere rather than in an enclosed area. I cannot see how a horse moves if I am on my own by long reining. Got to go, haven't got time to breathe today. ETA My horses don't buck, so I wouldn't know about that side of it.
|
|
Derek Clark
Grand Prix Poster
Olympic Poster
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by Derek Clark on Jul 26, 2007 14:07:00 GMT 1
sueW said: Mmm, quite so. Probably why it isn't being "banned". My guess is that it's used because it produces something that it's users want. The questions that one might ask of its proponents though are "what are the benefits that the people who use it really seek, what negative side-effects does this method of achieving that carry and what other ways might there be of solving the original "problem"... ... Of course, they might then have to consider accepting some ideas that they might currently believe to be "bad" or "look wrong" or "rubbish" or "too complicated" or "we don't do it that way around here..." Funny old world, swings and roundabouts, what goes around comes around... Derek PS: I just finished reading " The methodical training of the riding horse" which outlines Baucher's second manner. (We had a little discussion a while back about this being cited by the proponents of rolkur as the start of it all). My french is a little rusty (though I'm enjoying getting back into the swing of it ;D) but I'm still puzzled as to how they come up with rolkur as an interpretation of what the author calls "ramener outré". He (de Kerbrech) keeps banging on about the importance of having the horse's neck and head "as high as possible". Perhaps an "expert" told them how to do it...
|
|
Derek Clark
Grand Prix Poster
Olympic Poster
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by Derek Clark on Jul 26, 2007 14:51:14 GMT 1
sueW also said: Ooh! Would you like them to, just so you can find out? I know where there's a Terraxipus going spare... Derek
|
|
|
Post by friesianfanatic on Jul 26, 2007 18:13:41 GMT 1
I can see both sides to the 'lungeing' debate LOL!! I have *experienced* both sides LOL! I have used lunging as nothing more than a run round in a circle, blow a bit of steam off type of exercise *blush* then as I have become a more discerning rider and took time to learn, used lunging as a wonderful training tool! The fact is, is to start with we should look at any training aid / method as just that.............it is neither good or bad, positive or negative, it is simply 'a method' Then by learning, watching and also greatly by our experience, we can ascertain if this is a VALUABLE method or a RISK to our horses. Now I did say 'based upon OUR EXPERIENCE, but how many of us have let other peoples experience become our own? People say - Ooooo this method is fantastic or this method is Horrendous!! etc, etc and we then take this on as OUR experience! And tell others too LOL!! See how things can get so distorted? We become 'blind' to some superior knowledge without taking the time to 'test' it or to 'check' we understand it ourselves. This is when a 'good' method can become dangerous (by not using it correctly) or a 'bad' method become prevalent (by people not questioning it) and in both instances the problems are caused by lack of knowledge. Lack of knowledge is a dangerous thing - but so is blindly following other people's methods without first investigating and questioning the theories. I suppose what i am trying to say is there is a lot of good 'stuff' done badly but it doesnt mean that the original exercise is worthless - just that the original exercise has become forgotten and a caricature has taken its place. Which is a shame, as lunging can be a very helpful exercise when carried out properly but I agree, an awful one when not Education - as always - is key
|
|
|
Post by Susan on Jul 26, 2007 18:36:48 GMT 1
Ok I have joined in..didnt mean to though..
SueW wrote
I cannot see how a horse moves if I am on my own by long reining.
Sue I fail to see why you can not see how a horse moves in long lines.. have you seen my video I have posted of Flynn being long lined..you can see how he moves easily.. It isn't a criticism just an observation..
But for me and this is "only" my opinion... I prefer to Long Line..
|
|
Derek Clark
Grand Prix Poster
Olympic Poster
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by Derek Clark on Jul 26, 2007 19:01:42 GMT 1
No issue with expressing our preferences, is there...?
Derek ;D
|
|
|
Post by june on Jul 26, 2007 20:05:37 GMT 1
Depends on what you mean by long lining as to whether or not you can see easily how the horse moves. If by long lining you mean walking behind the horse in the same tracks then it is difficult to see how the horse moves. If by long lining you mean to use two lines but not necessarily to walk behind the horse then you can see how the horse moves. Some people call that double line lunging.
Going back to an earlier point about not disregarding the useful tools people can teach you while not agreeing with everything they do, that can be difficult if some of the things they say go so against what you believe to be fundamental. If something goes so much against your beliefs - take using the same saddle on every horse for example - then it is hard not to discount other things that person has to offer. If they get something like that so wrong then it is only human nature to think that lots of other things they say will be wrong. That may mean throwing the baby out with the bath water but it is understandable. Having done a clinic with Annabelle, I'd agree that there is stuff that Craig can offer but if I'd known more about him prior to the clinic and not checked Annabelle out with people I know and respect then I might not have been inclined to host that clinic.
|
|
|
Post by fin on Jul 26, 2007 21:28:34 GMT 1
OK, I know this is madly off topic, but I know all you guys will be able to answer it. (I really didn't want to PM any of you with this because it's just too wierd ;D ). Why is Craig Stevens selling rubber chickens on his site, and does he really ride with one in his pocket??? Sorry. But I HAD to ask! ;D www.classical-equitation.com/therubberchicken.htmJust to prove I'm not making it up to lower the tone! ;D ;D
|
|