|
Post by specialized on Dec 9, 2011 19:37:31 GMT 1
I think you're missing my point somewhat, which is that voice aids if used should be very precise and specific. Mostly they aren't, I've lost count of the times I've seen people say "up" to get a horse's foot up then just keep repeating it endlessly when the horse doesn't respond. Likewise with "back", "over" etc, I've yet to find a horse who responds to those voice aids with no physical back up, yet they'll all respond to the physical aid without the voice (even if it is the lightest of touches), what does that tell you? If your horse is trained to respond to voice commands without a physical aid it will respond as such. I am not talking about incessant chatter, I am talking about specific voice aids, especially when ridden as the horse cannot always pick up your body language when you are sitting behind his eyes. If I am riding one of my boys and we come to a rough bit of ground that he has not noticed I can just say 'watch' and he will look down and steady himself. It is down to building the full relationship to suit what you require - if you want to work without voice command that is personal preference, I know what works for me. michellep wrote Again, only if the horse has been taught the specific cues. Read more: ihdg.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=gh11&action=display&thread=119393#ixzz1g42tnv6aYou can say that about any horse and any cue.
|
|
|
Post by gem on Dec 9, 2011 22:00:44 GMT 1
I think it depends on the context of the situation - like jenny I can say Ho and Diesel will stop; I know this as I often leave his stable door open when I go into the tack room and he will start to come out - I can stand in my tackroom and say ho and he will stop - yet he cant see me. However the word has been repeated in training with my body so perhaps he learned the queue first and now understands the word?
I also think talking can be beneficial - with his mum out hacking I used to sing to her to keep her calm - im theory you can say that singing relaxes the body and hence thats why she relaxed but I cant say that I was ever worried by her so im not sure this is the case, i think its more the tone they recognise
Interesting though!
|
|
|
Post by wabuska on Dec 9, 2011 22:04:03 GMT 1
Flynn knows a firm 'no' and will screech to a halt in whatever he's doing when I say it.
|
|
jinglejoys
Grand Prix Poster
Grand Prix Poster
Posts: 3,503
|
Post by jinglejoys on Dec 9, 2011 22:25:41 GMT 1
I try not to say the "ho" word as Malaga tends to stop sharp at the"h" and I like to be ready ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by starbuck on Dec 10, 2011 8:48:45 GMT 1
I do tend to have a chatter to my horse when were out hacking but I've also taught him specific voice commands. 'No' which means stop whatever you're doing it's wrong, 'back' and 'over'. The back came in very useful when he half squeezed himself into my tack/feed room, I stood outside unable to get in and used 'back' not having massive expectations but out he backed. I was very surprised and incredibly pleased that his response to his training overode his curiousity and greed. The 'no' I mainly used in teaching him that nipping was not acceptable but it's morphed into 'stop whatever you're doing or about to do' which again is proving incredibly useful. These are single word clear cut commands that he reponds to though not the chatter.
|
|
Derek Clark
Grand Prix Poster
Olympic Poster
Posts: 1,369
|
Post by Derek Clark on Dec 10, 2011 10:43:47 GMT 1
Hi michelle,
Interesting topic...
No doubt you'll have seen me banging on in previous posts about the importance of the hand in riding and training horses (even though it's gone out of fashion in the modern day) and this subject is one that really illustrates why that is so.
At the end of the day we all want a means of influencing our horses to do the things we want, when we want and not do the things we don't want, especially when we really don't want them. That means that we have to create a language and then teach our horses the alphabet, syntax and grammar of that language. There are a variety of means that we can employ... visual, auditory or tactile. There are also different training methods we can employ... classical conditioning or operant conditioning, for example.
Some of these means of expressing language are more readily understood by horses while others need more 'teaching'. Some are more reliable in difficult situations while while others are more delicate. Some, again, are regarded as more 'elegant' or fashionable' while others are not.
They can and do all work provided the rider is clear enough in their own mind what the alphabet, syntax and grammar of their chosen language is and are consistent in the way they apply it. Once one means has been established, it can then be used to train another, and another, etc, etc.
There is a principle in systems thinking that states "the person or thing with the greatest flexibility of behaviour controls the outcome of any situation", so it's useful to have a variety of aids available to deal with different circumstances.
In old classical methodology,for example, the starting point is clear - it's the whip that produces motion most readily and the hand that directs it most reliably and effectively. Just waving a whip in the air is usually enough to produce movement in a green horse. For convenience, the horse is then trained progressively (by classical conditioning- using them at the same time) that the rider's legs represent the same stimulus as the whip. At the same time, a trainer could also associate a verbal cue together with the tactile one - by saying "walk-on" at the same time as touching with their calves at the same time as waving the whip. If the training has succeeded then any one of those three options should eventually produce exactly the same response.
To direct the energy produced, the hand is without a doubt the most effective and precise aid. A skilled rider will start with the hand (usually on the ground either via a cavesson or head collar of some kind) and then, once the horse understands the aids from the hand, will progress to sitting on the horse's back and associate changes in their spine (again by classical conditioning) so that the aids can become more 'elegant'.
The reason the hand is the starting point is that, when used skillfully, it can more or less 'enforce' the responses the rider wants to teach. Of course that can be misused but that's not the intention. All of the other aiding methods can be misused too, it's just that the consequences aren't always so obvious!
Join-Up fits nicely into this progression too as a tool that can be used to develop the trust and the beginning of a relationship that enables the rider to touch the horse without the horse's natural fears being aroused in the first place. It's not the only way to accomplish this but it is very effective.
I like to use a combination of everything available to me. I might start with a Join-Up if I think it will be useful, then progress to work by the hand in a head collar and then cavesson. Then I'd start introducing voice aids on the ground. Then I'd get a horse comfortable with the idea of a saddle and rider while continuing to develop the horse's understanding of the hand.
By the time the horse is ready to carry the rider's weight comfortably, he is more or less 'trained' to the aids thanks to all the work on the ground. Early riding then becomes very easy. I can use my hands from his back because he already understands them. I can even use my voice to help reinforce the actions of the hand without physical force. It's a process of building from the simple to the complex. Each time I introduce something new I only make one change at a time and I try never to put myself or the horse in a situation where we'd have to rely on complex understanding before it's been established.
So, riding a horse on 'half-loose' reins by the action of the seat alone is the 'proof' that the training has been taken to a very high level and that the horse is well educated. Doing it in the early days in order to get around the problems of irritating the horse's mouth due to a lack of skill in the hands is a much more risky way of going about things. The voice can work but it relies entirely on the horse's attention to the rider. If the horse becomes excited or fearful, it might work, but it also might not... If it doesn't, the hand is the only reliable aid that restores order and trains the horse to listen more intently to the voice or seat, or whatever other secondary aid the rider chooses to use.
Derek
|
|
|
Post by Catrin on Dec 10, 2011 14:01:45 GMT 1
… The instructor in an advanced lesson … stood in the middle, shouting: "Abteilung....[German: group, prepare for a change...] Galopp! [canter!]". And half the horses turned in towards the middle and lined up on the centre line! … they did that on voice command, despite the physical aids of the riders telling them to stay on the track and canter. … Be careful what you teach, it may be what you get! Brilliant. ;D I use only two voice commands and am thinking of teaching another one. The first was useful, not for the reason I taught it, but in an emergency. I taught all the horses I owned "over" and "stand". I didn't know then that I could use other means to achieve this. "Stand" came in most useful thirty years ago at Chepstow Horse Trials. When you fail to jump a hedge and end up in the ditch with a horse on top of you, the fact that you have a verbal command that ensures your horse doesn't move, buys you time to get out from underneath - and shows that commands transfer to when the horse is no longer even vertical! The second command is the one François teaches in groundwork, Jenny mentions the "Ho!" Excellent for getting the timing right for instant stop, but transferable, and the only one that I ever use ridden, because it drops your energy into your abdomen, which is exactly what you want to do when you stop. The one I am thinking of teaching is "Back!" I teach horses to back up and expect them to respond with body language, but when the feed room door blows open and you are on the outside and can't get in, "Back" can be very useful when you want to move a very large and curious warmblood.
|
|
|
Post by mandal on Dec 10, 2011 15:26:07 GMT 1
I teach over, back and stand to all mine. Not all are 100% perfect in all yet but a work in progress. I use whoa (don't know how to spell the short version) instead of ho.
They all know 'out' when I forget to shut the hay barn gate and they've got in. I say it firmly from across the yard and they all file out. It only has that context though.
|
|
|
Post by Beth&Rosie on Dec 10, 2011 19:21:45 GMT 1
I use whoa, which is very useful with a very excited warmblood on a XC or SJ course, I am also teaching back, but at the moment that is coupled with either a light touch on a rope or pointing behind her (that one is generally at meal times to keep her at the back of her stable while i put the feed in the front and leave)
I also use the voice to get a horses attention back/distract from unwanted behavior. I think I may have inadvertantly taught her shhh! for shutting up. It was very funny the other day, she was scraping the concrete on the yard and i said shhh! as she was about to slam her foot down again and she still scraped, but a lot quieter!
|
|
gillmcg
Grand Prix Poster
Olympic Poster
Posts: 1,948
|
Post by gillmcg on Dec 11, 2011 9:59:06 GMT 1
Have one who 'speaks' French and one who thinks he understands English. Welcome to come and play with mine and see how far specifics get you with them - particularly how quickly they pick up what you really really mean rather than what you think you 'say'. I use intention and some noise/rubbish! - not words. I think..........
|
|
|
Post by rj on Dec 11, 2011 18:18:56 GMT 1
All very interesting points, but I am sure horses don't expect to be spoken to. Also, by us concentrating on using our voices, we can neglect to notice what our body language is saying.
I would suggest that everyone should at some stage make whatever effort it takes to communicate with their horse in the language that he (& every other) horse can understand.
If it makes you feel better to use your voice fair enough, but at least take some time to become attuned to their body language, and use your body and thought-patterns to convey what you are trying to say.
Someone said they hate it when riders don't speak to their horses. I think I'd rather say I don't like it when riders don't communicate with their horses, but have a 1-way dialogue of the ' I say, you do' type..
Someone else said they talked and petted their horse through what could have been a scary experience. Mmm, not sure if/how that works. By focussing on the scary thing and changing your behaviour when approaching, you COULD reinforce the fact that this is something to be scared of. I would rather ensure that my breathing and heart-rate remain calm (which talking may produce) whilst directing my focus elsewhere.
But we all know theories don't necessarily translate to practice!
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Moy on Dec 11, 2011 18:43:14 GMT 1
My experience is that horses can learn verbal signals for example when loose schooling to walk, trot, canter, lengthen stride, shorten stride, halt.
My recollection of the 5-day Foundation course was that a 'kissing' noise was used to encourage the horse to move - they seemed to respond but I doubt that falls within a horse's 'natural' vocabulary. The thing that impressed me about Kelly and IH from that course was the open mindedness - so I would encourage people to explore and see what works with particular individual horses. And I wouldn't rule out verbal communication as not being natural - horses do use verbal communication.
|
|
|
Post by specialized on Dec 11, 2011 19:00:34 GMT 1
My experience is that horses can learn verbal signals for example when loose schooling to walk, trot, canter, lengthen stride, shorten stride, halt. My recollection of the 5-day Foundation course was that a 'kissing' noise was used to encourage the horse to move - they seemed to respond but I doubt that falls within a horse's 'natural' vocabulary. The thing that impressed me about Kelly and IH from that course was the open mindedness - so I would encourage people to explore and see what works with particular individual horses. And I wouldn't rule out verbal communication as not being natural - horses do use verbal communication. Yes, so how do people ask for different paces when loose schooling without using voice commands? I agree horses use a large amount of verbal communication in the herd, so they must be amenable to our verbal communication - it is not totally alien to them.
|
|
|
Post by taklishim on Dec 11, 2011 19:09:41 GMT 1
Someone else said they talked and petted their horse through what could have been a scary experience. Mmm, not sure if/how that works. By focussing on the scary thing and changing your behaviour when approaching, you COULD reinforce the fact that this is something to be scared of. I would rather ensure that my breathing and heart-rate remain calm (which talking may produce) whilst directing my focus elsewhere.
yes that was me. Sometimes I just get lost. There seem to be so many theories. I just rely on old common sense, or at least that it what it seems to me to be that I am doing. I have no doubt there will be some theory to support or disprove it. ;D
How does it work? well I made sure that the horse was reassured and thought that tractors were not scary. How do I know it works? because now he goes happily past bigger tractors or lorries. When he was younger he was nervous of little ones like many horses. It gradually built up his confidence. I certainly focussed on the tractor and I made sure he did as well. I didn't want it creeping past him and him not realising why we were stopping. I wanted him to look at it, focus on it and get the message that all was safe and he could stand calmly. When he was younger we would have gone up to the tractor, walked around it, licked it, eaten some nuts off it until he was so confident he would just about have climbed inside it. I don't want him to go past the tractor because my focus is directed elsewhere and hopefully his is as well. I want him to be brave and courageous with tractor's (or whatever) so that when I am not there he can be brave on his own not just because he picks up on my focus.
For example we drove the tractor (quite big one) past his stable door last night. On the front loader was a large hanging dumpy bag. It was so close to his open top door that he had to take his head back in for us to get past. This was in a small stable and he had no means of escape. His reaction was to stand very confidently with his nose almost touching the bag. Big noisy tractor was nothing to be scared off. I was not there to help him and he did it one his own.
I don't rightly care what the theory behind him going safely past tractors is, I just care with modern traffic conditions, that he does it confidently.
I am amazed that no one else seems to use their voice, or to stroke them, to reassure their horse and that people find it strange.
|
|
|
Post by taklishim on Dec 11, 2011 19:26:07 GMT 1
but I am sure horses don't expect to be spoken to.
how on earth can you say this? Why shouldn't they be spoken to? What is actually wrong with speaking to them?
we can neglect to notice what our body language is saying.
I not sure who you assume the collective "we" to be.
|
|