Post by Derek Clark on Jul 19, 2007 13:10:15 GMT 1
Hi Yan,
Well, I have to say I'm leaning more towards doing things on the basis of clinics - teaching a bunch of people in individual (or group) lessons - as this means I could travel to far-way places without having to work 24 hours a day
Would you be interested in organising something like that in Dorset? Please do PM or email if you'd like to disuss either option a bit further.
Hi Catrin,
That's a double shame, though probably a wise decision, if you see what I mean!
OK, the bit about the weight of the cavesson is important. When the horse is fully trained, one of the things it will learn to do is to carry the weight of the bit hanging directly from the poll on the cheek pieces of the bridle. This is why the "dressage" idea of the face being vertical comes from. The important thing is, though, that the face being vertical comes as a result of a number of internal "decisions" that the horse makes as it goes through the training.
Unfortunately, what often happens in the modern day is that the horse is "forced" to adopt the face vertical position through the use of gadgest like side reins. The problem here is that it "appears" to be "correct" if we look at the head and neck, but everything else (engagement of the quarters, balance of weight, the horse's internal mental state - ie the stuff that really counts!) could be all wrong.
When starting training as a riding-horse, one of the first things the horse needs to learn is to carry the weight more towards the haunches. In the beginning, this often means the nose will be poking out as the horse elevates the neck. There are many people in the modern day who just won't believe this and would say that the nose poking out means the horse is "above the bit". I can't say that they're "wrong", I'd just suggest trying training the way I'm describing and then make your own choice based on the results you get. ;D Have a look at Philippe Karl's DVDs to see an example (blimey, I should be on commission, the number of times I've said that ;D).
The weight of the cavesson helps in several ways:
1) Having a weight on the nose helps to strengthen the authority of the half-halt at a distance (eg when working in-hand at some distance from the mouth or lungeing)
2) The weight does have some "resistance training" (weight training) effect on the elevator muscles at the base of the neck.
3) The extra weight on the "balance lever" also encourages the horse to choose to sit more on the haunches.
4) The horse learns to carry the weight hanging from the poll before the bit is even introduced (also bear in mind that the old-style bits that were used in Baroque times were enormous great curbs that weighed about 5kg!)
5) Having the line attached above the nose apeears to help the horse understand the indirect rein better than attaching below or behind.
There should never be any force applied along the lunge line. If there is, then it's "giving the horse an aeroplane ride", not lungeing! This is easier said than done, but it's the whole essence.
I have to say I'm not sure, as I didn't get to see what the results were or what KFH actually means by "self-carriage" - it's a term used by many people, each with different meanings.
In one sense, we probably agree, since what I'm striving for is to be able to position the horse's skeleton via the use of the reins and bit, but without the need for any actual physical "touch" as I do it. The bit gives me the option of physical touch if the horse isn't paying (enough) attention, or is in the early stages of training, but my aim is to "captivate the horse's mind" by being so "interesting" to him that he is focused on having a conversation with me via the bit and reins all the time.
The question I don't yet know the answer to is how much people like KFH or Nevzarov are actually able to influence the positioning of the horse's spine when they have no actual physical means at all. If they can do it with total precision - then hats-off to them and I want to learn how ;D On the other hand, there are lots of definitions of things like "self-carriage" and "engagement".
Just because someone says a horse is "balanced", "light" or "on the haunches" doesn't necessarily make it "true". It depends on what you feel when you actually ride and try to do something like canter into rein-back or piaffe directly into a 4 foot jump.... That's what dressage tsts were invented for - unfortunately they are "judged" on the visual result rather than the internal sensual experience for horse and rider. In one sense that's OK, but in another sense it is so far wide of the mark it causes all sorts of problems.
For example, a horse can do something that looks like a shoulder-in in a number of ways, by pushing more with one leg or pushing less with another, or a mixture. You can't tell when watching which it is, but you can tell instantly if you test it by asking for another movement (which requires the horse to alter his balance).
Higher level dressage tests are close- interval "tricks and traps" that test whether the horse really is balanced and supple in the way it appears. I find it fascinating that many of the "harder" elements are being removed - apparently because modern riders and trainers find them impossible to achieve... Unfortunately, the way lower level tests have developed actually makes it very hard for those same trainers and riders to develop their horses in the way they need to in order to find the higher level stuff easy - it encourages the horse to go even more on the forehand, rather than rebalance towards the haunches!.
Real equitation isn't actually about what it looks like (though it does also look very nice indeed when the internal stuff is right ).
Derek
Well, I have to say I'm leaning more towards doing things on the basis of clinics - teaching a bunch of people in individual (or group) lessons - as this means I could travel to far-way places without having to work 24 hours a day
Would you be interested in organising something like that in Dorset? Please do PM or email if you'd like to disuss either option a bit further.
Hi Catrin,
But, having only had the basic BHS lunging training, I haven't got a clue where to start to do that. ..As I said, I can see how lunging causes problems, so I avoid them by never doing it as I was taught to.
That's a double shame, though probably a wise decision, if you see what I mean!
From a mechanical viewpoint, I can only see an already heavy head on a cantilever gaining more mass and then an application of force along the lunge rein causing an imbalance.
OK, the bit about the weight of the cavesson is important. When the horse is fully trained, one of the things it will learn to do is to carry the weight of the bit hanging directly from the poll on the cheek pieces of the bridle. This is why the "dressage" idea of the face being vertical comes from. The important thing is, though, that the face being vertical comes as a result of a number of internal "decisions" that the horse makes as it goes through the training.
Unfortunately, what often happens in the modern day is that the horse is "forced" to adopt the face vertical position through the use of gadgest like side reins. The problem here is that it "appears" to be "correct" if we look at the head and neck, but everything else (engagement of the quarters, balance of weight, the horse's internal mental state - ie the stuff that really counts!) could be all wrong.
When starting training as a riding-horse, one of the first things the horse needs to learn is to carry the weight more towards the haunches. In the beginning, this often means the nose will be poking out as the horse elevates the neck. There are many people in the modern day who just won't believe this and would say that the nose poking out means the horse is "above the bit". I can't say that they're "wrong", I'd just suggest trying training the way I'm describing and then make your own choice based on the results you get. ;D Have a look at Philippe Karl's DVDs to see an example (blimey, I should be on commission, the number of times I've said that ;D).
The weight of the cavesson helps in several ways:
1) Having a weight on the nose helps to strengthen the authority of the half-halt at a distance (eg when working in-hand at some distance from the mouth or lungeing)
2) The weight does have some "resistance training" (weight training) effect on the elevator muscles at the base of the neck.
3) The extra weight on the "balance lever" also encourages the horse to choose to sit more on the haunches.
4) The horse learns to carry the weight hanging from the poll before the bit is even introduced (also bear in mind that the old-style bits that were used in Baroque times were enormous great curbs that weighed about 5kg!)
5) Having the line attached above the nose apeears to help the horse understand the indirect rein better than attaching below or behind.
There should never be any force applied along the lunge line. If there is, then it's "giving the horse an aeroplane ride", not lungeing! This is easier said than done, but it's the whole essence.
KFH was aiming to get self carriage with no contact at all. How does that fit in?
I have to say I'm not sure, as I didn't get to see what the results were or what KFH actually means by "self-carriage" - it's a term used by many people, each with different meanings.
In one sense, we probably agree, since what I'm striving for is to be able to position the horse's skeleton via the use of the reins and bit, but without the need for any actual physical "touch" as I do it. The bit gives me the option of physical touch if the horse isn't paying (enough) attention, or is in the early stages of training, but my aim is to "captivate the horse's mind" by being so "interesting" to him that he is focused on having a conversation with me via the bit and reins all the time.
The question I don't yet know the answer to is how much people like KFH or Nevzarov are actually able to influence the positioning of the horse's spine when they have no actual physical means at all. If they can do it with total precision - then hats-off to them and I want to learn how ;D On the other hand, there are lots of definitions of things like "self-carriage" and "engagement".
Just because someone says a horse is "balanced", "light" or "on the haunches" doesn't necessarily make it "true". It depends on what you feel when you actually ride and try to do something like canter into rein-back or piaffe directly into a 4 foot jump.... That's what dressage tsts were invented for - unfortunately they are "judged" on the visual result rather than the internal sensual experience for horse and rider. In one sense that's OK, but in another sense it is so far wide of the mark it causes all sorts of problems.
For example, a horse can do something that looks like a shoulder-in in a number of ways, by pushing more with one leg or pushing less with another, or a mixture. You can't tell when watching which it is, but you can tell instantly if you test it by asking for another movement (which requires the horse to alter his balance).
Higher level dressage tests are close- interval "tricks and traps" that test whether the horse really is balanced and supple in the way it appears. I find it fascinating that many of the "harder" elements are being removed - apparently because modern riders and trainers find them impossible to achieve... Unfortunately, the way lower level tests have developed actually makes it very hard for those same trainers and riders to develop their horses in the way they need to in order to find the higher level stuff easy - it encourages the horse to go even more on the forehand, rather than rebalance towards the haunches!.
Real equitation isn't actually about what it looks like (though it does also look very nice indeed when the internal stuff is right ).
Derek