Re: One can ride well and know very little about training.


johdug-jen wrote:

>
> You know, Sue, this statement could be picked apart by those who would
> say that "correct" riding is correct riding, no matter what kind of
> horse or discipline. >>

I do think that this is true though.

How else would you explain the ability of some riders to *get* these
desired responses virtually every time, on any horse? Its not some
mystical talent, you know.

It comes down to the laws of horsey physics. Push here, horse goes
here. If horse *doesnt*, then you arent pushing correctly or are doing
something else that prevents the horse from doing what you ask.

>
> That is a good example in it's most elementary state. Some would argue,
> of course, that a good rider would probably know how to get a horse to
> move foward even if the horse had never been taught the leg aid. It's
> a very simple riding issue. >>

Thats true though. We get new horses in that are recalcitrant or
resistant or just dull..and within minutes are doing what we ask. A
training miracle? Naaah. Just riding correctly, and then rewarding.

> But your well made point is that simply
> applying the correct leg aid to a horse that hasn't been trained to
> understand the aid isn't always going to get the desired result. The
> horse must be TAUGHT what the leg aid means.>>

This is where I think so many riders and trainers are misguided.

A correctly applied leg aid will result in the desired response.
Period. If the horse has learned to tune out the white noise, perhaps
it may take a minute or two, and a quiet stick, or something. You can
'teach' the horse to respond to trial and error, as Jody said. But it
aint as good as it could be. Its 'scratch and sniff' aids and the poor
horse just guesses at the correct response.


>
> In my earlier example of my student, it was a similar situation. The
> horse didn't know what the seat and leg aid meant until the rider
> enforced the desired action. The rider, who has an independent seat
> and control over her legs and hands applied the correct aids, but the
> horse didn't respond to the seat like my school horse did.>>

If she had asked correctly, the horse would have. Im serious. If you
set up the movement, and ask correctly the HORSE WILL DO IT.

> The horse
> had never been trained to respond that way. Abby's point, I think, is
> that the rider wasn't a good rider because she didn't know HOW TO TRAIN
> the horse to do downward transitions off of the seat. Or maybe she
> thinks that any horse would respond to these aids if correctly given.>>

Yes. That is exactly what I learned is true.

>
> In my opinion, the rider was limited in her experience of training a
> horse, but it doesn't take away from the fact that she is a good rider
> in general. >>

Why do you think so? Im not picking on you Jen. Why would you call her
a 'good' rider? I would call her a good student maybe, since she was
able to do what you were telling her (though if she had really learned
it on flynn she should have been able to apply it to the mare) but not
a good rider. OR trainer.

< She became an even better rider after that lesson, because
> now she has learned how to teach the horse something new. Teaching the
> horse to "give the jaw" and stretch over its topline and into the
> contact definitely required good riding in addition to learning how to
> train the horse to accept the rein aids.>>

Horses will do this quite readily when the rider asks, and then allows.

And 'rein aids' are just ways of compensating for a poor seat. When the
seat is good, the reins are auxilliary. When the horse is IN FRONT OF
THE LEG, the reins are auxilliary.


>
> Not all "good riders" know how to train this. As a matter of fact,
> MANY do not ever see the need to teach this to a horse.>>

Then how in the world could you call them a 'good rider'.

> <sue here>
> > Since the "language" is one that requires physical coordination and
> > skill, some riders are significantly better at it than others, but I
> > think that what you describe as a "good" rider requires a physical
> > capability that only a few can hope to attain.
>
> That is why I said that the student had become a good rider, but not
> yet a good trainer. She was ABLE to do what I asked of her in order to
> influence the horse. Some riders, because they haven't yet developed
> their seat, etc, could not have achieved the same results.>>

But..beginners can and do learn to do this in their first lesson. Its
not rocket science. You do however have to know how to teach it. How
can you 'develop the seat' when you say, as you said in another past
thread, that you dont think horses can feel anything through the saddle
and pad anyway? You wrote that you you felt all kinds of new things
when you touched and thought about your seat bones. Gee. So how in the
world can you *teach* a seat when you dont even know what its about?!

> And when
> you are talking about the discipline of dressage, the technical aspects
> are quite different from many other forms of riding.>>

Ya think? More technical than Grand Prix jumpers? Really?! Where the
course is different every time? Really.

You do realize that there are more dressage horses that *used* to be
jumpers, than the other way around, eh.

> There are many
> very good riders out there who are quite successfull in various forms
> of riding. They can ride horses that are hard to handle, calm down
> horses that are tense, improve their gaits to an impressive degree,
> etc. But those same riders may look like they know NOTHING (I'm
> exaggerating) when asked to effectively ride a horse in another
> discipline.>>

I honestly cant think of any. Watch the fun trade competitions at the
big shows. They have the jumper riders ride dressage tests and the
hunter riders ride a jumper course, etc. The jumper riders ALWAYS do
better at the dressage work then the dressage riders do at the jumper
work. Those good riders do very well in other disciplines. Hap rides
reiners well. Denny Emerson rode the Tevis. A very good hunter trainer
in our area also cleans up at the dressage shows. Look at Bernie
Traurig. Olympic competitor in all three disciplines.

Principles arent separate between the disciplines. Ever. Ultimate
manifiestations are, yes, but the PRINCIPLES ARE THE SAME. Its going to
hold a person back to think so.

>
> I imagine that some good hunter riders would have some trouble
> communicating certain things to a dressage horse, and some good
> dressage riders would have the same issue if they were told to jump a
> show hunter around a course of 4'fences in winning style. >>

I would put my money on the hunter rider doing a good test than the
dressage rider getting those eight perfect distances over a regular
working course.

>
> If this is not a matter of semantics, then it is a matter of one's
> understanding of what it takes to teach a horse certain things. >>

Bingo. But not in the way you mean.

>One
> does not always simply "apply correct aids" and suddenly the horse is
> "allowed" to do the desired action. >>

Actually, yes it does.

>This IS the case in some parts of
> horse training, but the more you ask of a horse, the more you realize
> that it isn't always just "there" because you gave the correct aid.>>

ACtually, yes it is, to a large degree.

I did say fitness is a big part of the equation. If the horse is fit to
do the work required, and sound enough, it will answer the question in
the desired way.

Promise.

>
> For those riders who beat themselves up thinking that they are lousy
> riders because their horses aren't doing right, it isn't always because
> the rider is a LOUSY rider, just uneducated about the particular
> training need.>>

Id say its because the rider is doing things with her body that is
giving the horse a mixed physical signal.

>
> I'm always much happier to think that the reason my horse is having
> trouble is because of something *I* am doing wrong, rather than the
> horse being UNABLE. >>

I guarantee that you are the problem.

< At least, if it's MY fault, I can get help and fix
> ME! If the horse is the problem, then the potential for disappointment
> is even greater.>

It is rarely the horses problem. And if it is, a correct fitness and
soundness program will fix it.

>
> I'd rather it be my fault any day.>>

You get your wish >;->

Abby

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Toss up 2: Straying engaged
    ... > riding, rebalancing, etc. but they are accomplishing less also. ... If the horse is fit and the rider is RIDING WELL it WONT. ...
    (rec.equestrian)
  • Re: 2nd time last thursday. Only 1 more to go!
    ... Is it only take three falls to become a rider. ... I fell off almost every time, and quit riding when I hit my ... started hunter jumper lessons at 53. ... Last fall a woman switched to her class and soon bought ehr own horse. ...
    (rec.equestrian)
  • Re: Instructors riding during lessons: Long and boring life story post
    ... Do a decent training level test at home? ... | Riding includes pretty much everything done on horseback at whatever ... |> could appear mysterious to that training level rider. ... | developing the horse. ...
    (rec.equestrian)
  • Re: Steady Shoulders-In
    ... If you practice allowing the outside flank of the horse to swing ... A rider can't "make" a horse do anything ... The shoulders-in is one of the most important and fundamental of the ... The inside leg is straight ...
    (rec.equestrian)
  • Re: Toss up 2: Straying engaged
    ... Can a horse be trained to stay "engaged" without intervention by the ... (During the training the rider is allowed to help the horse ... > Quotes are welcome, but be prepared to answer questions about the quote. ... HUNDRED half-halts while riding a horse during a schooling session. ...
    (rec.equestrian)