Neutral spine/pelvis alignment in riders...

[rileyt]

A friend of mine has started taking lessons with a new trainer. Said trainer is highly respected and a stickler for position (as he should be). My friend says he has been really after her to engage her abdominal muscles and keep her pelvis "vertical". She said she's been working on this really hard, but is somewhat discouraged. She also said she believes that when she assumes this position, it "maxes out" her pelvis/spine flexibility, such that she has a much harder time keeping a soft, following seat. She believes her own pelvis is set on her body at a slight angle (tipped forward). Frankly, I never noticed before, but after she said this to me, I have to agree... it looks like her hips/pelvis are set on her body at an angle (think, slight case of "duck butt").

So, I started thinking about this, and started people watching some more... and noticed that it looks to me like a LOT of women have some level of this. Some have more vertical pelvises, and some are more "duck butted." (My own un-scientific research leads me to believe that the top female riders in our sport are more likely to have vertical pelvises)

I believe that SOME of this is caused by people who have no core/ab strength, and let their bellies pull forward (and their butts stick out). But it also appears to me that some of this is simply an issue of bone structure.

So, I have two questions I'd love to get opinions on...

1) Do you think some of this is purely a bone structure issue a rider cannot change? Or is it simply a matter of increased flexibility and strength training?

2) As for the riding, which is the lesser evil? Is it better to keep your pelvis vertical (and your seat bones absolutely vertical) even if it inhibits your range of motion? Or is it preferable to allow your pelvis to sit more naturally (I'm not talking about sitting on your crotch, but lets say you'd be more on the forward edges of your seat bones)?

She's questioning whether she should raise this issue with the trainer, or whether he will think she's just making excuses...

[tollertwins]

FWIW....


To get my pelvis vertical I have to REALLY engage my abs...I just now got all the way up there and it was HARD. Also, it DID remove some of my lateral flexibility. Haven't tried doing it enough to see what it takes to ride this way over the long haul.

I've always had a pelvis that tips the 'wrong way' (duck butt)...likely due to overly lax ligaments, and overly tight lower back muscles protecting the SI joints. However - you can't tighten ligaments....you have to work the muscles way harder if the ligaments are lax.

[Eclectic Horseman]

rileyt-
Your friend's observations are right on. Everyone's conformation is different. Quite often the roots of this conformation is SKELETAL and cannot be altered. Some people are naturally more lordotic than others, just like some people (10% of all women) have scoliosis or a lateral bend in their spines to some degree. A rider with a lordotic spine (duck butt) may look like she is sitting in chair seat, even though she is upright on her seatbones in the proper position.

A lordotic rider who attempts to straighten her spine by doing a pelvic tilt will not only be stiffer through the pelvis and lower back which makes it more difficult to follow the horse's motion, but riding like this can also do damage to your spine over the long term (arthritic changes.) I recommend the book "The Rider's Pain Free Back" by James Warson, MD for anyone who wants to learn more about this sort of thing. Tilting the pelvis foward puts a ton of stress on the lumbar spine, and then while riding you will subject it to pitch and yaw in that position.

The spine should be in the neutral position while riding, supported in that position by all of the abdominal and back muscles. The natural curves in the rider's spine (in the cervical and the lumbar regions) should be maintained while riding.

I don't know how you find out which is the problem: (1) you are just overweight (and have too much "junk in the trunk" so to speak) or (2) whether your muscles are weak or (3) whether the problem has a skeletal basis. Perhaps losing weight and doing pilates & yoga is a place to start. But tipping the pelvis forward in an attempt to make it look like your back has less of a natural curve is not a good answer.

[angel]

Most female riders have a degree of pelvic tilt...all sorts of anatomical reasons for this, but also a carry over from when we walked on four legs instead of two. I believe that mares cannot tuck under as well because they too have some pelvic tilt. This has to do with breeding and foaling ability.

[Eclectic Horseman]

Most female riders have a degree of pelvic tilt...all sorts of anatomical reasons for this, but also a carry over from when we walked on four legs instead of two. I believe that mares cannot tuck under as well because they too have some pelvic tilt. This has to do with breeding and foaling ability.

Ding-ding-ding! :D This article describes the phenomenan, although it doesn't seem to apply to quadripeds.

http://www.reasons.org/tnrtb/2008/02/14/curvaceous-anatomy-of-the-female-spine-reveals-ingenious-obstetric-design/


Of course, there are varying degrees of lordosis. Folks with spondylolisthesis (a slipped vertebra) probably have the most pronounced swayback of all.

[EqTrainer]

Well, I'm going to be the "ugly" one here and say that yes, a lot of people have a tilted pelvis and that it should be their number one goal - IF they intend to ride properly - to change it.

My old working student used to have a major duck butt. I am not joking, it was to the point that her upper body leaned forward. The first thing I told her was that if she wanted to use that as her cop-out, that she should find another instructor because I was not having it. The bottom line is, you cannot sit properly with your butt stuck out behind you. So she put herself to work, also did yoga, pilates and went to the chiro and today you would NEVER know she used to be "built that way". She has beautiful, correct posture now, on and off the horse.

She is not the only person I have taught to level their pelvis. In fact, I think that is the first thing most people need to learn to do. Yes, it's hard. Yes, it's boring. Doing lateral work is much more exciting :lol: but this is what the ODG's called "developing a seat".

So there is my two cents. If you want to really do dressage, suck it up and learn to fix yourself. And don't let anyone tell you "you cannot" because you can.

[Eclectic Horseman]

Well, I'm going to be the "ugly" one here and say that yes, a lot of people have a tilted pelvis and that it should be their number one goal - IF they intend to ride properly - to change it.

My old working student used to have a major duck butt. I am not joking, it was to the point that her upper body leaned forward. The first thing I told her was that if she wanted to use that as her cop-out, that she should find another instructor because I was not having it. The bottom line is, you cannot sit properly with your butt stuck out behind you. So she put herself to work, also did yoga, pilates and went to the chiro and today you would NEVER know she used to be "built that way". She has beautiful, correct posture now, on and off the horse.

She is not the only person I have taught to level their pelvis. In fact, I think that is the first thing most people need to learn to do. Yes, it's hard. Yes, it's boring. Doing lateral work is much more exciting :lol: but this is what the ODG's called "developing a seat".

So there is my two cents. If you want to really do dressage, suck it up and learn to fix yourself. And don't let anyone tell you "you cannot" because you can.

You can make it appear as though your spine is straight (at a price.) But honey, you cannot change your bone structure without major surgery and a spinal fusion. Sorry, that's just science.

Again, lordosis COULD be overweight. It COULD be muscle weakness (poor posture.) Or it may be skeletal. See

http://www.spineuniverse.com/displayarticle.php/article1438.html

You aren't the "ugly" one. You are just the "ignorant" one. Suck it up.

[EqTrainer]

Sorry to disagree with you but you cannot ride properly without your pelvis in correct alignment. So you can make all the excuses in the world for it, but if you want to do it RIGHT you will have to fix yourself.

If you think you can do dressage properly with your ass hanging out behind you, YOU are the ignorant one.

And yes, my previous working student DID have xrays and she had all sorts of issues including a neck that was a c-curve bent the wrong way.. and it's all fixed now CONFIRMED by xrays.

I have a hyper-mobile pelvis and that's no excuse for me to sit incorrectly. I have to suck it up, stay strong and work to stay sitting properly. That's what working on your seat IS.

Excuses are so much easier than doing the work.

[Blkarab]

Well, I'm going to be the "ugly" one here and say that yes, a lot of people have a tilted pelvis and that it should be their number one goal - IF they intend to ride properly - to change it.

My old working student used to have a major duck butt. I am not joking, it was to the point that her upper body leaned forward. The first thing I told her was that if she wanted to use that as her cop-out, that she should find another instructor because I was not having it. The bottom line is, you cannot sit properly with your butt stuck out behind you. So she put herself to work, also did yoga, pilates and went to the chiro and today you would NEVER know she used to be "built that way". She has beautiful, correct posture now, on and off the horse.

She is not the only person I have taught to level their pelvis. In fact, I think that is the first thing most people need to learn to do. Yes, it's hard. Yes, it's boring. Doing lateral work is much more exciting :lol: but this is what the ODG's called "developing a seat".

So there is my two cents. If you want to really do dressage, suck it up and learn to fix yourself. And don't let anyone tell you "you cannot" because you can.

EqTrainer-----

You are absolutely right on about this!!! I have the exact same problem as your working student, and I've worked very, very hard for the past 5-6 years with my trainer on correcting it. The very best thing that I did for my riding, was work with a personal trainer on the ground to strengthen the abs and lower back muscles, I went to the chiro (actually due to an old car accident injury) and discovered that my hips were out of alignment (thanks to a side-impact crash).

It has been a very, very long road, however, my trainer has not given up on me, and pushes me through the rough moments. It is hard, hard work, but the end result is great! I am now able to sit the trot with relative ease, and working towards the canter.

James Shaw also has a fabulous book "Ride from Within". It uses Tai Chi principles to aid in strengthening your core, developing your center of gravity, and becoming a more aware, balanced rider. Easy to read and follow exercises too. (I highly recommend his clinic).

Anyway--good luck to your friend!

[EqTrainer]

Good for you BlkArab! It is a long, slow, rewarding process, isn't it? It took her years, also. Alignment doesn't change overnight. I am so proud of her!

My current working student actually rotates her pelvis the other way. It's much more subtle but I think it's easier to correct. She does a lot of yoga and it has helped her with her awareness of what she does.

I am sitting on my balance ball while I type this, have you tried one? Very interesting :lol:

[Blkarab]

Sorry to disagree with you but you cannot ride properly without your pelvis in correct alignment. So you can make all the excuses in the world for it, but if you want to do it RIGHT you will have to fix yourself.

If you think you can do dressage properly with your ass hanging out behind you, YOU are the ignorant one.

And yes, my previous working student DID have xrays and she had all sorts of issues including a neck that was a c-curve bent the wrong way.. and it's all fixed now CONFIRMED by xrays.

I have a hyper-mobile pelvis and that's no excuse for me to sit incorrectly. I have to suck it up, stay strong and work to stay sitting properly. That's what working on your seat IS.

Excuses are so much easier than doing the work.

That was me too! It's amazing what Chiropractic therapy and physical therapy can do to help correct spinal problems. I'm structurally correct as well (confirmed by xrays!) and it was a long road to get fixed (Over a Year). I have had to really struggle with my position and emotionally it's been hard as well, since it can make for some very frustrating lessons.

You can not ride correctly with a bad seat! It's damaging to both the horse and the rider. Riders need to take responsibility for their own bodies and position for the good of the horse!

[Eclectic Horseman]

Sorry to disagree with you but you cannot ride properly without your pelvis in correct alignment. So you can make all the excuses in the world for it, but if you want to do it RIGHT you will have to fix yourself.

If you think you can do dressage properly with your ass hanging out behind you, YOU are the ignorant one.

And yes, my previous working student DID have xrays and she had all sorts of issues including a neck that was a c-curve bent the wrong way.. and it's all fixed now CONFIRMED by xrays.

I have a hyper-mobile pelvis and that's no excuse for me to sit incorrectly. I have to suck it up, stay strong and work to stay sitting properly. That's what working on your seat IS.

Excuses are so much easier than doing the work.


I give up. You are right and science is wrong. :no: The entire medical profession are a bunch of idiots.

[Blkarab]

Good for you BlkArab! It is a long, slow, rewarding process, isn't it? It took her years, also. Alignment doesn't change overnight. I am so proud of her!

My current working student actually rotates her pelvis the other way. It's much more subtle but I think it's easier to correct. She does a lot of yoga and it has helped her with her awareness of what she does.

I am sitting on my balance ball while I type this, have you tried one? Very interesting :lol:

I use one regularly---I love the bosu balls and balance board that I work with when I work out with my PT. The best thing that I have ever used is a piece of equipment that helps with back extensions. They were brutal when I first started (over 3 years ago). I wish I could remember the name of the machine, but it helps strengthen the lower back and the visset joints that are right above the pelvis. When I started working out with my physical therapist, I didn't tell my instructor until a few weeks later, just to see if she noticed a difference. It was unbelievable to her how much had changed in such a short time back then. She became such a believer that now 2 of her other students work out with him, and another dressage trainer. I still workout 2-3 times a week, just to keep things going and in place. I have found that if I don't keep it up, then my riding really, really suffers quickly. My new goal is to purchase the balance ball chair for my office at work. (That will further increase my standing as the crazy horse lady).

[Blkarab]

I give up. You are right and science is wrong. :no: The entire medical profession are a bunch of idiots.

Science has proven that chiropractic therapy (when done properly) is a valid form of treatment for spinal alignment. The key is catching the problem early. (I know this from having my pelvis knocked out as a child too). I was able to prevent scoliosis from developing when I was a child by seeing the chiropractor. Thank goodness my parents were believers in the therapy, otherwise, I would have been a candidate for back surgery by age 15! It was my pediatrician who recommended the therapy and insurance covered it.

There are lots of medical professionals who will prescribe chiropractic therapy for their patients. By no means is it meant to replace the doctor at all, but is another avenue of treatment, especially when all else will fail. Not all medical professionals are a bunch of idiots--but I personally know many who are.

[Eclectic Horseman]

Science has proven that chiropractic therapy (when done properly) is a valid form of treatment for spinal alignment. The key is catching the problem early. (I know this from having my pelvis knocked out as a child too). I was able to prevent scoliosis from developing when I was a child by seeing the chiropractor. Thank goodness my parents were believers in the therapy, otherwise, I would have been a candidate for back surgery by age 15! It was my pediatrician who recommended the therapy and insurance covered it.

There are lots of medical professionals who will prescribe chiropractic therapy for their patients. By no means is it meant to replace the doctor at all, but is another avenue of treatment, especially when all else will fail. Not all medical professionals are a bunch of idiots--but I personally know many who are.

Even assuming that chiropractic could "cure" scolliosis or spondylolythesis "if caught early enough" (which the mainstream medical literature does not accept) then what do you propose that the person does as an adult if he/she has one of these skeletal conditions?

People can compensate for many types of disabilities and still ride correctly despite what Eqtrainer says. Look at the paraequestrians! Those riders ride with all sorts of very serious disabilities. Denying that permanent, incurable disabilities exist does not help. :no:

[angel]

Each of us is given a particular "conformation" that is based on both the skeletal structure AND the manner in which the muscles aid to stabilize that structure. As we ride dressage to create a greater range of motion in the horse...extension and flexion of muscles, so too can work on our own muscle structures to better achieve extension and flexion, allow us to reallign certain inate "conformation" difficulties. Chiropractic adjustment is not enough, because without the change within the muscle ability, the adjustment will not hold over time. Not only must muscle memory be altered, but also the very ability to contract (flexion) certain muscles while extending other muscles to a greater degree. Without that change, you cannot hold the skeletal structures in a new conformation.

It is one thing for a disabled rider to learn how to compensate for a serious impaired conformation for which no full correction is possible, and quite another thing when someone who is for the most part "complete," to whine about it being okay to have a faulty seat!

[EqTrainer]

If people accepted everything that a medical doctor told them about their limitations, many people would still be laying flat on their backs.

A good example is Mr. EqT. He has blown out both knees and ruptured his Achilles tendon. Doctors here told him he would never walk normally and certainly would never play soccer again. The doctors in France sent him straight to the Osteopath and he not only walks fine, he runs fine, plays soccer and skiis regularly. Most important to note is that he was sent home with *alignment exercises* that he will have to do FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE to maintain his flexibility and range of motion.

Just like horses, our conformation is not set in stone. My hypermobile pelvis is a fine example of that :lol: I can assume ANY position with it. Who knows what my original orientation is :lol:

My point is, to accept your conformation as "the way it is" is to deprive yourself of possibly truly learning to ride correctly. Learning to ride in neutral pelvis IS the point of developing your dressage seat. That's why the longe lessons, the slow work, the years of learning to ride correctly.

Any instructor who tells their students they can just be the way they are, and compensate for it, is IMO not doing them any favors. Sure, it makes them happy today, because they don't have to put in the hard and often painful work it takes to change. And let's face it - that sure makes one popular with a certain set of students :lol: But in the long run, they are still WRONG, and you cannot progress in dressage without a correct seat. And that's not even touching upon the damage it does to the horse, to be ridden by a rider with an incorrect seat.

I wonder if this is not just one more example of the way dressage is heading - "sure, you can do it anyway you want... no hard work involved.. it's all about having fun... check, please!"

[rileyt]

EqTrainer, I will readily concede that some large portion of people with "duck butt" (60%? 80%? 90%?) is not in fact caused by any permanent skeletal misalignment, but instead by big tummies, weak abs, and generally poor posture. (I think Eclectic Horseman would concede the same, but I'll let her speak for herself).

I would also concede that many many people ride poorly because they just aren't willing to do the work to ride better, and may well say "I physically can't do it" when in fact they can, but just haven't worked hard enough and long enough.

But (and I'm just trying to understand your position here), is it your belief that EVERYONE (despite their natural given conformation) can ride with a vertical pelvis if they just work at it? I have a hard time accepting this, because I certainly would not ever ask a camped-out, sickle-hocked horse to try to piaffe or do canter pirouettes.

We seem to recognize (and educate ourselves) about all manner of equine conformation issues... but it seems that our sport (and our riders and trainers) really don't take "rider conformation" into consideration too much.

[slc2]

After seeing the crookedest, most deformed people get up on a horse, pick up the reins and go trotting off with their bodies and legs perfectly straight, I have a little bit different way of looking at the problem.

When riding, a person has MUCH more flexibility and ability to adapt his position than he does when standing with weight on his legs much more 'locking' him into a more fixed position. Just because he stands a certain way, or even because he is built a certain way, does not mean at all that he HAS to ride that way. He is even much more flexible and adjustable than he is when sitting in a chair...there are very few positions that give the person MORE flexibility and adjustability than sitting on a horse.

The whole point of the riding position on the horse is the person CAN compensate, to an incredible degree, actually, for any deformities or problems in his body.

This is why children in therapeutic riding get so much from riding, and it will even improve their coordination and posture off the horse. It gives them an opportunity to develop muscles and tendons and ligaments WITHOUT weight resting on them (especially if they learn not to brace or tighten up against the stirrups) and constantly forcing those muscles to the wrong position. Sitting on a horse actually liberates someone from their own physical problems and allows one to develop and correct those muscles.

If his toes poke out when he walks, they don't have to when he rides - all he has to do is exercise, stretch and focus on that problem - with his legs not bearing weight, he can do it. He eventually will walk with his toes straighter ahead too.

WHen a person has a weak pelvis and lower back, no, he can't ride well, sure, it doesn't hurt much of anything at the lowest levels, but the further up he goes the more he needs to be able to be stable and strong thru his pelvis and core. Alot of pelvis and lower back weakness is because the kinds of exercise we get simply don't develop those muscles evenly.

To a point, even the most advanced dressage rider can have a LITTLE bit of a hollow back, but there is a point beyond which it effects him negatively - very negatively, and a point beyond which no matter what he does he can't compensate enough for that problem.

When walking and standing, people unconsciously develop all sorts of tilts, shifts and leans to deal with the stress placed on their skeleton, and little problems become big problems. When on a horse not bearing weight, they can work on these things and improve them in a way they never could when bearing the stress of standing, which tightens up and locks the legs and back.

[Eclectic Horseman]

Each of us is given a particular "conformation" that is based on both the skeletal structure AND the manner in which the muscles aid to stabilize that structure. As we ride dressage to create a greater range of motion in the horse...extension and flexion of muscles, so too can work on our own muscle structures to better achieve extension and flexion, allow us to reallign certain inate "conformation" difficulties. Chiropractic adjustment is not enough, because without the change within the muscle ability, the adjustment will not hold over time. Not only must muscle memory be altered, but also the very ability to contract (flexion) certain muscles while extending other muscles to a greater degree. Without that change, you cannot hold the skeletal structures in a new conformation.

It is one thing for a disabled rider to learn how to compensate for a serious impaired conformation for which no full correction is possible, and quite another thing when someone who is for the most part "complete," to whine about it being okay to have a faulty seat!

There is no "full correction" possible for skeletal deformities. Just because the person "looks complete" doesn't mean that they don't have a serious impairment that they need to compensate for. Please don't denigrate people who may have had more to overcome than you realize just because you cannot see it. Spinal stenosis, for example, is a very real, very permanent, excrutiatingly painful condition. But the person who has it may look for the "most part complete," as you put it, and it takes more effort and dedication for that person to ride than any average able bodied rider. They usually don't "whine" either.

Because of the way a person is built, he/she may not "look" 100% correct while riding. The skeletally lordotic person can sit in fork seat or can tuck his pelvis under him (tilting the pelvis forward and rounding the lumbar spine) in order to look correct. But this is actually incorrect riding. :no:

If the lordotic person is sitting upright on his seat bones completely correctly with his pelvis erect (as it can be) then the rider will look like he is in some degree of chair seat. It is what it is, because the skeletal structure is deformed. (Again, see Dr. Warson's book)

So these folks have a choice. Look correct or BE correct.

Will these folks win any equitation prizes? Will they go to the Olympics? No. But most people won't anyway, and these folks have a lot more to overcome than a rider with good conformation. We aren't talking about excuses, but misunderstanding and intolerance of medical conditions can be demeaning at best and even physically harmful over time.

[rileyt]

Just like horses, our conformation is not set in stone.

while certainly you can see the effects (in bone structure) on an 80-year-old man who has had poor posture his entire life... I will never have broad shoulders. I will never have long legs, and my back was born with a certain curve that I think I would attempt to change only to my detriment.

For the most part, I'd say our conformation is pretty stone-like..., and if you think you can fix a horse's conformation through proper work... I've got a whole bunch of horses with imperfect conformation I'd like to have fixed.

[Eclectic Horseman]

rileyt-

:yes::yes::yes::yes:

They used to think that they could correct a horse's leg conformation by corrective trimming and shoeing, particularly if they caught it early enough. Since then, we have learned that if the hoof follows the line and the angles of the leg, then any "corrective" trimming of the hoof will cause an uneven loading of the joints and result in arthritis over the long term.

You must be old, like I am. There is a certain amount that you learn along the way. One thing is that not every thing can be FIXED, but it doesn't mean that it cannot be OVERCOME to a very great extent if you have the desire and the determination.

[EqTrainer]

[quote=rileyt;3100920]EqTrainer, I will readily concede that some large portion of people with "duck butt" (60%? 80%? 90%?) is not in fact caused by any permanent skeletal misalignment, but instead by big tummies, weak abs, and generally poor posture. (I think Eclectic Horseman would concede the same, but I'll let her speak for herself).

I would also concede that many many people ride poorly because they just aren't willing to do the work to ride better, and may well say "I physically can't do it" when in fact they can, but just haven't worked hard enough and long enough.

But (and I'm just trying to understand your position here), is it your belief that EVERYONE (despite their natural given conformation) can ride with a vertical pelvis if they just work at it? I have a hard time accepting this, because I certainly would not ever ask a camped-out, sickle-hocked horse to try to piaffe or do canter pirouettes.

IMO, the jury is out on ALL people with true pathologies. How could I possibly answer that, having not trained all of them (please understand I am saying this humorously).

In my *experience* the number of people who cannot ultimately achieve a correct (and I emphasize correct, because let's not have any illusions here, that is what we are discussing) has got to be minute. I teach a lot of adults who have issues - arthritis, neck issues, back issues... they all have learned to sit in neutral pelvis. It takes time. It takes work off the horse. It takes an incredible amount of body awareness.

But you know.. that IS the esssence of dressage. Learning to sit in harmony with the horses back, with body awareness. I would venture to say that if you have had spinal surgery in which your back was fused.. or you had a rod put in your back (although I know a woman who has had this done, I do not teach her but I have seen her ride, and she has a beautiful neutral seat) perhaps that ideal is not achievable. Otherwise, even if you were never going to get there - you should still be working on it! Consistent improvement is essential, it's part of the journey. I don't think there is ever a time that you stop improving your seat. It just becomes a way of life.

I would also venture to say that unless you have a trainer who can actually TEACH you how to sit in neutral, or believes that you CAN, you will never learn how, or even believe that you can. I think your friend is lucky :) and did you mention whether your friend actually has any documented pathologies or not? Or was she just "born that way"?


We seem to recognize (and educate ourselves) about all manner of equine conformation issues... but it seems that our sport (and our riders and trainers) really don't take "rider conformation" into consideration too much.

I think many of us actually do, but we move on to what needs to be done to correct it, rather than dwelling upon it. When I meet a new student I sum up their natural position in a matter of seconds and then I begin correcting it.

Regarding horses and conformation.. few horses cannot come onto the aids and attain a better self carriage. If they can do it, why can't we? They don't even "get it", they just do it when we ask them correctly (with our correct seats).

SLC also adds a great point, one that I frankly had forgotten about.

[EqTrainer]

For the most part, I'd say our conformation is pretty stone-like..., and if you think you can fix a horse's conformation through proper work... I've got a whole bunch of horses with imperfect conformation I'd like to have fixed.

Have you never seen a horse change thru dressage? I bet you have...

I ride an aged ASB who used to have a sway back. He does not anymore. What would you call that?

[Eclectic Horseman]

Have you never seen a horse change thru dressage? I bet you have...

I ride an aged ASB who used to have a sway back. He does not anymore. What would you call that?

If it was not just musculature development in his topline, then I would call it a bloody miracle. :lol:

Quick--somebody call the American Journal of Veterinary Medicine! This woman can cure spinal deformities!:rolleyes:

[mp]

while certainly you can see the effects (in bone structure) on an 80-year-old man who has had poor posture his entire life... I will never have broad shoulders. I will never have long legs, and my back was born with a certain curve that I think I would attempt to change only to my detriment.

For the most part, I'd say our conformation is pretty stone-like..., and if you think you can fix a horse's conformation through proper work... I've got a whole bunch of horses with imperfect conformation I'd like to have fixed.

I agree with you. But ... the negative effects of poor bone structure/conformation can be ameliorated in horses and humans with proper exercise. In my mind, there is a middle ground between a rider I know who excuses her unbalanced position because "my pelvis is uneven and there's nothing I can do about it" and those who say you fix anything with hard work. Neither is entirely true.

[EqTrainer]

If it was not just musculature development in his topline, then I would call it a bloody miracle. :lol:

Quick--somebody call the American Journal of Veterinary Medicine! This woman can cure spinal deformities!:rolleyes:

Oh please. It was no miracle, it was years of hard work. His muscles now hold his topline in place. Isn't that the point of dressage? Now that he can keep his back up his rear end can step under, his pelvis no longer rotates out behind him and his back no longer collapses.

I don't understand your defensiveness.

[EqTrainer]

[quote=mp;3101046]I agree with you. But ... the negative effects of poor bone structure/conformation can be ameliorated in horses and humans with proper exercise.

And that is ineed the point of dressage, isn't it? To make the horse more athletic, more supple, more rideable? :D

In my mind, there is a middle ground between a rider I know who excuses her unbalanced position because "my pelvis is uneven and there's nothing I can do about it" and those who say you fix anything with hard work. Neither is entirely true

I agree with that. The horse w/sickle hocks is not going to change the way his bones are set. But the rider.. the rider has every responsibility to continue to work on her asymmetries. Unless of course someone pats her and tells her she doesn't have to.. she was BORN that way... no need to work on change!

[Rhiannonjk]

The chiropractic argument is as old as dirt. Some people will believe that they are all quacks, and some people will have aligned backs :) I know that for me, a certain instructor told me to sit evenly on my left seat bone until she was blue in the face, and I tried all I could, but one little twist from a chiro, and I suddenly didn't have to think about it. But you can't change human confirmation, can you?

Which brings me to the OP's second issue, which was the loss of flexibility when put into the new position. Two weeks ago I had the chance to attend an Eckart Meyners Seat Symposium - and let me tell you he had a CRAZY genius idea. Lets stop telling riders how to sit and how to be flexible, and lets do things that straighten them and make them more flexible.

After a workshop to understand his principles, we watched riders and listened to their issues. Then Mr. Meyners had them dismount, and do an exercise, and get back on the horse, and the issue was better. Sometimes it was simple (or didn't even involve dismounting). But the #1 issue that it seems to me that his system would help (at least for me, with my pelvis that REALLY WANTS to be crooked) is increasing the flexibility through the abdomin, into the pelvis, and into the legs. And in general, stretching that area in unique ways, moving those joints in all directions however you can (a solution for one person was just exxagerated skipping) increased flexibility.

Anyways - my point is that some stretching on the ground can increase the flexibility while the neutral pelvis is trying to be achieved.

[mp]

And that is ineed the point of dressage, isn't it? To make the horse more athletic, more supple, more rideable?

Actually, I started on dressage to learn to ride better and in a more harmonious way with my horse. Is he changing and improving? Absolutely. But I needed a lot more work than he did.

But the rider.. the rider has every responsibility to continue to work on her asymmetries.

Saying a rider MUST work on assymetries is a but much. Perhaps that's what I want to do and what you think riders should do. But I also believe people should be free to ride at the level they choose -- have their own "horse experience" as a good friend puts it -- without people like you or me ragging on them about it.

If that includes really working on position, working out with a trainer/physiotherapist, getting a new office chair, fine. If it doesn't, and their horse is not worse for the wear, I say live and let live. Just no whining that "I can't do anything about it," please.

[Rhiannonjk]

Saying a rider MUST work on assymetries is a but much. Perhaps that's what I want to do and what you think riders should do. But I also believe people should be free to ride at the level they choose -- have their own "horse experience" as a good friend puts it -- without people like you or me ragging on them about it.

Sure. If you don't want to canter, that's fine. But my example above of the left seatbone was necessary just to get my horse to pick up a left lead canter (and it wasn't an incredibly crazy assymetry, I just couldn't get my left seatbone as deep as my right). What have you seen people do to try to get a horse to pick up the correct lead? Is that fair to the horse, when they are only responding to the crooked aids given by the rider? I wasn't trying to do upper level work - I was just trying to ride in a training level frame - so yes, I would say that a rider at any level MUST work on assymetries.

Perhaps if you just walk on trails, it doesn't matter.

[EqTrainer]

MP, I make that statement with the assumption that we are talking about individuals who are actively pursuing progress in dressage.

If someone is not - fine. But if your stated goal is to become a better dressage rider, there is no way to escape developing your seat. The horse CANNOT do it himself. Errrr.. most of them cannot anyway <LOL>

I personally have a lot of respect for those people who say NO GO and chose to do something else. I don't think there is anything wrong with that... dressage is HARD. I have a lot more respect for them than those who say, for example, "my goal is to do PSG" and then do not want to spend the time developing their seat. Because persuing moving up the levels without developing a correct seat becomes nearly impossible as the work becomes more demanding, and it is indeed hard on the horse to be expected to collect and attain self-carriage with a rider who is NOT in self-carriage.

So I understand your point.. the responsibility to do, or not do, IMO lies in the individuals stated goal.

[khemo]

Just for a different perspective... consider Rolfing or Structural Integration.

I know there are better photos out there, but these give the basic idea of how posture can change with this method, and the basic before/after (head up not foreward, belly in not out, hips balanced not out behind, lower back still has curve but not exaggerated, shoulder blades flatter, etc.

http://www.rolfguild.org/images/Eric.gif
from http://www.rolfguild.org/aboutsi.html
With this first guy, I can really see the different tilt in the hips by the different angle on the undies line.
http://www.juneaurolfing.com/leftside.jpg
(from the site http://www.juneaurolfing.com/what%20is%20rolfing.htm)

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2nrtn/rolflogo.gif
(from http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2nrtn/what.html)

and http://www.jeffreyburch.com/shop/images/gal7_womanba_th.gif
(Photo from Ida Rolf's Book Rolfing.)


It's just another method to accomplish some of the same goals, and just like yoga or chiro might not suit everyone, Rolfing may be helpful for some.

And, the level of results I read people looking for varies... so to me, Rolfing looks like it makes a subtle difference.

[mp]

Sure. If you don't want to canter, that's fine. But my example above of the left seatbone was necessary just to get my horse to pick up a left lead canter (and it wasn't an incredibly crazy assymetry, I just couldn't get my left seatbone as deep as my right).

I had the same problem. And guess what ... I don't know if I have an uneven pelvis or not. Because it doesn't matter. I wanted to change, so I did what I needed to do to improve.

What have you seen people do to try to get a horse to pick up the correct lead? Is that fair to the horse, when they are only responding to the crooked aids given by the rider? I wasn't trying to do upper level work - I was just trying to ride in a training level frame - so yes, I would say that a rider at any level MUST work on assymetries.

Perhaps if you just walk on trails, it doesn't matter.

I see people who ride as crooked as a dog's hind leg and do all sorts of things to get their horses on the correct lead. Is it pretty? No. Is it "fair"? Probably not. But it's not abuse, either. So unless they ask me what they can do about it, I'll keep my mouth shut. I'll leave it up to you to grab offenders by the scruff of the neck and say "you are allowed to walk ONLY and ONLY on trails. Now get the hell out of this arena!" :lol:

Seriously, what really bugs me is people who whine about their riding ... and make no effort to change. You can get better, no matter how bad you are. I am proof of that.

EqTrainer, my stated goal was to become a better rider. Period. No wait ... it was even more basic than that: I wanted to learn how to ride, even though I'd been at it for 10 years. Dressage just happens to be the way I choose to reach that goal.

[rileyt]

EqTrainer, I think you have some very valid points. Among them being:

1) If the trainer sizes up a student and says, "oh, you can't possibly sit straight", then you're right... the student will never sit straight. Its better to try.

2) Yes, it is the point of dressage to increase the athleticism of our horses, and encourage them to go "correctly"... precisely because "correct" work will increase their muscles and self-carriage, thereby reducing injury and arthritis.

As to your swayback example, I'd disagree. I'm SURE the horse looked and moved differently after working with him (as a result of muscle build up and training), but I don't think you can correct a true swayback any more than you can correct severe scoliosis in a human. I think that all the exercises/stretching in the world have their limits when the bone structure just isn't there. This is why some horses will NEVER be able to do a canter pirouette, and some people will NEVER be able to do the splits. I think MP summed it up best here:

"In my mind, there is a middle ground between a rider I know who excuses her unbalanced position because "my pelvis is uneven and there's nothing I can do about it" and those who say you fix anything with hard work. Neither is entirely true"

[Eclectic Horseman]

I don't understand your defensiveness.


That's the problem, isn't it? You don't understand.



Further elucidation:

"The most commonly seen type of swayback is that of older horses, often retired broodmares or horses ridden extensively for most of their lives. While these horses may have a downward deviation in the spine, their condition is not caused by a genetic defect or true spinal deviation. As a natural part of aging, the muscles in the body begin to weaken and waste away. It is the wasting of the muscles holding up the abdomen and supporting the topline that causes the horse’s midsection to sink, leading to the commonly seen swaybacked look.

It is estimated that less than 1% of the horse population is affected by true lordosis, a genetic disease causing spinal deviations and curvature. Studies have shown that lordosis is an inheritable defect, seen most commonly in the Saddlebred, but any breed can be affected.

In affected horses, an incomplete development of the upper thoracic vertebrae is the culprit of lordosis. As a result, overextension of the joints leads to a growth and conformation defect. Horses can have a 5” or greater drop in their spine below the withers, and often the most obviously affected horses developed the condition very early in life.

Affected horses are generally appear “normal” at birth, but the defect develops between 1 year and 18 months of age. Once the process of spinal realignment begins, it progresses quickly, with a massive curvature in the spine able to develop in a relatively short amount of time. In contrast, late-onset lordosis can occur later in life, but is less commonly appreciated, and harder to differentiate between a true spinal problem, and the aforementioned muscle-induced swayback of older horses.

Despite the often startling appearance of a lordosis affected horses, it is remarkable to find that the horses with this defect function almost completely normally, and can leave productive, useful lives. Similar conditions in humans and small animals are usually synonymous with neurological dysfunctions, such as a lack of coordination and paralysis. However in horses, lordosis does not appear to affect any part of a horse’s neurologic or physical well-being."

[Rhiannonjk]

I had the same problem. And guess what ... I don't know if I have an uneven pelvis or not. Because it doesn't matter. I wanted to change, so I did what I needed to do to improve.


Um... I wanted to change, too. And I did what was needed to improve. If simply willing it to happen worked for you, GREAT! But to expect that to work for anybody else is ignoring other tools that are available.


I see people who ride as crooked as a dog's hind leg and do all sorts of things to get their horses on the correct lead. Is it pretty? No. Is it "fair"? Probably not. But it's not abuse, either. So unless they ask me what they can do about it, I'll keep my mouth shut. I'll leave it up to you to grab offenders by the scruff of the neck and say "you are allowed to walk ONLY and ONLY on trails. Now get the hell out of this arena!" :lol:



What? I'm not setting any rules or grabbing anybody by the scruff of the neck. I'm not a professional, merely a student of dressage on and off the horse.

[mp]

Um... I wanted to change, too. And I did what was needed to improve. If simply willing it to happen worked for you, GREAT! But to expect that to work for anybody else is ignoring other tools that are available.

:lol: I didn't just will myself to ride better, I worked at it and I still do. I didn't bore you with exactly what I did precisely because it won't work for everyone. The point is that people who want to ride better can DO something about it. You did. And I did, too. So let's have a big hoorah for us. :winkgrin:

And congrats on being a student of dressage. Me, I'm just a student of the horse. ;)

[EqTrainer]

EC: Question for you -

is this you?

www.eclectichorseman.com (http://www.eclectichorseman.com)

and is Sylvana one of your partners?

[Eclectic Horseman]

EC: Question for you -

is this you?

www.eclectichorseman.com (http://www.eclectichorseman.com)

and is Sylvana one of your partners?


No. I actually had a nice chat with them via email though when they first put up the website. I jokingly threatened to sue them for using my name without permission since I had been using the name on bulletin boards for years before that site came into being.

They said that they thought of the name "all by themselves" and did not steal mine. :lol:

[EqTrainer]

Well that's a relief :lol:

Now.. why the hostility over something that we don't agree on? I ride the swaybacked horse, you don't..

and I teach the swaybacked lady, you don't... :lol:

if I am having a different experience than you are, why does that piss you off so bad? I read all about lorodosis when I started riding the horse. I just figured I would see what he could do if ridden correctly as long as it didn't cause him any pain. 8 years later, he is learning to half-pass.

I don't think there is anything wrong with us not agreeing.. I just don't understand why it makes you so mad. I don't expect you to change; fine, if your students don't have to be straight. Mine do. They have the right to fire me if they don't like it. Not sure where the big issue is here.

[Eclectic Horseman]

Well that's a relief :lol:

Now.. why the hostility over something that we don't agree on? I ride the swaybacked horse, you don't..

and I teach the swaybacked lady, you don't... :lol:

if I am having a different experience than you are, why does that piss you off so bad? I read all about lorodosis when I started riding the horse. I just figured I would see what he could do if ridden correctly as long as it didn't cause him any pain. 8 years later, he is learning to half-pass.

I don't think there is anything wrong with us not agreeing.. I just don't understand why it makes you so mad. I don't expect you to change; fine, if your students don't have to be straight. Mine do. They have the right to fire me if they don't like it. Not sure where the big issue is here.

I don't get personal on public bulletin boards, sorry. And I am not "mad."
I do find it highly offensive for you and others like you who immediately attack someone with a physical problem and tell them that they are lazy or don't want to do what it takes, blah, blah, blah. It is offensive to tell people that if only they tried hard enough they could fix their physical deformities. Offensive and untrue.

[EqTrainer]

Ok.. so let's talk about this.

Do you consider what the OP describes to be a physical deformity?

She was describing someone with their pelvis rotated behind them (seatbones pointing back).

I am assuming you teach? If so, how would you handle this in regards to developing a dressage seat?

[Eclectic Horseman]

In my previous post, I said it could be: (1) just overweight (and have too much "junk in the trunk" so to speak) or (2) whether muscles are weak creating poor posture or (3) a skeletal deformity, and I suggested that perhaps losing weight and doing pilates & yoga is a place to start. Toning the gluteal muscles can really help get rid of "junk in the trunk."

I didn't think rileyt was describing someone with their pelvis rotated back. That's entirely different. I thought she was talking about someone with a sway back, i.e., when that person is standing up on the ground on their two feet there is a greater degree of lumbar lordotic curve than in a normal person.

I don't teach (people) much anymore. But I did see Mary Wanless at a clinic take a rider with a very swayed back and she manually manipulated her body while in the saddle to make sure that the woman was sitting evenly on her seatbones and that her pelvis was upright and not tilted forward or back. The woman still looked like she was in chair seat even though she was sitting correctly. Wanless looked a bit perplexed, but she did not admonish the rider or attempt to straighten her back.

What I think many instructors are tempted to do is to make the rider's back appear straight by having the rider tilt the pelvis forward and tuck their buttocks underneath them so that they are sitting on their back pockets. This makes the back appear flat. But the seat is no longer correct.

Neutral position of the spine means exactly that. Neutral. The rider's personal neutral position, however large the curves in that rider's spine may be when the rider is sitting erect on his seatbones with the pelvis upright. Since the amount of curvature of the spine will be different, you cannot judge the correct seat by how flat the rider's lumbar curve is.

Riding with the spine in an unnatural position, to take the natural curves out of the neutral spine and make it flat, causes the spine to be less supple and flexible and it puts an extraordinary amount of stress on the spine which will result in back problems down the line.

[Blkarab]

Even assuming that chiropractic could "cure" scolliosis or spondylolythesis "if caught early enough" (which the mainstream medical literature does not accept) then what do you propose that the person does as an adult if he/she has one of these skeletal conditions?

People can compensate for many types of disabilities and still ride correctly despite what Eqtrainer says. Look at the paraequestrians! Those riders ride with all sorts of very serious disabilities. Denying that permanent, incurable disabilities exist does not help. :no:

I have not said ANYWHERE that permanent, incurable disabilities do not exist. And yes, people can compensate for all sorts of disabilities in so many ways. I'm a firm believer in therapeutic riding programs and the benefit they have for people with disabilities. I have seen paraequestrians ride, and find it very inspiring, especially in a sport as difficult as dressage.

I just know that for myself, with all of the crookedness I experienced in my pelvis and back that in order to improve my riding for the sake of my horse, that I had to look at all of the options. I was introduced to chiropractic therapy at a young age, so I knew that it worked. I sought out the help of a personal trainer to strengthen my muscles to support the correct structural alignment. I also do Tai Chi and stretching to keep myself flexible. I ride with an instructor who is adament about correct positioning. These are the things that I do to help MY Riding. They may not work for everyone, but they worked for me, and many others that I know. I have friends who have severe scoliosis and severe back pain. They are not riders, nor do they inspire to be. However, I have seen what they go through in their daily lives. It very easily, could have been me. No---chiropractic care does not necessarily work for everyone, but it sure worked for me and others.

I'm not attacking anyone here--just trying to offer some suggestions for the OP to consider. I however, do think that if you want to improve your riding to meet your goals, then just magically wishing that it will happen will not work for those who have structural problems. I take pride in the hardwork I've placed in my riding program, because although, I may never be a perfect rider, I will have the confidence to know that I tried my best and did everything in my ability to meet my goals.

[slc2]

what a relief that you aren't mad. :lol:

The whole argument usually gets very emotional any time it's brought up here - the crux of it is this:

1. anyone who suggests even the vaguest POSSIBILITY of working on a physical problem and improving it, is attacking someone who has a physical disability.

Being someone who has more than the usual share of physical problems, injuries, pain, disability, and limitations, I can't understand why someone would feel so completely threatened and so compelled to be on the attack feeling that someone is 'accusing me of being lazy' if someone even SUGGESTS...that SOMEONE...with a physical problem - has a POSSIBILITY...of...hope.

Physical therapists spend all their time doing exactly that - maximizing performance when a person has a physical disability, problem, etc, thru a knowledge of anatomy, physiology and how biomechanics work. And yes, it is work. It can be painful, it can be a long hard road. Yet quite a few people benefit - substantially. People benefit who never imagined they could...people who are twisted up wrecks of human damage improve. Quite often.

It's a fantastic thing, and for many people, in fact most people with a physical problem, very possible, very helpful and very, very positive to improve comfort, range of motion, strength and flexibility.

Dressage, in fact, IS physical therapy, for horse and rider. The dressage trainer and rider's whole mode of operation is in physiology, anatomy, and biomechanics. The whole science behind the dressage position is all about physiology and anatomy and biomechanics...of the rider. There is nothing false in classical riding and nothing impossible. There is also nothing easy. :)

And....With the right work, people DO improve despite having physical shortcomings and problems. And so do horses.

[Blkarab]

[oops]:winkgrin:

[Blkarab]

what a relief that you aren't mad. :lol:

The whole argument usually gets very emotional any time it's brought up here - the crux of it is this:

1. anyone who suggests even the vaguest POSSIBILITY of working on a physical problem and improving it, is attacking someone who has a physical disability.

Being someone who has more than the usual share of physical problems, injuries, pain, disability, and limitations, I can't understand why someone would feel so completely threatened and so compelled to be on the attack feeling that someone is 'accusing me of being lazy' if someone even SUGGESTS...that SOMEONE...with a physical problem - has a POSSIBILITY...of...hope.

Physical therapists spend all their time doing exactly that - maximizing performance when a person has a physical disability, problem, etc, thru a knowledge of anatomy, physiology and how biomechanics work. And yes, it is work. It can be painful, it can be a long hard road. Yet quite a few people benefit - substantially. People benefit who never imagined they could...people who are twisted up wrecks of human damage improve. Quite often.

It's a fantastic thing, and for many people, in fact most people with a physical problem, very possible, very helpful and very, very positive to improve comfort, range of motion, strength and flexibility.

Dressage, in fact, IS physical therapy, for horse and rider. The dressage trainer and rider's whole mode of operation is in physiology, anatomy, and biomechanics.

And....With the right work, people DO improve despite having physical shortcomings and problems. And so do horses.

AMEN SLC!

[Eclectic Horseman]

what a relief that you aren't mad. :lol:

The whole argument usually gets very emotional any time it's brought up here - the crux of it is this:

1. anyone who suggests even the vaguest POSSIBILITY of working on a physical problem and improving it, is attacking someone who has a physical disability.

Being someone who has more than the usual share of physical problems, injuries, pain, disability, and limitations, I can't understand why someone would feel so completely threatened and so compelled to be on the attack feeling that someone is 'accusing me of being lazy' if someone even SUGGESTS...that SOMEONE...with a physical problem - has a POSSIBILITY...of...hope.

Physical therapists spend all their time doing exactly that - maximizing performance when a person has a physical disability, problem, etc, thru a knowledge of anatomy, physiology and how biomechanics work. And yes, it is work. It can be painful, it can be a long hard road. Yet quite a few people benefit - substantially. People benefit who never imagined they could...people who are twisted up wrecks of human damage improve. Quite often.

It's a fantastic thing, and for many people, in fact most people with a physical problem, very possible, very helpful and very, very positive to improve comfort, range of motion, strength and flexibility.

Dressage, in fact, IS physical therapy, for horse and rider. The dressage trainer and rider's whole mode of operation is in physiology, anatomy, and biomechanics. The whole science behind the dressage position is all about physiology and anatomy and biomechanics...of the rider. There is nothing false in classical riding and nothing impossible. There is also nothing easy. :)
And....With the right work, people DO improve despite having physical shortcomings and problems. And so do horses.

Are you reading the posts?

Or just popping in as a "guest lecturer?" :lol::lol:

[rileyt]

AMEN SLC!

No. And SLC, I know you can read better than that. That's NOT what EH said.

Truthfully, I don't think there is as much disagreement here as appears.

I think EH and Eq Trainer probably agree that a LOT of people just don't want to work hard enough... and a LOT of forward-tipped pelvises are really not an issue of spinal alignment, but more an issue of slack tummy muscles and tight hip flexors.

I think we all are in agreement that lots of long hard work are the keys to fixing this.


And, I THINK if I am reading Eq Trainer correctly, that even she acknowledges that there are probably SOME small group of riders out there who have actual structural lordosis of the spine, and that while stretching and hard work are STILL the best prescription, it may not be able to fix the problem 100% (Eq Trainer - am I wrong?).

I think where there is disagreement is here: For every duck-butted rider who comes into her ring, Eq Trainer is likely to believe that 99.9% of the time its just a matter of hard work. Whereas EH might be more understanding (or some might say soft) and believe that hard as they might try, some higher percentage of those riders really has lordosis and is structurally limited.

I can live with both positions. For the record, I agree that while "work harder!" might be an appropriate teaching mantra... I think its flawed (and offensive) to believe that ALL of a riders physical problems can be eliminated by hard work. Ameliorated? Sure. But eliminated? No.

[Eclectic Horseman]

No. And SLC, I know you can read better than that. That's NOT what EH said.

Truthfully, I don't think there is as much disagreement here as appears.

I think EH and Eq Trainer probably agree that a LOT of people just don't want to work hard enough... and a LOT of forward-tipped pelvises are really not an issue of spinal alignment, but more an issue of slack tummy muscles and tight hip flexors.

I think we all are in agreement that lots of long hard work are the keys to fixing this.


And, I THINK if I am reading Eq Trainer correctly, that even she acknowledges that there are probably SOME small group of riders out there who have actual structural lordosis of the spine, and that while stretching and hard work are STILL the best prescription, it may not be able to fix the problem 100% (Eq Trainer - am I wrong?).

I think where there is disagreement is here: For every duck-butted rider who comes into her ring, Eq Trainer is likely to believe that 99.9% of the time its just a matter of hard work. Whereas EH might be more understanding (or some might say soft) and believe that hard as they might try, some higher percentage of those riders really has lordosis and is structurally limited.

I can live with both positions. For the record, I agree that while "work harder!" might be an appropriate teaching mantra... I think its flawed (and offensive) to believe that ALL of a riders physical problems can be eliminated by hard work. Ameliorated? Sure. But eliminated? No.

I think you summed it up pretty acurately, rileyt, but I am still having difficulty articulating what I mean when I say that a rider with actual spinal lordosis will appear as though he is sitting in chairseat (or his pelvis is tipped back) although he is NOT. It is just that his curvature is bigger than normal when in neutral position. His riding is not effected, because he is actually in the correct position. It just doesn't look like you think it should (nice flat back with minimal natural curvature.) Straightening out this neutral curvature is very detrimental to the rider's back, and it is unnecessary (and maybe counterproductive) for him to be a correct, effective rider.

In short, it is not all about the rider's lower back being FLAT. It is about the neutral position of the spine and being upright and even on the seatbones and pelvis.

[rileyt]

I know what you mean about the chair seat EH... makes perfect sense to me.

[Eclectic Horseman]

I know what you mean about the chair seat EH... makes perfect sense to me.

It came from here.

http://www.amazon.com/Riders-Pain-Free-Back-Overcome-Soreness/dp/1570763712/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1206559998&sr=1-1

You may want to recommend this book to your friend. Very interesting perspective.

[Blkarab]

In my previous post, I said it could be: (1) just overweight (and have too much "junk in the trunk" so to speak) or (2) whether muscles are weak creating poor posture or (3) a skeletal deformity, and I suggested that perhaps losing weight and doing pilates & yoga is a place to start. Toning the gluteal muscles can really help get rid of "junk in the trunk."

I didn't think rileyt was describing someone with their pelvis rotated back. That's entirely different. I thought she was talking about someone with a sway back, i.e., when that person is standing up on the ground on their two feet there is a greater degree of lumbar lordotic curve than in a normal person.

I don't teach (people) much anymore. But I did see Mary Wanless at a clinic take a rider with a very swayed back and she manually manipulated her body while in the saddle to make sure that the woman was sitting evenly on her seatbones and that her pelvis was upright and not tilted forward or back. The woman still looked like she was in chair seat even though she was sitting correctly. Wanless looked a bit perplexed, but she did not admonish the rider or attempt to straighten her back.

What I think many instructors are tempted to do is to make the rider's back appear straight by having the rider tilt the pelvis forward and tuck their buttocks underneath them so that they are sitting on their back pockets. This makes the back appear flat. But the seat is no longer correct.

Neutral position of the spine means exactly that. Neutral. The rider's personal neutral position, however large the curves in that rider's spine may be when the rider is sitting erect on his seatbones with the pelvis upright. Since the amount of curvature of the spine will be different, you cannot judge the correct seat by how flat the rider's lumbar curve is.

Riding with the spine in an unnatural position, to take the natural curves out of the neutral spine and make it flat, causes the spine to be less supple and flexible and it puts an extraordinary amount of stress on the spine which will result in back problems down the line.

I think I finally understand your argument now----I had mild lordosis caused by my car accident. The childhood accident I had, caused my pelvis to actually be dislocated, and once it was put back into place, I was able to prevent further damage (twist) in my spine. If it had not been corrected, then I would have developed scoliosis, and there was talk of rods being placed in my back. Ouch.... Both conditions I had corrected through physical therapy and chiropractic therapy. This is not always the case for others.

When I started working with the PT--toning the visset joints above my pelvis and working on my abs and glutes were essential, and where I saw the best increase in my performance as a dressage rider. I agree with you, that with the OP's friend, this is probably where she needs to start. It was really hard at first to get those muscles strong, because my lower back muscles were so weak due to not being correctly aligned for my body, and other muscles were compensating for the weakness causing back pain not only when I rode, but also getting up and down out of chairs and other daily activities.

I understood rileyt to be describing someone who has their pelvis rotated back. (Mine was and it was painfully corrected by the chiropractor). Someone with lordosis, can ride in a neutral pelvic position, and it may not look that way to an instructor. The back will not lie flat, it is not meant too. It will take a lot of core strength to overcome the curve in the spine, otherwise the limitation of the curvature naturally causes the upper body to want to tilt forward, and place more weight on the front part of the seatbones and pelvic girdle.


Neutral position of the spine means exactly that. Neutral. The rider's personal neutral position, however large the curves in that rider's spine may be when the rider is sitting erect on his seatbones with the pelvis upright. Since the amount of curvature of the spine will be different, you cannot judge the correct seat by how flat the rider's lumbar curve is.]. I agree with you completely on this point.

I'm not saying that all back problems can be cured by hard work and physical/chiropractic therapy, but in mild cases, some to most can, but it's not an easy road to take. Where I have issue is when people say "I have back problems therefore, I can't" and use their physical limitations as an excuse for not working hard. I think a lot of us are in agreement on that point.

[EqTrainer]

Ahhhh.. but see, I don't think a neutral pelvis necessarily means a flat back. That is definately something you have to be experienced enough and educated enough to define when working with each individual rider. And a neutral pelvis is something that develops over time, not overnight. It's a process for most people.

RileyT, it's not necessarily to first work HARDER.. it's usually work smarter, and work out of your comfort zone (which is the big one for most people) and lastly, work harder.

But SLC is right on many accounts in her post, and the one that struck me the most was the fact that being able to find a way to achieve a good dressage seat is - HOPE. Many people are THRILLED to find someone who can actually teach them how to RIDE. Not how to compensate, or look the part. But how to be effective, and how to improve. They really want that - and are indeed willing to work smarter, stretch out of their comfort zone and .. work hard to do it.

I used to teach a woman who had polio as a child. She taught me a lot about limitations.. and not limiting your expectations of your students. She was TOUGH. She never rode above a walk - but she did it correctly, and it was beautiful. I imagine if we'd had enough time she would have eventually trotted but her first goal was to be correct, and because of her limitations that had to be, at that time, at a walk. I am not an evil taskmistress who cranks on people to do what they cannot do. I do, however, take their stated goals seriously. If you tell me you want to ride GP then I'm going to be even more focused on your position than the person who tells me they want to do a little dressage, trail ride on the weekends and go to the ocassional hunter show. I don't think that is wrong.

[Cathbad]

Hey, before everyone runs off to dinner, and forgets forever about this thread, could you all clarify a few points in the discussion?

When you mention neutral spine, I'm assuming you're referring to what Mary Wanless describes in her book, etc., and that you all consider this a desirable thing in riding?

Also, this neutral spine thing I have never seen actually taught, only discussed (like on this board) or in the MW books. The neutral spine for me is not a flat back. It's more like, hmm, a releasing from tensions from being too swayed or too collapsed in the waist. Like a balance point, I would say.

[EqTrainer]

I am not sure WHERE the SPINE part of it came in. I am talking about neutral PELVIS. That means seat bones pointing straight down. I teach it first and then teach the rider to stack their body above/below it. I have never taught that a flat spine is desireable.. the spine has curves in it that it is meant to have and flattening them could not be a good idea.

Sorry if that's not helpful.

I do use Mary Wanless's work a lot :) hope THAT is helpful!

[FlashGordon]

She never rode above a walk - but she did it correctly, and it was beautiful. I imagine if we'd had enough time she would have eventually trotted but her first goal was to be correct, and because of her limitations that had to be, at that time, at a walk.

I'm not qualified to be commenting on this discussing, but have found it interesting as a whole.

Just wanted to add that I think you bring up a good point EqT. The pro schooling my horse was saying last week that even with her beginner students she expects them to ride correctly and effectively at every gait before progressing to the next.

She has gotten a lot of flack from parents and other instructors who think her expectations are too high-- that the kids should be able to w/t/c and "equitate" before you can expect them to really RIDE their horse. :eek:

Ok I realize I'm a little off topic but at any rate that point struck a chord with me.

[Cathbad]

:no:... I meant neutral pelvis... :yes:

[medical mike]

Leaves me very little to add, so I'll fine tune....

1. Everyone has missed the point that torso stability when sitting on the horse is influenced by the lower extremity. It is not just about the pelvis and torso. When you are posting, it is influenced from the foot.

2, From a medical perspective, "vertical" means posteriorly rotated pelvis stacking the spine. In very real terms it is a trade off....making the pelvis vertical takes away ~20% of the spine capacity to accept load, bigger amplitude etc.....
Going anterior engages the facet joints, going too far anterior increases load of those joints.
Each has its trade offs in mitigating spinal pain and where it is located. By nature, person will find a comfortable position in some degree of those motions.

3. Neutral is a RANGE, not an isolated spot. And just because someone is in neutral does not mean they are properly engaging their torso stabilizers or for that matter creating the "most-stability" needed to follow the horse.

4. Everything has some use, just there are some modes of treatment that work for a larger percentage of the population.

5. You can all shoot at this one.....I would make the arguement that scant few riding instructors know how to find torso neutral and for the eq pilates instructors (and like), how many can teach proper local activation? As noted above, being in neutral is one thing, having proper activation is another.

6. Until someone comes up with some $$$ for the study, THERE ARE NO "equestrian athlete biomechanical" studies. There is only hypothesis derived from the other sciences.

7. There is no "Fix" holds without exercise everyday..period.

To end......"Riding technique was developed by men, for men then subsequently taught to women by men using principles designed for men. Modern science tells us that there are gender differences that need to be considered when teaching these techniques."---ME

REgards,
Medical Mike
equestrian medical researcher
www.fitfocusedforward.us or .com

[EqTrainer]

Well Mike I dunno about the foot part. In dressage, the foot rests in the stirrup. You should - at least theoretically :lol: - in all disciplines, be able to post with no stirrups.

I see it more as the ankle acts as a pivot for the knee, which acts as a pivot for the pelvis, in posting trot.

More later.

[Petstorejunkie]

If people accepted everything that a medical doctor told them about their limitations, many people would still be laying flat on their backs.

A good example is Mr. EqT. He has blown out both knees and ruptured his Achilles tendon. Doctors here told him he would never walk normally and certainly would never play soccer again. The doctors in France sent him straight to the Osteopath and he not only walks fine, he runs fine, plays soccer and skiis regularly. Most important to note is that he was sent home with *alignment exercises* that he will have to do FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE to maintain his flexibility and range of motion.

Just like horses, our conformation is not set in stone. My hypermobile pelvis is a fine example of that :lol: I can assume ANY position with it. Who knows what my original orientation is :lol:

My point is, to accept your conformation as "the way it is" is to deprive yourself of possibly truly learning to ride correctly. Learning to ride in neutral pelvis IS the point of developing your dressage seat. That's why the longe lessons, the slow work, the years of learning to ride correctly.

Any instructor who tells their students they can just be the way they are, and compensate for it, is IMO not doing them any favors. Sure, it makes them happy today, because they don't have to put in the hard and often painful work it takes to change. And let's face it - that sure makes one popular with a certain set of students :lol: But in the long run, they are still WRONG, and you cannot progress in dressage without a correct seat. And that's not even touching upon the damage it does to the horse, to be ridden by a rider with an incorrect seat.

I wonder if this is not just one more example of the way dressage is heading - "sure, you can do it anyway you want... no hard work involved.. it's all about having fun... check, please!"

AMEN, and i'll drink to that!

[slc2]

I think there is a basic misconception here, with this 'neutral spine' thing. I think it's an oversimplification to imagine that everyone has to, or can look exactly the same when they ride, or that an arbitrary posture is right for everyone. This is the kind of thing that came out of a number of new age methodologies and I don't think they're valid.

I think that there is a range of positions that is correct, but I think again it's like a 'ballpark'...it has to be correct enough.

And I think there is basically one position in which a given person, with a given conformation, is effective and 'correct' in the dressage saddle. Monica Theodorescu has a more hollow back and a very different posture than say, Nadine Capellmann. Gunther Seidel has a different posture than Reiner Klimke did. They all work.

I also think it takes a very, very good instructor/trainer with a lot of experience teaching a great many people over a very, very long time, to know which compensations are going to be ok, and which are going to be a problem, which are just too incorrect and which will not matter.

[angel]

I am going to agree with Mike here....the foot needs to do more than just rest in the stirrups. There are many, little misinterpretations to the words which are used to teach riding, and the "resting" of the foot is one of them. Most riders do not have their feet positioned correctly in the stirrups, nor do they use their stirrups correctly for the half-halt. From what I have seen, that business of teaching a rider to post without stirrups is done incorrectly, and usually only results in the rider learning to grip with their knees.

For each person, there is a very specific point that the pelvis becomes neutral, and that neutral point will flatten the rider's lower back...not completely, but much more so than many riders are being taught. This position is necessary to stabilize the pelvis for riding suspension...not the walk, except just a tiny bit for the collected walk. This position in no way stresses the back if it is being done correctly, and in fact, keeps the back from being stressed.

Most riders really do not understand what the "neutral" pelvis means. The talk is about getting the seatbones vertical. Actually, the pelvis is all one piece in an adult, so this statement about seatbones sounds as if they are something separate from the pelvis. Not so. What is true about the pelvis is that the pelvis is both top heavy and front heavy. This weight on top and in front destablizes the rider during the riding of suspension if the pelvis cannot be positioned into a gravity neutral balance. This is especially true for women, whoses pelvises are already tipped forward, just because of gender. What this means is that the weight carried on the front and top of the pelvis must equal the weight carried on the rear and bottom of the pelvis. To achieve that, the pelvis must have its front portion lifted, thereby tipping the weight rearward. When the front is lifted correctly, the seatbones become vertically alligned with the hipsocket, creating a balance point similar to what our legs do for our torso when we are standing. In the half halt, the pelvis momentarily is lifted a minute amount more in front, which tips a greater portion of the weight of it rearward, creating a bit of leverage for the rider's seat in order to help lift the horse. The rider's correctly positioned feet in the stirrups should increase the pressure on the rear edge of the stirrups at that moment...by virtue of the rider's correctly balanced torso. This change in balance will change the weight-load of the horse's legs, placing more weight on the rear ones, and helping to lift the front ones...which is necessary for collection.

[rileyt]

I agree wholeheartedly angel.

I agree that most "no-stirrup" work is done incorrectly, and results in a pinched knee.

And, more importantly, I think you're making some very good points about the relationship between the pelvis and spine.

Eq Trainer, the spine IS a part of this equation, because it is connected to the pelvis, and the positioning of the pelvis affects the curve of the spine. As you noted, however, no one talks about neutral pelvis or neutral spine... they talk about sitting on your seat bones (which is, in effect, a way of saying tilt your pelvis front or back to get it in neutral), and they talk about "engaging your abs"... which also has the effect of pulling the front/top of the pelvis back, and taking some of the curve out of your lower spine.

Its all related. And as Angel correctly pointed out, SOME flattening of that curve in your lower back is a good helpful thing. By pulling your tummy in, you're protecting your spine.

I have to say, I think this has been a VERY informative discussion, and benefitted by a lot of thought and knowledge on this topic by a lot of different people. Yay US!

[angel]

I am going to interject one more caveat here, because of the prior remark about "pulling the tummy in." This should not happen either, nor should a rider stick their belly button out as some are taught. What should happen, is that the front of the pelvis is helped to become stablized by the long muscles of the front portion of the torso. These muscles are placed into a position of slight tension by taking one's shoulders back correctly. It is a "toning" of the abdominal muscles passively, rather than an extra something...not a pushing out, and not a sucking in of those muscles. Now if those muscles have been exercised more, such as by sit-ups, or leg lifts when flat on ones back, then the job of the shoulders to create this passive "toning" becomes much easier.;)

[xQHDQ]

Most riders really do not understand what the "neutral" pelvis means. The talk is about getting the seatbones vertical. Actually, the pelvis is all one piece in an adult, so this statement about seatbones sounds as if they are something separate from the pelvis. Not so. What is true about the pelvis is that the pelvis is both top heavy and front heavy. This weight on top and in front destablizes the rider during the riding of suspension if the pelvis cannot be positioned into a gravity neutral balance. This is especially true for women, whoses pelvises are already tipped forward, just because of gender. What this means is that the weight carried on the front and top of the pelvis must equal the weight carried on the rear and bottom of the pelvis. To achieve that, the pelvis must have its front portion lifted, thereby tipping the weight rearward. When the front is lifted correctly, the seatbones become vertically alligned with the hipsocket, creating a balance point similar to what our legs do for our torso when we are standing. In the half halt, the pelvis momentarily is lifted a minute amount more in front, which tips a greater portion of the weight of it rearward, creating a bit of leverage for the rider's seat in order to help lift the horse. The rider's correctly positioned feet in the stirrups should increase the pressure on the rear edge of the stirrups at that moment...by virtue of the rider's correctly balanced torso. This change in balance will change the weight-load of the horse's legs, placing more weight on the rear ones, and helping to lift the front ones...which is necessary for collection.

This helped.

I feel I have the exact same problem as the OP's friend. My trainer is saying lean back/sit up/etc. If I sit up anymore my hips get tight and I can't sit up more to half-halt. I am not fat (BMI =19) and I work out with a personal trainer that specializes in pilates 2x per week.

I have read through all of these posts and NO ONE has answered the question. Should I/OP friend sit the way our trainer asks if it makes are hips less flexible? Will our hips "relax" after a while of changing our position, which would support our trainers request? Or, are our trainers asking us to fit a preceived (visual) ideal that puts us out of our neutral positions?

Thanks.

[slc2]

usually it is a 'schooling exercise' - just for the rider, not the horse, and much like riding with one hand lifted or a whip behind the back.

[Kairoshorses]

My problem turned out to be NOT with the spine/pelvis, but with my core--or lack thereof!

After two children late in life (the last one a 10 pounder I had NATURALLY, thank you very much), I'd ripped my stomach muscles to shreds. And when I worked on my core, it just pulled the muscles further apart.

I finally went to a doctor who was able to sew it back together (and remove the nasty flap of skin that the last kiddo stretched out on my abdomen). What a difference! Now that I have a core again, I can actually do things I couldn't before, which I'd been blaming on my hips, spine, etc.

[EqTrainer]

Of course the spine and pelvis are connected :eek: tee hee. Thanks for that revelation RileyT. I might be on cold meds but I still remember that!

What I was referring to is the fact that there are people who actually do teach a neutral spine - meaning, flattened. I do not teach that.

And yes the seatbones are straight up and down, relative. There is always a point to be relative *to*.

Theoretically you SHOULD be able to post without stirrups. The point to be made is that you do NOT *need* them to post. Is it helpful? For most people, no. It teaches them to grab with other things, rarely with the parts I would like them to actually engage.

I cannot type all day, even when I am sick :lol:

IMO and IME feet should rest in the stirrups UNLESS you need them, for example, when Mr. Naughty is playing. Then by God yes you should push your feet into them and stay alive. But otherwise.. no. The minute you push into the stirrup, you create an opposite push up. Handy when your horse is bucking. Counterproductive in keeping your seat relaxed and on the horse. During the very best riding of my life, I have always had the knowledge that my stirrups had become irrelevant. Perhaps this is something that happens over time.

I disagree with Angel about the stomach and shoulders. That only works if you have the ability to OPEN your shoulders at that time. Not everyone does at that time in their riding. Most people learn in steps, rarely can you just stack someone up and off they go. Those people would be well served to think about solidifying their core by pushing their stomach at their hand in the half halt and maintaining a certain amount of isometric tension there. That too, is relative.

Someone asked:

"I have read through all of these posts and NO ONE has answered the question. Should I/OP friend sit the way our trainer asks if it makes are hips less flexible? Will our hips "relax" after a while of changing our position, which would support our trainers request? Or, are our trainers asking us to fit a preceived (visual) ideal that puts us out of our neutral positions?"

My question to you is.. makes your hips less flexible HOW? The way you want to sit naturally (based on the OP's description of her friend) actually closes your hip angle and makes your hips less flexible. My gut instinct is that you need to relearn what flexible is, that you think you are flexible when your hip angle is slightly closed but you are not - at least not for dressage. Might work nicely on a hunter.

My other thought is that you might be misunderstanding just how relaxed you are supposed to be. You cannot ride a horse who is in high muscle tone with completely relaxed muscle tone, you would fly right off them. And "Feeling relaxed" is so relative to the rider. When I feel relaxed, my muscle tone might be twice as high as yours when you feel relaxed. There is a story that circulates around about someone asking to put their hand under Arthur Kottas' thigh when he said it was relaxed. The hand supposedly came out mashed. He felt he was relaxed.

Lastly, regarding your hips. When you are riding well, there is open and then there is OPEN. I would recommend exploring open from a yoga perspective rather than a pilates perspective. I have done both; pilates was excellent for strengthening my core again after I had my kids and after injuries. But only during yoga have I ever had epiphanies about my hips opening more. The body awareness that develops can really help you with those things. I recommend one on one sessions with a good Anusara yoga teacher, and that you tell them what you are interested in. It is alignment focused yoga, very slow and very interesting.

[EqTrainer]

My problem turned out to be NOT with the spine/pelvis, but with my core--or lack thereof!

After two children late in life (the last one a 10 pounder I had NATURALLY, thank you very much), I'd ripped my stomach muscles to shreds. And when I worked on my core, it just pulled the muscles further apart.

I finally went to a doctor who was able to sew it back together (and remove the nasty flap of skin that the last kiddo stretched out on my abdomen). What a difference! Now that I have a core again, I can actually do things I couldn't before, which I'd been blaming on my hips, spine, etc.

Ugh that all sounds awful BUT I am jealous that you got that flap of skin removed... no matter how fit I am, I cannot get rid of it!

[Mozart]

Stabilize my pelvis? I thought I was supposed to mobilize my pelvis to follow horse's back in sitting trot..aarrggh ya'll are driving me to drink. :lol:

And this "opening the hips" thing. Just so we are all on the same page..the hip is where your femur attaches via a socket into your pelvis, correct? So if I "open" the hip...am I not pointing my knee out? I know that is not the goal but I cannot wrap my mind around the term "opening the hips".

I mean, yes, you can to a point but if you open them all the way, you can't rotate your knee in at the same time.

We need a COTH demonstration skeleton....

[angel]

For the person's benefit who asked about the leaning back...most riding instructors cannot see the correct balance of the rider...or lack thereof. When the rider is told to lean back, generally the rider is just doing this with the upper torso, which does nothing to get the seatbones into correct allignment. Leaning back with only the upper body is akin to riding a horse with the reins too short and calling it collection.:( This position actually jars the area we call the "small of the back," and does as much damage to the human, as riding with too short a reins does to the horse.

As to the "opening of the hipsocket"...again, an imperfectly worded description. The hip socket is always the same size. What changes is how the muscles around the socket that attach to the leg are contracted or flexed. It determines whether the legs hang without tension, or whether they create tension in some fashion on one side of the socket or the other. In other words, you want "balanced" leg muscles so that all the muscles surrounding the socket are evenly toned...none more flexed than the others. The reason for this is that when the muscles of the leg tense due to incorrect flexion, it prevents the correct transfer of weight from the rider's seatbones down the legs and onto the stirrups. Pinching with the knees retards the motion of the horse because the correct weighting from the seatbones does not fall into the stirrups, allowing the horse's hindquarters to trail out behind. By the same token, jamming the heels down, creates a weighting that constantly drives the horse's hindquarters into the bit, creating over tempo, on the forehand horses unless the reins a shorted to prevent the motion forward. The horse is still on the forehand, but the motion is held in check, and you get such things as the toe flipping upward in the extended trot, or the impure canter pirouettes.

[medical mike]

This is really confusing and from a medical/rehab perspective some of the points are incorrect.

"I am going to interject one more caveat here, because of the prior remark about "pulling the tummy in." This should not happen either, nor should a rider stick their belly button out as some are taught. What should happen, is that the front of the pelvis is helped to become stablized by the long muscles of the front portion of the torso. These muscles are placed into a position of slight tension by taking one's shoulders back correctly. It is a "toning" of the abdominal muscles passively, rather than an extra something...not a pushing out, and not a sucking in of those muscles. Now if those muscles have been exercised more, such as by sit-ups, or leg lifts when flat on ones back, then the job of the shoulders to create this passive "toning" becomes much easier...."

I'm presenting at Rolex as a guest of Charles Owen. I welcome everyone to come by as this will be one of the more "engaging" topics....

Regards,
Medical Mike
equestrian medical researcher
www.fitfocusedforward.us or .com

[tollertwins]

For those of use who won't be at rolex - do we get a hint?

[Rhiannonjk]

to the OP - I tried to address the flexibility issue. Yes. Sit as your instructor says (I'm exhausted after catching up on the thread, but I'm assuming that it was in the general direction of achieving a neutral pelvis) and there are other things you can do to increase that flexibility. Even if it feels weird now, go with it, and flexibility will come. Meanwhile, skip enthusiastically (crossing your legs in front of yourself as you jump forward, and moving as much like a crazy person as you can) through the barn before you ride, and you should be more loose through your hips!

[medical mike]

***"I am going to interject one more caveat here, because of the prior remark about "pulling the tummy in." This should not happen either, nor should a rider stick their belly button out as some are taught."***

Pulling in or "hollowing" is one of only two accepted methods to properly activate the local stabilizers of the torso. Bracing is the other.


***"What should happen, is that the front of the pelvis is helped to become stablized by the long muscles of the front portion of the torso. These muscles are placed into a position of slight tension by taking one's shoulders back correctly. "***

First sentence talks about what I am interpreting as anterior rotation. In a very simple interpretation, it is correct.. Second sentence as stated is incorrect. Properly activating the torso stabilizers allows the shoulders to assume proper position.



***"It is a "toning" of the abdominal muscles passively, rather than an extra something...not a pushing out, and not a sucking in of those muscles."***

Incorrect use of the word "tone". Torso stability is always active, the degree of and which muscles is always changing.


***"Now if those muscles have been exercised more, such as by sit-ups, or leg lifts when flat on ones back, then the job of the shoulders to create this passive "toning" becomes much easier...."***

While these exercises will improve torso muscle strength, if the activation pattern and technique is not correct then the exercise is less than effective in creating the desired result.

Regards,
Medical Mike
equestrian medical researcher
www.fitfocusedforward.us or .com

[EqTrainer]

The part about the shoulders makes perfect sense to me, because when my torso is correctly stacked, my shoulders can then open and stay loose at the same time.

I can, however, now from muscle memory recreate the feeling/action in the torso from bringing my shoulders back/open and then relaxing them. Sometimes how the mind works is just as interesting as the body ;)

When you talk about torso stablizers, are you talking about the muscles/tendons/ligaments that keep the spine erect, specifially the psoas muscles?

[medical mike]

Psoas flexes the torso forward through its attachments on the lumbar spine and femur.
"Local stabilizers" are the muscles that create the main corset around the torso and are intrinsic to the spinal segments.

"Global stabilizers" reinforce that corset.

If you think only "keep the spine erect" you miss a part of the model. You can have an erect spine, but poor stability.


REgards,
Medical Mike
equestrian medical researcher
www.fitfocusedforward.us or .com

[tollertwins]

The ONLY way that I seem to be able to get my shoulders up is to use the deep abs to rotate the lower part of my pelvis up....Think 'zipping up the front'....

Then use the obliques (I think) to go w/ the motion of the horse and leave the shoulders relatively loose....

But it's harder than you-know-what....and right now I feel sort of locked up (e.g. lateral work is out the window for awhile).

OTOH - the horse seems happier. On a vid it's only a couple inches difference in the shoulders...but TONS of work in the abs.

[EqTrainer]

Psoas flexes the torso forward through its attachments on the lumbar spine and femur.
"Local stabilizers" are the muscles that create the main corset around the torso and are intrinsic to the spinal segments.

"Global stabilizers" reinforce that corset.

If you think only "keep the spine erect" you miss a part of the model. You can have an erect spine, but poor stability.


REgards,
Medical Mike
equestrian medical researcher
www.fitfocusedforward.us (http://www.fitfocusedforward.us) or .com

Ok.. so WHAT are they exactly? Or should I keep guessing?

[dressagerose]

I know that I am a little late coming into this, but for the OP, I think that if the hips are tight with getting the pelvis in neutral, then you are using the wrong muscles to get the pelvis there. Guess how I know this:) I have lordosis (or duck butt) and years of working on this (mostly off the horse) has gotten me almost where I need to be. It has taken lots of different things to get my pelvis where it needs to be, but one revelation was certainly figuring out the correct muscles to use. I spent a lot of time fighting against myself, using the wrong muscles to try and get my pelvis aligned. Of course, part of that was that the right muscles are smaller and harder to access.

Just something to think about.

[Velvet]

To all those who think that a person who is born with certain physical limitations can over come them with pilates, yoga, chiropractors, and meditation (or medication, take your pick), I just have to say that I salute you. And I also want to let you know that after all your years of riding "correctly" and being all form and no function (like some hunter riders with pretty forms), having a body that can't absorb and assist in following the motion of your horse--I'll be happy to help push your wheelchair in your old age. :lol:

Seriously, there are some things that can be worked on, and then there are things that we need to find our own adaptations for--and things our horses will always adapt to when we ask them (because they are wonderful, and highly trainable and adaptable creatures).

Pushing people to have their backs locked and turning their toes in so hard that they can't follow a horse's motion (which hurts them MORE when you resist) is just teaching without a basic understanding of the fact that ALL people are unique. Unique physically, and mentally. There is no cookie cutter approach to this sport. There are basics to being in balance and working on staying in balance, but you can't achieve that and sacrifice a following and allowing seat without creating more problems in your riding, your physical body, and your horse.

As in all things in life, there is balance, and there is give and take. There is NO SUCH THING AS PERFECT. That doesn't mean you don't work to improve yourself and your riding. I'm all for that, but you do have to take into consideration that we are not built identically (thank God), or are we all able to achieve the same goals. We should just try to reach as high and far as possible as we are physically able without damaging ourselves in the process. We won't all be Olympic riders, nor should we be. We all have something we're made for and good at. Mediocrity is when you settle for less than your best, not when you don't achieve the Olympics, the FEI levels, or even Second Level (for some people).

[EqTrainer]

To all those who think that a person who is born with certain physical limitations can over come them with pilates, yoga, chiropractors, and meditation (or medication, take your pick), I just have to say that I salute you. And I also want to let you know that after all your years of riding "correctly" and being all form and no function (like some hunter riders with pretty forms), having a body that can't absorb and assist in following the motion of your horse--I'll be happy to help push your wheelchair in your old age. :lol:

Seriously, there are some things that can be worked on, and then there are things that we need to find our own adaptations for--and things our horses will always adapt to when we ask them (because they are wonderful, and highly trainable and adaptable creatures).

Pushing people to have their backs locked and turning their toes in so hard that they can't follow a horse's motion (which hurts them MORE than when you resist) is just teaching without a basic understanding of the fact that ALL people are unique. Unique physically, and mentally. There is no cookie cutter approach to this sport. There are basics to being in balance and working on staying in balance, but you can't achieve that and sacrifice a following and allowing seat without creating more problems in your riding, your physical body, and your horse.

As in all things in life, there is balance, and there is give and take. There is NO SUCH THING AS PERFECT, nor acheiving it through hard work. There is very good, but if perfection were possible, Tiger Woods would not be constantly striving for improvement. ;)

Velvet, please read your last paragraph. You have time to edit it, it's only 1:14 AM :lol:

Oh, I am editing to add that you did! Brava Velvet! Going back to see what it says...

[Velvet]

Um, the last paragraph still works. Tiger Woods is constantly striving to improve and reach perfection, but he hasn't done it, nor will he. ;)

(Not sure if that was what you were referring to. And yes, I did have time to change it. :lol: It's awful this time of night, after a busy week. I'm always editing and rewriting, and am too quick to post. :D )

[slc2]

I think alot of these posts are being 'interpreted to their own idiotic extreme'.

oh that toes in thing. yes it has been debated here ad nauseum, 'i can't turn my toes in, it would damage me internally'.

it does happen to work. it helped me immensely. it's actually helped alot of people....but the key is to NOT just force a very stiff, tense lower leg to turn the toes in, but to relax the entire leg, free up the hip, and give the entire middle body the flexibility and softness to free up the leg so the entire leg can lay against the horse...not just the toes cramped in. it is the lack of tension that allows the correct leg position, adn the toes are naturally and comfortably nearly straight or straight ahead.

anyone who wishes to is graciously entitled to believe that no one on the planet can turn their legs properly so the inside of the leg is against the horse, if they so choose. but the fact is, that quite a few people can and do, every single day.

if someone encourages a rider to try to improve his or her position, it doesn't necessarily mean that they're breaking the rider's legs and making him into a pretzel of pain or putting him into a wheelchair.

it just means they're trying to get the person to improve. it doesn't mean they're killing the rider.

i don't actually see all these dressage instructors forcing people into unnatural positions.

and i really don't think that any trainer or instructor i've ever met is that lame or stupid, that they would force someone into a position that's just ridiculous for them.

All trainers are not perfect, of course. Bettina Drummond in an interview said that Oliviera, the position he wanted her to be in, really messed up her back and hip and she just could not do it. That does happen.

But by and large, when instructors ask people to sit up a little or not point their toes out quite so much, it is do-able and it will help them ride better. Not every correction is going to put someone in a wheelchair.

[SaddleFitterVA]

You can alleviate a lot of problems through rider-physical effort/rehab (be that PT, yoga, pilates, etc). You cannot change the essential structure of the pelvis.

You can also do damage to yourself if you do not respect your own physical conformation.

When I was doing yoga teacher training, we spent quite a lot of time on anatomy, and I focused a lot of the hip/pelvis area because it is something that does affect rider position. There is a physical limit to how far a person can open the hips, and the longer the stirrup, the smaller that angle will be. The vast majority of people probably don't find that as they have not worked on their own suppleness and engagement, but that does not change that there is no "perfect" position that is based upon what somebody else is doing that is correct for their conformation...

[Whisper]

I have had a couple of dressage instructors who wanted me in a position where I felt really crooked/contorted, and was so tense I had trouble breathing. One of them even said that if it didn't hurt, something was wrong, that I wasn't trying hard enough.

My yoga and vaulting (gymnastics on horseback teachers) told me the opposite - that it's ok if I'm sore afterward (and steps to take to minimise it), but that there should not be acute pain or extreme discomfort during exercise, and if I feel that, they specifically wanted me to back off, relax for a second or two, and try again at a little less intensity. Also, in vaulting, the position is usually held for only 3 or 4 strides at a time. That felt like a much more realistic/manageable goal than all the way around the arena, or every single stride. So, I applied it to my regular riding, and it made a huge difference very quickly. Instead of feeling tense and strained, I'd do my best for 3 or 4 strides, reorganize and get my body back where it belonged, and repeat continuously. It's still a work in progress, but my alignment, suppleness, and strength have improved significantly. Switching to a different riding instructor with a better awareness of biomechanics, and who was willing to be patient and keep letting me know when I got out of position (my body awareness was really dreadful at first) helped enormously as well. As I've been working on it, it feels much more dynamic and adjustable, and natural/automatic, rather than me just posing up there.

I have mild/moderate scoliosis in an S curve, and slight lordosis. I've tried a couple of chiropractors for an extended period of time each, but didn't feel the adjustments made any difference at all. I went to a physical therapist (for a different issue), and he gave me some exercises that helped a lot.

[slc2]

i'd say yes and no. for some, the pain comes not from physical limits but from tension. they're so tight that trying to move around in to a more effective position causes pain. the key i think with the dressage position again is to be loose and relaxed. it helps alot. a person is much more adjustable and it's easier to make corrections. it's difficult to relax, though.

i think what feels 'wierd and crooked' might actually be correct, but the person is just so used to sitting crookedly.

bottom line is no matter what most students aren't going to put up with any more pain than they think is reasonable. what they think is reasonable and how much they're willing to put up with varies from rider to rider.

[Whisper]

Oh, I'd definitely agree that pain is usually from tension/trying to force a greater range of motion than I'm ready for right that moment. However, it is very possible/likely to get an injury by making myself do it. So, taking the other approach dramatically reduces the tension, and lets me keep working to get closer and closer to where I need to be.

For example, I have less range of motion in my right shoulder than in my left, when I try to bring it up behind my back. I've been able to improve it a lot, but if I try to force it past the point where it gets "stuck," it'll cramp up on me. I'm working toward doing splits, and sometimes need to back off slightly or stop/restart. Both are slowly improving, but it takes time.

Making adjustments that *don't* hurt, but just feel weird on the other hand, I need to embrace/memorise the weird feeling so I can replicate it correctly. That's very different from what I was doing when I first tried to move my leg here and shoulder there - I truly was getting all discombobulated and less correct. I had to learn how to use my core correctly and develop better coordination/independence of my body parts, so that moving my leg back didn't make me twist my shoulders and collapse my waist. I can cope with pain pretty well, if I clonk myself or land too hard and my feet sting in vaulting, or getting hit in martial arts class when we were doing sparring, but pain (especially acute pain) that happens from a stretch is usually a warning signal to back off, and shouldn't be ignored or worked through.

[vanheimrhorses]

i do not think position, having a disk fused to my pelvis since birth, is important as how the horse goes for you. Too much emphasis is put on say the Equitation of dressage and not the harmony of horse and rider, working to where the pair is comfortable "together" not in a forced position is best, remember how adamant we are not to force our horses into unatural positions we should not expect the same of riders, no forcing them into positions they cannot achieve or maintain. Find a place where the performance can come from.