Are top event riders victims of their own success?

[Jiffy Read]

I'm reading a lot about collapsible fences and more stringent qualifications, but by and large it is experienced riders who are suffering the worst of the falls. I think we need to ask ourselves: have top event riders become victims of their own success? Have they become so good that in day-to-day training they seldom make mistakes, thereby preventing their horses from developing the instincts necessary to get themselves – and their riders – out of trouble when things don't go right the last few strides before a cross country jump?

Back when I evented at the three star level, we weren't as technically proficient as today's top riders. Oftentimes we didn’t bother with seeing distances to cross country jumps; we just kicked on, and let our horses figure out where to put their feet. Not that we were hellions – we knew how to package a horse to an upright vertical, how to get a horse’s hind end underneath himself when a big oxer approached. But seeing distances was the last thing all but the most gifted or skilled of us thought about. Jack LeGoff preached of five criteria needed for successfully riding cross country obstacles – direction, speed, impulsion, balance, and timing – and although I don't recall the exact order of the first four, he made a point of timing being last on the list. Jack contended that direction, speed, impulsion, and balance were the most crucial elements for negotiating cross country obstacles. Timing (or seeing one's distance) was the icing on the cake. Nice if you could get your horse to that perfect spot, but not a disaster if you couldn't, as long as those other four fundamental factors were in place.

But what happens when you’re a top professional who always gets your horse to the right spot for take-off? What happens when you’ve had that horse from the early stages of his training, and he’s never learned to get himself out of a scrape because you’ve never let him get into one? What happens when you’re out on course, and for some reason at one jump your eye fails you, and your horse hasn’t developed the instincts to put his feet down somewhere other than where you tell him?

You fall.

More often than not it’s the top riders who are suffering the catastrophic falls, not the less skilled riders. Scary as they may be to watch on course, these less skilled riders are on horses that have learned to save themselves from their riders’ mistakes. They’ve developed an ability to put their feet down where needed in order to get themselves over the jump.

There’s been an occasional mention of how event horses used to hunt; what better way than hunting to teach a horse where to put his feet? When you follow a pack of hounds and a field of horses over a solid stone wall or fence panel (which is often as upright and vertical a jump as you can get, and airy, to boot), there’s no opportunity to see one’s distance. You put your hands down and say your Hail Marys. And the horses jump. Sometimes they scramble. Sometimes they flat out refuse, particularly if they think they’ve gotten themselves into a jam they can’t jump themselves out of. But they learn how to take care of themselves, how to think on their feet. How many times does a top rider bring his horse into a fence all wrong, or even slightly wrong, and let the horse work it out for himself, develop the instincts to put down that fifth leg when needed?

Eventing didn’t used to be “broken”. Of course there were the occasional bad accidents, and any bad accident is a tragedy. But those accidents were rare. Have courses changed all that much? Certainly the questions have become more technical, but many of the falls occurring these days are happening at straightforward jumps, jumps that we used to think of as “rest fences”.

I’m all for making eventing as safe as possible, but I think we need to examine what trainers are doing in their jump work to facilitate their horses’ ability to think and react for themselves.

[snoopy]

for those of you who do not know of the OP....


Listen PLEASE...This rider has been around for a long time and knows the game well. Welcome to the board and I for one am very much looking forward to many posts from you.

[Debbie]

Listen, heck, I'm in love. Yes, yes, yes.

[tx3dayeventer]

I think you are on the right track with this. I too believe that something has been lost. When i did my first CCI* (long) in the start box I was told to "get a faraway look, stick like a tick, and kick like a mule". Basically get to the spot you get and ride out of it. I never looked for the perfect distance but never had to. When worst came to worst it rode like a steeplechase fence, out of stride. I dont see very much of that any more. We are now trying to micromanage our XC rides.

[yellow rose]

that is a really really good point.

any ideas of how to teach our event horses to have better instincts, but without putting them at risk? I mean, foxhunting is great, but not everyone has a pack by them. Should we just biff every now and again? I'm being serious..

[Jazzy Lady]

You had me at the first paragraph

[flyracing]

Very interesting! I had the same type of realization today, but from a young horse/green rider persective. So, I've been riding one of my green students' horse in each jumping lesson, because they are both inexperienced. I jump on the horse each time we reach a new milestone that the horse is ready for, but the rider not so much. So, like today I rode the horse through it's first one stride combo today, made the spots, didn't land on her back or hit her mouth, blah, blah, blah and the horse was great. But then the rider gets back on and going to a single vertical of the same height the horse ran out! It's small she comes back and walks over it, but at the trot again runs out! I get back on, horse is foot perfect, grr... but anyways I think this is the same sort of deal. The rider is capable, but the horse wants that perfect ride that it's not getting!

[snickerdoodle]

Hi Jiffy! Great to have your input.

I think you maybe on to something. Too many look for your distance for that perfect spot and not enough training with balance, rythm, timing and let the horse figure it out. Especially at the lower levels where they can make a mistake and usually not suffer catastrophic injuries.

[NeverTime]

Good to know I'll never have this problem as my horse constantly has to save my butt!

No, seriously, I have heard professionals that I've worked with complain that horses like mine have a built-in "amateur pause" that makes them hard (for the pros) to ride to a fence: About three strides out, they take a little momentary hesitation just to size things up and see what needs to be done to make this all work out. If you are riding a great rhythm, that can mess you up, but that's the pony's self-preservation instinct at work right there.

In the best of both worlds, the horse still takes his "amateur pause" only to realize (shock!) we've actually put them in the right place/rhythm to jump!

[fordtraktor]

I agree completely. I also note that there is a huge difference between:

"we knew how to package a horse to an upright vertical, how to get a horse’s hind end underneath himself when a big oxer approached. But seeing distances was the last thing all but the most gifted or skilled of us thought about. Jack LeGoff preached of five criteria needed for successfully riding cross country obstacles – direction, speed, impulsion, balance, and timing – and although I don't recall the exact order of the first four, he made a point of timing being last on the list." (a mantra we should all memorize and chant to ourselves) -- and

"get a faraway look, stick like a tick, and kick like a mule."

[JER]

Awesome post. I look forward to more from you.

My old Prelim horse hunted for many years before eventing and he knew how to keep himself out of trouble. He could keep me out of trouble too -- he's 24 now, I've had him for most of his life and I've never fallen off of him. It was almost impossible to ride him to a bad spot and he simply would not jump from those spots. When I knew I had a bad distance 3 strides out, I could do like Jiffy said and kick on forward. You can't do this with a horse that doesn't know how to sort himself out.

In the UK and Ireland, it used to be the norm for horses to go hunting at ages 4-5 and then start eventing at 6. I know this still happens but it's not the norm with purpose-bred event horses (which is kind of ironic as the great event sire Ben Faerie was bought for the purpose of breeding sound field hunters). The YEH classes are a great showcase for youngsters but prepping a horse for the YEH doesn't give as good a foundation for eventing as hunting does.

IME, a hunt horse develops a strong opinion which doesn't always help in the dressage ring. But who cares, really, when you know your horse will lengthen/compress, bend and do perfect changes on XC?

Unfortunately, hunting isn't a viable option for many people in the US. If you're not experienced out there, you may not be suited to taking out a young green horse. Depending on where you live, you may not be anywhere near a hunt. This is really too bad as hunting is so much fun and teaches you so much about XC riding, like how to relax, deal with the unexpected and not to micromanage your horse.

[DLee]

I was thinking of a comment I heard from one of the riders on the Inside Eventing series. She was riding a new horse and (from what I remember) having a more difficult time. The groom told her to "just spend some time with him." :confused:

How much time do some of these riders actually spend on/with some of these horses? Do they really truly know each other? Is there less time spent in the saddle now on each horse due to absence of A,B and C? Do they do anything together EXCEPT train? Just wondering here. I heard that comment when the series first came out over two years ago, and haven't forgotten it. I guess I just couldn't imagine going out cross country on a horse I didn't know inside and out.

[Tantivy1]

I do not normally post on this forum, but I always avidly follow Rolex, even more so as I once lived near Laine and can remember her as a kid when she first moved to Crozier and I'd see her hacking across our field. To see her now....she has come a long way. But I digress.

Being a foxhunter, I have always wanted to try eventing but never get around to it as the hunters are used so hard in the winter months they need their vacations, or so they tell me. :) But I do like to stay tuned.

So my view is not exactly that of an expert, but in a nutshell, am I seeing event riders add too much showring type technicalities to their sport? Has it gotten so incredibly competitive, being as there are so many good riders out there, that in order to separate them this micro-technical riding cross- country has evolved?

The OP's observation about hunting horses learning in a natural setting how to carry themselves is right on. They learn or they are retired to other pursuits. Nothing beats following a screaming pack across country, and the many varied and unpredictable obstacles you will have to jump. NO COURSE DESIGNERS out there! and I cannot envision anything more unforgiving than a 3-4 foot cemented stone wall in Piedmont country.

Unfortunately, being as the winner often emerges during the dressage phase, I can appreciate not wanting to hunt a horse that moves with such quality.

From another angle, I was watching that superstar Teddy and I bet you there are a lot more Teddy's out there, but they are overlooked in the search for the super athletes that are more in line with what aspiring riders think a top star should be in size, movement and looks.

Just some ramblings from stone wall country.

[CoolMeadows]

I was just speculating about the flip side to your opinion on another thread. Is it possible that the huge increase in technical questions on courses has created the need for eventers to ride to the base more often than before and if so, is it possible that this could cause an increase in missing by getting a bit too close? Or even just an increase in rotational falls if the horse happens to just not be quick enough with his front end that instant? You guys have the vertical faces combined with huge spreads... hold 'em off the face and you land in the middle. Ride up to the base to make the spread and if the wheels don't come up quickly enough you're screwed or if you misjudge a hair and get too close you're in for an ugly punishment.

Your theory's interesting although I'd imagine that the ULRs still teach their horses to save themselves with tricky gymnastics from time to time, don't they?

[RunForIt]

I'm reading a lot about collapsible fences and more stringent qualifications, but by and large it is experienced riders who are suffering the worst of the falls. I think we need to ask ourselves: have top event riders become victims of their own success? Have they become so good that in day-to-day training they seldom make mistakes, thereby preventing their horses from developing the instincts necessary to get themselves – and their riders – out of trouble when things don't go right the last few strides before a cross country jump?



and here does lie the rub, not just at the upper levels, but down here where I ride too. (I'm about to send a talented, green horse off for training and bring home one that has had super stuff for the past year. Girl coming home will have to get used to being the lesson horse for her "definitely still learning upper-middle aged mom" while younger guy gets the pro treatment).

I'm trying to find a way for me to continue to support eventing - when its going right - MEANING NO HORSES BEING PUT DOWN BECAUSE OF INJURY IN AN EVENT for years - I am so proud to be part of this sport - I was so UP last Saturday morning and early afternoon watching the live feed of ROLEX XC!. BUT, when things go downhill for horses over and over, and I listen to one reason after another, one remedy after another address everything EXCEPT our sport is willing to sacrifice horses as simply a part of the game, I have to take myself somewhere else. I keep wanting to scream "hey folks, there's an elepahnt in the room - focus on the HORSE!" You've done that here - in an elegant, thoughtful way.

the point of this is that I don't know if the established pros or the up-and-coming young pros are going to go fox-hunting on their clients' 5 and 6 figure horses. I COMPLETELY agree that horses have to construct their own understanding of distance, space, and, damnit, - making it over the fence. I once jumped intermediate fences at Pine Top while out schooling because I didn't know what the fences were - horse did and stopped when I didn't have enough of the impulsion you mentioned. Turned around, came at the fence with impulsion and we were over and away with nary a thought. Kim Severson's mom bred him out of Kim's YR horse Power Pellet and Kim started the horse as a 3 year old, hacked him all over VA when she was trying to find a sponsor...horse learned good sense from making mistakes (Kim's told me the tales - she was very much a kid then) (though, even then, a rather talented kid).

Bottom line: I would be dead if Buddy hadn't made his mistakes - glad Kim was once a kid.

[VicarageVee]

Agreed.

That said, I think it is important to consider the fact that many trainers do still tell their students, "your horse needs to be able to figure its own way out of a problem" on the xc course. Woffard has always said that if you are in good rythym coming up to a fence, and you cannot "see a spot" your horse should still have no problem jumping from a safe, if not comfortable, distance. So this point of view is still alive and well.

However, perhaps part of the problem is the age of some of the horses, or their experience level. Horses no longer run for a year at Training, and then the same at Prelim, so that they can make mistakes (and learn from them) where the level of risk is lower. Instead, the records of many **/***/**** horses read a handful of Prelims, 3-4 Intermediates and then Advanced. Horses, I think, even with (or maybe especially with) top level riders still do not have the experience level to sort out a problem when their rider makes an error, because, they have come to depend wholly on that rider's proficency.

And finally, that's why I love to find UL prospects that have only been ridden by ammys, more honest horses are hard to come by!

[tx3dayeventer]

I agree completely. I also note that there is a huge difference between:

"we knew how to package a horse to an upright vertical, how to get a horse’s hind end underneath himself when a big oxer approached. But seeing distances was the last thing all but the most gifted or skilled of us thought about. Jack LeGoff preached of five criteria needed for successfully riding cross country obstacles – direction, speed, impulsion, balance, and timing – and although I don't recall the exact order of the first four, he made a point of timing being last on the list." (a mantra we should all memorize and chant to ourselves) -- and

"get a faraway look, stick like a tick, and kick like a mule."

In my reference I was fortunate enough to ride a horse that already had done 2 CCI* long formats. She knew what the heck she was doing! She knew where to jump from and those were my instructions on top of "dont pull", you have to take into consideration this was 8 years ago when I did my first 3-Day, and courses were very gallopy! There was hardly anything on the * course that couldnt be jumped out of stride with the proper balance. Of course you had to have the forward, balance, rhythm, suppleness and needed to be straight but those were not mentioned last minute because you had gotten to the 3-Day and into the start box by proving you could do those 4 or 5 things. You could not follow that ideology today because the courses are so technical. The most technical thing on that * course was a coffin and a few in-and-outs, maybe 1 corner. A little different than today's *!

Oh, heres an afterthought, my coach had the sense to hold me back until I was ready to move up to Int. I think I did 4 CCI* (long format) of the course of 2 years b/c I simply was not ready for Int. Once I got to Int I had no problem and not once a runout or refusal and was always safe b/c I had some damn good basics built up. He did not push me up the ladder (which he could have since Adv was not a challenge for my horse). We spent lots of quality time at Prelim.

[bip]

I have a question: If you took a horse and rider from 40 years ago - a real old school, kick-on rider who also hunted and maybe had galloped race horses at some point in their past, could that "less technical" (as the OP has observed) combo make it over today's course?

Is the problem that the top riders rarely make mistakes so they have less experience making mistakes? Or that the consequences of mistakes are so grave, that mistakes wouldn't give them practice making mistakes, but instead end in tragedy? Would the mistakes made out hunting even prepare them for today's course?

This is an honest question, as I am a ULL who will be lucky to see novice again in my life.

[bip]

It looks like tx3day was answering my question as I asked...

[RunForIt]

Is the problem that the top riders rarely make mistakes so they have less experience making mistakes? Or that the consequences of mistakes are so grave, that mistakes wouldn't give them practice making mistakes, but instead end in tragedy? Would the mistakes made out hunting even prepare them for today's course?



I suggest this is the question that one-by-one, we all have to address.

[SmallHerd]

Hi Jiffy! I, like many others, am looking forward to more posts from you.

I am a smurf. The ONE THING my trainer drills into my head is LET HIM FIGURE IT OUT. He doesn't like to touch a rail or fence and he is smart enough to know when to pick his feet up. I just need to stay balanced, steer with all my tools, keep him in front of my leg, and be patient. And it works. I now have much more confidence in my horse, which in turn, gives me more confidence on XC (but not too much - I'm a bit of a chicken!).

[Jiffy Read]

Although hunting is a wonderful way for horses to develop good instincts, it's not the only way. Try jumping with your "eye" turned off. Or let a less experienced rider take your horse over some smaller jumps. Anything you can do to give your horse the opportunity to work it out for himself.

[kacey'srider]

I am THRILLED to read this thread. I've been thinking about this very situation a LOT lately. W/horse on stall rest and me pregnant, I have been trying to take a step back and look at our training.

We are currently, well, until this few month hold up, competing at training level. We made it to AEC's at novice and 5 year old YEH last year. He was definetly the most immature five year old there. I have raised and done all of the horses training myself.

My horse tends to get very peeky to fences he's not sure of.. he'll sort of look and then jump. Willing but cautious. And I KNOW that we can't get away with that at prelim. I am considering doing a TON of free lunging over fences when he is well so that he can learn to figure things out on his own.

I've been told many a time that I do too much on the way to the fence, I am a control freak and perfectionsist through and through. So -I never know when I NEED to micromanage and when I need to kick on and let him figure things out himself, leave him alone. Obviously I want to do this at home first to develop his confidence in himself, thus the free lunging. So, how do you know? Is it in the feel of your approach.... b/c when he hesitates I kick and use my voice, but heck, this ain't gonna work over fences at prelim and above.

Give those of us who do micromanage some help here, please and thank you!

[Lincoln]

While we're all piling onto how great Jiffy is, I'll add some frosting to the cake. Watching her let my very green OTTB figure it out over fences is way too fun. She just puts him at the fence - if he comes in crooked/deep/off balance/long/whatever he just has to figure it out and jump it. The question is not too hard but it's emphatically his to answer. Watching the expression on his face when he figures it out is worth the price of admission. He gets positively puffed with pride. (It also builds my confidence that he'll bail me out later on.)

[TB or not TB?]

I heartily agree!!!

I think I posted just the other day about how a horse like Woodburn, who had awesome dressage and SJ yet was very green, was relying on Phillip for XC. It was a very different round than UN and Jane had, or the young rider with No It Tissant. Part of the current methodology of telling the horse exactly where to put its feet seems to stem from the increased focus on dressage.

[bascher]

Haven't read the entire thread, but I'll add my opinion as a hunter rider. My trainer and I have often seen horses that will be absolutely perfect when the person riding them never misses a distance or makes a mistake. However, if a younger or more inexperienced rider rides said horse and misses a distance or makes a mistake, the horse won't know what to do and will most likely stop because they don't know how to miss a distance and go across. Although I wish I could be a rider that never missed, sometimes people want horses that know how miss distances, make mistakes, etc because their rider isn't a pro. Their rider won't always be nearly perfect so a horse is needed that can deal with imperfection and still carry the rider across the jump. Some of the nicest horses that I have seen are very hard to ride for less experienced riders simply because they horse doesn't know how to deal with a rider that mistakes. Just my two cents, although I don't know very much about this in the context of eventing, I saw parallels to what I have seen in my discipline. Maybe eventing doesn't have so much to do with distances (I honestly have no idea!!) but I feel the principle is still the same.

[CookiePony]

Jiffy, do you remember a group of Lincoln 4-H ers coming for a field trip to your farm about 15-20 years ago? One of them was me!! I looked up to you then as I do now. Many thanks for your thoughtful post.

[frugalannie]

I have always been a fan of yours, and remember particularly the Tailess Wonder. Also how wonderfully supportive your mom was of you and the whole sport. Her daughter seems to have inherited that!

Someone mentioned to me that they thought that part of the issue was that UL riders were extremely, ummmm, controlling, and riding horses that were not quite confident but very obedient. Therefore, an UL rider will get the horse to jump even if the horse questions its ability to succeed. In other words, obedience is trumping the horse's instincts, and instead of getting a run out or a stop, we're seeing horses jump badly and dangerously. I don't know how to test this hypothesis, but it is an interesting one and dovetails with your point.

[pwynnnorman]

that is a really really good point.

any ideas of how to teach our event horses to have better instincts, but without putting them at risk? I mean, foxhunting is great, but not everyone has a pack by them. Should we just biff every now and again? I'm being serious..


From another angle, I was watching that superstar Teddy and I bet you there are a lot more Teddy's out there, but they are overlooked in the search for the super athletes that are more inl ine with what aspiring riders think a top star should be in size, movement and looks.


I suppose no one will believe me until I produce another Teddy -- even though he isn't the only very good jumper I've produced, including a fair number who walked into the show ring under catch riders and won the first time out -- but...

If you can't do the natural things like hunting that teaches your horse to figure things out for himself, LONGE HIM.

Longe him over everything, everywhere you'd take him on his back -- or to whatever extent that's possible. Learn how to effectively longe a horse over fences, learn how to set up gymnastics and adjust them to teach him lessons, learn how to go with the horse as you longe him up and down and sideways on hills, over ditches, into water. Teach him to jump out of any pace on the longe (and also on his back, eventually, of course): from the walk, halt, trot, gallop.

There's a now-not-young newspaper reporter out there, probably still in the Syracuse area, who can confirm that Teddy was NOT a natural jumper. On the day she came to write an article about my program, he was the only thing available for me to demonstrate with and he crashed around like a total klutz.

IT WORKS!!! George Morris had high, high praise for Teddy's half-brother, whom I developed o/f 95% on the longe line--yet another total klutz o/f as a 4-5 year old. I could continue dropping names, but I won't. I'm not bragging here. I'm jsut illustrating that there is another way out there for those who don't have the usual resources to make up a jumper. I'm a dressage specialist, never had the resources to develop sophistication o/f, but thanks to longing, I've produced a lot of very solid jumpers.

There is more than one way to produce results. You just have to be open-minded and develop the skills to use the alternatives that are out there.

[DLee]

Pwynn,
I totally, totally agree. I do that with young or green horses all the time, over cross country courses or wherever. They absolutely figure stuff out on there own when things are 'put in their way'. And I never inadvertantly punish them if they super over-do anything.

[katherine w]

I totally agree. This is true even in hunter/jumpers where a horse has been ridden so well that he cannot jump when not ridden perfectly. This also addresses my husband;s point that eventing seems now to be a case of perfection... there is no room for any error and no one can be perfect all the time.

It used to be you'd hear of an accident rarely... now we've had 5 horses die in a month. And two riders majorly injured. All that info isn't just because of the internet... Its everything put together but certainly these horses need to be "field smart" and know how and when to get out of a jam... even if it means stopping or running out.

[poopoo]

I was just speculating about the flip side to your opinion on another thread. Is it possible that the huge increase in technical questions on courses has created the need for eventers to ride to the base more often than before and if so, is it possible that this could cause an increase in missing by getting a bit too close? Or even just an increase in rotational falls if the horse happens to just not be quick enough with his front end that instant? You guys have the vertical faces combined with huge spreads... hold 'em off the face and you land in the middle. Ride up to the base to make the spread and if the wheels don't come up quickly enough you're screwed or if you misjudge a hair and get too close you're in for an ugly punishment.

Your theory's interesting although I'd imagine that the ULRs still teach their horses to save themselves with tricky gymnastics from time to time, don't they?
This makes a LOT of sense to me. What seems to have happened lately in addition to a lot of crashes, is an increase in technicality, and the removal of steeplechase (and therefore changes in the "cross country" phase) which have both been detrimental to the horses. It's too much stop and go on courses these days and a lack of rhythm. What was so wrong with the way it used to be?

[SEPowell]

There’s been an occasional mention of how event horses used to hunt; what better way than hunting to teach a horse where to put his feet? When you follow a pack of hounds and a field of horses over a solid stone wall or fence panel (which is often as upright and vertical a jump as you can get, and airy, to boot), there’s no opportunity to see one’s distance. You put your hands down and say your Hail Marys. And the horses jump. Sometimes they scramble. Sometimes they flat out refuse, particularly if they think they’ve gotten themselves into a jam they can’t jump themselves out of. But they learn how to take care of themselves, how to think on their feet. How many times does a top rider bring his horse into a fence all wrong, or even slightly wrong, and let the horse work it out for himself, develop the instincts to put down that fifth leg when needed?


I'm not an eventer but I am a fox hunter. My horses learn to take care of me and themselves when hunting. While I'm ducking branches and closing my eyes so I don't lose them they ski down 20 feet of muddy slide, cross a rocky stream, go up another 20 feet and then jump with very little help from me. It takes three or four years for them to get this good, but during those years they learn to think on their feet and take care of themselves and me in the process. In the past, and maybe it's still true, many steeplechasers foxhunted as part of their training for steeplechasing.

"Developing the instincts to put down the fifth leg when needed" is part of the solution, in my oh so humble opinion.

[treehouse225]

Excellent point. I wholeheartedly agree. Steeplechase, hunting, lounging, whatever gets the horse to think for themselves, to find their own natural balance and rhythm to make them succeed.

[wanderlust]

I was just speculating about the flip side to your opinion on another thread. Is it possible that the huge increase in technical questions on courses has created the need for eventers to ride to the base more often than before and if so, is it possible that this could cause an increase in missing by getting a bit too close? Or even just an increase in rotational falls if the horse happens to just not be quick enough with his front end that instant? You guys have the vertical faces combined with huge spreads... hold 'em off the face and you land in the middle. Ride up to the base to make the spread and if the wheels don't come up quickly enough you're screwed or if you misjudge a hair and get too close you're in for an ugly punishment.

coolmeadows, I'd say you are on to something, but I don't think the miss is in riding down to a super-deep distance or getting too close in stride. What I believe happens is that once you teach a smart horse to go to the base, and give him that ride with that deep base distance over and over and over, it is HARD to get them to leave a little long. So, when a rider pushes them to the gap or a flyer (which may be a totally reasonable distance, btw), they either stop, or they chip when there may not be room to chip... because they've been taught over and over that they are to leave from the base and don't feel comfortable taking the flyer. That chip shifts the balance forward in a way that the same distance jumped out of stride wouldn't, the horse can't rock back to get his legs up and out of the way, and you have the dreaded rotational fall.

[4Martini]

Very interesting post! Luckily my BN mount gets to figure a lot out for himself :lol: I do think you are on to something here.

Just had to put in another big welcome to Jiffy from the Lincoln 4-H field trip crew from a few DECADES AGO :winkgrin:

It was really great of you to show us around your place and talk to us about eventing! 20 years later I completed my first BN (Last summer!)

Welcome to COTH!

[jumpytoo]

Great topic !
I think constant perfect rides prevents the horse from developing a sense confidence and self preservation.
I make alot of horses specifically to end up as kids/ammy H/J horses and it's pretty darn rare that I ever place them at 8 or 10 perfect spots on a course..90% of the people that buy them arent gonna hit it right either. I depend on LOTS of flat work and basically get a song in my head and keep a rhythm. We get there deep,long, crooked, tight reins,loose reins, perchy..whatever alot of the time I just feed them the reins and bop around with a loop just using my voice a little or my knuckles in their withers to tell them to slow down.. The eventers at my barn often set fence lines at strange and unusual distances or maybe dont ever walk it.. my guys dont care they jump in and figure it out.. sometimes takes a few tries but really I just try and keep rhythm and not "help".. my guys are super grateful to get to a show because everything is a set distance and they can just lope around.. the ones working the big fences learn to have clever feet and it doesnt take much to make them a little "catty" and do those nice 3 stride roll backs.. am I gonna pick to a perfect spot then? Heck no ! Rhythm, balance, stay out of the way.. and look for the next fence.

I am a huge fan of eventing and I certainly don't think all the top horses are Princesses and "must" have that just right spot all the time to get around.. I DO think that horses benefit from less that perfect placing in practice

[beeblebrox]

I know what your saying and agree

However the new generation of successful riders are having the issue. Not the old crew say Ian Stark, P Dutton, Karen O, Mark Todd, Bruce D., David O.... etc etc etc and those are not the ones falling and crashing. The newer group of top eventers with fancier horses in some cases to be sure with more money backing them than most of the old school ever thought about. I know R Hill had the fall but for the most part it does seem like the YOUGER generation of top riders not the old crew.

YOU can not buy your way into eventing. Some talented riders get lucky with a ride of a lifetime and time will tell those who are really talented and those who can continue to cultivate top horses. There is a ART to teaching young horses to take care of themselves, I have ruined my fair share in my youth baby sitting and keeping them safe only to have that let me down later down the road. I am not making a blanket statement not making comments about any one rider so please do not think that. I am saying though those who have had a taste of top drawer horses want more and sometimes one has to wonder at what cost and how many they will run though and at what rate to find another IT horse???

It is really hard (I imagine as I am not a top rider & not immensely talented) when you have sponsors (the elite rich and all the goodies from pad makers, trailer makers, brand names etc etc) wanting you to produce horses. That pressure is a high and with very nice expensive horses that are talented it is easy to skip some basics and also not want at times that valuable horse to make a mistake that could hurt them or their placing so you babysit them... Then that catches up with you later. The pressure has always been there in the dressage, Grand-prix jumpers, top hunters and western horses but instead of being killed those horse burn out and will not play after awhile and hell with all the money just buy another.

It happened with me on a smaller scale . My parents bought me a fabulous baby in college who I so carefully brought along in college and wanted to make him safe and did not want to loose him as he was going to be the last horse my folks bought for me. He ran up through * and then even though he had the talent we could not make the leap to ** or intermediate as I had never allowed him to fail or take care of himself. I worked with Bruce D on the east coast in college and he said I coddled him and now he depends on it! I ended up showing him in the 4'6 jumpers where I could baby sit and ride off my eye :-( NOW what if you have a 50K or more baby owned by conglomerate X who wants him to be a ROLEX horse in 3 years? Do you let him fall on his face or carefully bring him along hoping his amazing genes and athletic ability will see him through as you do not want to loose sponsorship?

Just a thought and a opinion I have and not saying it is the real deal but something I have been thinking about.

[poopoo]

Great topic !
The eventers at my barn often set fence lines at strange and unusual distances or maybe dont ever walk it.. my guys dont care they jump in and figure it out.. sometimes takes a few tries but really I just try and keep rhythm and not "help".. my guys are super grateful to get to a show because everything is a set distance and they can just lope around..

Are you for real? That is just stupid......

[Eventer13]

Are you for real? That is just stupid......

If the fences are low enough, I don't see how this is that bad. No harm done if they make a mistake and I certainly think the horse learns from it. I know there is some BNR out there (Lucinda, maybe??) who likes to do odd distances when trying a horse to see how well it can sort things out.

Now, I would never do this with a fence 1-2 strides away, but on a related line, why not? Certainly better than getting a long/short one while XC and have your horse panic because its never had to deal with that before.

And I would think that out hunting, your horse sure as hell better be able to figure it out and know how to make a distance work.

[vali]

I've only ridden at Prelim, but I agree that the tendency of both endlessly schooling dressage for perfect obedience and always providing a horse with the perfect distance can set a horse up for problems. Not a problem my horses have, because I don't have a perfect eye or always perfectly compliant horses in dressage, but I've certainly seen it and felt it, especially when riding horses that have always had a pro on them. I have taken 2 horses from baby green to Prelim, usually over a few years, and am now starting my third greenie. I also had the great luxury several years ago when the exchange rate was better and I had more upper level aspirations of going to New Zealand and trying a ton of horses. I realized pretty quickly that I got on better with the horses that had been ridden by an amateur or young rider, since they weren't so horrified by my less than professional ride. The horse I bought had gone up to Intermediate being ridden exclusively by a young rider, and believe me, he had a tremendous amount of justifiable confidence in his own abilities. Always easy to ride in dressage? Not so much, but I would rather be safe on cross country any day than win the dressage. I strongly believe in letting young horses make some mistakes over smaller fences and do a lot of schooling with small gymnastics. I also believe in letting them enjoy themselves sometimes and don't always require perfect obedience when we are schooling. But I've never had a horse fall, and very very rarely even had one think of stopping. Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe in balancing up for a fence and know the virtues of a coffin canter, but you also have to let them go and enjoy themselves sometimes. I do think in the U.S. we don't spend enough time practicing the gallop enough. When I've ridden in England there is a lot more time spent practicing the gallop and how to regulate pace effectively, whereas in our area land is so much more limited that most conditioning is done in a more confined area and you can't really gallop in open countryside so easily.

[xeroxchick]

I don't event, just hunt.
Just a petite word of caution.
Yes, hunting demands a bit of independent thinking from the horse. I love it. My horse loves it. But some eventers bring their horses out to hunt with no hunting preparation because they think it's all about the cross country jumping. I have seen event horses and riders have major melt-downs in the hunt field, so be careful not to just show up for a hunt and expect your event horse to handle everything perfectly because he can cross country jump. We would love to have you out! But realize that it might take a lot more training and preparation for your horse to be safe in the field than you first thought, and you could find yourself out for four hours of jigging, bolting and runaway hell.

[pwynnnorman]

And another "petite" word of caution. Well, two words:
Course Designers

Teaching a horse to take care of itself makes super sense, BUT the horses don't walk the courses and course designers can and do create situations that test the rider's eye, controal and preparation/planning, NOT the horse's.

IMO, this is why a universal "kick on/just do it" strategy is no longer safe on today's UL courses.

(sigh) I can't find it now, but I just read last night a statement made by Hugh Thomas about some elements on the Badminton course that would have supported this point perfectly.

[RiverBendPol]

Hey Jiff- Great, great post. I'm with you all the way!

Another factor I believe is detrimental is that horses IN GENERAL are not getting the hours of Kindergarten training they so need and deserve. What has happened to the hours of hacking the youngsters, the 2 seasons at Novice, 2 at Training? Obviously, when a rider has even just 3+ horses to ride, lessons to teach, a business to run, they simply don't have enough hours in the day to spend 40 minutes in the woods, on each horse. Give them 3 or 4 more beasties and it becomes impossible. I'm guessing too, that most owners aren't interested in watching their horse run around Novice and Training courses ad nauseum. The riders are good enough to nurse a worried/inexperienced horse around so they do 1 or 2 Trainings, a few Prelims and the next thing you know, the 6 and 7 year olds are running Intermediate and (**/***)s. Rolex had 21 horses entered who were 12 and under this year.
I believe the YEH program is going to start showing up as a less-than-beneficial thing too. *In my opinion*, 5 years old is waaaaaaaaaay too early for a horse to be training Prelim questions, in the dressage ring and over jumps. You know full well, for these babies to be competitive in the ring, they WILL be schooling P questions. Not to mention, horses are being bred now for the dressage phase which means they have a lot of Warmblood in them which means they are slower to mature than a pure TB, it also means they don't think on their feet as fast...Reminds me of the book written years ago called The Hurried Child. These horses are being asked to accomplish too much TECHNICAL work, too soon.
I also believe (sick of my opinions yet?:)) that now that we've lost the long format, horses are being asked to be ON for too many months of the year. Riders think 'well, it is just another horse trial' when in reality, a CIC is in fact much more complicated and technical. The horses are competing every other weekend, working all winter in the South, not getting those lovely 6-8 weeks of down time following a full format 3-day. They are being asked to maintain not only their physical fitness for months and months on end, but their mental acuity as well.
I'll stop now.

[Lincoln]

This is a really helpful discussion and raises points that could make a real difference in the safety of the sport going forward. Attempting to summarize:
-- train horses to figure it out for themselves over fences and imperfect terrain in training (nb: the inherent tension with highly technical xc courses where obedience is pitted against self-preservation)
-- more training at the gallop and in the hunt field for agility and familiarity with tacking terrain at speed and with distractions.
-- ensure that the increased emphasis on dressage does not produce the unintended result of horses trained to their rider guiding each footfall. Stephen Clarke, the "O" dressage judge, talks about the elusive combination of suppleness, brilliance and accuracy. That comes from a horse being independent enough to remain in self-carriage and in rhythmn without being micro-managed. There is a bit of a parallel theological debate in the dressage community on whether art is in the control or in the partnership.
-- let horses develop more slowly (especially as there is a greater % of warmbloods who mature later), spending more time below the * level.

What else should be added?

[Lincoln]

Is there a case to be made that the endorphins from roads and tracks and steeplechase help to prep horses for cross country? Could that, combined with having a very fit horse who is also physically loose and warm as they come into xc, contribute to better equine decision making - maybe even better human decision making since the rider has been functioning at high speed already that day?

[Fergs]

Although hunting is a wonderful way for horses to develop good instincts, it's not the only way. Try jumping with your "eye" turned off. Or let a less experienced rider take your horse over some smaller jumps. Anything you can do to give your horse the opportunity to work it out for himself.

This is a great point. In training green horses, I've always been advised to just sit quietly and keep kicking even as mistakes happen or bad spots found. When you allow the horse to sort through bobbles on their own, letting them find their own sense of balance, they learn how to self-preserve. A horse that must be held together, balanced, regulated, and managed every stride is almost dangerous....dangerous because once the pilot "falls asleep" for a moment, the horse doesn't know what to do.

Hunting can help sort this out, as can lots of gymnastics and learning to sit quietly. It's a huge struggle for me personally. My trainer tells me often to "stop thinking, and stop riding."

I also agree wholeheartedly with those lamenting the rush to move up by many riders, professional and otherwise. A horse that's jumped around clean Intermediate might be capable of jumping around an Advanced course, but that doesn't mean it should. In my view, you should be winning or in the top three CONSISTENTLY, almost to the point of aggravating your fellow competitors, before you move up. That very often means at least a year at each level, and very likely even more time.

[beeblebrox]

"pwynnnorman

IMO, this is why a universal "kick on/just do it" strategy is no longer safe on today's UL courses.

(sigh) I can't find it now, but I just read last night a statement made by Hugh Thomas about some elements on the Badminton course that would have supported this point perfectly."

The fence Frodo, Quiet Man and Darren's horse flipped on were not what I would call extreme technical fences. The jumps at Rolex sure you had to take the lay of the land or terrain into account (which is why it is called cross country) but the foot bridge and the basket were NOT the big questions of the day. MANY MANY horses jumped those with ease and comfort. PWYN I do understand what your saying but at some point some of these horses are not backing off (I do not mean sucking back but rather bringing their withers up and asses down and saying huh) so you can ride them safely against a jump and sometimes a caviler attitude from a horse can create tea over kettle!

YOU Want brave sure but how about a horse that looks at a jump and sizes it up a bit? Seen so many horses these days held by huge BIT combinations charging around everything from training through 2 star, if it rained they would drown if you know what I mean! AND here is the other thing, I want a horse I can kick or put my leg on and I do not mean at the last min, so many riders are on the breaks with gung ho horses that can jump 4'6 with ease (fancy fancy) the leg is off which is exactly in my opinion the guise of a smart horse... HOLD ME BACK HOLD ME BACK cool you have taken your leg off and now I do not have to work so hard. If I see one more young rider on a horse previously only ridden by a man and in a full throttle bit I may seriously have a heart attack, I am a parent after all! Parents your kids running advanced is not worth a life of a child you have raised! A whole lotta show jumping (not saying good show jumping) rides going on in XC these days!

Too me yes of course there are horses like Murphy Himself who were trains and any fit *8- **** horse is going to be un godly fit and strong but with some of the new combinations and youth comes a shortening of the neck instead of compressing of the horse. These bits help create a hey I am packaged with they are not really just running with shortened turtle neck.. YIKES.. NO neck the scope of the back is limited! Of course many of the smart horses sat no thank you.

[MTshowjumper]

Very interesting idea. I was clinicing with a Advanced Lvl British rider a few months ago who I have ridden with before, and she commented that she could tell that I came over from the Jumpers because I was always picking my distances to the jumps on cross country. She said that I needed to just let my horse learn to pick their own spot instead of waiting for me to tell them what to do since I can't be right 100% of the time. We spent the rest of the day with me trying, and it was very hard to get my mare to think for herself and just as hard for me to leave her to it.

What was interesting was that this was the first time I had heard about this, and I remember thinking it was kinda old school and cool. I have cliniced with many UL riders and I spent a year as a working student with an olympic event rider and he (and us students) always picked the spots out for the horses. In fact we drilled it and drilled it trying to always get that perfect distance, including tricks to pick your distance on very green less adjustable horses (Perhaps where the horses should initially be learning to think for themselves?)

[justdream2ride]

And another "petite" word of caution. Well, two words:
Course Designers

Teaching a horse to take care of itself makes super sense, BUT the horses don't walk the courses and course designers can and do create situations that test the rider's eye, controal and preparation/planning, NOT the horse's.

IMO, this is why a universal "kick on/just do it" strategy is no longer safe on today's UL courses.

(sigh) I can't find it now, but I just read last night a statement made by Hugh Thomas about some elements on the Badminton course that would have supported this point perfectly.

Very true - so maybe we need to bring back the courses that allow the horse to think for himself - because I think 99% of the time they are smarter than we are!

[beeblebrox]

"RiverBendPol
Another factor I believe is detrimental is that horses IN GENERAL are not getting the hours of Kindergarten training they so need and deserve. What has happened to the hours of hacking the youngsters, the 2 seasons at Novice, 2 at Training? Obviously, when a rider has even just 3+ horses to ride, lessons to teach, a business to run, they simply don't have enough hours in the day to spend 40 minutes in the woods, on each horse. Give them 3 or 4 more beasties and it becomes impossible. I'm guessing too, that most owners aren't interested in watching their horse run around Novice and Training courses ad nauseam. The riders are good enough to nurse a worried/inexperienced horse around so they do 1 or 2 Training's, a few Prelims and the next thing you know, the 6 and 7 year olds are running Intermediate and (**/***)s. Rolex had 21 horses entered who were 12 and under this year. "


SPOT ON

It is I guess a catch twenty -two for many of these riders who ride with the cream of the crop. They have to pay the bills, they have families, they need another horse coming up behind the last horse. The time may often not be there while they run all over the country to give lessons and catch ride.

The horses are certainly marching up the levels. I would like to see four training's and four prelims for every horse not just for the riders!

[tx3dayeventer]

I also believe (sick of my opinions yet?:)) that now that we've lost the long format, horses are being asked to be ON for too many months of the year. Riders think 'well, it is just another horse trial' when in reality, a CIC is in fact much more complicated and technical. The horses are competing every other weekend, working all winter in the South, not getting those lovely 6-8 weeks of down time following a full format 3-day. They are being asked to maintain not only their physical fitness for months and months on end, but their mental acuity as well.
I'll stop now.

This is spot on. After the Spring & Fall 3-Days our horses would have 30 - 45 days off depending on how much they were jumping out of their skin. My mare was best to have 3 weeks completely OFF and turned out and a week on walk hacks on the trails with a "loose" rein just exploring. There were some horses in our barn that would become unmanageable if they had more than 2 weeks without working. After the Fall 3-Day she got off from the 3-Day until after xmas, when we would get ready to go to Ocala (which we still wouldnt run a HT until mid-Feb). I couldn't pull her shoes b/c she had high maintenance feet (ok so a club foot) and she got really mareish if she didnt get groomed twice a week, but my other guy would have a month or two off and I would pull his shoes and let him get all shaggy and he loved it. I dont think riders are doing this anymore. Could that be where the problem lies? No downtime?

[LAZ]

Along these same lines--I've done some endurance riding and I think it is excellent for getting miles on young horses. The limited distance (25 miles) are not too fast--you have 6 hours to do it in, and the changes in terrain, lighting, etc are fabulous. They learn to get over ditches, up, down and across hills and how to stay on their feet in less than perfect conditions.

And it is a really good excuse to go hack through the countryside!

[ThirdCharm]

Re: Setting jumps at random distances and expecting the horse to "figure it out" being "stupid", someone needs to ring up Lucinda Green and let her know to quit doing that, right now!!! Ohmigod!



Jennifer

[flyingchange]

And the problem becomes self propogating. The YRs and even some ammies, who look to the professional four star riders as examples, see them moving horses from N to P in one season, and they think that is how it is done and so that is where they set the bar for themselves. As soon as the horse has done a few acceptable Ts (or even unacceptable) they move up to P, and then I, and then A. If you look at some of these horses'/riders' move-up records, it is really eye-opening to see how many of them move on up to P and I even after getting eliminated or having stops at their last event at the lower level.

And they are typically in barns where the dressage is the focal point of daily training. Where the horses are learning to depend on the rider, because these days it is all about winning and attaining sponsorship and more horses and if you can't be competitive in the dressage then you can forget winning and as such forget the sponsorhip, more horses,....

The focus is not on making the horse the best it can be and the smartest it can be, but on prepping it as quickly as possible to get it out there showing what this barn and trainer can do. Sort of an assembly-line mindset, but one where production numbers take precedence over all the right pieces being present and fitting together correctly to ensure long-term use and soundness. Super-sized.

[flyingchange]

Re: Setting jumps at random distances and expecting the horse to "figure it out" being "stupid", someone needs to ring up Lucinda Green and let her know to quit doing that, right now!!! Ohmigod!



Jennifer

LOL.

The best quote from her clinic last week (among many!) was, "If you see a distance that's when you know that you are in trouble!"

[west5]

In the vein of horses being rushed:

Periodically we see threads written by amateurs looking to buy a horse. They have a decent budget but can't find an appropriate mount.

I believe that there is a section of the marketplace looking to spend money on horses that haven't been rushed up the levels.
Horses that fox hunted as youngsters, have decent manners and basic dressage training.
Horses that can think for themselves and help their riders out at the BN/N/T levels.
Maybe the horse goes Prelim a couple of times to show it has the scope but basically spends a couple of years at training and completes the T level 3de once each season.

One of the questions is why are all these horses being rushed up the levels?
To see if they have 4* potential?
If they don't, all of a sudden they try to sell them (really dump them) to people at the lower levels even though the horses aren't really appropriate.

I understand that the pros need to make money I believe there is money to be made (a lot of it too) producing really well rounded, smart, kind, athletic (but not Olympic) quality horses for the amateur market.

I know someone who did this with a horse, a chestnut mare no less, and had people (both teenagers and older ammys) fighting to buy her at $20,000.

Maybe if there were different business models the pros could still earn a living but do it in a way that many of us feel is more beneficial to the horse.

edited to add: the horses I'm thinking of would be 8/9/10 years old not 5

[wannabegifted]

not going to read the whole thread 'cause I'm at work, but I want to add this..

I think some of these might come from taking younger or less experienced horses up the levels way before an amateur would. For example, I can't imagine taking my TB to prelim right now, but I know in the hands of a BNT he would be going prelim.... which... he might not be quite ready to do if not ridden perfectly. Just a thought.

[Camstock]

I'm glad to see some eventers out hunting with our pack (TMH, Iowa). However, I see a lot of eventers directing their horses entirely too much when out on the hunt. I want to advise them to teach their horse to go on a mostly slack (or at least much lighter) rein. Check and release, do not HOLD. They look like they are ready to go into showjumping, with this neatly packaged horse, tight on the aids. I'm always tempted to pass the riders a flask... <roll eyes>

Xeroxchick had spot on comments. If you haven't hunted before and your horse hasn't either, hire a professional for his first time out and you go and watch and also, come to the brunch and meet fun people!

I hear a lot of fear from eventers about foxhunting. They worry that their horse might get hurt. I usually smile and say that it is usually the riders who get hurt, the horses do fine. This isn't encouraging of course, and I need to find another way to express this reality...

I've had a few moderately high dollar imported horses come through my barn and my two non-negotiables regardless of horse monetary value are that they live out 24/7 (with shelter of course) and they foxhunt before they event. Both these factors let horses be horses. This has worked fabulously for the horses and for the owners, most of whom were fascinated and came out to watch the hunt and to join us at brunch. We all had a blast.

Trainers need to educate owners, not just give in to perceived pressure about timelines. And many times that "pressure" is the trainer's misperception and doesn't really exist from the owners (or maybe I am just very lucky, and attract owners who are also kind humans). Every owner I have dealt with has been concerned about the money, yes, but also interested in the journey. The best trainers put the horse first, and the fabulous thing is that everybody benefits when they do.

[Kanga]

Jiffy Read- You hit the nail on the head here!!

The horses should go out, especially as youngsters, and learn to find where their feet are. Hunting/lungeing over fences/grid work are great ways to do that. I spent many years in England training with the Bartles and picking a spot was the LAST thing we were taught. We were always trained to ride the rhythm to a fence going cross country or show jumping. Often times we practiced having our eyes closed approaching fences so that the horse figured the distance out not the rider. Horses have to learn how to take care of themselves, there are very, very few of us out there that can take care of situations 100% of the time when things don't go right. I would much rather have spent the years training this into my horses than find out down the line these holes are there because they are looking for me to tell them everything.

On another note this is also the reason that I will not buy horses from the professionals, for my amateur riders. The horses that "good" professionals ride for a while are too reliant on a perfect ride then when an amateur gets on them and starts to make mistakes it blows their minds. I know there will be those of you out there that don't agree with this and that is fine. However, I have seen many times over & over this does not work for the average amateur rider.

Great post Jiffy.... Let's hope we can start getting more people to think this way and get back to what eventing used to be.

[lstevenson]

I agree completely with the OP. I had just the other day written something just like that on another thread. That riders are focusing so much on accuracy that they never let the horse learn to take care of itself.

I regularly school lines on half strides and use off distances in gridwork. And have my riders just stay in balance and leave the horse alone. They figure it out! And become much safer rides on x-c. After all the riders can't be perfect the whole time on x-c, and I want their horses to be able to bail them out when they make a mistake.

And as Lucinda Green says, " a horse isn't safe x-c unless he knows how to get to the bottom of a fence and get himself out of it"

I think many riders/trainers need to stop focusing so much on rider accuracy, and teach the horse to look after himself more at all levels.

[Jiffy Read]

On another note this is also the reason that I will not buy horses from the professionals, for my amateur riders. The horses that "good" professionals ride for a while are too reliant on a perfect ride then when an amateur gets on them and starts to make mistakes it blows their minds. I know there will be those of you out there that don't agree with this and that is fine. However, I have seen many times over & over this does not work for the average amateur rider.


I agree with you. That's why I have my daughter get on my green OTTB from time to time - when the time comes to sell her (the horse, not my daughter), I know she'll need to be accustomed to an amateur-style ride.

[KSevnter]

See if the pros would just hand their horses over to ammies to school on a regular basis then they wouldn't have this problem. I am only half-joking, I am only slightly ashamed to say that I miss often enough where my horse has to make a decision (I don't get to ride 10 horses a day). His instincts are good and they kept us safe at the upper levels. I have had him since he was five so essentially we learned together.

When I was at Champagne Run horse trials one year they ran YOI before OI so I went to watch a few rides w/ my coach. The water was set up so that you rode in and jumped a fence in the water turned left and jumped a bank w/ a ditch out and then made a sharp right turn to a corner (then around and back down a drop into the water again). Some girl was choking her horse in order to make the turn to the corner and instead of jumping the corner she put her horse at the middle of the fence. He attempted to jump it and hung his leg and flipped, landing next to her (thankfully).

They both got up fairly quickly, but I looked at my coach wide-eyed and he said, "Don't worry honey, your horse's sense of self preservation would have never let him take off from there. He would have said 'sorry kiddo try again' and ducked out the side."

Horses have a natural instinct to protect themselves but by training it out of them we create dangerous situations. I realize that top riders won't allow the rest of us to mess around with their horses but maybe they should create the situations for them (in a safe environment of course.)

[Outyougo]

Excellent to read a post from an experienced rider who had much success

D Direction
I Impulsion
R Rhythm
T Track

Except for the time in a pony club camp

D direction
I Implosion

Well it WAS funny from a 6 year old may not in view recent incedents

[gortmore]

Show Jumper here. I can comment a tiny bit on the distance thing. My trainer lambasted me for helping my green horses out at the small fences by getting them to distances. He told me to just ride the fences out of the rhythm and let the horse figure it out. His feeling is that it is important for young/green horses to figure out the distances and make mistakes while the fences are small and easy that way the mistakes are not starting at 4'3" and bigger where the results are a lot worse.

I do not know what the answer is for your sport, I love watching a good team go cross country, the horses look like they love it and so do the riders. I rode a bit of 3 day when I was younger but decided to focus on show jumping. I have had some horrible crashes show jumping so for those in hunter/jumper land it does happen to us as well. I saw a Grand Prix one year where the rider missed to a large oxer, the horse chipped in and I still do not know what happened but the consequence was that the horse broke his neck when he came down, so our sport is risky as well.

I have to ask if there are really more deaths/accidents now then in the past or is the media/internet playing a role in how much we all know?

[roki143]

My first Prelim horse was a case of extreme heart, and lesser talent. We cantered around the courses - probably shouldn't have been, but we were SAFE only because although he was full of heart, he also had been free-lunged extensively and would simply put on the breaks if he wasn't absolutely we'd make it to the other side - it didn't happen often, but when it did, I knew he did it because he was thinking of himself and me. Disappointing for me - but it was FUN because it wasn't scary, and my mother, who closes her eyes when I jump (still) could watch us go around and know we'd come off the course in one piece - competitive, not always... but I had a blast!

Fast foward to now - I am lucky enough to have an ex-4* horse and an OTTB who I biff it on quite often. Both of them are very talented jumpers, which allows me to spend most of my time jumping at about 2'6 - setting up jumps at random (because I'm lazy and would rather just move them slightly from where the hunter riders at the barn put them), not walking strides, and allowing them to jump into a line (not always a straight line) and figure it out. It's not perfect, and I don't necessarily recommend it, but it has taught me to maintain a balance, support all the way to the fence, and trust that when I miss - my horse will probably have the brain to figure it out. They also are aware that I miss - and are ready and willing to forgive me and take over.

The experienced horse definitely lets me know that I biffed (you can hear him say "come on mom, get your sh*t together"). But you can also tell that in order to compete at the level he did previously - he had a rider that helped him a ton - not a horses that a young rider could have gotten on, held on, and finished on. At the level I compete him - he is a lot more comfortable about bailing my butt out of trouble.

Basically - long winded way of saying tht I hope to give them the tools they need (balance, rhythem, support - all the stuff mentioned before), and they can handle the rest. There are days that my eye is just off, and I've accepted that... :winkgrin:

[hopashore1]

Great discussion!

So where's the middle ground? Is there even one? It seems that the pressures placed on our sport are in opposition with the basic necessities for the sport (at least at the upper levels), and I don't know if there is a way to solve this.

1) Horses are pushed based on talent, not experience and mental preparedness. As you move up the levels, a fabulous jumper might do great--but the chance of his inexperience will, at some point, catch up with him. And the mistakes that at N, T, even P might not be catastrophic ARE once you hit, I, A, **** courses. But you don't get the sponsorship or the horses to run around little old N and T courses, so if the up and coming riders want to get more horses, get the money, get the experience--they sort of are in a Catch 22.

2) There seems to be a huge gap between the established riders (Karen, David, Bruce, etc. etc.) and the younger riders at the same level. The 1st generation DID do the hunting, make the mistakes, take the falls, let the horse learn how to take care of himself. Newer riders start taking eventing oriented lessons young, or they come from a hunter/jumper background rather than pony club, where you DO learn to "micromanage" each stride. And that's ok at the lower levels. But once you get to the upper levels, riders are riding more horses, they are riding courses that are much more complicated and require a lot more preparedness. Maybe the riders are the ones becoming fatigued, and when they get to a relatively 'easy' fence compared to some of the others, they stop micromanaging to give themselves a break, and the horse doesn't cope.

Has anyone else heard the expression that horses at the eschelon of their sport are "freaks." Grand Prix dressage horses are "freak movers," Grand Prix show jumpers "jump like freaks." I think there's an element of truth to this. But in eventing, our horses don't have to be freak movers or freak jumpers to do well. What they DO have to have is "freak minds"--they have to have an ability to think QUICKLY, assess situations taking in a multitude of factors, yet still be responsive and listening to the rider as well. Maybe this thinking ability is either being bred out or trained out, and that's where we're going wrong.

On another note, I have a lovely 6 y/o I'm bringing along. We did a BN last fall and plan to move up to N in the spring. It's HARD--this horse is talented, and my long-term goals with him are Prelim and I have to keep telling myself that I KNOW we could "make it around" Training this fall, but he needs the experience at N. Even if we have 3 great runs at Novice, that 4th one might be where he makes a mistake and I would so much rather it be there than when the jumps are bigger, the questions more technical. And this is where I think we lose riders. When we look back at not one, but two or more consecutive events and say "you know, I think we should have moved up at the last one", maybe that's when we'll be finally ready. But I think that mentality is lost on a lot of people.

[SEPowell]

And another "petite" word of caution. Well, two words:
Course Designers

Teaching a horse to take care of itself makes super sense, BUT the horses don't walk the courses and course designers can and do create situations that test the rider's eye, controal and preparation/planning, NOT the horse's.

In hunting, the natural lay of the land often presents challenges very similar to those designed by course designers. Horses can and do learn to negotiate very tricky terrain while jumping and galloping.

IMO, this is why a universal "kick on/just do it" strategy is no longer safe on today's UL courses.

(sigh) I can't find it now, but I just read last night a statement made by Hugh Thomas about some elements on the Badminton course that would have supported this point perfectly.

I don't associate a "kick on/just do it" strategy with teaching a horse to take care of himself, and maybe I'm misunderstanding you. But training a fox hunter to take care of himself takes me, at least, about three years.

Also, training a horse to take care of himself is only one part of the solution for upper level eventing. But I think Beverly is right on with her suggestion to change this mind set for both horses and riders.

[poltroon]

If the fences are low enough, I don't see how this is that bad. No harm done if they make a mistake and I certainly think the horse learns from it. I know there is some BNR out there (Lucinda, maybe??) who likes to do odd distances when trying a horse to see how well it can sort things out.

Now, I would never do this with a fence 1-2 strides away, but on a related line, why not? Certainly better than getting a long/short one while XC and have your horse panic because its never had to deal with that before.

And I would think that out hunting, your horse sure as hell better be able to figure it out and know how to make a distance work.

It's not a problem if you're taking about longer distances - 4, 5 or more strides away - but I've seen badly set gymnastics and other exercises permanently destroy a horse's confidence.

[Copper]

I am wondering if the emphasis on dressage and the control which flows from having to produce an excellent test is not hampering those horse who would be better x-country machines? My friend's 1* horse will likely not excel any higher because he cannot score well in dressage (his conformation prevents it), he is however a x-country machine who, she says, has saved her ass more than once. He's smart and she trusts him to do the job. So the 4* horses who win pretty much on their dressage score are schooled to be controlled with minimal effort - can this be what is having them rely on their riders so much in the jumping phases? Essentially all of the will to act independently has been trained out of them.

So how about lowering the expectations in the dressage phase, combined with more field hunting? :)

[2Mares]

I also think the OP makes a great point. At a recent Lucinda Green clinic, she said the rider is responsible for three things, Engine, Line and Balance. Her whole clinic was about letting the horse find the distance and scramble if need be.

Another thought that has been tossed around by fellow eventers is the more demanding dressage tests may also be hurting the sport. Follow me for a second. Generally, as you move up the levels in dressage, the horse is required to think less for itself and more on listen to the rider. This trait is not beneficial on xcountry if the horse losses the thinking for itself.

An additional thought that I've heard is some of the more extravagant movers (not all, but some) may be slower thinkers where that can hurt them on xcountry. Thoughts?

Eventer13: You are probably right about that being Lucinda. In her clinic, she doesn't set a single distance and there is no rider walking the course. You let the horse find the distance. Of course she does this with low fences.

[Melliebay]

Although hunting is a wonderful way for horses to develop good instincts, it's not the only way. Try jumping with your "eye" turned off. Or let a less experienced rider take your horse over some smaller jumps. Anything you can do to give your horse the opportunity to work it out for himself.

This is wonderful advice. I try not to "help" my horses at all when they are in the beginning stages of jumping training. I help them until they get the idea of straight and forward, but then I turn off my eye, canter up to it, and let whatever happens, happen. It's not always pretty, but in the end I end up with a horse that his honest, brave, and wise. They know when to use that sense of self preservation to save both of us, and they know how to shorten/lengthen stride to make something fit, and they know how to jump from a multitude of distances.

I'm not turning out world beaters, that is not my goal, but I have VERY amateur friendly horses that people of all skill levels love to ride. They also save my ass on the regular. :lol:

[imapepper]

It's not a problem if you're taking about longer distances - 4, 5 or more strides away - but I've seen badly set gymnastics and other exercises permanently destroy a horse's confidence.

That is so true and especially true if they are green or very careful. I might not help my horse to a perfect distance and I might miss sometimes. But I never ever lie to my horse and set her up with something truly trappy. I want her to be brave and confident in case I do need to ask her for an extra effort.

[La Gringa]

I think the point of the OP is very valuable, and really should be applied to all jumping horse sports. It would be valuable for hunters, jumpers and eventers to have a horse that knew how to judge a distance for himself in case the rider was off...

Very valuable indeed.

My Selle Francais is very much good at this. He had a TERRIBLE rider while he lived in Peru, before I owned him. The horse always had to bail his rider out... I'll tell you what, when I needed him to bail ME out on course... I was sure grateful that he had this skill. There were many a time he bailed me out of some very large and sticky combinations!

Great thread, and great advice!

:yes:

[Lincoln]

I'll pile back in here; there is nothing in the dressage rule book that says that horses shouldn't think for themselves. I bet Isabel Klimke would have a good laugh at that idea -particularly as an eventer herself. As I wrote on an earlier post, there is a debate in the dressage community about whether the art is in controlling every footfall or in bringing out the best in the horse and in the partnership. It is very doable (and probably somewhat easier) to get a good score in dressage with the horse going along being micromanaged - and, unlike in eventing, at least it isn't potentially lethal. But that is not the same the classical ideal of the quiet rider and the horse on the aids and obedient while in self-carriage and maintaining his own rhythmn. As we say in Massachusetts: "that's really wicked hahd!"

[2Mares]

They weren't saying a dressage horse doesn't think for itself (it's a balance). I'm trying to sum up their thoughts in a few sentences, which is not easy. I think what they meant was along the lines of what others here are saying. There can be problems with the horse being too responsive to the rider, such as always taking the spot the rider says rather than adding that half stride or scrambling if it was really a bad spot.

[bip]

I think many riders/trainers need to stop focusing so much on rider accuracy, and teach the horse to look after himself more at all levels.

It is my understanding that part of the problem is that modern courses are actually asking questions that horses cannot figure out themselves unless the rider puts them in exactly the right place.

[nature]

When studying for my BHSAI exams in England at YRC, they told us...

R....Rhythm
I....Impulsion
B....Balance
S...Straightness

[RunForIt]

It is my understanding that part of the problem is that modern courses are actually asking questions that horses cannot figure out themselves unless the rider puts them in exactly the right place.
this is practically word for word what I asked Kevin and David, plus, why is it necessary...in a game.

[sporthorselover]

I totally agree with the idea that it's a bad idea for an upper level horse to be dependent on a perfect ride every time. but the "just kick on and let them figure it out" approach seems like that is exactly what at least one of the riders with a fatal fall at Rolex was doing.

are we suggesting that dependency on a perfect ride is the cause for the horse fatalaties at Rolex?

elsewhere on this forum I read that the rider blasted into the fence and did not attempt to balance or set the horse up before the fence. which led me to believe the rider probably shouldn't have been competing at a 4 star, that the qualifications aren't strict enough; also that we possibly need to be more vigilant about 'dangerous riding'.

the horse obviously didn't get the ride he needed at that fence at Rolex. is it because his training created a dependency on the perfect ride to every fence? Or was the rider being a cowboy?

confused!

[NeverTime]

I think you are confused because, frankly, we don't know what we want, except that we want horses and people to stop dying.

We want more cowboy in our riders ... but we want more responsibility in our riders, too.

We want to ban tables, open oxers without frangible pins ... and we want to ban skinnies and technical combinations and anything with a vertical face

We want "to go back to the old-fashioned, gallopy course" ... and we want to slow down times and slow down crazy people going too fast

We want people to get their horses to the fences right -- not forget to half-halt or try to jump an oxer from a crawl ... but we also want our horses to think for themselves and get it done despite our foolishness.

Every single thing that has been put forward as a change to this sport over the past weeks has been well-intentioned. And, no doubt, every single one of those ideas would have its own set of unintended consequences. I hope we don't make knee-jerk decisions that could make the situation worse instead of better.

[RunForIt]

originally posted by nevertime:

frankly, we don't know what we want, except that we want horses and people to stop dying.


I know that for me at least, that is the bottom line. And I know the answers aren't going to be simple, but for me, show me evidence that horses and riders are safe in this game, safe in this sport.

[pwynnnorman]

It is my understanding that part of the problem is that modern courses are actually asking questions that horses cannot figure out themselves unless the rider puts them in exactly the right place.

Thanks, bip. You said exactly what I was trying to.

Y'know, WHY don't we hear from more course designers concerning these issues? There seems to be a really significant perspective that I don't think is understood all that well. I find myself reading CDs comments and they just don't mesh with what seems to be the majority view from the rider's perspective.

Maybe that's a problem?

[lstevenson]

I totally agree with the idea that it's a bad idea for an upper level horse to be dependent on a perfect ride every time. but the "just kick on and let them figure it out" approach seems like that is exactly what at least one of the riders with a fatal fall at Rolex was doing.



Riders need to train the horse at home over show jumps to think for himself. What tends to happen if the horse is not trained to think for himself, is that he doesn't know what to do when the rider misses.

[lstevenson]

It is my understanding that part of the problem is that modern courses are actually asking questions that horses cannot figure out themselves unless the rider puts them in exactly the right place.


I can't think of any fence (except for maybe that mouse head fence, which I think was way to visually confusing with the way it stuck up in the middle of the fence) that a horse could not figure out if the rider has him on the right line, in the right balance, and with the right amount of impulsion, provided he has been taught to think for himself.

[pwynnnorman]

You can't? There are a ton of "blind" fences and complexes out there. Every horse that has gone ass over teakettle on the second element of a bounce has failed a question that was mainly the "rider's responsiblity." When jumping from light to dark, or dark to light, such as that wicked upright gate in Huntsman's Close (Badminton), is the horse supposed to see through that on its own? And what about bending lines? Is the horse supposed to drift out to give itself more room to fit in a stride in good balance...on its own? Come now. I haven't ridden much o/f in years, but this stuff is obvious, isn't it? It doesn't matter if it is a hunter course, a jumper course or an event course. Course designers design RIDER QUESTIONS and it's just a fact that some of them invariably involve distances (and the tracks that can make them easy or challenging, work out with respect to the next jump, or screw you up with respect to the next jump).

I also know it is just not possible or wise to make blanket statements about what horses can and can't do. My Colin needs to be supported right down to the base of every jump because, when he was showing in jumpers, he was basically a dressage horse being ridden over fences. Ya think you'd develop him as an x-c horse the same way as, oh, say Poggio? Phillip Dutton has admitted that he has had to really ride Connaught precisely (this was earlier in the horse's career). Maybe one rider's responsibility (or coach's) is to understand the horse and its needs for guidance or freedom. They can't all be alike--and it's probably a potentially tragic thing if try to treat them that way, IMO.

Indeed, the more I think about this, I gotta admit that I will not pay anyone who couldn't ride a distance reliably to take any youngster of mine in for training. I'm sorry, but the fact is that some babies scare themselves if left on their own. So should that kind of animal be discarded? Of course not. They are given good, solid, consistent rides by skilled riders who gradually provide them with experiences that enable them to develop their own judgment--through confidence and also through the experience of basically being shown a comfortable distance.

I talked about longing on one of these threads, as a way to teach a horse to judge for himself, but in doing so, I didn't mention how I've had babies crash headfirst into jumps because of the mistakes they made. And of courss that can happen u/s, too. Are some of you actually arguing that you would boot that horse (or ease it or whatever) back down to the same situation and risk it will scare itself yet again, rushing through anxiously or sucking back, thinking of refusing before lunging or flinging itself over in a panic. When something like that happens with my guys, I take them BACK to something easier and give them guidance to make sure they nail it and get their confidence back. And if they are u/s, you better believe if that rider doesn't get the horse down to a comfortable jump the next time, that rider is off the horse until I've solved any confidence isues that might have arisen -- IF IT IS THAT TYPE OF HORSE.

The rider's responsibility isn't just to get the horse to the jump and let it do its job. It is to produce a horse which can, both physically and mentally, do its job. And just letting IT figure it out, time after time, as a blanket rule, is most definitely going to eliminate a lot of very talented, but maybe a bit slow or even stupid, horses from contention--probably horses like Connaught, for example. Tell me you haven't encountered the type I'm refering to. Horses aren't all alike! Some are not going to learn without help...so what happens to those if they end up at a high and unforgiving level of the sport in hands that have never really had to develop an eye (or hae a philosophy that they shouldn't have to)?

[lstevenson]

You can't? There are a ton of "blind" fences and complexes out there. Every horse that has gone ass over teakettle on the second element of a bounce has failed a question that was mainly the "rider's responsiblity."


You are using a bounce as an example of a jump a horse can't negotiate without a perfectly placed take off spot?

I disagee. I think if the rider has produced the correct amount of impulsion, the right length of stride for the distance of the bounce, and the right balance and straightness in the canter, the horse can easily handle being not at the perfect spot. Provided he has already been taught to think for himself.

The ones that fall have most likely not met all of the criteria above.

[subk]

I totally agree with the idea that it's a bad idea for an upper level horse to be dependent on a perfect ride every time. but the "just kick on and let them figure it out" approach seems like that is exactly what at least one of the riders with a fatal fall at Rolex was doing.
Balance, forward and line. One had forward and zero balance (no brakes) the other had balance and no forward (no gas pedal.) Heidi's fall at the ducks from my vantage point appeared to be a line problem.

A balance horse with forward (i.e. impulsion) on a reasonable line should be able to figure out just about anything. Lose one of those elements and all bets are off.

[lstevenson]

Balance, forward and line. One had forward and zero balance (no brakes) the other had balance and no forward (no gas pedal.) Heidi's fall at the ducks from my vantage point appeared to be a line problem.

A balance horse with forward (i.e. impulsion) on a reasonable line should be able to figure out just about anything. Lose one of those elements and all bets are off.



Exactly.

[snoopy]

I can't think of any fence (except for maybe that mouse head fence, which I think was way to visually confusing with the way it stuck up in the middle of the fence) that a horse could not figure out if the rider has him on the right line, in the right balance, and with the right amount of impulsion, provided he has been taught to think for himself.


As I have said in a previous post regarding this particular fence....the mouse actually backs the horse off the spread instead of drwing the horse to the far end of the spread...and the head also has an effect of pushing the horse to either side, and with the fence being SO narrow at the base, it really was designed for mishap.

[lstevenson]

As I have said in a previous post regarding this particular fence....the mouse actually backs the horse off the spread instead of drwing the horse to the far end of the spread...and the head also has an effect of pushing the horse to either side, and with the fence being SO narrow at the base, it really was designed for mishap.


I agree, that fence was ridiculous. It would be like putting a head or something similar on a corner right where you would want a horse to jump it. They instictively move away from something that sticks up on a fence.

[pwynnnorman]

Well, there you go then: the horse is put off, sucking back or rushing anxiously. Whaddya gonna do then? Your rhythm is out the window now. And heaven knows where the horse's eye is.

Are you going to just drop your hands and let him figure it out on his own then? YOU know there is a steep slope after that jump, followed by a slight curve to another jump (doesn't have to be the mousetrap--any combo illustrates this). The horse isn't going to know about that slope until the moment he takes off. He sees a slanted faced set of logs, a lot like a triple bar in stadium. It's going to stretch him out, so if he takes off long, he's going to land even longer. You MUST get his to the base of that jump so his trajectory and his bascule will, ideally, give him time to land in a tighter, more balanced frame and in the mindset that will enable him to sight down on the next jump and hold himself off of it instead of letting gravity drag him into it.

So when you come around that corner, five strides from the stack of logs like a triple bar, you just sit quietly and let whatever happens happen??? Of course not: you at least try to ride to the base of the "triple bar" -- as you always do with slanted faces, right?

Y'know, getting a horse to the base of a jump is seeing, finding and riding a distance...at least it is if you get there by riding forward to it, not picking at the horse and reducing his stride so it has to work out to a deep spot, even if you can't see it.

And the horses at the mousetrap, specifically, didn't have time to "suck back" from the mouse head anyway. If they landed down the slope, plowing their forehands into the ground, all the desire in the world to "suck back" wasn't gonna make it happen. Put that exact same skinny with the exact same mousehead out in the open on flat ground and no one would have had a problem with it. It wasn't the mousehead that caused the problems. It was the ride necessary to make what came BEFORE it work. That ride was a tough--maybe even downright unreasonable--rider question, if only because the horse didn't have the time (or the course walk) to answer it on its own.

[Larbear]

I am wondering if the emphasis on dressage and the control which flows from having to produce an excellent test is not hampering those horse who would be better x-country machines?.....So the 4* horses who win pretty much on their dressage score are schooled to be controlled with minimal effort - can this be what is having them rely on their riders so much in the jumping phases? Essentially all of the will to act independently has been trained out of them.


I was going to post something similar :) I think some time ago Lucinda Green brought this concern up too. I don't remember all the particulars but I *think* she raised concerns about the shift in emphasis of dressage and how it could result in having to rely on the rider more etc...I think this article may have even been in response to a time when there seemed to be quite a few accidents as well. Darn my fuzzy brain that I can't remember where I saw the article!! Does anyone else remember this?

[Twomanydawgs]

"get a faraway look, stick like a tick, and kick like a mule"...THAT in a nutshell explains the problems with eventing today.:no:

[pwynnnorman]

"get a faraway look, stick like a tick, and kick like a mule"...THAT in a nutshell explains the problems with eventing today.:no:

Yup. Times have changed, courses have changed, but that attitude hasn't.

[Maren]

European eventer here, and I hope I don't sound ignorant, but could somebody please explain this to me?

Quote: If you look at some of these horses'/riders' move-up records, it is really eye-opening to see how many of them move on up to P and I even after getting eliminated or having stops at their last event at the lower level.

Is there no requirement a horse has to meet before you can move it up the ranks?? It clearly excists in Europe (Germany in my case) and you have no choice but to stick to it. And that is true for any discipline, btw. You can't just buy a PSG dressage mount and decide to ride PSG next weekend. Gotta work your way up there!

@2mares
Quote: An additional thought that I've heard is some of the more extravagant movers (not all, but some) may be slower thinkers where that can hurt them on xcountry. Thoughts?

I have no clue how that came up. Bigger movers are slower thinkers? What? Did whoever postulated that hypothesis offer any type of explanation?

[lstevenson]

Y'know, getting a horse to the base of a jump is seeing, finding and riding a distance...at least it is if you get there by riding forward to it, not picking at the horse and reducing his stride so it has to work out to a deep spot, even if you can't see it.



See now I think that getting to the base of the jump and seeing a distance are slightly different things. Getting to the base is more about the balance of the horse IMO. You can ride forward to the base even on a half stride distance. And if everything else is right the horse can work it out, if he's been trained to do that.

[pwynnnorman]

I have no clue how that came up. Bigger movers are slower thinkers? What? Did whoever postulated that hypothesis offer any type of explanation?
I've never heard that before. But if instead you postulate that "bigger movers are slower movers," that might be applicable, sometimes.

[Janet]

European eventer here, and I hope I don't sound ignorant, but could somebody please explain this to me?

Quote: If you look at some of these horses'/riders' move-up records, it is really eye-opening to see how many of them move on up to P and I even after getting eliminated or having stops at their last event at the lower level.
From the 2008 rule book (gets stricter in 2009)-
A competitor and/or a horse may be entered in a Horse Trial without having fulfilled the
qualifications noted below, provided the qualifications have been fulfilled by the closing date
for entries. Completion, as noted below, means having completed the entire Horse Trial,
and it means having completed the cross-country test with no more than one disobedience.
Exceptions to the qualifications noted below may only be approved by the
Credentials/Grading Committee.

...

1 LEVELS
1.1 BEGINNER NOVICE (B) - Open to competitors of any age, on horses four years of
age and older.
1.2 NOVICE (N) - Open to competitors of any age, on horses four years of age or older.
1.3 TRAINING (T) - Open to competitors of any age, on horses four years of age or
older.
1.4 PRELIMINARY (P) - Open to competitors from the beginning of the calendar year of
their 14th birthday, on horses five years of age or older. The competitor must have
completed four Horse Trials at the Training Level or higher.
1.5 INTERMEDIATE (I) - Open to competitors from the beginning of the calendar year of
their 16th birthday, on horses six years of age or older. Both the competitor and the
horse, though not necessarily as a combination, must have completed four Horse
Trials at the Preliminary Level or higher.
1.6 ADVANCED (A) - Open to competitors from the beginning of the calendar year of
their 18th birthday, on horses six years of age or older. Both the competitor and the
horse, though not necessarily as a combination, must have completed four Horse
Trials at the Intermediate Level or higher.

In 2009, it gets stricter. In order to count for qualifying, you will need

- not more than 50 penalty points in the Dressage Test; and
- No jumping penalties at obstacles on the Cross Country Test, and not more than 90 seconds (36 penalty points) exceeding the optimum time; and
- not more than 16 penalties at obstacles in the Jumping Test.

[Outfox]

Wow!!! This thread has gone "off-course".:eek:

[pwynnnorman]

Actually, Outfox, I'm intrigued by this thread because I think it is all related:


We want "to go back to the old-fashioned, gallopy course" ... and we want to slow down times and slow down crazy people going too fast


Maybe because "we" prefer to let the horses do the thinking (philosophy, not judgment). That perspective seems to support the more natural way of yesteryear, when such things as accuracy and distances were not as critical (at the ULs) as they are today.

And there was the connection that kinda got to this point: that pros micromanage the horse to its detriment (and that of the ammy who may buy it later, perhaps?0.

I think while the discusion may be wide-ranging, it is all relevant and consistent, too (from all sides). Indeed, these forays onto parallel paths help explain the sides we take on these issues, I think.

[subk]

See now I think that getting to the base of the jump and seeing a distance are slightly different things. Getting to the base is more about the balance of the horse IMO. You can ride forward to the base even on a half stride distance. And if everything else is right the horse can work it out, if he's been trained to do that.
Agreed. "Getting a horse to the base of the fence is finding and riding a" balance.

I don't consider myself as one who has a particularly good eye for a distance, but I'm dang good at putting one at the base. It's kind of freaky even because I don't know how I do it consistently, just that it's something I do by feel and is more related to rhythm (balance) then by something I see.

We're spliting hairs here...but if you are relating this to horses having problems they are going to fail more if they lack balance than if they lack a distance. Consider this, a "chip" is a chip not because of where the location of the take off is in relation to the fence, but because of the lack of balance when the horse takes off.

I don't see the issue as "teaching the horse to do it on his own." For me it's a division of labor. I set the pace, line and balance. The horse decides where to put his feet. They're his feet and when he free jumps he never makes a mistake, so that's a clue that if he misses I screwed him up. Now that doesn't mean we might not have the occasional discussion like, "no, not that distance I didn't bring a 'chute, do you think you could find something more reasonable?" Or, from him, "would you please sit back and shut up, because I've got it." I've got my job he's got his.

[justdream2ride]

This will probably we a wildly unpopular view but here goes…….

Perhaps some of our event horses should be doing a different job? There are SOOOOO many UL horses now – are they all really up to the task. I don’t think so. If a horse has to be ridden 100% perfectly every time then perhaps that horse would be better off in a job where if his rider missed 1% of the time it wouldn’t cost either of them their lives.

I think at least a partial reason for the short format was to make eventing doable for the warmbloods. I think what has actually been proven is no matter how you change eventing it is and will always be for the brave, bold and self confident horse who is smart enough to take care of himself when his rider screws up.

The best of the best may be able to nurse the lesser horses around but unfortunately even they will make a mistake eventually.

[snoopy]

[QUOTE=justdream2ride;3183235]
There are SOOOOO many UL horses now – are they all really up to the task. I don’t
QUOTE]


Jeez do you think so??!!!:eek: Go the UK then. I actually think the US and Canada are pretty thin on the ground in that regard.

[Jazzy Lady]

considering that majority of the horses that are at the **** level are still thoroughbreds, then I think the wb discussion is a bit void. Besides, who's to say that the wb has no self preservation and the tb does? That's a silly conversation.

What are we going to do, ban WB's from competing?

[justdream2ride]

Oh no - I never said what breed was better - just 'why' I think there was some push to get rid of the long format. I mearly stated what 'qualities' an UL horse should have.......never said it had to be TB!

[colliemom]

No, seriously, I have heard professionals that I've worked with complain that horses like mine have a built-in "amateur pause" that makes them hard (for the pros) to ride to a fence: About three strides out, they take a little momentary hesitation just to size things up and see what needs to be done to make this all work out.


That right there speaks volumes. Professionals "complain" when the horse thinks for itself??? :confused::confused::confused:

[Jiffy Read]

Three recurring concerns have sprung from my original post. I've been interested to read everyone's thoughts, and wish I could respond to each and every observation and suggestion, but I can't, so I'm in the process of crafting three separate posts which will address the following issues:


Have courses become too technical?
Is kicking on and letting the horse find its own way possible with today's technical courses?
Are horses being rushed up the levels?


Bear with me as I generate my posts. Articulation does not come easily to me, and I want to ensure that I give each topic its proper due.

-Jiffy

[2Mares]

First off, I'm only throwing out thoughts I've heard so people can add their input. I am in no way saying that this is the case, just adding to the discussion. That being said, in regards to the extravagent movers, a BNT (dressage) made a comment to a clinician about some of them being slower thinkers. Then there was an extravagent mover in the clinic that seemed to fit that mold. This horse in particular had that lovely hesitation in his gate. So going by what another poster said, maybe it's not slower thinking but slower moving. Maybe that hesitation in the gate slows the reaction time a touch and makes it appear to be a slower thinker (this is a sport where milliseconds matter). Again, these are just thoughts I've heard. I've seen just as many extravagent movers that were not slow thinkers as ones that are, but I haven't broken it down to ones that have that hesitation in their gate. Obviously you don't have to have that hesitation in the gate to be an extravagent mover.

[SEPowell]

Three recurring concerns have sprung from my original post. I've been interested to read everyone's thoughts, and wish I could respond to each and every observation and suggestion, but I can't, so I'm in the process of crafting three separate posts which will address the following issues:


Have courses become too technical?
Is kicking on and letting the horse find its own way possible with today's technical courses?
Are horses being rushed up the levels?

-Jiffy

Regarding your second issue, "kicking on and letting the horse find its own way possible with today's technical courses"; It seems that there are a few interpretations of this theory; one where the horse learns through experinece with little assistance from the rider, and when applied to eventing, the rider just gives it all up to the horse and "kicks on" versus the theory where training is structured to work toward the ability and willingness of the horse to take care of himself, and when applied to eventing, the horse and rider work together but one can compensate for the other when necessary.

Does this make sense? Anyone else running into this confusion:confused:

[lstevenson]

the horse and rider work together but one can compensate for the other when necessary.


Yes, this is exactly what should be happening. The horse should be able to think for himself in a pinch. But that doesn't mean the rider never helps him.

[snoopy]

For me anyway...XC riding is all about what happens when the rider gets it wrong, will/can the horse step up to the plate, think for himself and get out of trouble. It has to be a partnership, not a dictatorship. If today's courses demand such micromanagement from the rider, what happens when the rider gets it wrong?

[annikak]

For me anyway...XC riding is all about what happens when the rider gets it wrong, will/can the horse step up to the plate, think for himself and get out of trouble. It has to be a partnership, not a dictatorship. If today's courses demand such micromanagement from the rider, what happens when the rider gets it wrong?

Just speaking to a mutual friend-;) and came in to read this which is exactly what we were talking about. She will usually get it right, however I am not as likely. It needs to happen, and her ride gives the horse the ability to think- as he has the freedom to do so, where as I might not have that honed ability/. I want it, i just might not ever have that tool safely on my tool belt.

So, even if I totally get it totally wrong, he needs to say..Ahem, woman, let me do it! And I need to say... You got it, dear...and thanks! Carrots for you!

[tx3dayeventer]

"get a faraway look, stick like a tick, and kick like a mule"...THAT in a nutshell explains the problems with eventing today.:no:

It was 8 years ago when I was told this. There is no way in Heck you could ride like that today. You would kill yourself (not being mean, just truthful!). When I made that comment I was trying to show the difference between "then & now" in the mentality of a 3-Day rider there in-turn showing the difference the courses and other factors have weighed on our minds

[JAGold]

For me anyway...XC riding is all about what happens when the rider gets it wrong, will/can the horse step up to the plate, think for himself and get out of trouble. It has to be a partnership, not a dictatorship. If today's courses demand such micromanagement from the rider, what happens when the rider gets it wrong?
I agree with this, though I think the rider has the ultimate responsibility to stay the heck out of the way and give the horse a chance to get out of a tight situation! It's one thing to make a mistake, but another to prevent the horse from fixing your mistake.

And I think it's particularly important to keep this in mind when schooling young horses. It is so tempting to "help" them all the time. When I can see that the distance is wrong, I want to just fix it -- but it's important to just stay out of the way and let the horse figure it out on his own. This, to me, is part of creating a horse who can step up in the way snoopy describes. We have to not protect them so much from making any mistakes when they are young, so that they know how to think for themselves and what to do when things aren't spot on perfect. (I'm not advocating bad riding of green horses, just a more quiet, passive ride that gives the green horse more responsibility for figuring out simple exercises on his own.)

[Jiffy Read]

For all the talk about how technical the courses have become - and whether they're too technical - I think we need to examine the issue more analytically. After all, technical jumps are not a recent phenomenon. Courses have always had their share of technical fences. But consider the history of the cross country course, and the progression to today's supposedly "technical" courses.

Up until about 15 years ago it was possible at the Advanced level to produce a mediocre dressage test but finish in the ribbons, as long as you had a clear cross country go and no more than a rail or two down in the show jumping. In a Three Day, a dressage score that put you in the bottom third of the pile didn't necessarily count you out, as long as you didn't add any penalties the remainder of the weekend.

But riders began mastering all the questions asked on upper level cross country courses. Essentially all fences come down to a question of boldness and/or accuracy. We'd answered all the boldness questions: ditches, banks, water, spreads, light to dark, jumping blindly into space - and at that point were just presented with variations on a theme: fences put on angles or made into corners to raise questions of accuracy. Course designers began struggling for new ways to test horses and riders, to generate penalty points while still keeping courses as safe as possible.

And then along came The Skinny. A brilliant concept. Suddenly the leader board was peppered with penalty points again. The term "glance off" became a part of every eventer's lexicon, replacing the previously used "run-out", and the top placers went back to being not the dressage winners, but those who made it around the cross country clear. Course designers had succeeded in creating the perfect solution to stumping horses and riders without hazarding a fall.

But, again, riders rose to the challenge, and within several years they'd mastered the skinny. So it was back to the dressage and show jumping to separate the placings. Upper level riders, realizing that a stellar dressage test and clear show jumping round were crucial to the final placings again, turned to our nation's top trainers in those specialized areas for instruction. Consider how the quality of today's dressage and show jump rides compare to those of fifteen years ago. Eventing always had its few strong riders in those phases, but a greater number of competitors have now become really, really good.

So have courses really changed that much in recent years? No. The fact is skinnies, the most technical of the jumps, have been here for a while, along with all the attendant questions of accuracy that they pose. Not only that, but they continue to be quite safe. Flips, or those dreaded rotational falls, are the result of a horse "getting under" a jump and not being able to make its way out. Horses don't generally "get under" skinnies. For one thing, they are naturally backed off by the narrowness of the jump face. For another, they're more likely to glance off if they get into a trouble spot, rather than attempt the jump.

Consider again that cream-of-the-crop riders are getting hurt in disproportionate numbers over those less elite. Also, that many of the rotational falls are occurring at straightforward fences, not the technical ones. Of course there are exceptions, but in examining this issue we need to look at overall trends, and not focus on the exceptions. Exceptions will always be with us. The question we need to stay focused on is: why are horses and riders getting hurt in higher numbers now than they were before? It’s easy to blame course design, but courses are no more dangerous than they were before.

[Beverley]

...that speaks to the 'technical' issue and the issue of horse bailing out rider. It doesn't address wrecks caused by going too fast or approaching with insufficient impulsion or approaching out of balance.

Are today's fences being built in a manner that fools the horse? When I approach a honkin' big fence or a trappy fence on a horse, I might typically feel one of two things from the horse- 'I got it, let's go,' or 'no way am I jumping that, thankyouverymuch.' The latter obviously causes penalties, though I must confess I much prefer a horse that has the sense to stop when he's into it really, really wrong, regardless of how he got in the predicament. Mind you, I've booted a jumper over 4 feet from a near standstill to avoid a penalty but I sure wouldn't try that over just any old obstacle.

But I cannot help but wonder if in some cases, the way the fence is built, or the decorations, or the lighting, somehow come together so that the horse is processing false information in terms of what his effort is going to have to be. I expect we've all seen falls that you could see coming from a long way off. But we've also seen freak falls where everything looks okay on approach and then, suddenly, it's all wrong. What I am asking is, in their desire to test the riders, are course designers sometimes failing to take what the horse sees into account?

[RealityCheck]

Well, there you go then: the horse is put off, sucking back or rushing anxiously. Whaddya gonna do then? Your rhythm is out the window now. And heaven knows where the horse's eye is.

Are you going to just drop your hands and let him figure it out on his own then?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, no, no, absolutely no. The rider’s responsibility, the way I see it, is to help your horse have the best possible chance for success. When you’re out on course, only the rider knows what’s coming next and what kind of canter that next question needs, and therefore it’s the rider’s responsibility to half halt, rebalance, kick forward, or whatever needs to be done to prepare the horse. BUT, and this is the important part, we are all human, which means we all make mistakes. Yep, even Phillip, even Karen, even Bruce! And when we make mistakes, our horse needs to know how to take care of itself. Event horses are a special breed (and yes this can include warmbloods!)- they must have tremendous courage and heart, and they must have that instinct to think for themselves. But we, as riders and trainers, must nurture that instinct that the truly special horses have, and train them NOT ONLY to be rideable, but also to get themselves out of a sticky situation when we can’t help them. After all, the horses are the ones moving their feet, and as much as we can train them to be adjustable, balanced, responsive, etc. we can’t pick their feet up for them. However, this does NOT mean you should purposefully just drop the reins and let the horse take care of itself out on course. This means that the horse should know how to jump from a long or short spot and get its feet out of the way before it ever sees the course. It means setting up related distances that aren’t perfect at home, with low fences that will fall down, so that the horse learns in a safe environment that they can take care of themselves. It means not micro managing every second of every jump school you do on a green horse, and letting them make mistakes when the consequences will be minor. That way, when the consequences are much higher, your horse will know what to do.

[pwynnnorman]

Emily, I think we are sliding by each other on different, but parallel tracks. My essential argument is that the technicality of today's courses means that riders need to have an eye, the ability to ride accurately to a specific take-off point due to the conditions before or after the fence.

But I think what those who embrace the independent horse and kick on philosophy want to believe is that it is an all-or-nothing thing: either you micromanage or you keep the horse balanced and at the right pace, and leave the rest to it.

I'm saying that the higher up you go, the more dangerous, the more unsafe, it is if you can't micromanage when the course demands it. I suspect that event riders do not spend the time developing their eye the way, say, jumper riders do--and in arguing from this viewpoint, I've gotten the feeling from the opposing side that they feel they shouldn't have to.

I think they are wrong, that it's irresponsible to take on a technical course without the ability to set the horse right when necessary. I believe that such an attitude is russian roulette on course because someday, even the marvelous Mr. Big's of this world are going to be unable to read what is ahead and/or unable to physically get themselves out of the spot they got into by not knowing--say--the striding such that they go in too long and leave not enough room to get out (for example).

The epitome of this is "riding to the base" isn't the same as "riding a distance." How can that argument be made if the mechanics cannot be articulated? "I just feel it?" That may be true and fine for you, but #1. that ain't reassuring to me if you are on my horse and can't insure it's going to survive your ride because you can do something proactive should it errs and/or the course design demands such a ride, and #2. how can you feel getting to the base but not putting your horse's hind feet at a specific distance from the jump? Is getting to the base to you getting the front end there? I'm none too comfortable with that, either.

Indeed, I do believe, barring the exceptions that Jiffy talks about, one universal rule out there concerning the top event riders is indeed that they DO HAVE AN EYE and can control their horses, right down to the ideal take-off point when needed.

And that's a potential "great divide" between them and the rest. THEY are not the victims of their success--those who try to emulate them while downplaying essential skills they (top riders) possess -- are the potential victims of whatever managed to get them to the point they are at (in the ULs). Whether because possessing and using those skills runs counter to the sports traditions or whether they (non-top riders) simply don't understand the relationship between those skills and the top riders' success, IMO this is part of what is making the sport unsafe.

Moreover, it is illustrated at every event by hair-raising stadium rounds that illustrate just how little genuine skill in navigating accurately some possess.

As you progress up the levels of any jumping competition: hunters, jumpers or eventers, one thing that must progress alongside for the sake of safety is the control you have over your horse. The most basic example of this is that it is just a fact that the bigger the jump, the more precise an approach is required. (Also, the more limited the talent or confidence or experience in the horse, the more precise the ride must be for the round -- in competition -- to be a rewarding, encouraging, experience for the horse with limitations. One does NOT treat a stadium course in competition like a grid at home.) That doesn't mean the rider's control is constant--that makes no sense. But it does mean when the rider needs to micromanage, the rider CAN.

One last thing--and I have brought in this example before--decades ago, Practical Horseman had Bruce Davidson demonstrating precise riding (in terms of distances). Twenty years ago, Bruce shows how to put the horse's hind feet exactly where he wanted them to be in front of the jump. He had a lime box drawn on the ground in front of the fence and illustrated his point by nailing that distance every time he wanted to. He also showed how he could get the hinds a bit ahead or a bit behind the box, and so on and so on and so on.

Twenty years later, and I have not forgotten that. See why I push this point as perhaps the distinguishing trait of the "top event riders" and the damaging deficiency, perhaps, of ones who get into trouble?

[Mudroom]

Back around 2000 the USCTA news quoted Denis Glaccum describing many event horses as “well schooled, but ‘under developed’. They lack the natural instinct and the ability to make sensible decisions in tough sports that comes from foxhunting, hacking out, and growing up running around over tough terrain.”

I know a Rolex level pro rider who has said she would much rather ride a horse that looks good with an amateur than one that looks great with a pro.

[snoopy]

[QUOTE=pwynnnorman;3184921]Emily, I think we are sliding by each other on different, but parallel tracks. My essential argument is that the technicality of today's courses means that riders need to have an eye, the ability to ride accurately to a specific take-off point due to the conditions before or after the fence.

But I think what those who embrace the independent horse and kick on philosophy want to believe is that it is an all-or-nothing thing: either you micromanage or you keep the horse balanced and at the right pace, and leave the rest to it.QUOTE]






You did not read that in any of my posts...I would never say it is all or nothing. Of course a rider needs to have an eye, but you would be fooling yourself to believe that a rider will get it right everytime...It is what happens then at such a time that the horse should be able to read the fence and get itself out of trouble. I for one would never advocate dropping a horse like has been suggested as a counter to some of those who would like their horses to retain a bit of say in the matter.

[pwynnnorman]

Well, sure, mudroom--but what if it doesn't? What then? I said this on another thread: There's the Mr. Big's and the Connaughts and it'd be GREAT if we lived in such an ideal world that that's all there were who entered the Rolex-level of eventing.

But what should be done about the ones in between and their riders???

You did not read that in any of my posts...I would never say it is all or nothing. Of course a rider needs to have an eye, but you would be fooling yourself to believe that a rider will get it right everytime...It is what happens then at such a time that the horse should be able to read the fence and get itself out of trouble. I for one would never advocate dropping a horse like has been suggested as a counter to some of those who would like their horses to retain a bit of say in the matter.


Of course you wouldn't say that, snoopy. And I should have qualified by statement by writing "I think what SOME OF those who embrace the independent horse and kick on philosophy want..."

I think most folks agree that, ideally, it's a partnership: one makes up for mistakes in the other. But I think leaving it at that is oversimplifying and, like in the "rider responsibility" thread, ducking a significant and concrete issue, perhaps because it is not a comfortable subject for people unsure of their own skills to discuss (or whatever).

It's a fact in hunterdom that riders exaggerate and downright lie about seeing a distance. I've watched trainers reinforce the lie by praising something that wasn't even remotely accomplished. I have a jumper with a great eye of his own: just keep him coming forward and he will make you look and feel great up there. In h-j, you'd be TOLD you are great, too--you'd come to believe it was you, that you "saw it a mile away", that you've got this great feel...until you get off Col and onto a greenie or something that has been overfaced and suddenly you can't "see" anything. Well, that's because you never did "see," you felt Col get his eye on the jump coming out of the turn and them commit. All you did was keep him forward and not wreck his rhythm.

Now, take that into the eventing realm--and I think one should take it here because if it happens in hunterdom, chances are it happens here. A LOT of the elements that characterize hunters are seeping into eventing. That's a given. So, shouldn't we consider--because we are trying to figure out what's impacting these issues--this same situation where trainer praises rider for what horse is making possible (rather than rider). Rider never distinguishes between the horse's eye and his or her own. Rider keeps moving up.

One day, horse misjudges. Spectators can see it coming from way out, but rider can't because rider has been buffaloed into believing either 1.) s/he can see a distance (and ride to it) or 2.) s/he doesn't need to.

Isn't it possible that that is one of the problems that may be causing serious falls? It's partnership, but what if one of the partners hasn't read all the terms of the contract? When one defaults, is the other truly ready to make the decision about what to do next? And, most importantly, who reviews the contract for this partnership? Is that person (coach/trainer) going to be honest about it--both in general and concerning the specifics, such as "can she ride that accurately (as accurately as the course demands, that is) on this horse?

[TB or not TB?]

But what should be done about the ones in between and their riders???

Burn them as witches?

[snoopy]

Burn them as witches?



FAB!!:lol::lol::lol::lol:

[pwynnnorman]

TB, I know you meant to lighten things up a bit with that, but I have to admit to being annoyed by it. I'm like (oh, I can't remember who it was--on the rider responsibility thread)...I'm more than a little angry about the accidents and bad press. I've spent fully 30 years of my life loving this sport and I am pissed that it is getting a bum rap. And I'm pissed at those who are causing it to get this bum rap and pissed at the conditions that are causing the bum rap. I want to get to the bottom of it, not gloss it over. I welcome a frank discussion about specifics, not some generalities that shuffle the blame around and argue pie-in-the-sky idealism. Again, I'm sorry for coming off this way: It's late, I'm sleep deprived (that damn mare better foal tonight), and I'm fed up with vague, subjective, simplistic arguments.

[RunForIt]

Well, sure, mudroom--but what if it doesn't? What then? I said this on another thread: There's the Mr. Big's and the Connaughts and it'd be GREAT if we lived in such an ideal world that that's all there were who entered the Rolex-level of eventing.

But what should be done about the ones in between and their riders???


Of course you wouldn't say that, snoopy. And I should have qualified by statement by writing "I think what SOME OF those who embrace the independent horse and kick on philosophy want..."

I think most folks agree that, ideally, it's a partnership: one makes up for mistakes in the other. But I think leaving it at that is oversimplifying and, like in the "rider responsibility" thread, ducking a significant and concrete issue, perhaps because it is not a comfortable subject for people unsure of their own skills to discuss (or whatever).

It's a fact in hunterdom that riders exaggerate and downright lie about seeing a distance. I've watched trainers reinforce the lie by praising something that wasn't even remotely accomplished. I have a jumper with a great eye of his own: just keep him coming forward and he will make you look and feel great up there. In h-j, you'd be TOLD you are great, too--you'd come to believe it was you, that you "saw it a mile away", that you've got this great feel...until you get off Col and onto a greenie or something that has been overfaced and suddenly you can't "see" anything. Well, that's because you never did "see," you felt Col get his eye on the jump coming out of the turn and them commit. All you did was keep him forward and not wreck his rhythm.

Now, take that into the eventing realm--and I think one should take it here because if it happens in hunterdom, chances are it happens here. A LOT of the elements that characterize hunters are seeping into eventing. That's a given. So, shouldn't we consider--because we are trying to figure out what's impacting these issues--this same situation where trainer praises rider for what horse is making possible (rather than rider). Rider never distinguishes between the horse's eye and his or her own. Rider keeps moving up.

One day, horse misjudges. Spectators can see it coming from way out, but rider can't because rider has been buffaloed into believing either 1.) s/he can see a distance (and ride to it) or 2.) s/he doesn't need to.

Isn't it possible that that is one of the problems that may be causing serious falls? It's partnership, but what if one of the partners hasn't read all the terms of the contract? When one defaults, is the other truly ready to make the decision about what to do next? And, most importantly, who reviews the contract for this partnership? Is that person (coach/trainer) going to be honest about it--both in general and concerning the specifics, such as "can she ride that accurately (as accurately as the course demands, that is) on this horse?

Pwynn, your skills at analysis are clearly getting finer and finer in defining the issues we're facing...its illuminating the fact that at this point whoa may be the only answer - Reed asked for an imposed interim in UL eventing until some critical questions have valid answers...this thread keeps helping me understand the layers of thinking that are going to be required for addressing what is happening in eventing.

Thanks, Pat, for your thoughtful, respectful replies to all these ideas. :cool:

[RealityCheck]

Pwynn, I’m going to have to agree on the different but parallel tracks idea! But bear with me while I try to clarify my post as well…

“My essential argument is that the technicality of today's courses means that riders need to have an eye, the ability to ride accurately to a specific take-off point due to the conditions before or after the fence.”

Absolutely. I am definitely not arguing about this! The way you describe having a good eye, though, also encompasses another very important aspect of being successful-that is, having the ability to produce the appropriate canter or gallop for that fence, with the right speed, balance, and impulsion. I can gallop down to a vertical faced table and see the correct take off point all day, but if I can’t manipulate my horse’s canter to actually arrive at that point, it’s all in vain.

I feel like we’re straying from the OP’s point, though. In terms of horses being able to take care of themselves, I think it all comes down to experience. There has been a great deal of talk, due to recent events, about moving up the levels without sufficient experience (which is certainly a good thing, and I wholeheartedly agree with more stringent qualifications.) However, what I took from the OP’s post and what I agree with is that horses must also have experience in jumping from imperfect distances, because even the best of the best will miss sometimes. The way I see it, eventing is a partnership, and although the great event riders almost never miss, I think that the truly great eventing horses have enough ability to think for themselves (plus enough raw talent and ability!) that in the off chance their rider does miss, they’ll be OK.

“Twenty years later, and I have not forgotten that. See why I push this point as perhaps the distinguishing trait of the "top event riders" and the damaging deficiency, perhaps, of ones who get into trouble?”

Again, absolutely. But I think the discrepancy we’re facing is that I’m not really talking about the “top event riders” in this thread, but rather the “top event horses” and the “top event trainers” who produce them.

ETA: I just realized how to work the "quote function", sorry all!

[ToucheToujour]

I evented at the lower levels, went Training once at an unrecognized Plantation event. Anyone who has evented lower levels at Plantation on Dennis's courses knows that they ride very well, forward, inviting, etc. There really aren't too many technical questions. In fact, I think I really "learned on course" there as my options for schooling xcountry were very limited. But I was a teen on a mare who had not evented before and despite that, she got me out of trouble because she was, by nature, a practical horse with a self preservation button.

I could lose everything: reins, stirrups, be hanging off her side, etc (I ski and in skiing we'd call this a yardsale--best done in public, under the liftlines or in the eventing equivalent at the water) and yet, she would rebalance, reevaluate and decide whether we were good to go or not. I had a stop cross country once (Novice) because I had allllll sorts of speed to a solid log oxer (Fox Hill, DVCTA) and about six strides out, realized I had no balance, no horse, and no half halt. The mare stopped because we WOULD have flipped over it. My only other stop cross country (training) was bad footing and sliding chest first from one element into the other. The mare stopped. I sat still and she OFFERED to jump but I realized that it was likely she'd hang a knee and turned away.

I shouldn't have gone Training when I did. I was coming off the event where she had a stop and then a tendon injury and it was only our fourth event. I was an unorganized, tense, nervous rider with little experience on a mare recuperating from an injury with equally little experience. In retrospect, I was lucky.

However, it was "being a kid" that gave my mare the skills that she needed to haul my arse out of trouble. Galloping helter skelter all over Chester County, riding down roads, through neighborhoods, through people's yards and gardens (sorry!!), following deer paths in the woods, riding bareback halter leadrope, herding other horses, opening and shutting gates from horseback, etc that made my horse versatile. She could turn on the dime, stop on a dime, had excellent brakes, whoa'd off my voice, was used to me hanging off her side or not having stirrups, or being in crappy footing. Not that I recommend somewhat reckless kid riding, but I think that having fun on my horse, giving her experiences outside of eventing AND having a horse with a natural self preservation button was EXTREMELY helpful for me as a young rider.

I have a Thoroughbred now who has not an ounce of self preservation in him. He will go to the moon and back for me, and with me, but there's not a bone in his body that says "I'm going too fast, I have no balance, I shouldn't try that." Not one. I'm a pretty bold person on a cross country course but I'd be petrified to take this horse above Baby Novice because I don't trust him to get me out of trouble if I needed him to be smart and reliable. I think he'd probably kill me or himself or both just because he's a people pleaser who doesn't care how he gets it done as long as he gets it done.

[lstevenson]

I've gotten the feeling from the opposing side that they feel they shouldn't have to.



I don't think anyone here has said that riders should never work on their eyes. Just that they should ALSO train their horses to think for themselves. So that when their eye misses the horse can take care of himself.

With the increased submission and control required with higher level dressage, and the fact that riders tend to school for absolute precision over jumps ALL of the time, the horses' natural inclination to take care of himself seems to be diminishing.

And horses can be VERY good at figuring out how to stay on their feet if the rider lets them figure things out in schooling situations. Have you ever noticed that steeplechase horses almost never fall after they have lost their riders and are running the course loose? They usually have no trouble whatsoever figuring out how to jump each obstacle in front of them or finding the optimal takeoff spot. Even at the daunting "Beecher's Brook" with the huge drop in the Grand National.

Again, my take on this is that riders should be spending some time TRAINING and DEVELOPING their horse's eye and instincts at home. Then the rider can and should place the horse right as much as possible on x-c, but the horse will still KNOW how to get himself out of trouble when his rider gets it wrong.

Almost every rider misses at least once on course. Wouldn't it be nice if the horse knew what to do to save himself when that happens? That skill, which comes naturally to most, needs to be practiced and not subdued by constant domination when in training at home.

Riders should of course always ride to the best of their ability and make sure that the horse is on the right line, is balanced, and has the right amount of impulsion and length of stride for each situation. I just don't see where anyone here has said to just sit there and do nothing and let the horse do it all like you seem to be suggesting. Like most issues a happy medium is probably the most ideal.

[TB or not TB?]

TB, I know you meant to lighten things up a bit with that, but I have to admit to being annoyed by it. I'm like (oh, I can't remember who it was--on the rider responsibility thread)...I'm more than a little angry about the accidents and bad press. I've spent fully 30 years of my life loving this sport and I am pissed that it is getting a bum rap. And I'm pissed at those who are causing it to get this bum rap and pissed at the conditions that are causing the bum rap. I want to get to the bottom of it, not gloss it over. I welcome a frank discussion about specifics, not some generalities that shuffle the blame around and argue pie-in-the-sky idealism. Again, I'm sorry for coming off this way: It's late, I'm sleep deprived (that damn mare better foal tonight), and I'm fed up with vague, subjective, simplistic arguments.

Actually I was only being half facetious. How do you propose to police an entire sport for something as subjective as "who can see a distance?" Scope out trainers, monitor who is telling their kids they are awesome but really they can't ride their way out of a paper bag? It would become a witch hunt in no time flat.

Part of understanding the sport is understanding what we can and cannot change, and what we cannot monitor. There are ALWAYS going to be people who do stupid things, especially with horses. There are always going to be people who move up too quickly, or who really think they can ride Rolex because of a few clean scores. It's not right, and certainly not fair to the rest of us who aren't morons, but this isn't the Spanish Inquisition.

On the other hand, a lot of other ideas have been thrown around already on how to make Rolex safer. One I liked was to make it invitational, where folks with a qualifying record could submit an application to be reviewed by a panel (this would include having the panel watch them at competitions to evaluate competency).

You can't protect people from themselves, and I don't know that it's anyone's job to. However, I still putforth that people should not have to die for their mistakes, and hence I will still work protect them on the other end, with collapsible fences and data collection.

[ToucheToujour]

I evented at the lower levels, went Training once at an unrecognized Plantation event. Anyone who has evented lower levels at Plantation on Dennis's courses knows that they ride very well, forward, inviting, etc. There really aren't too many technical questions. In fact, I think I really "learned on course" there as my options for schooling xcountry were very limited. But I was a teen on a mare who had not evented before and despite that, she got me out of trouble because she was, by nature, a practical horse with a self preservation button.

I could lose everything: reins, stirrups, be hanging off her side, etc (I ski and in skiing we'd call this a yardsale--best done in public, under the liftlines or in the eventing equivalent at the water) and yet, she would rebalance, reevaluate and decide whether we were good to go or not. I had a stop cross country once (Novice) because I had allllll sorts of speed to a solid log oxer (Fox Hill, DVCTA) and about six strides out, realized I had no balance, no horse, and no half halt. The mare stopped because we WOULD have flipped over it. My only other stop cross country (training) was bad footing and sliding chest first from one element into the other. The mare stopped. I sat still and she OFFERED to jump but I realized that it was likely she'd hang a knee and turned away.

I shouldn't have gone Training when I did. I was coming off the event where she had a stop and then a tendon injury and it was only our fourth event. I was an unorganized, tense, nervous rider with little experience on a mare recuperating from an injury with equally little experience. In retrospect, I was lucky.

However, it was "being a kid" that gave my mare the skills that she needed to haul my arse out of trouble. Galloping helter skelter all over Chester County, riding down roads, through neighborhoods, through people's yards and gardens (sorry!!), following deer paths in the woods, riding bareback halter leadrope, herding other horses, opening and shutting gates from horseback, etc that made my horse versatile. She could turn on the dime, stop on a dime, had excellent brakes, whoa'd off my voice, was used to me hanging off her side or not having stirrups, or being in crappy footing. Not that I recommend somewhat reckless kid riding, but I think that having fun on my horse, giving her experiences outside of eventing AND having a horse with a natural self preservation button was EXTREMELY helpful for me as a young rider.

I have a Thoroughbred now who has not an ounce of self preservation in him. He will go to the moon and back for me, and with me, but there's not a bone in his body that says "I'm going too fast, I have no balance, I shouldn't try that." Not one. I'm a pretty bold person on a cross country course but I'd be petrified to take this horse above Baby Novice because I don't trust him to get me out of trouble if I needed him to be smart and reliable. I think he'd probably kill me or himself or both just because he's a people pleaser who doesn't care how he gets it done as long as he gets it done.

[RealityCheck]

I don't think anyone here has said that riders should never work on their eyes. Just that they should ALSO train their horses to think for themselves. So that when their eye misses the horse can take care of himself.

With the increased submission and control required with higher level dressage, and the fact that riders tend to school for absolute precision over jumps ALL of the time, the horses' natural inclination to take care of himself seems to be diminishing.

And horses can be VERY good at figuring out how to stay on their feet if the rider lets them figure things out in schooling situations. Have you ever noticed that steeplechase horses almost never fall after they have lost their riders and are running the course loose? They usually have no trouble whatsoever figuring out how to jump each obstacle in front of them or finding the optimal takeoff spot. Even at the daunting "Beecher's Brook" with the huge drop in the Grand National.

Again, my take on this is that riders should be spending some time TRAINING and DEVELOPING their horse's eye and instincts at home. Then the rider can and should place the horse right as much as possible on x-c, but the horse will still KNOW how to get himself out of trouble when his rider gets it wrong.

Almost every rider misses at least once on course. Wouldn't it be nice if the horse knew what to do to save himself when that happens? That skill, which comes naturally to most, needs to be practiced and not subdued by constant domination when in training at home.

Riders should of course always ride to the best of their ability and make sure that the horse is on the right line, is balanced, and has the right amount of impulsion and length of stride for each situation. I just don't see where anyone here has said to just sit there and do nothing and let the horse do it all like you seem to be suggesting. Like most issues a happy medium is probably the most ideal.

Amen!

[JER]

Lucinda Green wrote a very interesting column for the Telegraph a few years ago on the difference between British and French steeplechasers. For those of you who don't follow 'real' racing, French horses launched a very successful invasion of NH racing at the beginning of the decade; now some of the big stars of jump racing are French-bred horses who started their careers in France.

Lucinda Green: "French horses are trained to look after themselves" (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2001/09/30/solucy01.xml)

[JAGold]

Thanks for that post, lstevenson. I agree with what you are saying.

[TB or not TB?]

lstevenson - that was very well said. Words can sometimes be construed ridiculously, and you put it back on target.

JER - that is a fascinating article. Here is a quote that really struck me:

In sharp contrast, the French horses are jumped day in and day out by anybody who happens to be on their backs. Never does a horse have a better opportunity to learn to look after himself than when ridden by someone who genuinely does not have a clue and is prepared just to sit there and close his eyes.

[pwynnnorman]

Actually I was only being half facetious. How do you propose to police an entire sport for something as subjective as "who can see a distance?" Scope out trainers, monitor who is telling their kids they are awesome but really they can't ride their way out of a paper bag? It would become a witch hunt in no time flat.

IMO, TB, if we don't acknowledge it, we can't address it.

Consider this (not as the answer to your question, but rather as more to consider): What is the coach's responsibility in developing horse and rider? Is that not where this issue comes into play? What does ICP teach/guide/expect in this area? What kind of messages are being sent out to riders about this issue?

My fear is the "kick on" message. Eventers are known for using gymnastics to develop the horse's independence. Good riders will even put a horse in wrong intentionally--like too deep, for example--so it sharpens itself up. The same horse I mentioned before, when he was a greenie doing Schooling Jumpers, was ridden by a very skilled rider. I watched her warm him up by bringing him in to a comfortable distance, and then a long one, and then a tight one. He came in third in a class of 22 at an A-rated show.

THAT is a prepared rider on a well-schooled horse.

Would that that were the goal of everyone. Wouldn't that make things safer as horse-rider teams moved up the levels? If rider could aim for that level of skill and that level of responsiveness from the horse. I do believe, based on what he has stated, that that was the way Phillip developed Connaught, who seemed to me (by Phillip's statements) to tend to be a rather "dependent" ride. Indeed, it may also be why he has now said that Connaught may NOT be the horse he takes to Hong Kong.

I don't know, though. I'm speculating from a distance there. It would be very interesting to hear his perspective, especially since he has ridden so many different types of horses successfully.

Anyway, though, just because you have the skill, doesn't mean you have to use it. So is this a milestone along the road to the top? Is this, perhaps, something that is getting skipped over increasingly often and to the detriment of the sport?

As to the steeplechase horses, I say again, please, can we not shy away from complexity here? Can we keep in the backs of our minds the whole course design issue that is connected to this subject? Comparing steeplechasing to eventing TODAY is like comparing apples to oranges concerning this subject. Look, if you could just leave the horse to its own devices all the time, why bother walking the course? Is it wise to be prepared to answer some of the questions on a test, but not all of them? Is it wise for course designers to ask questions that someone in the partnership of horse and rider can't answer? The two issues are interrelated and, IMO, should both be considered in light of what has been occurring.

[HECS04]

Ok, first off, this thread has been very informative! I have enjoyed reading it (I have not made it all the way through as I just got my tonsils out and the pain meds are about to knock me out). I do have a question though...it seems to be the consensus that we SHOULD train our horses over odd distances, but my question then is....how often? How often should we school over these odd distances? Is this something we should do every time we jump or every other time or a few times a month? Just wondering how often this needs to be enforced in order to make it "natural" for them?

[SEPowell]

As to the steeplechase horses, I say again, please, can we not shy away from complexity here? Can we keep in the backs of our minds the whole course design issue that is connected to this subject? Comparing steeplechasing to eventing TODAY is like comparing apples to oranges concerning this subject.

If aspects of steeplechasing contribute to the long term solution it should be included in the discussion.

Look, if you could just leave the horse to its own devices all the time, why bother walking the course?

From my understanding of the responses, no one's advocating leaving the horse to his own devices all the time.

[cyberbay]

Well, I didn't read all the posts (apologies), but if you have all those traits in place, mentioned by the OP -- direction, speed, impulsion, balance -- you will see a distance. There is no magic to seeing a distance. Those are the traits, esp. impulsion + balance, for seeing a distance, and if the rider has those in place, it will result in a nice, workmanlike distance and subsequent jump. The hbasics are simple to understand, but do take a bit of practise to instill in both horse and rider.

We have all watched horses jump, and can all recognize an approach that will result in a nice jump by the horse or those approaches that result in a weak, chippy or long, distance. It's all a matter of having those characteristics in place. Jumping is a result of having your flat work in place, and it's not about such refinements as 'being on the bit,' or a turn on the haunches. It's about a nice working balance, high responsiveness to the go and whoa, and being able to maintain those qualities throughout the length of the course. Watch the very best show-jumping riders, and they are moving at a good clip around the course. In fact, they could xc-jump very well, b/c they, as well as the very good xc riders, know how to put the biomechanics (balance, etc.) of the horse in an optimal position for optimal jumping. They just never stray from those basics.

So, I'm not so sure I can agree with the OP. The characteristics for good jumping have never changed. Now, if the OP is referring to an over-refinement (nitpicking at the qualities instead of just maintaining) of these characteristics on approach to an xc fence ...

[frugalannie]

Jiffy and PWynn, great posts and analysis. Still processing your thoughts, but also impressed by the discussion in general.

[Carol Ames]

HAS ANYONE SEEN a statistic on number of riders starting per :confused:fatality? I do realize that statistics are able to show only one element; still,I would be curious about this

[LisaB]

I've seen a lot of pro's horses being sold to YR's or AA's where the horse doesn't even know water. They were slammed through without really learning to trust themselves. That YR or AA thinks they suck! Drives me nuts!
And there are VERY few riders that can get away with this. And the other riders that THINK they are that talented, fool themselves and their horses.
There are plenty of trainers who teach their horses slowly and let them think for themselves and the trick is to help them when needed and the horse accepts that. I saw Bruce Davidson do this at a * once. Saw the horse clocking along and then didn't know what to do at a bank complex and saw Bruce do his thing.

[Kcisawesome]

Hmm, this thread is VERY interesting to me, as this is an issue I am currently working on with my horse. "Kc" has always been the best at saving me. With the wierdest lines and worst of mistakes, she always has had that cat-like reflex to get out and over the jump safley. But as the jumps are getting bigger on us I have been working on making less mistakes and teaching her to listen to me more. But doing this WITHOUT sacraficing her quick thinking. In other words, I have to ride well enough to set her up for succsess, so that when I do make mistakes, she will be in a good enough positon(speed/balance/impulsion) to save me.

One thing I wonder about, is that many riders, and not just upper level riders, spend huge amounts of time in the arena. without acctually getting the horse outside. this is for many reasons, some do not have space, some are "saving their horse from the dangers of footing" Some are trying to up their dressage scores..etc. But, although I have never foxhunted, I have spent many, many hours galloping my event horse around on pretty rough trails. My horse has learned not just how to navigate, but how to SAFLEY navigate hills (up and down), bad footing, logs, branches, ditches, creeks, odd animals, weather, etc... And these skills have benifited her in competition SO MUCH. I take my greenie out on a loggin trail, put him on a loose rein trot and hold on. He learns so much by himself from these rides, when I first did this, he was all over the place. Now he confidently finds his own distances to fallen logs, he knows to keep his head up on the hills and how to place his feet in a deep spot. He also has an extra boost of confidence because he figured it out himself! And this shows up in his dressage (and stadium) scores better balanced, more focused and has a much better awareness of his own body.

[Jiffy Read]

Certainly some horses are hurried through the levels of eventing, but I disagree with the timetable for advancement proposed by some earlier in this thread. Before I go on, let me first say that decisions regarding moving up need to be made on an individual basis. Every horse is different, each situation unique. My own methods – as well as those of any other rider – by no means represent a blueprint to be followed. Riders, with their trainers, must determine the pace at which their horses progress through the levels, dependent upon experience, ability, and the comfort of both the horse and the rider.

Beginner Novice is a fairly recent addition to recognized events. Previously it was offered only at unrecognized events, and was entered mostly by junior and amateur riders who found Novice too daunting a challenge. Young horses displaying the potential for the upper levels were started at Novice or higher. I still start young horses at Novice. The fences are low enough to trot, the questions are straightforward and inviting, and unless you go too fast it's hard to get in much trouble. When I was bringing along upper level horses my basic formula was: four Novices, four Trainings, and then up to Prelim. Horses would get a full year of Prelim, another at Intermediate, and, if they had the scope, move on to Advanced.

I recall Jack LeGoff sharing his guideline: get the horse to Prelim, and then keep him there for two solid years. Skip Intermediate entirely, as Jack contended that the jumps at Prelim were challenging enough to educate the horse, but still forgiving enough that if the horse got itself into trouble, he stood a good chance of getting himself out. The Preliminary level was where horses were able to learn from their mistakes while still gaining confidence for the larger challenges they would face at Advanced.

Regarding the move up to Prelim, the suggestion of a year at both Novice and at Training constitutes a very conservative pace. Nothing wrong with being conservative, but a more assertive approach should not be condemned as hurried.

As to whether horses are really ready for the Preliminary level at the minimum age of 5, it depends on the individual horse. A question was raised about whether Warmblood breeds, on average, require more time to mature than do Thoroughbreds. Certainly it is a question worthy of consideration, particularly as some Warmblood breeds tend to be less “quick” than Thoroughbreds, and I’ve known my share of Warmbloods that haven’t achieved their full height or physical prowess until age six. However, as insightful a question as that might be, it lacks relevance to the hypothesis put forth by my original post, which is that technically adept riders are robbing their horses of the opportunity to develop the necessary reflexes for successfully navigating the cross country.

[Saskatoonian]

Thank you so much for your posts.

[sspeight]

I agree completely.

[cyberbay]

Moving up the levels I think has also as much to do with the horse's level of education to the rider!! Nothing to do with the horse's age, but everything to do with its responsiveness to the rider and its ability to read a jump.

If the horse is not reliably in front of the leg; if the horse fights the rider to a detrimental degree to be re-balanced; if the horse drops behind the aids at predictable sections of the xc course; if the horse is dull to any of the aids, then yikes, don't move up a level. Get those skills that determine xc success in place before taking on more difficult jumps, more difficult lines, more difficult terrain in a competition setting.

You can achieve all of this in a schooling setting, practising the more difficult jumps, practising at different times of day, and then when the horse and rider are acting like a team, then go to competition, or move up to the next level.

I'm not so sure if the Prelim courses in Jack LeGoff's day are the same we have available on Prelim courses today -- not saying it's not so, but would be curious to see if they're the same type of test.

[MotherGoose]

I am intrigued by this thread, and this is my first time posting. Jiffy and Kcisawesome, I very much agree with you. When I bring a horse along, I teach them first unmounted how to handle their feet and where their bodies are in space in relationship to other objects, then I get on, work on obstacles in the ring, and then out on the trails and in the fields, working on a long rein while I stay in balance on their backs and allowing them to learn by making mistakes and self-correcting. For cross country, I first teach them the skills they need to jump safely in new circumstances, and then I give them less and less input until they fell confident in reading the jump's question on their own and answering it.

To me, there is a difference between obedience and cooperation. According to my dictionary, obedience is doing what one is told; cooperation is working in a helpful way with others. To me, cooperation implies a willingness to participate that may not be present with obedience. In my opinion, eventing is all about PARTNERSHIP. My horse and I, through all the work we've done, develop a TRUST in one another and our various skills. He knows that I will support and guide him through a new situation or question--not force him to do it. He also knows that he has a responsibility for his own balance and the placement of his feet. In our partnership, my task is this guidance and support. His is to carry me safely through w/ a minimum of interference on my part--and to get us out of trouble when I make a mistake or the footing traps us. My job is to always be learning how to carry myself better on a horse and give him that guidance and support in ever more subtle and less intrusive ways.

When I was competing at the international level back in the 80's, I spent plenty of time at the Preliminary level like Jiffy brought up. I made sure that we could answer every question at that level, and I took all the harder options to make sure that we would be able to answer those questions safely when we moved up. I taught my horse that there were three different ways to balance for jumping: stadium, cross country, and brush fences. He learned how to move fluidly and in rhythm between those 3 styles. I taught him to precisely follow my eye first at a walk, then working up to a gallop, eventually being able to jump a single kitchen chair in the middle of a huge field out of a galloping stride. I spent as long as it took to put these skills in place.

As I worked my way up the levels, I called the organizers of lower level events and asked them what types of questions/footing/tracks were on their courses and made my entry decisions based on what I felt we needed at that time.


As has been mentioned before, rhythm and balance were Jack Le Goff's creed. He preached them above all else. He also taught us to make corrections to a horse's balance and stride BEFORE the last 3 strides to a fence, and then sit down and ride the horse forward to the fence from there. I saw excellent riding at Rolex, and I saw scary riding. I was surprised to see some riders taking horses back every stride to the jumps; others slowing down long before complexes to show jump them through, and then galloping fast between fences to make up the time. It takes an enormous amount of muscle strength to power out over large bounces w/out a balanced momentum coming into the fence.

Yes, I feel that today's courses are more technical, and that some jumps are grouped so that spectators can see them better. Could my horse of the past compete successfully now? Yes. I walked that course and thought how much he would have enjoyed it. He could run and jump, AND he was handy. Back then I went to experts in the show jumping world and learned how to use grids to teach my horse how to back himself off a fence. I let him go down to grids at small heights on a loose rein and make the mistakes that taught him that maybe he didn't know everything, and maybe going fast was different than going forward. When a horse backs himself off a fence, he can still use his scope to power out. When a rider is taking back to the fence, the horse is restricted in his motion. I went to classical dressage experts and learned the biomechanical science of movement from the hind legs and staying in front of the rider's leg. And as Kcisawesome said, those lessons applied to all 3 phases.

Didn't mean to run on for so long, but as Jimmy Wofford said in his Chronicle article, an upper level event horse is a warrior. He works WITH his rider. He has confidence in his abilities and his skills, and he's always thinking and able to respond in the moment. He understands the Game. He knows about dressage, flowing, and dancing. He understands how to conserve & meter his energy cross country. He knows to be careful over the poles of stadium jumping. The rider and he work as one unit. Through all the years of preparation, they have become a team who knows and trusts one another. The horse does not resent the rider or his guidance in any phase because he has come to understand that the rider is doing his best to support the horse in displaying his talents and is guiding him in accomplishing it. I was delighted to see some of those teams at Rolex this year--and I pray that I see more who take the time to develop such teamwork in the future.

[asterix]

This has been SUCH an educational thread. I am in agreement with much that has been said here.

Last weekend I did my second prelim on my warmblood, bred-and-raised-and-trained for dressage, wonderful wonderful amateur's horse. It took us a very long time to get to prelim -- a good two years at Training. When I bought him he had, at age 9, just given up life as a dressage horse (it made him miserable) and been introduced to jumping (via, among other things, a couple of fox hunts).

This horse did NOT think for himself, was NOT naturally bold, and was very, very careful and obedient. I am a very modestly talented amateur who had barely gone Training, with terrific and very conservative instruction. We ride out (and out, and out, over all kinds of terrain) whenever we can.

We have developed a real partnership. On course last weekend, I found that when I rode strongly to something hard, he responded. When I whiffed (and I certainly whiffed, both to a fly fence and to a combination), he had gained the confidence and the skill to take over and sort it out. I have had to become a much better rider, and he has had to become a much better event horse.

I have recently seen pros taking greenies out at prelim -- the difference between those horses' musculature and ability for self carriage/balance and mine is dramatic. The horses are super athletic, brave, and given absolutely brilliant rides, although they still sometimes have dramatic misses. No doubt they will make it to the 3 or 4 star level. But, you know what? I think my horse is probably a safer, better event horse at the Preliminary level.

I wish that the economics and character of the sport at the upper levels allowed for a slightly more prolonged and sedate preparation of the horses destined for "more than amateur".

[RunForIt]

This has been SUCH an educational thread. I am in agreement with much that has been said here.

Last weekend I did my second prelim on my warmblood, bred-and-raised-and-trained for dressage, wonderful wonderful amateur's horse. It took us a very long time to get to prelim -- a good two years at Training. When I bought him he had, at age 9, just given up life as a dressage horse (it made him miserable) and been introduced to jumping (via, among other things, a couple of fox hunts).

This horse did NOT think for himself, was NOT naturally bold, and was very, very careful and obedient. I am a very modestly talented amateur who had barely gone Training, with terrific and very conservative instruction. We ride out (and out, and out, over all kinds of terrain) whenever we can.

We have developed a real partnership. On course last weekend, I found that when I rode strongly to something hard, he responded. When I whiffed (and I certainly whiffed, both to a fly fence and to a combination), he had gained the confidence and the skill to take over and sort it out. I have had to become a much better rider, and he has had to become a much better event horse.

I have recently seen pros taking greenies out at prelim -- the difference between those horses' musculature and ability for self carriage/balance and mine is dramatic. The horses are super athletic, brave, and given absolutely brilliant rides, although they still sometimes have dramatic misses. No doubt they will make it to the 3 or 4 star level. But, you know what? I think my horse is probably a safer, better event horse at the Preliminary level.

I wish that the economics and character of the sport at the upper levels allowed for a slightly more prolonged and sedate preparation of the horses destined for "more than amateur".

Congratulations!!!! Its hard to sit back and wait on them to get really fit, smart, and "ready" at each level - especially when you want to compete. Your thinking is where I'm headed with my horses. Have watched a friend of mine bring along her Tb/Irish gelding s-l-o-w-l-y...up to prelim - Guiness is a XC machine now. He could've gone from BN to Training easily in one year, but owner and trainer gave him nearly a year at BN and Novice, a little over a year at Training with LOTS of competing, and Prelim has been a piece of cake for Guinny. His only problems have come after a couple of Intermediates with trainer, who then had an accident on a green horse WALKING, out of commision for months - Guiness got quite cheeky, but Mike Winter got that fixed.

Anyway - way to go! keep us all posted. :cool:

[Nightlace]

As a dressage rider who enjoys trailriding and natural horsemanship, I have been following this discussion with interest. I have been to every Rolex, beginning in 1978. I have seen the good, the bad, and the very ugly.

I admire the riding skills, bravery, gorgeous horses, and wonderful jumping efforts of the well-oiled teams. I think event riders have to be so knowledgeable and skilled to compete at that level. That said, I have seen deaths and serious injuries at Rolex.

I absolutely agree. prior and proper preparation of event horses and fences that collapse on impact could be very helpful. However, I think some tragedies have been caused by the riders' determination to finish the course, failure to listen to their horse, bravery (over-confidence), and adrenalin overpowering good judgment.

For example, I saw one top level event rider crack his shoulder when he went and his horse didn't. The horse, who had been moved up with special permission, was clearly saying, "I can't do that fence. I'm not going to do that fence. I'm scared" as soon as the horse came up the incline and saw the obstacle. The rider, just as clearly, was saying, "Yes, you can. And you will." The horse was clearly not going forward to the fence and was clearly not going to to take it. So the horse refused, and the rider crashed into the fence. While the rider was clearly in pain, he remounted and was going to give the fence another go. Fortunately, someone persuaded the rider to withdraw. The rider suffered a broken shoulder, as I recall.

Another year, I was watching at a straight-forward fence near the end of Rolex with 4 surgeons and one ER physician. We watched a horse lope toward the prior fence and refuse it. The rider kicked him over it and galloped on to our fence. Both of them looked exhausted. The horse chested the fence and flipped over on his rider. The doctors immediately rushed to the rider's aid, but said later that they could not have saved her, even if they had had an ER room right there.

I have seen other accidents that looked to me like the riders just weren't willing to listen to their horses and say, "It's not our day today" and call it quits. I applaud the riders who are brave enough and savvy enough to withdraw when they start having difficulties.

[MotherGoose]

Yes, yes, and yes! Taking the time to become a Team and have a 2 way communication between horse and rider who both LISTEN and act on what they experience is vital in this sport. Eventing is not a casual sport at ANY level. Occasionally I'll pop in to see what is going on in eventing locally, and can't stay long due to the scary riding I see. I hear people mention that they want to "try" eventing like they can just go from the ring to jumping over unlevel terrain in wide open spaces, and I shudder and do my best to educate them. It takes time and focus for both horse and rider to learn how to balance up and down hills. I can't count the times I've seen horses galloping up hills by pulling themselves up from their shoulders rather than pushing from the hindquarters. By the time they get to the top, they are exhausted, and can't get their shoulders up to clear the fence and there comes the fall you could see waiting to happen half way up the hill. Riders who lean on their horses necks in the hunter world don't realize that they can't do that eventing. The weight has to be in the pelvis!

[MotherGoose]

It's been a while since I evented at the upper levels, and I no longer have a current rule book--is there any rule about a horse and rider have to have competed as a team for a certain number of months before entering a *** or **** event? That seems like an essential ingredient to me. Since teamwork is such an integral part of eventing, catch riding doesn't seem like a safe option to me at any level.

[snoopy]

It's been a while since I evented at the upper levels, and I no longer have a current rule book--is there any rule about a horse and rider have to have competed as a team for a certain number of months before entering a *** or **** event? That seems like an essential ingredient to me. Since teamwork is such an integral part of eventing, catch riding doesn't seem like a safe option to me at any level.




http://www.usef.org/contentPage2.aspx?id=ruleshome


Hope this helps...

[Jazzy Lady]

It seems to be that every horse/rider combo hit a level where they plateau for a little bit, need to spend some more time there to get good and confident before moving up. Some horses can bounce through the levels faster than other horses, but still have that one level that is more of a learning curve than others. For me it has been preliminary. My horse has probably done like 20 prelims now, I have done 14 and a CCI* and we'll be doing our first intermediate xc round this sunday. So for me prelim was that level. Training was easy, but prelim asked enough questions that it truly helped build our partnership and trust in each other. So because of the skill of the pro to be able to get that horse right away, are they skipping past that area with the horses? Are the horses being successful because everything is right and not truly learning the process by trial and error, or by thinking for themselves. Where is their plateau where they need to spend some time?

I don't know if this makes sense to anyone other than myself. hahaha

[fooler]

It seems to be that every horse/rider combo hit a level where they plateau for a little bit, need to spend some more time there to get good and confident before moving up. Some horses can bounce through the levels faster than other horses, but still have that one level that is more of a learning curve than others. For me it has been preliminary. My horse has probably done like 20 prelims now, I have done 14 and a CCI* and we'll be doing our first intermediate xc round this sunday. So for me prelim was that level. Training was easy, but prelim asked enough questions that it truly helped build our partnership and trust in each other. So because of the skill of the pro to be able to get that horse right away, are they skipping past that area with the horses? Are the horses being successful because everything is right and not truly learning the process by trial and error, or by thinking for themselves. Where is their plateau where they need to spend some time?

I don't know if this makes sense to anyone other than myself. hahaha

I understand you completely!
I watched a young excellent horseman start a home bred & take him to advance. They were so successful they were long listed for 2 years.
Their only plateau level was prelim (after 2 novices and 3 trainings). By the way, they won 3 out of the first 4 prelims, she had a bad fall due to footing at the 4th prelim, then they placed 4th at their next outing, NAYR - 1st 3Day for both.
She was and is an amazing rider/horsewoman and he was born to event.
She started this horse's full sister who spent 1 full season at training and 2 seasons at prelim before everything clicked. Very talented and clever mare, just learned differently from her brother.
So yes, the rider is experience is only part of the equation - the horse has to learn the sport as well.
Horses, just like people, learn at different rates and reach their 'plateau' at different levels.

The question is, will we allow riders and/or horses time to really understand the sport at their 'plateau'.
Then advance to the next level or accept they can not advance due their own or their horse's limitations.