Question on Sylvia Loch

[dressagemom]

I very good friend up in Canada has told me that their group is thinking about bringing Sylvia Loch over to do a clinic. He asked me what I thought. I had to be honest and say that I did not know much about this lady at all. So - I am asking the dressage gurus on the COTH board their thoughts.

[slc2]

It's either a love or hate thing. Me? I think she writes well, but that's about it.

[Lusoluv]

I LOVE her books - really influenced my riding for the better. Rode with her in Europe...Personally, I would stick to the books or videos.

[oldbag]

No, she's not a trainer or a rider.

[Thomas_1]

Sylvia lives just down the road from me and I know her (and her horses) very well.

Two of my staff used to work for her prior to coming to me. (including one who's a member on this board)

What precisely do you want to know???

[dressagemom]

To be honest, I am not familiar with this lady and wanted to know more about her teaching style and her training philosphy. My friend was also wondering what type of a draw she might be as far as people coming to audit the clinic/sessions.

[Melissa.Hare.Jones]

Sylvia Loch has authored some good books - The Classical Rider and Dressage in Lightness among them. Reading them would be a good start towards finding out about her teaching philosophy.

[merrygoround]

The photos of her riding in Dressage Today were not very complimentary.

She writes very well, and I found "The Classical Seat" a great breath saver. If you give someone the book to read, you can save yourself a lot of talking, initially, at least' ;) Reading it doesn't translate into being able to do it. :no:

[Thomas_1]

To be honest, I am not familiar with this lady and wanted to know more about her teaching style and her training philosphy. Sylvia trained in Portugal with her late husband Lord Loch and also with Arthur Kuttos

She's an advocate for traditional classical training to produce high school dressage horses and mainly has had Lusitanos. She's had some nice ones too. Still has.

My friend was also wondering what type of a draw she might be as far as people coming to audit the clinic/sessions. She's quite a prolific writer and over here tends to draw a following from her books. She is quite a character and her clinics tend to be very hands on with her doing a ridden demonstration and talking through what she's doing and why.

I honestly don't know what her following is like in the USA though I know she sells well over there and I also know she's been there before and did a joint demo with Reiner Klimke so I presume she's got her "fans" there. Though obviously that demo was a long time ago .

[egontoast]

Thomas, no offence intended, but have you watched any of the so-called Classical Seat videos?:cry:

She wears nice hats, however.:)

[goeslikestink]

It's either a love or hate thing. Me? I think she writes well, but that's about it.

one uses knowledge and education well doesnt one in order to write books

[slc2]

Not necessarily does the knowledge and education come from an actual ability to do something well. Often good writing comes out of an academic exposure to knowledge, or from a few fondly remembered riding lessons years and years ago, memories that are more and more distorted as the years go by.

Too, one has to identify when writing isn't actually more than a regurgitation and elaboration of existing texts. There are specific authors who only do that, without a real understanding of the works, and without the ability to actually apply them in a sensible way.

There is such a thing as writing that attracts customers and 'disciples', vs something that is practical and a balanced, effective realistic method of riding and training. The reference to 'classicism' is guaranteed more than any other sort of slant, to bring in 'disciples' rather than 'students'.

Sylvia Loch has, at least sincere, and has made an effort, and has not invented herself in the way many other authors have. There are many authors who pretend to be far, far more than they really are, and who have invented themselves completely. The trouble is that so many people believe them.

Too, many of prominent 'classicists' work in a complete and total vacuum. After a brief period of learning from some highly regarded 'old master' (brief in the timing of learning dressage anyway), they go on to work for years, decades on their own, and since most of them eschew competition, they often have no one watching them from the ground an offering effective criticism for years and years. They get sloppy and incorrect and exaggerated and mannered, just like any of us would. No one can be immune from riding lessons; working in isolation for decades has its effect.

I like most dressage enthusiasts was early on completely intrigued by the classical works and read all of them that I could get my hands on. I was intrigued by the Spanish Riding School and the other similar schools like Saumur and held them to be a preservation of that past classical ideal.

What I didn't realize was that the 'elegance' and 'correctness' and 'lightness' of those horses and riders came out of years and years and years of mistakes and extremely hard work, usually compressed in to a far, far shorter period of time than any amateur rider could possibly hope for, due to daily work under an extremely demanding trainer. Podhajsky, for example, was no shrinking violet. He was actually extremely demanding and his temper was a thing to behold and there was never anything easy or effortless about the program - ever. Spanish Riding school students still measure eachother by comparing how much blood and raw skin they have on their legs after a ride. Charles Harris described it as 'everyone is trying to find a reason to leave without saving face', and around 80% of students LEAVE or are chucked out because they either can't take it or someone else is doing better.

These programs aren't about 'classical ideals' at all, unless you find an intelligent and sensible way to mix those writings with the realities of learning to ride.

Our ideas about how we interpret those classical writings are so, so far off that it is laughable.

We can't dig through the writing style of the time and come up with anything sensibly applied to our own situation, in most cases.

Of course there is a great deal to learn from those writings. I'm not even suggesting that isn't true. I'm saying we have a very, very distorted idea of classical riding and the process involved.

There are a great many writers who have a passion and fascination for a 'classical' ideal in many areas from painting to architecture to ethics to riding. The concept of having something pure that has been handed down through the ages, that is simply about devotion to an ideal, is intriguing in any subject area. Equestrian art has been a subject that has enthralled many people.

What Ive seen over the years is that the classical writings tend to also create a lot of very extreme opinions that lead to very poor riding and training, and a lot of confusion about what is really going on in the training, which tends to be seen as something much more advanced and positive than it really is. Often the problem is that the training simply isn't balanced, and one aspect receives too much emphasis, but there are times when the problems are far, far more fundamental than that.

[Thomas_1]

Thomas, no offence intended, but have you watched any of the so-called Classical Seat videos?:cry:

No I've not. Neither have I ever read anything she's written.

As I say I know her well and have seen her riding regularly and often.

Why do you ask?

[Thomas_1]

Not necessarily does the knowledge and education come from an actual ability to do something well. Often good writing comes out of an academic exposure to knowledge, or from a few fondly remembered riding lessons years and years ago, memories that are more and more distorted as the years go by.

I'm surprised you never saw fit to mention those who neither write well nor have any real knowledge and experience of the subject they write about.

They write whimsical, nonsensical diatribe that's difficult to read and impossible to understand.

Too, one has to identify when writing isn't actually more than a regurgitation and elaboration of existing texts. There are specific authors who only do that, without a real understanding of the works, and without the ability to actually apply them in a sensible way.

There is such a thing as writing that attracts customers and 'disciples', vs something that is practical and a balanced, effective realistic method of riding and training. The reference to 'classicism' is guaranteed more than any other sort of slant, to bring in 'disciples' rather than 'students'.

Sylvia Loch has, at least sincere, and has made an effort, and has not invented herself in the way many other authors have.
There are many authors who pretend to be far, far more than they really are, and who have invented themselves completely. The trouble is that so many people believe them. :eek: Surely not?? I never believe a word you say but I will mention you to Sylvia when I next see her :winkgrin:

Too, many of prominent 'classicists' work in a complete and total vacuum. After a brief period of learning from some highly regarded 'old master' (brief in the timing of learning dressage anyway), they go on to work for years, decades on their own, and since most of them eschew competition, they often have no one watching them from the ground an offering effective criticism for years and years. They get sloppy and incorrect and exaggerated and mannered, just like any of us would. No one can be immune from riding lessons; working in isolation for decades has its effect. Is the above supposed to have anything at all with the topic in hand or with Sylvia in particular???

I like most dressage enthusiasts was early on completely intrigued by the classical works and read all of them that I could get my hands on. I was intrigued by the Spanish Riding School and the other similar schools like Saumur and held them to be a preservation of that past classical ideal.What I didn't realize was that the 'elegance' and 'correctness' and 'lightness' of those horses and riders came out of years and years and years of mistakes and extremely hard work, usually compressed in to a far, far shorter period of time than any amateur rider could possibly hope for, due to daily work under an extremely demanding trainer. Podhajsky, for example, was no shrinking violet. He was actually extremely demanding and his temper was a thing to behold and there was never anything easy or effortless about the program - ever. Spanish Riding school students still measure eachother by comparing how much blood and raw skin they have on their legs after a ride. Charles Harris described it as 'everyone is trying to find a reason to leave without saving face', and around 80% of students LEAVE or are chucked out because they either can't take it or someone else is doing better.

These programs aren't about 'classical ideals' at all, unless you find an intelligent and sensible way to mix those writings with the realities of learning to ride.
Do tell what your actual experience is? Where did you train? What is your competitive experience?

How well did you know those whose names you now drop? Do tell how you managed to meet Podhajsky and Harris and Loch???

[slc2]

No point in responding to most of the prev comments, which are personal jibes and meant to appeal to the gallery rather than being sincere questions or seeking of information or ideas. Thomas has never been required to give a CV of his dressage experience before he expounds here.

Those who are a fan of someone called 'classical' tend to be absolutely rabid in their insitence that everyone who doesn't like their trainer is an ignorant fool. Even so, as far as I know, the situation remains that being a Sylvia fan is not in the Constitional requirements for citizenship of any known country.

Sylvia is probably far less insistent than her 'disciples' about her own perfection and sainthood, and I'm sure she has far purer motives than quite a few other 'classical' trainers. And like most mentally well balanced people, I actually think she'd rather have 'students' than 'disciples'.

Even so, like quite a few others, some who have commented here, I find the actual practice to trail behind the writings.

[magickmeadow]

I have never ridden with Ms. Loch; however, I have found her material interesting, easy to comprehend and helpful. If one does not find a trainer/clinician/rider's information of use then pass it by. I am an old broad, 54 years, and over the years I have taken lessons and clinics from some BN's and some LN's. Some have been helpful and others have not. Often a really superb rider being more of an intuitive horse person is unable to communicate what is needed. On the flip side, some trainers who aren't as showy can tell their student exactly how it should be done and how it should feel. IMO it benefits all of us more if the negative comments are sent PM and the positive pubilized.

[Thomas_1]

Thomas has never been required to give a CV of his dressage experience before he expounds here. I don't hide behind the cloak of anonymity and I've been asked to provide details regarding my experience and have freely so done.

So step up to the plate.

Those who are a fan of someone called 'classical' tend to be absolutely rabid in their insitence that everyone who doesn't like their trainer is an ignorant fool.

I don't know why you said that or even if you thought Sylvia was someone I'm a fan of. If the latter, then read my posts again. I said she's my neighbour and I know her. No more and no less.

Even so, as far as I know, the situation remains that being a Sylvia fan is not in the Constitional requirements for citizenship of any known country. My gosh you have an imagination! Or is this you just going off on one???

Sylvia is probably far less insistent than her 'disciples' about her own perfection and sainthood, and I'm sure she has far purer motives than quite a few other 'classical' trainers. And like most mentally well balanced people, I actually think she'd rather have 'students' than 'disciples'. Why did you think she had disciples blah blah blah blah.

No one said anything of the sort on here. It's all in your mind...... It's those voices in your head again!

Even so, like quite a few others, some who have commented here, I find the actual practice to trail behind the writings. So what exactly is your personal experience of her? Or did you just google her name or pick up a book?

[oldbag]

I used to compete at some the same shows as Sylvia. At affiliated dressage competitions she did really badly. Percentages in the low fifties at elementary and medium.(level 2)

Her horses were always hollow and creeping slowing along. The judges were kind, she should have been marked insufficient (4).

I also came across her at an Andalusian show. Here we had a different story. She won all her classes with Spanish judges. Work out why yourselves. To me it means certain 'Classical' ways of riding are unacceptable to some and what is required by others.:confused:

I also had a heated discussion with her via a dressage magazine. She confirmed herself in this as a fanatical Classicist and closed minded to any other ideas.

She is an eccentric - !;)

[egontoast]

Why do you ask?

because the content of the videos is relevant to the OP's question whereas the bare fact that she lives next door to someone is not. I was replying to your post which just said you knew her well and she lived nearby or some such words and supplied no information which might help the OP with her question.

[~Freedom~]

No point in responding to most of the prev comments, which are personal jibes and meant to appeal to the gallery rather than being sincere questions or seeking of information or ideas.

I think when your tendency to drop names like popcorn hoping the effect to incite adulation that you actually worked with some of these people (never mind that it would make you over 1000 years old) then yes we have questions on the authenticity of what you write (or google). :)

[dutchmike]

Thomas 1,

Please if you see her give her my regards. I used ride with her late husband in Portugal and saw her last when she wrote her first book the Royal Horse of Europe and haven't seen her since that time.

About the training &riding question I have no idea. I used to ride with her late husband, however she is bound to know more slc2 ;)

Thanks
Michael Vermaas

[goeslikestink]

I think when your tendency to drop names like popcorn hoping the effect to incite adulation that you actually worked with some of these people (never mind that it would make you over 1000 years old) then yes we have questions on the authenticity of what you write (or google). :)

tend to agree, action speaks louder than any words- of which there isnt any
to back up one claims

when someone asks for a cv and that soneone has proven ones cv many times
yet the one that shouts for a cv cannot preduce tiddle swat

[Thomas_1]

because the content of the videos is relevant to the OP's question whereas the bare fact that she lives next door to someone is not. I was replying to your post which just said you knew her well and she lived nearby or some such words and supplied no information which might help the OP with her question.

Who stuffed the bug up your backside???

Read again and you'll see that the OP didn't ask about the content of videos!

You'll also see that my first posting specifically asked precisely what the OP wanted to know and had she wanted to know availability or want contact details then I'm VERY able to provide that.

(I don't know if the OP knows but Sylvia had surgery earlier this year and hasn't really been doing any clinics since then. Rather she's had guest trainers and riders over here. She did a very interesting one very anti the rolkur fad)

When the OP specified what she was looking for, my second gave some information relating to her experience, philosophy and market.

What precisely did you add to this thread???

[egontoast]

What precisely did you add to this thread???

Take a pill, Thomas, or maybe a course in Anger Management.

The OP wanted information about SL as a potential clinician so I would think anyone who has seen her teach or has seen videos of her teaching might have something to contribute to the thread.

[Thomas_1]

Take a pill, Thomas, or maybe a course in Anger Management. You mistake my calmly thinking you've got a bug up your backside for something else :yes:

The OP wanted information about SL as a potential clinician so I would think anyone who has seen her teach or has seen videos of her teaching might have something to contribute to the thread I'd have thought that too but watching a video becomes pretty irrelevent or superficial if you've seen the real thing.

[egontoast]

I'd have thought that too but watching a video becomes pretty irrelevent or superficial if you've seen the real thing.
__________________

A video showing her teaching method ought to have some relevance to the question.

I didn't get the impression from your posts that you had ever actually seen her teach.