"Eventing" dressage or whatever happened to the sin of BTV?

[subk]

First off let me say I don't personally think there is a difference between "real" dressage and "eventing" dressage--but since I haven't been to USDF show in an age I don't really want to go there. That and they've beaten the poor thing to death over on the dressage board because this discussion can't come up without a Rolkur popcorn--fest. As I don't think Rolkur is an eventing practice I'm hoping we can avoid that...

But what is it with all the horse and riders I'm seeing behind the vertical? And having success with it?

http://www.nancarrow-webdesk.com/warehouse/storage2/2008-w32/img.290909.html

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0715321498/ref=sib_dp_pop_fc?ie=UTF8&p=S001#reader-link

http://useventing.com/blog/?p=198 Scroll for several

http://www.daylife.com/photo/0erx0Jr9897FV

I don't want to get into any names, and I've got examples of some of my favorites here. Granted we do have to remember that we're only looking at a moment in time, but these top riders would not have their horse cranked down if they weren't being rewarded for it. Or more precisely wouldn't be doing it if it was hurting their marks. I can remember a time that even the briefest instant in time BTV in a movement would heavily ding the score for the whole movement.

I've had it smushing around in my brain for awhile, but it's only started to really bug me. Perhaps reading the classics "Training Hunters, Jumpers and Hacks" by Chamberlain and Podhajsky's "Complete Training of Horse and Rider" back to back in the last month my have something to do with the last straw of my tolerance. Both of those horseman go on and on (and on) about the importance of head carriage being developed only as a function of the hind end and the balance of the horse and as such should never, ever, ever be behind the vertical. Yet you can't flip through a COTH with out seeing "the sin."

What I really don't understand and this was something Podhajsky mentioned was that the closer a horse's comes to vertical (and then beyond) the more restricted the horses vision, he says they only see in focus down the plane of their face so at some point they start struggling seeing where their own feet are landing. He pointed that out as one of the reason it is important for the change of shape outward in extended work--the horse needs to see further forward because the stride is longer.

As eventers are we cranking the heads in as a form (or shortcut) of demanding submission of horses that tend to be hotter? What kind of horse puts up with not being able to see where his feet are landing and how does that effect their boldness on XC? Was Chamberlain an old fuddy duddy who was guessing at horse physiology in the 1950s? Who is out there thumbing their nose at the trend? Am I just a nerd that really needs to stop reading and thinking and go ride? (probably! or at least read something more modern...)

Thoughts anyone?

[ezmissg]

I've always thought it was ... um... not correct, and I don't understand the scoring for it either.
But, what do I know? My mare is hard to get on the bit, and the more "intense" she becomes, the further BTV she gets...I mean, WAY behind -- as in the headless horse! So, our time is spent trying NOT to have that result! HA!

[TB or not TB?]

I am no expert, but I have some ideas. I'm sure folks will disagree and that's okay!

A fit 4* event horse is a totally different animal than an upper level dressage horse. I struggled with many a TB trying to go BTV if I took more than a feather light contact, but the fitter the horse becomes, the stronger contact they will allow. (JMHO, probably different for others) The temptation then becomes to really take a -for lack of a better word- "dressagey" feel, which for me always resulted in instant BTV. Keeping lightness while asking a fire breathing dragon to halfpass is a delicate, delicate balance, and I think this is where the problem stems from.

To further complicate the issue, there certainly is more control as the horse's vision decreases, and I can imagine the temptation for someone to trade a bit of obedience for a little BTV, especially if that is the current trend and they are not punished for it as much as they used to be.

That said, it's obviously NOT what should be sought and I am in no way condoning the practice. Actually, I'm rather interested in the discussions of late about the french vs. german schools of dressage. I think the emphasis has shifted almost completely to the german way of going, even in our little corner of the sport horse world, and the BTV is a reflection of the impact on event horses. (Yeah, feel free to disagree with me everyone, it's okay. :lol:) Even if there are many WBs, ISH, and crosses, (not just the TBs which really require that delicate hand) when dealing with horses so physically keyed up, more tact is required. This is even present in the pure dressage realm, where muscle over lightness has taken sway.

Disclaimer: not blaming the Germans, the German way of horsemanship, or idealizing the French - the true German school would obviously not allow BTV, but it has gotten so predominant that like all trends, bastardization occurs.

[Tamsin]

This is a very good question and I'll be interested to see the replies. I've always read that BTV is the first and most deadly sin of dressage, and very difficult to correct once it is the horse's habit.

[vineyridge]

As to horse vision, there is some excellent Australian research on the internet which explains it very well. IIRC, a horse who is really BTV is essentially blind and totally reliant on its driver for direction.

[Sebastian]

Zipping up flame suit... Just to play devil's advocate...When I looked at the photos (#1 excluded, can't tell from the angle), what I see are horses that are stretching across their polls...not BTV. Not to say that BTV is not OUT there, but I don't see it in these examples.

I was always taught if a horse is BTV, there is a loss of contact and the horse is successfully evading the bit.

These examples are stretching into the bit maintaining contact. And they are stretching across the poll, which can make the horse appear to be BTV, but they are not.

JMHO, Curious what others think...
Seb :)

[Sebastian]

IIRC, a horse who is really BTV is essentially blind and totally reliant on its driver for direction.

I was taught that BTV is an evasion, not dependence. Am I misunderstanding you?

Seb :)

p.s. this IS a great topic subk, and it will be nice to discuss without the usual degeneration re:RK. :D

[lstevenson]

Zipping up flame suit... Just to play devil's advocate...When I looked at the photos (#1 excluded, can't tell from the angle), what I see are horses that are stretching across their polls...not BTV. Not to say that BTV is not OUT there, but I don't see it in these examples.

I was always taught if a horse is BTV, there is a loss of contact and the horse is successfully evading the bit.

These examples are stretching into the bit maintaining contact. And they are stretching across the poll, which can make the horse appear to be BTV, but they are not.

JMHO, Curious what others think...
Seb :)


Seb, there is a difference between behind the vertical and behind the bit. You are talking about behind the bit, and these pics show behind the vertical.

On btv, I think that it is unfortunate that a certain few well known riders in this country get away with it. Then the groupies follow........

I think (and I hope!) that those without the benefit of the "halo effect" DO often get marked down for being btv, as it is definitely incorrect.

[vineyridge]

I was taught that BTV is an evasion, not dependence. Am I misunderstanding you?

Seb :)

p.s. this IS a great topic subk, and it will be nice to discuss without the usual degeneration re:RK. :D

I guess it depends how the horse gets BTV. If it does it him/herself by choice, it has to be an evasion and a very dysfunctional one as well. If the rider puts the horse behind the vertical (how and for whatever reason we won't discuss), the rider is forcing dependence--or so the vision research would indicate.

Let me do some googling and see if I can find the Australian research.

[JER]

Lot of examples on this page of photos (http://equestrian.cyberhorse.com.au/cgi-bin/tve/displaynewsitem.pl?20080809olympic08eventingdressa ge1.txt) from HK.

Isn't the head position/contact supposed to be the result of proper connection behind? In theory, at least.

Riding a horse 'deep' can be a useful technique in the right sort of horse but it should never be the goal for the made horse. I'd think the horses in subk's photos would be past the point of learning the basics.

I don't know why riders feature photos of themselves riding against classical principles (like the PF book cover). It's like those bizarre photos in the Chronicle of h/j kids lying on their ponies' necks. Never a pretty picture.

[subk]

IIRC, a horse who is really BTV is essentially blind and totally reliant on its driver for direction.
Trust is one thing but blindness is nothing more than total rider domination. Not exactly the qualities I want to teach an upper level XC horse that at some point in time might be required to save both our skins.

Seb, there is a difference between behind the vertical and behind the bit. You are talking about behind the bit, and these pics show behind the vertical.
Yes. BTV is nothing more than the plane of the face being deeper than 90° off the ground. It can happen for several reasons--such as to much contact or not enough. But I think (not 100% sure so chime in here) that for a horse to get his head deeper than vertical he has to bend the joints in his vertebrae at a point farther back than right behind the poll. (The other thing repeated ad nauseam "in the good old days" and discussed by both Podhajsky and Chamberlain was that the poll must be the highest point.) Once you get the wrong vertibrae involved you are activating and tensing muscles in the neck that are then disrupting the flow of energy from the hind quarters to the bit. Those are the big fat muscles that bulge 2/3 of the way up the neck when BTV. Compare a horse BTV with one that is not and you'll see it. Shouldn't "stretching over the poll" lengthen the neck not shorten it?

Can somebody explain this better than my "flow of energy" please?!

[Equa]

For those of you who believe BTV is the worst sin of dressage, how would you place a horse that is always totally hollow and stiff backed and unaccepting of the contact compared with a horse whose developing strength and conformation (and of course rider) conspire to have him somewhat BTV?

The "angle of the dangle" has so many varieties - (it's one issue guaranteed to get the monkey gallery sooo keyed up, and get their the protractors out)....the important thing, however, is to look at the whole horse. If you had a class of 30 horses, and if you automatically placed the half that were BTV at any time, in the bottom half of the class, you'd be doing some pretty weird judging. It's not that BTV is being rewarded (believe me, judges are very disapproving), it's just that nice horses who do an otherwise good test, and who may be BTV at times, can well do the best test in a class. And it's not like they are getting 80%.

Being a little BTV is caused by many things - not neccessarily involving cranking the horse's nose in. It is often a moment in time, a slight loss of engagement, a mild way of evading the collecting action of the half halt. The fixation of having "no mistakes" and "total submission" in tests encourages riders to ride, if not a little backward, then maybe not as forward as would help the horse lift the forehand and stay in front of the vertical.

[horsepix76]

Yes. BTV is nothing more than the plane of the face being deeper than 90° off the ground.

Doesn't "the vertical" refer to the line from poll to bit, not the plane of the face (as that changes based on the shape of the head)?

[Sudi's Girl]

Yes. BTV is nothing more than the plane of the face being deeper than 90° off the ground. It can happen for several reasons--such as to much contact or not enough. But I think (not 100% sure so chime in here) that for a horse to get his head deeper than vertical he has to bend the joints in his vertebrae at a point farther back than right behind the poll. (The other thing repeated ad nauseam "in the good old days" and discussed by both Podhajsky and Chamberlain was that the poll must be the highest point.) Once you get the wrong vertibrae involved you are activating and tensing muscles in the neck that are then disrupting the flow of energy from the hind quarters to the bit. Those are the big fat muscles that bulge 2/3 of the way up the neck when BTV. Compare a horse BTV with one that is not and you'll see it. Shouldn't "stretching over the poll" lengthen the neck not shorten it?


(Emphasis Mine) - Yes!! This is what I have always read/been taught/had emphasized to me by dressage trainers. I have been wondering about this topic for a while now, but as a simple smurf am not terribly confidant in my analysis yet. :) Thanks for starting the topic!! I'm very interested in hearing everyone's opinions!

[Jealoushe]

SO why do event horses get marked down for acting up and not halting but "real" dressage horses don't?:lol:

[purplnurpl]

I was taught that BTV is an evasion, not dependence. Am I misunderstanding you?

Seb :)

p.s. this IS a great topic subk, and it will be nice to discuss without the usual degeneration re:RK. :D


Behind the BIT is an evasion.

Behind the vertical is a position that the rider can point the horse in.
As is 'competition position', aka giraffe syndrome.

I see contact with BTV. A term which I don't use vocally or physically.
I use Deep. Which is BTV but more stretched downwards. A spot in which I will put my horse in for warm up to allow him to stretch forward and down across his topline.

but yes, I dislike the modern dressage trend as well. Horses that are crammed into little muffin balls (as long as they still go forward) win. No question about it.

[bambam]

I am not sure it is being scored any differently in eventing dressage than in "real" dressage. I rarely watch high level pure dressage but when I do it does not seem uncommon for BTV horses to be winning there as well.
As far as the judging goes, if I had to take a guess I would guess that they are being marked down for it but not as much as other faults and that the rest of their work is good enough that these riders you linked to still place well (goodness knows I have gotten dinged for it when my are drops BTV but it does not mean we do not end up placing well- not that I am comparing my dressage to Clayton or KOC, merely noting that it is bringing down scores at least sometimes at the LLs). I would also guess that, because they are winning in spite of it, it is getting done more often and becoming seen as "acceptable"

[vineyridge]

Quick search found this from MyHorse.com
]Shortly after Dr. Alison Harmon, of the University of Western Australia, witnessed two dressage horses collide as if they hadn’t seen each other, she used an ophthalmoscope to examine the retina of a horse’s eye to determine its field of vision. She found that the forward portion of a horse’s sight runs approximately down his nose, with the blind spot being roughly the width of the horse’s body in front of him as well as slightly above the level of his eyes.
If a horse is ridden “on the bit” with his forehead vertical to the ground, or overflexed and “behind the bit” with his nose pointed toward his chest, he only sees the dirt beneath his nose. The peripheral vision is still showing what is to the side, but he is working blind in regard to anything smack dab in front of him.

Some disciplines consider a headset in which the horse flexes at the poll and positions his face vertical to the ground, as a positive indication of the horse’s softness and submissiveness to the rider. And that may be true in more ways than anyone realized. The horse might be more attentive to his rider with his head in this position, because his ability to see is limited. In effect, he has to trust his rider not to run them both into a tree.And, in order to judge distance (as for a jump) the horse has to raise its head in order to use its binocular vision.

Here's the whole article:
http://www.myhorse.com/health/preventative/horse_vision_and_eyesight.aspx#
And an interview with Dr. Harmon
http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s545781.htm

And an abstract of the article she published on her original research:
General Articles - Horse vision and an explanation for the visual behaviour originally explained by the 'ramp retina'
Alison M Harman (http://discover-decouvrir.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/dcvr/ctrl?action=dsere&index=author&req=%22Harman%20Alison%C2%A0M%22), S Moore (http://discover-decouvrir.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/dcvr/ctrl?action=dsere&index=author&req=%22Moore%20S%22), R Hoskins (http://discover-decouvrir.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/dcvr/ctrl?action=dsere&index=author&req=%22Hoskins%20R%22), P Keller (http://discover-decouvrir.cisti-icist.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/dcvr/ctrl?action=dsere&index=author&req=%22Keller%20P%22)
Journal: Equine Veterinary Journal,

ISSN: 0425-1644,
Vol: 31, Issue: 5,
Date: 1999,

Start page: 384, # of pages: 7

Abstract: Here we provide confirmation that the 'ramp retina' of the horse, once thought to result in head rotating visual behaviour, does not exist. We found a 9% variation in axial length of the eye between the streak region and the dorsal periphery. However, the difference was in the opposite direction to that proposed for the 'ramp retina'. Furthermore, acuity in the narrow, intense visual streak in the inferior retina is 16.5 cycles per degree compared with 2.7 cycles per degree in the periphery. Therefore, it is improbable that the horse rotates its head to focus onto the peripheral retina. Rather, the horse rotates the nose up high to observe distant objects because binocular overlap is oriented down the nose, with a blind area directly in front of the forehead. (c) Biosciences Information Services.

[VCT]

You know, it's quite possible I'm just totally missing the boat here...

I don't CARE where my horses HEAD IS. I'm not interested in his head. I'm interested in his BACK and his LEGS. If his back is up/lifted/round whatever you like to call it and his legs are moving in the direction and rhythm, etc. that I want.. well... the head ends up where it should be. I've never really fussed about WHERE as long as the horse is carrying his own front end, is soft in the mouth and responsive to my rein aids.

Am I nuts? Am I just missing the point because I am not riding as advanced movements as some of the examples given (or as some of you all are)??

I had a lesson with someone a year ago and I didn't care for the theory they were teaching. (maybe just due to my ignorance?) Basically to hold strong contact with your hands until the horse gives and then you give back. I was always taught that you take a very soft contact and then ride the horse forward up into it.
:confused: :confused: :confused:

[breakthru]

yes, btv is incorrect. I agree that it might be that horses btv are easier to control, and given the proportions of hotter horses in eventing, that's why you see it more. but it doesn't make it correct.

think of the difference in the way the muscles are shaped in the topline of a horse that is pushing forward into the contact with an open throatlatch, versus one that is btv.

and yes, of course- much more important what the hind legs and back are doing than where the head is, but I find that if I instruct riders to try and keep the contact, keep the forward push but gently lift the hands until the nose is out and the poll is on top, even though you're looking at the head, where the balance is up front affects how the hind end must react (correctly) to acheive better balance.

[VCT]

breakthru,

Yeah, I think we are on the same page. I would rather have my horse have his nose poked out a bit (providing he is moving off the hind end and his back is up)... the softening at the poll has always just happened as a natural progression as the horse becomes more confident and accepts more contact softly.

Maybe I am leaving out something I do intuitively, but I have never forced a horse into a frame.. which is how a lot of the dressage I see today (mostly in eventing as I don't want much pure dressage) looks. It looks like the horse is "forced" there. Maybe I am wrong and it just looks that way but that is basically what the instructor was telling me. HOLD strong contact until they give. I don't agree with it theoretically and personally my back can't take it. I can't be holding my horse up in front until they finally submit. And thats not the type of partnership I want anyways. *shrug*

I dunno. Another instructor of mine once told me I must have learned from someone really old school because I also place the saddle further back then I see a lot of people doing. He said where I put it is more correct. I see a lot of people put it practically on top of the withers. I place it there but then slide back until it finds its "home" and I make sure it's behind the shoulder. *shrug* I've had a few people remark on it in the last few years actually.

[roki143]

I dunno. Another instructor of mine once told me I must have learned from someone really old school because I also place the saddle further back then I see a lot of people doing. He said where I put it is more correct. I see a lot of people put it practically on top of the withers. I place it there but then slide back until it finds its "home" and I make sure it's behind the shoulder. *shrug* I've had a few people remark on it in the last few years actually.


I find this part interesting because just last week I was with my mother, who is AMAZING as far as an 'eye' on the ground, as well as being able to get a horse truly using it's back (like really, freaky kind of amazing).

Anyway, we were watching a friend of mine go around on a preliminary mare who makes a cute little package and gets quite good scores. My mom commented on how far her saddle was forward, and although she was doing all the right movements - they weren't correct. Basically, she was only riding the horse from the front of the saddle forward - that didn't make very much horse considering the mare is quite small!

[VCT]

Interesting roki. I personally find if the saddle is too far forward I feel like we are on the forehand all the time. Er, I dunno, like I just am not in the middle of my horse and definitely like I can't get my leg to the correct "activate the hind end button".

I just mentioned that because it also seems to be a newer trend I think...

.. I'm wondering if we are moving away from what is truly correct, or adjusting for progress of learning what is correct or better(in various instances). Are these things... BTV... saddle placement, etc. Just trends? People finding out what works better? Or just monkey-see-monkey-do with the BNR's doing well and things trickling down the ranks?

I dunno.

[VCT]

For those of you who believe BTV is the worst sin of dressage, how would you place a horse that is always totally hollow and stiff backed and unaccepting of the contact compared with a horse whose developing strength and conformation (and of course rider) conspire to have him somewhat BTV?

The "angle of the dangle" has so many varieties - (it's one issue guaranteed to get the monkey gallery sooo keyed up, and get their the protractors out)....the important thing, however, is to look at the whole horse. If you had a class of 30 horses, and if you automatically placed the half that were BTV at any time, in the bottom half of the class, you'd be doing some pretty weird judging. It's not that BTV is being rewarded (believe me, judges are very disapproving), it's just that nice horses who do an otherwise good test, and who may be BTV at times, can well do the best test in a class. And it's not like they are getting 80%.

Being a little BTV is caused by many things - not neccessarily involving cranking the horse's nose in. It is often a moment in time, a slight loss of engagement, a mild way of evading the collecting action of the half halt. The fixation of having "no mistakes" and "total submission" in tests encourages riders to ride, if not a little backward, then maybe not as forward as would help the horse lift the forehand and stay in front of the vertical.


Well, I guess out of the two I would place the collected, forward but BTV horse better than a completely hollow, stiff and unaccepting of contact horse.

However, if there was a third horse in the mix, who had his back up, using his hind end, was accepting of contact but was in a slightly longer frame, maybe with his nose ever so slightly in front of the vertical due to, similar to how you put it, developing strength, conformation and rider input... I would put the third horse first. He may not be as "packaged" but he is progressing more correctly in his training according to what I have been taught.

Maybe I'm wrong.... :confused: What do you think?

[subk]

Well, I guess out of the two I would place the collected, forward but BTV horse better than a completely hollow, stiff and unaccepting of contact horse.

However, if there was a third horse in the mix, who had his back up, using his hind end, was accepting of contact but was in a slightly longer frame, maybe with his nose ever so slightly in front of the vertical due to, similar to how you put it, developing strength, conformation and rider input... I would put the third horse first. He may not be as "packaged" but he is progressing more correctly in his training according to what I have been taught.

Maybe I'm wrong.... :confused: What do you think?
I think you're absolutely correct and THAT may be where the whole judging system has slipped and created all the BTV horses and let us down. (And I see BTV at all levels!) A horse that is untrained is a much easier fix than one who has been trained incorrectly. What I find disturbing about the second link in the OP is that it is the cover (meaning someone chose to use that picture) of what is defined in the book as a young horse in the first stages of training. If proper head carriage is the result of the hind end then it requires strength and balance that doesn't/shouldn't exist yet! But this is the outline that does smashingly well at the LLs.

Also, I would not say BTV is the "worst" sin. It's significant, but in my mind the worst sin is not being forward. (Even more so for eventing.) I don't think it's asking too much at the UL's for the best scores to be given to horses that are correct in both forward and head carriage. Don't get me wrong I'm not interested in head carriage for the sake of head carriage, I'm concerned about it because BTV indicates a flaw in how the horse is connected back to front. Once you view those two things together--forward and correctly connected--everything else is just an add on. Shouldn't it be a little like judging hunters, you first pick out the horses that find eight jumps then start sorting those for the ribbons? It doesn't matter if the knees hit the cheekbones if you miss the distances.

Personally, I don't see this just as an UL problem. We're regularly seeing horses BTV but going fancy at Novice, and that's where it needs to be mark down the most. I suspect one of the causes is asking a young horse for a more balanced frame than the are physically capable of maintaining--and they sure seem to be starting them younger and younger, but finding a frame sooner and sooner!

Just for point of reference, I saw most of the dressage for Rolex last year and my favorite in these terms was Dobbin and Corrine Aston (you can see it in pictures as well.) Unfortunately the poor woman doesn't wear a halo...

[VCT]

What can I say subk... I agree with you on every point. And I did notice how lovely Corrinne Ashton's dressage pictures looked. I didn't recognize the pair just from glancing at the photos but I thought "now that looks really nice!" and then I read the captions and realized it was her. As an aside I got to chat with her at Fair Hill year before last and she is SO NICE and helpful. I was asking her about a product she was using on Dobbin and she really spent quite a long time talking with me about Dobbin and a horse I used to own that I was having problems chasing down a NQR issue with.

Back to the topic, I think some of the problem with BTV is that it is actually being taught as correct by BNT's to students. As in if you ride the horse "deep" they will learn to stretch down to the contact. Perhaps that is true, but I have never had to ride a horse that way to encourage stretching. Just forward with light contact and encouraging them to stretch with small reins aids. So from my experience it is not only becoming more popular due to it being accepted, and maybe rewarded, in the show ring, but it is being taught as correct!

Now it is true (and I've been given negative feedback during this stage by one person who was taught the "deep" theory and told I should "collect" the horse more but I have kept on with it because I like the results) on young or green horses they have occasionally stumbled a bit on the front end when first learning to stretch... or got on the forehand but this is easily corrected by making them go more forward and my end result has been a horse who knows how to carry his own front end whether stretching or collected or on a looser rein, etc. I don't want a horse who is heavy in my hands for personal reasons (my back is trash) or who may trip if I am not supporting them up front. That makes many novice riders nervous if the horse trips before they learn how to ride from leg to hand and help balance the horse! They will learn to hold themselves up pretty quickly if given the opportunity. Maybe that is a totally separate issue and I'm muddying the waters, but I did notice it in a horse that I began riding who was trained using the "deep" theory. If he wasn't on fairly strong contact and in a tight package, he'd trip and get on his forehand! Thankfully he came out of that pretty easily and learned to hold himself up, stay forward with his back lifted even on a light contact and in a longer frame. And hey, we'll keep working on improving from there!

Of course, my goals are not everyones. I try to make horses who are quiet, safe and easy to ride. Not trying to achieve as much as possible with the horses potential. One, I am not that great of a rider. Two, I have gotten more chicken as I've gotten older and Three, its hard for me to get really strong and fit due to physical issues but I continue to work on it.

So, have you also heard of BTV being taught as correct? Who is teaching this? How can we stop this bad trend?

I agree it is not the worst sin, but to see it as a phase during a process, or what happens when things don't go perfect for a moment is one thing. To see it as the correct means to an end is another and I think thats a real problem. I agree with whomever mentioned all the photos (maybe it was you subk)... when you see photos on book covers, or of the people winning hunters in COTH and the kid are all laying up the neck doing crest releases with their stirrups too long and legs swinging back. It's scary that is what is "out there" as being the best examples.

And, admittedly thats where some of my confusion came from... like, geez... am I really off-base here? Is what I'm teaching to my students not correct or considered the most up to date information... or is it just a bad trend?

It is also very difficult as a NNT (No Name Trainer LOL) trying to do right by your students and explaining to them why I am saying whats in those pictures is not right when the ppl in those pics are out there winning. Not that it really matters in my case, most of my students don't show at all or if they do its only small local shows, so it's not like their being beat by those ppl at that level, but of course people want to emulate who they think is the best!

Sorry for all my personal examples and questions but this very issue has really been a bit of contention between me and a couple other riders/trainers I know and work with and I've stuck to my guns on it but really have been wondering about it because they are both more advanced, more accomplished riders/trainers than me! This discussion is really valuable to me because there isn't much for decent "advanced" instruction in my area so I'm on my own with books and whatnot a lot to keep learning myself! So this thread is great, I'm leaning a lot and it is nice to know I'm not way off base in what I recognize as correct (like the photos of Dobbin and Corrinne). I try to test myself like that with the George Morris Clinic and the Conformation Clinic in PH before reading the text I try to figure out what the evaluation will be.

[purplnurpl]

breakthru,

Yeah, I think we are on the same page. I would rather have my horse have his nose poked out a bit (providing he is moving off the hind end and his back is up)...

which is actually CORRECT if you look up the definition of working trot. : )

I'm gald to be back over here.
I started a thread on Off Course about how people pay for their trailers and there is now 3 pages of purplnurpl character bashing. Man ya gatta take your shield with you if you leave the eventing community. I feel sorry for those people that are so angry all the time.

[Zephyr]

Just for point of reference, I saw most of the dressage for Rolex last year and my favorite in these terms was Dobbin and Corrine Aston (you can see it in pictures as well.) Unfortunately the poor woman doesn't wear a halo...

Dobbin was just named USEA horse of the year - at least they're finally getting their due!

[pwynnnorman]

Three or four years ago, I got bold and asked this question to a real mover/shaker. I was told that BTV had gotten to be too acceptable too often and that there WAS a definite move afoot to discourage it in the judging. Maybe a year later, I eavesdropped (well, I just didn't walk away, let's say) on a conversation between two ULRs who were actually talking about a horse one of them couldn't get "into the hand" better without it going BTV. "Booting" it up caused it to get rattled, while opening the fingers/giving it more rein made it fall on the forehand and wrecked its rhythm. Those two incidents convinced me that this is a known problem, but maybe the difficult product of other issues -- including temperament ones, which was at the heart of the conversation I listened in on. Indeed, the horse they were speaking of was an OTTB. Makes me speculate that perhaps the WBs and WBxs might be more easily kept between hand and leg because of being more submissive and accepting of leg. Sheer speculation, but DO you suppose BTV is more prevalent in the hotter eventers?

[Equa]

Absolutely, VCT. However I think that you have nailed the crux of the problem, people fixating on the "vertical" aspect. I was judging a large low-level class last year, and my nosy penciller (scribe) made some inappropriate comments about horses which were technically not "on the bit", quite strung out, but in a nice rhythm, not actively resisting, and doing the actual movements. She thought that they didn't deserve a 6 (a mere 6!) because they weren't "round" enough.

And while I still maintain that BTV horses are not necessarily pulled in by the rider, I believe they have less ownership of the bit than the horse that is truly correct and travelling with his head hanging naturally from his poll, and carrying the bit forward without tension in the body.

[Sebastian]

Seb, there is a difference between behind the vertical and behind the bit. You are talking about behind the bit, and these pics show behind the vertical.

On btv, I think that it is unfortunate that a certain few well known riders in this country get away with it. Then the groupies follow........

I think (and I hope!) that those without the benefit of the "halo effect" DO often get marked down for being btv, as it is definitely incorrect.

ACK! Killed by semantics again... You are correct, Leslie!! (Hey, it was late, I was tired... :winkgrin: )
Seb :)

[TB or not TB?]

which is actually CORRECT if you look up the definition of working trot. : )

I'm gald to be back over here.
I started a thread on Off Course about how people pay for their trailers and there is now 3 pages of purplnurpl character bashing. Man ya gatta take your shield with you if you leave the eventing community. I feel sorry for those people that are so angry all the time.


Well duh, you are individually responsible for the entire economic crisis with your extravagant spending. Didn't you get the memo? :lol:

[horsepix76]

Well, I guess out of the two I would place the collected, forward but BTV horse better than a completely hollow, stiff and unaccepting of contact horse.

However, if there was a third horse in the mix, who had his back up, using his hind end, was accepting of contact but was in a slightly longer frame, maybe with his nose ever so slightly in front of the vertical due to, similar to how you put it, developing strength, conformation and rider input... I would put the third horse first. He may not be as "packaged" but he is progressing more correctly in his training according to what I have been taught.

Maybe I'm wrong.... :confused: What do you think?

I think its hard to "place" a horse when they're not in the ring simultaneously. The judge is looking at the entire package, including the rider and how well the combination of horse and rider performed a specific movement of a test. Its not like a hunter ring where you get to see everyone together. I know you know this, but sometimes, it seems like in these BTV conversations, everyone talks as though the judges are looking at all the horses at the same time and picking ones out that are BTV to win. In reality, we also know that just simply isn't the case. If the horse that is slightly BTV in the show ring has the most fluid and well-ridden test, its probably going to win. In my view, this is not so much a failure in the judging system as it is a failure in the training system of the horse.

If this doesn't make sense, forgive me. Its late and I've had too much wine. ;)

[Ajierene]

There is this really goofy picture of my mare - taken by a professional. One of those where the camera is set up at the jump and automatically takes 3-5 pictures as you approach and take the jump. It is a log with a slight downward slope on the landing side. It is also between two trees, so somewhat shaded. Nothing serious, just a Novice jump. The first glance at the picture, my mare might look like she's refusing the jump - but really she is gathering herself to jump and at the same time looking at the other side. Her nose is poked way out as she is 'peering' over the jump to see how she is going to land.

Why do I mention this here? Because this is where I feel the fear of more emphasis on dressage in eventing is not reallyt he problem with accidents. The problem is not the greater emphasis on dressage itself, but the incorrect training that results in horses being afraid to poke their nose out.

Some people have mentioned it on this thread already - cranking horse's down, heavy hands forcing horses to have their head perpendicular to the ground instead of paying attention to proper muscle development and freedom of carriage. Someone I used to work for talked about a mistake she made where she rushed a horse into a dressage frame to quickly and now the horse keeps going behind the vertical - in an effort to please.

If you pay attention to proper dressage training and allow your horse to carry itself, it should seek contact. That means if you have shorter reins, you will be at the vertical, but if you lengthen your reins, the horse should stretch to seek contact.

I have seen articles that discuss this - how the ever so seldom 'poking the nose out' of Grand Prix riders is, something done to help the horse regain balance and only a moment in time, is being marked down where the horses forced into something of a false frame and afraid to poke their nose out are being rewarded.

To me it translates very definitely to eventing. When asked, a horse should happily carry itself in a dressage frame. When given longer reins and asked to go forward more, it should happily do the same. When given complete control (the middle of a combination out on cross country), the horse should be able to carry himself and be balanced (just as he should be able to carry himself and be self balanced in dressage). Likewise in stadium the horse should already be working with the 'rear engine' so the rider does not have to worry about him getting on the forehand and having difficulty making a turn or setting up for a jump.

So Behind the Vertical would not only effect the dressage phase, but it would be interesting to see how some of the 'dangerous riders' on cross country, or ones with consistent problems in stadium, train their horses in dressage - are the horses unable to carry themselves, so that in the cross country and/or stadium phase they have difficulty? Not every issue will be training related, but it would be interesting to see how many are.

[8seconds]

A horse's head begins forward and on the bit. Once he is on the bit, it is never lost. As the horse begins to collect, his hindquarters come up under himself as he brings his head closer to the verticle. When he nearly reaches the verticle, his neck starts to come higher to accommocate the increase in the hindquarters coming under him. NEVER DOES HE COME BEHIND THE VERTICLE. Once he comes behind the verticle, the hindquarters are lost and true control is lost. This is a difficult thing to achieve. It is not for everyone to master. Putting a horse behind the verticle is the "dumbing down" of dressage, done with the outside rein so virtually anyone can put a horse in a "frame, be it correct or not. The give-away is the position of the hind legs. Hind legs are never where they should be with the horse BTV. It is not a matter or control, as is not the result of dressage supposed to be training? and if your horse is trained it is in control - that is true for cross-country too. The control is in all parts of the horse's undersaddle life, not just the dressage ring.

Those of you who think that BTV has a purpose need to re-think or re-educate yourselves. The first picture of the lead article certainly was not a successful horse at HK. The US has done many wonderful things, but it has made true dressage "unrecognizeable," so many can compete. The only problem, you cannot build upon incorrect theories and training, and dressage, when done correctly, offers the building blocks of training for anything you desire to do.

Some of you are on the right track - keep at it and don't be swayed, because success will be yours to your abilities.

[asterix]

This has been a very interesting conversation to read. I have often looked around with a heavy heart at local events (always full of BNRs from Novice on up) at lots of young horses who look this way. I get to watch much less true upper level work but certainly this observation holds true at N/T/P.

I ride with a straight dressage trainer who is adamant about doing this correctly -- with my more educated (not by me -- he came that way) horse, I find he gets lighter in the contact, and I can shorten the reins, AS he comes more truly through and into self carriage -- because his front end lifts as his hind end comes underneath him, not because he goes BTV.

For what it's worth, I think there are plenty of judges who are perfectly capable of judging correctly on this issue. We had two well respected judges in for the T3d at Waredaca last year; I did the "demo" ride for them, and my horse was in a pretty good dressage mood that day (I've had plenty of those OTHER kind of days with him, too). He was also on the verge of moving to Prelim and doing good 2nd level work on a regular basis -- as I said, this is more about his prior training and my trainer than me, certainly! The judges made a particular point about his shape, the poll being the highest point, etc., and said this is not seen often enough in competition and so on and so forth...

I have a young horse who naturally likes to curl as an evasion -- gets short necked etc. The one time he really balled up during a (novice) test I got TOTALLY dinged for it by the judge -- from every move it was evident, including the halt. This is heartening, I thought.

Does anyone think this has anything to do with the use of draw reins? I feel like this is often a standard tool with event riders, and it would seem to me to easily lead to BTV and not truly connecting back to front if overused....

[frugalannie]

Well, I'm putting my flame suit on 'cuz I'm going to add fuel to the fire.

I have found (with the guidance of an excellent dressage guru) that a little BTV combined with long and deep can really help "explain" to a tense OTTB what relaxing their top line and coming through the back means. Please understand, I most emphatically do not mean rollkur. When retraining my current mare from racing to eventing, her tension was a real obstacle. Even loose in the field, she would go completely inverted with her head held high and horizontal. I never could figure out how she didn't run into things.

After a couple of years of patient training, her muscles have changed and her preferred frame, even when loose, is much more what one would hope for. But under saddle, if there's the slightest bit of tension, she can revert in a heartbeat. The first few shows I took her to, I had to reinforce relaxation by going a little BTV and deep (I mean a little), and she really has gotten very much better. Unless, of course, she sees a horse on course while we're in the dressage ring!

My point is that different things can be valid training tools and waystations in one's progress toward the ideal. The trick is to neither throw the baby out with the bath water nor assume that the tool is the endpoint in one's training.

However, I agree that ULRs on ULHs should have progressed waaaaaay beyond that point.

[Dawnd]

which is actually CORRECT if you look up the definition of working trot. : )

I'm gald to be back over here.
I started a thread on Off Course about how people pay for their trailers and there is now 3 pages of purplnurpl character bashing. Man ya gatta take your shield with you if you leave the eventing community. I feel sorry for those people that are so angry all the time.


Don't worry purp, I read your post and thought that you asked a legit question. But damn you for not saving, not owning a house and not making enough money to have to ask that question. :D

Sorry for the hijack - back to the original post.

[Dawnd]

Well, I'm putting my flame suit on 'cuz I'm going to add fuel to the fire.

I have found (with the guidance of an excellent dressage guru) that a little BTV combined with long and deep can really help "explain" to a tense OTTB what relaxing their top line and coming through the back means. Please understand, I most emphatically do not mean rollkur. When retraining my current mare from racing to eventing, her tension was a real obstacle. Even loose in the field, she would go completely inverted with her head held high and horizontal. I never could figure out how she didn't run into things.

After a couple of years of patient training, her muscles have changed and her preferred frame, even when loose, is much more what one would hope for. But under saddle, if there's the slightest bit of tension, she can revert in a heartbeat. The first few shows I took her to, I had to reinforce relaxation by going a little BTV and deep (I mean a little), and she really has gotten very much better. Unless, of course, she sees a horse on course while we're in the dressage ring!

My point is that different things can be valid training tools and waystations in one's progress toward the ideal. The trick is to neither throw the baby out with the bath water nor assume that the tool is the endpoint in one's training.

However, I agree that ULRs on ULHs should have progressed waaaaaay beyond that point.

I don't think that you need your flame suit. I have heard several straight dressage trainers use the behind the vertical and transitional training period for a horse that needs more "focus". It is a temporary measure and only in used in some instances. By second level, they should have worked past it.

[subk]

I have found (with the guidance of an excellent dressage guru) that a little BTV combined with long and deep can really help "explain" to a tense OTTB what relaxing their top line and coming through the back means....The first few shows I took her to, I had to reinforce relaxation by going a little BTV and deep (I mean a little), and she really has gotten very much better.

Well I certainly don't think you are evil or anything...

I too have used it with a very tense inverted horse. But the shape we used was not one that could ever go in a ring. It was more a matter of lowering the whole neck and lifting the back while still asking the horse to be flexible in the pole and jaw. So had the horse actually been carrying his neck higher the face plane would not have been to deep. I think the question is does the BTV involve the bending of the vertebrae that are farther down the neck than the ones behind the poll--but honestly I don't know. (I do suspect that lowering the neck and head for relaxation is as much a natural horseman thing as a dressage thing.)

I do know that in my attempts to deal with my hot tense TB I worked with quite a few experienced trainers both in the FEI eventing and dressage world. One of the things that disturbs me in hindsight was how wide apart some of them were on where and how "relaxation" fits into a training scale. (i.e the order of forward, balance, rhythm etc.) I have had top eventing coaches tell me it isn't a part of the training scale but rather a result of the training scale. That didn't work very well for us.

Our best success was when it was put first in the training scale. A dressage coach looked at me the day after our first 3-day and asked me if I was willing to give the horse a month off then spend the whole winter starting all over from the beginning. And we did, long neck and nose poked out we re-established relaxation (and a little trust) and built everything else on top of if. It was fun and extremely educational.

When I read these old classics relaxation is fundamental before you do anything. So while going BTV intentionally might be immediately effective I suspect it is the result of missing fundamentals.

[claire]

I have asked a lot of questions about this over the past couple years trying to understand why a "training tool" (Deep or RK) was being used as an end?

The understanding that I have is that dressage in the Eventing discipline and dressage in Dressage discipline is different. In that, Eventing stops short of the collection required in Dressage.

However, even in Dressage there is a divide that has developed between what is being rewarded in competition and what are core principles of Dressage.
The world champion rider in Dressage (and poster girl for extreme BTV ;) )
is a technically expert rider who can ride the extreme deep and (for the most part) keep the forward and the hind end under.

But, she is an example of the "new" Dressage competition riding: "What you lose on the swingboats , you make up on the roundabouts"
Or the few points you lose for BTV, halts, croup high piaffe you make up in high points for seamless transitions accuracy etc. etc.

But how can this work for Eventing? Maybe the points you lose XC you make up in the Dressage and Stadium Phase?

But at what cost? :confused:

From Jim Wofford's article "Eventing Lives in the Balance"


Jim Wofford: Eventing Lives in the Balance

By Jim Wofford
We absolutely must practice our dressage, because dressage is the essential tool by which we communicate with our horses. Without it, we cannot control them. However, we have recently started to require collection from our horses, and I am sure this is where we have gone wrong.

Certainly our horses are marvelous creatures, and they possess powers that leave us in awe. At the same time, just because a horse can do something is no justification for us to require him to do it. If we carry that logic to an illogical extreme, eventers would be performing a Grand Prix dressage test, an extremely complex cross-country course, and the same show jumping course as Grand Prix show jumpers. Crazy, right? But that has been the trend in recent years, to place increasing demands on our horses' performance. Possibly horses can do these things, but the question remains, should they?

Take collection, for example. Collection occupies a very specialized part of the dressage world. When a horse enters into collection he begins to surrender his body to his rider, and he begins to surrender his initiative as well. Two of my Olympic coaches, Jack LeGoff and Joe Lynch, told me not to go too deeply into collection because it would make the horse reliant on me.

[subk]

Or the few points you lose for BTV, halts, croup high piaffe you make up in high points for seamless transitions accuracy etc. etc.
But isn't that like a three legged horse winning a conformation class? Connection is as basic as it gets. If you are missing it in the ring but still have excellent transitions that's like saying the horse missing a leg doesn't matter because his head and neck are so wonderful.

[claire]

But isn't that like a three legged horse winning a conformation class? Connection is as basic as it gets. If you are missing it in the ring but still have excellent transitions that's like saying the horse missing a leg doesn't matter because his head and neck are so wonderful.

:lol: That would be my thought. But, I think Dressage is going through a big divide as to what is rewarded in the ring. And BNT's ride for the points in competition.

My question is, in Dressage missing a point or two doesn't result in fatal accidents...But in Eventing what/are there unintended consequences of extreme deep training on XC?

[Zephyr]

I don't know if it was on Youtube, but I watched a video of Karen O'Connor riding Teddy's 1/2 or full sibling in a beginner novice dressage test.

It was very interesting. It made me feel good to see that the horse was not on the vertical, but slightly in front the whole time. It had lovely rhythm and consistent tempo throughout the test, and a forced head carriage before it was ready was not attempted.

However, competing beginner novice last year, I felt like everyone had this packaged tiny frame that was really expected at that level to do well. Maybe I'm wrong. But I'll take an obedient horse that just isn't ready for perfectly vertical carriage any day, rather than jammed-and-crammed to "look good" when he's not progressed to a stage of training where he can go on the vertical yet. We still have a long way to go though!

And as a side note, I think it was Holly Hepp that said in an article somewhere, when a horse is going "deep and low" it is fine to be BTV because the relative position of the neck frame is identical to being on the vertical when the poll is up high. Food for thought for me since reading that.

[seeuatx]

I don't know if it was on Youtube, but I watched a video of Karen O'Connor riding Teddy's 1/2 or full sibling in a beginner novice dressage test.


Which was highly amusing when the dressage board started critiquing and told PWynn that her horse looked Ok, for having a hunter rider on her that is. I think I snorted a drink out of my nose when they called KOC a hunter rider. And she was ripped apart for being in front of the vertical and in a lightish seat, that is until someone told them it was KOC... then they back tracked really quick :lol:.

What I did take from that was an interesting thought on how allowing a young sensitive horse to be slightly poked IFoTV (not inverted or stargazing, and not braced against the bit) was seemingly considered a mortal sin. Yet, the objectives for Training level (straight dressage) are merely "To confirm that the horse’s muscles are supple and loose, and that it moves freely forward in clear and steady rhythm, accepting contact with the bit." Compare that to when you go to a show and see 9/10ths of the Intro and Training level horse breaking at the 3rd or 4th Vertebrae... . It is fairly clear to me that what is being said, and what is being rewarded in the ring are dichotomously split.

Personally, I don't think that a little BTV or IFoTV hurt anything... and firmly believe that both can be used as a tool to help establish relaxation and acceptance. But it seems that someone along the way said "hey BNT A puts their horse BTV for 2 steps and it helps her, so I am going to do it for 10 steps." either that or they said "oooh, pretty neck" . Once it began being rewarded in the show ring, it was all down hill from there. I have a picture from several years ago, of my 1st level debut show. My horse was quick in the canter lengthen back towards the barn, and to gain momentary control (ie, ahem...listen to me, silly boy) I over bent him on the last half so that he would not canter right out of the ring. The picture was snapped right at that moment, and he is clearly BTV. Now here's the kicker... I received a 9 on a canter lengthen that I was being almost taken of with. I figured a 6 or a 5 since the first half was great... but not a 9 :no:

[ZiggyStardust]

Those two incidents convinced me that this is a known problem, but maybe the difficult product of other issues -- including temperament ones, which was at the heart of the conversation I listened in on. Indeed, the horse they were speaking of was an OTTB. Makes me speculate that perhaps the WBs and WBxs might be more easily kept between hand and leg because of being more submissive and accepting of leg. Sheer speculation, but DO you suppose BTV is more prevalent in the hotter eventers?

Just speaking from the perspective of a one-horse owner (amateur), I was told by a dressage trainer (former eventer, who tends more toward the French dressage style) that she believed the wide hands, hold onto the face until they give style that tends to lead to BTV originated as a method for "difficult" horses (possibly those with the hotter nose in the air hollow back style). So while maybe this method has a certain place and time in training, I think it is problematic when used by a trainer as the default training method for all horses and students. I found it made my horse and I a pretty picture and we've always scored well in dressage, but it also caused tension and made him (and me) very dependent on my hands, which I was not quite to that degree previously. It seemed to (among other contributing factors) put a ceiling on our progress to excelling at more difficult dressage movements because he was not really carrying himself or using his hind end properly. This is a timely topic because we have been trying to relearn some things :)

[Viva]

I don't think we can really say "always" or "never" about much when it comes to training. Every single training strategy I can think of, as long as it's humane (still leaving the RK debate to the dressage board), has a time and a place. Yes, relaxation is the base of the training scale, but my prelim mare can't get to relaxation until she's supple and in the contact, the second and third tiers. My novice mare gets behind the bit if she goes behind the vertical (they are two VERY different things), so she has to keep her poll up all the time; the other one does well being ridden round and deep (with a focus on lengthening the neck) for a little bit before we get her into a more uphill frame. While I think we should be aiming for one ideal and bring that into the competition ring, it seems to me we have to be flexible in the methods we use to get there (again within the boundaries of humane practice) so we're working with the needs of each individual horse.
Great topic, and it's nice for it to not deteriorate into a bunch of fundamentalist rants!

[RunForIt]

or develop self-carriage? For that matter, can any of these young BN and Novice horses who we see with their noses on the vertical in tests and expected to go on around with their noses OTV (which for many = "round") IN THEIR LESSONS ever really develop the ability to work over their backs? I've got a VERY green horse and I've been in a lesson where that little guy ended the lesson with a very nice connection and he was obviously coming INTO the bit from behind, trotting around the ring with his nose on the vertical, but I wasn't MAKING him do this - all I had to do was keep the energy coming from my inside leg toward the outside leg. It was very easy for me to know this - green, GREEN rider that I am - because I'd never felt it before - BIG difference between "make him round" "use more leg, MORE LEG!" and feeling like my arms and legs were NEVER going to get fit enough and smart/effective enough to ride correctly, and the lovely feeling my horse and I had when he was asked to come from behind and we really didn't bother with his face except to ask him to barely look to the inside. Truly, the reins were shortened simply because the horse's withers kept raising as his little short back and rib cage relaxed and his hind end stepped under - he argued every once in a while but for the most part simply did the work asked of him. This is a short coupled young OTTB.

I won't take anything less now - but its damned hard to find with trainers - good, good people, just teaching and training to the test that's rewarded in the competition arena. :(

[merrygoround]

Seb, there is a difference between behind the vertical and behind the bit. You are talking about behind the bit, and these pics show behind the vertical.

On btv, I think that it is unfortunate that a certain few well known riders in this country get away with it. Then the groupies follow........

I think (and I hope!) that those without the benefit of the "halo effect" DO often get marked down for being btv, as it is definitely incorrect.

Darn you got there and said it ahead of me, again!!!! :yes:

Having been an eventer who graduated to straight dressage, I would say there is, although there should not be, a difference in approach, by the rider.

[lstevenson]

Darn you got there and said it ahead of me, again!!!! :yes:


:p:D

[Ajierene]

However, competing beginner novice last year, I felt like everyone had this packaged tiny frame that was really expected at that level to do well. Maybe I'm wrong. But I'll take an obedient horse that just isn't ready for perfectly vertical carriage any day, rather than jammed-and-crammed to "look good" when he's not progressed to a stage of training where he can go on the vertical yet. We still have a long way to go though!

Something else to consider is how long the horses have been at that level. A large issue I see with the Beginner Novice and Novice levels in eventing has to do with the people that are amateurs, riding for pleasure. Many may be cross training from straight dressage or dabbling in straight dressage. I have been at the Novice level for a number of years due to various issues. In the mean time, we have been improving our dressage (among other things). I have been to first level shows, where more is expected of the horse. When I go back and do an event show, I do not always put my mare into a frame equal to the Training level in dressage. My mare is still correct and round and technically I probably should be marked down for not being in the correct frame, but I am not - I think part of that is because judges know that at this level there are a mix of green horses working their way up, packers with green riders and seasoned amateurs that for one reason or another have not (and maybe never will) moved up the levels.

This does make it hard to accurately describe what is expected at the Novice level. This is where someone may crank their horse's head down instead of allowing the natural progression of the dressage frame.

The correct Training Level frame (Beginner Novice and Novice tests are equivalent to Training Level straight dressage) is to have the nose poked out a bit. Forward, balance, evenness are judged - the horse should look like he is getting the proper fundamentals.