Linda Parelli riding for Walter Zettl [Archive]

claire

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:28 AM

Wow. I'm amazed at the negativity. If it were any other rider besides LP, would you say the same thing?

horsepix, seigi is right on the money here :winkgrin: That is what the Parelli machine is about: $$$$ from expanding their Koolaid drinking followers.

Not that many years ago the P's out of an "interest to learn and share experiences with the eventing community" developed a similar partnership with the O'Conner Team.

The way the O'Conners sold out was a big disappointment to me. So, I guess I am not that surprised that WAZ would fall victim to the big dollar enticement the P's offer. :no:

(I wonder why we don't hear much about the partnership with the O'Conners anymore :confused: )

ps. Have you seen the new "P" Dressage saddle? You too, can ride just like Linda!!! :lol:

Mr. Zettl realized that he was getting on in years and when the Parellis made him an offer he couldn't refuse he sold out. He was known for being a very strict and picky to a fault kind of instructor - certainly nothing like what you could see on the video.

I couldn't care less about the Parellis - they're in the business to make money and will use whatever they can to achieve that goal. But yes, I could be considered negative when it comes to Herr Zettl who changed his tune completely once associated with the Ps. Call me a fool for wanting to believe in principles and honesty.... :-)

blackhorse6

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:33 AM

I agree.. parelli's bashed dressage for all it as worth so they could sell "their ideas" and so called horse training equipement.. Never liked them nor their ideas but only my opinion to which I am entitled. Now as for LP's riding. Hey, a 6 yr old can do one tempi's on a trained horse.. lets hope she can "at least" do the same? :lol::lol::lol:

blackhorse6

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:35 AM

PS she has alot of work to do.. wonder what they will come up with to teach all us DQ's to ride with their arms in the same position as LP's:eek:

Dancinglite2

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:38 AM

Thought it would be interesting to put this up and show that she does ride dressage 'normally'...

She even uses a double bridle ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy5TDrAXgNA&feature=related

Maybe so but she was riding very poorly. Bad transitions, lack of impulsion,very stiff and terrible lead changes.

Anselcat

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:43 AM

Just to throw some gasoline on this trainwreck ...

I believe that is her Dutch Warmblood Remmer, who has been owned by the Parelli's for years. She now lessons privately with Zettl several times a year (without the crowds), and will freely discuss how much she is learning and how much she doesn't know.

Carry on.

Eventer13

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:46 AM

...will freely discuss how much she is learning and how much she doesn't know.

*draw drops to the floor*

Anselcat

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:48 AM

*draw drops to the floor*

Your drawers just dropped to the floor? Eventer 13, whatever are you doing!;)

STF

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:57 AM

There was nothing in that video that would have gotten her decent scores in a test. The horse is out behind, not through and engagement is no existant.
Marketing ploy once again and all those people in the stands are not learning anything of value and THINK good ol Linda is a "dressage master!" LMAO

I was AT the PP in College Station many yrs ago where she said..... "Dressage is harmful to a horse" and went on and on about how it makes them lame, its mean to horses, etc, etc.

WAZ and the PP group got into a marketing scheme and its worked well for them, now all Parelli people (which some of the most messed up hroses I have had to start under saddlet he last 10 yrs have been Parelli based training horses) can just go on with their "bad selfs" and I would love someone like Linda Zang or Janet Foy or even better good ol Axel.... to get a hold of them in a ring! :lol:

horsechica58

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:05 PM

Herr Zettl definitely sold out to the highest bidder, and it's sad to watch him give a lesson to an average rider on a schoolmaster and use such words of praise.

Amazing what money can buy....

Seigi nailed that one on the head... :yes:

claire

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:06 PM

sorry duplicate post!

claire

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:06 PM

http://www.parellisaddles.com/

Only 4K, and you too can ride like Linda.

(Amazing, they came out with this right about the time they started their new "partnership" with WAZ) :rolleyes:

Coming soon: LP "dressage training" dvds and her majikal carrot stick dressage whips, side reins, bridles, halters and longing equipment! :D

Eventer13

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:10 PM

Your drawers just dropped to the floor? Eventer 13, whatever are you doing!;)

Excuse me my JAW dropped to the floor ;) Damn fingers aren't working today.

slc2

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:29 PM

The Pat owns one dressage horse, a Thb-Andalusian cross, that has been shown twice at training level and once at first level, but has never actually placed in a competition, according to the USEF results. It is not ridden by Linda. If it is ridden by a student of theirs, it's not a good example of how great their system is of producing success in dressage.

The video gives deeper meaning to the phrase, 'The horse is a saint'. I wonder how any of you could ever be taken in by such superficial public manouvering as what the Parellis do.

For them, dressage riders are stupid cash cows, and nothing more.

Don't ever kid yourself about that. That's all you are to them. Cash cows. And the less you know the better, because the more you'll believe them.

It looks like she is riding a little bit better than say 5-6 years ago, but still not very good.

At least she isn't quite as bad as the videos I saw of her...ahem....'eventing career', she couldn't ride at all, and gave a stunning impression of not being aware of the fact that she couldn't ride at all. I thought she was about to run the horse into the side of a building. I don't think I've ever seen such an oblivious performance.

She doesn't look quite as unstable and sloppy as she did a few years ago, but her hands are still awful, and she has a long, long way to go before I would even call her a beginner dressage rider.

About like a training level rider after 2 years of weekly lessons, but unfortunately, I think she has far too much ego, and far, far too much roughness in her, to ever actually ride well. She's just a rough, harsh person with very poor proprioception; she also lacks the suppleness and core strength she needs to ride well.

She is worse than a beginner, she acts like she doesn't even realize how bad she is. She talks like she's on the same level with the great dressage masters of all time. But so does the Pat. In fact, PAT talks like he's BETTER than the great masters of all time, so does she.

The odd thing about Linda is that she seems to have no feel at all. I'm really, really not sure how she does it. But she looks completely disconnected from the horse.

I would hate to have to reschool that horse after she got off; it would take months, the performance in that video is terrible. The horse minces or lumbers along on the forehand sprawled out worse than a lesson horse. The only reason people don't see that is that they aren't experienced enough or well trained enough to see that.

Neither she nor her husband are qualified to help anyone with their dressage. Nor is their system compatible with dressage, a substitute for dressage, or a way to improve one's dressage.

It is, indeed, very sad to see what Walter Zettl is doing these days. Evidently, he did not feel he was making enough money before; he has really become an embarrassment.

I don't actually think most people knew Walter Zettl when he was in Europe, or really, much detail about what he did there, or what his experience was. I think people assumed he was great because he talked about 'HARMONY' and his writing impressed them.

I'm not really sure anyone could match the ideal that Zettl wound up having in the mind of Americans.

The "negativity", oh poster who is wailing about people's lack of support for Madame Linda, is due to several things:

1. Not seeing good riding from Linda

2. Listening for YEARS to Linda and her LMSO talk about how bad 'dressage riders' (ALL OF THEM) ride, mimicking, ridiculing, name calling - and their audience at the time ate it up, as well as being told that dressage riders are snobby and all that poop. Frankly, I have NEVER met anyone as 'snobby' as a Parelli disciple.

3. She and her husband have championed themselves as being qualified to work with and improve dressage riders, something they are not qualified to do.

4. The aggressive marketing of their shlocky 'system', what they teach is an embarrassment to anyone that is not successfully indoctrinated - in reality it's nonsense

#'s 2, 3 and 4 are far, far more important to others, my big objection to her is that she has no business peddling herself as a dressage trainer or a 'instructor/trainer of dressage riders'; she is neither sufficiently knowledgeable nor sufficiently experienced to teach others. She has no certification, she has not shown at a level or with sufficient success to justify her teaching anyone except perhaps general riding in an Academy program (but she isn't even certified to do that), she literally has no reason to be teaching any dressage riders. She is a 'success' and 'experienced' only in a little world which is of her and her husband's own invention.

Dancinglite2

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:32 PM

[URL]
Coming soon: LP "dressage training" dvds and her majikal carrot stick dressage whips, side reins, bridles, halters and longing equipment! :D

Is this the new Parelli way to teach the piaffe using a carrot stick ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=CA&hl=en&v=DnnQt2mjPiQ

mortebella

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:44 PM

The quality of those clips is so bad (looks to me like they were shot off camera phones, and the Parellis prohibit filming, I believe, so what else could it be?) how can anybody REALLY tell that much about her riding? :confused: I can barely see the HORSE'S legs at times.

horsechica58

Mar. 15, 2009, 12:55 PM

During the changes the horse seemed way too strung out to me.. I do agree that the video wasn't the best quality...but it was pretty obvious to me that that horse was a schoolmaster. I definitely got the feeling that LP couldn't have trained that horse herself.

claire

Mar. 15, 2009, 01:07 PM

Is this the new Parelli way to teach the piaffe using a carrot stick ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=CA&hl=en&v=DnnQt2mjPiQ

:lol:

Perhaps this would be the extended canter Linda is demonstrating here?

(Their new "Fluid" saddle is essential to a perfectly executed extended canter :winkgrin: )

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

Eventer13

Mar. 15, 2009, 01:16 PM

:lol:

Perhaps this would be the extended canter Linda is demonstrating here?

(Their new "Fluid" saddle is essential to a perfectly executed extended canter :winkgrin: )

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

I'd like to know what "studies" they've done that show the ear-hip-heel position is deterimental to riding. All Olympian's must be notified, they've been doing it wrong for years. I guess that's why all their horses are on the forehand. Unlike that lovely, uphill bay Linda is riding in the picture.

claire

Mar. 15, 2009, 01:27 PM

I'd like to know what "studies" they've done that show the ear-hip-heel position is deterimental to riding. All Olympian's must be notified, they've been doing it wrong for years. I guess that's why all their horses are on the forehand. Unlike that lovely, uphill bay Linda is riding in the picture.

I must admit, I am confused by just what LP is demonstrating in that particular photo. :confused:

Maybe not an extended canter, but a XC gallop (from the O'Connor partnership days)?

(But, I sure would hate to jump a fence out of that gallop :eek: )

pintopiaffe

Mar. 15, 2009, 01:34 PM

does ANYONE who knows/rides with WAZ know... why??? :uhoh: :confused:

That's all I'll say. My house is far, far too see-through-needs-windex for me to be throwing stones at anyone.

But, I have/do wonder WHY. :sad:

merrygoround

Mar. 15, 2009, 01:57 PM

Here is a clip of Linda having a lesson with Walter at one of the Parelli Celebrations.

I have been in Sydney for the past 3 days, at the Australian Celebration, watching Linda help people with their Dressage.

Thought it would be interesting to put this up and show that she does ride dressage 'normally'...

She even uses a double bridle ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy5TDrAXgNA&feature=related

Oh Dear! Please define "normally". Her hands are awful, her arms are awful, her body is stiff.
I can't see her legs, but her upper body is enough.

Why comment? When someone sells themselves as the last word in horse training, they need to put their riding where their mouth is.

Remember the old saying "Money makes the mare go 'round".

Coreene

Mar. 15, 2009, 02:05 PM

ShannonLee

Mar. 15, 2009, 02:16 PM

I for one am amazed at the audience - if they think that work is so great? What are they used to seeing? It was just ok, completely uninspiring work.....Tolerant well trained horse, adequate rider, there seems to be no attempt on the rider or coaches part to engage the hindleg of the horse and improve the movement, which is much more important than timing for 4 tempis....

Kaelurus

Mar. 15, 2009, 02:25 PM

Dancinglite2

Mar. 15, 2009, 02:45 PM

There is a Zettle clinic coming close to where I am this year and I am thinking of going....I wonder if it would be a waste of time ?

STF

Mar. 15, 2009, 02:56 PM

There is a Zettle clinic coming close to where I am this year and I am thinking of going....I wonder if it would be a waste of time ?

After his teaming up with the PukaParelli's, I lost respect for him. I realized it was not REALLY about harmony anymore (or respect for dressage itself after yrs of Linda slamming it in public, on RDF-TV, etc), it was more about money. I dont like greedy people.

ridgeback

Mar. 15, 2009, 04:02 PM

Sadly many follow these guys and think they are Equine Gods:eek:

JLR1

Mar. 15, 2009, 08:38 PM

I still think she rides like crap, even with the help of WAZ.

309016

Mar. 15, 2009, 08:43 PM

but is she riding around with puppy paws (broken wrists)?!?! :eek:

Foxtrot's

Mar. 15, 2009, 09:22 PM

...but Waz was saying, over and over, "Gentle, gentle."

artisticgold

Mar. 15, 2009, 09:25 PM

I'm sorry if you dislike the Parellis so much...However, to judge WAZ so severely, just by association, is obvious that you don't know him at all. I've known him personally for years, and have friends that have known him for a lot longer than myself, and his integrity, honesty and committment to helping ANY rider that truly wants to form a better connection with his horse is utmost. I have watched him work with beginners, hunter-jumper riders, western riders, horses with 'issues', people with 'issues', and as long as there was a willingness to try really hard and listen to what he tells you and DO IT, then he is thrilled to work with them. I wish you knew this sweet gentleman, who is the epitome of class, and ethics. To watch him work with horses and riders that most clinicians would dismiss as beneath them, you would see how much class he has, and what a profound effect he has on their riding skills, and in turn on their horses. He has an innate ability to read horses and know what they need, I'm sure Walter can also read people very well, and if the Parellis were not honestly committed to improving their riding and therefore their relationship with their horses he would not be involved. He is always, in the long run, in it for the horses....

siegi b.

Mar. 15, 2009, 09:29 PM

artisticgold - I don't mean to be snarky, but if Herr Zettl is so good then why hasn't he been able to influence Linda in the two or three years that he's been hanging out with the Parellis? (been on their payroll)

dutchmike

Mar. 15, 2009, 09:51 PM

sam1979

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:00 PM

Mandalea... Aren't you soooooooooooo glad you started all of this?;)

amastrike

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:07 PM

The Parellis don't care about learning, they care about selling. Of course if Linda doesn't want to learn, there's nothing Walter Zettl can do about it. But what better way to look even better to your devotees, than to join up with a very good trainer? And what better way to win some new fans, than to start riding with a normal trainer? Smart business move for them, and who can blame Walter for taking the money--and probably hoping he can do some good there.

My instructor rode with him for a long time and has nothing but good things to say about him. As far as I know (which admittedly is not a whole lot), everyone in the area who knows him thinks the world of him. Hm, I'll have to remind my instructor to call him.. I would like to ride with him, even if he is (sort of) involved with the Parellis.

BoyleHeightsKid

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:09 PM

RedMare01

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:18 PM

Mandalea... Aren't you soooooooooooo glad you started all of this?;)

Uh, the OP is about 15 and has a history of starting trainwreck threads on eventing and OC. I would say give a wide berth...;)

Otherwise, unfortunate that people will sell their souls for money. I hope he is a least getting mucho $$$.

Caitlin

sam1979

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:20 PM

Noted.

FancyFree

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:26 PM

And what better way to win some new fans, than to start riding with a normal trainer?

The Parellis probably are hoping this will open them up a corner in the dressage world. Call me cynical, but I think everything they do is motivated by making money.

Sonesta

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:29 PM

Oh, guys. I assure you that WAZ is a wonderful trainer and a complete gentleman.

When I first heard about him working with the Pepperoni's I was appalled. But I have spoken with him about it several times now and I believe that he is doing it to try and help the P's actually become better riders so that their koolaid-drinking followers can get a bit better instruction.

Remember, the P's have THOUSANDS of idiots hanging on their every word. If WAZ can get through to them - even in a small way - that may get passed on to these backyard fools and can only be beneficial to the horses.

WAZ said that, marketing aside, the Ps do seem to actually care about the horses. And that is what WAZ is all about - the horses and helping them have better lives by helping their riders.

I don't think WAZ has sold out at all. I think he genuinely believes he can be of help. And I hope he is right. I totally distrust the Ps, but WAZ is no fool. He may end up doing the horse world a great service by working with these two.

As for the video of WAZ teaching LP at the public forum, I do think he has a fine line to walk, trying to teach them without making them look bad in front of their cultish followers. I would bet he's not quite the same in private sessions with them.

amastrike

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:29 PM

The Parellis probably are hoping this will open them up a corner in the dressage world. Call me cynical, but I think everything they do is motivated by making money.

Absolutely. What else could explain a $90 rope halter (or however much it costs)?

FlashGordon

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:30 PM

As amastrike and AG said, Walter does teach in this area very regularly. I had the opportunity to watch him teach one day. Yes I come form H/J land but I still I was definitely impressed. More by his demeanor, philosophy, and style of instruction.

I do think he is unique in that he is welcoming of any and all riders, and horses. In meeting him and watching him interact, I suspect this openness has less to do with the $ than it does with the fact that he really does enjoy teaching, and truly, he has a passion for horses-- of all sorts.

He is definitely a lovely man and it seemed he had a kind word for everyone. He was very nice and approachable. I don't think he was blowing smoke up anyone's ass nor giving credit where credit is not due-- he really did not strike me as that type. Simply, seemed the type to focus more on the positive aspects of a ride or horse/rider combo than the negatives. And let's face it folks a lot of people thrive in that sort of learning environment versus the opposite...

I did find his teaching style unique and I think it probably takes regular lessons and a familiarity to be able to get the most out of it. If I had a regular riding horse I'd probably take a few lessons with him myself. Not all of us are going to upper levels of this sport and the opportunity to ride with a dressage master is pretty neat, and valuable, any way you slice it.

Not sure why everyone is so hard on the man, sure the association with the Parelli's is odd, but I don't think it diminishes his credibility. At least, and most especially, not to those who have benefited from his teaching.

I wonder sometimes if WAZ even "gets" the stigma that is attached to the Parelli's. Probably not. This is a man in the twilight of his life and perhaps his working with them is, in his opinion, just another way to bring his philosophy to the masses.

Is he the guy to go to if you want to advance up the levels in a hardcore way? Probably not. But he's a cool guy with a lot of knowledge and he has his niche market. There are far worse things going on out there in the horse world than WAZ associating with NHers. :confused:

DressageGeek "Ribbon Ho"

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:32 PM

I am a First Level rider (on my good days).

Poor quality video, yes. But this is what I saw, because these are issues I am working on for myself:

(1) disconnected from her core. She is riding with her hands - there is no neutral, no give, her arms are always forward. So I don't see how she can be using her seat and core to ask him to come from behind and have thrust come from his hind end.

(2) She is often behind. And often collapsed. The second clip, where she is transitioning from a canter? I think? Very obvious there. So, if she is not in balance, she is making it that much harder for the horse.

(3) If the opening clips were piaffe, not much articulation there (which is not surprising, as she cannot effectively use her body to ask appropriately, and support her horse).

I couldn't see, due to the quality of the video, whether his back was swinging (or even his tail movement, so I can't speak as to relaxation. He did not appear to have much overstep in his strides.

But I'd say, for a first level rider on a schoolmaster, she's not doing too badly. And I concur with slc2 ("that horse is a saint!"). I would expect I'd look pretty much the same as LP.

...so does this mean I too can ride with WAZ?

FancyFree

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:36 PM

WAZ said that, marketing aside, the Ps do seem to actually care about the horses. And that is what WAZ is all about - the horses and helping them have better lives by helping their riders.

When put that way, it would seem pretty noble on Mr. Zettl's part. But the Pepperonis are ALL ABOUT the marketing. Their whole empire is built on tricks and gimmicks, ripping off their fearful/clueless followers. It may be very naive for WAZ to think he can get through to them. But good on him if those are truly his intentions. Maybe we'll see a radical transformation with the Pepperonis.

amastrike

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:40 PM

DressageGeek: Yes, you can ride with him. I'm a training level rider at best, and as I mentioned, I want to ride with him. My instructor showed first level years ago (the horse wasn't capable of higher, though my instructor is a wonderful rider), and hasn't shown at all in the three years I've been riding with her. You don't need to be a big time rider to ride with him... seems to me, you only need to want to learn. Heck, I seem to remember someone talking about riding with him in a western saddle!

I have yet to meet Walter, but he seems like a great trainer and just a good man. I'll ask my instructor about riding with him next time I remember.

Sonesta

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:44 PM

Fancyfree, I am with you in that I think WAZ may be a bit naive. But I assure you that this IS his belief and goal. He will work with ANYONE that wants to learn and cares about their horses. He sees them as just a couple of people that want to learn - and happen to have influence on thousands of others.

I would guess he almost sees it as his duty to help them so that better info is passed on.

I pray it works out well. There are so many who think so highly of WAZ that if the Ps take advantage of him and hurt this wonderful man in any way, they may find themselves getting rotten tomatos thrown at them in their clinics by some of us.

Whisper

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:46 PM

I think the thread and video title is misleading, since riding *for* him implies that he hired her to ride.

As to the audience, it's a Parelli event - they're going to clap and cheer no matter what she does, as long as she doesn't fall off.

I had the impression even before WAZ started working with the Parellis that he's perfectly willing to work with any rider at any level, just that some clinic organizers limit participants because attendance would be oversubscribed. I think WAZ is using the connection with the P's as a way to reach out to the mass market of horse people who *aren't* aware of dressage, and to try to bring some of those concepts to their awareness.

DressageGeek "Ribbon Ho"

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:50 PM

amastrike - WAZ did have clinics in this area, if he came back I would jump through hoops to ride with him, I love his books. My barn would host him in a nanosecond.

FlashGordon

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:51 PM

I had the impression even before WAZ started working with the Parellis that he's perfectly willing to work with any rider at any level, just that some clinic organizers limit participants because attendance would be oversubscribed. I think WAZ is using the connection with the P's as a way to reach out to the mass market of horse people who *aren't* aware of dressage, and to try to bring some of those concepts to their awareness.

For me, watching him teach sparked an interest in dressage. Even as he sits there teaching you can tell he is riding every step himself in a way. His quiet, but intense style was appealing and it did dissolve a lot my preconceived notions about dressage and dressage training.

I do think he is a good ambassador for the sport to the general horsey public. He is not intimidating, nor does he have an intimidating style.... Not the scary drill sergeant I thought a "dressage master" may be.

Whisper

Mar. 15, 2009, 10:56 PM

Precisely! I don't think the association with the Parellis should be considered him selling out, it's helping him reach out to more people who aren't aware of dressage! I haven't been able to work with him myself, but he posts occasionally on a different board I frequent, and I loved "Dressage In Harmony."

DressageGeek "Ribbon Ho"

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:01 PM

I think for the true masters, the horse always comes first, what is best for the horse.

I think, even though it is very demanding, it is critical to think this way.

Yesterday we had a lesson outside, we could really move and do patterns (finally, the ground has thawed! And our indoor is very small, so it has its limitations patternwise). I did not ride all week - I have been working late to meet deadlines, am at the computer or microscope, I have been hunched over. When I did go to the barn, it was still cold, too cold to really do much in the saddle. So I had my excuses. And at my age, it is really not very easy for me to say, "Um, body? Yes, you. Totally relax now. That five hours you spent with a cricked neck looking through the eye piece? It's like it never happened." Because my body says, "WTF? Are you freaking NUTS??? Get REAL."

And so, when I rode, my horse was not being disobedient, he was simply being inhibited by my body being tense, being stuck. This is not something you can cajole. My horse was doing exactly what I was permitting him to do. And every few seconds, from my trainer, it was,"Fix this. Fix that. Do this. Do that. Feel how you are blocking him? RELAX LADY." etc etc etc.

And I was disheartened, because, well, it wasn't my fault. Right? I mean, it's not like I was slacking all week. But in all honesty - my trainer was absolutely spot on. It doesn't matter, any of it. I have to learn how best to ask my body to be flexible and relaxed and strong, or I can't ask the same of my horse, I will only make it harder for him (see the thread on ruining a few horses on your path to dressage capability).

She wasn't mad at me. She was doing her best to try and help me to do what is best for my horse.

And I think the best dressage trainers - the best trainers, in any discipline - that is what they are all about.

Coreene

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:30 PM

Maybe we'll see a radical transformation with the Pepperonis. Maybe tomorrow morning my Kia Sportage will have grown up into a big Merc SUV and I'll be dating George Clooney. :lol: :lol: :lol:

pintopiaffe

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:32 PM

I have watched him work with beginners, hunter-jumper riders, western riders, horses with 'issues', people with 'issues', and as long as there was a willingness to try really hard and listen to what he tells you and DO IT, then he is thrilled to work with them. I wish you knew this sweet gentleman, who is the epitome of class, and ethics.

I agree 110% with all you posted AG, and I've seen and felt the "Walter effect" on both myself and loved mentors...

I'll have to try to believe both you and Sonesta, that he thinks it is worth this... that he's doing it to try to make a difference for the horse. But I still think the 'association' is less than positive publicity *for him.*

And perhaps it is stretched... does he actually "endorse" them? I dunno.

I would ride with him again in a HEARTBEAT given the chance. I would kill to ride with him with my current horse. It's been probably 15 years since I did ride with him, and I'd like to think I could USE the instruction better these days... ;)

FancyFree

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:36 PM

Maybe tomorrow morning my Kia Sportage will have grown up into a big Merc SUV and I'll be dating George Clooney. :lol: :lol: :lol:

If he manages to influence the Pepperonis, anything is possible. :lol:

Sadly, while it may be a sincere undertaking on Mr. Zettl's part, I can only see the Pepperonis as avaricious, greedy con people.

Xanthoria

Mar. 15, 2009, 11:43 PM

...if you lie down with dogs, you'll get up with fleas.

anyone got some Advantage for poor ol' WAZ? :no:

Dressage Art

Mar. 16, 2009, 12:15 AM

It doesn't look good, but in this economy I can't blame him.

Sabine

Mar. 16, 2009, 01:51 AM

There is a Zettle clinic coming close to where I am this year and I am thinking of going....I wonder if it would be a waste of time ?

This is all VERY LAME! It appears that both the Ps and WAZ are now 'has beens'....how time flies...and to pay money for this??? AMAZING!

Knights Mom

Mar. 16, 2009, 03:59 AM

Sonesta has summed up my feelings rather well.

I have ridden with WAZ numerous times and have also had the opportunity to speak with him privately driving him to the airport after some clinics.

He is a wonderful instructor who is not only world class, but has world class as well. He can be open and candid privately, and indeed is between a rock and parelli place when he teaches in front of the audience. Did you expect him to chastise LP to your satisfaction? He just doesn't do that, even for us little riders. As long as you're willing to listen and at least try, he'll help you all he can.

What WAZ dislikes is folks who attend clinics who are there to showboat and not learn. Should LP get to be blatant about it, there will be trouble.

There were comments that not everyone can ride with WAZ. That is untrue. My first clinic experience with him consisted of his teaching my OTTB with no right lead how to achieve that right lead upon my request. And I'm a nobody.... just a run of the mill ammy owner.

I believe that WAZ saw in his partnership with the P's a way to promote dressage to large audiences, get his message through, plus make a few bucks in the process. Nothing wrong with that, and I dare say most people (if not all) reading this board would do the same thing, even if someone else didn't like it.

No one has a bigger dislike of the Parelli's than I. WAZ himself knows I feel this way as I've posted such on other forums, and stated such to him directly. But he is a big boy, quite aware of the horse world, and doesn't have to justify himself to me or anyone and I believe genuinely wants to help anyone who asks.

WAZ's message is consistant and clear: Respect the horse, ride in harmony and dressage will be beautiful, fluid and unforced. He markets only training reference materials such as books and DVD's, and has no carrot sticks.

His training has helped both me and my horse immensely, and anyone who has seen us progress will attest to that.

ridgeback

Mar. 16, 2009, 08:32 AM

I want to clarify I'm not a Parelli fan but they have done some good work when it comes to horsemanship. Parelli came to Lex to work with the nastiest TB stallion in the business and did a great job from what I heard. Working in the industry, I'm at the same trade shows they are and trust me when it comes to riding I cringe.

Anselcat

Mar. 16, 2009, 01:03 PM

Parelli came to Lex to work with the nastiest TB stallion in the business and did a great job from what I heard.

Was that the stallion who had a bit attached to his halter, which he wore at all times, so the barn staff could handle him?

ridgeback

Mar. 16, 2009, 01:13 PM

Was that the stallion who had a bit attached to his halter, which he wore at all times, so the barn staff could handle him?

Had not heard that but I know he was really really mean and very few could handle him.

ChelseaR

Mar. 16, 2009, 01:43 PM

She's riding western in an english saddle...
Pretty much an average rider - nothing special.

STF

Mar. 16, 2009, 04:04 PM

Ok.....
Being I know for a fact that Rebecca (Sonesta) has had many first hand converstaions with Walter and I know Rebeccca well enough to know she does not coat words or phrases, Im sure what she is telling is true.
Maybe WAZ is trying to honestly help them and in return open the eyes to all the nasty ass lies the Pukarellis have spread over the years of our sport.
Either way, LP is still and always will be worthless in my eyes after I listened to her spew the most insane nonesense in College Station a few yrs ago. She can still kiss my big white ass.

STF

Mar. 16, 2009, 04:05 PM

She's riding western in an english saddle...
Pretty much an average rider - nothing special.

:winkgrin:
Amen sista!

egontoast

Mar. 16, 2009, 06:01 PM

Was LP there teaching the masses dressage? Do I have that right?:eek::eek::eek:

Was WAZ putting on clinics or was he just part of the parelli sideshow? If the latter, that is too bad. If they want to expand their $$$$ franchise into the realm of previously maligned dressage training, they should just let WAZ teach the cult members. It would be sad to think of WAZ as a trained monkey. I hope that is not the case. If he has become that, I guess I will throw my Dressage in Harmony/Hermoney into the furnace in disgust.

Parelli came to Lex to work with the nastiest TB stallion in the business and did a great job from what I heard.

Good God. I guess it must be true if YOU "heard" that.:lol:

ridgeback

Mar. 16, 2009, 06:27 PM

Was LP there teaching the masses dressage? Do I have that right?:eek::eek::eek:

Was WAZ putting on clinics or was he just part of the parelli sideshow? If the latter, that is too bad. If they want to expand their $$$$ franchise into the realm of previously maligned dressage training, they should just let WAZ teach the cult members. It would be sad to think of WAZ as a trained monkey. I hope that is not the case. If he has become that, I guess I will throw my Dressage in Harmony/Hermoney into the furnace in disgust.

Good God. I guess it must be true if YOU "heard" that.:lol:

Hey Egontoast aka JA I said I work in the industry so it's not like I"m hearing it on a board like this...DA

Hrsedq

Mar. 16, 2009, 07:32 PM

Hrsedq

Mar. 16, 2009, 07:38 PM

ouch:)

Say it like it is

WildWest

Mar. 16, 2009, 07:44 PM

If after riding with a trainer for 2 years they could not fix those awful piano hands and stiff arms then its clear either Linda is not listening or trying or shes not being told she has awful hands.

Lordy I have plenty of kids that come to me with hands like this and its never taken me two years to fix them.

Dancinglite2

Mar. 16, 2009, 09:13 PM

This is all VERY LAME! It appears that both the Ps and WAZ are now 'has beens'....how time flies...and to pay money for this??? AMAZING!

Considering it would be for the young person riding my horse that has little dressage knowledge it could be useful.

I have always been of the thought that knowledge is knowledge and unless you equate the Parelli's as little green men with brain sucking devices, something should still be useful in WAZ's head.;)

JumpingJambos

Mar. 16, 2009, 09:32 PM

They were all halucinating after drinking the koolaid ;)

I don't understand all the koolaid references....??? lol.

Sonesta

Mar. 16, 2009, 10:30 PM

pintopiaffe

Mar. 16, 2009, 10:49 PM

Damn I feel old now. :lol: :uhoh:

Knights Mom

Mar. 17, 2009, 03:29 AM

WAZ has definitely told me on more than one occasion: "Thumbs up my dear." Then, he'll turn to the auditors and explain more deeply "You see when the thumbs are up then you'll have a straight line......." and he goes on to explain the whole dynamics of hand use and placement.

Methinks she just can't stop an old, bad habit.

Just taking a lesson with WAZ doesn't turn you into a superstar overnight. And I don't know how often LP has trained with him, but I'm thinking it's probably bimonthly at best, and for a couple of days at a time.

We all know bad habits are hard to break and LP probably isn't taking lessons from anyone else. And whose better than her? Being PAID to take lessons with WAZ. (Wish I woulda thought of that)

My guess would be that WAZ doesn't care if she's a dressage superstar. In fact, he probably prefers that she have holes and flaws. Then, he can show a huge audience full of holed and flawed wannabe riders how things can be fixed, and can show them how to do it immediately and without force.

WAZ is showing the audience possibilities exist and are real. Dressage in harmony and without force.

That's WAZ's message. His message is NOT that LP is without flaw. He's not promoting LP, he's promoting dressage.

And, in an ironic twist, he's using the Parelli's to do it.

Symbiosis.

Tucked_Away

Mar. 17, 2009, 07:20 AM

Kyzteke

Mar. 17, 2009, 07:29 AM

The koolaide references refer to the Jim Jones cult, where Jim Jones controlled all the cult members to the point that he finally ordered them all to drink koolaid that was laced with poison and they all died.

Someone who has "drunk the koolaid" is someone who has been so brainwashed that they will do anything the cult leader says to do, without regard to whether it makes sense or is good for them.

Yeah -- you know, like all those DQs who think Anky is the end-all & be-all of dressage, and what she & her ilk are doing is "harmony, lightness, partnership". Those Kool-Aid consumers.

I find it interesting that WAZ prefers to be associated with the Parellis rather than some of the more...arghhh...*successful* modern dressage competitors.

Whereas every single person who really knows this fine old gentlemen confirms he TRULY is
"all about the horse."

I leave it to the rest of you to connect the dots.

There...I've thrown enough gasoline on the fire...I'm going back to bed.

slc2

Mar. 17, 2009, 07:34 AM

You guys should realize, not everyone is going to agree with this spin doctoring.

Anselcat

Mar. 17, 2009, 08:09 AM

You guys should realize, not everyone is going to agree with this spin doctoring.

And you should realize that, shocking as it is, not everyone will agree with your views either.

Viva la difference!

slc2

Mar. 17, 2009, 08:25 AM

After 10 yrs here, I do, in fact, realize that. But the spin on this situation - no, I can't go along with that interpretation. WAZ has been built up in the community and his actions are viewed under a golden halo - if someone else did this, the negative reaction would be much, much more.

webmistress32

Mar. 17, 2009, 09:19 AM

Knight's Mom (Walter Z is) not promoting LP, he's promoting dressage.

yep.

great stuff.

Sonesta

Mar. 17, 2009, 11:15 AM

Thank DOG for the ignore button.

MassageLady

Mar. 18, 2009, 03:24 PM

What I find amusing is that nobody has mentioned that the Parelli's are sliding more towards 'traditional' riding, learning from WAZ, making their 'cradle bridle', etc. This is completely hysterical to me, since they have been the ones screaming from the rooftops how horrible dressage is, how horrible the bits and bridles are (promoting riding bridleless or only with a halter)...now they are doing what they have been screaming about others doing.:lol:

As far as her riding...let's just say that I've seen better, hands are bad, the horse has no impulsion whatsoever, yet I'm sure the audience was amazed at her 'accomplishment'. Please, let's put her in a show ring and see how she does.:winkgrin:

Icecapade

Mar. 18, 2009, 03:28 PM

Druid Acres

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:16 PM

I audited a WAZ clinic several years ago - it was fun and I learned some things. He's worth auditing, IMHO. Not sure about riding in one, though.

And since nobody else has said it, regarding the video, where is Linda's helmet?????

starkissed

Mar. 18, 2009, 05:25 PM

I just wanted to mention that Linda has had Remmer, her horse, since he was 3 years old. So if he is a 'dressage schoolmaster' now, most likely it is the training she has put into him. He does have fancy dressage bloodlines (sired by iron spring farm rampal).
I don't think Linda is the greatest rider by any means (it is kind of scary watching her jump) but she has worked really hard with the dressage and I have seen them several times and she most definitely has improved. Still doesnt look terribly elegant aboard though.

But for the horse, he is definitely 'parelli trained' he does bridless, halter, liberty, all that stuff and is fantastic at it too.

STF

Mar. 18, 2009, 06:48 PM

But for the horse, he is definitely 'parelli trained' he does bridless, halter, liberty, all that stuff and is fantastic at it too.

Most serious riders dont find that crap very impressive. Honestly they see it as a dog and pony show for types of people who cant ride. End of story.

TheHunterKid90

Mar. 18, 2009, 07:19 PM

hahaha, I find it so funny that LP is supposed to be a natural horsemanship trainer etc etc....and WAZ said "gentle, gentle, gentle...." about 10 times...oh boy. :lol:

NoDQhere

Mar. 18, 2009, 09:46 PM

AZ Native

Mar. 18, 2009, 11:00 PM

I'm pretty sure that is not LP's horse "Remmer" in that video.

Yes, it is.

Equa

Mar. 19, 2009, 05:18 AM

So, where in Sydney was this Parelli extravaganza? Doesn't look like the SIEC indoor (maybe it has been camouflaged by the decor and camera phone quality). Don't recognise the sainted conveyance LP is "riding"...can you fill us in, dear OP?

Sadly, I am clearly out of the Parelli loop....sigh....

mandalea

Mar. 19, 2009, 05:31 AM

It was at SIEC..

That video was taken in the US..

They didn't bring any horses over this year, because they were doing mainly clinic type stuff, and had Lauren Barwick over, telling her story, and had a rescue horse they worked with, and had a 'Spotlight' for students to show how far they have gotten in the course.

And yes, she is riding Remmer.

And for the record, you guys b*tching about her, is like me saying Anky, Andreas or Isabel Worth cant ride to save their lives..

slc2

Mar. 19, 2009, 06:19 AM

Not really. Their hands are better, and they don't sit on the horse like a sack of potatoes. They also have horses that score better, there are fundamental things wrong with how Linda's horse is performing as a number of people have pointed out here.

Nother words, Linda don't surf.

Ware Whip!

Mar. 19, 2009, 06:57 AM

* whistles* :winkgrin:

Icecapade

Mar. 19, 2009, 07:50 AM

It was at SIEC..

And for the record, you guys b*tching about her, is like me saying Anky, Andreas or Isabel Worth cant ride to save their lives..

well, while I understand your if you say this its like me saying that etc etc etc...

except those are world class Olympic riders. She on the other hand as good as she *might* be, is not. So that argument is totally specious and completely illlogical.

webmistress32

Mar. 19, 2009, 08:28 AM

... bridless, halter, liberty, all that stuff ... Most serious riders dont find that crap very impressive. Honestly they see it as a dog and pony show for types of people who cant ride.

obviously you have never seen Stacey Westfall ride http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj0jp9Ko35Q

if that's not some damn good riding, then I don't know what damn good riding is.

slc2

Mar. 19, 2009, 08:33 AM

It's cute, but it's also a hell of a lot easier to ride without a bridle and without stirrups, than it is to ride with 'em.

FriesianX

Mar. 19, 2009, 08:47 AM

It was at SIEC..

And for the record, you guys b*tching about her, is like me saying Anky, Andreas or Isabel Worth cant ride to save their lives..

I think one of the issues with Linda Parelli is that she has, for so many years, very publicly disdained Dressage and those who ride dressage. And - I can speak from experience, having been stuck next to the Parellis at a big Expo a few years back - she did a "sound system check" every morning with a rant against dressage riders - OVER THE LOUD SPEAKER. Comments included "Oh, I tried dressage, then I learned how to really ride a horse", and "Oh, I'm a DQ, I can't ride, but I look good", etc. So, to be honest, she has brought much of this on to herself.

webmistress32

Mar. 19, 2009, 09:00 AM

she has, for so many years, very publicly disdained Dressage and those who ride dressage

agreed. however you have to give her props for finally seeing the light.

it might be about the money with them - but let's face it lots of folks hate dressage until they really learn what it's all about - then it becomes a passion!

I always hated dressage, it was just something to get through to do Cross Country. now that I'm older and have a talented WB, it's like a brand new riding life for me. I spend a lot more effort, time and $$ on dressage now than on my jumping. the big benefit is that my jumping improves from all the dressage work!

I don't remember making fun of dressage and dressage riders but I might have. now, I know better.

DLee

Mar. 19, 2009, 09:11 AM

Looks like she is having a lesson on a school master. One thing is certain, though, thats no Parelli trained horse.

I do think it's funny that many of you claimed there is no way that was a Parelli horse. :lol::lol::lol:

ASBnTX

Mar. 19, 2009, 09:38 AM

It's cute, but it's also a hell of a lot easier to ride without a bridle and without stirrups, than it is to ride with 'em.

I would love to see Isabell Werth riding Satchmo without a bridle and stirrups! :winkgrin:

NoDQhere

Mar. 19, 2009, 10:18 AM

I do think it's funny that many of you claimed there is no way that was a Parelli horse. :lol::lol::lol:

I actually said "Parelli trained horse".

My point was that she was riding the horse on contact *:eek:* and actually had a bridle *:eek:* on it. Not exactly things you are going to do with Pepperoni training. So Linda for years has ranted and raved against Dressage and "traditional" training. Now, suddenly, here she is, apparently trying to do "traditional" dressage. I am agasted, but not impressed. The bottom line is that the Pepperonis have seen the dollar signs in the dressage community and they want a piece of THAT pie.

And while it would be commendable if LP was actually in it for the learning, I doubt that is the case.

Comparing LP to Olympic Champions is IMO, :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Coreene

Mar. 19, 2009, 10:32 AM

Pepperoni. Proof that PT Barnum was right. ;)

kaluha2

Mar. 19, 2009, 12:51 PM

Eventer13

Mar. 19, 2009, 01:20 PM

" He markets only training reference materials such as books and DVD's, and has no carrot sticks."

My dear, maybe you have not heard of the "Cradle Bridle."

I wonder if he is still allowing LP to ride "dressage" in one of those contraptions???

A sell out-----why absolutely yes.

All for the horse/dressage----my ass!

Carry on.

LP really rides dressage in one of those things?

I don't suppose LP has actually ever competed in a recognized dressage show? Or is she too good for that?

FancyFree

Mar. 19, 2009, 01:44 PM

agreed. however you have to give her props for finally seeing the light.

Has she? Maybe she just sees another market.

fish

Mar. 19, 2009, 01:48 PM

He was known for being a very strict and picky to a fault kind of instructor - certainly nothing like what you could see on the video.

When did that happen?? I took a clinic with WZ 19 years ago and found him anything but "very strict and picky to a fault." My experience with him was, in fact, uniquely soothing-- it was as if he were riding my horse through me, to the accompaniment of things like "volte left, slow, straight ahead... I like your mare" (with "I like your mare" a continuing refrain). It was one of the best, softest rides of my life, and I spent years trying to figure out how he made it happen-- the lesson was all direction with no theory or explanation-- which made me very happy to see his book come out so I could get more insight into his operative theory.

I've spoken to many others who took from him at that time and their experiences were much the same.

Sandy M

Mar. 19, 2009, 02:19 PM

I would love to see Isabell Werth riding Satchmo without a bridle and stirrups! :winkgrin:

There is a Paralympic dressage competitor at a high level who does exactly that in exhibitions. Actually, she has a dispensation and competes at recognized shows stirrupless, but she also does bridleless exhibitions. I'm sorry I can't remember her name. She is also a dressage judge. Can someone else come up with the name for me/us?
She has some nerve condition from an injury that makes riding with stirrup pressure on her feet very painful.

Jane Savoie

Mar. 19, 2009, 02:26 PM

Robin Bruekman?

Sandy M

Mar. 19, 2009, 02:42 PM

Robin Bruekman?

Yes, thank you. I'm pretty sure you're correct that that's the person. I remember seeing a picture of her doing her bridless exhibition.

In fact, having gotten the name, I googled her and got this. Unfortunately, no pics of her bridleless exhibition ride, but nice pics of her riding, stirrupless.

http://www.theracelleq.com/Rider-Feature-Robin-Brueckmann

Dressage Art

Mar. 19, 2009, 03:32 PM

When did that happen?? I took a clinic with WZ 19 years ago and found him anything but "very strict and picky to a fault." My experience with him was, in fact, uniquely soothing-- it was as if he were riding my horse through me, to the accompaniment of things like "volte left, slow, straight ahead... I like your mare" (with "I like your mare" a continuing refrain). It was one of the best, softest rides of my life, and I spent years trying to figure out how he made it happen-- the lesson was all direction with no theory or explanation-- which made me very happy to see his book come out so I could get more insight into his operative theory.

I've spoken to many others who took from him at that time and their experiences were much the same.
Your wording of "riding thru me" is interesting. I experienced that feeling with only one instructor, and it's amazing!!!

I never audited or rode with WAZ, but have his DVDs and often when I watch them I wander how does he gets the results with his seemingly "soothing" manner... and he definitely does gets results...

Some of his regular students said that his manner of teaching is the same as Karl Mikolka's... but that gets me even more confused, since I didn't find KM "soothing" so to speak...

mbm

Mar. 19, 2009, 04:00 PM

I never audited or rode with WAZ, but have his DVDs and often when I watch them I wander how does he gets the results with his seemingly "soothing" manner... and he definitely does gets results....

this makes me sad..... kindness and gentleness do work. but - there is a difference between kindness/gentleness and not being an effective rider/trainer. in other words - you can be kind and gentle and *still* be effective.

NoDQhere

Mar. 19, 2009, 04:21 PM

LP really rides dressage in one of those things?

I don't suppose LP has actually ever competed in a recognized dressage show? Or is she too good for that?

Maybe Linda did, back when she was "torturing" her horse trying to do Dressage in her native OZ. However, both her and MMM (Mr. Mighty Mustache) have stated on numerous occasions that they won't show because it would disrupt the "bond" they have with their horses.

Never mind how much easier it is to be THE GREATEST when you never put yourself in a position to be Judged.

MassageLady

Mar. 19, 2009, 04:56 PM

Never mind how much easier it is to be THE GREATEST when you never put yourself in a position to be Judged.:lol::lol::yes:
Boy, if that ain't the truth! I love how she excuses herself from the show world by saying she only wants to compete against herself. Easy to be #1 when you do that.:yes:

VickyT

Mar. 20, 2009, 10:59 AM

mbm, I agree with you: "you can be kind and gentle and *still* be effective"

Don't most of us (certainly, I do) want full rapport and trust with our horses, and for them to join us mentally, emotionally, and physically when we ride them? That's my goal; I am not there yet, but it's my goal.

I saw Linda and Remmer in person during a recent lesson she had with WZ in Feb 09 in FL. Her dressage skills have improved greatly since I last saw her ride in Mar 08. Isn't that everyone's goal, to improve? Better still, her horse was happy and relaxed and trying to please her during the entire lesson...to me, that is the greatest compliment I could ever want.

I don't know Linda personally, but I have never heard or read any claim that she is an upper level dressage rider. I applaud her for introducing dressage in hew own way at their exhibitions to many, many people who have never heard of the sport, or have only seen/remember the uglier side of dressage competitions. We've all seen this side, haven't we?

Anyway, I spent too much time reading/pondering these posts...now I am going outside to enjoy my horses. Best to all.

meupatdoes

Mar. 20, 2009, 07:50 PM

I wander how does he gets the results with his seemingly "soothing" manner...

I would think much more quickly and easily than if he were to employ a seemingly abrasive one.

Dressage Art

Mar. 20, 2009, 08:09 PM

I would think much more quickly and easily than if he were to employ a seemingly abrasive one.
he-he-he by the way the "soothing manner" comment was about people, not horses. I personally never met any instructor who is as complimentary as he seems to be to his students. Really, just listen to what he sais:

"Click, click, click, soft, give, up, YES, let go, YEAAAAAAS, did you see it? Half halt, Wonderful! Gentle, easy, good. In the right moment! Now, now, YES, gentle, excellent, easy, good, shorter, gentle, half halt, YES, good-so!"

and those were the directions for riding passage and tempi flying changes ;) but I guess it's obvious for you how to learn passage and tempi flying changes with those direction so keep on going, you lucky you :lol:

Sonesta

Mar. 20, 2009, 09:52 PM

he-he-he by the way the "soothing manner" comment was about people, not horses. I personally never met any instructor who is as complimentary as he seems to be to his students. Really, just listen to what he sais:

"Click, click, click, soft, give, up, YES, let go, YEAAAAAAS, did you see it? Half halt, Wonderful! Gentle, easy, good. In the right moment! Now, now, YES, gentle, excellent, easy, good, shorter, gentle, half halt, YES, good-so!"

and those were the directions for riding passage and tempi flying changes ;) but I guess it's obvious for you how to learn passage and tempi flying changes with those direction so keep on going, you lucky you :lol:

Oh, my. Reading that, I think it's important to note that you need to BE THERE to understand. Taking a couple of lines completely out of context conveys NOTHING of what is being taught and understood.

After an hour of more explicit info, he can say such things and the rider knows EXACTLY what he is conveying. It doesn't translate to print well at all.

Dressage Art

Mar. 20, 2009, 10:55 PM

It doesn't translate to print well at all.You can listen to it as well ;) Here is a link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy5TDrAXgNA&feature=related

mbm

Mar. 20, 2009, 11:47 PM

well, in defense of WAZ, the video clips are just short *clips* of what i would assume were longer lessons?

and i would also assume that this isnt the first time WAZ has worked with LP and so she would understand what he was getting at, nor do i think this is the first time she has attempted the stuff she is riding.

i know that my trainer, once he has given me explicit directions (if they are needed) will give feed back very similar to what WAZ is giving.... mostly it is about TIMING and remembering to GIVE (and give again) and to be GENTLE ... (or in my case, to be more firm and determined )

i have never worked with WAZ, so i could be full of it - but the content of his book is very very similar to what i am taught (ie german school)

and my trainer is very gentle too. and yet effective. so it is possible :)

AZ TD

Mar. 21, 2009, 12:19 AM

Most of the people at my barn ride more effectively than LP with the horse more forward and straight. I cannot understand the applause for her mediocre performance. It is OK, a work in progress, but not worth of applause beyond the cult of personality
Theresa

Dressage Art

Mar. 21, 2009, 02:41 PM

I cannot understand the applause for her mediocre performance.Just like I can not understand the high praise from the Dressage Master for her mediocre performance such as "YEAAAAAAS!!! Wonderful! Good! Excellent! YESS! GOOD-so!" It seems that he is really, I mean REALLY exited and happy to see what she produces :confused:

pintopiaffe

Mar. 21, 2009, 03:30 PM

After an hour of more explicit info, he can say such things and the rider knows EXACTLY what he is conveying. It doesn't translate to print well at all.

:yes: That is his brilliance, IMO, the TIMING. He can get into your body/head and say the aid, in enough time for you to hear it, translate it and give it at the precisely right moment. I've seen so many people 'surprised' into the softest, lightest, most balanced walk-canter transition, or first 1/2 pirouette by that brilliance of timing.

Now, I can't SEE the whole video in discussion. My angst is just over the alliance. Which, in the end, is really none of my business, is it. :uhoh: I haven't had the privilege of riding with Walter in years... while I "feel" some emotions about the situation, it doesn't really effect me now, does it. :no:

Ambrey

Mar. 21, 2009, 03:44 PM

PhoenixFarm

Mar. 21, 2009, 03:47 PM

Just like I can not understand the high praise from the Dressage Master for her mediocre performance such as "YEAAAAAAS!!! Wonderful! Good! Excellent! YESS! GOOD-so!" It seems that he is really, I mean REALLY exited and happy to see what she produces :confused:

Ok, no dog in this fight, not a fan of PP and LP, rode in a few clinics with WZ when I lived in the east and got a lot out of them. FInd the partnership odd and disturbing, but ultimately it had nothing to do with me.

But this quote makes me wonder about how other people teach and view the progression of dressage. I have a student who when she first came to me couldn't get her horse to canter in less than half the ring (you know the kind--trot, slightly faster trot, bouncing, slightly bigger and faster trot, tipping, kicking, and ohmyogd heave and can-ter, LOL). We have now progressed to getting canter transitions on the letter, though admittedly they aren't always perfect tens. Sometimes his head comes up. Sometimes he falls in. But my instruction of her sounds very much like what is described above--because I know how hard she is trying, I know how far we have come, and I know that saying, "Well THAT was crap, you want to get a 5 at the show?" will only make her fall apart and ride worse. If we haven't had a perfect transition, we always do another one, and we work through what can make it better, but truly, supporting people who are learning works a whole lot better than telling them they suck. If you want to ride GP at the Olympics, then admittedly you might need a more aggressive approach, but most people have no such aspirations, and would not excell in that environment.

When I cliniced with WZ I was on a VERY challenging horse, where a good days was staying in the ring. I greatly appreciated his very soothing approach, and got a lot out of the rides and out of the horse as a result.

Ambrey

Mar. 21, 2009, 03:50 PM

PhoenixFarm

Mar. 21, 2009, 04:00 PM

The "well, that was crap" comment is for things you know your student knows how to do and is not concentrating on or not doing her best on.

It has its place too, but some teachers actually can teach without anything but positive reinforcement. The secret is that you say NOTHING when the performance isn't an improvement.

Works on dogs and horses too ;)

Some students, yes. I've got no problem using stronger language, or sarcasm, or silence. That suits their style of learning. But I've got several students here who can't handle even that. They in fact have come here from other barns convinced that they can't ride, never will be able to, and should take up tennis. To see their smiles when they realize they CAN actually do things and progress with their horse is gratifying. You have to adapt to your students and their needs. I am in no way advocating lying to them and telling something is perfect when it isn't. But I do advocate saying to a certain kind of student, "THAT WAS GREAT! Good girl, right on the letter. Now, if I was being picky I'd say you didn't quite keep him straight, so let's trot and try again, and use our legs and seat to keep him straight, but super job on the accuracy there. "

'Course I'll be the first to admit I know diddly about what kind of learner LP is, and maybe he is just humoring her, LOL. But, I do think there is a certain type of student that needs positive reinforcement rather than any hint of negative.

Ambrey

Mar. 21, 2009, 04:07 PM

'Course I'll be the first to admit I know diddly about what kind of learner LP is, and maybe he is just humoring her, LOL. But, I do think there is a certain type of student that needs positive reinforcement rather than any hint of negative.

Of course, good teachers can adjust their style :) And if you find you have a student that just glows and prospers with a lot of positive reinforcement, you'd be silly not to use that knowledge!

But from what I've read here, WAZ tends to always use positive over negative. It's a perfectly valid teaching method, depending entirely on the timing of the praise (positive reinforcement).

Dressage Art

Mar. 21, 2009, 06:43 PM

"Better" doesn't = "excellent" and "WOW!!!"

But your feedback explains why I see some people in tears when they hear a frank feedback from not overly rewarding instructors.

Ambrey

Mar. 21, 2009, 07:38 PM

"Better" doesn't = "excellent" and "WOW!!!"

But your feedback explains why I see some people in tears when they hear a frank feedback from not overly rewarding instructors.

Teaching with only "frank feedback" and no reward is actually not a very efficient technique. Positive reinforcement is the gold standard of learning theory. And anyone who has taught anything will know that there are very few people who learn well in that type of situation.

PhoenixFarm

Mar. 21, 2009, 07:57 PM

"Better" doesn't = "excellent" and "WOW!!!"

But your feedback explains why I see some people in tears when they hear a frank feedback from not overly rewarding instructors.

I guess to me it's about individual personalities. Some people are sensitive, worriers, over-achievers, and some are thicker-skinned, more focused, more ambitious, etc. I see those different personalities in my everyday life (ever seen someone almost break down because the movie they were counting on isn't at the video store?) so I certainly expect to see them in my professional life. I don't get why it's "wrong" for someone to be more of a positive reinforcement type?

I personally grew up riding with very old school types, and I've got the scream-scars on my backside to prove it :winkgrin::lol::D. But I don't judge someone else for wanting or needing something different.

However you bring up an important point. When speaking of clinicians and trainers, I think it is important that riders be self-aware and know what they need in terms of feedback and language--and when they hear someone described as "should have a thick skin", "should be serious about working hard, etc." believe the description and steer clear! It's not wrong to not be that type of rider, but don't torture yourself and the trainer by trying to put a round peg in a square hole.

Ambrey

Mar. 21, 2009, 08:01 PM

Yep, and if you're that other type who becomes complacent and needs a verbal kick in the pants, know that too ;)

PhoenixFarm

Mar. 21, 2009, 08:06 PM

Exactly!

Long Spot

Mar. 21, 2009, 09:53 PM

I would love to see Isabell Werth riding Satchmo without a bridle and stirrups! :winkgrin:

I'd like to see LP try to ride Satchmo with no bridle and stirrups as well. Heck, I'd like to see her try to ride him with them. :D

slc2

Mar. 21, 2009, 10:09 PM

Actually Isabel Werth said in an interview that she DOES ride her horses bareback or with a bareback pad. Around the showgrounds, at competitions. Let's 'em relax and feel like they're getting a break from work. In fact, if I remember, the article stated that most of the show riders do something to give the horses a break and get them to go sightseeing - hand grazing, riding bareback, etc.

I also saw a really cute video of Nadine Capellman doing kind of a trail obstacles class practice with Farbenfroh.

Brave2Xrails

Mar. 22, 2009, 08:07 AM

Teaching with only "frank feedback" and no reward is actually not a very efficient technique. Positive reinforcement is the gold standard of learning theory. And anyone who has taught anything will know that there are very few people who learn well in that type of situation.

In riding, I think the "reward" is doing it right and getting it to work. And I think you are in error when you confuse "learning theory" (there are actually many learning theories) with operant conditioning. If you want to use an operant conditioning model to talk about learning to ride, I would suggest you consider the horse as the agent who is providing the rewards and punishments, rather than the trainer. The trainer, in this model, is simply providing you with suggestions about which behaviors you can engage in next - again, it will be the horse who determines if the behavior will be reinforced (reward you) or extinguished (punish you). The trainer might also be considered an interpreter if the rider is too dopey to realize if s/he actually got it right or wrong because s/he can't really understand what the hell is going on underneath her.

slc2

Mar. 22, 2009, 08:33 AM

The horse is not the ultimate authority. Like all creatures, including humans, they think what is 'right' is what is comfortable and familiar.

The 'ultimate authority' is an ideal.

The horse will fuss if he's in pain, or being annoyed. He can be relied upon for that...most of the time...not always.

It's a big mistake to believe that if the horse isn't protesting, he's as comfortable as he can be while doing the work, or the work is correct.

In some things, the horse can be relied upon to 'give feedback'. In the simplest sense, if he isn't doing the work correctly, he is telling the rider the rider is incorrect.

Is the horse always revealing incorrect riding? No.

He may be showing that he has habits from a prior rider, that he doesn't feel well that day, that something is wrong with one of his legs, that he has a sore in his mouth, or that he's more interested in the mares in the pasture.

In any case, for the rest of it, it requires a coach, instructor, trainer, whatever you want to call it.

Horses tolerate all sorts of bad things that the rider does. They are not the ultimate teacher. The reason they are not the ultimate teacher is that they do tolerate a great deal of poor riding.

In addition, they are not dressage judges. The book on how to judge dressage was written with the horse's abilities and physicality in mind, but there is more to it than that. As the work gets more difficult, it becomes less and less likely that the horse will do the work correctly if he isn't fit, correctly prepared and positioned, and conditions aren't right.

'Wrong' is too comfortable, too familiar, and too habitual, for horse AND rider. The 'ultimate authority' is the ideal, not the horse OR the rider. It's up to the teacher to convey that ideal appropriately, in stages, as the horse and rider become able to face each step up to that ideal.

egontoast

Mar. 22, 2009, 09:11 AM

In the virtual world, it's true, the horse is not the ultimate authority.

In the pretend world of the internet where you can be whatever you would like to be, the self appointed expert is the ultimate authority. It's all in the delivery, the veiled references to insider information, the important imaginary friends, the name dropping, the exaggeration of skills, accomplishments and past experiences and the dripping scorn expressed if anyone challenges these delusions.

Right slc?:)

slc2

Mar. 22, 2009, 09:26 AM

You're the expert on that one; I have to defer to your considerable experience in doing what you describe.

egontoast

Mar. 22, 2009, 09:38 AM

Based on that weak attempt at a comeback, I guess that particular shoe fit ?:lol:

Brave2Xrails

Mar. 22, 2009, 09:45 AM

Good lord, Slick, I wasn't advocating for the elimination of trainers/instructors/coaches. Nor was I saying the horse is the ultimate authority on everything. Or that the only reason a horse might not cooperate was because of poor riding.

My point was that if a trainer tells a rider to do something and it works, the rider doesn't need the trainer keeling over to tell them how fabulous they are as a "reward". The simple fact that the rider achieved a minor goal by getting it right, imo, feels better and is more "rewarding" than anything a trainer could possibly say.

Ajierene

Mar. 22, 2009, 09:59 AM

In riding, I think the "reward" is doing it right and getting it to work. And I think you are in error when you confuse "learning theory" (there are actually many learning theories) with operant conditioning. If you want to use an operant conditioning model to talk about learning to ride, I would suggest you consider the horse as the agent who is providing the rewards and punishments, rather than the trainer. The trainer, in this model, is simply providing you with suggestions about which behaviors you can engage in next - again, it will be the horse who determines if the behavior will be reinforced (reward you) or extinguished (punish you). The trainer might also be considered an interpreter if the rider is too dopey to realize if s/he actually got it right or wrong because s/he can't really understand what the hell is going on underneath her.

This is all well and good until you have a horse that prefers to plod around than perform a working trot. Then you have a trainer saying 'leg, leg' without the, 'that's good! now you have it!' without the second statement someone may not know that they have developed the working trot and get frustrated because all they do is give leg to no result.

Think about it this way, you tell a puppy to sit. Continue telling him to sit and randomly he sits. You walk away, leaving puppy lost and confused. It is going to keep trying different things to figure out what this 'sit' thing is.

If the rider does not know what the response is supposed to result in, it will keep giving the signal. The horse receives no reward for going into a working trot (such as release of leg or verbal 'good boy') and hence goes back to plodding around.

Operant conditioning is best for learning basic principles, such as a yearling learning that pulling back on a tied rope a: could be painful and/or b: offers no result as far as getting away.

Teaching a horse the complexities of riding requires positive reinforcement. Teaching a person how to ride without positive reinforcement will result in extinction. Leg, leg, leg....trainer never says good job....rider stops giving leg because giving leg results no known reward. How many people do you know continue to produce the same results without reward?

Even with riding a schoolmaster, if the rider does not know what a piaffe feels like and gets no verbal reward/recognition that they go the commands right. Really, when giving a riding lesson, you are teaching the student, not the horse.

Brave2Xrails

Mar. 22, 2009, 10:19 AM

Even with riding a schoolmaster, if the rider does not know what a piaffe feels like and gets no verbal reward/recognition that they go the commands right. .

Hence my statement, "[t]he trainer might also be considered an interpreter if the rider is too dopey to realize if s/he actually got it right or wrong because s/he can't really understand what the hell is going on underneath her."

starkissed

Mar. 22, 2009, 10:26 AM

I haven't seen Walter teach, just some videos here and there. But I see nothing wrong with his style. I actually much prefer someone who has a gentle way about them.
I am a fairly sensitive person and I can get upset easily if someone is yelling at me when riding. That being said, I don't like it when I am having some problems and the advice coming is completely irrelevant but 'gentle'

However, based on what I have seen/heard from walter is that he has a very good idea of what is going on under the rider with the horse and he can see little changes that are occurring, and praises that. And at the same time will critique the rider on what needs to be changed.

Although LP is not the best rider, a lot of people are worse and a lot of people are a heck of a lot better. I do think she is trying, and from what I have observed, she and her horse are doing better. And I don't think it would be appropriate for WAZ to be criticizing her and telling her how bad she is in front of a crowd. Additionally, I don't think he would do that in a private setting either; I believe he wants everyone one of his students to improve and be their best, whether is training level or grand prix. As every instructor should

DressageGeek "Ribbon Ho"

Mar. 22, 2009, 10:28 AM

I think when you know your horse, his responses can give you a wealth of information that are critical for you. Because you are not always in the position of having eyes on the ground, and because you also need to be faster in your responses (going through the intermediate adds time, of course).

Like the title of the wonderful book, "My Horses, My Teachers."

Ambrey

Mar. 22, 2009, 11:14 AM

My point was that if a trainer tells a rider to do something and it works, the rider doesn't need the trainer keeling over to tell them how fabulous they are as a "reward". The simple fact that the rider achieved a minor goal by getting it right, imo, feels better and is more "rewarding" than anything a trainer could possibly say.

That would be the end goal. But in the meantime, the rider doesn't KNOW whether the horse is doing exactly what it should.

In conditioning theory, this would be "paired stimuli." The trainer says "very good!" and the horse does the right thing. The learner pairs the stimuli (both are followed by a positive emotion) and then is rewarded by the horse doing the right thing.

In life, it feels like is learning how to get the right response and being pleased with that, knowing it's "good."

Ambrey

Mar. 22, 2009, 11:16 AM

Hence my statement, "[t]he trainer might also be considered an interpreter if the rider is too dopey to realize if s/he actually got it right or wrong because s/he can't really understand what the hell is going on underneath her."

... how can she understand what she hasn't yet learned? This is teaching, not just reinforcing what someone already knows. Teaching involves both instruction on how to get somewhere and instruction on how to know you got to the right place.

Rusty Stirrup

Mar. 23, 2009, 08:12 AM

I prefer WAZ's style and try to emulate it. My few students are all beginning or returning adult riders and they respond so much better to positive reenforcement than to negative correction (which seems to work with 4 legged creatures also). Maybe it's because they are adults and don't appreciate being spoken to like a bad child or they realize riding should be a pleasure not a chore.

blackhorse6

Mar. 23, 2009, 09:02 AM

Ambrey

Mar. 23, 2009, 10:32 AM

Again, I think it all depends on the student.. I know my trainer treats each individual differently.. I personally will not ride with an instructor who does nothing but praise and doesn't "tell it like s/he sees it".. Positive feedback is great, but the reason you are paying for a trainer is to receive instruction...Good feedback and also the negative.. Lisa Wilcox is a wonderful example as well as Steffan Peters.

I also am fine with some negative feedback, and don't know enough about WAZ to say, but you'd be amazed at how well really good teachers who use WAZ's method can really relay information and make it a habit. If you think about it, you can relay as much information in saying "inside leg at the girth" as you can saying "don't put your inside leg back." It's beautiful to watch ;)

Sonesta

Mar. 23, 2009, 12:30 PM

For your watching pleasure, here are the links to a lesson with WAZ and one of my students on her Anglo-Arabian gelding who tends to be a leg mover and has difficulting relaxing his body - especially in the canter departs. They are training/first level.

I have had to divide the lesson into 4 parts to put on YouTube. Part One includes the warmup. This was the second day of lessons for the pair in the clinic and she has ridden with WAZ a few times before, so keep in mind that some of what he says is a "shorthand" for those who know what he means.

Enjoy:

Part One http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxkMmfhTiTY

Part Two http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_uqM5Pki2Q

Part Three http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HekGlV2erCM

Part Four http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLpSvqeSHyA

Ambrey

Mar. 23, 2009, 12:38 PM

Thanks, Sonesta- so much for the theory that WAZ only usually works with upper level riders. They are a cute pair!

mbm

Mar. 23, 2009, 12:43 PM

sonesta - thanks for posting those vids! i got a lot out of watching and can see why WAZ is so popular!

Mar. 23, 2009, 01:54 PM

Hence my statement, "[t]he trainer might also be considered an interpreter if the rider is too dopey to realize if s/he actually got it right or wrong because s/he can't really understand what the hell is going on underneath her."

And a simple "good" or "that's it" will suffice. No effusive praise needed. Just confirmation for what the rider feels. If the instructor keeps repeating "more leg, more leg" it probably means umm ... the rider needs to use more leg.

... how can she understand what she hasn't yet learned? This is teaching, not just reinforcing what someone already knows. Teaching involves both instruction on how to get somewhere and instruction on how to know you got to the right place.

Yes, but after a certain amount of riding -- or more accurately "correct riding" -- even the most ham-handed/ham-butted rider should have developed a feel for her horse and know when he's right, straight, soft, balanced, etc. No matter what they're doing.

You won't always know exactly what to do when he isn't those things, but that's when your instructor comes in with "left rein" or "right seatbone" or "sit back." And a small adjustment brings it all into line. And you know it immediately. That's the instructor's job -- to help you feel it.

And it's our job to work outside of lessons and not slack off into just poking around and calling it good. Working things out by yourself, without the instructor there to tell you what to do, is how you build "feel." Or muscle memory or whatever you want to call it. Once you have it, you're building on that feeling in everything you do. So even things you've never done before become easier. But if you don't have "feel" naturally (and most adult riders/re-riders don't) you have to work to get it.

miranduz

Apr. 1, 2009, 07:49 PM

You know...I think when the Parelli's first started out, they were in it for the horses and the people. Then they started to see the dollar signs and got greedy. I wouldn't fully subject to all of their methods, but some of them are helpful for some people and some horses. I agree that they bashed dressage at first, I've heard it come out of their mouths first hand. And I completely agree that they are following the money trail. It amazes me how they so obviously promote themselves in every way possible in every area of riding. I think that there are some good techniques to be learned from the Parelli's (obviously or they wouldn't be so successful), however, they contradict themselves in so many ways...I'm not for or against them, but I see both sides clearly.

Dressage Art

Apr. 2, 2009, 01:23 PM

Yes, I see that WAZ is a very patient man. In the video it took him a whole lesson to get the rider ONCE to flex correctly on the turns. The rider was counter flexed for the 99% of the lesson and WAZ very patiently correcting that rider time and time again. Most of the trainers/clinicians with whom I ride would be more demanding and would stop such an obvious mistake from the get go and not be so kind if the rider would keep on repeating that mistake over and over and over again =, since it's an obvious lack of correct basics. I’m curious if the rider did understand that counter flexing on the turns is incorrect and putts her on the incorrect training path? I hope so, since WAZ charges about $250 for his 45 minutes?

egontoast

Apr. 2, 2009, 01:33 PM

I hope so, since WAZ charges about $250 for his 45 minutes?

I don't think so. Clinic organizers charge what they need to charge to cover such things as facility fees, catering, airfare for the clinician, accomodations for the clinician and so on. I don't think WAZ charges/makes $250 for 45 minutes.

[edit]

mbm

Apr. 2, 2009, 02:27 PM

. Most of the trainers/clinicians with whom I ride would be more demanding and would stop such an obvious mistake from the get go and not be so kind if the rider would keep on repeating that mistake over and over and over again =, since it's an obvious lack of correct basics.

DA, without this sounding personal, don't you have "habits" that are so ingrained that you have a hard time "fixing" it in one lesson? Should we all think that you lack "good basics" because of your bad habit? (i am not sure what it would be, but i am sure you have one - we all do)....

instead, perhaps it is more kind to try to see that we ALL (pro and ammie like) have things that need changing and that we all do the best we can ....

if you were giving this lesson in front of a large crowd of parell followers - how would you of taught this "lesson" ?

and finally. how would you like to be taught so that you eventually learn to change an ingrained habit?

just curious :)

Dressage Art

Apr. 2, 2009, 02:45 PM

if you were giving this lesson in front of a large crowd of parell followers - how would you of taught this "lesson" ?

and finally. how would you like to be taught so that you eventually learn to change an ingrained habit?

just curious :)

I don't teach - I'm an amateur dressage rider. You on the other hand is a dressage professional trainer. So you tell me if you do teach your horses/students to be continually counter flexed on the turns at 1st level?

And by the way, you misunderstood me yet again, I was commenting about the video of the lesson that was posted of the rider who is 1st/Training Level (??) Honestly, I thought that by the 1st level we ALL should NOT be counter flexing on the turns. Is this really too much to ask for by 1st level tests? Or do you disagree? Do I expect too much? May be a correct flexion on the 1st level is the thing of the past? If yes, when do you expect your students/horses NOT to be counter flexed in the turns? By PSG?

For your watching pleasure, here are the links to a lesson with WAZ and one of my students on her Anglo-Arabian gelding who tends to be a leg mover and has difficulting relaxing his body - especially in the canter departs. They are training/first level.

I have had to divide the lesson into 4 parts to put on YouTube. Part One includes the warmup. This was the second day of lessons for the pair in the clinic and she has ridden with WAZ a few times before, so keep in mind that some of what he says is a "shorthand" for those who know what he means.

Enjoy:

Part One http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxkMmfhTiTY

Part Two http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_uqM5Pki2Q

Part Three http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HekGlV2erCM

Part Four http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLpSvqeSHyA

mbm

Apr. 2, 2009, 03:00 PM

ahhh, got it. :)

as for my questions - i was just curious.... i mean, i know for me that if i have a ingrained habit - it takes ages and many repetitions to work thru it. so no matter how many times i am told "do X", i can't /wont retain/ etc til i have repeated the change/been told a thousand times.

that is the nature of learning. it does no good to scold/yell/ get frustrated/etc with someone/somehorse that cant make an immediate change with an ingrained habit.

and thanks for the promotion ! :) :)

eta: i think the counter flexing is an issue with being too heavy/pulling on the outside rein (ie out side rein-itis ) .... not a problem with counter flexing /not knowing about bend per se....... or at least - that is what it was for me when i went thru this.

Sonesta

Apr. 2, 2009, 03:24 PM

Just FYI, the rider in that test has a horse that gets very tense in the body very easily. She had developed the opposite habit of not having enough outside rein contact with him (in her concern about him getting tense) and now is trying to work through the correct amount of contact on the outside rein to still be able to bend him without him going rigid. It's an ongoing process.

And while being nervous riding with WAZ, she would forget herself as she concentrated on something else. Cut her some slack.

Dressage Art

Apr. 2, 2009, 03:39 PM

as for my questions - i was just curious.... i mean, i know for me that if i have a ingrained habit - it takes ages and many repetitions to work thru it. so no matter how many times i am told "do X", i can't /wont retain/ etc til i have repeated the change/been told a thousand times.Then you work on going to X until you establish a basic steering of your horse. Not just brushing on that and go on riding fancy tricks on a schoolmaster. If that takes a whole lesson, then this is what it is. Why allows a rider who doesn't have basic steering to work on anything else?

Dressage Art

Apr. 2, 2009, 03:45 PM

Cut her some slack.Oh Sonesta, that's the reason why I didn't even mention the little thing called "on the bit" that is needed for 1st level. But yet again, may be I'm too demanding and riding "on the bit" at 1st level is also the thing of the past?... but sometimes I wonder where dressage is heading too... even the current state of classical dressage!

May be the answer in the WAZ+Parelli= future of classical dressage?

Ambrey

Apr. 2, 2009, 04:38 PM

Sandy M

Apr. 2, 2009, 06:17 PM

Besides, most people consider "TL/1st" as being "Training level, learning 1st level."

Perceptions obviously do differ. I consider my horse (he's not quite 5) to be basically Intro, and that's the level at which I show (only 3 shows in 9 months - exposure more than competition, really).

However, when I'm schooling he's on the bit a good portion of the time thought not always as round as I would like, he does 10 and 15 m. circles at trot and canter, occasionally a 10m circle at the trot. I do small amounts of sitting trot. He does good/acceptable beginner leg yields - presently from the quarterline, but lately more and more from the center line. I do trot serpentines, 3 and 4 loop, and half-circle reverses, and flat loops from H X K at the canter, i.e., minimini-countercanter. I ask for slight lengthenings and shortenings of stride at the trot. Since he is spooky and his degree of roundness and reliability "on the bit" is a developing proposition, and his transitions not always as smooth as I would like, I definitely consider him Intro/sorta-Training level - but on "OTHER BOARDS" I was firmly told that this sounded like a 1st level horse. So perceptions can differ WIDELY.

I would expect him to be rounder and more reliably on the bit before I would attempt training level, let alone 1st level, but almost every poster on other boards maintained that it sounded like he was a 1st level horse. (I had been joking that after seeing the DT article that talked about Materiele classes and said that 4 and 5 year olds should be showing 1st/schooling 2nd level, I felt that I was retarded in my horse's training.)

Ambrey

Apr. 2, 2009, 06:24 PM

TL horses are not required to be on the bit, just accepting of contact.

Sandy M

Apr. 2, 2009, 06:38 PM

TL horses are not required to be on the bit, just accepting of contact.

Sure - that's what the directives say. But try to get a decent score at training level with a horse that isn't on the bit. I've only ridden for ONE judge in the last 30+ years (as an eventer and straight dressage) where I had a judge comment that my horse (my recently retired horse who was schooling 3rd level when he retired) was - I can't remember the exact words - but something along the lines of showing first level carriage at training level was incorrect. My experience is that if you want a good score at training level, the horse better be on the bit and almost ready to show 1st level, and a 1st level horse should be approaching 2nd level beginnings of colleciton, etc., etc. Merely "accepting the bit" doesn't really cut it at trainint level anymore, in my experience.

A few weekends ago, I watched a kid do a Training Level test that was obedient, accurate, one minor error, and the horse "accepting" but not "on" the bit. She got a 55%. A horse that did the same test but on the bit and carrying himself like a 1st level horse got 68%.

Dressage Art

Apr. 2, 2009, 07:15 PM

TL horses are not required to be on the bit, just accepting of contact.

And may I ask what is the definition of "just accepting of contact" is?

Ambrey

Apr. 2, 2009, 07:24 PM

Acceptance of contact is just how it sounds- accepting steady contact without leaning or ducking away.

"on the bit" is defined in the rulebook:

A horse is said to be on the
bit when the neck is more or less raised and arched according to the stage of training and the
extension or collection of the gait and he accepts the bridle with a light and soft contact and
submissiveness throughout. The head should remain in a steady position as a rule slightly in
front of the vertical with a supple poll as the highest point of the neck and no resistance should
be offered to the rider.

Dressage Art

Apr. 2, 2009, 07:30 PM

steady contact That is correct so STEADY even in the changes of the direction and transitions = not throwing head up = not shaking head = not curled = not braced = not resisting rider's hands = not tilting head = not counter flexed = but a frank, steady, even, & correct contact between rider's hands and horse's mouth.

So did you see that "steady" contact that is required for Training Level? Or did you see "unsteady contact"? Or "lack of acceptance of the frank contact with the rider's hand"?

Ambrey

Apr. 2, 2009, 10:11 PM

Bellfleur

Apr. 2, 2009, 10:38 PM

Ambrey

Apr. 2, 2009, 10:41 PM

When you shake the lead shank, I think they are supposed to back up.

Cindyg

Apr. 2, 2009, 11:40 PM

The barn where we stayed had a woman practicing her Parelli on a very older horse. The horse was a very pretty and sweet who had a bombproof disposition ....Much to my friend and mines surprise one day there was someone standing in the field with a long lead shank and flipping the lead up in the horses face for about 10 minutes. ...The person looked to be moving on to doing something with a long stick. ....So I guess the question is does anyone know what the heck was supposed to be going on??

I think you're describing one form of the Friendly Game. It's a desensitization exercise. The human creates commotion with the rope, and the horse -- reading the human's body language that the commotion doesn't mean go -- learns to ignore it. The anticipated result of this exercise is a bombproof horse who doesn't over-react to commotion -- just exactly as you described this horse having.

If the horse had his head up as you described, the person may have been waiting until he put his head down and relaxed before she "released" or stopped the exercise.

I don't know how close you were to them or if you had a good angle for depth perception, but the lead rope should not have come dangerously close to his face.

Coreene

Apr. 3, 2009, 12:22 AM

PT Barnum, always right. ;)

Ambrey

Apr. 3, 2009, 12:23 AM

Damn, I guess that's why I got an F in Natural Horsemanship. I thought they were supposed to back off when In waved things at them.

Sandy M

Apr. 3, 2009, 11:15 AM

I was merely commenting to the rider who said she won't consider her horse ready for training level until he is steady on the bit. Not making any other observations about who is or isn't exhibiting steady contact (but steady contact is an issue with horses throughout the levels, whether they are on the bit or no. most people are not perfect examples of whatever level they are showing at).

Just to note - I'm not expecting perfect "on the bit-ness" (!?!) from my greenie, but I want him to be steadier and rounder, and better in his trot/canter transition, than he currently is before I would show him at a recognized show at training level, if only for purposes of control - i.e., when he is really focussed and on the bit, he is less likely to do the airs above the ground in which he occasionally indulges. Capriole and Ballatod (?) (whatever that one is where they jump on their hind legs for a few steps) are certainly NOT called for at Training Level. LOL

Ambrey

Apr. 3, 2009, 11:43 AM

Sandy M

Apr. 3, 2009, 11:58 AM

Ambrey - I think a lot of people would happily show a horse that is going the way my guy is presently going at Training Level (absent the airs above the ground, of course ;0))l. I've shown him Intro 3 times. He blew up three times during the first test and ended up with a 58.8% (well, three 4s in a test will do that....). The next two tests (months apart) he got a 62% and a 61.5%. To me he (a) wasn't on the bit and round but WAS accepting contact, and (b) was tense and therefore not working through his back (as he does at home or at my trainer's barn). Also, even when schooling, we are only JUST within the last couple of weeks beginning to get consistent canter departs without him coming above the bit. So... .that is why I would still consider him Intro/Training rather than Training/1st Level. I guess my standards have risen a lot from the days when, as an eventer, I considered doing the figures obediently was more than sufficient for a dressage test (on the bit? His head's sorta down, isn't that enough?) and let's get to cross-country!!!!! Even in eventing today, that wouldn't do, but back then, if you didn't completely suck in the dressage test - i.e., did the figures quietly - and had a horse that would go clean cross-country/stadium, you sort of blew off dressage - something you just had to get through to get to the jumps. ROFLOL

Dressage Art

Apr. 3, 2009, 12:01 PM

PT Barnum, always right. ;)
Barnum never flinched from his stated goal "to put money in his own coffers." He was a businessman, his profession was entertainment, and he was perhaps the first "show business" millionaire. "There's a sucker born every minute"
It would be sad to think of WAZ as a trained monkey. I hope that is not the case. If he has become that, I guess I will throw my Dressage in Harmony/Hermoney into the furnace in disgust.

As an owner of all of his books and DVDs - his overly eager high praise of mediocre riding for Parelli exhibition tour doesn’t sit right with me. It’s tormenting me. If he is not teaching during that tour what exactly is he doing? I still don’t want to believe that such a wonderful gentleman is a sell out. I just hope that WAZ will be able to uphold the important basics of the true classical riding and will not lower himself to just giving high praises for trick riding and stroking egos by promoting riders to a level that they do not deserve.

Ambrey

Apr. 3, 2009, 12:09 PM

To me he (a) wasn't on the bit and round but WAS accepting contact, and (b) was tense and therefore not working through his back (as he does at home or at my trainer's barn).

I think the tension is a bigger issue at TL than the "frame," isn't it? Since relaxation is before connection on the training scale? A person familiar with judging would have to answer, but it makes sense to me. I'd think a relaxed horse with smooth, balanced transitions who is not "on the bit" but is accepting steady contact would score higher than a tense horse with unbalanced transitions who appears round.

Being able to relax at a show has got to be a big stumbling block for a lot of horses. I wish you much luck! And in my opinion, it doesn't matter what level you call yourself as long as you're having fun ;)

Ambrey

Apr. 3, 2009, 12:13 PM

As an owner of all of his books and DVDs - his overly eager high praise of mediocre riding for Parelli exhibition tour doesn’t sit right with me. It’s tormenting me. If he is not teaching during that tour what exactly is he doing? I still don’t want to believe that such a wonderful gentleman is a sell out. I just hope that WAZ will be able to uphold the important basics of the true classical riding and will not lower himself to just giving high praises for trick riding and stroking egos by promoting riders to a level that they do not deserve.

But how much of this is based on your opinions of LP that may or may not be based on fact?

Maybe he was heaping praise on her because that was a wonderful ride FOR HER. Maybe she'd made great strides recently. Maybe she's a very nice, genuine person and WAZ really likes her and wants her to succeed. Maybe NONE of this is based on money?

Just because he doesn't agree with your opinion of LP doesn't make him a "sell-out."

hammondcrazy@yahoo.com

Apr. 3, 2009, 12:17 PM

As an owner of all of his books and DVDs - his overly eager high praise of mediocre riding for Parelli exhibition tour doesn’t sit right with me. It’s tormenting me. If he is not teaching during that tour what exactly is he doing? I still don’t want to believe that such a wonderful gentleman is a sell out. I just hope that WAZ will be able to uphold the important basics of the true classical riding and will not lower himself to just giving high praises for trick riding and stroking egos by promoting riders to a level that they do not deserve.

I don't know much about the parellis. I saw a couple of shows on RFDTV and yeah they were ok. I like Craig Cameron much more even though he is western I still learned much from him and he is so entertaining. Maybe he will come to our side.

I just hope WAZ will always do clinics and all. I loved riding in his clinics at Reddemeade. I learned so so much from him. I don't think he is selling out just maybe he is trying to mainstream Dressage. I lived in South Dakota and there is no Dressage except a few clusters. I live in SW Missouri and there is less Dressage. If a good amount of western riders would go dressage it would be a much more positive thing for all of us. Mike.

Sandy M

Apr. 3, 2009, 01:24 PM

I
Being able to relax at a show has got to be a big stumbling block for a lot of horses. I wish you much luck! And in my opinion, it doesn't matter what level you call yourself as long as you're having fun ;)

He's not quite 5. Every new location is a BIG DEAL to him. My first few lessons at my trainer's, I rode in her lungeing pen so he wouldn't have room to really get ambitious. I still ride him in an eventer's vest, though I only wore it during warmup at the last show and took it off for the actual test. His comfort zone is indoor/covered arenas. It's a little strange, in that he's really into checking things out - he's not at all timid, but he is easily distracted, and when he gets distracted.....I guess the only solution is exposure, so I try to get him out to different places. I'd like to trail ride him more, but I sure am not going to go solo and no one else at our barn trail rides, except one guy who's retired, so his schedule and mine don't sync. I'm trying to find someone to trail ride with, or, in the alternative, I will ask a friend who is a western trainer to ride him, while I accompany him on my retired friend's horse. Miles, miles, miles,.... eventually relaxation will come (I hope!) ;0)

Ja Da Dee

Apr. 3, 2009, 01:53 PM

I'm certainly not a fan of The P's, but at least people aren't coming out of WAZ clinics talking about how they "joined up" like what was happening with the OC's. it sounds like WAZ is staying true to his methods and hopefully giving the P's some more tools in their toolbox, as well as broadening their knowledge. Of course, then the P's will probably wrap the new tools in a Parelli package and sell it with a high pricetag.

Dressage Art

Apr. 3, 2009, 02:18 PM

I don't know much about the parellis. I saw a couple of shows on RFDTV and yeah they were ok.

I don't know much about Parellis either: saw them on RFDTV as well and saw videos of them on You tube. Didn’t appreciate them bashing dressage, but didn't necessarily form any opinions about them, since they seem to teach not really riding, but ground manners and I'm all for having good ground manners with your horse. If it takes "games" to teach ground manners to the horse - so let be it.

What bothers me is the video clip that was posted by OP when WAZ, a classical dressage master, is seen giving a very high praise for a mediocre riding. He doesn't seem to explain about very important basics or training pyramid, or what comes after what and what is important. It seems that he is just showcasing trick riding and showering LP with the highest praise that a master can give, such as "excellent" and so on. (By the way basics can be found in the dressage training pyramid and also on the "purpose" of every test. Actually, if a rider doesn't have basics that are outlined in the "purpose" of each level = the test movements that this rider is performing are really "tricks" rather than a correct classical dressage)

I'm concerned that the message of classical dressage about having strong basics will be lost with blowing all that smoke up. I’m YET to see WAZ talking about basics and concerned that people who are not familiar with dressage will form their opinion of dressage from LP riding fancy tricks on a schoolmaster.

If WAZ would be EDUCATING Pirellis and their followers - I think that might be good for dressage. However, several posters here already said repeatedly that it was not really a lessons but an exhibition. Thus my question if he is not teaching, then why bother if it’s not about $?

jilltx

Apr. 3, 2009, 02:46 PM

Having been to a Parelli demonstration in person two years ago I can tell you that it surprises me to see her "embracing" the discipline. She was less than complementary on the sport as a whole when I saw her, and was CONTINUALLY digging at dressage horses and riders.

I found her offensive and distracting.

I went to "see for myself" and the only thing I learned is that they are BRILLIANT at marketing.

egontoast

Apr. 3, 2009, 02:58 PM

I went to "see for myself" and the only thing I learned is that they are BRILLIANT at marketing.

yup

DressageGeek "Ribbon Ho"

Apr. 3, 2009, 02:59 PM

Here's my take on desensitization.

I do want my horse to trust me. I want my horse to know that I would never knowingly or willingly put him in danger. Now, if there were floods, for example, and I had to get him to jump onto a seesaw to get out of there - well, that would be a matter of extreme necessity. And I would ask because I had to.

But they are prey animals. And a sensitive, hot horse who is very aware of his surroundings is going to want to focus on that. So when the chickens and ducks roosting in the bushes near the outdoor get surprised out of their nesting areas and whoosh into our path - I spook as well. But if I can say to my horse - hey, okay, trust me - not a threat, let's focus - well, I want to know that we have established a relationship where that can happen.

And I don't think that throwing all sorts of crap in his face, especially a horse that has been abused in the past, is the way to establish that trusting relationship.

How do I desensitize? By going about our business, and when we are working, asking him to focus on work. If something happens to disrupt that and it is not a crisis, I ask him to refocus and carry on.

But being the instrument of stuff that spooks him? NOT.

AnotherRound

Apr. 3, 2009, 04:53 PM

Well, when I think "on the bit" I think "round." When I think "not doing airs above the ground" I think "on the aids." And, indeed, "on the aids" is better than "on the ground" ;)

We both live in highly competitive areas, so I'm guessing that there are many people showing at TL whose horses would not place well in our areas. I don't think it means their horses aren't REALLY TL horses.

Personally, I'd call your horse a TL/1st horse because he's mastered most or all of the TL requirements and is working on 1st level requirements.

But it's hard, because there are always cases like mine in which the horse knows far more than the rider. We are working on TL and 1st level and even 2nd level stuff, but it all looks pretty bad right now ;) I'd say that people should call themselves whatever they want, I'm sure the person in the video is painfully aware of whatever shortcomings she has. Leave the judging to the show ring.

But here you are again, Ambrey - we don't call a horse riding at a certain level because he can do the movements. He is "at" a certain level because that is how he is performing in front of a judge. Period. That is what Dressage is, its the performance of the horse under scruitiny following a discrete set of rules in the competition ring. If a horse hasn't ever shown, he isn't qualified at any level. If a competitor hasn't ever shown, he or she isn't competiative at any level. And, a competitor doesn't base his success or achievement in a class qualified by where in the country he showed - his success is based upon the scores he acheives when he shows. Period. No scores, no achievement.

If a horse is schooling certain movements, that's good, but they do not identify his competative level, such as Training, Intermediate, etc. His schooling movements mean nothing about his "level" until he goes into the competative rings, because the performance in the ring is the achievement which qualifies him for levels, not the performance in the schooling ring, Once you begin to compete you will understand this, but its unfortunate that you deliver evaluations of competitor's achievements based upon these false assumptions and your apparent lack of understanding about competition.

Since your barn is hosting a local dressage show, it seems a perfect opportunity for you to put your purported knowledge to the test now, so will you be entering one of the classes to deomonstrate the talent you have for being on the bit, and start showing like you have talked about so much of late?

And also, just out of curiousity, how can "we" be working on 1st and 2nd level "stuff" when you haven't even cantered yet?

Sandy M

Apr. 3, 2009, 05:09 PM

Oh my. Did I step into the middle of something? Was I not paying attention?

Another Round - I guess that, without my venturing any opinion on Ambrey's horse/level.riding, since I really know nothing about her/her horse, etc. - I would say that you and I are sort of on the same page, in that what you have stated about levels of training/levels of showing, is what i was trying to express. I consider my horse Intro/Training, not Training/1st level, despite the fact that I school some 1st level movements: I am only now beginning to consider, perhaps, showing him at Training Level in a month or so, at a SCHOOLING show. When he's right, he's lovely, but he's too green to be consistent, and therefore not yet truly even a "training" level horse.

Ambrey

Apr. 3, 2009, 05:25 PM

I am only now beginning to consider, perhaps, showing him at Training Level in a month or so, at a SCHOOLING show. When he's right, he's lovely, but he's too green to be consistent, and therefore not yet truly even a "training" level horse.

You didn't step into anything, I have no idea what that's all about :) I think your horse sounds lovely, no matter what level you call him! Good luck at TL :)

Apr. 3, 2009, 05:47 PM

we don't call a horse riding at a certain level because he can do the movements. He is "at" a certain level because that is how he is performing in front of a judge. Period. That is what Dressage is, its the performance of the horse under scruitiny following a discrete set of rules in the competition ring. If a horse hasn't ever shown, he isn't qualified at any level. If a competitor hasn't ever shown, he or she isn't competiative at any level. And, a competitor doesn't base his success or achievement in a class qualified by where in the country he showed - his success is based upon the scores he acheives when he shows. Period. No scores, no achievement.

I agree with you that calling your horse whatever level because you're fooling around with some of the movements doesn't make much sense. And where you are geographically has zilch to do with whether your horse is "competitive" or not. The tests are the tests, and the requirements are the same, whether you're in Southern California or BFE.

I also agree that showing is the best way to find out exactly where you are. I show because if I don't, I know I won't push myself and work hard enough to make real progress. I have several friends who ride with excellent dressage instructors and haven't shown in all the time I've known them (5+ years). I don't get it. But if that's what makes them happy ...

But the no scores = no achievement I can't entirely buy. I made progress with my gelding last year that wasn't reflected in our show scores. Because, although I'm getting better, I haven't learned to how to ride tests very well. And there is no movement called "holding bug-eyed horse together in a spring gale." ;)

ETA -- SandyM, I'm so glad your greenie is doing well. He's by one of my favorite stallions. Watching Aul Magic do a 2nd level test was one of the reasons I got interested in dressage. Talk about a horse with presence. Keep us posted on your spotty-body boy.

slc2

Apr. 3, 2009, 05:59 PM

Usually, but if the person is riding with a skilled trainer, especially one who has judge's education, who tells them the truth, it's not too bad of a substitute for showing. If you come out of a show with a first place ribbon and your instructor says, 'And what the hell was that mess????'(and knows) you probably aren't missing much if you work with that person. There is, however, a big difference between doing tests and schooling separate movements.

Ambrey

Apr. 3, 2009, 06:08 PM

I agree with you that calling your horse whatever level because you're fooling around with some of the movements doesn't make much sense. And where you are geographically has zilch to do with whether your horse is "competitive" or not. The tests are the tests, and the requirements are the same, whether you're in Southern California or BFE.

Uh, competitive means winning- and geographically the competition is stronger in some places than others. Maybe you meant to say that geography has nothing to do with whether a horse is competent or not at a level? Sandy had discussed being competitive at a level, not just competent.

And that was exactly my point- competent at a level isn't going to necessarily mean winning classes around here. Meeting TL requirements won't necessarily win the class if many of the horses in the class are going on the bit- does it make the person who says their horse who accepts steady contact is at TL any less accurate? What if they are in an area without such stiff competition, where they can win classes?

And my second point, and the one I was trying to illustrate with my own example, is that a horse might be going at one level with one rider but not capable of the same things with a less competent rider. And a rider might be able to do certain things on a schoolmaster but not able to do them on a less well schooled horse. The level of the rider is dependent on the horse, and vice versa.

Sparky

Apr. 3, 2009, 07:05 PM

And my second point, and the one I was trying to illustrate with my own example, is that a horse might be going at one level with one rider but not capable of the same things with a less competent rider. And a rider might be able to do certain things on a schoolmaster but not able to do them on a less well schooled horse. The level of the rider is dependent on the horse, and vice versa.

How is the level of the rider dependent on the horse? And how is the level of the horse dependent on the rider? I'm truly confused by these statements.

slc2

Apr. 3, 2009, 07:45 PM

Sparky

Apr. 3, 2009, 08:09 PM

1. If the horse is green, the GP rider isn't doing GP on the horse.
2. If the rider is green, he isn't doing GP on the GP horse, either.

but of course it's a lot more complicated than that and a lot more subtle. A rider who's less experienced and buys a highly trained horse pretty quickly brings the horse down to his level if he has no guidance, but if he has help, the horse might actually help him slowly raise his level of riding.

Thanks slc2, I understand that the GP rider isn't going to get GP movements on a green horse, but he's still a GP rider: his skill isn't dependent on the horse. Conversley, a green rider on a schoolmaster is still a green rider, even if he manages a few 'tricks':the horse's skill isn't dependent on the rider, just because the rider can't make it do anything. But you guys are the experts, I'm just trying to learn.

FancyFree

Apr. 3, 2009, 09:57 PM

I also agree that showing is the best way to find out exactly where you are. I show because if I don't, I know I won't push myself and work hard enough to make real progress. I have several friends who ride with excellent dressage instructors and haven't shown in all the time I've known them (5+ years). I don't get it. But if that's what makes them happy ...

But the no scores = no achievement I can't entirely buy. I made progress with my gelding last year that wasn't reflected in our show scores. Because, although I'm getting better, I haven't learned to how to ride tests very well. And there is no movement called "holding bug-eyed horse together in a spring gale."

No I don't agree with the no scores=no achievement either. There was a fantastic rider with a very talented mare at my old barn. She had huge anxiety issues and never showed the whole time I was at that barn. She did however, clinic regularly with an Olympic rider and train with a top trainer in our area. It was common knowledge that she was solidly at fourth level. She also was an experienced enough rider to know where she was at. It probably helped that she trained with people who didn't bother BSing their clients. They didn't need to, being so in demand. The rider was satisfied with the feedback she got from her very competent trainers.

On the other hand, the inexperienced dressage rider, who may not have access to such frank trainers, isn't experienced with riding the movements, doesn't really know what they are suppose to be riding them like; they can greatly benefit from a show. Even the little schooling show can be a great way to evaluate what level the horse is actually at. Feedback from a judge can be immensely valuable in this case. Also sometimes very eye opening. ;)

mandalea

Apr. 3, 2009, 10:39 PM

OK I will probably get my head handed to me but maybe someone here can explain something about the Parelli 'training method' I know it is off on a bit of a tangent but still I am so curious.

We were just in FL for several of the dressage shows. The barn where we stayed had a woman practicing her Parelli on a very older horse. The horse was a very pretty and sweet who had a bombproof disposition and had obviously been around the block numerous times. Nothing much seemed to bother her. He appeared very easy to lead, groom and handle. He even patiently taught lessons (up / down ones) to some younger children when we were there.

Much to my friend and mines surprise one day there was someone standing in the field with a long lead shank and flipping the lead up in the horses face for about 10 minutes. We both stood there waiting to see what was supposed to happen. The horse just stood there looking insulted with his head in the air. He never moved even when said lead shank almost clocked him in the head. We however stood there for ten minutes with our jaws practically hanging on the ground since we had never seen anything like this behavior and we could not figure out what was supposed to be happening. We finally gave up and went about our business. The person looked to be moving on to doing something with a long stick. Later in the week we asked the farm owner what that was and they said OH She is practicing her Parelli. Once again we looked at her with blank expressions and said but what was she teaching the horse. The farm owner said Oh I don't know.

So I guess the question is does anyone know what the heck was supposed to be going on?? People do not pay money to get told to do this type of thing to their horses do they??

He's supposed to back up. The fact he didn't back up means he's dominant. Dominant horses don't like to move their front end. She should have had her stick, enforcing the back up.

I think you're describing one form of the Friendly Game. It's a desensitization exercise. The human creates commotion with the rope, and the horse -- reading the human's body language that the commotion doesn't mean go -- learns to ignore it. The anticipated result of this exercise is a bombproof horse who doesn't over-react to commotion -- just exactly as you described this horse having.

If the horse had his head up as you described, the person may have been waiting until he put his head down and relaxed before she "released" or stopped the exercise.

I don't know how close you were to them or if you had a good angle for depth perception, but the lead rope should not have come dangerously close to his face.

It's not a form of desensitization. And it's not the Friendly Game either. It's the Yo-Yo game, because they're supposed to go out, then come back in to you.

And they don't price their stuff. Some guy does, and they're having problems with him.

And Linda doesn't bash all dressage, just 'Modern' Dressage, like Hyperflexion, draw reins, side reins etc. She prefers Classical dressage, that's why she's working with Walter, because he is very against Modern Dressage, and all for Classical.

MistyBlue

Apr. 3, 2009, 10:43 PM

And that was exactly my point- competent at a level isn't going to necessarily mean winning classes around here. Meeting TL requirements won't necessarily win the class if many of the horses in the class are going on the bit- does it make the person who says their horse who accepts steady contact is at TL any less accurate? What if they are in an area without such stiff competition, where they can win classes?
I didn't think dressage was judged against other competitors. I thought each rider and horse are judged and scored individually and the highest score wins.
If a horse and rider are showing a test in a show and they score a 65%...it's because they scored a 65%. It doesn't matter if there were 10 others doing that test in Hoboken and they were all riding camels or if there were 50 other riders in CA all on well trained horses with BNTs ring side. The score is still the same. Now in the CA scenerio there's probably a better chance of someone else getting a higher score than in Hoboken, but either location and type/amount of competitors won't change the rider's or horse's score.
The level of competency doesn't change with surroundings, location or company in dressage I thought. :confused: Maybe on the judge, but nothing else.

MistyBlue

Apr. 3, 2009, 10:47 PM

He's supposed to back up. The fact he didn't back up means he's dominant. Dominant horses don't like to move their front end. She should have had her stick, enforcing the back up.
Why not just point a finger at him or a light poke in the chest and say "back." ? Isn't that more simple and direct and effective? All my horses do that, I need them to move and I walk by or up to them and direct them which direction I want them to move. A common thing when I'm putting out lunch hay and the moochers are moving in looking hungry before I give them the go ahead. I point at the chest and say "back" and they back up. I point at the shoulder and say "over" and they move to the direction I'm pointing. Same with the hips if they've got a butt in my way, point and say "over." Rarely do I have to touch them. Or flip anything in their face. :confused:

slc2

Apr. 3, 2009, 10:56 PM

No, that's too simple, no one would buy a dvd teaching them to do that!

"he's still a GP rider"

There's no such thing. A person rides each horse at the level that's appropriate for their training and development, and someone who rode gp once ins't necessarily able to do it now, or ride any other but one horse at that level.

narcisco

Apr. 3, 2009, 11:24 PM

I swear I read a Parelli article years ago describing Remmer as a "ruined" dressage horse that Linda had miraculously saved and retrained. I don't know how that happened if they've had him since he was three. I guess the story has changed. Does anyone else remember that?

slc2

Apr. 4, 2009, 06:27 AM

It's Parelli. Of course 'The story has changed'.

I think thinking of someone as a 'Grand Prix rider' is a big, big mistake and leads to a huge amount of mistakes in people selecting clinicians, trainers and instructors, or even in deciding who to listen to or emulate. The idea that because someone has done some of that work, they now have some sort of mysterious qualification, is a sore, sore mistake, don't bother to ask how I know this, LOL.

yaya

Apr. 4, 2009, 07:20 AM

Looks like the Ps have a new market to go after. Pat showed up on "The Dog Whisperer" tonight to work on a therapy horse that kicks at side walkers while Cesar Millan worked on two dogs that bark and lunge at the therapy horses. (The show will repeat on Sunday morning)

Nothing like exposure on national tv!

Nojacketrequired

Apr. 4, 2009, 11:05 AM

Well, when I think "on the bit" I think "round."

When I think of "on the bit", I think of a horse working forwards from the hind end into acceptance of the bridle, which results in them being round.

Just being "round" often means they've dropped behind the bit.

NJR

Ambrey

Apr. 4, 2009, 11:34 AM

I didn't think dressage was judged against other competitors. I thought each rider and horse are judged and scored individually and the highest score wins.
If a horse and rider are showing a test in a show and they score a 65%...it's because they scored a 65%.

We're not disagreeing- what I'm saying is that a competent score isn't always going to be competitive in all areas. In some areas people can win the class with a 62, but if you're in a particularly competitive area you might need to be low 70s to win.

If someone is going to use competitiveness as a judge of whether a horse is "confirmed" at a level, it's going to vary depending on where they are. Doesn't seem that complicated to figure that out.

As for the level of the horse and rider being dependent on each other- there is a complete spectrum between "green rider" and "highly skilled pro." There are some horses that can perform at a level only with riders at the pro end of the spectrum- if that horse was owned/ridden by an average rider his performance would suffer. Would you then say that horse who is then scoring less than wonderfully is not REALLY an _x_ level horse, even though he can perform beautifully at that level with his pro trainer?

And there is a complete spectrum between "can perform at _x_ level" and "has done _x_ level so often he can do it in his sleep" in a horse. There are plenty of riders who can ride _x_ level on a horse of the latter variety, but when faced with a horse who needs constant support and correction they will not score as well. So when they ride the more difficult horse and don't score so well, are they not REALLY _x_ level riders, even though they can do _x_ level beautifully on their trainer's schoolmaster?

And then you can put the "middle of the spectrum" horse and rider together. The horse can, say, do lovely 3rd level work with the pro ride. The rider can do 3rd level work on the trainer's schoolmaster. But when you put that rider on that horse, their 3rd level stuff is less than stellar because the rider still needs work on the finer points and the horse needs constant support to keep it together.

Beasmom

Apr. 4, 2009, 01:01 PM

It boggles the mind when people who have no experience in competition pontificate about it. A horse can be schooling some Second and Third level movements but not be consistent enough for anything above First Level. This does NOT mean the horse is Third Level. It means he is First Level, no higher. Take that horse into a Second Level test and get your head handed to you.

And going through the motions in an illegal bit is just that. Going through the motions. It is not building a foundation for correct training. Such people are talking through their hats and can't be taken seriously, be they trainers or students.

So what's your point, Ambrey, concerning scores? Scores can be influenced by weather, judges, footing, as well as the individual competitiors. What wins in Colorado may not win in California or Florida, but a horse that scores in the mid-to high 60's at a level is, in the opinions of most, ready to move up a level. Doesn't matter where the horse is geographically. Also, there are talented horses who end up showing and scoring much better at the higher levels, where their talent really shines. You still need the basics even for talented individuals.

Linda P. will likely NEVER put her money where her mouth is through competition. She'd get HER head handed to her and exposed as a fraud. Of course, they would have excuses for poor scores, should she ever be silly enough to try it....

FancyFree

Apr. 4, 2009, 01:22 PM

And going through the motions in an illegal bit is just that. Going through the motions. It is not building a foundation for correct training. Such people are talking through their hats and can't be taken seriously, be they trainers or students.

I've wondered about that. Can I rider actually say what level they are at if they've never ridden their horse in a dressage legal bit?

Beasmom

Apr. 4, 2009, 01:43 PM

No. Any horse should be able to be ridden in a simple snaffle bit. Any horse. If not, there is a hole in the horse's training, or a hole in the rider's training that is not being addressed.

Double bridles are for the horse/rider pairs who have their basics firmly in place and are ready to move into the realm of very finely tuned communications. This means the rider must have an excellent seat and is able to use that seat for most of the communication to the horse. A Pelham is IMO, a "faux" double bridle. OK for the hunter ring, but lacks the finesse demanded in the use of a double bridle, and lacks the delicate communication of a double.

It's a cheat.

CatOnLap

Apr. 4, 2009, 05:09 PM

Interesting thought about what qualifies a horse to carry a label of a certain level of competence. I think for most people, we'd infer a horse had actually shown at the level claimed in order to qualify. We'd have to trust the speaker really well and know their background merits the claim otherwise. I rarely show and I use several different highly qualified clinicians who give me decent appraisal and good advice. But every once in a long while you have to go out for an independant opinion who is not biased by longstanding "friendly" consideration. Otherwise, I think you can say things, like "well I've played around with the Three P's (piaffe, passage and pirouettes) but we've never actually shown it." There's no shame in that, but I wouldn't go around telling people I trained a GP horse or that the horse is at GP level- that implies to most of us that an independant opinion has agreed with you.

On good days, with really green horses at clinics, I've see good trainers get passage, flying changes and half pass and so on, at least a few steps. This does not mean the horse is working those lauded FEI levels. It means the trainer is adept at catching the horse's natural movement and enhancing it at a lucky moment.

Those trainers, IMO, have a right to call themselves GP level riders, though.

mbm

Apr. 4, 2009, 05:39 PM

sorry, i have to absolutely disagree that showing is the *thing* that certifies a horse/rider at x level.

dressage is training - not showing. sure, showing is fun/helpful/etc, but a horse that hasn't shown can absolutely be called an x level horse.....

and a trainer that has trained a horse to x levle can absolutely say they are a x level rider/trainer.....

the idea that showing can certify a horse's training is silly.... it leaves out the possibility of someone showing at say - 4th or psg and getting 40% - is that horse and rider 4th/psg?

what about a trainer/rider that has brought along a horse (or 2) to the same level and the horse is fab at everything at that level.... ?

which is the real 4th level horse?

i do think that there is a difference between riding a test and riding where you can do your transitions etc when it feels right instead of at x letter, and having outsidee input is good if you need that kind of thing ...

and of course if you are selling horses it does good to get them out for exposure....:)

Ambrey

Apr. 4, 2009, 05:54 PM

i do think that there is a difference between riding a test and riding where you can do your transitions etc when it feels right instead of at x letter, and having outsidee input is good if you need that kind of thing ...

I agree completely with all of your points!

I think there's just a lot of gray area. And in any person's situation, what we can see by a video or photograph or even what they post here, it's hard to know what all information went into their saying they are an _x_ level rider. Since not everyone shows, you can't very well say people can only claim a level they are confirmed at.

Especially since most people are discussing the level they are working on, rather than the ones they've already mastered.

egontoast

Apr. 4, 2009, 06:07 PM

do think that there is a difference between riding a test and riding where you can do your transitions etc when it feels right instead of at x letter,

except that most likely if you can't do your transitions at the letter and need to wait until all the planets are aligned then you are probably not riding every stride, your horse is probably not on your aids and there are probably gaps in the training.

For example, it's not really a third level horse if you can only get collection when the ambulance goes by while there is a full moon..

"having outsidee(sic) input is good if you need that kind of thing"

Thanks for the chuckle. :lol:

Beasmom

Apr. 4, 2009, 06:11 PM

Showing does not "certify" a horse or rider. Certificates are not issued at horse shows. You have set up a straw man.

A horse that gets a 40% score once at 4th or PSG may be having a bad day. If he consistently scores in the 40's, the rider/trainer better regroup, because something's amiss. Consistent scoring in the 40's at ANY level with no improvement (or getting a clue that there's a problem) just means you're lousy.

So certainly someone can school a horse at home and convince themselves that they are riding at (insert your level here). They may persuade others that this is so. They may in fact BE schooling the horse very well and correctly at said level. They may or may not have an instructor/clinician telling them that this is so. Or they could be kidding themselves and living in a fool's paradise.

Showing is not for everyone. Showing can serve as a yardstick for progress (or regression, sometimes!). A judge can give feedback on what they observe on a given day. Remarks that turn up over and over in a test indicate issues to be addressed. Many of us show for the information we get. I enjoy reading my test remarks as much or more than getting ribbons.

slc2

Apr. 4, 2009, 06:27 PM

"Is a person really (doing that level) if they do the work in an illegal bit."

If the bit is something that is only very slightly different from the allowed bits, it's possible. Some bits are just slightly different and simply haven't been approved yet.

But the bits that are legal for competition were chosen very, very wisely, and very, very carefully, for extremely good reasons. They are the allowed bits because they are compatible with traditional, classical training.

Other bits mean the training has mistakes in it. Other bits mean the rider has not gotten his basics. Horses, to be perfectly frank, just really don't require different bits in and of themselves, no matter how much people insist they do. The allowed bits are perfectly fine when a person is doing a proper job.

It is extremely, extremely different to school vs to ride tests. I actually think that difference gets more and more as one goes up the levels.

A person who is schooling repeats the exercise in isolation, the tests are designed to test more than just following a pattern, the movements are arranged in an order that deliberately increases the level of difficulty. The continuous effort makes it very different too.

Dressage tests are designed to expose every training weakness.

Schooling is designed to do the exact opposite.

Carolinadreamin'

Apr. 4, 2009, 08:08 PM

If the bit is something that is only very slightly different from the allowed bits, it's possible. Some bits are just slightly different and simply haven't been approved yet.

What are your thoughts regarding pelhams? What if that's the only bit a person EVER rides their horse in. They just use it to hold the horse. No dressage going on, not really, they're just holding their horse...usually at the walk and sometimes at the trot. Then to blather on and on and on on dressage threads, well....I just don't know. They can read about the feeling of riding correctly all they want. It's another thing to actually do it.

Went to one Parelli demonstration. Left when Linda took over an hour to get her horse to take the bit. She never did ride as he never took the bit.

siegi b.

Apr. 4, 2009, 08:13 PM

slc - so you're saying that "schooling hides every training weakness"??? Really?

Beasmom

Apr. 4, 2009, 08:15 PM

It better not or you're doing it wrong!

Carolinadreamin', "dressage with a Pelham" is an oxymoron. It. Ain't. Happening.

Carolinadreamin'

Apr. 4, 2009, 08:18 PM

Beasmom, yep indeed.

AnotherRound

Apr. 4, 2009, 08:22 PM

Yes, I agree about the bits, and the thing that bothers me about when people compare pelhams with the curb on a doubl bridle is that the pelham acts on the lower jaw and the horse tucks his nose in to avoid the bit, which is the antitheses of dressage - the horse needs to move from his back forward into the bit, and if he is tucking his nose or head down he isn't working forward on the bit, and his training will suffer until he learns to accept the bit and move into it. A rider is in essence training the horse to avoid the bit with a pelham, and as el Slicko says, using an illegal bit, and I call a pelham one of the illegal bits, means the rider hasn't gotten his basics yet - the head is tucked without the back being engaged and without the horse learning to move from behind into the bit. The rider isn't riding from his seat and enabling th ehorse to move out freely in front. The horse hangs heavily on the bit and doesn't have a free shoulder, all because the rider doesn't ride him from their own seat from behind and push him up onto the bit- he cant't because of the action of the bit when the horse moves into it. That's why, in my estimation, the pelham is not allowed in dressage. Using it and training with it mean the rider isn't doing a proper job.

And I agree with your description about schooling and tests, Slick. Showing is the work which continuously challenges and "tests" the rider and her mount, in, I might add, the testing environment they will not find at home in their ring, together, as a team, and the schooling practices the routines. I can be challenged, I must say, by my trainer, and actually am every lesson, but its not the same at all, and what I was trying to say in previous posts was that the class in the show is the environment where the riders are tested, challenged and where they "earn" their recognition of progress from a judge, and where they earn their right to say they and their horse, together, are at a certain level. My work in training does not qualify me to say I am riding training. Until I show and start receiving decent scores at training, in a variety of the tests, then I would say satisfactorily that I am "training level" but not until then. I might be working on some level one (I am not, yet) transitions but I am not riding level one. Not, in my opinion, until I put it all together consistently at shows, successfully, at shows, and ride Level 1 tests well. That's just how I see it.

Its a little bit like swimming laps and being timed at the 100 meter and finding you are faster than the current AAU record holder for 100 meter free. Well, that's fantastic, but you haven't broken the record. Yet. Even if you swim in a local league and swim faster than the AAU record holder, you still haven't broken the record, and won't until you swim competition at 100 meter free at an AAU meet. Then you have broken the AAU record, and call yourself the record holder in AAU for that event. Until then, you are schooling and haven't broken the AAU record. That's just how I see it

slc2

Apr. 4, 2009, 08:44 PM

I didn't say SHOWING exposes every weakness, I said dressage tests are designed to expose weaknesses in training.

For example, an extended movement is followed by a collected movement. If the rider cannot make the transition, it will be obvious because the test has one after the other, and often, because the transition itself received a separate score.

"schooling hides every training weakness"

If you want to state it that way, I'm not going to contradict you, I've seen how that can go, :lol:.

I would express it as 'The main point of training is to educate rather than test', or that, 'a certain amount of testing is avoided in training'. Or, 'don't set the horse up to fail'. This means I wouldn't start out by trying to do a '10' full pirouette in a very collected canter. I'd start with half turns on the haunches at the walk.

Some people might express it as, 'The tests in training are very little ones, in steps. The tests in the show ring are the whole enchilada'.

My point is that schooling is different from showing. Showing is a report card. In schooling, you are looking for ways to create habits in horses, and to develop their muscles. You do 'test' as in, trying to find out if the horse understands it. There are, in fact, 'mini examinations' in training.

But the goal of training is different.

If you have a child who has just started to practice how to do a certain dive, you don't take him to a competition and demand he do it perfectly/correctly to win. Training is to explain things to the horse.

"What are your thoughts regarding pelhams? "

A pelham is not a useful dressage bit. It does not create correct contact or correct neck muscle development. In even the best hands, it makes the horse 'drop' the bit, so causes the horse to lose muscle development at the base of the neck, and shortens his neck without coming through the neck.

We used to call it 'a pelham neck', and my trainer could tell you in an instant if a horse was schooled in a pelham, just as she could tell you if it lived in draw reins. Why? Very, very simple. It affects the horse physically in ways that are very obvious to an experienced person.

Even for the hunters, back then, they were not a desirable bit. Seeing a pelham on a hunter was nearly as bad as seeing a slow twist or a wire bit. It screamed, 'too strong' or 'not well schooled'.

Today, people are overhorsed and have horses with gaits they can't sit. So today, it's a fashionable bit in the hunters.

If I needed to put a 'control bit' on a tiny child's pony, I think I'd put on a gag, or a running martingale, a grass rein, or a little western curb bit, or a noseband.

The other problem with the pelham is that when you use it, it has a mixed effect. It does not have a clear snaffle and a clear curb bit effect. It has a mixed effect. When it is used during an emergency, the snaffle effect pulls the bit up, and the curb chain backward and upward on the jaw, up out of the chin groove, causing the horse to have a great deal of discomfort.

"What if that's the only bit a person EVER rides their horse in. They just use it to hold the horse. No dressage going on, not really, they're just holding their horse...usually at the walk and sometimes at the trot. Then to blather on and on and on on dressage threads, well....I just don't know. They can read about the feeling of riding correctly all they want. It's another thing to actually do it."

This unneccessary item is, I take it, because you are attempting to insult and pick on Ambrey?

Ambrey rides her horse in a pelham because she is petrified of him, and because he is not a good match for her. She is a very physically weak person who is petrified after having a spill, she is not in good physical condition, and is riding a fairly green, extremely strong-necked draft horse cross that is ridden in a snaffle by a professional male trainer.

Exactly what do you EXPECT her to put on her horse given the situation? She puts on the horse the bit she doesn't feel quite so petrified in. And no, it's not my choice. But you aren't her, it isn't your choice, and aside from that, you can't ever get adults to change their mind once it's made up. She'll ride the horse in that pelham til she's less fearful, and sick of the bit and ready to bit him correctly.

Beasmom

Apr. 4, 2009, 08:46 PM

But, but.... does Linda Parelli use a Pelham? Will she and Paddy come up with a new, improved bridle/bit system for dressage?

Just keeping things on topic!

Beasmom

Apr. 4, 2009, 09:17 PM

When discussing dressage, it's a more useful conversation when all parties have a good grasp of the basics, the why and wherefore of it. True, beginners may (and will) ask questions about the discipline that seem simplistic, but they (usually) come from a sincere desire for knowledge. The ones who try to grab attention or argue a point (ad nauseam) to justify their own shortcomings become painfully obvious to everyone else.

Irritation ensues when persons pontificate about dressage when in fact they know little or nothing about it. Like Mrs. Pirelli, for instance, who used to declare dressage harmful before she and the Mister teamed up with WAZ. Irritation occurs when upstart newbies try to sound like experts, when they should emulate the wise owl who,

"The less he spoke, the more he heard",

But when they ASK for help or opinions on a subject, they reject out of hand every suggestion. It gets tiresome.

slc2

Apr. 4, 2009, 09:34 PM

And what would you think such endless argument and rejection of information comes from? Fear. Justifying actions taken out of fear. It's a pretty simple situation, beasmon.

Sorry, I just like 'beasmon'. It sounds like a rastafarian apiculturist.:)

Beasmom

Apr. 4, 2009, 10:01 PM

'sokay, SLC! I kinda like it, too!

Fear is a sad way to go through life, though, wouldn't you say?

I refuse to succumb to the fearmongering about the economy, for instance. Besides, there's only so much I can do about it. A few years ago, after a very bad and painful fall from a horse, I sought professional help to overcome my fear. I could not, would not give up riding, but fear kept me from progressing with the horse that threw me.

Smart, determined people do whatever it takes to achieve their goals, whether that means psychiatrists or psychologists to overcome mental blocks, physicians or therapists to help with physical issues, dietitians for help with nutrition, or personal trainers for strength training. Riding teachers can only help so much. My coach cannot push me away from the dining table, or take away my bag of Cheetos. She cannot force me to do stretches or crunches. She can make suggestions but I have to follow them!

Fear and doubt are enemies to be defeated with personal strength and determination. The ones who do nothing to overcome these things do not deserve, and will never achieve, their goals. Furthermore, having failed to conquer their demons, or even engage them, those people are in no position to advise others.

Lip service to the battle is not the same as taking up arms. We all battle demons of some sort. What I'm trying to say is, if you have not taken up arms against your personal demon, if you are standing on the sidelines of your own internal battles, you cannot advise anyone else.

AnotherRound

Apr. 4, 2009, 10:12 PM

Yes, but fear of what? Fear of riding, it seems, but when its done ad nauseum on a BB it looks like social fear - fear of not being seen as competent and knowledgable, in the dressage BB community. Problem is, in all communities, its transparent when someone parrots bits and pieces of information and begins more and more to lecture on topics they aren't competent in IRL. Its very young, that kind of social behaviour, like a 13 year old trying to associate with adults, talking as though they know what they are talking about, but to the adults its apparent they are a child, and its ok in a teen ager, but tiresome ad nauseum in an adult who pretends to be oblivious about themselves. LP seems to want to be perceivd as an competent and experienced horsewoman, and its clear to folks with half her claimed expertise that she has not worked to achieve what she talks about. Her riding, even with a dressage master, is surprisingly poor - basic seat hands and communication on a horse which she should have as a working foundation. had she the schooling she touts, but does not have as a foundation to learn dressage. Funny how the same kind of person posts on this thread with the same lack of ;understanding about how to work hard and learn and improve and so unaware of how glaring her unwillingness to be honest about herself is.

I chuckled at beasmon, too. :cool:

AnotherRound

Apr. 4, 2009, 10:20 PM

Oh, Slick, I thought I would point out that Ambrey is riding her horse in a pelham, but her trainer isn't using a snaffle, he's using a pelham as well.

FancyFree

Apr. 4, 2009, 10:56 PM

A pelham is not a useful dressage bit. It does not create correct contact or correct neck muscle development. In even the best hands, it makes the horse 'drop' the bit, so causes the horse to lose muscle development at the base of the neck, and shortens his neck without coming through the neck.

We used to call it 'a pelham neck', and my trainer could tell you in an instant if a horse was schooled in a pelham, just as she could tell you if it lived in draw reins. Why? Very, very simple. It affects the horse physically in ways that are very obvious to an experienced person.

Why would anyone who trains dressage put a horse in a Pelham then? I recently heard about a trainer who puts horses that don't even regularly go in Pelhams, in that bit. It's his bit of choice apparently. Is it an easier bit to deal with? Does a Pelham offer more control than a double? If you have a horse that goes nicely in a double, why would you ride the horse in a Pelham?

Also if a horse has been schooled exclusively in a Pelham, is it a difficult task to then go back to a snaffle? Or would the horse have to go in a double if the rider wanted to compete?

Questions, questions. I can't seem to understand the use of a Pelham in dressage. In my experience, I've never seen any competent dressage rider or dressage trainer ever use one. I've seen jumpers in them, but never dressage horses.

Carolinadreamin'

Apr. 4, 2009, 11:02 PM

Nothing wrong with using the pelham if you need it for the brakes. Heck, as an adult re-rider, I am much more cautious now. However, don't try to explain it as a bit suitable for dressage and pontificate about all things dressage. People understand the former, not the latter.

mbm

Apr. 5, 2009, 12:02 AM

So certainly someone can school a horse at home and convince themselves that they are riding at (insert your level here). They may persuade others that this is so. They may in fact BE schooling the horse very well and correctly at said level. They may or may not have an instructor/clinician telling them that this is so. Or they could be kidding themselves and living in a fool's paradise.
.

do you honestly believe that unless someone shows they aren't competent at x level?

what about those trainers that train the show horses that the show riders ride?

what practical purpose does showing have? sure if you show then it is important to have a horse that does well at shows.... but if you only want to learn to train and or learn to ride to the best of your ability in a non show environment showing isnt needed.

all the above btw assumes that the trainers involved are extremely well quailified to be the eyes on the ground..... which btw is what i meant by not needing outside input. if you have an excellent/honest trainer it shouldnt be needed.

i guess i just get tired of hearing how unless you show you could never be anything other that dirt ;)

Beasmom

Apr. 5, 2009, 01:19 AM

Oh, my, my, my. Where to start?

Certainly there are people who are riding at "X" level and doing it competently, but do not show. Witness the SRS. On the other hand, there are a lot of people in the world who drink the Kool-Aid offered by trainers who dismiss the competitive world of dressage as somehow "impure" or "beneath" their efforts. I get tired of THAT.

What about trainers who ride their client's horses? So what? What about the riders who are training their horses under the guidance of a trainer? So what? What about people who try to learn dressage from books and DVD's? So what? People make choices based on time constraints, demands of family, money, you name it.

How do you know for sure your trainer is competent and honest? (And by "you", I don't mean you, MBM, but "all you all".) You know by watching other trainer's students, comparing their results, observing their horses, as well as reading books, watching DVD's, and comparing what your trainer tells you to what competent, respected clinicians and trainers say.

If, by dressage training, you mean putting the basic balancing, straightening and steering on a horse, then certainly showing is not necessary. Horses working on a ranch have some "dressage", in that they steer, stop, go and so forth in accordance with their ranch and cattle work. They don't need a show.

But if one wishes to get an independent outside opinion on the horse's progress, horse showing is one way to do it. Attending clinics as a riding participant is another. Oops! That would be "outside input"! I am suspicious of trainers who discourage students from attending clinics or shows. There is usually a reason for this. Either the student is TRULY not ready for a show or clinic, or the teacher is threatened by the student's interest in venturing outside the teacher's influence. A confident, competent teacher will deal with the questions that may arise from a clinic or show.

If a horse does badly at shows, ask yourself why. Does the horse lack confidence in his rider? Does the rider herself lack confidence? Good dressage training enables the horse to trust his rider and vice versa. If that trust is lacking, maybe there's an issue that needs to be addressed at home. But how do you know unless you show?

Yup, some folks are better test riders than others. Some horses are absolute hams in front of an audience. Some are shrinking violets. I've had a few of each. The "hams" are much more fun. That's the way it is. Show if you like. Stay away if you don't; you'll just spoil the fun for those of us who show for the pleasure of it.

I never said anything implying that those who do not show are "dirt". Another straw man, MBM.

slc2

Apr. 5, 2009, 07:28 AM

Agree with all points. One of the biggest danger signals is the trainer discouraged his students from attending shows and clinics.

Any trainer who gets up on his soapbox and beats his chest about how bad ALL judges are, and how bad ALL other trainers are (or even just MOST), has a very, very serious problem, which is, basically, he is trying to form a cult, and the member of the cult is YOU.

Trainers DO try to play head games with students, especially when they have deficiencies of their own that will, with time, become obvious to the student -- especially if the student were to go to a show or clinic and talk with other riders, trainers and judges.

BUT...unfortunately, there are a few times when things get tougher than this. I have had two kinds of 'don't go to the clinic' trainers. Sometimes a trainer discourages a student from going to clinics because he knows the clinician has nothing of value to offer, sometimes because he doesn't want his student's checks going to someone else.

Unfortunately, just about anyone today can and does give 'dressage clinics'. Clinics also don't always help students...but while there might be a few caveats to beasmom's post, it is still very true. If a trainer discourages you from going to all clinics and especially shows, if a trainer runs down other trainers who are legit, run.

Apr. 5, 2009, 11:12 AM

what I'm saying is that a competent score isn't always going to be competitive in all areas. In some areas people can win the class with a 62, but if you're in a particularly competitive area you might need to be low 70s to win.

If someone is going to use competitiveness as a judge of whether a horse is "confirmed" at a level, it's going to vary depending on where they are. Doesn't seem that complicated to figure that out.

Good grief. I had no idea you were talking about ribbons. Your score (outside input!) is the litmus test of whether you're confirmed at a level, not your placement in a class. It's also how you qualify to compete at regionals, and get a bronze, silver or gold medal. Where you place is just a point of pride and maybe some nice prizes.

Honestly, if you're this interested in levels and how to determine where you are, you should try showing. It would put a whole new perspective on your riding. It certainly did for me,even though my instructor is quite honest about where we are and how well we are (or aren't) doing.

slc2

Apr. 5, 2009, 11:24 AM

"Smart, determined people do whatever it takes to achieve their goals, whether that means psychiatrists or psychologists to overcome mental blocks, physicians or therapists to help with physical issues, dietitians for help with nutrition, or personal trainers for strength training. Riding teachers can only help so much. My coach cannot push me away from the dining table, or take away my bag of Cheetos. She cannot force me to do stretches or crunches. She can make suggestions but I have to follow them!"

Very true, but people are weak and they are afraid of change.

People are also terrified of success. They cling to things that prevent success so they don't have to confront success.

On the psychological stress test, many, many very 'success events' are listed as extremely high stress.

Success is terrifying for many people.

If they master one thing, then there will be the next thing to learn. Then the next thing.

If they removed the barriers to success, and ate better, exercised, rode more often, they would have no excuses except their innate ability to learn and improve. And they couldn't rest on their laurels quite so much. They would have to keep learning and moving along.

Moving up the levels is difficult. Not everyone can do it. People are afraid to try.

Most people would prefer to not have people see them try, struggle and work their way up over time. Yes, most people don't comprehend how much it involves struggle and slow improvement, and they pick on people who don't move up as quickly as they think they should, but this is more more than that.

People are terrified to make the attempt. And it's not just about failing. There is a lot different kind of pressure involved in success. As long as they have an excuse, they are safe.

As long as they have their bad back, their physical condition, lack of time, lack of money, husband, children, job or diabetic canary to blame, they don't really have to try, and they get a lot of sympathy.

mbm

Apr. 5, 2009, 11:38 AM

fwiw, beasmom - this is what i was originally commenting on:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnotherRound
"we don't call a horse riding at a certain level because he can do the movements. He is "at" a certain level because that is how he is performing in front of a judge. Period. That is what Dressage is, its the performance of the horse under scruitiny following a discrete set of rules in the competition ring. If a horse hasn't ever shown, he isn't qualified at any level. If a competitor hasn't ever shown, he or she isn't competiative at any level. And, a competitor doesn't base his success or achievement in a class qualified by where in the country he showed - his success is based upon the scores he acheives when he shows. Period. No scores, no achievement."

i personally disagree with the above statement. and i gave some reasons why i disagree.

i never said anything about a trainer "not letting" a student go to a show or clinic etc.

what i said was: if you have competent instruction, you should be able to know where you are and not need to show to get this input.

yes, of course there are many many many bad trainers out there. but there are good ones.

as for how to know if your trainer is on the right track? the horse will tell you. and as long as you have a decent foundation in theory and "classical" education (ie the classical texts on riding) you should be able to get a good feel for your progress.

by using only showing to gauge your progress you are absolutely at the whim of every current fad in dressage..... and of course you assume that the judges are always correct. i am one of those that think the direction competitive dressage is heading is not where i want to go. therefore if i show it is more of a personal goal then to get a stamp of approval on where i am. besides we all know that what you see in the show arena is not necessarily what you will see in teh training barn of the same pair - better or worse.

bottom line: showing is a nice extra bit of info but to me it inst required for a horse or rider to be called "x" level rider/horse.

FancyFree

Apr. 5, 2009, 11:50 AM

what i said was: if you have competent instruction, you should be able to know where you are and not need to show to get this input.

I agree. But I think Beasmom was saying that there are people who do not have access to competent instruction. They either don't have a trainer or they have a trainer that just tells them what they want to hear. A shuffle to the left, a shuffle to the right and "OMG we're schooling second!" In those cases, the comments from a qualified judge can be very eye-opening. You get an idea whether you're on track, need to get a trainer or need to get a new trainer.

I agree though, you don't need a judge to confirm where you're at if you have a qualified instructor. Showing, for me, was never about the ribbons. It was about the comments the judge made about my test. The experience enhanced my work with my trainer.

Ambrey

Apr. 5, 2009, 01:24 PM

Good grief. I had no idea you were talking about ribbons. Your score (outside input!) is the litmus test of whether you're confirmed at a level, not your placement in a class. It's also how you qualify to compete at regionals, and get a bronze, silver or gold medal. Where you place is just a point of pride and maybe some nice prizes.

That's what competition means- someone else brought up the levels and the competitiveness, not I.

My interest in levels as it applies to myself is nonexistent. My comments were meant to show that people's ideas of what level someone is riding/schooling at are very subjective, because I disliked the negativity shown toward the kid in Sonesta's videos, and even toward LP and WAZ.

Dressage Art

Apr. 5, 2009, 05:39 PM

what practical purpose does showing have?Showing is certification of your and your horse abilities. Just like in the classical cradle as SRS they do show and they do have levels and they are not allowed to claim the level that they THINK they are unless they proved their riding affront of qualified/certified eyes. It’s a baloney that classical riders didn’t have to show or they didn’t like to show. Klimke showed extensively up to Olympics. Arthur Kottas is a judge himself with many students who show. Classical trainers do not push their horses as much or as early and they always keep the best for the horse in their mind. Classical trainers do not take shortcuts and pride themselves in the strong basics; they do not ride “poodle dressage”. But still many of them show and do believe in the value of showing.

At times, self image of some riders is faultered by "smoke blowing" trainers who is after $ and by riders themselves since they avoid the critique of judges and/or outside input. Unfortunately, there are some people who fool themselves that their horses are trained to a certain level and they do not need to show to prove that. Then the question of misrepresentation arises. Why do they lie about their training? It’s definitely easier to lie about what level you train when you don’t show.

I’m get tired of riders who hide behind word “classical”. Just because you don’t show, it doesn’t make you automatically a classical rider. It’s the well being of your horse, strong basics, understanding of the correct progression of the horse training and maximum results with minimum aids, studying, reading, riding with classical masters = what makes you a classical rider.