PDA

View Full Version : Edward Gal clinic- can anyone translate a bit?



Ambrey
Sep. 6, 2009, 12:44 PM
I was watching this Edward Gal clinic video, and was wondering what he was saying as he put more and more loft into Totilas' trot steps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7itK8W6J4E

woodcat
Sep. 6, 2009, 03:12 PM
look how he leans back a bit past the vertical to sit the trot. Totilas seemed to shift his weight back too.

TheHorseProblem
Sep. 6, 2009, 05:47 PM
Watching this makes me understand what hyperflexion is. Check out 2:30 to 2:50, and around 4:50 on. That is pretty extreme, but it does get results. Should Totilas' neck be sweating like that? When Edward is wearing a jacket?

siegi b.
Sep. 6, 2009, 07:25 PM
You're kidding, right? :eek:
Let me look for an analogy...... You've just run a couple of miles - should your back really be that sweaty?

Moogles
Sep. 7, 2009, 01:51 AM
look how he leans back a bit past the vertical to sit the trot. Totilas seemed to shift his weight back too.

This is actually a very interesting technique that my trainer was teaching me. There is absolutely NO PULLING back on the reins and no digging you seat bones. Its rocking your weight back then the horse rocks back on his hocks. It's a rebalancing, not intended as immediate collection. Think of a tilt table, your just adjusting the weight transfer back a bit which eventually helps the horse to learn he can sit which in turn will help the ability to collect in the future.

Weight distribution is something that we don't concentrate on enough I think. You ideally should be able to influence where the weight is at any given point in your ride. i.e Is that right hind taking enough weight or is the horse avoiding it and taking too much on the left. This is where you really realize if your horse is balanced and even.

slc2
Sep. 7, 2009, 07:26 AM
I've seen over many years, not just recently or 'with rollkur', but with some very, very classical folks, that using the weight, to a point, does help the horse balance and becomes an aid in collection.

And, one has to remember that some of these riders are very light in weight and very slim, I think some of these folks have to make more of a position. A taller upper body or a soft flexible waist and lower back, can also have the effect of exaggerating the look of that change in position.

In the past, from very classical trainers, old guard German, statements like, 'women can't do pirouettes because they don't have enough weight to shift back in the saddle'....despite how that sounds, it does bring out the point that shifts of weight are used and they do assist higher degrees of collection.

mickeydoodle
Sep. 7, 2009, 04:25 PM
I wish two things- 1. that I understood what he was saying 2. that I could sit the horse one 1/000 as well as he does, his seat is totally with the horse, and he talks thru the whole thing! I get short of breath after 2 min of sitting trot

Ambrey
Sep. 7, 2009, 04:27 PM
But see how he goes into HF, then out again, then Totilas starts with that big shoulder movement? I'm dying to know what EG says at that point.

slc2
Sep. 7, 2009, 04:29 PM
What does HF mean?

Edward seems to have that same extremely long thigh like Anky van G, and like her tends to put his lower leg forward at times. It's really interesting watching him the way he positions himself given his own 'conformation' - he puts his lower leg rather forward, it seems, whenever he is not actively giving a specific aid with the leg, and the horse goes by himself the rest of the time (the lower leg forward seems to be kind of an aid itself).

The coolest thing is to see he never, EVER punishes that horse for going forward. Horse breaks to a gallop and goes flying across the diagonal...no problemo. Maybe that's why he can put his leg like that.

Ambrey
Sep. 7, 2009, 04:42 PM
Hyperflexion. I was trying not to use the "r" word ;)

slc2
Sep. 7, 2009, 04:47 PM
That is just how they use hyperflexion. They loosen up the back and shoulder/neck by using it, then put the horse in a more classical posture and go forward. Trainers who don't use hyperflexion usually supple the horse using some other method, then also send the horse.

mbm
Sep. 7, 2009, 06:14 PM
as far as i understand, and it isnt far, when you put a horse in rollkur, or way over flex them - the muscle that gets affected the most is the upper front leg/shoulder (sorry don't know the names) . this creates more ability to have a "free" shoulder - this is why you see the horse being able to be more expressive up front.

while it doens't appear to be discussed much, this seems to me to be the 2nd most important idea behind the concept, the first being to teach the horse to go "in any frame the rider asks" ie" "put the neck anywhere" .. which of course sounds good on paper, but the horse uses it's neck to balance. so Rollkur, teaches the horse how to go without using its neck, which allows the rider more control, more precision and which is why so many rollkur'd horses appear to have necks of stone:)

before any jumps all over me - just go do some research before doing that, k?

as for the clinic - it would be very interesting to understand what he is saying.... while i totally disagree with rollkur, there are some aspects of his riding that i do appreciate and it would be interesting to hear what he has to say.

slc2
Sep. 7, 2009, 06:25 PM
I don't think the primary or first goal actually is to achieve 'the ability to put the horse in any position'. I think you're wrong there. And I have researched it. A lot. From both sides, pro and con.

I think the main idea of rollkur is to supple horses' muscles. Whether you agree or not, or like it or not, or think it can DO that or not...that's still the main idea of it.

Most opponents say it DOESN'T supple horses. They say it makes the horse stiffer. In fact, the most strong opponents say it affects every single characteristic or attribute of dressage that exist, in a negative way. It puts the horse on the forehand, behind the bit, stiffens the back and neck, causes an artificial carriage, destroys the horse's will, violates classical principles, ,and a bunch of other stuff I can't think of right now.

And I think that's why they think people do it - just to subjugate the horse or to prove they can position the horse; that is just another part of the opponent position.

Rollkur is abusive and brutal, so the person CAN'T be doing it to supple the horse, but to subjugate it, in fact, they have to be, because that's how those people think - they want to abuse and subjugate their horses. They want to win, they don't care how the horse feels, and they'll do anything to win, especially abuse their horse. The judges pin them because the judges can't tell the difference or don't care or have been corrupted by you-scratch-my-back type deals on selling horses etc.

In other words, to maintain the strong opponent position, one has to maintain that rollkur doesn't supple horses. If it suppled horses, it would have a usefulness and a purpose other than subjugating the horse, causing it pain and abusing it. That's not a part of the stronger opponent position. The other part is degrading the character of the riders and the judges who 'permit' it and reward the riders. Those are both VERY important parts of the stronger opponent position.

I've talked to and watched alot of people use this, and they never say they are doing it 'to prove they can put the horse in different positions'. That is what opponents say; it is not what proponents say.

It is done to supple the muscles. Proponents believe it supples muscles. Opponents do generally not. Proponents usually believe different positions ALL supple horses, in different ways. Opponents usually only believe that SOME positions supple horses, and that rollkur does not.

The video makes it rather clear that something pretty noticeable happens.

If opponents do recognize this effect, they usually maintain that it only increases the freedom of the forelegs, creating a defective gait in which the hind legs are dragging along behind with an action that does not match the forelegs.

Proponents will say that it affects the back as well, and allows the horse to have more freedom; the forelegs are given more freedom and lift because the self carriage and suppleness increases. The increased suppleness allows the hind quarters to take more weight, the self carriage to improve, and lightens the forehand. Opponents say it does the opposite - puts the horse on the forehand, reduces self carriage, etc.

In other words, opponents say one thing, and proponents say something else. What each group says follows fairly predictable lines. How much they impune the character of the opposite camp, and how many aspects they say rollkur affects, is a good measure of how polarized their position is.

siegi b.
Sep. 7, 2009, 06:44 PM
mbm - you obviously don't see the contradictions in your own posts.... You say that rollkur allows the rider to "put the neck anywhere" and end in the statement that "many rollkur'd horses appear to have necks of stone".

How can you have a neck of stone that can be put anywhere????? Or doesn't logic play a roll when it comes to rollkur? :)

I think Edward's clinic would be totally lost on you because you have already made up your mind that it's bad.

Just my opinion....

mbm
Sep. 7, 2009, 06:51 PM
hi seigi, i think you misread what i wrote.

i wrote "while it doens't appear to be discussed much, this seems to me to be the 2nd most important idea behind the concept, the first being to teach the horse to go "in any frame the rider asks" ie" "put the neck anywhere" .. which of course sounds good on paper, but the horse uses it's neck to balance. so Rollkur, teaches the horse how to go without using its neck, which allows the rider more control, more precision and which is why so many rollkur'd horses appear to have necks of stone"

so i am saying that the people that use rollkur will say they want to be able to put the neck anywhere, have the horse in any frame, and i say that this goes against the nature of the horse, who uses the neck to balance. the end result, in my view, is a neck like stone too short and too tight.

as for the rest - if the only thing he is talking about is rollkur, it would still be interesting to hear what he has to say about it......

slc2
Sep. 7, 2009, 06:56 PM
why is it then, that the horse nods his head less and as his collection improves and becomes more correct, and why then is that the goal of the most classical, traditional trainers to see that 'balancing gesture' decrease and decrease?

The horse uses his neck for balance, then why do they say that?

mbm
Sep. 7, 2009, 07:01 PM
there is a difference in the horse progressively becoming more and more balanced/collected so that he does not have to use his neck for balance, and a rider taking the neck usage away from the horse.

eta: it would be like a gymnast learning to do the beam over time so that she uses her arms less and less to the point of rarely having to use them, but being able to if she needed too...

and that same gymnast having to learn the beam with her arms tied behind her back.

alicen
Sep. 7, 2009, 09:26 PM
The video is 6:10 minutes long. The horse is put behind the vertical for a total of 44 seconds on separate occasions. I don't see how that amounts to taking away his neck usage. Also keep in mind that Totilas' stallion neck is none too long.

Ambrey
Sep. 8, 2009, 12:58 AM
as far as i understand, and it isnt far, when you put a horse in rollkur, or way over flex them - the muscle that gets affected the most is the upper front leg/shoulder (sorry don't know the names) . this creates more ability to have a "free" shoulder - this is why you see the horse being able to be more expressive up front.

This is what I had heard as well, and I was wondering whether he actually mentioned that, or discussed hyperflexion, in the clinic.

mbm
Sep. 8, 2009, 01:51 AM
The video is 6:10 minutes long. The horse is put behind the vertical for a total of 44 seconds on separate occasions. I don't see how that amounts to taking away his neck usage. Also keep in mind that Totilas' stallion neck is none too long.

my comments were made in general and were not specific to the video.

Pony Fixer
Sep. 8, 2009, 09:24 AM
I have no idea what he is saying, but this video was 2 years ago, so Toto was only 7? Clearly he is demonstrating (either on purpose or just as it happens) the forward correction. The horse is not "corrected" for breaking gait on the extensions at this level, it's just repeated until it's done right. He also does the very beginning with the loose rein and sharpening to the forward aids (ie, small aid, no response, so "shoots" him forward but does not "stop" that forward with any reins).

The amount of deep you see at least in the first BTV is not any more extreme in time or degree than I saw at the show this weekend. Not saying this was necessarily done on purpose at the show, since I only pay real attention to what I am doing and I did not watch the whole video.