Cross-post: what is the difference between hunter & low-level dressage

[sunico]

I'm curious to see what people think, and how the dressage rider's opinion will differ (if at all) from the hunter rider's opinion. Sorry for cross-posting, but I'd really like to see opinions from both sides of the coin.

When I was a pony clubber, I did hunter, jumper, dressage and eventing. Flat work was flat work was flat work. I didn't ride my horses any differently with a hunter show coming up as I did with a dressage show. It was all just basic flatwork for me. A few years ago I spent 6 mos as a working student for a dressage trainer, and have been mainly teaching adult amateur low-level dressage riders since then. When people ask me "what I do"... I instinctively say dressage, but really, I just love flat work. I love to flat hunters, I love to sit on nice dressage horses... personally, it's all correct flat work to me. I'm not a guru in either discipline.

But most people I talk to say it's not that simple, and then you get the people (from each discipline) who look down their noses at the "other discipline"... which drives me insane.

So tell me, dressage riders and hunter riders: what do you see as the biggest difference in way of going, schooling excercises and movement?? Do you think a nicely flatted hunter should be able to hold its own against a training or 1st level dressage horse? Why or why not?

[sunico]

I'm curious to see what people think, and how the dressage rider's opinion will differ (if at all) from the hunter rider's opinion. Sorry for cross-posting, but I'd really like to see opinions from both sides of the coin.

When I was a pony clubber, I did hunter, jumper, dressage and eventing. Flat work was flat work was flat work. I didn't ride my horses any differently with a hunter show coming up as I did with a dressage show. It was all just basic flatwork for me. A few years ago I spent 6 mos as a working student for a dressage trainer, and have been mainly teaching adult amateur low-level dressage riders since then. When people ask me "what I do"... I instinctively say dressage, but really, I just love flat work. I love to flat hunters, I love to sit on nice dressage horses... personally, it's all correct flat work to me. I'm not a guru in either discipline.

But most people I talk to say it's not that simple, and then you get the people (from each discipline) who look down their noses at the "other discipline"... which drives me insane.

So tell me, dressage riders and hunter riders: what do you see as the biggest difference in way of going, schooling excercises and movement? Do you think a nicely flatted hunter should be able to hold its own against a training or 1st level dressage horse? Why or why not?

[Equibrit]

Difference in .........
Quality of horse ?
Type of horse ?
Price of horse ?
Quality of riding ?
Type of rider ?
Income of rider ?
Quality of instruction ?
Type of instruction ?
Price of instruction ?
Use of vocabulary ?
Number of shows ?
Attention to detail of participants ?
Type/Colour of saddle pad, tack, breeches, boots, jackets, shirts,underwear and lipstick

What exactly are you asking ?

[TalkIsCheap]

With our trainer, flat work is flat work.

[bort84]

Well, they can be very very similar, or they can be vastly different = ) It totally depends on horse, trainer, rider. (Also, I'm thinking of hunters as show hunters, not hunters that mostly hunt, haha) Anyway, since the end goal is different, the hunter horse doesn't have to have the same training as the dressage horse. One thing that can be extremely different is the concept of contact. Some hunters are just taught to go in a certain head set/frame and stay there - they aren't truly in proper dressage contact or on the bit, and because of this, they usually aren't working their back and hind end properly. This does also occur in the lower levels of dressage though. When you start to move up the levels, if the horse is stuck in a certain frame or doesn't have the right idea of contact, you can have some difficult retraining to go through.

The movement looked for is a little different too. You want "daisy-cutter" motion for a hunter on the flat, but you want a different movement for dressage because the end goal of a "finished" dressage horse is very different than the end goal of a finished hunter. However, at the lower levels, you often see a lot of similarities.

Horses with FEI talent that are showing in lower levels due to age and training level, will often look a lot different than a hunter or a dressage horse that only has lower level aspirations. The training on a horse who's goal is to get to FEI is also often very different than the training that an ammy puts on a horse that has no plans for showing above 1st level.

In summary, since my post is rambling as usual, ideally, a well trained hunter should be able to do well in lower level dressage and vice versa. However, there are shortcuts that can be implemented in hunters that may be penalized more strongly in the dressage ring than in the hunter ring. These shortcuts will become more apparent as you move up the levels. A well trained lower level dressage horse may also run into issues in the hunter ring due to the different styles that are currently popular. I personally know a couple of nice warmbloods that do well in both = )

[rizzodm]

I think of hunters more of less contact, more of stretching and reaching forward where dressage is more round and more contact.

Dawn

[sunico]

Type/Colour of saddle pad, tack, breeches, boots, jackets, shirts,underwear and lipstick

Equibrit - none of the above :D. I'm talking more in way of going, schooling exercises, movement. Oh, and yes, lipstick. :lol:

[Tif_Ann]

I don't know the actual answer, but I laughed at your post because I'm a dressage person, and my sister a hunter. When we disagree about something we often chalk it up to "well, you're a hunter" or "different goals" or whatever. For example, I see spurs as a refinement and as such, don't use them right away. My trainer just recommended them for my horse that is not at a set level - we haven't shown yet so will be showing Training - but our trainer just introduced rein back and counter canter/simple lead changes, halt to canter, etc.. and we do full collection at W/T/C, the spurs are a refinement. My sister, on the other hand, as a "hunter" ... uses spurs from the get go to make the horse move and because they "don't listen to her leg".

Same with training stages - like when to introduce flying leads. As a hunter, my sister introduces them pretty early, and they are different from the dressage leads. I would probably never introduce them to a lower level dressage horse *shrug* ...

When we discuss our differing viewpoints regarding spurs (or contact, or stages of training) ... it's always ultimately looked at as "dressage is different" or "hunters are different." Whether that's right or not I don't know ... we both believe we are right! :)

[Ajierene]

The training for a Training level dressage horse and hunter horse should not be really different. Training level is the beginning of the horse's career and ideally they should just be learning walk, trot, canter, how to be straight and how to listen - basics.

When you move up to First level, you start to see differences. A hunter horse is never (in show) asked to do a 15 M circle. The ability to extend the trot and do simple changes should be different.

When you move up more and start asking for things like shoulder in, haunches in, leg yielding, etc. You start to see more differences. Dressage is about the perfection of the movements - all about the perfection of the movements. The hunter horse's skills are derived from necessity of the field. As in leg yield - if trotting across a field, the horse may need to be asked to move over to avoid a rough patch of grass, hound, troublesome horse - but placing one leg across the other is not necessary, just moving over.

Also, hunter horses are judged on their ability to trot and canter all day, as defined in the show ring as their way of going. It would take vastly more energy for a third level dressage horse to go in a frame out on a hunt all day than it would a hunter horse of equal level. So what is being judged is different. The relaxed neck and flatter movements are hallmarks of a horse conserving energy to go all day. Granted many hunter horses are not fit enough to make it all day on a hunt, but still - that's what is being judged.

[slc2]

If one is considering people who show in local shows, and do a little hunters, and a little training level dressage, of course they school similarly.

The less difference they feel they have to create, the less different their schooling. They can go around at a local schooling or small recognized show and do basically the same thing in hunters and dressage.

They school the same because their conception is that the two are the same.

However, how someone schools a young or lower level horse is going to be very different between hunters and dressage, if they are to learn to be competitive and to progress beyond that type of show and that level, and to be successful. Especially the changes are different. The hunter changes are supposed to be flat, and the degree of straightness and type of cleanness of the change is very, very different. Hence the training is different.

But the aids, the contact, the position, the balance, the leg, the hand and seat aids are all very different. Yep. I've done both. It's very different. Even at the lower levels. Especially at the lower levels. If it isn't done differently, you wind up with a hunter, not a progressing, competitive dressage horse.

It's something I learned a long time ago - horses that are going to progress beyond training and first level, and are going to do intro, training and first in a way that forms a sound foundation to progress, are already going to be trained very differently, even at training level, from the hunters.

Do most hunters and most lower level dressage horses look fairly similar and get trained fairly similarly? Sure. But that's more because of the situation, than that being the way to build the solid foundation for progress.

[canyonoak]

Well, when I go to the big A Circuit h/j shows, and look at the Big Eq horses, I often think what fantastic dressage horses many of them might be!

Honestly, they look like 3rd-4th level dressage horses.

But the balance of the horse changes for FEI, and no one in the h/j world would want to add the extra engagement and expression to the gaits,of course.

They all started looking similar when the move from TB to WB happened for the h/j.

[Midge]

Flat work was flat work was flat work.

This.

[suzier444]

I grew up learning to ride from a hunter/jumper background and there seem to be a lot of differences in rider position -- some things being just plain different, and other things being emphasized to greater degrees in one versus the other. For example, nobody when I did hunters really got after me about opening my hips or sitting deep in the saddle, but I don't get nearly as many comments in dressage about heels down although I know they're supposed to be -- it's just not emphasized nearly as much. I'm still trying to get some of my hunter tendencies out of my dressage position.

A lot of the basic things we did with the horses were the same -- leg yields, riding properly shaped figures, maintaining a nice even tempo, but others were different -- expectations for contact, straightness, bend, stuff like that seems different. That may have been a product of my age, since I was a kid when I did h/j, or it may be that those things are focused on more later in one's development as a rider, whereas in dressage they are focused on pretty early on. Some of that stuff was a focus coming to fences but only when it got to the point where it screwed up the jump, and never on the flat.

The canter in particular seems in my memory different -- the way we sat the canter was way different, the aids for a canter depart were kind of different - much more outside leg, much less seat.

In terms of the horses, the ideal for gaits is definitely different, though I've been told that's changed as warmbloods have become so prevalent. I also feel like hunters were expected to be more...pleasant or easygoing somehow (hope that doesn't offend anybody).

I was friends with a hunter/jumper rider who was probably 30 or so years older than me, and iirc she used to say h/j and dressage weren't as different when she grew up learning to ride as it is now and I don't think she was thrilled with the changes. Her position was more jumper than dressage but her focus on things like straightness, etc. was indistinguishable from dressage. She was a really great rider and her horses held their own in both arenas -- I think she asked for slightly different things in the different settings, but her skill set and her horses' skill sets were spot-on for both.

[WorthTheWait95]

There isn't a difference in correct flat work. Period.

Now what you see in the hunter warm up rings on the flat could be an entirely different story depending on where you are but that doesn't mean it's correct.

[RugBug]

Flat work was flat work was flat work.

<snip>

So tell me, dressage riders and hunter riders: what do you see as the biggest difference in way of going, schooling excercises and movement?? Do you think a nicely flatted hunter should be able to hold its own against a training or 1st level dressage horse? Why or why not?

Flat work is flat work...

Not until you rise up the ranks in dressage is there really any difference, IMO.

I grew up like you although strictly HSE...no pony club/eventing and therefore not a stich of dressage. But still proper flatwork was proper flatwork. We did lateral movements, lengthening/collecting.

I've done a few dressage tests and done well. I did some research, so I was clued in on "geometry" and from there, I just did some flatwork. I did just fine. :yes:

[MistyBlue]

The saddles.
Those are way different. :yes:
Irons too long, seat too deep in dressage. :D :winkgrin: :lol:

[Petstorejunkie]

Do you think a nicely flatted hunter should be able to hold its own against a training or 1st level dressage horse? Why or why not?

Should and DO are two completely different things. If you take the hunter stylistic trends off of the overall picture then the horses should appear to go identical in my opinion. And i would prefer to see more of a balanced seat on the hunter riders... but i'm not holding my breath!

[Timex]

As others have already said, it depends on the situation. A youngster aimed at FEI level work is going to be worked and shown at the lower levels looking very different than the mount of an adult ammy, whose highest goal might just be the jump a 2'6" course nicely and be able to put together a nice training level test. Neither is more correct than the other, its just different. Does that make any sense? Lol
I teach a bunch of adult ammies who have some very pleasant capable horses, very suitable for what their owners goals are. We're not looking for world domination, but to be able to go to the shows around us (largely unrated, but we do have a few rated shows here and there) and not look like the biggest clowns. Hunter shows, dressage shows, it doesn't matter either way, we incorporate a lot of basic dressage work into our everyday flat work. I was a pony clubber, I don't know any other way! Lol. Plus, the benefits of all the lateral workand extension/collection work - for any horse - is well worth it!

[mojo7777]

Great question and interesting answers. Flatwork has always been just flatwork to me too, but I've encountered "discipline prejudice," even among those at the lower levels, that can be pretty surprising.

[SkipChange]

Flat work was flat work was flat work.


I believe this, but I would also say "basics are basics are basics." The higher levels of dressage and the higher levels of hunters have very different goals and a very different look. But the basics and lower levels of both are quite similar. Of course I grew up with a similar background (Pony Club, eventing, jumpers, hunters, dressage).

There are notable exceptions, lead changes for instance. We often expect 10 year old kids to be doing flying lead changes in the Short Stirrup & pony divisions. Flying changes are SOP and introduced very early while Dressage training generally involves a much higher level of preparation prior to their introduction.

Re: MistyBlue...the irons are LONGER yes, but don't judge and say they are "too" long. They are Too long to jump, yes, but they are not too long for dressage. Ditto on the seat comment. :D

[MistyBlue]

LOL...it was a joke, the irons comment. :winkgrin:
My first dressage lesson in a dressage saddle the coach came over and dropped my irons...I kept saying, "Why not just remove the things? Where'd they go?" :lol: :lol:
I tend to ride with slightly shorter than average irons in general, dressage irons were *way* long. Of course I wasn't used to my arse spending so much time in the tack either. ;)

[mbm]

well i have 2 answers: my (FEI) trainer worked for a A jumper barn and the working students/riders would take those horses and show them 2nd level and do quite well....

next answer is that i believe the lower levels were created to entice the hunter/jumper crowd to come play in our sandbox.

i see lots of hunters/jumpers that go better, to me, than the "dressage" horses go... they seem more free, more forward, less constrained by the hand and on the forehand....

:)

[SkipChange]

LOL...it was a joke, the irons comment. :winkgrin:
My first dressage lesson in a dressage saddle the coach came over and dropped my irons...I kept saying, "Why not just remove the things? Where'd they go?" :lol: :lol:
I tend to ride with slightly shorter than average irons in general, dressage irons were *way* long. Of course I wasn't used to my arse spending so much time in the tack either. ;)

sorry I didn't catch it, glad it was a joke! I'm guilty of riding shorter than average myself :cool: it is nice to have long stirrups to really get your leg around them though (every now and then that is ;))

[MistyBlue]

My biggest issue the first few rides or so in a dressage saddle with the long irons was using my legs. Since they felt so ridiculously long to me I either rode like the jumper rider I am and my feet would creep up or I rode like it was bareback. My coach spent a lot of time looking like this: :lol: :confused: My mare was more :rolleyes::sigh:.
The coach asked after the first lesson, "So how did that feel?" Ummm, my arse hurts from too much time in the tack...:winkgrin:

[Beasmom]

I'm interested, mbm -- how long ago was your FEI trainer working at the A jumper barn?

Back in the 60's and 70's, it was quite common for the H/J and dressage crowd to cross over. As a matter of fact, two of my early trainers expected all their students to be competent at both jumping and dressage, or "flat work". I believe most people back then thought of themselves as "English" riders and foxhunted, evented, pair-paced, and entered dressage shows when and if any were offered. it was not as cut-and-dried as it seems now.

I recall several instances of local level h/j shows being held, with a dressage competition going on in another ring. Some of us rode our hunter classes, then rode a dressage test. And no, this was not some sort of combined test, though we had those, too. Dressage, back in those days in Texas and Colorado, did not have the popularity it enjoys today. Jumping was the "main course". Dressage was a "side dish", competitively speaking.

An aside: my very first instructor was Hungarian, had ridden for a while at the SRS, was roughly a contemporary of de Nemethy and de Kunffy. He was still teaching, training and jumping (!) at the age of 74. The second instructor was a Volgadeutcher, who spent some time in Germany after WWII and studied with R. Waetjen.

My current instructor is using cavallettis and gymnastic jumps to help develop strength and boldness in dressage horses. I know Ingrid Klimke and others promote cavalletti for dressage, but how many of us dressage folks actually use them?

One of my old teachers believed that a good Grand Prix jumper had all the proper biomechanics to make a Grand Prix dressage horse. She had a point. For a horse to jump well, it has to be off its forehand and able to rock back on the hind legs for takeoff. Even a hunter, with a more relaxed manner over fences, will be penalized if it's heavy on the forehand and diving over jumps.

I've heard many h/j trainers insist that their horses must be schooled to at least Second or Third Level. They may not demand or need the same level of collection, but it might come in handy sometimes!

[angel]

The great jumpmaster, Bertelan deNemethy believed that any horse that jumped should be a Third Level dressage horse as far as training.

In the Arab show world, it is not unusual for dressage horses to be shown hunter on the flat and show hack. The cross-off is quite easy.

[Mac123]

Idealism, textbook answer: it's the same. Flatwork is flatwork. Correct is correct. Now, there may be different applications, but the process is very much the same.

Real world answer: it's not the same. I haven't seen a properly flatted hunter in a long time (and neither have I seen many properly flatted dressage horses). The sad thing is that most will insist that both are the same and that they are riding correctly when they are sadly and ignorantly wrong.

Questions like this are pointless. EVERYONE will say that hunter flatwork is correct and dressage flatwork is correct, that they're one and the same and of course they ride perfectly too. If you want to know the real answer, go watch a hunter show and go watch a dressage show with an open, honest mind, and compare BOTH to what the textbook says is ideal. IME, neither is very close to classical, correct riding, regardless of the discipline. Watch how members of both disciplines only look at where the head is and have absolutely no idea of the hindquarters and the back, much less the transfer and flow of energy, elasticity, or degree of connection and throughness. Foreign.

[mbm]

Beasmom - my trainer was until quite recently working for the jump barn and only stopped because the barn owner died and the farm sold :( (this was in the last year or so...)

but my trainer is from Belgium and came up in Germany so has one of "those" types of educations..... believes that horses should be well rounded etc etc.

and i agree - seems like back in the day we all were more "all rounders" and there wasn't this specialization there is now..... i personally thing specialization too early is not a good thing for horse - or rider.

ps - apropos of nothing - here is super pic of ingrid - the queen of "all rounder!"
http://dressageit.com/bb/attachment.php?attachmentid=677&d=1185698510

[skip916]

I grew up with the same background as you and now frequent multiple show rings watching/working/riding and helping start horses. I have been to a low level dressage show recently where almost every beginner rider was all hands and was so very obsessed with the horse being "round/on the bit" that they were cranking noses in with no real idea of actual self carriage. The trainers were totally on board with this method most of the time- which is scary.
On the flip side, the beginning hunters are flatting around with their horses looking like llamas with noses out and up in the air and reins flapping away in the wind. The prettiest pony wins!

Please before you execute me for my observations please keep in mind that they are just observations from watching a few lower level shows lately where the riders are obviously still learning and no one is EVER perfect. I just wish the different disciplines weren't so concerened with trends, and instead were more concerned with creating riders and horses with a good, basic and classical foundation of skills from which to draw. Idealistically, a hunter should be able to do training level dressage (at least), and a training level dressage horse should be able to flat in the hunters... and you shouldn't be able to tell which was which. Honestly though- you often can. Shame on us as riders for NOT crossing disciplines more often to make ourselves and our horses more well rounded!

[slc2]

Ingrid Klimke does not train or show hunters. She is in eventing and dressage. If you jumped an eventer cross country like an American Hunt Seat show hunter, you'd die.

[sunico]

Questions like this are pointless. EVERYONE will say that hunter flatwork is correct and dressage flatwork is correct, that they're one and the same and of course they ride perfectly too.

Not necessarily - apparently the people over on the dressage board would beg to differ. :lol:

But I do thank you for pointing out the pointlessness of my question, bless your heart. ;)

[magnolia73]

I think that they are different. In dressage you are creating a horse that is obedient, and will eventually collect. I don't know how to describe it- but when I did dressage I felt like I rode every step. This makes sense- as you go up the levels, you are constantly delivering aids as the tests change movements frequently. Even at the lowest levels, you are constantly there.

Hunters- you are creating quality movement that you don't have to maintain every step (ideally). Ideally, you ask to canter, and they float off and don't need you until you ask for something else. I think it takes a hell of a lot of work to get that canter or you can buy it.

The biggest spread is in the bad sides of either discipline. The worst dressage riders spank and crank- you'd never lock the rein down on a hunter while spurring (and should not do that to a dressage horse), the worst hunters float along on a long rein letting the horse fall on the forehand.

I think the first steps in the scale are useful - relaxation and rhythm. I think often hunters never get beyond relaxation and rhythm- it generally gets you a nice trip over lower fences- a nice, relaxed rhythmic canter, but doesn't allow for really harnessing power of impulsion etc. Honestly, I have felt impulsion on my horse, and don't want to use that over the 2'6 I may jump.

I think in dressage, contact often comes at the expense of relaxation, but then contact - steady, happy contact is a requirement at the lowest levels. Hunters don't need to show a horse submitting to contact. I think its easier to get relaxation without contact- getting it with contact takes some skill- and good hands.

Honestly- I think two different disciplines, but dressage can be very useful at getting what you need from a good hunter, and I think some hunter style rides might help some dressage horses with relaxation.

FWIW, my horse has a lovely metronome canter now. I think it was due to her natural ability, but she only improved when I started adding stretchy trots daily. There is so much good in dressage- its worthwhile for any discipline, but I don't think it needs to be practiced so intensely by hunters.

[magnolia73]

Watch how members of both disciplines only look at where the head is and have absolutely no idea of the hindquarters and the back, much less the transfer and flow of energy, elasticity, or degree of connection and throughness. Foreign.

That is so true. I will say, hunter trainers tend to not care about where the head is as long as you are not on a giraffe, and my dressage teachers always told me to ignore the head, it would come.

I HATE seeing horses in draw reins, head cranked, back hollow and hind end dragging. I hate MORE seeing people see that and saying "wow, that horse looks great" because the neck is arched.

[shall]

This is an excellent topic, so I'm sending thanks to the OP for starting it. As someone who started out hunter, took a 30+ year hiatus and started in on dressage, it has been a struggle internalizing the why's of the new way to ride. The 'spank and crank' comment of magnolia73 hit home for me. I'm still working on relaxation, self carriage and contact. Good contact has been hard for me.

[paintjumper]

I'm not going to get into the differences as they have been discussed here very well. What I hate is when I am looking around at horses for sale, dressage horses; people will advertise as "will make a great dressage or hunter". No they won't, either they are dressage movers or hunter movers or neither, but there is no such thing as an upper level dressage horse AND an upper level hunter in the same horse. They are vastly different at the upper levels. Now if you want to ride around in the back yard and do local schooling shows then one horse will do, but to see a 5 + figure horse for sale described as a dressage horse and a hunter...........no way. I just REALLY hate that. OK, down from my soap box now ;).

[ponies123]

I think that they are different. In dressage you are creating a horse that is obedient, and will eventually collect. I don't know how to describe it- but when I did dressage I felt like I rode every step. This makes sense- as you go up the levels, you are constantly delivering aids as the tests change movements frequently. Even at the lowest levels, you are constantly there.

Hunters- you are creating quality movement that you don't have to maintain every step (ideally). Ideally, you ask to canter, and they float off and don't need you until you ask for something else. I think it takes a hell of a lot of work to get that canter or you can buy it.

:yes: This I definitely agree with. After I sold my hunter mare last year, I leased a fabulous little eventer who's owner/trainer put a lot of emphasis on flat work (which was great!). During lessons she was always telling me to "control every step", which to strictly-hunter princess (albeit a slightly perchy, throw-away reins hunter princess) was a lot of work! In hunters, when we are showing off our flat work in the U/S classes, it is walk trot canter reverse repeat. As long as you have a horse with a good natural rhythm you can pretty much just cluck, point, shoot and go through the flat class. Of course you have to do some work if you want to WIN and if you want horsey to go correctly, but the idea of hunters is to make it look like zero work. If you are in an equitation flat class, however, it does incorporate more dressage and that's why the eq riders are sitting with shorter reins, etc. - more is asked of them to demonstrate so they have to control more, like a dressage rider.

Although I think the point of "control every step" is to eventually produce a horse that supports himself in a good frame rather than higher level riders having to constantly support and guide.

[Roan]

I'm not going to get into the differences as they have been discussed here very well. What I hate is when I am looking around at horses for sale, dressage horses; people will advertise as "will make a great dressage or hunter". No they won't, either they are dressage movers or hunter movers or neither, but there is no such thing as an upper level dressage horse AND an upper level hunter in the same horse. They are vastly different at the upper levels. Now if you want to ride around in the back yard and do local schooling shows then one horse will do, but to see a 5 + figure horse for sale described as a dressage horse and a hunter...........no way. I just REALLY hate that. OK, down from my soap box now ;).

You forgot "Has auto changes!" -- as if that was a feature desired in a dressage horse. I feel your pain as I live in HunterJumperLand and I've spent the last six months helping a friend buy a dressage horse on a budget.

As for the OP's original question, which to me was about training and not whether a horse is suitable for hunters or dressage:

at LOWER levels the flatwork should be the same.

Just my 2 cents
Eileen

[caradino]

I grew up with the same background as you and now frequent multiple show rings watching/working/riding and helping start horses. I have been to a low level dressage show recently where almost every beginner rider was all hands and was so very obsessed with the horse being "round/on the bit" that they were cranking noses in with no real idea of actual self carriage. The trainers were totally on board with this method most of the time- which is scary.
On the flip side, the beginning hunters are flatting around with their horses looking like llamas with noses out and up in the air and reins flapping away in the wind. The prettiest pony wins!

Please before you execute me for my observations please keep in mind that they are just observations from watching a few lower level shows lately where the riders are obviously still learning and no one is EVER perfect. I just wish the different disciplines weren't so concerened with trends, and instead were more concerned with creating riders and horses with a good, basic and classical foundation of skills from which to draw. Idealistically, a hunter should be able to do training level dressage (at least), and a training level dressage horse should be able to flat in the hunters... and you shouldn't be able to tell which was which. Honestly though- you often can. Shame on us as riders for NOT crossing disciplines more often to make ourselves and our horses more well rounded!

:yes:

i totally agree! both horses SHOULD be able to cross over into each discipline at the lower levels... it's about correct flatwork and adjustibility. you should be able to ride ANY horse long & low & forward like a hunter, and also sit them back and shorten the frame a bit for training or first level dressage. you see it all the time in horses that cross over from the hunters to the eq, the way you ride the horse in an eq class is the same way you ride in a lower level dressage test. i'm a hunter rider with some dressage training, and the way i school hunters and the way i show them are different. i like to school on the bit, in a training/1st frame, do lateral work, lots of transitions, work to build up the topline and hind end. sometimes we'll practice the floaty rein hack class stuff, but mostly it's correct flatwork. it produces a fit horse. no matter what you're doing. then in the hack classes i can let go, move them out, and they have the fitness to carry themselves.

[mvp]

The differences between them are either superficial or due to bad renditions o either discipline.

It is true that the hunter is asked to maintain his frame with less contact and rider input with each. damned. footfall. of each hind leg. (Thank God.) Also, the French school of dresage doesn't recommend nearly so many pounds of pressure in the rider's hand. I'll take that kind for either my hunter or dedicated dressage horse, thanks.

It is also true that dressagers demand nice accuracy of geometry and an attempt to feel lots about balance (front to back and side to side) that the hunter world blows by. I can't believe how many hunters are just ridden and accepted as being "one sided."

Dressage philosophy and practice also contributes working, no-questions-asked half halt. If more hunters had these, we wouldn't see ammies and kids dragged around by horses in slow-twist full-cheek snaffles because they build and build around the course. Where, my friends, is the trusty, universal half-halt?

The "token stirrup" in dressage, you know, the kind you have to point your toe to reach, is a relatively young affectation. Good luck with that. Stirrup length is really just a coarse and visible expression of how your seat is arranged and used in the saddle. True bad-a$$ riders can sit nicely with any length stirrup or none at all.

[Trixie]

Questions like this are pointless. EVERYONE will say that hunter flatwork is correct and dressage flatwork is correct, that they're one and the same and of course they ride perfectly too. If you want to know the real answer, go watch a hunter show and go watch a dressage show with an open, honest mind, and compare BOTH to what the textbook says is ideal. IME, neither is very close to classical, correct riding, regardless of the discipline. Watch how members of both disciplines only look at where the head is and have absolutely no idea of the hindquarters and the back, much less the transfer and flow of energy, elasticity, or degree of connection and throughness. Foreign.

I wouldn’t say questions like this are pointless.

I would say that people are LEARNING. Therefore, not going to be perfect. Recently, someone on the eventing forum posted about how cantering a hunter course is [paraphrasing] SO EASY. I pointed out that while the test itself may not be hard, doing it to the top standards of the sport IS. Just because I can canter circles doesn’t mean I can make them look like Reiner Klimke. Likewise, I can talk about whether or not the flatwork is the same, but I won’t promise that I’m going to be textbook ideal. I can, however, try, and I can be open to learning more to become better at it.


That is so true. I will say, hunter trainers tend to not care about where the head is as long as you are not on a giraffe, and my dressage teachers always told me to ignore the head, it would come

To be fair, I’ve heard this from most every hunter trainer I’ve ever ridden with – the head position is last. When they’re using their bodies properly, it will work itself out. That's why a lot of people are so freaked by the term "headset."


Hunters- you are creating quality movement that you don't have to maintain every step (ideally). Ideally, you ask to canter, and they float off and don't need you until you ask for something else. I think it takes a hell of a lot of work to get that canter or you can buy it

But for most horses, it takes a fair amount of quality flatwork to get to the point where you don’t need to maintain every step, at least on the ones that I’ve ridden. In order to get to that point, where they’re just able to do their jobs, be adjustable, and go around smoothly with little input – takes a lot of flatwork first. And keeping them supple enough to be able to continue – more flatwork. I never feel like we’re done with flatwork, even though it’d sure be nice to just float the reins all the time.

[JumpWithPanache]

Personally, I started in Hunters as a kid, rode eventers during my teen/junior career, and chasers/hunters in College. I'm now back to the Hunter world and have incorporated aspects of all into my training preferences. I will say that the basics of correct flatwork learned from my eventing days has influenced all my riding, including exercising chasers. Just because we're doing trot sets doesn't mean they don't learn to gather up (collect) the energy into a more impulsive movement. Now with my Hunter I school her at home and at shows as I would school a dressage horse. We do lots of transitions, circles, serpentines, and lateral exercises. The horse learns the balance and concept of self carriage such that when needed I can soften my reins, which pokes the nose out, and she has that pretty Hunter movement for the flat classes. I do however, ride every step (both o/f and u/s) which doesn't mean nit-picking with my hands but rather means that I remind or support as needed and ride mostly from my seat for turns and transitions. The correct techniques of dressage are truly essential, the key IMHO is giving the horse a range of expertise and adjustability.

[meupatdoes]

I'm not going to get into the differences as they have been discussed here very well. What I hate is when I am looking around at horses for sale, dressage horses; people will advertise as "will make a great dressage or hunter". No they won't, either they are dressage movers or hunter movers or neither, but there is no such thing as an upper level dressage horse AND an upper level hunter in the same horse. They are vastly different at the upper levels. Now if you want to ride around in the back yard and do local schooling shows then one horse will do, but to see a 5 + figure horse for sale described as a dressage horse and a hunter...........no way. I just REALLY hate that. OK, down from my soap box now ;).

That is such a load of CRAP.

As somebody here who actually owns and rides horses that cross over, (as opposed to musing about how hunters must be trained from my desk chair,) I currently own and ride a horse that is currently capable of scoring 80+ in open company in the rated hunters, and my dressage trainer insists the horse will have no problems reaching PSG.
And yes, he is a five figure horse. In both disciplines -with his dressage number rapidly catching up to his hunter number.

My hunter carries himself in a hunter frame, when asked, because he is well gymnasticized and carries himself how I ask him too. If I ask for hunter frame, I get hunter frame. If I ask for more collection and elevation, I get more collection and elevation. The. End.

For the record, paintjumper, the highest level hunters are often not the best hunter movers themselves. At that level it is all about the jump, and the kind of hind end action required to cruise around the workings does not always lend itself to being the hack winner against a star 3' horse.

I suspect that the people on this thread doing all this yammering about how different it is haven't coasted the long approach to a sizable single oxer in the past decade, if ever, and I wonder how many of them have managed a passable shoulder-in/renvers transition lately either.


And ETA:
Those who think that horses are either dressage movers or hunter movers or neither should take a second look at Donarweiss. That young stallion, initially started by a HUNTER TRAINER, is scoring in the 70's at I-1 at Palm Beach with Chris Hickey and has hunter movement TO DIE FOR. They begged the owners to keep him a hunter but they wanted him to do dressage from the start.

[eqinegirl]

Riders & horses with different backgrounds will always disagree on what "ideal" should look & feel like. But, I think that we are all trying to have balanced riders & horses. I've seen angry cranky horses in the hunters, dressage, jumpers, driving, reining, eventing & pulling Amish wagons. I've seen angry cranky riders on very expensive horses that can barely get their horse into the ring. I've seen happy giggling riders who walk into the ring with floppy reins & untalented mounts & have marvelous rides. Perfect is unattainable. Excellence is always within our grasp. Let's all work towards having happy horses & happy riders. I believe that that will be found with good attitudes & balanced riding. :)

[CatOnLap]

Well, its been a long time since I, like Beasmom, did the all rounder pony club thing and almost as long ago since I did hunters, but I am surpirsed no one has mentioned that the biggest difference between low level dressagers and low level hunters is those pesky little jumps?

[paintjumper]

So............. you think Blue Hors Matine and Moorland's Totilas would make great hunters do you? Go to the Paul Schockemöhle site and look for his 2009 dressage auction horses and pick out the hunter in that bunch. One of my best friends is Dr Paula Pell in Fla, she and her husband own the very successful hunters Unmistakable and Unbelievable.............now THOSE are HUNTERS! IMO, two very distinct TYPES of horses, not one better than the other, just not the same. I doubt I am going to change your mind........and I KNOW you are not going to change mine. Oh well.
And for what it is worth, I proudly own Windell, and APHA stallion that has won a state Western Pleasure championship, won hunter and jumper classes, western trail classes, is a PtHA dressage world champion, AND won at eventing with my great friend and trainer, Jill Williams. He is very much the jack of all trades........and I love him DEARLY. But I wouldn't put him head to head with Matine, Totilas, Unmistakable or Unbelievable.

[flshgordon]

meupatdoes-obviously someone hit a nerve with you but perhaps you have that very rare individual than can go upper level in both sports. I assure you that what you have is not all that common or everyone would be doing it.

I have done both hunters and dressage (not talking about jumpers because I think that translates much easier than hunters) and it is not going to be easy to cross over after training (possibly first) level.

I've tried it with both my horses. One started as a hunter and is quite talented. He is used to long and low, going on a somewhat loopy rein with big sweeping turns. He is point & shoot on course. In dressage (now working 1st level), he has more difficulty with the lateral work/suppling exercises needed and he has auto changes so that canter loop in 1st 4--took months to keep him from swapping when you turn up the diagonal. I have no doubt he'll score well at first, but the more dressage we do, the less of a textbook hunter he has become on course.

My 6yo who I wanted to turn into a hunter will never make it. Her trot is too springy & she just "looks like" a dressage horse. I have taken her to a hunter show and no matter how much I pose, loop the reins at her, etc, her "nice dressage movement" is too much for the hunter ring....she'll never place in a flat class, she lives for the more structured work we do in dressage so I'm not going to try squashing her into a mold I want her to be but she doesn't.

Training level is a whole different animal even than 1st level in dressage and I think hunters can do TL all day long. TL dressage horses can not always excel as hunters though.

[Rival]

I would say yes there is a difference and it is in the way they are asked to carry themselves.

Hopefully the owner of this stallion doesn't mind me pointing this out (as he is hugely successful being ridden either way) but take a look at the stylistic differences in the riding on Apiro from when he was in Europe versus now that he is a North American Hunter.

[Janet]

The ideals are/maybe/should be the same, but the emphasis tends to be different.

When hunters enter low level dressagte tests without dressage specific training, they tend to be "not forward" and "not straight".

When I was working with Muisc with both a hunter trainer and a dressage trainer, and her canter was crooked, the hunter trainer told me not to worry about it. But the dressage trainer spent a lot of time on exercises to fix it.

I can't comment intelligently on the converse (what the dressage horse is missing from a hunter perspective), but I know that the hardest things for me and Music going "hunter" were a) slowing down without getting strung out (or collected) b) going on a loose rein without getting strung out (i.e. self carriage).

Yes, both of those (slowing down without changing the balance, and going on a loose rein without changing the balance) are things an ideal low level dressage horse SHOULD do, but they are lower in priority than going forward and straight on contact.

[HollysHobbies]

I was certainly no brilliant hunter, but I rode with a hunter trainer for 5 years after getting my PC HA in eventing (because, frankly, I had a confidence problem o/f) and now focus just on dressage (about to start competing 3rd) with some low fences once a week. Here are my observations:

Contact--I think hunter and dressage defs of contact, even at lower levels, is very different...

Development and def of a good canter is a little different, IMO.

I would say that by 2nd level (maybe even those horses that win at First), the frames/outlines look very different between a really nice hunter horse and a really nice dressage horse.

Riding style and development/use of seat/legs is very different. Dressage riders work to develop a strong core...your legs don't "hold your position" but move independently from your core as needed...your seat and core absorb it.
Hunter riders work to develop a very light seat and a steady, tight leg and aren't "in the tack" in the same way dressage riders are (hense, different stirrup lengths, saddle types)

It's true that both riders want a light horse, but I think defs of "light horse" are very different as well. Dressage riders are looking for light "brilliance" Hunters are looking for a light "quiet, lovely" ride.

I think at Training Level and even First, these differences are hard to see.

I have "hunter" days with both my horses...days where I ask simply for long and low, throughness, forwardness, and straightness without contact over small courses or while out hacking...I think it helps them and helps me too. My 3rd level warmblood and I even did some B level 3' hunter shows (we didn't win, but it was good for us!)...come to think of it, I don't win in dressage either (but we get scores in the 60s and have won a couple this year), but winning's not what I'm after. Now, my little OTTB, I've TRIED to get him to figure out jumping. He just don't get it. But I do 2' courses once a week on him too, but I doubt I show him in a hunter show...maybe some local schooling shows.

Jumps? Attire? Saddle? Use of flash noseband? More than one horse in the ring? FULL CHAPS? SHOW BOWS? TS vs Pikeur? :lol:

[flshgordon]

And ETA:
Those who think that horses are either dressage movers or hunter movers or neither should take a second look at Donarweiss. That young stallion, initially started by a HUNTER TRAINER, is scoring in the 70's at I-1 at Palm Beach with Chris Hickey and has hunter movement TO DIE FOR. They begged the owners to keep him a hunter but they wanted him to do dressage from the start.

And just because a horse is started by a hunter or jumper trainer doesn't mean it's going to be a hunter. That just means that someone with that background taught him how to go under saddle & go straight & forward to the bit. When dressage people have their horses started by cowboys, they don't turn out to be cutting horses...

Obviously Donnarweiss has a lot of dressage talent.

[HollysHobbies]

I was certainly no brilliant hunter, but I rode with a hunter trainer for 5 years after getting my PC HA in eventing (because, frankly, I had a confidence problem over big fences) and now focus just on dressage (about to start competing 3rd) with some low fences once a week. Here are my non-judgemental (I hope) observations:

Contact--I think hunter and dressage defs of contact, even at lower levels, is very different...

Development and def of a good canter is a little different, IMO.

I would say that by 2nd level (maybe even those horses that win at First), the frames/outlines look very different between a really nice hunter horse and a really nice dressage horse.

Riding style and development/use of seat/legs is very different. Dressage riders work to develop a strong core...your legs don't "hold your position" but move independently from your core as needed...your seat and core absorb it.
Hunter riders work to develop a very light seat and a steady, tight leg and aren't "in the tack" like dressage riders are (hense, different stirrup lengths, saddle types)

It's true that both riders want a light horse, but I think defs of "light horse" are very different as well. Dressage riders are looking for light "brilliance" Hunters are looking for a light "quiet, lovely" ride.

I think at Training Level and even First, these differences are hard to see.

I have "hunter" days with both my horses...days where I ask simply for long and low, throughness, forwardness, and straightness without contact over small courses or while out hacking...I think it helps them and helps me too. I like to cross-discipline though...makes me sane-er and breaks up the routine. My 3rd level warmblood and I even did some B circuit (I think that's what they were called...) 3' hunter shows (we didn't win, but it was good for us!)...come to think of it, I don't win in dressage either, but that's not what I'm after. Now, my little OTTB, I've TRIED to get him to figure out jumping. He just don't get it. But I do 2' courses once a week on him too, but I doubt I show him in a hunter show...maybe some local schooling shows.

Jumps? Attire? Saddle? Use of flash noseband? More than one horse in the ring? FULL CHAPS? SHOW BOWS? TS vs Pikeur? :lol:

[meupatdoes]

meupatdoes-obviously someone hit a nerve with you
I am sick and tired of certain individuals in the dressage forum acting like they are some kind of authority on how hunters are trained because they have watched one go on youtube once. If they have perhaps once taken a hunter that somebody else trained for a spin, the world can forever after hear them pontificate. Ridiculous.

You do not see me yammering on and on about how driving horses are trained just because I drove a carriage once on Macinack Island.

it is not going to be easy to cross over after training (possibly first) level.
"Going to be?"
Been there, done it. We did the formal switch in April after he returned fat as a house like a pile of jello after a winter off and are currently schooling a solid second. He hunted around a little course quite nicely just yesterday; I regularly do courses with all of my horses because it helps them stay loose over the back.

Meanwhile there is a misconception about the desirability of the "auto swap" in the hunters. You DO NOT WANT your hunter to offer you an early change, because if you change in the last strides before the out of a line it is called swapping off and is a major fault. You want the horse to wait until close to the far corner to change.
For this reason my hunter who is the subject of this exchange learned his changes, from the get go, out of holding a counter canter. He held the counter canter around the arena and through serpentine figures and coming across the diagonal, until eventually he came up the quarterline, did two strides of leg yield and then popped the change before the turn. You want the hunter to WAIT for the change. And I had no intentions of doing dressage with him eventually at that time; it is just how my (top) hunter trainer at the time told me to do it. The horse also, at same hunter trainer's behest, schooled counter canter regularly to develop balance and cadence in the canter. Said hunter trainer regularly sells horses for $250,000+, and, having watched how his horses get schooled, spends more time counter cantering around than true cantering. The canter, one may imagine, is quite important to a hunter trainer, so the good one spends some time developing it.

I am sure that certain COTH dressage forum posters can absolutely not imagine that a top hunter trainer would train his horses that way (after all, we just pose and loop the reins, right?), but there you have it.

Due to his hunter foundation, the First level counter canter loop and the three loop serpentine introduced at second level were no problemo for my horse. He has been countercantering serpentines since before he learned to jump (but, omg, beginning hunter training is SO DIFFERENT from beginning dressage training, amirite??!), so continuing to do so was not exactly a problem.


TL dressage horses can not always excel as hunters though.
This I agree with.
The hunter "type" is a much narrower type than the dressage type. Seldom Seen would never have made a good hunter -simply too small to make the lines.
A good hunter is more likely to be able to cross over into dressage than the other way around.


But mainly, I am sick and tired of certain people who have NO ACTUAL EXPERIENCE in making up a hunter (or any horse, for that matter) pontificating endlessly about how it's done. There are enough people in this forum spouting advice who have no idea how to train a horse in their OWN discipline past First Level to have people pontificating about how to train a horse ANOTHER discipline in addition.

[meupatdoes]

And just because a horse is started by a hunter or jumper trainer doesn't mean it's going to be a hunter. That just means that someone with that background taught him how to go under saddle & go straight & forward to the bit. When dressage people have their horses started by cowboys, they don't turn out to be cutting horses...

Obviously Donnarweiss has a lot of dressage talent.

Well, certain people in this forum LOOOOOVE to yammer about how the beginning hunter training is SOOOOOOO different from beginning dressage training that if you initially train your horse as a hunter you will ruin him as a dressage horse for life. So, Donarweiss's owners, who sent him to a hunter trainer to be started to prepare for his stallion testing even though they intended to market him as a dressage horse, must have been CRAZY to do that.

Didn't they know that early hunter training would ruin their future dressage star??!!!

Ah-may-zingly, protestations of the We've-never-trained-a-hunter-but-we-post-a-lot-on-COTH brigade aside, he turned out to be quite a nice dressage horse in spite of such ruinous early training and is now scoring 70+ at I-1.

Donarweiss has BOTH a lot of dressage talent AND a lot of hunter talent.
His hunter trainer said of him, "Donarweiss is straight, correct over fences, with the best technique I have seen since Popeye K."

Source (http://www.hilltopfarminc.com/stallion_donarweiss_ggf.html).

[bort84]

I don't think anyone on this particular thread said starting a horse with a hunter trainer will ruin it for dressage... A lot of trainers can do both successfully. A lot of trainers in a variety of disciplines utilize dressage basics in early training and continue to build on this foundation. So far, this thread has not devolved into a "we dressage people are the real trainers" type of thread, though I know that happens.

I do think that except for a select few individuals, a very successful hunter is unlikely to be a very successful dressage horse (meaning, one who progresses to the top levels of the discipline). Obviously there are individuals that can excel at both, but, as you said, the hunter type is often pretty different (and perhaps more narrow) from a dressage type that someone is looking at for FEI.

At the lower levels, I think a well trained hunter with solid dressage basics (that they should have), should be able to do very well at the lower levels. My trainer does dressage, H/J, and also did a lot of eventing when she lived in England (where she's from). She absolutely believes a solid dressage foundation is very necessary to make a nice hunter or jumper. She has some lovely warmbloods that cross over very successfully (at the lower levels). As these horses progress in dressage, however, they start to look less like the hunters on the flat that are winning, even if they have a lot of raw hunter potential as well. At some point, the horse specializes in one or the other and becomes less good at different disciplines at higher levels, whether the specialty is dressage or hunters.

[mbm]

can i ask a question? since "hunters" is a purely american *thing* how exactly does warmblood breeding in europe fit into this?

they are breeding either jumpers or dressage horses.

anyone?

[HollysHobbies]

There are a lot of hunter riders that would say dressage riders do nothing but see-saw their hands and crank horses together--I bet there's some on the hunter post right now. It's the same kind of judgement you refer to, and it's unfair (either way!) and it's just a misconception. Those comments are as frustrating as the things MPD refers to.

[grayarabpony]

My hunter carries himself in a hunter frame, when asked, because he is well gymnasticized and carries himself how I ask him too. If I ask for hunter frame, I get hunter frame. If I ask for more collection and elevation, I get more collection and elevation. The. End.



As someone who tends to get overzealous herself, you may want to calm down a little. :)

The above is the difference between hunters and dressage horses. Even at training and first level, because it's often so competitive, riders ride with a shorter rein than hunters, requiring more lift in front and raising of the abdomen and back, etc. I don't know if that's required in the judging though -- one of the most beautiful training level tests I've ever seen was a little kid riding a gray horse on a relatively long rein.

With hunters, they have fences to deal with. With dressage, more exacting requirements of straightness and impulsion, which makes the horse rounder.

And yes, I have jumped a sizeable oxer in the last decade (and would love to do so again), and done a passable shoulder-in/ renvers transition lately. The pony is handy and can do all sorts of things on a good day. ;)

[SaluteAtX]

I don't believe there should be a difference between a good training level horse and a hunter horse. A good hunter in my opinion goes on the bit and is supple. I don't care for the stiff, nose out hunter type you find on the local levels. A horse who is soft and on the bit is a better horse imo.

[flshgordon]

I am sick and tired of certain individuals in the dressage forum acting like they are some kind of authority on how hunters are trained because they have watched one go on youtube once. If they have perhaps once taken a hunter that somebody else trained for a spin, the world can forever after hear them pontificate. Ridiculous.

You do not see me yammering on and on about how driving horses are trained just because I drove a carriage once on Macinack Island.

"Going to be?"
Been there, done it. We did the formal switch in April after he returned fat as a house like a pile of jello after a winter off and are currently schooling a solid second. He hunted around a little course quite nicely just yesterday; I regularly do courses with all of my horses because it helps them stay loose over the back.

Meanwhile there is a misconception about the desirability of the "auto swap" in the hunters. You DO NOT WANT your hunter to offer you an early change, because if you change in the last strides before the out of a line it is called swapping off and is a major fault. You want the horse to wait until close to the far corner to change.
For this reason my hunter who is the subject of this exchange learned his changes, from the get go, out of holding a counter canter. He held the counter canter around the arena and through serpentine figures and coming across the diagonal, until eventually he came up the quarterline, did two strides of leg yield and then popped the change before the turn. You want the hunter to WAIT for the change. And I had no intentions of doing dressage with him eventually at that time; it is just how my (top) hunter trainer at the time told me to do it. The horse also, at same hunter trainer's behest, schooled counter canter regularly to develop balance and cadence in the canter. Said hunter trainer regularly sells horses for $250,000+, and, having watched how his horses get schooled, spends more time counter cantering around than true cantering. The canter, one may imagine, is quite important to a hunter trainer, so the good one spends some time developing it.

I am sure that certain COTH dressage forum posters can absolutely not imagine that a top hunter trainer would train his horses that way (after all, we just pose and loop the reins, right?), but there you have it.

Due to his hunter foundation, the First level counter canter loop and the three loop serpentine introduced at second level were no problemo for my horse. He has been countercantering serpentines since before he learned to jump (but, omg, beginning hunter training is SO DIFFERENT from beginning dressage training, amirite??!), so continuing to do so was not exactly a problem.

This I agree with.
The hunter "type" is a much narrower type than the dressage type. Seldom Seen would never have made a good hunter -simply too small to make the lines.
A good hunter is more likely to be able to cross over into dressage than the other way around.

But mainly, I am sick and tired of certain people who have NO ACTUAL EXPERIENCE in making up a hunter (or any horse, for that matter) pontificating endlessly about how it's done. There are enough people in this forum spouting advice who have no idea how to train a horse in their OWN discipline past First Level to have people pontificating about how to train a horse ANOTHER discipline in addition.


um once again.....thank you for taking out your frustration on someone who has actually done what you're saying and knows it isn't as easy as you say. Not all horses are like yours (and I was trying to pay you a compliment on that but obviously you missed that). Many, many, MANY hunters (and yes I have ridden lots & lots of them over the years) are not trained like you're talking about....because most of them aren't trained by people selling 250K horses. You can't just pick out your fabulously trained horse as the example of how that type goes because it isn't the norm. I don't think anyone here insinuated that we wanted horses to auto-swap at will (i.e. in a line, before a jump, etc). In fact if I had thought that needed to be mentioned I would have. I would describe auto changes as the horse that auto-changes at the right time with just a thought, not the one who is doing tempis in front of a jump. No one said anything about early changes.

For the record, I also don't think we're all talking about the same thing....I'm talking about flatting a hunter, some are talking about jumping. No one is saying dressage horses can't jump, or even jump in nice form, just that they don't traditionally go the same way (as others have already mentioned-contact, collection, impulsion, etc.) I always advocate jumping dressage horses for a change of pace, but I don't suggest they all go out and enter an HUS class.

Anyway, it's clear you don't think anyone else (even those of us who have done hunters for years and happen to have a dressage horse now) has a right to an opinion on the differences b/w hunters and dressage because you have a horse that does upper level in both. We'll just have to agree to disagree...

[Horseymama]

Hi, I'm one of those rare people that actively competes in H/J and dressage. I started out an H/J rider and then became addicted to dressage but couldn't give up jumping competitions, either. It takes lots of time to do both, but I'm kind of the type of person that likes to take on too much!

But my horses benefit from the cross training! Here's my two cents:

Every hunter or jumper SHOULD eventually be able to do a decent 3rd level test. Of course a Baby Green won't yet, but that is definitely a goal of mine with my hunters and jumpers. Not everyone trains the same though, or expects the same out of their horses. I'm sure there are many going hunters doing well in competition out there that couldn't do a nice third level test, but for me, that would be a hole in their training.

For me it's all about self-carriage for both. All my horses must self carry, but that can mean a little bit different things for a dressage horse and a hunter. They start out the same, however, learning to carry me forward from behind into the contact. With a hunter, I ultimately don't want to ride them around a course of jumps in a round frame on the contact like a dressage horse, but I would like to be able to relax the reins and have them "poke their nose out," while remaining balanced and steady. And although you can ride a training level dressage horse around a little in front of the vertical, you don't want the degree that is acceptable in the hunters.

But it may take a while to get a horse to that point. Like I said, for me, they must first go forward into my steady hands and accept my contact and leg, and I work them over small jumps and cavaletti (the dressage horses, too) like this until I can let go a little and they remain balanced and when I put on my leg they don't push on me or shoot forward, and when I steady them with the reins they don't pull through my hands or "splat." I won't hold a dressage horse in position. Equally, I need to be able to pick up the reins on a hunter and not have them be confused!

So it's about getting the quality of the gaits and the balance in the hind end that makes true self carriage for both disciplines. But the acceptable degree of nose in front of the vertical is probably one of the biggest differences I would note.

[meupatdoes]

um once again.....thank you for taking out your frustration on someone who has actually done what you're saying and knows it isn't as easy as you say. Not all horses are like yours (and I was trying to pay you a compliment on that but obviously you missed that). Many, many, MANY hunters (and yes I have ridden lots & lots of them over the years) are not trained like you're talking about....because most of them aren't trained by people selling 250K horses. You can't just pick out your fabulously trained horse as the example of how that type goes because it isn't the norm. I don't think anyone here insinuated that we wanted horses to auto-swap at will (i.e. in a line, before a jump, etc). In fact if I had thought that needed to be mentioned I would have. I would describe auto changes as the horse that auto-changes at the right time with just a thought, not the one who is doing tempis in front of a jump. No one said anything about early changes.

For the record, I also don't think we're all talking about the same thing....I'm talking about flatting a hunter, some are talking about jumping. No one is saying dressage horses can't jump, or even jump in nice form, just that they don't traditionally go the same way (as others have already mentioned-contact, collection, impulsion, etc.) I always advocate jumping dressage horses for a change of pace, but I don't suggest they all go out and enter an HUS class.

Anyway, it's clear you don't think anyone else (even those of us who have done hunters for years and happen to have a dressage horse now) has a right to an opinion on the differences b/w hunters and dressage because you have a horse that does upper level in both. We'll just have to agree to disagree...

I was not taking anything out on you.

I was mentioning certain people in the dressage forum who LOOOOVE to yammer on and on about how hunters are trained, even though they have clearly never trained one up themselves.

Since you have evidently trained up a hunter yourself, you should be able to self-exclude yourself from that remark. I value the opinions of other cross-over riders in the face of the Great Dressage-Biased Ignorance that often appears on this side of coth.

And, just to clarify, my horse is NOT a $250,000 horse (well, he did sell for $335k at Keeneland as a yearling but that was before his race trainers discovered he was a slow poke). He is a nice hunter who does well for himself in rated company, but he is not going to march into Capital Challenge and take home a tri color in the regulars. He got his early hunter training when I took a la carte lessons with a top hunter trainer who had OTHER $250,000 horses. Yes, the training program was excellent, but a.) it was my amateur, lesson-taking heinie in the saddle applying it, and b.) it is nothing that doesn't apply to much fancier warmbloods than my guy OR rejects from the auction in the backwoods.

Good training is good training no matter what horse it's on or who's riding it. Any trainer who wants to take people's money really ought to be able to do it, whether their clients have $500k per year to spend or $5,000.

[mvp]

Hollyshobbies makes a couple of good points:

The ideal canter at 1st level (and especially second) in the modern dressage ring is not what hunter people seek. In the dressage world, engagement at the canter seems to be looking toward the more "uphill" and "up and down" canter required later.

That being said, hunter peeps would do well to produce three distinctive canters and quick, easy adjustability between them. I also think the modern hunter ring would do well to accept, even value "brilliance" as dressage does. To me, that means the subtle quality of an obedient horse putting in a little effort to produce an expressive version of the gait or movement at hand. We want that in the ascent of the bascule, but *not at all* it seems during the rest of the hunter's round. That's too bad.

[Carnelian]

Ex-eventer and 3rd level dressage rider here.

Maybe it's the barn I board at, but I have yet to see a hunter here follow the contact forward, down and out (f/d/o you'll see referenced on the dressage board). A dressage horse is swinging through its back and using itself properly if, when you lenthen your reins, the horse seeks out the contact f/d/o. If when lenthening your rein, it just goes slack and the horse's nose goes out, your horse isn't engaged and seeking the contact properly. The "stretchy circle" introduced at Training level and used through First level is the test for true engagement and the horse's ability to seek the contact. I don't see how a hunter can "flat" doing lateral work, lengthen, collect, etc. without the horse seeking the contact because without seeking the contact I don't think the horse is truly swinging through the back. The working gaits of Intro through First level are the same, and even the Intro riders should know how to put a horse on the bit by engaging the hind end. Engage the hind end and the frame we refer to as "on the bit" will follow.

The whole "when to teach the flying change" is different in dressage. Dressage horses aren't taught a flying change by changing direction (or at least that's not how I taught it to my mare). I teach it out of the counter canter on a 20m circle staying in the same direction of travel while asking for the change. In my barn, the hunter riders teach it by heading toward the arena wall and turning while asking for the new lead. :no: Or the better ones at least teach it over a pole, but still with a direction change. I have to be very conscientous when I jump (yes, please note that I jump my dressage horse) to NEVER ask for a flying change as I change direction. I always establish the counter canter, ask for the change then turn. Clean changes are VERY important. A late change is an automatic 4, and horses that change late are hard to teach to change clean consistently.

I'm usually just a lurker on the H/J forum because I think there is nothing more beautiful than a nice eq round. The eventer in me can't swing the boring (sorry, boring to me) courses in the hunters, but I LOVE the derbies. If I was reincarnated as a hunter rider, that would be my goal.

[Moderator 1]

We merged these two threads under Off Course to bring the discussion together and avoid duplication. Now that everything's together, it's easier to compare and contrast opinions--let's keep it productive where they differ. ;)

Thanks!
Mod 1

[RugBug]

Huh...found this thread all mashed together on Of-Course. it's a little hard to read coherently now, but I still have a comment or two:

I'm not going to get into the differences as they have been discussed here very well. What I hate is when I am looking around at horses for sale, dressage horses; people will advertise as "will make a great dressage or hunter". No they won't, either they are dressage movers or hunter movers or neither, but there is no such thing as an upper level dressage horse AND an upper level hunter in the same horse. They are vastly different at the upper levels.

So............. you think Blue Hors Matine and Moorland's Totilas would make great hunters do you?

The range of movement acceptable in dressage is a lot larger than in hunters. A nice moving hunter can still be a good dressage horse. The two dressage horses you mentioned however, if in hunterland, would be the type you NEVER, EVER hacked on and would do the 'walk-canter' transition for an opening circle. :winkgrin:

(Can I just say that I'm nt a fan of Moorland's Totillas? Lovely, lovely piaffe and passage, cannot stand the trot. Can you say TWH? Blech (for the dressage ring...nothing against TWH's for TWH pursuits) Canter is exuberant the rhythm is good. Wonder what it would be like if he was allowed to stretch? But really if the jump was a 10 and he could go around the ring relaxed and quiet, he'd probably do just fine)


Those who think that horses are either dressage movers or hunter movers or neither should take a second look at Donarweiss. That young stallion, initially started by a HUNTER TRAINER, is scoring in the 70's at I-1 at Palm Beach with Chris Hickey and has hunter movement TO DIE FOR. They begged the owners to keep him a hunter but they wanted him to do dressage from the start.

We looked at Donarweiss as a hunter sire back in 2005. Didn't end up going that direction (used Jupiter instead), but he was deleted from the final list because at that age, I wasn't going to pay for his DVD.