PDA

View Full Version : Walter Zettl Speaks on Zwangsjacke



Mike Matson
May. 27, 2006, 10:21 PM
The following was posted by Walter Zettl on the UDBB:

"Col. von Ziegner asked me to try to get his response to “The Workshop in Lausanne” published in the Dressage Today. After I read his response, I was happy to offer it to the DT, and they immediately agreed to publish it.

Col. von Ziegner is an old friend of mine from many years ago. He is also an advocate of classical dressage, like me and many of the BB-friends, as well as of the new Xenophon Gesellschaft. He was one of the founders. They are against the “Zwangsjackenreiterei”. Col. von Ziegner is 84 years old, is still very active in teaching and riding. His remarks touched my soul.

It is incredible that these people, who are at the head of the FEI, are allowing this kind of riding. One should question their knowledge of horsemanship. Should not their priority be the well-being of the horse? What did they do about the protection of the horses at Lausanne? All they did was create a new word for the Zwangsjackenreiterei – “Hyperflexion of the neck”, and which can only be used by “top” riders. Someone please tell me what is correct about this new riding style? By the way, under Baucher, we already experienced a similar type of riding. The horses were tortured, and they became soulless creatures.

As a result of force riding, the horses hardly stays still, they are very tense, and they do not do a correct walk or no walk at all. One rider (whose horse does not do a walk at all anymore because he is tense and frightened), made the suggestion to take the walk out of the higher classes of dressage. Why not then take everything with which they might have trouble out? Like a correct collecting trot? The “hyperflexion of the neck” horse does a kind of passage. In the medium and extended trot, the horse throws his front legs unnaturally high, and therefore the horse only takes very short steps with his hind legs to balance himself, and is not covering any ground. It takes half an hour to get across the diagonal! The canter is too short and stiff, and during flying changes, the horse swings to the left and to the right, due to too much leg moving to the back. The pirouettes are 4-beat, because the rules require them to be as small as possible. We have to change the rules to make them bigger so that the horse is able perform them in a correct 3-beat canter. In the piaffe one does not see any forward movement because of force used in the training: too strong hand and leg (spurs) aids. To stay balanced the horse has to cross the front legs or swing to the left and right side. Most of the time, the horse is too short through the neck, and escapes the aids.

The three gaits should never lose their naturalness, but with hyperflexion of the neck, what is left? Those poor horses are not “gymnastized” to make them physically and mentally stronger, but are trained mechanically to perform a certain test and then they feel they are in a “Zwangsjacke” (straightjacket).

Please keep up the fight for the classical (humane) training of our horses. They will be thankful and show us their appreciation through their trust and devotion.

P.S. A short time ago, Dr. Ulrike Thiel got in contact with me. She has a small institute in Holland which researches the training of dressage horses and its effects. She heard of me through my German edition of “Dressage in Harmony”. By reading my book she recognized my philosophy about classical training. I have to admit that this lady left a big impression on me, as she does in Holland (the lion’s den of the Zwangsjackenreiterei) fighting this type of riding. In the meantime, she sent me three DVD’s which show training in the warm-up ring with hyperflexion of the neck. When she asked Anke and Sjef to publish them, they threatened her with a lawsuit. If their training is humane, why would they prohibit her showing those DVD’s? If your are interested in learning more about her and her work, here is her website: www.hippocampus-nl.com."

sabryant
May. 27, 2006, 10:48 PM
I don't see what is so incredible about it! If they took it out of the dressage warm up, they would have to take it out of the jumper and eventing warm up. As far as the tense walks, that is an error in peak for brilliance and not a result of hyperflexion.

escondi
May. 27, 2006, 11:00 PM
I ought to know better and stay out of this. Give it new names, call it a new practice. It's NOT new. Anymore than a crop or a spur is "new".

Put a crop or a spur in the wrong hand or on the wrong foot, and it can be an instrument of abuse.

nowar
May. 27, 2006, 11:21 PM
Who is Walter Zettl :confused:

DressageGuy
May. 27, 2006, 11:31 PM
sabryant, you keep using this excuse, of, they're just peaking their horses. BULSHIT. You can peak a horse without making its gaits impure. Hell, I got one of my better performances out of Chase yesterday after having him spook. Got some beautiful medium trots, and collected trot. It doesn't mean they have to lose what should be natural for these so-called "top atheletes".

escondi
May. 27, 2006, 11:37 PM
DG: check your PMs.

sabryant
May. 28, 2006, 12:00 AM
Dress-a little-edgy Guy, I think that I said in a post that peaking a horse was an ART unto itself. A rather lost one, wouldn't you say? Glad you had a good ride today. Hope you got a great score!!

DressageGuy
May. 28, 2006, 12:06 AM
I realize it's an art, but to do it in such a fashion that you lose the natural beauty of the horse, is not an art to me.

Sabine
May. 28, 2006, 12:28 AM
I realize it's an art, but to do it in such a fashion that you lose the natural beauty of the horse, is not an art to me.

Aren't you in Europe yet to brush up on the real stuff going on??

Glad that you figured out how to use a spook to your advantage..WOW- now take it one step further and get a 'good' spook feeling going all the time...that's one of the many recipes that create a winning ride...:)


Mike Matson- what is it that makes you so happy to bring subjects from TOB to this board?? Could it be that the constant yes-mentality over there is boring the living gageebees out of you...---> back to TOB for you!!

DressageGuy
May. 28, 2006, 01:01 AM
Sabine, you really a condescending person. I don't know quite why I'm responding to your childish taunts, but here we are. Yes, I know, that's what I strive for. Try doing it without having had regular lessons in 2 months. You obviously are SOOO much better than we mere mortals. Pleeaassseee, show us the error of our ways. (Insert eye-roll here).

DressageGuy
May. 28, 2006, 01:28 AM
Yikes, you need to get to know her a bit better then. Check the other RK thread. She's one of the most condescending people I've seen on here, and it's acknowledged by others too. And I've had plenty of beers.

Sabine
May. 28, 2006, 01:37 AM
thanks DG- just because I don't agree with your rather provincial view on training techniques- doesn't mean I am condescending. In fact I am trying to point out to you that broadening your knowledge might help you understand what this RK thing really is in international dressage- rather than spouting what you read from well respected- yet retired famous horsemen.
Go see for yourself- that's all I have said to you.
don't worry- carry on...:)

Kareen
May. 28, 2006, 01:38 AM
I'm sorry WPF but how can it be classy to belittle someone and keep accusing them for not being able to run to Europe all the time?!?!
What continent you are on and what level of riding one personally is at doesn't change a single thing about everybody being entitled to build their own opinion based on what information they have available. The amount of arrogance in these posts is unbelievable. Who are you to judge DressageGuy's level of expereince? As if any of you guys were as close to the scene as you all claim to be *LOL*. Quite ridiculous really. I feel with you DressageGuy. And am out of here. Kindergarteners have more civilized manners than this.

Sabine
May. 28, 2006, 01:45 AM
I'm sorry WPF but how can it be classy to belittle someone and keep accusing them for not being able to run to Europe all the time?!?!
What continent you are on and what level of riding one personally is at doesn't change a single thing about everybody being entitled to build their own opinion based on what information they have available. The amount of arrogance in these posts is unbelievable. Who are you to judge DressageGuy's level of expereince? As if any of you guys were as close to the scene as you all claim to be *LOL*. Quite ridiculous really. I feel with you DressageGuy. And am out of here. Kindergarteners have more civilized manners than this.

Kareen,
we all know you sit right in the middle of the hot bed- you just have to stick your neck out your window and can watch international level dressage.
All I ever suggested to DG (ironic...) is to take a peek at what is like over there...you playing holier than thou just fits your purpose....go figure...
why don't you invite DG to your place for a while and do some good for the American dressage youth...?

Lead the way- instead of bemoaning the style....:)

DressageGuy
May. 28, 2006, 02:05 AM
I don't NEED to go to Europe to "broaden my knowledge" as you so kindly put it. I see plenty of it on this side of the pond. Saw a YR at NAYRC 2 years ago riding her horse with his chin on his chest. Nauseated me even then.

P.R.E.
May. 28, 2006, 02:17 AM
Sabine, you really a condescending person. I don't know quite why I'm responding to your childish taunts, but here we are. Yes, I know, that's what I strive for. Try doing it without having had regular lessons in 2 months. You obviously are SOOO much better than we mere mortals. Pleeaassseee, show us the error of our ways. (Insert eye-roll here).

Maybe it is because you are looking for it. I will like to hear your comment about what is said by Walter Zettl, when he mentions that Rollkur is causing that in the Piaffe there is not enough forward movement, in contrast with what you said in the other thread, when your argument was that you can't find a Piaffe in place any longer, that everyone is now always moving a little forward. Or you are going to tell us know that Zettl is wrong. This is what we have been trying to tell you, nothing else. You have all the right of the world to your own opinion, but that doesn't mean that you can't make a mistake, we all do, God knows that I make lots of mistakes.

The point is that you are making comments without a strong knowledge basis, I was your age once and I was also passionate and I learned when it was time to get better informed before making such strong comments. If you give yourself time to learn, your arguments are going to be of more value.

Sabine
May. 28, 2006, 02:24 AM
Thank you PRE for your kind and well chosen words. I hope DG listened.
While thinking about this I realize that while I could be DG's mom and am surrounded by my own kids who are bursting with passion and energy for different ventures than dressage- but often show the same attitude...I should know better...bad on me!

JSwan
May. 28, 2006, 06:34 AM
Thank you PRE for your kind and well chosen words. I hope DG listened.
While thinking about this I realize that while I could be DG's mom and am surrounded by my own kids who are bursting with passion and energy for different ventures than dressage- but often show the same attitude...I should know better...bad on me!

I used to think DQ stood for dressage queen, not drama queen.

You sure have a lot of time to post on Internet BB's for someone with so many horses to ride.

slc2
May. 28, 2006, 07:51 AM
do you always descend to such statements in discussions? JESUS, i may not always agree with sabine but i don't go THAT low. can you kind of make like a line you don't cross, and then be brave about not crossing it?

ise@ssl
May. 28, 2006, 08:29 AM
I agree with Mr. Zettl - sorry for the person who has never heard of him! You don't have to look very far to see numerous photos here and over the pond of horses with what is supposed to be an extended trot - but looks more like a "goose step" march stride up front and a hind end that just can't motor up due to the overflexion in the neck.

If some people prefer tight, tense, stilted movements in GP - well then focus on those Rolkur horses - when the reins are released they almost look like they CAN'T stretch their necks forward - probably due to a lactic acid build up in the muscles.

Sadly this "Nose to the Knees" warm-up is now creeping into other disciplines and more often than not by riders who are just plain LOUSY riders themselves. We seem to see more and more people looking for the "quick fix" and if the horse has to suffer a little - well they seem to feel that's o.k. As long as THEY - the riders - don't have to work too hard.

The hardest part breeders like myself face now is "vetting" potential buyers to make sure the horses don't head down this HEAD DOWN ROAD. I would be physically ill if I saw one of our horses ridden this way - and I wouldn't care if it was an Olympic a** on the saddle or an Amateur one.

jester1113
May. 28, 2006, 08:30 AM
Who is Walter Zettl :confused:

That's a joke funny ha-ha, right?

escondi
May. 28, 2006, 09:27 AM
DG: I don't know Sabine, but she has not sounded condescending to me. Merely frustrated. That's why I pm'd you. Trying to take you under my wing a bit. Not on the riding side of things because I'm just not that good a rider to pretend to do that.

But you really need to get a firmer point of reference before you take a "side" and better yet,

don't take a side.

I know when you are 21, there's a tendency to want to find the "black and white" in things.

Remember that the person who is heldup as an expert today might very well be in the proverbial equne shit house tomorrow. The US is a place where we seek the trainer du jour, we pay him an obscene amount of $$, and oust him the next day/year.

I repeat, rolllllkur and whatever new names you want to put on it, it is NOT a new practice. It did not start with the dressage. And, like a crop or a spur, yes it can be abused. But then so can damn near everything else in this world of ours.

No, we can't all afford to hop over to Europe. Hell, we can't all afford to hop around within the US itself. But watching a video only gives you a very small snap shop, a cross-section, you know? Even watching an actual performance can't give you a realistic idea of a rider's abilities or of a horse's potential. Every rider and every horse has both good and bad days. To form an opinion (in either direction) based on those is to do yourself a disservice.:(

Moll
May. 28, 2006, 09:41 AM
do you always descend to such statements in discussions? JESUS, i may not always agree with sabine but i don't go THAT low. can you kind of make like a line you don't cross, and then be brave about not crossing it?

LOL, slc: ever heard the story about people in glass houses..? ...any of these ring a bell?




you're full of balogna

What a load of crap.




J Swan seems to be giving Sabine a compliment in comparison :winkgrin:

Daydream Believer
May. 28, 2006, 09:58 AM
The hardest part breeders like myself face now is "vetting" potential buyers to make sure the horses don't head down this HEAD DOWN ROAD. I would be physically ill if I saw one of our horses ridden this way - and I wouldn't care if it was an Olympic a** on the saddle or an Amateur one.

Amen to that.

mzpeepers
May. 28, 2006, 10:07 AM
Is this the official "pounce on Sabine" thread? Ok...I'll throw in my two cents then :D
Perhaps Sabine is not realizing she's coming across as a condescending holier-than-thou wench? Perhaps she has been around people who wouldn't know class if it hit them in the ass and that are idolizing her and thus she has been on a high trip?
Cuz the Sabine I used to know wouldn't come out patronizing people regardless of their age. To most people, being told things like "you are young enough to be my kid" and "Why aren't you in Europe yet" is...well....annoying to say the least. I'm sure that Sabine, who has been to Europe many, many times, won't mind reporting on her various enlighting discoveries from that continent without making it sound like unless you are there you are just an idiot? No? Hmmmm.....

escondi
May. 28, 2006, 10:31 AM
Well, MsPeepers, I did not realize this was a "pounce on" anyone thread. Butyou seem intent on encouraging it to go there. In fact, forget "pouncing", you seem intent on taking this to a personal level. :D Or don't you realize how you are coming across? Shrewish at best.

I'm actually a cyber-buddy of DG. I PM'd him not about Sabine (who I do not know in Cyber-friendship, let alone IRL) but advising him that "sitting on the fence" can be a very smart stance.

Sabine's initial comments in another thread started out much more gentle. I believe she may be getting frustrated at this point. At least, that's my take.

I repeat, rollllllkur is not a new practice. Carrying and using a crop or wearing and using spurs is not a new practice. But old as the crop and spur are, they can either be used as aids or as torture devices.

ise@ssl
May. 28, 2006, 10:56 AM
What relevance is the official birthdate of Rolkur in any discussion about it? Does that somehow dilute the fact that many people - professionals and amateurs alike who are around horses in many capacities and roles - see this as WRONG?

And I fail to see this allegation that NOT traveling to Europe censors a person as far as their opinion of the method. I go to Europe and have a 6 yo horse I bred here in the U.S. in training there and a 4 yo GRP Stallion I purchased in Europe in training there. I fail to see how that permits me to have MORE to say on this subject than someone who hasn't been there. ??

And quite honestly - ANY training method that bars outsiders from watching sends up red flags. And it's not just Rolkur, there are other FEI riders/trainers here in the US - (not all US Riders) who have this curtain around their training - and it exists in all equine disciplines. If it works and it's fine for the horse - then why the "blackout" policy?

P.R.E.
May. 28, 2006, 11:00 AM
Perhaps she has been around people who wouldn't know class if it hit them in the ass and that are idolizing her and thus she has been on a high trip?
....

This comment for sure shows how much class you have and how you are surrounded by so classy people!!!:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Maybe it has already hit you in the a**s and you don't not know it, just maybe. Have you thought that this is a possibility.

P.R.E.
May. 28, 2006, 11:07 AM
What relevance is the official birthdate of Rolkur in any discussion about it? Does that somehow dilute the fact that many people - professionals and amateurs alike who are around horses in many capacities and roles - see this as WRONG?

And I fail to see this allegation that NOT traveling to Europe censors a person as far as their opinion of the method. I go to Europe and have a 6 yo horse I bred here in the U.S. in training there and a 4 yo GRP Stallion I purchased in Europe in training there. I fail to see how that permits me to have MORE to say on this subject than someone who hasn't been there. ??

And quite honestly - ANY training method that bars outsiders from watching sends up red flags. And it's not just Rolkur, there are other FEI riders/trainers here in the US - (not all US Riders) who have this curtain around their training - and it exists in all equine disciplines. If it works and it's fine for the horse - then why the "blackout" policy?

You are right, you can have an opinion doesn't matter where youare and have learned. I don't think that Sabine was trying to say that you need to go to Europe first in order to have an opinion. She was making a reference to a comment against GP riding in Europe and she just said that it will be wise to first go there and see first hand what is really going on before making such a harsh comment about GP in general.

You are also right about banning outsiders from watching a training method. I am not going to go in favor or against Rollkur, but if you are comfortable with what you are doing, there is no reason to hide it.

Horsedances
May. 28, 2006, 11:17 AM
I have said this before and I say it again. Let Mr. Zettl explain to us why he changed his mind over the past years. I have seen him train several topriders in the 1980's. And he sure was using the whole toolbox at that time. Has he learned from this ?, or is it only because he don't train the topriders anymore ?.

escondi
May. 28, 2006, 11:31 AM
I am not justifying anything by its birthdate.

But do we open the "banning door" to crops and spurs, too? Do we ban riders who have not learned a light hand?

I'm not an expert. I barely know how to ride at all. I've only got about 6 weeks experience. So I claim nothing. I'm just questioning.

mzpeepers
May. 28, 2006, 12:19 PM
Well, MsPeepers, I did not realize this was a "pounce on" anyone thread. Butyou seem intent on encouraging it to go there. In fact, forget "pouncing", you seem intent on taking this to a personal level. :D Or don't you realize how you are coming across? Shrewish at best.



There are two open threads in which this poster has been called every name in the book because of a seemingly condescending attitude but *I* I'm making it personal? You guys are funny! :D

physical.energy
May. 28, 2006, 12:32 PM
You are right, you can have an opinion doesn't matter where youare and have learned. I don't think that Sabine was trying to say that you need to go to Europe first in order to have an opinion. She was making a reference to a comment against GP riding in Europe and she just said that it will be wise to first go there and see first hand what is really going on before making such a harsh comment about GP in general.

You are also right about banning outsiders from watching a training method. I am not going to go in favor or against Rollkur, but if you are comfortable with what you are doing, there is no reason to hide it.

I second this. I don't think Sabine is trying to be harsh or rude. She has relevant experience and therefore has a point of reference. Telling someone to go see first hand before attacking the entire international GP community isn't really an unreasonable comment. I agree completely that blanket statements made by DG were just inaccurate and shows he needs more experience and to see more international competition first hand. It changes your perspective to see the riders warming up and the process they go thru behind the scenes days before they enter that competition arena. I was impressed by the level of professionalism and kindness most all of the horses were ridden with back there in the warm up. On a RARE occasion I did see horses ridden harder than I thought need be (not by the more prominanat riders btw), but I wasn't sitting on the horse and therefore could make no riteous judgement.
Some of us have seen international riders training first hand on a daily basis for years. Enabling an opinion based on the daily training thruoughout the year not just the 10 minutes seen in the GP arena. Some have lived in this community in the international scene for many many years and do have a point of view at a depth that is fairly educated.
I guess my point is that it is unfair to attack the entire group of international dressage competitors as DG did without someone with experience piping in to say how do you know, you have never seen these people first hand ride and train their horses and how can you criticize something you have never seen.
I personally don't take a stand on RK. Not using it on my horses, don't have contact with anyone who does use it. Unlikely I ever will, so I cannot make a judgement without relevant information. Just because I think something is ugly doesn't mean I understand it. It only means it doesn't appeal to me. ;)

FWIW~ People sometimes have much more experience than they put in their profiles. If I put in my profile everything I have done or everyone I have worked with, it would sound like a lie or like I was boasting and still a lie. So I have a blank profile but that surely doesn' t mean I have a life lacking of experience. So for you ney sayers that question an opinion for a blank profile ya just never know........
Back to Zettl who I have no experience with..... BTW.

ise@ssl
May. 28, 2006, 12:49 PM
"Let Mr. Zettl explain to us why he changed his mind over the past years. I have seen him train several topriders in the 1980's."

I have to laugh at this comment. I've been around horses most of my life - I'm 55. Have I changed my mind about certain training methods over the years - FOR GOD'S SAKE YES.

And I have to imagine that Horsedances - YOU HAVE TOO!

If we don't LEARN as we get more experience - something is very wrong. With experience on different horses, with different trainers, in different disciplines - does our depth of knowledge grow - I HOPE SO! Do we see the merits of some training and cast off others when we start to understand IN DEPTH the physiology of the horse itself and our ability to ride correctly (or in many cases not ride correctly) - I PRAY WE DO for the horses' sake.

And here's breaking news - some people could spend a lifetime crawling around the barns of Europe - AND NEVER GET IT. So this condemnation of people who cannot afford to troll Europe is just arrogant hooey IMHO. There are many people who spend decades around horses - ride - even have FEI HORSES - and they haven't a CLUE how the horse actually moves naturally and if they are or are not achieving success riding that horse. For many - the test scores and the ribbons are all of it - the training the connection, the "good stuff" is absolutely unknown to them.

It's no secret that some people just have an "eye" for horses and I believe emphatically there are some people who can just see the best way to train a horse and/or a rider - or do it themselves. It's called TALENT.

So DG - don't regret that you aren't on the grand tour of the training barns of Europe - and don't feel badly that you see what many, many others see - the dangers in Rolkur training. Others can venture in - but my heart aches for the horses.

And Escondi - the over use of pizza cutter spurs and double whips (crops are really more a hunter/jumper thing) - falls into the same category of abuse. This condemnation of Rolkur doesn't make other forms of abuse acceptable, nor does it condone them.

Kareen
May. 28, 2006, 01:46 PM
Wholeheartedly agree with ise@ssl's post.

BornToRide
May. 28, 2006, 01:47 PM
[quote=P.R.E.]
Maybe it has already hit you in the a**s . quote]

What's a**s? Is that a misspelling of A$$?? :D You guys ARE funny.....:lol: :lol: :lol:

Kareen
May. 28, 2006, 01:50 PM
To Sabine: The guy is more than welcome to stay over at my place if they want to hang out here however I just don't agree about your opinion that you need to sit in the center of Europe in order to develop an idea of what good or bad training is or what's ethical. Afterall there are FEI competitions held in North America too and quite frankly I think what's being displayed in the warmups today is already an 'ethicalized' version of what has gone on over the past 5-15 years (with varying degrees of 'mechanisation' and a varying percentage of riders doing it and a varying degree of brutality).

Lambie Boat
May. 28, 2006, 02:32 PM
just because I don't agree with your rather provincial view on training techniques- doesn't mean I am condescending.

Let's read this sentence again :cool:

Provincial: unsophisticated, countrified, rustic.


sounds kind of condescending to me....

BornToRide
May. 28, 2006, 02:37 PM
Countrified is a word?? :lol: Yep, I'll have to agree with that .....:winkgrin:

Lambie Boat
May. 28, 2006, 02:41 PM
P.S.
If rollkur is considered the height of sophisicated dressage training technique, I'll drink colored dye, crap on a canvas and hang it in the Louvre. European enough for ya?

physical.energy
May. 28, 2006, 02:43 PM
P.S.
If rollkur is considered the height of sophisicated dressage training technique, I'll drink colored dye, crap on a canvas and hang it in the Louvre. European enough for ya?

Your painting and RK might look the same!!!:lol: :lol:

Daydream Believer
May. 28, 2006, 02:51 PM
As for having to go to Europe to see rollkur...no not hardly. I sat at a clinic and saw it right here in VA not that long ago. They called it "deep" but it was rollkur depending on the level of the horse being ridden. The higher level horses were hyperflexed at all paces with a shorter neck than the loer level horses who were put deep...very deep...to supposedly loosen their backs and whatever it's supposed to help. I kept wondering why they were doing it as the horses did not seem to get any better afterwards. It was not quite as grotesque or extreme a hyperflexion as that video of Anky but certainly the concept was very much the same.

mzpeepers
May. 28, 2006, 02:56 PM
P.S.
If rollkur is considered the height of sophisicated dressage training technique, I'll drink colored dye, crap on a canvas and hang it in the Louvre. European enough for ya?

Now now....not all Europeans think they're "all that". Besides, it depends on the color of the "painting" :D

BornToRide
May. 28, 2006, 02:59 PM
Hay, I resemble that remark......:D

Touchstone Farm
May. 28, 2006, 03:17 PM
Thanks for posting this, Mike. I don't see anything wrong with posting this important info on many BBs. Perhaps it should even be posted on billboards, in magazines, on TV...whatever it takes to guide others -- or bring them back -- onto the correct path of classical horsemanship. I'm curious why anyone would think this is "wrong?" Why are they afraid of the discussion?

ise & kareen...good posts. Rolkur is no longer in my vocabulary. Zwangsjacke is a much more accurate description.

nhwr
May. 28, 2006, 04:17 PM
attributed to Herr Zettl
In the meantime, she sent me three DVD’s which show training in the warm-up ring with hyperflexion of the neck. When she asked Anke and Sjef to publish them, they threatened her with a lawsuit. If their training is humane, why would they prohibit her showing those DVD’s?
This way of framing a question is worthy of J. Edgar Hoover and is a prime example of why I have a major problem with many in the anti crowd. It is conviction by insinuation. Why should Sjef and Anky agree to load the cannon for those who dislike their methods? Questioning their alledged refusal to do so is evidence of nothing, except perhaps the ethics of he who asks the question.

Ellie K
May. 28, 2006, 04:22 PM
...they do not do a correct walk or no walk at all. One rider (whose horse does not do a walk at all anymore because he is tense and frightened), made the suggestion to take the walk out of the higher classes of dressage. In the interest of not spreading misinformation, Mr. Zettl should be aware that it was fairly well-established that the rider in question was joking when making this remark. People who had an agenda "reported" it as a serious proposition when it was a joke.

egontoast
May. 28, 2006, 04:32 PM
it was fairly well-established that the rider in question was joking when making this remark. People who had an agenda "reported" it as a serious proposition when it was a joke.

true, yes, but we wouldn't want to let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Karoline
May. 28, 2006, 08:03 PM
In fact, two riders were joking that day...

"It was Martin Schaudt who urged removing the walk from the Grand Prix test to avoid upsetting tense horses and Anky who urged FEI officials to require only one halt in the Grand Prix freestyle for the same reason."

this, in an admirable and rare show at self derision, no doubt.

canyonoak
May. 28, 2006, 08:17 PM
Just to stay on the level of this thread... ahem (clearing throat)

Swan-nee, how I love ya, how I love ya,
My dear old Swan-nee,
Id give the world to be
with my dear old Swan-neee....

and to Theo: Ive said it before and I will say it again.

There is nothing like no longer competing to make a rider a horseman.

There is no way for someone to see what they do not already understand (and want to believe).

ise@ssl
May. 29, 2006, 07:39 AM
Joking or not - the proof is in the performance and the horses that are overflexed in training DO seem to have trouble with the walk and the halt. JMHO!

slc2
May. 29, 2006, 08:45 AM
So then all horses who don't stop or don't walk well are ridden hyperflexed?

I'll tell that to my friend's 12 year old daughter who has the same problem with her pony. What a surprise, since its nose is always struck straight forward.

Of course, once a horse is ridden hyperflexed, then ANYTHING that happens to it is due to hyperflexion.

Next we'll be hearing that trailer accidents, brown recluse spider bits and mistrimmed tails are all related to hyperflexion training.

I actually think that Martin S. and Anky v G don't make their horses halt or struggle with them about their walks during a test because it would be very bad horsemanship to do so.

The problems at Athens have already been discussed hundreds of times, for people who deign to listen. The ring was very badly situated and many of the younger, less experienced horses, or the more sensitive horses, were very badly effected there. Weltall, despite all his tension that day, had moments of absolute brilliance, and I have never in my life seen anyone give a frightned horse such a sympathetic ride as Martin did that day. Despite serious problems in that test, Weltall showed what an awesome athlete he is as he is so unbelievably supple in his shoulders, back and hind quarters that he can do incredible things.

To say 'well they both dont walk or halt well because they are trained such and such a way', is absurd, because they are trained in very different ways.

I think both Weltall and Salinero are very excitable, spirited and eager animals. In fact, I think many of the top show horses today are very sensitive, brilliant animals. I think that because of this, tension IS something you can at times see in these brilliant horses. No, one doesn't see the rider up there pumping away like they're having sex with the saddle at piaffe, or thumping the horse's sides to keep them going at the end of the test like we used to. These are a different type of horse. Each type of horse has strengths and weaknesses. Really excitable, sensitive animals, like so many people here insist they prefer, and indulge in breed assassination ad nauseum because of this, then when they see a sensitive, excitable horse showing some of that while being ridden by a top show rider, then THAT'S because of shitty training or riding. But when the speaker is riding THEIR horse, oh, that's because Darling is so Sensitive, not because they are a shitty trainer. It's a double standard,

At the same time, I think they are both brilliant animals, but the rider is constantly dealing with their high energy levels. With horses like this, i CONSTANTLY hear amateurs say they 'finesse' different movements in the test, without wanting to pick at their horses or to make them feel they are being punished or corrected when they are excited or trying hard. Of course, that's ok, as long as it isn't Anky v G or Martin S doing it.

Instead, I think the riders just finesse these situations, knowing that they will lose some points on those movements, but have a more relaxed horse in the long run. It's just good ringsmanship. One shouldn't go nuts over something like this at this point with these horses. They will improve, as long as they aren't picked at about it. That's why Weltall has continued to mature and improve as much as he has, and has come back mentally from a horrible accident, because Martin seemed to just say, 'it's alright, let's just go in the ring and do what we can, you'll see with time, there's nothing that's going to hurt you'. To do that at the Olympics because that's what the horse needs for his future to build his confidence, to not do what so many riders would have done (punish or exhaust the horse before the next ride) - that is a horseman.

They can joke about it later, AND, they can sit there and take any criticism and any nastiness about it, because they KNOW they are doing the right thing for the horse in the long run by NOT attacking the horse in the ring, OR in training, for that particular problem.

Years ago, MANY years ago, I watched Reiner Klimke teach a young eventer to do much the same with her horse, who was panicking in the ring during a clinic, and refusing to stop. Instead of freaking out, Klimke urged the rider to gently deal with this calmly and just continuing with the work.

To even SUGGEST that Martin doesn't know how to deal with a horse many people would have given up years ago with, a horse that Martin has done nothing except improve with and has NEVER given up on, to me it's the height of absurdity.

Martin Schaudt responds to every communication personally, and after the Olympics, a bunch of us sent congratulations to him because we were so impressed with how he handled the situation and with the athleticism of Weltall. A really good horseperson can look THROUGH the problem of the moment, and see all the ability there. Weltall vindicated all by going to horse show after horse show after Athens, and giving one joyous, brilliant, controlled and accurate performance after another. Martin did exactly the right thing at Athens, and the results after it prove that.

Martin wrote back to each one of us: "I will always believe in Weltall, he is the best".

Martin has my respect.
slc

ise@ssl
May. 29, 2006, 09:08 AM
SLC - we aren't talking about some child's pony here - why make such comments? But knowing how most children are taught to ride in this country - maybe she's just HANGING ON THE PONY'S MOUTH and not providing consistent contact riding back to front. Riding the pony (or any horse) into a bridle with correct contact is a RARE EVENT in the US riding programs for children and junior riders!!

What I SEE - is what I SEE - you obviously LOVE ROLKUR and must train horses that way - YOUR CHOICE. But there is a DIFFERENCE between a horse that is nervous or distracted in competition and a horse that just can't stand still nor relax into a frame due to tight neck and back muscles. Now write long narratives relating to other matters to try to muddy the water. You CONSTANTLY insist on mixing apples, oranges - but fruit salad is the result. Can't you ever just break things down into specifics relating to certain levels of training or horses at different levels??

slc2
May. 29, 2006, 09:35 AM
Ise, you know what? YOu are stating some pretty stupid assumptions.

NOT ONLY do I NOT love rollkur, I have never and most likely WILL NEVER train a horse using that technique. Why don't you just crawl back into your hole and wait for someone else to walk by?

Just because I don't write EXACTLY what yiou would like on this bulletin board, does NOT mean that I "LOVE" rollkur or EVER train my horses that way. IN FACT, if you ever had paid attention at all, you would know that as I have stated it MANY times here.

What I WOULD LOVE, is to see ONE rational discussion about it on the bulletin board. I have yet to see that. And NO, Sannois, a 'rational discussion' is NOT one that agrees with your opinion. Sannois sent me a 'good job!' post when I agreed that horse racing had problems. Agreeing with someone, Sannois, is not 'doing a good job'. That's the whole problem with this bulletin board - people are doing a 'good job' when they agree with you. That's the cheerleader mentalily, that's not rational discourse.

God, the second someone doesn't join on the bandwagon with all this irrational, emotional crap, they "LOVE" rollkur. Not finding an emotional, accusation, innuendo laden bitchfest to be something I agree with, is NOT the same as 'LOVING' a technique. You can't just not like a technique, or not want to do it, you have to accuse people of deliberately killing horses with it to make your decision be valid. Why can't ANY of you just stand on your own two feet and just choose how you train your horses without any of that?

What I DON'T love is the ridiculous emotional crap passed off here as a 'discussion', when it's more like the Brittany-and-Paige-kill-Tiffany-with-Manicure-Scissors episode of SVU.

Tonja
May. 29, 2006, 09:49 AM
For those who would like to take a closer look at rollkur in practice, the DVDs that Walter Zettl mentioned are available for non-commercial use. http://www.hippocampus-nl.com/s2e.php?content_id=353 They were created to document how rollkur is used.

ise@ssl
May. 29, 2006, 10:28 AM
Well - there are good discussion on this method of training - but to toss it back at you SLC - if they aren't word for word what is acceptable to you - it's apparantely rot. Troll around and I'm sure you will see all the discussion on Rolkur - according to YOU - none of it is worthwhile. I SPECIFICALLY DON'T AGREE. There have been many good points made here. If you don't feel what's written is worth anything - WHY POST ON THOSE THREADS?

And I don't live in a hole - I have a very lovely farm in the Amwell Valley in Hunterdon County New Jersey. Meow.

BornToRide
May. 29, 2006, 11:05 AM
love ya, Oakie and egon!

I can spot some hind-end smooching a mile away :D

Sannois
May. 29, 2006, 11:21 AM
Ise, you know what? YOu are stating some pretty stupid assumptions.

NOT ONLY do I NOT love rollkur, I have never and most likely WILL NEVER train a horse using that technique. Why don't you just crawl back into your hole and wait for someone else to walk by?

Just because I don't write EXACTLY what yiou would like on this bulletin board, does NOT mean that I "LOVE" rollkur or EVER train my horses that way. IN FACT, if you ever had paid attention at all, you would know that as I have stated it MANY times here.

What I WOULD LOVE, is to see ONE rational discussion about it on the bulletin board. I have yet to see that. And NO, Sannois, a 'rational discussion' is NOT one that agrees with your opinion. Sannois sent me a 'good job!' post when I agreed that horse racing had problems. Agreeing with someone, Sannois, is not 'doing a good job'. That's the whole problem with this bulletin board - people are doing a 'good job' when they agree with you. That's the cheerleader mentalily, that's not rational discourse.

God, the second someone doesn't join on the bandwagon with all this irrational, emotional crap, they "LOVE" rollkur. Not finding an emotional, accusation, innuendo laden bitchfest to be something I agree with, is NOT the same as 'LOVING' a technique. You can't just not like a technique, or not want to do it, you have to accuse people of deliberately killing horses with it to make your decision be valid. Why can't ANY of you just stand on your own two feet and just choose how you train your horses without any of that?

What I DON'T love is the ridiculous emotional crap passed off here as a 'discussion', when it's more like the Brittany-and-Paige-kill-Tiffany-with-Manicure-Scissors episode of SVU.
a PT concerning Horse Racing?? The only thing I have been on the Racing Forum is Barbaro. No worries..
But you know, it works both ways, maybe not you, but many folks on here are exactly like you say in the other camp.. They condem those who disagree with these methods.. So Whats the difference?? I know I have said this before, and it always gets turned around. BUT if the folks getting all hot and bothered about the folks who dont like RK or whatever can get emotional, why cant the folks that dont agree with it be just a passionate?? Why do people get so angry on here because some disagree with it, or any method. I tell you this, I dont do it, could not probably ever do it, never rode a horse that level that would warrant it. And dont think it falls in line with what I believe Dressage is about! ME!!! I dont care if you or anyone else likes that I feel that way or doesn't. I have been riding and training and teaching for over 30 years. I am no expert but I have a good grasp of what it takes to train a horse. I dont seek approval from you or anyone on this board. And I dare say I am sure there are folks that feel the same.
I for what its worth never thought you were an advocate of this method of training, I just dont see why you are upset as are others because those in the other camp dont agree with it! Dang... Long winded. :eek:
And maybe we can all find something better to chat about.. Ummm lets see, Ummmm OH I know.. Why do people wear dresses over there clothes at Dressage shows.. I know I know its to keep clean.. Where did the dresses come in?? I just wore Warm up pants and a tee shirt over my stuff! Even then I did get dirty, Green slobber on white breeches every time.. See A tame topic! Pretty innocent mundane.. and Harmless! :lol:

Sannois
May. 29, 2006, 11:31 AM
For those who would like to take a closer look at rollkur in practice, the DVDs that Walter Zettl mentioned are available for non-commercial use. http://www.hippocampus-nl.com/s2e.php?content_id=353 They were created to document how rollkur is used.
I would like to here the proponets on here explain all the points listed in highlighted yellow. I know what the answer will be.. Who are these people , its just a Video, its all taken out of context. If you dont ride it you cant see it or understand it! :sigh:

Horsedances
May. 29, 2006, 11:38 AM
Pictures from the Ducth National Championships this weekend !


http://www.dressuurstalvanbaalen.nl/news_detail.asp?id=5427

some more

http://www.dressuurstalvanbaalen.nl/news_detail.asp?id=5437

and some more :


http://www.horsedances.net/EindhovenPaintedBlack.jpg

http://www.horsedances.net/EindhovenKrackC.jpg

http://www.horsedances.net/EindhovenEdward.jpg

Mardi
May. 29, 2006, 12:06 PM
The point is that you are making comments without a strong knowledge basis....

Doesn't matter. He knows what he sees. Instinctively, he knows it is not correct.

Often it is those without "a strong knowledge basis" that see things the most clearly.

fiona
May. 29, 2006, 12:27 PM
edited as the copy/paste didn't work!
I'd be interested to hear the anwers to the questions in yellow from someone that has trained in this method too.

Horsedances
May. 29, 2006, 12:43 PM
edited as the copy/paste didn't work!
I'd be interested to hear the anwers to the questions in yellow from someone that has trained in this method too.

Don't you think we should investigate the background of Ulrike first:yes:
What is her hidden agenda:confused:

fiona
May. 29, 2006, 12:48 PM
Absolutely! I was going to do that anyway! But i'd still like to hear the answers to the questions from someone that knows this method.

claire
May. 29, 2006, 01:09 PM
Tonja: Interesting link (particularly the yellow highlighted questions/points)


For those who would like to take a closer look at rollkur in practice, the DVDs that Walter Zettl mentioned are available for non-commercial use. http://www.hippocampus-nl.com/s2e.php?content_id=353 They were created to document how rollkur is used.

Sannois/Fiona, I agree! Using the highlighted points on the link Tonja provided would be a great basis for an objective/rational discussion on the HF/RK method.

Don't you think slc2? :D

Pollyanna that I am :winkgrin: : Looking forward to learning from the responses from both camps!

Horsedances
May. 29, 2006, 01:11 PM
Absolutely! I was going to do that anyway! But i'd still like to hear the answers to the questions from someone that knows this method.

I know this method, and I know the method WAZ was using 30 years ago, I know the method of Conrad Schumacher, the method Rudolf Zeilinger is using, the method of Jo Hinneman, I know most of the methods, but, as stated before, these trainers change their method with every horse. :cool: . Are they right or are they wrong :confused:

But trying to explain these methods is a hughe waste of time, because people have made up their minds already.

It was Kyra K which stated in a recent article "we just do what the judges want to see". And every week, when I receive the results of the worldwide dressage-competitions from dressagedirect.com I notice that this attitude is the road to succes.

Tonja
May. 29, 2006, 01:34 PM
Horsedances wrote:

Don't you think we should investigate the background of Ulrike first
What is her hidden agenda

I realize that some might like to think that discrediting Ulrike could invalidate what is presented on the DVDs but in reality the DVDs show a sample of what is seen in many dressage training arenas around the world. After studying zwangsjacke in use it becomes clear what affect it has on the horses.

I agree the questions highlighted in yellow on Ulrike’s site, http://www.hippocampus-nl.com/s2e.php?content_id=353 definitely do need to be answered!

fiona
May. 29, 2006, 01:55 PM
But trying to explain these methods is a hughe waste of time, because people have made up their minds already

Actually theo that is not always the case. For one i would like to have the system explained to me by someone that has used/learnt it properly over the long term. I have never had this opportunity and i am curious, open minded and interested in other peoples methods.
I am also interested in the agenda of anyone that is trying to sell me thier latest product whether it is an idea, a concept, a philosphy or a piece of real estate. I like to make informed decisions for myself by being fully armed with the facts on account of not actually being a sheep.

At no point am i asking is it right or wrong - the question for me is far more simple......What is it?

physical.energy
May. 29, 2006, 01:59 PM
It was Kyra K which stated in a recent article "we just do what the judges want to see".

I hope this statement doesn't lead people to believe what Kyra does at her stable is anything but positive. What Kyra does at home is really good quality classical training with absolute kindness toward the horses. Her horses are honestly happy. What she changes at the shows is the picture of what the judges want to see for 10 minutes.

Moll
May. 29, 2006, 02:08 PM
What Kyra does at home is really good quality classical training

Ho-hum. And at her clinics, she changes it again just to be sure in case judges are watching?

Kathy Johnson
May. 29, 2006, 02:13 PM
Where have I been? I didn't know Marlies had the ride on Relevant. They look great. Lucky girl.

ise@ssl
May. 29, 2006, 04:56 PM
Well there are symposiums and clinics and lectures/demonstrations of all types of riding techniques. It appears though - the people who swear by the Rolkur method don't want to offer their expertise to the public on this type of training - in fact they seem to throw up the hot-wire to keep people from seeing it.

What's the problem? If it's just fine and works and (in their opinion) has no negative affect on the horses - either short or long term - why not be open with it?

Ghazzu
May. 29, 2006, 05:03 PM
Well there are symposiums and clinics and lectures/demonstrations of all types of riding techniques. It appears though - the people who swear by the Rolkur method don't want to offer their expertise to the public on this type of training - in fact they seem to throw up the hot-wire to keep people from seeing it.

What's the problem? If it's just fine and works and (in their opinion) has no negative affect on the horses - either short or long term - why not be open with it?

Because the elegance of the technique is like the emperor's fine raiment:

"As a matter of fact it is invisible to anyone who is too stupid and incompetent to appreciate its quality."

Horsedances
May. 29, 2006, 06:13 PM
Actually theo that is not always the case. For one i would like to have the system explained to me by someone that has used/learnt it properly over the long term. I have never had this opportunity and i am curious, open minded and interested in other peoples methods.
I am also interested in the agenda of anyone that is trying to sell me thier latest product whether it is an idea, a concept, a philosphy or a piece of real estate. I like to make informed decisions for myself by being fully armed with the facts on account of not actually being a sheep.

At no point am i asking is it right or wrong - the question for me is far more simple......What is it?

Anky and Sjef have (and are) giving clinics almost every day and have explained their trainingsystem for over years and years now. And also their students are giving clinics on a daily base. They never made it a secret.

fiona
May. 29, 2006, 06:17 PM
I don't live near them and whilst they are in the UK it's not until November so ... go ahead explain the system because so far you seem to be the only person that actually knows anything about it.

ideayoda
May. 29, 2006, 06:30 PM
So they tell us how to do it (one already has) and why they do it (one does). Christian Theis gave us urban legand about how it works, which everyone has taken up as truth, although it cannot be. The question is the loss of balance affect on the gats worth the choice? The judges say it is. But arent they ignoring alot? And what about the time it is employed to get the desired response? And no friend it isnt second nor minutes nor strength to establish it. Why do we need to do it at all except to make a steady outline for the crowds?

claire
May. 29, 2006, 06:43 PM
It was Kyra K which stated in a recent article "we just do what the judges want to see". And every week, when I receive the results of the worldwide dressage-competitions from dressagedirect.com I notice that this attitude is the road to succes.

You know, I can't put my finger on just why this statement bothers me so...:no:

I have also been trying to understand:
-WHY the secrecy about this training method. Why the closed warm-ups and training sessions? It truly isn't anything NEW... versions of it were/are used in western riding/showjumping/arab breed shows...

-WHY this method IS so controversial...I mean IF it is so successful for competition; why don't the other elite riders just use it. Instead of going public about it's detriments?


And finally, WHY can't anyone answer the questions/points posed in the above link?

The silence is deafening! :confused:

Alagirl
May. 29, 2006, 06:56 PM
You know, I can't put my finger on just why this statement bothers me so...:no:

I have also been trying to understand:
-WHY the secrecy about this training method. Why the closed warm-ups and training sessions? It truly isn't anything NEW... versions of it were/are used in western riding/showjumping/arab breed shows...

-WHY this method IS so controversial...I mean IF it is so successful for competition; why don't the other elite riders just use it. Instead of going public about it's detriments?


And finally, WHY can't anyone answer the questions/points posed in the above link?

The silence is deafening! :confused:


Because it goes against all principles of riding as it has been passed down, where the head goes and largely that the neck is not to be the prime concern (riding back to front, not the other way around) It's worse than being thrown in to lefthanded traffic after driving on the right side for all your life...

physical.energy
May. 29, 2006, 07:16 PM
Any sentance taken out of context and used like this can portray the ugliest intent. I whole heartedly agree that as it reads it sounds really horrible. But then when you think about it truly.... isn't that what everyone does.... gives the judges what they want to see for 10 min. Having nothing to do with their regular training... which I must add isn't necessarily right by any stretch. The article this was from was basically saying.. "where do we go from here? All the riders and judges need to get more together and make a decision on what is the correct direction." Not that RK is THE way to go.
I am distrubed by the statement used out of context, because I watched her for countless hours, riding many horses, all ridden with kindness and respect and never RK.

claire
May. 29, 2006, 07:28 PM
physical energy, Just wanted to clarify: what was disturbing to me was the way KK's quote was being used to explain the use of RK method.

Rather came off as "end justifies the means" or any method of training is justified by success in the competition ring.

Thank you for pointing out that the Kyra K. quote was out of context. :)

claire
May. 29, 2006, 07:47 PM
Because it goes against all principles of riding as it has been passed down, where the head goes and largely that the neck is not to be the prime concern (riding back to front, not the other way around) It's worse than being thrown in to lefthanded traffic after driving on the right side for all your life...

Alagirl, Understood! :D I think I was really questioning the continued response of Jealousy/Agendas/Politics when an elite rider/trainer comes out publicly against the RK method.
I mean wouldn't it just be more profitable/easier for them to just use this (successful?) method also?

Trying to be objective and understand but I wish some of the responses were more logical...:confused:

P.R.E.
May. 29, 2006, 08:09 PM
Doesn't matter. He knows what he sees. Instinctively, he knows it is not correct.

Often it is those without "a strong knowledge basis" that see things the most clearly.

So you agree when he says that GP riders today can't perform a good piaffe in place without the horse moving forward?

(based on this comment as an example, I made the comment of without a strong knowledge basis)

canyonoak
May. 29, 2006, 08:40 PM
If you watch Anky on Painted Black or Krack C or any of her younger horses, and what you believe you see is tension, horses pushed over-tempo, impure gaits, etc., then for sure you should find a training process that you feel creates horses that perform in a way that you find pleasing.


I watch Anky, even on Salinero-- one of the most difficult horses I have ever seen, much more so than Biotop who was already at the end of the spectrum-- and am continually amazed at her talents.

So the arguments about rollkur are needless, if the point is that someone does not like it.

If rollkur results in mostly tense horses--whcih no rider enjoys riding-- then more and more trainers/riders will not use the technique.

If the arguments are that a spectator feels that the technique is unncessarily abusive, then a problem arises: because not only did the recent FEI workshop not come up with any proof, the use of such a mobilization technique has been used by jumpers for umpteen years, with absolutely no one having any problems with the technique--not riders, not trainers, not spectators, not press, not anyone.

The reason that rollkur is attracting so much attention NOW is, simply, because of the internet.

Dressage used to be a tiny, elitist world, where everyone knew everyone else, knew exactly what they each were doing, and who had coffee with cream in the morning.

Now, dressage has sponsors, and TV coverage (at least in Europe) and is a fast-growing sport, filled mostly by well-to-do women, where it used to be the province of mostly men and mostly cavalry officers at that.

Hardly a surprise to me that many people are not happy with the way the sport is growing, taking what used to be a mostly artistic endeavour to train a horse for the approval of one's peers, and now seeing what is becoming a money-driven spectacle.

But these have always been the arguments when a sport or art changes.

Whoever changes it is always found to be in disfavor or at least laughed at ,
or what have you.

But we now have a way to link one to the other, almost instantenously. What used to be the subject in a tack room, or more realistically, in the glassed-in room next to the indoor arena, now is broadcast all over the world in a matter of minutes.

A small example: judges have been high-handed since the first tests were judged, including even at the Olympics. But Mme Withages had no sooner made the decision that Hubertus Schmidt had carried his whip too long, then her decision to disqualify him was known EVERYWHERE, almost before he had managed to whip the championship cooler off his horse's ass and return to the barn.

A bitter old lady with an agenda decides to present facetious remarks as real demands, and suddenly there are entire threads demanding to know facial expressions, demeanor, and voice inflections, to prove one or the other if the jokes had hidden subtext.

WHY WHY are people so fascinated with one stupid technique that has been around for as long as people have sat on horses?

I mean, is there NOTHING ELSE to discuss about the relative merits of training horses for whatever purpose?

I just cannot believe the amount of hot air and in some cases ignorant venom that has been heaped on one technique.

What? No one ever used a curb before? All those German horses with bloody mouths and sides and heaving barrels and peeing all over themselves--that was OK because it was guys with accents and uniforms?

I have been writing about rollkur --and Anky -- for...a while now..what could I possibly say that will change any one single perspective?


People can only see what they already understand
(and want to believe).


Salinero, for me, is flawed. And I do not believe Anky and Sjef will ever again start with a horse that has been through so many other hands.

That said--they certainly made lemonade out of a lemon that everyone knew was talented but could not figure out how to train.
If one wants to be on the medal stand, then one needs a special horse these days.

It is not so easy to find a top horse, let alone a top horse that one can have success with.

I believe Sjef's ideas on rollkur have changed, evolved, adapted over the years as the horses changed, as Anky matured as a rider and himself as a trainer.

I certainly believe that Anky did waaaaaay too much rollkur at Aachen, for too long a period of time.

What is rollkur and why is it different from deep?

EVERONE uses deep, just as everyone (knowledgeable) varies the frame, does forward-backs, varies the tempo/speed within the gaits .

lets define rollkur as manipulating the head/neck aka the balancing rod of the horse. When one correctly manipulates this front end, one can ask the horse to pay attention and focus, because it is definitely true that a horse HAS TO FOCUS ON THE RIDER .

Without FORWARD, rollkur is stupid and potentially a BAD IDEA, as the horse then learns to duck behind the aids/bit.

hasnt anyone wondered how Anky can get Sal's nose to his chin and still keep him moving forward? And up?

When the complaint about most horses with their nose to their chin is that they are NOT moving forward but just pogo-ing up and down?

so rollkur requires a horse that responds instantly to forward aids and a rider who can give such an aid, reward the response, and get the horse to agree to stretch more and more and still stay forward.

The part of rollkur or really deep that I think knowledgeable people are arguing about is the length of time to hold the position and WHY.

Sjef/Anky will argue that they reward/change the position when they feel the response they want-- that the horse agrees to swing in the back and stay engaged on its hind legs...

To use really deep ONLY to gain control of a horse is just simplistic horsemanship. To shorten the frame and ask for the nose near the chin and not be able to ask the horse into competition frame and extended frame is poor horsemanship.

Anyway, to ask a horse into rollkur and NOT lose the hind legs requires strength of core and hips, timing, tact, and the usual host of other stuff.

Sjef and Anky seriously want that when they use a closing of the hand + core strength, the horse submit and soften in the poll/jaw without losing the balance.

And when a light leg aid is given, they expect the horse to jump forward and ask 'how far? how high?'

when the response is not clear and fast, and the horse locks its back and says, uhh, maybe I own my hind legs and the engine, they use rollkur.

Suspension and elasticity and the part they play in modern competition demand bigger, better, fancier movers to add risk to the training scale elements of rhythm/balance and so on.

With risk comes the risk of failure--the horse blowing over the line.

Rollkur is just a tool to help contain and minimize the risk while riding as close to the line as one can.

if one watches it and sees only tension, then the risk did not succeed.

if one watches it and sees two athletes at max power, then the risk did succeed.

For all that "the people-who-hate rollkur" talk about 'circle of aids', the reality is, a lot of those years-ago horses did not swing the back..and if they stopped swinging the back, it took serious MANpower to get them motivated again.

If a horse locks its back in today's arena--the result is immediately obvious, because of the emphasis on elasticity. A concept not really discussed much before ...Rembrandt.

Rollkur--the concept of over-mobilizing the balance mechanism and asking for a bit more schwung to go with the power--is icing on the cake.

No one starts with rollkur, not even Sjef and Anky.
Im not sure that it is any more complex than the other standard necessity of good training : understanding half-halt forward,without which rollkur will never happen, let alone work.

The complexity is because everything else has to be in place. Balance, rhythm, desire to go forward, suppleness, flexibility, and did I mention balance and rhythm?
And that's the horse.

The rider has to really have swinging hips, a lot of core strength, excellent timing, and a real undertsanding of half-halt forward to use rollkur. It is NOT a position, it is an extreme gymnastic flexion.

THAT is what is meant by the concept that the technique is only for experienced riders. I hardly need the fingers of both hands to see riders who truly understand and use half-halt forward.

If there is an argument to be made, it wd be in the amount of time such a position is held.

I do think Anky will not publicly ride in rollkur for any long time periods, as she has done in the past.
I also think she may not need to any longer, as Salinero seems to have matured.

Sal was successful before Anky/Sjef, in getting riders to just give up on him..Horses go to where they have been successful--that is, if they succeed in getting out of work, they will return to whatever they did that proved successful.

To get PAST that point, on a horse as strong as, as clever as, as successful as, Salinero..well, I sort of wonder if Anky would do it all over again.
ANd no, I do not think she could have done it without rollkur.

Even last year, as soon as they hit the show grounds, Sal was arguing about whether or not he would agree to listen for the whole nine minutes..
now, i think the work has finally become 'easy' for him, and he has enough tape loops of doing it correctly, that he agrees with the program. So now he can walk and even ignore falling Christmas trees.

I have No idea which of the great 'masters' the anti-rollkur people honestly believe are such saints with the horses.

The old German joke has always been, you want to find a horseman? look for a rider that has stopped competing.

I mean no disrepsect to von Ziegner, Zettl or any of the others..but when they were competing NONE of them were all saintly. No one who has ever successfully trained horses has been been that saintly.

Not Oliveira. Not the SRS guys. No one.

Of course, they remember only that they loved the horses--which they did. But such love has always been tempered with the need to correct what is wrong. And here, the rose colored glasses and fog of memory has definitely set in.
Why is mobilizing the head and neck crueler than umpteen repeated gallop-halt-gallops?
Umpteen shoulder-ins around a stationary point?
and all the other 'exercises' that crush rebellion, not to mention joints?


I think that the hunger to compete and win has always been part of human nature.

I am all for the FEI making a decision to patrol and observe the warm-up arenas. Welfare of the horse must always be paramount.

I just think there are many other concerns besides one technqiue.

reidsporthorses.nz
May. 29, 2006, 08:49 PM
canyonoak- have i told you how much i like reading your posts? i really do.
very non emotive, and quite logical.

thank you

DressageGuy
May. 29, 2006, 08:54 PM
P.R.E., I was not aware of the quote made by Zettl about forward in the piaffe. It was always my understand that it should be performed with little to no forward movement. That was simply MY understanding of it. Evidently I was wrong, and have learned another of those elusive little tid-bits. Thank you for correcting me.

Sabine
May. 29, 2006, 10:04 PM
Wow- Oakie- you outdid yourself- what a great post and how true.
Mike Matson- why don't you post this on all the great Dressage boards you frequent?
It's a great explanation of the technique, the context in which it was used as far as AvG is concerned and amazingly does not seem to step on anyone's toes....just plain good info!

europferde
May. 29, 2006, 10:22 PM
Finally, the best arguement on the subject I've ever had the pleasure of reading.

Thanks

Diane

www.europferde.com

sabryant
May. 29, 2006, 11:57 PM
You rock OAK!

I love Will Durants perspective about life in THE TEN MOST IMPORTANT LESSONS IN HISTORY and it seems appropriate here. not a quote, can't remember exactly but something like this. We are, all, just frogs croaking beside big ponds. It isn't about who croaks the loudest rather it's about who gets the job done, who keeps the life of something going. Dressage is hard work...Anky/Sjef deserve to be admired!

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 12:09 AM
This method is not new. It has been around for a while. Many trainers have embraced it.

"Sometimes successful riders warm up their horses by overflexing them in an extremely round frame. This exercise requires some explanation. If it is executed excessively or incorrectly it can do great damage. If done correctly it can be useful. The horse's back connects the quarters with the forehand like a bridge. Under the rider's weight, this bridge cannot function unless the back muscles are strong enough and work without tension. To make sure the horse enters the ring relaxed and submissive, it can be useful to over flex the horse's neck for a limited time in order to achieve relaxation by a maximum stretching of the topline (Fig.18).

This way, poor back muscles can be strengthened or strong and tight ones can be loosened up. Highly strung horses will get bored with the monotony of the work and calm down, since there is nothing to see but the ground.

To overflex properly, however, requires a sensative and effective rider who knows how to keep the horse connected. As long as the rider is able to elevate the forehand (the poll being the highest point), and to create engagement as well as impulsion from the haunches at anytime, it is not a violation of classical dressage."

page 33 The Elements of Dressage by Kurd Albrecht von Ziegner.

Sounds pretty similar to what the FEI has to say about it.

fiona
May. 30, 2006, 02:47 AM
Oakie you are truly a master of the key boards. Thank you.

Dressage Guy good for you for admittting you were wrong with humility adn for learning. There appears to be hope for youth, Yay!

nhwr thanks for the quote from von Z.

P.R.E.
May. 30, 2006, 03:11 AM
Canyonoak great analysis, detailed, logic, no passion, fair and balanced, brilliant!!

"I mean no disrepsect to von Ziegner, Zettl or any of the others..but when they were competing NONE of them were all saintly. No one who has ever successfully trained horses has been been that saintly.

Not Oliveira. Not the SRS guys. No one."

All these guys to get were they are right now and to be treated like gods by some people, in their day, they needed to ride and compete and not only that but they needed to win and be succesful, no one remebers the guy that always came last. Even in the SRS, you have to be talented and succesful with the horses you receive within a reasonable peiod of time, becaus ethey need to show them in their presentations.

None of you guys will be mentioning any of these names, if they had been the saint horsemen that always finished last.

I grew up with horses, 2 members of my family have ridden in Olympic Games, we have always cared for our horses, we treat them with respect, we will be just another person without our horses, with them we are riders. We don't abuse them, we are always researching how to feed them better, how to have them more comfortable, how to make them enjoy what we do. When we go to shows, we never leave them in the small stalls and we go to chat around, our horses never stay during the day in the stall by themselves for more than an hour, someone is always grooming them or walking them.

Boarding in our barn is expensive, because we provide all the hay and grain that the horses require (without limits), we have excess of clean shavings, we provide all the grooming products that are required as well as first aid products. We don't take the risk that soemthing will be missing for the horses in our barn.

But when we train, we take it seriously, is a sport, we work hard, we demand a lot (fairly but a lot), we work hard to win. Because if we win , means that we have done a good job in our day to day training. Here I have read so many people write with admiration about Hubertus S., in the Dressage Today article he says how important is for him to show, because keeps you updated and keeps you honest But the same people that in one thread admire him in another critisize who ever is trying to win at shows and in avery suspicios way ignore that part of his life.

Personally I am tired of people labelling the traniers who show as a dark force in dressage. We have to make a living, so we train, we show and we love our horses (one is not opposite to the other). We ride enough horses in a day, to find ourselves in the position of needing different resources to address specific problems. Because in certain moment we put a horse BTV within true contact, doesn't make us horse killers, because we use spurs or whips, we are not horse abusers.

Like in everything you have the good, the bad and the ugly. But is time to stop labelling us because we show or because we have a different opinion.

P.R.E.
May. 30, 2006, 03:20 AM
P.R.E., I was not aware of the quote made by Zettl about forward in the piaffe. It was always my understand that it should be performed with little to no forward movement. That was simply MY understanding of it. Evidently I was wrong, and have learned another of those elusive little tid-bits. Thank you for correcting me.

DG, good for you. Now you see that when I made a comment about your posting was not personal, it was just that I found that it was not fair and that the elements that took you that conlusion were not accurate.

Again, good for you, we all make mistakes ( I make LOTS of them, but I have leraned to be more patient to avoid them as much as possible). We both have different opinions about dressage, but when you accepted that you made a mistake, my respect for you went very high. (Not that you need my respect, but doesn't hurt to have it). I rather have a conversation with someone that I disagree with, but that is intelligent and is willing to be open to arguments than with someone that blindly agrees with me, without owning their own opinions.

Sannois
May. 30, 2006, 05:44 AM
Who are you???:confused:

egontoast
May. 30, 2006, 05:59 AM
"Sometimes successful riders warm up their horses by overflexing them in an extremely round frame. This exercise requires some explanation. If it is executed excessively or incorrectly it can do great damage. If done correctly it can be useful. The horse's back connects the quarters with the forehand like a bridge. Under the rider's weight, this bridge cannot function unless the back muscles are strong enough and work without tension. To make sure the horse enters the ring relaxed and submissive, it can be useful to over flex the horse's neck for a limited time in order to achieve relaxation by a maximum stretching of the topline (Fig.18).

This way, poor back muscles can be strengthened or strong and tight ones can be loosened up. Highly strung horses will get bored with the monotony of the work and calm down, since there is nothing to see but the ground.

To overflex properly, however, requires a sensative and effective rider who knows how to keep the horse connected. As long as the rider is able to elevate the forehand (the poll being the highest point), and to create engagement as well as impulsion from the haunches at anytime, it is not a violation of classical dressage."

page 33 The Elements of Dressage by Kurd Albrecht von Ziegner.



Interesting.

sm
May. 30, 2006, 06:42 AM
He is probably talking BTV and not RK... "Highly strung horses will get bored with the monotony of the work and calm down, since there is nothing to see but the ground." He still asks the rider for the poll to be the highest point and the horse off the forehand, neither is achieved during RK.


And Zettl can't be any clearer than the OP quote:

"It is incredible that these people, who are at the head of the FEI, are allowing this kind of riding. One should question their knowledge of horsemanship. Should not their priority be the well-being of the horse? What did they do about the protection of the horses at Lausanne? All they did was create a new word for the Zwangsjackenreiterei – “Hyperflexion of the neck”, and which can only be used by “top” riders. Someone please tell me what is correct about this new riding style? By the way, under Baucher, we already experienced a similar type of riding. The horses were tortured, and they became soulless creatures.

"As a result of force riding, the horses hardly stays still, they are very tense, and they do not do a correct walk or no walk at all. One rider (whose horse does not do a walk at all anymore because he is tense and frightened), made the suggestion to take the walk out of the higher classes of dressage. Why not then take everything with which they might have trouble out? Like a correct collecting trot? The “hyperflexion of the neck” horse does a kind of passage. In the medium and extended trot, the horse throws his front legs unnaturally high, and therefore the horse only takes very short steps with his hind legs to balance himself, and is not covering any ground. It takes half an hour to get across the diagonal! The canter is too short and stiff, and during flying changes, the horse swings to the left and to the right, due to too much leg moving to the back. The pirouettes are 4-beat, because the rules require them to be as small as possible. We have to change the rules to make them bigger so that the horse is able perform them in a correct 3-beat canter. In the piaffe one does not see any forward movement because of force used in the training: too strong hand and leg (spurs) aids. To stay balanced the horse has to cross the front legs or swing to the left and right side. Most of the time, the horse is too short through the neck, and escapes the aids. "

sm
May. 30, 2006, 06:58 AM
Why would Anky threathen a lawsuit if she rides so correctly and humanely? A DVD cannot lie, it is what it is.

From the OP, quote from Zettl:

"P.S. A short time ago, Dr. Ulrike Thiel got in contact with me. She has a small institute in Holland which researches the training of dressage horses and its effects. She heard of me through my German edition of “Dressage in Harmony”. By reading my book she recognized my philosophy about classical training. I have to admit that this lady left a big impression on me, as she does in Holland (the lion’s den of the Zwangsjackenreiterei) fighting this type of riding. In the meantime, she sent me three DVD’s which show training in the warm-up ring with hyperflexion of the neck. When she asked Anke and Sjef to publish them, they threatened her with a lawsuit. If their training is humane, why would they prohibit her showing those DVD’s? If your are interested in learning more about her and her work, here is her website: www.hippocampus-nl.com." "

MareForceOne
May. 30, 2006, 07:06 AM
He is probably talking BTV and not RK... "Highly strung horses will get bored with the monotony of the work and calm down, since there is nothing to see but the ground." He still asks the rider for the poll to be the highest point and the horse off the forehand, neither is achieved during RK.




To overflex properly, however, requires a sensative and effective rider who knows how to keep the horse connected. As long as the rider is able to elevate the forehand (the poll being the highest point), and to create engagement as well as impulsion from the haunches at anytime, it is not a violation of classical dressage."

page 33 The Elements of Dressage by Kurd Albrecht von Ziegner.


sm, I think that von Ziegner means that the rider is able to elevate the forehand (poll) at any time, not that the rider must maintain the poll as the highest point at all times. If the poll was always the highest point, the horse would not "only be seeing the ground" at times as mentioned.

I agree with egontoast, very interesting.

Mike Matson
May. 30, 2006, 07:11 AM
Sabine,

I don't cross post info unless the credentials of the poster are known (including real name) or the source of the information is documented and verifiable. This applies to pro or con posters/info on this topic.

Mike

slc2
May. 30, 2006, 07:13 AM
that is not what zeigner said, he discussed how doing tha twork with a connection can benefit.

sm
May. 30, 2006, 07:27 AM
On post #101, a horse sees the ground when it is BTV. Your point is a good one, MareForceOne, however it is still not clear to me by "very round frame" that he is referencing RK.

If von Zeigner had written the horse sees only his legs moving around his belly and dirt flying up near his eyes/face, that would be the tip off to me that we're talking RK.

Kathy Johnson
May. 30, 2006, 07:31 AM
Just to stir the pot, it also sounds like Von Ziegner has had a change in thinking about the method since the publication of his book some years ago. He's definitely talking about the same method. It's not unheard of for people to change their minds when they see or hear more. "Not a violation of classical dressage" is a far cry from "straightjacket." Perhaps he's now objecting to the increased prevalance, the increased duration of its use, or the more and more extreme hyperflexion of the neck. It would be interesting to know.

ise@ssl
May. 30, 2006, 07:34 AM
Well CanyonOak - if you feel this is a big waste to discuss -
tell us in your opinion - what should we be discussing. I'm a breeder and have put some wonderful horses and ponies on the ground with tremendous movement and potential. BUT - BIG BUT Canyon Oak - I see more and more and more and more riders who are looking for sporthorses (Dressage riders are the WORST) - who really are TERRIBLE RIDERS. Hand riding, huge spurs, no seat, no knowledge of horse physiology, aides at the wrong time, bad position, etc. etc. etc.

AND - BIG AND - when it comes to CAPABLE AND EXPERIENCED TRAINERS FOR YOUNG HORSES - all we see in this country is a BIG BLACK HOLE.

Now those who feel Rolkur is "just another method that's been around forever" - so therefore - don't debate it, don't evaluate the affect on the horses, don't critique if this is really giving us light and yet powerful movement (which I truly believe it is NOT) - let's talk about ......................................WHAT?

In two paragraphs you speak of TWO of Anky's horses by name and mention others - and use the word DIFFICULT. Were they difficult to begin with? Or did that come with training? It would seem to me that one of the top riders in the world would have access to some of the absolutely positively BEST HORSES IN THE WORLD. So why pick the ones that are difficult? (If - BIG IF -that's how they started out).

I fail - completely fail to see why people who feel the debate on Rolkur is WORTHLESS - continue to jump into the threads and poke everyone in the eye. Or evaluate their riding or age or travels to Europe or whatever.

KEEP IN MIND for you people who feel ONLY those RIDING FEI are qualified to speak - it's the THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of people who will never competitively ride at FEI that financially hold up this leve of the sport. So keep crapping on the heads of people who may not RIDE FEI - but can (YES CAN) see and understand the nuances of the Dressage and you may just send these thousands and thousands of people down the road WITH their dough. Not all the people shelling out dough for sponsorships are FEI riders and many actually financially support them without ever having ridden down center line at any level - but you know BIG SHOCK TO SOME OF YOU - many of those patrons ARE capable of purchasing the BEST horses and knowing them when they see them. They are also capable of seeing when some trainers/riders ARE NOT right for their horses. So draw that circle smaller and you may actually find yourself outside that little circle. Or having a circle that just gets to small to exist.

For as long as there were horses as riding animals there have been people who were capable of training them or selecting them who were perhaps not the best at riding them - some never even rode at all. Having an EYE for good horses and/or an EYE for correct riding - is not exclusively dependent on being in the saddle.

And finally - are we now to train all horses with goal of pleasing sitting judges regardless of whether the riding is CORRECT? PLEASE - don't tell me there aren't judges that should have their cards pulled - that problem exists in just about every equine discipline out there but there really is not cure for it except voluntary retirement (or a more morbid departure) or SHOW MANAGERS ACTUALLY HAVING THE BRASS TO NOT HIRE SOME OF THESE JUDGES. The former is a bit slower and the later doesn't seem to be happening.

sm
May. 30, 2006, 07:35 AM
I agree Kathy, perhaps he can clarify. A "very round frame" does not spell out RK to me. One way to find out, contact him via:

Col. Albrecht Von Ziegner Dressage Clinic
4/21/2006 8:00 AM -- 4/24/2006 8:00 PM
Location: Smithville, TX
Contact Information: Contact Bobbie Paulk at cpaulk@totalaccess.net
http://www855.outtech.com/Lists/Even...rm.aspx?ID=180

sm
May. 30, 2006, 07:42 AM
excerpt post#106, "PLEASE - don't tell me there aren't judges that should have their cards pulled - that problem exists in just about every equine discipline out there but there really is not cure for it except voluntary retirement (or a more morbid departure) or SHOW MANAGERS ACTUALLY HAVING THE BRASS TO NOT HIRE SOME OF THESE JUDGES. The former is a bit slower and the later doesn't seem to be happening."

I'm still trying to figure out why the FEI committee doesn't demand to see the DVDs mentioned in OP. Wouldn't that indicate a fair and inpartial review of the "world's best rider," if she can't master the technique humanely -- hey, something's very, very wrong. Even a blind man can see that.

egontoast
May. 30, 2006, 08:19 AM
A "very round frame" does not spell out RK to me.

The quote said "overflexing them in an extremely round frame"

sm
May. 30, 2006, 08:23 AM
Would you like to do the honors, Egy? I fielded the last one calling and emailing regarding usdf/usef rules on trainers riding warm-ups:


Col. Albrecht Von Ziegner Dressage Clinic
4/21/2006 8:00 AM -- 4/24/2006 8:00 PM
Location: Smithville, TX
Contact Information: Contact Bobbie Paulk at cpaulk@totalaccess.net
http://www855.outtech.com/Lists/Even...rm.aspx?ID=180

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 10:36 AM
The problem with publishing a book is, someone might actually read it, LOL. I have found von Ziegner's book, The Elements of Dressage to be a great resource for working with younger horses. It was published in 2002, not very long ago. I like his philosophy a lot.

If you can get a hold of a copy, read the text (there are further discussions beyond what I entered) and view the picture he refers to. There is no doubt that he is discussing RK. I have seen Anky ride and warm up at over 10 international competitions.I have had only one first hand training experience with RK and it was von Ziegner's discussion of it that lead my to try it. I had a difficult horse who was becoming more and more resistant with the usual "classical" tools. I put this horse in training with someone who rode with Sjef and Anky for over a year and the horse blossomed, physically and behaviorally. But the method I watched being used wasn't anything like what the anti crowd describes.

It is curious to me that von Z didn't acknowledge and disavow his previous statements when he made his straightjacket comments. That is what one usually does when one has a change of heart.
It is almost like there might be something else going on ;)



PS
Mike, if you want to independently verify the quote it is on page 33 at the end :D

JSwan
May. 30, 2006, 10:59 AM
Well CanyonOak - if you feel this is a big waste to discuss -
tell us in your opinion - what should we be discussing. I'm a breeder and have put some wonderful horses and ponies on the ground with tremendous movement and potential. BUT - BIG BUT Canyon Oak - I see more and more and more and more riders who are looking for sporthorses (Dressage riders are the WORST) - who really are TERRIBLE RIDERS. Hand riding, huge spurs, no seat, no knowledge of horse physiology, aides at the wrong time, bad position, etc. etc. etc.

AND - BIG AND - when it comes to CAPABLE AND EXPERIENCED TRAINERS FOR YOUNG HORSES - all we see in this country is a BIG BLACK HOLE.

Now those who feel Rolkur is "just another method that's been around forever" - so therefore - don't debate it, don't evaluate the affect on the horses, don't critique if this is really giving us light and yet powerful movement (which I truly believe it is NOT) - let's talk about ......................................WHAT?

In two paragraphs you speak of TWO of Anky's horses by name and mention others - and use the word DIFFICULT. Were they difficult to begin with? Or did that come with training? It would seem to me that one of the top riders in the world would have access to some of the absolutely positively BEST HORSES IN THE WORLD. So why pick the ones that are difficult? (If - BIG IF -that's how they started out).

I fail - completely fail to see why people who feel the debate on Rolkur is WORTHLESS - continue to jump into the threads and poke everyone in the eye. Or evaluate their riding or age or travels to Europe or whatever.

KEEP IN MIND for you people who feel ONLY those RIDING FEI are qualified to speak - it's the THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of people who will never competitively ride at FEI that financially hold up this leve of the sport. So keep crapping on the heads of people who may not RIDE FEI - but can (YES CAN) see and understand the nuances of the Dressage and you may just send these thousands and thousands of people down the road WITH their dough. Not all the people shelling out dough for sponsorships are FEI riders and many actually financially support them without ever having ridden down center line at any level - but you know BIG SHOCK TO SOME OF YOU - many of those patrons ARE capable of purchasing the BEST horses and knowing them when they see them. They are also capable of seeing when some trainers/riders ARE NOT right for their horses. So draw that circle smaller and you may actually find yourself outside that little circle. Or having a circle that just gets to small to exist.

For as long as there were horses as riding animals there have been people who were capable of training them or selecting them who were perhaps not the best at riding them - some never even rode at all. Having an EYE for good horses and/or an EYE for correct riding - is not exclusively dependent on being in the saddle.

And finally - are we now to train all horses with goal of pleasing sitting judges regardless of whether the riding is CORRECT? PLEASE - don't tell me there aren't judges that should have their cards pulled - that problem exists in just about every equine discipline out there but there really is not cure for it except voluntary retirement (or a more morbid departure) or SHOW MANAGERS ACTUALLY HAVING THE BRASS TO NOT HIRE SOME OF THESE JUDGES. The former is a bit slower and the later doesn't seem to be happening.


Excellent post. If Zettl is "too old", Dressage Guy is "too young", and no one except an annointed few know anything about the nuances of dressage - perhaps those few annointed ones would like to finance the entire sport by themselves and see how far they get.

The vast majority of spectators, financiers, and riders are the lowly amateurs that y'all seem to be spitting on. And many of those folks have a very keen eye and an excellent BS detector. The patronizing tone of the posts to Dressage Guy are a perfect example.

I lurk a lot on this forum because I really do love dressage - I just can't stand the people. And I've noticed something - time and time again it's the same people who piss on anyone who dares voice an opinion without the "I've trained in Europe or watched Anky tie her shoelaces" for backup. I'm amazed anyone bothers to ask any questions anymore.

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 11:11 AM
How is "spitting on" anyone to say you've seen the practice first hand and disagree with what some posters say who haven't, J Swan? Or to ask people to be reasonable, clear and rational in their arguement?

sm
May. 30, 2006, 11:33 AM
I'm not sure to see the practice first hand in person is dramatically different than seeing a video -- a video is what it is.

Getting back to posts #107 and 111, I guess Egy can try to contact to get a response. I would only try to email if I had a page from the book faxed to me -- I'm not going to attempt to contact anyone unless I see the quote is completely accurate.

Then I would: mention this forum and provide a link, ask for clarifcation, ask for PERMISSION to post the response.

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 11:42 AM
The difference between seeing it first hand and watching on video is one can see the occurance in its totality, not just the parts that someone with an agenda wants you to see. It is kind of like the difference between reading von Z's own words vs emailing Bobbie Paulk to ask what von Z really meant ;)

There is no real way to verify the accuracy and totality of the respresentation, especially when the person distributing the DVD has an established opinion to defend.

Moll
May. 30, 2006, 12:44 PM
There is no real way to verify the accuracy and totality of the respresentation, especially when the person distributing the DVD has an established opinion to defend.

Oh yeah, so she has faked the video material? ;) (I remembered when the last batch of RK pictures were published some people were vocal about the fact that they could be fakes. And you know what Hollywood can do now to film!!!)

ise@ssl
May. 30, 2006, 12:54 PM
Well NHWR - I had two horses at a training facility for a winter that had a trainer and riders that rode using ROLKUR - I saw it first hand for over 6 months - and it was ...in my opinion HORRID. I also didn't see ONE happy horse in the bunch and a lot of people who rode without ever breaking a sweat themselves but horses that had sweat dripping off their necks and very few other locations on their bodies. Also LOTS AND LOTS of injuries. I also have never in all my many years of riding and boarding heard so many horses kicking the walls while being ridden.

So that's my first hand experience and I'm on the CON side.

sm
May. 30, 2006, 12:54 PM
post#115: "The difference between seeing it first hand and watching on video is one can see the occurance in its totality, not just the parts that someone with an agenda wants you to see. It is kind of like the difference between reading von Z's own words vs emailing Bobbie Paulk to ask what von Z really meant"

Uncut video -- not a series of clips -- is accurate to the quality of the video: is the lighting adequate, etc. Also, I could be there in person on the spot and "someone with an agenda" would not show me an accurate training session.

Sorry I was not clear, I would email Bobbie Paulk for von Ziegner's contact info re post#115, "emailing Bobbie Paulk to ask what von Z really meant." Unless someone already has his contact info.

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 01:10 PM
what is left out is as important as what was left in. Not saying the videos were faked, I am just questioning their accuracy, Moll.

ise, so you experienced it in one situation. That is something. It is possible to do rk, or any type of riding, badly :rolleyes:

sm, even if the video is uncut, I think most competitive riders would agree that their warm up routine at a show is not the sum total of their training method, particularly on an explosive horse.

I do find it curious that those of you in the anti crowd don't have much comment on von Z's statement from his book.

egontoast
May. 30, 2006, 01:17 PM
Would you like to do the honors, Egy? I fielded the last one calling and emailing regarding usdf/usef rules on trainers riding warm-ups:


Why would I? I'm not in the skirmish. I just corrected a misquote and said it was interesting. 'Interesting' in the plain usual sense, meaning 'of interest'. I am not in the rollkur war. I respect the opinions of this man and Zettl, and also Anky, Kyra, Schumacher, etc... I don't necessarilly agree with every single thing they say or do though.

fiona
May. 30, 2006, 01:23 PM
Can someone explain how the sport is financed and how the non FEI riders are paying/subsidising those that ride FEI? Is this worldwide or just US? Are we talking at national level or International? Major championships or all shows.

sm
May. 30, 2006, 01:26 PM
from post 120, "I just corrected a misquote and said it was interesting." Sorry --- what misquote?

Well, fax me over the page from the book and I'll try to get clarification. You can raise questions about von Ziegner but not go for the facts? Why???

A video is what it is -- it works great for jockey/rider faults and suspensions at the track, where lots of money is involved. It works great for Warner Wolf on the TV news (and every other sportscaster on the planet) as he recaps sports. Why doesn't it work for nhwr? What's so different from your rider/athlete? Your riders are, after all, international professionals we're talking about.

egontoast
May. 30, 2006, 01:36 PM
Well, fax me over the page from the book and I'll try to get clarification. You can raise questions about von Ziegner but not go for the facts? Why???


What?Perhaps you should read more carefully. I don't have the book!
I didn't raise any questions??????????????

sm
May. 30, 2006, 02:05 PM
oh, got it Egy. Well, whoever took that shot at von Ziegner, let's resolve it. It's a good question, if the quote is accurate.

BornToRide
May. 30, 2006, 02:14 PM
It is really interesting to note how certain threads always attract a certain same group of people for discussion.....:D

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 02:23 PM
I posted the quote. Unfortunately, I don't have a fax. I have an e-mail fax server and a scanner (single sheet, not flatbed), so I can't fax you a copy of the page. But little ole heretic me can't be the only person on this thread who has read or has a copy of this book, can I? What about all you purists? Isn't von Ziegner the real deal?

Sabine
May. 30, 2006, 02:37 PM
Why would I? I'm not in the skirmish. I just corrected a misquote and said it was interesting. 'Interesting' in the plain usual sense, meaning 'of interest'. I am not in the rollkur war. I respect the opinions of this man and Zettl, and also Anky, Kyra, Schumacher, etc... I don't necessarilly agree with every single thing they say or do though.


Wise move...:)- reading the last 2 pages seems like seeing hormones in action...I think RK threads have a magic effect on menopausl women and their hormones...LOL!

sm
May. 30, 2006, 02:44 PM
so Sabine, from your response of changing the subject to the first item that came into your head --- oddly enough some sort of personal imbalance attack -- can we assume that you don't have the book?

JSwan
May. 30, 2006, 02:53 PM
How is "spitting on" anyone to say you've seen the practice first hand and disagree with what some posters say who haven't, J Swan? Or to ask people to be reasonable, clear and rational in their arguement?


I never said the person was not reasonable or clear. I merely disagreely strongly - and seconded another poster. If you read my posts - what is angering me is the condescending and patronizing attitude, in this, and other threads. If an amateur with a good eye dislikes what he/she sees or feels intuitively about rollkur, that opinion is valid - whether or not they are "young", trained with whichever dressage trainer is most in fashion at the moment, or cleaned stalls in Holland.

If someone brings up what some dead white guy said about a particular method or goal in training, that person is denounced. Then we get the "Anky's sh** smells like roses" group weighing in. So I'd appreciate knowing at what age, and in which country one should study before being permitted to voice an opinion on this forum. I'm sure others would like to know as well.

If one is against the use of Rollkur as a method, or does not approve of the direction the sport appears to be going in; whether it's judges, or shortcuts in training, or rules being changed - heck I'd be glad people are interested enough in dressage to even feel comfortable commenting.

In eventing - there is still a debate on the traditional vs short format and what it means to the sport both at the amateur levels and above. I don't recall one single person being told, in the most obnoxious way possible - that they need to go to Europe or that they are too "young" or "not high level" enough to appreciate the argument or its impact on the sport - even if they disagree with each other. Same with every other sport that is discussed on this BB. Comments like that are intended only to embarrass the individual and put them in "their place."

I wonder why the dressage forum seems to be dominated by les Dames formidable? I sense no camraderie as I do in eventing or other horse sports - no sense of sportsmanship at all.

edited to add - I just read Sabine's most recent post and I am more than ever convinced of the utter lack of sportsmanship being displayed here. If this is what people are getting when they peek into the world of dressage - I wouldn't blame them if they took up another sport.

ise@ssl
May. 30, 2006, 02:59 PM
Well Fiona - the SHOWS don't pay for themselves with just a few FEI riders riding Grand Prix. What finances the shows are all the other classes with people who won't be riding FEI but slap down the various fees and make the shows either break even or make money. The NGB - the USEF would NOT exist if we only had members that were professional riders of international caliber and it's those organizations that finance the sport officially. The USET Foundation is the fund raiser for the Teams as well and BELIEVE me they have many donors who are not FEI riders. It's like a pyramid - a few at the top supported by a large base at the bottom.

Many FEI competitors who don't have sponsors with endless money - have clients that they train, buy horses for, train horses for and many of THOSE people are NOT professional riders. But they dole out the dough big time and provide an income to the FEI riders.

And NHWR - first you say people haven't really seen it day to day - then I tell you I did - then you say ...well that was only one location. Guess what? There are a few others in my area who do it as well and I've seen them and still believe it's wrong. Now what will you say? I need to see it in different states? (I saw it in more than two!) - Now what? What qualifies a person who has watched this training to say - I THINK IT'S WRONG?

And isn't the great guru of Rolkur this Sven - Anky's partner the one who lost the big buck lawsuit to the Neal's over a horse sale? http://utopia.utexas.edu/explore/equine/cases/sales/neal.htm

mzpeepers
May. 30, 2006, 03:19 PM
Apparently you need to go see it in Europe or you're not to formulate an opinion one way or another. Pay attention! :D :D :D

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 03:31 PM
first you say people haven't really seen it day to day - then I tell you I did - then you say ...well that was only one location. Guess what? There are a few others in my area who do it as well and I've seen them and still believe it's wrong. Now what will you say?
ise,

You are free to think it is wrong, even if you have never seen it here or in Europe or at all. No one has ever said otherwise. That does mean everyone must agree with you or make what you think correct, though ;)

ise@ssl
May. 30, 2006, 03:36 PM
I don't care who agrees with me on this - I just wish those who advocate and use the training technique would be completely open about it - so those of us who BREED horses can do everything we can to avoid selling our horses to the Rolkur crowd. Come on - step up and get yourselves some T-shirts or bumper stickers - Rah!Rah!Rolkur!!!

And Mz Peepers - I think you have to see it in Europe when you are wearing a green shirt and the moon is new and you have 16 Euro's stuffed in your left sock! Then and only then can you speak on this matter. ..............tee hee

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 03:50 PM
Did you know that the author of the DT letter describes it as a technique for realxation? Doesn't sound to me like that is what you saw, ise :cool:

sm
May. 30, 2006, 03:56 PM
"Did you know that the author of the DT letter describes it as a technique for realxation? Doesn't sound to me like that is what you saw, ise"

How closely is SUPPLE-ING to relaxing? A horse needs to be relaxed to be supple... To be supple is supposed to be the benefit (after effect) of the exercise.

Kathy Johnson
May. 30, 2006, 04:00 PM
I had a Von Ziegner book, but it was an older edition, "The Basics." (1995) It said the same thing, had diagrams of deep, and it was definitely rollkur he was talking about. A very good book, in general. I thought even then that it was a good and balanced description of the method. I wonder why the turnabout.

ise@ssl
May. 30, 2006, 04:04 PM
Well - as I've said before - if this type of thing really really worked - well let's take a really really long stick and have the riders lay on the floor on their backs and then tie their ankles to each end (even if it means really really pulling them apart and then we can really really loosen up those hips!

Then to stretch the back muscles take a good long length of duck tape (we all have about 3 rolls in our barns - don't we?) - have the rider pin their chin down tight and then run that duck tape around the chin and neck twice and let them ride that way through the warm up.

Sabine
May. 30, 2006, 04:08 PM
so Sabine, from your response of changing the subject to the first item that came into your head --- oddly enough some sort of personal imbalance attack -- can we assume that you don't have the book?

SM<
no longer interested in discussing the subject- just musing on the atmosphere around here.
And yes- I have the book- I have read it a ton of times- I don't have it with me right now- as I am at work :(- but I can bring it tomorrow- scan it for you and send it to Eggy- since I know her- then she can forward it to whomever she wishes...good enough??

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 04:22 PM
ise, you might have something there, if people were horses. But they aren't :lol: Maybe this anthropomorphizing is at the root of the issue.

But my question is; how you you reconcile von Ziegner's diametrically opposed statements?

SGray
May. 30, 2006, 05:20 PM
If you watch Anky on Painted Black or Krack C or any of her younger horses, and what you believe you see is tension, horses pushed over-tempo, impure gaits, etc., ........

http://www.horsedances.net/EindhovenPaintedBlack.jpg

Mike Matson
May. 30, 2006, 05:27 PM
As a follow on to the earlier post quoting from von Ziegner's book "The Basics" regarding the use of overflexion, below is the rest of the text as written in the second edition, 1995, page 31:

"But there is a warning:
1) This method should not be practiced by riders who do not know how to engage the seat and how to mobilize the haunches.
2) Inexperienced riders will end up with problems such as horse behind the bit, "dead" back, on the forehand, restricted gaits, no engagement, resistance, etc. We see this all over.
3) Keeping the horse pemanently overflexed ruins his natural flair and has nothing in common with classical dressage!"

Mike

Sabine
May. 30, 2006, 05:35 PM
As a follow on to the earlier post quoting from von Ziegner's book "The Basics" regarding the use of overflexion, below is the rest of the text as written in the second edition, 1995, page 31:

"But there is a warning:
1) This method should not be practiced by riders who do not know how to engage the seat and how to mobilize the haunches.
2) Inexperienced riders will end up with problems such as horse behind the bit, "dead" back, on the forehand, restricted gaits, no engagement, resistance, etc. We see this all over.
3) Keeping the horse pemanently overflexed ruins his natural flair and has nothing in common with classical dressage!"

Mike
Sounds a lot like what Oakie said....:) :) ;)

egontoast
May. 30, 2006, 05:45 PM
but I can bring it tomorrow- scan it for you and send it to Eggy- since I know her- then she can forward it to whomever she wishes...good enough??

Yikes, leave me out of that please.

fiona
May. 30, 2006, 05:50 PM
Would you prefer that i scan Mrs Beetons Cookbook? The pages with the ultimate recipe for Blancmange will be most pertinent.

Sabine
May. 30, 2006, 05:56 PM
Yikes, leave me out of that please.
just testing to see if you're paying attention...LOL!

Sonesta
May. 30, 2006, 07:04 PM
I agree with Mr. Zettl - sorry for the person who has never heard of him! You don't have to look very far to see numerous photos here and over the pond of horses with what is supposed to be an extended trot - but looks more like a "goose step" march stride up front and a hind end that just can't motor up due to the overflexion in the neck.

YES! That is EXACTLY what it looks like. And it just looks WRONG, I tell you. WRONG.

nhwr
May. 30, 2006, 07:45 PM
Mike Matson
In the interests of accuracy, the quote I posted is not from "The Basics", it is from "The Elements of Dressage: A Guide for Training Young Horses". However there are similar, if more specific warning, in that text as well. It basically serves to re-emphasize his original points and essentially echos the FEI's statement that this technique is not for everyone. I see nothing there to disagree with.

mbm
May. 30, 2006, 10:58 PM
its interesting how so many threads and posts are the same between here and UDBB :)

anyway, i looked up the image being discussed, and i would hazard a guess that what Von Z is talking about is *deep* and not rollkur. at least, the image in the book doesnt look extreme enough to be rollkur. or maybe i have my definitions mixed up. but i remember many threads where it was vehemently pointed out the difference between deep and rollkur.

and i thought rollkur was extreme "hyperflexion" *and* extreme lateral flexions ie: nose to boot/nose to chest; at least that is what i have seen in pics and vids.

i do have a scanner but i am not sure what the copyright infringement might be.... maybe somone can draw the image?

but honestly to me it looked like deep and lots and lots of warnings about how it is dangerous and should only be used for moments and only by skilled riders.

so, for those that want to say how come he changed his mind? i dont think what is being done nowadays as rollkur is what he was talking about in that book.

anyway. i hope someone does post the pic or a facsimile.

Sabine
May. 31, 2006, 12:29 AM
I think you're right- the threads are the same - the topics are the same- because these are topics that dressage lovers worry about.
But the crowd is quite different here- I beg to differ...the responses are different and the freedom to say what you want to say is VERY MUCH different.
That's why you see a lot of ex-UDBBers on this thread. Have you ever wondered???

I think your statements are well worded and true. It is in the judgement of the seasoned and experienced trainer that these tools turn into tools of abuse or tools of magic transformation. Sadly- as in many things in life there is no black or white here either- it is a variety of shades of grey- with a great deal of sensitivity and love for the horse on the part of the trainer.

Those that take very extremely adverse stances against the method have either only seen the worst kind or feel very insecure- because they trusted a trainer and afterwards found out that the style did not suit their own sense of justice towards the horse. They felt abused themselves ...and rightfully so.

Riding deep well is an art- and there will surely be people piping in and saying that even the slightest bit of deep is Rollkur and so on and so on- and I am frankly tired of it- and have been posting too many sarcastic posts to deal with my frustration (bad me...:( ) but - I am encouraged that you of all MBM- have accepted that there is a good in riding deep moderately and with care- but that physiologically and sometimes psychologically - there is a great value for the horse in this method.

PS: Even though many would like to think this - I repeat- I ride deep- not RK, and I believe in varying the frame of the horse so that nothing ever gets stuck and hurting in the horse- so that carrying the rider is an effortless thing and training is gymnasticizing.!!!

DressageGuy
May. 31, 2006, 12:40 AM
Sabine, we actually agree on something! Deep does NOT equal rollkur. I was with a very "classical" trainer for over a year, and saw little to no improvement in my horse. I then went to work for another trainer who taught me how to put him slightly deep through our warmups and even occasionally in the real work, and he's now a totally different horse. Where we used to fight for the whole ride just to get him approaching "on the bit", he now does willing. He has never protested against this, and seems to almost be a happier horse these days.

P.S. I apologize if I pissed you off or frustrated you earlier, that was not my intention.

Sabine
May. 31, 2006, 01:20 AM
Sabine, we actually agree on something! Deep does NOT equal rollkur. I was with a very "classical" trainer for over a year, and saw little to no improvement in my horse. I then went to work for another trainer who taught me how to put him slightly deep through our warmups and even occasionally in the real work, and he's now a totally different horse. Where we used to fight for the whole ride just to get him approaching "on the bit", he now does willing. He has never protested against this, and seems to almost be a happier horse these days.

P.S. I apologize if I pissed you off or frustrated you earlier, that was not my intention.

Kiddo- you're great- and I promise - if you save the money for the flight- I'll hook you up with a BNT in Germany- as long as you promise you will act like the german culture demands: do the work with respect and learn and keep your mouth shut if you disagree (I know that's really hard....LOL) but that's the way it is over there...but you can learn MOUTAINS of interesting stuff so fast- that a year there is like 5 years here...because so much happens, so many competitions, so many good horses...you're cool- I am not POed at you at all...glad you saw that deep can help- and really it's all in your hands and your feel and of course your seat- you've got to push that hindend into the hand- or you've got nothing to work with...good luck!

DressageGuy
May. 31, 2006, 01:23 AM
If I didn't have the seat and core to be able to keep him forward, I can see how it could easily turn into disaster. I appreciate the offer on Germany, we'll see how my life pans out, I'm about to start school here in Arizona.

Sabine
May. 31, 2006, 01:36 AM
If I didn't have the seat and core to be able to keep him forward, I can see how it could easily turn into disaster. I appreciate the offer on Germany, we'll see how my life pans out, I'm about to start school here in Arizona.
best wishes to you! remember school is VERY important! so go for the education! (of course I sound like a wicked mother...:(

DressageGuy
May. 31, 2006, 01:41 AM
LOL! For once, school is my choice this time.

fiona
May. 31, 2006, 01:43 AM
Group hug!

Sabine
May. 31, 2006, 01:59 AM
I agree- BIG GROUP HUG!!

hard earned too....::))

Kareen
May. 31, 2006, 02:04 AM
Yeahyeahyeah :)

belambi
May. 31, 2006, 03:22 AM
Is it safe to come out now??!!

Noir
May. 31, 2006, 04:18 AM
I have no opinions on von Ziegner or his statements. I have his book, and read that passage some time ago. I also looked at the drawing accompanying it, and thought "Oh, well".

My guess is that the difference now is, that he has actually watched the taped warm-ups from the 2004 Dutch Championships, and seen what it actually is we are discussing, what "rollkur" is and how it's used.

My next guess is that many of you here have not seen what it looks like in an unofficial setting like the Dutch Championships, and also not in motion on video. To me, that dvd is the most objective thing to watch, since it is not orchestrated to charm an audience, or to make a tape to sell for profit. It just shows what goes on in the warm-up, uncut. Interesting.

Theresa

claire
May. 31, 2006, 05:45 AM
Lots of reading! :eek: Good to see some objective posting. Thank You Canyonoak; Very succinctly put.

And Sabine, big of you to apologise for your previous :confused: posts! :D

Sabine pointed out how one's experiences with RK ( bad RK) determines one's feelings about the method.

And it occurred to me that maybe alot of the "raging" and "trainwrecking" that occurs with these RK discussions is because people are feeling threatened by something related to RK.

ie. One's friends, living/business customers are being slammed as they see it (because they use RK to train) Slam RK=Slam FEI Rider friend/customer.

One believes in riding "deep" and feels personally affronted as she sees all those who disagree with RK are disagreeing with HER and trying to minimize and take away her freedom to train in the way she believes best.

Hopefully, the discussion can continue and can be kept on an objective level...for the most part I think most here ARE NOT slamming people or wanting to take away their right to train "Deep"

Correct me if I am wrong though: my questions are about RK and some videos and photo's and various related objective first hand experience with an EXTREME method that IS used for long periods of time (30-45 minutes)
I would still like have someone clarify the above with respect to the questions /points highlighted on the link Tonja provided? :confused:

sm
May. 31, 2006, 06:33 AM
mbm, there is no copyright infringement to scan the page (with photo) and send it to him as an attachment to review the point of reference and ask for feedback. If you can scan it and send it to me I'll take it -- to try to see if he is discussing training rollkur. If you can save it PDF that's better than JPG. If it's JPG then it should be a high quality...

Sabine's offer in post#138 to scan it and email it over works for me too.

Unless everyone agrees von Ziegner was talking deep and not RK. They are two separate issues and it is not of importance to me if he was discussing using caution and great care with deep.


****
mbm post#148, "its interesting how so many threads and posts are the same between here and UDBB

anyway, i looked up the image being discussed, and i would hazard a guess that what Von Z is talking about is *deep* and not rollkur. at least, the image in the book doesnt look extreme enough to be rollkur. or maybe i have my definitions mixed up. but i remember many threads where it was vehemently pointed out the difference between deep and rollkur.

and i thought rollkur was extreme "hyperflexion" *and* extreme lateral flexions ie: nose to boot/nose to chest; at least that is what i have seen in pics and vids.

i do have a scanner but i am not sure what the copyright infringement might be.... maybe somone can draw the image?

but honestly to me it looked like deep and lots and lots of warnings about how it is dangerous and should only be used for moments and only by skilled riders.

so, for those that want to say how come he changed his mind? i dont think what is being done nowadays as rollkur is what he was talking about in that book.

anyway. i hope someone does post the pic or a facsimile."

****

slc2
May. 31, 2006, 07:29 AM
why are you so obsessed with this one person's opinion of rollkur? are yuo going to attack him, and in what way, if he doesn't agree line and verse with you?

sm
May. 31, 2006, 07:37 AM
huh? Please read thread if you haven't. It's a fair question to ask since some believe he is talking RK. Plus, if/when the book is reprinted that part could be rewritten to be more clear on the training technique he's discussing.

Why would you want to speculate and guess forever when you could have a real answer? That to me makes no sense... And yes, if he did have a change of heart as suggested much earlier on this thread, I would honor him all the more.

Kathy Johnson
May. 31, 2006, 07:42 AM
there will surely be people piping in and saying that even the slightest bit of deep is Rollkur and so on and so on-

Here I am :) We are being led or misled a little by semantics, which I believe was Von Ziegner's point in change the term to zwangsjacke. A few years ago, deep was a four letter word because nobody could spell rollkur.

It is all on a continuum. Anytime the horse's head is deliberately brought behind the vertical is deep, but you can call it anything you want. Without exact definitions, our arguments tend to go downhill. Von Ziegner's book was one of the first dressage books to list the benefits of deliberately bringing the horse behind the vertical. The older texts are vehemently opposed, at any time.

Generally, bringing the horse behind the vertical is against the tenets of classical dressage. All of the warnings apply, and all of the benefits apply. Herberman, in "The Dressage Formula" does not even want the nose behind the vertical when riding long and low. He wants the neck forward, down and out.

So long and low is not deep, but I would consider forward down and in to be deep. Where you draw the line between that and rollkur does not matter much to me except in argument. Both are the act of deliberately putting the horses BTV and shortening the neck. For me, most of the horses I ride tend to go deep too easily, and it is a much harder proposition to get them on or in front of the vertical on demand.

Sabine is right; dressage is about gymnasticizing the horse. There are certainly horses I have deliberately ridden deep when they are tense, hollow and inverted. It can help. I also know trainers (mine) who shudder when they see it. These are people who can get the horse where they need to without going BTV, deep or using rollkur. We spend a lot of time trying to get every available inch from the neck.

Someone like Paula/Galop is not just spouting theory (although she's good at that). Riding above the bit is easy. Putting the horse on the bit is harder, but once you have that, getting him deep is not so hard. Opening the throatlatch while remaining on the bit is much harder than closing the throatlatch.

Reading Von Ziegner's excerpts in context with the warnings attached means to me he did not change his mind, but is objecting more strongly. He may have changed where he drew the line, which is certainly understandable given the way definitions change.

sm
May. 31, 2006, 08:40 AM
hi Kathy, in response to the last post above I was thinking about your post#136 :

"I had a Von Ziegner book, but it was an older edition, "The Basics." (1995) It said the same thing, had diagrams of deep, and it was definitely rollkur he was talking about. A very good book, in general. I thought even then that it was a good and balanced description of the method. I wonder why the turnabout."


Actually anyone can contact him for clarification....

EDITED TO ADD: maybe straight jacket is a better description because RK to me is "biting the chest," not BTV or deep. There is still the ability to evade the bit with deep or BTV. Of course, the horse does not really BITE the chest, so perhaps that's why straight jacket is a more clear description as to what degree of BTV.

SGray
May. 31, 2006, 01:06 PM
For those who would like to take a closer look at rollkur in practice, the DVDs that Walter Zettl mentioned are available for non-commercial use. http://www.hippocampus-nl.com/s2e.php?content_id=353 They were created to document how rollkur is used.

can one order them from the U.S.?

egontoast
May. 31, 2006, 01:14 PM
WHo cares? See, here's the thing: for some of us, this is not a burning issue. I would only write to an author for clarification about something IF I REALLY RULLY RULLY WANTED TO KNOW! Not everyone is as obsessed with this as you seem to be.

Same with the highlighted questions. "WHy is the intention to....." That's called a leading question, similar to 'when did you stop beating your wife..." There's a biased assumption in there.

There is nothing new in this discussion. Welcome to Hell, Mrs. Wilkinson, here's your accordian. Eternal Rollkur Discussion, first door on your right.

sabryant
May. 31, 2006, 01:28 PM
Lots of reading! :eek: Good to see some objective posting. Thank You Canyonoak; Very succinctly put.

And Sabine, big of you to apologise for your previous :confused: posts! :D

Sabine pointed out how one's experiences with RK ( bad RK) determines one's feelings about the method.

And it occurred to me that maybe alot of the "raging" and "trainwrecking" that occurs with these RK discussions is because people are feeling threatened by something related to RK.

ie. One's friends, living/business customers are being slammed as they see it (because they use RK to train) Slam RK=Slam FEI Rider friend/customer.

One believes in riding "deep" and feels personally affronted as she sees all those who disagree with RK are disagreeing with HER and trying to minimize and take away her freedom to train in the way she believes best.

Hopefully, the discussion can continue and can be kept on an objective level...for the most part I think most here ARE NOT slamming people or wanting to take away their right to train "Deep"

Correct me if I am wrong though: my questions are about RK and some videos and photo's and various related objective first hand experience with an EXTREME method that IS used for long periods of time (30-45 minutes)
I would still like have someone clarify the above with respect to the questions /points highlighted on the link Tonja provided? :confused:

Nice post Claire!

suzy
May. 31, 2006, 02:18 PM
A few years ago, deep was a four letter word

Sweety, here's a news flash. Deep is still a four letter word. D-E-E-P. One "D" two "E's" and one "P." That still adds up to four. ;)

Just had to check in and say hi Kathy.

Sannois
May. 31, 2006, 02:35 PM
For the group hug???:( Damn Storm knocked out satellite connection. :(
I was so excited when I read about the group hug.. that was a few pages back.. Have things deteriorated since??:confused:

sm
May. 31, 2006, 02:40 PM
it's never too late for you Sannois!

fiona
May. 31, 2006, 02:53 PM
You can group hug........





NOW!



but not you suzy because you are wayyyyy late and i have been forced to try and be a wittty one man band.

Sannois
May. 31, 2006, 03:38 PM
it's never too late for you Sannois!
OK Here goes!!! (((((((((((((((Group hug))))))))))))))))))))):D

Kathy Johnson
May. 31, 2006, 04:46 PM
Not another counting lesson! The twos, the threes, the fours, argh. The square roots were easier. Once when I was teaching high school, a student asked me "is sense of humor one word or two?" I could not answer. This was the same student who began her conclusion paragraph with, "in confusion,...."

bjrudq
May. 31, 2006, 07:55 PM
the illustration in "the basics" depicts, imo, a horse who is "deep" but the picture has little in common with extreme rollkur.

i don't know about "elements;" i only have "the basics."

BornToRide
May. 31, 2006, 08:56 PM
When will you guys ever stop beating a dead horse?? :D

Sannois
May. 31, 2006, 08:58 PM
When will you guys ever stop beating a dead horse?? :D
That nag is so dead its beyond recognition!!! :D

ise@ssl
Jun. 1, 2006, 07:07 AM
For those who feel the discussion is worthless - why take valuable time out of your lives to read and post?

Kathy Johnson
Jun. 1, 2006, 07:30 AM
bjrudq,

I think that deep has a great deal in common with extreme rollkur, along the continuum of riding a horse deliberately behind the vertical. Two, three years ago the term "deep" meant rollkur. Weren't you reading these same arguments on the boards then? I know I was. One of my current concerns is that there seems to be a movement that "deep is great, but rollkur is not" which I find merely a matter of semantics and degree.

Now, the current definition seems to be that rollkur pulls the head sideways to the toe. Rollkur puts the nose to the chest. But deep does too--I watched all those jumpers in the 80s. Where exactly is the difference? Do we just change definitions to suit the mood of the day (as Von Ziegner is)? At what point does this generation draw the line? The old masters had a clear line. Behind the vertical. When the horse is behind the vertical or shortened in the neck it affects the purity of the gaits.

Sannois
Jun. 1, 2006, 07:36 AM
For those who feel the discussion is worthless - why take valuable time out of your lives to read and post?
Great to see you,, you and I have been in on some great discussions, Mostly political! LOL But it just seems that no matter how many times this topic comes up it alwasy ends the same. We dont know anything, they do! :)

claire
Jun. 1, 2006, 07:59 AM
Now, the current definition seems to be that rollkur pulls the head sideways to the toe. Rollkur puts the nose to the chest. But deep does too--I watched all those jumpers in the 80s. Where exactly is the difference? Do we just change definitions to suit the mood of the day (as Von Ziegner is)? At what point does this generation draw the line? The old masters had a clear line. Behind the vertical. When the horse is behind the vertical or shortened in the neck it affects the purity of the gaits.

Kathy, Did you see the effect on gaits as much in the showjumpers? And is RK (or extreme version of deep :D ) used for warm-up in SJ discipline as much now (as in the 80's)?

Re: "Drawing the Line": Is it that these days we have "Competition Dressage" and we have more of a focus on "maxing out" or "extreme riding" Sort of what you "lose on the roundabouts you gain on the swings"? :winkgrin:

You bring up some interesting questions in your post.

Kathy Johnson
Jun. 1, 2006, 08:20 AM
Kathy, Did you see the effect on gaits as much in the showjumpers?
The showjumpers I saw ridden that way were scampering giraffes. The fact of the matter is that a jumper needs to pick his head up to see over the fence. The higher the fence, the more the horse needs to pick his head up. Hunters can stay fairly round to a fence, but a jumper can not if the jump is over his head. So, although riders tried, it was impossible to bring a horse in deep at all and make it over the fence. The horses HAD to find a way up, and it resulted in some interesting spots. So, perhaps even more than in dressage, the riders had to have the ability to allow the horse back up and open. The gaits, of course, are not judged so I wasn't watching them so closely.


And is RK (or extreme version of deep ) used for warm-up in SJ discipline as much now (as in the 80's)? There's still a lot of schooling in drawreins (illegal for showing) but I don't see rollkur as much in America anymore in h/j. I suspect the preponderance of riders are coming up through the hunter ranks, and they wouldn't school deep.

slc2
Jun. 1, 2006, 09:13 AM
we have some hunter riders at our barn, and when ever they see anyone ride a horse really, really extremely deep they say, 'Oh My God, I love the position of the horse's head, nice work!' so I'm not sure that's always true. We have always had some jumper people at barns I've been at, and most of them ride the horses VERY deep in schooling, explanation to me has always been that the horses have to use their backs so hard in the jumping, this helps them relax and stretch their backs, and a stretched muscle is a strong muscle, etc. The riders we have from Colombia and South America seem to ride the horses in less of an extreme position, but I wouldn't generalize about that.

bjrudq
Jun. 1, 2006, 09:53 AM
"Von Ziegner's book was one of the first dressage books to list the benefits of deliberately bringing the horse behind the vertical."

i HAVE the basics(and have cliniced with the colonel.) maybe i am reading it differently than you are, but i hardly see less than a page describing what some advanced rdiers are doing and why as listing the benefits of bringing the horse btv. he certainly doesn't recommend it!

nor is ONE line drawing of a horse placed deep(and in no way extreme) equivalent to "diagrams" of rollkur. (feel free to correct me if indeed "elements" has several diagrams.

you are both exaggerating the colonel's endorsement of "overflexed" imo and perhaps that is one of the reasons that he feels the need to go on the record against rollkur, becasue some people may be using his very limited writing about "overflexed" to justify its extreme use in rollkur.

btw i quoted that section of the basics months ago and i don't think anyone commented very much on it. but now that the colonel has clarified his position on rollkur, everyone is all over it.

as for those who suggest that colonel and zettl were no saints, and then allude to bloody mouths and sides, i hope you are not implying that either of these men rode like that in their competition days, unless you can prove it. and if you can- then PROVE it!

really something. according to some of you, the old, recognized masters are full of shit becasue they were abusive back in their day. the modern internationally competitive dressage riders and coaches who condemn rollkur are just jealous. and the lower level rider(and by that, anyone who hasn't competed gp in europe and less) who doesn't like what he or she sees is provincial, naive, and unqualified to comment.

only you have all the answers. what a crock.

JSwan
Jun. 1, 2006, 09:59 AM
really something. according to some of you, the old, recognized masters are full of shit becasue they were abusive back in their day. the modern internationally competitive dressage riders and coaches who condemn rollkur are just jealous. and the lower level rider(and by that, anyone who hasn't competed gp in europe and less) who doesn't like what he or she sees is provincial, naive, and unqualified to comment.

only you have all the answers. what a crock.

It's just a pissing contest now - like most threads - it's just someone wanting to get the last word in - and being "right" no matter what.

Every time I think about getting back into dressage - I just visit this forum for five minutes and change my mind. I get reminded why I left the sport in the first place - the harpies.

bjrudq
Jun. 1, 2006, 10:17 AM
canyonoak, at least, attempted to outline a reasonable explanation of rollkur-one of the first I'VE ever seen, which was a lot more useful than the usual put downs and condescension demonstrated to those who dare question its use. (and thank you for that.)

and kathy, sm, along with several others have discussed the issue, not hurled insults.

but it is almost impossible to have a civilized discussion when some people take the attitude that they know everything, and the rest of us know nothing.

jswan, i don't know where you're from, but i have not encountered harpies in my dressage world (which consists mostly of middle aged overweight post meopausal women-who are supportive of each other.)

Daydream Believer
Jun. 1, 2006, 10:22 AM
bjrudq,

I think that deep has a great deal in common with extreme rollkur, along the continuum of riding a horse deliberately behind the vertical. Two, three years ago the term "deep" meant rollkur. Weren't you reading these same arguments on the boards then? I know I was. One of my current concerns is that there seems to be a movement that "deep is great, but rollkur is not" which I find merely a matter of semantics and degree.



I agree with this statement. I really see little difference between the two either. A person I worked with very briefly that uses deep on all her horses told me that it was a matter of degree between rollkur and deep. However, watching it in practice, I saw little difference.

JSwan
Jun. 1, 2006, 11:24 AM
canyonoak, at least, attempted to outline a reasonable explanation of rollkur-one of the first I'VE ever seen, which was a lot more useful than the usual put downs and condescension demonstrated to those who dare question its use. (and thank you for that.)

and kathy, sm, along with several others have discussed the issue, not hurled insults.

but it is almost impossible to have a civilized discussion when some people take the attitude that they know everything, and the rest of us know nothing.

jswan, i don't know where you're from, but i have not encountered harpies in my dressage world (which consists mostly of middle aged overweight post meopausal women-who are supportive of each other.)

I agree - canyonoak, kathy and some others have been reasonable - though I still disagree - and am very concerned. Whether rollkur is new, old, reinvented, deep, not deep, which dead or living white guy should be believed or ridiculed, or whether our horse has a brand on its ass or not is what this is boiling down to.

There was a letter to the editor in the latest Mensa Bulletin about civil discourse (I admit to being part of the problem on occasion!) I'll excerpt a few snippets....."The world seems filled with "experts" who are certain they couldn't possibly be wrong and will vocally defend their point of view without the need to maintain respect for anyone who disagrees.".....the letter goes on to state, referring to Mensans, "of all people, be bright enough to acknowledge that the world is rarely black and white, and that their solution or opinion may not be the only solution, best solutions, or even perhaps the appropriate solution for a particular person or situation." ....."May I ask what is the purpose trying to have a discussion if you've already made up your mind that you're right?"

I'm afraid I don't see the point in denigrating a dressage rider's ability to form an opinion merely because they have not studied in Europe, or another poster being an "expert" just because they watched a competition in person rather than by video, or ridiculing a respected professional because they are "too old" - these are just all gratuitious assertions and designed to quash disagreement by embarrassing people into silence, or browbeating them into agreement.

As far as Rollkur goes, there is a controversy. No conclusions have been drawn. There are people on both sides of the camp - and though we disagree with each other - we don't have to go to extremes to silence the opposition just so we can be "right". Discussions on this forum all too often become dominated by a few tyrants who can't change their mind and won't change the subject.

fiona
Jun. 1, 2006, 12:36 PM
I absolutely agree. Canyonoaks post was the most erudite constructive description of Rollkur that i have ever seen.

I think huge difficulty arises in discussion of a technique or method of training when there is little agreement on what it actually is.


be bright enough to acknowledge that the world is rarely black and white, and that their solution or opinion may not be the only solution, best solutions, or even perhaps the appropriate solution for a particular person or situation."

I think this is particulary relevant when you have no practical experience of the situation you are discussing. Yes, of course you are entitled to your opinion but in my experience what you think at the start of your dressage journey is not always relevant 20 years later. There is no substitute for experience.


As far as Rollkur goes, there is a controversy. No conclusions have been drawn.
Should properly conducted scientific research prove that it is detrimental to the horse i cannot imagine anyone will continue to use it.


There are people on both sides of the camp - and though we disagree with each other - we don't have to go to extremes to silence the opposition
There are actually 3 camps. Those that use the technique, those that are against it who are in my experience usually the most entrenched and vitriolic and the third group. Those of us that neither use it nor abhor it who are waiting for the results of veterinary research.

SGray
Jun. 1, 2006, 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonja
For those who would like to take a closer look at rollkur in practice, the DVDs that Walter Zettl mentioned are available for non-commercial use. http://www.hippocampus-nl.com/s2e.php?content_id=353 They were created to document how rollkur is used.



can one order them from the U.S.?


??

sm
Jun. 1, 2006, 12:57 PM
post#189: "...Should properly conducted scientific research prove that it is detrimental to the horse i cannot imagine anyone will continue to use it. "

Yes, but if the FEI definition is anything behind the vertical as indicated on their page 14, like one inch BTV, doesn't that dilute the findings? And what's ROLLKUR-LIKE on page 7?

Here's from page 7 of the FEI report:
2.6. RADIOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF THE CERVICAL REGION IN RELATION TO OVER-BENDING (ROLLKUR)
Dr. Emile Welling, Blaricum, The Netherlands
Dr. Welling said that as a veterinary clinician he could not attribute specific lesions in horses to “round and deep” “Rollkur-like” training. He found a huge variation in radiological findings in different types of horses subject to a variation of training methods and not just in sports horses. Moreover, calcification and exostoses at the attachment of the ligamentum nuchae to the nuchal crest of the occipital bone was common in a great diversity of horses. However, pain in the cervical region was not as common as back or limb pain.

And page 14:
"Definition
Rollkur has been defined as a training method involving forced flexion of the poll and neck with the horse’s head pulled behind the vertical. "


http://rhonealpes.dressage.free.fr/INFOS/FEIrollkur.pdf

Moll
Jun. 1, 2006, 01:47 PM
??


Yes, you can. You'll need to pay by bank transfer, your bank will help you with that.

nhwr
Jun. 1, 2006, 02:34 PM
There several things that interest me about this discussion, foremost among them have little to do with dressage.

The first thing is how readily some posters "assume the position" :lol: It is obvious that many of us don't agree on this. We have varying levels of expereince but we are all entitled to our opinions. When I say I have seen something first hand, it doesn't equal you don't know what you are talking about. It means this is, in part, what I am basing my opinion on. It isn't a put down, why make it so? This is the same as saying if I don't agree with you, I must be an idiot. While that remains a possibility ;), it is also possible for reasonable and intelligent people to form different conclusions about issues. Experiences have alot to do with that.

The second thing, in life I find it is often worth thinking about what isn't said as well as what is said. In discussing what von Ziegner has said, there are conflicting statements. Even the anti posters acknowledge this subconsciously because now they are talking about "extreme rolkur". Isn't that redundent? Excuse if I am putting words in your mouths, but isn't the one of the major problems you have with rolkur, it is extreme?

Von Ziegner's words are there for anyone to read. In his book, he endorses and describes a warm up technique for talented riders that involves riding deep and BTV. Some say that he doesn't mean that deep or that BTV. But who knows? In DT, he denounces rolkur but he doesn't clarify or retract his previous statements. That is meaningful. We can speculate that what he said was some sort of retraction, but I think the man is certainly capable of saying exactly what he meant. If he didn't say something, we can't infere that he did.

The quote that I posted is part of a discussion that takes up maybe a page out of a book that is about 130 pages long. He has much more to talk about than how to warm a horse up at a show. But consider this; most of the outrage regarding this technique is generated by what people have seen in the warm up ring at horses shows. This is specifically how von Ziegner recommends the technique be used. You can say that the riders aren't qualified to use it, that they over-use it or they go to extremes with it. But that is an indictment of the riders, not the technique. Many people extrapolate what they see in the warm up into the sum total of a rider's training technique. Isn't that assumption just as narrow as saying that 1 page in von Ziegner's book is all he has to say?

I think it is very interesting that von Ziegner chose to make the statement he did to DT, what he said and what he didn't say.



PS SGray, if they are really DVDs (not CDs), you won't be able to view them in the US. Wrong format.

SGray
Jun. 1, 2006, 02:38 PM
thanks Moll - appreciate it

good point nhwr

sm
Jun. 1, 2006, 02:43 PM
"I think it is very interesting that von Ziegner chose to make the statement he did to DT, what he said and what he didn't say.

He did more than make the statement in DT, he is a founding member of http://www.xenophon-classical-riding.org so there is something here he feels strongly about working on. Because I have been called "obessed" with this point, I won't bring up we can contact him for clarification. LOL.

also from #193: "You can say that the riders aren't qualified to use it, that they over-use it or they go to extremes with it. But that is an indictment of the riders, not the technique."

EDITED TO ADD: Or we can say that's an indictment of what's being rewarded by the judges -- instead of pure gaits including a halfway decent free walk, a full halt, etc. Riders are there repping their country, after all, because they win.

nhwr
Jun. 1, 2006, 02:48 PM
well, sm, he certainly does have a large enough platform to clarify his statements then, doesn't he? That he chooses to leave them ambigous has meaning. That is my point.

JSwan
Jun. 1, 2006, 04:00 PM
fiona posted:
"Yes, of course you are entitled to your opinion but in my experience what you think at the start of your dressage journey is not always relevant 20 years later. There is no substitute for experience."

My point was that the folks who have been around the longest - and are acknowledged masters - are ridiculed as being "too old". They are not given the same respect and consideration that an anonymous BB poster thinks she is entitled to merely by virtue of having ridden at a certain level, or ridden in Europe! They just don't get it, man. They ain't groovy. It's like the 60's all over again - and it was bad enough the first time 'round.

Too many "experts"......

sm
Jun. 1, 2006, 04:05 PM
"well, sm, he certainly does have a large enough platform to clarify his statements then, doesn't he? That he chooses to leave them ambigous has meaning. That is my point."

Oh. I just took his thoughts to somewhat BTV was in a different category than his "biting the chest" rolkur thoughts. I wouldn't agree with, "That he chooses to leave them ambigous has meaning," since I think he is outspoken. I must be missing your point.

If anything -- if he thought it was such a great exercise reaping benefits -- he would be applauding the direction the sport is going in. More. More. More. We know he was open to BTV training when he published his book. Not a stuck-in-the-mud blindly following old school doctrine.

fiona
Jun. 1, 2006, 04:50 PM
My point was that the folks who have been around the longest - and are acknowledged masters - are ridiculed as being "too old". They are not given the same respect and consideration that an anonymous BB poster thinks she is entitled to merely by virtue of having ridden at a certain level, or ridden in Europe! They just don't get it, man. They ain't groovy. It's like the 60's all over again - and it was bad enough the first time 'round.

Too many "experts"......

Totally agree with you on that point. I was thinking more of the over zealous young who are quite rightly enthusiastic and passionate but often misguided and unwilling to listen and thus learn. Sadly i wasn't around in the 60's but i did punk big stylee. Thank the gods for New Romantics!

nhwr
Jun. 1, 2006, 05:08 PM
sm, you are making a lot of assumptions in your post, which, of course, you are free to do. You took von Ziegner's thoughts to mean something. But his words are his words. They speak for themselves very well. No one here said he was stuck in the mud, though he does proclaim himself to be classical. He is a pretty insightful writer, IMO. So I don't choose to make interpretations for him.

I agree that he has a lot to say on many subjects but he doesn't address the disparity of his past and current position. With all the opportunities he has taken to speak on the subject, leaving that out is significant, IMO.

J Swan, it seems to me that you are saying that we should respect the opinions of those who have been around the longest, who are acknowledged masters (by virtue of their experiences), yet no one else is allowed to use their expereinces to form opinions :confused:

fiona
Jun. 1, 2006, 05:11 PM
I think what she is saying is we should show them respect even if we totally disagree with them. In addition i think we ought to be a bit realistic about our own experiences compared to theirs.

Sannois
Jun. 1, 2006, 05:37 PM
It's just a pissing contest now - like most threads - it's just someone wanting to get the last word in - and being "right" no matter what.

Every time I think about getting back into dressage - I just visit this forum for five minutes and change my mind. I get reminded why I left the sport in the first place - the harpies.
Its taken alot of the joy out of Dressage for me. I am not saying that I would let this spoil my rides but really All this crap is not why I ride! :no:

JSwan
Jun. 1, 2006, 05:53 PM
J Swan, it seems to me that you are saying that we should respect the opinions of those who have been around the longest, who are acknowledged masters (by virtue of their experiences), yet no one else is allowed to use their expereinces to form opinions :confused:

Actually - I was referring (not very well I admit) to posters who seem to discard what the masters say merely because they are "old". There are a couple of folks who did just that - on this thread or the other current one on Rollkur - or who use the reason that "Anky does it" as the justification.



You know what I keep being reminded of? The folks who justify soring Walkers. The ends justify the means....

PonyDressage
Jun. 1, 2006, 05:55 PM
There is excellent information available in this month's issue of Horses For Life magazine, www.horsesforlife.com. Please take a moment to check it out. On a personal note, I was very fortunate to spend some time with Walter Zettl earlier this year and I have the deepest respect for this man.
Best, Daniela

Bogey2
Jun. 1, 2006, 07:31 PM
J Swan...you mean you actually let a BB get to you that much? I never even discuss RK in real life...with anyone. And my trainer certainly is the person I go to for my training questions. Smash your computer if the internet has that much effect on you!:eek:

BornToRide
Jun. 1, 2006, 08:41 PM
I'm sitting here eating my popcorn and I can't help but wonder if anyone has ever done studies on people who do serious yoga. Are they suffering from any degenerative issues because of the type of hyperflexion that they subject themselves too?!?

slc2
Jun. 1, 2006, 08:47 PM
the harpies

actually, you sound like a gigantic harpie, j swan. in fact, probably the queen of the harpies.

:D

slc

bjrudq
Jun. 1, 2006, 09:52 PM
born to ride- a good yoga teacher will always tell you not to overdo it. and she or he doesn't come over and physically make you hold the pose for as long as she sees fit; the student herself makes that determination.

i suppose someone who is overenthusiastic can hurt themselves though, just like you can overdo it lifting weights, running, aerobic dancing, etc.

my little sister hurt her back doing ballet. ballet injuries are not unusual.

YoungFilly
Jun. 1, 2006, 10:04 PM
Or is this someones interpretation? I can't picture him getting into a controversy.....

Karoline
Jun. 1, 2006, 10:04 PM
http://rhonealpes.dressage.free.fr/INFOS/FEIrollkur.pdf

Check p.31 and 32 from post conference feedback from participants. Appears report did not reflect ALL the concerns and questions still needing answers.

Sabine
Jun. 2, 2006, 12:56 AM
one actually really reads Ziegners book- knows it by heart- studied the illustrations- practiced the exercises , memorized the recommendations...what if that has become one's training system- including the deep and btv pieces (as needed and indicated by the needs of the horse)...would you all sentence such a rider...?

What would you all say to that...those that are really pure, like Ms Swan, SM and some others- or the ones that are more moderate like NHWR and Fiona- what would you think??

It is that and some other major ODGs books and some strong influences from Europe- that have taught me and until I hit on this BB given me the legality to train like that- ???what is it, that differentiates this from the next level and where do you all draw the line???

Gaia
Jun. 2, 2006, 03:30 AM
... the time used in the hyperflexion. If the horse cannot carry itself in this pose, then the rider does - for some purpose. To do it more than for a couple of streches - is IMO too much. Self-carriage does not exist in hyperflexion if you believe FEI experts, and we want self-carriage. What I have seen from warm-up in Holland is hyperflexion for extended periods, more than ten minutes with no stretching out. And that practise is something totally different.

JSwan
Jun. 2, 2006, 05:54 AM
No - I'm not a harpie - I'm a post menopausal cat lady. There is a difference!

The BB doesn't get to me - I just get reminded of the caa caa I used to have to listen to at shows and at barns. Whew! Folks talk about dressage as if they are going through labor without an epidural.

It's supposed to be fun - and it isn't supposed to hurt the horse in mind or body.

The Yoga analogy is insteresting - except that those folks aren't being asked to perform a piaffe with their legs behind their head.

ise@ssl
Jun. 2, 2006, 05:59 AM
I too find the Yoga analogy to be void of validity. I've taken Yoga classes - they don't tie ropes on your ankles and then stretch your legs up to your face. In fact, the entire concept of Yoga stresses slow releasing through the stretch.

JSwan
Jun. 2, 2006, 06:07 AM
one actually really reads Ziegners book- knows it by heart- studied the illustrations- practiced the exercises , memorized the recommendations...what if that has become one's training system- including the deep and btv pieces (as needed and indicated by the needs of the horse)...would you all sentence such a rider...?

What would you all say to that...those that are really pure, like Ms Swan, SM and some others- or the ones that are more moderate like NHWR and Fiona- what would you think??

It is that and some other major ODGs books and some strong influences from Europe- that have taught me and until I hit on this BB given me the legality to train like that- ???what is it, that differentiates this from the next level and where do you all draw the line???

Drop the high and mighty attitude. You're drawing conclusions about my "purity" - which again demonstrates that if someone doesn't agree with you - the only way you know how to deal with it is try and embarrass them into silence. Now you're just picking at people like we're a crusty scab.

I don't care for Rollkur - especially as practiced in the manners and methods and circumstances that have irked others. I also don't care for the "classical at any cost" folks - there are no absolutes. There are many roads to Rome. But if any method affects the purity of the gaits, the horse is not relaxed (admit it - we've ALL seen it) and you have a goose stepping horse dragging its hind legs around the arena - sorry - it ain't right.

But what's going on now - needs to be examined and questioned. By everyone. Anyone who rides or is a dressage supporter should care enough about the sport to participate in the discussion at all levels.

Now carry on - I have a 5 year old niece to take hound walking this am.

sm
Jun. 2, 2006, 06:51 AM
post #200: "sm, you are making a lot of assumptions in your post, which, of course, you are free to do. You took von Ziegner's thoughts to mean something. But his words are his words. They speak for themselves very well. No one here said he was stuck in the mud, though he does proclaim himself to be classical. He is a pretty insightful writer, IMO. So I don't choose to make interpretations for him. I agree that he has a lot to say on many subjects but he doesn't address the disparity of his past and current position. With all the opportunities he has taken to speak on the subject, leaving that out is significant, IMO."

***
nhwr, I find no DISPARITY or AMBIGUITY as you do. I was trying to explain this to you, that's all. As far as I'm concerned, he is very clear. I'm not a mind reader, and never pretended to be one. At least we agree on something though, because I don't either regarding your comment, " So I don't choose to make interpretations for him."

Here was my post:

Oh. I just took his thoughts to somewhat BTV was in a different category than his "biting the chest" rolkur thoughts. I wouldn't agree with, "That he chooses to leave them ambigous has meaning," since I think he is outspoken. I must be missing your point.

If anything -- if he thought it was such a great exercise reaping benefits -- he would be applauding the direction the sport is going in. More. More. More. We know he was open to BTV training when he published his book. Not a stuck-in-the-mud blindly following old school doctrine.

sm
Jun. 2, 2006, 07:05 AM
I think the line is drawn at what gets rewarded by the judges. If they insist on a really good free-swinging free walk, correct gaits all around, and correct classical movements then RK training does not fit the bill.

Just to clarify I am not pure classical (whatever that is, the costumes and all? And my horse does compete FEI tests which puts me out of the running right there).

But #211 is a great post Sabine, and written like a competitive rider who wants to be successful. When my horse tests, I don't expect or need to win. Often I do, but that's because the other guy blows the test (a movement in the test) and my non-flashy, non-rollkured horse can be counted on to reliably put in his test. I accept not to win the class, but often do anyway. However, international riders don't have that option.

***
post 211: What if.....

one actually really reads Ziegners book- knows it by heart- studied the illustrations- practiced the exercises , memorized the recommendations...what if that has become one's training system- including the deep and btv pieces (as needed and indicated by the needs of the horse)...would you all sentence such a rider...?

What would you all say to that...those that are really pure, like Ms Swan, SM and some others- or the ones that are more moderate like NHWR and Fiona- what would you think??

It is that and some other major ODGs books and some strong influences from Europe- that have taught me and until I hit on this BB given me the legality to train like that- ???what is it, that differentiates this from the next level and where do you all draw the line??? "

***

bjrudq
Jun. 2, 2006, 07:37 AM
"one actually really reads Ziegners book- knows it by heart- studied the illustrations- practiced the exercises , memorized the recommendations...what if that has become one's training system- including the deep and btv pieces (as needed and indicated by the needs of the horse)...would you all sentence such a rider...?"

i have "really read" the book, took instruction from someone who cliniced with the colonel for many years, and took and observed a clinic myself.

both nwhr and you are overemphasizing the "deep" part of the book, which is LESS than a PAGE.

he does NOT recommend it; he does NOT describe how to do it; it is more a comment or explanation of why certain successful riders do it, explaining that it can be useful "for a limited time" and following up with many warnings.

it is NOT a practice described in the book, and he offers NO exercises in btv or rollkur.

how you conclude from this that colonel advocates and teaches rollkur is beyond me.

sm
Jun. 2, 2006, 07:59 AM
thanks bjrudq, at least you have the book in front of you.

I am wondering now if the international judges are asking riders to PERFORM ANTICS rather than ride real dressage. Just a thought, on what's getting rewarded. Because some international riders train to reach the goal and win, apparantly not to embrace "real dressage" movements.

EDITED TO ADD: I'm from a registry that predates the FEI, my horse's registry is the Jockey Club. So I have the idea that the FEI exists to provide a service to me. They did not invent dressage, for wisdom there I hold to the dressage masters. I'm funny that way: I don't allow my trainer to vet and my vet (who rides) doesn't give me training advice. And for centuries, horses in my registry show up, saddle up, and we salute whatever flag is flying that day -- often it was not the FEI.

That is different then the view that I must comply or cater to rulings that dressage masters don't agree with. I think my registry affords a degree of independence on that. We just show up, saddle up, and salute whatever flag is flying that day. My horse is trained to the masters, and my horse teaches me always. Somehow we often win our FEI classes (as well as USDF classes in the past) which is quite nice but not as important to me as correct dressage with my horse.

claire
Jun. 2, 2006, 08:34 AM
So, although riders tried, it was impossible to bring a horse in deep at all and make it over the fence. The horses HAD to find a way up, and it resulted in some interesting spots.

:eek: LOL Kathy! I can only imagine!

See, this is what confuses me about this RK (EXTREME Deep)...If SJ's don't use it much in the ACTUAL COMPETITION (because of the neck=balance issue)
Why would it be used as a training method in Dressage where in competition the gaits ARE judged. And a training method/technique that manipulates the neck to such an extreme degree
would effect balance and therefore gaits? :confused:

Just wanted to clarify: I understand that RK (X-Deep ;) ) is NOT used in the competition ring...but when used for prolonged periods during the warm-up and for day to day training is the example I am using...

claire
Jun. 2, 2006, 09:00 AM
It is that and some other major ODGs books and some strong influences from Europe- that have taught me and until I hit on this BB given me the legality to train like that- ???what is it, that differentiates this from the next level and where do you all draw the line???

Sabine, Just curious: WHY would you need validation of your preferred method of training from a BB???? "The legality to train"...Here in the USA you can train anyway you like in your backyard (except for legally defined physical abuse)

IF you compete you agree to submit your training/performance to a judge's validation. And that would be as "legal" as it gets. ;)

Otherwise, taking a "discussion" on a BB about RK and seeing it as a personal slam to yourself :confused:

Take a page out of Canyonoak's book: OBJECTIVELY make your points and explain what you think RK/Deep/Sorta-Deep/BTV is and why you find it helpful to train in the way you do...:)

Tonja
Jun. 2, 2006, 10:10 AM
________________________________________
BornToRide wrote:

I'm sitting here eating my popcorn and I can't help but wonder if anyone has ever done studies on people who do serious yoga. Are they suffering from any degenerative issues because of the type of hyperflexion that they subject themselves too?!?

I agree that yoga is a poor analogy. I seriously doubt any yoga instructor would advise a student to participate in arduous and complex high impact activities while extremely contorted into a seriously imbalanced position.

It’s well known that seemingly minor crookedness or imbalance in the rider can have a huge negative impact on the horse’s balance and way of going. Likewise, grossly contorting a mass the size of the horse’s head and neck has a substantial negative impact on the horse’s balance and way of going, especially given the location of the head and neck on the front end of the horse. Add to that the fact that the horse depends on the freedom to use of its head and neck to influence its balance and it becomes clear why zwangsjacke is in direct conflict with the principles of the Equestrian Art.

The basics (with the horse working at or in front of the vertical) are completely sufficient to relax, stretch and balance the horse to the ultimate degree. After all, dressage is the ART of developing balance and harmony through the use of the basics (although now it seems like competition dressage is trying to become something else). If ALL of the basics are correct and the horse still won’t stretch and relax then the horse has a physical issue. Forced riding can mask problems but, obviously with what we are seeing in much of today’s top competition performances (increased weight on the forehand, distorted gaits, tension, false head sets, lack of throughness, imbalance and lack of engagement), force doesn’t completely resolve the issues.

I agree with sm that the FEI and the judges are not qualified to alter the time honored principles of dressage. The classical principles were not arrived at as a matter of personal taste. They were derived from the laws of balance and horsemanship, with clear objectives in mind. Balance is a matter of physics and can not be influenced by personal preference. The FEI and the judges will either uphold the classical principles or it won’t. The development of the sport at the expense of its principles can not, in all honesty, be considered ‘development’ of the sport of Dressage. It is the development of another riding style and ought to be officially recognized as such.

If the FEI is going to offer Dressage in competition then the FEI owes it to it’s the equestrian community to carefully select judges who understand and uncompromisingly uphold the Equestrian Art in the purity of its principles and who will recognize and reward correctly working balanced horses.

nhwr
Jun. 2, 2006, 10:24 AM
bjrudq,

I am pretty famiiar with his work as well. In fact, it was the deciding factor in my decision to try working with a trainer of had schooled in with Anky. I had reservations but his writings made me think "Give it a try'. Having said several times that it is only one page out of many, just a technique suggested for warming up a horse, I don't think I am giving it too much emphasis. There is a passage in his book where he describes it as beneficial. It seems to ver similiar to the conclusions reach in the FEI report. All that I have done is cite a quote from his book and point out that there seems to be a contrast. There is an alternative line of thinking that says that perhaps you are dismissing his statements altogether ;)

sm,
Oh. I just took his thoughts to somewhat BTV was in a different category than his "biting the chest" rolkur thoughts. I wouldn't agree with, "That he chooses to leave them ambigous has meaning," since I think he is outspoken. I must be missing your point.

If anything -- if he thought it was such a great exercise reaping benefits -- he would be applauding the direction the sport is going in. More. More. More. We know he was open to BTV training when he published his book. Not a stuck-in-the-mud blindly following old school doctrine. http://praha.planetsg.com/Forum/images/buttons/quote.gif
These are both your interpretations of his actions, sm, not what he has said. You are making assumptions about it.

Are you really suggesting that the registry that regulates the racing industry should be the model for dressage? :eek:

europa
Jun. 2, 2006, 10:47 AM
Jumping in ...hope the pool is warm! Chocolate in hand.

To begin, when I rode jumpers in Europe they all prescribed to the rollkur method for both jumping and dressage horses. The explanation to me was that by riding the horses behind the vertical at home they would go on the verticle at shows when nervous. Evidently, they felt that show horses are nervous away from home and more likely to raise their heads.

Anyway, I was glad to read an article from the Beerbaum's who are my idols. Ludger was saying that Meredith had taught him that the over flexion was not helping the jumping horses and that it actually made them worse before the fences. AMEN TO HIM is all I can say. Riding a naturally soft and supple horse to the fence is the way to go....I would imagine the same would be true for dressage.

Flamesuit zipped nibbling chocolate and smiling

canyonoak
Jun. 2, 2006, 11:01 AM
I was at World Cup Final last year and was giggling to myself that the two riders using rollkur most successfully and beneficially in terms of gymnasticizing their horses were Anky and Meredith.

bjrudq
Jun. 2, 2006, 11:19 AM
"just a technique suggested for warming up a horse,"

he DOESN'T suggest it! he notes that "some successful riders" are seen doing it.

that is not the same as suggesting it.

BlkHrsRdr
Jun. 2, 2006, 11:53 AM
HI I am new in here. Thought I would jump into this hot pool too. I must admit to not knowing much about Herr Zettl, so I won't begin to discuss him or what he says or instructs. Though I doubt he would deliberately ask a student to place a horse in an RK "frame" and ride that way for any lngth of time, well based on his reputation anyway.

The subject of RK though, well that is another matter. True it is everyone's own personal opinion. (And I certainly have mine!) Of course my personal opinion is that if used all the time is detrimental to the horse. It is not natural and does not imho help to develop the horse correctly.

I believe there is a vast difference of a horse just going a little behind the vertical when trying to find a comfortable place within the contact and movement. This may (or should) be a momentary thing. Holding a horse with his nose on his chest though for me is simply cruel. They cannot see well and it has got to hurt. But again this is just my opinion. Well and most likely (I am really sticking my neck out here) the riding is not truly back to front if they must resort to holding the horse's nose on chest. Again just umy opinion and experience, but if the horse is truly well engaged and trly working through CORRECTLY they will place the head so poll is highest naturally, nose just in front of vertical.

I also feel there is a huge gap between good (classical) dressage and competition dressage. Most likely many competitive riders would just want to find a means to that ribbon at any cost of a horse. I also believe many follow trainers that have competition only in mind as well and they follow through blind ignorance, yet completely adore their beloved horses. This too is a shame. But does happen all too often.

For many years I abhorred comptetive riding and competing myself. I felt the true art of dressage had been mutated into something quite ugly and I wanted no part in it. However today I am beginning to work toward competing myself. Why? My reasons are simple. I probably will not get any ribbons and that is not why I want to compete now. I want to get out there and show what a lovely flowing relaxed HAPPY dressage horse can look like!! One whose nose is poked just ahead of the vertical, one whose back is swinging in a flowing manner and one that is working well engaged and properly through, poll high, poll and jaw relaxed and happy in the ride. I hope that maybe, just maybe, if people see a happy horse moving as beautifully as they should, maybe, just maybe, the views will begin to shift again back to what a dressage horse should look like. I may be way too optimistic to believe that this may happen within my lifetime, but I now believe I can at least help to change a few minds while I am still here.

Horsedances
Jun. 2, 2006, 11:58 AM
Jumping in ...hope the pool is warm! Chocolate in hand.

To begin, when I rode jumpers in Europe they all prescribed to the rollkur method for both jumping and dressage horses. The explanation to me was that by riding the horses behind the vertical at home they would go on the verticle at shows when nervous. Evidently, they felt that show horses are nervous away from home and more likely to raise their heads.

Anyway, I was glad to read an article from the Beerbaum's who are my idols. Ludger was saying that Meredith had taught him that the over flexion was not helping the jumping horses and that it actually made them worse before the fences. AMEN TO HIM is all I can say. Riding a naturally soft and supple horse to the fence is the way to go....I would imagine the same would be true for dressage.

Flamesuit zipped nibbling chocolate and smiling

Probably you didn't see the TV-interview with St-George magazine, Anky, Isabelle, Jean Bemmelmans and Ludger Beerbaum some months ago.
Ludger did make some very strong statements in favour of Anky, as did Isabelle Werth and last but nost least Jean Bemmelmans who stated
"you can't win when a horse is not happy".

sm
Jun. 2, 2006, 12:46 PM
have a nice weekend, nhwr. You're assuming that I'm assuming... for the record your conclusions re my comments are not correct. If that helps clear things up for you, I certianly hope so. LOL.

nhwr
Jun. 2, 2006, 01:44 PM
Precise communication and a real effort to understand opposing viewpoints are very important for polite discussion.

sm.
when you preface a statement with comments like "I just took his thoughts to mean...." or "If he thought this, he'd be doing that" it is an admission that what you are presenting is an interpretation.

bjrudq,

I never said that he suggested it. I said he describes it in his book, talks about the benefits and drawbacks and issues some warnings about it, period. One might infer that by mentioning it and describing as beneficial in some circumstances, that he is endorsing it. But I think that is a stretch. He certainly doesn't say this should never be done! He does say it is not a violation of the principles of classical dressage.

Do I think I am a talented enough rider to use this technique properly? No way! But I have worked with someone who was and the results were pretty amazing. The really funny thing about this whole debate to me is what the training really looked like. The emphasis was 85% on establishing and maintaining absolutely correct basics like forward, straight, rhythm, suppling and engagement, 14% on schooling higher movements and 1% (maybe even less) on "rolkur". We never called it that though. My horse changed dramatically within 3 months. Her physique and muscling were radically improved. She didn't resist anymore because the work was easier for her. And for those who think riders use this method are harsh and cruel I have to laugh. My horse loved this trainer! And once while a very large (and expensive) show, the trainer insisted we pull her from her classes because she just wasn't "right". So I took her home and had the vet out. The vet determined that the mare had a small but potentially career ending suspensory strain. If we had continued to compete and the ligament had torn, that would have been the end of her in competiton. To me, it felt like she just wasn't coming through. To my trainer, it was more.

I believe there are people who have the talent and the feel to use this technique well because I have seen it. But they are a pretty small and elite group, IMO. The larger question to me is; If the horses aren't being harmed, and even guys like von Ziegner say it isn't a violation of the principles of classical dressage, why is this such a big deal?

fiona
Jun. 2, 2006, 01:51 PM
If ALL of the basics are correct and the horse still won’t stretch and relax then the horse has a physical issue.

Absolutely true.


If the FEI is going to offer Dressage in competition then the FEI owes it to it’s the equestrian community to carefully select judges who understand and uncompromisingly uphold the Equestrian Art in the purity of its principles and who will recognize and reward correctly working balanced horses.

They can only select from the tiny pool of people available. Many times we read about classical purists who don't compete because it is somehow going to corrupt their principles of riding but if you don't compete you can't be a judge - in Europe at least. The only way you can be an influence is by taking part.


For many years I abhorred comptetive riding and competing myself. I felt the true art of dressage had been mutated into something quite ugly and I wanted no part in it. However today I am beginning to work toward competing myself. Why? My reasons are simple. I probably will not get any ribbons and that is not why I want to compete now. I want to get out there and show what a lovely flowing relaxed HAPPY dressage horse can look like!! One whose nose is poked just ahead of the vertical, one whose back is swinging in a flowing manner and one that is working well engaged and properly through, poll high, poll and jaw relaxed and happy in the ride. I hope that maybe, just maybe, if people see a happy horse moving as beautifully as they should, maybe, just maybe, the views will begin to shift again back to what a dressage horse should look like. I may be way too optimistic to believe that this may happen within my lifetime, but I now believe I can at least help to change a few minds while I am still here.

Putting aside the fact that that is possibly one of the most arrogant paragraphs i have ever read, we clearly don't attend the same competitions. I see happy free flowing horses at every level from children on ponies to competitors at Aachen and i don't think this is just because i happen to live in europe. You have a wealth of talented riders in the US you need to go take another look!

sm
Jun. 2, 2006, 02:25 PM
I like your comment nhwr, do try it sometime: "Precise communication and a real effort to understand opposing viewpoints are very important for polite discussion."

-- I prefaced the way I did to dumb it down for you because you have trouble with this concept. Not to appear too aggressive, but to soften it.

-- why the quotation marks, I never prefaced any statement with "If he thought this, he'd be doing that"?

-- and how did you get this conclusion, I suggested nothing of the sort, and why the word REALLY when I never suggested it at all, "Are you really suggesting that the registry that regulates the racing industry should be the model for dressage"

for the record your conclusions re my comments are not correct. But conclude away, nhwr. Enjoy yourself...

Moll
Jun. 2, 2006, 02:33 PM
Jean Bemmelmans who stated
"you can't win when a horse is not happy".

What an impossible statement. We can never know what a horse is truly thinking or feeling, we can only go by exterior indications. Does the horse look happy? Does the horse look unhappy? Winning is no indication of happiness. That is just such a strange way to put it - just as strange as the whole "happy athlete" slogan that seems to be more of a "happy until proven otherwise no matter how it may look" strategy.

fiona
Jun. 2, 2006, 03:19 PM
i think you'll find he means if you have made the horse miserable in the training you won't win because it will not be an attractive enough picture to get a good score. obvious really.

nhwr
Jun. 2, 2006, 04:51 PM
No need to dumb things down for me, sm. I enjoy trying to keep up ;) It can lead to learning something new. My intent isn't to offend you. I simply think you are being pretty imprecise and don't agree with what you are saying.

-- why the quotation marks, I never prefaced any statement with "If he thought this, he'd be doing that"?

Because you said "if he thought it was such a great exercise reaping benefits -- he would be applauding the direction the sport is going in." Seems pretty straightforward. We can't know what von Ziegner thinks, we can only know what he says. That is what I am basing my discussion on. You are going a little beyond that.


and how did you get this conclusion, I suggested nothing of the sort, and why the word REALLY when I never suggested it at all, "Are you really suggesting that the registry that regulates the racing industry should be the model for dressage" Since you asked.... when you said

I'm from a registry that predates the FEI, my horse's registry is the Jockey Club. So I have the idea that the FEI exists to provide a service to me. They did not invent dressage, for wisdom there I hold to the dressage masters. I'm funny that way: I don't allow my trainer to vet and my vet (who rides) doesn't give me training advice. And for centuries, horses in my registry show up, saddle up, and we salute whatever flag is flying that day -- often it was not the FEI.

That is different then the view that I must comply or cater to rulings that dressage masters don't agree with. I think my registry affords a degree of independence on that. We just show up, saddle up, and salute whatever flag is flying that day. My horse is trained to the masters, and my horse teaches me always. Somehow we often win our FEI classes (as well as USDF classes in the past) which is quite nice but not as important to me as correct dressage with my horse.
it seemed like that is what you were suggesting by your comparison. But rather than assume that was what you meant, I asked for clarification. My goal is to understand your point. Maybe you could tell me what that is with regard to the statement above.

HXF
Jun. 2, 2006, 07:50 PM
You know, I came over here because I found the views on "TOB" so extreme, now it seems the extremists are taking over here... so sad. I really appreciate those who maintain thoughtful balanced discourse on this subject. It's the only way to debate this topic, or any issue for that matter.

Sabine
Jun. 3, 2006, 01:49 AM
Otherwise, taking a "discussion" on a BB about RK and seeing it as a personal slam to yourself :confused:

Take a page out of Canyonoak's book: OBJECTIVELY make your points and explain what you think RK/Deep/Sorta-Deep/BTV is and why you find it helpful to train in the way you do...:)


Claire- you sound like a school master...I am not taking anything personal- I am just musing about the very judgmental tone around here...I have made my points many times and frankly don't feel the need to convince anyone.
Things are just fine the way they are...and Ziegner- while not spending more than a few pages specifically on deep and btv- does return to the subject frequently during the first 6 chapters of the book. It is definitely a fundamental element of his teaching to stretch the horse over the top, thus contracting the bottom muscles...

carry on...

Moll
Jun. 3, 2006, 02:13 AM
i think you'll find he means if you have made the horse miserable in the training you won't win because it will not be an attractive enough picture to get a good score. obvious really.

Really?

To me it just sounds like incomprehensible logic. "We win, therefore the horse is happy". Flawed.

fiona
Jun. 4, 2006, 01:40 AM
that would be incomprehensible logic but it's not what he meant.

Moll
Jun. 4, 2006, 01:52 AM
Well, even if that is what he meant I don't agree. (Who cares?) You can torture a dog and it'll still look happy half an hour later. You can force a horse into an unnatural position and in the arena, when it finally gets its head up, obviously the judges cannot tell what just happened. (Or they just don't care?)

I wish Rollkur had been invented by some lower level dufus. Then there would have been no problem outlawing it. Now it's about the serious money and the FEI shows no guts.

JSwan
Jun. 4, 2006, 06:54 AM
I wish Rollkur had been invented by some lower level dufus. Then there would have been no problem outlawing it. Now it's about the serious money and the FEI shows no guts.

Actually - I think you have made an interesting observation, Moll - and probably the most accurate one.

Carol Ames
Feb. 18, 2012, 01:54 PM
It's a shame Totilas received such "inflated scores:eek:"now that is the bar/ / standard people strive to achieve:(; unfortunately the genie has been let out:mad: