Anky is a gorgeous rider. I think that the picture that PaulaM posted of Junior was typical of how Anky had to ride him with all of the hubbub going on around her. There were sponsors out looking around the course, riders walking the lines, and kids rolling down and running up the grass hill in front of the stands. Junior did not put a foot wrong, he was obedient and did his job------he just looked very strong. She reassured him but he is a young stallion and the atmosphere was alot for him to handle. On the Wednesday that we watched Spruce Meadows gave her NO time to warm him up so she did it in the ring!!!! If you have ever been to Spruce you know that's a holy sh&% experience for anyone. So back off the slagging of Anky and appreciate what she did and will continue to do. Show Dressage at it's top level.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Accomplishments don't mean a lot all the time either <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Um ........I don't agree. Especially not in dressage. I know how gosh darn hard it is for me to do my dinky little Training level tests. For someone to acceive that many accomplishments in such a hard dicipline she has to be doing something right. It isn't like there was just one instance. I don't think you can accuratly judge a horse and rider untill you yourself have ridden at the level they do. And I certainly don't think you can deny a list of acceievments like the one she has. To say she didn't deserve those awards is basically saying all of competative dressage is wrong because she is obviously what the judges are looking for.
Totally agree with Velvet on this one (shocking, huh?). And adding on to Eilonwy's good points is this: Anky has brought a number of horses to the FEI levels; not just one! Also, Bonfire is at least 17 (maybe older) and still SOUND! If that isn't a testament to the correctness of someone's training methods than I'm sure I don't know what is. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]
I don't think there is any ONE person in any discipline that you can unequivocally say is the BEST. There are a number of people in every discipline who are among the best, and that's a pretty nice place to be.
P.S. I personally do not see where comparing a hunter rider's seat to a dressage rider's seat is of any value -- they are two different disciplines!
I would much rather watch a dressage rider who may flop their legs in rhythm than a hunter rider kissing the horse's ears. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img] As for good seats, how about Gunther Siedel or C. Traurig or Klimke, or Debbie MacDonald?
I like her riding, I think she presents a pretty picture on a horse.
I have a question that on one has answered yet however...
How can one be correct if a horse is broken at the 4th vertebra? Is it ok now not to be through and connected in Grand Prix tests?
If you look at Anky's photos, you will see this over and over.
Is it not considered important to have a "thru" horse anymore? Or one that is engaged? I see in many photos her horse not working off the hind end.
I'm not trying to say what she does is wrong or trying to stir up more trouble, I'm just trying to understand what is correct and what isn't.
In the 15 years that I have been riding dressage, these things that I mentioned above, have been incorrect. When did this change?
Can anyone explain this to me? [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif[/img] [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_confused.gif[/img]
The pictures of her horse in that deep outline were taken in the warm-up arena, not during competition. She warms-up very deep, but right before her test, she rides her horse into an uphill outline and the competition photos show that. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]
I would like an explanation of what riding with the neck over-bent does for a horse. I've not heard or read anything that gives me a good idea. I may just be over-sensitive to the issue, having had a horse whose main evasion was going behind the bit. Why wouldn't it be as easy for horses trained this way to use it as an evasion? Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying they *are* going to do it in expert hands, but if this becomes acceptable, many less than expert riders are going to be doing it.
As far as Anky's riding, there's no denying that she's an expert. That doesn't mean, of course, that she's perfect. If I question some of what she does, that does not take away from her expertise. There are many very good riders, but apparently she has had the winning combinations many times. She certainly has been a boon in popularizing dressage, all the more reason to not ride a horse with its neck over-bent and waaay behind the vertical, unless she can say what the bio-mechanics are of the activity.
If any of you reading this know what it is accomplishing, I would appreciate an explanation as I can't quite understand yet.
Mary Wanless stated publicly in a clinic in Canada last November that Anky is the most perfect rider she has ever seen. Mary stated that Anky's position is absolutely classic and that she uses her body position, particularily her front, in a way that enables her to be very effective with her aids yet ride very softly at the same time.
A land where classical riding and natural horsemanship have all but vanished, and must be revived for the greater good of all horses trapped in the human world...
You know, I'm really tired of hearing about Anky, competition, deep vs. not deep, etc. I'm not even reading this thread anymore. I just hope at least some of you guys have some common sense. Bye y'all.
--Checkers324, forever faithful in the classical methods... The old masters' knowledge cannot be denied!
[I]\"His [the horse\'s] is a power enhanced by pride, a courage heightened by challenge. His is a swiftness intensified by strength, a majesty magnified by grace. His is a timeless beauty touched with gentleness, a spirit that calls our hearts to dream
I never understood this to be a problem with how Anky looks on a horse.
I thought we were talking about how the horse was being schooled.
Anky is a beautiful rider, her position is perfect.
That's never been in question.
My question is, and has been...
How do the mechanics of riding a horse way behind the bit, and over bent, help a horse in his training? Especially when you are showing in a completly different frame? Is there anyone out there that can explain this??
Ok, I'm going to step out on a limb here. I know very little of the mechanics of deep. But from what I have read and seen, deep does not just employ the horses neck. Deep is the haunches engaged, the horse working over the back, a lift to the shoulders. You are NOT holding the horses head down with your hands. Deep actually promotes flexability and engagement.
Oh goodness, please some brave soul help me out here.
There was a good article on deep in I believe "Hunter and Sport Horse" magazine. Jean Brinkmann was describing deep. If you can wrangle up the magazine it is worth the read.
What gets people in trouble, is those who see Anky, or Isabelle doing this exercise, they go home, try to duplicate it and get their horses all stuck and on the forhand. Correct deep work is misunderstood by many many many people. And as someone earlier stated, deep is only done for short periods of time. You don't spend your hour schooling session, 6 days a week riding deep. As with everything, good in moderation.
HELLLLLLLPPPPPPP, Why can't I leave this thread alone.
For a super article on "riding deep", read the July/August issue of "Hunter & Sport Horse" - it really describes how "deep" is a tool for getting the horse "through" and "engaged".
I just started taking dressage lessons with an upper level rider who trains with an Olympic dressage rider. I have made more improvement in a month with my mare than over the past year. We do incorporate "deep" into our warm-up.
The top riders and trainers use this method with great success. I have refrained from getting into this argument since I know that the training I am receiving is correct and it is kind of pointless to try and debate it with people who really don't seem to have a clear idea of what it is like to ride at the upper levels. When they are asked to ride at a demonstration at Spruce Meadows or when they win an Olympic Gold Medal, then they can judge all they want.
And I think that picking a horse or rider to bits from one picture is nonproductive to say the least. The picture only catches one moment in time and without witnessing an entire test or performance, how can we adequately judge a horse and rider at all?
Where am I and what am I doing in this handbasket?
I won't profess to being (*giggle*) anywhere close to being a dressage expert, but all the same, I have just one question to pose...
What if the ODG's aren't right?
I mean, speaking from the hunter world, we have a bunch of current ODGs that have usurped the last group of ODGs. But if we hadn't taken the time to listen to the current ODGs, back when they were NOT actually OLD or DEAD, but were alive and kicking, we would still be sitting somewhere around the horse's tail over the top of a jump...
Proud owner of one Lunar acre! (Campanus Crater, The Moon)
The problem with trying to explain how it is done correctly is pretty near impossible. Riding is a feel. You have to be able to ride under someone who really knows how to ride a horse deep so they can tell you when it's correct. If you just watch and try to emulate what you "think" you see (with no idea of the feeling), you'll get the wrong thing.
When you ride a horse that is truly deep and over the back, but elastic, supple and free in the front...you'll know it. And you'll know there is nothing like that feeling and everything you thought about it was wrong.
Guess that's my last comment on this issue (yeah, right--if I can stay away).
This is how I look at it.
Anky, Nicole,Isabel, and all the others that are top riders in our sport have a big responsibility.
Because they have the ability, and the feel to do something that "appears" to be less than correct or accepted training. They go on to win the gold medal, then every yahoo in the dressage world with no idea of the why's and wherefore's of riding deep will go and bury their horse's head in their chests and think they're riding "deep" when in fact their doing more harm than good.
I have always been taught that a horse cannot be through with a broken 4th vertebra. I don't care what anyone says, it cannot be through in the back and hind end if he's broken the connection in the neck. He also cannot be raising the wither if he's not connected.
I think it's wrong, incorrect, and flawed training. and i imagine that we will be arguing about this for a long time. But I am hoping that one of these days, this "fad" will subside, and the top riders will come back to the classical way of doing things.
This is also my last post on the subject as we could be argueing about this forever. Kinda like religion and politics heh?? [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img] [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif[/img]
Well, since I set myself up on another thread for a critique, I may as well crucify myself here....
Here's me and the same 4 yr old, same day as the other photo was taken but earlier in the ride. I KNOW that he's behind the vertical and normally his position is not this way. But he's only 4 and still not always steady in his position and this kind of thing can happen. But I do warm him up "deep" like this in the neck...
I know it's impossible, but TRY to ignore the nose position and look at his legs. Do you think he's stepping under? I do. And this is the warm up of our ride - you can see another picture on the critique thread of our "working frame". I can move his neck where I want it and to me that's a good thing.
Besides, I wuv him [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif[/img]
If we assume (for the moment only) that I am an expert rider, capable of riding my horse through and forward in all gaits, at what point do I start riding deep? Is it started at the low levels or is it only a higher level exercise? Once that is figured out, *why* do I do it? What does it accomplish? People are saying it's good to do it but not why. So I do it for a few minutes at a time and I do it correctly, what have I done?
This appears to be the same type of situation as there is in the rein back. There is the opinion that the rein back is never to be over-trained, then some say that reinback can help develop muscles in the hindquarters and should be used accordingly. Two different points of view, but what are the mechanics involved?
A lot of us go on hearsay, we do it because it works for someone else, but how often do we actually know *what* we are doing? For the tried-and-true training, it's probable safe to accept and use the principles that are taught, but for something new and relatively untried, shouldn't we know more than just that the Olympic riders are using it?
I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I just want to know what it is supposed to accomplish, and why.
Seems like the only answer to this thread is to get Anky involved. She then can explain what was going on at SM and what sheï¿½s doing when she trains/rides/competes with her horses. You all can argue for ever about training/riding but if the object of you criticism is not able/here to defend /explain herself, youï¿½d be best off to not relate your remarks to that persons riding. It REALLY easy to criticize someone when their not around. Sure, you can have an opinion and express it but critics are a dime a dozen.