The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 104
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,535

    Arrow

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    There is one quote. The implication is that this must be something very important. If not, then why even say it? Of course you point out plenty of folks get a change and still remain unbalanced. Therefore, lead changes are either NOT an indicator of a hole as you posit or these folks are so good they can get through bad changes and still win/place. Does a horse counter cantering while playin in a field have holes in its ability to preform? I tend to see it as a good test of balance for when we run XC.

    What I find interesting is what you describe in terms of training is counter to what I have been taught from riders/top dressage judges including those who developed the recent dressage training structure, oversee dressage judge education and have judge at the past couple of Olympic Games. None has ever described the necessity of a lead change. They all taught me about developing a balanced canter through the counter lead and to do simple changes through the walk or trot. Again, we only worked flying changes when we reached 3rd and 4th level.
    First, I guess it is super convenient to only quote the very first bit of my post, to conveniently obscure the fact that leadchanges were used as a sliding indicator. One single lead changes was described as indicative as one level of control and balance, then progressive tempis on a stright line as progressively indicative of more and more control and balance, culminating finally in 1s on a circle. I think you would be hard pressed to argue that a horse that can do 1s on a circle is not controlled and balanced. But it would also be pretty ridiculous to infer that my post says 1s on a circle are a NECESSITY. So instead you just skipped quoting the rest of my post and acted as if I said single changes are a NECESSITY, which I didn't say anymore than I said 1s on a circle are a necessity. "Indicator" and "necessity", shockingly, are not the same word. The level to which a horse is controlled and balanced progresses on a sliding scale throughout its career, with lead changes as one of the indicators along the way of what progress is being made. But feel free to skip all of that when you quote to more effectively mischaracterize what I said.

    So if what I describe is so counter to what you say, did I NOT say that I put the counter canter in first and install the change last? By now I have said it several times, it is a wonder that in the face of that repetition you still respond as if I had said the opposite.

    And to my point that the lead change is a test. You disagree with this too? If you ask the horse one day, "Hey is there a change in there?" and discover he's not quite laterally responsive enough for it and then based on that diagnosis you do some legyield work in trot and canter before trying again in a few days, do you somehow disagree that this will improve the horse? Is there some argument you are making that using a leadchange as an indicator of what basics to emphasize is going to be somehow harmful? Is there some instance you are thinking of where it is BETTER to have a canter that is too crooked or quick for a change and the horse would be done a disservice by addressing whatever the underlying issue is? Similarly is I ask my horse to do 1s on a circle tomorrow I guarantee you we will fail. So they're not a NECESSITY. But can you really disagree with the idea that if I try, and fail, and discover that the primary contributor to this spectacular failure was lack of sufficient collection, that working on improving the collection then will overall develop the horse? Does this more clearly explain to you the difference between "test" and "necessity" or are you going to come on here and with a straight face argue with me with the greatest indignation you can muster that I am saying 1s on a circle are necessary for BN eventing?

    And where have I said they are a necessity? I have said they are a good indicator, the same way that if a horse follows you on the trailer the first time you ask him it indicates your groundwork has been good. But you can theoretically train a horse without ever loading it on a traiker. So it's a good indicator, but not NECESSARY. Does my posting that trailer loading is a good I.dicator similarly mean to you that I am saying putting the horse on and off the trailer 50 times every day is NECESSARY and daily trailer loading should be a top priority? Are you also going to ask me to go work at a developing a prelim horse and see how many days trailer loading is a top priority? Because you have repeatedly made the same false jump about my feelings that a lead change is a good indicator.


    I'm not sure what you are hammering into me about. Like, what are you trying to get me to say that will indicate to you that you have 'won' this conversation? Hey, make sure to NEVER see what the change reveals to you about where the horse is at and for the love of God don't address any issues that reveal themselves? That's a total waste of time and probably even counter productive and would never ever be of benefit to any horse? Would you feel like you had achieved your goals on this thread then?

    Surely you are aware that you don't actually need my approval to ride however you want, but I also do not need your approval to see about a leadchange on every 2'6" horse I ride, install one with no muss no fuss, and then relegate them to a quick checkin. I have not been trying to crucify anyone on this thread and I know it is hard to believe but it would actually be possible for you to continue to ride yourway without trying to smack down anyone else who happens to mention they ride differently and finds leadchanges useful as a test of the canter or as a good diagnosis of what to work on (if you chose to use it). That is not actually the hugely unreasonable point you are trying to make it out to be and I'm not sure why you are so aggressively trying to beat it out of me.
    Last edited by meupatdoes; Dec. 7, 2012 at 05:07 AM.



  2. #62
    Join Date
    Mar. 17, 2009
    Location
    The Mitten
    Posts
    1,136

    Default



    2 members found this post helpful.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan. 6, 2008
    Location
    Area II, the Blue Ridge Mountains
    Posts
    1,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by baxtersmom View Post



    2 members found this post helpful.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    First, I guess it is super convenient to only quote the very first bit of my post, to conveniently obscure the fact that leadchanges were used as a sliding indicator....
    So, you make a statement and then have to qualify it? If so, why even make the statement in the first place? All I did was, as you requested, "bluenote" one of many statements you make concerning the lead change as some indicator of a "training hole."

    I would suggest proofreading before posting. I am not jumping anywhere about your feelings. I am, however, deducing what you mean in your written comments. But it is clear you are sure NOT communicating your IDEAS well to the audience here because we ALL are reaching the same conclusions

    What I suggest is you realize that you are showing both a lack or understanding and perhaps full-on ignorance of the dressage training pyramid where something such as lead changes comes only after learning collection which comes at a high level, WELL ABOVE training, even preliminary event horses are.

    Do you actually know what it takes to get an eventer trained up? At least I can say I spent 30 years in the h/j world, riding in the A/Os, both jumpers and hunters.

    While I understand your fundamental premise (which could be summed up in one sentence rather than numerous rambling posts) that one should strive to produce a well trained horse for the level at which they compete, your suggestions of training are very much off base. As noted, many of us spend maybe 2-3 days on flat work a week because we have 2 other phases to train. And, in my case, if I need to develop the confidence and boldness in a horse for XC, even less.

    I, in no way, see the lack of changes as an indicator of a hole in the horse's training, nor as an indicator of a well balanced or trained animal. If I see a horse and rider go around the end of the ring on the counter canter still in a balanced frame (OH, WAIT THAT IS A JUDGED MOVEMENT AT INTERMEDIATE WITH A 5 LOOP SERPENTINE WITH NO LEAD CHANGES!), then I have no issue with the ride.

    Reed


    1 members found this post helpful.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan. 14, 2006
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    4,004

    Default

    My $600 craiglist pony turned training level packer is a percheron/QH and has been with me for 4 1/2 years. I don't know how to train or ride a flying lead change. At the beginning of this season, she started changing on her own. Nicely.

    Because I spent three years working on her canter and balance.

    She will also counter canter.

    I think the eventing forum should do with threads about flying changes what we originally intended to do with this one- ignore them.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    What I suggest is you realize that you are showing both a lack or understanding and perhaps full-on ignorance of the dressage training pyramid where something such as lead changes comes only after learning collection which comes at a high level, WELL ABOVE training, even preliminary event horses are.
    Is there some reason you feel it is necessary to turn this into a personal attack? Many dressage trainers begin the lead change work before showing second, having found that instilling the counter canter too firmly can make subsequently getting a change difficult later on. (Lauren Sprieser for example has blogged about this.) This in spite of the fact that 2nd is all about counter canter and 3rd is where the changes are introduced in the tests. Somehow they find it helpful to touch upon the changes well before they are formally required in competition. I wonder why? I guess Lauren Sprieser doesn't understand the dressage training scale either, what with having brought... what is it, 5 now? ...horses to grand prix, two from complete scrath, and before turning thirty.

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    While I understand your fundamental premise (which could be summed up in one sentence rather than numerous rambling posts) that one should strive to produce a well trained horse for the level at which they compete, your suggestions of training are very much off base.
    What exactly WERE my "suggestions" about training? I said that I personally prefer having the changes and that I use them as a test of my canter. "A" test, not the one and only test. Just because I prefer something doesn't mean I am telling everyone else they have to do it my way. I prefer to ride in a double jointed albacon loose ring. I prefer not to use a martingale. I prefer a lot of things, which theoretically you could kindly allow me to prefer, even if you prefer a different thing, without attacking me about it. It could even be the case that our two points of view could coexist on the same thread without getting in a pov death match over it...

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    As noted, many of us spend maybe 2-3 days on flat work a week because we have 2 other phases to train. And, in my case, if I need to develop the confidence and boldness in a horse for XC, even less.
    Congrats, I spend 2/3 days a week on flat work too. I ride my personal horse 3-4 days a week and one of those days he jumps or does a light hack. So far he has made it to pirouettes and tempis on this schedule and is still on a strong upward trajectory. My max training schedule for a "full training" horse is 4 days a week for about 30-40 minutes each time and I try to make at least one day be a light jump school. This has not impacted any of their lead changes, so I'm not sure what doing flat work 2-3 days a week has to do with whether or not a horse can learn changes? Some of my in-training horses get a proride from me once a week and the owner does light riding one or two other days, and those horses still progress. Of course I didn't see where I was advocating making changes a "top priority" and doing them three hours a day but please feel free to post as if I had.

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    I, in no way, see the lack of changes as an indicator of a hole in the horse's training, nor as an indicator of a well balanced or trained animal. If I see a horse and rider go around the end of the ring on the counter canter still in a balanced frame (OH, WAIT THAT IS A JUDGED MOVEMENT AT INTERMEDIATE WITH A 5 LOOP SERPENTINE WITH NO LEAD CHANGES!), then I have no issue with the ride.

    Reed
    Either way it is really disappointing to me that you have resorted to such an aggressive posting style. Theoretically it would be possible for you to ride around your way with your reasons for not using changes as a test and me to ride around my way using changes as a test without you trying to aggressively stamp out my opinion from the face of the internet and tell me I have no idea about the training scale. You can still do it your way without having to try to wipe my way off the table. Other people can read about your way and about my way and make their own decision on what they'll do with their horse, without you necesarily attacking me that I have no clue about training horses. My HUNTER on the 3/4 day a week schedule that does tempis was selected by Jane Savoie to demo ride, wait for it, ...lead changes for her recent teaching clinic at Gladstone, which unfortunately we bowed out of due to Hurricane Sandy. Really amazing that she looks at a video and determines they're demo ride quality and you look at a text block on the internet which happens to differ from how you ride and start attacking me that I have no idea about the dressage training scale, which is really totally unnecessary.

    It is one thing to say you disagree, and here's why, and to have our respective points of view peacefully coexisting on the same thread, and quite another to escalate your point of view to the level of aggressive personal attack. Most everyone else has managed to disagree and explain why they do so without getting personal or aggressive about it so I wonder why you feel personal attacks are necessary to your contributions here.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Apr. 11, 2001
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eponacowgirl View Post
    At the beginning of this season, she started changing on her own. Nicely.

    Because I spent three years working on her canter and balance.

    She will also counter canter.
    THIS is actually a better indicator of not having "holes" in your training.

    I'm sorry this thread seems contentious. I've actually thought about changes in a way I haven't before and have an even better feel for how they work in the training scale as I know it and work it.

    meupatdoes brought up stretchy circles here:
    Other things that lower level horses of any discipline often don't have fully installed are...good stretchy circles
    I don't teach a horse a stretchy circle. There isn't an aid or a cue for it. I don't "install" it. I just allow the rein to lengthen and IF I have been riding the horse correctly back to front in a connection the horses OFFERS the stretch. The horse is FOLLOWING my connection in terms of longitudinal flexibility and "access."

    Some disciplines teach a horse to lower it's head on a cue. It could be the way you bump the horses mouth with the bit. Hell, it could be a whistle. I think we could all agree that a horse that lowers its head to a whistle isn't giving us a clue as to whether it is correctly connected or has a "hole" in its training.

    The flying change could be considered the same way.

    Lauren never taught her horse a "cue" for a change. Instead by riding the horse correctly and in balance the horse has learned to OFFER the change as a matter of FOLLOWING the rider's connection in terms of balance--lateral accessabilty, if you will. There's a good chance if she went to any of the numerous threads that correctly "teach" a horse the change and used those aids to cue her horse--who now does them based on the simplest of rider balance shift-- the mare would say "what the hell?!" (Then buck her off and step on her to get her to shut up and stop yelling at her...Just kidding.)

    By the same token you can "teach" a flying change as learned response to a cue. Race horses can be taught the cue of a smack on the shoulder--which doesn't say much for them as a sign of balanced riding. You can also "teach" it by manipulating the balance of a horse and getting the horse to associate the change with how you are manipulating them--inside leg at the girth, outside leg behind the girth then a clear change in your hips--a cue. Over time the aid can becomes more and more subtle until the simple shift in weight is the only aid needed and eventually the horse does the change as offering as way to follow instead of a cue response mechanism. (This is generally how a plain old canter transition is taught, then refined to be be the simplest roll of the hip without any leg involvement.)

    Nowhere has anyone suggested that teaching a young horse a change this way is "wrong." Or that hunters are "bad" (ignorant, lazy or stupid) because they teach them this way. What we are saying is that many eventers are happy to be patient for the change to be offered instead of taught and that we have found that as a movement that isn't taught first as a cue/response it is easier to deal with both the counter canter and the change while developing collection later in training. Really it is that simple.

    By the way Lauren says that she doesn't "know how to do a flying change." Actually she knows exactly how to do one classically correct, what she doesn't know is how to do one base on a cue/response mechanisim.


    Aggessive posting style is when you tell people their horses have "holes" and are not "whole horses" because they aren't trained the way you train regardless if you ride a different disipline.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subk View Post
    THIS is actually a better indicator of not having "holes" in your training.

    I'm sorry this thread seems contentious. I've actually thought about changes in a way I haven't before and have an even better feel for how they work in the training scale as I know it and work it.

    meupatdoes brought up stretchy circles here:

    I don't teach a horse a stretchy circle. There isn't an aid or a cue for it. I don't "install" it. I just allow the rein to lengthen and IF I have been riding the horse correctly back to front in a connection the horses OFFERS the stretch. The horse is FOLLOWING my connection in terms of longitudinal flexibility and "access."

    Some disciplines teach a horse to lower it's head on a cue. It could be the way you bump the horses mouth with the bit. Hell, it could be a whistle. I think we could all agree that a horse that lowers its head to a whistle isn't giving us a clue as to whether it is correctly connected or has a "hole" in its training.

    The flying change could be considered the same way.

    Lauren never taught her horse a "cue" for a change. Instead by riding the horse correctly and in balance the horse has learned to OFFER the change as a matter of FOLLOWING the rider's connection in terms of balance--lateral accessabilty, if you will. There's a good chance if she went to any of the numerous threads that correctly "teach" a horse the change and used those aids to cue her horse--who now does them based on the simplest of rider balance shift-- the mare would say "what the hell?!" (Then buck her off and step on her to get her to shut up and stop yelling at her...Just kidding.)

    By the same token you can "teach" a flying change as learned response to a cue. Race horses can be taught the cue of a smack on the shoulder--which doesn't say much for them as a sign of balanced riding. You can also "teach" it by manipulating the balance of a horse and getting the horse to associate the change with how you are manipulating them. Over time the aid can becomes more and more subtle until the simple shift in weight is the only aid needed and eventually the horse does the change as offering as way to follow instead of a cue response mechanism. (This is generally how a plain old canter transition is taught, then refined to be be the simplest roll of the hip without any leg involvement.)

    Nowhere has anyone suggested that teaching a young horse a change this way is "wrong." Or that hunters are "bad" (ignorant, lazy or stupid) because they teach them this way. What we are saying is that many eventers are happy to be patient for the change to be offered instead of taught and that we have found that as a movement that isn't taught first as a cue/response it is easier to deal with both the counter canter and the change while developing collection later in training. Really it is that simple.


    Aggessive posting style is when you tell people their horses have "holes" and are not "whole horses" because they aren't trained the way you train regardless if you ride a different disipline.
    What on earth universe are you going on about that I apparently said somewhere that teaching a horse a change is based of a trick cue? Many horses in the lower levels of all disciplines don't have stretchy circles because their understanding of contact sucks. Fix the understanding of contact in the horse and boom, stretchy circles appear. And for this reason a correctly ridden stretchy circle is a good TEST (here we go again) of the horse's foundational training. If you ask for a stretchy circle and nothing happens, guess what you need to go back to your foundational work. Yes, you can use a stretchy circle as a TEST of your horse's foundational training, and if you detect a hole in the stretchy circle, improve the horse by plugging in that hole. I am guessing people will now commence yammering that in developing prelim level horses stretchy circles aren't a "top priority," but STILL you can use them as a handy diagnostic, no? Still you will improve the overall horse if you improve whatever is kinking up the stretchy circle, no? Is it "aggressive" to say that if there is a hole in the stretchy circle there is probably a hole somewhere in the overall understanding of contact that the horse has?

    Oh wait, meupatdoes has apparently now said that every horse needs to practice stretchy circles 7 days a week and twice on Sundays and anyone who doesn't do this sucks. I nevertheless submit that if you can't get a stretchy circle without resorting to tricks or gadgets, there is, in fact, a hole in the understanding your horse has of contact. Not the end of the world, just means there is some work to be done and you haven't actually completely finished your horse's training just yet.

    I could not possibly have referred to lead changes as a TEST more repetitively in this thread. Not as a trick cue, a test of the foundation. I have repeatedly said, hey, if your horse is laterally responsive enough and well balanced the change will probably be there. Does that sound like I am teaching him to change off a whistle to you? No, that is adding up lateral responsiveness plus a half halt plus a yes ma'am to the requesting leg and voila, a change. It is use of the aids to communicate with the horse what you want him to do with his legs. I have repeatedly said, "If the horse says no to the change, I consider it beneficial to go back and school whatever the problem seems to have been and then revisit later to see if it is better then." Regardless of if you need them for competition, if the test reveals a little hink in the straightness, try some legyields down the wall and see if that makes your overall straightness better, with a side effect that the change may well be there the next time you ask.

    Not "if he says no to the change, whistle louder," but "see if you rstraightness/balance/lateral control is in solidly enough that when you change the lateral balance, the horse naturally offers the change. As a (A, not THE ONLY) symptom of all those things clicking into place to create the change."


    2 members found this post helpful.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Mar. 17, 2009
    Location
    The Mitten
    Posts
    1,136

    Default



    1 members found this post helpful.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Apr. 11, 2001
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,493

    Default

    [QUOTE=meupatdoes;6705559]I could not possibly have referred to lead changes as a TEST more repetitively in this thread. Not as a trick cue, a test of the foundation./QUOTE]

    Right, and you could not have more clearly said that if a horse does not respond to the change as a "test" then there is a fundamental hole. Yet you STILL have not addressed why horses that are so young as to not have the physicallity for good balance or have not been in training long enough to understand subtlties of weight shift or are just not correctly ridden have changes. Lots of them. Everywhere you look, out there doing changes. Like you said: "it's not hard, it's not rocket science." Yet it is a "test" in your mind indicative of solid fundementals. Wow!

    Sorry, most of the lower level horses of any displine if not all, that I see doing changes are doing them (and learned to do them) as a trick cue. If you are smart enough to develop that into something more, good for you. I think you're the exception.



  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,535

    Default

    ^ By the way, in case anyone is wondering how to disagree with someone, state your reasons why, and do so WITHOUT resorting to aggressive personal attacks, here's how.

    More than happy to discuss like this; it is obvious we approach things differently and are articulating our reasons therefore, but without either of us calling the other names or incompetent or having no idea of how to train. For what it's worth I really appreciate HOW you are having the discussion.



  12. #72
    Join Date
    Dec. 10, 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,636

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    Is there some reason you feel it is necessary to turn this into a personal attack? Many dressage trainers begin the lead change work before showing second, having found that instilling the counter canter too firmly can make subsequently getting a change difficult later on. (Lauren Sprieser for example has blogged about this.) This in spite of the fact that 2nd is all about counter canter and 3rd is where the changes are introduced in the tests. Somehow they find it helpful to touch upon the changes well before they are formally required in competition. I wonder why? I guess Lauren Sprieser doesn't understand the dressage training scale either, what with having brought... what is it, 5 now? ...horses to grand prix, two from complete scrath, and before turning thirty.
    Good for her. Very few event horses make it to third level. We are talking about TRAINING level. In training level eventing dressage, a horse and rider are required to do training level tests and only touching briefly on first, not 2nd, not third. Even prelim is still just first level movements. So, I fail to see why you keep going on about tempis and 1's on a circle when we are talking about entry level competition.



  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    Is there some reason you feel it is necessary to turn this into a personal attack? Many dressage trainers begin the lead change work before showing second, having found that instilling the counter canter too firmly can make subsequently getting a change difficult later on. (Lauren Sprieser for example has blogged about this.) This in spite of the fact that 2nd is all about counter canter and 3rd is where the changes are introduced in the tests. Somehow they find it helpful to touch upon the changes well before they are formally required in competition. I wonder why? I guess Lauren Sprieser doesn't understand the dressage training scale either, what with having brought... what is it, 5 now? ...horses to grand prix, two from complete scrath, and before turning thirty.
    And who is being aggressive? You may call my style aggressive, I say I was pointing out "holes" in you logic based on my experiences as an upper level eventer and having trained with FEI and senior USEF dressage judges.

    As for disagreeing with you, every other poster here has said the same thing. You continue to display an arrogance and unwillingness to listen to the other posters, continually pointing out how wrong we are and displaying an ignorance of what we do as eventers.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    As for disagreeing with you, every other poster here has said the same thing. You continue to display an arrogance and unwillingness to listen to the other posters, continually pointing out how wrong we are and displaying an ignorance of what we do as eventers.
    Actually, no.
    No other poster other than you has called me arrogant, ignorant, or said that I have no idea of the dressage training scale.

    If those statements were really a refutation of my logic, then someone who had no idea what the thread was about would be able to deduce from just those statements what the point of logical disgreement was. However someone who had no idea what the thread was about would only be able to deduce that you think I am arrogant.

    So once again I am wondering why you evidently think it is necessary to your allegedly logical argument on lead changes to call me arrogant and ignorant? Everyone else has displayed the ability to make their points without doing so.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Apr. 20, 2009
    Location
    Raeford, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    Actually, no.
    No other poster other than you has called me arrogant, ignorant, or said that I have no idea of the dressage training scale.
    Actually, you come across as exceptionally arrogant. Therefore any valid point you may have is being discarded in the delivery.
    "Drawing on my fine command of the English language, I said nothing" - Robert Benchley
    Cotton would fight.
    http://buildingthegrove.blogspot.com/


    4 members found this post helpful.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Jan. 14, 2012
    Posts
    452

    Default

    I guess I am going to post from a different point of view and I am ready to be flamed!

    1. I have been training with a H/J trainer since I started my 5 year old over jumps. I have been training with her for 9 months now and I have learned the most I have ever learned regarding stadium. Many event trainers don't completely dedicate a ton of time to it when it comes to perfecting the stadium course.
    2. If your horse cannot canter a course off of the counter canter, then the horse should get to know lead changes before you are jumping a 3'3'' course PERIOD! The counter canter basically needs to be just as balanced as the right lead. To me its not appropriate to be jumping around a course of that size when you have to either go to the trot to get the right lead or if your horse can't jump as well in the counter canter.
    3. Almost every horse at the barn I am jumping at know how to do lead changes. They will not do a change unless asked to do it. So, they can counter canter AND do lead changes. They are also not done incorrectly or in a manic way.

    4. If your horse can't do counter canter because it is too busy thinking about doing a lead change because it knows how to do one, then your horse isn't trained 100% correctly. We see this even at the 4**** level when we watch Rolex every year. I see time and time again a horse that won't hold the counter canter or does an ugly lead change. Well maybe if it was worked on more often and from the beginning they would be better.

    With that being said, my trainer is putting lead changes on my horse this year. He needs them because his counter canter is unbalanced and it will help him jump much better without trying to trot and then canter all of the time. It also takes time to do that when you are jumping a course. So I am ready to be flamed by everyone but I personally feel like changes should be established BEFORE training level. That's just my personal opinion.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Mar. 17, 2009
    Location
    The Mitten
    Posts
    1,136

    Default

    I'm really not trying to dig into you personally, MJ. But I guess to me, your entire post is really confirming what almost all the experienced eventers have been saying on this thread -- that EVENTERS who TRAIN THEIR OWN HORSES have OTHER PRIORITIES than "putting changes" on our BN/N/T levels horses.

    I think the point is that no one here wants to here from people WHO DON'T EVENT about how our training priorities are all wrong. Especially coming from people who compete in a world where "lunged to death" and "prepped" and "cocktail" are part of the basic vernacular of "training methods."


    1 members found this post helpful.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by baxtersmom View Post
    I think the point is that no one here wants to here from people WHO DON'T EVENT about how our training priorities are all wrong. Especially coming from people who compete in a world where "lunged to death" and "prepped" and "cocktail" are part of the basic vernacular of "training methods."
    Actually, the OP talked about comparing the hunter training to the eventer training. It wouldn't be much of a comparison if you only allow one side to participate. So it seems the OP did want to "here" about it.

    The dig about "lunged to death" and "prepped" and "cocktail" is really unecessary. You are seriously implying that that is "basic" training methods for hunters? And if "TRAINING YOUR OWN HORSE" (all caps) is a prerequisite for participation, I did train my own. From the day he was broke, number of pro rides = 0.The other one I trained from when he came off the track. I was an amateur at the time, too, btw.



  19. #79
    Join Date
    Apr. 11, 2001
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MorganJumper848 View Post
    With that being said, my trainer is putting lead changes on my horse this year. He needs them because his counter canter is unbalanced and it will help him jump much better without trying to trot and then canter all of the time. It also takes time to do that when you are jumping a course. So I am ready to be flamed by everyone but I personally feel like changes should be established BEFORE training level. That's just my personal opinion.
    In all seriousness, I think you are great for having the gonads to wade in here! I want to put a thumbs up on "did you appreciate this post." Appreciate? Yes. Agree? No.

    BUT if you are looking at a dressage training scale (and we eventers actually get marks in dressage) and your horse can't counter counter because it's unbalanced it CANNOT do a classically correct--will score well in the dressage arena--flying change. PERIOD.

    As you describe it, your trainer is installing nothing more than a party trick into your horse so he can hide that he isn't and can't be straight. Lead changes and counter canter are not about some BS "access to both sides of the horse", they are about straightness. Generally it's the last or next to last element on the dressage training pyramid.

    But you know what? I think it's great that you can go have success in YOUR sport and have fun by having your trainer "put on" lead changes. I love it that riding can be that accessible.

    One more thing. Last year I watched some of the top junior jumper riders utterly FAIL to ride a correct circle, FAIL to have even a semblance of correct connection (if they even HAD contact,) YET they came out later and jumped the socks off of 4+ foot courses. Sure, they would have kept more poles up if the flat work was better, but I'd bite my tongue off before I ever said how high they should and shouldn't be jumping!!


    3 members found this post helpful.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jun. 7, 2006
    Posts
    8,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subk View Post
    BUT if you are looking at a dressage training scale (and we eventers actually get marks in dressage) and your horse can't counter counter because it's unbalanced it CANNOT do a classically correct--will score well in the dressage arena--flying change. PERIOD.
    OK, not to be snarky here, but the dressage training scale is:

    RHYTHM -> SUPPLENESS -> CONTACT ->IMPULSION -> STRAIGHTNESS -> COLLECTION

    The order in which you develop counter canter and flying lead changes is not prescribed.

    In my experience (with which others are free to disagree), they are best worked on essentially simultaneously. First I teach the horse to pick up out of the walk a specified lead, then I pick up a counter canter up the long side and simple change to true canter for the short sides, simple change back to counter canter for the long sides, then I counter canter to a flying change before the short sides, and then I start holding the counter canter on progressively steeper curves, while still checking in with a lead change each direction per ride.



Similar Threads

  1. Teaching flying lead changes?
    By justjumpit278 in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: Aug. 16, 2011, 03:02 AM
  2. Did he REALLY get a flying lead change? Video
    By Duckz in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: Mar. 24, 2010, 09:31 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: Oct. 5, 2009, 01:49 PM
  4. Flying changes
    By GiantPonylvr in forum Dressage
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: Jan. 19, 2009, 05:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness