Catherine Haddad's latest editorial

[Forte]

I generally really enjoy Catherine’s editorial, but I have to say I found this one a bit odd. Any thoughts?

It's Time To Train The Trainers

What I took away from her editorial was that she does not want to teach anything other than pros on FEI horses at her clinics and that any trainer who allows a lower level amateur into one her clinics is being lazy and not doing their job. I realize that there are some BNT trainers who may not enjoy teaching lower level or amateur riders, and that is their right, but I find it odd that she would suggest that the trainers or organizers of the clinic are at fault for allowing mere mortals to ride in the clinics. To me this seems like a lack of communication. If she doesn’t want to teach anything other than pros on upper level horses, she should make that clear to the clinic organizers (and I guess she now has with this editorial) rather than blaming the local trainer who invites some of her students to ride in the clinic hoping that they may learn or advance their riding. Realistically, in most parts of North America, it is going to be impossible to fill a clinic with only pros riding upper level horses (perhaps in Southern California or Florida, but not in most other parts of the country). What think you COTHERS? Should the 99% not be allowed to ride in clinics with big name clinicians like Catherine?

[SendenHorse]

I get what she is saying. It is a waste of her time to work with people who can’t get the horse on the bit. There is no reason to go to her for this when the in house trainer SHOULD be able to do this.

She is asking why the lack of basics in ammys. I agree. Why can’t there be better training going on?

Why on earth would someone spend that kind of money to be told how to hold the reins?

she is a GP trainer, there are plenty of others for everyone else.

I think its a bit harsh but reality hurts sometimes.

She does need to be more clear with her expectations, its a TRAINER clinic.

[Eclectic_Horseman]

In a perfect world, she’s right. But unless she is offering her clinics for free to trainers, then she needs an economic reality check.

[McGurk]

I think it’s more of a matter of trainers not being willing to offend their well-paying but otherwise clueless clients. If I mentioned a clinic to a few advanced students in the barn, and another student, a good client, asked about attending but was aspiring to do Intro Level at an unrecognized show soon, could I tell her it was a waste of time and money to attend a clinic with an FEI level rider? Yes, I could. Could I tell her that without mortally offending her and losing her business? Difficult!

I would much prefer that the clinician had a entry bar, as in, “Catherine will be working with horses and riders successfully competing at 2nd level and above.” and “The focus of this clinic is lateral work and collection; not appropriate for green horses and/or riders competing below 2nd level. All are welcome to audit.”

This gets Catherine the appropriate participants and doesn’t put the trainer in the position of alienating paying clients.

[tja789]

Ok, I see her point. But wow what a colossal ego that woman seems to have. I’m sure she hurt a lot of feelings with that post and, if it’s widely read, she won’t remain a popular clinician. But I gather that won’t bother her much.

[suzy]

I also get what she’s saying but wonder at what level a rider must be before she is willing to teach them. She is someone I would love to have do a clinic in my area, but I wouldn’t be able to fill it if her requirements, for example, are strictly professionals riding at fourth level and up on 2 or more horses.

tja, I don’t think this is about ego; I think it’s about being realistic. It’s a waste of her time and the client’s money for her to be teaching people who don’t (as she said) even know how to put a horse on the bit. There are plenty of local trainers who can and should be filling that role. If she can fill as many clinics per year as she wants to by setting the entry level higher, more power to her. I’m just not sure it’s realistic.

[not_again]

She is spot on. We Americans need to correct our basics, learn to sweat and not whine so much!

[Forte]

[QUOTE=not again;7102189]
She is spot on. We Americans need to correct our basics, learn to sweat and not whine so much![/QUOTE]

So ammies and lower level riders are not willing to learn the basic and sweat??

[katarine]

She needs to set her own bar, that’s her fault, absolutely.

If there really were stacks of passagers-in-the-bushes that didn’t elect to come ride in her clinics- maybe they knew all about it, where it was, when it was, how much it was, and wanted no part of riding with her.

I understand her frustration, I do. I get what she is saying. But damn if she doesn’t expect someone else to manage her red carpet. That’s her job.

[MaisieMae]

Very good editorial, and I believe her to be spot on. As an “L” graduate I see many of the riders to whom she is referring, who are at the show but have no idea about very basic things like the dimensions of a dressage arena, or the elements at the bottom of the Training Scale, if they have ever even heard of the Training Scale:(

This makes me sad and frustrated, and I agree that local trainers should be more judicious about who attends shows and clinics. I realize this is not an easy task, but it is an important one.

I look at it this way–you don’t send a first grader to a graduate level course with a professor who is tops in his or her field. For me it is the same with sending a rider without a firm grasp of the basics to someone like Haddad. It’s unfair to everyone involved! Certainly any rider is is just beginning in dressage would be advised to do as much auditing of clinics with trainers with Haddad’s knowledge and experience as possible. But until they possess certain skills, they are not ready to be able to truly use and understand the information she is giving them. It’s not that anyone is stupid–it’s more about the knowledge and experience that comes with years in the saddle, studying dressage. It IS a discipline to which we hopefully humbly submit ourselves.

Ultimately she may find it difficult to fill clinics with riders who have the knowledge and skills she seeks. But on our end, I think we should take her editorial as a challenge to up our game and become better riders. At least that’s my take away from the article.

[katarine]

Realistically, in most parts of North America, it is going to be impossible to fill a clinic with only pros riding upper level horses (perhaps in Southern California or Florida, but not in most other parts of the country).

It would be impossible here in central Alabama. We have a small but strong interest in dressage, CKD was here in April (full clinic) and will be back in the Fall. Eugene Abelo comes 4-6 times a year, and GiGi Nutter recently began doing clinics, and I think those will be twice a year as well. I am confident we’ll get by without Princess Haddad, we’ll muddle on through somehow.

[suzier444]

I totally get what she’s saying and agree with her, even though I am closer to the “rank amateur progressing at the rate of a rabid garden snail” end of the spectrum. My feelings aren’t hurt at all.

I don’t think the idea is necessarily that she can’t teach the basics or doesn’t find value there or thinks she’s above it, but that if she (as a clinician) is the one teaching that stuff to the vast majority of the riders in every single clinic, the system is really, really beyond broken. I can see why that would be frustrating for her, and hell, it’s frustrating to me as the lower-level ammy, too. While I have an awesome instructor now, that hasn’t always been the case – I’ve been in a situation before (briefly) where I felt like I was relying on the monthly clinician to make any progress.

We shouldn’t have to rely on paying hundreds of dollars to receive a few clinic lessons a year in order to develop solid basics. We should be getting solid basics from our regular instructors.

(but yeah, I agree she should make her requirements known upfront)

[merrygoround]

Except for a few “hot spots” in the country, I doubt an organizer could fill a clinic at her desired level. And that is an organizer’s nightmare.

I have audited clinics where few of the riders even came near the level worth watching. I have audited other clinics where the riders thought they were far more advanced than they were, and until the clinic began, even the organizer had no idea of the true ability of the riders. But I was there not only to listen and learn but to test my evaluation of the riders and to see if my approach to teaching them would be similar to the clinician’s.

But for Catherine Haddad, I hope she likes being impecunious.

[Angelico]

The point she was trying to make got more lost everytime she said something about honoring her. She isn’t your mother and she isn’t God, why on earth should you be concerned with honoring her? She puts her pants on the same way I do, one leg at a time. She is still just a person.

I do get what she is saying, but does she realize that many people just don’t have the access to a realistic trainer? That is WHY they clinic with her. They know they are struggling and need better instruction, but they don’t have the trainer to teach them, so they assume someone as notable as her must be their best chance. Is that respecting the idea of a clinic experience? No, but when it’s your only shot at receiving some quality instruction, what else do you do?

[TickleFight]

@McGurk;7102166

I think it’s more of a matter of trainers not being willing to offend their well-paying but otherwise clueless clients. If I mentioned a clinic to a few advanced students in the barn, and another student, a good client, asked about attending but was aspiring to do Intro Level at an unrecognized show soon, could I tell her it was a waste of time and money to attend a clinic with an FEI level rider? Yes, I could. Could I tell her that without mortally offending her and losing her business? Difficult!

This says a lot about the average dressage rider. It should be common sense that spending hundreds of dollars for a 45 minute lesson in how to get the horse on the bit, or how to get the horse to canter, or how to sit the trot… is a massive waste of money. A clinician isn’t going to reinvent the wheel for them, or say anything their regular trainer isn’t already saying (or would like to say).

How can this be interpreted as offensive?

Until the average dressage student is willing to put in the time and effort to really learn and improve - and take constructive criticism and honesty from their trainer - things will stay the same.

There are too many large, fragile egos in this sport. Frankly, I’m surprised that more FEI level riders don’t attach a “2nd level and up” stipulation to their clinics.

[Lucassb]

Well… as one of those potential lower level riders this trainer would likely decline to teach, let me offer a few thoughts.

I can completely understand that some people find teaching the basics to be uninspiring, preferring instead to produce the more dramatic party tricks, so to speak. However, that attitude would lessen my regard for that trainer as a teacher. In my maybe not so humble opinion, there is really nothing more important than correct basics, and disinterest in promoting a high level of quality at that level is just, well, … kind of a bummer.

I have ridden for many, many years - in other disciplines, where I’ve had my share of success. About a year ago, I started to focus on dressage, and in that time, have had some really fabulous opportunities to ride with some BNTs who’ve done clinics at the farm where I train. They’ve all been opportunities to really take my progress to a new level, and I’ve relished them “despite” being just a lower (first) level rider.

I note that WAZ was happy to train my pro’s amateur clients as well as a couple of her fellow professionals - and everyone had great, productive rides.
Interestingly enough, while the application of his basic principles might have differed from rider to rider depending on their current skill level - the principles themselves were really repeated over and over. He admonished ALL the participants to “ride up in heaven!” whether they were simply trotting down the long side or executing a half pass or working on pirouettes. WAZ was equally attentive - and clearly just as pleased - with the riders who were successful in following that direction at the lower levels as he was with the rider who executed her first tempi changes under his tutelage. He clearly enjoyed the process of sharing his knowledge and watching the spark of understanding in the student, regardless of where they were on their journey. In my opinion, THAT is the mark of a great teacher.

Of course, I get that not everyone wants to be a great teacher. Some people just want to coach those upper level folks on very advanced horses, and obviously that is their right. But, as Eclectic Horseman wisely notes… those folks may find that that economic reality makes that a difficult approach to implement on any scale. It’s been my experience that most trainers have to have considerable financial support from their clients (and the clients of their fellow trainers) if they want to bring in a BNT trainer for a clinic opportunity. The great majority simply don’t have enough owners/sponsors to fly someone in just to train them individually.

[Lost_at_C]

I read it and wondered why she is teaching clinics if she doesn’t need the money, as her public critique of this client base would seem to suggest. I do see where she’s coming from… But riding with someone for inspiration is not a waste of most lower level amateurs’ time, although of course they could get the same practical advice from a cheaper source.

What’s really at issue is a failure on the part of instructors to thoroughly instil basic equitation skills, and yes, that should be addressed through Train-the-Trainers programmes. I hope she writes a follow-up piece that sets out a more detailed action plan and suggestions for how to achieve it!

It also wouldn’t have hurt to acknowledge that correctly training a new rider is NOT an easy thing to do, and it requires no less skill, experience and knowledge than training a horse to GP. Perhaps she should emphasise her strengths AND weaknesses when promoting clinics, if she wants to focus on the horse-training side of things.

[Eclectic_Horseman]

I find it extremely interesting that she seems to believe that dressage trainers in the USA control their clients. While some of that “control” may happen in h/j land (where so many students are young riders), it is not commonly found in the dressage world.

Am I missing something? Does CHS only allow riders into her clinics if they are referred by, sponsored by, or accredited by their trainer? I am guessing not. So then, how on earth are trainers supposed to have any control over what their clients do with their own horses and their own money?

This is the USA, Catherine. People are free to do what they like with their own horses and their own money. You also have the right to set your own rules for your clinics. I agree completely with katarine. She needs to set some rules and stop her bellyaching.

[Ibex]

Wow. I now have that much more respect for a couple of VERY BNTs I’ve watched that will happily teach us lowly, imperfect ammies, provided students turn up ready to learn and to make an effort.

[meupatdoes]

She makes several points in her post.

If you have a rank amateur who really wants the opportunity to learn from me, train that person—kick their butt—until they are good enough. Make them earn the right, not buy it.

I work on the basics of EVERY horse and rider combination with fervor, technical focus, and 99.9 percent of the time with visible results.

Our trainers need more knowledge about how to train the basics—not just for themselves, but for their students as well. And they need to motivate themselves to GET RESULTS. Don’t pass off a basic problem to a visiting clinician—it does not speak well of your own teaching skills!

I did not fly half way across the country to do YOUR job for you.

So basically, she wants trainers to learn how to train the basics better, since 95% of riders are riding lower levels anyway, (and lets be honest, this is what most trainers spend most of their time doing even if they do have a good FEI roster to ride as well)

BUT

not if it means SHE has to DEMONSTRATE to the watching trainers how SHE goes about getting those “visible results” in a student.

The trainers are supposed to learn how to train lower level riders in the same sentence she refuses to demonstrate to them how to train lower level riders.

It would be a waste of her skill set to actually train the trainers how to train. They should just know how to do it better before she gets there.

Personally I love watching my trainer and the clinicians I attend teach beginner students. The results that Eddo Hoekstra can get and the transformations he creates in one session are amazing to see. I sit there and watch with eagle eyes the teaching decisions he makes, what does he pick up on, would I have chosen the same thing to mention at that time? What would I see, what does he see? I recently watched someone who has trained multiple Pan Am medalists teach a lesson that I honestly realized I would have taught completely opposite. I watched that ride intently trying to see what he sees, why is he making that choice, why is he telling the rider the opposite of what I, in all honestly, would have come up with.

I guess Catherine Haddad doesn’t want to afford this trainer that opportunity. This trainer will have to get her “trainer” training from other trainers than her.