Clinic hell

[horsepix76]

Personally, I think there is a nationwide issue with people NOT getting their horse responsive to their seat. In my opinion, there should be no need for whips or spurs if the horse is truly on the aids. And this fault falls on the shoulders of the trainers/instructors.

I’ve seen way too many folks who, to put it simply, are overhorsed. The reason I say this is because at a recent clinic with a past Olympian, 8 of the 9 horses were WBs (most imported). The non-WB was a TB. The clinician essentially had to get on each horse (except for the TB) and resensitize it to the riders seat. Each rider had been working in spurs, which caused the horse to tense even more.

And the most interesting part to me was that the highest trained horses (those at PSG, I2, etc.) were the ones that put up the biggest fight about having to move off the rider’s seat. By fight I mean some pretty serious rearing, bucking, and spinning. The sad part was that it became obvious that the AA riders, good as they were, were too intimidated by their horses to ride through the bucks and rears. The clinician did a wonderful job of staying quiet and keeping calm persistence in asking the horse to “move off my seat NOW.” Sadly, I do wonder how long the AAs will be able to keep their horses “off the seat” after the clinic.

[P.R.E]

[QUOTE=sherie;2141408]
At my stable, trainers have most of their students in draws and spurs. I tell my clients that if your trainer puts you in draws, etc. it must mean they either don’t know how to tech or they think you’re a hopeless moron and not worthy of their sage teachings. Yeah, I get frustrated, but it just means I have to illuminate the training scale and its application in ways the individual can relate to it. I’m never bored! There is no substitutefor repetition with positive reinforcement for getting a horse forward. And now, I must prepare for the silent treatment ftom the queens tomorrow, oh wait, they don’t talk to me anyway!![/QUOTE]

I tell my friends, that there are some people in dressage that are psychics and they know exactly what other people are thinking and without any doubt they know why they do what they do. Personally I think that these psychics are “hopeless morons and not worthy of my time”.

I don’t blame the queens for not talking to you, you are so bitter and full of absolutes, that I would not talk to you either, I would be afraid of doing it.

[P.R.E]

@horsepix76;2141712

Personally, I think there is a nationwide issue with people NOT getting their horse responsive to their seat. In my opinion, there should be no need for whips or spurs if the horse is truly on the aids. And this fault falls on the shoulders of the trainers/instructors.

So in your opinion the horses of the SRS are not truly on the AIDS?

[horsepix76]

[QUOTE=P.R.E.;2142012]
So in your opinion the horses of the SRS are not truly on the AIDS?[/QUOTE]

Wow…talk about reading your own meaning into a comment.

There is a difference between a rider who wears a spur and rides off their seat (ala SRS) and a rider who wears a spur because their horse ignores them. I think the SRS does it right! Their beginners learn to ride completely from the seat on the lunge before ever learning about reins, etc. I think that’s great and find it unfortunate that most people (myself included) weren’t able to learn to ride this way (on the lunge, learning to control the horse from the seat).

[P.R.E]

[QUOTE=horsepix76;2142024]
There is a difference between a rider who wears a spur and rides off their seat (ala SRS) and a rider who wears a spur because their horse ignores them. I think the SRS does it right! Their beginners learn to ride completely from the seat on the lunge before ever learning about reins, etc. I think that’s great and find it unfortunate that most people (myself included) weren’t able to learn to ride this way (on the lunge, learning to control the horse from the seat).[/QUOTE]

That was not your original argument, your original argument was about everyone:

“In my opinion, there should be no need for whips or spurs if the horse is truly on the aids.”

That is one of the problems we have, generalization. People see something they don’t like and they make an argument that includes everyone, guilty or not.

Don’t you agree that if the horse is “truly” on the aids, that talks about the quality of the rider and that would mean that in most (not necessarily all) cases, that rider would have the skill to wear spurs and carry a whip?

[horsepix76]

Absolutely, but that quality of a rider won’t need to use them…so why wear them??

[P.R.E]

[QUOTE=horsepix76;2142057]
Absolutely, but that quality of a rider won’t need to use them…so why wear them?? ;)[/QUOTE]

Why they wear them at the SRS? because having the horse perfectly on the aids has nothing to do with wearing spurs or a whip. If you are correct rider, spurs and whip are there for more refined and on time aids.

[Brady_smom]

@Speedy Alice;2141179

Thanks for your common sense posts!

The clinician was fabulous. He insisted on correct basics - if upper level horses weren’t forward, they didn’t do upper level movements. He rode the FEI Lipizzan on Sat - this is a horse who consistently scores in the 60s. We were expecting to see P & P, canter pirouettes, etc. Instead, he rode precise circles and figures, a little half-pass, a million walk-trot transitions, and some reinback, all at a very rhythmic sitting trot, for about 20 minutes. Never cantered. He was so focused that the audience was pulled into his focus - it was absolutely quiet (this is with about 50 people watching). He finished with trotting stretchy circles. He told the owner that the stallion was missing in his basics… he was leaning and needed to transfer more weight to the hindquarters. That until this was accomplished, he should not do upper level work. The good thing is that the owner agreed - she was very happy with the instruction she got.

He was encouraging, kind, and if there were issues that might be embarrassing to the rider, he talked with them in private about it.

This sounds like an instructor so much after my own heart.

I was starting to wonder what was going on in the riding world, where instructors were doing what too many teachers of human children do - passing the kiddies through to graduation only to find the students couldn’t read their own diploma.

This instructor saw that this horse was not yet ready to be doing what he was doing, and needed to come back and develop stronger foundationals.

Not only that, but it sounds too as though he took the time to explain not only to a group, but to individuals. Excellent. That’s what I’d pay for!

Every student of any school needs encouragement along with a correction that is explanatory.

We must not demand a performance of an action without the student understanding the why as well as the what and how. Unless we are instructing a toddler (who doesn’t yet have the capacity to reason things out) we give the reason behind the directions. The rider then becomes a ‘thinking rider’, able to reason out a solution when an issue arises and the instructor is not beside them.

[Brady_smom]

[QUOTE=P.R.E.;2142054]
That was not your original argument, your original argument was about everyone:

“In my opinion, there should be no need for whips or spurs if the horse is truly on the aids.”

That is one of the problems we have, generalization. People see something they don’t like and they make an argument that includes everyone, guilty or not.

Don’t you agree that if the horse is “truly” on the aids, that talks about the quality of the rider and that would mean that in most (not necessarily all) cases, that rider would have the skill to wear spurs and carry a whip?[/QUOTE]

Is there a smilie for scratching one’s head??

If the horse is truly on the aids and completely attentive and obliging to the rider, why would that rider then need to wear spurs or carry a whip? The answer is they would not.

Are they mere decorations for the rider and horse at the apex of skill? (Pardon me, I also feel that if a horse can perform a movement in a snaffle, it should not be required to wear a double. It’s useless gear.)

If we don accoutrements that serve no purpose, then they are decorations.

So when my new horse and I are finally of one accord years from now, I shall wear a purple ostrich feather on my top hat, since that too would be useless except as decoration. But it would be a true joy to me since I adore purple…

[horsepix76]

[QUOTE=P.R.E.;2142066]
If you are correct rider, spurs and whip are there for more refined and on time aids.[/QUOTE]

I guess I’m confused then because I was under the impression that a more refined aid meant that the horse was responsive to being ridden off the seat and weight of the rider. Shouldn’t the order of aids go seat/leg/whip/spur (or spur/whip depending upon how you’re taught)?

I’m scratching my head with Brady’s Mom in that I have always been taught that the more refined and in tune the horse is to the aids, the less it should require spurs/whips to aid it. Therefore as the horse and rider become more in tune with each other, the spurs become mere decoration – or perhaps only to show how quiet the leg is and how responsive the horse is to the seat.

[AllWeatherGal]

brandy’s mom and horsepix … do you guys do piaffe and passage with your horses?

1-tempis?

[horsepix76]

Never intentially worked on P/P, but have gotten both just by inadvertantly overtensing my core muscles during collected work. Starting to think about tempis, but not yet singles.

I see where you’re going with this, but I still question whether or not spurs are truly necessary. I really do think that they’re mostly a decoration (or should be) at that level. If more than the seat is needed, shouldn’t the leg alone be enough? I mean…if the horse can feel a fly on its side, does it really require a spur? Of course, I have a very sensitive horse too, which I’m sure biases my opinion.

[AllWeatherGal]

[QUOTE=horsepix76;2142477]
if the horse can feel a fly on its side, does it really require a spur? Of course, I have a very sensitive horse too, which I’m sure biases my opinion. ;)[/QUOTE]

Ah ha! Here-in lies the “rub”.

Your spur, properly used, is a more refined as in SMALLER, more delicate, subtle and light aid than your seat or leg.

As you say, the lightest touch is all that’s needed, so your seat and legs remain quiet while your spur gives the most imperceptible little noodge!

This has nothing to do with ya-hooo-git-along-little-dogie “spurring”.

[horsepix76]

[QUOTE=AllWeatherGal;2142487]
As you say, the lightest touch is all that’s needed, so your seat and legs remain quiet while your spur gives the most imperceptible little noodge![/QUOTE]

But my point is that I don’t even need to use my leg. Just a shift in the weight through my seat is enough. If the leg does move, it is as a result of the shift in my seat – no conscious use of the leg. It is already imperceptible.

Are you suggesting that I will need more leg and that my horse will become less sensitized as I ride up the levels? I should hope this doesn’t happen…

[horsepix76]

And yahoo-gitty-up spurring wasn’t what I was talking about before either…just that the riders that I see who need spurs had horses that totally ignored their seat and leg aids, giving the rider no choice but to use the spur (because they ALLOWED the horse to ignore their seat/leg).

[P.R.E]

[QUOTE=AllWeatherGal;2142487]
Ah ha! Here-in lies the “rub”.

Your spur, properly used, is a more refined as in SMALLER, more delicate, subtle and light aid than your seat or leg.

As you say, the lightest touch is all that’s needed, so your seat and legs remain quiet while your spur gives the most imperceptible little noodge!

This has nothing to do with ya-hooo-git-along-little-dogie “spurring”.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for explaining better than I do, still working in my use of the English language.

[Tonja]

AllWeatherGal wrote:

Ah ha! Here-in lies the “rub”.

Your spur, properly used, is a more refined as in SMALLER, more delicate, subtle and light aid than your seat or leg.

The continuous presence of the rider’s seat becomes a part of the horse’s back and allows the rider an infinitely broader range of subtly than the leg or spur. The leg and spur simply remind the horse to stay attuned to the rider’s seat.

[P.R.E]

This is turning in to one of those “I am right and you don’t know **** discussions” so I am going to get in my new pair boots, my just cleaned and shinny spurs and go and do some riding.

[sm1]

Christine Traurig had a nice response to this type of ride the OP describes, Traurig basically had one terse comment, then took rider and horse down the other side of arena (auditors were on the opposite side) and schooled the rider in basics.

All other rides there was commentary and interaction with the auditors, but this rider she kept to herself. A nice way to get information across to the rider without torturing the horse and making believe to everyone that everything is “okay dokay.”

[Atlantis]

The seat is not the only aid.

The leg is also a totally legitimate proper aid. The leg aid is further refined by correct tactful use of the spur.

Some of these posts border on absurd. What’s next, if the horse is listening well enough to the seat, no reins? no bridle? no saddle?

It is easy to be judgemental and holier-than-thou, when one has not had the actual experience to realize how idealized some of their theories are.