Menu

Stay in Touch
Sign up for ENews
Subscribe Now

Unlimited access >

Menu

Clinton Anderson training?

Dressage
#21

Ambrey - I see what you are saying. A conflict of interests so to speak. Yeah, I have seen that before. I have retrained a lot of horses so I am used to walking up to a horse and asking the horse how it was trained and going from there. Many trainers that have worked in one discipline for a long time, whether that be hunter, dressage, western, or something else, will be frustrated at working with something that is outside what they have been doing for the last 20+ years. I can see where that can be a problem as well.

Similarly, a friend took a well broke older horse to a Parelli clinic just to see if it would ‘help increase the bond’. The horse looked at her like she had suddenly grown a second head. She knew how to back up with command A, when being given command B, she just got confused. There was no point in putting any other training into an already trained horse. Just illustrating that it works both ways.

BaroquePony - The traditional method of walking with the horse next to you, opposed to behind you is to prevent getting run over by a spooking horse. The concept behind a horse walking behind you is to teach the horse that you are the lead horse. Ideally the horse should be paying full attention to you and not spooking at anything. Natural Horsemanship uses a lot of herd mentality. While a horse may jump at something,they should look to you immediately for guidance and calm down because you are calm.

I have not had any horse run over me whether they walk behind or next to me. I have had less instances of spooking and running when horses walk behind me - but I have worked with less horses that were trained with Natural Horsemanship techniques, so the data is somewhat skewed.

#22

CAs methods are very counterproductive to Dressage. The overbending and forcing the horse “off” the bit is very hard to undo. As far as the ground work, most of it appears OK, UNTIL you get to a point where you need to school a horse in hand. Then all that “smacking” on the butt till the horse faces you becomes a real problem.

If Dressage (or anything English) is your goal, buy the Klimke’s books on Training the Young Horse and Cavalletti and forget you ever heard the term Natural Horsemanship :slight_smile:

There are many good books out there by folks who have ACTUALLY done Dressage, why on earth would you even give CA a second thought?

#23

What do I think of CA?

Violates the George Carlin proved seven words you can’t say on TV.

Go to one of his ‘clinics’ reeeeeaaally early and then tell me what you think.

#24

IMO, if you are going to look at NH folks who will be more geared towards dressage, you want to look at Dennis Reis, Mark Rashid (who is awesome, but doesn’t really have a program) or Chris Cox.

I think they all have more to offer than CA for a horse that is headed for a dressage career.

#25

Similarly, a friend took a well broke older horse to a Parelli clinic just to see if it would ‘help increase the bond’. The horse looked at her like she had suddenly grown a second head. She knew how to back up with command A, when being given command B, she just got confused. There was no point in putting any other training into an already trained horse. Just illustrating that it works both ways.

funny thing is, this is what they tell people to do-work with an already trained horse. So now I’m supposed to take my already well broke, been there, done that horse-and start him from ground zero?:eek::lol:
I really wish they would tell people to go take lessons first, before buying a horse, learn to ride-before trying to train. Put the cart back where it belongs, in front of the horse.

Another part of the lunging that drives me nuts, is leaving the extra line on the ground:eek:, just another ‘safety’ part of NH that isn’t very safe.

#26

I haven’t seen much of Clinton Anderson, but what I have seen of his ground work is that he is more akin to John Lyons.
CA is much more like Parelli, they both have a lot of the same mentors. CA has ripped dressage and English riding way more then people have tried to give Parelli credit for.

Lyons is a conditioned response type trainer heavy into cues. He’s also very boring to watch.

#27

[QUOTE=7HL;3338648]
CA is much more like Parelli, they both have a lot of the same mentors. CA has ripped dressage and English riding way more then people have tried to give Parelli credit for.

Lyons is a conditioned response type trainer heavy into cues. He’s also very boring to watch.[/QUOTE]

I guess it is just what I have seen of Clinton - which is admittedly not much. I didn’t know either one ripped English and Dressage Riding. Cross them off my list of trainers to consider might have something to offer.

Lyons is boring to watch and boring to do, if you think about it - but it works for very untrusting horses because you perform each step until you and especially the horse is bored to death with it. His method works with more trusting horses as well, it just takes less repetition to be bored with it.

What I don’t like most about Parelli is the evangelist ways his followers view other riding and training styles. It is like they have seen the light and now are on the “true path”, all other training/riding techniques are the “path to the devil”. Not all Parelli students are like that, but enough are that I steer clear of him. I don’t have years to spend playing games with my horse so I can ride without a bridle - everything I compete in requires a bridle and every Parelli student or certified trainer spent at minimum 5 years before riding without a bridle. It is fine if that is what you want to do, but it is not what I want to do. They like to tell me it is the “only way”, though.

#28

My experience, as well.

[QUOTE=Ajierene;3338774]
…What I don’t like most about Parelli is the evangelist ways his followers view other riding and training styles. It is like they have seen the light and now are on the “true path”, all other training/riding techniques are the “path to the devil”…[/QUOTE]

Amen!:lol:

#29

You right!

I know that Parelli has made some comments that have offended others from other disciplines. I pretty much think however he’s refrained from making anymore statements. He does come from a cowboy background. However he and Linda are taking the program into new areas for him. I have heard him say the program is growing and changing. He also has said, he’s always learning.

Now Clinton has much more a cowboy attitude. His interests are in reining and breeding performance stock. His comments are a little rough around the edges sometimes.

As for John, yawn! If I wanted scripture I’d get it in church. The fact that he puts out certified trainers in twelve weeks, that don’t even have to have prior experience, just the money and the horses to bring to his classes, says alot about his program.

One of the major rodeblocks that I see for some of the clinicians in getting their message through is the fact they are addressing the crowd in a cowboy hat. There are those that just won’t take advise from a cowboy.

There are many good clinicians out their, even some of the worse you can get something from, even if it’s how not to do something. What works for one may not work for another.

#30

i don’t think CA’s methods would be productive for dressage. i have some friends who are really into him, and all the flexing/bending of the neck to get the horse to “drop” the bit goes exactly against dressage principles. I actually had a huge disagreement with them over whether they were riding front to back or not (they are). CA espouses getting the neck “free” (whatever the hell that means) before working on the back/haunches/whatever. but the thing that most goes against dressage is the whole bend the horse’s head back and forth until he drops the contact and slack appears in the reins.

#31

back in the day, that was called ‘Rubbernecking’ and it was THE MOST HEINOUS SIN for english riding of any type, LOL. Now it’s SELLING! LOL!

#32

It would be helpful if people who had actually seen the particular clincian work would answer this thread. Otherwise its just so much imagination and “inyourendo”, sunshine.

I watched CA work with mules, donkeys and a very nervous stock horse a couple of years ago at a clinic.

I was impressed with his ability to gain trust of the nervous horse, and his ability not to piss off the mules and donkeys, who are easily turned off some traditional training methods.

What has this to do with dressage? Not much, except he does say, if you have a hole in your groundwork and trust with the horse, it will show up amplified under saddle.

That said, I learned groundwork from traditional aboriginal horsemen, cowboys and later from a german trained FEI trainer. The methods are a little different, but the same aim of gaining trust, preceded any work under saddle.

Many roads to Rome and all. I doubt anyone who has trained a horse past second level would need the stuff that the well marketed natural horsemen teach, but don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. There is some value in a lot of the methods for those who are less experienced.

#33

I disagree with your statement, because i don’t like the groundwork or the under saddle work as far as it helping with dressage. And I have seen Clinton Anderson. I think it’s also counter productive for dressage, and tries to get the same responses as the under saddle work. I wouldn’t want a horse to have that type of ground work on him if i wanted to do dressage with him.

#34

A lot of wisdom in this…

#35

well no kidding. that’s just common sense…

#36

[QUOTE=Gucci Cowgirl;3340384]
well no kidding. that’s just common sense…[/QUOTE]

He was just pointing it out…you’d be surprised how many lack common sense!

#37

There are so many good clinicians out there so why, if you want to do dressage, would you bother with CA?

#38

You can buy just about anything on his site…

You can even buy a stock whip. Here’s what he has to say about the product. "Great for desensitizing horses to noise and movement… and let’s face it…JUST PLAIN COOL!"

#39

[QUOTE=Liz;3340390]
There are so many good clinicians out there so why, if you want to do dressage, would you bother with CA?[/QUOTE]

He’s a good horseman and many great riders/trainers are not good horseman…maybe that is what they want to learn?

#40

Bull$hit. Most good dressage riders and trainers are good horseman. Far better than Mr. CA.

He is just selling himself as a brand, he is no “superior” horseman. It is all packaging.

If you disagree then you are not riding with a good dressage rider/trainer.

Get your Digital Subscription here - only $21.95 / year

Subscribe here
See gift options

Sign up to our monthly newsletter!

By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.

Copyright © 2023 The Chronicle of the Horse