Del Mar Live Stream

[AZ_TD]

@Equibrit

On the contrary, that video has circled the world with the word American attached.

Yes, Tempest in a Teapot!

[SendenHorse]

@Equibrit

On the contrary, that video has circled the world with the word American attached.

Yes. But I think we can separate the actions of one person here. Can’t we… ? Its also an AA. Very different than the olympics or world cup as far a how things represent the country.
is SB an American anyways? Never assume… !

[alicen]

@AZ TD

DR117.4 Riding with both hands obligatory for all tests…goes on in more detail that if rider momentarily uses one hand to pat horse or swat at a fly, no problem, but if rider uses hand off the reins to try and produce more impulsion then grounds for elimination.

I’m not convinced that she has mastered the use of the whip with rein in hand.

[LE1]

@KBC

Certainly not being obtuse, again the question was about people watching and making judgements, well it is what happens if you get in a show ring…at my local shows, a few, at bigger shows a few more…I am though not naive I know that every man and his dog has a cell phone now, and the chances are that if something goes wrong it is going to end up on the internet.

It is, again, much like the so called bullying aspect of it, if one person says it is an abusive ride, it is their opinion, when 100’s share that opinion it is called bullying. If 20, 200, 2000, 2000000 people watch it does not make any difference to the test you rode.

I still do not agree it was abusive. I watched Friday’s test and she rode better Friday, but was aggressive. Likely how she was taught—have you all not watched someone training a horse? Have you seen training methods? Do I agree with them? No, but I’ve seen my share of riding and trust me, she was not abusive–she has zero strength to be abusive. I’ve seen people leave the rings at barns I rode at in the past with spurs marks and whip marks bleeding. Of course that’s not right and no one should ever hit a horse in anger, but I don’t think I saw anger in her use of the whip, I saw focus. This is the problem with those who feel justified in saying ‘this is abuse’. What denotes abuse? By definitition we are all abusive when we ride if we use a whip and spurs—where does abuse begin? What is your definitition of over use? Every coach and trainer has a different theory on what those aids are for and will use them according to how THEY were taught. I am more disgusted seeing the top dressage riders reef their horses heads into their chests, using a method that has been flagged as abusive by the FEI, yet it a) still goes on and b) still is rewarded. A rider who is weak and using a whip one handed, who barely has the strength to stay upright in the saddle is a lot less harsh than a strong international rider who is using a method that has been flagged as abusive, but is not being marked down or eliminated.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Maybe I’ve just grown up and learned to ride in a time when people were firm with horses. Not cruel, but firm. So, the question then remains—what is firm vs what is cruel? That’s up to the judges to decide and show officials, not the internet.

[Cowgirl]

@LE

I still do not agree it was abusive. I watched Friday’s test and she rode better Friday, but was aggressive. Likely how she was taught—have you all not watched someone training a horse? Have you seen training methods? Do I agree with them? No, but I’ve seen my share of riding and trust me, she was not abusive–she has zero strength to be abusive. I’ve seen people leave the rings at barns I rode at in the past with spurs marks and whip marks bleeding. Of course that’s not right and no one should ever hit a horse in anger, but I don’t think I saw anger in her use of the whip, I saw focus. This is the problem with those who feel justified in saying ‘this is abuse’. What denotes abuse? By definitition we are all abusive when we ride if we use a whip and spurs—where does abuse begin? What is your definitition of over use? Every coach and trainer has a different theory on what those aids are for and will use them according to how THEY were taught. I am more disgusted seeing the top dressage riders reef their horses heads into their chests, using a method that has been flagged as abusive by the FEI, yet it a) still goes on and b) still is rewarded. A rider who is weak and using a whip one handed, who barely has the strength to stay upright in the saddle is a lot less harsh than a strong international rider who is using a method that has been flagged as abusive, but is not being marked down or eliminated.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Maybe I’ve just grown up and learned to ride in a time when people were firm with horses. Not cruel, but firm. So, the question then remains—what is firm vs what is cruel? That’s up to the judges to decide and show officials, not the internet.

The horse obviously disagreed with you that the ride was not abusiive: it was going along crooked with its rump away from the whip to protect itself; it was kicking out, hopping and bucking-; it was rolled up behind the vertical or leaning to stabilize the bit pressure; when she popped him in the mouth, he braced for it. It was bad. If you don’t think that is abusive, I wonder how you ride. I grew up riding hunters in the stone age–the 60s and 70s and we trained with repetition, and with lots of work on our seats and balance so we had clarity of aids. The true test is if you can ride that level without a whip or spur and your horse does the work for you. This lady does not have the ability to be FIRM–her body was flinging every which way and completely unstable. And yes, I totally disagree with you about leaving it to the judges and show officials, because in this case it is clear that they didn’t apply the scale correctly and they didn’t protect that horse.

[skydy]

@LE

I still do not agree it was abusive. I watched Friday’s test and she rode better Friday, but was aggressive. Likely how she was taught—have you all not watched someone training a horse? Have you seen training methods? Do I agree with them? No, but I’ve seen my share of riding and trust me, she was not abusive–she has zero strength to be abusive. I’ve seen people leave the rings at barns I rode at in the past with spurs marks and whip marks bleeding. Of course that’s not right and no one should ever hit a horse in anger, but I don’t think I saw anger in her use of the whip, I saw focus. This is the problem with those who feel justified in saying ‘this is abuse’. What denotes abuse? By definitition we are all abusive when we ride if we use a whip and spurs—where does abuse begin? What is your definitition of over use? Every coach and trainer has a different theory on what those aids are for and will use them according to how THEY were taught. I am more disgusted seeing the top dressage riders reef their horses heads into their chests, using a method that has been flagged as abusive by the FEI, yet it a) still goes on and b) still is rewarded. A rider who is weak and using a whip one handed, who barely has the strength to stay upright in the saddle is a lot less harsh than a strong international rider who is using a method that has been flagged as abusive, but is not being marked down or eliminated.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Maybe I’ve just grown up and learned to ride in a time when people were firm with horses. Not cruel, but firm. So, the question then remains—what is firm vs what is cruel? That’s up to the judges to decide and show officials, not the internet.

Eh?

Cowgirl, I’m glad you had more to say to that nonsense than I could scare up.

[Sannois]

@skydy

Eh?

Cowgirl, I’m glad you had more to say to that nonsense than I could scare up.

Yeah. Me too! Wow. not abusive huh? ~Sigh~:confused:

[xQHDQ]

@LE

I still do not agree it was abusive. I watched Friday’s test and she rode better Friday, but was aggressive. Likely how she was taught—have you all not watched someone training a horse? Have you seen training methods? Do I agree with them? No, but I’ve seen my share of riding and trust me, she was not abusive–she has zero strength to be abusive. I’ve seen people leave the rings at barns I rode at in the past with spurs marks and whip marks bleeding. Of course that’s not right and no one should ever hit a horse in anger, but I don’t think I saw anger in her use of the whip, I saw focus. This is the problem with those who feel justified in saying ‘this is abuse’. What denotes abuse? By definitition we are all abusive when we ride if we use a whip and spurs—where does abuse begin? What is your definitition of over use? Every coach and trainer has a different theory on what those aids are for and will use them according to how THEY were taught. I am more disgusted seeing the top dressage riders reef their horses heads into their chests, using a method that has been flagged as abusive by the FEI, yet it a) still goes on and b) still is rewarded. A rider who is weak and using a whip one handed, who barely has the strength to stay upright in the saddle is a lot less harsh than a strong international rider who is using a method that has been flagged as abusive, but is not being marked down or eliminated.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Maybe I’ve just grown up and learned to ride in a time when people were firm with horses. Not cruel, but firm. So, the question then remains—what is firm vs what is cruel? That’s up to the judges to decide and show officials, not the internet.

Remember, this is a well-trained horse. Watch rides under his previous owner. He did not need such aggressive “training”. It was also obvious that her actions were having an effect, so she had enough strength in that regard - he was excessively BTV and kicked out a number of times, among other resistance as Axel pointed out in his commentary.

[Just1Alter]

@LE

I still do not agree it was abusive. I watched Friday’s test and she rode better Friday, but was aggressive.

…

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Maybe I’ve just grown up and learned to ride in a time when people were firm with horses. Not cruel, but firm. So, the question then remains—what is firm vs what is cruel? That’s up to the judges to decide and show officials, not the internet.

Yanking a horse in the mouth with a double bridle is not firm, that is, no questions asked, abusive. Especially now that research has shown how sensitive not only the horse’s mouth is, but their face/cheek/nose are.

To repeat this act multiple times during a ride… I feel for that poor horse.

What is considered cruel is not only up to judges & show officials to decide.
It is up to the rider to behave appropriately on her horse at all times. To have her horse’s best interest in mind. It may not always happen, but if the rider has no problem displaying these acts in the show ring, then I can only image what happens when she is riding at home when not being judged.

No one is being forced to show or ride. No one is holding a gun to your head to ride perfectly. No horse wants to be ridden with such harsh aids for an hour each day. This is “hobby” that should be enjoyed, not abused.

[CFFarm]

@Just1Alter

Yanking a horse in the mouth with a double bridle is not firm, that is, no questions asked, abusive. Especially now that research has shown how sensitive not only the horse’s mouth is, but their face/cheek/nose are.

To repeat this act multiple times during a ride… I feel for that poor horse.

What is considered cruel is not only up to judges & show officials to decide.
It is up to the rider to behave appropriately on her horse at all times. To have her horse’s best interest in mind. It may not always happen, but if the rider has no problem displaying these acts in the show ring, then I can only image what happens when she is riding at home when not being judged.

No one is being forced to show or ride. No one is holding a gun to your head to ride perfectly. No horse wants to be ridden with such harsh aids for an hour each day. This is “hobby” that should be enjoyed, not abused.

Agreed. Maybe it’s time for a “classical” or “non-competitive” dressage forum if LE and others think this is just a matter of opinion.

[Bellathemustang]

@Cowgirl

The horse obviously disagreed with you that the ride was not abusiive: it was going along crooked with its rump away from the whip to protect itself; it was kicking out, hopping and bucking-; it was rolled up behind the vertical or leaning to stabilize the bit pressure; when she popped him in the mouth, he braced for it. It was bad. If you don’t think that is abusive, I wonder how you ride. I grew up riding hunters in the stone age–the 60s and 70s and we trained with repetition, and with lots of work on our seats and balance so we had clarity of aids. The true test is if you can ride that level without a whip or spur and your horse does the work for you. This lady does not have the ability to be FIRM–her body was flinging every which way and completely unstable. And yes, I totally disagree with you about leaving it to the judges and show officials, because in this case it is clear that they didn’t apply the scale correctly and they didn’t protect that horse.

Thank you! Whips and spurs should be additional aids, you should not use them until you can use your natural aids 100% effectively. I sure know I don’t need them, as I have a long way to go with my natural aids.

And as for abuse or not, ask the other party, in this case, the horse. The horse is speaking very clearly. As horsemen we need to listen.

[MysticOakRanch]

@LE

I still do not agree it was abusive.

I’ve seen people leave the rings at barns I rode at in the past with spurs marks and whip marks bleeding.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. Maybe I’ve just grown up and learned to ride in a time when people were firm with horses. Not cruel, but firm. So, the question then remains—what is firm vs what is cruel? That’s up to the judges to decide and show officials, not the internet.

Your post really makes me - sad. I am not in a full training situation, but I do take lessons, and I do clinic with a few clinicians, and I can tell you I’ve NEVER seen bleeding spur or whip marks. EVER. All the people I’ve ridden with are FEI trainers - meaning they have trained horses to the FEI levels. None have resorted to drawing blood. If you go through their barns, you will not see horses with wounds (except maybe turnout scrapes and bangs).

Of course we need to be FIRM in our training - and I do use a whip, and I do ride with spurs. But again, my horses have no blood marks, and I’ve never had to take the reins in one hand so I could use full arm force to whip a horse. Ever. I agree it is not all roses and butterflies, but it isn’t beating and blood either. Maybe I’m not firm enough in your judgement, but I wear that badge with pride.

It is up to the judges to determine abuse in a competition, but the trainer and the horse owner really need to look inward and decide what is acceptable every single time they handle a horse. And full arm whipping and jerking a horse’s mouth when it is walking quietly on a long rein are not acceptable in almost every knowledgeable horse person’s eyes.

[Jealoushe]

This is not a difference between being firm or being abusive.

What was there to be firm about in a training sense? The horse practically did the entire test himself. He couldn’t go forward because the rider was skiing on his curb rein the entire test. She hit him over and over and over again for not being forward but he was in an impossible spot, where to go forward was to have his teeth pulled out by the over bearing curb rein.

Stand a horse in cross ties and whip them to make them go forward. Only to rip their teeth out when they do. Continue this cycle. THAT would be seen as abuse. Only difference here is there is a rider on top.

[Silverbridge]

I only saw the video the day it occurred and I have not reviewed it since, so I may be wrong-- but my impression was that the one-handed whipping was in the specific places where the piaffe is called for in the test.

Therefore it looked to me like she was (awkwardly and severely) trying to motivate the hind legs to piaffe.

As in where many trainers and riders tap the horse on the croup or thigh from the ground, in order to train half steps, she was attempting to reach farther back and hit a more distant part of the horse than she could reach with her hands still on the reins. It was awful but I didn’t see that she was hitting him for not being forward. I saw that she was holding him hard on the spot, and then hitting to activate. Horribly, with terrible timing, and much too hard, so that it was punishing instead of activating. And of course under those conditions, he kicked back at her and shut down in movement, more than he ever piaffed.

I need to watch it again. I didn’t see her continue the disqualifying, one-arm whipping during the canter but if she did, then my impression of her intention isn’t correct.

[mswillie]

@LE

I still do not agree it was abusive. I watched Friday’s test and she rode better Friday, but was aggressive. Likely how she was taught—have you all not watched someone training a horse? Have you seen training methods? Do I agree with them? No, but I’ve seen my share of riding and trust me, she was not abusive–she has zero strength to be abusive. I’ve seen people leave the rings at barns I rode at in the past with spurs marks and whip marks bleeding. Of course that’s not right and no one should ever hit a horse in anger, but I don’t think I saw anger in her use of the whip, I saw focus. This is the problem with those who feel justified in saying ‘this is abuse’. What denotes abuse?

Ignoring all the rest for the sake of argument, deliberately slamming the horse in the mouth as he quietly walked from the arena in what was nothing more than a spoiled fit of pique was abuse.

To call what she is doing “training” would be laughable if the horse didn’t bear the brunt of her ineptitude and hubris.

[Angela_Freda]

I agree with Jeloushe and MysticOaks, and only wish to add that by the time you get to I2, it seems to me, that having to remove ones hand from the reins to use the whip, whether to activate the hind end, or send the horse forwards, indicates a lack of finesse with the aids or training of the horse to the aids that should not be at I2

In both the use of the whip and the use of the spur, the hands on the reins… there was no nuance, not subtlety, no finesse that you expect to see in a rider at this level. I mean, isn’t that the goal? For the cues to be invisible, the movements to appear to come from the horse as if spontaneous?

[Jealoushe]

The whipping was more than just the piaffe. Definitely watch the video again.

[Cardboardoux]

In Europe you are not allowed to ride with a whip in I2. It shouldn’t be something you need really.

[Sannois]

@CFFarm

Agreed. Maybe it’s time for a “classical” or “non-competitive” dressage forum if LE and others think this is just a matter of opinion.

That post from LE has bothered me all day. Even if she is not a Dressage rider, to think those are training moments…

[Sannois]

@Angela Freda

I agree with Jeloushe and MysticOaks, and only wish to add that by the time you get to I2, it seems to me, that having to remove ones hand from the reins to use the whip, whether to activate the hind end, or send the horse forwards, indicates a lack of finesse with the aids or training of the horse to the aids that should not be at I2

In both the use of the whip and the use of the spur, the hands on the reins… there was no nuance, not subtlety, no finesse that you expect to see in a rider at this level. I mean, isn’t that the goal? For the cues to be invisible, the movements to appear to come from the horse as if spontaneous?

YES! Have some forgotten! So very sad. It is one thing for that rider to be abusive, but it saddens me so much to see people making excuses for it.