Groundwork: signal to yield hindquarters

[BatataHead]

I’m relatively new (last couple of years) to the idea of formal groundwork as such, but have Buck Brannaman’s 7 Clinics DVD and watch Warwick Schiller’s stuff, and have been using some of it with my horse to good effect.

Just wondering why the crouching/chasing stance to signal the horse to step over behind (Yielding HQ) is so popular? I mean where the person leans forward at the waist/crouches, and sort of cranes their neck while moving to the horse with bent knees. Some people do this quite intensely, like they are trying to rush the horse. Was it popularized by a certain clinician, or is there something inherently effective about the leaning over method? To me it looks extreme and it just bugs the heck out of me. I’m not sure I have any legitimate reason for my disapproval other than, well, I just don’t like to take a crouching stance around horses, and maybe I’m just being cranky about it.

COTHers who do groundwork - do you have a different signal or cue for disengaging the HQ/getting the horse to step across behind?

[mvp]

To me, that’s the posture and feel of a predator. Yes, it bugs the horse. But that’s the point… and it comes in a form they understand.

(Another favorite for me is looking intently at their hip and raising my hand with the rope in it as though I’m picking out the spot I’m going to hit… or where I’d pitch a rock if I had one in my hand. The horse sees my body and where I’m aiming and he moves that part of his body away from me.)

To be clear, however, you shouldn’t always have to use a signal as “loud” as “I look like I’m going to come take a chunk out of your ass if you don’t run.” Rather, the “pitcher” stance or the “ready to spring predator” stance is just the “You didn’t see the (one or several) softer signals I used before… so here’s a big one you can’t miss.”

When I have a horse trained to watch my feet, arms and posture, my movements are actually quite subtle. Raising a hand is enough to have the horse move where I have sent him. And taking a step toward him with my foot that’s closest to his tail is enough to have him take a step over with his hind end if I wanted it. I’m standing pretty straight with my belt buckle facing his heart girth. My hands are close in front of me, as if I were riding. That position is my “neutral”. Any movement from there is a signal for the horse.

[BatataHead]

Ok, the predator stance explanation makes total sense - so maybe it not an arbitrary method, but one used because the horse understands it easily. Can’t argue with that (other than the fact that I still don’t like the look of it). Laughing about your “taking a chunk out” comment. I’ve seen a lot of folks go from 0 to 60 pretty fast!

I do something similar to what you describe (basically I point with my finger and look at the body part I want to move).

Thanks for sharing your method - I’m not a dedicated follower of any one method and I like to try to get as much exposure to ways of doing things as possible. In the grand scheme of things I think safety and effectiveness are most important, but I’m also concerned with style. I want the end result to look like art (not saying i can accomplish that, but might as well have something to shoot for, right?).

[Bluey]

Also consider, for centuries people trained and worked with horses without demanding horses scoot around away from you disengaged.

In fact, it was considered poor horsemanship to have a horse do that, meant the handler is a bit too rough and has the horse spooked.

You want a horse to move nicely, slow and properly, crossing his legs over, etc., not scrambling away, many times high headed and tight.

Decide which kind of horseman you want to be, one that the horses stand at attention and respect, but also are somewhat wary of you, or the kind horses are always at ease around you and when you make a request respond nice and properly, not overreacting into a scramble, legs every which way.

The system I learned under to become a riding instructor would have let me go if I kept doing some those NH trainers do, would have been considered not good horsemanship and unbecoming of a good horseman to train with what amounts to spooking your horse first.
Not much finesse to that, you needed to learn to be more soft, to have a horse work with you without any resistances showing, the proverbial “watching paint dry” when training, no fireworks.
That was the sign of the master horseman.

[Palm_Beach]

I don’t agree with ^^. You are teaching your horse to respond to a specific cue, not to move away from you every time you move towards it. Hence the exaggerated body positions. And hence the work with both sensitizing and desensitizing exercises. As your horse learns, it will also pay closer attention to you, and it will be able to distinguish between a cue to move, and your usual movements around the horse as you groom, tack up, etc. Think of the exaggerated movements of an orchestra conductor - very clearly visible. But the orchestra does not respond in between pieces as he moves about, speaks to the audience, etc. Maybe not the best analogy…

The goal is NOT the response - it’s getting your horse into a mental mindframe where the horse pays attention, accepts and trusts you as the leader, and responds to what you are asking it to do. Once you get that mindset, your training will really move forward. The exercises are tools to get your horse mentally prepared to learn.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=Palm Beach;8615978]
I don’t agree with ^^. You are teaching your horse to respond to a specific cue, not to move away from you every time you move towards it. Hence the exaggerated body positions. And hence the work with both sensitizing and desensitizing exercises. As your horse learns, it will also pay closer attention to you, and it will be able to distinguish between a cue to move, and your usual movements around the horse as you groom, tack up, etc. Think of the exaggerated movements of an orchestra conductor - very clearly visible. But the orchestra does not respond in between pieces as he moves about, speaks to the audience, etc. Maybe not the best analogy…

The goal is NOT the response - it’s getting your horse into a mental mindframe where the horse pays attention, accepts and trusts you as the leader, and responds to what you are asking it to do. Once you get that mindset, your training will really move forward. The exercises are tools to get your horse mentally prepared to learn.[/QUOTE]

Right, but others get horses to work with them just the same without those techniques, which was my point.
Everyone has to decide how they want to train, after giving all the options a second thought.

[clanter]

most all of my ground work these days is confined to being in a stall with the horse I just tell them to Step and they move away, either pivot on the forelegs or hind whichever that is needed to provide me room;

[Altermyne]

I also follow WS, but don’t do the whole crouch thing for DE. On one of the threads on his page that came back to haunt the poster, as when she crouched to pick up a foot, the horse DE’d. I don’t want that, so instead I’ve used switching the rope hand to cue them to face me, and wait for the next cue. I don’t care if she stops between exercises, as I can cluck her on if I am working on changing directions.

I think, you adjust what you do (sometimes without actually thinking about it), as you become more finessed in your communication with your horse. At least that is what happened with me.

[Altermyne]

also, in response to Clanter, I do not do groundwork just in a stall. The ability to disengage under saddle when requested is important to my riding. The abiilty to flex laterally, with a soft feel and hand, is important to me. In order to keep these skills sharp and smooth, I practice them every time I handle my horse. Your mileage obviously is not the same as mine

[Pocket_Pony]

I remember riding in a Buck Brannaman clinic and he was talking about people who approach their horses like crouching lions getting ready to pounce. He said if he saw anyone do that in his clinic he’d kick them out (or something like that; while he was mostly joking, he made his annoyance at that stance clear).

I try to separate my hand aids. Let’s say I’m standing facing the horse’s near side and I want them to move off to my left. I have neutral position where I’ll just be standing with hands relaxed. I have the invitation to move forward where I lift the lead rope and open my left hand away from my body (and once you get your horse to understand your language, a lift of the hand turns into draping the lead rope over one finger and lifting it without putting any tension in the rope). I have the request to move the hind legs over which is bringing my hand across my body toward the haunches (again, can be done light as a feather). No crouching needed.

Intent has a lot to do with it as well. Some people’s “intent energy” may be lacking (not the clinician’s but they are trying to speak to a large audience, let’s face it, of mostly timid women who need help in their assertiveness with their horses) and so assuming such a position can help communicate their intent / transfer their energy.

I try to get my horses tuned in to me enough that the intent behind what I’m asking is clear, regardless of what I’m doing. Meaning, I can stand in front of, beside, behind (safe distance) my horses and wave my flag, make noise with it, jiggle a tarp, swing a rope, whatever - but if my intent isn’t there, then the horse doesn’t respond. When I add intent to action, then I get a response.

Long story short, though, I agree with you - I hate that posture and think it unnecessary.

[pAin_t_Misbehavin]

:lol: Wow, really? I’ve never seen anybody do the crouching thing. So glad you prepared me in case I ever do.

I just switch hands, shorten up and lift the lead rope, and walk towards the hip with my flag.

[Palm_Beach]

[QUOTE=Pocket Pony;8616258]
I remember riding in a Buck Brannaman clinic and he was talking about people who approach their horses like crouching lions getting ready to pounce. He said if he saw anyone do that in his clinic he’d kick them out (or something like that; while he was mostly joking, he made his annoyance at that stance clear).

I try to separate my hand aids. Let’s say I’m standing facing the horse’s near side and I want them to move off to my left. I have neutral position where I’ll just be standing with hands relaxed. I have the invitation to move forward where I lift the lead rope and open my left hand away from my body (and once you get your horse to understand your language, a lift of the hand turns into draping the lead rope over one finger and lifting it without putting any tension in the rope). I have the request to move the hind legs over which is bringing my hand across my body toward the haunches (again, can be done light as a feather). No crouching needed.

Intent has a lot to do with it as well. Some people’s “intent energy” may be lacking (not the clinician’s but they are trying to speak to a large audience, let’s face it, of mostly timid women who need help in their assertiveness with their horses) and so assuming such a position can help communicate their intent / transfer their energy.

I try to get my horses tuned in to me enough that the intent behind what I’m asking is clear, regardless of what I’m doing. Meaning, I can stand in front of, beside, behind (safe distance) my horses and wave my flag, make noise with it, jiggle a tarp, swing a rope, whatever - but if my intent isn’t there, then the horse doesn’t respond. When I add intent to action, then I get a response.

Long story short, though, I agree with you - I hate that posture and think it unnecessary.[/QUOTE]

I agree - I think that in the beginning, you make your cues very visible and clear. As your horse becomes more in tune with you over time, you can minimize your cues and still get the same response. BTW, I don’t do the crouching thing, I’m short enough that I might just disappear. I tend to just focus on the hip when I want the hq to move over. It’s a shaping technique.

[BeeHoney]

BatataHead, I have no idea what you are talking about, but, a properly handled horse stands still while being worked on and moves over when you ask with a touch and a cluck. Even the worst behaved horse in my barn does this. Foals born two months ago do it. There’s no need to “act like a predator.” I can’t understand why you would want a horse to be so supersensitive to moving sideways anyway. Personally, when I’m at a show or on a trail ride or out hunting I don’t want my horse moving sideways every time a “predator” approaches or if I accidentally ever impersonate a predator with a flapping jacket or a sudden movement. Also, if someone else accidentally makes a “predatory” move towards my horse I actually DON’T want my horse over reacting and stepping sideways into another horse or a spectator or off a bank down into a creek thank you very much.

I just really don’t see the use of training this technique. A few years ago I had a horse on my farm that apparently had received this kind of “training” and he was a VERY annoying horse to deal with. Any time you moved towards him–to mount, to groom, to pick a hind foot, to brush the tail, take the temp, undo blanket straps, whatever–he moved away. Frankly, I find it much more useful when people teach horses to politely stand still.

Obviously I am for some reason incapable of understanding NH, so flame me if you must, but my advice is that anyone who has this kind of time on their hands should quit fooling around and get on the horse and go riding.

[downen]

Interesting conversation. I am familiar with the NH crouching, as well as the rope twirling and snap clanking. I am not a fan of any of it.

In contrast, my daughter and I audited a George Williams clinic at Tempel Farms a few weekends ago. We were treated to a demonstration of in-hand work by the trainers with the stallions. They were working on airs above the ground, and one stallion in particular was literally explosive, firing into the air on multiple occasions. The trainer handling him was the epitome of calm, and thus the stallion’s energy never escalated into disobedience. I am certain a crouching position, wiggling of the longe line or any such exaggerated cue would have sent that particular stallion into the stratosphere. Bluey is right, horseman have been training from the ground for centuries without have to resort to what to me seems to be over the top theatrics.

[sherian]

I am with Beehoney. It is really annoying to work with a horse that has been taught that, bloody hard to fix a leg strap or paint a hind hoof for the ring when the damn horse keeps going sideways. Just teach the horse “stand” and “over”.

[Red_Barn]

I also agree with BeeHoney.

I don’t understand this bizarre fashion for making a huge production out of simple handling methods that used to be taught in a few five minute sessions, and without any fanfare whatsoever.

Now every little thing - leading, backing, “yielding” this, and “disengaging” that - is a massive psychodrama of cosmic proportions. The horses clearly hate all the drilling, and I really don’t see the point.

Seriously. Other than putting off the trauma of actually learning to ride, what is all this fussing supposed to accomplish?

[Altermyne]

@BeeHoney;8616435

BatataHead, I have no idea what you are talking about, but, a properly handled horse stands still while being worked on and moves over when you ask with a touch and a cluck. Even the worst behaved horse in my barn does this. Foals born two months ago do it. There’s no need to “act like a predator.” I can’t understand why you would want a horse to be so supersensitive to moving sideways anyway.

I think it’s like much training and the horses don’t continue to be super sensitive, once you refine your cues. If what you do is touch a flank with the flat of your hand, then cluck for a move over, it might start with a push on that flank and develop into a finger touch sensitivity.

Personally, when I’m at a show or on a trail ride or out hunting I don’t want my horse moving sideways every time a “predator” approaches or if I accidentally ever impersonate a predator with a flapping jacket or a sudden movement. Also, if someone else accidentally makes a “predatory” move towards my horse I actually DON’T want my horse over reacting and stepping sideways into another horse or a spectator or off a bank down into a creek thank you very much.

this of course, assumes “predator” is what the horse is thinking. It might not be too. When I teach my horse to respond to a cue, I also teach them not to anticipate a cue and I teach them to not respond to quickly to a cue. But you start somewhere and I would rather start with a sensitive horse then refine my cue.

I just really don’t see the use of training this technique. A few years ago I had a horse on my farm that apparently had received this kind of “training” and he was a VERY annoying horse to deal with. Any time you moved towards him–to mount, to groom, to pick a hind foot, to brush the tail, take the temp, undo blanket straps, whatever–he moved away. Frankly, I find it much more useful when people teach horses to politely stand still.

then the training was not taught to fluency. When taught to fluency, the horse does not anticipate the cue, but waits to be cued.

Obviously I am for some reason incapable of understanding NH, so flame me if you must, but my advice is that anyone who has this kind of time on their hands should quit fooling around and get on the horse and go riding.

I want my horse to know what my cues are going to be BEFORE I get on her. I want to have that solid, so she doesn’t leap out from in under me if I add my heel to her barrel or flank. That’s done in the groundwork portion, not up on top of them. You won’t get flamed by me but I will agree you are missing the point of gw.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=Altermyne;8616907]
I think it’s like much training and the horses don’t continue to be super sensitive, once you refine your cues. If what you do is touch a flank with the flat of your hand, then cluck for a move over, it might start with a push on that flank and develop into a finger touch sensitivity.

this of course, assumes “predator” is what the horse is thinking. It might not be too. When I teach my horse to respond to a cue, I also teach them not to anticipate a cue and I teach them to not respond to quickly to a cue. But you start somewhere and I would rather start with a sensitive horse then refine my cue.

then the training was not taught to fluency. When taught to fluency, the horse does not anticipate the cue, but waits to be cued.

I want my horse to know what my cues are going to be BEFORE I get on her. I want to have that solid, so she doesn’t leap out from in under me if I add my heel to her barrel or flank. That’s done in the groundwork portion, not up on top of them. You won’t get flamed by me but I will agree you are missing the point of gw.[/QUOTE]

Lets consider this, why teach a horse in a rough way, where the horse is not responding as it learns, but hurrying with stiff behaviors until it gets what is wanted?
Then refine the cues so the horse is not overreacting to them as taught initially?

How hard is then to re-teach a horse to unlearn that “grab tail and scoot” behavior initially taught because that is not what we wanted, but was what we though we needed to get the horse to learn?

Why not start with a small step, where the horse can learn without getting uptight and overreacts, so it doesn’t at all go there to get stiff and resisting at all?

Then ask for more and more, once the horse knows to take that first leaning step away, then build on that, without stirring the horse to do it?

That is the important difference here, I think.
For some, the horse needs to move, no matter how, later then teach the horse they didn’t mean to hurry and be aggressive with the demand.

For others, you teach the horse a bit as you go and in a few times of adding to your request, as the horse learns to respond quietly, you are in the right spot, without having to teach the horse to be relaxed about our requests.

Some like a horse that is alert and quick and immediately responsive.
Others give the horse time to do what is requested.
It may depend on the temperament and training and tradition of that training of the handler which way we prefer.

I suggest when training we video what we are doing.
Then use our educated eye to see what is really happening there and think about it.

[merrygoround]

I’m in Bluey’s court. I want to be able to move among the horses when they’re hanging out at rest, without them waiting for me to go into predator mode. I grumble at some because my poked finger doesn’t move them easily, but know my horses will move at a touch.

Just time and patience.

[Altermyne]

I want my horses responsive, and I know what that means to me. If you know what that means to you, and you are successful in getting it, good for you. Dull horses need to be more sensitive. Sensitive horses need to be less so. At least for my handling requirements