Groundwork: signal to yield hindquarters

Fascinating discussion, and very useful right at this time for me and my guy.

The ground work I’ve begun has been helpful in creating a connection with a very, very opinionated horse - successful years ago on the track - with a history - even in some race calls, of being very heady. The years since have not easily changed his opinion of himself. :wink:

Under saddle, once he gets a pattern/request down, he chooses to initiate the next step, rather than wait to be asked. Then wanting to hurry up to the next thing. So having this connection a definite improvement. He is increasingly giving up his needing to make the decisions.

And, he has some issues with balance and lead changes, so his resistance to moving over one direction, and not the other, with the explanations above make all fall into place.

His fitness also increases the attitude. I don’t need him to move over in the stall, but I do need him to focus, and to work him regularly again without his wondering if we’re shipping back to Belmont. This is helping.

[QUOTE=Red Barn;8616995]
Yep. Bluey’s right on.

Once you’ve built in these gigantic, exaggerated reactions, it’s extremely hard to get rid of them.

Suppose, for example, that you want to ride an ordinary leg yield. If you’re riding a horse that “yields” wildly at the very slightest suggestion, you’re absolutely screwed here, because the horse will evade leg aids for ever after, and you’ll never get the healthy, gymnastic bend you need for even this basic exercise to be useful - never mind actually moving on from there.

Same deal with horses that are endlessly drilled to “disengage” in the one-rein stop. Here you end up with a flabby, noodle-necked mess, and you’ll never get an honest rein contact, no matter how tactful you may be. All that drilling to “yield” simply trains them to evade contact forever, and trying to get past this is just one long nightmare.

Honestly. These points are so obvious that I can only assume that devotees of these methods really don’t care very much about the traditional ridden disciplines - at least as the rest of us know them.[/QUOTE]

If your horse is doing anything wildly, that’s not what the good horsemanship / groundwork is about. The stuff that the good horsemen promote teaches the horses to think before reacting, and it really, truly, balances them.

The two horses I’ve started from nothing move off a suggestion really well, and they were started from unhandled (and already middle-aged). So never mind any good handling put on them from birth… try thrown/left in a field.

The one-rein stop is used to stop my horses at the beginning of their training, it’s kindergarten. It’s your emergency stop when anything goes awry, and it’s my back to earth when the horse gets tense and quick about anything (this along with round-pen work that was paramount for my “separation anxiety space-cadet” mare that couldn’t deal with absolutely any stimulus from anything ever, and who pushed me to find a better way to go about training her. I was able to teach her in various ways to self soothe when she got into situations that started to worry her).
Mine have been trained from the ground to accept the ask for lateral flexion, and it translates easily to under saddle. It’s not the be all end all, its the first step. Disengaging is a completely different thing from the one-rein stop. It’s lateral flexion paired with yielding the hindquarters. I’ve never drilled my horses on it, I ride the horse I have that (or any given) day. And I use the tools that I’ve collected along the way accordingly.

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash2/v/t1.0-9/10491102_10152296956952449_3656767397242269627_n.jpg?oh=94185dc7c2c8e610dfcb448035559682&oe=57B0DD1E

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1525664_10151944866747449_1901193202_n.jpg?oh=acb4c53010f1639b6edf5a91efeaaa1e&oe=5781E0E8

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/72806_10151944866697449_1735162206_n.jpg?oh=9917665b6a6928b3aa6725b48944e8f4&oe=57739527

I don’t know if those pics will work, but this is the anxious one. She is so lovely and light in the mouth as well as responsive to the leg, and doesn’t get uptight in response to either. This was not the horse I had prior to learning some real good horsemanship skills, and I feel so fortunate that she pushed me to better myself in this area.

I’m not great, but I used to ride through anything, with a bit of finesse I’d cover up holes in training and I didn’t really ever know why I was doing things, or maybe why exactly they worked. Now I see it as truly training the horse so that anyone can get on and get the same results, not just a good rider with great feel.

[QUOTE=Palm Beach;8617962]
Bingo. When taught correctly, they pay attention and respond in a calm manner. A horse that responds wildly is not responding correctly, and the trainer needs to change something to get a better response.

I don’t worship at the “NH altar,” but I am a much better horseperson for having been exposed to it. I understand how a horse thinks (for the most part) and even better, how it learns. I never wrestle or fight or get rough with a horse and I never have bad rides. I ride a lot, and when I compete, I do so successfully.

The same helmet wearing vest wearing people I trail ride with “don’t buy into it,” but they are also sending their horses out for training because it’s behavior deteriorated, or having to go back to the barn because their horse is not behaving, or disappearing up the trail because the horse bolted when it saw a dog…

WRT disengaging the hq, it’s a handy tool. Although my horses are prepared and trained in a way that they don’t buck or bolt, there is sometimes an occasion when antics are lurking, and a few one rein stops w/disengagement gets their feet back on the ground and their brains thinking a little calmer.[/QUOTE]

This. All of this.

[QUOTE=Red Barn;8620295]

For example: if your horse(s) are regularly coping with indoor and outdoor jump courses, dressage and roadwork, how is it that they still need to practice “yielding their hindquarters” to begin with? Weren’t Turn on the Forehand and Turn on the Hindquarters part of their pre-backing basics? How have you managed to groom, blanket, and tack up if your horse(s) aren’t reasonably cooperative and maneuverable already?

:confused:

I’m not asking this stuff to be snarky or argumentative, I simply don’t get it.

So really, and in all seriousness: what does traditional, fitness-based groundwork lack in your book? What does the NH thing provide, and how does it make you “better”?[/QUOTE]

I’ll answer from my perspective. As I mentioned before, I’ve ridden for 30+ years, with most of that time in a regular training program. I’ve ridden a combination of trained horses or green horses, but also horses who had always been handled or in a training program, so there were already ground rules of how to behave and do things and get along in life.

Then I had to put a horse down and wanted a project, so I got my mustang. He had been “started” so had some ground work and round pen work and he had been used as a pack horse by a hunter. He was used to being in a herd, out in the open, and going along with his group. The handling he got was in no way refined or set up for riding horse life.

The traditional methods of what I knew from my years in h/j and dressage barns didn’t work with him, as he had never been taught that. Combine his lack of knowledge with a stallion-like personality and I had my hands full.

I am all for in-hand gymnastic work and I do use that with my horses, and my goal is always to move from crude (not meaning rough, per se, but basic and loud if necessary) to refined.

I had worked this horse at home, taken him on the trails, taken him to an XC park, taken him to a dressage show, and he handled it all great . . . until he didn’t. And I realized that there were some big holes and the “lunge him in tight side reins” wasn’t a means of fixing the holes. It may temporarily solve one problem, but it wouldn’t/couldn’t get to his brain - it would just “put him in his place” body-management-wise, but it didn’t do anything to further our communication in the way I wanted it to.

While this topic was originally about the hindquarters lion crouch (which I don’t do), obviously “ground work” is so much more than that. I used it to develop a feel between the two of us, to set a space up that is “ours” for lack of a better word. For example, at the first BB clinic I went to, he was reacting to everyone doing ground work and using their flags. It was a great place for me to say, “no, only I matter, the only person with a flag you should pay attention to is me, and I will lead you in the dance.” And it was so good for both of us (30 horses in the arena with various levels of experience, behavior, and handlers).

What in the past when lunging might be a spook and a turn tail and try to run became a spook and turn on the circle and maintain a soft line between us because I’ve got you, buddy.

What in the past would be a tense warm up with a braced horse became a soft horse ready to work (after the ground work) because we got in the groove together.

What in the past may have required a strong hold on the lead became an ability to do the work at liberty.

I’m not about doing disengagement for the sake of doing it; and, I don’t/didn’t do it exclusively. It is part of a wide range of skills and exercises that help me help my horse to mentally get in tune with me, to use his inside hind to step under himself and develop strength and balance, to soften up his back, to stretch out his body, to feel with me through a series of movements such that our connection is light and soft . . . all the things I would want under saddle.

Perhaps if I had access to a traditional english trainer who knew all of this stuff I wouldn’t have gone the route I did. But I find people sort of get stuck in their own boxes or work within the framework of what has worked for them in the past. And to be honest, how many h/j or dressage trainers want to work with a bull-headed mustang who acts like a stallion and wants to strike or scream at the ladies or throw his own version of a hissy-fit when they could be training a lovely WB or some other purpose-bred horse who is easy and likes to get along and will go to shows and represent them well?

It was up to me to take the situation into my own hands and find whatever tools I could find to make my horse a better citizen. And he is. Even though he is put together funny and still opinionated and can be bratty, I honestly don’t know what I’d do without him. We are very connected and through his stubbornness I have learned more and grown more as a horse woman than I would have had I stuck with a “traditional” program. At least for this horse.

Wanted to add that I just came in from a ride after making my last post. I haven’t really been schooling dressage in a while because I’m working through an injury. It was snowing this morning (in the 70s last weekend and supposed to be 80 this weekend!) and I almost was too lazy to ride. But I thought of this thread and thought I’d at least do some ground work with my mustang, since it has been a while. It was very good to have a refresher and turns out we had some things to work on (focus and lightness). I figured after we did our ground work then why not ride and he was very light in my hands and off my aids, soft in the bridle, and just very good overall.

So that’s the use of ground work for me - to mentally prepare/focus and physically gymnasticise the body so that when I get on to ride it is a good one.

FWIW, the ground work that I do is a combination of things I’ve learned from Buck Brannaman, Bryan Neubert, and Harry Whitney. I’ve never been interested in Parelli’s games or Clinton Anderson’s whatever.

I’ve put it all out there in my blog so you can see what kind of rider I am if you’re feeling nosy or curious. I’m just an ammie who loves my horses and loves to ride and wants to be the best horse woman I can be.

Wowser. I really appreciate the time everyone’s taken to explain their methods. Super interesting read.

:yes:

I’m trying very hard to understand all the points people have made, but I guess I’m still baffled by the idea that “NH” groundwork fills some void that other disciplines don’t cover.

For example, I’m totally on board with Pocket Pony’s statement here:

So that’s the use of ground work for me - to mentally prepare/focus and physically gymnasticise the body so that when I get on to ride it is a good one.

Right on!

The thing is, there’s groundwork and then there’s groundwork. I myself would look to somebody like Paul Belasik, maybe, or the OP’s friend Ingrid Klimke, if I wanted specific exercises and training plans to physically develop my horse. This kind of training is clearly their area of expertise, and anyone can see this in the horses they actually ride and train.

Mr Branamann, on the other hand, sounds like a very sweet, folksy guy, and I can see why he has heaps of followers. But a gymnastic wizard - not so much. Physically speaking, his horses look . . . okay. But nothing to write home about, certainly, and his teaching monologues barely address gymnastics anyhow.

And this is why I’m confused. It’s not that I have some weird aversion to groundwork per se; it’s just that I don’t see the purpose of that kind of groundwork for the averagely civilized riding horse. Wouldn’t it make more sense, if physical development for sport is the goal, to study the work of those who actually produce fit, happy, accomplished animals in one’s own chosen discipline?

Here, for instance, is Belasik actually explaining the basic principles underpinning lateral work as a gymnastic tool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja3QdD6uWys

The “NH” people never do this, either in discussing groundwork or ridden work. They tend, instead, to talk a lot about the horse’s psychology, and to catalog various kinds of behavioral or emotional resistances that might be in play - never dreaming, apparently, that the horse may simply be lacking in fitness or strength, or that the rider himself may be less than competent. (Any “NH” video of “disengaging the hindquarters” illustrates this perfectly, pretty much regardless of the practitioner.)

Does that help to illustrate my question? I feel like I’m just not being clear.

.

I use both traditional methods and what’s deemed NH methods- I like having lots of tools in my pocket. To me, everything we do with a horse is about pressure- whether it’s hand, seat, leg, posture, voice etc. And we have the options, with all of them, to take the pressure away, apply and change the “volume” as necessary. The NH methods, I think, really help the horse to understand pressure and how to react to it. I want my horses to be very soft and light and I want them to respond instantly to a feather command. I love that if I come to some crazy obstacle on the trail (where it’s safer to have them do the obstacle without me on their back) all I have to do is let them out the the end of the rein and give them a slight direction and they’ll do the obstacle. That’s not something that usually comes with traditional methods of teaching. I also feel that the NH call for the horse to think for itself more than traditional methods. I don’t want to ride 25, 50 or 100 miles having to constantly dictate the proper speed, where to place feet, etc.
If you look at a lot of the big name dressage riders, they are starting to incorporate NH methods into their training- watching someone do in hand piaffe and passage work using these methods is amazing compared to watching traditional work.

[QUOTE=tabula rashah;8621067]
. . . watching someone do in hand piaffe and passage work using these methods is amazing compared to watching traditional work.[/QUOTE]
Could you post an example of this? I’d love to see it (unless its Linda Parelli, of course, in which case I hope you’ll feel free to skip it).

:wink:

[QUOTE=tabula rashah;8621067]
I use both traditional methods and what’s deemed NH methods- I like having lots of tools in my pocket. To me, everything we do with a horse is about pressure- whether it’s hand, seat, leg, posture, voice etc. And we have the options, with all of them, to take the pressure away, apply and change the “volume” as necessary. The NH methods, I think, really help the horse to understand pressure and how to react to it. I want my horses to be very soft and light and I want them to respond instantly to a feather command. I love that if I come to some crazy obstacle on the trail (where it’s safer to have them do the obstacle without me on their back) all I have to do is let them out the the end of the rein and give them a slight direction and they’ll do the obstacle. That’s not something that usually comes with traditional methods of teaching. I also feel that the NH call for the horse to think for itself more than traditional methods. I don’t want to ride 25, 50 or 100 miles having to constantly dictate the proper speed, where to place feet, etc.
If you look at a lot of the big name dressage riders, they are starting to incorporate NH methods into their training- watching someone do in hand piaffe and passage work using these methods is amazing compared to watching traditional work.[/QUOTE]

I was doing that as a little kid riding my white mule in the mountains, when we had to get around some tricky spot I was not sure he may stumble, so I got off and went over it and asked it to follow, or sent it over first, even over some fences, etc.
That was over half a century ago, before NH was invented.

Standard training has made use of lead ropes and longe lines to send horses over jumps and other for centuries.

Late to the discussion, but the cowgirl who started my horse about 9 years ago taught me to have the horse yield the hindquarters during ground work by standing (straight) at the shoulder and raising my inside arm with the lead (held loosely) towards his hip, perhaps clucking a bit if he didn’t immediately respond. It’s always worked like a charm. Never heard of this “crouching” thing. (I will add that my horse is Appy/Arab and super-sensitive and alert - doesn’t take much to make him move ANYTHING. Perhaps a colder-blooded horse might not respond as easily to such minimal signaling?)

Here is one of many, many videos out there on this “crouch”, for those that are not sure what is being talked about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRrH9UJsD4Y

It also helps to twirl your rope at the horse’s hind end, in case it is not minding your crouch, that will sure get it moving, especially if it was whacked over that before.

Wow there are so many posts I want to reply to - I wish I could hit the pause button on this thread until I had time to jump back into the conversation. Continuing to read with interest

[QUOTE=Bluey;8621114]
Here is one of many, many videos out there on this “crouch”, for those that are not sure what is being talked about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRrH9UJsD4Y

It also helps to twirl your rope at the horse’s hind end, in case it is not minding your crouch, that will sure get it moving, especially if it was whacked over that before.[/QUOTE]
Yes. This is an example of a quiet crouch without a lot of energy or big movements. While the really exaggerated crouch and dash style prompted my original question/post, this is still a good example of a posture that just bugs me. It looks weirdly artificial and tentative / unsure to me.

[QUOTE=Bluey;8621114]
Here is one of many, many videos out there on this “crouch”, for those that are not sure what is being talked about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRrH9UJsD4Y

It also helps to twirl your rope at the horse’s hind end, in case it is not minding your crouch, that will sure get it moving, especially if it was whacked over that before.[/QUOTE]
The handler looks like she’s either cowering or constipated, and the poor horse looks like she’s so hot in that blanket that she might pass out at any moment.

I have to say, I’m seriously under-impressed.

[QUOTE=CVPeg;8620464]
Fascinating discussion, and very useful right at this time for me and my guy.

The ground work I’ve begun has been helpful in creating a connection with a very, very opinionated horse - successful years ago on the track - with a history - even in some race calls, of being very heady. The years since have not easily changed his opinion of himself. :wink:

Under saddle, once he gets a pattern/request down, he chooses to initiate the next step, rather than wait to be asked. Then wanting to hurry up to the next thing. So having this connection a definite improvement. He is increasingly giving up his needing to make the decisions.

And, he has some issues with balance and lead changes, so his resistance to moving over one direction, and not the other, with the explanations above make all fall into place.

His fitness also increases the attitude. I don’t need him to move over in the stall, but I do need him to focus, and to work him regularly again without his wondering if we’re shipping back to Belmont. This is helping.[/QUOTE]

I agree! Also, I think we have the same horse (see highlighted above)! I love that my horse is bold and confident - I love this type of horse. And, like George Morris says, I like my horses fresh because I at least I don’t feel like I need to call the vet. However, I want that confidence and energy under my direction. I don’t want to extinguish his brilliance. I do want him to look to me for the plan.

Ah yes! I do love Mr zen master Paul Belasik. So, in my groundwork, the “yielding of the hindquarters” resembles Belasik’s Giravolta, which is a sort of turn-on-the-forehand while moving. The difference - I give my horse a bit more space and do not hold the reins or lead as close to his head (so insert the tiniest Buck Brannaman/WS modification). Additionally, I like aspects of Buck’s half circle exercise (BUT with the horse more in a traditional posture). So I might initiate a Giravolta but travel down the arena with direction changes, with my hand and body slightly further away from my horse’s chin.

Agreed re the gymnastic quote. I don’t look to Buck or Warwick for that. And, there is no horseman whose entire “program” or school I follow to the most minute degree, but most of my horsemanship is grounded in more traditional methods, with Buck and Warwick surprising and interesting new addition, or interest.[\quote]

The “NH” people never do this, either in discussing groundwork or ridden work. They tend, instead, to talk a lot about the horse’s psychology, and to catalog various kinds of behavioral or emotional resistances that might be in play - never dreaming, apparently, that the horse may simply be lacking in fitness or strength, or that the rider himself may be less than competent. (Any “NH” video of “disengaging the hindquarters” illustrates this perfectly, pretty much regardless of the practitioner.)

Does that help to illustrate my question? I feel like I’m just not being clear.
.

Yes, I think I understand where you’re coming from and I think we agree. You mentioned that you do a bit of groundwork - I suspect what you and I do might be similar. My interested in Buck and Warwick is surprising to me because normally I would avoid that world. I’m interested that I’ve found they have something extra to add.

Ok, think of a hearty, sustaining meal laid out on a table. For me, Buck and Warwick are condiments and Waldemar Seunig is the Roast . I didn’t think I liked or needed condiments. And I don’t necessarily need anything on the condiment tray - the Roast sustains me. But I’ve found, to my surprise, that a dash of hot sauce here and a pickled onion on the side there makes things better. And I’m kinda surprised. Condiments! Who knew?

Wait - I feel an ice cream sundae analogy coming on…

[QUOTE=Bluey;8621092]
I was doing that as a little kid riding my white mule in the mountains, when we had to get around some tricky spot I was not sure he may stumble, so I got off and went over it and asked it to follow, or sent it over first, even over some fences, etc.
That was over half a century ago, before NH was invented.

Standard training has made use of lead ropes and longe lines to send horses over jumps and other for centuries.[/QUOTE]

So what? Why does it matter if people call it something different than what you called it many years ago? It’s still a solid training tool even if I wanted to call it Tiger Hotdog. NH is simply a brand name on something that’s been around forever. Lots of us can see through the crap of the trainers like Parelli and take what’s useful out.

[QUOTE=Red Barn;8621080]
Could you post an example of this? I’d love to see it (unless its Linda Parelli, of course, in which case I hope you’ll feel free to skip it).

;)[/QUOTE]

Look up info on Morten Thomsen and Tristan Tucker. I’ve had the pleasure of working with both:) Usually any sessions they do are private so I’m not sure how much video is out there.

[QUOTE=tabula rashah;8621336]
It’s still a solid training tool even if I wanted to call it Tiger Hotdog. [/QUOTE]

Tiger Hotdog Training - I love it!

[QUOTE=tabula rashah;8621342]
Look up info on Morten Thomsen and Tristan Tucker. I’ve had the pleasure of working with both:) Usually any sessions they do are private so I’m not sure how much video is out there.[/QUOTE]

Interesting - I see Morten Thomsen and Ingrid Klimke have worked together. Will check into him and TT.