We have discussed the differences between Nuno’s “dressage” and modern or competition “dressage”; several times. I will also not that the one horse in your example in a lower level frame clearly has contact on the snaffle. Comparing upper level horses in upper level movements to what people on this page are trying to teach you about the beginnings of teaching connection and contact is not a fair analogy.
2 Likes
In my example?
We have not discussed anything. This is the first time I have had a discussion like this here. You may have had this discussion with someone else, but this is the first time I’ve seen a discussion about signal vs riding on contact.
You stated unequivocally that if you weren’t riding on contact, you weren’t doing dressage. I posted a picture of Nuno because he clearly is. It made me laugh because it is the kind of seriously unhelpful response that I have gotten from others when I ask questions.
I understand contact. I actually do. Again, I’ve read the books and taken the lessons. I’m not a beginner rider, been doing this for almost 40 years, mostly in the English disciplines.
I struggle (and have always struggled) to reconcile contact with what I know about training horses. Most of the time when I have asked instructors as I’ve been learning, I’ve gotten very esoteric responses. Those are not tremendously helpful to me. I have in the past ridden on contact and gotten a horse “through” and yet there is something academically that has always escaped me.
This discussion has been useful. If you’d read my responses, you’d see how I’m turning it around in my head. This is what I’ve been seeking.
I’m not sure who you think I am, but you are responding as though you believe I’m someone else. I’m sorry that they have made you feel angry and defensive.
And yet thats exactly what we do with the leg (in both traditions 
)
I do think some of this has to do with autonomy. In the signal tradition we want the horse responding to the lightest signals we can provide. It’s baked into the theory from the ground up.
Grab my hand and try to take me anywhere and I’ll rebel. Clearly explain to me where we want to go, and what you’re looking for, then leave me alone and I’ll do my best to accommodate.
I think that is also some of the difference between the two philosophies.
I’ve also thought about this - we want the horse to become desensitized to the girth. So yes, while it does stay on - we want it to fade into the background.
I don’t want my aids to do the same thing
No, it’s not. In dressage we do not ride around with our legs off the horse. Our legs hand hold the horse just like our hands hand hold the horse. And, the hotter, more reactive the horse is, the more conscious we are of not letting that gentle contact with our legs disappear in order not to give the horse a shock with a sudden unexpected leg aid.
1 Like
I know you don’t ride around with the leg completely off (nor do I) but if you want the horse to go forward, do you give the aid and keep it on? No!
This could also be said about dressage. The goal is to have “invisible” communication with the horse.
That is why I say they are cousins. I think there is just this one little bit of philosophy that we differ on. It is ok to have these differences.
Giving the aid and reverting to ‘neutral’ is NOT equivalent to poking someone in the shoulder. We don’t give aids and leave them there at full volume for goodness sake.
I honestly don’t get why you are so convinced that dressage is such a horrible thing and that ““signal”” riding is the absolute bomb, but whatever. Done here. It’s like you’re looking to point out faults with a system that goes back hundreds of years rather what you purport to want to do - discuss and learn.
It’s like you read somewhere that it’s ok for young horses to lean on their riders and that tarnished your whole perception of good dressage. Well, there are good riders and shitty riders in all disciplines just like there are good trainers and shitty trainers in all disciplines.
1 Like
I’m not at all saying it’s a horrible thing.
I’m trying to understand two different philosophies of training. I appreciate the effort that everyone has put in. I best understood what Scribbler was saying about the origins and the difference in horses.
I’m sorry this made you upset, certainly wasn’t my intention.
I’ve taken more than a few dressage lessons. I wouldn’t ever call it abuse or horrible.
I think it depends what kind of dance you are doing. Try to waltz without contact. The contact isn’t painful or uncomfortable, necessary to accomplish the purpose.
It isn’t about grabbing the hand and pulling, clearly the is not what was said, its a form of communicating, refining that communication so signals can be transmitted subtly without disruption to the rhythm.
cheers
2 Likes
I’m not upset. I’m fed up with trying to explain something to someone who refuses to open their mind enough to see despite everyone’s efforts at making really clear descriptions and tableaux.
Understood.
I think in this case it is a matter of difference in using the bit vs not. And that’s ok. We still seek to dance. We still do all the same exercises. The bit for us is there but almost superfluous.
It’s probably not translating well because I’m not explaining that from a bridle horse perspective we don’t ride along with zero contact and then whammo, touch the bit. We don’t traipse along and surprise our horses either. That is unpleasant in any discipline.
We ride along, using our body to help direct and shape the horse, and if the horse doesn’t pick up on what we are doing, the signal bit lifts off the tongue to say “hey, the aid i gave you before that was the one you were supposed to listen to”.
Again, I think Scribblers explanation of the history (and in thinking about it) makes a ton of sense. The bridle horse tradition evolved from the Spanish methods used on Iberian horses.
Why do you see it as me not opening my mind? Puzzling something over is not the same as not being open-minded.
Again, as I have stated numerous times, the big aha for me was what Scribbler said about the origins. Thinking about that in relationship to the origins of the bridle horse made the differences in philosophy make more sense.
It seems that a lot of people also don’t understand what I am saying in relationship to the bit and signal, and that’s ok too. Bridging a gap means trying to find analogies that work.
I didn’t come here to argue this, you’ll note we are on a groundwork thread. I became a bridle horse person after changing my mind about groundwork. I used to back a lot of babies and took on a lot of problem horses. That evolution has been interesting for me, and it has made me examine everything I do with a horse very closely.
1 Like
So, having ridden and trained in a variety of both western and English disciplines…
There IS a “give” re: contact in dressage, it’s just not a give the way you think of it. A release in western training can be a bit more of a complete release of aids, especially in the beginning stages until the horse gets really light.
In dressage, at least how I’ve been taught by a few UL riders and trainers, it’s more of a “soften”. You don’t actually drop the contact, but there is enough of a softening that acts as a “yes, correct” that you’d use western riding. But it has to be at the right time, with good engagement from the HQ, or you will just teach them to lean on your hand and they fall on the forehand. It’s very fluid too, there’s a lot of movement to keep it elastic and I’ve even been instructed to occasionally give the inside rein completely to prevent any leaning on that rein, for example.
As far as softening, too, it doesn’t necessarily mean softening the contact. It can be a slight softening of your fingers, or it could be softening your body. One of the very first guys I rode with when I first started dressage, very old GP rider and trainer. He would remind me to soften even my tongue, I’d get too tense in my jaw. I was blown away by the difference in the horse I was riding by that tiny change 
Ultimately, contact isn’t a “hold”, and it’s very soft and fluid and, when done correctly, should make the horse happier and softer and relaxed. Getting to “correct” can be difficult, but it feels just lovely when you do. I’ll still ride loose rein, neck reining sometimes when goofing off, but there’s just something special about the communication that can occur when your horse is reaching for your hand while reaching under from behind. It’s like discovering a whole new dimension to riding.
5 Likes
I don’t know who is describing it as “quite heavy,” but I assure you it isn’t. With a young horse, you take a very light contact and send them forward to it. If you were riding him around on his forehand, you wouldn’t be teaching him anything of value. You begin to take more contact as the horse gains strength. You don’t just grab the reins and say go to a young horse.
2 Likes
Not a failing at all! I would enjoy teaching you on a horse. I tend to be the instructor who has to explain everything in depth because I am a person who needs to know the why of things. Don’t just tell me, do this, do that, and expect me to comply without knowing why.
3 Likes
Mr. Oliveira is riding the horse in self-carriage, which is the ultimate goal! You aren’t going to (often) see that kind of gorgeous riding in competition. But all those years of training and gymnastisizing create self-carriage you see here, and that is accomplished with contact. Also, if you scroll down the page you linked, you’ll see that he has contact on the snaffle on some of the horses. At that level, it’s an in the moment thing. I’ll tell you a secret, I really chafe at the concept that the FEI now requires “light contact” on the curb rein when riding in a double bridle. That is so wrong! And unnecessary. Contact on the snaffle, not on the curb. The curb is used sparingly and only for the minutest aids.
1 Like
Also most of the classic photos of Nuno are passage and piaffe. Horse is really collected and carrying himself, very highly educated. Those movements are the earliest foundation in the Haute Ecole progression and I expect were the “aspirational” showcase moves of his day. Today the “aspirational” show case move is the huge extended trot, and a horse/rider combo can get away with a rather rough passage/piaffe if the gaits are there. It’s just an end goal to meet a mark on the score sheet .But a rough or faked piaffe on the forehand is not going to be the foundation for levade or capriole. Modern dressage does not include airs above the ground, and modern WB are not going to be super talented in that direction unless they are having a Very Bad Day. So having a truly correct piaffe is not so crucial, since you aren’t planning on building on it for more Haute Ecole moves.
So it’s important to realize Nuno is doing a slightly different thing. He’s riding mostly baroque horses and he’s riding more in the direction of prepping for haut ecole than a modern Grand Prix dressage test. Indeed I don’t think I’ve seen any images of him riding an extended trot even. I don’t think it was the “money shot” in his day in the same way.
The only readily available current images of people training and riding to a consistent level in the old Haut Ecole tradition are of course the Spanish Riding School Lippizanners. We can see how much they differ from modern dressage. (you can find various people posting photos of backyard levade but I don’t know of any other program that goes consistently right up the levels).
The extended trot has become worth more points over time and the piaffe/passage less.
I think we’d see FEI dressage and the Spanish Riding School of Vienna as two distinct disciplines sharing a common starting point but very different today in aims, balance, technique. I don’t think the Spanish Riding School is necessarily perfect or “pure” whatever that means, but it does carry on a tradition that is closer to what Nuno would have been brought up in as a young rider in the 1920s in Portugal.
Edited to add: haute Ecole is what comes after dressage, it includes all the Lippizanner airs above the ground that were developed out of military cavalry battlefield manoeuvres and reached a high point in the 18th and 19th century.
5 Likes
Understood! I really only shared that photo because the poster was insistent that if you weren’t riding on contact, it wasn’t dressage. However, I think you’re right, the concept of it not being modern dressage is quite accurate.
I can see how the shift to the larger horse and the more extravagant extended gaits has likely changed quite a bit in the discipline - and I do think two separate disciplines (with similar language) is a great way to understand it.
