absolutely, the exchange rate is pretty straightforward, just nominate your most precious body organ and we’ll conveniently remove it at the gate.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Well, he’s worth it ::hmmmmmm:: I have two lungs, two kidneys, I could sell part of my liver…I don’t really need all my skin :winkgrin:
'Course if you’re willing to sell your soul to my colleague DevilEgontoast* you may…just may, get to ride.
*pronounced Devil the egontoast is (surprisingly) silent, it is england after all
Ok I’ll throw in some nose hairs, navel lint and one of my tonsils.
offtoharvestnasalhair
Ive got some spare fat Ill donate and a mole thats grown on my face complete with a hair.
A horse can indeed have “too much suspension.” A horse has to know forward, as well as up. Horses who tend to be “passagey” or that possess a good deal of suspension will often use it as an evasion tactic when the rider asks for more forward. They can tend to suck behind the bit or get stuck and do not understand FORWARD as well as they should. I know a person with a horse who was very much like that. When the horse was asked to lengthen the trot, for instance, his answer was to get very passagey instead.
And this can happen in any breed. I have a video at home of a cute little Arabian colt I was interested in purchasing. But he was all “bounce” and no “go.” He pranced around on little springs going bounce, bounce, bounce, bounce, and never did exhibit any good working gaits. He was about 2 and not under saddle of course, but when asked by the lunge whip to move out, he would swing his head around and bounce higher.
A horse like that would tend to get stuck or suck behind the bridle. A horse with that much natural suspension would rather go up and down than work forward when asked. Arabians do tend to be more bouncy and naturally animated, and have more suspension than say, the average QH or Mustang or TB cross, etc. (not always, of course.) So when looking for an Arabian prospect, you have to balance the amount of suspension with the amount of good forward working gaits, as that breed does have a tendency to have a lot of suspension.
As in everything - there needs to be a balance. Good suspension, but good working gaits as well.
too bad the test for that horrible suspension is flawed.
<<…And this can happen in any breed. I have a video at home of a cute little Arabian colt I was interested in purchasing. But he was all “bounce” and no “go.” He pranced around on little springs going bounce, bounce, bounce, bounce, and never did exhibit any good working gaits. He was about 2 and not under saddle of course, but when asked by the lunge whip to move out, he would swing his head around and bounce higher. …>>>
And that is called ‘leg-mover’ and lack of schwung.
I rest my case.
OK, I’m jumping on this late, but while he has a lot of suspension, I can’t see where anyone would get that he doesn’t move forward from his trot. The horse is 3, most horses don’t have as much push and forward impulsion as this one does. And at this age you can still see he is able to collect and lengthen his stride at the trot while maintaining his suspension.
I’m in the camp of if you don’t like him I’ll take him. grin
HOLY TROT–BATMAN!!
I’ll take him!!!
I will take that horse any day of the week. Even tho I know I couldn’t ride him at the moment (or at least, not the way he deserves to be ridden,) I’ll still take him :winkgrin:
Someone I know saw the clip and thought it looked like the rider was working very hard to sit that trot. What do you guys think??
It doesn’t look like he’s having that much trouble to me, but I have a very amateur eye for that kind of thing.
An idea. When I hear people describing dressage to a non-dressage person- ie what it is-i almost always hear the phrase “ballet on horseback” (or some derivative of that). ALMOST ALWAYS. However, as TS pointed out, it evolved from the military, and these moves were meant to be military moves. Not many people know/remember this. Extreme balance, etc were obviously needed in the military, but did they need to look pretty? Probably not 
Not used to describe dressage now, generally. However, considering it is now an artistic sport, they do. Possibly part of the reason some people aren’t reaching a consensus, even when bringing ballet dancers in as an example of supremacy in their field paralleled to Quaterback?
Sorry, just throwing that idea/my two cents out there, for what it is worth:P
Gorgeous horse, even to my uneducated eye. And I’m learning a lot by reading people’s responses!
I think the horse has an amazing ability to move through his whole body. He has a great talent for going and coming back. He also has a great talent for passage. I love the way he moves.
Still I think he is held in too short of a frame that is not right for him at this stage in his development. The first few strides as he enters the ring are very passagey, not because he is a leg mover or evading anything but because he is held up in a frame that is too confining for him.
Again maybe it is just for the stallion show because the rider is really showing him off. Maybe he is not ridden like this on a regular basis.
But if I understand what slc said earlier on this thread, everything I’ve ever been taught about dressage being derived from the military is wrong. According to her, dressage had nothing to do with the military. So I guess all the other hundreds of people who have said that it DID derive from the military are wrong. 
shrug oh well.
[QUOTE=Two Simple;2040664]
But if I understand what slc said earlier on this thread, everything I’ve ever been taught about dressage being derived from the military is wrong. According to her, dressage had nothing to do with the military. So I guess all the other hundreds of people who have said that it DID derive from the military are wrong. shrug oh well.[/QUOTE]
There was an article in Dressage Today a year or so ago debunking the idea of military derivation for dressage. While I realize that Dressage Today is not an “oracle” of dressage, it’s pretty reputable as to what the dressage establishment believes, so… The three-day event IS evolved from the military, but the dressage phase of the 3-day was originally based more on the idea of obedience and parade ground maneuvers - and was originally held as the LAST phase. Bet they got VERY obedient tests AFTER all the endurance phases were complete!
Personally, I had always questioned the supposed “battle” derivation. I hardly think that a knight in armour would have time to cue his horse to capriole or levade or courbette and a courbette-ing horse would easily be struck down by an opponent. While that might protect the rider, he’d then be on foot and more vulnerable, so military… I don’t think so.
The first few strides as he enters the ring are very passagey, not because he is a leg mover or evading anything but because he is held up in a frame that is too confining for him.
Your first nine words could be the clue to why he had a “passagey” trot. I’m surprised he didn’t jump out of his skin. To have that much poise and control when entering such an electrified environment says a ton about his temperament. I’ll forgive him his “passagey” trot.
That’s interesting - can you, or anyone, provide some links? I don’t get DT. I have seen paintings depicting horses in battle doing a capriole or levade, etc. and I do wonder where the artists got this crazy idea from, if its all false.
This isn’t the DT article but it does summarize the history of the development of the Equestrian Art.
http://www.ridingart.com/history-of-equitation.htm
[QUOTE=Two Simple;2041004]
I have seen paintings depicting horses in battle doing a capriole or levade, etc. and I do wonder where the artists got this crazy idea from, if its all false.[/QUOTE]
The same way they figured out that Jesus was a fair-skinned man with light-brown shoulder length hair and a neatly trimmed beard.
You took the words right out of my fingers…
