Please explain the Western Please Quarter Horse "peanut roll"

[kdow]

My biggest question about WP is - is it a biomechanically fair thing to be asking horses to do? To my very English eye, they all look like they are moving very uncomfortably - and I don’t buy “they are bred that way” as a defense because we quite happily have bred all kinds of physical deformities into dogs for the look or movement (American German shepherds anyone?) so the fact the animal naturally moves that way does not mean it is a good way for the animals to be moving in general. And if it is a style of movement that makes the horses more likely to have soundness issues (even if they’re bred for it, because all breeds are still subject to physics) then is that a thing we should be doing?

People ask the same questions about all other types of riding, so I think it is perfectly fair to apply it to WP also. But while you can go to the dressage forum and probably hear more than you ever wanted to know about the anatomy of the horse and how these parts move relative to those parts, so far the most we’ve gotten from a WP person is something that the spine of the horse isn’t actually supposed to be able to do, with the middle of the back being the highest point.

To be fair, there are many more people on the dressage forum, so perhaps that’s it?

(Though so far we’ve also been told that you can only be a good horseman if you show, and heard “look at all those other people who do awful things!” Which is… Not actually a good defense of your own practice. “Someone else is worse!” Is pretty much only a sensible sounding argument when you’re 8.)

[aktill]

That’s the crux of my annoyance with WP. Even setting aside having to explain to many english riders that just because I have a western saddle doesn’t mean my horse limps along a la WP, the current movement pattern being rewarded sets up horses perfectly for long term damage.

I’ve tried numerous times in this thread to bring things back to movement principles that apply to the horse as an organism, but nobody really bit. Instead I was asked if I’d ever sat on a WP, heard of a few big name trainers, or taken a judging class…none of which have anything to do with whether what a WP horse is asked to do is actually in their best interests. Obfuscation at its finest, but not really helpful.

[enjoytheride]

I will wade in here and say that it’s perfectly acceptable to recognize that many disciplines have their faults while focusing on a single discipline. I don’t think it’s an effective way of arguing why you think there is nothing wrong with your discipline by saying “but look at those walking horse people! They are so much worse, why aren’t you bothering them?” It’s kind of the pot calling the kettle black.

Instead point out what you do like about your discipline, why you think the gaits are ok, and where you think showing is going. You don’t need to be showing WP to not like it, just like I don’t need to be showing saddleseat to not like some of their problems. It’s also ok to recognize problems within your own discipline while at the same time talking about someone else’s.

I personally think that horses are prepped for leadline classes in a way that is not positive for long term soundness while showing in hand is more positive for future soundness. In one it’s ok if the baby horse acts like a baby horse as long as the rest of the time he is presentable to the judge which allows for less heavy schooling. In the other it’s not ok and I think people overwork their babies to get them quiet. I believe the emphasis is on the yearling looking quiet and deadbroke and not on gaits or future potential.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=kdow;7858188]
My biggest question about WP is - is it a biomechanically fair thing to be asking horses to do? To my very English eye, they all look like they are moving very uncomfortably - and I don’t buy “they are bred that way” as a defense because we quite happily have bred all kinds of physical deformities into dogs for the look or movement (American German shepherds anyone?) so the fact the animal naturally moves that way does not mean it is a good way for the animals to be moving in general. And if it is a style of movement that makes the horses more likely to have soundness issues (even if they’re bred for it, because all breeds are still subject to physics) then is that a thing we should be doing?

People ask the same questions about all other types of riding, so I think it is perfectly fair to apply it to WP also. But while you can go to the dressage forum and probably hear more than you ever wanted to know about the anatomy of the horse and how these parts move relative to those parts, so far the most we’ve gotten from a WP person is something that the spine of the horse isn’t actually supposed to be able to do, with the middle of the back being the highest point.

To be fair, there are many more people on the dressage forum, so perhaps that’s it?

(Though so far we’ve also been told that you can only be a good horseman if you show, and heard “look at all those other people who do awful things!” Which is… Not actually a good defense of your own practice. “Someone else is worse!” Is pretty much only a sensible sounding argument when you’re 8.)[/QUOTE]

I have already explained that to ropers, dressage horses look horribly stressed and stiff and moving funny and we know what dressage riders would think of a roping horse.
To most other than five gaited show horse people, those look very strange and definitely question their soundness the way they are trained and motor around a ring.
Many minis are pure dwarves with some of those handicaps.

There is all kinds of ways we breed and train horses that some like, some don’t and you know, no one is really right there, we bred them for many purposes, not just a generic perfect nicely moving basic tarpan type horse as horses first evolved to be.
I started some wild tarpans and those were what anyone should go back if they want a “natural” horse, something not many of todays horses would fit and I can tell you, they would not have been much of a performance horse.

When it comes to domesticated horses and all we do with them, well, there really is not that much anyone can say, no matter what they ride.

[aktill]

@Bluey;7858286

I have already explained that to ropers, dressage horses look horribly stressed and stiff and moving funny and we know what dressage riders would think of a roping horse.
To most other than five gaited show horse people, those look very strange and definitely question their soundness the way they are trained and motor around a ring.
Many minis are pure dwarves with some of those handicaps.

Quite a few people are actually educated, on the other hand. Though you seem to enjoy splashing the brush of ignorance on everyone other than youself (as implied by continuing to imply that the rest of us would be surprised or included by statements of discipline specific ignorance like the above), a soft, reponsive horse is a soft, responsive horse. You could put a tutu on said horse and not get the comments like those expressed here.

Ride that horse lethargically way under tempo while claiming collection and the ignorance of others however, and we can have a repeat of this thread.

[RatWrangler]

[QUOTE=NoSuchPerson;7857910]
Very nice post, RatWrangler. I appreciate the information and explanation.[/QUOTE]

Thanks.

[sandsarita]

I have stayed out of this thread as I don’t ride western pleasure horses, but I feel like I have to say something. I have a lot of respect for a GOOD WP horse. I ride AQHA all-around Hunter horses, (used to do traditional all-around) and occasionally venture over to USEF shows (ironically my AQHA mare is unbeaten I the HUS at USEF shows, but I digress). I did all the judging competitions growing up, and was trained to look at horses critically. One of my trainers is a carded judge, the other is a current applicant and we often sit next to each other and they point out good and bad features of horses to help me further develop my eye.

HUS horses and WP in AQHA have similarities in how they move, but the HUS horse is more extended and is ridden with light contact, but have some basic ideas about lift and roundness and drive that apply to both. People on this thread keep talking about the back being the highest point in the horse. That isn’t really the case mechanically. As we are riding, we are constantly thinking about wanting the horse to “round” the back, but in reality that is driving from behind and lifting the shoulders. This is similar to USEF horses, but our QH are built to do this with the neck coming out level from the withers (and sometimes go lower). We say round the back because we are lifting our horses with our spurs and legs, so that is where WE are at and what we are working on, but mechanically we are really lifting the shoulders and aiming to get the hocks deeper underneath the horse. And sometimes this results in the horse being canted in slightly. If you watch a horse in the pasture cantering, they naturally cant in SLIGHTLY. Not like some of the trainers take it, but very very slightly.

A lot of people are jaded from the past with peanut rollers, and at smaller shows looking at how horses still go around. I don’t like how those horses go either. I will admit that there are WP horses that are trained with abusive methods, but there are those that aren’t. And I know this for a fact. A good friend of mine has some of the TOP AQHA horses (showing and breeding) and I have seen their training methods and I know that they take their pleasure horses out to the cutting pen and use them as turn back horses to give them a break. And this is world champion AQHA horses WP and WR horses. And another friend of mine also has Congress champion AQHA WP horses that while they don’t work cattle, I know they don’t use abusive methods. Now have I seen it, yep. But have I seen it at USEF shows as well, yep. I’m not blind. It’s in every type of horse shows and styles of riding.

Western pleasure needs to continue to evolve. But the hunters need to continue to evolve, as does dressage and reining. And they all are. But no matter what, nothing is going to make everybody happy no matter what.

[Wirt]

"…but in reality that is driving from behind and lifting the shoulders. This is similar to USEF horses, but our QH are built to do this with the neck coming out level from the withers (and sometimes go lower). We say round the back because we are lifting our horses with our spurs and legs, so that is where WE are at and what we are working on, but mechanically we are really lifting the shoulders and aiming to get the hocks deeper underneath the horse. And sometimes this results in the horse being canted in slightly."

You see, this is an example of where I have a problem.
If the results of driving the horses hocks underneath is the horses having to cant himself in or out or sideways, it is just wrong. It defies any classical principles of collection and straightness. It shows the trap the horse is in, trying to drive him into to fixed hands or hands that say, don’t go forward, and don’t raise your head, and get off the bit.n The result is more exaggerated head and neck movement, and the humping up of the hind end at the lope.
And add to this the necks that come out level or low, and the insistence the horse shouldn’t gets his ears above the withers.
So I get that very few horses can pull it off, and have it look normal, so that leaves all the others looking tortured into it and awkward.
And AQHA hunter under saddle?
A hunter is supposed to be a field horse, ready to jump a fence. HUS now is a parody of that at AQHA shows. A lot of them are WP horses with an English saddle going a little faster. But I would rather watch that still than WP.
My opinion, not that my opinion means squat.

I have a problem with people telling me this is athletic and good movement, when the movement is retarded, literally. Movement is diminished into barely any movement. Slowed to a point of being pointless.
To me, athleticism is movement. It is activity and articulation. It is something physically done with some authority. It is what horses are all about. But WP wants the opposite. Flat knees. No action, no life. Barely any movement. And they tell me these are athletes.

Have I mentioned that I don’t like western pleasure?

[ToTheNines]

I show USEF ( just local these days), but when my App was four, he showed no interest or talent for jumping, so I spent a year with him at breed shows. I learned a LOT. There are at least two things, IMO, the AQHA WP and HUS horse has right. I emphasize, the following are just two things I learned to look for at breed shows, which made a big difference in my taste for how a horse moves.

First, the neck coming out of the wither, relaxed and flat. In contrast, I see so many horses in the USEF with what I call a “compressed neck”. It is jammed up out of the wither.

Second, the deep hocks. Love those Quarter Horse canters for that. Look at a lot of the warmbloods – their hocks barely come under them. They lift them high and out, especially at the canter. Yes, they move fancy in front, but something tends to look wrong to me behind.

I am not saying the USEF horses should go like breed show ones of course, but I do think there is some good in the breed show. BTW, the App that I took to the breed shows that year matured and turned into a great little USEF type hunter for me. He is long bodied and just needed to spend a year learning to canter. I stuck out at the breed shows because he was not as low and slow as the others, but the people were great ad we had fun.

[enjoytheride]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17YnLlKLa4M

Here’s QH Congress from two years ago. I used to ride WP back in the day and I can tell you sitting that canter is as uncomfortable as it looks.

[KIloBright]

Thanks, ToTheNines and Sandarita for the excellent and informative posts, not that they will make an iota of difference to those here that don’t like western pleasure
I also hate that bunched up look of that neck many English horses have, and appreciate that relaxed head and neck carriage
Actually, my point of the middle of the back being the highest point, comes from the book “Breed Show HUnter Under Saddle”, by Mellisa Sexton, and it certainly includes the horse being collected , with shoulders up, moving deep hocked
Since ‘we’ that show breed, desire the same topline in both HUS and western pleasure, I will copy her statement, to clarify tot hose that care, and the rest can bash her , just to keep consistency in this thread!

'The level topline that occurs as a result of proper training, actually consists of a rounded arch that goes from the poll to the top of the hip, with the highest point being the roundness of the lifted back
You can see from the ground that a horse with this frame has lifted shoulders and is balanced over his hocks
From the saddle, you recognize that your horse is giving at the withers rather than the poll because his neck is lowered, lengthened forward and RELAXED
But if a horse is only giving at the poll, his neck will look like an accordion. He will be over flexed , with very little drop in the elevation of his neck"

That last part certainly applies to many open English horses. To each his own, and beauty is in the eyes of the beholder!

[Wirt]

[QUOTE=KIloBright;7858904]
Thanks, ToTheNines and Sandarita for the excellent and informative posts, not that they will make an iota of difference to those here that don’t like western pleasure
I also hate that bunched up look of that neck many English horses have, and appreciate that relaxed head and neck carriage
Actually, my point of the middle of the back being the highest point, comes from the book “Breed Show HUnter Under Saddle”, by Mellisa Sexton, and it certainly includes the horse being collected , with shoulders up, moving deep hocked
Since ‘we’ that show breed, desire the same topline in both HUS and western pleasure, I will copy her statement, to clarify tot hose that care, and the rest can bash her , just to keep consistency in this thread!

'The level topline that occurs as a result of proper training, actually consists of a rounded arch that goes from the poll to the top of the hip, with the highest point being the roundness of the lifted back
You can see from the ground that a horse with this frame has lifted shoulders and is balanced over his hocks
From the saddle, you recognize that your horse is giving at the withers rather than the poll because his neck is lowered, lengthened forward and RELAXED
But if a horse is only giving at the poll, his neck will look like an accordion. He will be over flexed , with very little drop in the elevation of his neck"

That last part certainly applies to many open English horses. To each his own, and beauty is in the eyes of the beholder![/QUOTE]

Never mind the fact that this is bio mechanically impossible.

The level topline, or rounded topline, description, and a relaxed long neck she gives only addresses a frame, and not movement or forward.

But can you please explain what is meant by “shoulders up” or “lifted shoulders” and also “flat knee”? (I know, I want to see if you think it means what I think it means)

The loping in the video from the congress show is in my opinion, hideous. I just cannot wrap my head around the idea that this way of loping is considered desirable in any horse.

[aktill]

I beg to differ Wirt http://slidenspin.webs.com/2%20june%202010%20008ed.jpg

[enjoytheride]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKR11sF1NmE

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

Congress 2014 Western Pleasure.

[Doctracy]

[QUOTE=enjoytheride;7858822]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17YnLlKLa4M

Here’s QH Congress from two years ago. I used to ride WP back in the day and I can tell you sitting that canter is as uncomfortable as it looks.[/QUOTE]
Terrible class. Was that a Novice class with senior horses?
As I said before, anybody can show at Congress since there’s no qualifying.

[zipperfoot]

[QUOTE=Wirt;7858958]
But can you please explain what is meant by “shoulders up” or “lifted shoulders” and also “flat knee”? (I know, I want to see if you think it means what I think it means)[/QUOTE]

Please also explain the term “deep hocks.” What does that mean?

[Wirt]

[QUOTE=aktill;7858996]
I beg to differ Wirt http://slidenspin.webs.com/2%20june%202010%20008ed.jpg[/QUOTE]

You had me for a moment. LMAO

[ToTheNines]

Wish I had a better video of him, but this one is of a mostly QH with fairly deep hocks at the canter. They could come under better, but they are low and level. Actually this video is not too bad because it is first time cantering under saddle, so this probably a good example of how he naturally goes. This is what I would look for in a youngster even for a USEF horse. In an under saddle class I would want them low and level like that, but with more separation and reaching under.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=3928800272879&set=vb.1665880789&type=3&theater

[Pocket_Pony]

I think what we have here is a difference - people confusing horsemanship (not the “NH” term, but true horsemanship) with showmanship. Some horse(wo)men also show their horses. Some show(wo)men are also keen horse(wo)men [ok, I’m not going to be PC anymore and insert (wo) to indicate women - I think we can all agree that horseman can be a gender-neutral term]. At the same time, some people are true horsemen without having any interest in showing, and some showmen have no interest in being good horsemen.

To me, a true horseman is the person who puts the horse first, the person who trains the horse according to what is in the horse’s best interest. What is in the horse’s best interest is, to me, a lifetime of health and soundness. How to achieve that (in addition to proper feed/lifestyle management) is training according to enchancing the horse’s natural movement in a biomechanically correct and efficient manner. That means that the horse is balanced laterally and longitudinally; that means the horse is allowed to carry itself in a “frame” (for lack of a better word) that is consistent with its conformation; that means that the joints are able to fully articulate; that means that the horse is supple; that means the horse moves forward at natural gaits; that means the horse, as a result of being trained according to its own physical construct and abilities, is happy in its work and has a spark of life in its eye and is interested in the work it is asked to do.

So what is showmanship? It is going into the arena (or whatever type of venue is appropriate) and playing by the rules set forth by humans - rules that have changed according to the whims of whoever or whatever committee is in charge. Within the confines of those rules, showmanship is about trying to present your horse to meet and exceed the specifications set forth by the governing body of the discipline. Showmanship is about competing against others. As long as you follow the rules in the arena dictated by the governing body, then whatever training methods you use to get there are okay because only on show day when you are competing against others do the results actually count. There is an aspect of showmanship that is about the ego. (And before you jump all over me, for most of my riding life I have been in training programs and show barns. I like to learn, take lessons, and show if/when I want to. I enjoy showing, but it is not my main focus.) But true horsemanship is not first and foremost on the list of requirements for being a good showman.

There are a lot of things about a lot of disciplines (including the disciplines I’ve ridden in/showed in) that I don’t like, so I’m not singling out any one discipline. But the bastardization of biomechanicallly correct movement in WP is appalling. If this were a thread about Big Lick horses, I’d say the same thing, but it isn’t - this is about WP. I do wonder how one can look in the eye of the horse (as evidenced by many pictures and videos posted here) and witness the dull and lifeless and pained expression and think that what they are doing is okay.

At the end of my life, when I look back on my horsey years, the thing I would be most proud of would be if I could call myself a true horseman. It is more than a life-long journey.

[Flash44]

[QUOTE=Doctracy;7859024]
Terrible class. Was that a Novice class with senior horses?
As I said before, anybody can show at Congress since there’s no qualifying.[/QUOTE]

Yes, people go to Congress just to say they went. And that video was NOVICE YOUTH. Agree with Doctracy.