I’ve always thought of shoulder-in as three tracks - specifically three tracks in the show ring, but I’ve been following a long-lining series with Piet Bakker and he explains that the three track is shoulder-fore and the shoulder-in is four tracks.
What do you think? Do you think of three tracks or four for shoulder-in?
Also, if shoulder-in is three tracks, then what would shoulder-four be?
Three tracks.
Shoulder-fore 1/2 track. I do use four track SI when schooling sometimes, but it is very difficult to actually get that much true bend and not compromise the hind legs straight, front legs crossing.:eek:
Edit to say, just watch video, and his four track work is more like leg yield
2 Likes
Three tracks. But when showing, go a tad on to four tracks so the judge can see it clearly. If you’re stingy, they’ll think you aren’t fully on three tracks, because it’s hard to see from C. (If you want expert confirmation of this, look at Alois Podhajsky’s book “The Complete Training of the Horse and Rider.”)
2 Likes
shoulder-in = 3 tracks, shoulder-fore = 2.5 tracks (the inside hind is between the two front legs when viewed from the front.
That being said, I often school shoulder in on 4 tracks, I vary it alot, do serpentines down the track in shoulder in, go from 2.5 tracks to 4 tracks and back again, etc…
1 Like
Gueriniere was supposed to be the inventor of the shoulder-in (epaule en dedans). It is very difficult to find prints from his book, but the Diderot & D’Alembert Encyclopedie has excellent prints showing the school figures. Below is such a print
Diderot et D’Alembert 1769. Plate 14 “Manege, plan de terre de l’epaule en dedans.”
http://www.hoofprintstudio.com/store/avactis-images/pimage_361.jpg
You will see that in the old texts the “shoulder-in” was in 4 tracks. The 3-track shoulder-in is a modern invention. Anyone who says different needs to look at these old prints. You can see these plates in the reproductions of any of Gueriniere books.
Hoofprints Studio has a pretty good collection of these ancient prints showing how the old training books showed the school figures.
2 Likes
[QUOTE=Bronte;4650143]
Three tracks.
Edit to say, just watch video, and his four track work is more like leg yield[/QUOTE]
But the horse in the video has bend and I thought leg yield did not have bend.
Agree, it should be 4 tracks.
Why do you say “it should be 4 tracks”?
1 Like
[QUOTE=cute_lil_fancy_pants_pony;4650557]
Why do you say “it should be 4 tracks”?[/QUOTE]
The current definition states that shoulder-in is on three tracks. However, it is physically impossible for a horse to have the proper bend and remain strictly on three tracks.
Shoulder-fore is on 4 tracks. I do not understand the concepts of 2.5 tracks. A leg is on a track or not. ?? Shoulder-fore has relatively little if any bend.
In the show ring, show good bend and and aim for three tracks. If you are clearly on four tracks you will be marked down.
2 Likes
that’s "for not “four”
oulder-in is three tracks, then what would shoulder-four be?
shoulder in on three :yes::)tracks and shoulder fore which, no :no:one could agree on;therefore it is NOT in the USDF tests:no:
1 Like
that’s "fore not “four”
oulder-in is three tracks, then what would shoulder-four be?
shoulder in on three :yes::)tracks and shoulder fore which, no :no:one could agre on;therefore it is NOT in the USDF tests:no:
Yes - the Rule Book says that the S-I is on 3 tracks and if you clearly show 4 tracks you will be marked down by any judge that knows what they are looking at.
Schooling 4 tracks, if you can maintain the training scale (as mentioned before) is fine… just ride 3 tracks in the show ring.
2 Likes
de nemethy agreed!
with si on three tracks:yes:, it infuriated him to see judges say “show more angle” because that mean:eek:t shoulder fore and NOT:no: shoulder in; he was a graduate of the Hungarian cavalry school; and proudly and strictly :yes:
guarded that tradition, a classical one;)
Okay, now I am totally confused. Not that that takes much!
a very old idea
btw., SI predates either rule book:lol:La Guérinière is credited with “inventing” the shoulder in; My reading knowledge of French is too poor to know which number of tracks he ascribed to; does anyone know?
[QUOTE=Arathita;4650634]
Shoulder-fore is on 4 tracks. I do not understand the concepts of 2.5 tracks. A leg is on a track or not. ?? Shoulder-fore has relatively little if any bend.
In the show ring, show good bend and and aim for three tracks. If you are clearly on four tracks you will be marked down.[/QUOTE]
Bless you. :winkgrin:
Yes, for training purposes (which is where my viewpoint was coming from) shoulder in should be four tracks, as this is when the joints in the hind legs are bent enough and the horse carries more weight behind. This assumes a trained horse and that it is being done correctly and evenly on both sides, haunches not falling out, etc. Younger/greener horses will start with less angle since they cannot carry as much weight behind. Then as CapitolDesign stated, for competition purposes it should be on three tracks. So I suppose the answer to your question is really “it depends”! 
My trainer has me do S-I with the bend in the spine not the neck. The bend of spine is very slight compared to travers or renvers.
When I have too much bend in the neck she tells me that was a lovely “neck-in” and then I have to explain what I did to get it so she can learn how. Makes me more aware of what I am doing.
And it needs to be on 3 tracks, a 30 degree angle from the wall, also with energy.
1 Like
[B]Shoulder-fore is on 4 tracks. I do not understand the concepts of 2.5 tracks. A leg is on a track or not. ?? Shoulder-fore has relatively little if any bend.
In the show ring, show good bend and and aim for three tracks. If you are clearly on four tracks you will be marked down.[/B]
The idea of ‘2.5 tracks’ is confusing. It’s usually easier to just describe the position.
‘leg being on track’ kind of depends who is using the words and how. The ‘track’ can be in reference to the line of travel, where the feet land in relation to the position/angle of the body, or where the feet land in relation to where the other feet are landing. ‘track’ can refer to the rail or wall, to the prints in the sand making 3 tracks (two feet landing on the same line) or 4 tracks (all 4 feet making 4 separate tracks in the sand), or to the feet landing correctly under the body (not landing way wide).
On a straight line, all the legs are supposed to ‘track’ close to the center line of the body, as well as follow the ‘track’ the animal is supposed to be on - straight forward, circling or whatever. In the standard shoulder in, the feet make 3 tracks in the sand. Less angle and bend, is shoulder 4, and 4 tracks. MORE angle and bend, 4 tracks again, and no longer a shoulder in.
As Klimke and most others said, when the horse is more angled than a 3 track shoulder in, so it makes four tracks, that is leg yielding, not shoulder in. However much a person feels the horse is also bending, when the angle goes beyond a shoulder in, it’s leg yield.
A hundred or more years ago, a 4 track position, ie, more angle than shoulder in, was also called shoulder in, and it’s written up in some old books that way. Today, the distinction is made between a shoulder in, 3 tracks, and a leg yield - more angle than a shoulder in.
The reason is that to move at more angle than a shoulder in, the horse cannot achieve enough bend to correctly match that angle, because it cannot bend its body that much.
The smallest circle the horse can make with a correct bend is a 6 or 8 m volte, to shoulder in at more angle, the horse cannot bend correctly.
There are those who say that’s not true and follow the older books, that say there is a 4 track shoulder in, and that a well trained horse CAN bend that much.
In shows, the movement is specified as a 3 track movement, not a 4.
2 Likes
Maybe it’s over simplified by we were always told that the Spanish/Baroque type riders used 4 track. German/Dutch school uses 3.
