Interesting point to note…if you do pure three tracks a judge at C will not always see what they think is enough angle when you are riding it on the track. A little more and even for tracks often looks like a great three track to them.
1 Like
This is what I was thinking of… I’ve done a good 3 track shoulder in and gotten the comment “not enough angle” BUT the following day I rode in front of a higher level judge (same test, same horse), and tried to show on 4 tracks to correct the mistake from the day previously and it was noted that it was not 3 tracks. I think it really comes down to judge experience which makes it hard for us competitors
1 Like
In training, except on a very young or green horse, I shoot for 3 tracks. A prominent judge, and BNT told me early on in my riding career that a 30 degree angle was correct.
As a rule when in an arena, I ride and train as correctly as possible. Every time. every ride. That way, when riding a test, the corners take care of themselves, as do the circles, and laterals. That way my brain has only got to focus on what movement comes next, not how to ride it. Of course, with young or green horses all bets are off.:rolleyes:
And, I nag at students for the same thing.
So my vote is for three tracks, on S/I, working for 4 on H/I
1 Like
Drawings are just that, drawings.
It doesn’t necessarily portrait the reality.
They did not seem too concerned about the angles (degrees) or tracks so I guess that’s why it wasn’t mentioned.
Just look how horses were depicted prior Muybridge’s photography.
And with videos today, we now know that a pirouette cannot be physically executed in a 3 « pure » beat canter. The more collected, the less pure is the gait.
I always aim at 4 tracks, if the horse is supple enough.
The goal is to have a « mobile » (can I say that?) horse that you can play with as you want, longitudinally and lateraly. More/less angle, more/less bend, more/lesscollection … like transitions within the gait.
You correct and adjust as needed.
1 Like
You dug out a post from 8 years ago? To what end? Are you stalking me? Or just being argumentative.
These prints are from the 1700’s…long before photography was invented. The print comes from a classical horse training book.
The current OP asked about the 3 or 4 track Shoulder-In. I am attempting to answer her questions as an objective of TRAINING…NOT COMPETITION.
The above post that you quoted, and those that preceded it earlier in this thread are references to historical documents on the training of the horse.
Below is one of the classic engravings from the Duke of Newcastle’s book.
http://www.georgeglazer.com/prints/s…nv/plate17.jpg
Pls note the extreme bend and lateral work of these prints. The Duke of Newcastle prints date from the 1600-1700’s…long before the “campaign school” from which the modern Olympics evolved.
These old prints reflect the training used in the “manege school”…the training of the horse for the artistic exhibition of the very wealthy.
The “campaign school” ---- which is what current dressage COMPETITIONS are based on ----- favored the big forward galloping horse needed for war.
Some of the cavalry officers studied the academic equitation of the manege, but it was not part the formal schooling required for the 1800-1900’s cavalry.
Our modern dressage competitions date to the traditions of the modern cavalry…eg., the cavalry that used the big forward-moving galloping horse.
1 Like
Chillax a bit… :rolleyes: No one is stalking you… Go on with your life and have fun… a glass of wine maybe?
The current OP asked about the 3 or 4 track Shoulder-In. I am attempting to answer her questions as an objective of TRAINING…NOT COMPETITION.
Not my fault the OP brought back an old thread to life… I was just reading through it but ok… It’s all yours… pffff
2 Likes
Ok…point taken. It just seems this board has become quite contentious recently where a good discussion goes off the rails.
I just struck me that instead of responding to the current OP’s question, the 8-yr old post was quoted.
Late to the party, but isn’t a 4-track SI essentially just a leg yield along the rail?
1 Like
yes.
It’s been three tracks forever in competion and training (after all, good balance is good balance)…
Not sure why this is so confusing?
1 Like
I don’t know, but my trainer sure makes sure I know when I am doing it wrong. :lol: There is no usefulness to lateral movements if you’re just doing it to jab your horse’s side back and forth.
well, yes, that is what lessons are for?
Preaching to the choir here about lateral work, not sure why this post?
The best benefits are when you do in gait/btw gait transitions in lateral work and go between lateral exercises every few steps. If you (g) can’t move the shoulders or hanches in 1 step then you don’t have full control.
Well. I guess there was no point to my last post. Just small talk.
2 Likes
I don’t know whether it is “so” confusing. But it’s worthy of discussion in part because, when people go out and show at recognized shows, and perform a shoulder in on three tracks, as it’s been defined by the book, “forever”, they sometimes get back the comment “needs more angle.” This happens. Not infrequently.
So the rider asks, “If I need more angle, then, am I not going to be moving from the desired three tracks to four tracks, in order to show more angle?”
And so, people wonder whether the by-the-book description must always apply. This type of judge’s comment, “needs more angle”, was noted by posters above as the thread unfolded. And another thing noted is a bit of what we call “ring craft” in which a rider may purposely perform a shoulder in with more angle in one location in an arena versus another, depending on the test, in order to show more angle to the judge from various perspectives. The I-1 shoulder ins for example are on centerline, directly to and away from the judge at C. The judge ought to be able to see the tracks very clearly.
The Second/Third Level SIs, however, are mostly called for at the opposite end of the arena and coming at the judge out of the corner to the midpoint. From K to E or from F to B. It is much harder to tell how many tracks the horse is on, from the view at C. What’s more clear is whether the exercise is having the desired effect of compressing the horse and making it appear to grow taller at the base of the neck. If you’re showing that result and are slightly on four tracks, you are not performing it “wrong”. As people learn after getting some feedback showing those tests at those levels and beyond.
And on top of that, when a horse is more compressed from head to tail and taking more weight behind (at the FEI levels, ideally, for example) then the angle may not need to be as steep to achieve the desired result of the exercise. There are variances to take into consideration for different horse’s body types. A longer, more downhill type horse, at a lower level of schooling, simply may not be able to achieve the desired result while remaining solidly in three tracks.
I am personally of the opinion that the result is more important than the technical execution of the exercise itself. The Shoulder In is the initial exercise as we come up the levels that puts the horse/rider combination into a commitment from the inside leg into the outside rein. The horse should appear to be off, around, and ahead of the inside leg and should be contained and directed by the outside aids. It is also the first true collecting exercise. The horse should appear to shorten in his body and to grow taller at the base of the neck-- to appear more uphill.
We all attempt it with different horses and different levels of experience and other variables. And sometimes we get a positive response from the trainer, the judge, and the horse, when we’ve varied slightly from what the books say we ought to do.
And so there’s discussion. It’s not “so confusing”. But it’s not cut and dried, either.
4 Likes
I rode with Jeremy Steinberg last weekend and someone asked him the question. He was firm that shoulder in is 3 tracks; travers is four tracks. This is how I always understood it. A shoulder in has the same bend as you find in a ten meter circle, or in riding a correct corner.
As for shoulder fore, my understanding is that it means the horse is really into the outside rein from the inside leg (and kept by the outside leg from falling out)–the angle and bend in shoulder fore should be very slight–the shoulder is foreward/leading (and free) but not in. The inside hind is engaged under the center of gravity.
Janet Foy once explained it to me that regular straight riding has the horse’s “wheels” positioned four square like a roller skate; shoulder fore positions the horse more in alignment under the center of gravity, and the “wheels” are more positioned like a roller blade. For me, the effect of shoulder fore is more experienced as a much stronger recyling from the inside leg to the outside rein.
3 Likes
I think a lot depends on what you are trying to achieve. Is one using it as an training exercise or a showing movement?
1 Like
Yes - and no. I truly supple horse can execute a shoulder in on four tracks. The important thing is to look at the hind legs. If the quarters still are going straight down the long side - not angled or swinging out - then the amount you are able to bring in the shoulders can make a 4 track shoulder in. If the hindquarters are allowed to deviate outwards, the inside hind stops heading toward the center of gravity.
1 Like
I don’t think anyone is confused about it being 3 tracks in the current USEF or FEI rules. I’m asking because some people have indicated there are benefits to using the 4 track shoulder in training. Pluvinel did a pretty good job of explaining the differences in training benefits in her original response to me.
I find there is a huge range of angle to play with before you go from a 3 track shoulder in to a leg yield on the rail.
And as I mentioned earlier, even Janet Foy said that shoulder in used to be 4 tracks in competition. Which makes me wonder the context of what prompted that change in the rules. I assume there was some kind of logic behind the rule change but maybe beyond asking Foy herself I may never get the real answer. This is the book I read it in: https://www.amazon.com/Dressage-Not-So-Perfect-Horse-Opinionated-Complicated/dp/157076509X/
1 Like
Sure. Point taken. But that’s still taking a rule and bending a rule deliberately for training benefits.
I do counter si too but I know that’s a distinct element, or more or less angle in si .
Oh, oh, <raises hand> – I am a realtive dressage newby, but I just audited an “L” judges training session. At least up through second level (the training did not go beyond secnd, so I do not know about upper levels), the instructor was very clear that an SI is three tracks, has an angle of about 35 degrees (30 for travers) with no crossing behind.
t seems to my limited understanding of equine biomechanics that it would be hard to get enough angle to have four tracks without the hinds crossing.
1 Like
You are talking about “Judges Training.” Everyone agrees at SI in competition is in 3 tracks. No one is debating that point.
The OP, asked about the Shoulder-In as a training exercise. Two different concepts. Competition vs Training.
It seems that some people can only conceptualize the lateral movements as something that is done in a dressage test and not as a useful movements to help gymnasticize their horse.
Lateral work…in all its assorted variations and degrees…including the 90-degree full-pass…is horse yoga.
3 Likes
