Nope…you’re showing your age…or I’m showing mine.
Dressage & CT, published by Ivan Bezugloff…inductee to USDF Hall of Fame.
It ceased publication in 1998. I believe Dressage Today bought the intellectual property as I have seen the old Hilda Gurney training articles resurrected and appearing recently.
Let ye who have no sins throw the first stone…
Dressage is never going to be “accessible”, nor will the general public ever be interested in watching it. That does not, however, prevent the satisfaction of training your own horse, even if you don’t want to pay the expenses of showing.
As a total non-competitive, middle-aged, pleasure re-rider, I might offer that one way to help make dressage more accessible is to get it out of the dressage arena. Dressage was not originally intended to be performed by impeccably groomed people on impeccably groomed horses in impeccably groomed arenas. 
Horse and I school dressage-ish-ly in the ring, but when I really need dressage is for keeping myself plugged in to the saddle and using a combination of light aides, vs. any one heavy aide, to keep my horse together when negotiating trail obstacles and horse deciding whether or not to spook because the field has been mowed, or side-stepping a hole, or collecting or extending himself when moving out on the trail. And I need it for keeping an older horse using himself properly and developing balanced muscles. So, if vets, farriers, and trainers from other disciplines talked about the value of dressage for horse and rider connection and horse health/muscle development, etc., it wouldn’t seem like such a separate discipline. Then if people want to get fancy, that is their decision, but at least they will feel like it’s more inclusive… similar to how groundwork applies to all horses.
And humor. I always think this ancient video has done alot for dressage…
We both are! I never read this magazine - what a shame. Still, if they are publishing the old articles that is a win for us all.
I think about what AQHA did with performance halter. They recognized that a horse who competed in halter and won was generally bred specifically for that class, and that breeding didn’t resonate so well for performance. Likewise, they recognized that performance horses couldn’t be built like winning halter horses, so they created “performance halter.” The horse has to be actively competing in performance classes in order to enter that halter class.
Now, thinking to USDF. Clearly some horses are purpose-bred, and they do dressage and that is all.
But… we have some that show in hunters, jumpers, combined training. Some who do mounted archery, western pleasure, or breed shows.
So why not think outside the box a little and recognize that purpose bred horses are different than non-purpose bred. If your horse has a non-dressage performance history, why not consider that it’s a Performance Dressage horse vs a Purpose-Bred one? My Polish WB gets dressage training twice a week between his hunter training, and it has helped him immensely. But he’s not bred to be a dressage horse and will never move well enough to compete with those who are. But dressage is, as so many have stated, training. I will still show him, but there is no all breed award for a Polish horse. But there could be a USHJA one. Why not find ways to reward people who want to make dressage part of their horse’s foundation? It would take a division or class or category, and maybe it’s just a year-end thing, but it might be an interesting way to reward the horses who DO show up to support USDF and who also have another job. This would actually help promote dressage as part of every day training, regardless of discipline.
I’m new to USDF. I just joined last month, so take this with a grain of salt, but I actually find the shows so much more affordable than the hunter world. The fact that you can haul your own horse, braid, and only have your horse at a show on weekends is significantly more affordable than hunterland. I also went to WEF/WEG and thought the dressage people were all actually really nice and civilized in comparison to the WEF experience. I read a lot here about the snobbery and such, but the WEG people were all so incredibly kind. And the dressage people’s bathrooms were much, much cleaner!!! 
Oh, I have done all the things I suggested and more before I made my post.
Sadly I’ve been in enough barns to see that, particularly in dressage barns, people letting anyone else ride their horse is a rarity.
I once lent my (quite valuable) sale horse to someone to take off property to a clinic and when I later asked for help trailering they declined, and when their former horse came up for sale and the new owners asked for a recommendation, I asked that person to vouch for me and was ignored.
Or people want you to demo ride for the L program but somehow no one else in the universe has a trailer going that way that could at least split costs so could we make our own commercial arrangements for a couple hundred dollars and then they want the owner of the horse to additionally pay for an auditing slot in addition to paying for trailering and lending the horse. (We declined.)
Or people who charge as much as a commercial hauler to go to the same show grounds they are going to anyway and won’t let anyone else borrow a set of clippers for 15 minutes.
Excuse me for being jaded, and good on anyone who is the exception, but help only goes one way for a lot of people. This is their hobby, they want to relax and enjoy, complain about their horse not beating warmbloods when they can barely sit the trot themselves, complain that things aren’t accessible enough, and be frenemies with the rest of the barn, not help out.
The people who do have a more generous approach generally get further in life as well as in dressage, but these “accessibility” threads always bring out the eyeroll in me based on how at least half of horse people act.
I think it’s disingenuous to start tallying individual acts of generosity, because we all have different resources to contribute and riders may act at different levels (barn community, local chapter, GMO, etc.).
I don’t feel the need to defend my own volunteering and horse sharing and other community-minded actions to internet strangers, but I’m happy to talk about the generosity I’ve seen from others. I’ve had excellent saddles loaned to me while I endure the arduous process of tack shopping to fit a tricky conformation. I’ve had rides to clinics and shows without expectation of payment. I’ve seen so many people step up to organize shows and clinics and just-for-fun community events. And when I was first getting started a much more advanced rider literally gave me the jacket off her back to wear to ride my tests. There are a lot of kind and wonderful people who ride dressage! I don’t think there’s really a shortage of generosity and good spirit among individual dressage riders when it comes to how most of us comport ourselves within the communities we interact with IRL.
But none of that fills the gaps in opportunity between schooling and recognized shows, or makes the scoresheet I get after a test more insightful or useful as a measure of progress, or puts a dent in the hundreds of dollars it costs for me to go to a show, or moves that clinic I’d love to audit from a workday to the weekend. It’s unclear how any individual is supposed to act in order to solve the specific barriers to participation under discussion in this thread, just as it’s unclear that anyone here is really a cold-hearted miser whose callous indifference to other riders is the obstacle that makes the sport less inclusive.
It is truly a shame that it went under, it was a fabulous resource…
You might be interested in this link…Ivan Bezugloff and his Dressage & CT Magazine
https://www.usdf.org/EduDocs/History…zugloff_Jr.pdf [INDENT]In its heyday, Dressage & CT was a must-read for the intellectual equestrian. There was no gloss, no “equestrian lifestyle” component, no stunning photography, no award-winning design. D&CT was rather more like a scholarly journal, with lengthy treatises on training, equine biomechanics, competitions, and sport and governance issues. Its small but passionate group of subscribers hoarded every issue and spent hours poring over the dense content.[/INDENT]
I was wrong about who owns the rights to the mag, it eems the USDF owns the intellectual property that remains of the magazine.
And from the link above…as applies to accessibility of dressage…here is an excerpt of who won the 1982 Insilco Championships…yes, that dates me. [INDENT]Woodimix, a Thoroughbred gelding owned and ridden by 26-year-old Kim Beardsley of issaquah, Washington, won both Grand Prix preliminary classes, entering Sunday’s freestyle ride-of with a commanding lead which he maintained despite two costly omissions which lowered the Kuer score, to be named the Insilco United States Grand Prix champion. Jaye Cherry’s Appaloosa, Moga, was ranked fourth after the Friday preliminary class but moved up on Saturday to second and maintained that ranking through the Sunday ride-off. Third place at Grand Prix was Moonshadow, a Thoroughbred mare owned and ridden by Barbi Breen of Los Osos, California.[/INDENT]
I dont find AA s to be very snobby.
The worst experience I had with rudeness was from a pro.
The barn at I was boarding at had an indoor. A dressage instructor rented it for a day because he didnt have one and his students were going to a big show and they hadn’t been able to ride much because we’ d have several days of bad weather.
It was a husband and wife team who taught. I was standing by the door watching and talking with one of her students who was also watching.
The wife was schooling one of the horses and she came over to us to talk with the student . She dropped her whip so I bent down and picked it up and handed it to her. She took it without a word. Her student tried to introduce us.
She just looked at me and without speaking turned her horse and walked off.
Rude!
The student and I looked at each other and just shrugged our shoulders.
But I swore if I ever had the money I would not be taking lessons with her ever.
Most sports don’t capture the attention of the general public, and yet I doubt that they have the same problem of holding onto the amateur base that dressage does. As for accessibility, well, that depends on one’s definition of accessible. I know in my other sport, when one disciple becomes less “accessible,” people group together and make a new one from the ground up that fits their needs. F-Class shooting was invented almost entirely because people with physical limitations struggled with the demands of Palma shooting and High Power shooting. IDPA was invented entirely because none of the other pistol shooting competitions centered around common service pistols. And yet, despite neither of those types of competitions having literally any appeal at all to people who don’t shoot, there are competitions almost every weekend, in every corner of the US and across the globe, and at all levels.
I see western dressage (and to some extent working equitation, although IIRC they’ve been around a long time and were just in the right place at the right time to capitalize on the wave of dispossessed dressage AAs) as the poster child of a similar thing. And yet, despite I’d bet having even less general appeal than regular dressage, they’re seeing a massive uptick in popularity. How interesting.
Thanks for the great out of the box thinking, this is a great idea.
I am glad you are finding things to like in the USDF world!!
I just wonder how you would determine if a horse was “dressage bred” or “performance bred”. Is it breed ? I know some non traditional breed horses that are doing very well in Dressage. And I know a few WB that were “bred” for dressage but arent going down that road… If you are looking for a more all around discipline, perhaps Eventing… or working eq, which is quite fun!
Our GMO has a Versatility division (I mentioned it a few posts ago), but I am not sure how USDF could measure/quantify/ develop something like this…
I did know. What I was saying was that it SHOULDN’T be this way. I did not know that it used to not be that way. Does anyone remember those days. How were the scores? Did people complain at all? What issues prompted the change?
Well now.
I support my coach of 40 years, and two others.
I have been bringing clinicians to my students, and any outside riders interested… for thirty years.
I have given juniors rides to shows.
Ive had young riders show my schoolmaster. At no charge, even a lease fee.
so I guess you are incorrect.
Hahaha, plunivel! Not only do I remember those Insilco championships, I rode in them! A college kid on a THOROUGHBRED mare, we were 3rd at First Level. She would never place well now.
I also read D & CT, and knew Ivan B., who was a real character, and just loved dressage.
I was, therefore, also around when the tests changed from not judging the quality of the gait for every movement. I don’t know what, or who, prompted the change, however. I think it was done when I wasn’t looking. Also, before the internet, things were far less transparent.
Yes, I have been showing for 40+ years, I’m an AA, and I plan to bring 2 horses out at GP when the smoke clears from this virus. I have found that showing is less fun than it used to be, now that going in just 2 classes will set you back $500. I competed at the National Championships at Lamplight last year, and it was so breathtakingly expensive that I doubt that I will do it again.
Thanks for jumping in on the creative thinking side of things! A fresh perspective is always nice! And welcome to dressage.
I agree that rewarding people who want to make dressage a part of their horse’s foundation is a way to move forward for this other realm that exists outside of high performances on purpose-bred horses. AND the upside is that some people who want to try out dressage or use it in a cross-training sort of way might stick around and become more integrated into the community. In a way, that’s what I remember of the 90s – a lot of people who mostly did other things with their horses felt welcome to dabble in dressage and for some of us it developed into something more central to our equestrian lives.
I think it’s really difficult to set top-down guidelines for what constitutes a purpose-bred horse and what doesn’t. I suspect that a lot of people would be unhappy with any sorting into categories that’s imposed upon them from above – there are WBs out there with ancestry that should lend them talent that aren’t spectacular dressage horses, and there are now and then other breeds that are competitive. Would you have to actively show in another discipline to get this designation? That would also be a sticking point for many whose time and money for showing is limited. Not to mention all the things that can happen in a horse’s life (or a rider’s) that can derail purpose or performance. Rule-based sorting on “purpose” is just harder than sorting on breed registry or amateur status. But it’s my understanding that in some of these breed shows that have divisions that go hand in hand with breeding traditions (e.g. QHs), the showing is mostly self-selecting. As in, there’s nothing to stop you from putting a QH hunter into a halter class except for the certainty that it’s a waste of time, given the judging criteria and how certain inborn traits are factored into that. Correct me if I’m wrong – I have zero real life exposure to the breed show world! But the hypothesis is that self-selection gives people options and lets them choose which are suited to their goals and resources.
One thing I mused about upthread was having classes that use the regular dressage tests (not the abbreviated, collectives-only rider tests that never caught on) but which are scored more like intercollegiate dressage (i.e. horse’s innate physical limitations or gifts are not factored in). That is, a division or show series or something that gives people real showing opportunities that fit a range of goals other than developing purpose bred prospects into highly competitive dressage horses. Such a division might serve both those who train in multiple disciplines and the folks who are more focused on dressage but whose goals are not aligned with contemporary dressage competition.
IME people are not good at self-selecting for many things, but they are good at self-selecting into categories that reward their advantages and fit their goals. The competitive folks on horses with inborn physical talent would be rewarded for their achievements in regular dressage tests. The folks who can’t buy dressage prospects per se and the folks who want to do dressage to develop their horses in a cross-disciplinary way would end up in the classes that reward them for tactful riding and merely correct movement. It would take some doing and frankly I can’t imagine USDF/USEF going out on a limb to try anything to serve new groups after what happened with the rider tests. But if some local schooling show or something tried this out I think they’d get a response.
Yeah like 4 people on COTH have claimed to be personal exceptions. That leaves a lot of humanity. I’m fortunate to know some truly excellent humans, but they are balanced by also knowing several super shitty ones.
Also, if you have students, you’re a professional, not an amateur.
Fact: the people who are the first to whine about access are not necessarily the first to make access more possible.
Professionals who dedicate their career to teaching others are a different crowd entirely.
And you are adding to the problem because you emphasize the AA Pro division… that for sure makes riding a lot more unaffordable for AAs…
Lighten up, Francis
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
