Self carriage is a good characteristic for a horse. But what does it mean? Wilhelm Müseler in ”Riding logic” (1973) describes it like this:
”By self-carriage [or self-collection] we mean the apparently automatic maintenance of the position which the rider has requested the horse to assume. The expression does not refer in any way to a particular degree of collection or a certain outer form. A horse which is properly put to the aids will, with progressive dressage, very soon arrive at this self-collection; it will get there all the sooner the more subtle the rider's aids and the more subtle his rein influences. The opposite of self-collection is the horse leaning heavily on the bit.”
A horse that leans on the bit is not in self-carriage since the horse, if he is leaning on the bit, does not carry his own head! As a rider, you should not have more than the weight of the reins in your hand, otherwise the horse is not carrying its own head.
But "self-carriage" can be about more than just the horse's posture. McGreevy and McLean, two scientists specialising in horses and the horse's welfare, say that self-carriage also means that the horse on his own continues with the behaviour you asked for. This applies to signals from both the hand and legs. Once you have asked the horse to move forward from the legs or hand then the signal should cease once the horse starts to move forward, and the horse should be left alone as long as the horse continues to move forward. The same applies if the horse should trot, canter, rein-back, perform shoulder-in, stop, go on a circle, stand still, piaffe and so on.
De la Guérinière (1731) called this the "descente de main" and "descente de jambe" in French. "Descente de main" is when the rider lowers his hand and opens his fingers so that the contact is lightened. The horse's job is to continue with whatever it was that he was asked to do. "Descente de jambe" is when the rider relaxes her legs and lets them hang like wet towels along the sides of the horse while the horse continues with whatever it was he was asked to do.
Ehrengranat (1836) writes about three degrees of “descent de main”. The first degree gives freedom for the horse's head, the second to the horse's neck and the third opens up for steps to be extended. The first degree of freedom means that contact between the rider's hand and the horse's mouth eases but nothing else happens. Ehrengranat continues "If the horse has followed the aid, it should cease, so that he [the horse] will be left to himself, for as long as the movements in their fullness still continue, no longer."
To me, self-carriage is to hand over responsibility to the horse to maintain speed, direction and posture. I should not have to hold the horse together or support him just in case he will not maintain speed, direction and posture. If and when the horse ceases to do whatever I have asked for, then and only then, should I remind him of what we were doing.
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Thursday, 30 December 2010
Wednesday, 22 December 2010
A seat that swings
Take a look at the picture, note the location of the skeleton that is in contact with the surface, it is the point which we call the riders seat bones, ie the lowest point of the pelvis (when the pelvis is upright!). Note the hip joint resting freely, well above the base, just like the femur.
As we sit on a horse, the seatbones are in contact with the saddle and on them rests our torso and our legs is hanging along side the horse's sides. The basic idea is that our legs belong to the horse and that they must absorb the movement that is created by the horse's body as it moves.
When walking, there are two movement that the rider should be able to feel in their legs and joints. The calf penduling with abdominal movement (knee joint), and the thigh rolling slightly in the saddle (hip joint). Both of these movements should follow the horse's movements.
The walk also causes a movement in our trunk, it occurs when our seat bones slides forward and back in the saddle in harmony with the movement that occurs in the horse's back in walk.
Many riders receive the movement through a "break" in the lower back. The spine above the lumbar spine is completely rigid and the motion of the horse is only absorbed by the lower back.
If you instead see the spine as a center around which the pelvis moves, rotating maximum a half turn on the left and right side, that movement allows the movement given by the horse's back to billow up through our back up all the way to our shoulders. The spine is straight, the lower back are not exposed to any break and we get a swing in our own back.
In order to perfect compliance, we also strive for a quiet hand - a hand that is stationary in relation to the horse's mouth! This means that the arm needs to be mobile in the shoulder and elbow, so you can keep an even touch with the horse through the bit.
Walk out in the terrain and allow the horse to move you. The feeling is almost like waves on the beach one summer day, some comes in with more force and some splashes softly. Be observant of yourself so that you really let yourself be moved and do not start doing more than required - if you do it is very likely that you "ride more" than the horse actually gives.
Wednesday, 15 December 2010
Classical riding
Classical riding is a concept that is used to describe a variety of different styles of riding: competition dressage, what goes on at the Spanish Riding School as well as in Swedish riding schools and so on.
But what does classical really stand for?
Classical riding has its roots in ancient Greece. That culture was different from our modern culture in many ways . René Descartes had not yet put forth his theory about dualism that among other things included the idea that animals do not have a soul and therefore cannot feel pain.
Isaac Newton had not yet defined the law of universal gravitation and the three universal laws of motion that enabled many of the advances of the industrial revolution.
Modern culture is influenced in many ways by these thoughts and concepts, but it is difficult for us who live in this modern culture to really understand to what extent we are influenced by them.
Classical antiquity is, according to Wikipedia, ”a long period of history centred on the Mediterranean Sea, comprising the interlocking civilizations of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. This period is conventionally taken to stretch from roughly the 7th or 8th century BC to the 5th century AD. It is often seen as a golden age of Western civilisation, preceding the Dark Ages of the early medieval period.”
Classical riding has its roots in ancient Greece, not juts because we want to call a certain type of riding “classical”, but because Xenophon lived there.
He wrote one of the first books about horses and riding. Here he described the vertical seat and that one should never be angry when handling horses. In ancient Greece body and mind were seen as one unit which according to Loots (Loots, Johannes Marchand (2006) Classical horse riding: a systems theory approach. Doctorial Thesis at Tshwane Technical University, South Africa) meant that how something was achieved was just as important as that it actually was achieved .
Xenophon himself trained horses to be ridden in parades and in battle. For this the horses needed to be accustomed to weapons, sounds of trumpets, flying flags, large crowds of people. The horse also needed to be trained to respond to light signals, to go fast on straight lines and to turn easily in any direction.
Classicism in art refers, again according to Wikipeida, to a high regard for classical antiquity. “It was particularly strong during the Renaissance and from the mid 18th into the 19th century.”
It was during the 18th century that the art of riding reached its zenith and the airs above the ground were developed.
Today something strange, or sad, has happened, at least here in Sweden. Today classical riding is thought to be based on military riding from the beginning of the 20th century.
What happened to the previous history and ideals? Are they completely forgotten?
Classical riding, according to the common opinion here in Sweden, is believed to based on riding from an era that in no other context is defined as either classical or championing the ideals of classicism. The main argument for deviation from the original classical ideas about unity and lightness is that riding has to be allowed to progress. When René Descartes in the 17th century put forth the idea that animals can't feel pain he paved the way for a culture where the ends do justify the means. In the 19th century the military modernised riding further by equating the horse to a steam engine where the riders legs pumped up the steam and the hand directed it.
But the old ideals are not completely lost. Military riding from the 19th and 20th century contains both the old classical ideals as well as the simplified modernised version. Since it takes time to school both horse and rider according to the classical tradition that relies on a high degree of body control and awareness from the rider, it was only the officers that were taught these ideals. The common soldier was taught a simplified and modernised version. I find it dismal that it is this latter, simplified, way of riding that is taught in Swedish riding schools and displayed in competition.
I want something more, what do you want?
But what does classical really stand for?
Classical riding has its roots in ancient Greece. That culture was different from our modern culture in many ways . René Descartes had not yet put forth his theory about dualism that among other things included the idea that animals do not have a soul and therefore cannot feel pain.
Isaac Newton had not yet defined the law of universal gravitation and the three universal laws of motion that enabled many of the advances of the industrial revolution.
Modern culture is influenced in many ways by these thoughts and concepts, but it is difficult for us who live in this modern culture to really understand to what extent we are influenced by them.
Classical antiquity is, according to Wikipedia, ”a long period of history centred on the Mediterranean Sea, comprising the interlocking civilizations of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. This period is conventionally taken to stretch from roughly the 7th or 8th century BC to the 5th century AD. It is often seen as a golden age of Western civilisation, preceding the Dark Ages of the early medieval period.”
Classical riding has its roots in ancient Greece, not juts because we want to call a certain type of riding “classical”, but because Xenophon lived there.
He wrote one of the first books about horses and riding. Here he described the vertical seat and that one should never be angry when handling horses. In ancient Greece body and mind were seen as one unit which according to Loots (Loots, Johannes Marchand (2006) Classical horse riding: a systems theory approach. Doctorial Thesis at Tshwane Technical University, South Africa) meant that how something was achieved was just as important as that it actually was achieved .
Xenophon himself trained horses to be ridden in parades and in battle. For this the horses needed to be accustomed to weapons, sounds of trumpets, flying flags, large crowds of people. The horse also needed to be trained to respond to light signals, to go fast on straight lines and to turn easily in any direction.
Classicism in art refers, again according to Wikipeida, to a high regard for classical antiquity. “It was particularly strong during the Renaissance and from the mid 18th into the 19th century.”
It was during the 18th century that the art of riding reached its zenith and the airs above the ground were developed.
Today something strange, or sad, has happened, at least here in Sweden. Today classical riding is thought to be based on military riding from the beginning of the 20th century.
What happened to the previous history and ideals? Are they completely forgotten?
Classical riding, according to the common opinion here in Sweden, is believed to based on riding from an era that in no other context is defined as either classical or championing the ideals of classicism. The main argument for deviation from the original classical ideas about unity and lightness is that riding has to be allowed to progress. When René Descartes in the 17th century put forth the idea that animals can't feel pain he paved the way for a culture where the ends do justify the means. In the 19th century the military modernised riding further by equating the horse to a steam engine where the riders legs pumped up the steam and the hand directed it.
But the old ideals are not completely lost. Military riding from the 19th and 20th century contains both the old classical ideals as well as the simplified modernised version. Since it takes time to school both horse and rider according to the classical tradition that relies on a high degree of body control and awareness from the rider, it was only the officers that were taught these ideals. The common soldier was taught a simplified and modernised version. I find it dismal that it is this latter, simplified, way of riding that is taught in Swedish riding schools and displayed in competition.
I want something more, what do you want?
Wednesday, 8 December 2010
out of scale
Now you can buy a gadget that measures the pressure on the reins. It's called EC Hands (a bit witty actually). It works like a fishing scale but the scale is composed of two fields of color, a green for ok and a red to alert that the pressure becomes too high.
I think the idea behind EC Hands is good. The pressure may well vary during a riding session and with this you could "see the variation". Another pressure measure tool is made of plastic and breaks when the limit is reached and passed, but it gives no indication of whether you stay too close to the limit all the time you ride.
But even if I like the idea, I can not hold back a sigh - how did they set their scale!? I had to pull quite hard just to reach the green field, I guess that it was at least 1.5 kg. In order then to get me up to the red zone, I really had to put effort in the pull. The plastic pressure measurer has a minimum weight of 2 kg, so my perception of 1.5 may well be 2. Manufacturers often glance at each other to look for guidance.
During the ISES Conference a research project on horses habituation of the pressure of the bridle was presented. The study showed that horses were not accustomed to the pressure, but tried to avoid it. The maximum pressure they put on the reins once (and never again) was 1 kg, then they exposed themselves to about 600 g.
My reins including a 12.5 cm bridong bit weighs 394 g. To that weight in the horse's mouth I can add up to 200 g and land on a pressure that a horse might accept.
There are research done in the U.S. showing that bit damages horses' mouths. The scale ranges from micro-fracture on the bars to fully visible dental damages.
I have not taken a stand against bits. But I definitely react to how the bit is used and what is considered acceptable in today's riding regarding what riders do with bits and reins.
Therefore, I wish and hope that the producers of "pressure gadgets" dare to adjust their scales so that they begin with grams, not kilograms. And that riders dare to let go of the reins during their riding lessons. It is not about having un-taut reins but to reduce the tension in the muscle chain belonging to the arms. If an exercise went well, do it again with half as much effort. It decreases your muscle tension and increases your flexibility.
Quoting Nuno Oliveira "... try to relax your hands to have a lighter contact. I have been lecturing for forty years and this is what I never cease to repeat to students around the world who speak to me about their difficulties."
The control lays not in force but in ease! This insight would certainly be appreciated by a large number of horses.
I think the idea behind EC Hands is good. The pressure may well vary during a riding session and with this you could "see the variation". Another pressure measure tool is made of plastic and breaks when the limit is reached and passed, but it gives no indication of whether you stay too close to the limit all the time you ride.
But even if I like the idea, I can not hold back a sigh - how did they set their scale!? I had to pull quite hard just to reach the green field, I guess that it was at least 1.5 kg. In order then to get me up to the red zone, I really had to put effort in the pull. The plastic pressure measurer has a minimum weight of 2 kg, so my perception of 1.5 may well be 2. Manufacturers often glance at each other to look for guidance.
During the ISES Conference a research project on horses habituation of the pressure of the bridle was presented. The study showed that horses were not accustomed to the pressure, but tried to avoid it. The maximum pressure they put on the reins once (and never again) was 1 kg, then they exposed themselves to about 600 g.
My reins including a 12.5 cm bridong bit weighs 394 g. To that weight in the horse's mouth I can add up to 200 g and land on a pressure that a horse might accept.
There are research done in the U.S. showing that bit damages horses' mouths. The scale ranges from micro-fracture on the bars to fully visible dental damages.
I have not taken a stand against bits. But I definitely react to how the bit is used and what is considered acceptable in today's riding regarding what riders do with bits and reins.
Therefore, I wish and hope that the producers of "pressure gadgets" dare to adjust their scales so that they begin with grams, not kilograms. And that riders dare to let go of the reins during their riding lessons. It is not about having un-taut reins but to reduce the tension in the muscle chain belonging to the arms. If an exercise went well, do it again with half as much effort. It decreases your muscle tension and increases your flexibility.
Quoting Nuno Oliveira "... try to relax your hands to have a lighter contact. I have been lecturing for forty years and this is what I never cease to repeat to students around the world who speak to me about their difficulties."
The control lays not in force but in ease! This insight would certainly be appreciated by a large number of horses.
Wednesday, 1 December 2010
Science: comparison of methods for training
This is a study which I find very interesting. Scientists have compared two different methods for starting 28 horses. While the horses where trained to accept saddle, bridle and rider the scientists monitored the level of stress experienced by the horses. After 5 weeks all the horses demonstrated their newly acquired skills by performing a simple dressage test.
The scientists came to the conclusion that although the horses' level of stress and thus their experiences differ due to the method, the technical performance at the dressage test were not affected. Thus one can use a method that the horse will find less stressful without compromising the technical performance.
Conventional horsemanship
The two methods that were used was a conventional method for starting horses and what in this study was called “sympathetic horsemanship”: The conventional method was based on Steinbrecht's system for starting horses.
This means that the horses where trained according to a pre-defined program. This included longing, first without and later with bridle and saddle during the first week. The second week the horses were backed, first while being longed. At the end of the first week the horses were ridden in walk and trot. The continued work focused on the outline and rhythm of the horse.
Sympathetic horsemanship
”Sympathetic horsemanship” means that every signal was first taught separately and then introduced together. The training program was made to fit each individual horse's progress. The method included ground work, yielding to pressure and de-spooking to objects and events. The horses were first introduced to the rider and after that to a bareback-pad and later a bit made of leather.
Less stress during the training period
The results show among other things that the horses trained with ”sympathetic horsemanship” showed lower levels of stress during the training period. This means that these horses, compared to the ones trained with the conventional method, showed a more relaxed body language with a lower head position and lower heart rate.
No visual difference, but measurable
What I find very interesting is that at the dressage test at the end of the test period, there were no differences whatsoever between the technical performances of the horses trained with the two different methods. The horses where ridden in all three gaits. Neither were there any differences in behaviour between the two different groups. But the horses trained with the conventional method showed a higher heart rate.
Official conclusion
The scientists in the study draw the conclusion that the horses experience the two methods differently but that the technical performance in spite of this was not affected. Thus one can use a method that the horse will find less stressful without compromising the technical performance.
My conclusion
I draw the conclusion that horses are extremely forgiving animals that always do their best even during less than optimal circumstances. That is why the official and conventional methods are still practised.
Reference
”A comparison of sympathetic and conventional training methods on responses to initial horse training” by Visser, K; VanDierendonck, M; Ellis, A; Rijksen, C. & Van Reenen, C. Publicerad 2009 in “The Veterinary Journal”.
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
The scientists came to the conclusion that although the horses' level of stress and thus their experiences differ due to the method, the technical performance at the dressage test were not affected. Thus one can use a method that the horse will find less stressful without compromising the technical performance.
Conventional horsemanship
The two methods that were used was a conventional method for starting horses and what in this study was called “sympathetic horsemanship”: The conventional method was based on Steinbrecht's system for starting horses.
This means that the horses where trained according to a pre-defined program. This included longing, first without and later with bridle and saddle during the first week. The second week the horses were backed, first while being longed. At the end of the first week the horses were ridden in walk and trot. The continued work focused on the outline and rhythm of the horse.
Sympathetic horsemanship
”Sympathetic horsemanship” means that every signal was first taught separately and then introduced together. The training program was made to fit each individual horse's progress. The method included ground work, yielding to pressure and de-spooking to objects and events. The horses were first introduced to the rider and after that to a bareback-pad and later a bit made of leather.
Less stress during the training period
The results show among other things that the horses trained with ”sympathetic horsemanship” showed lower levels of stress during the training period. This means that these horses, compared to the ones trained with the conventional method, showed a more relaxed body language with a lower head position and lower heart rate.
No visual difference, but measurable
What I find very interesting is that at the dressage test at the end of the test period, there were no differences whatsoever between the technical performances of the horses trained with the two different methods. The horses where ridden in all three gaits. Neither were there any differences in behaviour between the two different groups. But the horses trained with the conventional method showed a higher heart rate.
Official conclusion
The scientists in the study draw the conclusion that the horses experience the two methods differently but that the technical performance in spite of this was not affected. Thus one can use a method that the horse will find less stressful without compromising the technical performance.
My conclusion
I draw the conclusion that horses are extremely forgiving animals that always do their best even during less than optimal circumstances. That is why the official and conventional methods are still practised.
Reference
”A comparison of sympathetic and conventional training methods on responses to initial horse training” by Visser, K; VanDierendonck, M; Ellis, A; Rijksen, C. & Van Reenen, C. Publicerad 2009 in “The Veterinary Journal”.
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Thursday, 25 November 2010
It's all in the head.
There are several connections between classical riding and the Alexander Technique. One of these is the head, both from a psychological but also physical / mechanical perspective.
The hand is the primary aid in classical riding, “because the horses head comes first” according to de la Gueriniérè or as an Alexander teacher would say - "the head leads and the body follows." It can be described purely mechanical / physical, the head of both horse and man weighs its courageous kilos. In a full-size horse approximately 30 kg and 4-6 kg in humans.
To give you an idea of what the weight of your head really feels like I suggest you fill a bag with about 4.5 kg. Then take the bag and let it hang from the hand alongside your body. Notice how you perceive the weight. Then lift your arm with the bag straight out in front of you. How do you percieve the weight now? Notice what's happening in your body when you stretch out your arm. Does your body need to compensate for the weight in any way? How did you feel your balance was affected?
If we let the head fall in front of the body's center of gravity (I call It a vulture’s neck) the muscles of the neck, shoulders, back and calves make up for the weight shift that occurs in our body, otherwise the law of gravity will do its job and we fall over.
A horse can be compared to a table with four legs with a weight of 30 kilo attached on the far end of a stick that is nailed to the table-body. If the stick is raised, the weight of 30 kg is shifted towards the rear end of the table and if it is lowered it brings the weight on to the front end of the table. So by shifting the weight of its head a horse can get ready to make a roll back by lifting its head or stay heavy on the front legs (and be less moveable) while grazing.
One facet of the psychological gemstone in humans is our thoughts and ideas. Every move we make has its origin in the brain. Either we are aware of the nerve impulse or we are not – the latter it is often called reflex. When we learn to ride (or anything else for that matter), we are egaged in creating and establishing new nerve connections that will manifest themselves in the body as motion. At the beginning of learning our movements are many times both briska and jerky. That is because we are busy analysing what’s going on, what we are doing and how well we manage to meet the assignement.
After a while, we have streghtened the neural pathway enough so that we can begin to rely on a reflex like response. We begin to develop our skills. We begin to "ride every step", we are starting to detect if the position of the horse is correct before we even start the specific movement and if need be we can provide help accordingly and adjust the position.
If the horse is thinking or not I leave unsaid, what I do know is that a horse needs to involve the brain at the beginning of its learning process and build the neural pathways that will facilitate its body to perform what we ask of it - and they certainly get tired of the work . Good training helps both rider and horse to quicken the time of response and it helps to establish a reflex like response to clear questions (from both ends of the rein!).
So there are no specific equestrian bodies, the important thing is the riders head! Equestrian tact and feeling is positioned in the head, both in how you carry it physically and how you use the inside in your approach to learning and indeed how you view the fact of beeing right and wrong in that process.
The hand is the primary aid in classical riding, “because the horses head comes first” according to de la Gueriniérè or as an Alexander teacher would say - "the head leads and the body follows." It can be described purely mechanical / physical, the head of both horse and man weighs its courageous kilos. In a full-size horse approximately 30 kg and 4-6 kg in humans.
To give you an idea of what the weight of your head really feels like I suggest you fill a bag with about 4.5 kg. Then take the bag and let it hang from the hand alongside your body. Notice how you perceive the weight. Then lift your arm with the bag straight out in front of you. How do you percieve the weight now? Notice what's happening in your body when you stretch out your arm. Does your body need to compensate for the weight in any way? How did you feel your balance was affected?
If we let the head fall in front of the body's center of gravity (I call It a vulture’s neck) the muscles of the neck, shoulders, back and calves make up for the weight shift that occurs in our body, otherwise the law of gravity will do its job and we fall over.
A horse can be compared to a table with four legs with a weight of 30 kilo attached on the far end of a stick that is nailed to the table-body. If the stick is raised, the weight of 30 kg is shifted towards the rear end of the table and if it is lowered it brings the weight on to the front end of the table. So by shifting the weight of its head a horse can get ready to make a roll back by lifting its head or stay heavy on the front legs (and be less moveable) while grazing.
One facet of the psychological gemstone in humans is our thoughts and ideas. Every move we make has its origin in the brain. Either we are aware of the nerve impulse or we are not – the latter it is often called reflex. When we learn to ride (or anything else for that matter), we are egaged in creating and establishing new nerve connections that will manifest themselves in the body as motion. At the beginning of learning our movements are many times both briska and jerky. That is because we are busy analysing what’s going on, what we are doing and how well we manage to meet the assignement.
After a while, we have streghtened the neural pathway enough so that we can begin to rely on a reflex like response. We begin to develop our skills. We begin to "ride every step", we are starting to detect if the position of the horse is correct before we even start the specific movement and if need be we can provide help accordingly and adjust the position.
If the horse is thinking or not I leave unsaid, what I do know is that a horse needs to involve the brain at the beginning of its learning process and build the neural pathways that will facilitate its body to perform what we ask of it - and they certainly get tired of the work . Good training helps both rider and horse to quicken the time of response and it helps to establish a reflex like response to clear questions (from both ends of the rein!).
So there are no specific equestrian bodies, the important thing is the riders head! Equestrian tact and feeling is positioned in the head, both in how you carry it physically and how you use the inside in your approach to learning and indeed how you view the fact of beeing right and wrong in that process.
Thursday, 18 November 2010
Leadership = emotional balance?
This fall there have been a series of entries discussing leadership here at The Quest for Equipoise:
*) Leadership, something to strive for. Or?
*) Leadership is all about relationship
My leadership ”over” my horse Yeats was put to the test last week. I've decided that we should go out on the trails to enjoy the beautiful autumn days. The test this day came in the shape of the brand new hunter's tower that had been set up on a field about 50 meters from the road we usually go on. That Yeats noticed there was something new is an understatement.
Soon after Yeats started to stare and tried to make a 180 degree turn to run back to the barn I made the choice of dismounting. Since Yeats still isn't 100 % secure in leaving the barn without a fellow horse have I made a habit of leaving the rope halter on underneath the bridle. This gave me the option at this point to give him the space he needed, instead of hanging on to the reins. I could also ask him to focus on me by asking him to yield his hind- and fore quarters rather than on the – according to him – lethal tower.
Since I didn't bother to look at the watch I don't know how much time we spent on getting by the tower. Since we were there, we did go back and forth a couple of times. On the way home we passed it without me having to dismount. The day after, when we passed the tower with another horse as company, he didn't even raise his head to look at it.
So, what made Yeats go past the tower? My leadership? The equipment I used? The technique? My attitude? What is most important – how I present myself to Yeats, or that I achieve a certain goal (in this case getting past the tower)?
This is what I think:
About the equipment – Since I'm used to handling the rope halter and the rope I also trust my ability to not have Yeats get loose and run home, possibly getting hurt in the process. The rope also let me give Yeats the extra space he needed to deal with his own emotions without me finding myself pulling on the shorter reins and by doing so hurting him in the mouth.
About the technique – the ground work I have done before has not only opened a bridge of communication between me and my horse (Six Keys to Harmony) but also gave both of us a familiar and well-known routine to lean on. The way I approached the situation was with the goal of not getting by the tower, but to gain and keep Yeats attention.
About the attitude – For the non-Swedish readers I might need to explain a little about the attitude toward the horse that is prevalent at most Swedish riding schools. The horse is usually seen as someone that the riders “need to put in his place”, and it is said to be important to “make the horse do” whatever we ask of it. When the horse tries to communicate back this is often seen as the horse having a bad personality.
This day I made a conscious decision not to make the horse do anything, but just to offer him the possibility of relying on me by remaining calm and assertive instead of getting frustrated (that my plans for the day were spoiled), upset (with the horse for “making trouble”), insecurity (what if Yeats hurt himself?!) and so on. Time was of no importance since horses don't have the same mental capacity as humans to measure time anyway. What they remember is not the time spent achieving something but the emotions and level of stress involved. By remaining calm and assertive I could grasp this opportunity to deepen my relationship with my horse.
I think that the attitude together with the equipment and the technique worked in this instance to produce the successful outcome. What do you think?
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
*) Leadership, something to strive for. Or?
*) Leadership is all about relationship
My leadership ”over” my horse Yeats was put to the test last week. I've decided that we should go out on the trails to enjoy the beautiful autumn days. The test this day came in the shape of the brand new hunter's tower that had been set up on a field about 50 meters from the road we usually go on. That Yeats noticed there was something new is an understatement.
Soon after Yeats started to stare and tried to make a 180 degree turn to run back to the barn I made the choice of dismounting. Since Yeats still isn't 100 % secure in leaving the barn without a fellow horse have I made a habit of leaving the rope halter on underneath the bridle. This gave me the option at this point to give him the space he needed, instead of hanging on to the reins. I could also ask him to focus on me by asking him to yield his hind- and fore quarters rather than on the – according to him – lethal tower.
Since I didn't bother to look at the watch I don't know how much time we spent on getting by the tower. Since we were there, we did go back and forth a couple of times. On the way home we passed it without me having to dismount. The day after, when we passed the tower with another horse as company, he didn't even raise his head to look at it.
So, what made Yeats go past the tower? My leadership? The equipment I used? The technique? My attitude? What is most important – how I present myself to Yeats, or that I achieve a certain goal (in this case getting past the tower)?
This is what I think:
About the equipment – Since I'm used to handling the rope halter and the rope I also trust my ability to not have Yeats get loose and run home, possibly getting hurt in the process. The rope also let me give Yeats the extra space he needed to deal with his own emotions without me finding myself pulling on the shorter reins and by doing so hurting him in the mouth.
About the technique – the ground work I have done before has not only opened a bridge of communication between me and my horse (Six Keys to Harmony) but also gave both of us a familiar and well-known routine to lean on. The way I approached the situation was with the goal of not getting by the tower, but to gain and keep Yeats attention.
About the attitude – For the non-Swedish readers I might need to explain a little about the attitude toward the horse that is prevalent at most Swedish riding schools. The horse is usually seen as someone that the riders “need to put in his place”, and it is said to be important to “make the horse do” whatever we ask of it. When the horse tries to communicate back this is often seen as the horse having a bad personality.
This day I made a conscious decision not to make the horse do anything, but just to offer him the possibility of relying on me by remaining calm and assertive instead of getting frustrated (that my plans for the day were spoiled), upset (with the horse for “making trouble”), insecurity (what if Yeats hurt himself?!) and so on. Time was of no importance since horses don't have the same mental capacity as humans to measure time anyway. What they remember is not the time spent achieving something but the emotions and level of stress involved. By remaining calm and assertive I could grasp this opportunity to deepen my relationship with my horse.
I think that the attitude together with the equipment and the technique worked in this instance to produce the successful outcome. What do you think?
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Wednesday, 10 November 2010
The shortest way to yes can be no.
If I compare Alexander Technique (AT) with learning to play the guitar it’s easy to learn some common chords and then you can happily play the accompaniment at a party or a bonfire at the beach. If you want to deepen your knowledge and improve your technique, you’ll find that there is something to learn from this day on and all of a sudden playing guitar has become a way of life.
The same goes for AT. There is a basic level that in many ways is about the mundane and physical. How you sit, stand and walk, a technique for improving posture. As we sit, stand and walk a great deal during a normal day that knowledge is useful for everyday health and wellbeing.
If you decide to go ahead with AT, you can explore what is needed to move and how much tension that is really necessary to make the moves. Then there is an equally interesting aspect of how different stimuli (sensory input) affects the body physically without it showing outwards. How is the level of stress affecting tension in the body? Nervousness? Fear? The sight of the one that you like or hate? AT helps you discover how your body reacts to different stimuli and it can open up for a chance to choose what to do with these initial reactions.
On both these levels you train your perception and inhibition and direction are your tools in learning. As the nervous system is equipped with the ability to automate processes, it is sometimes necessary to actively say no (inhibit) to make room for an active yes (direction).
There are studies showing that the nervous system is prepared to get into action about 10 seconds before we ourselves become aware of what we intend to do. 10 seconds ... in neuroscience that is one (if not two!) eternities.
It is of great importance to realise that even if the nervous system and thus the body "is ready to do what we’ve always done”, there is a moment, a few milliseconds, where we are offered the opportunity to actually say no to whatever the nervous system have prepared itself (and us ) for. The opening allows us to choose a new way of acting, a way that better lead us to where we want to go, a reaction that brings us closer to our goal.
If we refrain from or miss our chance to say no (inhibit) the stone is put in motion, and like a band of crackers nerve impulse after nerve impulse is fired until the automatic reaction is completed. During that journey we have few if any means to stop the process.
Imagine a man who has a habit of betting on the racetrack. He comes to the junction at Solvalla. If he takes advantage of the opening to actively say no to the reaction his nervous system offers as he drives past the junction, he’ll come home with all his money. If he misses the moment and makes the turn, he will go all the way and bet on horses til his wallet is empty.
What do you need to prevent from happening to make way for the things you want to happen?
The same goes for AT. There is a basic level that in many ways is about the mundane and physical. How you sit, stand and walk, a technique for improving posture. As we sit, stand and walk a great deal during a normal day that knowledge is useful for everyday health and wellbeing.
If you decide to go ahead with AT, you can explore what is needed to move and how much tension that is really necessary to make the moves. Then there is an equally interesting aspect of how different stimuli (sensory input) affects the body physically without it showing outwards. How is the level of stress affecting tension in the body? Nervousness? Fear? The sight of the one that you like or hate? AT helps you discover how your body reacts to different stimuli and it can open up for a chance to choose what to do with these initial reactions.
On both these levels you train your perception and inhibition and direction are your tools in learning. As the nervous system is equipped with the ability to automate processes, it is sometimes necessary to actively say no (inhibit) to make room for an active yes (direction).
There are studies showing that the nervous system is prepared to get into action about 10 seconds before we ourselves become aware of what we intend to do. 10 seconds ... in neuroscience that is one (if not two!) eternities.
It is of great importance to realise that even if the nervous system and thus the body "is ready to do what we’ve always done”, there is a moment, a few milliseconds, where we are offered the opportunity to actually say no to whatever the nervous system have prepared itself (and us ) for. The opening allows us to choose a new way of acting, a way that better lead us to where we want to go, a reaction that brings us closer to our goal.
If we refrain from or miss our chance to say no (inhibit) the stone is put in motion, and like a band of crackers nerve impulse after nerve impulse is fired until the automatic reaction is completed. During that journey we have few if any means to stop the process.
Imagine a man who has a habit of betting on the racetrack. He comes to the junction at Solvalla. If he takes advantage of the opening to actively say no to the reaction his nervous system offers as he drives past the junction, he’ll come home with all his money. If he misses the moment and makes the turn, he will go all the way and bet on horses til his wallet is empty.
What do you need to prevent from happening to make way for the things you want to happen?
Wednesday, 3 November 2010
Leadership, something to strive for? Or...
I've been pondering the concept of leadership since ISES this summer. What is leadership for you? Is it something you strive for, or do you interpret it as something that dominates your horse in a way that his/her personality is stifled?
Scientists don't want us to use words like ”leadership” or ”respect” when we talk about the way our horses relate to us. They say that horses don't have the same ability as humans for abstract reasoning. I agree with this. Scientists also say that the way horses behave is all about learned behaviour. Whatever the horse does is, from this point of view, something you taught the horse to do and has nothing to do with any feeling of love, respect etc that the horse has for you, or if the horse sees you as a leader.
But, horses are herd animals. This mean that a horse always knows who the leader is in a herd, even if this herd only consists of one horse and one human. Or at least the horse always knows who at the moment is in charge of looking after potential danger spots in the surroundings. As Maria wrote in last week's blog:
”Within a horse herd there is a situation-based leadership. Different jobs have different 'leaders', some individuals are responsible for certain stages of the everyday activities of a herd. One is good at finding water, one being the guard, one finding herbs, minerals, one fostering the fillys and one being ready for defence, etc. ”
So, OK, horses cannot perform abstract reasoning, they don't write blogs and don't read any for that matter. But there is for sure a big difference in being with a horse that doesn't see me, walk all over me, does whatever he/she feels like but not whatever I asked for (follow me from the field to the barn, stand still when mounting, loading, pick up the correct lead etc), and a horse that calmly follows me, and in a calm and attentive state responds to my light requests.
The horse that response with lightness to my light request, does he/she see me as his/her leader? Well, I don't know what the horse calls it, but to me this is leadership. Leadership to me is to gain the horse's attention so that I can communicate with my horse. If I have the horse's attention and ways to communicate, at the least I can let my horse know I don't particularly like being physically pushed around by backing him/her out of my space. So, if the scientists don't want us to use words like “leadership” and “respect”, what words should we use to describe the difference in behaviour between the first and the second horse?
Whatever word you choose to use, leadership or learned behaviour, the one thing that both science and NH have in common is the emphasis on the horse handler's behaviour. If I want to teach my horse to behave in any particular way I will have to behave in a way that the horse can understand. What this is called seems to differ with different communities.
What do you want to call it?
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Scientists don't want us to use words like ”leadership” or ”respect” when we talk about the way our horses relate to us. They say that horses don't have the same ability as humans for abstract reasoning. I agree with this. Scientists also say that the way horses behave is all about learned behaviour. Whatever the horse does is, from this point of view, something you taught the horse to do and has nothing to do with any feeling of love, respect etc that the horse has for you, or if the horse sees you as a leader.
But, horses are herd animals. This mean that a horse always knows who the leader is in a herd, even if this herd only consists of one horse and one human. Or at least the horse always knows who at the moment is in charge of looking after potential danger spots in the surroundings. As Maria wrote in last week's blog:
”Within a horse herd there is a situation-based leadership. Different jobs have different 'leaders', some individuals are responsible for certain stages of the everyday activities of a herd. One is good at finding water, one being the guard, one finding herbs, minerals, one fostering the fillys and one being ready for defence, etc. ”
So, OK, horses cannot perform abstract reasoning, they don't write blogs and don't read any for that matter. But there is for sure a big difference in being with a horse that doesn't see me, walk all over me, does whatever he/she feels like but not whatever I asked for (follow me from the field to the barn, stand still when mounting, loading, pick up the correct lead etc), and a horse that calmly follows me, and in a calm and attentive state responds to my light requests.
The horse that response with lightness to my light request, does he/she see me as his/her leader? Well, I don't know what the horse calls it, but to me this is leadership. Leadership to me is to gain the horse's attention so that I can communicate with my horse. If I have the horse's attention and ways to communicate, at the least I can let my horse know I don't particularly like being physically pushed around by backing him/her out of my space. So, if the scientists don't want us to use words like “leadership” and “respect”, what words should we use to describe the difference in behaviour between the first and the second horse?
Whatever word you choose to use, leadership or learned behaviour, the one thing that both science and NH have in common is the emphasis on the horse handler's behaviour. If I want to teach my horse to behave in any particular way I will have to behave in a way that the horse can understand. What this is called seems to differ with different communities.
What do you want to call it?
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Thursday, 28 October 2010
Leadership is all about relationship.
When I started with horses, no one talked about leadership with me as it is talked about today. I remember being pushed and shoved around by cunning ponies, had my share of bruses and aces and that it somehow was considered to be the kind of lessons a rider needed to have.
I do believe (in retrospect, of course) that these bangs and bashes laid the foundation for the fear that I actually had for horses for many years, without ever believing I was scared! I felt a lack of trust, I knew that even if horses were said to be "nice" they could actually cause real pain.
What made life unpredictable was that I could not see the pattern for when the horse would be "good or bad." It meant that my action was based on the principle Guilty By Suspicion with the horsemanship I have learned, and that would be to jerk the reins roaring "Stand still you biiip-ing horse".
We've talked leadership in the blog, and I thought I'd add to that on the basis of two books - All the King's horses by Emelie Cajsdotter and Finding the Magic of Dan Sumerel.
A quotation from Emelie's book. "If you communicate with wild horses, they seldom speak about leadership. But they often talk about survival. For a flight animal, it is necessary to detect a potential danger, and when it occurs, already be in motion. When all this happens in the split of a second, there is no time for doubt or a peer discord. Each herd member must know his place. From a human perspective, we have studied this behavior and decided to call it ranking. By doing so, we assume that the leading horse is the group leader. We assume that this horse is the fastest, strongest and most intelligent horse. As a result, there are many animal owners who ask me to find out who the leader is in the stable. Alternatively, which human they regard as the dominant. But if you ask that question to a horse, you always and without exception get the same answer. They describe the different herd members' personalities, horses as well as people. --- It seems to be impossible for them to define a specific leader. Instead, they describe a sophisticated interaction, where the foundation of the structure is that each individual first and foremost knows himself. "
Within a horse herd there is a situation-based leadership. Different jobs have different 'leaders', some individuals are responsible for certain stages of the every day activities of a herd. One is good at finding water, one being the guard, one finding herbs, minerals, one fostering the fillys and one being ready for defense, etc.
In Dan Sumerels book is a wonderful section that shows that this situational leadership includes us. After an distance competition Dan and two friends rides out to remove all the paper-strips that has marked the track. When they turn back home they realize that it will be dark "Can-not-see-hand-in-the-black" and with at least three hours of riding ahead of them, along the winding and brushy mountain paths he will experience something extraordinary.
I quote "My concern and fear started to release and I handed over my well-being to Cisgo. My whole perspective on the ride changed. I had to trust him, because I had no opportunity to control the situation. We humans always want to be in control, because we believe we can and know everything. Sometimes we do not know everything. Lose the possibility to see when riding in the Colorado mountains and you will notice how little control you have. " (This is a quote based on the swdish translation of Dan’s book and therefore not an exact quotation.)
Leadership is about the relationship between individuals more than determing who rules and who obey. But nevertheless, it must be a certain degree of rule and obey in the horse and human relationship.
I take my own ladies and as an example. When I itch my 17 year old, I let her itch back, because she has learned just to rub me with her muzzle. My 1-year old can NOT itch back because she wants return the favour with her teeth. That sort of mutual grooming is ok with a horse but not with me!
In everyday chores, there are many moments that qualify for the application above, for the simple reason that we humans are so much more fragile (and slower and weaker) than horses.
Trust is a basic requirement for any relationship, and it grows out of friendliness, comfort and clarity and is made possible by the fact that "every individual first and foremost knows himself." as it says at the end of the quotation from Emelie Cajsdotters book.
I do believe (in retrospect, of course) that these bangs and bashes laid the foundation for the fear that I actually had for horses for many years, without ever believing I was scared! I felt a lack of trust, I knew that even if horses were said to be "nice" they could actually cause real pain.
What made life unpredictable was that I could not see the pattern for when the horse would be "good or bad." It meant that my action was based on the principle Guilty By Suspicion with the horsemanship I have learned, and that would be to jerk the reins roaring "Stand still you biiip-ing horse".
We've talked leadership in the blog, and I thought I'd add to that on the basis of two books - All the King's horses by Emelie Cajsdotter and Finding the Magic of Dan Sumerel.
A quotation from Emelie's book. "If you communicate with wild horses, they seldom speak about leadership. But they often talk about survival. For a flight animal, it is necessary to detect a potential danger, and when it occurs, already be in motion. When all this happens in the split of a second, there is no time for doubt or a peer discord. Each herd member must know his place. From a human perspective, we have studied this behavior and decided to call it ranking. By doing so, we assume that the leading horse is the group leader. We assume that this horse is the fastest, strongest and most intelligent horse. As a result, there are many animal owners who ask me to find out who the leader is in the stable. Alternatively, which human they regard as the dominant. But if you ask that question to a horse, you always and without exception get the same answer. They describe the different herd members' personalities, horses as well as people. --- It seems to be impossible for them to define a specific leader. Instead, they describe a sophisticated interaction, where the foundation of the structure is that each individual first and foremost knows himself. "
Within a horse herd there is a situation-based leadership. Different jobs have different 'leaders', some individuals are responsible for certain stages of the every day activities of a herd. One is good at finding water, one being the guard, one finding herbs, minerals, one fostering the fillys and one being ready for defense, etc.
In Dan Sumerels book is a wonderful section that shows that this situational leadership includes us. After an distance competition Dan and two friends rides out to remove all the paper-strips that has marked the track. When they turn back home they realize that it will be dark "Can-not-see-hand-in-the-black" and with at least three hours of riding ahead of them, along the winding and brushy mountain paths he will experience something extraordinary.
I quote "My concern and fear started to release and I handed over my well-being to Cisgo. My whole perspective on the ride changed. I had to trust him, because I had no opportunity to control the situation. We humans always want to be in control, because we believe we can and know everything. Sometimes we do not know everything. Lose the possibility to see when riding in the Colorado mountains and you will notice how little control you have. " (This is a quote based on the swdish translation of Dan’s book and therefore not an exact quotation.)
Leadership is about the relationship between individuals more than determing who rules and who obey. But nevertheless, it must be a certain degree of rule and obey in the horse and human relationship.
I take my own ladies and as an example. When I itch my 17 year old, I let her itch back, because she has learned just to rub me with her muzzle. My 1-year old can NOT itch back because she wants return the favour with her teeth. That sort of mutual grooming is ok with a horse but not with me!
In everyday chores, there are many moments that qualify for the application above, for the simple reason that we humans are so much more fragile (and slower and weaker) than horses.
Trust is a basic requirement for any relationship, and it grows out of friendliness, comfort and clarity and is made possible by the fact that "every individual first and foremost knows himself." as it says at the end of the quotation from Emelie Cajsdotters book.
Wednesday, 20 October 2010
Horse's nature and leadership
What have high quality Natural Horsemanship and Classical Equitation in common? Both respect the nature of the horse. I wrote ”high quality” since unfortunately there are trainers who claim they work according to the principles of Natural Horsemanship and Classical Equitation but still don't respect the nature of the horse.
Horses are not humans. There are certain specific differences in the way horses function compared to us humans. The nature of the horse as a species have not changed in the 6,000 years humans have invited horses to be part of our daily lives. I like to think that people who either instinctively understood or learned to understand the horse's nature were, and still are, more successful in getting the horse to do whatever he or she asked of the horse.
What are these ancient secrets of the horse's nature*?
1) The horse is a herd animal. In a herd of horses all individuals always know how the leader is. This also holds true if the herd consists of you and your horse.
2) The horse is a flight animal. The best defence for a horse is to run away from danger. It is the leader's job to look out for danger and to make decisions about the necessity of flight, or not. Who do you want to make these decision when you handle a horse, you or your horse?
3) The horses' reflexes are 6-7 times faster than humans. This is the reason we as humans don't always notice what the horse does until after he's done it. Especially if the horse thinks he/she is the leader and need to make a decision about flight.
4) Horses are desensitized quickly. When the horse's flight response is triggered, it will usually run 200-500 meters. If whatever scared the horse is not still in pursuit, the horse will stop, turn and start to explore what triggered the flight response.
5) Movement determines who is the leader. The individual that can get others to give up a certain space is the leader. A very good leader can get others give up their space simply by being focused, no need for negative emotions like frustration or anger.
The day-to-day handling of the horse as well as riding is so much simpler if I just remember how the horse's nature influences its behaviour. Riding can also be seen as a manifestation of leadership. The leader is the one that makes a decision about where to go and when. On a basic level this might mean you ask the horse to turn right, exactly how this is done the horse can decide for itself. When riding with precision, you not only ask the horse to turn to the right, but also exactly how this should be done. For instance with the weight on the right hind leg (turn on the haunches) and looking in the direction of the movement.
* Read more in "Understanding the ancient secrets of the horse's mind" by Robert M Miller(1999)
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Horses are not humans. There are certain specific differences in the way horses function compared to us humans. The nature of the horse as a species have not changed in the 6,000 years humans have invited horses to be part of our daily lives. I like to think that people who either instinctively understood or learned to understand the horse's nature were, and still are, more successful in getting the horse to do whatever he or she asked of the horse.
What are these ancient secrets of the horse's nature*?
1) The horse is a herd animal. In a herd of horses all individuals always know how the leader is. This also holds true if the herd consists of you and your horse.
2) The horse is a flight animal. The best defence for a horse is to run away from danger. It is the leader's job to look out for danger and to make decisions about the necessity of flight, or not. Who do you want to make these decision when you handle a horse, you or your horse?
3) The horses' reflexes are 6-7 times faster than humans. This is the reason we as humans don't always notice what the horse does until after he's done it. Especially if the horse thinks he/she is the leader and need to make a decision about flight.
4) Horses are desensitized quickly. When the horse's flight response is triggered, it will usually run 200-500 meters. If whatever scared the horse is not still in pursuit, the horse will stop, turn and start to explore what triggered the flight response.
5) Movement determines who is the leader. The individual that can get others to give up a certain space is the leader. A very good leader can get others give up their space simply by being focused, no need for negative emotions like frustration or anger.
The day-to-day handling of the horse as well as riding is so much simpler if I just remember how the horse's nature influences its behaviour. Riding can also be seen as a manifestation of leadership. The leader is the one that makes a decision about where to go and when. On a basic level this might mean you ask the horse to turn right, exactly how this is done the horse can decide for itself. When riding with precision, you not only ask the horse to turn to the right, but also exactly how this should be done. For instance with the weight on the right hind leg (turn on the haunches) and looking in the direction of the movement.
* Read more in "Understanding the ancient secrets of the horse's mind" by Robert M Miller(1999)
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Thursday, 14 October 2010
Alexander Technique - a matter of learning
The Alexander Technique is an over 100 year old method with roots in one man's quest to overcome his own voice problems. FM Alexander himself was reciter and actor which in turn lead to that the first students were found among actors and later on among other culturally involved people.
From that startingpoint the technique has spread and is now available as a way to refine the use of the self in running, swimming, horse riding, golf, rowing, tennis, martial arts, rehabilitation, pregnancy, childbirth yes, in almost every area where the ability to use the body in a better way can mean a lot to both performance, experience and health.
When I got my first "Alexander Experience" in 1997 I was hooked. Hooked, because I knew that even if I was offered this great experience in my body now I could "own the road" to the experience itself, if only I could learn more about how to enter that road.
It is the fact that “the road becomes yours” that distinguishes the Alexander Technique from so many other body awareness methods. It is also therefor the thechnique is not a technique for everyone. It requires your commitment. You need to devote time to your development by doing your homework. You may have to opt out of some of the things you do today to get where you want tomorrow, I had to put riding on the shelf for two years and then return to it as a re-ginner for example.
Alexander Technique is no quick fix, it is a process (under your control) based on your ability, needs and desires. As a teacher, I can initiate, provide feedback and serve as your guide and give you reference for your work.
A lesson in Alexander Technique can be both pleasant and a challenge, it can vary from one hour to two minutes (it was all Lena coped with in the beginning because she had her history of back problems). Since it is a process, it is you as a student that determines how fast it will proceed. The tools you have available is to visit yourself, that is to check what is going on in your body and your mind in a specific moment (Visit yourself right now: what is going on in you?), inhibition (the transformative word" no ") and direction.
At first lessons cover everyday activities like walking, sitting and standing. The genius of these "exercises" is that all you do is a possible training opportunity for you as an Alexander Student. You do not need to devote one hour a week for training, the opportunity is there all the time your’e awake!
When training is possible as often as you just remember, the better you become at reading what is happening inside of you before, during and after an everyday activity, and therefore the more refined your perception will become. You will eventually be able to determine what you need to adjust before coming into play in order to get what you want to be doing done in a better way.
That ability is so important for us as riders. It allows us to ride the horse in the present, taking in information and adjust the next step. Among the athletes it is called flow. For a tennis player, flow could mean that he percieves that the ball is moving in slow motion on its journey from the opponent's racket against his own and that he has time to make the necessary adjustments he needs to hit the ball as he wants to. Flow is a form of mindfulness in activity that makes you feel that you have control of the boat or the horse, which we probably can assume it is in your case, no matter pace.
For me, the Alexander Technique led to increased self-awareness. I know where I am in myself, where the sign of stress comes first, how stupid I get when I learn new things, how I can rest in the middle of chaos, what to do if I need to let my thoughts free and I can enjoy the beauty around me (skyes, views, flowers) even if I'm on my way to something else, and usually in a hurry.
The Alexander Technique bares recemblance to several currently popular approaches; mindfulness, coaching and body awareness among others. FM Alexander stressed that man was a psycho-physical unity and that body and mind was an inseparable whole.
He also stressed that it really was not important to reflect on which muscles are doing what since the quality of the movement is dependet on their ability to interact with each other. A collaboration which in turn is depending on how well the head is carried on top of the spine.
As a summary, the Alexander Technique teaches how the mind-muscle-skeleton can work for you and with you in the best possible way under the influence of gravity. Alexander Technique takes a fraction of a second to understand and a lifetime to master, said Marjorie Barstow, one of the grand old ladies of the technique, and I can just nod my head and return to my chamber to continue my studies.
From that startingpoint the technique has spread and is now available as a way to refine the use of the self in running, swimming, horse riding, golf, rowing, tennis, martial arts, rehabilitation, pregnancy, childbirth yes, in almost every area where the ability to use the body in a better way can mean a lot to both performance, experience and health.
When I got my first "Alexander Experience" in 1997 I was hooked. Hooked, because I knew that even if I was offered this great experience in my body now I could "own the road" to the experience itself, if only I could learn more about how to enter that road.
It is the fact that “the road becomes yours” that distinguishes the Alexander Technique from so many other body awareness methods. It is also therefor the thechnique is not a technique for everyone. It requires your commitment. You need to devote time to your development by doing your homework. You may have to opt out of some of the things you do today to get where you want tomorrow, I had to put riding on the shelf for two years and then return to it as a re-ginner for example.
Alexander Technique is no quick fix, it is a process (under your control) based on your ability, needs and desires. As a teacher, I can initiate, provide feedback and serve as your guide and give you reference for your work.
A lesson in Alexander Technique can be both pleasant and a challenge, it can vary from one hour to two minutes (it was all Lena coped with in the beginning because she had her history of back problems). Since it is a process, it is you as a student that determines how fast it will proceed. The tools you have available is to visit yourself, that is to check what is going on in your body and your mind in a specific moment (Visit yourself right now: what is going on in you?), inhibition (the transformative word" no ") and direction.
At first lessons cover everyday activities like walking, sitting and standing. The genius of these "exercises" is that all you do is a possible training opportunity for you as an Alexander Student. You do not need to devote one hour a week for training, the opportunity is there all the time your’e awake!
When training is possible as often as you just remember, the better you become at reading what is happening inside of you before, during and after an everyday activity, and therefore the more refined your perception will become. You will eventually be able to determine what you need to adjust before coming into play in order to get what you want to be doing done in a better way.
That ability is so important for us as riders. It allows us to ride the horse in the present, taking in information and adjust the next step. Among the athletes it is called flow. For a tennis player, flow could mean that he percieves that the ball is moving in slow motion on its journey from the opponent's racket against his own and that he has time to make the necessary adjustments he needs to hit the ball as he wants to. Flow is a form of mindfulness in activity that makes you feel that you have control of the boat or the horse, which we probably can assume it is in your case, no matter pace.
For me, the Alexander Technique led to increased self-awareness. I know where I am in myself, where the sign of stress comes first, how stupid I get when I learn new things, how I can rest in the middle of chaos, what to do if I need to let my thoughts free and I can enjoy the beauty around me (skyes, views, flowers) even if I'm on my way to something else, and usually in a hurry.
The Alexander Technique bares recemblance to several currently popular approaches; mindfulness, coaching and body awareness among others. FM Alexander stressed that man was a psycho-physical unity and that body and mind was an inseparable whole.
He also stressed that it really was not important to reflect on which muscles are doing what since the quality of the movement is dependet on their ability to interact with each other. A collaboration which in turn is depending on how well the head is carried on top of the spine.
As a summary, the Alexander Technique teaches how the mind-muscle-skeleton can work for you and with you in the best possible way under the influence of gravity. Alexander Technique takes a fraction of a second to understand and a lifetime to master, said Marjorie Barstow, one of the grand old ladies of the technique, and I can just nod my head and return to my chamber to continue my studies.
Thursday, 7 October 2010
Details are important, but what details?
Last week during my visit to the UK, I had the good fortune to be able to attend a demo about understanding collection. The lecture part was presented by a riding instructor who also was a chiropractor. She explained collection as something horses do naturally in the field when they get excited. With this I agree completely. She continued by saying that the collection we want from our horses when we ride is this same posture from the horse but without the excitement, on the contrary the horse should remain calm. Again, I completely agree.
What I don't agree with is what I as the rider / horse trainer should focus on when training my horse. The chiropractor suggested that the focus should be on certain specific muscles. More precisely in the first stage of the horse's training the ilio-psoas muscles in the hip area, the abdominal muscles and the scalene muscles in the base of the neck. Her horse was certainly calm and attentive with three pure gaits. In themselves these are very good qualities and a testimonial to the chiropractor's good qualities as a horse trainer and rider.
Two things where never touched upon during the evening lecture and demo. Two things that in my opinion are far more important details: the mobilisation of the horse's jaw and the use of the rider's hand. Why do I think this is more important than focusing on specific muscles in the horse's body? First, the mobilisation of the horse's jaw is a prerequisite for relaxation in the horse. If the horse's mouth is not mobilised by the horse swallowing, licking and lifting the bit with the tongue, then the horse is contracted not only in the jaw but also in the neck and thus most likely in the rest of her body.
Why do I think that the horse that was shown during the demonstration was too tense? It was very often behind the vertical. Not much, but even so very often just behind the vertical. This indicates to me that the muscles, particular the muscles underneath the neck, are too contracted and need to be relaxed. This relaxation is dependent on the mobilisation of the jaw and the use of the rider's hand.
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
What I don't agree with is what I as the rider / horse trainer should focus on when training my horse. The chiropractor suggested that the focus should be on certain specific muscles. More precisely in the first stage of the horse's training the ilio-psoas muscles in the hip area, the abdominal muscles and the scalene muscles in the base of the neck. Her horse was certainly calm and attentive with three pure gaits. In themselves these are very good qualities and a testimonial to the chiropractor's good qualities as a horse trainer and rider.
Two things where never touched upon during the evening lecture and demo. Two things that in my opinion are far more important details: the mobilisation of the horse's jaw and the use of the rider's hand. Why do I think this is more important than focusing on specific muscles in the horse's body? First, the mobilisation of the horse's jaw is a prerequisite for relaxation in the horse. If the horse's mouth is not mobilised by the horse swallowing, licking and lifting the bit with the tongue, then the horse is contracted not only in the jaw but also in the neck and thus most likely in the rest of her body.
Why do I think that the horse that was shown during the demonstration was too tense? It was very often behind the vertical. Not much, but even so very often just behind the vertical. This indicates to me that the muscles, particular the muscles underneath the neck, are too contracted and need to be relaxed. This relaxation is dependent on the mobilisation of the jaw and the use of the rider's hand.
PS Thank you to Mark Stanton of Natural Horsemanship magazine for proof reading!
Thursday, 30 September 2010
To have rights is to gain obligations
After Ed has been and worked on our horses, Lena and I have had lively discussions around the topic ownership and control over someone else. Are we entitled to it? What considerations should we take? Do they have something to say? Do we have the right to demand what we want? Are there limitations of what we can ask?
These are questions with more than one answer. They are connected with how we as humans view ourselves as superior. It involves questions of ethics, moral and our own desires and hopes for our own life. It's about love, frustration, agony, sorrow and joy and it's mostly about us as individuals and our attitude toward the world and its beings - among them foremost the horse. And it is about money, I almost forgot that. There is always a penny or two in the picture.
For my own part, I have no problem with having a horse and keeping it within the boundaries that my location provides me with. I want to use the horse I have for both riding and driving. It is, if you want to see it that way, my right to choose what I want to do with the horses I have.
Several years ago there was a man on the radio that said "it is important to remember that my rights ends where my obligations begins".
It is my right to ask certain things of my horses but I also have responsibilities to live up to. I am obliged to ensure that they are trained with training methods that are based on as little coercion as possible. The question of constraint is interesting, just as there are degrees in hell, there are degrees of constraint. All handling of horses involves coercion. The only question is how much is needed and if there is the possibility to give moments of release within the constraint.
During the ISES conference Camie R Heleski talked about the importance of ethics in horse management. She showed photos of training methods similar to animal cruelty in the training of pleasure horses. She also talked about how some exhibitors rubbed the anus with ginger on Arabian horses. The perceived irritation lead to highly held horsetails - something that paid off in the show ring.
On the list of obligations relating to the outside around the horse there are; food, pastures, maintaining of the horse, and by that I mean access to skilled farrier, veterinarian, any other therapist, saddler. I have an obligation to be vigilant for my horse to be able to assess the horse's day to day state, build my knowledge of common diseases and their progress so that I can minimize any suffering. I should keep track of the environment that the horse is kept in to avoid injuries in the paddock or stall.
On the list belonging to the “inner areas” around the horse, our relationship, there is as much concern to the inner wishes in people and what it is we want the horse to manifest for us.
Here we have what Ed calls leadership. We want the horse to respect us and we want it to "cozy up" with us, show us that they like us simply. Do you know what the horse's signs of "love" is or do you want it to show it in a more human-like way, with his muzzle against your cheek, for example?
Does your horse meet your ambitions. If not, what can you ask of him? How do you know if your horse has the capacity or not? Do you ride him "into the wall" to see if it can take or make it or should you stop earlier?
And then, worst of all - death. Are you prepared to take your responsibility for the end? I once went with a friend to see an older horse that was for sale. It was just crazy, the owners should have brought an end to that horses life rather than to advertise it. It felt very much like they wanted make a "doublé", get some money for the old mare (26 year old, but as they said "she breeds nice" - as if breeding was an option?) and avoid the cost of putting her down.
My opinion on that issue is clear as day, really old horses should not be sold. They can possibly be given away, if they are healthy, with the condition that it can not be resold, and it must be agreed with the receiver if they are prepared to take the cost of it being put away or if you should share it. Otherwise, we have to personally take the decision to end life. For me it's a question of being decent, and it is also the last obligation, to make sure that my friend may have a good life or a good death when age makes itself present.
These are questions with more than one answer. They are connected with how we as humans view ourselves as superior. It involves questions of ethics, moral and our own desires and hopes for our own life. It's about love, frustration, agony, sorrow and joy and it's mostly about us as individuals and our attitude toward the world and its beings - among them foremost the horse. And it is about money, I almost forgot that. There is always a penny or two in the picture.
For my own part, I have no problem with having a horse and keeping it within the boundaries that my location provides me with. I want to use the horse I have for both riding and driving. It is, if you want to see it that way, my right to choose what I want to do with the horses I have.
Several years ago there was a man on the radio that said "it is important to remember that my rights ends where my obligations begins".
It is my right to ask certain things of my horses but I also have responsibilities to live up to. I am obliged to ensure that they are trained with training methods that are based on as little coercion as possible. The question of constraint is interesting, just as there are degrees in hell, there are degrees of constraint. All handling of horses involves coercion. The only question is how much is needed and if there is the possibility to give moments of release within the constraint.
During the ISES conference Camie R Heleski talked about the importance of ethics in horse management. She showed photos of training methods similar to animal cruelty in the training of pleasure horses. She also talked about how some exhibitors rubbed the anus with ginger on Arabian horses. The perceived irritation lead to highly held horsetails - something that paid off in the show ring.
On the list of obligations relating to the outside around the horse there are; food, pastures, maintaining of the horse, and by that I mean access to skilled farrier, veterinarian, any other therapist, saddler. I have an obligation to be vigilant for my horse to be able to assess the horse's day to day state, build my knowledge of common diseases and their progress so that I can minimize any suffering. I should keep track of the environment that the horse is kept in to avoid injuries in the paddock or stall.
On the list belonging to the “inner areas” around the horse, our relationship, there is as much concern to the inner wishes in people and what it is we want the horse to manifest for us.
Here we have what Ed calls leadership. We want the horse to respect us and we want it to "cozy up" with us, show us that they like us simply. Do you know what the horse's signs of "love" is or do you want it to show it in a more human-like way, with his muzzle against your cheek, for example?
Does your horse meet your ambitions. If not, what can you ask of him? How do you know if your horse has the capacity or not? Do you ride him "into the wall" to see if it can take or make it or should you stop earlier?
And then, worst of all - death. Are you prepared to take your responsibility for the end? I once went with a friend to see an older horse that was for sale. It was just crazy, the owners should have brought an end to that horses life rather than to advertise it. It felt very much like they wanted make a "doublé", get some money for the old mare (26 year old, but as they said "she breeds nice" - as if breeding was an option?) and avoid the cost of putting her down.
My opinion on that issue is clear as day, really old horses should not be sold. They can possibly be given away, if they are healthy, with the condition that it can not be resold, and it must be agreed with the receiver if they are prepared to take the cost of it being put away or if you should share it. Otherwise, we have to personally take the decision to end life. For me it's a question of being decent, and it is also the last obligation, to make sure that my friend may have a good life or a good death when age makes itself present.
Monday, 27 September 2010
Now posts on Thursdays!
Since it fits better with the rhythm of our lives, posting will now be done on Thursdays.
Happy Trails
Lena & Maria
Happy Trails
Lena & Maria
Tuesday, 21 September 2010
Side reins for riders – NOT a good idea
Most of us have understood that a good seat is worth striving for. Most of us also dream of having perfect and light communication with our horses. There are different ways to train the seat and develop communication. Some are good and some not so good. According to me the following falls in the latter category: a rubber band that is advertised to "help the rider to keep the shoulders, arms and back in the correct position when riding". (The page only in Swedish but I bet you get the picture.)
If you think about trying this one out my advice is – forget about it.
I see this stuff as side reins for the rider. The only good thing I can say about it is that humans are reduced to objects just like the horse. How does that make you feel? Side reins for horses, or these so called ”aids”, guarantee neither a correct seat nor better communication. The key to developing a balanced seat and light communication lies in your own posture and in the technique you use when you communicate with your horse.
Any flaws in your seat and/or communication will not be resolved because you force your body into a certain position, quite the contrary. Perfect posture and a balanced seat on horseback have their origin in how well you can allow your skeleton to be aligned correctly so that your postural muscles are free to do their job efficiently. Any imposed straight jacket on the surface will just interfere and hamper these tasks.
Do you want to improve your posture? Take a lesson in the Alexander technique!
Do you want to improve your riding technique and your communication with your horse? Take a lesson in classical equitation!
If you think about trying this one out my advice is – forget about it.
I see this stuff as side reins for the rider. The only good thing I can say about it is that humans are reduced to objects just like the horse. How does that make you feel? Side reins for horses, or these so called ”aids”, guarantee neither a correct seat nor better communication. The key to developing a balanced seat and light communication lies in your own posture and in the technique you use when you communicate with your horse.
Any flaws in your seat and/or communication will not be resolved because you force your body into a certain position, quite the contrary. Perfect posture and a balanced seat on horseback have their origin in how well you can allow your skeleton to be aligned correctly so that your postural muscles are free to do their job efficiently. Any imposed straight jacket on the surface will just interfere and hamper these tasks.
Do you want to improve your posture? Take a lesson in the Alexander technique!
Do you want to improve your riding technique and your communication with your horse? Take a lesson in classical equitation!
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
Changing reflection to proaction
Since I have been busy sitting on stands this week I've had plenty of time to think about life, learning and coincidences.
In everyday life we often talk about thought and action, in that order - that thought precedes action. And then there is the concept of reflection, that usually comes after a performed action. Quite frequently the reflection is coloured by remorse.
Many of us are caught in the chain of action-reaction and reflection. We react to something with an action, which we on reflection later on, regret. The Alexander Technique is striving to change that pattern to a thought-proaction pattern instead. That is to say that we have thought through what we want to do and how we would do it before we take action (means where by).
To assist us in the process, we have the ability to say no (inhibition) and to give directions. Reflections is still present but instead of being coloured with remorse, self-loathing, devaluation of ourselves, we change it to the observation, analysis and ideas of improvement.
It is thought that gives us a plan for our action, reflection allows us to evaluate the outcome. This in turn leads to experience, it sharpens our intuition and suddenly we are in the viewer's (and even our own!) eyes "skilled".
What is required of you if you want to switch from a reactive pattern of behavior to proactive? Well, it requires curiosity, the courage to be be- or reginner, preparedness to practice and it is also beneficial to have easy access to a good laughter.
The answer to Ed's question is that two out of hundred horse owners have a functioning leadership in relation to their horse. Are you one of those two? I'm working towards that in "my group of one hundred" we shall be three ...
In everyday life we often talk about thought and action, in that order - that thought precedes action. And then there is the concept of reflection, that usually comes after a performed action. Quite frequently the reflection is coloured by remorse.
Many of us are caught in the chain of action-reaction and reflection. We react to something with an action, which we on reflection later on, regret. The Alexander Technique is striving to change that pattern to a thought-proaction pattern instead. That is to say that we have thought through what we want to do and how we would do it before we take action (means where by).
To assist us in the process, we have the ability to say no (inhibition) and to give directions. Reflections is still present but instead of being coloured with remorse, self-loathing, devaluation of ourselves, we change it to the observation, analysis and ideas of improvement.
It is thought that gives us a plan for our action, reflection allows us to evaluate the outcome. This in turn leads to experience, it sharpens our intuition and suddenly we are in the viewer's (and even our own!) eyes "skilled".
What is required of you if you want to switch from a reactive pattern of behavior to proactive? Well, it requires curiosity, the courage to be be- or reginner, preparedness to practice and it is also beneficial to have easy access to a good laughter.
The answer to Ed's question is that two out of hundred horse owners have a functioning leadership in relation to their horse. Are you one of those two? I'm working towards that in "my group of one hundred" we shall be three ...
Thursday, 9 September 2010
Train confidence and independence
Last week Maria wrote about her clinic experience with Ed Dabney. Last Saturday it was my turn to organise a demonstration and lesson day with Ed, this time in Vallentuna right outside of Stockholm. More than 30 people attended and they all went home with new inspiration and practical tools to achieve a better relationship and communication with their horses.
At dinner we discussed the difference between training the horse's confidence and its independence.
Train confidence
When you are training your horse's tolerance, it is simply to get him/her used to scary objects, sounds and so on. When you train the horse's confidence, you teach the horse to dare to stand still and not run away. To run away is of course the horse's first response when something frightens it. When the horse gets used to the saddle/plastic bags/wash rack/horse trailer etc. the flight response will no longer be triggered, instead the horse remains calm, and a calm horse is a horse that is safe to handle for us humans. Your horse will have gained self-confidence.
The horse's reaction decides
To train the confidence of your horse you gradually introduce a frightening object, like a plastic bag. At first you fold the bag in your hand and caress your horse with the bag. The important thing here is that it is the horse's reaction that determines when you remove the bag. When the horse stands still, you remove the bag. The behavior your horse displays when you remove the scary object, this is the behavior your horse will repeat. The learning for the horse is in the release. If you remove the bag when the horse steps away, this is what the horse learns to do. So it is the horse's reaction that determines what you do and when you do it. Gradually you unfold the bag and move it with more intensity until the horse is completely confident.
Train independence
You train your horse's independence when you teach the horse to leave his herd. Horses may react strongly when they are left alone inside the barn, or outside in the paddock, or when she/he is separated from other horses when you are out riding. Here it is the horse's need to belong to a herd that determines the horse's reaction. What your horse needs to learn is that his/her herd members will come back.
The clock decides
When you train your horse to have greater independence, that is to be without his/her herd, then it is not the horse's reaction to decide what to do, but the clock. A horse that has difficulties with, for example, being left alone inside the barn, you leave him/her alone inside the barn for a predetermined period of time. Whatever happens, you do not bring the horse's friend back until the deadline is up. You can start with 30 seconds, two minutes or 10 minutes. The important thing is that you do not bring the horse's friend back into the barn until the time is up. When your horse learns that his/her friend will come back your horse will learn to accept to be left alone. Gradually, you can then increase the time that your horse is alone.
At dinner we discussed the difference between training the horse's confidence and its independence.
Train confidence
When you are training your horse's tolerance, it is simply to get him/her used to scary objects, sounds and so on. When you train the horse's confidence, you teach the horse to dare to stand still and not run away. To run away is of course the horse's first response when something frightens it. When the horse gets used to the saddle/plastic bags/wash rack/horse trailer etc. the flight response will no longer be triggered, instead the horse remains calm, and a calm horse is a horse that is safe to handle for us humans. Your horse will have gained self-confidence.
The horse's reaction decides
To train the confidence of your horse you gradually introduce a frightening object, like a plastic bag. At first you fold the bag in your hand and caress your horse with the bag. The important thing here is that it is the horse's reaction that determines when you remove the bag. When the horse stands still, you remove the bag. The behavior your horse displays when you remove the scary object, this is the behavior your horse will repeat. The learning for the horse is in the release. If you remove the bag when the horse steps away, this is what the horse learns to do. So it is the horse's reaction that determines what you do and when you do it. Gradually you unfold the bag and move it with more intensity until the horse is completely confident.
Train independence
You train your horse's independence when you teach the horse to leave his herd. Horses may react strongly when they are left alone inside the barn, or outside in the paddock, or when she/he is separated from other horses when you are out riding. Here it is the horse's need to belong to a herd that determines the horse's reaction. What your horse needs to learn is that his/her herd members will come back.
The clock decides
When you train your horse to have greater independence, that is to be without his/her herd, then it is not the horse's reaction to decide what to do, but the clock. A horse that has difficulties with, for example, being left alone inside the barn, you leave him/her alone inside the barn for a predetermined period of time. Whatever happens, you do not bring the horse's friend back until the deadline is up. You can start with 30 seconds, two minutes or 10 minutes. The important thing is that you do not bring the horse's friend back into the barn until the time is up. When your horse learns that his/her friend will come back your horse will learn to accept to be left alone. Gradually, you can then increase the time that your horse is alone.
Monday, 6 September 2010
New entry is coming - on Thursday!
Since the beginning of this week is very busy, the entry is coming but on Thursday. It will be worth the wait!
Tuesday, 31 August 2010
Rescued at the right time
When the need is great, help is close, so they say. And in my case, I am happy that the saying was accurate. Our newly bought filly, a one-year old North Swedish Draught horse had already early in life realized that she is stronger and faster - both in reaction speed and movement forward than us humans.
My limited experience of NH was not enough. Lena, who has a little more experience, managed to hang in there a bit longer but even she found herself outmaneuvered. Our little lady had learned that when she was sent out on the volte, she could, by going in the tangent direction, escape our influence. When Lena managed to stop her a few times, she just a stylishly rose on her hind legs and added a light twist to release herself from us. Thereby she transformed a small victory to a big loss for us.
Now we had do put our heads togheter, this maneuver was so effective that we felt that if we were to continue, it would only result in her developing and refining her escape technique.
Who could help me??! I did not want someone who would "push through" anything, nor was I interested in putting a bit in her mouth to gain some sort of control through pain and discomfort...that kind of control is only an illusion and often leads to other problems later in the training program. There is a risk that the horse's trust in people is effected. It was then remedy materalised itself in the shape of a man from the American plains, Ed Dabney.
Madam Fortuna arranged that Ed was giving a clinic in northern Finland (Kokkola) and that he had the opportunity to dedicate one day to my challenge before he had to move on.
We had a demo at out house, where Ed showed "Six Keys to Harmony" the program he developed to train riders and horses to a better relationship. Before we started the day we had agreed to do all six keys, and then "provoke" a escape-reaktion after lunch, we did not have to wait so long ...
At 11, without warning, Houdini Horse pulled from Ed's daughter Elizabeth and disappeared into the forest. After the escapade Ed took over the rope and even he saw the horse's rear end disappear in between the trees.
The duel had begun. Ed picked his weapons. Lasso. Single pillar.
When Ed chosed the lasso, he removed the rope halter - one aid at the time. He made sure that he never (and I mean n e v e r) was the one who began to pull, our filly had to run out lasso rope before Ed put it to a stop by using a tree pillar. When she after a while realized that there was a stop to run into, Ed changed back to the rope halter.
Now an interesting moment occurred. Ed let her go on a volte, we all saw that she was considering pulling but, at the moment when she could have left, she reconsidered her descision and chose to remain on the volte. At that point two hours had passed and we took a break for lunch.
After lunch, Ed continued the training and showed me how I could break the escapes without ever having to pull on the rope and thus her head. And this is when it struck me how strong the habit is within me (and probably for some of you too) to just "pull on the head" of the horse when it gets hot. I had to be very observant of myself so that I had a good slack in the rope when I asked her to give the hind legs. If I was hanging on to her, albeit tiny, I could feel how she "took my force and leaned into it" and that force, really was something we wanted to avoid provoking...
Ed pointed out that the hand is the primary aid and that, by virtue of being it, should always be light. Especially in my case, it seemed relevant. I want her to be with me but without me needing to hold on like mad, be it reins or rope, and I can achieve that lightness by letting the secondary aid make my will clear. I can let the rope whiz in the air or cause it to land on the horses hip as a reinforcement, and thereby I need not to compromise on the lightness in the rope.
Now it has to be said that Ed possesses a cobra's speed in his work with horses. At one point, he worked my old mare and I saw that she tried to slip away from work by moving forward instead of sidways. He made the necessary correction long before my brain even had taken the decision of a correction. I have a little left to work on...
So the recipe from Dr. Ed reads that I should under no circumstances lose the filly as long as she demonstrates a tendency to go against the rope halter. Believe me, she was smooth as butter with Ed but showed evidence of her old behviour as soon as I took over the rope. They know who runs them. My shift begins at the single pillar before I move out in the paddock. Pure classical training in other words!
The day gave me a lot more insight, such as the horses adapt more quickly to each of us than we do to any of them. They read us better, they outsmart us faster, they establish leadership hierarchy faster than we can imagine.
Ed left a question for you. Out of one hundred horse owners, how many are there who have a functioning leadership in relation to the horse?
Think about it, the answer will be in my next posting.
My limited experience of NH was not enough. Lena, who has a little more experience, managed to hang in there a bit longer but even she found herself outmaneuvered. Our little lady had learned that when she was sent out on the volte, she could, by going in the tangent direction, escape our influence. When Lena managed to stop her a few times, she just a stylishly rose on her hind legs and added a light twist to release herself from us. Thereby she transformed a small victory to a big loss for us.
Now we had do put our heads togheter, this maneuver was so effective that we felt that if we were to continue, it would only result in her developing and refining her escape technique.
Who could help me??! I did not want someone who would "push through" anything, nor was I interested in putting a bit in her mouth to gain some sort of control through pain and discomfort...that kind of control is only an illusion and often leads to other problems later in the training program. There is a risk that the horse's trust in people is effected. It was then remedy materalised itself in the shape of a man from the American plains, Ed Dabney.
Madam Fortuna arranged that Ed was giving a clinic in northern Finland (Kokkola) and that he had the opportunity to dedicate one day to my challenge before he had to move on.
We had a demo at out house, where Ed showed "Six Keys to Harmony" the program he developed to train riders and horses to a better relationship. Before we started the day we had agreed to do all six keys, and then "provoke" a escape-reaktion after lunch, we did not have to wait so long ...
At 11, without warning, Houdini Horse pulled from Ed's daughter Elizabeth and disappeared into the forest. After the escapade Ed took over the rope and even he saw the horse's rear end disappear in between the trees.
The duel had begun. Ed picked his weapons. Lasso. Single pillar.
When Ed chosed the lasso, he removed the rope halter - one aid at the time. He made sure that he never (and I mean n e v e r) was the one who began to pull, our filly had to run out lasso rope before Ed put it to a stop by using a tree pillar. When she after a while realized that there was a stop to run into, Ed changed back to the rope halter.
Now an interesting moment occurred. Ed let her go on a volte, we all saw that she was considering pulling but, at the moment when she could have left, she reconsidered her descision and chose to remain on the volte. At that point two hours had passed and we took a break for lunch.
After lunch, Ed continued the training and showed me how I could break the escapes without ever having to pull on the rope and thus her head. And this is when it struck me how strong the habit is within me (and probably for some of you too) to just "pull on the head" of the horse when it gets hot. I had to be very observant of myself so that I had a good slack in the rope when I asked her to give the hind legs. If I was hanging on to her, albeit tiny, I could feel how she "took my force and leaned into it" and that force, really was something we wanted to avoid provoking...
Ed pointed out that the hand is the primary aid and that, by virtue of being it, should always be light. Especially in my case, it seemed relevant. I want her to be with me but without me needing to hold on like mad, be it reins or rope, and I can achieve that lightness by letting the secondary aid make my will clear. I can let the rope whiz in the air or cause it to land on the horses hip as a reinforcement, and thereby I need not to compromise on the lightness in the rope.
Now it has to be said that Ed possesses a cobra's speed in his work with horses. At one point, he worked my old mare and I saw that she tried to slip away from work by moving forward instead of sidways. He made the necessary correction long before my brain even had taken the decision of a correction. I have a little left to work on...
So the recipe from Dr. Ed reads that I should under no circumstances lose the filly as long as she demonstrates a tendency to go against the rope halter. Believe me, she was smooth as butter with Ed but showed evidence of her old behviour as soon as I took over the rope. They know who runs them. My shift begins at the single pillar before I move out in the paddock. Pure classical training in other words!
The day gave me a lot more insight, such as the horses adapt more quickly to each of us than we do to any of them. They read us better, they outsmart us faster, they establish leadership hierarchy faster than we can imagine.
Ed left a question for you. Out of one hundred horse owners, how many are there who have a functioning leadership in relation to the horse?
Think about it, the answer will be in my next posting.
Tuesday, 24 August 2010
ISES 2010: to objectively measure the welfare of horses
Two weeks ago I wrote about my presentation at ISES 2010 and I promised then to write about other research that was presented at the conference. One subject that was recurring in several presentations was the horse's welfare when being handled and ridden. What the scientists are studying is the possibility of objectively measuring the horse's welfare.
Welfare
Welfare can be seen as either the absence of negative experiences, or as the presence of positive experiences. Whichever way you look at it, how can the horse's welfare be measured?
Physiological parameters
It is common to measure the horse's heart rate and cortisol levels.
Heart rate – a lowered heart rate is usually seen as an indication of positive horse welfare since it is commonly associated with a calm and relaxed horse.
Cortisol levels – cortisol is a hormone that can be found in the horse's saliva. The levels increase with stress.
So far so good, but there is one problem. Studies have shown that exercise and stress have the same effect on physiological parameters: heart rate goes up as do cortisol levels. Thus it doesn't seem to be enough to measure these things. The scientists suggest we also look at the horse's behaviour.
Behaviuor
When looking at the horse's behaviuor, welfare is defined as the absence of conflict behaviour. An example of conflict behaviour may be that the horse puts his ears back, opens his mouth, shies, kicks out. On the other hand, it seems not enough to simply study and interpret the behaviour of the horse because some horses also seem to suffer from so-called learned helplessness. Learned helplessness means that the horse is in a situation that is unpleasant but shows no conflict behaviour.
In the case of animals, the following experiment illustrates what learned helplessness is: A fish swims in an aquarium. A translucent glass wall is placed between the fish and its food. The fish will swim into the wall repeatedly to reach the food, but eventually gives up and stops trying to reach the food. Later, even when the glass wall is removed, the fish will no longer try to reach the food since it "knows" that it can't.
One study suggests that the absence of conflict behaviour in horses riding in the rollkur, hyperflexion or LDP (low-deep-round) is the result of learned helplessness. Although other measurable parameters indicate that the horse does not have a good time (for instance reduced airflow due to blocked airways as well as increased heart rate), these horses show no conflict behaviours.
Eye temperature
Research has also used infrared thermography. What they have done is to measure the heat that is radiated from the horse's eyes using a heat sensitive camera. Exactly what a decrease or increase in the temperature of the eye means seems to be a bit difficult to determine. Different studies have so far come to conflicting conclusions.
Welfare - objective or subjective?
The scientist that gave the final presentation at the conference was Camie Heleski from Michigan State University (you'll find her abstract on page 48). She argues that science alone cannot define what should be considered to be the welfare of horses, because science is never free of values and thus is not objective. I agree with this wholeheartedly. Heliski writes that the values we have affect how we define welfare, both for ourselves and for horses. T. Grandin has said that if a particular approach is not deemed acceptable to the ordinary airplane passenger, in the end it doesn't matter what science has proven. The horse's welfare is not just subjectively assessed by you and me. Those who are not actively involved in horses and that are "looking in" from the outside also have an opinion about what animal welfare is. This is especially true today, when science cannot provide conclusive answers to what welfare is for the horse.
How do you asses your horse's welfare when you ride and handle it?
Welfare
Welfare can be seen as either the absence of negative experiences, or as the presence of positive experiences. Whichever way you look at it, how can the horse's welfare be measured?
Physiological parameters
It is common to measure the horse's heart rate and cortisol levels.
Heart rate – a lowered heart rate is usually seen as an indication of positive horse welfare since it is commonly associated with a calm and relaxed horse.
Cortisol levels – cortisol is a hormone that can be found in the horse's saliva. The levels increase with stress.
So far so good, but there is one problem. Studies have shown that exercise and stress have the same effect on physiological parameters: heart rate goes up as do cortisol levels. Thus it doesn't seem to be enough to measure these things. The scientists suggest we also look at the horse's behaviour.
Behaviuor
When looking at the horse's behaviuor, welfare is defined as the absence of conflict behaviour. An example of conflict behaviour may be that the horse puts his ears back, opens his mouth, shies, kicks out. On the other hand, it seems not enough to simply study and interpret the behaviour of the horse because some horses also seem to suffer from so-called learned helplessness. Learned helplessness means that the horse is in a situation that is unpleasant but shows no conflict behaviour.
In the case of animals, the following experiment illustrates what learned helplessness is: A fish swims in an aquarium. A translucent glass wall is placed between the fish and its food. The fish will swim into the wall repeatedly to reach the food, but eventually gives up and stops trying to reach the food. Later, even when the glass wall is removed, the fish will no longer try to reach the food since it "knows" that it can't.
One study suggests that the absence of conflict behaviour in horses riding in the rollkur, hyperflexion or LDP (low-deep-round) is the result of learned helplessness. Although other measurable parameters indicate that the horse does not have a good time (for instance reduced airflow due to blocked airways as well as increased heart rate), these horses show no conflict behaviours.
Eye temperature
Research has also used infrared thermography. What they have done is to measure the heat that is radiated from the horse's eyes using a heat sensitive camera. Exactly what a decrease or increase in the temperature of the eye means seems to be a bit difficult to determine. Different studies have so far come to conflicting conclusions.
Welfare - objective or subjective?
The scientist that gave the final presentation at the conference was Camie Heleski from Michigan State University (you'll find her abstract on page 48). She argues that science alone cannot define what should be considered to be the welfare of horses, because science is never free of values and thus is not objective. I agree with this wholeheartedly. Heliski writes that the values we have affect how we define welfare, both for ourselves and for horses. T. Grandin has said that if a particular approach is not deemed acceptable to the ordinary airplane passenger, in the end it doesn't matter what science has proven. The horse's welfare is not just subjectively assessed by you and me. Those who are not actively involved in horses and that are "looking in" from the outside also have an opinion about what animal welfare is. This is especially true today, when science cannot provide conclusive answers to what welfare is for the horse.
How do you asses your horse's welfare when you ride and handle it?
Tuesday, 17 August 2010
Rein tension, something horses get used to?
During the ISES Conference an danish/ukrainian team had examined how much rein tension a horse was ready to accept in order to obtain food reward. The horses in the study was 2 years old and not experienced to bridles before.
At the test the horses had reins attached by the bit to a girth and the length of the reins created the resistance which the horses experienced when they stretched to reach the food. The researchers assumed that the first time the horses were subjected to tests, they would put a little pressure on the bit, but when they had realized that there were titbits involved they would be willing to increase the pressure of the bit to access the food.
The results showed otherwise. The horses applied the highest rein tension on the first day 10,5N +/- 1,4N (10 Newton or approx 1 kg) but for the following sessions they avoided to put so much pressure into the bit (6,0N and 5,7N). Instead of getting used to the pressure (habituated) the horses learned to avoid the pressure in the mouth. It was concluded that horses ability to avoid tension could be used in horse training by increasing focus on the timing of pressure release.
Of course I make (fully unscientifical) connections to the controversial training method roll kür and LDR varieties. Bone-wise the bars are razor sharp ridges that are covered with a very thin layer for protection. The bit is placed on these ridges. A high pressure on the bit creates such discomfort that the horse just "takes the pressure once" and then make whatever it can to avoid the discomfort in the future.
For me, it may be a way to understand how an animal that is so much stronger than us can keep itself from breaking free from the position that roll kür and LDR puts them in. They "curl themselves up" in a (desperate?) attempt to avoid the discomfort that pressure from the hands, through the reins and bit create on the bars.
During the conference suggestions were made to introduce so-called pressure gauges on the reins during dressage competitions. But I think it's too late to measure the pressure at that point. It must be done during training. Because if the horse seeks to avoid the pressure it will have learned to take the position itself that creates the least discomfort and that without the rider necessarily putting much pressure in the reins.
The focus must shift from what we can see on the competition grounds to what we can not see during training. Ethics will have to range from training to competition and, as another scientist said, "even if it is not illegal, it need not be ethically correct".
At the test the horses had reins attached by the bit to a girth and the length of the reins created the resistance which the horses experienced when they stretched to reach the food. The researchers assumed that the first time the horses were subjected to tests, they would put a little pressure on the bit, but when they had realized that there were titbits involved they would be willing to increase the pressure of the bit to access the food.
The results showed otherwise. The horses applied the highest rein tension on the first day 10,5N +/- 1,4N (10 Newton or approx 1 kg) but for the following sessions they avoided to put so much pressure into the bit (6,0N and 5,7N). Instead of getting used to the pressure (habituated) the horses learned to avoid the pressure in the mouth. It was concluded that horses ability to avoid tension could be used in horse training by increasing focus on the timing of pressure release.
Of course I make (fully unscientifical) connections to the controversial training method roll kür and LDR varieties. Bone-wise the bars are razor sharp ridges that are covered with a very thin layer for protection. The bit is placed on these ridges. A high pressure on the bit creates such discomfort that the horse just "takes the pressure once" and then make whatever it can to avoid the discomfort in the future.
For me, it may be a way to understand how an animal that is so much stronger than us can keep itself from breaking free from the position that roll kür and LDR puts them in. They "curl themselves up" in a (desperate?) attempt to avoid the discomfort that pressure from the hands, through the reins and bit create on the bars.
During the conference suggestions were made to introduce so-called pressure gauges on the reins during dressage competitions. But I think it's too late to measure the pressure at that point. It must be done during training. Because if the horse seeks to avoid the pressure it will have learned to take the position itself that creates the least discomfort and that without the rider necessarily putting much pressure in the reins.
The focus must shift from what we can see on the competition grounds to what we can not see during training. Ethics will have to range from training to competition and, as another scientist said, "even if it is not illegal, it need not be ethically correct".
Tuesday, 10 August 2010
ISES 2010: "directed perception"
As Maria wrote last week, we both attended the International Society for Equine Science Conference (ISES) at the beginning of August. Sadly I'll have to agree with Maria about the impressions from the day at Strömsholm.
Some of the research presented was however very interesting. I will share with you the studies I found most interesting, but that will be for later. Now I will do something completely out of character for a Swede and first share with you the result of my study.
In my role as a master student in didactics, I had submitted an abstract and after review and approval from a scientific committee, I was invited to give an 10 min talk. The title of my abstract was “Learning to ride a horse – A study of concepts and thought styles in three textbooks from three centuries”.
I have read three books:
1)”School of Horsemanship” by F. R. De la Guérinière written in French 1733, translated to Swedish in 1828.
2)“Ridskolan eller ridläran” (“The riding school or the principles of riding”) by A. Ehrengranat (1836)
3)“The Principles of Riding (Complete Riding & Driving System)” by Miesner et al. Swedish translation from German in 2003.
In these books I've identified the concepts used for describing how to teach a beginner rider. I've seen these concepts as the result of the common thought style. A thought style can be explained as “directed perception”. What this mean is that we, you and I, don't see things simply by looking. We need a mental readiness to notice objects and processes. What this means in practical terms is that whatever your teacher talks about, this is what you will learn to notice. From that point of view, I've analysed the way that the teaching of the beginner rider was described in these three books.
Teaching a novice rider includes teaching the seat, the aids and equestrian tact. All these areas were included in all three books. No surprise there. What is interesting is how concepts used in these areas where explained.
In the 18th and 19th century literature, the focus for the seat is the position of the upper body. The placement of the rider's legs are said to be the result of correct posture and position of the upper body. In the 20th century literature the starting point is the placement of the rider’s legs.
Regarding the aids, the 18th and 19th century literature emphasises the rider's hand and states that this is the primary aid. The reason for this is that in all gaits the horse's head and shoulder come first. In the 20th century literature it is stressed that all aids should act together. The driving aids, here defined as the legs and the seat, are seen as more important than the hand. One reason for this is, according to the authors, that it is the nature of man to use the hands for all different kinds of purpose. Therefore the rider should focus on using the legs and seat instead
The most hands-on explanation of equestrian tact is presented in the 19th century literature. Here it is stressed that it is the rider's ability to register how the movements of the horse affect the rider's body which is the foundation for equestrian tact. The focus here is on the rider paying attention to what goes on in his or her own body,
In the 20th century textbook equestrian tact is described as “The ability to give aids at the right moment and with the correct interplay between the legs, seat and hands”. Here the focus is on the rider giving aids.
In the 19th century textbook it is said that the rider cannot receive information from the horse and give aids at the same time. I think this is the core difference between these two different thought styles. As a rider, are you foremost concerned with registration of movement (the movements in your body as a result of the movement from the horse), or on giving aids to the horse (using your own body to create impressions on the horse's body)?
My abstract is included in the conference proceedings (page 36), which you'll find it here >>
Some of the research presented was however very interesting. I will share with you the studies I found most interesting, but that will be for later. Now I will do something completely out of character for a Swede and first share with you the result of my study.
In my role as a master student in didactics, I had submitted an abstract and after review and approval from a scientific committee, I was invited to give an 10 min talk. The title of my abstract was “Learning to ride a horse – A study of concepts and thought styles in three textbooks from three centuries”.
I have read three books:
1)”School of Horsemanship” by F. R. De la Guérinière written in French 1733, translated to Swedish in 1828.
2)“Ridskolan eller ridläran” (“The riding school or the principles of riding”) by A. Ehrengranat (1836)
3)“The Principles of Riding (Complete Riding & Driving System)” by Miesner et al. Swedish translation from German in 2003.
In these books I've identified the concepts used for describing how to teach a beginner rider. I've seen these concepts as the result of the common thought style. A thought style can be explained as “directed perception”. What this mean is that we, you and I, don't see things simply by looking. We need a mental readiness to notice objects and processes. What this means in practical terms is that whatever your teacher talks about, this is what you will learn to notice. From that point of view, I've analysed the way that the teaching of the beginner rider was described in these three books.
Teaching a novice rider includes teaching the seat, the aids and equestrian tact. All these areas were included in all three books. No surprise there. What is interesting is how concepts used in these areas where explained.
In the 18th and 19th century literature, the focus for the seat is the position of the upper body. The placement of the rider's legs are said to be the result of correct posture and position of the upper body. In the 20th century literature the starting point is the placement of the rider’s legs.
Regarding the aids, the 18th and 19th century literature emphasises the rider's hand and states that this is the primary aid. The reason for this is that in all gaits the horse's head and shoulder come first. In the 20th century literature it is stressed that all aids should act together. The driving aids, here defined as the legs and the seat, are seen as more important than the hand. One reason for this is, according to the authors, that it is the nature of man to use the hands for all different kinds of purpose. Therefore the rider should focus on using the legs and seat instead
The most hands-on explanation of equestrian tact is presented in the 19th century literature. Here it is stressed that it is the rider's ability to register how the movements of the horse affect the rider's body which is the foundation for equestrian tact. The focus here is on the rider paying attention to what goes on in his or her own body,
In the 20th century textbook equestrian tact is described as “The ability to give aids at the right moment and with the correct interplay between the legs, seat and hands”. Here the focus is on the rider giving aids.
In the 19th century textbook it is said that the rider cannot receive information from the horse and give aids at the same time. I think this is the core difference between these two different thought styles. As a rider, are you foremost concerned with registration of movement (the movements in your body as a result of the movement from the horse), or on giving aids to the horse (using your own body to create impressions on the horse's body)?
My abstract is included in the conference proceedings (page 36), which you'll find it here >>
Wednesday, 4 August 2010
A system is alright as long as it is all right...
Sitting in the car on our way home my travel companion and I tried to sum up all we'd experienced during the ISES conference.
The theme for this years conference was safety and horse welfare. It was quite obvious that hyperflexion (including LDR), cranked nosebands, swishing tail and other signs of detrimental riding upset the majority of attendees.
On Sunday we were all exposed to the official system of horse and rider training in Sweden and being swede in the audience that day made me wanna seek asylum in what ever country that had accepted my application. There were sounds of astonished disbelief on more than one occasion.
My intent is not to accuse the teacher/trainer, rider or horse - they were all well educated according to our present system. It is the system that fails.
In our system we seem to have inherited procedures that we upon a straight question really don't know why we do as we do.
Why do lungeing of the young horse require two persons, one holding the horse one the whip. The answer started with - I think it's because we have a tradition if showing our horses with the help of a separate whip carrier. Her answer remindes me of the story of a woman copping off both ends of the christmas steak and at one time her mother saw what she did and asked her why she did it. -Well, you used to do it, the daughter answered. -But that was because my pot often was too small.
One question was regarding the saddle used on the present horse, it was noticeably bad fitting. The answer stated "It's a tradition to use bad saddles". I do think that she ment that we usually use old, cheap saddles not bad in the sence ill fitting - but at that time the audience was prone to take her answer literally.
The education process of the rider showed discrepancies between the wordings and the action on several occasions, and what was said was more in line with good riding than the actual riding.
On a straight question of why the horse seemed to resist the work by opening its mouth and swish its tail it was explained to us that this was how this horse behaved when he was ridden.
Only the day before Andrew McLean urged us not to put any blame on the horse as an individual if it showed signs of conflict behaviour, the behaviour was a result of the training and not its personality...
So, what do I feel is necessary for thing to improve?
Well, first of all I wish them a good horsemanship trainer to teach them how to walk their feet forwards when lunging, so that they stop dragging the horse towards them as they want him to trail outwards. I want them to stop the use of a separate whip carrier. The pair we saw were not syncronised at all, as the whip carrier tried to engage the horse the one in front janked on the horses head.
In riding it is essential to introduce them to the concept of neck extension and to stop the use of draw-reins. Then I'd go for some lessons in non-doing because lightness is not something you get by doing, it is given to you by allowing.
The theme for this years conference was safety and horse welfare. It was quite obvious that hyperflexion (including LDR), cranked nosebands, swishing tail and other signs of detrimental riding upset the majority of attendees.
On Sunday we were all exposed to the official system of horse and rider training in Sweden and being swede in the audience that day made me wanna seek asylum in what ever country that had accepted my application. There were sounds of astonished disbelief on more than one occasion.
My intent is not to accuse the teacher/trainer, rider or horse - they were all well educated according to our present system. It is the system that fails.
In our system we seem to have inherited procedures that we upon a straight question really don't know why we do as we do.
Why do lungeing of the young horse require two persons, one holding the horse one the whip. The answer started with - I think it's because we have a tradition if showing our horses with the help of a separate whip carrier. Her answer remindes me of the story of a woman copping off both ends of the christmas steak and at one time her mother saw what she did and asked her why she did it. -Well, you used to do it, the daughter answered. -But that was because my pot often was too small.
One question was regarding the saddle used on the present horse, it was noticeably bad fitting. The answer stated "It's a tradition to use bad saddles". I do think that she ment that we usually use old, cheap saddles not bad in the sence ill fitting - but at that time the audience was prone to take her answer literally.
The education process of the rider showed discrepancies between the wordings and the action on several occasions, and what was said was more in line with good riding than the actual riding.
On a straight question of why the horse seemed to resist the work by opening its mouth and swish its tail it was explained to us that this was how this horse behaved when he was ridden.
Only the day before Andrew McLean urged us not to put any blame on the horse as an individual if it showed signs of conflict behaviour, the behaviour was a result of the training and not its personality...
So, what do I feel is necessary for thing to improve?
Well, first of all I wish them a good horsemanship trainer to teach them how to walk their feet forwards when lunging, so that they stop dragging the horse towards them as they want him to trail outwards. I want them to stop the use of a separate whip carrier. The pair we saw were not syncronised at all, as the whip carrier tried to engage the horse the one in front janked on the horses head.
In riding it is essential to introduce them to the concept of neck extension and to stop the use of draw-reins. Then I'd go for some lessons in non-doing because lightness is not something you get by doing, it is given to you by allowing.
Monday, 2 August 2010
Those who waits for something good
usually waits too long;-) and this goes for this weeks post because
for the first time in my life I've attended an equestrian science conference arranged by ISES.
At the moment I'm having a cup of thea 1100 km from home and I do need the driving hours and all Tuesday both to rest and to digest the input from three days of lectures, dinner talks and practical presentations.
So om Wednesday I will begin to unwind my twirling thoughts.
for the first time in my life I've attended an equestrian science conference arranged by ISES.
At the moment I'm having a cup of thea 1100 km from home and I do need the driving hours and all Tuesday both to rest and to digest the input from three days of lectures, dinner talks and practical presentations.
So om Wednesday I will begin to unwind my twirling thoughts.
Tuesday, 27 July 2010
A made mouth
There is an expression in English that, I'm sorry to say, has no equivalent in Swedish. The expression I'm thinking of is ”a made mouth”. This expression means a horse that with a light touch follows the bit and the rider's hands, wherever the rider places the bit.
Simplifying slightly, a horse can react in three ways when the rider takes touch on the reins:
1)in a schooled way and also use her head and neck to balance her body in a correct way
2)negatively to the bit and move her head in a way that puts herself out of balance (using her weight in a negative way)
3)she can fight the bit and the rider's touch (using her muscles in a negative way)
The first of course describes a horse with ”a made mouth”. As I said, this is the reaction of a schooled horse, which means the horse has to be trained to have ”a made mouth”. Of course all horses can be trained to have a made mouth, you don't need a special breed or an expensive horse.
The horse that uses her weight in a negative way, as in the second case, will either lean on the bit and/or move at a higher speed than requested by the rider, and also be difficult to stop. To counteract this the rider can use the classical half halt. This half halt is done with only the hand, the rider's legs are not involved. The aim of the half halt is to help the horse in using her neck to regain her proper balance, which in this case means the horse has to raise her neck.
The horse that uses her muscles in a negative way, the third case, will for instance pull on the reins by locking her jaw, or even try to pull her rider out of the saddle. To solve this problem the rider needs first of all to stop pulling on the reins. All backwards movements by the rider's hand will have the horse defending itself by locking the jaw and/or pulling the other way. Secondly the horse has to release the jaw by lightly chewing on the bit and swallowing. The goal is to have the horse release the jaw as soon the rider takes touch on the reins.
As Maria wrote last week, touchmeans that neither horse nor rider lean or pull on each other.
A horse with a made mouth is a horse that with a light touch follows the bit and the rider's hands, wherever the rider places the bit. A horse trained in this way is a horse that is a true pleasure to ride.
Simplifying slightly, a horse can react in three ways when the rider takes touch on the reins:
1)in a schooled way and also use her head and neck to balance her body in a correct way
2)negatively to the bit and move her head in a way that puts herself out of balance (using her weight in a negative way)
3)she can fight the bit and the rider's touch (using her muscles in a negative way)
The first of course describes a horse with ”a made mouth”. As I said, this is the reaction of a schooled horse, which means the horse has to be trained to have ”a made mouth”. Of course all horses can be trained to have a made mouth, you don't need a special breed or an expensive horse.
The horse that uses her weight in a negative way, as in the second case, will either lean on the bit and/or move at a higher speed than requested by the rider, and also be difficult to stop. To counteract this the rider can use the classical half halt. This half halt is done with only the hand, the rider's legs are not involved. The aim of the half halt is to help the horse in using her neck to regain her proper balance, which in this case means the horse has to raise her neck.
The horse that uses her muscles in a negative way, the third case, will for instance pull on the reins by locking her jaw, or even try to pull her rider out of the saddle. To solve this problem the rider needs first of all to stop pulling on the reins. All backwards movements by the rider's hand will have the horse defending itself by locking the jaw and/or pulling the other way. Secondly the horse has to release the jaw by lightly chewing on the bit and swallowing. The goal is to have the horse release the jaw as soon the rider takes touch on the reins.
As Maria wrote last week, touchmeans that neither horse nor rider lean or pull on each other.
A horse with a made mouth is a horse that with a light touch follows the bit and the rider's hands, wherever the rider places the bit. A horse trained in this way is a horse that is a true pleasure to ride.
Tuesday, 20 July 2010
When did grammes leave the scene?
During my 18 years as a riding school student countless lessons has started with the command "take the reins" and I have picked them up. Then followed the instructions; take up a contact with the horse's mouth, have support on the outher rein, be light, give and take with the reins and so on.
As I recall, nobody talked about the way I should pick up the reins, what quality I should strive for, how I should give aids with the reins and what exactly the aid of the reins would mean to the horse.
For my own part, it resulted that I either held the reins too hard or didn’t hold them at all, I oscillated between full contact and no contact, the register in my hands were absent.
In my quest to get a better contact I switched out "take the reins" to "give the horse my hand" and felt that it helped me to become less rigid. And then I met Craig Stevens (Snohomish, WA), who said "Establish Touch" and it threw my equestrian world up side down - touch the horse's mouth!
To relate to rein aids as touch made it easier for me to explore a sliding scale, from the feather light touch to the robust and firm grip.
In a study by Cavallo magazine in 2004 they measured the contact between the horse and the hand. They used electronic sensors on the reins and registred the force on the rein at the transition from canter to halt. They studied riders riding Western style and traditional dressage style. The figures I remember are those concerning the dressage riders. A half halt showed values ranging from 8-10 kg in each rein and at the moment of halt the pressure level in the reins rose to 12.5 kg in average. Anyone who has ever been grabbed the arm by harsh strong hands knows the discomfort it creates.
The study by Cavallo gives me a clue to why riders today feel they have to build up their muscular strenght. Having the idea that you need to pull with 12,5 kg in each hand every time you'd like to bring your horse to an halt is daunting. Especially since halt is something you do more than once each time you ride.
But as refered to in the post from June 23 nowhere in older litterature is strenght a requirement in riding. Not strenght in connection with rein contact anyway.
So, when riding instructions and instructors go astray? When did the definition of contact became equal to kilogrammes and not gramme?
In the book "Fundamentals of Riding" Sir Charles Harris writes “…If you can ride at each gate with rein contacts between 20 and 100 grammes – you have a light hand…”
We ride an animal capable of sensing a fly landing on its skin with kilogrammes in our closed fists. I rode with gloves because of the blisters and wounds I'd get between my little finger and ring finger if I didn't wear them. But the horses I rode at that time had nothing to protect them from blisters and wounds in their mouths...
As I recall, nobody talked about the way I should pick up the reins, what quality I should strive for, how I should give aids with the reins and what exactly the aid of the reins would mean to the horse.
For my own part, it resulted that I either held the reins too hard or didn’t hold them at all, I oscillated between full contact and no contact, the register in my hands were absent.
In my quest to get a better contact I switched out "take the reins" to "give the horse my hand" and felt that it helped me to become less rigid. And then I met Craig Stevens (Snohomish, WA), who said "Establish Touch" and it threw my equestrian world up side down - touch the horse's mouth!
To relate to rein aids as touch made it easier for me to explore a sliding scale, from the feather light touch to the robust and firm grip.
In a study by Cavallo magazine in 2004 they measured the contact between the horse and the hand. They used electronic sensors on the reins and registred the force on the rein at the transition from canter to halt. They studied riders riding Western style and traditional dressage style. The figures I remember are those concerning the dressage riders. A half halt showed values ranging from 8-10 kg in each rein and at the moment of halt the pressure level in the reins rose to 12.5 kg in average. Anyone who has ever been grabbed the arm by harsh strong hands knows the discomfort it creates.
The study by Cavallo gives me a clue to why riders today feel they have to build up their muscular strenght. Having the idea that you need to pull with 12,5 kg in each hand every time you'd like to bring your horse to an halt is daunting. Especially since halt is something you do more than once each time you ride.
But as refered to in the post from June 23 nowhere in older litterature is strenght a requirement in riding. Not strenght in connection with rein contact anyway.
So, when riding instructions and instructors go astray? When did the definition of contact became equal to kilogrammes and not gramme?
In the book "Fundamentals of Riding" Sir Charles Harris writes “…If you can ride at each gate with rein contacts between 20 and 100 grammes – you have a light hand…”
We ride an animal capable of sensing a fly landing on its skin with kilogrammes in our closed fists. I rode with gloves because of the blisters and wounds I'd get between my little finger and ring finger if I didn't wear them. But the horses I rode at that time had nothing to protect them from blisters and wounds in their mouths...
Sunday, 11 July 2010
How to use the hand
Since I'll be sitting by the ocean next week, I post this blog entry early:
In modern dressage the idea that the driving aids are more important than the hand is often voiced. But it is so? All the aids, particularly the rider's hands, are there to communicate with the horse, not to physically control her. If you have the horse's attention and she understands your request, how strong do you have to be? In my blog two weeks ago I wrote about why the hand is seen as the primary aid in classical riding. What does it really mean for how the hand should be used?
Never a backward action
The most basic technique is never to take your hand backwards. You simply should not pull on the horse's mouth. Horses are six to seven times faster in their reactions than humans, and stronger. If you start a wrestling match you will lose sooner or later. And above all, a wrestling match will give both you and your horse unnecessary and incorrect muscle tension.
Direct instead
Then what to do? You can raise your hands, bring them forwards or sideways. In doing this your hand can redirect and reflect your horse's energy through the bit and reins. Your goal is to get your horse to shift its weight on its four legs so that she takes the position she needs for the movement you want to do without you getting any pressure in the reins.
Up
If you use your hands by lifting them upward, following by a lowering you'll perform what the old masters called a half halt. For this you don't need any legs just a simple raising of your hand, followed by an immediate lowering. The response from your horse can be divided into four stages: 1) she raises her head, 2) she slows down, 3) she stops, 4) she backs up. The raising of the horse's neck and head makes the horse re-balance itself by putting more weight on its hind legs. This is the beginning of collection.
Towards and away from the horse
When you direct your horse's energy out and away from the horse (this is almost the same thing as performing a small leading or opening rein) this is called a "direct rein". The effect is that the horse either makes a wide arc in the same direction as your hand moved or a turn on the forehand. Which one you get depends on the horse's degree of collection. A direct rein asks the horse to put her weight on the front leg. If you do a direct rein with the right hand your horse should put her weight on the right front leg.
If you instead direct your horse's energy into the horse's body (this is comparable to a neck rein in Western riding), this is called an "indirect rein". The effect is that the horse either makes a wide arc in the opposite direction, or a turn on the haunches. What movement your horse will perform depends, again, on the degree of collection. An indirect rein asks the horse to put weight on the diagonal hind leg.
The principles are very easy, but not always so simple to do in reality!
In modern dressage the idea that the driving aids are more important than the hand is often voiced. But it is so? All the aids, particularly the rider's hands, are there to communicate with the horse, not to physically control her. If you have the horse's attention and she understands your request, how strong do you have to be? In my blog two weeks ago I wrote about why the hand is seen as the primary aid in classical riding. What does it really mean for how the hand should be used?
Never a backward action
The most basic technique is never to take your hand backwards. You simply should not pull on the horse's mouth. Horses are six to seven times faster in their reactions than humans, and stronger. If you start a wrestling match you will lose sooner or later. And above all, a wrestling match will give both you and your horse unnecessary and incorrect muscle tension.
Direct instead
Then what to do? You can raise your hands, bring them forwards or sideways. In doing this your hand can redirect and reflect your horse's energy through the bit and reins. Your goal is to get your horse to shift its weight on its four legs so that she takes the position she needs for the movement you want to do without you getting any pressure in the reins.
Up
If you use your hands by lifting them upward, following by a lowering you'll perform what the old masters called a half halt. For this you don't need any legs just a simple raising of your hand, followed by an immediate lowering. The response from your horse can be divided into four stages: 1) she raises her head, 2) she slows down, 3) she stops, 4) she backs up. The raising of the horse's neck and head makes the horse re-balance itself by putting more weight on its hind legs. This is the beginning of collection.
Towards and away from the horse
When you direct your horse's energy out and away from the horse (this is almost the same thing as performing a small leading or opening rein) this is called a "direct rein". The effect is that the horse either makes a wide arc in the same direction as your hand moved or a turn on the forehand. Which one you get depends on the horse's degree of collection. A direct rein asks the horse to put her weight on the front leg. If you do a direct rein with the right hand your horse should put her weight on the right front leg.
If you instead direct your horse's energy into the horse's body (this is comparable to a neck rein in Western riding), this is called an "indirect rein". The effect is that the horse either makes a wide arc in the opposite direction, or a turn on the haunches. What movement your horse will perform depends, again, on the degree of collection. An indirect rein asks the horse to put weight on the diagonal hind leg.
The principles are very easy, but not always so simple to do in reality!
Tuesday, 6 July 2010
Beginner or re-ginner
There is a big difference being a beginner compared to being a “re-ginner” in many ways.
As a beginner, you are a clean sheet, everything you do, you do from the beginning and provided you have a good teacher you can quickly and easily acquire new skills. I remember an adult beginner that in a relatively short time learned to ride and with great enthusiasm during a lesson exclaimed .- Do I make a passing now?! (referring to a side pass) He had everything to gain and nothing to loose, it's the novice privilege.
As a re-ginner you have to face challenges on several levels.
To re-learn is more difficult than learning a new because you have to struggle with your acquired reflexes or so called habit. Since you already have some knowledge of the subject, you have to put up with reflexes that allow you to automatically act when something happens.
Sometimes you are aware of your reflexes, sometimes you are unaware of them and the latter can cause problem. I saw a lesson where the riding instructor wanted a pupil to raise the hand and the hand rose but it was simultaneously brought backwards. - No, the riding instructor said, not that way. I want you to just raise your hand. The rider made another try, doing the same as the first time. At that point the riding instructor walked over and showed the student what actually happened to the hands. –Oh, I see, the pupil said and at a new request the hands were raised without pulling the reins backwards. You can only change the things you are aware of, you need to become aware of yourself and what you are actually doing.
Once you become aware of what you do "when you do what you do" you will face the next challenge.
You need to find out what your new habit is going to consist of.
So intellectually, you are in the game but your body is unable to go for the new. It feels as it is resisting. If it is any comfort I have heard that it takes 10 000 repetitions to consolidate a habit. If the habit turns out to be something we need to address later on in life, it takes 10 000 reps to work it off and 10 000 to consolidate a new habit.
It is the stubbornly and tirelessly saying no to the first impulse (your old habitual response) and giving yourself direction for your planned new route that brings about change. Being bewildered, clumsy and wrong belongs to that part of the task. To make it easier and to give yourself the space needed to change it is great if you can blur the paradigm of right-wrong within your mind and instead see your chosen path as an experiment. Were the results of your experiment the expected? How well did you keep to your new direction? At what point were the urge to do as you usually did the strongest?
Once you know what you want, have a clear vision of how to do it and manage to prevent yourself from getting stuck in some old habit - then it is possible that what you want to achieve is done by you and for you almost without effort.
And if you can ease the demands of perfection on yourself with some good humoured self criticism and accept that being a re-ginner is going to make you feel lost and stupid at times, then you have given yourself a fair chance to succeed.
"If you stop doing the wrong thing the right thing does itself."
F.M Alexander
As a beginner, you are a clean sheet, everything you do, you do from the beginning and provided you have a good teacher you can quickly and easily acquire new skills. I remember an adult beginner that in a relatively short time learned to ride and with great enthusiasm during a lesson exclaimed .- Do I make a passing now?! (referring to a side pass) He had everything to gain and nothing to loose, it's the novice privilege.
As a re-ginner you have to face challenges on several levels.
To re-learn is more difficult than learning a new because you have to struggle with your acquired reflexes or so called habit. Since you already have some knowledge of the subject, you have to put up with reflexes that allow you to automatically act when something happens.
Sometimes you are aware of your reflexes, sometimes you are unaware of them and the latter can cause problem. I saw a lesson where the riding instructor wanted a pupil to raise the hand and the hand rose but it was simultaneously brought backwards. - No, the riding instructor said, not that way. I want you to just raise your hand. The rider made another try, doing the same as the first time. At that point the riding instructor walked over and showed the student what actually happened to the hands. –Oh, I see, the pupil said and at a new request the hands were raised without pulling the reins backwards. You can only change the things you are aware of, you need to become aware of yourself and what you are actually doing.
Once you become aware of what you do "when you do what you do" you will face the next challenge.
You need to find out what your new habit is going to consist of.
So intellectually, you are in the game but your body is unable to go for the new. It feels as it is resisting. If it is any comfort I have heard that it takes 10 000 repetitions to consolidate a habit. If the habit turns out to be something we need to address later on in life, it takes 10 000 reps to work it off and 10 000 to consolidate a new habit.
It is the stubbornly and tirelessly saying no to the first impulse (your old habitual response) and giving yourself direction for your planned new route that brings about change. Being bewildered, clumsy and wrong belongs to that part of the task. To make it easier and to give yourself the space needed to change it is great if you can blur the paradigm of right-wrong within your mind and instead see your chosen path as an experiment. Were the results of your experiment the expected? How well did you keep to your new direction? At what point were the urge to do as you usually did the strongest?
Once you know what you want, have a clear vision of how to do it and manage to prevent yourself from getting stuck in some old habit - then it is possible that what you want to achieve is done by you and for you almost without effort.
And if you can ease the demands of perfection on yourself with some good humoured self criticism and accept that being a re-ginner is going to make you feel lost and stupid at times, then you have given yourself a fair chance to succeed.
"If you stop doing the wrong thing the right thing does itself."
F.M Alexander
Tuesday, 29 June 2010
The hand is the primary aid
A few days ago I gave a lesson where the rider got to practice the reverse half halt. I love giving this lesson since most riders are very sceptical at first but then get all excited when it works. The aim of the exercise is to get the horse to trot only using a specific giving action with the hand.
The hand can create impulsion. Yes! I mean it! How is this possible?
”The hand is the primary aid”. This means that the hand should act first, before the legs and/or seat. But it also means that neither legs nor seat is necessary at all. If the horse is attentive, and if the rider sits on the horse in balance and with a supple seat without hindering the horse's movements.
The father of classical equitation, François Robichon de la Guérinière (French, 1688-1751), wrote in his book “Ecole de Cavalerie” that: “The hand ought always to begin the effect, the legs to accompany it: for it is a general principle in all the paces, as well natural as artificial, that the head and shoulders of the horse must go first”.
One more thing – the hand should never ever act backwards. The reason for this is that the horse's reflexes are 6-7 times faster than human reflexes. It is therefore impossible, from the horse's point of view, to yield a hand that acts backwards at the proper moment. A hand that acts backwards usually makes the horse protect itself in other ways, for instance by not bringing the hind legs under and/or overbending the neck.
So, how does all this add up to the horse trotting by the action of the hand alone? It is simple (but not always easy to do), a well schooled horse follows the bit. If the bit is allowed forwards, so the horse should go forwards.
The hand can create impulsion. Yes! I mean it! How is this possible?
”The hand is the primary aid”. This means that the hand should act first, before the legs and/or seat. But it also means that neither legs nor seat is necessary at all. If the horse is attentive, and if the rider sits on the horse in balance and with a supple seat without hindering the horse's movements.
The father of classical equitation, François Robichon de la Guérinière (French, 1688-1751), wrote in his book “Ecole de Cavalerie” that: “The hand ought always to begin the effect, the legs to accompany it: for it is a general principle in all the paces, as well natural as artificial, that the head and shoulders of the horse must go first”.
One more thing – the hand should never ever act backwards. The reason for this is that the horse's reflexes are 6-7 times faster than human reflexes. It is therefore impossible, from the horse's point of view, to yield a hand that acts backwards at the proper moment. A hand that acts backwards usually makes the horse protect itself in other ways, for instance by not bringing the hind legs under and/or overbending the neck.
So, how does all this add up to the horse trotting by the action of the hand alone? It is simple (but not always easy to do), a well schooled horse follows the bit. If the bit is allowed forwards, so the horse should go forwards.
Wednesday, 23 June 2010
Fitness training for rider - a misunderstandig?
In several horse magazines they have published articles about riders who are now actively into fitness training to cope with their riding. And I can agree that you need to be in good condition to ride several hour a day, if nothing else you will be in good condition after riding several hour a day… But fitness training??!!
Regardless of background all authors below agree that the rider's contact with the horse's mouth should be light, this will be selection of quotes from Swedish and foreign literature.
--- They (the hands) must be elastic and delicate, not strong, harsh or brusque.
Eric Herbermann
--gentle and soft touch of the rider's hands---
Alois Podhajsky
No strength in the arms or hands is ever needed.
Udo Bürger
Hands should be soft and springy.
Lars Lithander
The rider must have a light, supple hand.
Bengt Gustavsson
The rider should have a light touch with the horse's mouth.
Gehnäll Persson
The connection between the rider's hand and the horse's mouth should be soft and elastic
Nils Ankarcrona
Bengt "Blomman" Blomqvist discusses in his book "Driving" the issue about horses that lean into the reins. He makes it clear that it is his belief that that the strength of the arms and back are better trained anywhere else than on the driver’s seat and he stresses that he wants a light contact with the horses.
When the rider cannot cope with his own riding, when the body feels tired and exausted, it is easy to assume that it is the strength that fails you. But it is the tug of war with the horse that tire us, considering the fact that horses by far outweigh us.
More logical, and more in line with the above given quotes, we should strive to do less in order to cope more.
In the words of Nuno Oliveira
Actually, the horse schooled with maximum finesse, may be directed with the “reins attracted by the concept of gravity” as expressed by La Guérnière.
How tiring can that be?
Regardless of background all authors below agree that the rider's contact with the horse's mouth should be light, this will be selection of quotes from Swedish and foreign literature.
--- They (the hands) must be elastic and delicate, not strong, harsh or brusque.
Eric Herbermann
--gentle and soft touch of the rider's hands---
Alois Podhajsky
No strength in the arms or hands is ever needed.
Udo Bürger
Hands should be soft and springy.
Lars Lithander
The rider must have a light, supple hand.
Bengt Gustavsson
The rider should have a light touch with the horse's mouth.
Gehnäll Persson
The connection between the rider's hand and the horse's mouth should be soft and elastic
Nils Ankarcrona
Bengt "Blomman" Blomqvist discusses in his book "Driving" the issue about horses that lean into the reins. He makes it clear that it is his belief that that the strength of the arms and back are better trained anywhere else than on the driver’s seat and he stresses that he wants a light contact with the horses.
When the rider cannot cope with his own riding, when the body feels tired and exausted, it is easy to assume that it is the strength that fails you. But it is the tug of war with the horse that tire us, considering the fact that horses by far outweigh us.
More logical, and more in line with the above given quotes, we should strive to do less in order to cope more.
In the words of Nuno Oliveira
Actually, the horse schooled with maximum finesse, may be directed with the “reins attracted by the concept of gravity” as expressed by La Guérnière.
How tiring can that be?
Tuesday, 15 June 2010
Walk - the mother of all gaits
This weekend I teached at a clinic in Piteå. There were 10 riders who rode one lesson each Saturday and Sunday. It was a mixed group, ranging from beginners to those I have followed for many years. The youngest participant was 10 years old and started riding with me in Stockholm this past winter and we have focused on seat training in walk and trot. Ronja trotted and steered the horse all by her self for the first time in the clinic and was mighty proud of the achievement! For me it is a privilege to follow her development. Thanks to the seat training Ronja could ride her horse in trot without hanging in the horse's mouth or lose adherence in the saddle. Nice job Ronja!
But, what I mainly want to address in this blog is the walk. I sometimes get the question if riders do anything else than walk when riding with me. Well, yes. In this clinic, there were several participants who practiced transitions between walk, trot and canter, and flexions in trot and canter. But I see no advantage for either the horse or rider to start adding speed if not both rider and horse have the basic understanding of communication (that is the aids), and proper balance and posture. And it's not for nothing that the walk is called "the mother of all gaits".
The walk is the one gait that is most easily influenced by the rider. Modern research has shown this. Perhaps that is the reason that in traditional dressage it is said that you should not work the horse at the walk, since this will destroy it. That is not true. It all comes down to how the rider uses his/hers hands and what is perceived as a good "support".
If the rider uses his/hers hands backwards the horse will most likely hang on the bit. The horse can do this either by leaning with his weight forward, or use the muscles in the neck to push on the bit. When this happens, the walk will deteriorate. The same will happen to the trot and the canter, but it will not show as clearly.
Returning to the horse, which hangs or push on the bit. In the first case the horse must be made to balance himself and in the other the horse must be made to relax the neck muscles. The key to the solution for both problems is how the rider uses his/hers hands. The half halt (raising and lowering of the hand) re balances the horse and vibration will loosen the tense muscles.
In order not to invite the horse to lean or hang on the bit again, the rider have to follow and allow the natural oscillation of the horse's neck. If not the walk will deteriorate and in the worst case the horse will start to pace. This is where the rider's idea of what a good "support" is will be important. The contact between the horse's mouth and the rider's hands should not be much more than weight of the rein. Any more than that means the two are hanging on each other, which does not just make it hard for the rider's arms, it also means that the horse does not have a good posture.
The horse's posture is most readily seen when the horse is standing still. Look at the feet. Imagine that you look down at your horse from above. Usually the horse stands uneven. "Square" means that the horse's feet are evenly spaced so it formed a square rectangle. When it does, the horse have the beginning for a correct posture, i.e. the spine is straight seen from above.
When the horse is in motion and the hind feet track directly behind the front (which corresponds to the horse being "square" but in motion) AND also has the proper rising in the neck corresponding to its degree of education, AND is light in the hand. Well, then the horse is virtually guaranteed in good posture and balance. What you feel as a rider is that the horse in motion is as easy to turn to the right as the left, can do right shoulder in as easy as left, will back up straight, etc. It is a proof of good balance and posture that the horse can easily carry out whatever you ask. For both horse and rider, it is easier to find those good posture and balance in walk than trot or canter. The walk is the only gait in which both rider and horse have time to really explore and find good balance and posture. When the foundation is laid, trot and canter is not a big problem, but to train the trot and canter before the basics are in place is just a long detour back to the start and a waste of time even if it feels like you have trained when you merely exercised the horse.
Classical dressage is not primarily about fitness, but practicing posture and balance.
But, what I mainly want to address in this blog is the walk. I sometimes get the question if riders do anything else than walk when riding with me. Well, yes. In this clinic, there were several participants who practiced transitions between walk, trot and canter, and flexions in trot and canter. But I see no advantage for either the horse or rider to start adding speed if not both rider and horse have the basic understanding of communication (that is the aids), and proper balance and posture. And it's not for nothing that the walk is called "the mother of all gaits".
The walk is the one gait that is most easily influenced by the rider. Modern research has shown this. Perhaps that is the reason that in traditional dressage it is said that you should not work the horse at the walk, since this will destroy it. That is not true. It all comes down to how the rider uses his/hers hands and what is perceived as a good "support".
If the rider uses his/hers hands backwards the horse will most likely hang on the bit. The horse can do this either by leaning with his weight forward, or use the muscles in the neck to push on the bit. When this happens, the walk will deteriorate. The same will happen to the trot and the canter, but it will not show as clearly.
Returning to the horse, which hangs or push on the bit. In the first case the horse must be made to balance himself and in the other the horse must be made to relax the neck muscles. The key to the solution for both problems is how the rider uses his/hers hands. The half halt (raising and lowering of the hand) re balances the horse and vibration will loosen the tense muscles.
In order not to invite the horse to lean or hang on the bit again, the rider have to follow and allow the natural oscillation of the horse's neck. If not the walk will deteriorate and in the worst case the horse will start to pace. This is where the rider's idea of what a good "support" is will be important. The contact between the horse's mouth and the rider's hands should not be much more than weight of the rein. Any more than that means the two are hanging on each other, which does not just make it hard for the rider's arms, it also means that the horse does not have a good posture.
The horse's posture is most readily seen when the horse is standing still. Look at the feet. Imagine that you look down at your horse from above. Usually the horse stands uneven. "Square" means that the horse's feet are evenly spaced so it formed a square rectangle. When it does, the horse have the beginning for a correct posture, i.e. the spine is straight seen from above.
When the horse is in motion and the hind feet track directly behind the front (which corresponds to the horse being "square" but in motion) AND also has the proper rising in the neck corresponding to its degree of education, AND is light in the hand. Well, then the horse is virtually guaranteed in good posture and balance. What you feel as a rider is that the horse in motion is as easy to turn to the right as the left, can do right shoulder in as easy as left, will back up straight, etc. It is a proof of good balance and posture that the horse can easily carry out whatever you ask. For both horse and rider, it is easier to find those good posture and balance in walk than trot or canter. The walk is the only gait in which both rider and horse have time to really explore and find good balance and posture. When the foundation is laid, trot and canter is not a big problem, but to train the trot and canter before the basics are in place is just a long detour back to the start and a waste of time even if it feels like you have trained when you merely exercised the horse.
Classical dressage is not primarily about fitness, but practicing posture and balance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
