QOTM Archives

Your Subtitle text

QOTM Archives

Past Questions
of the Month

Listed below the arch-chives

“Do you judge riders at schooling shows
by a different standard
than you do at recognized shows?”

BILL: The answer to this, for better or worse, is a resounding NO! Some judges seem to have a sliding standard and want to be “kinder” or “encouraging” to less experienced competitors. I am totally in favor of encouraging them—particularly with my comments on the test sheet or, if time permits, in conversation after the ride. But to jimmy the scores higher—whether at a schooling show or at a competition in a more remote part of the country—just confuses riders and trainers. A single standard that remains the same morning to night, professional to amateur to kid on a fat pony, and—as much as is humanly possible—week to week and show to show is the only good way to indicate to riders where they really stand and what progress they are making.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“Was Gal's freestyle really
the best that's ever been?"

BILL: The nice thing about this question is that there isn't really a single correct answer. Some opinions may be worth more than others, and your own can be foremost if you so wish. When I first saw the video from the end of July of Edward Gal & Moorlands Totilas doing their 89+% ride at Hickstead, I very much admired the horse's athleticism, and the piaffe/passage was truly spectacular. My overall impression, however, was less ecstatic than many others'. For me parts of the ride seemed almost inorganic -- robot-like. The topline reminded me a bit of a Saddlebred -- nearly a headset, and I missed the elasticity and harmony I have seen in other horses. Looking at the linked video here from the European Championships, I take it all back. I admit that the music doesn't appeal to me -- on the apocalyptic scale it belongs somewhere to the west of the Road Warrior soundtrack. But, WOW, what a ride this one was! Goosebumps are more than appropriate. Tears, well, that's up to you.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

"How are we supposed to ride that
stupid loop in Training Test 4?

BILL: The one word answer is WELL. You're supposed to ride it well. The question is HOW. What do we see as judges that usually goes wrong?

The exercise is mainly about suppleness and bending and showing that the bend can be changed smoothly and without resistance. Riders very often dig themselves into a hole right from the start by riding the figure itself incorrectly and giving themselves no opportunity to show those bend changes. Typically what we see is a figure that looks a lot like the walk pattern in Training Test 2: The rider goes from the corner letter on a diagonal, "changes her mind" at X, and goes back to the corner letter on the same side on another straight line.

What we want to see is a figure of continuous curves--no straight lines at all. Think of a "bell curve." After a normal corner between C and M, peel your horse gradually off the track aiming not at X but almost towards E. You should cross the quarter-line right opposite R, and that's the point where the bend should change. Then you ride a "fat dome" whose point furthest from the track is at X. The second half of the dome as you return to the rail, should match the first half. Don't aim back at F; think of a sharper curve almost as though you are going to P. Then DO change your mind and the bend as you cross the quarter-line in line with P, and ooze gracefully back onto the track approaching F as gradually as you see the space shuttle touch down at Kennedy.

When the movement was new, a diagram on the front of the test sheet explained how it should look. I wish the Test Writers would restore that picture. It would make it a lot simpler for the riders, and I wouldn't need to order a rubber stamp which explains to the people I judge what they keep doing wrong!

___________________________________________________________________________________

"Show me how to switch the whip
the right way?"

BILL: It ought to be simple, painless, and elegant, but much of the time getting your whip switched from one side of your horse to the other is none of those things. So to avoid you impersonating the fourth Musketeer or a high school baton twirler, I offer these suggestions.side of your horse to the other is none of those things. So to avoid you impersonating the fourth Musketeer or a high school baton twirler, I offer these suggestions.

For photos and more, CLICK HERE

______________________________________________________________________

"Is It for the Journey or the Blue Ribbon?"

BILL: This is another one of those questions that doesn’t have one right and one wrong answer, although I bet you’ll find some people that are sure that it does. If you read the dressage pulps or lurk around the message boards and chatrooms, you’ve already heard the contentious sparring: It’s an art; it’s all about the relationship; it’s how you think about your horse and your work, not success itself; you can’t measure success, anyway, by ribbons you win. That’s the Less Taste side of the argument.

    On the More Filling side, if you don’t go out and measure yourself against other riders, you seal yourself in a bubble where “Not Very Good” can seem to you like “Just Fine”; competition is what pushes people to excel; shows attract sponsors and money and even fame, and without those things it would be impossible to breed and support star athletes like Ravel or Edward Gall’s horse that we all admire.
    From one vantage point, it might be even borderline sinful to spend exorbitant amounts of money on a horse with all the problems and inequities that exist in the world. But what’s “too much”? Is it ten million dollars? Is it two million? Is it the price of a house? Or just a low six figures? Maybe just the price of an SUV from Korea? Might it only be a year’s tuition someplace? I’ve heard people claim that if it’s more than a thousand bucks, that horse ain’t worth it. Clearly, it’s a matter of perspective.
    The so-called (oops, I’m showing my bias) classicists might argue that “since it’s about the training” and not the innate value of the horseflesh, there’s no need to spend the cash. That is, until someone acknowledges that there is greater raw beauty in the superior horse than in a common one.     They might also point out that success which is purchased is of lesser value than success which is created from time and effort. Alternatively, that you can’t experience what some of the movements are really supposed to feel like if you don’t feel them on a horse that’s truly talented and capable (and, by definition in our modern world, expensive.) You can go round and round—many people have in the past in tones both self-righteous and accusatory.
    Personally, I like shows and competition as long as they don’t make people crazy. Kept in perspective, showing can be wholesome, fun, and motivation to go out and put in the hours in the saddle when it might feel easier to succumb to the comfort of the couch, a glass of wine, and the TV. If you’re of the journeying ilk, you’ll say you’re happy enough right at home, and you don’t need externals to keep you focused. It’s all so tied into your own personality and what makes you tick. I will say this, however, whether you do it for its own sake or specifically to get to the destination, the journey itself is inevitable, and it’s always a long one. You can step out for a jaunt to the convenience store pretty easily, but training a dressage horse is more like embarking on a hike the length of the Appalachian Trail. Governor Sanford excluded, if you don’t enjoy the trail itself, you aren’t going to be happy out in the woods, and you’re going to be more aware of the aches and the blisters than you are of the rewards. If frustration and disappointment dominate your riding, you either need a new, attitude, a new horse, or a new sport!

________________________________________________________________

"Can I learn to train my horse as I'm learning to ride

or do I really need a fancy schoolmaster?"

BILL: And now for the bad news for both your spouse and your bank account….

YES, you would be far better off with a schoolmaster. If you think about it, it ought to be obvious. Have you ever found yourself in a backwater restaurant with pretensions? I recall one where the chef had clearly never tasted a properly prepared version of what he was trying to cook. You can imagine the results!

It's the same deal with dressage. How can you train connection, collection, softness, or lightness if you've never felt those things? It is a cliché among instructors' nightmares that a parent says, "We're bought our little daughter a three year old so they can learn together." With luck, they may survive, but that approach makes the road much bumpier and a whole lot longer.

Every "schoolmaster" doesn't need to be an FEI one. It needs to know a few degrees more than you do, but especially, it needs to know it correctly. It is relatively easy to find a horse that will do some semblance of more advanced movements (if you let it hang on your hands or if you sit on the wrong seatbone), but ultimately that won't help your understanding of what it's really supposed to feel like.

And one more thought: the fact that your schoolmaster "knows it" doesn't mean that he'll do it! Get help, keep him tuned by a more knowledgeable rider, and you'll get the most value (and fun) from your investment.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

An Interlude replaces The Current Question

BILL: This month I do, indeed, have a few things to rant on.
       Item Number 1: Some months ago I explained in this space why when I judge schooling shows, I try to apply the same standards that I do at recognized shows.
Here's another reason, this time from the trainer's viewpoint. Recently several students of mine were treated very generously by an L judge at a schooling show, e.g.: for a line of tempi changes "two mistakes -- 5." Or after some inadvertent tempis on the centerline on the way to the initial halt, again a 5. I was not present at the show. So when I taught these people the following week and they showed me their test sheets, the scores and remarks left no realistic picture of what their horses had looked like or how they'd performed. If the above scores were so off base, how could anyone assume that impulsion or submission scores were accurate either? Aside from the information doing me no good, both students are now hot to take their skills to a recognized show next. When they run into the buzz saw of a less tolerant S or I judge, they're going to be in for a shock as well as a big disappointment. So, please, for everybody's sake, if you're judging a schooling show, make lots of constructive comments, but don't do your riders any "favors" by skewing the scores up in an effort to make them happy.
      Item Number 2: I'm about to judge the new 2010 eventing tests this weekend for the first time. Looking them over, I found a movement in a Prelim test which hasn't been included before. In the 20x40 arena, it reads:
KXM Change rein, giving and taking the reins forward over X for 5 meters
The accompanying Directives read: Straightness on diagonal, the reach forward of the neck while maintaining the balance, smoothness of the giving and retaking.
My problem is the lack of clarity of exactly what's expected. Does the "reach forward of the neck" imply that the horse should stretch down? If not, surely it isn't meant to encourage simply poking the nose forward! Is the horse supposed to stay "up" in a First Level-ish version of self carriage like the uberstreichen we see in Third Level? If I have these questions, certainly a lot of riders must have them too. Why can't the Directives be more helpfully explicit? Why in these technologically-sophisticated times couldn't the USEA test writers put a three minute video up on YouTube demonstrating what they want to see?
        And Item Number 3: Again in the new Eventing tests, Beginner Novice A starts out:

AXMC Enter working trot

When I first saw this, I thought it must be a misprint! The rationale for this strange figure undoubtedly is to avoid having the green horse in his first test approach the scary judge's booth head on. This way, he gets to pass it side-on, presumably an easier task. One shortcoming with this reasoning: lots of Beginner Novices are the riders, not the horses. In this division we see lots of old packers that have been around the block (and up the centerline) many, many times without a problem. It brings up a larger question, however. Yes, the tests are supposed to help bring the horses along confident in their training, but some things are supposed to be accomplished in their training before the horse ever comes to his first competition. Like going up the centerline. Or for that matter, being able to enter, halt, and move on. To those who think it's too much to ask a young horse to interrupt his forward flow with a halt right at the beginning, I wonder what that says about how on the aids (or not) they expect their horses to be when they take them out in public to compete. Since they also plan to gallop them cross country and ride a stadium round in the same competition, I'd think a simple display of having them in front of the leg wouldn't be an unreasonable demand!

OK, I feel better. Back to your questions next month.

__________________________________________________________________________________

"We're always taught to maintain impulsion.

How come in pirouettes the horses are allowed to slow down?"

BILL: This is an example of the classic “Impulsion is Energy, Not Speed” concept. While in a pirouette you will see the horse travel more slowly over the ground, in very collected canter he should maintain his rhythm and energy throughout. The whole idea in Collection is that some of the horse’s forward thrusting power is converted into upward lifting power. If you see a pirouette where the tempo markedly decreases and the strides look labored or dragging (as opposed to crisp and active), you’re watching a bad pirouette.

The same concept applies in all the collected work. For instance, inexperienced dressage riders coming from another discipline may sometimes think of slowing down or shortening their horse for a shoulder-in. On the contrary, they should think power, engagement, lift, and expression when the topic of Collection arises. This is what judges want to see, and this is how each exercise will have its intended gymnastic value for the horse.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Question of the Month?

(Sorry, another interlude this month)

BILL: This is just a minor rant because I just don’t want to get myself too wound up. And besides, it gets easy to sound both curmudgeonly and elitist at the same time if I’m not careful.

Years ago, when I was chair of the Instructor/Trainer Council, I was told that I could not say “Dressage is good for all horses, but not all horses are good for dressage.” That seemed like a perfectly obvious statement meant to open the door to many disciplines to use our approach to riding while recognizing that horses which have been selectively bred for generations to compete in our sport are apt to be at a significant advantage when it comes to winning in the show ring. In the immediate post-Lowell Boomer era, that attitude was deemed politically incorrect and not in the best interests of a USDF trying to increase its membership.

In a few weeks I will judge a USDF recognized Morgan show, and in it I will judge, among other conventional dressage classes, something called Morgan Western Dressage. You heard me right. It’s in the USEF rules in the Morgan division! When you look at the book, it appears that they’ve lifted the regular dressage rules verbatim and substituted a few phrases like “jog-trot” where it otherwise would say “working trot” and “lope” where our rules say “canter.” Most all the other terminology remains the same, as are the tests the same as ours. There is a directive which warns that these are not to be “English horses going in Western tack” but that the intention is to preserve the style and way of going of the true Western horse.

None of this would bother me if it didn’t pretend to be dressage and if it didn’t have to be judged by a recognized dressage judge. Using gymnastic exercises to make a horse more pliable, supple, and obedient makes sense no matter what the end result is meant to be.

My problem comes when I have to SCORE it like dressage! A round circle is a round circle, of course, no matter what kind of tack you use. But when we evaluate dressage rides beyond the stages where survival and successful navigation are paramount, the qualities that separate the Exceptional from the Ordinary are things like cadence, engagement, expression, and buoyancy. The degree to which riders can infuse their performance with these ideas is what it’s all about. As Col. Sommer once said, “Dressage without Impulsion is Circus.”

I’ve gone to YouTube and looked at examples of Morgan Western Dressage and scored the rides by our normal standards. The kind of Collectives I saw were on the order of 5-5-7-6. Pleasant, obedient, but truly lifeless. I’d be the first to admit I have no eye for judging Western horses. Nor any training. Nor particularly any interest since their end goals aren’t the same as what I’ve been working on learning and teaching for the last forty years.

How’s it going to come out? I guess we’ll know by mid month. I don’t want to disappoint people. But I do have to be able to look myself in the eye (in the mirror) the day after this all shakes out.

I’ll report back, promise!

POST SHOW UPDATE:

"Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, and sometimes it rains." (Annie Savoy speaking in Bull Durham) In this case, I won: there were no entries in Morgan western dressage at the Citrus Cup, which let me avoid the above stated conundrum altogether. In the "regular" Morgan dressage division, there were quite a few pleasant, respectable rides and some decent scores.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

I see lots of Dressage riders, both beginners and pros—on horses that plod submissively along--- I guess they look “happy” in a bored sort of way. I think there must be something MORE. More like—an edgy quality--- like riding a horse whose expression might just look not quite in control- Your comments? D Neibling, Tucson, AZ

BILL: You’re quite right—there IS something more, and it’s what separates the “interesting” horses from the obedient, cheerful “coasters.” And I was with you right up to the horse’s expression looking “not quite in control.” Then we’re getting towards those flashy models with tail fins and a lot of chrome (that also throw their legs around and can’t stand still at the halt.)

A good rider takes chances and dares to ride the horse nearer “the edge,” but not so near that edge that the aura of harmony and a certain serenity are lost. Sometimes what’s crowd-pleasing because it’s flashy doesn’t (or SHOULDN’T) satisfy the judges if it goes over that line. Striking the best balance between energy/expression and calm confidence is the tactful rider’s art. That’s what we ought to be appreciating as spectators and rewarding as judges.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Received via e-mail from a Western-trained observer:

I was watching a student of yours working with a horse in training and making turns on the forehand. You should both know that turning on the forehand will not engage the horse’s hind end. In fact, turning on the forehand disengages the hind end and basically stalls the horse’s motion. You cannot get collection with the horse in neutral. To teach a horse to engage his hind end you must teach a horse to turn on his haunches. This will put his hind end under him and teach him to use himself in a correct manner.

Regards, Mary

BILL: This criticism wouldn’t come only from a western rider. I’ve heard it from Europeans with a certain background as well. But specifically here’s the background on what Mary saw: the horse in question is one of those “plodders” who’s oblivious to his owner, drifts around long and flat, and needs in almost every sense to “get with program.” What my student-trainer was doing was pushing the horse off her leg, making something akin to a big-angle leg yielding with the forehand on a small circle and the hindquarters on a much larger one.

With a horse like this one, the first job is just to get him forward off the leg in real time. The second is to make his forehand displaceable laterally. As Major Lindgren and I wrote in the USDF Instructors Manual, if you do this with your inner leg in the vicinity of the girth (not by bringing your inside leg back just to swing the quarters), you create a movable center of gravity that yields around his inside shoulder. Your modifying outside leg (behind the girth) channels his energy forward into your receiving, regulating outside rein. Forward thought is never lost. Forward movement is instantaneously available on demand.

When you can shift the horse’s center of gravity laterally, he unblocks and becomes susceptible (try it) to a half halt that can displace his weight longitudinally and produce engagement. This isn’t to say turns on the haunches aren’t also valuable in the training process, but with a green horse (or one with a troubled background) it’s more believable to begin with an exercise that lets him move away from a leg he’s bent around than one which requires him to look in the direction he’s turning.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I have a husband and three kids at home and a hot schoolmaster in the barn. Will judges discriminate against me and my horse if I wear a safety helmet with my tailcoat instead of a top hat?
What about riding PSG in a snaffle?

BILL: The judges will absolutely not discriminate against you for exercising caution and common sense. Aside from the rulebook making it completely legal, some will secretly admire you for eschewing the glamour road for the sake of yours and your family’s wellbeing. You are more apt to have tales told about you for the reverse – the top hat worn in Intro, for example, which while legal, is pretty pretentious!

As for the snaffle bit in the St. George, most of the judges who’d have thought it inappropriate are dead and gone. I was once praised by a judge for doing even Fourth Level in a snaffle. While it won’t affect your score one way or the other, if you can pull it off successfully, you’ll get more admiring glances for braving the snaffle in FEI.

Weird rumors get started from time to time that have no basis in reality. I remember one circulating that you should never ride a test in a figure 8 noseband because the judge will assume that your horse is a “puller.” Like good judges aren’t smart enough to tell whether your horse is being carried around or holding himself in a correct carriage! Honest, judges generally have better things to worry about than the shade of your breeches, whether the buckles on your bridle match the ones on your spurs, or whether your mane is braided on the left or the right. If what you are doing is within the rules and your horse looks comfortable and happy, no one has a reason to complain about anything.

________________________________________________________________________

ANOTHER UNAVOIDABLE RANT

         Excuse me, I’m feeling unbearably passé as I drag my sorry carcass each day through Oldies Radio reveries 
from the middle of the last century. I should be out there at the dressage barricades (or at least teetering on the cutting 
edge). But across my Samsung SyncMaster™ 2233SW  HD quality 22" display monitor (with 5 ms (GTG) response time, 15000:1 dynamic
contrast ratio, and 300cd/m2 brightness) the other  day came information about a special clinic being shilled in the Deep 
South. And, I’m sorry, I thought the brave new world it offered was just TOO goofy for me! It began:

_________ will provide instruction using her "Dressage Simulator."

Like our airline pilots do their simulator-training, she will employ a life size sensor-imbedded mechanical dressage horse with a variety of computerized screens that you "ride." It even does lateral work, pirouettes, tempi changes, and will crash through the arena fence if you don't give your aids properly to control it. One of the best things I think it does is it has screens to tell you all of the pressure points you are applying to the horse - how straight or crooked you are sitting in the saddle, if your aids are stronger on one side or the other, if the timing of your aids is correct or out of sync with the stride of the horse. It teaches you to perform all the required movements in a dressage test: leg yield, shoulder in, half pass, flying changes, pirouette, passage, piaffe, and collected & medium paces. The rider can repeat centre line, diagonal and any other movements indefinitely, with no anticipation from the horse. Unlike a real horse, the simulator won’t anticipate practicing movements. [My italics added]

On a certain level I see why this notion has some appeal. It IS a lot easier to find someone who’ll let you on their mechanical horse for $130 than it would to find a similar person to lend you their FEI horse. And, if you’re still at the “flopping around” stage, no poor real horse will have to bear the brunt of your floundering.

But viscerally, to the Horse Simulator I react the way the Wright Brothers’ neighbors must have felt in the years before Kitty Hawk: “If God had meant us to fly, She’d have …”

My first fear—both unfair and uncharitable since I’ve never laid eyes on this device or its promoter—is that it probably isn’t all that realistic. While masses of rote physical repetition are necessary to learn basic skills like posting or maintaining a following contact, the whole nature of the sport (art) as riders move into more advanced work IS ABOUT COMMUNICATING. Because horses are NOT the same every time, because they do move varyingly not only because you might be sitting off center but because sometimes they just might feel like it! And that’s much more what riding is about. The feedback loop, behavior modification, nuance versus recipe. The Horse Simulator proudly denies you the worry over such esoterica.

My second fear is more serious. What if it IS realistic? What will become of The Children if the essence of riding mutates to “virtual riding”—a total corruption of the inter-species bond that (I hope) drew most of us to our fascination with horses in the first place? Like Dick Cheney, “It’s better because it doesn’t have feelings”? It just makes me uneasy when “virtual” gets equal billing with “real.” It’s Why-go-to-France-if-I’ve-been-to-Epcot? reasoning. Next thing, middle school health teachers will be handing out life-sized inflatable plastic dolls to the boys. You know, so they get it all right before it counts. Sorry, somehow it wouldn’t be the same!

But worst of all, what if virtual riding is Beyond Real? It’s bad enough when your regular living, breathing equine partner is balky or disobedient. But it would be way over the top if I have to face my Virtual Horse in his synthesized voice telling me, “I’m sorry, Dave. I can’t do that ...”

________________________________________________________________________________________