Know the difference
Fairly sure the bottom picture is passage though….
Can people who make these stupid graphics please learn something about dressage before trying defame our sport?
Defame your sport? what, the modern take on “dressage”? Whats so stupid about this picture? does it go against your belief system to think that a top dressage rider is actually really crappy? oh wait… never mind. most people have their blindfolds on anyway.
You’re obviously new here. What’s so stupid about this picture is that these are two different movements. But that’s cool, you can call us the ignorant ones, go right ahead.
Um no actullay they are both in piaffe. Why dont you go right ahead and watch a video of BHM on youtube. Go see for yourself.
Yeah no, I know that horses movement like the back of my hand. I have seen that test at least 100 times. She was expressive in front, yes, but some horses are naturally. And no, this is most definitely not a piaffe.
Darling you really need to learn to take a step back and realize that different horses move differently, and it doesn’t all have to do with how little a horse is flipping its tail.
But since you insist, I’ll judge these two images as if they are both piaffe:
You can see that Andres by no means has a chokehold on either rein, and there is some slack in the snaffle, implying the mare is in fact very light. You cannot judge straightness from a profile shot, but if you must, they are both relatively straight.
You can argue that the bay is more balanced and even uphill in the piaffe, but if you were to tilt the image so that it did not have an uphill tilt to improve the horses appearance, you would notice that, in fact, Matine is more uphill in her movement at this point.
Here’s where it gets tricky.
These are two very different parts of the stride, so it’s difficult to compare the two horses impulsion. Matine is at the peak of her stride while it appears the bay is either just coming up or down from the peak of his. But you can see, Matine is highly engaged in her hind end showing a good reach underneath herself, though her sit could be better it could simply be a bad step or moment within the test, as the mare often sat very well despite a lot of swishing. The bay, however, has his hock equal with his standing hock and his hind hoof hardly off the ground. Again I will give him the benefit of the doubt and say that this is most likely due to the place of the stride he was in.
Relaxation is another tricky one to judge in a still image. The bay looks fairly relaxed as his tail show little to no movement other than natural movement from the body, but as I cannot see his ears I cannot be a complete judge. While Matine, on the other hand, shows relaxation (and harmony with her rider) through pricking her ears paying attention to what he is asking her. Many would say her constant tail swishing was a sign of tension, and while she did carry some tension in her back, I believe this was more of a “mare” issue than a training issue. Truly I believe the tail swishing from Matine was her showing her personality more than discomfort.
While I will be the first to admit that Matine could be more thru in the back in this particular image, I believe this has to do with the fact that she is at the peak of her stride in this particular image, and not because of tension of lack of connection. It is important to remember that the body is not an immobile being and different parts oscillate with the stride, including the back. It’s why the trot is rhythmic and has to be taught to sit. The appearance of thruness can also be aided to the bay by where he is in his stride.
Once again, you cannot judge harmony from a still image other than how the rider may be holding the reins and perhaps ears, which in this case is light in both cases.
It’s also really important to note that different conformation leads to tricking the eye into thinking a horse may be more or less connected than they are or have more or less impulsion than they really do.
Matine had a very high wither which can cause the appearance of almost a sway back, especially under saddle. This can lead to an appearance of being less thru in the back. The bay horse, however, has a very steep croup which leads you to believe that he is sitting more than he really is.
There’s your lesson from Emily for the day.
Alright… Sigh. Im not going sit down and type 7 paragraphs about what my actual point is here because everyone seems to get wrapped up in “but its only a photo” and they try to justify every sign of tension, stress, and dis engagment and an especially uncollected piaffe and passage with un-horselike behaviour (like saying tail swishing is because of her concentration)… Haha sure ok. I understand why you defend his riding (or any top dressage rider under fire because of annoying people like me) but i know that no amount of typing or explaining will change anyones mind. And you will just carry on and continue to be blind folded by the industry.
Or it’s because you don’t actually have an argument. If you want to prove a point, show videos and Gifs.
Trust me, there are top riders I do not like or appreciate their methods, you just always choose good, proper riders to criticize.
Go take a few lessons with a top trainer and realize that “classical” methods truly aren’t much different in theory from the “modern” training you see today. If you don’t appreciate what you see in the show ring, perhaps you should move on and find a new hobby or sport instead of spending your time criticizing one that people dedicate their lives to the wellness of.
Im not investing the time to write you a research paper that you will ignore and cast aside. Why dont you take a few lessons from a classical trainer (who studies straight from the old masters) and learn that “modern dressage” is far from its roots in history.
I have taken lessons from classical trainers, thanks. I enjoyed it very much and used it to help my technique and training.
Darling what you’re not understanding is that it truly isn’t two different things. Dressage is dressage and though it has developed over time the object of modern dressage is still the same as that of classical dressage.
I have studied classical dressage through reading and riding lessons, as well as “modern” dressage. I feel it’s not we who cast things aside but you, as you seem to think that all “modern” riders are horrible, awful people who cannot possible have harmonious, impulsion and connection filled rides with their horses. So truly it is not you we who cast things aside but you.
And trust me, if you wrote an essay, as you call it, it would be read.
Darling, when did I ever state that every “modern dressage” rider is awful and incorrect? Its the nature of any horse sport were money and fame are involved that i disagree with. Marijke De Jong, Nuno, PK, Bent Branderup, Anja Beran, Manolo Mendez, and the rest of the more recent masters didnt compete. They had a true passion to perfect the horses already natural abilities to collect and they kept to themselves. They also woulden stand a chance against the toe flinging warmbloods seen the the ring today. I never said that all modern dressge is terrible. I just dissagree with FEI dressage. I genuinely regret any unnecessary bashing or crit from the past. Key word: UNnecessary. You are absolutly correct about dressage riders having the passion. It obviously takes skill to preform the manuvers… However, im always comparing FEI dressage to my own studdies on what collection and the other components and their faults and misunderstandings.Yes sure dressage is dressage, but the fundementals, the ground work, the basic blocks are so different. We are both speaking entirely different languages. For me to explain in greatest detail as to why i dont like BHM would be to explain everythink i have ever come to know. I made a post, people bashed it becuase “the bottom photo is a passage” becuase they clearly dont see the meaning behind the post. Reguardless of the movement, the fundementals are different. And if you cannot see that, im not going to convince you otherwise. I think that you bring up a good point saying that i should be prepared to explain my post before thinking about putting on the internet. I dont have the time to explain every bit of my belief system on here. And its not worth it. I love a good conversation but all i end up doing is repeting myself over and over again throughout every post on my blog.
I admire you for your determination and passion, but you’re still missing some things.
First, I apologize for saying that you’ve said all modern dressage riders are awful, it’s simply been insinuated/inferred though your arguments and demonstrations.
Secondly, the toe flicking warmbloods are not created artificially. It’s simply how movement has developed over time through breeding. It’s bound to happen. I’ve seen just as much flicking from show jumpers or thoroughbreds. It’s evolution.
Thirdly, if a dressage rider does no in hand work with their horse, they will never make it to FEI, let alone the international ring. Several movements are still taught in hand first and then under saddle. I’ve had an amazing time watching horses work in hand with riders who have worked at the Spanish riding school and taken that knowledge and applied it to modern dressage.
You say we’re speaking two different languages but I understand everything you’re saying, so unless it’s me who is not being understood, I’m certain we’re speaking the same.
People are going to have different training methods and styles of riding, but that doesn’t mean just because it’s different doesn’t mean both are not correct. If nothing evolved over time we would still be riding without helmets, saddle pads, only members of the military would be allowed to compete in dressage, and every horse would have to clear a fence after the test or be eliminated.
Things evolve. That doesn’t make them incorrect, old or new.
Yeh really do understand your point. But from my point of view, the theory might be similar, but the results are very different.
And from mine, it’s not. But I respect your opinion.Source: theclassicalhorse