Right, the gloves are off in the dressage debate. It really annoys me when people jump on the bandwagon of critisising training methods when they have no knowledge of them. I have heard some extremely nasty things said about the use of RollKur in dressage training by people who know nothing about how to use it. I have already stated my views on these training methods in a previous post, but feel the ned to do so again. I have used RollKur myself in the past as a small part of training the horse. I use it as and when I feel it is needed as it helps a horse to relax through the neck and over tha back and so engage the hindqaurters more effectively. This is not about encouraging artificial cadence. Artificial cadence is achieved through using raised poles in flat work to get the horse to lift its legs more. The more it is used, the more the horse learns to lift it's legs high at the knees and hocks and so even when there are no poles there it continues to make these over exagerated movements. Some people mistake this artifical cadence for natural ability and would mark accordingly. We cannot condemm judges for this high marking of horses with artifical cadence as there are so many of them about now, it is hard to tell whether that upwards spring is natural or not. I long for a return to the times when a horse was judged purely on it's paces and uphill movement. I know there are peolpe who will say that this is modern dressage and I should get used to it, but surely, I should be able to take a classically trained horse that has plenty of cadence that has not been exagerated into a dressage test and score just as highly, if not scored higher than a horse that has been trained to exagerate it's movements?
Posts archive for: 23 March, 2007
-
A bit miffed
@ 23.03.07 – 11:57:42 pm
-
Who is better, Salinero or Wansuela Suerte?
@ 23.03.07 – 06:22:41 pm
Here is the test of Wansuela Suerte:
And here is the test of Salinero:
Let me know.
