The Horse Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Put a dressage rider in the hunter ring, put a classical rider in the modern ring=?

35K views 136 replies 30 participants last post by  Beling 
#1 ·
I think that you can take a dressage rider and put them in the hunter ring and they will kick butt, but if you take a hunter rider and put them in the dressage ring then they won't do so well :-?

I am not trying to put anyone down, it's just that dressage riders have learned a lot more communication with the horse and they would obviously need a bit a practice.


Now this is what I'm thinking: If you take a classical dressage rider(very few out there) and ask them to do modern dressage movements, it would be a piece of cake for them. In modern dressage these days, I see a lot of short cuts, contraptions, heavy hands, horses heavy on the forehand, etc. They can do piaffe(much better than modern riders), passage, pirouettes, extension just as well or better. They communicate better, use their seat more, and right with light hands. I am not saying that modern dressage riders are bad, they just ride differently(I ride dressage myself). But many riders these days just don't care about the horse, they care about winning and they care about their own ego. The sell their horse for a better horse, like they are riding machines.

*I am not putting labels on all riders.

Here are classical pictures:


And modern dressage pictures


There are lots of good modern riders:


And what makes a classical rider different from a modern rider?
 
See less See more
6
#2 ·
Contentious!!! Hopefully this thread doesn't head south....

As someone who has been criticized for spending too long on the basics with horses I pull off the track (OTTB's) I consider myself more of a classically trained rider. I firmly believe in achieving excellence at each gait and movement before progressing too far through training just to satisfy someone elses ideas of what a horse should be doing and how quickly. If that means it takes 6-12 months to develop balanced gaits with impulsion, rhythym and flexion, so be it.

I do however believe that people who have the desire to learn will seek out knowledge and put it into practice, regardless of what dicipline they associate themselves with.
 
#4 ·
I've been to more than a few schooling shows (eventing) where hunt seat riders are showing in the combined shows just to get some more experience under their belts. Without fail, they have problems simply sitting tall and deep in the saddle. The forward seat muscle memory looks like it's very difficult to overcome. I would say there's definitely an advantage to coming from a dressage background versus the other way around.
 
#6 · (Edited)
I firmly believe in achieving excellence at each gait and movement before progressing too far through training just to satisfy someone elses ideas of what a horse should be doing and how quickly. If that means it takes 6-12 months to develop balanced gaits with impulsion, rhythym and flexion, so be it.

I agree with this as well. A friend of mine said that if she ever bought a horse that she had to train for dressage the first thing she would do would be 30 days of longing with side reins to teach the horse to bend before she even got in the sadde. She would go longer if the horse had little muscle tone and needed to be worked up to using side reins. She then would perfect every gait before moving on. I really respect people who take the time to train like that! :)


The forward seat muscle memory looks like it's very difficult to overcome. I would say there's definitely an advantage to coming from a dressage background versus the other way around.

Amen to that! I can speak for myself as a previous hunter. I was taking more dressage based lessons for a while before my trainer moved and I had to switch to a hunt trainer. I developed the WORST seat ever! I went to visit my old trainer and I couldn't ride the horse I had leased for two years prior to going hunt seat! Now, trying to get back into dressage, it has been at least two years and my forward seat is still terrible! :oops: Once you get into that mode, its so difficult to overcome!
 
#5 ·
Dressage is harder to achieve. It takes much longer to become a dressage rider than a hunt seat rider. You have to have utmost balance and be aware of every part of your body. You have to be relaxed and yet work. The seat is very hard to achieve- being able to ride with proper contact of your reins and body which have to work in harmony to communicate harmoniously with the horse.

A hunt seat rider(I rode hunter before I started dressage), does not have that contact and harmony the same as a dressage rider. Their seat has no communication with the horse because they aren't even upright over their legs. Not having that upright, grounded balance does not allow them to use their seat to bring their all their body parts and different aids all together so their communication is chopped up(this isn't bad, it's just different). They depend much more on the reins, and the legs are only for getting the horse to move off pressure.
 
#9 ·
I like to think of myself as one of those riders that rides classically in the modern dressage ring. And I think it needs not to be referred to as classical, but instead just simply as correct.
It is possible to train like this, there are trainers out there. I find Robert Dover to be one of the most influential correct or "classical" teachers out there today and have been lucky enough to ride for him and am coached by people who ride under him as well. He does not allow whips, would prefer if everyone wore nub spurs and really encourages the horse towards brilliance without harmful methods. If you ever get the chance to see him ride, or even just teach, take it.
This is why I prefer the words correct and incorrect versus modern and classical. There is no time period for good and bad riding. There was a lot of bad riding in the years where we say the "classical" era was. It is very easy to look back and think that when Dr. Klimke was around, everyone rode like him and that was the norm. But in reality he was winning at international dressage, he was the best, therefore the "average" riding was far far below his ability, or else he would have been an average rider. There was plenty of front to back riding, kick-and-pull collection and horses incorrectly performing movements with riders in poor positions. There always has been, or else why would books about riding correct dressage have been written, even in what we say is the "classical" era?
 
#10 ·
I like to think of myself as one of those riders that rides classically in the modern dressage ring. And I think it needs not to be referred to as classical, but instead just simply as correct.
I wanted to say that but I just didn't know how to put it. I completely agree.
 
#11 ·
I think the hugest difference that I see between 'classical' and 'modern' riders (for want of a better description) is that if you watch a classical rider at home, he or she trains as they plan to ride, without secret training methods that they would rather no one saw (*cough* like Anky *cough*). They ride correctly because they know it gets the best results, not because the rules of the competition don't let them ride like they do elsewhere.
 
#12 ·
I was a hunter when i was little, then switched to dressage when i got my own horse, and I love it for the challenge! There is always something to learn! something to practice! There is always a 'higher jump' to get to in dressage, which i love. And if i ever want to switch back to hunter? no problem! if i want to go western? no problem (personally it is a bit harder for me, im not that comfortable in western saddles) I can do anything!

I have noticed a few hunters are working mroe on dressage, which is great too!

I agree with Anebel, I like to think of myself as a dressage rider who uses 'classical' dressage in the show ring. And im so excited because its kind of related to this topic, but i figured out how to get my stubborn mare to work for me with pleasure! LOADS of praise, and after she does something to the best of er abilities THAT DAY (if its an off day i accept a little less) then we walk and i give her a little treat with lots of praise along with it. I have foudn this has worked perfectly for her and I! So i think a lot of good riding is changing for the horse.
 
#13 ·
CHOO CHOO!

*grabs the popcorn*

There is BIG D Dressage, and little d dressage and what Big D Dressage and Hunters have in common is little d dressage.

Riders everywhere take shortcuts, and generally just suck at riding. Each discipline has this. I don't understand why its constantly EVERYTHING IS BETTER THEN HUNTERS on this forum.

I took Dressage lessons for almost 3 years when I started riding, and rode some decent tests. Got bored and moved on, it wasn't my discipline but I don't bash it for being "easy".

Top level hunter and jumper horses go under a lot of little d dressage. Lateral movements, suppleness, collection, extensions, etc etc the homework/flatwork is there. We just have some jumping in there too.

Hunters "looks" easy because that is what it is supposed to look. Go out there find 8 win a tri-color and tell me that it was "easy". Don't tell me "if I had a 6 figure horse I could do it" Go do it on my horse, tomorrow, and tell me its easy.

And don't digress into "their positioning is awful" Hunters isn't Equitation. Totally different argument.

The seat is a very important aid in jumping. If you read any books on the subject you would know this. In order to be a well balanced, sympathetic, and effective rider you need to have body control. Body control is one of the most important things in any sport.

*passes popcorn*
 
#14 ·
I am not sure what the point of this thread is ... you stated that dressage is better then hunters but then went off on classical vs modern. So I am not sure what your point is nor that you should stereo type things.

I am a hunter rider and I have taken LOTS of dressage lessons. Because I don't focus on the dressage aspect only that doesn't make a dressage rider a better rider then me. Nor does that make the dressage rider more versatile then a hunter rider. It has to do with the training a rider has had, the foundation and their capabilities- not the discipline they ride. I have ridden hunters ALL my life and recently have learned some reining/sorting/barrel racing etc. I am in no way shape or forum well skilled in those western disciplines but i do have a good foundation and have the ability to carry out them (sometime better then others who have been doing them longer but have no formal training).

I am not sure the purpose of this thread or what your intent was and would really like to know. With all respect I ask that you explain your point.
 
#16 · (Edited)
I also agree. I don't understand why Hunters have to constantly be bashed here. I like riding hunter, and it is what it is. Constantly comparing it to other forms of riding is just that, comparing it to OTHER FORMS of riding. I don't mind talking about how great dressage is, but there is no need to keep comparing it to hunters and saying how much better it is.

And I have only been showing hunters not even a year. I don't have the experience to really TALK with authority like other members here, but even I can tell that the bashing needs to stop. Aren't we all here because we love to ride, regardless of what discipline we ride?
 
#18 ·
As others have said, I do not understand the intent of this thread, unless it is to bash hunters and go down the usual, 'overplayed' modern vs. classical dressage debate. Which by the way, Anebel put nicely in her comment regarding classical and modern dressage have no timeframe.

OP, please give a clear direction to this thread.
 
#19 ·
Oooh I was replying to the content. In terms of the subject - I haven't seen enough hunter to criticise. I love dressage, but I don't expect anyone else to. I do, however, like to remind other riders that dressage is the basis of all riding, english at least lol.

Hunter isn't very popular over here in WA, I can't say I have ever seen any schools that offer classes that would take the rider in this direction. However, it could be my narrow focus on dressage that makes me blind to all else lol.

As long as the rider is having fun, the horse isn't being hurt in any way, then who cares what discipline it is?
 
#20 ·
This thread starts off with a false premise:
I think that you can take a dressage rider and put them in the hunter ring and they will kick butt, but if you take a hunter rider and put them in the dressage ring then they won't do so well
and then veers accidently onto a correct premise worthy of discussion re: classical vs. modern dressge.

Let's get rid of the false premise, that hunters and dressage are judged on the same objective standard and hunters somehow fail to measure up, once and for all. A dressage rider in the hunter ring will not kick butt, and a hunter rider in the dressage ring will fight against their forward seat training and struggle to adapt. A dressage rider, in a full seat, riding a dressage quality gait, is going to look pretty silly in the hunter ring and is going to do the opposite of well. The goals of the two disciplines are *different*; it's comparing apples and oranges. A hunter is supposed to move freely forward on light, passive contact and maintian pace and balance with little or no interference from the rider. Done correctly, it's lovely and a joy to watch and completely antithetical to the principles of dressage, which expects that the rider be influencing every step and produce a horse that is completely submissive and obedient to the rider's aids.

Because of that difference is goal and training philosophy, I will say that it is easier to master the basics of hunter seat riding than it is to master basic dressage. AND when learning dressage, as I did, from a hunter seat background, you struggle to stay in a deep seat and to ride every moment of every stride. However, that struggle is no way more or less humiliatating than a classically trained dressage rider getting on a well schooled hunter and confusing it to distraction with a pushing seat and over active aids. If that well-schooled hunter is a TB, particularly one that's had race training, the dressage rider's ride is going to be....short.

Both disciplines are based on sound principles of horsemanship and have value in and of themselves. It's even possible to ride both disciplines and love them both. My hunter seat training informed my dressage riding and my dressage riding informed my hunter seat riding. That's the whole reason to study another discipline. A side benefit of studying another discipline is that you gain enough perspective and understanding of the new discipline and can avoide false comparisions and mindless bashing in the future.
 
#21 ·
Let's get rid of the false premise, that hunters and dressage are judged on the same objective standard and hunters somehow fail to measure up, once and for all. A dressage rider in the hunter ring will not kick butt, and a hunter rider in the dressage ring will fight against their forward seat training and struggle to adapt. A dressage rider, in a full seat, riding a dressage quality gait, is going to look pretty silly in the hunter ring and is going to do the opposite of well. The goals of the two disciplines are *different*; it's comparing apples and oranges.
You put it great, maura! What about western riders than? We can go ahead and compare say cutters or reiners vs jumpers. Why not? :D
 
#22 ·
Criticizing hunters and hunter riders by comparing them to dressage horses and riders is like criticizing a human track and field athlete running the 440 hurdles for not sticking their landings like gymnasts. It only requires that you ignore the goal of the individual discipline before making the comparison.
 
#24 ·
Yes, that's true. In a Hunter under saddle class, a dressage horse can and does do very well IF it's shown in a training level frame or allowed to move in huntery frame. And yes, it would be easier to show a dressage horse in a hunter under saddle class and pin well that it would be to take a hunter and show training level dressage and do well - you'd have to ask the hunter to carry more frame and move through its back; though I think there are some horses who could make the switch quite well.

It's still true, though, that at a rated show and a rated division, the under saddle portion is 25% of the division (used to be 1/3, back in the day, but it was decided to lessen the emphasis on the flat and increase the importance of over fences.) The dressage horse would require some signifigant schooling to compete in the over fences portion.

None of which changes the fact that the original post in this thread starts with a faulty premise, an apples to oranges comparison, and an offensive, discipline-centric, chauvinistic point of view.
 
#25 ·
It's still true, though, that at a rated show and a rated division, the under saddle portion is 25% of the division (used to be 1/3, back in the day, but it was decided to lessen the emphasis on the flat and increase the importance of over fences.) The dressage horse would require some signifigant schooling to compete in the over fences portion.

.

It is interesting that my boy's sire competed and won at the Tournmant of Champions in dressage (rated) and in the hunter ring (rated) in under saddle and over fences. He was a natural for both, and my boy has also done the exact same thing.

Like father like son I guess.
 
#37 ·
Here he is with Dressage rider Lee Tubman in the warm up to the Tournament of Champions show.



And here he is in hunter over fences.



I can easily see a horse OR rider competing at the top levels of both disciplines with the right horse if both the horse and rider were trained dressage first.. and the proof is in both my boy and his sire.
 
#27 · (Edited)
^^^I am not entirely sure there was a clear point in the OP other than to say that dressage riders are better than hunter riders. And then later to say that classical dressage riders are better than modern dressage riders. When in actual fact there is bad riding and bad form in all diciplines.

Any rider that has a true desire to enhance their skills will seek out knowledge and training that will enable them to excell in WHATEVER they are doing. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that many diciplines would benefit from a greater understanding of classical dressage as it is one of the oldest and most refined Equestrian activities? Not to say that any other dicipline is less refined as such, just that the principles of classical dressage have been established for centuries and are widely applicable for some of the newer diciplines.
 
#29 ·
The goals of modern vs. classical dressage are the same; though the methods differ; both the goals and methods of hunter seat equitation and dressage riding are very, very different. Still a bad and inaccurate comparision.

"Dressage with jumps" accurately describes showjumping, and sadly, some xc event courses these days; but does not accurately describe hunter seat riding.
 
#31 ·
Ok ,scratch the title of my thread as I did not explain what I meant. I wanted this to be modern vs. classical dressage.

To explain quickly, I did not mean take a dressage rider and just put them on a hunter horse and send them into the ring. What I meant is take a dressage rider, and if they were to change disciplines and start hunter/jumping, it would be easier than to have a hunter rider start dressage. That would mean they take lessons and ride hunter horses and already having that aware, centrally balanced dressage seat would give them an advantage in the hunter ring.
 
#32 ·
What I meant is take a dressage rider, and if they were to change disciplines and start hunter/jumping, it would be easier than to have a hunter rider start dressage.
I'd be very curious to hear the opinions (personal experience) on that one. I believe we have several riders here on forum who switched from dressage to hunter/jumpers and vs.
 
#34 ·
My trainer did pretty much everything in her life (including western riding as well). She ended up with dressage, and from what I understood it wasn't that hard to switch. If you are a very good rider with good balance, hands, legs, it should take that much effort and time, because you already have good basic foundation.
 
#36 ·
I switched from hunter to dressage and it was hard for me, I find it easier to switch back to hunter anytime i want to jump, but then i get back into m dressage saddle and i do a dressage seat, so personally I have done it so much i just dont think about it anymore. But I think i found it easiest to switch back to hunter from dressage (rather then goin g from hunter to drssage) was because i did hunter a while before i switched back, so it wasnt something compeletly new lkike when i switched from hunter to dressage.

But i do also think its something personal too, like it was harder for me because of my muscle memory and Im not dancer or something, so i didnt have very good control and feel of where each piece of my body was. I think those things effect it a lot too. I dont think one is better then the other, Dressage is better for dressage, Hunter is better for Hunter, Warmbloods *tend* to be better for dressae, when QH's are better for western. It doesnt mean a Warmblood is better, but it DOES mean a warmblood *in most cases* would be better for ME, because i want to excell at dressage, so according to that stereotype, a warmblood is better for me. Hunters is better for some people because they want to do hunters, dressage is better for some because they want to do dressage.
 
#38 ·
Gorgeous horse, Spyder, and lovely photos of him competing in both disciplines.

There's no doubt that a talented horse with the right conformaton, attitude and training can be successful in both disciplines. The original title of the thread, and subsquent posts by the OP, weren't really addressing the horse, but the rider.

And my take, and my continued posting in this thread, is that the OP thinks that a hunter rider is just an undereducated dressage rider, or a rider that hasn't had their eyes opened. This opinion is further solidified by the OP's statement
...already having that aware, centrally balanced dressage seat would give them an advantage in the hunter ring
No, it's not an advantage. It's a lack of understanding of the fundamental goals of the discipline. And it's incorrect. A hunter rider is not a dressage rider that hasn't learned to sit up straight yet. Hunter riders ride "forward" for a reason. Different discipline, different goals, both valid *but* different. Cross discipline education is wonderful, and can always give you new tools and perspectives to apply to your primary discipline *IF* you approach the new discipline with an open mind. I do not suspect the OP of this.

Finally, if I rode down the center line of my test in two point or with my body inclined ahead of the vertical; and rode the rest of my test on a hunter style contact I would expect to be marked down on position and submission in the collective marks.

If I rode into the hunter ring in the OP's "centrally balanced dressage seat" I would not be competing on a level playing field with the other, conventionally forward seat ridden, hunters. Even if I was on a beautifully moving horse, I would not expect to pin as high as the horses that could maintain consistent gait *WITHOUT* active contact and seat aids. And in a hunter seat eq class, even if I managed to nail 8 spots and two changes from a consistent pace from that seat, I would expect to pin lower than the forward seat riders....because the name of the class is "Hunter Seat Equitation." Not "highly evolved equitation for riders who have realized that dressage is the one true grail."

Spyder, I hope you realize that the sarcasm is not directed at you, because I hope you know that I respect you and value your opinion. I know you to be a true horseperson with a *great* cross functional perspective. I also hope that your remember from previous threads that I have great respect for the principles of classical riding.

This thread has rubbed me the wrong way from the first post, and for the people who are willing and capable of hearing it, I have made my point several times over.

Please feel free to continue with the discipline chauvinism; I'll try to restrain myself from posting and spoiling the fun going forward. (Forward? Get it? It's a pun.)
 
#39 ·
Gorgeous horse, Spyder, and lovely photos of him competing in both disciplines.

There's no doubt that a talented horse with the right conformaton, attitude and training can be successful in both disciplines. The original title of the thread, and subsquent posts by the OP, weren't really addressing the horse, but the rider.


Spyder, I hope you realize that the sarcasm is not directed at you, because I hope you know that I respect you and value your opinion. I know you to be a true horseperson with a *great* cross functional perspective. I also hope that your remember from previous threads that I have great respect for the principles of classical riding.

This thread has rubbed me the wrong way from the first post, and for the people who are willing and capable of hearing it, I have made my point several times over.

Please feel free to continue with the discipline chauvinism; I'll try to restrain myself from posting and spoiling the fun going forward. (Forward? Get it? It's a pun.)
Thanks. I understand where you are coming from and agree with the points you made. To me, lay a good foundation (via dressage) on either the horse or rider and with the right training a rider or horse can slip between many disciplines. The funny thing is that my boy's sire is known only as a hunter but clearly that is not the foundation as the dressage picture was taken 4 years before the hunter one.

My old GP horse actually did western games and western pleasure ( not at any national level) but does prove the point that a rider ( it was I that rode in both disciplines) can switch but again my feeling is that if the basics in dressage is stamped there first, a rider can switch their riding style to encompass both fairly easily.

I would not expect that rider to do 2 point in dressage nor a flat deep seat in hunter but follow the norm for whatever discipline that they are competing in. This would require training in both disciplines so only in the vaguest sense is the OP right and maybe this is what the OP really meant.

I do completely disagree with the premise that one rider from the other discipline would kick *** the riders in the discipline they switch to. I simply believe they would be just as competitive as any other rider...no better or worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top