Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: southern Arizona
"Classical dressage us the base if all currently known and accepted riding styles. So CLASSICAL DRESSAGE is the trunk, reining, jumping, dressage, competitive, are branches."
I'm sorry, but you are ignoring history and indulging in mythology.
Look at the examples I showed. Ask yourself how many of those examples show the shoulder - hip - heel vertical line prized in classical dressage. Look at how closely the cowboy from 1900 Texas mimics the riding done for a thousand years before him, and how that style differs from classical dressage.
Repeating an assertion doesn't make it true. Classical dressage branched off from mainstream riding in the 1800s. Mainstream riding lived on, and was used by cowboys (and still is).
European or classical dressage promoters have passed off these myths for a long time, but there is no evidence to support their argument - or yours. Classical dressage is a branch of riding adapted for riding highly collected horses in the style suited for parade grounds. It isn't wrong. It is admirable for what it is. It is very difficult to do well. But it is NOT the base of all riding, nor the trunk of the tree. It is a specialty, as are cutting, barrel racing, polo, steeplechase and jumping. All of which should be admired and practiced for what they are, and not promoted as being what they are not.
The folks riding dressage competitively are largely following "classical dressage". The classical dressage fallacy is just that. Dressage as practiced in the 1800s was every bit as ugly as competitive dressage can be. Or not. Depends on the trainer, as it does with cutting, WP, and polo. And I said parade, because it would cause greater offense if I said 'circus'...
... Energy is an admirable thing, but the energy of stupidity seldom avails much..." - On Seats and Saddles (1868), Francis Dwyer, Major of Hussars (light cavalry)
Last edited by bsms; 11-25-2012 at 03:25 PM.