Parelli or Clinton Anderson?

I'm not a fan of either CA OR PP and BOTH of them have had beat-downs caught on tape, so they are both in the same boat. Linda has a nice video herself of tormenting a horse blind in one eye. You know, if you CAN'T make your point in 3 seconds...then you are in over your head...period. That goes for CA, for the Parellis...whoever. The vids I've seen from the PP camp are just bad horse sense...period.

I don't hang on any ones particular program however what I do see being said here is its ok if YOUR personal favorite abuses a horse because it was a bad situation and needed done. How old was "Catwalk"? Do you even know? Probably not, so lets not make unproven statements. Secondly a three year old horse still weighs 1000-1200 pounds and is NOT a "baby." I see how you try to make CA look bad because you are a Parelli person. CA is in competition with your favorite he's TOTALLY WRONG mean and cruel. Sounds like hypocrisy at its finest to me. The point being NO ONE is perfect. What I know is I would rather have a horse that respects me and from what I HAVE SEEN Parelli's horses are rude compared to CA's, BB's and Chris Cox's. Im not saying Parelli doesn't have some good things to learn. I just don't like his "games." The old saying goes..."its all fun and games until someone loses an eye"

ACtually Clinton Anderson proved himself an abusive monster on RFDTV to me years ago - long before I knew anything about Road to the Horse competition. I was actually sitting in front of the TV horrified that this abuse could be broadcast on national television. I thought - REALLY?! If someone were doing this stuff to a dog or a kid they would be locked up for 5 years.

I suspect, then, that your definition of abuse differs from a lot of people. You mentioned Pat Parelli kicking your horse in the stomach as if it was incredible force to use against a horse that was about to run him over...let's just say that is perhaps 1% of the force my mare would use in a case like that. Horses are big, strong animals. I think the number of obnoxious horses is proportional to the number of owners who don't want to hurt their poor, little 1000 lb horse.

My definition of abuse would include Trooper, who had holes spurred thru his skin, and who still has a scar on one side (hair grew back on the other
Side). I doubt CA did anything like that...

Girls, girls, this is a poll O_O

In light of the argument;

I don't particularly vote for any one horseman, they all have their place... Yes, even the "abusive" ones, people who don't just chase a horse down, or even electrocute horses. The purpose might not be a humane or good one. If you just want a horse to DO something, well, you've got many ways to do that. Step it up a little and say you want a horse to respond, or "listen", to you all the time? You can do that by beating the liver out of a horse as well.

Paso Finos in their homeland are a prime example. Temple Grandin remarks on meeting these horses, saying that they clearly "hated people" but were so bred and trained for rough treatment, that they simply took it. Pasos can dance, prance, passage, trot, etc. without falling over backwards or rolling on the ground to get the abusive rider off, and with the rightly timed bludgeon to the head whenever they open their mouths or swish their tails, they can look like a perfectly tamed Dressage horse. The hard truth is that animals, as well as people, will become accustomed to almost anything. I've known women who stayed with abusive husbands when they had clear options, but they never lifted a finger against their men. No, it isn't as simple as saying this guy or that guy, this method or that method, is "correct" or "good" because the horses aren't behaving violently. Remember the infamous Rolkur video of a horse still very well working under saddle without buck or kick, yet his blue tongue flopping in the breeze? I rest my case.

Take a big breath.... If you work with horses, want to minimize or eliminate injuries and property damages, stay within the law, want to understand the mechanisms of horse behavior + horse health, want to obtain the ability to work with almost any horse effectively without causing injury or property damage, as well as achieve a bond with the horses, you create your own horsemanship by observation, experimentation, and research. Plain science. Anderson's horsemanship is his horsemanship. Same with Parelli and all the others. It is up to you, all of you, to put together your own. Of course mimicry, monkey see monkey do, is the quickest way to get a result, or learn something, and that's what most monkeys---- people do.

I've been out of the loop and didn't see your response, BBCrone, to my problem with having to buy all his dvd's prior to buying one of his horses. I really see your point of view. You're right, if I never saw anything that he did, I wouldn't know what to do with one of his horses. Agreed.

My issue was more in the condescending attitude he had. I'd told his staff that I wasn't a devoted follower of his program, had used it but had seen a lot of his shows on tv. They made the decision to put him in touch with me based on my total honesty.

When I brought this issue up to his staff, they told me it wasn't a problem as if I did purchase a horse, I'd spend at least a day (not much time in my opinion if I knew zero about his program) learning how to work with the horse, learning his methodology and having hands on time with his staff and CA. All of which I mentioned to Mr. CA when he called and told me to buy all of his products before buying one of his horses.

I'm not the sort to have a person powder my hind end..just show a bit of respect. No, I'm not a famous horsetrainer, or a famous anything else, but I do deserve to be treated in a respectful manner. IF he'd said to me, something to the affect of "if you purchase one of my horses w/o knowing anything about how he's trained, you both will be set up for failure" I'd have taken his commentary in a completely differernt way.

I've watched him at a clinic here in town a few years ago. I believe it was a 3day clinic. I have no idea of what was presented to the people who attended as far as what was to be expected of their horses in the physically fit sense, but on that third day, I saw exhausted horses.

While I was there for about 2.5hrs, I don't think the horses stopped cantering for more than 30min. In fact, one horse was so tired, it went to the middle of the arena and layed down with the rider still on it. He thought nothing of it, but went over amidst the concerns of colic and said if the horse didn't get up he'd spank it. Of course, it got up and went back to another hour of canter, canter and more canter.

I have NO problem with making a horse work. I see zero issue with sweat, or even lather. I know he was trying to make the most of the time he had with the people who attended. I get that and would agree. Not taking into consideration that most horses can't work to that level isn't smart, in my opinion.

When he did allow the horses to stop so he could describe something every single one of them was not only sweating, they were all trembling with exhaustion, then it was off to canter some more. I ended up leaving before the clinic was done, so maybe he cautioned people to not work their horse to that point when they were home, I'd like to think so.

I'm not trying to pick on CA, I've seen quite a few of his shows and like a lot of what I see. As with any trainer, you take the things that work for you, work for your horse and apply them. I think a smart horseperson has more than one way to train a horse, lot's of tools in the tool box, not just one cookie cutter way.

Again, thank you for looking at his point of view and pointing it out.

Hey! I totally forgot about that post :)

Okay what you are saying now makes more sense. I understand why you might be a little miffed about that. Everyone deserves common courtesy. ESPECIALLY when dealing with a potential business transaction.

Like I said, I don't really follow him. I've learned a few things I hadn't known before. Some of his stuff I don't agree with. My hubby likes him because he's pretty good at explaining things in a way he understands. Nobody drinks anybody's kool-aid in this house though that's for sure.

I like them both. I think that sometimes Parelli can be a little to soft, but then Clinton can be a little rough. So if you take them both and do a mix then it's good. I started listening to Clinton and its because of his teaching style that I can understand what Parelli is saying. LOL.

I have very little experience with NH. I have seen Parelli being done by a couple different people at the barn that I board at. One girl is actually quite amazing. The others, I am guessing it may not be something the horse is into(I was more looking at the horses expressions and body language when going through their Parrelli training). I have done a little bit of John Lyons, and found that to be interesting. I have seen Monty Roberts in person and what I took away from that was he was all about selling stuff and breaking records in getting untrained horses backed. To quote him "26 minutes, now that's a record!"
Someone earlier mentioned common sense, That is pretty much what I try to use. Parrelli may work with some horses, CA may work with others, it depends on the horse and what type of training works with them.

Clinton Anderson