Parelli Horsenalities

I have the book of Hempfling Horsenalities. Very different system that Parelli. Interresting anyway.

I feel that Hempfling goes much deeper than Parelli - PP's system is an easy concept, helpful to grasp the very basics of the different motivations a horse may have and how to deal with them accordingly, whereas Hempfling touches subjects that help to get to know a horse as a real individual.

I'm glad for you. Just don't take care of this thread.
You're as free as you want to don't like Parelli.
And we're as free as we want to try our horse journey with him.

And every body's fine and happy!

I think I agree!!!!
I'm afraid that to a lot of people the mere mention of Parelli gets their hackles up so removing his name from the horseanility concept would attract more interest - the moment a lot of us see PP we go negative or just move on
I'm also a fan of Hempfling, when you study his approach its very different to the whole PP thing though - almost in opposition, as its about the horse working with you because it wants too and not because it feels defeated and oppressed
SORRY for hijacking your thread pegasus You may all continue!!!

Sorry, but I think it is important for folks to be free to bring up disagreements. No one called Parelli a poo-poo head, but saying you haven't seen a well trained Parelli horse would indicate to others that maybe his methods (and horsenality idea) don't work all the time. That, in turn, might make them reconsider spending the money to buy stuff from Parelli - which is a good or bad idea, depending on what one thinks of Parelli.

Not everyone who comes here to read a thread will spend months on HF reading all of them. My introduction to HF was finding threads during Yahoo searches, and eventually I concluded I had seen so much good advice that I needed to join - but I started by reading individual threads found in searches for specific terms.

This is not a James Roberts Forum, nor do OPs "own" their threads. As someone who has owned a total of 4 horses over 4.5 years, I NEED more experienced riders and owners to chime in. And if those chimes sound more like gongs, I need that too. Heck, my horses need some negative attitude at times. They consider it natural. My lead mare can get VERY negative, and the others adore her. If negative is bad around horses, someone needs to tell my horses. I'd hate to see the forum become a place where only nodding heads of agreement are welcome...

Although I am not a PP follower, I really hope this doesn’t go the way that other PP threads have gone…. South, as I think they have helped many people. Just as most other trainers have as well.

I will say that while horses are horses, there are many ways a person can approach horses. (Philosophy I mean, not actual walk up approach) and I think the different trainers, or rather human coaches are geared towards the different needs of the humans that follow them and what helps them (humans) get the best relationship they can with their horse.
Nothing wrong with that.

I have been around horses far longer that many of the well know trainers have even been riding. As in, back when you needed to figure it out yourself, pronto, or it (whatever you were trying to accomplish) wasn’t going to work.
However, I do have to say after reviewing many of the trainers lately, some really do offer some good information, especially for people who are new and haven’t ridden for their whole life, but they also offer a fresh approach for those who have been around.

Horses, much as any other subject or pool of knowledge there is to be had, have some basic common sense things and I amazed at how many people struggle with these common sense things. (In general, not directed at anyone on HF)
So I, for one, am glad that there are different trainers/gurus/whatevers out there for people to utilize in their journeys in the horse world and I think over all it (all the different approaches) have been helpful.
The knowledge that is… not the marketing. Not going there.

That said, I did look over the personality chart when it first came out and the ability to “peg” my horse wasn’t so much what I found helpful, but more rather the idea of breaking horse characteristics down into relatable terms. I’m sure many of us can attest to the fact that horses do indeed have different personalities.
Being able to recognize that can only be beneficial, no matter who came up with the concept of putting it on paper and selling it.
I think it is high time we start to look more at the info that is available and less at the names associated with it.

I just plain love it! I know there are so many Parelli haters, just like with everything else. Parelli was a method I learned when I first got into horses and my horse given to me, as my first horse, was a complete nutcase and trainwreck. Trainer gave up on her and I was told to get rid of her because she was dangerous. She was unbroke at 16 years old and hurt anyone who tried to ride her. She had one owner, previously to me, who just let her sit in a field her whole life. She was scared of her own shadow and an alpha mare. Ahhhhh, my pretty first horse at the age of 36 years old and recovering from a broken ankle after my first trail ride on a horse....

I spent a lot of time with this horse after this, just getting to know her and learned about Parelli. People laughed at me.... But it was a method that was slow, easy and gentle for this horse. It didn't send her into a complete panic and I could understand it. I was comfortable and coordinated enough to do it, which in turn, made it easier for her to understand.

Turned out she was a RBE! What a shock! The horsenality chart isn't a magic tool and it constantly changes. But it gave me a place to start. It helped me learn about the differences in a world that I had no clue about. I was on my own with people laughing at me and this horse. That horse was one of the best things that ever happend in my life. Granted, I could only ride her and she put all of her confidence in me....I had no idea a horse/human relationship could be so special.

I don't say one method is better than the other. I think it all depends on how you learn and what you are comfortable with so you can teach your horse successfully. Does it really matter so much that people have to argue about which trainer/method is best? I've used CA method, John Lyon's methods and Monty's joinup. I make a blend that 'seems' to be suited towards the individual horse and myself at that time.

Sorry, not meaning to get off topic. So, horsenality chart? I think it's a great for something to refer to and get a general understanding, knowing that it changes.

Here is an example of what I think ought to be common sense, and may or may not be covered in a left brain/right brain analysis:

My mare had not been out of an arena. So when I started taking her out, I started by walking her on a lead line. We started at 100 yards max before a meltdown, and extended it. While doing that, it became apparent that she considers backing up a fair and reasonable way to be disciplined, but spinning in circles to be abusive. I don't know why she feels that way, but she would get pissy if I turned her in multiple tight circles. I could back her up 100 yards at a near run, and she would drop her head, lick her lips, and want to be near me.

So with Mia, when we started riding, a scary thing was responded to by backing up. We might then approach a few steps at a time, watching her for tension, or I might dismount and lead her. But I would not turn her in circles to try to convince her she was being bad and had to listen to me. That would have turned it into a fight. I gather the latter works for some horses and some people, but not for Mia & I.

Each horse is an individual. Back in the 70s, there was a popular book that tried to break humans into 4 basic types, and then had further breakdowns within those 4 types. I read it, but found it too simplistic to be useful. In the end, I found I had to treat each human as an individual. But I also found that certain principles - honesty, fairness, genuine concern, etc - worked well on about 95% of humans. So far, based on 4 horses, I'd say they have different personalities, but they don't fit into neat patterns, and the basic principles of training mentioned earlier work well.

You have to accept that though like humans horses all start out with individual personalities, in the same way as humans their approach to things and the way they react is also scarred by whatever life has thrown at them on the way to the point they land up at your door. So you have all of this to deal with as well
Unfortunately horses can't sit down and have a chat with you and discuss things over a cup of tea/coffee so a lot of time we are 'making it up as we go along'.
PP has packaged and marketed his ideas in his own unique way but none of it is is strictly unique - they are methods used from way back and passed down from person to person so they will work on some horses - it all depends on how far you want to go down that route and if your horse needs an different approach and then you need to research or dig deep into your own book of plans.
A horse owner that can't take the time to understand his/her horse is going to be a rather sorry one.

That's the reason why Parelli horsenalities are not 4 types you have to lock our horse into one.
But 4 tendencies and the horse personality goes from one to another.