Actually, as some of the quotes I provided above show, it is PAT AND LINDA PARELLI who claim their teachings are "revolutionary
" and even provides "magical results
". They claim they have "discovered" how to teach a horse to ride with contact. It is NOT unfair to take what they say at face value. Someone whose website announces on its webpage that they are "revolutionary" IS claiming to provide something new, something so unheard of as to be a revolution.
When I quote from their homepage, I'm not slandering them with "a gross misrepresentation of the truth", other than to let their own words weigh in against them.
said I'm opposed to using video programs to train horses, but I have not
said I think Clinton Anderson is better. On the contrary, I have said I oppose anyone who suggest their video training "allows horse owners at all levels of experience (from trail rider to Olympic level Dressage rider) to achieve success without force, partnership without dominance and harmony without coercion
"- again quoting Pat Parelli's website.
Is there some good in it? Maybe. There is some good in a lot of training videos, and in books. Is the hype to help ratio a bit high? I'd say yes:
"Two hearts. Two minds. Two days. One vision.
Linda and Pat Parelli. Live. Love, Language and Leadership and a revolution in the heart and mind of every Horse Lover.
Where will YOU be?"
"It’s 8:00 on a crisp, cool Saturday morning. You and a few of your closest friends are just pulling into the arena parking lot when you see – and hear – the laughing, dancing, screaming crowd outside. They’re snapping pictures on their phones, sipping hot coffee out of their thermoses, and they’re all wondering the same thing you are:
“What are we going to see?!”
If those are the only trainers in the UK, then I guess you'll have to put up with the hype to get the help. I don't think the idea of training a horse to be a partner is so radical that no one else in England trains that way. Maybe the traditional English style of training is to whip and spur a horse into a bloody, submissive mess - but I doubt it. There are too many English riders on HF who obviously love and enjoy their horses.
I think many of us who aren't crazy about Parelli are reacting to the hype. And it could well be that many Parelli trainers train without the hype, and use the Parelli name as marketing, and to reassure folks they aren't trainers who beat a horse into submission. I suspect there are a number of darned good 'Parelli trainers' who would do a fine job with a horse.
But I don't think Pat Parelli walks on water, and I would avoid any horse advertised as "Parelli trained" OR "Clinton Anderson trained" unless
the name of the professional trainer following those methods was included. I would actually prefer to contact the local, unknown trainer who worked with Lilly, Trooper and Mia, and see if she knew of any horses...
I'm glad you've worked with a local trainer who helped you a lot and taught you a lot. That is great. If he felt comfortable training horses using Parelli methods, that is fine too. But I'd also like you to understand why a lot of folks in southern Arizona have an adverse reaction when they hear "Parelli trained horse"...