Your opinion on Parelli

This thread seems to be getting back on track at last.
But I would liken the antagonism that has been displayed as analogous to a religious war. This is a shame. I am not religious, but have a very healthy interest in belief systems of all sorts. After all when it comes down to it most religions belief in the same god, whether it be Allah, Christ, Yaweh etc. All religions also have their good points. I have spent many hours on a flight deck chatting to Muslim colleagues and find their understanding of god quite enlightening.
If only the different religions could get together to understand each other they may find that there are ideas in other religions that actually help them to understand their own better. But that is not what happens. In many instances they would rather kill each other because of perceived insults to their religion by the other, even if the insult took place 100s of years ago. As a result they all loose a chance for greater enlightenment that cooperation could achieve.
This thread suggests a similar strife within NH. Because folks cannot stand PP,CA etc for one reason or another they are not willing to see if there are any nuggets of truth in their teachings and incorporate them in their own knowledge base.
I had hoped that this forum would not be like that. I had hoped that folks would ask constructive questions about different trainers, even if they personally did not like them. For example I went to some lengths to explain the 7 games on a different thread, and those who bothered to read that thread seemed from their replies to come away with a new understanding of the ideas. Even those who had only heard the level 1 understanding of the games and had firmly rejected them.
That is how this forum should work.
When I get to where I have a solid foundation on myself and Filly then I would like to quiz folks on how to do reining, where to get the info. Even to visit with them if possible (airline staff travel has its' benefits ;) ). The problem is that the aggressive nature of this debate (and I have probably been guilty as well) leads me to not want to seek advice from many on here at all. That is not a rational point of view as there is clearly lots of knowledge here, but a gut reaction to strife. Can we see how religious wars start ?
James Roberts has a few rules on his yard. One was "Never say anything negative", and I never heard him ever do so. You could ask questions, but it had to be phrased in positive light. Not "I don't like playing games with my horse, it's stupid. Why on earth do you do it?" but "What are the seven games about and how do they help you ?". The first question will get a defensive answer with little information content, the second will actually get the respondent to think carefully about the answer (maybe even increase their understanding of it) and the questioner will get an understanding of the respondents ideas on the subject. They may not agree with the answer, but even in that disagreement they will gain knowledge.

I hereby pledge to try and post on this forum in this positive vein. Be tolerant to others ideas and try to ask only positive questions of those with whom I do not agree in order to try and understand their point of view more clearly. I also pledge to try and give only positive answers to questions I feel I can contribute to.
I hope others can join me in this and we can progress with more tolerance and understanding.

I think you'll find that what mostly ticks people off is that many 'Parelliites' have a tendency to push the idea that without him they would never have achieved anything at all or without him we would all be flogging our horses on an hourly basis because he was the bringer of all things good and kind
You get an almost identical vibe from the 'Goreites'
Of course that isnt true - he even got most of his basic knowledge from people like Tom Dorrance and others like him and there are so many accomplished horse people out there that have achieved great things over the years without even hearing of PP which means that anyone who makes the effort can learn to be successful without him
One of my earliest 'mentor' was a second cousin of my Grandfathers - he would be in his 100's now. He learnt his trade from his father - they broke most of the horses and ponies in our area. A batch of New Forest ponies would turn up - 3 & 4 yr olds, totally untouched, no join up in a round pen - no one in the UK did that - they were stabled, handled, groomed, taught to lead, learnt to trust & rely on him so catching was never an issue, they got lunged, lunged with tack on, long reined, backed & ridden on to become safe reliable childrens ponies. I never once heard him raise his voice or use any abuse. No one ever said "wow' look at Bill, he's a miracle worker because it was his job and he knew how to do it.
James Roberts was undoubtably a capable young man but when I heard about him removing a headcollar from a first time backed horse because it wouldnt go forwards that screamed 'inexperienced and someone who had cut corners somewhere' and was a risk taker beyond what is reasonable.
I find it amusing when I look at an audience at a PP event and he's doing things that hundreds/thousands can do just as well and much better and the crowd is all shouting 'oooooohh & wowwwwww' like its never been done before
To me that is like worshiping a false god - which is why it does start to take on the feel of a religious cult when I hear people that seem to be so totally sucked in to him

Well that started on a positive note didn't it, with an immediate attack on James Roberts as inexperienced and reckless. In fact he was anything but inexperienced and reckless.
He was experienced enough that he was invited to take part in public colt starting demos in the USA.
He introduced me into the idea of a thorough "prepare to ride" session prior to getting on a horse, even a well trained one. Not exactly reckless.
I guess we will never get over this attack on each others ideas which is a great shame as it could be a very progressive forum.
Maybe a better response would have been "that's an interesting idea, do you have a video of it to share ?"
Ah well, I tried :(

That was no where near negative. Taking off a bridle on a green horse b/ he would not move forward it reckless. What he needed to do is get his rear out of the saddle and do some more ground work. Teach a horse the cue to go forward from the ground so when he was in the saddle the horse would have known what he wanted.

How do I know this works? B/C I have been there with green horses who would not go forward. I got off and went back to the ground work. Got the horse better with the cue on the ground and then got back on might have been the same day may have been a week or more down the road. Fact is when I got back on the problem was gone.

Good-bye all

Well now, that's sort of a crappy defeatest attitude.

Who cares if other's don't agree? You'll find that everywhere you go in life.
Let 'em have their opinions and you, yours. Just don't engage them.

So if/when people don't agree with you, offer opposing ideas, etc you just quit?

Im guessing after 28 pages of negativity, pegasus is out. Can't really say I blame her. She must feel ganged up on.

On a different note, my farrier and PP used to work at the same ranch together. My farrier like PP a lot, but says he is more of a trick trainer. He said he couldnt get the colts started as fast as they wanted him too.

My farrier also knows mark rashid [sp?]. He said he's a terrible horse person. He was supposed to feed some draft horses out in a field, but didnt, and they ended up starving to death =/

Oh for pity's sake - it is not "28 pages of negativity" - there are a lot of very valid, though out and reasoned opinions (on both sides) being expressed throughout this entire thread. As for the "ganged up" assertion - I am always amused when that is trotted out. Exactly how many people have to agree about something before they become a bandwagon/gang (I mean, if three people have already said they don't care for something, and you also don't care for it, are you mean to just not voice your opinion because that means you are ganging up on those who do care for it?)- why is is always only thrown out against people on one side of a particular discussion but not used in reference to those on the opposing side of the argument?

Why would someone react that way if their honest opinion was, "That's a technique that could get someone hurt"? Lots of folks read here without commenting. If that person read that technique, followed by "that's an interesting idea, do you have a video of it to share", then they might go out and try it.

Politeness is good unless it is taken to the point of not challenging things that deserve challenging. I'm fairly unorthodox AND fairly new to horses, so I get challenged a lot. In spite of my thick skull, I sometimes learn from it. I'm not always wrong, although I'm sure I'm wrong more often than I admit, so the back and forth 'challenging' is good for me, and good for others who read a thread. It is a part of learning.