What is your opinion on Parelli?

Not that you're highly opinionated or anything... ha ha.

Well I was truly hoping for something a little more definitive and I'm not sure that is actually here.

Anyone else watching the webcast? The rope is cool - that's neat - OK enough already with the rope....please

then why does parelli put such an emphasis on the theory of his program? I did the theory, presented linda's theory in a way that compromised pats theory, proving that linda's parelli's horsemanship program compromises pat parelli's horsemanship program.

If a horse bites, "rubbing his muzzle harder" isn't what linda suggests. She might not even know this, but her theory indicates that if a horse bites we should solve that by sticking our fingers inbetween its teeth and wiggling them around.

"thats ridiculous!" says the linda afficiandos, but if you actually studied the theories behind her methods you'd find this to be true.

What you called "direct opposition" is pats method, direct opposition with pressure that comes on slowly and releases quickly. That's how we get horses to "ask us questions"

Pat says this, in one of his newwest riding dvds he is in the arena on magic and says that when approaching a corner with a turn or a stop in the corner as the options, you should wait untill the very very very last moment to choose an option, and if the horse picks an option before you, do the opposite. He words it slightly differently "if you feel the horse bank to turn, stop in the corner and if you feel the horse going for a stop in the corner, bank to turn"

The horse will establish a pattern of asking a question when approaching a corner. If the horse banks to turn left and you turn it sharply to the left, it will establish a pattern of the horse banking even harder to turn left in anticipation of the hard left turn.

"what happens before what happens happens"

To say that L & P are opposing each other in the program, by the claim that only L uses reverse psychology/Pat never uses reverse psychology is just wrong.

Yes. Horses are the best teacher of horsemanship. And i've never seen or actually heard of a horse being anywhere near successful using linda's methods. But i've seen countless reining & cutting horses and top performance horses whose trainers do direct opposition (with pressure that comes on slowly and releases quickly, of course) rather than being a passenger and doing lindas brand of reverse psychology. Although the choice is up to each individual, I know which i'd rather choose, and as a trainer myself which i'd rather endorse.

I'm all for being a passenger, and as CA suggests, spending time purely developing an accelerator and brake while leaving the steering for another day, but I simply can't see the sense in linda's new method of being a passenger, it follows no time tested or proven equine psychologies (whereas pats psychologies follow vacqero principles, which are time tested & proven). And i've never heard of it's use before she suggested it.

Linda has her own program - this is the first I've heard of that. I think maybe you don't know too much about dressage Chris or finesse. Maybe that's what's confusing you but don't let your ego get in the way of learning

Linda isn't a horse trainer. I think we all agree that she's basically just a marketing person who dabbles in horse riding and handling and she doesn't have good feel or timing. And yes she doesn't know how to explain things-concepts well so she gets people confused. I don't watch or listen to hear talk anymore because of her poor horse skills.

HAY, TLO! Have ya bin watchin' the RTTH? If so, pray tell us whazzup? If no one minds (not strictly on topic, but PP's competing)?
T'ankies!

Ya I've been watching and even my hubby came to watch. OK we're both hoping "my hero" wins However, Chris has got some good moves too. But what's happened thus far is that Pat is way ahead with his horse in that he focused on building rapport and then respect. He got up onto the horse within 40 minutes and he had him moving thru obstacles and things were looking good. Then he put the saddle on - still good - then he got back on and asked him to move a bit - lateral flexion if you please - perhaps the hind end too - and then after a few step boom he started bucking and reared up and poor Pat fell off. He fell OK thou and said he was OK but I fell off a warmblood 6 years ago just like that and I tell you I was sore for at least a week. But anyway he took the saddle off and then got back up just to sit a bit. Then he was done.

Chris got his horse to accept him on without a saddle and then with a saddle and then he rode him around a bit. He did very well. He reminds me of a colt starter I met about a year ago Daryl Gibbs very good, studied with Tom Dorrance before he died. He talks a lot about the horse's spirit - very cool. I always think that words - especially written words just can't describe things very well. So much of what we do is feel and knowing is feeling.

Then there was Clinton who didn't get very far with his horse today. No saddle but he did manage to lay on him. The horse did seem to accept him more at the end. I don't think he got as much rapport as either Pat or Chris got. He seems kind of over confident and was pushing the edge by desentizing his horse from outside the pen when he was supposed to be taking a break. Clinton constantly clucks and breathes really heavy like please guy stop with all the clucking and heavy breathing for goodness sakes you're the youngest guy here

So I guess we'll see what happens tomorrow - I can hardly wait

Thank you so much, TLO, for sharing! Blessings upon you, & forget your club dues this month, if you update us tomorrow!