The Horse Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Clinton Anderson on Buddy Sourness

14K views 94 replies 27 participants last post by  loosie 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
Well, this is one way to "fix" a buddy sour horse, I guess.

My issue with this method is that the horses are not learning that their choices affect how they are ridden, but rather they are simply complying with Anderson's insistence upon loping a tight circle. And while they're doing exactly what he's asking them to do, he says things like "get the darn thing to lope" and "whoop his bum."

I like Schiller's methods, make them work if they choose to do the wrong thing, but give them the option to choose the right thing and be rewarded for it should they make that decision.

Anyone else's opinions, agreeing or disagreeing?

Mod note Warning - This video contains some language that parents might consider unsuitable for their children.
Jaydee.


 
#2 ·
I'm not really a Clinton fan. I think he has good basics, and a decent understanding of horses compared to a lot of "trainers" who really don't think past the tip of their own nose, but he's too aggressive and "one size fits all" with horses for my taste. I also don't like his tendency to really flex the heck out of his horse's necks. (I can't imagine that's super comfortable - flexing has it's place, but I don't think it should be used that excessively.)

Yeah. He's not my thing. I'll mix and match some of his methods with other trainer's methods depending on the horse I'm working with, but typically I'm dealing with highly sensitive horses and Clinton's methods just don't seem to mix well with that type of horse. I have used some of his techniques on my very pushy, in-your-face gelding(who is sweet as sugar, but has absolutely no concept of personal space), and they're worked with varying degrees of success.

Overall, I don't really like many of the "top trainers" such as Clinton, Parelli, Westfall(I don't know if you'd consider her a "top trainer" but she's decently popular). Anyone who thinks a horse is "out to get them" needs a re-think on what horses are and how they think, because I assure you - the horse's only concerns in life are eating, sleeping, making little horses, and staying alive. Anthropomorphism is where a lot of people wrongly assign emotions and motives to animals that simply do not have them, and that's where a lot of training goes wrong. Horses don't plot revenge or purposely forget things, and likelier than not that issue that they have is something you're causing, not something they're just coming up with.

One thing I can appreciate from Clinton is his bluntness with people. If someone's being stupid, he calls them out. I don't like some of his horse methods, but I think it's high time we stopped tip-toeing around people when they're doing something that can end up with either them or the horse(or both) getting killed. It's not funny or brave, some things are just plain stupid and ignorant.
 
#3 ·
I think in the cases where a horse has been previously well trained, but allowed to become a spoiled, dangerous, jackwagon, as in the Running Scared and Once Bitten, Twice Shy vids, CA does what he knows and it works. It slaps a hard factory reset into a horse's brain when they've been allowed to become rude, disrespectful, and dangerous.

His method on getting a horse to load is fantastic - I've seen it work... but on horses that already KNEW the drill and just wanted to be patooty heads - chief among them, Gina and Sarge. I have videos of the final result.

I don't like his 'method' used on a young horse that has no idea what's being asked of them. That same method to get a horse to trailer utterly failed with Outback. She was confused, no closer to learning what was being asked of her, and she closed off - it was like watching the shutters on a window close in her eyes. She was nothing but emotion and instinct. His method of being aggressive on a horse that gets in your space while being led sent Oops straight into the air and she came no closer to learning to not run over the back of a person or stopping when they stop. She. had. no. idea. what was being asked. In both cases, both horses were 2 at the time... babies... and honestly ignorant. In both cases they were being treated like adult horses that knew better. Was this a failing of the person using his method or was it a failing of the method on these two horses given their young age and lack of education? I have no idea... but I don't want it used on my youngsters again.

On being buddy soured - and again I'm no trainer, my experience is limited to my horses and mine only - I found what worked is to take them away from home to ride them and ride with people and horses they don't know.

For Trigger specifically, I had to redirect his attention back on me. He goes to hollering at or for other horses - I have to talk to him, turn his head, maybe even get out of the saddle and redirect his attention to me. I tell him often: Nooo, you're with me... lean forward and scratch his neck, snap my fingers, whatever it takes to get his ears to swing back to me so I know he's listening or get his head to turn just a bit so he's looking at me. If he tries to hook on to other horses on the trail... we do circles at the pace he chooses. I have had to get out of the saddle before, and lead him off in another direction while the other riders go on down the trail. It's worked for him. I'll keep doing it.

I think there's more than one way to skin a cat and I'll keep working to learn what works for my horses and what doesn't. I really like Warwick Schiller - he's humble enough to admit he's been wrong in his way of thinking in the past, and he's willing to try something new - I mean the man taught a chicken to lunge... he seems like a gentle soul, and think he's probably a genuinely nice guy. I like Gord Searle - he's unflappable and makes the showing out a naughty horse does sound like no big deal. Just a horse being a horse: Oh lookie there - you just ran into my elbow. Huh. Wonder how that happened?

CA strikes me as an arrogant tool... but I think there are times his no nonsense, 'I'm the boss, you aren't' approach is useful, specifically for a horse that knows better and has been allowed to get away with murder. He gets their attention and demands their respect immediately and I think some horses need that.
 
#4 · (Edited)
Yeah, seen that once April, and like other CA stuff I've seen, have no desire to see it again. He wants a 'mechanical' horse slave, who does what it's told regardless, who is not allowed to think for itself. In his words, 'the more you scare him, the quieter he will become' ~ which means the horse has become mentally 'shut down', shell shocked, 'broken' of spirit. If that's what you want of a horse, unfortunately, IMHO, it's your call. But it's far from what I want - I'm into horses because I love HORSES, not just what they can do for me, and as such, I don't just want an 'obedient' beast of burden.

While there is absolutely value in 'make the wrong things difficult' principle, I think we've got to be careful not to use that as the 'be all' kind of approach, esp when fear/anxiety is involved. And for something like 'buddy sour', it often is. So, if your approach is just to make it unpleasant for the horse when he's near his buddy/at home/whatever, remember that leaving his place/buddy of security is often 'hard' too, so his choice is then between a rock & a hard place. He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. Choice becomes only the 'better evil'. Rather than focussing on & teaching him that it's OK to go out with you, that he can trust you to keep him safe, that it's fun & rewarding to go out...

The other thing with 'working' a horse as punishment is a) it associates that work with punishment. I personally want to teach the complete opposite, for horses to ENJOY their 'work' & see it as fun. b) it associates YOU strongly with punishment/unpleasantness. c) It DOES NOT cause his buddy/place of security to feel any less secure, to make the Big Wide World less scary/unpleasant.

And I won't go into his 'whooping butt' of a horse who's already doing what it's told, or his lack of release & poor timing I've seen in vids which cause far more confusion & fear. But hey, I suppose when you want them 'quiet' from frightening them...
 
#5 ·
The other thing with 'working' a horse as punishment is a) it associates that work with punishment. I personally want to teach the complete opposite, for horses to ENJOY their 'work' & see it as fun. b) it associates YOU strongly with punishment/unpleasantness. c) It DOES NOT cause his buddy/place of security to feel any less secure, to make the Big Wide World less scary/unpleasant.
I think it depends on how you use it. Rather than using "work" as a punishment, "work" is just the thing we do and may be fun on its own, and resting is the reward for doing something particularly special. Like a job for us is not meant to be a punishment, just something we do, and a bonus is a reward for doing our job particularly well. Even then, it only works on rest-motivated horses. It does not work on my horse whatsoever. She loves to work. She will happily stand still if asked, but will not do it of her own accord and will not see it as a reward. On the other hand, I've taught horses in five minutes to use the whole ring on their own (as opposed to reverting back to one side) by trotting at their favorite spots and walking at their least favorite spots. Totally depends on the horse.
 
#7 ·
I think CA was good for the older people that have lost confidence - his step by step approach really gave the people something to do when working with their horses. Also good for beginners. My issue has always been that it is just badgering the horse - constantly badgering them. We have a mare that ridden by a novice and he loved the CA method. But now 15 years after we purchased her if you get after her for anything she will still swing her head to her side like CA's one rein stop - it is scary and annoying when you are riding down the trail!
 
#12 ·
Also good for beginners.
I disagree extremely strongly on that. He seems impressive, for those who don't have the experience to understand fully what they're seeing, or for those who don't care. But I seriously think teaching beginners who don't have a clue such aggression, such disregard for the horse is a terrible thing.
 
#9 ·
This works fine if the horse is stubborn. It does NOT work fine if the horse is buddy sour because he's anxious and seeks security with others. My Paso would gladly have worked near his friends until he dropped dead before standing and catching his breath away from them. All Clinton's method did was make him more worried and worked up.

Once we addressed the anxiousness, most of they buddy sourness disappeared altogether. Now he only makes a fuss if the other horses both leave, and he's alone, which is not anything unusual with horses.
 
#13 ·
Clinton admits his methods are directed to the middle aged gals who bought a horse and let it walk over the top of them.

I am in agreement that he is not my cup of tea and I currently own a mare who wouldn't deal with that style of handling. She is ouchy on the ground, sensitive and her bubble is pretty big.
 
#14 ·
Clinton admits his methods are directed to the middle aged gals who bought a horse and let it walk over the top of them.

I am in agreement that he is not my cup of tea and I currently own a mare who wouldn't deal with that style of handling. She is ouchy on the ground, sensitive and her bubble is pretty big.

I went to one of his "Walkabout" (snort) presentations and it was utterly embarrassing, how he was egging those middle aged women on. If he'd have stripped, they'd be throwing money at him. I unfortunately sat behind a woman who chanted every word he was going to say before he said it. He didn't "perform" so much as he just whipped the women into a frenzy. And sold stuff.

I'm not bashing him personally but I have watched one of his videos about "curing" the barn sour horse, which was based on the widespread practice of working the horse to death at the barn. What I saw was basically a good technique for making a horse hide in the corner every time you came in to its stall. Nobody ever explains to the horse WHY it is being worked to death at the barn, so it's very hard for me to see how a horse is expected to make the connection between its behavior away from the barn and the too-late punishment of hard work in a place where it used to feel safe.

Not that I'm a trainer, but I kind of subscribe to the "what's in it for the horse" type of training. I've "cured" bolting for the barn by spending the walk back to the barn "moseying" (a concept from another popular clinician) from one tasty morsel of grass to another (but I do this methodically). I use the time to practice the halt from a faint cue heavily, and rewarding a good response with a chance to snatch some yummy grass (on cue), or using the clicker training concept, with the reward for the halt being "clicked" and rewarded. My mare frequently prefers the clicker treat to the grass! If she cons me out of both, so much the better in her mind! However, the constant halts and subsequent rewards means her mind is NOT on running back to the barn, but anticipating the halt and reward, which automatically slows her down and makes lingering away from the barn more fun than getting there. I ride her away from the barn now and she has nary a backward thought, despite her buddy yelling for her in the barn.

I know it wouldn't work in all circumstances, (especially if the rider doesn't "get" the concept of operant conditioning) but the difference is, the horse anticipates rewarding behaviors from ME when we go out together, not relentless, punishing work for reasons she doesn't understand, which would add to her overall anxiety and certainty that she's in mortal danger from me when we go away from the barn.
 
#16 ·
Wth is Quigley down under?? No clue about that one! 'Walkabout' is an aboriginal term, so it could be said to be a little... Disrespectful for an Anglo man to use it. But who knows, he could be Koori.

As for the 'whipping middle aged women to a frenzy', I'd say he focusses on that group because he can have the hero worship. A previous client is like that about Parelli, his word is gospel. In her 60s she got full arm tattoos of his logos...
 
#17 ·
I grimaced reading Parelli tattoos. Uffda!


I am not a CA expert I just happened to listen to a podcast awhile back, Andrea Fappani interviewed him. He got into because he knew he could make money from the middle aged woman dynamic. He worked for another trainer down the road from one I worked for in California. When that didn't pan out he was giving little horsemanship, problem solving lessons. I met the gal that started to help him market him to that crowd. He came to the US to be a reining horse trainer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: loosie
#19 ·
^Oh, Tom Selleck, so Australian! Yeah, the walkabout thing, I just wondered, political correctness & all. The 'town' was called Walkabout Creek in CD. If it were a real place, I'd guess it was either the place they left from, or the destination of the local tribe.

I think WS went to US to be a reining trainer too, if I remember what he said right.
 
#20 ·
"Dingo ate my baby"

Famous Quigley Down Under line..

Tom Selleck wasn't an Aussie in the movie, he was an American sharp shooter hired to go to Australia to find out he was hired to shoot Aboriginals.
 
#21 ·
^Oh.

Spose you saw the Azaria Chamberlain movie with Merryl Streep years ago? Apparently there was a coverup about tourist operators & rangers there hand feeding dingoes, and they'd been known to bite kids before... Anyway, sorry OP, we should keep this thread on track.
 
#22 ·
^Oh.

Spose you saw the Azaria Chamberlain movie with Merryl Streep(as an Aussie) years ago? Apparently there was a coverup about tourist operators & rangers there hand feeding dingoes, and they'd been known to bite kids before... Anyway, sorry OP, we should keep this thread on track.
 
#24 ·
LOL, it's no problem, I enjoy digressions.

This reminds me of a mare at my stable that, now that I think about it, was probably trained with CA methods. Ironically, her current owner is a middle aged woman, but certainly not the one who put the training on her to begin with. I know she was run through the auctions at some point.

I have ridden her probably half a dozen times. The owner is not 100% confident with her. Probably because she has a history of being "explosive" in previous homes. In the times I've handled and ridden her, she just feels very shut down. She does not particularly enjoy human company, but will tolerate it. If you go out to the pasture and approach her, she'll stand and pretend you aren't there, but nonchalantly turn away and leave if you go to pet her. The most I've seen her do is flick her ears forward when she suspects a treat. She rides like a robot in the arena. She will walk/trot/canter/turn whenever you ask her to. But each gait is automatically set to only one speed, and she will completely ignore absolutely everything that is not a transition or turn command. She will never reach down and stretch, will never raise her head.

When I take her out on the trails, she is robotic until she's not, and then suddenly she's cantering sideways through a corn field or into traffic and completely evades and ignores any aids. This is probably the closest I've ever seen her to "explosive" as she was described by previous trainers.

It's a shame because she really is a cute mare with good movement. I don't like horses that have learned to just shut down and selectively listen. She has just learned too much that humans don't care to hear what she has to say, so she keeps quiet and willingly obeys right up until she sees a way to escape.
 
#25 ·
When I take her out on the trails, she is robotic until she's not, and then suddenly she's cantering sideways through a corn field or into traffic and completely evades and ignores any aids.
Poor baby. Yeah, sooo many 'well trained' horses I've met are like that, including a little brumby I have, tho my son who has become an excellent & respectFUL horseperson has largely got him out of his shell & he's no longer 'robotic' with him... and less so with me, though I haven't spent much time on him myself & he's still hesitant & a bit of a brick with me sometimes.

I don't look at it as 'evading' or 'ignoring', when they 'blow up' which implies conscious, purposeful thought, but it's just panicking and reacting on instinctive level & when they get like that they can't even 'hear' the 'aids'.

I love the analogy of stress being like drips from a leaky roof. You can put a bucket under it, contain it and minimise it to only a drip at a time, but if you don't empty the bucket, it will still eventually become too much for the bucket & overflow. Furthering that analogy, stress/reactivity to a 'shut down' horse is like those drips going into a... jerry can, where you can't see them. You don't know how full it's getting, until 'suddenly, out of the blue' it overflows. That's why they can 'explode without warning'. So short, easy 'sessions' are best.
 
#26 ·
There are some things that CA does that I like very well and others.......not so much. The new mare that I just got is a victim of over using a chain. Instead of training her to be respectful on the ground, they have trained her to stand up at halter and then just shanked the living tar out of her for anything else. So every time we would use a tug on the lead rope, she threw her head up and her front feet would pop up off the ground, even a couple of full on rears for tugging (and I mean gentle tugs rather than yanks)on the lead rope. She started acting out and being difficult, so I had hubby and my assistant lead her around and let her play up in response to various cues and corrections while I watched what her reactions were. Now at the time we were using a soft, nylon web halter that was humongous on her, literally she could have thrown her head hard and slipped right out of it, no chain and just a regular cotton lead rope. No chain. But she was expecting pain, so was trying to avoid it by popping up. Yes, she was being pushy and bratty, but not to the extent where a chain was needed to stop that behavior.

So, we switched to a stiff rope halter and a 12 foot lead line, and started doing some ground work that was based on redirection rather than punishment. We started walking and if she wanted to bolt on past, we just turned around and walked the other direction so that she was following us no matter what she did. She found that in order to keep up and avoid constantly hitting the end of the line, which of course bumped her nose with the rope halter, then she had to pay attention and stay respectful and focus on us and what we were asking of her. She's a 'delicate little flower' and the stiff rope is a little too harsh, rubbed some fur off, so I'm buying her a soft rope halter and a web halter that fits her, so we can stop rubbing fur off.

In the week since we started the minor ground work her attitude has done a complete 180, she's been respectful, much more mindful of OUR personal space, and a lot less testing and pushy. She's getting the idea that we're not going to beat her or shank her for punishment, we're just going to redirect her thoughts and feet. She's also gone from not giving us 2 eyes and ears to looking at us and focusing on us with her ears. She's not afraid of the whip, so that wasn't used on her in her previous situation (thank God for small favors) and now is getting the idea that if she stays by my shoulder and doesn't try to take me dirt skiing, we're good. If she does, and it's more than an "I'm startled" response, then we switch directions and keep on walking. She's very smart, catches on to things super quickly, is a little reactive to things yet but has improved a HUGE amount and most of her reactivity has calmed down. Most of the reactive behavior was in response to trying to give us what she thought we wanted rather than waiting to be asked or directed, again a case of too harsh training. I can only imagine how this one would take to CA's training methods, she would blow like a powder magazine that a Molotov Cocktail had been tossed into. Gentle is definitely the way she will learn best.

She's a prime example of "no learning takes place when fear is in charge" and showing her that she's a part of the team and her opinions matter is key to setting her up for success. She's learned that being naughty on the lead line is going to get her worked, we can walk and switch directions as many times/long as it takes for her to connect the dots. She also connects the dots and they stay connected, for good or ill. I also use what I call "her currency" to reward her slightest try. I made it my business to find out where all her favorite scritchy spots are and when she gives me a try, she gets a reward using her currency, a good scritch on her neck. I've also spent time in her stall just walking around her and scratching her favorite spots and then walking out so that she's left wanting more. She loves attention and that has been a wonderful way to get her past the naughties. I also carry a soft rubber curry in my back pocket so I can give her a quick scrub with the curry, another of her favorite things.
 
#27 ·
She's a prime example of "no learning takes place when fear is in charge" and showing her that she's a part of the team and her opinions matter is key to setting her up for success.
Can not be said enough!

Of the first bit, yes, think how even people get when they panic, just reacting, they *can't* think clearly in that state. To the second, yeah, focusing on *successes* and setting it up to make them most likely/easiest, rather than what so many do - focusing on what needs 'correcting' and just 'getting on with it' when things are good.
 
#32 ·
Yes. absolutely. being ok, even happy with ones job, is not evidence of being shut down.



I do not think I worded my response well. I wish to goodness I could lay my hands on that article. She/He was talking about horses that are great at one thing. They are good because they learn that if they do what is asked, they get the reward. No concern or thought is given for how THEY feel about what they are doing. They become very inured to pain, or discomfort, and just do a good job to earn their rest. They find a comfortable, reasonable life in this.


But, if someone starts asking them to make decisions on their own, they become emotionally undone.


I wish I could find that article. IT was so interesting, and so odd to me in the sense that it was saying that it's best for such hroses to keep them in a life where they know exactly how to respond, and never have to make decisions on their own. they are actually better off ridden that way.
 
#33 ·
jumping in late here. i like CA's Ground work as it is decent. still can be very aggressive but if done by someone who understand how to not go straight to violence it can work well. my arab loves it as its clear for her. my paint is a different story. you want them to trust YOU. they want their buddy because they are pray animals and single animals are food. their entire genetic makeup is saying "you will die if you are on your own!" if you teach them they YOU are their other, that because you are there they are NOT alone, then they calm down. they get emotional and stop thinking. you need them to calm down and realize they are NOT going to die and that they are not alone. making then lope the smallest circle untill they hate their buddy and think being eaten may not be so bad.

so like i said hes ground work and basics are like "horse training for dummies". works for most. easy to fallow, enfranchises human safety. dose not make him perfect and dose not make it the best way.
 
#34 ·
When I first started watching different trainers , mostly via videos, I was hooked and amazed at the ‘natural horsemanship’ activities. How you could make them turn and run, or stop, or back up without even touching them. It was amazing. I then sort of fell into learning from a different trainer, face to face, and I was confused.



At a clinic, another student was having trouble following the teacher’s instructions in the round pen. The student wanted to show us how she normally did things, as far as using the round pen and having her horse run one way, then the other, with some darn snappy turns and take offs.


Teacher said she didn’t really like how Clinton Anderson horses were trained, and didn’t advocate it. She did not ‘dis’ the man, just said that there was something missing in it, as an approach to horses. That thing is the horse’s ‘thought’.
The approach she is using is all about seeking, earning, drawing, and sending the horse’s thought, because where goes his thought, go his feet. In nature, a horse’s thought and his feet are always united. However, when we ride them, we are often moving their feet literally counter to where their thought is focused. We are often oblivious to this because we ARE moving the horse. We don’t even notice where his thought is. That disunity causes discomfort to the horse. He is being PUSHED around against his own intention. That is often expressed in him bracing his body, leaning on a bit, running through a bit, dragging his feet, etc.



When the horse was charging around the round pen in an impressive display of activity, the horse was not really THINKING so much as he was reacting; anticipating, and worrying about fleeing the human. He was not listening so much as assuming and obeying. He is not waiting to hear you, if you chose to ‘whisper’ something different from “RUN, CHANGE, Run”. People say, ‘but look how immediately he turns. Look how he comes running toward me if I back up, look how he immediately disengages and faces me when I point the stick at his haunches.” Pretty impressive, no?’


Yes, in a way. But, can that horse turn slowly if you want him to, or is it him just snapping around and running up? Can you send him out to the edge of corral and ask him to just stand there and wait? or will he assume that as soon as you send him away, he is supposed to run his hind end out of there and get busy, or else!


You see, this sort of work is all about driving a horse. pushing on his hind end. Even getting him to face up to you you are told to push on his hind end, to force it away from you so that his head ends up pointing at you. (you bend over, ‘look’ at his hind end, or point the stick at it. ) But, I ask you, do you know where the horse’s thought is when you do that? Not on you, but on the pressure you just placed on his hind end, and how to get away from that pressure. He is in ‘fleeing’ mode and he feels like he’s in ‘trouble’. But, he stopped and squared up to face you, right?


You can get a better turn, softer, more balanced, less abrupt by drawing his thought TOWARD you. When he does this, he will be focused ON you, and will set up his own body to follow that draw, not fleeing his hind end away. His thought comes first toward you, then his feet follow up on that. His feet and his thought are united. The result is quite different in the horse’s mind. He will want to connect WITH you, rather than want to avoid trouble.



Once you start to watch a horse and see his thought, openly expressed in his eyes and ears and body, you start to see where it is going, when it’s not with you, even if his feet are moving along. When his thought comes to where you are asking his feet to go, he becomes very light and soft. But, the thought comes first.



If you look at so many problems we have with horses it boils down to us trying to move their feet somewhere, when their thought is somewhere else.


There is even a difference between ‘pushing’ and ‘sending’. Pushing is pressure on the hind end, or sometimes shoulders. The horse moves away from it, but will often stay mentally focused on the source of the push, either in resentment or fear.


‘Sending’ is more about getting the horse to move his thought ‘out there’ somewhere, and then encouraging that intention so much that the horse decides he wants to go there. He is focused on his destination, not on the driving force making him go away. He is focused toward something, rather than away from it. To the horse, it is a big difference.




I hope I'm not going to regret posting this long, verbose bit of yammering. I am so NOT an expert on horse training, I hesitate to post anything about this, since I don't understand it fully. But, I do know there's a whole different feel to my trainer's way, and CA's way.
 
#35 ·
Tiny aka 'so not a trainer' :lol: that is something that I could not have put into words myself, but I feel YES! Is so important! Thank you for sharing!

And don't underestimate yourself, your experience combined with your respect & consideration for the horse, combined with your analytical brain that you keep filling with info from many sources to consider & discuss...
 
#36 ·
if you watch trainer like the Frenchman, what's his name . . Pignot? Something like that. They focus way more on drawing a horse's thought toward them than sending the horse away. And even if the 'send' the horse away, the bond is still unbroken. The horse moves away, but keeps part of his attention 'listening' for the next direction of his thought. He doesn't BREAK away, he stretches away, still available to be drawn back with ease, without interruption.


If you DRIVE a hrose away, you will create a pretty strong break. There are times when you may want that, such as when a horse is really crowding you , or being aggressive.

Sometime you have to do that; you have to break the horse's thought off of you because his thought on you is hard, and it's him 'taking over', rather than him listening and asking. Once you have driven him off firmly, he will often feel uncomfortable having had the connection broken, and he will turn and seek to reconnect, on YOUR terms.
 
#37 · (Edited)
If you DRIVE a hrose away, you will create a pretty strong break. There are times when you may want that, ...
... on YOUR terms.
Yeah... and no, I reckon. :lol: If you drive a horse away, *it will often* create a 'break' but not always - depends how you do it, how good a 'language' and relationship you have with them, I reckon. I can only 'drive' 2 of my horses pretty strongly (cantering circles or away & back or such) and have them *often*(depends if they want to play, not reliable tho) stay 'connected' and in control(in an open area, not roundpen or such). Of the others, I wouldn't do it with the brum, there being no actual need, & him having a long & bad association with 'round penning'(he's better on a lead), still a bit 'shut down' about it... he doesn't work well being 'driven'(or rather, he actually *works* well... in a very robotic, 'not quite there' way...) and just haven't done much of it with my mare. The pony I've leased to someone LOVES to play games like that with you!

Oh and 'on your own terms'... Yes, necessary most of the time, and I think it pays to present it in a way, as often as possible, that it's also on the horse's terms too. Set it up for 'Right' behaviours to be a win/win. I guess you could say that's my basic premise I work to, in getting a horse to *want* to play my games, take me for a ride, etc. As much as is possible(of course, some things gotta be done regardless...).

I want them thinking 'oh boy!' when I want to play with them, not just 'ugh, OK...' And if you 'practice' too much of the stuff that gets 'ugh, OK', they will get in the habit of it & it can 'rub off' in other areas. BUT if you 'practice' too much of the stuff that gets 'oh boy', they'll get habitual about that attitude instead! :happydance:
 
#38 ·
Part two of my response: Regarding becoming shut down emotionally/mentally. I read an article somewhat reacently about this . The writer said that MOST of all performance horses are pretty shut down. Most ranch horses, most reiners, dude ranch strings, etc. Their training has made them very responsive to cues and routine, and as long as the person continues to ride them in this way, and is fair to them, the horse finds a system for living that keeps him out of punishment, and he has 'peace' in his life. As long as he always responds in that 'correct' way, and quickly, he gets his job done, he gets to rest, is fed, and wakes up the next day to do a KNOWN job. He may not be very aware of things, emotionally outside of what is part of HIS job, but he is a great working 'machine'.



The writer said that it is actually unfair to such a horse to take them out of such a lifestyle and start expecting them to be 'awake and aware', and feeling/touchy, connected emotionally, etc. This puts them into a place of anxiety, where they are suddenly left to make decisions on their own. Horsemanship activities like liberty work become very stressful for such horses.


Additionally, if they do find themselves in a place where they are not being 'told' to do something, and something comes up, like a scary thing on the trail, they have no experience in making decisions on their own about how to react. They have been 'woken' by different handling methods, but now that they are 'awake' to what's around them, their true nature may come out, and it may be very powerful, and much more focussed on making their own decisions about self preservation. And, I think that describes what Swissmiss was talking about.

I get what you are talking about and really would like to read the article.
I don't find performance and ranch horses to be shut down but more of internalizers.



In my opinion, there is a difference between a horse who internalizes his emotions and a horse that is shut down. A horse who has a tendency to internalize has more to do with his own personality in combination with the training style not neccesarly him being a performance or ranch horse. However there is a similarity in a need for a horse to be able to go to work within a timeline and get a job done which lends to pushing on a horse more than say the backyard training enthusiast. (I am not speaking ill of either end of the spectrum)

A horse who is shut down is one that has had his plug pulled. One of the main differences between one who internalizes and a shut down horse is the ability to bring the horse back out through a different job/training technique. A horse who internalizes still takes work and definitely conscious effort on the trainer/handlers part but a shut down horse is beyond. I have rarely seen a horse come back that has had his plug pulled. It is not as simple as a turn out for a year or two, a job change or change in trainer and style.


I may get thrashed for this but I don't think internalizing is as bad as the new wave of natural horsemanship thinks it is. There is a bit of a safety net in it for the horse and the trainer BUT only if the trainer understands where the threshold is. If the threshold is pushed beyond it's point then that is when it becomes explosive and then the big problems get set in. I am just speaking from my personal experience not from a clinician theory, but on some of the hotter performance or work horse bred horses where the sensitivity and the bubble is large the internalizing gives a starting point to get things done and the internalizing can be fixed later. I should also mention that there is a difference in handling the sensitive/big bubble and the sensitive/small bubble horse. I find the sensitive/small bubble horse doesn't tend to internalize like the sensitive/big bubble horse and that is another reason you can't throw most performance and ranch horses into the same "shut down" category.
 
#39 ·
I absolutely agree. the point the writer was making was that horses that are trained to do a specific job, with extremely clear parameters, and how they 'feel' about a job is not really of concern, they adapt quite well to their job. They are actually some of the BEST riding horses. They get the job done and are quite dependable.


The article was more about allowing a horse to stay in that form of living, if that is what has worked for him. And, being aware that if you really 'wake up' your horse, you may not like what comes out.


I think her/his point was not to think less of a horse that has learned a job in an automatic manner, and has come to peace with that. And that such a horse is happier if his life continues about like he has adapted to. And, if you start asking the horse to think outside what he has learned to react to in a set manner, you may not like what comes out.


I am really sorry I don't remember where I saw that article. Like I said, it might have been Eclectic Horseman . . . or something I linked to here. I should have noted the source at the time.
 
#40 ·
I just can’t read these threads about Clinton Anderson without wanting to scream. Yes, you saw him get tough with a horse on YouTube. You didn’t like what you saw. You think you could do it better. Fine. I believe some of you probably could.

What bugs me is you have leaped to the conclusion that CA’s methods wouldn’t work on your horse or some horse because his methods are too rough. It’s even more disturbing when you start speculating that every horse that you encounter that has certain issues was “probably” trained with CA’s method.

I wish one of you would watch one hour of the 26 hours of the Colt Starting series so you could realize how much of what you say about Clinton Anderson’s training methods is hideously, slanderously wrong. The idea that his cure for a buddy sour horse is to ride him to exhaustion so he can be pushed through some kind of panic about leaving his buddies is just crazy. The whole foundation of his approach is to turn around BEFORE the horse ever gets to that emotional state.

I love you guys and this forum but the Clinton bashing that goes on here is unconscionable. Warwick Schiller is an interesting guy with some nutty ideas about sitting in cold water and Mark Rashid’s books can make me cry, but I’ve watched them both in person and they train horses just like Clinton does, only slower. And if I had to go by what they teach, I would have missed the last 15 years with my gelding. Clinton Anderson got me back on my horse.

It’s funny to me how many people here think it’s ridiculous to spend $600 on a dvd series, but every time somebody has an issue with their horse, the first word of advice is to hire a trainer. $600 is a mouse pee in the ocean compared to what a trainer costs, and if you’re a beginner who needs a trainer, how are you supposed to pick one? CA’s Colt Starting and Fundamentals series have helped thousands of people with their horses, avoiding the injuries and issues that create former horse owners and auction bound horses. And I am one of them.
 
#42 ·
that CA’s methods wouldn’t work on your horse or some horse because his methods are too rough....
I wish one of you would watch one hour of the 26 hours of the Colt Starting series so you could realize how much of what you say about Clinton Anderson’s training methods is hideously, slanderously wrong.
Joel, we've been here before. I'm glad you've found someone who has helped you. By all means, if you want to share some of his stuff that he doesn't show publicly, which may give people a different view of him, go for it. I'd be interested to see.

But again, what HE puts out publicly on Youtube is indeed all most of us see(at least those who aren't impressed & so therefore wouldn't fork out for his 'courses'). It is NOT in the least wrong that *in many people's opinion* he is too aggressive and has no respect for the horse in his vids. It is NOT 'hideously', far from 'slanderously' wrong, that HE gives people that picture of himself. It is what HE puts out there as egs of himself and his philosophy. If he doesn't put out an accurate picture about what he's about, it's not about, please don't lecture us, as if it's our fault we supposedly have the wrong end of the stick.

The idea that his cure for a buddy sour horse is to ride him to exhaustion so he can be pushed through some kind of panic about leaving his buddies is just crazy. The whole foundation of his approach is to turn around BEFORE the horse ever gets to that emotional state.
I don't know anything about the assumption of working to exhaustion or such, just IMO in a nutshell, what *he shows* in this vid is simply about working a horse hard, whenever the horse is with his 'buddy' and this is a philosophy, for reasons explained, I disagree strongly with.

I love you guys and this forum but the Clinton bashing that goes on here is unconscionable.
I don't believe 'bashing' is the appropriate word for it at all. We're not getting personal about him, but we are making comment/giving opinions on what he SAYS & DOES, publicly, which is, IMO an entirely reasonable thing to discuss.

Warwick Schiller is an interesting guy with some nutty ideas about sitting in cold water and Mark Rashid’s books can make me cry, but I’ve watched them both in person and they train horses just like Clinton does, only slower.
Interesting. So if those others teach the same stuff, I'm curious why do you give credit to CA & not them?? Is it because CA has a vid series you got into? I saw Mark Rashid in person twice, at least 20 years ago, so while I remember he seemed very gentle & respectFUL to the horse, I don't recall details. WS I've only seen very recently, and he was extremely 'low key' and respectful too. Apparently WS has changed his ways drastically, recently, so I don't know if what I've seen of him was 'like CA' in your eyes or not. I'd really like to see some of that side of CA if he is comparable to those 2. I have to ask tho, why on earth would he put out such a drastically different - in your eyes incorrect - view of himself & his philosophy if that's not what he generally does/believes?

It’s funny to me how many people here think it’s ridiculous to spend $600 on a dvd series, but every time somebody has an issue with their horse, the first word of advice is to hire a trainer. $600 is a mouse pee
Yes, I don't think watching vids & 'going it alone' is really comparable at all with hands on help. However, yes, it's cheap in comparison with having a bucketful of lessons with some trainers(that would pay for 12 hour long lessons with the girl I used to employ to give my kids lessons...), and there are indeed lots to be learned from some vid series. And many people don't have the opportunity of a good trainer. Therefore, I can absolutely see value in vid courses, just that, why on earth would I invest that much money(or anywhere near) on a trainer who, from what I've seen of him, I can't stand, who, according to you, puts out a false idea about himself publicly??
 
#41 ·
I'm hardly bashing anyone. I'm glad you and your horse were helped.
The example I raised was one where the young owner HAD worked with CA, I hadn't just assumed it.

Obviously he gets success in many circumstances Based on every video of him I've ever seen, I see a trainer that operates from a paradigm of working with horses that is NOT the same as what I seen from several other trainers , such as Warwick Schiller and Harry Whitney and his offshoots. However, I wish I could see that series without buying it.

And, yes, I personally am not a skilled trainer, much less rider. I'm just a good observer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top