Light Contact - Gentle Riding Aids - Dressage

Do you understand advertizing?
Who is targeted here?
The ever so gullible women, Oh such horse lover Alois.
He was peddling him self like a whore and the Vienna school with it! Now just look and see all the assholes trying to imitate him, the god of "dressage".

Who is he targeting below?
The guys of course.

The fools reading books on "how-to" in riding will get worse, guaranteed, hence no decent riders ever read them. The worst part about his books is that he knew that, and yet he published them. Thanks to this "master of the riding art", we have horses tortured, abused and crippled by most who read his books. By the way this is pretty lousy piaffe on that cover. The below is much better piaffe presented by some kid.

     I recall one of these deceivers and manipulators/exploiters writing bullshit like this in his books, his name was Alois Podhajsky (a person with a swollen brains), whose writings inspired many jerks and idiots, especially in the crap that they are riding and calling a dressage.

    (His genuine oxymoron; writes a book titled "My Horse,  My Teacher" and so why to hell did he writes any books and giving advice on "how-to" if the horses and not him should do the teaching? He even writes in his book (not that I have read his books), in not so many words, that the reading of his book will make the reader a worse rider if he already does not know the how-to that is in the book. See the oxymoron in the whole thing? Well, he just wanted to be remembered as some "master of the riding art" of his time. Among horseman he is remembered as conceited and proud fool, whose books due to misunderstanding caused a complete degeneration of the thing we used to call dressage at one time.)

     His stupidity and incompetence was publicly preformed when he took his "well" and "gently" trained horse to show him on an exhibition in a stadium before hundreds of fans. The horse supposedly spooked at one point and ran off with his "master of the riding art", whose "gentle" aids in controlling the horse were obviously useless and ineffective.   
    On the battle field this would mean almost a certain death. Of course some of the famous riders and experts follow his example like the "iron hands" Anky losing the control of the horse in a riding ring, not a battle field mind you, and that supposedly on a well trained horse.

     All these people are simply nothing but fools, and most of the books written on riding, by the so-called military officers that for most part never seen a battle field, or better said never thought of battle field when riding or training the dressage when using the so-called amplified aids, are simply bullshit books and no self-respected horseman would ever read them. One look at the book covers and I feel like barfing, though one has to know what he is looking at.

     Here is the today's moron's misunderstanding of the use of the so-called amplified riding aids like spurs and curb bits.
    Most simply have no clue why these aids were mandatory in the higher level of dressage, and some of these fools even went as far as inventing their own theory, completely contradicting the reality by saying that the spurs and curbs are used in the higher levels of dressage because the horses are more refined. Imagine just how stupid one can be to come up with such nonsense.
    Needless to say that people like this will eventually find themselves in embarrassing situations like Anky or Podhajsky. Not that these two should be compared, because Anky is just plain incompetent and clueless fool that has no idea what she is doing when with horses, which is self evident to anyone that has only the basic knowledge of dressage, without even knowing how to ride, as all is self-evident in her completely abandoning the principles of genuine dressage or even just plain simple and basic riding rationales. On the other hand Podhajsky at least managed to reached the half-ass rider level, when taken from the horseman's perspective.

     Here is some enlightenment why the horses in the more advanced stage of training had to be presented under the use of the more severe aids, like the spurs and curb bit, not whip of course. (The latter (riding crop, not the long touché whip) used strictly in training young riding horses and later on, once horse was refined, it was abandoned. Of course there are practical uses for the whip in racing and such, as well as in most sport disciplines, but the use or carrying of the whip on a refined and advanced dressage horse was simply inconceivable and seen as simply crude and a sign of incompetence on the part of the rider, not to mention that it was not allowed.)

      You simply take a young so-called remount and train it first to accept all the riding aids, the seat, the bit and the rider's hands and the leg aids. Please note the word "accept", because that is the key word in training young horses, because if the horse does not accept one of these riding aids, and does not "learn" to respond to them appropriately, the animal is simply unreliable as a riding horse, something that no soldier would ever want to ride into the battle, nor I would want to ride anywhere as a finished horse.
    Of course many soldiers had to ride such horses into the battle, especially towards the end of most wars, as there were simply not enough trained and suitable horses available. I recall a one-time hussar in the former Austro-Hungarian cavalry saying, that it was common knowledge that if your horse got killed or disabled on the battle field you were next. This because such soldier then had to go to the remount camp, since trained horses were no longer available, because most got killed, and had to train a green horse for the battle field, while he had often only three months to do this.

     Once when your horse accepts and learns how to respond to the rider's aids it can perform even the most complex dressage maneuvers, when advanced and refined enough, (not talking about the work in the air, which are in essence horse tricks these days like in the circus.) without the need for any amplified aids by the rider, like spurs and curbs, because the horse gets more refined under a decent rider, and responds well just to miniscule movements of the rider, touches of the legs, easy and responsive  hands only with a snaffle bit, and to any slight body aid through the rider's seat.
    Needles to say that the horse must first undergo the basic school, then the campagne school (cross country), before reaching the dressage levels, though the fools today call all of these stages a dressage.
    Of course only decent riders can accomplish this through riding only, with no help from the ground. And so as to explain to any simpleton, the more refined the horse is the more refined the use of aids is, in short no need for any curb bit or spurs, obviously. How can people be so ignorant to even put next to the words "refined", let alone "gentle" the words like curb bits, or lever bit, or spurs? Isn't it a genuine oxymoron even to a moron?

A typical refusal of the spurs can be seen in the swishing of the horse's tail, which by the way can be seen on the Pdhajsky's book cover "Horse and the rider", in contrast of the picture below that book cover that presents a horse in piaffe with very quiet tail.

A typical refusal of the curb by the "Iron hand Anky", as the horse is trying to evade her brutal and pulling hands by trying to put its head closer to its chest.

      The refusal of these riding aids in most cases would insure disqualification in the days when dressage was dressage, because the addition of the amplified aid in the higher level was primarily about the acceptance of the severe aids, and was not about the response to these aids. Now you may understand why everyone was talking about applying these aids very gently when in performance, because if they would be applied in the genuine and intended military form many horses would, refuse/resent these aids. The refusal of accepting these aids by the horse becomes very obvious even to a laic when explained.

      When the horse refuses the curb, since already accepting the snaffle prior to this advancement, the horse simply looks for escape from the bit by yielding to the bit via putting its head past the "vertical" (below the impulsion line) and closer to his chest, which reduces the mechanical power of the curb bit (in reality called the lever-bit), and thus reducing the pressure of the bit against the horse's jaw (The horse is instinctively and obviously avoiding pain as any living creature does).

     A good riding horse does not yield to the bit, and it is not something you want to teach any riding horse, but a good horse accepts the bit and responds to it in an appropriate and suitable fashion in the way it was trained. (Of course most cannot understand what I am talking about here, obviously, since one has to live it and experience it to understand it)
   The dressage morons of today actually pull on the lever bit so that the horse yields to the bit, puts its lower jaw (which by the way is often and literally tied to the horse's nose/upper jaw with some noseband contraption) literally on its chest thus "deactivates" it (no supple lower jaw there, obviously) and becomes totally irresponsive to the rider's hands, and these fools actually think they have accomplished something, while all they did is to ruin the horse for any riding purposes what so ever, because once taught it becomes an evasive habit on the part of the horse and extremely, if not impossible, to correct. In short, the horse finds a place where it can evade the rider's brutal hand and the rider's crude irresponsiveness to the animal, as well as the frequent interference with the animal's movement.

     Now here you can see the female cunning and evasiveness in the genuine form, when they take their incompetence and start to call it art or even something "classical". It's like me taking a shit and then calling myself an artist sculptor, but the former is more absurd and preposterous, not to mention vulgar, and it simply cannot be outdone in its imbecility. In short if the horse puts its head behind the so called vertical, and or below the impulsion line, he is not only and obviously out of balance and very much on the forehand, but in most cases in today's dressage the horse is evading the pressure of the lever bit, as well as evading to use its rear end sufficiently, because both are easier on the horse, obviously.
     All this "bowing or bending" the head down at the neck has to do with pure incompetence, because these people are simply no riders at all, have brutal and literally dead and irresponsive hands, and so they cannot teach the horse to accept the bit, and even if they could their hands are so hard like stones (Hard does not necessary mean pulling hard on the reins, it is referring to irresponsive hand of the rider to the horse, just in case you thought that when you have a light contact that your hands are not hard like stone.) that most horses would simply reject their hand aids, often throwing their heads up and about.
    And so the "ingenious" minds of greenhorns came up with the idea that if we cannot ride the horse in hand and cannot have the animal accept the bit, we can make it so hard on the animal that it will yield to the bit, and here you go, a nonsense is born. Of course this is extremely lucrative, because now you can have all sorts of nincompoops joining the ranks of the so-called and newly discovered dressage and then exploit them for every penny you can get. I know when I go fishing I have to use some lure, like worm or fly, but human beings are the only species I know of that can be lured by shit and loving it, and this is what present dressage is, a genuine human decadence, or shit if you will.

To expect a horse to respond to some "gentle and light" riding aids under these circumstances is as absurd as expecting a commander, while fighting in the middle of the battle, to whisper his commands to the troops in the battle. They used trumpets or horns to amplify the signals, the same reasons for spurs and curbs, hence amplified riding aid/instruments to get the horse to respond under extreme situations like the battle field. One of the most important parts in training a horse for the battle field was to get the animal accustomed to pain. What is the purpose of it now, when we do things with horses solely for entertainment?

Better horses + better riders = no spurs, no curbs even on the battle field. Why can't the dressage riders do this in only silly riding rings? Because they genuinely suck as riders, obviously. If and when you don't get it after reading this article you must be surely mentally challenged, so stay away from horses just for their sake if for nothing else, please!

The smaller, more agile and responsive horses were not only better balanced for riding purposes but also more suitable for the modern warfare in its days, and so they are also more suitable for dressage and other sport disciplines. Needles to say they require better riders than the type of heavy, overgrown and clumsy warmbloods used in dressage and other sport disciplines today. The breeders simply adjust their breeding to the demand, simple economics.

    Do you think for a moment, unless you are a complete imbecile, that any horse, no matter how well trained, would respond to light riding aids or a gentle touch under such circumstances? Or what do you think would happen to the horse that was not accustomed to the amplified aids? A horse that is not accustomed to, or better said did not accept the amplified aids, when applied it only adds to the panic of the horse, and things get even worse, which needless to say was presented by the morons like Anky and Podhajsky and such but in less dramatic circumstances.
   This is why I am pointing out that any young horse has to learn to accept the bit with at least 50 pounds of pressure to his mouth, so if the shit hits the fan so to speak, we can use the bit in more drastic measures to bring the horse under control. If not accustomed to it, we only add to the panic of the horse by introducing pain that is unfamiliar to the animal while it is panicking. How difficult is this to understand? How obvious is this, or better said how obvious all this should be even to a moron?   

     And so, the most difficult part of the advanced genuine dressage is to have the refined and well trained horse to accept the harsher and more brutal riding aids in its refined state. That is extremely difficult since the more refined or responsive the horse is the more difficult it becomes. And so, since we have no use for military horse and we no longer train horses for the battle field, we no longer need to train the refined horse for any of these amplified riding aids, hence they should be banned, especially from dressage.

    The dressage today simply makes no sense here, which is obvious, because if they claim that their horses are refined, or they claim that dressage is all about refining the horse in responding to the rider, why to hell do they need these amplified aids which practical use is and was obvious, and is totally useless and senseless on a refined horse in this, supposedly, modern age, and that only in some riding ring.
   Well, it should be band, but as it is the morons are in control of the horse world, and the greatest horse morons of all time are mainly in dressage, because they turned the entire dressage upside down and made it into circus freak show, and instead of actually riding the horses, they teach them cheep circus tricks, often taught form the ground and then associated by the horse to the use of the curb and the spurs, and of course the whip. In short, for horse to perform these cheep tricks it does not have to be ridden, and the horse once taught these cheep circus tricks will perform them with bag of potatoes on its back and more likely better than with these comedian riders.(Been there, done that.)    

    And so, the mandatory acceptance of the amplified riding aids by the horse in the higher and advanced levels of dressage had solely a military use in its time and it has no place in this world of horses that is primarily about entertainment. You must realize, that on the battle field, the soldier and the horse alike experienced a huge rise of adrenalin, which any fools knows and can imagine, which means that the soldier and the horse alike did not feel pain as under normal circumstance, or better said were not always aware of everything they would feel under normal circumstances.
    Therefore just like you have to yell in a loud disco if you want the person next to you to hear you, so the rider must "yell" (hence the term amplified aids, get it now?) via the amplified aids to which the horse is accustomed (accepted them in training) to direct and control the animal under these extreme situations.

     There are even some morons so stupid that they actually believe that military horses would respond to voice command when on battle field. Oh, how many times have I seen fools on a running off horses screaming whoa, whoa, which actually made them even less effective in controlling the horse, as their yelling freaked and panicked the horse even more, not to mention they really looked like genuine assholes on horses. An asshole in the horse world is any person that thinks he knows when he does not (unaware of his or her limitations), which are about all people around horses these days, though most cannot help it, because most of the so-called education or "information" in this modern world is presented by deceivers and propagated by the assholes, which only multiplies their ranks.

      Most of the eastern cavalries did not use neither curb bits or spurs, because the riding and horsemanship was fairly different, mainly due to different circumstances, philosophies, technology, culture, environments and mainly breeds of horses that were for most part much lighter and often smaller than the western counterpart, hence more maneuverable and not klutzy and clumsy, especially nothing like the modern so-called warm-bloods, or as I call them the numb-skulls. (A note for most Americans: The USA is not the world, and so the word "western" is not referring to the American concept of the word in reference to the equine, nor it has anything to do with the political division of the world; see the breed's origins for better understanding.)

     The internet is a river of shit, and this website is a rock in the middle of that river of shit, not a nice place to be, and so the writings reflect the environment in which it lives. If you are offended by the vulgarity of the writing, please go and reflect and see your own, more likely hidden and "refined", but keep in mind the you can refine a horse, but you cannot refine shit. Vulgar words do not make a person vulgar but his conduct does. (A lady, a woman with class, is a woman that does not get offended in the presence of vulgar language, though she her self never use it.)

     Should I collect all the vulgar words I could fine, and write them down multiplied hundred times over, I could never even come close in vulgarity to the so-called "horse lovers" or "animal lovers" in the way they treat, and mostly disrespect the very critters they claim to love.