classical dressage? (english)

I enjoyed reading in the “Horseman’s Forum” of the recent “The Chronicle of the horse”, Gerhard Politz’s point of view regarding “Classical Dressage Versus Competitive Dressage”. It’s interesting to read the merits of “Classical training” promoted by a high profile equestrian. But, his comments woke up my suspicions. I agree with him. Buried in the “pyramid” graphing a dressage progression the original principles of “Classical training” can be recognized. They are: Xenophon’s objective to preserve the “noble carriage of the horse”, La Guérinière’s basic training principles, Steinbrecht’s gymnastics, Baucher’s stable balance that is the foundation of “self-carriage”, all synthesized in Nuno Oliveira’s recommendation to obtain results without resorting to force. Can their applications diverge with one’s experience and understanding of lightness? Here is my point of view. Am I right?

Guided by the Classical principles “a knowledgeable trainer who ‘feels’ his horse” has to recognize that success depends on a highly interactive dynamic process that cannot be graphed only on a single “pyramid”. Guided by the tolerance of the horse, true “Classical trainers” follow the path of lesser resistance and proceed by small incremental pyramidal steps that stack up to support the overall progress while preserving the “noble carriage of the horse”. The equestrians who are aware of these incremental steps recognize the merits of “equestrian sports massage”, “self-carriage” and “ suspension” in not-walked gaits. The others end up admiring a mockery of “Classical Dressage”. A mockery fostered by the misinterpretation of the FEI rules Colonel Carde and Michel Henriquet deplore.

Trainers who don’t seek the support of reliable “equestrian sport massage” to achieve a smooth progression tend to condone the use of force in dealing with horses’ resistances. I mention only the use of draw reins as an extreme example. Such use of force causes modern horses to lose their flexibility, some “suspension” in all their gaits, and the ability to perform in “self-carriage.”

Podhajsky recognizes that “suspension” is minimal in piaffe. I studied videos of piaffe performances of International competitors, using slow motion and frame by frame analysis, keeping in mind his explanation why “piaffe is incorrect and appears stiff and the impression of dancing is lost”. Thereafter, I chose to define “elastic suspension: It is the moment no leg is bearing weight even though some toes may still touch the soft footing”. “Elastic suspension” implies that in synchrony the diagonal at stand pushes upwards before the elevated descending diagonal lands. Without this “elastic suspension” piaffe is at best gauche and not “Classical”. Besides, pirouettes at piaffe that are pleasantly used in freestyles need “suspension” to be performed with elegance.

“Suspension” is rarely observed in modern piaffe, apparently sometimes even at the most reputable schools of riding. This fact can be explained by the failure to maintain the elasticity of the shoulders and pelvic connections. These important connections are rarely subject for discussion. These are not simple articulations. They are fairly complex connections. The true freedom of their mobility escapes most observers. However, their freedom is more essential in producing the suspension in a gait than a strong back. I can assure you this is true, I witness the improvement each time I free these connections with my hands.

When the “Classical trainer” understands and respects the freedom of their motion the expressions “raising the withers”, “making the shoulders come up”, and “elevating the forehand” start to make sense. Instead of positioning the neck with a domineering action of the hands, it comes, as it should be, from behind. The prompt of a light hand suffice to communicate to the horse the intent of the rider. The “withers rise”, the “shoulders come up”, and the “forehand elevates” thanks to the springing action of the pasterns and the elasticity of the cradle of muscles that support the front end of the horse. Once the shoulders and the pelvic connections remain flexible, “self-carriage” regains its simple definition. It becomes Baucher’s stable balance. The “constant lightness” at all gaits maintained in spite of “no leg, no hand” that is “self-carriage”. It can be used as a test at all gaits. It crowns success for each incremental pyramidal step of a dressage progression. “Self-carriage” demonstrates that a horse cooperates without needing the intervention of the rider’s aids. Note that “no leg, no hand” implies only that the aids remain passive but may be present. Guided by the results of the “self-carriage” tests, talented trainers can seek the next step of the dressage progression. That is the way to obtain results like Nuno Oliveira without resorting to force; free of undue tension the horse remains light able to respond to whispered messages of the rider’ aids.

Of course, in competition, a supportive environment helps greatly. As a proof, I invite you to watch the video showing Anky von Grusven’s 1994 Freestyle at the WEG in The Hague published by Miller’s. It rightfully earned a gold medal. The position of the rider is classically perfect. The piaffe at letter “A” is performed on the spot; the hind legs sufficiently engaged; the pelvis tilted down while respecting Bonfire’s tolerance; his ears are forward; his forehead is slightly ahead of the vertical. Bonfire free of undue tension cooperates while giving the impression of dancing in “self-carriage”; with a little help from the music, we must admit. All steps show “elastic suspension” and good elevation. Note also that the top of the horse does not move up or down. In front the springboard action of the pasterns and the resulting rise of the shoulders are absorbed entirely by the elasticity of the shoulders’ connections. Behind, the elasticity of the pelvic connection allows the full flexion of all joints securing synchrony and harmony.

Continually subjected to critics, open-minded modern trainers and competitors tend to recognize their mistakes. However, their excuses are understandable; many have won and still win at shows without having to discover the virtues of lightness. Little by little they tend to recover from that oversight. After all they belong to the generation that tends to forgive Baucher for his “erreurs de jeunesse”. Hopefully like Nuno Oliveira they will embrace Baucher’s valid legacy: the “constant lightness” with “no leg, no hand” that is the only true “self-carriage”.

(par M.Kaplan)