Green

Today I'm thinking about green.

Well, I mean, it IS Spring now, so there's plenty of green around :)

But specifically, I'm thinking about green horses.

Everyone has their own definition of what green is.  I guess I'd define "green" as a horse that doesn't respond predictably or consistently to simple cues (ie, stop, back, turn, W/T/C, etc). 

As I've talked about before, I think "trained" and "broke" are different things.

I still maintain from 2012 that horses with limited training can be "broke".  These are the easy ones.  The usual phrase we use for these non-reactive, easy-going horses is "born broke".  They just seem to be confident in their survival abilities and inherently trust their handler.  They may have some baby moments, but they're pretty reliable.

Horses with tons of training are sometimes never broke horses.  They may be perfectly schooled to cues and execute them with precision...in the arena...but they just aren't ever as reliable.  With extreme examples, you take them out on the trail, and they absolutely fall apart.  Going to a new place may trigger a meltdown. 

Of course--the best kind of horse is both trained and broke!  I call these "finished horses".  They could do their job upside-down and blindfolded.  They might not even need you up there.  But anyway, that may be beside the point a little...

Thinking back before I got Chevy, I was afraid of green horses.

I had ridden a lot of difficult horses (of course I didn't know that at the time; it was just normal for me then).

They were all trained (some were fairly young).  Most were broke even if they were unrefined (as are most school horses--how refined can you be with kids constantly pulling and thumping you at the wrong times?).

But I had never ridden a green horse.  Not until I was in college.  I leased a sorrel mare briefly out at a huge facility on the outskirts of Eugene when I rode with the UO Equestrian Team.  My roommate and I would head out there after classes in the dark of winter in her old gold diesel Mercedes.  This night it was her time to ride.  I stood in the middle of the warm up pen, watching her and eying the other horses as they went around.

After a few minutes, a middle-aged lady rode up to me on a bug-eyed paint.

"You want to ride?"  She said.

"Ummm...Sure."  I looked at her shaggy sorrel and white colt.

"He's just 3 and he's green, but he's good.  Just needs more saddle time.  Looks at everything but he's alright.  Just get on and ride him around for me."

Ooooooh boy!  I swung up.  He was a looky-loo.  But he was good.  Just as she said.  Trucked my hiney around that pen at a fast even walk, head all over the place...but his steps were sure and rhythmic.

So this is a green horse, I thought.  That was about it.  Really.  I made sure to stay out of his way, watched my heels, calves and hands, and he was great.

[The only other thing I took away from the ride was:  This is the first truly comfortable western saddle (SIDENOTE:  I was English-only in those days) I HAVE EVER BEEN IN.  I also remember it had a wonderful, cushy natural sheepskin over the seat.  Heaven.]

It may have been the first time a little seed was planted in my head that green didn't necessarily mean...dangerous.

So maybe green is too broad a term:  On the one hand, a crazy horse backed unsuccessfully several times, who bucks and snarls at his rider...is green.  And a baby hunter at his first show...is green.  Hmmm.

I'd categorize that shaggy paint as green but with a broke attitude.  He may not have responded predictably to all my cues--had I given him any--but his affect was willing, flexible and non-reactive.

"As long as a horse has a good stop I don't care how green it is."  is a phrase I heard recently.

I guess my problem with that is expecting that a green horse HAS any kind of real reliability.  I'm not sure a horse with a sure-fire stop can really be considered green any more.  I guess it all has to do with that definition thing again.

I think a general acceptable definition of green is:  "A horse (or rider) at the beginning of his training."

I've already defined my thoughts on the horse above.

In my opinion...a  green rider anywhere from someone brand-new to horses to someone who knows how to tack up the horse appropriately, and can ride the walk and trot.  Green riders lack balance and may frequently clutch at the reins, horn or front of the saddle or use their legs for balance.  A green rider may fall off spooky horses frequently because they lack the ability to sense when a spook is imminent. 

I don't think you really get out of green rider status until you're able to cue and ride the walk, trot, canter and halt effectively, understand the gaits, can lengthen and shorten them without verbally cuing the horse...and know which leg the canter originates from on the horse!  Ha ha!  Seriously though.  You gotta have some in-depth knowledge of how the horse works.   You begin to graduate into Intermediate status when you are able to give the horse subtle cues...and understand why you're giving the cues, in what order for what outcome.  You start to figure out how to cue best for the response you want.  You should be able to feel your correct diagonals and canter leads without looking.  You begin to develop the sensitivity you expect from the horse.

There are shades of green, of course.

Tiny, at about 4 rides, is definitely a green horse, even though she's quickly closing in on 5 years old (eeek!  Where has the time gone?).  She is easy to handle on the ground but just starting her under saddle career.  I'm really excited about her because I'm responsible for all her training so far.  And so far...so good.  I'm sure we'll run into stickies later. :)

Chevelle on the other hand, is no longer green, but in the "trained" category.  Her responses are dialed in and she responds to them in a predictable manner.  Even though she is sensitive, I'm confident if other Intermediate/Advanced riders rode her, they'd have a good ride.  She is not suitable for green riders.  I'd say she's still at the lower levels of her training though, and that's all my fault.  But she is solid on W/T/C, knows some complex aids and certainly knows her leads.  She listens to her rider and only requires rare support.  But she doesn't do flying changes and isn't highly schooled (especially lately, with all our time off).  She is certainly nowhere near "finished".

I'm not really sure where I'm going with this.  I guess it just all comes down to expectations.  I don't know that I'd ever expect a green horse to be able to stop consistently--just like I wouldn't expect a green rider to cue the stop effectively.  That doesn't mean they can't--or won't--or that is isn't reasonable for a specific horse or rider...I just don't know if it's really fair, in general.

I think a lot of success is really just setting the horse up to succeed. 

And I guess I also feel like the stop is one of those simply elegant things to teach, that requires a lot of subtlety and timing to get right and communicate right.  The stop is a beautiful thing.  I've written about it so many times because when you have a horse that really stops, it is so super cool.  I think the only way you can really get there is to have a horse that wants to stop.  The stop is their happy place.

What do you think?  Do you know green horses with a great, consistent stop, in the arena and out on the trail?

A few words on feel

In the horse world, particularly the western world, we talk a lot about "feel".  In the english world, we're likely to call it "timing" and "submission to the aids".  I think these things are driving at the same basic concept.

Part of the education of the rider really begins with a simple revelation:  No amount of hardware will control the horse.

Not big bits, not big spurs, not big whips.

Riding is not about forced control through device.  It is about training a specific response to a specific aid.

If it was all about hardware and leverage, then I would never be able to ride in the thing above.

The horse has to be willing to listen to a series of programmed cues.  There are a lot of ways to get there.

I was reading the blog of a fairly inexperienced horsewoman the other day, who nevertheless is really trying to learn, through a lot of well-known clinicians and a large amount of trial and error.  She kept saying "the soft feel".  As in, "Buddy didn't have the soft feel today".

It struck me that the language we use to talk about horses and training can expose a basic lack of understanding.

Lord knows I'm guilty of it.

But what really struck me here was the lady thought of "soft feel" as a definite "thing".

As in, "the" soft feel.

I tend to think of feel as a reaction.

Is that enough confusing subtlety for you?

At any rate, the feel of the horse tells you a lot about the training to the aids that he's had.  A soft feel is a rapid, cheerful and willing response to a given aid.

The cue is given, and the horse responds with a light, willing reaction to that cue.

I remember riding a particularly sensitive little mare when I was young who was probably my first real introduction to the world of "feel".

All I had to do was think it, and darned if that little mare didn't do just what I was thinking.

If I thought "trot", she'd trot.

If I thought "canter", we'd be cantering.

I think this has something to do with the core of "soft feel".  It's almost the feeling of doing nothing, and having the horse respond to that.

It's a lofty goal.  I don't believe it's one that can be obtained through shortcuts.

The good stop is a great example of a horse operating on feel.  No one likes to ride a runaway freight train.  It's a terrifying feeling when a 1200 pound animal takes hold of the bit, takes off with you at full speed on the trail or straight at an arena wall.

Cramming a super duty bit in that horse's mouth won't do anything to stop it.  At that point it would be like grabbing your emergency break when your car's at 80 to slow down.

All you have at that point is the training you have put into the horse on how to respond to your aids.

There is always some sort of pre-signal.  Pre-signal has become somewhat of a buzz word in the western world lately because it helps to sell people very expensive bits.  But the fact is, anything can have pre-signal.  But that's entirely up to the rider, not to the bit.  For example, when I want Chevy to slow down, I sit back and deep in the saddle.  That's the first cue I give her.  In a perfect world, she'd slide to a stop after that.  But she's not quite there yet.

My next signal is to say "hhhho".  I'm a ho-er, not a whoa-er.  But it doesn't really matter what word you use.  I guess you could use "easy".  Or "yellow".  Or "tiger".  Whatever floats your boat.  But be consistent about it.

This is usually all it takes to get a stop out of her.  These are all "pre-signals" because they all take place before any action of the bit or hackamore is introduced.  If I don't get a stop out of her with the body/voice pre-signals, we have to move on to...

Engagement of the bit or hackamore.  Because I'd like my horse to stop of the slightest pressure, my first signal through the reins is small and light.  This is the warning signal.  At this point, she's had three chances to listen to subtle, non-offensive cues.  If she refuses to listen, then the bit comes into play.  But this doesn't happen much anymore.

Starting with soft cues is what develops "feel".

If the horse isn't ever given a soft cue to begin with, he'll just assume he's about to be yanked on and will prepare himself for it by stiffening up his neck and jaw.

Which will make him a hell of a lot harder to stop.

So this is why increasing the leverage of your bit setup will do more harm than good.

Also, your horse doesn't understand English.  He only understands the words you've taught him.  Chev has a very limited English vocabulary.  As do most horses.  She knows "hhho", "stand", "walk", "trot", "canter", and various clucks and kisses.  Generally a cluck means speed up what you're doing, and a kiss means canter.

Your horse does not understand when you yell "WHAT DID I TELL YOU?!  WHOA! WHOOAA! ARE YOU STUPID??? WHY AREN'T YOU LISTENING??!!!"

You are just terrifying Buddy.

And horses can't learn when they're terrified.

Quiet down and don't forget to do some of the listening, too.

Also, for Chevy the stop is a reward.  It is a break from work.  If I ask her to stop, and she stops but strides right off again without being asked, then she didn't really need a break.  We lope off immediately and she gets a few laps to think about what a blessing the stop is.  The second time she plants it and stays there.  I make it her choice.  But if she chooses not to listen, then she has to work.

Equally important is the rider's reaction to the horse's correct response to the given cue.  The release of the aid (or "cue") needs to be immediate so the horse knows he is being rewarded for his good behavior.  This makes the horse cheerful and quick in his response to the aids, because he knows he'll be rewarded as soon as he does what his owner is asking of him. 

I guess that's all I've got on feel for now.