Which one is right? With pictures...

[melissabee]

I'm reading Enlightened Equitation, and am so excited to put Heather's ideas into action during my next lesson. The one thing that continues to baffle me is the difference between her description of how to absorb the horse's movement in my lower back (at a sitting trot, canter, etc) and what I'm reading in my other book, Riding Logic by Museler. Here are pictures of what each author describes. Please someone tell me which one is correct so I don't learn all wrong from the start. Or feel free to tell me if I'm overanalyzing this and either is fine - I just think the pictures seem like an opposite movement, and each author seems to say you shouldn't do the other!

Here's how EE illustrates absorbing the horse's movement:
classical riding position:
http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b8dc03b3127cceb661291a25d400000035100BaMm7do3ZsY
back slightly flexed to absorb movement:
http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b8dc03b3127cceb6612f22a4df00000005100BaMm7do3ZsY
Here's how Museler illustrates absorbing the movement, bracing the back as he calls it. It makes more sense in the last pic of asking for a halt, but seems like the position he calls "Incorrect, hollowed back" is what Moffett describes as ideal. Isn't it the opposite movement of the seat and hip bones?
http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b8dc03b3127cceb6612971a48f00000046100BaMm7do3ZsY
http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b8dc03b3127cceb661296225ac00000066100BaMm7do3ZsY
http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b8dc03b3127cceb6612961a49f00000035100BaMm7do3ZsY
http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b8dc03b3127cceb6612cfc65a800000005100BaMm7do3ZsY
Sorry for the long post and all the pictures, but it was the best way to describe my question!
Thanks for any help,
Melissa

[Kate F.]

Hi Melissa!

Interesting, isn't it? and I guess just goes to prove that "correct" is a point of view, and not an absolute!!:D

Musler says in the text "there must be no hint of stiffness in bracing the back" - but when you look at the picture, the back HAS to be stiff if you roll the seat under in why he suggests because that's just the way the back is. The human spine is naturally curved. If you straighten it, it has to be held straight and that locks out the movement that you would want to use to go with the horse. What he says in the text is in itself contradictory, and doesn't match the picture. However, a lot of people do consider this "correct" - and teach people to sit to the trot, for example, by flattening the small of the back and pushing down into the horse. It looks horrible - the movement then moves up to the mid-back and you see that ghastly "belly flop" sitting trot. The horse usually starts to hollow away from this (understandably!) and the people who consider this seat "correct" then reach for spurs, whips, draw reins - any gadget you can think of to try and get the horse to lift its back again. They consider the rider "correct" so the horse must be at fault. The horse finds a way out by either tensing its back or trying to get rid of the rider.... so then they go for more gadgets and so it goes on. However, they consider what they are doing "correct".

The Heather Moffat approach is much more sensible and logical, but I have to say the rider in the pictures looks rather "perched" - which I think might be a function of the stirrup bar placement on the Heather Moffat saddle.

As the end of the day, the correct seat is the one that puts your centre of gravity over the horse's and allows the horse to move freely and softly. This will be a little different for each person as everyone is built differently - but you'll know when you find it because it will feel right immediately! Personally, I like the approach of Centered Riding/Sally Swift - which focuses more on balance than on a "correct" position - the idea being that if you help the rider to find balance, the position will look after itself.

If you're using these books to supplement your lessons, I think I'd look at them as a pool of ideas to try out and see what works for you, rather than a prescription of a "correct" that you are trying to copy. The horse will soon tell you when you're getting it right! :D

[cwb]

Sorry but I don't think it is as simple as all that!

The movement of the pelvis and lower back is different at the different paces - there is more side to side pelvis movement at walk, more diagonal downward pelvis movement at canter.

The pelvis should be upright with you seat bones on the saddle at all times and the pelvis movement above helps maintain this.

During certain manoeuvres you deliberately change this - turns require more weight in the outside seatbone, leg yields and shoulder in require more weight to one side - the horse moves away from the weight so you can control the lateral movement.

Both books are right - the hollowed back tips the pelvis forward and is wrong, HM's flexion is of the spine only - not tipping the pelvis. The spine is used as a movement isolator so the pelvis goes with the horse but the shoulders move a lot less. So as the horse goes down your spine lengthens and as the horse comes up your spine shortens.

Bracing the back tips the pelvis backwards moving weight onto the rear of the seatbones and further back in the saddle - this tells the horse to slow or stop.

Lightening your seat in the saddle by sitting tall, taking more weight on your thighs -or at the extreme, going into 2 point and putting all your weight into the stirrups - tells the horse to go faster and is often used as the aid to gallop from canter.

[melissabee]

Thank you both - these replies are both very helpful to me. The only thing I'm still not quite understanding is how to flex your spine, as Moffett says, without hollowing your back or moving your pelvis. She describes rolling slightly forward on the seat bones as you flex your back -isn't this rolling the pelvis a bit forward? Thanks again - it's so much easier for me to try these things while riding if I understand them a bit in my head first.
Melissa

[aussieannie]

I aggree to a point to the above posts Sorry but a plug coming here. All of the above and so much more is explained in my book. I am a rider a teacher and a Pilates trainer and have a Masters degree in Physiotherapy . i love to answer questions and ask my own on this site but this time I declare i am an expert. check my site if you are interested.

[cwb]

Forget trying to flex your spine and think more about lifting your shoulders - sit on a stool and put your hands under your seat bones - you can feel the sledge like bones of the lower pelvis.

Now lift your shoulders and sit "tall", then relax and let your shoulders drop - do this alternately and you should be aware of your spine straightening and curving - this is the flexion HM refers to. Don't push up with your thighs, just use your core muscles to lift your ribcage.

The pelvis should stay relatively still with even weight on your hands.

[kt_luvs_smartie]

iv heard from top instructors that the movement of the seat in canter is more of a U shape well kind of. really hard to explain on here. :rolleyes: im always perplexed about the seat in canter.

[melissabee]

Heather, from EE was kind enough to answer my question, and helped me to understand this so much better. She asked me to post her answer here, as well:

What Museler is describing is ‘the driving seat’ and which I completely abhor. It was fashionable in Germany for a couple of decades and thankfully is seldom taught over there now. It causes the flapping legs and nodding head to be seen in many dressage riders, and also the leaning back upper body. It weights the back of the saddle, right over the most sensitive part of the horse’s back, that contains the reflex point that makes it drop, or allows it to raise and flex. Initially it will cause it to hollow, but the horse learns to brace his back upwards to avoid the pressure – this does build muscle and a topline, but the back is rigid and makes the movement very hard and difficult to sit to.

When we did the computerised saddle testing, the worst pressure readings came from both treed, and treeless saddles when the rider sat in the ‘driving’ position. Many horses will not take this, especially sensitive hotbloods like TB’s Arabians and Iberians, and is why some riders get into difficulties with them and the horse is branded hot or flighty. If I used a driving seat on any of my four Iberians, I would quickly be airborne!

If you go to my website and look up the library, you will see an article there which describes the driving seat and how ‘illogical’ it actually is! It negates the rider’s feel of what is going on underneath them as the rider is not synchronising with the two halves of the horses back and is moving against it with both seatbones, instead of unilaterally.

I saw the thread on NR which was sent to me by one of my mods, but I cant remember my login details for NR!! Perhaps if you can reply to it with the above, and also add that last year I was the only specialist classical seat trainer to be invited to lecture and demonstrate at Equitana, Essen, Germany, which is a huge event like a nine day long Your Horse Live only with 250,000 through the gates, not 25,000!! The Germans were who invited me, so they seem to think that what I am doing is correct! You would see an enormous difference in a rider who is riding the way I describe, and one who is driving with the seat.IN the former, there would appear to be hardly any movement in the rider, in the latter, they would look ‘busy’, and this detracts from the beauty of dressage, as far as I am concerned, but worse, it also makes it harder for the horse.

[puzzles]

It surely depends hopw you use it - often 'experts' condem a position as it can trigger other faults in the rider/effects on the horse, but if you use it specifically and with control and deliberation it can have a positive effect I suppose.

Very interesting!

:-)

x

[fimonkey]

AussieAnnie, I'm interested in your theories, but your weblink isn't working. Can yuo re-post or pm it to me please?

Thanks

[peronacedressag]

Both. Your back should move with your horse, as should your seat. If you need some help with this, go back on the lunge line. I hope your trainer knows about balance and seat, if not find another one and get back on the lunge. Good Luck:)

[Kate F.]

Both. Your back should move with your horse, as should your seat. If you need some help with this, go back on the lunge line. I hope your trainer knows about balance and seat, if not find another one and get back on the lunge. Good Luck:)

I don't think the OPs own skills were the issue. It was a question about an contradiction between two texts, so actually about theory, rather than her own seat. If you read Heather Moffatt's reply to the OP, you'll see that the discrepancy is very real. It's not about sitting on the lunge, it's about understanding the different approaches and the effects they have.

[wanabe]

Is this different for the sexes?

It would be very difficult (unpleasant, too) for a man to ride with a hollowed back.

[peronacedressag]

it's about understanding the different approaches and the effects they have.

I agree. And a Lunge Line lesson will show you both, without hurting your horse to find out. As you move, so should your back. Your back should move with your horse. When you get up to things like shoulder in and half pass, your back moves with your horse, as does your shoulders.

Sometimes my back is hollow, sometimes it is not. It moves with the horse.

In these pictures, notice how the back and shoulders move with the horse.

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj44/bigsteaks/hollowback.gif

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj44/bigsteaks/nuno2.jpg

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj44/bigsteaks/nuno1.jpg

[Kate F.]

I agree. And a Lunge Line lesson will show you both, without hurting your horse to find out.

So the OP should sit on a horse on the lunge holding the two books, and ask the instructor to explain each one and the differences while she sits there? :rolleyes: How on earth does a lunge lesson explain the difference between two books? How does reading a book hurt the horse, for goodness sake? Sorry - but I fear your lunge obsessed arguements are going round in circles!! :D:p