Question from a Sceptic

[taffy]

I have just been reading the thread in CA about the Monty Roberts and have a bit of a question.
Someone said that a horse was broken in in 25 minutes. I always been led to believe that breaking in is a long process, and that each stage has to be done slowly and properly. Surely this couldn't be done in 25 minutes??

Can anyone explain to me how he does this without the whole breaking in being a shambles?

Thanks

[taffy]

Janice has just explained what happened. I got the impression that the horse was fully broken in 25 minutes :eek: which is just plain silly.

Thanks Janice :D

[Harry Hobbes]

It is certainly possible to get a green horse saddled and a rider on within a couple of hours; and, perhaps 25 minutes.

But, you won't see me putting my foot in the stirrup. Nor would I recommend anyone else ride the horse; for the simple reason that the foundation is not there.

Your impression "...that breaking in is a long process..." is correct if you want a solid foundation in the horse. This is why some of the modern horsemanship masters such as Lyons, Brannaman, Cox, et al, will tell you that "...I'd begin again tomorrow, and do the same thing; and again the day after that..." In other words, they repeat the starting process during successive training sessions, to build that foundation. The number of training sessions will be determined by the needs of the horse; because all horses are individuals, and some are started easier than others.

Take for example, my new three-year-old filly: I've been statring her for about the past five weeks. She's been trained five days per week for the past five weeks. But, although we're riding, she is no where near being "well-broke." I expect she'll be well-broke in a year or two (assuming we continue to work four or five days per week.)

That 25-minutes-to-break-a-horse stuff is great PR; but, it doesn't build a foundation.

Best regards,
Harry

[Yann]

I think it is a case of an unbacked horse happily accepting a saddle and rider in 25 minutes, nobody is likely to pretend you can properly train a horse in such a short length of time.

It is a bit of a PR thing perhaps, but I'm sure Monty R or anyone else involved would always stress the need for proper training beforehand and afterwards, which indeed they do in all the books I've read and the dealings I've had with an RA. Rome is never built in a day.

[chev]

Echo Yann - MR does state that what he does is just starting, and the horse has only completed one stage in the journey to becoming a ridden horse. The point of the exercise is to show how easily a horse that has trust in his handler will accept tack and rider - very relevant to the type of background Monty has (old old methods of tying horses up and forcing them through this stage) but maybe not so relevant to cultures like that in the UK where backing has been a slow process and the actual moment of first carrying saddle and rider is generally a quiet and non-violent one anyway.

He uses these demonstrations to show how effective good communication can be - that a horse you've never met can develop enough trust and confidence in you to let you saddle and mount them in that first session, through choice. That is the pivotal point though - good communication. As Janice said on her thread, join-up has a lot more to it than just sending away and joining up - there's a whole lot of subtle signals going on that it does take some practice to develop. And this is just a demonstration - it's not advocating that anyone wishing to start a youngster goes out and tries this with their unhandled, ill-prepared three year old. Not a case of 'don't try this at home' - but definitely a case of 'here's what can be done - wanna learn more?'

[JaniceH]

Hi Taffy :D
As I was able to explain on Chat last night, MR was only introducing the saddle, bridle and rider to the horse in a postive way with positive interactions and nothing negative or aggressive going on at all. The idea as Harry says, is that it is part of the very foundation of the starting to be ridden process (I hate the word broken to ride) and that it was not a one off experience, it was the start of the process.

Hope that helps. :)

[taffy]

Right - I know what i'm trying to say, but i'm struggling to put it into words, so bear with me if this doesn't make sense.

I still think that this first experience with a saddle is too rushed. Isn't the horse meant to be lunged with a saddle for a few weeks without stirrups, let alone a rider?

I'm glad some of you NH people think it is for publicity as well.

[Harry Hobbes]

I still think that this first experience with a saddle is too rushed. Depends upon the horse, the training sequence (i.e., preparation); and the horse trainer.
Keep in mind that carrying a saddle is only one experience of a multitude. It is approximately step 10 of 39,849 (or more) training steps; :p and, each experience will be new to the horse exactly once.

It is quality of the entire sequence, integrated with the quality of the individual experiences that is paramount; that is what builds the foundation. (This is why individual "training mistakes" are recoverable.)
Isn't the horse meant to be lunged with a saddle for a few weeks without stirrups, let alone a rider? That's one method (of many) that works. However, we don't dissassemble western saddles to accomplish the saddling; and, we don't necessarily use lounge lines. Sooner or later the horse gets to experience the whole thing; while at liberty. If the horse is physically, mentally and emotionally ready, then make it sooner. If not, then later when it is.

Best regards,
Harry

[jinglejoys]

Taffy I really think you ought to go and see what he does first.As has been said Monty emphasises that this is just the start and by the way he doesn't like the term "break" which conjures up very negative pictures.
The horses are introduced to their first saddle,bridle and rider in a quiet and positive manner.

[FRED]

:)edited,oops computers!grr:D

[FRED]

:)maybe you could ask your friends if any have the video by Kelly Marks,Whispering The Wild.
I think its brilliant and it gives you a good insight into their work and methods.

[merry_legs]

its realy amazing to watch Monty Roberts start (not break) a horse in 30 minutes

[cvb]

the counter question to yours (Isn't the horse meant to be lunged with a saddle for a few weeks without stirrups, let alone a rider? ) would be

"what good does lunging a horse with a saddle for a few weeks before adding a rider do ?"

really the only point would be to familiarise the horse with the saddle. Its not so heavy that the work is needed to build up back muscles in a way that you couldn't do equally well without the saddle.

So why a few weeks ? If your horse accepts and is happy with the saddle much quicker, why delay ? How quickly they accept the tack depends on all sorts of factors - including what sort of early training they have had. If they are already used to things (e.g. rugs) on the backs, surcingles round their middles, people higher than them etc - then a saddle is just one new thing among a whole load (as Harry said) that they learn.

But if you don't prepare them, or there is some other reason for there to be a concern - then you need to adjust for that and listen to your horse about when they are ready to move on.

What Monty does is establish trust and leadership in a very short time - such that the horse is more able to accept changes.

The other "devil's advocate" thing to say is "do we give them a few weeks to accept EVERY new thing ?" - and the practical answer is no, we expect them to accept all sorts of changes without even thinking about it - so why not this one ? It really comes down to how big a "new thing" it is for the horse, and how that horse handles change.

Adding a rider is a different thing as it has a big effect on their balance and they need to build different muscles.

[Bay Mare]

Originally posted by taffy
I'm glad some of you NH people think it is for publicity as well.

From what I saw at the demo he doesn't profess to 'break' a horse in 30 minutes. A lot of the publicity surrounding his methods SAY that he can break a horse in 30 minutes but that doesn't mean that it's him saying it.

I went to his demo out of interest. I agree with the gentler methods but didn't really believe that there would be such a huge difference in the horse within that time. What fascinated me was how every single horse (five) followed EXACTLY the same pattern of behaviour in join up. I would urge you to go and see for yourself. There may be a lot of publicity surrounding him and his methods but then it is so contrary to traditional methods then that is going to happen anyway and, of course, publicity is how you get the 'word' out quicker isn't it? It doesn't need to be negative.

Having seen horses being bullied into loading in the past week and one young horse being yelled at and smacked because he was trying to avoid having his bridle put on (I wonder why :rolleyes: ) I would rather follow a method that has a lot of publicity surrounding it than the aggression and dominance that sometimes accompanies 'traditional' methods :mad:

I have to admit to being ignorant of 'natural horsemanship' until recently but the more I look into it the more I realise that it makes a lot more sense.

[cvb]

I have seen Monty, and was very impressed - but my problem is what happens next ?

I've used the same principles in round pen work - but I can't spend my whole life in a round pen. Thats why I then look to some of the other nh people for a broader programme.

I wonder sometimes if Monty has been a victim of his own success - that he's not been allowed to go beyond the initial work. Who knows ?

[Harry Hobbes]

I wonder sometimes if Monty has been a victim of his own success - that he's not been allowed to go beyond the initial work. Who knows ?
You may be on to something here.

Several years ago, there was a television program regarding Roberts, his history, work, methods, etc. It seems that in the program he was shown doing the join-up thing for an audience, as a demonstration. The audience were "business-types" from the big city. It appeared that this demonstration was part of some form of "leadership training" for the business types.

If in fact true, it would appear that Roberts was spending his time (capitalizing) on the "leadership semminar" craze in the USA (rather than taking Join-Up in to the intermediate and advanced work, as Parelli and others have done.)

Best regards,
Harry