Training in the Right Way: “Fancy Warmblood Movement” Is Not the Same as “Quality of Movement” (And This Matters!)

“Dressage is for all horses, but all horses aren’t for dressage”… sort of.

It is critical that we as riders, trainers, and/or judges be careful not to assume that “fancy Warmblood movement,” derived from innate talent, is the same as “quality of movement,” produced from suppleness, balance, and well-delivered aids and harmonious riding.

Dressage training is supposed to be the process of training ANY horse to be a better riding horse. The more the horse learns, in theory, the easier it is to communicate with and therefore complete more complex tasks with. Although competition dressage training often is more focused on training for the dressage test, that is not what the original intention (and original judging requirements) were for competitive dressage. Initially, it was designed to give riders and trainers a way to determine how their training measured up to the theoretical ideal of the training process. That said, it is critically important to understand the meanings and reasons for some of the terms we use to describe dressage training and what to look for when observing training and competition (and videos and photos), regardless of whether you intend to compete or just train your horse to be a better whatever you do with him. That, ultimately, is the main purpose of my articles. To provide education and knowledge for riders to understand and improve their eye and understanding of what dressage training is supposed to be. While there will always be some differences in practice and theory, good horse training is always recognizable to the educated eye. That said, it absolutely is necessary that we remember and understand that limited knowledge is limited judgment.

* * *

I have always been taught, and teach, that dressage is for all horses (which is true). What this is supposed to mean is that all horses who are being ridden need training — generally through a systematic approach (dressage) — to learn how to carry a rider efficiently and in balance. This applies to eventers, hunters, jumpers, and basically horses in all other disciplines (yes, I know that this is not always the case, but it’s supposed to be).

The second part of that saying is that not all horses are for dressage, which is also somewhat true: not all horses are talented enough to be Grand Prix or FEI level competitors. Some just simply are not talented enough to do much of anything, actually. But even those horses can (and should) be trained to be better and more rideable. The important point to take away here is that we should not “gate keep” which horses “should” be doing dressage training and which should not — all horses benefit from systematic, kind, firm training that improves their suppleness, strength, balance, and ability to carry a rider while performing the tasks required of them. Where it can get tricky with regards to competition is in the idea that only the super talented horses should score ‘well.’ Or, rather, the confusing of talent with good training.

The exceptionally talented (well-bred), well-trained, and well-ridden horses should certainly be competing and scoring well. At the other end of the spectrum, we have the poorly conformed, the unsound, poorly trained, and underprepared horses that clearly should not be competing. But it’s the middle of this spectrum that I am interested in discussing as this is where most horses tend to fall and, realistically, represents the sort of horses most people have access to.

Dressage competition is first and foremost a test of the training that has been done at home. Quality of movement improves with systematic training for suppleness and balance under the rider. Photo (C) Gwyneth McPherson.

To begin, what prompted this discussion is that I was coaching one of my students at a dressage show recently and I had an interesting experience with how she and her horse were perceived by two different people at this show. For background, my student was competing in First Level Test 3, in her first sanctioned dressage show, on a very kind, smart horse that enjoys doing things with people and likes to expend energy under saddle (meaning he willingly goes forward in three gaits and attempts to do what the rider asks), and has three very clear, correct gaits.

This gelding has been prepared to compete at First Level in that he and his owner/rider put in the time and effort to prepare for competition and he has been schooling Second Level movements and therefore has developed some beginning ability in collection. He is very close to being ready to learn piaffe and a flying change, and although he has limited natural ability for extended trot, the training process will help mend that problem by the time he needs it.

They did well on the first day (score was in the low sixties) and improved dramatically on day two receiving a 67.7%. They had the same judge both days and the comments and scores reflected the horse and rider’s performance very fairly, and clearly rewarded the improvements made from day one to day two. Both my student and I were extremely pleased with their performance and with the judge’s insight and feedback both days.

Most riders have access to “normal” moving horses, and if they are well-trained and well-prepared, they should score well in competition. Photo (C) Gwyneth McPherson.

I had prepared my student to take advantage of showing off what she and her horse could do well and gave her strategies for handling the movements and areas that were more difficult for them. We knew that the trot lengthenings were not going to be a highlight for this horse, so we made certain to show some change in the stride length without putting the horse in a position to be off-balance and stiff from over-trying in the next movement. We focused on what she needed to do to produce a harmonious, accurate test that showed the horse’s training was appropriate to the level he was being presented at and that the rider had the tools she needed to have a successful experience piloting her horse around the competition arena. So basically, we had a well-prepared, average-moving, willing horse being ridden harmoniously by a good amateur First/Second Level rider who presented a solid-for-the-level accurate test.

The judge clearly saw this as well and rewarded the horse and rider for the things they did right, took away an appropriate amount of points for the things that needed to be better while giving clear comments on all the movements that reflected her reasons for the score she gave, and added a brief helpful comment at the end of the test. Overall, this was an excellent show experience.

Now for the part that prompted this discussion. The only place available for me to stand to watch my rider in the competition arena was at the “A” end. This happened to be where a group of learner judges were practice judging. In all honesty, I have no idea what level licensure they were practicing for, but this isn’t about that. Nor is it about whether they knew what they were doing, or not. And it is not about the program or the judges involved in the education (one of whom I happen to know is an excellent judge and teacher). What this is about was the perception that the learner judge standing closest to me had of my student’s horse.

What this person saw, over all of what I have mentioned about this horse and his training, was that he was not moving like an uber-talented Warmblood. All of their scores were 1-2 points lower than the judge at C, and many of the comments were about the horse not having enough suspension or being “earthbound” and not “uphill” enough (remember, this is First Level — there is no requirement of collection, or for very much impulsion, even in the trot lengthening). Yes, more impulsion, uphill tendency, and suspension shown will result in higher scores, but – at any level – the lack of big/fancy movement is not supposed to be penalized (have points deducted) if the horse is showing suppleness and performing harmoniously with a rider who is not inhibiting the horse or riding it in a way that creates tension.

A well-prepared, harmonious ride should be the standard. Photo (C) Gwyneth McPherson.

What stood out to me in this situation was this particular candidate’s inability to see the training showing through the horse’s talent, or lack thereof. This is a critical issue we need to address if we want our sport to promote exceptional training and riding excellence. If we continue to turn dressage competition solely into a contest of “who has the best mover” and away from a comparison of “who has the best prepared-for-the-level horse,” we are missing the whole point.

These two concepts do eventually converge, and the best prepared horses and riders will be separated by talent (who has the best mover) when all other qualities are essentially equal. But lesser talented horses should not be judged as deficient just because they aren’t “fancy” movers prior to performing the movements and have an automatic 1-2 point deduction on each movement. Consider that movements such as the halt, reinback, and turns on the haunches are 0% judged on talent, meaning a low-quality mover with three clean gaits and good training and riding can (in theory) get 10s on these. Things like extended trot, piaffe, and passage are greatly effected by talent, and when all things are equal otherwise, the talented horse will get more points on these sorts of movements.

All that said, I would like to be very clear that the learner judge’s scores had no bearing on the actual score, and everyone has to learn by practicing. Judging a dressage test is inherently hard as it goes by quickly with no replays. Nevertheless, I do think that we – the dressage community— should be making a concerted effort to educate ourselves to be more mindful of looking at the training rather than relying on apparent talent as the barometer of (training) quality.

As it ended up, my rider was fourth overall, and second in the amateur division of 10 riders (official scores ranged from 72% to scores in the low to mid-fifties). What I want to note here is that the actual judge of the class did a really nice job of not scoring my student’s horse based on his apparent talent and instead gave him a fair assessment based on his performance, which is excellent and exactly what I hope we can perpetuate as a sport going forward. Also, knowing at least one of the faculty for the judge’s program, I imagine that there was a resulting discussion about scoring the horse on the “lack” of typical high quality Warmblood movement, rather than on his performance.

So, to circle back to my initial quote, dressage is for all horses. In competition and judging, we need to continue to hold to the standards of training and how it effects the quality of movement (creating suppleness, harmony, and a sense of the ride looking “easy”) and not confuse high-quality (fancy) movement with high quality of performance due to horse and rider preparedness and quality of education and training. In other words, whether we are riders, trainers, or judges, we must be careful to not assume “fancy warmblood movement” derived from innate talent is the same as “quality of movement” produced from suppleness, balance, and well-delivered aids and harmonious riding.

And remember: limited knowledge is limited judgment.

Gwyneth and Flair in competition at Grand Prix. (c) flatlandsfoto.

Gwyneth McPherson has over 35 years experience competing, training, and teaching dressage.  She began her education in in the late 1970s, riding in her backyard on an 11 hh pony. Her first instructor introduced her to Lendon Gray (1980 and 1988 Olympian). who mentored Gwyneth for a decade during which she achieved her first National Championship in 1984, and her Team and Individual Young Rider Gold Medals in1987.

In 1990 Gwyneth began training with Carol Lavell (1992 Olympian) who further developed Gwyneth as an FEI rider and competitor. Gwyneth achieved a Team Bronze in 1991 and a Team Silver in 1992 in the North American Young Riders Championships, and trained her stallion G’Dur to do all the Grand Prix movements while riding with Carol.

In 2008, while Head Trainer at Pineland Farms, Gwyneth began training with Michael Poulin (Olympian 1992). Michael was trained by Franz Rochowansky (Chief Rider for the Spanish Riding School 1937-1955). Michael has shared much of Rochowansky’s knowledge and wisdom with Gwyneth, completing her education as a Grand Prix rider, trainer, and competitor.

Gwyneth’s teaching and training business, Forward Thinking Dressage,is based in Williston, FL. In addition to teaching riders and training, Gwyneth also loves sharing her knowledge of the sport and art of dressage as well as discussing relevant topics pertaining to the training itself and the current competitive landscape.