To see more of Karl's articles, please visit Karl's Korner
Before we venture into a detailed discussion about the benefits or disadvantages of draw reins, let's explore the question: Why draw reins at all?
To establish a generality, draw reins should only be used as a backup rather than a replacement for the gymnastic training necessary for achieving suppleness, submissiveness, balance and throughness. Since these milestones of proper training are best accomplished by selecting the right combination of ring figures, forward riding, bending in motion, engaging, half halting and countless transitions in proper balance, one should never hope to achieve the same solely through the use of draw reins.
The subject of draw reins and their value in the training of the horse has been dividing the equestrian world for centuries. Certain Masters of the past regarded draw reins as a useful means in achieving the highest level of 'throughness', while others opposed their use entirely, even on difficult horses.
In recent times the question of draw reins is often defended by professionals as being helpful in cutting down considerably the training time and getting difficult horses quicker on the bit and up through the levels. It has been proven that draw reins in sensitive hands are effective tools when smartly used as a support rather than applied as a forceful gadget for pressing the horse's head into a certain form.
Experts in theory - as they are wont to call themselves - and Puritans who defend the orthodox approach toward training often disagree in the use of draw reins, no matter what the excuse. They are quick to quote the late Col. Podhaisky who was heard saying on more than one account: "In the wrong hands, draw reins are as dangerous as razorblades in the hand of a monkey" A potentially insulting maxim in itself, considering all the animal rights groups nowadays who might immediately protest such an insinuation.
As with all things in human life, there is a good side and a bad side when it comes to managing draw reins. After all, it is not the draw rein which does the damage or the fixing, it is the person behind the draw rein, the rider himself. Considering the imperfection of human nature it is easy to understand how controversial an issue such as the dispute over draw reins can become and how quickly those who see merit in using them are, at the same time, immediately regarded as incompetent in their application.
It is almost like saying:" If you merely think of working with draw reins you are automatically admitting that you know nothing about their manipulation." A somewhat over simplification of the situation.
The mere term draw rein brings to mind of the sensitive soul a device which uses force as a means to an end. Like a draw bridge lifted by force, force is used to pull a horse's head down. Granted this can easily happen, especially when inexperience dominates. The philosophy of the Old School stressed first and foremost 'throughness' rather than insisting on a certain head set. How the horse placed its head was secondary to throughness, although the degree of throughness affected the horse's head carriage. 'Throughness 'or Durchlässigkeit is a condition which includes and afects the entire body and being of the horse, not only a small part of it. All too often the term 'on-the-bit' is attributed to a certain head set - roughly two fingers in front of the vertical - while in reality 'on-the-bit' mainly describes the condition of a completely relaxed horse accepting the rider's aids without arguments. In the Old School, 'on-the-bit' was the result of throughoess and throughness was the product of the highest level of suppleness, submissiveness, balance and relaxation. No draw reins, even those made of gold, can replace the work toward throughness, although sometimes they can be quite helpful in achieving it.
As I mentioned before, one of the great dangers of riding with draw reins lies in the false assumption they can replace suppleness, balance and submissiveness, providing a short cut of some sort. Unfortunately, they can not. One can never compensate for the lack of throughness by solely relying on draw reins. Modern day horsemen unfortunately tend to do just that and create horses which carry their heads far too low and too close to their chests. This is highly detrimental for establishing true throughness, a stage where the horse offers no resistance either from the front to the rear or from the rear to the front. The rider's signals are accepted without delay or blockage. The horse becomes an extension of its rider. Whenever a draw rein is used to coerce an improper headset, its merit is lost and its application academically wrong.
Any one part of the horse which is singled out and worked without paying attention to the whole of the body will at best lead to a pitiful caricature of an animal exposed to human ignorance but never to an art form. That's the main reason why all the anti-draw rein supporters warn against the utilization of draw reins. And in this respect they are absolutely right.
That, according to the Old Masters requires some level of experience. Under Podhajsky, any manipulation of draw reins was limited to the Chief Rider and Podhajsky himself. Various historical treatises on the subject suggest that draw reins should only act as a certain boundary on a horse's head carriage. They advise using the draw rein as an auxiliary rein only when the horse is about to overstep this boundary line, while the rest of the time the draw reins should remain slack. I personally do not agree with this recommendation simply because experience tells us that it is rather difficult, if not impossible to apply a smooth, non-offending rein aid quickly and precisely with a rein not in continual elastic contact with the horse's mouth.
Before riding with draw reins, it will be indispensable for the rider to have developed a steady, independent seat, the base for a relaxed and sensitive hand. The effectiveness of the draw reins depends entirely on that good hand. The good hand has several qualifications which must be practiced off the horse as well as on the horse to the degree that they become second nature. In developing such a hand, the rider would do well to keep the following points in mind:
The thumb is the only part of the fist which exerts a strong pressure on the rein which rests on the second joint of the index finger. The middle finger ring finger and pinky are turned towards the palm of the hand in such a way that there is a little room left between the finger tips and the palm of the hand. Some people refer to this fist as 'bird fist', firm enough to prevent a bird from escaping but soft enough not to crush him. The wrists as well as the muscles along the lower arm must remain completely relaxed without allowing the thumbs to weaken their pressure, resulting in losing control over the reins.
To keep the wrists relaxed, the thumbs firm but the lower arm muscles free of tension and stiffness is at first difficult. I advise practicing these procedures while sitting in front of the TV or while taking a bath. The feeling of a correctly working hand has to be secured first off the horse, then reestablished on the horse.
It is all too tempting to tighten up the wrong parts of the hand such as wrists, fists, arm and shoulder muscles, especially when the horse starts moving. It is furthermore easy to forget to keep the thumb firm and the rest of the hand light and sensitive. Developing this good hand before working with draw reins will make the difference and can not be emphasized enough.
There are numerous opinions on how the draw reins themselves should be adjusted. Some riders prefer attaching draw reins to the bottom of the girth and run them between the horse's front legs, over the horse's chest to the snaffle rings. This method can bring about good results temporarily. In the long run though, it entices the horse to lower its head too much and to drop its neck too low thus creating an image of an animal getting ready to perform a head stand. When confirmed, it will hinder the rider from using the natural leverage of the neck, head and shoulders, which otherwise would provide a means of shifting more weight occasionally towards the hind legs in preparation for good collection.
Other riders prefer to adjust the draw reins like side reins: through the left or the right side of the girth and through the snaffle rings from the inside out. This arrangement is the most common one. The rider holds two reins in his hands, the reins of the snaffle, divided through ring and little finger, the draw rein around the little finger; through the fist to the index finger where the thumbs hold both reins firm. A number of riders choose to divide the draw rein by the ring and middle finger. How the reins are held is not as important as how the rider's hands function. My extensive clinic travels reveal that most riders do not pay attention to or are even aware of their hands and stiff wrists. This phenomenon combined with weak thumbs, tight fists, rigid arm and shoulder muscles with elbows sticking out are quite wide spread.
Based upon my education it is my belief, that using draw reins on the same bit which holds the snaffle reins has only limited possibilities. Two pair of reins working the same bit? How can we expect the horse to understand the different meanings of snaffle versus draw rein? In my experience, which is also backed by the thinking of the Old Masters (see Seeger), it is much more beneficial if the rider works the horse Auf Doppeltrense with a double snaffle whenever draw reins must be used. For that purpose, a somewhat thinner snaffle, similar to the one used in conjunction with a curb bit is a good choice. This second snaffle is attached to a separate cheek-strap and is put on the horse first, while the normal - or 'true'snaffle is placed over it. The first or thinner snaffle is therefore closer to the rider, the 'true'snaffle a little further away. The draw reins are attached to the right and left hand side of the girth and run from the inside out, through the rings of the thinner, or second snaffle. Each hand holds two reins, the snaffle rein and the draw rein. With this set up the rider has a multitude of combinations available when 'playing' the true bit against the draw rein bit. It also has the added benefit of exposing the horse to carrying two bits in anticipation of the curb and snaffle work later.
Preparing the horse with the true snaffle and following through with the draw reins is the hallmark of this type of work. For example: the true snaffle is responsible for keeping the horse's neck and jaw soft and relaxed (lateral flexion) while at the same time the second snaffle, attached to the draw reins, is accountable for keeping the poll of the horse supple (longitudinal flexion). As long as the poll of the horse is allowed to remain stiff - an all too common occurrence - no horse can be consistently on the bit. Relaxing the poll area is mandatory for accepting the double bridle later. For that reason, the most important by- product of all work with draw reins, no matter how they are attached, must be the relaxation of the poll area. The success of draw rein work depends greatly on:
Over the years I have had the opportunity to ride a wide variety of horses, horses of different breeds and horses with different problems. I discovered that horses with parrot mouth for instance, respond better to draw reins when they are attached to the girth under the belly and run between the front legs through a strap which connects the right and the left snaffle ring, almost acting like a very lose chin strap, to the rider's hands. This method can also be used with one snaffie bit when working a neck which is rather short and muscular and with a double snaffle when confronted with a neck resembling a swan.
Such a set up protects the delicate parrot mouth from all too strong pressures, guarantees quick relaxation of the poll and encourages the acceptance of the bit with confidence and trust. Working in that order, it becomes clear that the snaffle reins are free to influence and improve the relaxation of the neck muscles while the draw reins, almost acting as a running martingale, influence the flexing of the poll.
Other variations include: riding with only one draw rein. There are numerous horses which feel entrapped and claustrophobic when ridden with two draw reins. Their tenseness increases sharply due to feeling uncomfortable. So WHY- I ask- insist on two draw reins when they only make matters worse? Col. Podhajsky always stressed the need to develop into a 'thinking rider' That includes the one who never chooses a procedure which makes the horse unhappy or uncomfortable - (not to be confused with challenging the thinking of a horse).
The single draw rein can be attached either to the left or the right side of the girth. From there it runs into the same snaffle ring on which the bridle reins are hooked. From the left side it is passed through the left snaffle ring and when attached to the right side of the girth, it passes through the right snaffle ring. Here I would like to point out that only one snaffle is used when working the horse with one draw rein. The draw rein supports either the right or the left snaffle rein, both acting on the same mouthpiece. The rider works with two reins in one hand and one rein in the other - that which carries the crop. Working with two reins in one hand and only one rein in the other offers an excellent opportunity for the rider to experience the important- but often forgotten - counter-function of the outside rein. The two reins in one hand should never overpower the single rein, be it on the outside or the inside of the work direction.
If the horse has a pronounced stiff side, it is then advisable to put the draw rein on the softer side first. The horse needs a few days to get acquainted with this 'rigging.' Like water which follows the path of the least resistance, the rider should do the same. As soon as the horse is confident with this set up then the draw rein can be used on the stiffer side where it will be of great usefulness.
A few horses which develop the habit of falling on a shoulder every time they are asked to flex, benefit from a diagonal adjustment of the single draw rein. For example, a horse which drops or falls on its left shoulder every time it is required to bend right will be assisted in maintaining a better balance when the single draw rein is attached from the left side of the girth, underneath the neck, diagonally into the right snaffle ring. The draw rein when used for bending guards the diagonal shoulder at the same time. A draw rein used in that manner can also be quite helpful in preventing the horse from falling on his outside shoulder; as often occurs in the early stages of shoulder-in training.
The most challenging combination in addition to all previously mentioned is that of a cavesson and draw reins, a chapter; which goes beyond the scope of this study. This type of work requires a great amount of experience and is definitely not recommended for the average rider. Ignorance and inexperience invite accidents. Moreover; the horse must have developed a very high level of submissiveness before it can be expected to accept the cavesson without potential harm to its rider or itself. The cavesson-draw rein technique was preferred by the Old Masters who, granted,had much more time than we do to meet the needs of their horses. Times may change, but horses do not, and this combination still remains the best preparation for the work on the double bridle.
© Karl Mikolka 1998
All rights including translation reserved.
Please see related articles The Draw Rein Debate and Riding auf Doppeltrense by Cynthia Hodges
After reading in Dressage & CT the series of articles on Baucher written by Jean-Claude Racinet, I am still very confused about his methods. Particularly I do not understand the meaning of riding with ' hands without legs' and ' legs without hands'.
Did Baucher mean that one should train a horse the entire time by using either hands only or legs only, or did he mean that at the moment the rider does something with the legs, he/she should not do anything with the hands and vice versa? What are the major differences of training methods between Baucher and de la Gueriniere? I believe that the system of de la Gueriniere is the one followed at the Spanische Hofreitschule. If I am correct, why is it so?
When François Baucher ( 1796-1873) published his
controversial book: Methode d'Equitation basée sur de noveaux
principes in 1842, he believed strongly that he had found a system which
makes all horses supple and obedient in a much shorter time than any other
system before him. A good friend of mine, who is himself a trainer, explains
the newly discovered popularity of some of the Old Masters by saying: "
The longer they are dead the better they seem to be in the eyes of
the general public." I must admit that my friend is right. What do we really
know about the skill and equestrian ability of the equerries of long gone
times? We can only trace their styles and methods through a few books which
were published during their life time, or we can listen to the few eyewitnesses
who happen to be around to see the masters in action. It is furthermore
possible to form quite an accurate picture by listening to the pupils the
masters left behind and by assessing the horses those masters made. We are
therefore able to compile a few points of reference for evaluating their
true horsemanship by what they handed down to the present generation of
riders and trainers. François Robichon de la Gueriniere (1688-1751)
stresses in his book Ecole de Cavalerie the importance of using sound
principles in the education of the horse which must serve to perfect nature
with the aid of the art. His guidelines from
the early stages of training to the airs above the ground were based on
a deep love for horses and a thorough understanding of the natural development
of the horse into becoming man's best friend and most reliable partner.
The development of quality gaits through suppleness and obedience was one
of his main concerns. It was always a hallmark of the Classical Trainers
to believe in the application of training methods according to the horses
needs. With emphasis on 'the thinking horse and the thinking rider', they
sought to avoid confrontation and resistance as much as possible and never
forced their method as a doctrine or 'straight jacket' upon their horses,
That is why Gueriniere's methods have
survived the test of time and were adopted, cherished and cultivated at
the Spanish Riding School for centuries up to the present.
François Baucher went through two stages in his life, the younger more aggressive, innovative years and the more matured time following his serious accident in the circus. In his nouvelle Méthode, Monsieur Baucher introduces the technique l'effet d'ensemble: a simultaneous use of hands and legs to eliminate the horse's intrinsic strength and to replace it with the transmitted strength that comes from the rider in order to achieve balance and suppleness. In his deuxième manière Baucher speaks of ' hand without legs, legs without hand' implying the use of only one aid at a time. Some say this change of technique was the result of injuries sustained in the accident while others see it as an improvement of the nouvelle Méthode. But whatever it may be, modern dressage enthusiasts should not forget that Baucher's methods were never approved of, not even in his life time, as being acceptable and valuable guidelines for the training of the Dressage Horse. Baucher's method was rejected by many of his contemporaries, most of them highly regarded horsemen or equerries such as Count Antoine Cartier D'Aure, P.A. Aubert, M. Thirion and the Duc de Nemours, to name only a few.
Hilda Nelson's excellent book: Francois Baucher, The Man and His Method is an impressive testimony to the myth and controversy to which Baucher contributed during his life. Here are just a few examples of what these men had to say about their much controverted contemporary:
Aubert remarks in his observations : ' … the posture of Monsieur Baucher violates the laws of gravity and balance.' 'Baucher's philosophy to overcome the forces and resistance of a horse by other forces must lead to failure. All horsemen agree that to combat force with force is the worst thing one can do..' Aubert condemns the constant attacks with the spurs on the flanks of the horse and refers to a horse which has been subjected to Baucher's nouvelle méthode as an 'ambulatory cadaver.' D'Aure describes the gaits of the horses schooled in the new method by saying: "….broken in their paces, uncertain in their movements, nothing is left of the paces of a horse…" M. Thirion, equerry at the Manege de Luxembourg felt that… 'Baucher's method is so full of errors and contradictions that it is not worth the effort of refuting it…' In 1852 the famous and most esteemed German Riding Master, Louis Seeger -himself a student of Weyrother, published his little known book with the title: Herr Baucher und seine Künste. Ein ernstes Wort an Deutschlands Reiter: "Mr. Baucher and His Arts, a Serious Word to Germany's Riders." Baucher, who rode in the circus owned by M. Dejean, invited Seeger to come and observe his work and ride his horses. After having this unique experience, Louis Seeger decided to make his impressions about Baucher's method public .."in the best interest for future generations of horses and riders" as he quotes it.
The first thing Seeger noticed when riding Baucher's horses was the 'total absence of energy in all gaits, especially in the trot which was the weakest gait.' Unpleasant to sit and dead on the rider's legs, the horses moved flat and on the forehand, hind legs dragging without ever taking a steady contact on the reins. With tails swishing and incapable of bending their hind legs, the horses produced a stiff picture in the canter especially in the changements de pied a chaque foulée-( changes a tempo- an invention of Mr. Baucher).
Mr. Seeger complained that all horses he rode were heavy on the forehand, moved with stiff hind legs and could not be collected. Collected canter was non-existing and the canter strides resembled more a 'hopping rather than a jumping motion.' The piaffe was executed with stiff hind legs and the horses stepped sideways and even backwards with little action in front but quite a high action behind while carrying most of the weight on the forehand. The passage lacked springiness and elasticity and Baucher was compelled to use quite visible leg, spur and whip aids to keep the horse going, contrary to the classical way of riding the passage in which the rider sits still and steady while the horse gives the impression of moving with great energy, cadence and flexible joints all on its own. The pirouettes were impossible to ride and the horses had the tendency to throw themselves around instead of turning gracefully.
Anyone familiar with Dressage and the requirements in FEI competitions must admit that Mr. Seeger's analysis of Baucher's methods and the judgement of his horses is not at all in agreement with modern FEI rules. I believe that Seeger, who had the on-hand opportunity to ride Baucher's horses and to study his system, deserves to be more respected for his objective explanation of his experiences. Perhaps the modern prophets who persist in glorifying a system which failed already 140 years ago might consider the contemporary assessments of Baucher's methods more seriously. Of course, those wishing to follow Baucher are certainly free to do so but should not expect great success in the dressage arena.
As far as I am concerned I must agree with the Duc de Nemours who said: "Je ne veux pas d'un systeme qui prend sur l'impulsion des cheveaux." (I do not want a system which takes away the impulsion of horses.) 1. Do you?
Karl Mikolka
1. Oddly enough, the same passage in Hilda Nelson's translation of the same de Nemours' statement reads: "I do not want a system that depends on the impulsion of horses." François Baucher: The Man and His Method, pg.46. Or was it Clement Thomas, a staunch Baucher defender, who is purposely misquoting de Nemours?
© Karl Mikolka 1997
Please see the summary of and excerpts from C. Hodges' translation of Seeger's text Monsieur Baucher for more information.
In the Spanish Riding School we were taught to
avoid accidents at all costs. This philosophy saves a lot of unpleasant
surprises, prevents a lot of unnecessary injuries and teaches the
rider to be alert and always prepared to 'expect the unexpected'.
One of our Chief Riders used to say: 'don't fall off, and if you have
to use your teeth to stay on...use them..'. I can proudly say that the teachings
of the Spanish Riding School helped me avoid serious injury while working
with horses on five continents: in Europe, South America, North America,
Australia and Japan. As young riders we were taught the importance of carefully
checking the equipment ourselves and never relying on a third party for
safety and
security. With all that thinking deeply implanted in my system, I have often
discovered defects in equipment before they could become dangerous. Stitches
on stirrup leathers, on reins, bridles and on girths wear out with time
and if you do not check them periodically, it can happen, that in the most
inconvenient moment, those things break on you. It is no fun to find yourself
with only one rein while riding a young horse out in the field and it is
certainly most detrimental to your well-being when your girth breaks in
the middle of a cross country course.
One day in the fall of 1985 I worked my Lipizzan stallion Conversano Grandiosa in the indoor hall at Tempel Farms. Grandi as we called him, gave me a superb ride and did everything I asked for with joyful obedience. I remember having a heavenly feeling, especially in the canter. While riding on the left rein in a very active, round, up & away canter I prepared myself to negotiate the corner in front of me when suddenly my inner leg seemed to drop six inches. Before I could figure out what happened my horse gave a very powerful buck which I managed to sit quite effortlessly. I remember saying to myself: 'not bad for an old man'... Before I could finish this thought several more bucks followed in such quick succession that I found myself searching for balance. Suddenly without any warning the horse turned to the right, i. e. against the wall and in the same moment he gave another buck which, according to eye witnesses, propelled me several feet into the air and unable to 'hold on with my teeth', I landed flat on my stomach a few inches away from the horse's hind legs. This was clearly a life threatening situation. Grandiosa had once a frightening experience as a young stallion when a saddle rolled under his belly causing him to kick and kick and keep kicking until nothing was left of the equipment. Having previously witnessed the power of his kicking ability, my last thought before I closed my eyes was: 'Karl keep your head down'!
Later my friends told me that Grandi fired a double barrel and his hooves were but a few fingers width from my head. Had he connected I would not be able to write this story today. For three days I was very sore and could hardly move. Why did all that happen? In the moment I came to the corner and stretched to the inside, the stirrup iron had broken. It snapped almost in the middle and the part which was dangling from the stirrup leather acted like a giant spur which poked the horse in the belly with every canter stride. Grandi remembered the unpleasant encounter with the saddle from years past and decided not to go through this again. Another proof that horses do not forget what they have once learned or experienced. Upon closer examination of the defective material, I found on the bottom of the stirrup in small print: Made in Korea. The new manager of the farm wanted to save some money and bought the cheapest equipment he could find.
The moral of that story: Do not shy away from buying the best equipment you can find. Your horse deserves it and nothing should be too expensive for your own safety. Unless you want to be known as penny wise but pound foolish: Don't Do It.
Draw a picture of a stirrup hanging on the leather looking like two giant prongs of a fork, and write underneath: The teeth of the tiger......
© Karl Mikolka 1997
One of my long term instructors at the Spanish Riding School was Herr Ignaz Lauscha. Mr. Lauscha was assistant rider when I joined the school in 1955 in spite of the fact that he had been with the school for almost 14 years. Mr. Lauscha's nickname was: the hunchback. His characteristic style of walking and riding with rounded shoulders drove Podhajsky crazy who more often than once was heard to yell: " ..the school has no use for a hunchback…!" The main reason Lauscha was not promoted in the normal pattern was his questionable posture and after 14 years he was still only an assistant rider.
When the Spanish Riding School returned to Vienna in the Fall of 1955, several members decided to accept more lucrative offers from abroad. Rider Franz Meiringer decided to relocate to Australia, and Walter Biedermann left for Germany, Franz Rochowanzky went with the van Doorn sisters to Holland and Podhajsky found himself suddenly short of riders. He was practically forced to promote Lauscha to Bereiter, a decision which called for a big celebration. Lauscha was assigned to be my teacher and delighted about his long awaited promotion, he took me on as his first student with great enthusiasm. We had a wonderful relationship and I remain forever indebted to him for having shared so much with me. But Mr. Lauscha was also a tough teacher and not all that I learned from him was without its price.
Lauscha was in the habit of carrying a sizable bundle of heavy jailor's type keys in his pocket which he used from time to time to enhance a command or insure that his instructions were executed without undue delay. A stickler for posture - in others, he frequently employed these keys to deliver a deadly blow to an imperfectly positioned back. When words could not straighten the back, the keys certainly could in a hurry. Mr. Lauscha had a remarkably accurate aim and could have been easily a pitcher. He could hit a person right between the shoulder blades with deadly bullseye precision from a distant of ten meters.
My first introduction to this singular talent came during one of my Lektions when my horse became quite heavy in hand during a passage-extended trot -passage session. As I allowed myself to be gradually pulled forward, my back became more and more rounded. Mr. Lauscha reminded me more than once to sit up straight and not to let the horse get the better of me. I did not heed. Suddenly I felt a burning pain from a sharp impact between my shoulder blades just before my horse made a tremendous leap sideways, nearly unseating me. The keys hit me and bounced from my back on to the horse's croup where they lay for a few passage steps clanging and bouncing about and driving the horse nuts.
Experiencing this one time seat correction had a lasting effect on me. Never again in the following years did I give Mr. Lauscha an occasion to practice target shooting during my lesson.
The moral of that story: if you do not want to hear or heed (the advice) you will have to feel (the pain). Don't discount the possibility that a classical principle can be also taught in a very unclassical manner.
© Karl Mikolka 1998
All rights reserved including translation.
