Talk:Dressage

Old miscellany

Just announcing that I am going to throw my hat in the ring on this one very shortly, forgive the pun. The historical development of Dressage should be included here especially since the statement in the intro that "little has changed" since the rennaissance is only true in spirit. Techniques and intents in those days were highly militiristic. Secondly, a whole separate article is warranted by the Spanische Hofreitschule, if only for its connection with the Hapsburg Charles I/V, Patton and others. --Domhail 08:33, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks as if there is an article on the school here already. Anyway, we need work on the history of Dressage's development as a sport distinct from its roots as advanced cavalry training. --Domhail 09:06, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Judge Locations

From talking to judges when there are the maximum five judges, they are located at C, at the two corners by C (looking down the long sides), and at B and E. If my graphics skills were better I'd like to have these positions marked in the Arena picture, maybe with arrorws. Any volunteers? MartinRe 00:43, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made an arena picture with the judges positions on it and uploaded it to the commons - but it is a pdf which does not seem to work ( Image:Publicarena.pdf ) anyone have any idea why not ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.69.48 (talk) 10:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably because it's a .pdf. Upload it as a .png or a .gif. That should work. Montanabw^(talk) 03:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tried that but it lost all clarity,so I will just leave it 'as is'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.66.83 (talk) 06:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Collection?

What is "collection"? The article uses the term a few times without clearly defining it. -- Mikeblas 03:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

agreed (somewhat) as a horsey person, I've heard the term, but I worry it could be a term that you either know or you don't, in the sense that if you need collection explained, you can't recoginize it. (I can't see it, btw). there's several Catch 22 terms in the horse world that are difficult to put into just words, if you try and expain "trotting up a horse" and what signs to look for lameness, it's next to impossible. Hey, even trotting on the wrong diagonal is difficult to explain (okay easy to explain, difficult to understand)) unless you understand what it means, but once you understand what it means, it's "obvious" and hence hard to explain.

To me, collection is the "togetherness" of a movement, meaing that all the elements required happen collectively. IOW, the transision looks like like it was planned by every part of the horse/rider, and not just one part and the rest followed/corrected. Note this is just my horse/laymans view. MartinRe 23:41, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Collection is when the horse carries more weight on his hindquarters (they actually drop lower), which therefore lightens the front end. The hind legs move more towards the front end (not the other way around), and the joints have more flexion. Collection (carrying power) is not the same thing as impulsion (pushing power). There are more technical explanations about the biomechanics out there, just have to find them. --Eventer

Collection, as discussed, deals with the distribution of the weight of the horse. Typically, an untrained horse will carry about 3/5's of its weight on the two fore legs. Collection is the process of training the horse to shift the weight to the hind quarters. The goal is for a more even weight distribution over all four legs, or, the ability for the horse to be able to carry itself. Collection is a prerequiste to being able to learn and correctly perform the so called upper level or FEI movements. A horse that is not in collection or self carriage is discribed as being on the forehand.

Levels

Can those of you who have more knowledge in the field of dressage possibly elaborate on the FEI levels? I put down as much a I knew, but the distinction between PSG, I1, I2, and GP are a little fuzzy for me. --Eventer 06:44, 10 February 2006

I find the comparasion bettwen levels for US/FEI/UK a little hard to read. Is there a better format for this info, maybe one tabel with first column being what's expected, and the following columns showing what level that is at? Or a separate list for the expectation, with details showing that level x in US/UK requires up to item y. Or are the level grades sufficently different that trying to combine them together be unworkable? MartinRe 14:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know much about the difference in levels, but I believe the UK goes half-way between certain ones. For example, "medium level" UK could fall between US 2nd level test 2 and US 3rd level test 4. But I dont know enough about the UK levels to distinguish this. I'll see what research I can do. Eventer 21:34, 29 March 2006

Link to www.horsemanpro.com

The link called "More information on the Airs Above the Ground" is broken. I have not fixed it because the possible replacement, http://www.horsemanpro.com/articles2/dressage.htm appears to be an anti-dressage polemic. It does not seem right to include such a link without also providing additional information about the controversy that is put forth by the owner or author of the horsemanpro website, apparently one "J.G."

Our choices seem to be:

A. Remove the link entirely.

B. Replace the broken link with a link to the polemic.

C. "B" plus added paragraphs on the matters raised by the polemic.

Snezzy 22:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go with "A" ( no point in a non working link ) dressagedirectory 03:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I say just toss it. External links need to be kept to a minimum, I'd say more than the FEI and USDF is overkill. OTOH, sometimes there is a place to discuss controversies, maybe not here, but food for thought. Rollkur, anyone? <grin> Montanabw 23:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Not everyone wants info on the competitive sport side. Many just want to know what it is and how it came about. Maybe the links should all go, except the FEI and a couple of classical sites. Otherwise where do you draw the line ? ( there is enough bickering on the BB's ) dressagedirectory 03:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Polemic" is an understatement. That "horseman pro" site is apparently run by a lunatic. Other pages there claim that women lack the correct hip structure to ride and other total nonsense, that definitely is NOT a suitable link for wikipedia. As for links generally, I'm pretty much with DressageDirectory, at least to a point, The user pages at WP:EL (external links) sort of define the guidelines and User:I@n is pretty good about explaining it. The basic idea is that commercial stuff is OUT, chat groups and BBs are OUT, links to basic stuff should be incorporated into the article itself, and links to more links are frowned upon. Links to rules or "official" web sites are suitable, citations and bibliographies are suitable for people who want to know our source material, etc. A huge number of links can be unweildy. My own rule of thumb is that if a link allows someone to quickly learn more useful information, it is probably OK; if not, why is it there? Montanabw 01:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I deleted the 'horseman pro' link, (more because it did not work than for any other reason). No doubt if someone feels strongly about it they will re-instate a (working) version. I also deleted the link to 'dressage.net.au' , as although ( I thought it ) pertinent, it was a conflict of interest. There remain links to commercial sites and a handful of the official sport bodies. However as Montanabw says the inclusion a more representative collection would be unwieldy, so I still say that a link the main official site( FEI ), a few suitable sites that give the history of the sport, and maybe some video/photographic sites ( such as http://www.dressageworld.de/cgi-bin/cl?l=de&a=richten&c=piaffen/select )would be the most workable format. dressagedirectory 03:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rules on tack--someone want to paraphrase?

DR121 Saddlery and Equipment. 1. An English type saddle with stirrups is compulsory for Federation and USDF tests. An English type saddle may be constructed with or without a tree but cannot have a horn, swell, gallerie, or open gullet. Australian, Baroque, Endurance, McClellan, Spanish, Stock, or Western saddles are not permitted nor are modified versions of these saddles (exception: competitors with a current approved Federation Dispensation Certificate). A Dressage saddle which must be close to the horse and have long, near-vertical flaps and stirrups is compulsory for FEI tests. Saddle pads are optional, but should be white or of conservative color. While present in the competition area and during prize-giving ceremonies, the name and/or logo of the individual’s sponsor(s) may appear on a surface area not exceeding 200 cm2 on each side of the saddle cloth. Breed logos (for horses registered with that breed), national flags (for citizens of that country), and business/farm names or logos (used with DR14 © USEF 2007 DR-DRESSAGE © USEF 2007 DR15 DR-DRESSAGE permission of farm/business owner) are also permitted and must have the same specifications as sponsor logos. No other advertisement or publicity is permitted on saddle cloths or horses. 2. For Training, First and Second Level tests and FEI Pony tests, a plain snaffle bridle is required with a regular cavesson, a dropped noseband, a flash noseband (a combination of a cavesson noseband and a dropped noseband attachment) or a crossed noseband. Except for the FEI Pony tests, a crescent noseband is also permitted at these levels. Except for the crescent noseband, buckles and a small disk of sheepskin, which may be used in the intersection of the two leather straps of a crossed noseband, the noseband must be made entirely of leather or leather-like material. A padded noseband is allowed. 3. For Federation Third and Fourth Level tests same as (2) above, or a simple double bridle (bridoon (snaffle) and bit (curb) and curb chain, lip strap and rubber or leather cover for curb chain optional, cavesson noseband only). 4. FEI tests (including FEI Junior Team and Individual Tests) a simple double bridle as above. For the FEI Junior Preliminary Test, a plain snaffle bridle or simple double bridle may be used, as above in DR121.2-.3. For the FEI Dressage Tests for 4, 5, and 6-year-old horses and the USEF Dressage Test for 4-year old horses, a plain snaffle bridle is required, as above (DR121.2). However, when a snaffle is used in FEI tests, a crescent noseband is not permitted and a snaffle is required as described in Figure I and as pictured in Figure 1B. In addition to the crescent noseband, the crossed (figure-8, Mexican) noseband is not permitted for the FEI Dressage Tests for 4, 5,and 6-year-old horses and the USEF test for 4-year old horses. 5. Only those bits listed with Figure 1 are allowed. At any level of competition, a cavesson noseband may never be so tightly fixed that it causes severe irritation to the skin. Cavesson nosebands may be used with a chin pad. At any level of competition, a browband may be multicolored and may be decorated with metal, beads, gemstones and crystals. BOD 1/15/06 Effective 12/1/06 6. Martingales, bit guards, any kind of gadgets (such as bearing, side, running, balancing reins, nasal strips, tongue tied down, etc.), any kind of boots (including “easy-boots”) or bandages (including tail bandages) and any form of blinkers, earmuffs or plugs, nose covers, seat covers, hoods are, under penalty of elimination, strictly forbidden. Fly hoods (ear covers) will only be permitted in order to protect horses from insects. The fly hoods should be discreet and should not cover the horse’s eyes, and will only be permitted in extreme cases at the discretion of the presiding judge(s). Permission must be granted prior to the class and applies to all competitors in the class. However, leg bandages are allowed in Pas de Deux and Quadrille classes. A breastplate and/or crupper may be used, except that a breastplate is not permitted in USEF High Performance Championships, USEF High Performance Qualifying and Selection Trials, and Observation classes. A rein is a continuous, uninterrupted strap or line from the bridle bit to the hand. Rein additions or attachments are not permitted. Each bit must be attached to a separate rein and reins may only be attached to bits. Any decoration of the horse with extravagant items, such as ribbons or flowers, etc. in the mane, tail, etc., is strictly forbidden. Braiding of the horse’s mane and tail, however, is permitted. False tails are permitted and if used may not contain any metal parts. 7. The above restrictions (1-6) apply to warm-up and other training areas, however, running martingales (with snaffle only), boots, bandages (without magnets) and ear muffs are permitted. Fly hoods (ear covers) that do not cover the horse’s eyes are permitted in warm-up and other training areas. Single direct side reins are permitted only when lungeing (mounted or unmounted). Only one lunge line is permitted only while lungeing. Driving or long lining is prohibited. A side rein is defined as an auxiliary rein affixed to the bit and to the girth, saddle or surcingle on the side of the hose (not between the legs). A lunge line must attach only to the bridle, halter or cavesson and go directly to the hand of the longeur. Horses competing at Third Level and above may be warmed up in a snaffle if the rider so chooses. (Exception: For breed-restricted Arabian competition see Chapter AR, Subchapter AR-11). A running martingale consists of a divided strap attached to the girth or breastplate (at the front of the horse’s chest); the extension of each strap must be connected from the point of division only to the rein on the same side and must be free to slide. The rings through which the reins slide may not be connected to a neck strap. BOD 1/15/06 Effective 12/1/06 DR16 © USEF 2007 DR-DRESSAGE 8. Ring stewards appointed by competition management must check saddlery and inspect bits and spurs on both sides of the horse for at least one-third of the horses in each class. Inspection of saddlery and bits in classes of five or fewer must be done at the direction of the technical delegate. Inspection of saddlery and bits must be done immediately as the horse leaves the arena. (See DR126.10) The checking of the bridle must be done with the greatest caution, as some horses are very touchy and sensitive about their mouths. Bit inspectors must use a new disposable protective glove for each horse. The responsibility for the correct attire and equipment, however, still rests with the competitor. BOD 1/15/06 Effective 12/1/06 9. The following whips are permitted for schooling only: One whip no longer than 43.3. inches (110 cm), including lash, may be carried by the rider when mounted. One lungeing whip is permitted only when lungeing. One whip no longer than 43.3 inches (110 cm) including lash may be carried in all classes except USEF/USDF Championships, Federation Junior Team Championships, Championships for 5 and 6-year old horses, NAYRC qualifying classes, USEF High Performance Championships, USEF High Performance qualifying and selection trials, and observation classes. (Exception: Competitors riding sidesaddle may carry a whip no longer than 43.3 inches (110 cm), including lash, in Federation/USDF Championships.) An adjustable-length whip may not be carried by a mounted rider. BOD 1/15/06 Effective 12/1/06 10. Numbers must be worn at all times when a horse is being exercised or ridden. 11. Individuals holding Federation Dispensation Certificates may use special saddlery and equipment as specifically listed on their Certificate. The following equipment is permitted if listed on the certificate: a. Any well fitted saddle that is suited to the needs of the rider. b. Devonshire, western, or oxbow stirrups, tethers from stirrups to girth; seat covers; velcro and rubber bands (provided the equipment allows the rider to fall from the horse). Break-away safety stirrups are required if the rider’s feet are secured into the stirrups and shoes with distinguishable heels must be worn. c. Except for sidesaddle, either two stirrups or no stirrups must be used, unless rider has one leg and no prosthesis on other leg. d. Adapted or bridged reins. If the rein is not be used in a conventional manner, it must be in as straight a line as possible from the normal hand position (as described in DR117) to the horse’s mouth. e. One or two whips, not to exceed 4’ in length. 12. Horses may only be exercised and ridden in management-designated areas on the competition grounds. 13. The following rules apply exclusively to USEF High Performance qualifying and selection trials, and observation classes. a. Upon arrival on the showground, only the rider when riding, walking, leading or lungeing a horse (lunge whip allowed) is allowed to carry a whip (maximum 110 cm) anywhere on the showground. The groom may also walk, lead and lunge a horse as above. Other parties are allowed to carry a whip, provided it is not in connection with the training of the horse. Under no circumstance is it allowed to school the horses in the stables. b. The whip must be dropped before entering the space around the competition arena or the rider will receive a penalty of 4 points per judge. c. The following bit is permitted for use either as a snaffle or bridoon: (Snaffle or bridoon with rotating middle piece) Figure 1. Bits Permitted in Dressage. All bits (in A and B below) must be smooth and with a solid surface. Twisted, wire and roller bits are prohibited. A bushing or coupling is permitted as the center link in a double jointed snaffle, however, the surface of the center piece must be solid with no moveable parts. The mouthpiece of a snaffle may be shaped in a slight curve, but ported snaffles are prohibited. A bridoon is defined as a snaffle bit used together with a curb bit to form a double bridle. Bits (including curb and/or bridoon bits of a double bridle) must be made of metal or rigid plastic and may be covered with rubber; flexible rubber bits are not permitted, except as noted below, under A. The diameter of the snaffle or bridoon mouthpiece must be minimum 3/8 inch diameter at rings or cheeks of the mouthpiece (exception: for ponies, the diameter may be less than 3/8 inches). Any bit combining any mouthpiece pictured in Figure 1A with any cheekpiece pictured in Figure 1A is permitted. Type of bit should not vary from those pictured below except where specified, and bits should be attached only as pictured in diagram. NOTE: FEI Level riders may warm up only in a double bridle (with both bit and/or bridoon made of metal or rigid plastic) or metal or rigid plastic snaffles pictured under B. In both cases, bits may be covered with rubber and flexible rubber bits are not permitted. A cavesson, dropped, crossed or flash noseband is allowed when a snaffle bridle is used in warm-up. BOD 1/15/06 Effective 12/1/06 A. PERMITTED SNAFFLES* (Must be used in Training-Second Level Tests. Optional in Third and Fourth Level Tests.)

Any of the above may be made with a rubber, plastic or leather covering, but the bit may

not be modified by adding latex or other material. Bits with mouthpieces made of synthetic material are permitted, provided that the contours of the bit conform to the contours of one of the bits pictured above. Flexible rubber or synthetic mouthpieces are permitted. 1. Ordinary snaffle with single-jointed mouthpiece. 2. Ordinary snaffle with double-jointed mouthpiece. 3. Racing snaffle (D-ring). 4. Snaffle. A) with cheecks, with or without keepers. B) without cheeks (Egg-butt). 5. Snaffle with upper or lower cheeks. 6. Unjointed snaffle (Mullen-mouth). 7. Snaffle with cheeks. (Hanging or drop cheek; Baucher). This may be a D-ring or other ordinary snaffle as pictured in Nos. 1-6. 8. Dr. Bristol. 9. Fulmer. 10. French snaffle. 11. Snaffle with rotating mouthpiece. © USEF 2007 DR17 DR-DRESSAGE B. PERMITTED BRIDOON, CURB AND SNAFFLE BITS (Must be used in FEI Level Tests. Optional in Third and Fourth Level Tests) (Reprinted from the FEI Rules for Dressage Events, 2003 edition) 1. Various double bridle bits Bridoons: 1. Loose ring bridoon bit. 2. a.b.c. Bridoon bit with jointed mouthpiece where the middle piece should be rounded. (Note: A Dr. Bristol bit is not permitted.) 3. Egg-butt bridoon bit. 4. Bridoon bit with hanging cheeks. Curbs: 5. Half-moon curb bit. 6. & 7. Curb bit with straight cheeks and port. 8. Curb bit with port & sliding mouthpiece (Weymouth) A curb bit with rotating lever arm is also allowed. 9. Variation of bits Nos. 6, 7 & 8. 10. Curb bit with S-curved cheeks. 11. Curb chain (metal or leather or a combination). 12. Lip strap. 13. Leather cover for curb chain. 14. Rubber cover for curb chain. DR18 © USEF 2007 DR-DRESSAGE Figure 2. Correct bit measurement. The lever arm of the curb bit must not exceed 10 cm. (length below the mouthpiece). If the curb has a sliding mouthpiece, the lever arm of the curb bit below the mouthpiece must not measure more than 10 cm. when the mouthpiece is at the uppermost position. GmaRocks 19:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Cynthia[reply]

New Picture?

I hope I'm doing this correctly; it's my first time posting. I couldn't help but notice that the picture posted as good turnout for dressage shows a rider with very sloppy posture and an uncomfortable looking horse. Probably an example of someone snapping the picture at a bad moment. Anyway, could someone find a new picture for this? I know the point isn't to show good dressage, but surely there are enough pictures of riders with good turnout out there that a replacement could be found. I don't know where to look or how to deal with the copyright issues or I'd do it myself. If I'm all wrong about this please let me know; like I say, I'm very new to the whole thing. Thanks! Southwind287 09:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. The problem is finding FREE images with a generous copyright for Wikipedia...they are getting more and more anal about uploads of anything with even a whiff of a substantive copyright. Unless an image is pretty much GDFL or public domain--or has an airtight fair use argument, they'll delete it. Go to Wikimedia commons and dig around in there yourself...I will say that there MIGHT be some uncategorized horse photos from other nations that are tagged with foreign language labels (I found a couple under "Pferde" that way) and a few that are labeled with the photographer name or something, but it's difficult.

So what's left often, well, totally sucks as far as quality goes. I am seriously thinking about taking photographs myself to illustrate some articles, just because there's so little material. Nonetheless, if you find a better photo, go for it! Montanabw 22:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:DSC 2520.JPG or Image:WCLV07m.JPG ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.66.83 (talk) 06:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC) on second thought - maybe a bit too gainy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.188.66.83 (talk) 07:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

I just want to say that I think this article needs more pictures. I would like to see more of the dressage ring and moves. 68.110.232.148 16:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find appropriate COPYRIGHT free images suitable for Wikipedia, we always welcome more uploads to Wikimedia Commons! If you find some, let us know on this talk page! It's very difficult to find quality public domain and GDFL photos of horses in general. Montanabw 04:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Montana, I took some pics at the recent WC in LV, and have put a few on the commons & dressage gallery( eg Image:WC07b.JPG ).

Can you put more of the links here? Commons is a PITA for finding things sometimes... and are they categorized? Thanks! Montanabw 16:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are the last 4 on this page ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Dressage ). no sure how to 'catagorize' them.

Sometimes Category:horses will do the trick. But putting the link here on the talk page like you just did is a good way to get them to the people who need them most! Thanks! Montanabw 03:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of offending anyone, the video is not, perhaps, the best option for a page on dressage. It appears to be a low level schooling show at best, and the horse is not even on the bit.173.66.40.229 (talk) 18:41, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good point; someone was trying to help by adding video to articles, but... Montanabw ^(talk) 04:22, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Classical dressage

I read the Classical dressage article, and I don't understand well why there are two different pages with so similar a content (see, as an example, the list of air movements and their definition). I put a "merge" template there, and there's a beginning talk about. --Alex_brollo Talk|Contrib 11:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe put the "merrgefrom" template on this article and see what shakes out, may get more comments. Montanabw^(talk) 16:46, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

01-Oct-2008: (one year later) The article "Classical dressage" is more of an extended history article, which is an acceptable concept as an separate, alternate article: Wikipedia can have several articles covering various aspects of a subject; for "The Da Vinci Code" people created 12 articles in 2006. -Wikid77 (talk) 09:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany

I think the section on scoring is wrong - a rider who gets 80% does not get a score of 80, and high scores are not good. The lower the score, the better - ie, scores in the 30s are impressive, scores in the 50s are much less so. I've heard you take the percentage score away from 100 and multiply by 1.5 for FEI events, so 80% gives a score of 30. Am I correct? -- 82.33.182.39 (talk) 01:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, no. Higher the score the better. Fewer deductions, the better. However, I'll check the scoring section, as indeed a score of 80 does not necessarily mean an 80%; different tests have different totals depending on the number of movements, etc... Montanabw^(talk) 02:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thibnk the proble here could be the difference between dressage scoring in dressage competitions and eventing competitions. In dressage competitions the 'score' peopel are seen to have are the percetnage the socre, say 80%. In eventing however, the 'score' people are seen to have are the penalities. So if you have a score of 80% you'd take forward something like 20 penalities (though I'm not sure if these penalty points are adjusted). Does that make sense? Evil Eye (talk) 20:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ask User:Eventer about scoring in Eventing, she will know. All I know is Dressage scoring per USEF and USDF rules. Montanabw^(talk) 04:51, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrofit topic year headers

01-Oct-2008: I have added subheaders above as "Topics from 2006" (etc.) to emphasize the dates of topics in the talk-page. Older topics might still apply, but using the year headers helps to focus on more current issues as well. Afterward, I moved the Miscellany-topic into date order for 2008, and dated/named unsigned comments. -Wikid77 (talk) 09:36, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We could just make an archive for the old stuff, that might be easier. I find creating archives a pain in the you-now-what, so I like to "delegate" the task to others (grin), but that may be better than rearranging the talk page. It also isn't a moral issue, just a thought! Montanabw^(talk) 20:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup October 2008

01-Oct-2008: There are several long-term issues that apply here, as well as to formatting of other articles on Wikipedia:

Add both conversions of meters with feet in Wikipedia articles.
Avoid commas/periods inside quotes: Wikipedia has been using "logical quotations" which keep commas outside, so I add parentheses as a trick to nest quote-marks & keep the commas/periods outside:

zero being "not executed" (and 10 being "excellent").

Always capitalize German nouns (such as "Durchlässigkeit").
Avoid bold-face text, except as the title words for the article.
Use Notes/References: Wikipedia:Guide_to_layout (WP:GUIDE).
Add a period after each reference in References & in footnotes.
It is no longer standard to link dates for date-format preferences.

Those are some of the simple issues about article formatting that new Wikipedia users might not have known yet. -Wikid77 (talk) 09:36, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input. Bottom line is that there are something like 1800 articles in WikiProject Equine and only about three editors who actively care about this stuff on a regular basis (of whom I am one). So if you want to tweak the style stuff here, go for it, we need all the help we can get! The "logical quotations" question goes back and forth so much that I can't keep up--so this week it's punctuation outside. Whatever. Someone else will probably change it again next month. I'm a cynic on that topic. (smile) Anyway, thanks again and feel free to fix. On distance, the FEI and USDF all use meters as a universal measurement, so that needs to be the first-placed measurement if you insert convert templates. On heigh of horses themselves, not sure if mentioned in this article, but just remember that we measure horses in hands and no one has yet figured out a workable convert template for that one! We are slowly moving toward cite templates, so if you want to throw in a few, that too would be cool. Thanks again. Montanabw^(talk) 20:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

20-Oct-2008: The www.classicaldressage.com domain name is about to expire! As it is referenced from the Dressage page, either the owner of that page should be notified, or the link should be removed from the Dressage page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.92.5.170 (talk) 20:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alois Podhajsky

Podhajsky didn't save the Lipizzans in Hostau! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Conversano Isabella (talk • contribs) 19:16, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Smile) Technically, it was the American Army! (LOL!) Can we credit George Patton? (Actually, Patton's book notes that they flew Poshajsky into Hostau for something...?). Any further clarification would be helpful, acutally. And by the way, can you also look at [{Classical dressage]] when you have a chance? It was split from this article a while back due to a difference of opinion over competitive Dressage vs the Spanish Riding School/Samur/etc programs. Montanabw^(talk) 23:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Grand_Prix_Dressage

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Grand_Prix_Dressage. -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 10:52, 28 October 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})[reply]

REQUEST FOR CORRECTION in article.

Under "TESTS", please correct the name of the organization. Currently, it reads as follows:

"At the upper levels, tests for International competitions, including the Olympics, are issued under the auspices of the Federation Internationale Equestre." The words "Internationale" and "Equestre" are reversed.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.3.156.138 (talk) 17:41, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to fix it yourself. Requests in talk pages usually take some time to be fulfilled. I'll see to this. Pitke (talk) 18:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clarification of section

I believe the section "International Level" should be slightly amended, in the paragraphs referring to "Extended Gaits" and "Collected gaits". Currently the article appears to infer extension and collection are only to be performed at trot and canter, but these gaits are required in all three paces - walk, trot and canter. http://www.fei.org/sites/default/files/file/OFFICIALS%20%26%20ORGANISERS/ORGANISERS/DRESSAGE/Dressage%20Tests/GP_09_1.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lifelike001 (talk • contribs) 10:47, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to tweak it, preferably with a reference to the FEI rules that support this. There IS an alternative philosophical position that extension is, in fact, only really something for the trot and canter, but whatever FEI says is probably the way to go. Montanabw^(talk) 23:19, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

Calling something "the highest expression of horse training" is not a definition. It's a description, and not even a very descriptive one. Thanks for being sure to cite it from a reliable source, but it's just not helpful.

I'd fix it, but I just came here to find out what dressage is.

184.17.170.153 (talk) 02:54, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is the definition from the highest international governing body of the sport. It's also a form of competition, and a word from the French language. All of which is already explained in the first sentence. If that doesn't help you, then make a suggestion here as to what else you think needs to be added. But please do read the rest of the article first, as it is pretty extensive. Montanabw^(talk) 15:49, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hey Montanabw, thanks for taking the time to reply. The "definition" -- even though (or especially because) it came from the highest governing body -- sounds more like a boast or advertisement; like if the NFL called basketball the most bad-ass sport in the world, or the National Association of Curlers called Curlling the least-douchey-sport. A definition would be something like this one from wiktionary: "an equestrian sport in which the horse and rider perform a test of specific movements in an arena, and are judged on the horse's obedience, acceptance of the bridle and of the rider's aids, gaits, impulsion, and the harmony between horse and rider". I'd have used the one from m-w, but I couldn't paste it. Usefully, wiktionary also had another example of a non-definition: "an event or competition of the sport of dressage".

I get that the rest of the article goes into great detail about what it is: I did not mean to demean its overall quality... I was just looking for a quick summary, and came across the comically bad one in the introduction. 184.17.170.153 (talk) 16:54, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, talk to the FEI; they only govern the Olympics, after all. (smile) And actually, you won't find any true horse person who disagrees with this, it won't be everyone's cup of tea, but no one disagrees that the classic form (minus disagreements on modern competition standards) is not topped by any other school of training. Pretty much what classical violin playing is to the fiddle; there might be some damn fine fiddlers, but even they admit the classical form is the "granddaddy," so to speak. ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 21:14, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'm not arguing the objective truth of the statement (I may find the claim silly, but that's not the point); the point is that it's just not a definition. That's like defining the Fox News Channel to someone who doesn't understand what a news channel is by just saying that it's the most-watched news channel (which is an objective fact based on ratings). It's true, and probably should even be mentioned in the intro, but that doesn't define what it is (eg a television network that exclusively runs news and political opinion programs). It's definitely not the best example, since it's almost a tautology that a "news channel" is a channel that shows news, but hopefully it at least elucidates the problem...184.17.170.153 (talk) 22:19, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is it a stupid "definition", but the FEI doesn't actually define it that way. What you find when you follow the link to the alleged definition is a blurb that says a bunch of things. It is not at all evident that it is a definition. That's why they have a section labeled 'what is dressage?' that actually explains what it is. In any case, since the intent seems to be to describe the status of dressage rather than define it, I've changed the wording from "defined" to "considered". I also added some more which others can feel free to revert. Let me only point out as the other person did above that describing dressage as the pinnacle of equestrianship is not a definition. Please check a dictionary for the definition of "definition" if you have confusion about what a definition is.

The edit made was a good addition to the article; you don't have to be such a snark about it here. Montanabw^(talk) 16:20, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, somebody reverted your change; I added "described as" to precede the bit about it being "the highest expression of horse training." A subjective claim can't be part of a "definition" of anything, and my edit cleanly separates the "definition" part (explaining the the sport is laid out by the IEF, which, since they write the rulebook, is certainly true) and the IEF's claim about the merit of the sport. 206.53.106.13 (talk) 10:58, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

is it worth including pop culture references?

I had never heard of "Dressage" before the US Presidential election in 2012, in which GOP candidate Mitt Romney's wife Ann Romney gained popular attention for her ownership of an Olympic horse competing in Dressage. Seems worth mentioning that this sport gained the attention of the zeitgeist, especially in the US, with the 2012 olympics and the election, doesn't it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.208.242.74 (talk) 17:24, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have been to dressage competitions in Devon, Pennsylvania, so I did know a little bit about the sport when Ann Romney explained why dressage was important in her recovery from multiple sclerosis. What I want to know now is how did her horse do in the Olympics?--DThomsen8 (talk) 20:39, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Pop culture reference" sections tend to be completely redundant and irrelevant laundry lists. Unless Romney's ownership of a dressage horse or public mentions of the sport somehow become important for the public image of dressage or something like that, they are not worth mentioning here. Pitke (talk) 22:56, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that trivia about Ann Romney's horse is probably best covered in the Ann Romney article, not here. While the notoriety that Stephen Colbert brought to dressage this summer was entertaining, I agree with Pitke that once we start adding this sort of stuff (famous people who ride/own horses), it expands exponentially; I realize that we have a current Presidential campaign issue tied in here, but, as a comparison, Princess Anne has competed in eventing at the Olympic level and we don't mention her in the eventing article. So I see no reason to go there with this case, either. Montanabw^(talk) 21:53, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whips at championships

In the UK, whips aren't allowed at regional championships as well as nationals. Is this also the case elsewhere? I'm happy to make the edit, but don't want to cause confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.170.94.199 (talk) 14:37, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Any of these pictures needed?

Canter
Extended trot
Canter at FEI level

White Arabian mare (Neigh) 15:24, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The first canter one is already in there, but I've never cared for it much because the horse is cranking its tail in irritation, it could be replaced by the gray. I do like the extended trot, it could be placed in there somewhere, in addition to what's there already. Good finds. Montanabw ^(talk) 02:15, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dressage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:39, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There should be some section on potential animal cruelty

ie https://horseracingsense.com/is-dressage-cruel-horses-sport-training/ https://www.writingofriding.com/in-the-media/the-dressage-community-has-failed-shelley-browning/ just a thought 38.73.253.217 (talk) 08:40, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Animal cruelty and abuse has been often reported as an actual part of dressage horse training. Of this the entry makes no mention, asides from a note on the rule on display and use of whip in competition. Solution: to start a section in the article. There are many sources in the news with the recent ban on a star UK rider [[1]] before the Paris Olympics. (If deleted the lacuna would remain, but at least it would add the terms to the article history. Wiki Blame found no instances of the words cruel, cruelty, and abuse in the edit history. Your search term was not found at all. Check the settings and try again.)-Yohananw (talk) 10:18, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

== Cruelty to animals ==

The International Federation for Equestrian Sports (Fédération Equestre Internationale, FEI) Code of Conduct for the Welfare of the Horse states that "Training methods: Horses... must not be subjected to methods which are abusive or cause fear."

^[1] The FEI is sensitive to public perception of cruelty to animals.^[2] Their recently enacted Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission published recommendations and documents to promote ethical and evidence-based equestrianism.

The FEI has banned hyperflexion of horse’s neck, the Rollkur technique, but a July 2014 article in the Guardian notes that it was still in use.^[3]

Julie Taylor has argued for equestrian dressage to be dropped from the Olympics.^[4]

The ban on star UK rider Charlotte Dujardin before the Paris Olympics in July 2024 raised the public awareness on the welfare of dressage horses. Yohananw (talk) 13:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "The FEI Code of Conduct for the Welfare of the Horse" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 April 2017.
^ Lesté-Lasserre, Christa (May 11, 2023). "FEI Moves to Raise Equine Welfare Standards". The Horse.
^ Kevany, Sophie (July 24, 2024). "'Dressage is in trouble': where is the line between horse abuse and training?". The Guardian.
^ Taylor, Julie (2022-01-15). 'I Can't Watch Anymore': the Case for Dropping Equestrian from the Olympic Games. Epona Media A/S. ISBN 978-87-973543-0-8.

Ground jury: please turn this red link blue

Hallo, I know nothing about dressage but am creating a stub for Jonquil Solt. (I had her on my "to do sometime" list, I think after hearing a news item about her death, and this month's Women in Red alphabetical theme of "I and J" inspired me to start the article now.) The term Ground jury crops up in various sources, and I see from searching Wikipedia that in many articles on specific dressage competitions there are people named as "Ground jury", but it isn't an obvious term to the outsider. I hoped to find it defined somewhere in this article, but it isn't mentioned. Could someone perhaps add a description of "Ground jury" to this or another relevant article, and make the above red link into a blue link, either as an article title or, more likely, as a redirect to an appropriate section? Thanks in advance! PamD 15:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "The FEI Code of Conduct for the Welfare of the Horse" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 April 2017.

[2] Lesté-Lasserre, Christa (May 11, 2023). "FEI Moves to Raise Equine Welfare Standards". The Horse.

[3] Kevany, Sophie (July 24, 2024). "'Dressage is in trouble': where is the line between horse abuse and training?". The Guardian.

[4] Taylor, Julie (2022-01-15). 'I Can't Watch Anymore': the Case for Dropping Equestrian from the Olympic Games. Epona Media A/S. ISBN 978-87-973543-0-8.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]