Talk:Western pleasure

Balance

Montana, the article gives so much space to historical, negative aspects of Western Pleasure. I'd like to see more 'balance' there. Obviously, my contributions are of little value ;) (and I'd rather ride than write), so I'll just enter my request to you for improvement to the article. Pretty please? Also -- how about some hints to your real-life identity on your user page? (Will add credibility to your articles.) Lil 15:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm all for "fair and balanced." (grin) I will look over the article again and reconsider your edits. I didn't mean to be too harsh, but my complaint was that you wrote like use of dressage techniques is a new thing, it isn't. Good western riders have worked off of some classical dressage principles for decades, though some may not have realized it. (ever read Charles O Williamson? He wrote in the 1930's and mentioned dressage techniques in training the western horse). Most of that discussion is probably better in the western riding article anyway. And trust me, you do NOT want to draw the dressage people to this article by suggesting that modern western pleasure is lots like dressage. Even though all good horsemanship borrows from dressage, (and doesn't Lynn Palm show in both disciplines?) I just would not want to mediate THAT edit war. YIKES!!!

The contents block is a problem that does make the how article look rather negative, I do admit, and I will try to create some headers to correct it. But we can't duck the controversies, and WP has a lot of them. For example, the spur stop isn't "historical," it's a huge problem right now. Horse & Rider did a big article on spur stops just last summer, if I recall correctly. Someone else put in something about peanut rollers, I cleaned it up from a PETA rant to something closer to NPOV. There are still too many peanut rollers out there, and in some breeds, they may not drag their heads on the ground, but the obsession with artificial headset and reins so loose they are hitting them in the knees also creates some training methods that are beyond bizarre. (Oh I'm also not mentioning how some exhibitors wire the horse's mouth shut with fine wire and some judges seem to turn a blind eye to it, nor do I mention the practice of tying up a horse with his head in the air for hours or longeing it to exhaustion before the class. Hmmm, shall I go on?)

I do not intend to offend anyone by dumping good edits, but rah-rah POV isn't my cup of tea (nor are PETA rants, for that matter). But watching the discipline change over the past 30+ years has not been a pleasant experience, if anything there is less classical training and more artificial gadgetry than ever. Oh, did I mention hock hobbles in there? No, hey, I am cutting the discipline some slack here. We really DO need to talk about hock hobbles too, don't you think?

FYI, I am not picking on WP, I also fought and won an edit war keep the soring controversy in the Tennessee Walker article and have spent way too much time trying to get correct and accurate research sources on some of the horse racing controveries discussed in the Thoroughbred article. We horse people have to face facts. I'm tired of people justifying abuse in the name of winning when the best trainers have no need for it.

As for credibility, I choose to be vague on my user page because the internet is a big city. It's a practical personal safety issue, IMHO. I don't feel comfortable posting my resume. I guess citing verifiable sources when asked and just trying to write the best I have the time to do is going to need to suffice. (We all have a real life outside of wikiland). I've shown horses since the 70's, including western pleasure, won a few, lost a few, been there, done that, but I'm not inventing anything that isn't already out there. If you want verifiable sources, mark the locations where they are needed with a fact tag, I'll find some. If you show WP, you know nothing here is new or constitutes original research. I can cite articles from sources far more authoritative than either you or me if needed. Montanabw 05:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Montana, please change link description

In References, you posted: ^ AQHA World Senior Western Pleasure Final Nov 2006. (Note: Video shows that the "peanut roller" fad is not yet dead, though fewer horses are traveling with poll below the withers.)

With regard to how the horses in that video are carrying themselves, use of the term "peanut rolling" is HIGHLY subjective. They all look GREAT to me. That aint 'peanut rolling!

"Peanut rolling" was MUCH more extreme! Lil 15:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough that I will tweak the caption, but when the poll is below the withers, that's technically against the rules, and they are obviously still doing that much. I would agree that the worst of the peanut rolling was more severe, but it's obvious that rule is being followed somewhat grudgingly (at least they are MOVING, which is an improvement). That said, I am just as irritated at the Arab/Morgan crowd who think a proper "headset" is having the neck arch at c3 instead of the poll and have weighted reins knocking the horse in the knees...sigh... Montanabw^(talk) 18:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Western pleasure is a slower sport the slower you horse is the better you will do ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.144.217.247 (talk) 02:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Spur stop stuff

Seeing as how the debate over the spur stop kept growing and growing to the point it admittedly threatened to consume the article, I removed a lot of the detailed stuff, leaving only a superficial description of the basic spat, and am parking it here in case it needs to be used for a whole new article or if anyone cares about the debate: Montanabw^(talk) 08:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

---

The precise cues given a horse are not necessarily a problem in themselves, but opponents of the spur stop raise two distinct concerns. The first problem is that a rider who overuses the spur stop command can "capture" the horse, or in other words, use too much pressure, which most often results in the horse sucking back in the midsection to escape the pressure. This body tension causes a horse's gait to become very jerky and unnatural. If used in this incorrect manner for a long period of time, the spur stop can lead to pinched nerves, spine and joint pain, and lameness.

The second concern raised about the spur stop regards the potential for retraining. With the reality that the horse show career of most animals lasts relatively few years (at least at national level intensity), plus any number of animals initially trained for this discipline may not excel at it and require a switch to something else, most western pleasure horses, particularly those of average ability, can reasonably be anticipated to go on and do different work at a later point in its life. Therefore, if the horse is later used for some other purpose, it has to be retrained.

Spur or leg pressure is a near-universal cue in virtually every other equestrianism discipline to ask the horse to go forward. Thus, a horse that slows or stops when spur pressure is applied responds in the opposite manner. Spur-stopping horses become very sensitive to variations in leg cues, and are specifically trained to respond to a subtle and flexible set of commands that control the slightest variations in movement, body placement, and cadence. Leg cues such as lifting pressure from a single spur, rolling the spur along the sides, bumping with the calf, and cueing different areas of the horse's barrel may all result in a different action. Many other commands, often unique to each trainer, are cultivated between horse and rider. Because these commands are so highly individualized, when such a horse is sold, if a new owner does not know how the horse is trained, it can create considerable confusion for the animal.

Promoters of the spur stop claim that a spur stop is not inherently abusive if properly trained and used and in that respect is no different from the traditional method of stopping using a combination of light bit pressure and collection with the legs. They argue that any training method can be abused, citing the example of horses with "hard mouths" that are a result of irresponsible and excessive bit use. They also argue that it is a misconception that no other leg commands will be accepted by a spur stopping horse. Riders who use the spur stop technique also use leg pressure to achieve forward momentum like any other rider, thus spur stopping does not completely override the leg commands a horse will respond to.

---

Hey, I really appreciate what you did for length of the article. As far as people who oppose/support the spur stop, I'm sure you can find many on either side. It's a controversy, and if there's one thing all horse people do well, it's stir up controversy. We're oppinionated and thats just how it is. You can talk to some horse owners so devoted to their self-righteous respect for the horse that they won't even ride them. "Horse's aren't ridden in the wild... etc. etc." I have known many successful riders that train with a spur stop and they have never been penalized. Recently, one of my close friends who originally taught me to spur stop went touring the nation with his horse and was champion on two occasions and top 10 in every class. He only shows AQHA approved functions. I just don't see how someone could meet with that much success while simultaneously breaking rules that border on horse abuse. I am also very familiar with the video's put out by the AQHA in 2003 for the betterment of the sport and if I recall correctly, there is no mention of the spur stop. As a matter of fact, the participants could be seen using the spur stop without reprimand. In any case though, I'm glad the links are there. They are perfect for the whole article.

Of course, I see no reason why there shouln't be a section on the controversy, and I'm all for an entire article about it. I just didn't think it needed to be so long. I also tried to make it a little more two-dimensional by adding some defenses of the technique. 71.206.136.55 (talk) 05:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

---

If it's stable for now, that's great. We can live with that. (smile) As for the "champions do it" argument, the Rollkur debate in Dressage is IDENTICAL; the "Anky does it and she won a gold medal at the Olympics so it's OK" versus the "Anky is cruel to her horses" thing has been burning up the Dressage boards for a couple of years now. No question that horse people are opinionated.

I think the biggest problem with spur-stopping aside from the problems with misuse is that there is no consistency to the methods, every trainer has their secret code, and a lot of horses are being punished by new owners for simply doing what they were taught to do. (Know some folks who unwittingly bought one and had a horrible time until someone managed to say, "oh you bought that horse from so-and-so, here's what they do..." I think they still just threw up their hands and sold the horse because it had soem really weird "programming")

Now, you want a real challenge? Want to lend a hand improving the Natural horsemanship articles? EGAD are those a disaster! (I don't even know where to start other than to edit out the "everything else but our cult is cruel" myth. Bleech) I may be critical of spur-stop horses, but I confess the most completely messed-up in the head horse I have worked with in the last five years was a "P.P. method" horse gone very, very wrong. =:-O Montanabw^(talk) 06:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

---

Yea, the Western Pleasure article looks great now. I see no reason to change anything. =) I can understand what you mean about the spur-stopping differences from horse to horse. I think it's just in the nature of the thing. It has required so much increased sensitivity in that region and even the lightest of taps will cause a reaction that seems quite disproportionate to the cue. Certainly something for trainers to improve, I agree. Haha, NH article. I don't know, it could be frightening! I used to practice it and since then I've been pretty skeptical of it all. I'll see what I can add, if anything. 71.206.136.55 (talk) 02:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

2008 Pleasure Improvement Effort

Hi, before editing this article with news about the latest AQHA improvement video due for release in late summer / early fall of 2008, I wanted to raise the issue here.

The NSBA and AQHA have teamed up to address the judging standards for western pleasure classes. A large group of well-respected trainers and exhibitors in modern western pleasure have been appointed to a subcommittee to discuss, review, and approve the final cut of the video.

You can read the article that appeared in the February 2008 issue of the AQHA JQURNAL here.

I'm hoping this might be able to bring some stability to this article. It would make it possible to describe western pleasure in greater detail so that the controversial material would no longer dominate the article. I think if we were able to provide a better definition of the class procedure and proper exhibition and judging of western pleasure horses, the warning-sign controversy topics would be less necessary. To me, the current article represents exactly what western pleasure is these days, and all the things that are wrong with it. There is too little information regarding the true nature of the event, and too much attention is paid to the controversial aspects. In that regard I think the wiki entry parallels the real world where the concern over controversial issues has managed to displace the real nature of the sport. If we want to help change that we're going to need to align this article with the efforts of the AQHA and NSBA by clearing up the actual definition of western pleasure so that we can help to reduce the conflict.

I'd love to discuss a better layout for the article. I think that several sections should be created to further define the gaits, procedure and judging criteria. The rulebooks should be quoted heavily (and properly cited of course ;) and a logical line of progression should be established in the topic order.

Let me know what you think! Thanks! Tim 71.206.164.246 (talk) 18:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The article has been basically stable since we worked out the spur stop debate (which was an elegant compromise, IMHO). My main concern is that the article not become AQHA all the time; many, many other breeds show western pleasure, other organizations have their own rules, etc. However, I acknowledge that AQHA is the 10,000 hippo as far as setting fads and show trends. I would be OK with some expansion of the article, and if you want to toss out some ideas here on the talk page, go for it. However, to go too far into minutae will get us slapped by the wiki-gods for writing a wiki-book with too much how-to. The article needs to remain general interest, written for people who are just wondering what western pleasure is, with links for the aficionados to learn more. I actually oppose quoting the rule book extensively, (boring for one thing) we can simply link to the rules when needed. And the controversies do need to stay (Rollkur in dressage has its own article, we're getting off light here! LOL!), though if more content came in so they weren't so dominant, that would certainly be OK.

If you want to see what has been done elsewhere, this article is better than English pleasure at least, and if you want to see how unreadable an article can get when the technical stuff dominates too much, see Dressage. Show jumping is in-between, it needs work and is kind of long, but it's readable for the most part other than being put together by a committee with no real flow. Reining is pretty good, not perfect, but better than this article. Anyway, toss out some ideas and we shall we what works! Montanabw^(talk) 03:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Girlonhorse.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:36, 23 October 2022 (UTC)