Jessica Jahiel's HORSE-SENSE Newsletter Archives

English "pleasure"?

From: Deb Bridgewater

Hi Jessica!

My horses and I think you're wonderful!!!

I have a question which doesn't exactly refer to training, but is still horse related and has been bugging me for a while.

I ride my Arab gelding in a plain eggbutt snaffle, no extra nosebands, no martingales, no "junk" whatsoever. At shows I see numerous horses in so called "pleasure" classes with double bridles, martingales, flash nosebands, and every other piece of equipment they can think of! These horses tend to place way more often than the ones with simple bridles. My question is, if a person needs all this equipment to ride their horse, how can the horse be considered a "pleasure to ride"? I would think the less equipment the better and the judge should reward the riders who have taken the time to work with their horses and train them without the need for all the gadgets. I'm wondering what your opinion is of this.

Thanks for all your great help and advice!

Debbie:)

Hi Debbie, and thank you! I don't think I'm going to be able to give you a good answer to your question, though, because I've wondered the same thing myself, for years, and asked this question on numerous occasions. I think that what it comes down to is a difference between what you and I think a PLEASURE horse should be -- a horse that is a pleasure to ride -- and what the judges are actually looking for in a "pleasure" class.

It's not just English Pleasure that's confusing. Western Pleasure can be equally mystifying. One of my students became fascinated with WP horses, and I sent her to a very good trainer who was quite successful at large shows with his WP horses. She came back amazed at what she had seen -- and at what she had felt when she rode those horses. The first time she rode such a horse at a lope, the gait was so uncomfortable and the horse was four-beating to the point where she thought it was dead lame! The trainer said "No, that's how it's SUPPOSED to be, it's not meant to be comfortable. If you feel as though you're being slammed back and forth from corner to corner, then you're doing it just right." The horse she liked best at that training barn, a horse that truly WAS a pleasure to ride, and performed three nice, quiet, slow, comfortable gaits, was deemed "worthless" as a show horse!

"English Pleasure" and "Country Pleasure" classes can be quite mystifying. In these classes, "animation" is valued -- and my friends who train and show "English Pleasure" horses tell me that the best candidates for show-ring success are those horses that aren't quite flashy or animated enough for the Park classes, but are by no means calm horses, and aren't necessarily a pleasure to ride. Most of these same trainers DO keep one or two horses that they enjoy, and that they ride on trails and around the farm for their own pleasure -- smooth-moving, calm, cheerful horses that go in a simple saddle and bridle. But when I ask "Why not show THESE horses? They really ARE lovely to ride!" the answer is always the same, a shake of the head and "There's no point giving them trailer space to a show, they can't win anything, that's not what the judges are looking for."

I agree with you that a genuine "pleasure" horse should be able to come out in a simple saddle and bridle -- no weird tack, no weird bits, no exotic shoes -- and perform cheerfully and well, in a way that would make the judge want to RIDE that horse. But that's just MY opinion. ;-)

So I don't know why it is, or whose fault it is -- the judges'? the breeders'? the trainers'? that "Pleasure" with a capital "P" so often seems to have no relation, in terms of either performance or equipment, to a truly pleasurable ride. I would guess that it's like so many other areas of showing, in which the description has little to do with the reality. "Hunter" classes, for instance, rarly showcase horses that would be useful in the hunt field -- and good field hunters wouldn't place in most "Hunter" classes. "Conformation" classes for QHs were once intended to be classes to show off the good conformation of performance-type horses -- now there's an entirely separate "halter type" of horse that wins these classes and then retires early because the conformation that wins ("downhill" horses with heavy bodies, tiny feet, too-straight hind legs) in halter classes is a formula for later lameness. It's comparatively rare to find horses that win at halter and go on to have performance careers... although that may change as the standards and rules change. I hope so. There have already been some welcome changes regarding the headset and tail carriage in WP classes, and perhaps there will be more widespread changes later.

I'd say that if you have a horse that's a true pleasure to ride -- Arab, Morgan, QH, TB, or whatevr it might be -- you should just enjoy riding your horse and not worry about what the show ring standards call for. If there's a choice between a "Pleasure" horse and a horse that's a pleasure to ride, I'll be riding the second one. ;-)

Jessica

Materials from Jessica Jahiel's HORSE-SENSE, The Newsletter of Holistic Horsemanship® may be distributed and copied for personal, non-commercial use provided that all authorship and copyright information, including this notice, is retained. Materials may not be republished in any form without express permission of the author.

Jessica Jahiel's HORSE-SENSE is a free, subscriber-supported electronic Q&A email newsletter which deals with all aspects of horses, their management, riding, and training. For more information, please visit www.horse-sense.org

Please visit Jessica Jahiel: Holistic Horsemanship® [www.jessicajahiel.com] for more information on Jessica Jahiel's clinics, video lessons, phone consultations, books, articles, columns, and expert witness and litigation consultant services.