25/05/2024
Love love love this! this is a fantastic explanation on why teaching lateral flexion can actually be a disadvantage!
WHY YOU SHOULD NOT TEACH LATERAL FLEXION
My previous post started some debate about the use of lateral flexion in training. This has prompted me to explain my view on lateral flexion by reposting an essay I wrote in August 2022.
_____________________
Lateral flexion is one of the most common exercises taught to horses that are being started. Virtually every trainer, 90% or more, in the “Natural Horsemanship” sphere teaches it. I am one of the few trainers who won’t teach lateral flexions and discourage its practice at my clinics.
For those that don’t know what a lateral flexion is, it is when a person applies a feel to the inside rein and asks a horse to softly bend its neck around in the direction of the feel, while the horse keeps its feet absolutely still. It can be one on the ground and under saddle.
The purpose of teaching lateral flexion to a horse is to ingrain them to offer a soft lateral bend to the inside rein. From talking to trainers who teach lateral flexion to horses and riders, it is intended to teach a horse to give to the inside rein without resistance and to build strength and control. That sounds like a worthy goal, right?
So what’s my problem with teaching lateral flexion?
I have two objections.
The first objection is easy to explain and get out of the way quickly.
I have never heard a single trainer, who teaches lateral flexion, talk about the horse giving its thought to the feel of the inside rein or to be looking in the direction of the bend. Not one person! Without a change of thought, bending the neck is just a trick and avoidance of rein pressure. Nothing of significant value is learned without the horse thinking in the direction of the feel of the rein. Go to YouTube and watch videos and notice how all the talk is about how the horse bends and how light the feel is in the reins. Nothing about getting a change of thought. Even more telling, is the fact that when most riders release the inside rein, the horse instantly flips its neck straight like a spring, as if he has been just waiting for the second the rein is dropped. Anytime we ask a horse a question we should be waiting for a change of thought, not just a movement.
My second objection to teaching lateral flexion is gravely serious.
Trainers make a big deal that when performing a lateral flexion the feet should not move. I believe this is a serious mistake that makes lateral flexions damaging to how a horse operates. When asking for flexion to the inside, the thought should follow the feel, the neck should follow the feel and the inside hind foot should yield across the outside hind foot. This should occur because the inside rein inspires the horse to think to the inside and line up its body in that direction without the need for the rider’s leg to drive the hindquarters to disengage. The inside rein should connect to the entire body, not just from nose to wither.
By insisting the feet are stationary when the horse yields to the inside rein, we are teaching a horse that the rein should not connect to the hindquarters. In other words, giving to the inside rein should only go as far back as the wither and not to the whole horse. To create straightness, balance, softness, and correctness I need the inside rein to connect to the inside hind.
Without a connection to the inside hind foot, when we ask a horse to move in a circle or turn, the hindquarters will push the shoulders to the outside of the circle or turn. It creates imbalance and crookedness. We taught the horse to be crooked. Then to fix it we often apply an outside rein to block the shoulders from drifting to the outside. The outside rein blocks the shoulders, but the real cause of the problem stems from the inside rein not connecting to the hindquarters.
At the very least it causes crookedness, and we need to call on the outside rein. But in the worst case, it causes rubber-necking and we need to call an ambulance (rubber-necking is when a horse is bent say to the left, but traveling to the right). Don’t ride a horse that rubber-necks until it has been re-trained to connect the inside rein to the hindquarters.
I have asked dozens of trainers and clinicians who teach lateral flexion why they require the horse’s feet to be still. Some of these trainers are the biggest names in the business and people some of you no doubt admire and follow. Not one of them can give me a rational explanation of why the horse must stand still. Never have I heard a logical reason why you can’t teach a horse to softly bend to the inside rein while at the same time connecting the hindquarters to the inside rein. It stuns me that so far nobody has been able to explain what it is about lateral flexion that I don’t understand.
The closest it has come to an answer is that lateral flexion is setting a horse up for the one-rein stop. But this is not true because it is the disengagement of the hindquarters that sets up a horse for the one-rein stop. When a horse is having a meltdown, your best chance of gaining back control is to disengage the hindquarters as soon as possible to shut down any bucking or bolting.
I am totally in agreement that we should teach to softly give to the inside rein. I’m not in agreement with why we can’t do that and have the hindquarters softly yielding too.
What advantage is gained by having the feet standstill? What disadvantage is created by connecting the hindquarters to the inside rein? Maybe next time you attend a horsemanship clinic or have a lesson, you could ask your teacher these two questions. If you get a perfectly rational explanation, please let me know. I want to understand if I missing something.
