Many people believe that the sport has split into two distinct streams: classical dressage and competition dressage. To unpack the opinions on both sides, first we need to define what is “correct dressage.” Article 401 in the FEI’s dressage rule book makes that definition clear:
1. The object of Dressage is the development of the Horse into a happy Athlete through harmonious education. As a result, it makes the Horse calm, supple, loose and flexible, but also confident, attentive and keen, thus achieving perfect understanding with the Athlete. These qualities are demonstrated by:
• The freedom and regularity of the paces.
• The harmony, lightness and ease of the movements.
• The lightness of the forehand and the engagement of the hindquarters, originating from a lively impulsion.
• The acceptance of the bit, with submissiveness/throughness (Durchlässigkeit) without any tension or resistance.
4. By virtue of a lively impulsion and the suppleness of the joints, free from the paralysing effects of resistance, the Horse obeys willingly and without hesitation and responds to the various aids calmly and with precision, displaying a natural and harmonious balance both physically and mentally.
The rule book goes on to clearly define correct ideals for each gait and each movement – ideals which are very much in line with the fundamental classical principals of dressage: the systematic, gymnastic training of the horse to enhance the natural gaits and create harmony between horse and rider.
Despite these specific guidelines, there seems to be a growing sentiment that correctness is being sacrificed for the flashy and extravagant movement today’s dressage horses are being bred for, resulting in the development of “competition dressage” and “classical dressage” as two separate disciplines.
What the Pros Think
Charles de Kunffy. (Photo by Catherine Respess / RedMareEnterprises.com)
Legendary riding master and classical dressage advocate Charles de Kunffy doesn’t buy that theory.
“I do not accept the idea that in competition you should present a different horse than in classical riding,” says the author of Dressage Principles Illuminated and The Athletic Development of the Dressage Horse in a recent Zoom chat on the topic. “There is only good riding versus bad riding, not classical riding versus competition riding.”
While everyone interviewed for this article agrees that there should be no difference between the two, the question of whether classical principles and the FEI’s definitions of correctness are always being upheld in competition gets a bit thornier.
Canadian Grand Prix rider, trainer, and international competitor Wendy Christoff is concerned about the direction in which the sport is moving. When asked whether incorrect movements are sometimes rewarded in the competition ring, Christoff was blunt:
“Absolutely I think the flashy but not necessarily correct movers are being rewarded. The ‘leg movers’ versus the ‘back movers’ are also in this mix. The slow and flamboyant front leg in the extended trot with the hind leg nowhere near parallel is one of my pet peeves.”
Christoff points to the popularity of the superstar Totilas as the beginning of the classical vs competition divide. The huge scores awarded to the stallion in competition were often controversial, particularly in his later years when moments of incorrectness and unevenness were visible even to the untrained eye. Totilas brought a level of athleticism and extravagance to the sport which, though initially viewed as extreme, soon became an ideal which riders and breeders sought to emulate.
“I went to the stallion show in Holland this past February,” says Christoff. “The quality of the young stallions now is jaw-dropping, but they are all moving in this hyper-mobile and extravagant way.”
One of Canada’s top international dressage riders, Tom Dvorak, has developed a number of horses through to the Grand Prix level and has represented Canada at Pan American Games, the World Cup and World Championships. He believes maintaining correctness in today’s athletic dressage horse comes with its own set of challenges for riders and trainers.
“As riders we have had to adjust to the more athletic horse,” he says. “Today’s horses are a lot more energetic and sensitive, so they require a rider with a good balanced seat, good feel, and – as with any horse – patience. Flashy, expressive-moving horses are not necessarily the easiest horses to judge, nor to train, in my opinion. Certainly, we must always look for the correct training in the horse no matter how expressive it is. Expressive movers, or flashy horses, are usually also quite high energy, which could easily create negative tension. Positive tension is what we need in the Grand Prix horse, but negative tension should be penalized.”
“If an expressive horse is trained correctly and performs movements well, they can afford a mistake or two in their test and will still achieve a high score because everything else is brilliant,” Dvorak continues. “It is the upside of having an impressive horse, but it still has to be trained and presented correctly. If an expressive horse is trained incorrectly, an educated judge will not reward this type of training.”
De Kunffy agrees that education is key to upholding the principles of classical dressage – not just the education of riders, but of instructors, trainers, and judges as well.
“There is a troubling tendency today where riders and teachers don’t always understand the principles behind the terminology used in dressage. We no longer have the academies where goals are agreed upon and universally taught,” he explains. “It’s our duty to make sure that information about the classical heritage of riding is taught by educated teachers. With such a rapidly growing demand for teachers and judges, the education required isn’t always taking place or being passed on.”
“Judges are ultimately in charge of the survival of the principles of classical dressage; they are the most important measuring device we have. We depend on them to give a solid, accurate evaluation in the ring., and trainers are very mindful of judges’ opinions.”
When asked whether he believes classical principles are always being upheld by judges in competition, and whether correctness is sometimes ignored in “flashy” movers, de Knuffy doesn’t hold back.
“The FEI definitions are a good starting point to determine correctness,” he says. “In the medium trot, for example, the hind feet must over-track. In the piaffe the buttocks can’t be bouncing and the croup can’t be higher than before the movement began. Those are requirements. They are not negotiable and should be marked as a 4 or less. Many riders are over-rewarded.”
“When it comes to judges there is a continuum from excellent and outstanding, to those who don’t seem to have a clue,” he continues. “We all understand ‘pretty,’ and animated horses are valued highly. If the knowledge of correct athletics is not clear in the judges mind due to a lack of education, then they will score based on superficial beauty. It’s not new. This always happened in the past and still does today. But in dressage, the real beauty is when it’s correct.”
From the Judge’s Booth
How do the judges feel about the great divide? FEI 4* judge Cesar Torrente, who hosted the Zoom chat with de Kunffy, believes classical and competition dressage are one and the same. “The FEI rules follow classical dressage principles and judges must follow them,” he confirms.
Cara Whitham.
Torrente’s Canadian colleagues agree. Retired FEI 5* judge Cara Whitham, retired 4* judge Lorraine MacDonald, and current 4* judge Brenda Minor put their heads together to collectively tackle this complicated issue.
“Dressage is a living sport; there is always an evolution as times change,” the group says. “However, the training scale will not change and the correct adherence to the training scale will always be the guiding foundation of successful dressage. Specifically, the ‘natural paces’ of the horse must be taken into consideration, focusing on freedom and regularity. Education programs for dressage judges around the world begin with discussions and demonstrations of the paces. Integrated into this is the kinetic understanding of how a horse’s body functions and how the conformation can affect the freedom and expression of each horse.”
Lorraine MacDonald.
“There are many roads that lead to Rome; however, the training scale has stood strong throughout all decades of dressage development and evolution. When understood and correctly followed by riders, trainers, and used as the foundation evaluation tool by judges, the result is a breathtaking, beautiful, harmonious performance.”
If judges are quite certain they are correctly marking what they see, but a growing number of spectators, riders, and armchair experts complain that “flashy but incorrect” horses are being rewarded in the ring, where is the disconnect? Is it denial on the part of the judges or a lack of understanding on the part of the observer? Is it the perception that a score of 7 is a reward, without realizing that had the movement been performed more correctly, the same horse might have received an 8 or even a 9?
The Canadian judges believe the disconnect may stem from the following factors:
a) The judge focuses 100% of the time on the horse and rider in order to give an accurate evaluation with marks and comments for anything with a score of 6 or below. The spectator, however knowledgeable, watches but is often distracted by other matters, thus missing a truly accurate or consistent impression.
b) Judges are positioned around the ring, each having a different view of the horse/rider. Spectators can be located anywhere, but they are not in the ring.
c) It is the judge’s job to stay fully focused and unbiased.
d) Judges are fully cognizant of what each score means in relation to the training scale. There is no ‘formula’ judging and often spectators will think a movement which has a small mistake should be marked down. However, they may not take into consideration the positive aspects of that movement, whereas judges are trained to evaluate the positive along with the negative.
Brenda Minor.
“Judges mark what they see,” says the Canadian panel of experts. “Depending on where a judge is situated – for instance at the side – they are more likely to see and lower the score due to a lack of engagement and thoroughness, and would comment to that effect. However, scoring could be influenced by the activity, regularity, contact, uphill carriage, precision, and other factors. There is no prescription for any movement. A judge has to look at and assess the entire picture. However, slow and short behind and flailing front legs are not acceptable and would receive a lower score, as they show incorrect training.”
“Judges today do see more quality horses with extravagant movement. We need to get past the expression ‘flashy mover’ and simply acknowledge that horses are now being bred specifically for dressage, resulting in more expressive, ground-covering paces and more supple and elastic bodies with more naturally uphill conformation,” they conclude. “When correctly trained and ridden, these horses produce dynamic, powerful performances which appear effortless and light on the ground, leaving the onlooker with the impression of being in complete harmony. In order to be competitive, top international horses have to be both of quality and correctly trained.”
Now you’re just showing off! Charlotte Dujardin (GBR) and Mount St John Freestyle during the victory lap of the FEI Dressage World Cup Grand Prix Freestyle at Olympia. (Jon Stroud/FEI photo)
