Kom just hem från jobbet ivrig att fånga några solstrålar men molnen la sig precis i vägen ;) Hmm
Steve Miller är en stjärna på att beskriva och analysera sin hästträning och jag är mycket road av det han skriver.
Sätter det här så att jag hittar igen det och kanske någon annan har glädje av det också.
"Defining the True Friendly Game: Part 1
av Steve Miller kl. den 12 oktober 2010 kl. 03:33 ·
A few of you asked me to try a 'blog' so I thought I'd try this method and see what response I got:
It has been a pillar of Inge's teaching from the early days to incorporate the Extreme Friendly Game (ExFG) very early on in the process of teaching Natural Horsemanship. Inge had always understood Pat's teaching in the old L1/2/3 to mean that the FG always has to be in balance with the Driving Game (DG). So when she was invited to teach the first ever 12 week module in Pat's HMS University (quite an honour), she just did as she always had. Others commented and complimented her on her use of the ExFG vs DG but Inge responded that this is what she thought every other PP did! LOL!
These days, Inge's goal is for the horse to read our intention and not our body, not our stick and string and not our degree of energy (unless it is focused on them or shows them a path to follow!).
I thought I had a fairly solid FG but when I went to Inge's Foundation course in May 2010, I found that I had HUGE holes in my Parelli foundation. Yes, I could stand in Zone 1 and thwack the ground on either side of Jo's nose (missing by 1 inch!) and she stayed relaxed - but when I asked for even a light, rhythmic FG over Zone 3 in the walk, Jo either came Sideways Toward me or she was off! I had accidentally taught her that when she was on the move 'everything means something' - or had she taught me to keep 'quiet'?
This was a kind of turning point for me because instead of experiencing the highs and lows of success and failure as I often had on courses, I not only saw the large deficit in my relationship with Jo but also did not get upset by this. I recognised the importance of getting it fixed and I knew instantly that I HAD the necessary skills and that I COULD fix it. That was a good feeling. I also recognised that I needed to ignore what was supposed to be our focus for that session and get these fundamentals improved.
So, 20 mins later, I had not practised what we had meant to be doing but I did have a rudimentary FG (CS & SS rhythmically over Z3) in halt, walk ,trot and canter. Phew! This was sufficient to complete the course but I knew this fell far below Inge's dreams for us. I apologised to Inge for not working on the suggested tasks but she had noted our difficulties and was happy that I ditched the task in favour of the fundamentals and that I had got it fixed.
Back home, every time I started to think about improving my FG, Inge style, I got confused. There only seemed to be a few variables but it still all seemed to send my head spinning.
One day, not long ago, when I got bored during a seminar, I doodled idly to myself. Then my LB became engaged and I tabulated what I was actually trying to do. It all got horribly complicated. In no time at all I had tabulated;
5 Gaits = back-up/ halt/ walk/ trot/ canter (gallop not included cos I can't keep up during ground work ! LOL!)
5 Zones (at least)
2 types of Internal Energy; can be High or Low ( the horse needs to learn to ignore both UNLESS there is 'intention' behind the energy - a concept unique to Inge, I think, but one that she taught throughout her Parelli days).
4 types of Stimulus type; Movement or Noise but both of these can be Rhythmic or Random.
So for any one person+object combo (eg person with CS & SS) there are 5 x 5 x 2 x 4 = 200 types of Friendly Game!!!!
No wonder I was confused and no wonder my FG felt incomplete! LOL!
Let's take an example;
Can you play Rhythmic CS & SS over Z4 in back up such that the horse ignores your stick and string and only listens to your intention (perhaps backed up by a minimal body language cue)?
Can you make Random Noises in Zone 1 as the horse canters to you? Think of using an old fashioned football rattle as the stimulus. Now there's one hell of a strong draw to be had if you got this to work!
OMG, I forgot to include On-Line versus Liberty. OK, that makes it 400 FGs per object! But then again, there are 3 lengths of rope (at least). So that's 4 variables; 0 (=Liberty), 12ft, 22ft and 45ft. So that's 4 x200 = 800 FGs per object!!!
You can probably see why I shut off my analytical brain at this point cos it was shouting at me to not even START this IMPOSSIBLE process! LOL!
In recent times, I have learned to apply my analytical mode only on specific occasions. When I started and for the most part of my NH endeavours, 'LB Analytical' was my default position. There's nothing wrong with this and it has served me well but like everything else, it needs to be in balance - and my use of LB vs RB back then was not. Let's be honest, although PNH never stated 'LB = Good, RB = Bad', this is the message that a lot of people took and I was probably among that number. It was only this January that I found how to go more by 'feel' - to work things out IN the moment and not 'beforehand', to trust more to my instincts and inner voice (intuition). It may not be coincidence that this was when my own play drive and imagination grew exponentially and I started to just make things up. 2 horses at Liberty? If it looks like a safe option, why not just try it?!!! This was when I started to make and publish videos of my own progress on FB. I had found the FUN in fundamental again : )
Anyway, as the second Inge course approaches, I returned to my self-imposed FG homework in the realisation that there WERE some 800 FGs but that I was going to stick to a 12ft line, that I was going to get only great at the Walk first (then trot, then canter), that I already had a good FG in Halt in place, that I was only going to concentrate on Zone 2/3 to begin with. That I was not going to attempt random movements just yet (remember Pat's 'drunken Cowboy' walk?) and that I was also NOT going to worry about noise as a variable until all the movement variables were in place. So the REAL variables were;
1. My energy being low.
2. My energy being high but in an unfocused way.
In this context, all other variables being the same, if I were to focus the energy toward a certain part of the horse, I would expect (and cause) that body part to move. In other words the HIGH energy along with intention is the Driving Game. This creates a third 'Game' to play so that the horse can learn to distinguish between the FG and DG;
3. My energy being high and focused in a direction (in the manner Inge teaches)
So the difference between the Driving Game and the Friendly Game, at this level, should be only my intention; not my body language, not my internal energy (or 'Life' as Pat refers to it) and not my movement or the movement of my stick and string.
So, I had reduced my nightmare of 800 FGs to just 3; Movement of stick and string in Z3 with 1) Low energy, 2) High energy but 'unfocused' and 3) High energy with clear purpose and direction.
If anyone reads this far and is curious to hear how I got on, the mistakes I made and the solutions I found, then please leave me a message to ask for Part 2 : )
[Oh NO! I forgot that there are TWO sides to the horse, and the TOP of Zone 3 = riding position so there's 8 Zones - at least....... argghhhh!]"
Steve Miller UK
