19/07/2026
A wonderful read!
Principles of the Use of the Aids
Recently, I had a relatively new student ask me a basic question about applying the aids during a lesson that was introducing shoulder in. She asked, once the movement was achieved, should she continue to actively ask for the quarters with her legs, the shoulders with the reins, and so on: in short, should her aids continuously act? And it occurred to me, across disciplines, this is a question that is rarely asked, but often wondered about, tacitly enforced, or seems to waffle from one extreme to another.
My answer to this question, when asked is to respond as follows. “Hmm, let me demonstrate…What day is it?” The student invariably answers: Thursday, Sunday etc. and then I repeat: “What day is it?” And the student responds:….Uh…the 17th? And then I repeat: “What day is it?” And the student responds…..Um…..the third day of the week? And then I repeat: “What day is it?” When the student gives up, becomes flustered, yells at me or stops answering, I respond: “That’s pretty annoying, isn’t isn’t it, when you give me a correct answer and I keep asking the same question….” This exchange perfectly illustrates one of the basic tenets of the use of the aids in my teaching: The aids are to request, restore, but never to maintain. (Like all great artists, I have stolen this from Philippe Karl, via Pippa Callanan 😀 Nothing I share in this post is original, nota bene!)
This post is not about the technical use of your aids, per se, but a brief treatise on the most important concepts concerning training a horse to the aids, in a way that is both ethical, and effective. In this post, aids refers to those that a rider gives through gesture, pressure, weight, energy, breath, voice, or touch. It does not refer to artificial “training aids” which I refer to as gadgets, that cannot release and simply act as a bandaid to hide an unwanted behavior.
Here is my short list of principles regarding the aids, and their sources as best I can recall them:
- The aids are to request, restore, but never to maintain: see above. Any aid needed to maintain (for example, a nagging leg to go forward, a lifting rein to insist on flexion one direction, etc) is an indicator that the horse has not understood the basic request of the aid, or is struggling physically to execute what is asked, and a step backward in training is required.
-
- As little as possible, as much as is necessary. It is often repeated in horsemanship circles that the horse can only be as light as your first ask. However, I often see people hesitate to increase their pressure, presence or energy when they ask a horse something and the horse doesn’t respond. This for me, creates a similar conundrum as the rule banning maintenance aids: a kind of Chinese water torture of the aids, that creates a dull, bored, tuned out horse. On the other end of the spectrum, is the insistence that aids can be increased, either internally or with artificial enhancements (spurs, draw reins etc) indefinitely, or used with great strength from the initial ask. As a child who rode in the hunter discipline, the solution to many training issues was proposed: “More Leg”! But this isn’t actually correct: you cannot strengthen your leg aid indefinitely, what you are really looking for is more *response* to the leg. A horse learns to tune out repetitive asks, often even very strong or harsh ones if they are not applied judiciously, with meaning, the way we would a fuzzy radio station, or the annoying tag on our shirt. This is where a nuanced understanding of escalating aids comes in. In my program, if the rider makes a request, we continue our request, with escalation of the aids, until the horse makes an attempt to answer. It can be a wrong answer, or a partial response, but If there’s not a response, we do increase our ask. We do not dull our horse by repeating the aid ad nauseam, we do not release without a response, and we do not escalate without giving a moment for the horse to reply. This is extremely important because:
-
- The release is where the learning happens. Again, I have heard some version of this repeated often in horsemanship circles. If you use negative reinforcement training (please note, this doesn’t mean punishment, this means you introduce a stimulus, for example, your leg aid, and then remove the stimulus when there is a positive response from the horse) consistency in your release is essential, so the horse understands what the aid is meant to request. Horses aren’t born with a button in their ribs telling them go forward, nor do they understand pressure on their head means stop. We must take time to explain each aid by very judicious application, and *most crucially* immediate and full release of the aid when the horse gives us even a semblance of what we’re looking for. We can, incrementally, move that goal post back, looking for better refinement as the horse understands what is being asked, but at the beginning, our timing and our release of the aids are crucial. Timely release from an initial ask/introduction of the aids is like teaching the horse the alphabet. Often I see people using glaringly louder aids from the jump, without explaining through measured escalation what they want. I am always reminded of my fellow countrymen when I lived abroad. I would watch Americans yell in English at a native of whatever country they were visiting, simply progressively more slowly and more loudly, rather than attempting to speak the native language. The listener simply did not speak English Yelling it louder and slower didn’t make them magically understand…it just made everyone within earshot assume the yelling American was a moron. Likewise, horses don’t innately understand the aids we use to communicate: the release (and in positive reinforcement the reward) are what give the horse the most clarity in terms of what we are looking for, as a basis.
-
- Aids must not conflict. In the French School, from Baucher, we have a tenet: hand without leg, leg without hand. Many riders struggle to execute aids in isolation - we are only human after all! But anyone who has experienced a tendency to hold back with the reins or posture, while attempting to drive the horse forward will recognize the same scenario: When conflicting aids are applied, the horse simply chooses to obey the aid that most aligns with his nature, conformation, or feeling in the moment. A horse asked to stop and go simultaneously will either stop, because he is economical, more placid in temperament, or a bit tired, or he will go because he is energetic, alert, maybe a bit on edge. Therefore, it behooves any rider to educate themselves and be judicious about how they apply each aid, in order to avoid muddying the waters, and creating a conflicting or confusing message for their horse.
-
- Nothing beautiful comes from force. Again, stolen from Pippa Callanan. (Edited to add: my friend Marcy Baer reminds me, Pippa probably lifted this from the venerable Xenophon one of the first Western European trainers to actually write about training…and may predate Pippa by a few millennia 😀 )But we see this concept reflected in many good classical trainers. While you can push and mold a horse into a movement, particularly if you are fit, or using harsh tack, or gadgets, it is rare to see any true fluidity, harmony or ease through force. So, unless you enjoy “gymnasticizing your horse like a bag of muscles” as I once heard Philippe Karl describe it: this is probably something to eschew and avoid. If you feel you need force to make the horse do something, there’s likely a problem with the earlier explanation and training of the aid, or a physical or mental inability on the horse’s part to perform what you are asking.
-
- Yes has very little meaning when No isn’t an option. I have heard this phrase from Warwick Schiller, and I think it rings very true. Horses that are often described as “dead broke” come to mind. These are the horses in viral tik Tok videos in freeze/shut down, while children shoot guns off their backs, and teens fling trash bags at their faces. These are horses who, often hard tied, have been exhausted mentally, physically, and emotionally, drained of cortisol, and have given up any semblance of reaction, as it yields no relief from the unrelenting pressure of the human. Aids, by definition, should be helping the horse to understand or execute what you are asking. This version of psychological (and sometimes physical abuse) often is described as “desensitizing”, This is traumatizing, not desensitizing. If a horse meets an aid with resistance, the rider has to choose whether to escalate, or to go a step back, and re-explain the aid in smaller pieces. The rider’s own discretion, education, tact, and skill are essential here, and if you are inexperienced, the same could be said of a trainer you trust. If you see professionals resorting to force and submission, refusing the allow the horse any answer but the affirmative, this is not a trainer, this is someone interested in obedience. They are not educating the horse: they are forcing the horse, containing the horse, and using the horse.
I am sure I could write a whole book on the principles of how to apply the aids. Are there any essential points you think ought to be included in this list? Please add them in the comments. Take issue with any of my descriptions or principles? Discussion, if measured, polite and thoughtful, is always welcome here.
Here is a photo of Mousse in his first ride in the double bridle, as I am explaining the feel and meaning of two bits for the first time. A nice moment to capture some of the alchemy of understanding that the most subtle, refined aids can produce:
23/08/2026
17/08/2026
13/08/2026
27/07/2026
27/07/2026
19/07/2026
16/06/2026