66.6 percent
Bit late, been to see Hellboy. Smashing film :-) knocks Batman into a stuffed hat.
It took Zippy 15 minutes to warm up and then do some perfect trot shoulder in, quiet and balanced trot canter transitions, relaxed and rhythmic canter circles, two wrong-leg walk to canters and two perfect walk to canters. I finished with five minutes of long and low trot to strengthen up his back. He did it very well, bouncing along and reaching nicely forward to the bit. He was very chipper to start with, as you would expect from a four year old not ridden for several days. But he's really very good even when he's unsettled, which is a considerable relief given that he is so sharp. If he was naughty and sharp he'd be a handful and a half.
It was "thank goodness for the pelham" today again with George. It was the only thing that kept either of us calm, and even then I was half halting the walk every third stride. He refused to hold my right seatbone when bent left (it was hanging out in space!) for a considerable time. But when he agreed to keep his back up in the bend, his walk was different from anything that I have felt him do before. It was huge, with so much movement coming from his shoulders that I was shocked. I'd have loved to have seen it from the floor. He has tomorrow off now and competes, rain allowing, in our first affiliated event since I broke my arm, on Saturday. We are starting with an Intro, I thought it would be wise.
Tomorrow Jazz goes to a top class eventer for our first lesson together. I won't name them until I know what I want to say, I'd like to be able to report warts and all and if I name them I won't be able to without risking a libel case. I'm really looking forward to seeing what they correct about my riding, and what they say about his abilities. Full report tomorrow!
C
posted by cptrayes @ 10:57 PM
9 comments
9 Comments:
Way cool! Good for Zip, of course, but at this point, what else can I expect.
And George..just goes to show that appearances can be deceiving. As well, it also proves that good training can make any horse better and a good horse super. Hope the weather holds for the event.
And exciting to have someone else evaluate Jazz. You might ask about his mental issues as well. Many good trainers have dealt with difficult horses themselves in the past and may have some good insight. Don't be afraid to ask. Some people get to wrapped up in the lesson, they forget to talk about problems.
Lockie Richards (New Zealand 3 Day Team) was incredible with difficult horses. Too bad he passed away as the horse world lost a true master who had all kinds of methods for dealing with problems.
Can't wait to read your reports.
Dark Knight kicks the pants off Hellboy II, though they're both good movies.
Oh and I thought libel cases were on only if it's untruthful? Absolute truth is the best defense against libel suits here.
libel cases.
Perhaps C, you could enligten us about it? I had enraged discussion about it with my husband. It did not make sense.
I would like to know the details the laws, are they international? How does it apply to the World-wide-Web?
Dark Knight is a horror movie, though Jen, isn't it? If you like horror movies, and I wouldn't knowingly pay to see one, and was duped into seeing half of that one, then it's a superb film. But the 12A rating was a travesty for a sadistically voilent film. Hellboy was just good plain cartoon fun. Full of violence (and love and jokes) and none of it believable for an instant.
I have already discussed Jazz's problems with the trainer Jean, that's why I have chosen them for this lesson, they are so prepared to discuss things. I also saw him/her teach my friend and come up with a string of different exercises to suit the horse, as well as firmly correcting the rider's faults - just what I need!
Libel? Prove it's *not* libel in a "my word against yours" argument. If I end up wanting to criticise this trainer, I don't want to name them so there can be no risk. I think I will be singing their praises, actually, but let's get one lesson under our belts first.
I don't know how international the libel laws are Muriel but it most certainly does apply to the web and there have been several high profile cases won in the UK this year.
C
I know C. it applies to teh Web ... On EE they keep mentioning it.
But I was wondering how does it work ... when can somebody say it is libel?
When you mention their name?
Myhusband argues that one cannot crtisizes a product ...hmm.. like saddle for example. that one can be sued for it.
But all over the web, people express their like and dislike for a sadlle or others.
Is it libel?
Can they be sued for saying they "hated YXZ saddle because it wrecked their horse back" ?
Just wondering. Because I do not understand this libel law. I have made my blog private, just to be on the safe side !
Libel is anything that's not true, so if it wrecked your horses back and you can prove it, it's not libel. But even if what you say is true, fighting a court case is horribly expensive and some people just pay up to get rid of the problem.
You're perfectly entitled to say you hated something, but if you say why then what you say must be provable. Like if I said about this trainer today "she was a bad tempered cow" (she wasn't!) and there is only her word against mine, then she'd be quite entitled to sue me if she disagreed and felt I had damaged her business and/or caused her personal hurt.
And in the saddle case, you could say it wrecked your horse's back, but what if the supplier got some video of you riding like a sack of potatoes? They'd have a pretty good case that you damaged the reputation of their product.
But Nicola could show photographs of her wonky saddles, so there was no libel there.
On the other hand, I also stuck to physical things that I could photograph on the saddles I have had problems with and the manufacturer still wrote and told me they were going to talk to solicitors on Monday.
The upshot of it is that it's better not to go there. The only people who win are the lawyers.
C
ps more on my lesson later. I am still mulling it over and need a snooze because she wore us out!
on libel - briefly, the laws on libel and slander in the UK are very tight, which is why a lot of foreigners try and find a way of suing here if something horrid has been said about them in a foreign publication - for instance, if said publication sells copies in the UK, one can sue in the UK.
it's not about truthfulness or otherwise, although PROVING that something you said is true is a good defence to a libel suit. that was why jonathan aitken lost his case against the guardian. and why jeffrey archer won one of his cases against another paper.
it's about whether your reputation has been brought into disrepute. if it has, you can sue.
and the libel laws DO apply to the web, and our ISP's will boot us off if we are found to have libelled someone (as they can be sued as well, probably, as publisher).
anyway, caroline, glad you were only at the pictures, i was starting to worry! (or think you might have been at work, but you usually say).
hope it went well today.
Thanks so much for C and Claire to clarify.
So I guess uit is like "if you have naything bad to say it is better to keep your mouth shut".
Well it was enlightening to say the least!
Post a Comment
<< Home