Calling all level 3 graduates of Parelli!!! (official or unofficial)

[Meovcorz]

Statement in the title really. Would you say it was all worthwhile. Did you decide to do more? And why? Why did you decide to start level 2 when you had finished level 1, and why did you decide to start level 3 when you had already completed level 2?

 

[Meovcorz]

Bumpity Bump.

 

[Waikato Valuta]

I don't think there are many level 3 graduates on the forum. It takes years of hard work and dedication not to mention utter faith in the Parelli method.

I have done bits of level 1 and 2 (Unofficial).

I like parts of the system and not other parts. Where are you at right now? Have you done any Parelli before?

 

[mayoguinness]

Think Crystle Fire got to level 3! and I'm sure theres a couple of others on here!

 

[wonkeywoody]

Hi, (not a graduate of level 3 - still working on it!)
I started P after 34 years of BHS (style). Reason? My horse had become an excellent rearer and NOTHING else was working! Started P as the website said level 1 would help cure that problem (amongst a host of others' - some of which he did too but not to any serious extent).
It was like magic. He responded really well. I noticed MASSIVE changes alround in him and in my confidence. I progressied to level 2 before completing level 1 as he was better at some games than others and I didnt want him to get stale. Ditto starting level 3.
I have thoroughly enjoyed having a different angle at which to approach problems. Its nice to not have to chose either hacking/schooling/jumping but being able to 'play' instead. Its a fun way of overcoming alkinds of problems.
I WISH I'd had all this knowledge years ago.
Lots of people dismiss NH/Parelli or bits of. I'm the same with more classical stuff. Suppose its each to their own, but having had to decide whether to open my mind and views or PTS my (then dangerous) horse I am glad I ventured on this journey. I will certainly be very different with the way I bring on future horses.

 

[Crystal Fire]

Nope, I didn't get to level 3. I've done a fair bit of the level 3 groundwork and liberty, but in terms of tasks completed I left Parelli around the middle of level 2 somewhere.
If you want my absolutely honest and strictly personal opinion...?
I studied Parelli for years, including working in the organisation for a while. For a lot of that time I thought it was the best thing since sliced bread. I irritated the hell out of people by saying "Why don't you try Parelli for that problem?" a lot Then as I started to look around at other trainers, and also looked at what I was learning with a more questioning attitude, I started to re-evaluate what I was learning. There had always been some aspects of Parelli that made me uncomfortable because I thought they were a bit harsh or confrontational, so I kind of faffed about not doing much for about a year - hosting clinics but not taking a horse. I had also seen quite a lot of senior PNH people (including Pat) working with horses and was not sure if I wanted to become like them.
Then some instructors left Parelli and, as a result of learning with other horsemen and also because they had more flexibility, their teaching styles changed. Some of them were the trainers I aspired to be, and I needed to learn more about why. I spent a month in Australia with Steve Halfpenny and was blown away by how quickly I learnt to work with a horse at "level 3" of softness and responsiveness, skipping over the "level 1 + 2" stage altogether. I asked Steve "Why were we mucking about for all those years for when we could go straight to this?" and he said words to the effect of "I know". I have also attended clinics with Phil Rodey, Philip Nye, Mark Rashid and others, all of them very valuable and useful. In Parelli this was discouraged, as Pat once said to me "Until you've passed level 3 you ain't got the savvy to evaluate different trainers". Maybe not evaluate, but certainly I was able to learn from them.
I like that I no longer use 4 phases of pressure to teach. I like the end of the heavy metal clips on lead ropes. I love being encouraged to study as widely as possible in my horsemanship (for example I have a fantastic classical trainer helping me with ridden work). Oh yes, and I've decided, to quote Phil Rodey "This ain't playing games, this is darn serious".
So for me it was worth the study in Parelli because I learnt a lot and it opened me up to learning so much more. Why did I keep on going through the levels and tasks? Because all my friends were and I wanted to be an instructor. Would I do it again with hindsight? No, from the start I'd pursue my learning with some of the less well known horsemen whose style is more in keeping with how I want to be around horses. (Which takes much more time, imagination and effort because you don't get a complete programme of 3 levels to follow ).
As I said, that's just my personal opinion and experience, others will be completely different I know.

 

[mayoguinness]

Nope, I didn't get to level 3. I've done a fair bit of the level 3 groundwork and liberty, but in terms of tasks completed I left Parelli around the middle of level 2 somewhere.
If you want my absolutely honest and strictly personal opinion...?
I studied Parelli for years, including working in the organisation for a while. For a lot of that time I thought it was the best thing since sliced bread. I irritated the hell out of people by saying "Why don't you try Parelli for that problem?" a lot Then as I started to look around at other trainers, and also looked at what I was learning with a more questioning attitude, I started to re-evaluate what I was learning. There had always been some aspects of Parelli that made me uncomfortable because I thought they were a bit harsh or confrontational, so I kind of faffed about not doing much for about a year - hosting clinics but not taking a horse. I had also seen quite a lot of senior PNH people (including Pat) working with horses and was not sure if I wanted to become like them.
Then some instructors left Parelli and, as a result of learning with other horsemen and also because they had more flexibility, their teaching styles changed. Some of them were the trainers I aspired to be, and I needed to learn more about why. I spent a month in Australia with Steve Halfpenny and was blown away by how quickly I learnt to work with a horse at "level 3" of softness and responsiveness, skipping over the "level 1 + 2" stage altogether. I asked Steve "Why were we mucking about for all those years for when we could go straight to this?" and he said words to the effect of "I know". I have also attended clinics with Phil Rodey, Philip Nye, Mark Rashid and others, all of them very valuable and useful. In Parelli this was discouraged, as Pat once said to me "Until you've passed level 3 you ain't got the savvy to evaluate different trainers". Maybe not evaluate, but certainly I was able to learn from them.
I like that I no longer use 4 phases of pressure to teach. I like the end of the heavy metal clips on lead ropes. I love being encouraged to study as widely as possible in my horsemanship (for example I have a fantastic classical trainer helping me with ridden work). Oh yes, and I've decided, to quote Phil Rodey "This ain't playing games, this is darn serious".
So for me it was worth the study in Parelli because I learnt a lot and it opened me up to learning so much more. Why did I keep on going through the levels and tasks? Because all my friends were and I wanted to be an instructor. Would I do it again with hindsight? No, from the start I'd pursue my learning with some of the less well known horsemen whose style is more in keeping with how I want to be around horses. (Which takes much more time, imagination and effort because you don't get a complete programme of 3 levels to follow ).
As I said, that's just my personal opinion and experience, others will be completely different I know.

Oh right, well I was close I like that I no longer use 4 phases of pressure to teach. I like the end of the heavy metal clips on lead ropes. I love being encouraged to study as widely as possible in my horsemanship
Ditto, same for me when I met Jayne!

 

[Dancinglite]

Since this thread is not in the Natural Horsemanship forum ( where I will not go) I assume it is open for all comments good or bad.

I cannot condone a training system that is so closed minded that it disses other training systems soley for the purpose of selling "gagets" at ridiculously high prices to the masses of people that think looking at one of these expensive DVD's makes them into the worlds next super trainer.

I have seen more dangerous antics performed by the 30 minute dvd parelli "instant trainer" than I have ever seen by the average person that has been coached under the usual school situations.

 

[india]

I passed L1 & L2 ( L2 groundwork) and unofficially went through the online and liberty tasks of L3. Would I say it was worthwhile.........YES YES YES, it was thanks to this programme and especially Kaffa Murray (3* PNH instructor) that I was able to help my horse overcome a serious behaviour problem, pain free and without the need of any gadgets.!!!!!

Although I no longer study the programme, I still believe Pat Parelli is one of the world's best trainers...there's some things he's done and still does that I'm not comfortable with.... also some tools I would never use, ie: a PNH 12' rope with a bull clip...to harsh for my liking. But that's my personal choice. The thing is, most folks don't realise........you DON'T have to use the PNH gear to practice (or pass) the levels or does it insist you follow it to the rule, (there's only one rule, and that is there are no rules)

There's always going to be folk that knock the system... mainly it's those who've studied the programme a little, think they know it all – go out and wreck their horse and then blame it on the training method. Others think they know a lot but are often only making assumptions or blind guesses.

Every training method has it's faults, but PNH must be getting something right (besides their excellent marketing strategies) to have been around so long and have hundreds of thousand students worldwide...let's face it - no business could survive and grow on good marketing alone.



I would recommend it to anyone...take from it what suits your personal circumstances and goals.

 

[Waikato Valuta]

There's always going to be folk that knock the system... mainly it's those who've studied the programme a little, think they know it all – go out and wreck their horse and then blame it on the training method. Others think they know a lot but are often only making assumptions or blind guesses.

Ok, has anyone here see the video in pack 1?

Parelli say something like this:

We use the 12' foot rope and then we double it to the 22' rope. And then what do we do? That's right we double it again to a 45' rope.

Now is it just me or is the maths off there?

After seeing that video I lost all respect for the system. I have done level 1 and parts of 2 but I would never buy anything from him. His prices are extortion.

It's not that the system didn't work for me or that I wrecked my horse. I just don't agree with some of his methods. If you want to do it that way, go for it. But you can't dismiss me as making assumptions and blind guesses.

 

[india]

Ok, has anyone here see the video in pack 1?

Parelli say something like this:

We use the 12' foot rope and then we double it to the 22' rope. And then what do we do? That's right we double it again to a 45' rope.

Now is it just me or is the maths off there?

After seeing that video I lost all respect for the system. I have done level 1 and parts of 2 but I would never buy anything from him. His prices are extortion.

Sorry, genuinely confused here.....

You first say that you lost all respect for the PNH system after watching the video in level one and that you wouldn't buy anything from him. Yet in the same paragraph you state that you've done L1 & part of L2.......why did you study a system you had no respect for...and how was you able to study parts of L2

The incorrect rope measurements on the video was intentional, it's just one of many irritating little quips that PP throws around.

 

[india]

.... I like the end of the heavy metal clips on lead ropes.....

Now I don't think you intended to write that did you CF....think you could have missed a little word out.

DOH......I get it now (think I've had one glass of wine to many tonight)!!!!!

 

[fairlady]

Well I personally follow my own system. I read up on different things and the things that make sense to me I will try. I would not follow any system to the letter as there is lots of things I personally do not agree with. However, I feel it is very important to keep an 'open mind' and if you are failing miserably with one method be open minded enough to read up and try another method or system.

I love some of the Pat Parelli stuff and disagree with some others. Take bits that will help you and apply them and disregard the rest.

 

[Waikato Valuta]

I had an instructor who did Parelli. I did level 1 and some 2 with her before I brought anything.

As I said, it's not "all" bad. I still use many of the exercises.

I just think there are cheaper ways to do the same thing.

 

[Kate F.]

I spent a month in Australia with Steve Halfpenny and was blown away by how quickly I learnt to work with a horse at "level 3" of softness and responsiveness, skipping over the "level 1 + 2" stage altogether. I asked Steve "Why were we mucking about for all those years for when we could go straight to this?" and he said words to the effect of "I know".

There was an interesting discussion a little while ago in the NH section that touched on this, and I'd be interested in what you think, CF. After the usual backwards and forwards about pros and cons of Parelli, the poster drew a distinction between behaviourism, or rather behavioural based training, and natural horsemanship. She said, if she wants to know why a horse behaves in a certain way, she'll go to a behaviourist, if she wants to know what to do when the horse behaves in a certain way, she goes to Parelli.

(The discussion was over the horsenality chart - and I'd said I found it very anthropmorphic and not helping people understand how a horse thinks. She said that wasn't the point - it was meant to be anthropomorphic because it's for people to quickly assess what's happening and have a path of action.)

I think you and I, CF, are primarily interested in WHY the horse does what it does, and from that making our own strategy of how to deal with it. We look at what a wide variety of trainers do, and in the context of understanding where the horse is coming from, can pick and choose between what we see. We're more the behaviourists who first want to know what's going on, then choose from a "tool box" which contains a lot of NH type tools alongside others, in deciding what to do. Therefore we can go straight to the "Level 3", if you like, as we want to start from the "why" side anyway.

However, I can also see that not everyone comes at things like that. For many people, they want to follow a set pattern and have confidence it will work. That's where Parelli comes in. He doesn't require anyone to think about it - he just sets out the rules, and therefore needs the "mucking about" to get the people into line, with them simply following rules (or games, to make it sound more friendly!). The Level 1 and 2 puts in the level of conditioning of the PEOPLE. When you look at it like this - and bear in mind his "so simple even adults can do it" slogan, and the principles of only Level 3 people and over handling young or problem horses, it starts to fall into place.

So I guess my answer to the OP would be, consider what you want to achieve and how. There are different paths and with different aims. If you want a neatly ordered programme that you can follow and have reasonable confidence it will work in most situations - Parelli is great - he does the thinking for you - you just follow the pattern. If you want a deeper understanding for yourself of what it really going on in the horse's mind and how you can relate to it, you will probably find it more satisfying (and possibly cheaper!) to look for a more behavioural based approach, because, as CF says, for the behaviourists the first 2 Levels of Parelli are "mucking about" and when you do get to Level 3, you may well find other approaches more appealing.

 

[Cheeky]

Ok, has anyone here see the video in pack 1?

Parelli say something like this:

We use the 12' foot rope and then we double it to the 22' rope. And then what do we do? That's right we double it again to a 45' rope.

Now is it just me or is the maths off there?

!!!!!!! I thought I was the only one who noticed that? My sister (younger) was like "Yer .. and your point?"

*Few* not going nuts ..

 

[Crystal Fire]

We use the 12' foot rope and then we double it to the 22' rope. And then what do we do? That's right we double it again to a 45' rope.

It's a joke...
Tools and gadgets - I don't regret the money spent on a few Parelli bits and bobs because over the years of use they have worked out very cheap. The training I was getting also enabled me to sell lots of rubbish out of my tack room, which more than funded the purchases. It would however have been quite difficult to work through the levels without the Parelli tools. I have heard instructors making sarky remarks to people who had non-PNH gear at clinics (Oh look,she's got a Parsnip Stick). Working at a Parelli centre then you definitely were expected to have the right gear at clinics, to be honest though that really didn't cause me any grief.
Kate, to be honest I don't know if the trainers I like use an understanding of behaviour more effectively. They just seem to be much more straightforward. They don't spend time sitting in a field with a book for hours, or filling in horsenality questions. They would make comments like "He's just being a horse" or "He's scared" or "He needs to move his feet". And then they work with what they have in front of them. Certainly in the case of Steve, Phil's Nye and Rodey there are certain principles that they don't waver from. The most important one is that the horse is never to blame, and always trying to do the right thing.
As for level 3 from day 1... well that is about being absolutely clear that your "ask" will only ever be soft, because that will be your cue for ever onwards. Then if the horse doesn't understand you don't increase that ask, you use something else to explain. I know that this is coming into some of the Parelli training now, but as long as 4 phases are taught I think it's going to be difficult to get people into that way of thinking.
I did level 1, which could be quite lumpy, and your cues could be quite firm. Then in level 2 you have to up the pressure to wake your horse up, say the rules have changed, and get impulsion. Then eventually you get to level 3 where you start to seek the truly soft cues and responsiveness. Well, what I've learnt is that with the right training you can forget the level 1 and 2 stage and go straight to "level 2". Even real novices on my clinics work on softness and tiny cues from day 1.
Parelli costs what it costs. If you don't like it don't do it, there are cheaper (and some would say better) alternatives. If you want to do Parelli look at his Savvy Conferences, his Parelli stands, advertising etc (not to mention the cost of running the ISC) and understand that this puts a huge overhead on the business, which I really think explains some of the cost of the gear. I'm pretty certain that a Parelli agency could work a year and still struggle to recoup the cost of a conference like the one that was held in the UK this year.
I'm not saying Parelli is wrong, I'm saying that these days I prefer a different approach. Parelli was a great start for me and I'll never deny that basic education.

 

[Kate F.]

If you want to do Parelli look at his Savvy Conferences, his Parelli stands, advertising etc (not to mention the cost of running the ISC) and understand that this puts a huge overhead on the business, which I really think explains some of the cost of the gear. I'm pretty certain that a Parelli agency could work a year and still struggle to recoup the cost of a conference like the one that was held in the UK this year.

I think there's a lot in this! Not directly related, but I thought it was funny and probably very true.... a few years ago I heard Robbie Williams (at the height of his fame and fortune) being asked what it was like to be so rich... and he said nothing really changes - just the numbers get bigger... so instead of a 100.000 pound house you have a million pound house with correspondingly higher bills, instead of one car, you have 5 cars - and 5 times the running costs. When you go overdrawn you do it in millions instead of hundreds or thousands. You never really get away from the worries - there are just more numbers on the bills and the bank statements. I think it's probably much the same for Parelli - the bigger the operation, the more it all costs to run.

 

[india]

The Level 1 and 2 puts in the level of conditioning of the PEOPLE. When you look at it like this - and bear in mind his "so simple even adults can do it" slogan, and the principles of only Level 3 people and over handling young or problem horses, it starts to fall into place.

In general that is principle behind the PNH training theory, the first two levels are mainly about teaching humans how to address the behaviour of their horses, although L2 does begin to cover the reasons behind the behaviour, it doesn't go into it in great detail.

In certain circumstances though, PNH teaches students to addresses the horses behaviour at L3 from day one. This is initially done under instruction and with horses that have serious behaviour issues. In that situation, the behaviour problem is evaluated, most likely reason for it established and the owner given help and advise on addressing the problem.

In some cases, due to the probable cause of the behaviour problem....starting directly onto the L1 programme would not be considered advisable until the issue had been partially addressed.

 

[mayoguinness]

(Oh look,she's got a Parsnip Stick).

Never heard that one before