Skip to main content

Denoix vs Burger

5 replies [Last post]
Delphine Drory
Offline
Joined: 24/10/2011

 

Biomechanics vs biomechanics : 

attachment.fbsbx.com/file_download.php

 

A Comparison between the theories of Vet Surgeon Udo Bürger (Der Reiter Form Das Pferd - 1939) 
and Vet Professor Jean-Marie Denoix (Physical Therapy and Massage for the Horse - 1988)

 

It can be very interesting to study the theories of the biomechanics of the riding horse. It's 
really such a big and complex subject and the horse is so intricate and so many variables 
influence its performance. There is so much yet to find, investigate and scientifically test 
and prove. But it may not be as much undiscovered as one initially thinks...

 

I have studied modern dressage biomechanics for 
years, now. What I mostly find is a lot of scientific 
studies about particular details; how different types 
of shoeing influences the hoof function, how the 
snaffle fits in the mouth and how footfalls change 
when trotting at different speeds. All interesting, of 
course, but it does not give a general explanation to 
how the horse works as a system. And such an all 
encompassing knowledge of how the ridden horse 
works is very much needed to train horses and 
riders.
It's hard to find any studies into the general overall 
athletic function of the horse when ridden, with a fe 
exceptions. Dr Clayton's study on the shifting back of 
the weight over the hindquarters in collection, is one 
you can find on the internet. It was a very interesting 
read in itself from a scientific point of view, but the 
conclusion was even more interesting - that top 
dressage horses don't necessarily have to shift weight 
back in collection, in order to compete at the highest 
levels, however those who did appeared to be the 
most balanced. That says a lot more about modern 
dressage riding than it does about the general 
concept of collection.

 

The most general and overall description of dressage biomechanics written in modern times, and the one most widely used and referenced, comes from Jean-Marie Denoix and Jean-Pierre Pailloux in their book 

Physical Therapy and 
Massage for the Horse. 
It is a very interesting 
book, well written, and it 
also contains as the title 
suggests a lot of 
descriptions for 
treatments of injuries in 
sport horses and their 
training solutions, in a 
very pedagogic way. In 
that sense, and others, 
it's a one of a kind book 
and referenced by many, 
if not all modern writers 
on the subject of the biomechanics of the horse.

 

Delphine Drory
Offline
Joined: 24/10/2011

 

And this is where 
it gets interesting, 
because a lot has 
been written on 
dressage 
biomechanics, and 
that is good. But it 
all, more or less, 
relies on the same 
source (this book), 
and that's not so 
good, of course. 
Because if some kind of error in the source (this book) 
would get multiplied in all the texts based on it, like a 
dominant genetic disease. All of a sudden, this error 
is left without challenge, and it becomes a universal 
truth. This is a form of “cascade of errors” which 
leads astray. And I will argue that exactly that has 
happened with the theories explained in Denoix’ 
book. Wether that is by design or simply by 
negligence is a different matter. I don’t know. What I 
do know is that it has been used as the sole basis for 
almost all discussions of biomechanics lately.

 

Another book, one that there's any reference at all in any other literature, despite it being very clear, concise and accurate. Did i mention brilliant? It is Udo Bürger's & Otto Zietschmann's Der Reiter formt das Pferd (The Rider Forms/Shapes the Horse). In our modern times, it feels like no-one has ever read this book first published in 1939. I was re-issued relatively recently in an affordable paper-back version for €15 ($22). Still, no-one seems to have read it. I guess it could have to do with the lack of glossy illustrations, or the heavy language, or possibly that it was published in times of war, and by a citizen of a country so maligned by that war. I hope that had nothing to do with it, but such things have happened before, for sure.

From Bürger’s daily 
work as a veterinary 
surgeon, his own 
riding experience and 
the traditional 
remount training by 
the cavalry, he formed 
his theory on how the 
horse uses himself 
under saddle. And his 
theory is very logical if 
one takes the time to 
study it carefully. 
Unfortunately, the 
way it is today, 
hardly anyone has 
studied it, and very 
few horse 
professionals are 
aware of its 
existence. Personally, 
I had to overcome 
my own resistance. I 
had to press myself 
through 118 pages of 
old-style German 
text (witch is not 
really my forte) and 
translate it to 
Swedish, then sit and try to figure out what it all 
meant. But now that it's done, I’m so happy that i did. 

 

 

 

Delphine Drory
Offline
Joined: 24/10/2011

 

There is also a translated English version of the book, 
but as usual with translations, I'm worried about the 
original meaning and intent by the author being 
compromised. I have read Gymnasium des Pferdes 
in both English and German. It’s not the same book, 
really. I don't know if the same fate struck this one. So i read the original one myself.

 

The two quite differing theories on riding horse biomechanics of the French and German books above have some fundamental differences that are very interesting to juxtapose. Very interesting, since what is written in Denoix's book has been standing un-argued for almost 20 years, and is described in horse articles everywhere as "the truth" when it comes to how the horse works and what we should expect of the horse when we ride. But in the light of how Bürger explains it, the absurdity of it becomes quite clear. Below are the main differences have been set opposite each other : 

 

 A   : Vet. Surgeon Udo Bürger 1939           B  : Vet. Prof Jean-Marie Denoix 1988
 
A : Bürger talks lengthily and in detail (p.19-) about different 
types of muscles, those with strong faschia interwoven, 
divided into sections by bands of tendinous material, and 
covered with tendinous material, and those purely fleshy 
ones. The tendinously re-inforced ones have multiple 
amounts of muscle fiber (repeated per segment) and is 
therefore many times stronger but don't shorten as much, 
because of the tendinous material. They are postural 
muscles, that keep the body parts in position. The fleshy 
ones can shorten extremely but tire very fast if held 
contracted. They are for moving - a pumping action.
 
B  : Denoix makes no such differentiation, but divides the 
different muscles into flexors and extensors of the spine 
or joints (p. 52). He also calls some muscles gymnastic 
(large, strong muscles) while calling others cybernetic 
(more proprioceptive nerves) answering to subtler aids 
(p. 17), and saying they can come into conflict with each 
other. He does not point out which muscles are 
cybernetic, other than saying those close to the spinal 
column. He claims that in a stressed and tense horse, the gymnastic muscles take over.
 
 
Delphine Drory
Offline
Joined: 24/10/2011

 

A : Bürger describes the lowered neck function (p. 24-) 

emanating from the tendinously interwoven semispinalis 
muscle (p. 26) and continuing with the tendinously covered 
and slanted multifidus that work efficiently against the 
slanted spinal processes of the withers in an effective lever 
function. The semispinalis muscle should grow into a nice 
rounded topline after 2 years of basic work with the neck 
stretched forward. The results were visible on live, trained 
horses, compared to Denoix's skeletons.

 
B : Denoix describes the neck function as that of the head 

pulling on the nuchal ligament to "get the back up" (p. 
24). He describes how the head be pulled in and the 
neck must be pulled down for this to happen, and which 
muscles do it (the underneck). He also describes how the 
nuchal ligament pulls on the spinous processes, but not 
the role of the muscles. These experiments were done on 
skeletons stripped of their muscles and thus a purely 
mechanical function.

 

A : Bürger explains how the head comes to the vertical from 

relaxation, and that the "Ganaschenbiegung" (flexion at the 
poll) comes from the horse lifting the base of the neck and 
releasing the top of the skull, to drop the nose to the 
vertical. There are no muscles "flexing" because they 
should be idle and become thinner. The "flexion" comes 
from relaxation.
 
B : Denoix says the opposite - The long and short muscles of 
the head (the underneck) should pull the chin in to flex 
the poll, and this should pull the top of the skull forward 
so much that the nuchal ligament somehow pulls the 
withers up and arches the back. The small muscles of the 
underneck lifting the back?! I find this so bizarre I have 
even illustrated it below (Illustration 2 - page 4).

 

Delphine Drory
Offline
Joined: 24/10/2011

 

A : Bürger explains how the juxtavertebral muscles are 

slanted diagonally and how the spinous processes are 
tilted (p.26), all to facilitate the lever functions (p.29) of the 
neck in front and the pelvis behind to manage the load of 
the viscera and rider. The 2 levers help holding the back 
up, and forward moving paces are necessary for the 
stronger hind-lever to be able to do its work with each 
stepping under of the horse's hindlegs.

B : Denoix is concerned with the topline muscles (longissimus 

dorsi) and underline muscles (abdominals) working to 
extend (hollow) or arch the back. He mentions the 
underline is "underdeveloped" compared to the topline, 
and needs careful attention and gymnastic strengthening to 
be able to cope. One gets a feeling this could be done 

isometrically in the stable, using one of those electrical ab-trainers from TV-shop. No need for forward movement...

A : Bürger explains the true purpose of the massive topline 

muscles (Longissimus Dorsi) to work together with the 
Quadriceps group and Gluteus muscles (the butt) to lift the 
back over the broad hip on the same side as the lifted 
frontleg (in that exact phase of the stride), by pulling it 
over the broad hip like a crane. These muscles should also 
grow substantially during the horse's training, because 
they lift the forehand from behind.

 

B : Denoix simply sees the Longisimus Dorsi as antagonist to 

the underline muscles and the Gluteus muscles as 
pushing muscles of the hindlegs, and declare the whole 
burden of carrying the viscera and rider to the 
abdominals. There's no explanation as to why we want 
the back muscles to grow and fill out the back, since they 
are obviously only antagonists to the real carries of the 
load, the abdominals. With this theory, all focus should be 
on the abs, not the back/croup. How unreal...
 
Delphine Drory
Offline
Joined: 24/10/2011

 

Sorry for the format, the link doesn't work so i have to copy/paste bit by bit. (to be continued...)