Does a Registered Lease = Elgibility in the AO's ??

[nycequestrian]

[QUOTE=Nickelodian;7613553]
The trouble I have with allowing leases and/or doing away with the owner clause are the plethora of ammys who are independently wealthy and/or trainer right hand people that would ride multiple sale horses or horses that need a tune up before the juniors get there. By limiting to owner you’re limiting to only horses that a person owns. Even the shamatuers typically only have 2-3 at a time.

So would doing away with the rule help or hurt the more “common” rider?[/QUOTE]

I’m just bolding this because I’m a little confused. Wouldn’t these people still be considered professionals? Even if the owner part was done away with and leases were allowed, professionals would still not be allowed to compete in the amateur divisions. So the trainers and assistants could not use those classes to tune up the juniors horses etc.

[karasha]

NYC Equestrian – you can definitely be a trainer’s right hand man yet still be an amateur by carefully abiding by the rules. So, in this instance, if my understanding is correct: Shamateur rides the junior rider’s horse in an amateur class since the junior (or I suppose junior’s parents) 100% pay for the class and is in no way compensating the rider for her riding the horse in the class. I believe that is the song and dance that occurs. Professional riders tend to charge a training fee or some sort as well whenever they ride your horse in a class for warm-up. Shameteur does not, obviously.

[nycequestrian]

[QUOTE=karasha;7613576]
NYC Equestrian – you can definitely be a trainer’s right hand man yet still be an amateur by carefully abiding by the rules. So, in this instance, if my understanding is correct: Shamateur rides the junior rider’s horse in an amateur class since the junior (or I suppose junior’s parents) 100% pay for the class and is in no way compensating the rider for her riding the horse in the class. I believe that is the song and dance that occurs. Professional riders tend to charge a training fee or some sort as well whenever they ride your horse in a class for warm-up. Shameteur does not, obviously.[/QUOTE]

I gottcha! That makes sense. Can you (or anyone) just clarify for me, as I’m still trying to learn the intricacies of the rules surrounding the ammies; doesn’t the amateur rule prevent any person except the ammy from paying for things such as class fees? I was under the impression that ammies have to pay for everything on their own and cannot have anyone paying for their classes or covering their costs of showing (like stabling) as that would be considered a type of compensation.

[Janet]

[QUOTE=nycequestrian;7613578]
I gottcha! That makes sense. Can you (or anyone) just clarify for me, as I’m still trying to learn the intricacies of the rules surrounding the ammies; doesn’t the amateur rule prevent any person except the ammy from paying for things such as class fees? I was under the impression that ammies have to pay for everything on their own and cannot have anyone paying for their classes or covering their costs of showing (like stabling) as that would be considered a type of compensation.[/QUOTE]

In a relatively recent change, the part about reimbursement of expenses is DIFFERENT for “hunter jumper” and for everyone else.

First the rules say

3. Permitted activities by Amateur. An Amateur is permitted to do the following:
   …
   j. Accept reimbursement for any bona fide expenses directly related to the horse
   (i.e. farrier/vet bills, entries). Travel, hotel, equipment, and room and board are not considered bona fide expenses.

But then it says

k. Entries for non-under saddle classes in amateur sections at hunter, jumper or hunter/jumper competitions, must be paid either
(i) directly to the competition by the Amateur or by the Amateur’s family or
(ii) by someone whom the Amateur or the Amateur’s family reimburses within 90 days of the last day of the competition for which entries were paid.

So, for H/J, the amateur has to pay the entries for AMATEUR classes over fences.

But, at least as I read it, the owner can still pay for stabling, farrier, vet, etc., even in H/J.

Again, as I read it, the owner can still pay the entry fees in classes not restricted to amateurs.

[nycequestrian]

Janet: Thank you for clarifying. I appreciate it.

[Janet]

To clarify what karasha said

Shamateur rides the junior rider’s horse in an amateur class since the junior (or I suppose junior’s parents) 100% pay for the class …

is not quite true under current rules.
She can ride the junior’s horse in a NON-Amateur class with the parents paying the entry. But if she rides the junior’s horse in an AMATEUR class, she has to pay the entry fee herself.

[SnicklefritzG]

[QUOTE=Janet;7613794]
To clarify what karasha said

is not quite true under current rules.
She can ride the junior’s horse in a NON-Amateur class with the parents paying the entry. But if she rides the junior’s horse in an AMATEUR class, she has to pay the entry fee herself.[/QUOTE]

But there isn’t necessarily a way to determine who really pays is there? Shamatuer could enter the amateur class and pay with her own check, but then get reimbursed later by the junior rider’s parents.

[PonyPenny]

[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;7613818]
But there isn’t necessarily a way to determine who really pays is there? Shamatuer could enter the amateur class and pay with her own check, but then get reimbursed later by the junior rider’s parents.[/QUOTE]

That is the way it is done as USEF has no way of policing it. Kind of a stupid rule if you ask me.

(ii) by someone whom the Amateur or the Amateur’s family reimburses within 90 days of the last day of the competition for which entries were paid.

How does USEF verify this? Do they really check three months after a show ended that the entries were actually reimbursed?

[Everlong274]

just another piece to add to this puzzle, I know several trainers that will list the “amateur rider” as the owner even though they dont actually own the horse. I dont know how they get away with it, but they do. Just as bad as the schamateurs.

[PonyPenny]

[QUOTE=Everlong274;7613920]
just another piece to add to this puzzle, I know several trainers that will list the “amateur rider” as the owner even though they dont actually own the horse. I dont know how they get away with it, but they do. Just as bad as the schamateurs.[/QUOTE]

And you know this how?

[ladyj79]

[QUOTE=Everlong274;7613920]
just another piece to add to this puzzle, I know several trainers that will list the “amateur rider” as the owner even though they dont actually own the horse. I dont know how they get away with it, but they do. Just as bad as the schamateurs.[/QUOTE]

They get away with it because it costs 200 bucks to report them. And they know that most of us don’t have 200 to throw out into the world, even if we MIGHT get it back.

And yeah, I know them too.

[PonyPenny]

[QUOTE=ladyj79;7614155]
They get away with it because it costs 200 bucks to report them. And they know that most of us don’t have 200 to throw out into the world, even if we MIGHT get it back.

And yeah, I know them too.[/QUOTE]

An ownership change would have to be recorded with USEF for that to occur. What evidence do you have other than hearsay?

[ladyj79]

When I know a horse is owned by a particular person, being trained by another, and another trainer is listed as the owner at a horse show in which they are exhibiting the horse in the A/Os, and I watch them with my own eyes, that isn’t hearsay. People cheat.

Why do you think people are so concerned these days about USEF registering the same horse multiple times and general bad record keeping?

[vxf111]

[QUOTE=ladyj79;7614181]
When I know a horse is owned by a particular person, being trained by another, and another trainer is listed as the owner at a horse show in which they are exhibiting the horse in the A/Os, and I watch them with my own eyes, that isn’t hearsay. People cheat.

Why do you think people are so concerned these days about USEF registering the same horse multiple times and general bad record keeping?[/QUOTE]

Who is registered with USEF as the owner? If it is a rider OTHER than the one riding in an A/O class… that sounds like a slam dunk violation to me?! Or is the horse registered as being owned by the rider, only you think the actual owner is someone else? That’s harder to prove.

[Everlong274]

[QUOTE=PonyPenny;7614150]
And you know this how?[/QUOTE]

I know this because I know the people and people talk. The horse is shown as being owned by person A, when its known that (and not hidden by anyone) that person B actually owns it but is unable to ride it in the AO division. They spend the money to transfer the ownership in the USEF bc its still cheaper. One trainer in my area is notorious for it. Everyone knows she does it. She had even gone as far as to change a horses name to get around the rule.

How many of us know “amateurs” who really arent showing in the ammy divisions? One trainer and rider combo dont even bother to hide it. If you hang around long enough and know enough people and go to enough shows, you know these things. Look them up on the USEF, rider is listed as owner.

Im just adding a very obvious piece to this rule that people find a way around. I dont agree with it. I just know it happens.

[vxf111]

A variation on the old…

Trainer buys horse, does green classes. Horse is nice, doesn’t seem to be a top top level horse. Trainer sells the horse to poorer but great riding amateur in-barn for $1-- wink. Amateur campaigns the horse everywhere in the A/Os, aided by trainer not charging her usual fees. Once horse has great ammy record, owner sells horse back to trailer for that $1-- wink. Trainer sells horse to new buyer as A/O horse based on great ammy record.

[PonyPenny]

[QUOTE=vxf111;7614388]
A variation on the old…

Trainer buys horse, does green classes. Horse is nice, doesn’t seem to be a top top level horse. Trainer sells the horse to poorer but great riding amateur in-barn for $1-- wink. Amateur campaigns the horse everywhere in the A/Os, aided by trainer not charging her usual fees. Once horse has great ammy record, owner sells horse back to trailer for that $1-- wink. Trainer sells horse to new buyer as A/O horse based on great ammy record.[/QUOTE]

Well since the A/O division is probably one of the smallest divisions out there, I don’t see this going on that much. Trainers could easily buy a horse and have a junior ride it in the junior hunters and not have to deal with owner transfers at all.

[vxf111]

[QUOTE=PonyPenny;7614404]
Well since the A/O division is probably one of the smallest divisions out there, I don’t see this going on that much. Trainers could easily buy a horse and have a junior ride it in the junior hunters and not have to deal with owner transfers at all.[/QUOTE]

I’ve seen this happen. It was a trainer that had very few junior clients but one very excellent amateur rider. In our area, over the winter, the A/Os and junior are equally as likely to fill and she was far away more likely to get points than your average junior because she was great!!! They showed all over in the A/Os, got tons of points, and then mysteriously the trainer bought the horse back and sold it all nicely qualified for all the indoor shows etc. I believe they did it twice in a row.

[Janet]

[QUOTE=PonyPenny;7613890]
That is the way it is done as USEF has no way of policing it. Kind of a stupid rule if you ask me.

(ii) by someone whom the Amateur or the Amateur’s family reimburses within 90 days of the last day of the competition for which entries were paid.

How does USEF verify this? Do they really check three months after a show ended that the entries were actually reimbursed?[/QUOTE]

The USEF doesn’t verify it at all. But f someone protests them, the amateur would have to provide proof.

[Nikki]

[QUOTE=Janet;7614589]
The USEF doesn’t verify it at all. But f someone protests them, the amateur would have to provide proof.[/QUOTE]
How? If they used cash then there isn’t a paper trail. All you have to say is that you reimbursed the owners in cash.

I think the USEF needs to get rid of the “Owner” in Amateur Owners in hunters and jumpers. Let those who lease have a chance to jump the higher levels against their peers.