Why? Many people on this thread have said that they’re okay with a combination of pro rides and skilled non-pro rides. I would actually prefer to send a horse to this type of program because I think it’s important that horses learn to deal with different types of riding. If the trainer is carefully choosing riders it’s no different than hiring another assistant and if the situation is transparent I don’t see the issue.
11 Likes
I agree here to this extent. I think it’s something that many clients/boarders/students are uncomfortable to level set about… but it needs to be discussed. I’ve tried to make it clear that if I’m not in town, that my expectation is that horse is having 3-4 rides by pro that week if I’m on a training board schedule. If I’m in town, expectation is that we work together twice… and trainer gives 1-2 pro rides. If someone else needs to flat the horse the other 1-2 days, so be it, but if I find horse fussing after those days, I will request that if it happens again, another rider be selected.
1 Like
In my experience, this is common in some barns and doesn’t generally have any nefarious intent behind it. Others don’t do this at all. It’s an important thing to clarify if the trainer didn’t talk about it when you came to the program - who’s riding your horse and what they’re doing with it shouldn’t be a taboo topic. (And if it is, I’d take that as a red flag!) I think I’ve had most trainers volunteer this information up front, and if not I must have asked when inquiring about the program.
Also, it doesn’t necessarily violate the amateur rule, as a couple of people suggested. If an amateur just gets to hack the horse around with or without general trainer supervision and isn’t paid or getting other compensation, there’s no violation. (I’m 99% sure the ride itself doesn’t count as compensation, though this rule has some changes in the few years since I’ve been party to one of these setups. If there’s a free lesson or free show involved, that changes things.)
It all depends on what you agreed to up front. Any horse we have sent out for training we have specified that only the trainer was to ride them unless we were consulted up front. I currently about to send one or two out as I am injured and I want to keep them working. I’ve already specified to the trainer that she is the only rider unless I am consulted up front.
If you weren’t told in the beginning that other clients, assistants, etc were going to be riding your horse than that would a be a problem.
2 Likes
No, it’s not. Unless an amateur is getting paid for the ride, there’s nothing in the rule that says amateurs can’t ride their peers’ horses.
3 Likes
Just to clarify “getting paid for the ride” isn’t the only form of compensation. For example: If you get $$ taken off your board bill, a free lesson/coaching/hauling to a show in exchange for working horses, that is compensation. There are many forms of compensation outside of money. That is how many of the working students at my barn get around the pro vs. amateur rule. There is no money trail.
3 Likes
Or they are Juniors. My barn did let approved clients do simple WTC exercise rides ( 30 mins at most) but with specific owner approval of each rider. Nobody got charged anything, nobody got any discounts or bill reductions. Nobody over 18 who was paid in any other capacity by the barn was allowed any catch exercise rides to avoid the perception of impropriety.
Some barns are well run and honest.
Oh, the question of trainers taking on more horses then they can ride every day? In a perfect world, they wouldn’t. But in reality doubt a decent living could be earned with less then 15 horses and every client could be at the barn on all non Pro ride days to keep keep it legged up or pay the Pro what their services are really worth.
3 Likes
It’s one thing if the main trainer who has a qualified assistant trainer. But the horse owner IMHO should know/be able to ask if it’s main pro or the assistant who is doing the majority of the riding. Agreed this should be spelled out beforehand, especially given the costs of training board (at least in my area).
Where this can be open to abuse is the pro using the horse in “training board” for lessons, charging a fee for the lessons, and effectively charging the owner for the privilege of the horse being used in said lesson (even though the focus of the lesson is on the student’s rather than the horse’s progress).
5 Likes
I had a trainer who would charge you for a training ride and use the horse in her lesson program so she was also charging for a lesson. These were lesson students and not assistant trainers or amateurs who rode better than the owner. It was sneaky. The owner figured it out when the kid learning how to jump said how nice her horse was.
9 Likes
I’m an ex-barn rat – worked in many different barns up and down the east coast as a groom, exercise rider, barn manager, stall picker, you name it… I saw this all the time even in competition barns. Vet your trainers carefully, find out what their standard practice is. Even the ones that have good training programs can do this.
I think the general assumption among trainers is that their boarding clients are aware this happens.
The assumption among boarding clients is that their trainers are the only ones riding the horse.
It’s not always nefarious, but it is something I see a lot that really needs to be discussed up front.
9 Likes
I agree with other posters here that there is a wide range of “normal,” and a lot depends on what you and your trainer have agreed on. As in so many things, communication is the key thing.
Most barns I’ve ridden in do rely on skilled amateurs to help with exercise riding of customer horses. But that practice is never behind the owner’s back. As a horse owner, I prefer to vet my riders personally, so I tend to purchase scheduled, a la carte training rides from a professional, and make arrangements directly with ammys to fill in the cracks. Other owners prefer not to handle all those logistics, and simply trust their trainers to manage their horse’s schedule with a suitable mix of rides.
If they are getting around it-that is their own morals. There are ammies out there who will ride someone elses horse (lesson or not) just to ride the horse with no remuneration of any kind. It is perfectly legal.
1 Like
FWIW,
I currently have a horse on training board, and yes, people other than the trainer get on the horse. It is usually run by me first, via a text that says “Okay if I put Sally on your horse to hack on Saturday?” and I of course say yes.
I have repeatedly said to the trainer, whom I trust, that I’m fine with whoever she feels is suitable to be on the horse. I believe we are of the same opinion as to whose a good fit and who is not.
When I ran a barn and had training clients, I would be up front with clients about what training board included. It was usually 4 rides/week by me or a highly competent assistant, and the option for additional rides by working students if that was something the client wanted. (Extra, supervised rides at no extra cost.)
It’s all in what’s in the training contract and what’s been communicated. Sounds like you’re overdue to review your documentation and talk to the trainer about what’s standard.
4 Likes
Exactly. A lot of weekend warrior ammy-types just want the chance to get more time in the tack. No problem with that.
2 Likes
Pretty much will echo what everyone else has said. It’s pretty normal, or at least common, to spread out riding duties in a show barn. In my grooming career, I did log a lot of saddle time. I’m not a world beater by any means, but I am passable. I (and anyone else filling this role, including clients picking up extra rides) was useful not just in the sense of making daily numbers work for the trainer, but in making the schedule work. Think situations like where the trainer and most horses head to the show and leave just a handful at home. Or at the show where ring times got tight, I could hack to the ring and start trotting around (only if told to do so of course!). Etc, etc.
Really, as others have said, I think it matters how “training board” is defined to both the client and trainer. (And that both parties are clearly communicating it). If you’re ‘sending a horse out for training’ as in to get started or learn an entirely new skill set, then sure, I think all or the vast majority of riding falls on the trainer. But I think we’re really talking about what could be more aptly described as “keeping a horse in a program” for current show horses that basically know their job. This entails making sure the horse stays fit, healthy, tuned to the aids, and mentally sound. Staying schooled generally relies on true professional rides or the owner taking lessons. Fitness can be done by a wider variety, and for many horses, mental health necessitates some easier days, which is sometimes best not left to the pro (For example, I’ve had pros say things to me like, “She can w/t/c but make it easy and stretchy… I’d do it myself but I honestly have a hard time not asking her for more.”). Honestly, part of what you get as part of a good “professional program” is someone properly managing and balancing all those priorities for each individual.
Now, of course, what you are paying for becomes a different conversation to have with the trainer. I totally understand and agree that you don’t want to pay for a fellow client to ride your horse. As in, if your training rides are billed a la carte or it’s a very set out “one training ride and one lesson a week included in board” I don’t think it’s very cool to sub in an ammie hack there. However, if it’s more that “full program” pricing that ensures your horse is doing something 5-6 days a week, it’s fair to look at it more as part of the big picture. Did the trainer maybe call in help on that really busy week for her, but then ride 3x the next week? Was it that they were “subbing in” a day they thought you would hack and couldn’t make it last minute? Did you take a whole week away, and they thought the horse needed one or two easier days? Things like that probably aren’t huge deals. But if it’s stuff like you being gone a lot, and your horse is so easy anyone can ride it, so they use it in lessons and the trainer only gets on once a month…then… no.
Again, as everyone else said, communication matters. It’s well possible your barn didn’t say anything because it is totally normal for them. But it you have enough concern to bring it up here, it’s worth bringing it up to your trainer. Their reaction should start to tell you if it’s a reasonable and well thought out part of their program, or just a lazy, greedy trainer sham. Your horse’s state will tell you the rest.
8 Likes
All I’ll say here is that at some barns, it’s a slippery slope from ammies doing “training rides” on client horses to trainer using horse in lessons and calling that a “training ride”. Do make sure you’ve set the parameters on what you’re willing to put up with.
10 Likes
My issue is that if I am paying for a pro ride, I want a pro ride. A fellow client who is a better rider than I am is fine (as long as I am confident that they ride my horse well) but I don’t want to pay for them to ride. I can just ask them if they are available to hack my horse while I’m away. My trainer teaching another client on my horse is something I should be paid for, not the reverse.
15 Likes
Here’s another suggestion: Do the math.
A trainer riding your horse should get $30 - $60 per ride. If your training board contract is for 4 rides per week, that’s between $600 - $1200 on top of your regular board. If your training board cost is less than that, it means that some of your training rides are being done by an assistant, a working student, other clients, or are lunging sessions.
I don’t know too many people who can handle $1k on top of regular board for an extended period of time. But if the training board surcharge is $400 on top of straight board, I can guarantee you, other people are riding the horse.
However, this all should have been communicated clearly before you stroked the first check.
8 Likes
My issue is does the client know about it and what is the quality of rider? If I’m busy and I don’t have time to ride then I might not mind someone qualified hacking my horse, I have had a child school one of my horses for me and she’s a better rider over fences than I am, but I wouldn’t want just any kid up on my horse and me being charged for training rides AND I’d want to know ahead of time. Otherwise I’d be doing the riding myself in lessons and hacking for fitness.
In the situation mentioned upthread it was lesson students on a green horse that the owner had in full training for flying changes and jumping. Lesson students who often didn’t know how to pick up the canter leads at all. Yet the trainer charged for both a lesson, AND a training ride. Owner didn’t know about it until one of the kids mentioned it so owner picked up the horse a week later.
3 Likes
Agree that the scenario you’re describing is NOT okay.
But I wonder what the cost of the training board was in that scenario. If the price is too low, you can be sure that there are shortcuts being taken.
In a perfect world, horse pros would be scrupulously ethical and communicate with their clients well. In this same perfect world, training clients would do their own due diligence and have reasonable expectations about what they are and are not paying for.
It’s not a perfect world. 
