I am not surprised at the comments in the article at all. Many wealthy amateurs do not want to compete against the 19 year old who just won medal finals on her trainerās lovely sale horse. And yes, they pay the big bucks to I doubt the change will ever come despite many good reasons.
I think they could protect that AO division and create just a simple āopen amateurā division to run along side the class but pin separately. Open to catch rides, show trials, whatever. Personally I would love to have shown some horses beforehand that I bought. Damn they looked so east with the pro! It would also the ring going, bring in more money to shows and keep the sport accessible to younger / less privileged folks.
At WEF in the hay days of Tori Colvin riding Dr. Parkerās horses in the juniors they used to give a separate champion/ reserve award to the junior who owned their horse. I was older than Tori but definitely appreciated it. Perhaps they could do something similar nationwide or just for this proposed championship?
10 Likes
Or big eq horses, who probably work harder than many others.
5 Likes
The concerns that people list in the article feel very out of touch. Every other amateur and junior division allows for leases and those divisions have not fallen apart.
It truly does not make logical sense to me as to why the 3ā3ā and 3ā6 amateur hunter divisions have different rules.
8 Likes
Making a separate division doesnāt make sense for any of the not huge circuit shows. They would likely be combined anyway. Sometimes the juniors and AO get combined, and thus was the case many years ago when I showed in the juniors, and no one was up in arms about it.
It is more likely to grow the market for 3ā6ā horses than kill it. Itās already a pretty small group at this point that can afford these horses anyway, lease or purchase.
6 Likes
Yes, it absolutely is a concern for junior hunters and bigeq horses. And a/o hunters have some protection against this concern by the owner requirement.
3 Likes
Iāve sure seen that happen. It makes me sadā¦get a bicycle.
Right, that is what I am saying. I meant my question in jest - if the argument against opening up the AO 3ā6 to non owners is a horse welfare issue, then we should also then scale back the junior and big eq divisions to also create that protection for any 3ā6 hunter or eq horse. And heck, letās also do it for the 1.10 jumpers too! The horse welfare argument is BS unless we are going to systematically evaluate leases and āpoundingā of ALL performance horses. Very slippery slope!
4 Likes
Why is it BS to recognize that the owner requirement may offer some protection, just because not every group has that protection?
3 Likes
I admit I havenāt considered all of the ramifications of a change to the A/O requirements.
But one thing sticks out to me.
If your kid wants to go to Pony Finals, you can lease a qualified pony and your kid gets the PF experience.
If your kid wants to show at indoors, you can lease a qualified junior hunter and your kid gets to say they showed at indoors.
The Amateur Owner division is the only one where you, as the owner of the horse, have to put in the qualifying rides to show at any venue where participation is based on earning the wins to get there. Iām not saying this doesnāt require the support of a very good professional along the way, but thatās true in EVERY division, leased horses or not.
I can understand the desire of AO riders to maintain that exceptionalism in their division.
13 Likes
I think the core issue of people declaring themselves amateurs when they arenāt needs to be addressed, then. There should be more severe punishment when someone is caught doing this. The fact that classes arenāt being offered because people are afraid of cheating is absurd.
7 Likes
I think there is a misconception as to who does the AOs. Sure there are a lot of uber wealthy people who do the division, however there are also a lot of folks who do the division who have fulltime jobs and have figured out a way to make it work. The division is not as elite as itās being portrayed. I guarantee some adults and pre adult packers sold for more than the green horses I purchased and developed into AO horses. Nothing is ever going to be āfairā to allā¦however I wholeheartedly support keeping the O in the division.
As someone who has a regular job and does the division this is how I make it work. I buy a young/green horse and develop it into an AO horse. Iām in it for the long haul with the horse and I build a relationship with it. It also means when my first AO horse got injured and was out for a year, I was also out of the show ring, as I devoted my time and resources to getting him sound. Given the time, energy and money Iāve spent to bring horses along to be able to do the division it would be really frustrating to see the O portion of the division go away. That wouldnāt be āfairā to those of us who spent our money bringing horses along to do the division.
I think having a 3ā3/3ā6 amateur division has a number of other unforeseen issues:
- We have a hard enough time with the burden of proof for protesting shamateurs. How in the world would you prove that Sally Ammy who shows her trainerās sales horses isnāt getting a cut of the commission on the side after she does a bang up job with them in a new amateur division. If we canāt find the check showing someone is getting paid for rides, how will we be able to prove they are getting some cash from stellar performances in the show ring.
- Whatās the incentive for amateur riders to buy horses? If I can just rent a horse for the weekend, why would I want to purchase a horse?
- Whatās the incentive for people to turn professional? If I can have a 9-5 job during the week with a salary and catch ride on the weekend, why would I want to take the chance of being a pro? Especially if I could make some of that unallowed side money I mentioned in point 1.
One thing strikes me after hearing the discussion on USHJA call. Riders in the AOs have a lot of restrictions placed on us. We have many rules to follow to be able to show in the division, we can only show one other non-owned horse at a show and it canāt be in the adults. But you didnāt hear anyone complaining about that. Why? Because we do what we have to do to show in the division.
I think the call proved that those who are in the division see the value in it. Iām sure there will be naysayers who say itās not fair you have to own your horse; juniors donāt have to own their horses. Fair point, but I believe the reason was to separate the professionals from the amateurs. By having us own our horses that gives us a little protection from shamateurs, sure there are still horses sold for $1 but at least that takes a little paperwork. There is nothing currently restricting anyone in USEF to show whatever height they want, they just may have to show in an open division, with pros. Which I think is another misconception, there are no pro divisions they are all open to all.
16 Likes
I am not saying it is BS to recognize that by owning a horse, you can protect it from being pounded. Absolutely, as an owner myself, I can protect my horse by being selective with shows. And not over jumping. Etc.
I am saying if that is the argument for why we wouldnāt want to allow leased horses or catch rides in the AOs - because somehow that is the differentiator on horse welfare - it is not a strong argument in my opinion. Itās like saying if we open up the AOs to just As magically horses are going to be shown more or treated worse than today, where we already have hundreds of junior hunters and eq horses showing 20+ times a year to qualify for said finals or awards. I am just pointing out I think it is a weak reason to limit the division when we have 3ā6 horses being leased and shown a lot all the time.
I get that, and I donāt think the welfare issue is going to make or break the A/O hunters either. It just seems a little all or nothing to say that any limited protection the ownership requirement imposes isnāt worth keeping if other divisions donāt have it and weāre not looking specifically into the issue of āpoundingā all performance horses.
I agree w this. I was SO proud to do the AOs.
3 Likes
This! Iām a regular person with a full time job, I take 1-2 lessons per week, a handful of training rides per year.
I bought my gelding as a yearling. I started him myself, Iāve done the work, and Iām proud to show him at 3ā6ā in the A/O hunters. I donāt want to show against the pros or the shamateurs, or the people who lease the fanciest horse that they can get their hands on. I like knowing that my competitors canāt enlist a catch rider to qualify for finals or RAWF.
Iām in Canada. Last year EC introduced a new jr/am 3ā3ā division. It was very popular.
11 Likes
Just popping in to say that from a dressage perspective, the idea that trainers can warm up and prep hunters and jumpers to the extent they do is rather bizarre.
12 Likes
The nice thing about keeping the AO what it is, is that at the year end awards time, you donāt lose to someone who āleasesā a horse (or horses). Other than that, I donāt see the point. Once again, it all about the ribbons! No money in AO hunters unless you are selling them on.
Iām sure that there were similar arguments being made for keeping the O in the A/O jumpers. Does anyone happen to know how it was ultimately decided to remove the ownership requirement for the 3ā3"+ amateur jumper heights?
The 1.0m and 1.10m jumpers (equivalent to the 3ā3ā and 3ā6ā divisions in height) have been the child/adult divisions for a long time now. No restrictions on owner.
The AO jumpers were 1.20m+ and theyāve almost always been combined with the juniors anyway because of lack of entries. A few people made noises about the O dropping from the jumpers, but nothing crazy. Probably because thereās a lot fewer of us doing the 1.20-1.40m jumpers than there are in the hunter ring.
4 Likes
