Totally usual for the horse to go with the barn on Monday or Tuesday and show with the professional on a weekday, then the amateur arrive Friday afternoon to show Saturday and Sunday. At long circuits, the amateur may fly back and forth each week while the horse stays at the horse show grounds with professional or working student rides.
Horse showing is a unique sport where no one answer fits everyone.
I feel like Iâm asking a really stupid question, so I apologize ahead of time.
How does this apply to leases? Like someone who happens to have a nice horse but not time or talent, leasing to someone to campaign said horse for a year or four. Would that lease be restricted to pros only? Sorry. My brainâs not all the way engaged yet this morning.
For a big barn going to a big show, yeah. Itâs too much to coordinate to have all the horses coming and going on different days and to have different fluctuating staff levels at home and at the show accordingly. So all the horses going to the show ship out at the beginning of the week and leave at the end. Riders come and go as needed for their classes but horses go up in a group due to the logistics of the whole thing.
I think what she is trying to say is that it seems hard to believe someone earning a meager living COULD actually be paying all the show fees, training fees, groom splits, etc. on that income. What is far more likely is that the good riding ammy is actually being paid to ride in the form of someone else picking up all those costs. The horse owner gets âamateurâ miles in exchange.
The reality of this sort of situation is that itâs not a lease at all. Nor is it a free ride. Itâs essentially paying the âammyâ for riding the horse. The horse owner pays all costs. The âammyâ gets to ride and show for free. And that this will also start happening at 3â6.
We have several of these types of âamateursâ in my zone, and it always makes me wonder âŠ.
If Iâm looking for an amateur-friendly horse to purchase, and I see that Dobbin has earned multiple blues and championships with said âshamateurâ, is it REALLY indicative of a true amateur ride?
Many of these âshamateursâ could be professionals/perhaps were at some point/former Top 20 Big Eq kids and, yeah, they can get the best out of a horse, consistently. So, not really the best measurement IMHO of true amateur rideâŠ
shrug
But people looking at the horse from outside the geographical area donât necessarily know who the shamateurs are (except the truly notorious ones). They just see a nice record in the AAs and assume that means this horse has been an amateur ride for SOMEONE.
Look there are some true non-cheating amateurs who could ride the pants of pros (think Betty Oare). So the mere fact that a horse has an ammy show record does not, standing alone, mean the average ammy can ride it. But a horse with no ammy record at ALL is going to be really unappealing to a big segment of the market, and a shamateur can add those miles much easier than getting the horse to be equally rideable/successful with a less slick amateur rider. Itâs just a signifier of possible rideability and itâs a heck of a lot cheaper and easier to get using a shamateur than a real ammy who is going to take longer to get successful on the horse.
So all of the issues here like week long shows and shamateurs are inter related.
You have a week long show where the client is paying to have their horse kept at the venue and paying trainer to school and show him. Trainer gets exposure and show miles, owner arrives Saturday to pilot a prepped horse. Then thereâs all this dickering over whether other clients are getting some under the table subsidy.
In dressage and eventing only the competitor can ride the horse on the show grounds and the competition is one, two or three days long. Itâs not quite as integrated into the business model of the coach.
How are they supposed to run the amount of classes with the amount of horses in a one, two, or three day show?
Yes. Different sports entirely.
I guess smaller shows more frequently? If the pros are not showing the clients horses all week there will be lots fewer classes.
I donât mean to see denseâI do understand what people are objecting to in this scenario. But I am just asking whether this is against the USEF rules. Because, the way I read them, it is not. The rule is written to prevent people from being paid to ride and show, but appears to be fine with letting them ride and show for free.
Because if the âamateurâ rider is not paying for those things that other clients are paying for and that are part and parcel of the showing experience, thatâs considered remuneration and thatâs against the rules. If you donât have to pay for hauling the horse to get it to the show, thatâs a âserviceâ thatâs considered remuneration. If you donât pay the trainer fee, or the groom fee, or the stall split, all of those things count as remuneration.
Imagine a scenario where I have brought my horse to the horse show to compete in the adult amateur hunters. My friend (also an amateur) wants to compete in a medal class, and I agree to let her ride mine in this additional class. Is she not an amateur if she does not pay for shipping, stall splits, etc?
I know this is a different situation than the one mentioned in the post, but I think basically the same from a rules perspective. If I pay her money to show my horse in a medal class, thatâs obviously against the rules. And if I pay her entry fee, that is also against the rules. But I donât think USEF wants to be in the business of figuring out what percentage of which of my horseâs upkeep bills should be her responsibility. If USEF wanted to require leases for all horses shown by amateurs, it could have done that.
I agree itâs a terrible rule and damn near impossible to police and enforce.
This is a different situation because youâre not paying someone to ride. Youâre allowing someone to ride out of the kindness of your own heart.
If you are an amateur and someone is paying your entry fees to show their horse so it can get miles and be sold for a higher price due to its miles then yes itâs against the rules because those entry fees are a form of remuneration in exchange for riding.
Two difficulties here:
Intent is hard to prove. Why is ammy on my horse? A real lease? Iâm letting someone ride because Iâm nice? Iâm paying someone to ride? Different legality for these different scenarios and distinguishing them can be hard.
Remuneration is hard to prove. If Ammy pays the show bills but owner pays her back, no one is the wiser. If Ammy pays the show bills but gets $200 extra in her paycheck from working for the barn, and the barn charges $200 extra on the ownerâs board bill that month, no one is the wiser. Obviously if owner pays the show bill directly for ammyâs classes itâs out in the open, but all three of these are problematic. But two of them are hard to prove.
This is why the ammy rules are just plain hard to enforce. Proving who is getting paid to ride/train isnât as hard as proving someoneâs age. Doesnât make the rules bad in the abstract, but it does mean that any discussion of ammy classes has to consider the reality that cheating into these classes is easier than cheating into other classes.
Paying entry fees is against the rules, because it is specified in the amateur rule.
This is also very clearly prohibited for an amateur. It may be hard to prove, but if you are being paid anything by a barn for work, you canât ride another horse that boards there and remain an amateurâeven if the owner isnât laundering additional money through the board bill. If you get paid money and you ride the horse, you are in violation of the rule, regardless of whether the money was specifically âforâ riding the horse.
The scenario people are objecting to in this thread that I think is kosher is one in which a rider receives no money from anyone involved, pays their own entry fees, but also does not pay a lease fee or upkeep on the horse. I donât think itâs against the rules to ride a horse where someone else has paid for expenses like shipping or stall splits, and I suspect banning that behavior would require a rule change.
I could be wrong! But this is my read. Do we have any stewards who could weigh in?
Iâm not disagreeing with you, we agree. Iâm just saying some people are lying and saying theyâre just letting an ammy ride to be nice and thatâs not actually true.
But that doesnât take into account the whole picture. Under that scenario, a trainer with both junior and adult clients is gone basically all the time because you have to take kids one weekend, and adults another weekend. Nightmare for the trainer, and means they really need to have an assistant trainer who can stay home and teach the other half of the clients on the weekends. Weâd all welcome something that actually made it more user friendly, but I donât think thatâs it.
What would end up needing to happen to fit everybody in is divisions would have to be shorter, so instead of the traditional 4 over fences classes and a flat itâd be 2 over fences and a flat (so one jumping class a day). People might gripe about less time in the ring but other disciplines (including jumpers) get one round so it can be done.
The show hunter world is pretty unique to the US.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
