This makes a lot more sense to institute this only for the final and with a time limit versus putting such a rule in place for qualifying.
1 Like
The reality is that you can lease a qualified horse and show it, so even if you don’t have the deep pockets to campaign all year to qualify, you could save your money and do a one-time show lease. In the long run, it might actually be cheaper to take that route.
Of course, this means that any person with $$$ can pay to play.
TBH… what you’re doing is a business. This is what the open classes are created to be, as well as the baby greens. What should be done is to lobby to allow some of those classes to be held friday-saturday, rather than muddy the waters with the amateurs. I agree that some folks crossover and it’s frustrating and the answer always defaults to doing the young horses in the ammy classes bc there’s no other option. I can see your point in that you’re just trying to give your horse miles and the idea of money commitment of going 5 days is a lot, but riding against mortified adults isn’t the answer when your capability outshines the typical low AA by miles. The horse show needs to offer another option. Even if it’s just a ring full of warm-ups where you can jump a 2’6 course and be all by yourself in the ring to give the horse a good experience on a solo mission in a ring.
4 Likes
TIP awards for certain divisions at hunter shows (jr/a/o hunter, children/adult hunter, etc) would be a nice addition. The TB divisions are great, but they are open divisions w/ pros (and I don’t think we need an “adult TB hunter” division).
3 Likes
For one class at one show, couldn’t a trainer possibly just subtract the pro rides off their bill? Or just make it a lesson instead> It’s not exactly a big cut in pay considering how much a regular client is paying a trainer throughout the year. They’re still gonna bill for hauling, grooming, tack and grooming stalls, coaching. Eventing trainers don’t even ride people’s horses for them at shows.
Then hold that division on the weekend.
1 Like
In addition to what @Pennywell_Bay said, I’ll add that amateur eventers and dressage riders also work full-time and show up the morning of our shows. We survive without pro rides and warm-up divisions. I’m also in the camp that leveling the playing field in the hunters is impossible without major structural changes that show organizers and trainers will never allow. As long as you’re stuck sending your horse down for a full week when you just want to run one amateur division it’ll never be truly accessible to the working ammy.
Another possible solution is to move away from the amateur/pro categories entirely and adopt a rider/horse/open system like eventing uses. Let the green riders compete against each other and the green horses compete against each other, and everyone that’s neither can either face each other or move up.
Also ban coaching from the in-gate, at least for the hypothetical adult ammy championships. Now that I’m out of the hunters it blows my mind that I ever thought that was normal.
17 Likes
I mean I agree that they’ll fight any changes to the status quo, but again this isn’t a problem in other disciplines. The business model is supposed to cater to the client, not the other way around. I’m not at all sympathetic to the idea that clients should have to pay for services they don’t really want just because it’s more lucrative for the trainer.
12 Likes
Nobody said they had to pay for pro rides an owner feels is not necessary. That’s between customer and trainer.
1 Like
Maybe so, but I’m absolutely an amateur under USEF rules. I only ride, compete, and sell my own horses. I also have a full-time non horse job that pays most of our bills. And regardless of what height I compete at, I promise you I absolutely miss distances and make mistakes from time to time. I’d argue that’s part of why I’m good at selling horses. It’s not just that I can put amateur miles on them, but I also teach them how to safely take a joke lol
10 Likes
I agree it would take a major change. Horses like mine compete in both the pro divisions and amateur divisions. It would be REALLY unfair to my horse to put him on the road twice the time for competitions. It also does not make sense for me to spend money to go to shows for the pro divisions, and entirely different shows for the amateur divisions.
I get that other people have found ways to make this work for other disciplines ,which is great! But everyone has their own take on how to make it work, generally focusing on what is better for their horse. I competed in dressage with my horse and we always shipped in on Fridays unless it was a schooling show where we showed off the trailer or a local show where we could take them home. Most shows were not local, and it’s not fair to the horse to load them up at 4 AM, haul several hours, show, and come home. Not everyone has the luxury of showing up the morning of the show - but it’s great that you can make that work!
I think you’re taking me a little too literally there. Trailering in on a Friday afternoon for a Saturday show is a big difference from trailering in on a Tuesday for a Saturday show just because that’s when your barn goes down. I’ve also done that on occasion, but there’s still no warm-up division or pro ride involved. I was responding to a poster who said she needed to have her trainer do a warm-up division because she couldn’t get there earlier in the week, which is different from you choosing to have your trainer show your horse to achieve other goals.
I also wouldn’t expect a horse that’s being regularly campaigned by a pro to be eligible for the working-ammies-only special anyway (or at least, it would defeat the purpose of the level playing field) so I don’t see how that would really be an issue in your case. The standard amateur divisions would still be available to you. But, I think this is just more evidence that something like what OP was proposing just isn’t really viable under the current system.
4 Likes
I may not be understanding, but I don’t think people are entering the 2’6" just for fun when they normally show at 3’6".
Of my friends who are going: one is taking their 3’6" and 3’3" A/O horses, another is taking her green 3’3", and another is taking her 2’6" horse, who has recently stepped down from the 3’. None of them mix classes when they show.
1 Like
Most events and dressage shows don’t run Wednesday-Sunday. A friend who events and did AECs last year started competing on a Thursday or Friday (can’t remember which) and it was the first event she did all year where she didn’t show Saturday and Sunday only.
Hunter/jumper show schedules are just so different that it doesn’t seem a helpful comparison. Even if the amateur classes are Friday-Sunday, if the barn is trailering in on Tuesday you either have to take off work Tuesda-Friday or pay the pro to ride your horse until you get there. Its a different set up.
3 Likes
Say I have a nice 3’6" horse and I also have a new 5yo that has just started over fences and that i want to get some experience in the ring and want to show at 2’6". That’s who this applies to.
2 Likes
I don’t see the problem with that.
1 Like
I agree that Horse Trials are very different from Hunter/Jumper shows in many ways - BUT.
The AEC run for 5 days, Wed - Sun. So, if your friemd had been trailering in with a trainer, who had clients in other levels/divisions, she WOULD have been trailering in on Tuesday, and leaing Monday.
In the mid-Atlantic, most Horse Trials are run over 1 or 2 days (and each division usually does all 3 phases on one day, even if the cometition runs for more days), but there are quite a few that run for 3 or 4 days.
In the Western part of the country, many Horse Trials, even at the lower levels are run over 3 days, with everyone doing dressage on Frday, some doing XC on Sat and SJ on Sun, others doing SJ on Sat and XC on Sun. In the West, the typical rider is 5 hours or more from the competition, so they trailer in on Thursday and leave on Monday.
I COMPLETELY agree that the competition model is very different from the Hunter Jumper model, but the difference in the “time on the grounds” is not always quite as stark as your friend’s example.
Another, more relevant, difference, is that, at Horse Trial, each horse can only compete in one (3-phase) “class”, and no one but the entered rider can ride the horse during the days of the competition (but, because I am a rules nerd, a groom can ride the horse on a loose rein, from point A to point B). NO “trainer rides”.
And as I have already said, the Amateur/ Non-Amateur distinction is largely irelevant at most Horse Trials.
2 Likes
I think coffeehag doesn’t want to compete in the 2’6 or 3’ divisions against horses that have also done a 3’6 division/class earlier in the week. She seems to imply that showing the horse over the higher height earlier in the week creates an advantage for qualifying the horse at the lower height later in the week, but showing the horse early in the week over the lower height does not create an advantage:
Or maybe I’m misundertanding too.
1 Like
I am only speaking of qualifying for a Champ class/division. I don’t feel strongly either way, generally. But that’s because I have a horse who doesn’t need pro rides. I actually went to St. Louis with a trainer when my trainer couldn’t make it and he watched him jump around and said “I am not going to ride him because you guys don’t need it”. He is right. (not that I am awesome, I do the jumpers and my horse is brave).
Regardless of height, it’s an advantage in terms of confidence, polish, and ring prep. Pros can fine-tune pace, straightness, and adjustability earlier in the week, so the horse goes in with better rhythm and rideability for the ammy.
We use very similar courses across divisions. If the horse has already gone around at 3’6” (or the same height, whatever), then the horse has seen the jumps, shadows, decorations, flowers, and the ring itself.
Bigger jumps generally require more focus and effort, so when the horse steps down to 3’ or 3’3” later with the amateur, it may feel easier and more confident. This is a smart move by trainers and you even see it used by some jumper trainers. My trainer will sometimes take his one ammy’s horse in the open meter and the ammy takes it in the .9.
I see a lot of benefit for this, honestly. No one cares but I am not against it. But-
Allowing a horse to compete with a professional at a higher height earlier in the same show week, then step down for an amateur rider at a lower height to earn points toward an amateur-only championship , undermines the spirit of the division.
Amateur Divisions are Meant to Be a Level Playing Field. (as much as one can) The intent of amateur-only championships is to recognize riders who present (not necessarily bring along bc I think that is an important distinction because we all can’t produce our own for various reasons) their own horses without the competitive advantage of professional show rounds. When a horse has already gone in the same ring, often over a similar course, under the guidance of a pro, it enters the amateur classes at a clear advantage over horses who have not had that luxury.
-
It Shifts the Competition Toward Who Has a Pro, Not Who Rides Best. An amateur whose horse was tuned by a professional the day before is not competing on the same terms as an amateur who walks in on their own. Points toward an amateur championship should reflect the rider’s ability to produce their horse in that moment , not the residual polish of a professional’s ride.
-
It Dilutes the Meaning of “Amateur Achievement.” The prestige of a year-end amateur title should come from amateurs showing they can compete their horses themselves. If horses are essentially “prepped” in the division above, the amateur’s ride becomes more of a showcase of a pro’s work rather than their own.
-
It Creates an Unequal Barrier. Again- never gonna be equal. But we are talking Championship. Not every amateur has access to a professional willing (or financially feasible) to show their horse in multiple divisions. That means the system disproportionately favors wealthier riders and further separates “have” vs “have not” competitors, which contradicts the goal of keeping amateur championships accessible and fair.
If a horse shows with a pro at a higher height in the same competition week, maybe it should be ineligible to accrue points toward amateur-only year-end championships. This preserves the integrity of the amateur championship and ensures that the results reflect the skills and partnership of the amateur rider , not the advantages of professional preparation.
JMO. I hear what others are saying. It is never going to be “fair” and that is horse showing (and life). 
9 Likes
I hear what you’re saying, but wouldn’t that all come out in the wash if the actual Championship event was amateurs only? If you’ve got even a slightly peaky one, and you’ve never taken it around for it’s first trip in the ring, you’re probably in for a very rude awakening at the finals. If you’re only in the ribbons because the horse spent three days being prepped to perfection in the open classes, then the one-and-done Championship format is probably going do you in.
Just wondering if we can get the same end result (a fair chance of ribboning at the final) without the year-round cross-entry restrictions that inevitably leave someone’s perfectly acceptable situation out in the cold.
5 Likes
.
The quality of a 3’6" horse can be quite a bit different than a 2’6" horse - I think that’s where it seems like leveling the playing field to suggest that a 3’6" horse not show against the 2’6"-ers. Of course it’s imperfect as well but I see the point of the suggestion. It’s not the showing earlier in the week that is creating the advantage as much as the quality of the horses are less equal.
1 Like
