I get that.
But given the choice, I think I would rather show against the person who teaches up/downers, but who is on a horse that could only do the low adult division, rather than the person who doesn’t teach, but is mounted on the next Rumba. Lol.
Of course, whether the person is legitimately only teaching up/down lessons to beginners, or doing much more than that, is an entirely different facet of the conversation.
That’s the thing though … amateur doesn’t mean grassroots or beginner or incompetent or dilettante, but it does mean someone who does the sport as a hobby, instead of making money through it. Or at least it used to.
That’s the whole thing in a nutshell. 
On the flip side of this, I also have a friend who is arguably not even as a good of a rider as the two shamateurs I know, but who is making a go of starting a true lesson barn and teaching up/down lessons. I will cheer her on all day long, because she’s doing a very good job of instilling the basics in these new riders. But she’s not showing rated or otherwise pretending to be something she’s not.
Being a “pro” does not mean that you ride well - just that someone is willing to pay you to ride for them. Plenty of amateurs ride circles around many of the pros.
Another question, what constitutes “oversight” by a professional?
Absolutely. And another problem entirely are the many pros (training ride, showing, and teaching, not a “bucket scrubber” like my lowly self) who are utterly unqualified.
I digress.
In my experience the hardest part of this concept (which I don’t disagree with on its face) is getting those lower-level people to encourage the kids to move on to a new trainer when it’s time. There are so many people in my area who just refuse to own that their niche is up/down kids who need to be encouraged to move on to someone more qualified (and with access to better equine resources) if they have any aspirations of jumping over 2’ once they reach that height. Instead they cling to their students with a death grip rather than admitting that there’s a limit to what they’re capable of teaching and encouraging kids to take that step up when they reach the point where it’s necessary.
That’s a good point. Maybe limit amateur coaching opportunities to 18" or less?
Another thing that would take policing though, which lord knows won’t happen.
And that will likely cost at least half (if not more) of what legit non shamateurs, but people trying to help out and cover a bit of their expenses,could possibly make in a year. From what I read here, nothing USHJA does is cheap.
A lot of the western groups have Levels (AQHA) so an Amateur just starting out doesn’t have to show against a multiple World Champion. In Cutting and Reining, they are split on money earned. If you’ve won over a certain dollar value, you have to show up a level. I’m not sure how NSBA does it, but likely along the same path, but it’s all available online.
As far as the Shamateurs, sadly cheaters are going to find a way to cheat. It’s a shame that a rule change that could help the people who aren’t rolling in cash is being met with such skepticism because of the cheaters.
This is where I think the shortage of lesson horses comes into play as well. I was a certified therapeutic riding instruction that also taught beginner able bodied lessons (kids and adults). Many of our horses were unsuitable for a lot of cantering or any jumping, so it was very easy to recommend that riders who could competently ride independently w/t/beginning to canter move on to another barn that would bring them along and get them started jumping and riding competitively, even at the local fairs and fun shows. Sometimes it was hard to convince them they were ready to go though, we had some very beloved horses in our program 
A lot of our “graduates” ended up being some of our best volunteers and camp counselors when they were teens. And they were also nice little riders, many who owned or leased their own horses and had fun competing locally. We filled a role in the local ecosystem that was really important. And I think getting harder to find.
If it’s all about helping working, middle class people afford to compete, should we also let amateurs get sponsorships from saddle companies, get paid to exercise horses, etc? None of those things will magically turn them into someone competitive in the Open division, and they’ll help make showing more affordable.
I wouldn’t be so sure that the loss of school horses isn’t tied to a lack of reliable up/down instructors. Legitimate pros aren’t teaching up/down lessons- they don’t want to and, frankly, I don’t blame them. It’s an entirely different skill set than what most successful horse trainers possess (people skills lol).
Filling this position is notoriously hard. It (usually) requires at least one weekend day as well as weekday evenings for the after school crowd. It doesn’t pay well and it doesn’t have benefits, and it basically demands you dismiss all of your own personal show ambitions, because riding in the open divisions is effing hard and a lot of money to spend with zero hopes of a ribbon.
Who does everyone imagine is picking up this gig? It’s not a stay-at-home mom that used to ride and now just wants to be around horses, because the hours will rob her of time with her own kid. It’s not usually a full-time position, so it requires a second (often primary) job that has the pay and benefits it takes to “do horses”.
The two best beginner instructors I’ve ever known have taught for decades and decades and graduated… thousands? of riders into the Intermediate trainer’s ranks, and they both did/do dressage, where pro/am doesn’t matter. They were capable riders, but they were absolutely amateur riders.
But what if those ladies jumped fences instead of cantered circles? Would they have given up all of their competitive ambitions, sacrificed evenings and weekends, just for the pleasure of introducing snotty children and their overbearing parents to the joy of horses?
So half the time it’s college kids that cycle out every 6-18 months, or some random person who answered your ad and who you now have to trust with your entire rider pipeline + school horse string. You pray that they know what they’re doing and, more so, that they approach horsemanship from the same angle as you, and then you load up the trailer and head to a show for 2 weeks. And then they flake or whatever, and now you’ve got 6 school horses eating food and getting shod and not getting scheduled for any lessons. At that’s when school horses really start losing you money, and the whole thing becomes way more hassle and stress than it’s worth.
In summary (lol), I think movement in this direction is best for the sport. I also think the way they think they are going to track and police this is absolutely asinine.
But it will be under the supervision of an already existing trainer so I’m not sure how this is broadening accessibility.
I love this rule change. I’m literally waiting to hear back on insurance costs for teaching 5-10 lessons a week. I have two beginner safe horse/pony that love kids and are fantastic lunge line lesson givers. They totally need the exercise and attention.
I love teaching the 5-12 year old range and getting them started and passing them on to an actual trainer if they stick with it.
Let’s be real, riding at that age should be fun and working on balance. If they want to show and get serious, I can refer them to an excellent trainer.
Now I have to find a pro that can sign off.
I also think this is the solution; a spin on Maiden/Limit/Novice, but I doubt the infrastructure is there. The data? Yes. But the software to track it, likely not. The USEF records are somewhat of a mess and actually could use an entire overhaul, but I think the problem is the lack of consistency between the show softwares that submit those results to USEF. To track what you’re talking about, and automate live updating of who’s eligible for what, that data’s going to need to arrive in a very strictly defined fashion that’s consistent across every horse show office. I think that’s going to be hard to pull off, unless USEF develops their own Show Software and requires its use.
(sidebar: USEF should have absolutely invested in building horse show software a decade ago and sold licenses to use it. Could have been a solid income stream.)
Nope. If they’d been teaching hundreds/thousands of lessons for decades, they were not amateurs by the definition that, until now, has always been used in horse sports: someone that does it as a hobby rather than a profession. It doesn’t matter how good or mediocre their riding skills are, or whether a competent amateur could beat them in a show.
Reclassifying divisions so that they’re primarily decided by past winnings and competition experience rather than amateur/professional status is a completely reasonable argument and one I’d get behind. It works overall very well in Eventung. But I don’t agree with the mentality that riding instructors should be competing as amateurs just because they aren’t able to win in the open division.
I don’t have a problem with the intent of this rule change, but (as often happens) it’s poorly written and has no chance of real enforcement. As I stated earlier in this thread, anybody can call themselves a pro for the sole purpose of providing “oversight” and signing off on the paperwork of the amateur who wants to teach. My mother or my husband could get a membership claiming to be a professional and who is to say they’re not the head trainer?
Interesting timing combined with all the talk about the AOs ownership requirement going away. Fair went away on the playground, I will never have the time talent and funding of the classical amateurs who are independently wealthy, but I already find it obnoxious enough to show against NCAA riders on peoples sales horses in the adults, throwing actual pros into the mix who now can be getting paid legally for “beginner lessons” is wild. By the time someone is showing at USEF rated shows, being able to make 600 bucks a month teaching riding lessons isn’t moving the accessibility needle.
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
