It’s interesting to me that they put the word astride in there. Were there so many people doing it sidesaddle that they needed to differentiate? 
1 Like
lol I believe it’s to make a distinction between people training on the ground - driving or halter or just general breaking/training
5 Likes
That possibility totally had not crossed my mind. Lol.
1 Like
Interesting! It looks like by their rules, if you ever taught a cutting lesson for money, or ever trained a horse under saddle for any discipline involving cattle for money, even if it was 40 years ago and you haven’t sat on a horse since, you can’t ever be non-pro again and have to compete as a pro for life? But you can be, say, a professional hunter/jumper trainer (as long you aren’t in the show jumping hall of fame!) and compete as a non-pro in cutting since you are in a different discipline? Or am I misunderstanding it?
1 Like
TBH - I have no clue.
1 Like
Looking at the NCHA rulebook briefly, it appears that there are ways to get a Non Pro or Amateur card back if you have previously done something that made you ineligible for a Non Pro or Amateur card. Kind of looks like the waiting period is between three to five years, depending on the type of card you want.
2 Likes
If that is truly what this rule means, then it is an asinine decision on the part of the USHJA and USEF leadership. I can’t help but think there was some serious Groupthink occurring amongst the leadership of both those organizations and no one either thought about or pointed out the unintended consequences of this rule change. I also wonder if there was anyone amongst said leadership that had the b**** to speak out against it or if everyone just went along with the gag.
They are trying to slap a band-aid on a laceration that requires debridement and sutures but God forbid they do what really needs to be done - completely rethinking (as someone said) the archaic Amateur/Open concept and coming up with some other kind of structure that will better distinguish the lines between true amateurs and true professionals.
I think on the face of it the Novice/Maiden/Limit/Open concept sounds more promising than basing the distinction between Amateur/Open on winnings/money earned but I am not well versed in the requirements of those divisions (Novice/Maiden/Limit/Open) so may be talking out of my hat (or a** - LOL).
3 Likes
I’d be happy to submit my taxes or something that shows I make money doing something else, very fully time.
If someone were to offer me the chance, as an amateur, to teach 3 hours or so a week to cover board and training or show fees, or whatever, that seems fair to me.
So, are we okay if our work goes toward horse related services? Or is it just if actual money exchanges hands?
To me, the rule is just permitting barn staff to teach beginner lessons when the pro is away at shows with the showing kids/adults. Without making barn staff, who don’t ride or train as part of their jobs, a professional. I don’t see what the big deal is. Any barn staff who were already breaking rules by training and riding for trainer for renumeration will continue to do so. Any who aren’t, won’t.
I think I’m in the camp of “throw the whole Amateur/Pro division out and come up with new divisions based on show results”, but I also wonder why people are so motivated to show in the Amateur divisions. Fine-tuning the definition of an Amateur doesn’t seem to be very effective in stopping cheaters; perhaps it would be more effective to eliminate or reduce the “benefits” of competing in the Amateur division.
For me, it’s important to stay an Amateur so my classes run (mostly) on the weekend and I don’t have to take as much time off work. I can’t imagine that would matter to pros unless they insist the horse has to enter something every day of the show?
Is it really worth that much to say the horse was shown by an “amateur”? If the horse is really a “pro ride” only, wouldn’t prospective buyers learn that when they try the horse?
Are people trying to win additional prize money in the Amateur divisions?
Shouldn’t it be more prestigious to win in the “open” division?
(It’d also be really nice to have data about what divisions are most prone to cheating and why, but I don’t think anyone would fess up!)
2 Likes
It’s basically just the Adult & Amateur Hunters. I’m sure it occurs in the Ad/Am Jumpers too, but I don’t think it would affect the placings as much as the fancy 6 year old hunter that shows up out of nowhere and is perfectly prepped to turn in pristine 3’ Hunter rounds for exactly 2 days with an “amateur” in the tack. That’s the kind of thing that immediately adds a 0 to price tags; not quite so cut & dry in the jumper ring.
10 Likes
So in the cutting horse world non-pro riders still aren’t allowed to teach cutting horse lessons. Presumably a person could teach lessons in another discipline and maintain their non-pro status, which is interesting.
I find it amusing that I couldn’t get my amateur card with the NCHA because my ex was a trainer, even though he wasn’t training cutting horses when we were together, and I’ve never ridden a cutting horse other than to lope one at a show I was at with friends, and I definitely didn’t get paid for it.
1 Like
I think you’ve helped me to find my new career.
My two girls are retired and none of us will ever see the inside of a show ring again. So I think I will reactivate my membership as a pro, and hire myself out as the “supervising pro” to everyone who needs the paperwork. GENIUS! 
12 Likes
Sounds like a nice little side hustle
All jokes aside - this is one of the things that I don’t understand about the rule! What constitutes being under the supervision or guidance of a pro?
1 Like
GENIUS! Love it and a great side hustle.
1 Like
Bingo
1 Like
There’s a thread over on Off Course about lesson barns disappearing. I know there are a lot of problems with this rule, but I personally would have been very happy to teach beginner lessons on my semi-retired show and hunt horses if I could have done that without breaking the amateur rules and sacrificing my own showing. My older but still healthy horses that I was keeping and paying for anyway would have benefitted from some light work and I enjoy teaching. Many true, by-the-rules amateurs, have decades of training and experience riding, showing, training horses, breeding, managing their own barn, etc. Many also own horses that have stepped down, ponies that their kids have outgrown, etc.
Unfortunately, I also see that this rule is going to be interpreted by the current rule breakers as license to continue breaking the rules.
12 Likes
This is an interesting aspect of the rule. It makes a pro responsible for potential rule breaking by the amateur. What is the penalty for a pro who supervises an amateur who breaks the rule, let’s say by teaching kids who are showing? That seems like an awkward setup. Also–I think it might make it difficult for legit amateurs who are not teaching specifically for the benefit of a pro to find someone to agree to supervise them.
2 Likes
I mean… they’re already “among us”. How many of them are riding family horses in the AOs and Am Derbies bc their parents are the pros? Note that horses are conveniently sold as ammy friendly and there’s a hamster wheel of horses coming through their programs.
The bigger thing for me… what’s gonna happen when the NCAA Equestrian teams start latching onto Name,Image,Likeness and start allowing their riders to accept compensation? Is USEF going to immediately declare these riders to be pros? Or are we going to just continue to put on blinders and let the true Ammys scrape together their pesos to compete against those getting big $$$ to promote themselves bc of their college accomplishments. That, to me, seems a bit tone-deaf.
The whole amateur idea needs a complete revamp IMO. If you are spending 5-8 hours/ 4-5 days a week at the barn riding multiple horses almost weekly, then it’s probably not a level playing field with a weekend warrior that can barely have 1-2 30min-1 hour lessons a week in the dark after a full office workday and a 35 minute commute to the barn.
9 Likes
