[QUOTE=MintHillFarm;8368185]
Adult Amateur Hunter division is different than the Amateur Owners, the latter of which must be owned by the rider or immediate family.
Adult Amateur Hunters can be horses owned by others…[/QUOTE]
Yes, that’s not what the concern was. The rules are different if your family member/spouse is a professional.
I don’t think it was a crazy assumption (in light of the way the article was written) to assume that the horse was in AL’s training. That fact turned out not to be true once the horse’s actual trainer clarified-- but I don’t think it was a crazy assumption to begin with.
If I (or most of us) called up my/our trainer and said “put a horse on the trailer I need something to show,” the horse that showed up would be one from that trainer’s program and/or owned by the trainer. Many trainers don’t have permission to take a horse on trial for one client and just toss it on the trailer to go show with someone else. Most trainers probably wouldn’t trust an amateur to ride a strange horse at a show that wasn’t even a horse from the trainer’s program. The wording “this horse was a barn favorite” seemed to imply that the horse was FROM AL’s barn/program. Apparently AL had that permission from the horse’s trainer and trust in JL here but that’s a little unusual so I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume from the article that the horse was originally in training with AL.
[QUOTE=Tha Ridge;8368194]
Yes, that’s not what the concern was. The rules are different if your family member/spouse is a professional.[/QUOTE]
I don’t believe that matters… I can think of more than a few scenarios where well known Professionals are married to an Adult Amateur or Amateur Owner.
[QUOTE=MintHillFarm;8368281]
I don’t believe that matters… I can think of more than a few scenarios where a well known Professionals are married to an Adult Amateur or Amateur Owner.[/QUOTE]
But the issue HERE was not whether JL could show in the A/Os or not. The issue here was whether riding the horse at all rendered her a pro under the rules. Not eligibility to show in a specific class.
I don’t believe it would.
Yes, we’ve all concluded that many pages back. Because the horse was never in training with her husband at all.
As an A/A, she could ride anyone’s horse; I don’t see anything in rule book to say otherwise.
[QUOTE=MintHillFarm;8368302]
As an A/A, she could ride anyone’s horse; I don’t see anything in rule book to say otherwise.[/QUOTE]
No, incorrect. She cannot ride a horse in training with her husband. If an amateur rides a horse for which a family member is paid to board/train that riding makes the amateur a professional. This was discussed several pages back. The rule was cited and explained. Pretty uncontroversial understanding of the rule. The question here was whether the horse she rode was or was not in training with her husband.
[QUOTE=kh209;8368468]
I’m sorry but this whole post is such a waste of energy. If you have a LEGITIMATE, FACT BASED CONCERN, contact the appropriate people. If not, mind your own business and stop trying to stir the pot.
What an eloquent post by Deloise. Congratulations on her win! Let’s put our energy into celebrating great moments in our community vs. speculating and gossiping.[/QUOTE]
Y’all, no one on this forum is going to mind their own business, and if we did there would be no forum right? And how is minding one’s own business defined anyways? The WIHS adult winner is everybody’s business and huge congrats to her! Beautiful, beautiful team!
This board is just the place to ask a question. In fact, isn’t it silly for people to get so defensive about questions if they have nothing to hide? OP didn’t press any charges for Lord’s sake.
OP was forthcoming about saying she wasn’t sure if she was correct and everybody walked away a little wiser. There’s got to be a place to get help with figuring out rules and asking questions. USEF rules? Are you kidding me? They’re pretty arcane. I’m pretty grateful to the board for helping me figure them out. OP did the right thing by asking a question and in the meantime clarifying the rules. It’s ok by me.
[QUOTE=kh209;8368468]
I’m sorry but this whole post is such a waste of energy. If you have a LEGITIMATE, FACT BASED CONCERN, contact the appropriate people. If not, mind your own business and stop trying to stir the pot.
What an eloquent post by Deloise. Congratulations on her win! Let’s put our energy into celebrating great moments in our community vs. speculating and gossiping.[/QUOTE]
I think you are getting a little worked up about it.
It was a question.
I didn’t get the impression that there was any pot stirring or personal attack by the OP, only a COTH article that was (obviously) not written clearly and made the situation sound as if the rider was indeed riding a horse trained by her husband.
The rider has explained that it is not the case. Though the horse was at her husbands barn, and he had use of it, the owner of the horse was not his client.
Really nothing to get worked up about. 
[QUOTE=right horse at the right time;8367803]
Thanks for clarifying and clearing up all the speculation. Must be a super great horse to become a barn favorite in a week. :)[/QUOTE]
Good lord! How hard is this?
Reporter: Is he nice to work around?
Rider: Oh yes! He’s a barn favorite. Everyone loves him.
Reporter: When did you start riding him?
Rider: Oh that’s a funny story! I was having a bad week…
[QUOTE=Ladylexie;8367350]
A well know Saddlebred person showed as an amateur despite her husband being a pro. I wouldn’t be surprised if they just figured they could flaunt the rules.[/QUOTE]
A spouse can show as an amateur as long as the horse is owned by them or their family - they can’t show as an amateur showing a client’s horse.
[QUOTE=right horse at the right time;8367803]
Thanks for clarifying and clearing up all the speculation. Must be a super great horse to become a barn favorite in a week. :)[/QUOTE]
USEF records show the rider in question starting showing the horse in January of 2015.
Hmmm, a barn favorite in a week. That’s some horse. I’m not buying it, sorry. I see too many getting away with it.
So Trainers wife would be paying the board bill (to her spouse) for said horse, which eliminates the ‘true owner’ as any sort of client, because ‘true owner’ only has an agreement with ‘other trainer’?
And Trainer has an agreement with ‘other trainer’ only?
The money is clean, clean, clean.
[QUOTE=Jumphigh83;8368625]
Hmmm, a barn favorite in a week. That’s some horse. I’m not buying it, sorry. I see too many getting away with it.[/QUOTE]
So, your don’t see how it is possible that a trainer friend of yours would send you a horse for a client of that didn’t work for said client, but would end up working perfectly for your son? And your son rides the horse for a year then describes him as a barn favorite?
It’s inconceivable!
[QUOTE=Jumphigh83;8368625]
Hmmm, a barn favorite in a week. That’s some horse. I’m not buying it, sorry. I see too many getting away with it.[/QUOTE]
It doesn’t say the horse was a barn favorite in a week. It says:
That horse turned out to be a barn favorite, Davenport.
Sounds like with more information he became a favorite after he’d been in the barn for a while. The writing is a wee bit vague and open to interpretation.
[QUOTE=Jumphigh83;8368625]
Hmmm, a barn favorite in a week. That’s some horse. I’m not buying it, sorry. I see too many getting away with it.[/QUOTE]
Did you consider that he was a barn favorite at the barn of his owner’s trainer who JL and AL are good friends with? Also, I’ve spent plenty of time around Dylan seeing how I ride with AL and he is literally the most perfect and wonderful horse to be around, let alone to watch being ridden. The horse is a giant puppy dog and anyone would like him. I bet if you spent 5-10 mins around him he would be one of your favorites, too.
[QUOTE=jvanrens;8368703]
Sounds like with more information he became a favorite after he’d been in the barn for a while. The writing is a wee bit vague and open to interpretation.[/QUOTE]
I agree that writing in the article caused confusion (or covered deception). I don’t know. But I will say that the rather casual attitude toward cheating by insiders and those at the top, as well as a long history of BTNs (and perhaps show managers) having a disproportionate amount of power on USEF committees helps to raise suspicion. Oh, and the ammy rule is a mess besides. The bottom line is that the real context surrounding this bit of confusing writing plays a part. It makes no sense to me that someone should get mad at a person raising a question or suspicion. Were things cleaner in our sport, I’d see it.
[QUOTE=Jumphigh83;8368625]
Hmmm, a barn favorite in a week. That’s some horse. I’m not buying it, sorry. I see too many getting away with it.[/QUOTE ]
did it ever occur to you that maybe the clients of Alans knew the horse from having seen it show under its trainer Deloise? Maybe the horse has a ton of personality and good looks making him a barn favorite as soon ss it got there . A friend of mine moved her hamof a horse to a new show barn the fact that he is gorgeous, an incredible mover and a ham I’m sure endeared him to those at his new barn.
Of note Jesse is president of the Maryland Horse Show Association and a USEF judge
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
