Question About Trainer's Spouses/Family Members & Amateur Rules

[Linny]

[QUOTE=vxf111;8371280]
Please show me where I said anything LIKE THAT. Please.

it would take a chart to explain the relationships. I pointed out that it was really very simple and could have been explained in a simple sentence.

I never said the reporter HAD to do anything. I pointed out that explaining the relationships could have easily been done in the article and that doing so would have given credit where credit was due.

But if you like kicking strawmen, have at it. I didn’t say anything even remotely close to what you’re claiming I said.[/QUOTE]

Agree completely.
I’d like to start with the assumption that the person covering the hunters at WIHS for the Chronicle is reasonably well versed in the rules under which hunters are shown. If the writer is going to discuss the horse being sent by Mr. Lohman to his wife, it only makes sense to mention the ACTUAL trainer who had developed the horse. Not to do so creates the impression in the reader’s mind that the horse was one of the horses in Lohman’s barn.
As a reporter, covering AA level hunters, the simple question “Where did Davenport come from?” would seem elementary. I interviewed (on live TV) many horse trainers and owners in the racing world. The question of where your recent stakes winner (etc.) came from is pretty basic and in a situation where lack of clarity creates the impression of cheating mention should have been made.

[Linny]

The next thing that *USEF will have to consider re: Ammy Rule is the definition of “client.”

Let’s say I own a horse and board him with Trainer A who rides him weekly and from whom I take lessons and under whose banner I show. I decide that I want to go to Ocala for the winter but trainer doesn’t go to Florida (or maybe goes to WEF?) so trainer arranges for me to work with Trainer B for 3 mos. The plan is for me to return to A’s barn on a pre-set date.
Am I “client” of A during my tenure in Fla? If I am not asked to pay a hold stall fee? If I pay a hold stall fee in a lump sum in Dec but nothing in Jan and Feb? What if I ask A to keep an eye out for a young prospect for me during the winter but no money changes hands?
It’s pretty vague when eligibility is based on the status as “client.”

[Jumphigh83]

Aren’t leases recorded with the Federation any more?

[Janet]

[QUOTE=Jumphigh83;8372230]
Aren’t leases recorded with the Federation any more?[/QUOTE]
Sometimes they are.
Sometimes they are not.

[vxf111]

I think the concept of client is pretty clearly described in that same subsection

[mvp]

[QUOTE=Moesha;8370968]
Actually they did accuse them and maybe should edit the original post. I think this is disgusting - the people being discussed are some of the most wonderful people in the Mid Atlantic Show World and since the whole thing is based on completely wrong assumptions the remaining discussions about amateur rules should be on a new thread.[/QUOTE]

Well, you should have those wonderful people lay their complaint at the doorstep of the author of the article who, with one comma in a badly-constructed sentence, created the confusion.

[Daventry]

[QUOTE=jennifersw;8367943]
Perhaps the biggest/worst assumption of all is that the article itself is accurate. I won a big class at Harrisburg last week and was followed out of the ring by the reporter from the show’s PR agency. She asked easy questions. I gave easy answers. About 4 hours later, as I sat in my kitchen at midnight having my victory party of one after the horse had been unbraided and turned out, I opened my laptop and in my inbox was the press release sitting there. I opened it, all excited to read about my horse…and shut the laptop about 60 seconds later, frustrated & let down by how badly the reporter had screwed up what I told her. Huge, glaring mistakes.
So, believe half of what you see & none of what you hear, people. Do you really think that article was sent to the Lohman’s or Dani DiPietro for fact checking? Of course not. Because in modern media, it’s more important to get the story out than to get the story right.[/QUOTE]

I haven’t read this entire thread, but have to agree with you 100%!! I get asked to contribute to articles all the time, journalists looking for quotes, etc. I have always been very straight forward, answered questions in an easy to follow manner…and nearly all of the articles I have contributed to have misquoted me or stated ridiculously untrue, wrong or unresearched information. It is beyond frustrating! As a result, anyone now wanting me to contribute to an article or wanting to interview me for a quote must now provide me with a draft of the article so I can proofread what has been written. It honestly makes me wonder if some writers/journalists do any research at all?? So because of my many experiences with journalists over the years, I take most stories in print with a grain of salt! Sad really.

[copper1]

You can maintain your ammy status if you groom but do not ride horses in your employers care but can still ride and show your own horse.

[st_francis]

I don’t think the rules are that convoluted . I agree that many people present a story or circumstance that sounds convoluted but in every instance its pretty easy to spot where the conflict is. I don’t really see any problem with the AO division either since it’s for amateur owned not amateur lease and there already is an amateur to ride division.

[Moesha]

[QUOTE=mvp;8372277]
Well, you should have those wonderful people lay their complaint at the doorstep of the author of the article who, with one comma in a badly-constructed sentence, created the confusion.[/QUOTE]

There was no complaint by anyone - except for this thread and those on it -and there was no confusion - people found confusion on their own and ran with it

[Trixie]

I don’t really see any problem with the AO division either since it’s for amateur owned not amateur lease and there already is an amateur to ride division.

Well, for a long time, the problem was height. Before the advent of the performance hunters, if you were an amateur on someone else’s horse, you really didn’t have a place to go show 3’3" or 3’6" hunters, even if you leased the horse. So riders were going from the 3’ AA’s to… where? Workings? That’s a pretty big height gap even if you wanted to ride against the pros, as opposed to your peers.

I know I personally spent a lot of time nagging schooling shows to add a 3’6" option to something just so I could go around at that height.

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=Trixie;8375517]
Well, for a long time, the problem was height. Before the advent of the performance hunters, if you were an amateur on someone else’s horse, you really didn’t have a place to go show 3’3" or 3’6" hunters, even if you leased the horse. So riders were going from the 3’ AA’s to… where? Workings? That’s a pretty big height gap even if you wanted to ride against the pros, as opposed to your peers.

I know I personally spent a lot of time nagging schooling shows to add a 3’6" option to something just so I could go around at that height.[/QUOTE]

Honest question, no snark intended at all: Has the implementation of the Performance Hunter division helped at all with the issue you describe above?

I assume (I know, I know) that when it comes to schooling shows, the new division hasn’t made a bit of difference since, if there were enough people at unrated (another assumption) schooling shows who wanted to jump over 3’, they would just add a division, or another section to an already established division.

How many adults are out there taking advantage of the Performance Hunter division at the rated shows? Or is there so little interest in the division that many shows can’t fill it?

If I remember correctly, this issue was a very hot topic before the Performance Hunter division came to be, but it hasn’t really been brought up since then. I’m wondering where all those non-owners who were bemoaning the lack of 3’6" divisions to show in have gone and what they are doing now?

Trixie, my reasons for quoting you are twofold: 1) you brought it up :), and 2) I remember you as being one who not only talked the talk, but were more than capable of walking the walk. I figure you are probably most likely to be able to chime in on this in an educated,honest, and realistic way.

I’m honestly curious about what, if any, difference the Performance Hunter division has made for amateurs who don’t own a horse.

[Trixie]

For me, it’s actually kind of interesting - right around when the performance hunters rolled in and that became a viable option, I GOT a horse! (first one I’ve ever actually owned, as opposed to leased or catch rode) He’s also the one I was comfortable doing that height on that wasn’t primarily a jumper.

However, that being said - as an ammy, if I didn’t own one, I wouldn’t gripe about having to show against pros. I’ve never considered anything about the horse show world to particularly be on even ground anyhow, so if I wanted to jump a certain height, it wouldn’t particularly matter to me whether my competitors were ammies or pros, as long as the height was where I felt I needed to be. The performance hunters give us a place to move up if we want to, incrementally. Previously, the only option for that, it seemed, was to find a schooling show with real jumps or do jumper classes.

On the other hand, I do recall a few ammy riders saying they really only wanted to be judged against other ammy riders. I can understand that - they’re your peers - but at the same token, half the ammies in my zone are truly excellent riders anyhow.

So my answer is that I don’t actually know the answer to your question. I’m certainly appreciative of the fact that there now ARE open divisions for riders, but the only horses I’ve shown in the last few years at all are the ones under my ownership - my big horse and the one I purchased sometime after that, who is a 14h pony and not about to go jumping more than 2’6" with me.

[IPEsq]

I’m interested in that as well. Don’t the performance divisions go earlier in the week? Does that help the ammy at all?

I loved being the lone ammy in the Regulars. Hope to make it back there some day (need to get a horse there again and drum up the courage of 20yo me).

[Soaponarope]

[QUOTE=IPEsq;8375713]
I’m interested in that as well. Don’t the performance divisions go earlier in the week? Does that help the ammy at all?

I loved being the lone ammy in the Regulars. Hope to make it back there some day (need to get a horse there again and drum up the courage of 20yo me).[/QUOTE]

Yes, the performance hunters goes on Thursday and Friday. It is also an open division and has become basically a division in which pros show their juniors’ horses as a warm up for the weekend. So, we still don’t have a 3’6" division that is comparable to the juniors who may lease a horse to show.

[Soaponarope]

[QUOTE=IPEsq;8375713]
I’m interested in that as well. Don’t the performance divisions go earlier in the week? Does that help the ammy at all?

I loved being the lone ammy in the Regulars. Hope to make it back there some day (need to get a horse there again and drum up the courage of 20yo me).[/QUOTE]

Yes, the performance hunters goes on Thursday and Friday. It is also an open division and has become basically a division in which pros show their juniors’ horses as a warm up for the weekend. So, we still don’t have a 3’6" division that is comparable to the juniors who may lease a horse to show.

[EAY]

[QUOTE=Trixie;8375620]

However, that being said - as an ammy, if I didn’t own one, I wouldn’t gripe about having to show against pros. I’ve never considered anything about the horse show world to particularly be on even ground anyhow, so if I wanted to jump a certain height, it wouldn’t particularly matter to me whether my competitors were ammies or pros, as long as the height was where I felt I needed to be. [/QUOTE]

This. One of the best lessons horse showing teaches kids is that life is often not fair. There’s always going to be someone out there who is richer/smarter/prettier/more talented or has a fancier pony. You just have to do the best you can for yourself and your equine partner.

@Soaponarope;8375755

So, we still don’t have a 3’6" division that is comparable to the juniors who may lease a horse to show.

But juniors can be paid, so the field there is probably even more uneven. Kids with a single horse compete against others who are catch riding all day long, who might not even be in regular school so that they can devote themselves to showing. In the pony divisions, you can have 17-year-old mini pros who show in the grand prix jumpers competing against 11-year-olds in jods and pigtails.

I have seen plenty of amateurs showing and winning in the performance hunter divisions, though I agree that people primarily use them as a warm-up.

[roamingnome]

@EAY;8375923

But juniors can be paid, so the field there is probably even more uneven. Kids with a single horse compete against others who are catch riding all day long, who might not even be in regular school so that they can devote themselves to showing.

Watching the Harrisburg live feed the last 2 years, I’ve seen that they’ve added an award for highest ranked horse/rider combo in each junior hunter division where the kid goes to a ‘brick and mortar’ school. I think that’s a nice thing to have!

Now, if they could only have that for the ammies who work “40+ hours/week in a cubicle” :lol:

[Darkwave]

[QUOTE=roamingnome;8376012]

Now, if they could only have that for the ammies who work “40+ hours/week in a cubicle” :lol:[/QUOTE]

Ive advocated for years for them to split the amateurs not by age, but by hours worked per week at a desk job (at a company NOT owned by your family).

[roamingnome]

[QUOTE=Darkwave;8376104]
Ive advocated for years for them to split the amateurs not by age, but by hours worked per week at a desk job (at a company NOT owned by your family).[/QUOTE]

I might actually win then!!