Taking the model of maiden/novice/limit/open and modifying as needed for both horse and rider should be workable.
You could run classes/divisions of maiden/ limit/open horse, etc. based on wins.
Or you could use a point system based on how many competitors were in a class (similar to how the Arab folks award points for Legion of Merit, etc–based on placing and class size) and do the same with riders.
If you wanted, you could combine them in some sort of mix, like limit horse and rider.
3 Likes
Yeah - you could. I would lean to scores over points for dressage at least. The Arab point system overweights regional and national championships, although that could be a feature not a bug, given the pay to play nature of going to a national show.
2 Likes
SInce our median scores are already calculated, this would be easier.
1 Like
I believe somebody upthread asked about the survey that was mentioned in the webinar. I received it this afternoon at the email address that I used to register for the webinar in the first place.
1 Like
May have been me. I also got the email. I suspect that I wasn’t the only one that didn’t catch it at the end of the webinar.
Aside from coaching low level riders at I think 3 horse shows, everything I’ve done as a pro over the past several years would have let me stay an ammy under the proposed rules. Unfortunately, the side hustle didn’t pay for any showing, mostly helped a little with vet bills. I stopped teaching a couple lessons on the weekend during the COVID shutdowns, and I’ve got a nice “ammy friendly” horse now, so I thought it’s a perfect time to sit out a year. I’d had a hard time finding shows on my local circuit that would put open classes on the schedule other than one 2’3 schooling division. I also couldn’t afford to take time away from my day job to spend a ton of money to show in the USHJA hunters early in the week. I’m far too rusty for the bigger divisions at the moment, and horse is green to hunters.
Sitting down meant I also had to leave my friend hanging in the middle of rehabbing her horse and/or switch to doing that very hard work for free. I did go through the process and had my amateur status reinstated.
I have picked up some braiding and grooming jobs this summer. One friend I braided for has a horse I’ve never ridden or been asked to ride although back when I was a pro I did a lot of rehab work with her prior horse. She’s now had some travel, is paying a pro to ride the horse 4x a week, and asked if I could take him on a hack one other day. I now can’t do this, which truthfully is a dumb consequence of the current rule. There aren’t any other AA acquaintances at the barn with some spare time that she necessarily trusts with her horse, and her pro rider can’t do 5 days/week. I also assume that the allowance for the “barn duties” tasks mean I could exercise this horse on occasion for free, otherwise it’s not a rule change at all except to add lunging back to the list. To that extent, I think the proposed rule changes are a good step in the right direction. The rule wasn’t really intended to stop that I don’t think (if anyone needs extra saddle time opportunities for their own development it’s the one horse owning desk job working amateur), but rather the full time groom or bookkeeper who spends hours a day riding for their employer.
I asked for clarification on the survey as to whether you can now exercise a horse if you are paid as a groom. As far as I could tell, the only real change is that longeing is no longer training But then I see other interpretations
I think this is what frustrates me so much about USEF. Seems like they are confused too or don’t think through very careful and deliberate communication. Perhaps that’s a result of horse people running a large and complicated organization. I don’t know. But seems like standard output for them. Confusing rules even when they are reinventing them.
1 Like
On a similar perspective I asked “Does this mean it would be OK for a groom to ride her employer’s horses, but not OK for the book keeper to ride her employer’s horses?”
3 Likes
I do like that they are raising the age of Junior to 21. Under the current system, the Jr. ages out at 18 and is sort of pushed into the YR FEI division. If a Jr. has a horse that tops at 3rd level, that Jr. can stay for 3 more years in the Jrs. I don’t know how fair this is to the younger Jrs. though, having to compete against kids that have ridden for years at this level.
As a practical matter, most of the amateurs who are going to teach lessons (to perhaps try out being a pro) or who are going to work as full time influencers are not going to be people who are struggling to pay show fees because of their moderate income from their 40 hr/wk job–they are going to be people who DON’T WORK. So I don’t see how this will increase attendance at shows. Also, the influencers, if they are bringing people INTO the sport, will likely be successfully showing amateurs (and not need the free swag) whose names are recognized.
Finally, I really think they are torturing this thing to death and no one will be able to follow it. I think they will drive true amateurs OUT of the sport. These rules do nothing for leveling the playing field, which is what has been driving amateurs out of the sport. It can’t solve the problem of horse barns being raized to make room for more developments and the cost of boarding and training being out of reach for many people. I agree that the paid/unpaid distinctions is ridiculous and what would make more sense is a point based system that allows people to compete against other people in their own catagories.
5 Likes
Meanwhile the ridiculously high cost of showing remains unaddressed.
3 Likes
I think raising the junior age will help the h/j group more than dressage. There are kids who want to work to keep having access to horses and shows in college after parents cut them off / sell their horse. For them, maybe they don’t have other jobs because they are students. So changing some of the junior classes to YR would avoid all of those other complications with the amateur rule. Maybe these working students can actually get treated a little better than slaves if they don’t have to worry about harming their amateur status at young rider age.
True. But I don’t think the amateur rule was intended to address this. Trust me. If there was a rule to decrease the cost of showing I’d be all over it.
5 Likes
I think there is a DIFFERENT task force addressing that.
2 Likes
I think for CDIs, NAYC qualifiers, and the actual NAYC, the FEI rules for the age limits for JR vs YR will supersede this rule.
Except how are they going to enforce it or differentiate between those two things?
They are going to rely on people reporting infractions to them. They are not going to police any of this directly.
1 Like
According to some posters (or at least one poster) the ammy rule is why showing is not affordable to so many and getting rid of the ammy rule will fix all things showing.
At least that is what they seem to say in just about every thread.
4 Likes
I can see how some of these things would help to defray costs by allowing someone with time to make a bit of extra money. But the ammy rule is far from the main factor driving show costs. So I really don’t get all the disappointment that some are experiencing.
5 Likes
This is what I keep saying. I want the sport inviting to newcomers.
That means I think the more brilliant influencers out there attracting people to the sport the better, and the more we acknowledge if you’re new to a level you’re expected to struggle with it, the better. It IS hard to get started and not feel like an idiot (or it was for me!) and continuing on helps you learn some competency even as you learn how little you know. Though I would score an embarrassing amount lower than he did, I would rather I ride against Steffen Peters than some newbie to dressage show against some of the super talented ammies who bring their own horses up the levels and consistently score in the 70s. Because I’ve been around some now, I get what importance I put on comments and scores and care less about placing. But I want the sport to grow and bring in new faces who are interested! Throw out an amateur division, and create a novice division.
This seems like something USDF could do without a change from USEF, just like eventing does.
1 Like
Here is the Chronicle’s summary of the webinar.
