WEF Amateur Questions - Help!

[Nickelodian]

@OnDeck

Ah but here’s the problem with your first scenario. That individual is NOT a shamateur. She’s a legitimate amateur as per our lovely set of rules. Unless you meant to say her entries are paid at the horse show but she could just be riding for free at home which means she has enough money to pay her entries on the weekend. Completely allowed.

Actually ehhhh about 7? years ago, that was one of the BIG shamatuer issues. Riders that were wealthy enough to show 18 horses in all of the divisions, and not get paid to do so, while still riding in their own A/O classes. That was why the rules were changed to ONLY allow a/o riders to show one additional horse that they did not own. To prevent that exact problem. The entries were being paid by the owners for these particular riders. Which they have somewhat shut down as well. Before this rule change thee owners would pay entries, schooling, braiding, etc, while the rider got nothing. It was all legit under the rules at the time, and why it was changed.

@OnDeck

By our current rules an individual who spends 40 hours a week in an office, teaches some up-down lessons, but is a very untalented rider herself is a professional. She’s not allowed to show in the amateurs because that wouldn’t be fair to the REAL amateurs who ride multiple horses a day, 6 days a week are actively involved in buying and selling their own horses, could be showing in the grand prixs/hunter derbies etc. I mean come on. The consequences of the amateur rule is so far from the actual purpose behind it that it’s laughable.

With this I completely disagree. By the definition of amateur:

am·a·teur
/ˈamədər,ˈaməˌtər,ˈaməCHər/
noun [LIST=1]

1. a person who engages in a pursuit, especially a sport, on an unpaid basis. [TABLE] [TR] [TD]synonyms:[/TD] [TD]nonprofessional, nonspecialist, layman, layperson; More[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

• [TABLE] [TR] [TD] [/TD] [TD] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [TABLE] [TR] [TD] [/TD] [TD] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

[/LIST] [I]adjective[/I] [LIST=1]

1. engaging or engaged in without payment; nonprofessional. "an amateur archaeologist" [TABLE] [TR] [TD]synonyms:[/TD] [TD]nonprofessional, nonspecialist, lay; dilettante "an amateur sportsman"[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/LIST] LITERALLY an amateur is someone who does not get paid. The consequences of the rule is exactly that of the purpose of the rule. To prevent people who accept remuneration for riding/teaching/training from being an amateur. Period. It has absolutely zero to do with how talented you are in the tack, and everything to do if you get paid or not. It's that simple. If you do barn chores, don't ride. If you want to be an amateur, don't teach.

I can ride just as good an average pro for typically 10% of the time in the tack. I have been doing this my whole life. I win some, I lose a lot, I ride green horses much much better than trained ones. I train my own horses to good animals that go on to serve other A/As that ride trained horses better than I. My uneducated coworkers often think I"m a pro. Explaining to them why not makes complete sense when you say “i’m like a 39 year old NCAA student, can’t take money for anything.” It’s not that hard, it’s not that complicated, and it has nothing to do with skill.

[OnDeck]

@Nickelodian

Actually ehhhh about 7? years ago, that was one of the BIG shamatuer issues. Riders that were wealthy enough to show 18 horses in all of the divisions, and not get paid to do so, while still riding in their own A/O classes. That was why the rules were changed to ONLY allow a/o riders to show one additional horse that they did not own. To prevent that exact problem. The entries were being paid by the owners for these particular riders. Which they have somewhat shut down as well. Before this rule change thee owners would pay entries, schooling, braiding, etc, while the rider got nothing. It was all legit under the rules at the time, and why it was changed.

With this I completely disagree. By the definition of amateur:

am·a·teur
/ˈamədər,ˈaməˌtər,ˈaməCHər/
noun [LIST=1]

1. a person who engages in a pursuit, especially a sport, on an unpaid basis. [TABLE] [TR] [TD]synonyms:[/TD] [TD]nonprofessional, nonspecialist, layman, layperson; More[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

• [TABLE] [TR] [TD] [/TD] [TD] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [TABLE] [TR] [TD] [/TD] [TD] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

[/LIST] [I]adjective[/I] [LIST=1]

1. engaging or engaged in without payment; nonprofessional. "an amateur archaeologist" [TABLE] [TR] [TD]synonyms:[/TD] [TD]nonprofessional, nonspecialist, lay; dilettante "an amateur sportsman"[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/LIST] LITERALLY an amateur is someone who does not get paid. The consequences of the rule is exactly that of the purpose of the rule. To prevent people who accept remuneration for riding/teaching/training from being an amateur. Period. It has absolutely zero to do with how talented you are in the tack, and everything to do if you get paid or not. It's that simple. If you do barn chores, don't ride. If you want to be an amateur, don't teach.

I can ride just as good an average pro for typically 10% of the time in the tack. I have been doing this my whole life. I win some, I lose a lot, I ride green horses much much better than trained ones. I train my own horses to good animals that go on to serve other A/As that ride trained horses better than I. My uneducated coworkers often think I"m a pro. Explaining to them why not makes complete sense when you say “i’m like a 39 year old NCAA student, can’t take money for anything.” It’s not that hard, it’s not that complicated, and it has nothing to do with skill.

It is much harder and much more complicated if you are not in a position to own your own horses, which is the point of my argument. The rules allow the wealthy to go about competing with few worries while the less wealthy are always thinking about when/if they can ride or when/if they can accept payment. Sure it’s easy to say “don’t ride” or “don’t groom” but that also means “don’t progress in your riding” and “give up on an opportunity to improve your horsemanship”.

ETA: I would have much less complaints if it were easy to go pro and still horse show. I would have no problem showing as a pro if it meant I could take more riding opportunities. But since I would be in some limbo between “actual pro” who’s career is in horses and an “actual amateur” who makes zero money in horses - I wouldn’t be able to horse show at all because I don’t have the vacation time at my office job to show during the week. So I turn down opportunities to actually be an “actual amateur”. There’s no good answer and it’s frustrating.

[Midge]

@OnDeck

while the less wealthy are always thinking about when/if they can ride or when/if they can accept payment.

It’s dead easy if you don’t want to stew over it. The first is “all you want”. The second is “never”.

Quit worrying about all ways someone else has an advantage over you. There will always be someone smarter, richer, better looking, and more talented than you. No matter what you do or where you go or what your goals are. Work with the skill set you have in the parameters available to you.

[OnDeck]

@Midge

It’s dead easy if you don’t want to stew over it. The first is “all you want”. The second is “never”.

Quit worrying about all ways someone else has an advantage over you. There will always be someone smarter, richer, better looking, and more talented than you. No matter what you do or where you go or what your goals are. Work with the skill set you have in the parameters available to you.

You took that sentence out of context. Please read the rest of my post.

Im not worried about life being unfair. It’s an unfair sport. I would just want the governing body to do its best to mitigate the unfairness instead of creating rules to make it worse. I get it, there are people constantly breaking amateur rules and loopholes had to be closed. We’re worried about people getting paid to ride under the table and as a result we’ve stopped a hard working amateur from body clipping for their trainer or working off board without limiting their opportunities for improvement in the saddle. Maybe that’s how it has to be, but no I do not think it is fair. And yes, I think it overly restricts the average amateur in comparison to a wealthy one. To each their own - the rules aren’t changing anytime soon so we all have to follow them regardless!

[Nickelodian]

@OnDeck

It is much harder and much more complicated if you are not in a position to own your own horses, which is the point of my argument. The rules allow the wealthy to go about competing with few worries while the less wealthy are always thinking about when/if they can ride or when/if they can accept payment. Sure it’s easy to say “don’t ride” or “don’t groom” but that also means “don’t progress in your riding” and “give up on an opportunity to improve your horsemanship”.

ETA: I would have much less complaints if it were easy to go pro and still horse show. I would have no problem showing as a pro if it meant I could take more riding opportunities. But since I would be in some limbo between “actual pro” who’s career is in horses and an “actual amateur” who makes zero money in horses - I wouldn’t be able to horse show at all because I don’t have the vacation time at my office job to show during the week. So I turn down opportunities to actually be an “actual amateur”. There’s no good answer and it’s frustrating.

Really all of this only applies if you want to do a/o. You can a/a and modified to your heart’s content. Not to mention the (approximately) 376 open divisions. If you can’t afford a horse, you won’t be horse showing at that level anyway (see the 3’6 lesson horse thread). There are plenty of opportunities to show that aren’t a/o related.

Also, hate to break it to you but a majority of the a/o classes at shows run during the week. Opening up the division to non owners does nothing to help your day job problem.

As someone else said, nothing stopping you from earning extra cash with non-horse related work and still riding to your heart’s content. The reason for the rule is not to separate the good riders from The bad. It’s to separate the money earners from the non.

[Linny]

The Ammy division wasn’t invented to suit the needs of the working amateur. It was created to allow the wealthy horse owner who paid pro’s to campaign their horses a place to show where they didn’t have to compete against their trainer. It was designed for ladies who lunch and their club member husbands back when showing was even less egalitarian than it is now.

The arrival of the Adult hunters was intended to offer a place for the non elite to show. You didn’t need as fancy a horse, in fact you didn’t even have to own a horse. Of course, it’s gotten to be more and more competitive too. Back in the 60’s when the Amateur division came in to being, it solved a problem. the fact is that since then, many new problems have arisen. The biggest is that for “average” middle class people who earn their money working 40+ hours a week entered the sport. The division now runs the gamut from the $45K/year person struggling to scrimp for a week at HITS to the child of an international financier who jets between her New England university and her horse in FLA all winter but both feel far overshadowed by the REALLY rich who winter in Wellington.

It would be nice if there was some threshold that made the walk trot instructor non pro or allowed the mucker to hack a client horse but it just doesn’t work. Even with a strict rule there is tons of cheating. Do you want to send your W-2’s to the USEF every year for recertification? It is odd that a rider who is very good at making up horses can literally earn a living buying and training and selling horses and NOT be a pro as long as she’s acting on her own behalf yet someone who helps tack school horses for lessons for $50 off board is a pro if they hack a boarder for a sick client.

If you want to compete at the elite venues in the sport, you have to be prepared to face elite competition. In this game that means facing very expensive horses often shown by very wealthy people who can afford them. Is it fun to go be part of the “big show?” Yes, I suppose, but even horses who have done very well at zone level will often find themselves badly outgunned at places like WEF. It’s simply another universe. Go, learn, see the sights and ride your best but leave your illusions behind.

[findeight]

Just a thought, but you can earn more extra money outside the barn at a large variety of low paying jobs with flexible schedules then barn work. In AA caliber barns that can really advance your riding and reputation, you can’t make enough money or credit for many lessons or a big break in board if you also have a career job. Most full time staff in serious show barns can’t afford to board or take lessons there. This whole argument is based on the very rare situation barn workers, full or part time can fund their hobby with barn work at the AA level. Maybe 20-30 years ago, not in today’s big business environment in successful show barns.

It it shouldn’t really be that difficult to say no to rides you know will be cheating and pick up a second, non barn job or work overtime to get more lessons or a better horse.instead of trying to restrict legit competitors that just have more then you do. That’s unfair too.

[Peggy]

There are also relatively high-paying (maybe not relative to the average WEF exhibitor) jobs with flexibility in hours. But you’re going to have to give something else up—like weekday nights and/or weekend afternoons and evenings. But you’ll be able to ride in the morning and have time to hack that extra horse, if offered.

[touchstone]

@findeight

Just a thought, but you can earn more extra money outside the barn at a large variety of low paying jobs with flexible schedules then barn work. In AA caliber barns that can really advance your riding and reputation, you can’t make enough money or credit for many lessons or a big break in board if you also have a career job. Most full time staff in serious show barns can’t afford to board or take lessons there. This whole argument is based on the very rare situation barn workers, full or part time can fund their hobby with barn work at the AA level. Maybe 20-30 years ago, not in today’s big business environment in successful show barns.

Yes. Part-time barn work simply doesn’t pay better than these other options. And even if you have no employment prospects that pay better than braiding or body clipping, you can still do those, at another barn from the one where you ride!

To me, someone who wants to earn all their money in the horse industry IS on the road to being a professional. It is reasonable to put more restrictions on such people.

[poltroon]

@OnDeck

ETA: I would have much less complaints if it were easy to go pro and still horse show. I would have no problem showing as a pro if it meant I could take more riding opportunities. But since I would be in some limbo between “actual pro” who’s career is in horses and an “actual amateur” who makes zero money in horses - I wouldn’t be able to horse show at all because I don’t have the vacation time at my office job to show during the week. So I turn down opportunities to actually be an “actual amateur”. There’s no good answer and it’s frustrating.

Best way to solve this at the moment may be to take up eventing or dressage.

[MHM]

@touchstone-

Yes. Part-time barn work simply doesn’t pay better than these other options. And even if you have no employment prospects that pay better than braiding or body clipping, you can still do those, at another barn from the one where you ride!

I wouldn’t put braiding in the same category as part time barn work or the like for ~$10 an hour. Not at all. Don’t get me wrong, it’s hard work and the braiders earn every penny. But that is a much more lucrative activity than lots of other options.

[touchstone]

@MHM

I wouldn’t put braiding in the same category as part time barn work or the like for ~$10 an hour. Not at all. Don’t get me wrong, it’s hard work and the braiders earn every penny. But that is a much more lucrative activity than lots of other options.

I agree. That’s why I put it and body clipping in a separate category in my post. Braiding pays big bucks and is compatible with a typical full-time work schedule (assuming you don’t need much sleep), so it seems like the sort of lucrative freelance work that a working ammy might like to do from time to time to help make extra cash. But it’s also a job that you can do for anyone, so I think it’s relatively easy to just not braid for barns where you also wish to catch ride horses.

Some of the posts in this thread bemoan the inability of working ammies to help out around the barn to work off expenses. That work is definitely not for braiding money at most barns I know of.

[hoopoe]

@poltroon

Best way to solve this at the moment may be to take up eventing or dressage.

How/why so? Are you talking about the weekend only option?

[poltroon]

@hoopoe

How/why so? Are you talking about the weekend only option?

Well yeah, because first there’s not the distinction of pro/am as to when you ride in the same way, and also because in eventing and dressage you can generally always show on weekends if that’s what you need. Some events run on Friday but in that case they do so for everyone. You can be a professional and still show in beginner novice if that’s what’s right for you or the horse for whatever reason.

[MHM]

On the subject of the ever-increasing size of the rule book, I have to chime back in with this quote from the Chronicle’s extremely entertaining Throwback Thursday article about issues discussed at AHSA/USEF conventions over the years. This quote was from 1949:

“Van Sinderen also brought up that in 1937, the AHSA Rulebook was 28 pages, while the newest edition was 236 pages. (The 2019 edition of the USEF Rulebook is 1209 pages.)”

Sometimes it’s nice to know that the family lore I’ve always heard is correct.

The article is well worth a read, both for historical value, and for the many great old pictures!

http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/throwback-thursday-similar-yet-different-a-look-back-at-usef?fbclid=IwAR3YN1ae0H48YdpM6ixe1DM2s9HhU97qfujK1fttGyqBua9nhEEbQpjpcmc

[Anne]

@touchstone-

Braiding pays big bucks and is compatible with a typical full-time work schedule (assuming you don’t need much sleep), so it seems like the sort of lucrative freelance work that a working ammy might like to do from time to time to help make extra cash.

Spoken like someone who’s never been self-employed or been issued a 1099 at the end of the year.

[Soaponarope]

Another point to remember is that the hunters is about the skill level and beauty of the horse, not the rider. Lots of people will do different heights in the hunters depending upon the horse they are riding. Once you get used to how the whole thing works and start improving your own skills, you will relish the opportunity to compete against professionals in open classes like hunter derbies or the performance hunters. It’s very satisfying to beat them. Although again, winning in the hunters has everything to do with the horse vs. the rider. Good luck and enjoy moving up. Also, be glad you are competing in the adults vs. the juniors where many of the latter are mini-pros and are selling horses for trainers. In the AOs you have issues such as competing against the trainer’s spouse etc. The adults is a little more laid back. Or it seemed that way to us from the perspective of the juniors and the AOs. At any rate, the thing is to enjoy your horse and keep making progress regardless of competition. Set personal goals and go for your personal best.

[supershorty628]

I’d like to propose a “One Jump Not to Count, Determined by the Rider/Rider’s Trainer Upon Completion of Course” division, with ammy, pro, junior, and pony splits.

It could be across all hunter/jumper/equitation divisions.

We’d call it the “Almost a Genius” division.

[ladyj79]

@supershorty628

I’d like to propose a “One Jump Not to Count, Determined by the Rider/Rider’s Trainer Upon Completion of Course” division, with ammy, pro, junior, and pony splits.

It could be across all hunter/jumper/equitation divisions.

We’d call it the “Almost a Genius” division.

I deserve between 2-5 jumps not to count because I have a toddler and live in gentile poverty and have a quarter horse :lol::lol: in addition to my lack of general talent handicaps

[PKP]

@supershorty628

I’d like to propose a “One Jump Not to Count, Determined by the Rider/Rider’s Trainer Upon Completion of Course” division, with ammy, pro, junior, and pony splits.

It could be across all hunter/jumper/equitation divisions.

We’d call it the “Almost a Genius” division.

I was at a show last summer where they offered this in a non-pro derby. After completing the derby course but before leaving the ring, the rider had to approach the judges booth and tell them which fence should be eliminated from their scoring and why. I thought this was, as you said, SS, genius!!