Question about Juniors Getting Paid

[Amigo]

So obviously I know that as a junior rider, you can't be paid to ride people's horses because that technically makes you a professional.

However, I've been told recently that a junior rider can not be paid to groom at a horse show either. I don't really understand that since grooming isn't getting paid to ride, which is what you'd be doing as a junior.

So my question is: is this true? Can you not be paid to groom at a horse show and still compete as a junior rider? As a last-year junior, I was planning on working at shows to save money for college in addition to working for extra rides and lessons as a working student as I have for the past four years.

Thanks!

[supershorty628]

Juniors can't be professionals; they are juniors. You can get paid.

[ExJumper]

So obviously I know that as a junior rider, you can't be paid to ride people's horses because that technically makes you a professional.

This is not true. A junior can be paid to ride, teach...to do anything.

A junior is defined by age. There is nothing a junior can do, short of getting older, than makes her NOT a junior any more.

[Janet]

So obviously I know that as a junior rider, you can't be paid to ride people's horses because that technically makes you a professional. Nope, doesn't make you a professional. Only things you do AFTER you age out of Juniors can make you a professional. You are still a Junior. The only criteria for being a Junior is your age.


However, I've been told recently that a junior rider can not be paid to groom at a horse show either. I don't really understand that since grooming isn't getting paid to ride, which is what you'd be doing as a junior. Nope, doesn't make you a professional. Only things you do AFTER you age out of Juniors can make you a professional. You are still a Junior. The only criteria for being a Junior is your age.


So my question is: is this true? Can you not be paid to groom at a horse show and still compete as a junior rider? Yes, doesn't make you a professional. Only things you do AFTER you age out of Juniors can make you a professional. You are still a Junior. The only criteria for being a Junior is your age.



As a last-year junior, I was planning on working at shows to save money for college in addition to working for extra rides and lessons as a working student as I have for the past four years.

Thanks!Sounds like a plan.

[Alterrain]

^Ditto.

you don't need to worry about pro status until you are OVER 18. you CAN get paid to ride/ groom/ teach etc... (lucky :) )

[mvp]

I suggest you build a huge fortune via hard work in the horse industry before your 18th birthday. You may have to pay taxes, but it won't make you a pro in USEF's eyes.

ETA: That may be before the January 1 of the calendar year in which you turn 19. Or the year when you turn 18?

[Janet]

December 1.

From the Amateur rules


a person is an amateur
for all competitions conducted under Federation rules who after his/her 18th birthday, as
defined in GR101, has not engaged in any of the following activities which would make
him/her a professional.
and here is GR101

GR101 Adult or Senior (Individual).
1. An individual who has reached his 18th birthday as of December 1st of the current
competition year

[Hunter/JumperMom]

looking for the simple version!! haha like there is one

After ones 18th birthday, can one still ride and show (with mom and dad footing the bill), as a ammy, but hold a job as a groom while in college? And receive payment in terms of a paycheck, and if not, how about the payment being deducted from the horse bill? I'm going to USEF now, but figured out post it here for the abbreviated version!!

[Trixie]

After ones 18th birthday, can one still ride and show (with mom and dad footing the bill), as a ammy, but hold a job as a groom while in college? And receive payment in terms of a paycheck, and if not, how about the payment being deducted from the horse bill? I'm going to USEF now, but figured out post it here for the abbreviated version!!

One cannot work as a groom for their own trainer and receive remuneration - either as a paycheck or in any sort of reduction on bills. It doesn't matter who is paying the bills, if the rider is over 18 and receiving remuneration and riding horses around the barn, they are professional.

One could, if I recall correctly, work as a groom for another trainer and receive a paycheck provided they never ride, train, or show any of their horses. This is why a working student is by default a pro.

[Janet]

looking for the simple version!! haha like there is one

After ones 18th birthday, can one still ride and show (with mom and dad footing the bill), as a ammy, but hold a job as a groom while in college? And receive payment in terms of a paycheck, and if not, how about the payment being deducted from the horse bill? I'm going to USEF now, but figured out post it here for the abbreviated version!!

Yes, but only if you never-ever-ever ride or train ANY horse connected with the barn except the horses you actually own or lease. If you so much as exercise a horse for another boarder who is away (or take a lesson on another horse) you would no longer be an amateur.

It doesn't make any difference if your remuneration is a pay check or reduced board.

[Hunter/JumperMom]

so what do kids do that go to college, and want to work at the barn instead of the grocery store? Declare themselves pro, and show in open classes?

So it doesnt matter what your riding ability is? I guess thats the part of the rule I don't get.

Watched a junior rider yesterday, showed in the big eq, the high jr jumper, low jr jumper, large jr hunter, open stake, and grand prix, multiple horses, and kid is a great rider, but she would still be able to show as an ammy, but the kid that has one horse and has to hold a job, wants to groom cause it is flexible with college and riding, can't?

Just trying to comprehend!

[Trixie]

Yes, exactly. Because once they're 18, they aren't kids anymore, they're grown ups in the real world with the rest of us, and riding ability isn't actually a factor in the amateur rules.


so what do kids do that go to college, and want to work at the barn instead of the grocery store? Declare themselves pro, and show in open classes?

A kid that needs to work for the money will find very quickly that just about ANYTHING else pays more than barn work, really. If they prefer the barn over the grocery store, there are consequences with that. It's pretty rare that someone "has" to work at the barn unless there are absolutely no other possible employment opportunities, even now. If that's the case, unfortunately, it is what it is.


So it doesnt matter what your riding ability is? I guess thats the part of the rule I don't get.

This is how the rules are written, most likely because the USEF couldn't find another threshold to prove "amatuer" abilities.


Watched a junior rider yesterday, showed in the big eq, the high jr jumper, low jr jumper, large jr hunter, open stake, and grand prix, multiple horses, and kid is a great rider, but she would still be able to show as an ammy, but the kid that has one horse and has to hold a job, wants to groom cause it is flexible with college and riding, can't?

No, that kid CAN still show as an ammy. They just can't ride or train or show anything at the barn they're working for, period. Or they can have a job outside of horses.

It's not an elitist thing. It's to stop people from being employed as a "groom" when they're really riding 5 horses a day for trainer, which is equally unfair to those that are truly amateurs.

[joiedevie99]

Ability has nothing to do with amateur rules- it has to do with whether you profit from riding, teaching, or training.

To be an amateur, you can't earn any money for riding, teaching or training horses or riders.

Lots of people abused this rule by being employed as a "babysitter" or "stall mucker" for their trainer, when in fact they were riding and showing 10 horses per day and operating as a trainer.

To curb this problem, USEF requires that people who work in barns/for trainers may do so, and remain amateurs, so long as they don't ride horses that the trainer owns or profits off of (boards, trains, etc.).

One can work in a barn in any capacity other than rider, trainer, coach, instructor (i.e. babysitter, stall mucker, groom, bookkeeper, receptionist, etc.) and remain an amateur so long as the rider does not throw a leg over any horse at that barn that she doesn't own or USEF lease. No hacking the owners horses or the boarders horses, no lessons on other horses, no teaching even one lesson.

In short, a rider who is paid $$ or free board or free lessons as a groom can stay an amatuer as long as they stay on their own horses.

[Alterrain]

One cannot work as a groom for their own trainer and receive remuneration - either as a paycheck or in any sort of reduction on bills. It doesn't matter who is paying the bills, if the rider is over 18 and receiving remuneration and riding horses around the barn, they are professional.
.

NOT true. you can groom, as long as you don't ride.

[Trixie]

It doesn't matter who is paying the bills, if the rider is over 18 and receiving remuneration and riding horses around the barn, they are professional.

Yep, true. But should have phrased it more clearly- riding horses that they don't own around the barn.

You can ride your OWN horse.

The rule actually says:


c. Accepts remuneration for employment in other capacity (e.g., secretary, bookkeeper, veterinarian, groom, farrier) and gives instruction, rides, drives, shows, trains or schools horses, other than horses actually owned or leased by him/her, when his/her employer or a member of the family of said employer or a corporation which a member of his/her family controls, owns, boards or trains said horses.

[Alterrain]

Watched a junior rider yesterday, showed in the big eq, the high jr jumper, low jr jumper, large jr hunter, open stake, and grand prix, multiple horses, and kid is a great rider, she would still be able to show as an ammy,

but

the kid that has one horse and has to hold a job, wants to groom (including riding) cause it is flexible with college and riding, can't?

I made it easier to read. :)

Easy way to define am/pro- Is person in question spending or making money.

In your examples, kid #1 is spending (a lot). spending=ammie

Kid #2 is making money (although probably not much). Riding job=making $$= pro. If she does NOT ride (or at least, not when anyone is watching) then she can remain an ammie.

Ammie= someone who does not ride or teach for money or compensation. Regardless of abiltity. I think it's retarded too, but it's the rules.

[justathought]

I made it easier to read. :)

Easy way to define am/pro- Is person in question spending or making money.

In your examples, kid #1 is spending (a lot). spending=ammie

Kid #2 is making money (although probably not much). Riding job=making $$= pro. If she does NOT ride (or at least, not when anyone is watching) then she can remain an ammie.

Ammie= someone who does not ride or teach for money or compensation. Regardless of abiltity. I think it's retarded too, but it's the rules.


I agree its retarded.... the intent is correct but the application just doesn't work all that well.

What it means that most kids without independent means (big money) the ones that spent all of their junior years as working students just to be able to show are quite limited in their choices - they can cut back their riding to fit their non-existent budgets, they can turn pro before they are really ready or what....

Even the programs that are now in place (Emerging Athletes which is a great step) do not cover these young riders with ambition, work ethic and desire but without money...

It would be nice to see some accomodation that helps to develop the horsemen that the sport says it wants in a way that realistically addresses the economic environment and costs of the sport

[mvp]

I agree its retarded.... the intent is correct but the application just doesn't work all that well.

What it means that most kids without independent means (big money) the ones that spent all of their junior years as working students just to be able to show are quite limited in their choices - they can cut back their riding to fit their non-existent budgets, they can turn pro before they are really ready or what....

Even the programs that are now in place (Emerging Athletes which is a great step) do not cover these young riders with ambition, work ethic and desire but without money...

It would be nice to see some accomodation that helps to develop the horsemen that the sport says it wants in a way that realistically addresses the economic environment and costs of the sport

Oh, honey. Now you're catching on.

Yes, the rules are baroque. But that's because people with talent and "no money"-- but let's be clear, enough to have learned to ride well enough to get the pro-like rides and show against ammies-- were finding all ways to cheat.

This will sound too strong, but the USEF and trainers that mainly run it really aren't interested in the adults who can't spend a lot of money. The junior who was great helps no one of any consequence by riding well and being given opportunity.

FWIW, I don't think the EA program reaches terribly far down the socioeconomic ladder to find riding talent. Again, one person's idea of "no money" is not the same as another's.

[Trixie]

What it means that most kids without independent means (big money) the ones that spent all of their junior years as working students just to be able to show are quite limited in their choices - they can cut back their riding to fit their non-existent budgets, they can turn pro before they are really ready or what....

Are these kids without "big money" going to be making that big money by working in a barn? Or training and hacking horses? Do you think that's actually going to pay for campaigning a horse?

Sorry, but you just don't make big money riding, even if you DO get paid. If you spent your childhood as a working student, you've already got an advantage over the people who didn't have that opportunity. It's never going to be "fair."

Nothing about showing at the "A" shows in this sport is economically realistic for most families, regardless of whether you're riding at Grand Prix or in the unrated crossrail division.

I personally have more of a problem with the rules of A/O classes as opposed to amateur status.

[lindsay.anne]

A kid that needs to work for the money will find very quickly that just about ANYTHING else pays more than barn work, really. If they prefer the barn over the grocery store, there are consequences with that. It's pretty rare that someone "has" to work at the barn unless there are absolutely no other possible employment opportunities, even now. If that's the case, unfortunately, it is what it is.




I disagree. I've groomed when I was a junior making $100/day, worked out to about $12 an hour.... Now as a college student (and an ammie) I make a little over $8 an hour making people's coffee at Starbucks. Not to mention on a nice day I'd rather be outside at a horse show

[justathought]

Are these kids without "big money" going to be making that big money by working in a barn? Or training and hacking horses? Do you think that's actually going to pay for campaigning a horse?

Sorry, but you just don't make big money riding, even if you DO get paid. If you spent your childhood as a working student, you've already got an advantage over the people who didn't have that opportunity. It's never going to be "fair."

Nothing about showing at the "A" shows in this sport is economically realistic for most families, regardless of whether you're riding at Grand Prix or in the unrated crossrail division.

I personally have more of a problem with the rules of A/O classes as opposed to amateur status.

Sorry.... but i am not sure that I understand the point of your response.... none of the kids I described, the working student juniors think they are going to get rich, --- they are NOT stupid --- what they think is that PERHAPS if they are LUCKY and the cards fall their way that they can work hard enough to have a shot at making a living in the sport that is their passion - not a good living but ahard working get by living doing what they love

I long ago gave up the idea of fairness --- but not the idea of opportunity

[Hunter/JumperMom]

just a thought, i think we are on the same page, my kid is lucky to be riding at a barn with a big name trainer, has worked her way up, we leased her a horse on a payment plan, she goes to A shows, we are struggling but its worth it, so she is fortunate, but she works and works hard to help cover expenses, she has one horse. She is going to college, and wants to keep working, minimal hours, going on the road when she can etc, while getting an education, but if this is correct, she can't? I doubt these are the kids the USEF is trying to effect, its the people with barns giving lessons, buying and selling horses, training, teaching, etc., but still show as an ammy. not the kid working and riding part time while in school? I truly wish that if you are still enrolled in school full time, you may show in the ammy catergory, but the rules were more like the juniors. But I really don't know enough about the situation to fully understand all of it.

[Lucassb]

just a thought, i think we are on the same page, my kid is lucky to be riding at a barn with a big name trainer, has worked her way up, we leased her a horse on a payment plan, she goes to A shows, we are struggling but its worth it, so she is fortunate, but she works and works hard to help cover expenses, she has one horse. She is going to college, and wants to keep working, minimal hours, going on the road when she can etc, while getting an education, but if this is correct, she can't? I doubt these are the kids the USEF is trying to effect, its the people with barns giving lessons, buying and selling horses, training, teaching, etc., but still show as an ammy. not the kid working and riding part time while in school? I truly wish that if you are still enrolled in school full time, you may show in the ammy catergory, but the rules were more like the juniors. But I really don't know enough about the situation to fully understand all of it.

Unfortunately, once she ages out, she can either turn pro and work as a groom (and ride whatever she can get her hands on) OR she can work as a groom and show only her own horse. In that case she cannot ever throw a leg over anyone else's animal, not even just to hack around the farm, and cannot take lessons or school on anything but the horse she owns/leases.

The rule as it is currently written deprives a lot of people from off setting their horse expenses by working at their barns. Those who'd love to teach a few up down lessons, or work as a groom or book keeper etc to help pay their board or cover the cost of lessons etc cannot do that and still remain amateurs. That is because people who were ACTUALLY working as professional riders/trainers held themselves out to be grooms or bookkeepers while they competed as amateurs, ruining it for everyone.

[Trixie]

Sorry.... but i am not sure that I understand the point of your response.... none of the kids I described, the working student juniors think they are going to get rich, --- they are NOT stupid --- what they think is that PERHAPS if they are LUCKY and the cards fall their way that they can work hard enough to have a shot at making a living in the sport that is their passion - not a good living but ahard working get by living doing what they love

I long ago gave up the idea of fairness --- but not the idea of opportunity

Um, no one is taking away these people’s “opportunity” to “make a living.”

If they’re planning to make a living in horses, they’re going to become professionals anyway. It doesn’t make a big difference if they do it at 18 or at 30. The only thing that going pro does is prevent them from competing against AMATEUR riders in the AMATEUR division. There are plenty of other classes that they can compete in and work their way up to being as good as a seasoned pro.

My point was also that working with horses is VERY RARELY as lucrative as doing other things. Sorry, I worked as a waitress in college and made more than I’ve ever made in a barn, and at a coffee shop before that - still more than most horse jobs pay. If you want to be a show groom, the amateur rule isn’t stopping you as long as you follow the rules by the letter of the law. However, for those that want to “help out” trainer and do barn work and ride and receive remuneration while remaining an ammy - not generally lucrative, and not an amateur activity.

I too would love to spend all day in a barn. I sit behind a desk because it pays the bills.

[justathought]

Um, no one is taking away these people’s “opportunity” to “make a living.”

If they’re planning to make a living in horses, they’re going to become professionals anyway. It doesn’t make a big difference if they do it at 18 or at 30. The only thing that going pro does is prevent them from competing against AMATEUR riders in the AMATEUR division. There are plenty of other classes that they can compete in and work their way up to being as good as a seasoned pro.

My point was also that working with horses is VERY RARELY as lucrative as doing other things. Sorry, I worked as a waitress in college and made more than I’ve ever made in a barn, and at a coffee shop before that - still more than most horse jobs pay. If you want to be a show groom, the amateur rule isn’t stopping you as long as you follow the rules by the letter of the law. However, for those that want to “help out” trainer and do barn work and ride and receive remuneration while remaining an ammy - not generally lucrative, and not an amateur activity.

I too would love to spend all day in a barn. I sit behind a desk because it pays the bills.

Actually .... I think you misunderstood my use of opportunity.... I meant the opportunity to get the training and background and maturity necessary to be a REAL professional in the business -not the opportunity to make money, the opportunity to learn, train, and compete (and one of the reasons that it is valuable to have juniors show sale horses is because it shows an ammie can show it) on horses other then their own (which they may not have or which may be limited in scope). It is not advantageous to a trainer to have an ammie show a sale horse in a pro class - generally a pro can do that better. Yes - there are a few RARE 18 year olds who are competitive with the pros but NOT many. If the sport is to build the next generation of professionals - there must be a program to get those juniors from here to there.... and at least to my view there is not.

Also, IMHO it DOES matter whether they turn pro at 18 or 30. There is a whole hell of a lot of growing up that happens between 18 and 25 let alone 30.....Having an 18 year old teach - well its a whole lot different from the having a 25 year old who has watched and listened (REALLY appenticed) teach....Having an 18 year old ride - well its also a whole different from having the older, wiser more experienced person who has ridden and apprenticed - the one who has been there and done that and been supervised and advised by a more experienced professional ...

what I am suggesting is that there needs to be some program designed to "grow" our future professionals

Sure, other occupations pay more.... but that really isn't the question or the issue I was addressing

[EqTrainer]

I agree that we are lacking a system to bring along young professionals. There needs to be something between an ammy and a pro while they are learning. So many talented young people leave the business because of this road block.

[Trixie]

Again, “professional” in this industry is only a status, and has nothing to do with ability. Nor does it imply that you make your sole living working with horses. I should probably also point out that in most industries, someone in the 18-25 year old range isn't going to be a "top dog" - they're going to be working their way up.

And again, no one is denying anyone the opportunity to learn, train, or compete. Most of these aspiring pros take working student positions for good professionals. They’re professionals by the letter of the law even if they aren’t “there” yet, but they can make their opportunities by learning and improving. As a very average ammy/desk jockey, I’ve had people let me show their horses - even pay entries. The opportunities are out there. And believe me, if someone like me, who is a 45+ hour a week desk jockey, can find people who let me ride their horses, other people can also.

I’ve also seen 18 year olds that ride brilliantly, and professionals that don’t. Status has NO bearing on ability - training and talent do.

Also, if said rider turns pro at 18 and decides at 21 that they don’t feel like being a professional anymore and would like to compete as an ammy, all they need to do is go through the process of reinstatement.

Is it perfect? Of course not. I'd love to hear some other suggestions.

[Hunter/JumperMom]

suggestions sure - I like the idea that if your a full time student, you can keep your "junior benefits", but if your working in the profession full time, then yes you should be a professional. But if you are in school, and come to the barn on weekends and during break, work and take home a paycheck, whether in the form of a check or barter for board or lessons, then it should not go against you.

But I do agree if you are working full time, 40 (but lets not kid ourselves - 60) hours a week, as your sole income, then sure bring on pro status. But working through college, nah, keep the ammy/junior status.

I am sure there are many reasons why this wouldn't work, but just thinking out loud here.

[ExJumper]

I think it would be interesting to consider what would happen if the age was raised to 21. I *think* that's what it is in dressage land. It seems like it would be a good idea to give people a few years after high school to test the waters and see if they want to make horses a business instead of a hobby.

[Alterrain]

I think it would be interesting to consider what would happen if the age was raised to 21. I *think* that's what it is in dressage land.

It can't be. USEF = USEF, across the board.

[Whisper]

Easy way to define am/pro- Is person in question spending or making money.
I currently get to ride several horses for free/in exchange for doing a bit of help around the place. I've been able to ride other horses for free as well at other places in the past. No money changed hand in either direction, and the USEF does not consider getting to ride to be a form of compensation, as long as it isn't in a lesson.

So, spending money isn't a good criteria, *getting* money (even if it isn't enough to cover your gas to and from the barn) for riding is what makes you a pro. A nominal gift (I believe up to $50 value in one year), or covering the actual expenses of showing, and a few other exceptions are explained in the rules, and you can check with USEF to make certain that anything you are planning is legal, if it's at all questionable.

Exjumper, you're thinking of the Young Rider program, which has classes for people who are 18-21.


USEF Rule - Art. 808. Amateur Status. In the Dressage Division, individuals are only eligible to compete as amateurs from the beginning of the calendar year in which they reach age 22. See Art. 1919.3.

I'd have to review the USEF rules, since it seems that if they ride only in the Dressage division, not Hunters, they can earn money without it affecting their ammy status once they age out of YR, since they are not considered to be amateurs. If they switch divisions to Hunters, though, I think they would need to go for a year to get their ammy status back. It used to be that people could earn a small amount for riding/training and stay amateurs for Eventing, but they changed that a year or so ago.
Anyway, if an adult wants to do barnwork or teach up-down lessons, they just need to find a different barn to do it at than where they take lessons. Instead of being able to barter for reduced board or free lessons, they need to make money at one place and spend it at the other. If there are two completely unaffiliated trainers at the same barn, you might be able to work something out and have it be legal, but I'd really recommend double-checking your plans with USEF first.

[Peggy]

I think it would be interesting to consider what would happen if the age was raised to 21. I *think* that's what it is in dressage land. It seems like it would be a good idea to give people a few years after high school to test the waters and see if they want to make horses a business instead of a hobby.
IIRC, at least at one time amateur dressage riders in that 18-21 age bracket got dropped into a kind of purgatory. They could not ride in junior classes b/c they were too old as per USEF rules but also couldn't compete in the amateur classes b/c, again IIRC and this may have changed, a dressage Young Rider (21/u by FEI rules) couldn't also be an amateur. But I could be remembering wrong. And it's not a huge deal in dressage land where it's mostly about the scores so having to ride in open, as opposed to amateur classes, isn't a huge deal.

While I would have no objection to raising the junior age to 21, IMHO allowing only some 18-21 y.o. (or 18+ y.o.) who work PT in the industry to ride as amateurs would be opening up an large and unenforceable can of worms.

[Equsrider]

Just a thought....one can make alot more money per day for alot less work braiding horses at shows....That was my summer job a a kid, because I was always traveling with my horse...If one braids 2 manes and 2 tails/day, and are good and fast, they've made$150.00 in about 3 hours....:)

[RockinHorse]

Actually .... I think you misunderstood my use of opportunity.... I meant the opportunity to get the training and background and maturity necessary to be a REAL professional in the business -not the opportunity to make money, the opportunity to learn, train, and compete (and one of the reasons that it is valuable to have juniors show sale horses is because it shows an ammie can show it) on horses other then their own (which they may not have or which may be limited in scope). It is not advantageous to a trainer to have an ammie show a sale horse in a pro class - generally a pro can do that better. Yes - there are a few RARE 18 year olds who are competitive with the pros but NOT many. If the sport is to build the next generation of professionals - there must be a program to get those juniors from here to there.... and at least to my view there is not.



So they can still get that opportunity, they just don't get to do it showing against amateurs. I get that the pro won't then let them show the horses in the pro classes but learning to be a professional should not be only about showing.

When I started in my career, I didn't get to go on the client visits to the good locations and I didn't get to give the high profile presentations. Those perks didn't come until I was skilled enough to do so.

[Janet]

Anyway, if an adult wants to do barnwork or teach up-down lessons, they just need to find a different barn to do it at than where they take lessons. . Barn work - Yes.

Teaching up-down lessons - NO.

[Commander Cody]

So true about braiding - I paid my way at the shows years ago by braiding. My friend and I would stay up most of the night - I did manes, she did tails - and then show during the day (oh to be young and have so much energy again!). We were Juniors at the time. It was good money then, and probably better money now.

[meupatdoes]

just a thought, i think we are on the same page, my kid is lucky to be riding at a barn with a big name trainer, has worked her way up, we leased her a horse on a payment plan, she goes to A shows, we are struggling but its worth it, so she is fortunate, but she works and works hard to help cover expenses, she has one horse. She is going to college, and wants to keep working, minimal hours, going on the road when she can etc, while getting an education, but if this is correct, she can't?[quote]

Yes, she can, as long as she sticks to riding only her leased horse. She can ride horses for other trainers, but not the trainer that is giving her breaks on board.

[QUOTE=Hunter/JumperMom;4870032] I doubt these are the kids the USEF is trying to effect, its the people with barns giving lessons, buying and selling horses, training, teaching, etc., but still show as an ammy. not the kid working and riding part time while in school?

Please strike this sentiment from your thought process.
The rules are the rules.
The USEF is most definitely trying to affect EVERYONE who gets ANY sort of remuneration for riding, including getting a break on expenses and still riding horses in that program that do not belong to you.

[meupatdoes]

Actually .... I think you misunderstood my use of opportunity.... I meant the opportunity to get the training and background and maturity necessary to be a REAL professional in the business -
...

what I am suggesting is that there needs to be some program designed to "grow" our future professionals

I don't understand how preserving a person's right to sandbag the amateur division is going to train them how to be a professional.

They can learn how to teach without going up against amateurs in the show ring. They can learn how to ride without going up against amateurs in the show ring.

There are also PLENTY of lower level open classes like the schooling hunters for them to ride in before doing the big time classes, too.

If you are going to insist on a lower level tier of 'professional' showing, rather than making amateurs ride against young professionals I would advocate "Young Professionals" classes for people who have been pro 3 years or less. I do not think it is necessary though. And I say this as someone who had to give up my amateur status, rides primarily MY OWN sale horses, had ZERO junior career, and makes my living off of non-riding pursuits.

Young professionals will do themselves much better to strive to reach the higher bar than trying to lower the bar to their level.

[Janet]

I doubt these are the kids the USEF is trying to effect, its the people with barns giving lessons, buying and selling horses, training, teaching, etc., but still show as an ammy. not the kid working and riding part time while in school?

Generally speaking, the USEF investigates Amateur status when someone issues a protest.

Generally speaking, someone protests when a rider who is not strictly an amateur is WINNING.

As I understand it, this part of the rule was introduced because of soemone who was being paid by the barn as a book keeper, but was riding and training multiple horses owned by the barn each day, and showing her own horses as an amateur on the weekend.

But remuneration is remuneration, and riding a horse is riding a horse.

Yes, the rule paints with a very broad brush in order to be sure to cover a smaller subset.

But that is what the rules ARE.

I wouldn't think that teaching a child that she only needs to obey rules that were "intended" for her situation would be good parenting.

[Hunter/JumperMom]

well im not sure how understanding rules has turned into my parenting skills, but thanks everyone that did help explain it. I have a while before I even have to consider any of this, but thanks again for pointing out all sides.

[Cannonball]

You can get paid to ride as a junior but once you age out you are not a junior anymore. If you receive renumeration from a rider that is a pro you become a pro, but if you receive renumeration from an amateur you are an amateur, but if you groom for a grand prix rider then you are neither, unless you ride pintos at night, which makes you an professional amateur pinto night rider, not to be confused with the car "Kit". Unless you really need the money, not like those rich people who have lots of horses. Then the rules are not rules to you and you can groom for a junior, ride for a pro and resinstate your "short stirrup" status because it's best for you. But if you actually are good enough to make a living in the equestrian world then you aren't a Pro any longer, you are just a jerk that everybody hates, because they can't do it. Unless you have a farm and have a successful program which, of course, brings your very own fan base. But nobody believes you worked for it and everybody is talking about which side of your family has money, because it couldn't be because you are a better rider, trainer, manager etc..

I think that's about it......

[theinstigator]

You can get paid to ride as a junior but once you age out you are not a junior anymore. If you receive renumeration from a rider that is a pro you become a pro, but if you receive renumeration from an amateur you are an amateur, but if you groom for a grand prix rider then you are neither, unless you ride pintos at night, which makes you an professional amateur pinto night rider, not to be confused with the car "Kit". Unless you really need the money, not like those rich people who have lots of horses. Then the rules are not rules to you and you can groom for a junior, ride for a pro and resinstate your "short stirrup" status because it's best for you. But if you actually are good enough to make a living in the equestrian world then you aren't a Pro any longer, you are just a jerk that everybody hates, because they can't do it. Unless you have a farm and have a successful program which, of course, brings your very own fan base. But nobody believes you worked for it and everybody is talking about which side of your family has money, because it couldn't be because you are a better rider, trainer, manager etc..

I think that's about it......
:lol: :lol: :lol:

I have never understood people's attachment to their Ammy status. If you want to get paid, suck it up and go show in the Open divisions.

[mvp]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I have never understood people's attachment to their Ammy status. If you want to get paid, suck it up and go show in the Open divisions.

It's like the tax-shelter of horse showing. People like nice roads aka a healthy horse industry with lots of money coming in. But they have Compelling Reasons that they shouldn't have to abide by the laws that benefit all and take a cut from them.

I do understand why getting to college-- that purgatory between childhood and adulthood-- means people would like to extend junior status up to graduation day. But then they'll want more as starting salaries don't buy the 3'6" horse that you're talented enough to ride because you have been grooming yourself as a junior pro for the last 15 years. And after that-- with the house to be bought, the kiddies' college funds and your retirement to consider, when is the good time to drop $150K on a show horse or put in half that amount in post-tax dollars per year for a fun sport?

As expensive as the top levels of this sport has become, there's no good time to start paying for it in full. But money is made by the middling trainers, vets and farriers and even managers of unrated shows. The USEF just has its head stuck up it's a$$ or stuck in 1950 because it can't think of a way to arrange rules except by speaking to the interests of the very small group at the top.

[Ravencrest_Camp]

Nope, doesn't make you a professional. Only things you do AFTER you age out of Juniors can make you a professional. You are still a Junior. The only criteria for being a Junior is your age.

Nope, doesn't make you a professional. Only things you do AFTER you age out of Juniors can make you a professional. You are still a Junior. The only criteria for being a Junior is your age.

Yes, doesn't make you a professional. Only things you do AFTER you age out of Juniors can make you a professional. You are still a Junior. The only criteria for being a Junior is your age.


Sounds like a plan.

I understand that junior eligibility is defined by age, and regardless of where you earn money as a rider/trainer you are still a junior until you hit 18. So the two are not mutually exclusive.

Does the possibility not exist that if you earned money in your last year as a junior, that once you turn 18 you would be ruled ineligible to compete as an amateur?

After all, even though you WERE a junior, you do not meet the criteria to be an amateur, having received renumeration within the last two years?

[PineTreeFarm]

I understand that junior eligibility is defined by age, and regardless of where you earn money as a rider/trainer you are still a junior until you hit 18. So the two are not mutually exclusive.

Does the possibility not exist that if you earned money in your last year as a junior, that once you turn 18 you would be ruled ineligible to compete as an amateur?

After all, even though you WERE a junior, you do not meet the criteria to be an amateur, having received renumeration within the last two years?

The Ammie certification on the membership application mentions nothing about 'within the past two years'
If you WERE a Pro and wish to get reinstated as an Ammie then it's 12 months to sit out.
But because a Jr rider is never classified as a Pro they do not have to apply for reinstatement.
No matter how much or for how long they have been earning $ as a junior they are still not Pros.

[Giddy-up]

I truly wish that if you are still enrolled in school full time, you may show in the ammy catergory, but the rules were more like the juniors.

If that was the case, then I would return to college (I am almost 32) so I could ride as an ammy yet only have to follow the junior rules. ;)

[Janet]

Does the possibility not exist that if you earned money in your last year as a junior, that once you turn 18 you would be ruled ineligible to compete as an amateur?
Please READ the RULE.

It is very clear that
a person is an amateur
...who after his/her 18th birthday, as
defined in GR101, has not engaged in any of the following activities which would make
him/her a professional

It is only the activites you engage in AFTER your 18th (horse show age) birthday that make you "not an amateur".

Someone proposed a rule change that would do what you suggest, but it was not passed.

[Janet]

you do not meet the criteria to be an amateur, having received renumeration within the last two years?
Just to clarify (independant of the junior-aging-out bit) there is NOTHING in the rules about "the last two years".

If you were "paid to ride" (as an adult) even 3 years ago, you have to "re-apply for amateur status" (with a fee and notarized letters, and so on) .

Please READ the RULE.

[Whisper]

Barn work - Yes.

Teaching up-down lessons - NO.
Oops, I was tired and got myself muddled. I meant to say that you can get paid for barn work, braiding, grooming, etc. at another barn than you ride other people's horses for free or in lessons at. If you want experience teaching lessons before going pro, you can volunteer with a theraputic riding program or a program that teaches disadvantaged kids, but *NOT* get paid for anything you do there.

[justathought]

I don't understand how preserving a person's right to sandbag the amateur division is going to train them how to be a professional.

They can learn how to teach without going up against amateurs in the show ring. They can learn how to ride without going up against amateurs in the show ring.

There are also PLENTY of lower level open classes like the schooling hunters for them to ride in before doing the big time classes, too.

If you are going to insist on a lower level tier of 'professional' showing, rather than making amateurs ride against young professionals I would advocate "Young Professionals" classes for people who have been pro 3 years or less. I do not think it is necessary though. And I say this as someone who had to give up my amateur status, rides primarily MY OWN sale horses, had ZERO junior career, and makes my living off of non-riding pursuits.

Young professionals will do themselves much better to strive to reach the higher bar than trying to lower the bar to their level.

OK - Interesting.... I am not suggesting that PROFESSIONALS get to sandbag ammies.... although it is not clear to me that junior working students who stop working when they hit 18 show for 6 months or a year on their own horse and then go back to work for a trainer are not doing just the type of sandbagging you are talking about... It is legal and totally within the rules for this to happen.... the junior who has been showing nationally on many many horses in hunters, jumpers, and equitation ---- (a pro for intents and purposes) --- now shows as a ammie adult against the "real" ammies.

BUT that is not what I am suggesting happen nor should it. I like your idea of a young professionals class - great idea! It would go a long way to doing what I was suggesting - creating some kind of appentice program that provides incentives to existing trainers to mentor young adults who want to become professionals on all dimensions - teaching, training and showing.

[Trixie]

It is legal and totally within the rules for this to happen.... the junior who has been showing nationally on many many horses in hunters, jumpers, and equitation ---- (a pro for intents and purposes) --- now shows as a ammie adult against the "real" ammies.

How is that a "pro for intents and purposes?"

An amateur rider may ride many horses in hunters, jumpers, and equitation as well. No one is stopping them. They just can't get paid for it.

[justathought]

How is that a "pro for intents and purposes?"

An amateur rider may ride many horses in hunters, jumpers, and equitation as well. No one is stopping them. They just can't get paid for it.

The junior working student who has been riding many horses for the trainer (not horses owned by the junior but horses under training with the trainer) would, absent being below 18, be a professional - instead they are labelled juniors. I think that there is complete agreement on that fact. It is only age that prevents these 17 year olds from being labeled pros but absent age they are pros if you applied the rules.

I am not sure how to clarify my comments. I recognize what the rules are... I am not questioning them. I also recognize that the rules do not always make sense in application or impact. I am not questioning what an ammie can do - nor am I suggesting that real PROS compete in ammie classes.

I am suggesting that there is not a good path to bring along young riders who need broad experience on all dimensions. There is no formal appentice program and there should be. It is an expensive sport - I liked the suggestion of Young Professional classes - but some program or mechanism to support young adults with professional ambitions would pay dividends for the entire sport.

[RockinHorse]

The junior working student who has been riding many horses for the trainer (not horses owned by the junior but horses under training with the trainer) would, absent being below 18, be a professional - instead they are labelled juniors. I think that there is complete agreement on that fact. It is only age that prevents these 17 year olds from being labeled pros but absent age they are pros if you applied the rules.

I am not sure how to clarify my comments. I recognize what the rules are... I am not questioning them. I also recognize that the rules do not always make sense in application or impact. I am not questioning what an ammie can do - nor am I suggesting that real PROS compete in ammie classes.

I am suggesting that there is not a good path to bring along young riders who need broad experience on all dimensions. There is no formal appentice program and there should be. It is an expensive sport - I liked the suggestion of Young Professional classes - but some program or mechanism to support young adults with professional ambitions would pay dividends for the entire sport.

Okay, not to be negative but as a client, I don't see any benefit to me of having junior professionals showing my horses. If it doesn't benefit a client, I don't see how it is going to fly.

Where are these horses coming from that the young professionals will be showing? As an owner of a horse in training or a sale horse, I am not going to pay for my sale horse to go in a wannabe division when I can get a junior or an ammie to show it in juniors/childrens or adults. If it is a horse in training I would rather it show in the pre-greens/greens/etc.

[MyGiantPony]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I have never understood people's attachment to their Ammy status. If you want to get paid, suck it up and go show in the Open divisions.

Well, my one and only question way back when wasn't because I was attached to my status, but I wanted to be sure I wasn't breaking any rules.

[Whisper]

It is only age that prevents these 17 year olds from being labeled pros but absent age they are pros if you applied the rules.
Um, and absent being a man, a guy would need a gynecologist!:lol: If someone is a junior, they aren't a professional, by definition, and by the rules.


although it is not clear to me that junior working students who stop working when they hit 18 show for 6 months or a year on their own horse and then go back to work for a trainer are not doing just the type of sandbagging you are talking about... It is legal and totally within the rules for this to happen
If they go back to work for a trainer after they are 18, they can't ride any horses they don't own or lease for that trainer and still be an ammy.

How well they ride has nothing to do with amateur status. If I accepted minimum wage for cleaning the paddocks and feeding at the barn I ride at, I would be a professional, even though I'm only an advanced beginner/beginning intermediate. Even if I only rode her horses bareback or Western, I still wouldn't be allowed to show in Ammy classes in Hunters, Jumpers, Dressage, or Eventing. Since I don't accept any money, I'm free to show in Ammy classes if I want to.

Sandbagging is a different matter - if an experienced adult ammy shows an experienced horse in a W/T long stirrup class at a schooling show, they are sandbagging, even though it's within the rules. In some special circumstances, it's still reasonable to show well below their usual level. For example, if the horse and rider are brand new to each other, or the horse had become really burned out with showing and they're trying to keep things low key, or if the horse is coming back from an injury, or the rider is really scared coming back from a nasty fall.

[tuckawayfarm]

There is no formal apprentice program and there should be. It is an expensive sport - I liked the suggestion of Young Professional classes - but some program or mechanism to support young adults with professional ambitions would pay dividends for the entire sport.

I believe the USHJA has a mentoring program for young pros. There are also experienced trainers who see the advantage of supporting their young and upcoming assistants and will give them opportunities to grow and compete.

I don't think there is a need for "young pro" classes. It is tough competition at the biggest shows, but there are plenty of venues to offer a less experienced pro a chance to shine. The young pros coming out of the junior ranks are probably already used to showing against upper level riders and top horses. Many got their feet wet in the GP ring as teens and not all of them were handed expensive made horses to do so.

If they have the talent and dedication, they can make it. It's just not an easy or lucrative lifestyle for most.

[findeight]

I currently get to ride several horses for free/in exchange for doing a bit of help around the place. I've been able to ride other horses for free as well at other places in the past. No money changed hand in either direction, and the USEF does not consider getting to ride to be a form of compensation, as long as it isn't in a lesson.

...and you can check with USEF to make certain that anything you are planning is legal, if it's at all questionable.



And you need to recheck with USEF because you are doing some barn work in exchange for free rides on horses not owned by you the trainer is accepting money to board, train or otherwise manage.

You are in technical violation.

You know, everybody keeps saying more opportunity needs to be created but forgets that oportunity requires a horse owned by somebody else. It DOES take money to enter this sport, that's the way it is until somebody provides a horse to the horseless and financially challenged. And that costs more then a tennis racket. Simplistic solutions that may apply to other sports just don't make the transition to horse sports.

[meupatdoes]

And you need to recheck with USEF because you are doing some barn work in exchange for free rides on horses not owned by you the trainer is accepting money to board, train or otherwise manage.

You are in technical violation.


NO, she is NOT.

According to her post, she is helping out UNPAID and riding some horses UNPAID.

As long as SHE is not getting paid, which she is not, and as long as SHE is not getting a board discount from that trainer, which I assume she is not, she can ride any horse at any trainer's place regardless of whether that TRAINER is getting paid.

If the money never makes its way from the TRAINER'S pocket to HERS, either directly or through a discount, she is NOT getting paid to ride and she is NOT in violation.

[Janet]

It is the phrase
get to ride several horses for free/in exchange for doing a bit of help around the place. That SOUNDS as if it could be "remuneration" ("in exchange for"). But if she has checked with USEF and they don't consider it remuneration, then it should be OK.

[findeight]

It is the phrase That SOUNDS as if it could be "remuneration" ("in exchange for"). But if she has checked with USEF and they don't consider it remuneration, then it should be OK.

If she has received clarification in writing from USEF that she can swap barnwork for rides and it's not remuneration, she is OK. But I'd keep the paper handy in case challenged.

[meupatdoes]

It is the phrase That SOUNDS as if it could be "remuneration" ("in exchange for"). But if she has checked with USEF and they don't consider it remuneration, then it should be OK.

No it doesn't.

USEF considers you a professional if riding is something you get paid to do.

If someone works on a farm unpaid, and then additionally gets to ride unpaid, they are still not getting paid for their work.

Maybe they get to do one unpaid thing because they did another unpaid thing, but they still are not getting paid. They are just doing more work for free.

[meupatdoes]

If she has received clarification in writing from USEF that she can swap barnwork for rides and it's not remuneration, she is OK. But I'd keep the paper handy in case challenged.

How is it remuneration??!
She ISN'T GETTING PAID.

Just because the riding is the 'fun' thing to do FOR FREE does not mean she is getting paid.
She does some "less-fun" stuff for free, and she additionally does some "more-fun" stuff for free.

It is all FOR FREE.

[grandprixjump]

I didn't read all of these, so someone else may have mentioned it. But...

The biggest difference is PRIZE MONEY, as a junior you can compete is Classics, Stakes Classes, etc for Juniors and Ammys. Once an Adult you have to maintain ammy status to be able to ride for ANY MONEY without a MiniPrix or Grand Prix horse. If you go pro there IS A HUGE GAP in prize money classes. As an ammy you have all kinds of stake or Classics, as a Pro you have the LEVEL CLASSES till you get to Miniprix's. How can someone who doesn't have TON's of money, possibly get anywhere, when all they do is PAY OUT TO SHOWS, with no possibility of prize money to offset the costs.

I personally believe it would help a lot if they opened up these CLASSIC's to people who haven't earned $x in money classes, to allow even young pros ride in them. Once you hit, for example, $40k in prize money YOU are no longer eligible for them. And how many of the people riding in these classes, aren't more the young pro, or super rich and ride better than some pro's??

[Whisper]

Yup, I just phrased it poorly. *I* consider getting to ride to be "worth" the time I spend picking up poop, feeding, bringing horses in from the pasture, and otherwise helping out. I usually ride for 2-3 hours and help out for 1/2 hour or so. There's no formal agreement of x amount of work for y amount of riding. If I never helped out, she'd probably give the opportunity to someone else who appreciated it more and was willing to do some of the "less fun stuff." I've been riding there for about 2 1/2 years now.

The USEF person I called said flat out that they do not consider riding to be a form of compensation/renumeration. No money changes hands whatsoever, and the owner's insurance does not allow "commercial activity" on the property. She runs a 501c(3) horse rescue and teaches riding and horsemanship lessons to disadvantaged and troubled kids for free. She has a couple of boarders who pay for their own hay/grain, and help with mucking and such, and again, no money changes hands. I usually ride her horses, and occasionally one of the ones who belong to her boarders (with their permission). She gave me two handmade nails from a fence that was built in 1825, a pair of gloves for Christmas, and a neck cooler for my birthday. Since their value isn't over $50, we're all good. If I had the same arrangement with a trainer who was accepting board and training money, I would still be within the rules, since *I* am not accepting any money.

A couple of years ago, at a different barn, I was allowed to ride two (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2201/2082959264_770f7f5864.jpg) ponies (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2322/2159171149_0258ee8a57.jpg) for free, and did help with mucking out and feeding. Several years before that, at a 3rd barn, I rode a 2nd Level dressage horse for a few months while his owner was pregnant. I didn't need to muck his stall or hay him, but did grain. I've had other shorter-term opportunities that were similar, but have not had any payment for it except when I was 14-17, when it was allowed due to my age. I mucked 4 stalls, fed and watered the horses, and was paid $5 per day, and was allowed to ride 2 of the horses. I also did "will muck for rides or $5" occasionally for other owners there (self-care barn, so I usually had a few people who were willing to take me up on it). Since I was a junior, it was allowed by the rules, and doesn't affect my ammy status now. If you look at the "riderless horses and horseless riders" thread, there are a lot of people who are looking for someone to ride their horse for free, and to do some barnwork while they are there. :D

Findeight, you said that it's not like tennis, and nobody has the opportunity to ride without paying for it. If someone like me, who is a relative beginner, is able to currently ride 8 horses for free, and has had lots of similar opportunities in the past, someone who is a better rider should have offers coming out their ears. ;) I think a lot of people just don't appreciate the "non-fancy" but safe horses, or don't bother to look for horses to ride, or aren't willing to make an effort to be helpful, reliable, and responsible. Woody (http://www.flickr.com/photos/82782698@N00/2812539535/in/set-72157601565361913/), Missy (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2644/3734063602_5b4a421ab4.jpg), Wanda (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2658/4001772040_4b63c0313d.jpg), Tonka (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2667/3799167973_a269680742.jpg), Dixie (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3646/3633720323_8343b9e85c.jpg), Pep (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2466/3737718848_cb241932a7.jpg), Kin (http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4576192429_bbbbc75fb7.jpg), and Les (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3532/4555432063_fec5d4e2f8.jpg) aren't A show material by any stretch of the imagination, but they're fun, sweet, and patient with me while I work on my seat and contact. I feel very fortunate to get to ride them.

[tuckawayfarm]

The biggest difference is PRIZE MONEY, as a junior you can compete is Classics, Stakes Classes, etc for Juniors and Ammys. Once an Adult you have to maintain ammy status to be able to ride for ANY MONEY without a MiniPrix or Grand Prix horse. If you go pro there IS A HUGE GAP in prize money classes. As an ammy you have all kinds of stake or Classics, as a Pro you have the LEVEL CLASSES till you get to Miniprix's. How can someone who doesn't have TON's of money, possibly get anywhere, when all they do is PAY OUT TO SHOWS, with no possibility of prize money to offset the costs.

So true! Of all the young pros and those young ammies considering going pro that I know, this is probably one of the biggest obstacles. For those financially challenged, the prize money is often necessary to show in the bigger classes and the A/O Classics can fund the GPs.

However, most everyone makes sacrifices early on in their careers (whatever that may be) and this is one of those occasions IMHO. IME, the owners are paying the show fees, so there is no reason a talented young pro could not bring a good prospect up the levels with time and hard work.

[meupatdoes]

Findeight, you said that it's not like tennis, and nobody has the opportunity to ride without paying for it. If someone like me, who is a relative beginner, is able to currently ride 8 horses for free, and has had lots of similar opportunities in the past, someone who is a better rider should have offers coming out their ears. ;) I think a lot of people just don't appreciate the "non-fancy" but safe horses, or don't bother to look for horses to ride, or aren't willing to make an effort to be helpful, reliable, and responsible.

Completely agree.

On another thread somewhere I think I guesstimated the number of individual horses I have ridden in my life to be from 500-750.

Out of that number, I have owned 9 and leased 2.

"Helpful, reliable, and responsible" goes a long way.

[Lucassb]

I didn't read all of these, so someone else may have mentioned it. But...

The biggest difference is PRIZE MONEY, as a junior you can compete is Classics, Stakes Classes, etc for Juniors and Ammys. Once an Adult you have to maintain ammy status to be able to ride for ANY MONEY without a MiniPrix or Grand Prix horse. If you go pro there IS A HUGE GAP in prize money classes. As an ammy you have all kinds of stake or Classics, as a Pro you have the LEVEL CLASSES till you get to Miniprix's. How can someone who doesn't have TON's of money, possibly get anywhere, when all they do is PAY OUT TO SHOWS, with no possibility of prize money to offset the costs.

I personally believe it would help a lot if they opened up these CLASSIC's to people who haven't earned $x in money classes, to allow even young pros ride in them. Once you hit, for example, $40k in prize money YOU are no longer eligible for them. And how many of the people riding in these classes, aren't more the young pro, or super rich and ride better than some pro's??

Ah, but shows are not in the business of producing young professionals. They are for profit entities and behave accordingly.

Junior and A/O Classics pay money because they draw paying customers to the show. Putting a cap on money won would mean that a lot of the most attractive customers (admittedly often highly advantaged folks who can afford to ride and compete often, frequently with a string of horses) would be shut out pretty quickly. Not good for business, and frankly, not good for a lot of professionals who earn a living teaching, training, and selling horses to these folks in addition to taking them on the $$$ road showing.

I am all in favor of creating and supporting mentorship type opportunities for young pros, and think that is a worthy goal for the sport. But not at the expense of the customers who are the backbone of the industry - the amateurs and juniors who pay to play (and pay, and pay.) It is hard enough to somewhat level the playing field for ammies as it is, particularly for those who are amateurs-with-non-horsey-jobs, rather than amateurs-with-significant-trust-funds. Making them ride against pros - young OR old - doesn't fly with me. That's what OPEN classes are for.

[grandprixjump]

Ah, but shows are not in the business of producing young professionals. They are for profit entities and behave accordingly.

Junior and A/O Classics pay money because they draw paying customers to the show. Putting a cap on money won would mean that a lot of the most attractive customers (admittedly often highly advantaged folks who can afford to ride and compete often, frequently with a string of horses) would be shut out pretty quickly. Not good for business, and frankly, not good for a lot of professionals who earn a living teaching, training, and selling horses to these folks in addition to taking them on the $$$ road showing.

I am all in favor of creating and supporting mentorship type opportunities for young pros, and think that is a worthy goal for the sport. But not at the expense of the customers who are the backbone of the industry - the amateurs and juniors who pay to play (and pay, and pay.) It is hard enough to somewhat level the playing field for ammies as it is, particularly for those who are amateurs-with-non-horsey-jobs, rather than amateurs-with-significant-trust-funds. Making them ride against pros - young OR old - doesn't fly with me. That's what OPEN classes are for.

The cap would ONLY affect people with PRO status, and they CAN'T be riding horses above level 6 for example. So the new pro's and young pro's have a spring board up, while not cursing the Ammy's. And like I said before, a lot of the Ammies in these classes, are as good as, or better than a new pro, because they have the trust fund to buy whatever horse they want and ride 7 horses a day, everyday...

Or even better yet, and probably easier to track, have a PRO-AMMY (people working in the horse industry, but no ways near a true pro rider) status. Allowed to show in the Ammy classes, but point tracked to a certain level... These people can be the bookkeepers, internet developers, office personel, grooms, barn managers, etc. Track their winnings, and have a cutoff.

[Lucassb]

The cap would ONLY affect people with PRO status, and they CAN'T be riding horses above level 6 for example. So the new pro's and young pro's have a spring board up, while not cursing the Ammy's. And like I said before, a lot of the Ammies in these classes, are as good as, or better than a new pro, because they have the trust fund to buy whatever horse they want and ride 7 horses a day, everyday...

Or even better yet, and probably easier to track, have a PRO-AMMY (people working in the horse industry, but no ways near a true pro rider) status. Allowed to show in the Ammy classes, but point tracked to a certain level... These people can be the bookkeepers, internet developers, office personel, grooms, barn managers, etc. Track their winnings, and have a cutoff.

I don't think there is going to be much appetite to allow pros (even young ones) to compete in the ammy classes. There are just as many (maybe more) amateurs who work their butts off at non horsey jobs as there are trust fund babies, and neither group is going to be pleased to ride against those who are PAID for their time in the saddle.

The bright line dividing pros and ammies is never going to have anything to do with ability or even riding success. It is about whether or not someone gets paid to ride. I know that creates a lot of heartache in all sorts of areas, but trying to track the sorts of activities you describe is unrealistic, IMO.

I have NO objection whatsoever to developing classes - like the WCHR program does already - to showcase new/young pros. But not by compromising the amateur divisions.

[Whisper]

Meupatdoes, I've been on over 150 horses, but most were in lessons of some sort, only a couple of dozen were completely free for me to ride. I remember one person posted here about getting to ride several horses, and after a week, it went from her being so lucky, and him doing her a favor, to her wanting to get paid, and have classes at shows paid for, and so forth. It's like you said in your thread over on the eventing board. A lot of people have horses they're willing to let people ride, and are very generous, but potential riders need to start with a small opportunity and work their way up.

Grandprixjump, I agree with Lucassb that adding pros to ammy classes sounds like it wouldn't be very workable. If it's a priority, people who are interested should try to find someone to sponsor a class that is limited to young professionals, with prize money and/or merchandise. It's like all of the proposals for a separate Hunter class limited to horses between 14.2 and 15.2. There seems to be a lot of interest from people who want to ride in it, but they need to organise and get someone to offer one.