The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 105
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Jul. 12, 2010
    Posts
    284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grandprixjump View Post
    Instead of capping or doing away with the money (which you know show organizers are not going to do) putting restrictions on who can be in the classics. Cap amount of money on horse rider combinations and Especially if your riding at the GP level, you can't step down to that level on the same horse. No horses capable and showing at 1.4m and above cross entered into 1.0m classics. And make the no cross entries viable for 30 days before and after the class. That way they are either ammies or not, none of this switch hitting and screwing up the classics for REAL ammies...
    I like this idea. Maybe horse/rider combination can only compete 1 level higher than a classic they enter within 30 days. Horse can do 2 levels higher with a professional rider but no stakes. That would allow for the "move up" practice classes but take away financial incentives to cross enter.

    Instead of capping prize money at a hard dollar figure- what about using a multiple of stall fees & fence height to come up with caps for amateur classes? Classic winner gets enough for a "free" show plus a few $ for the must have new piece of tack. I know its a bit complicated but it would make "shamateur" status less attractive, offer more $ for moving up and allow true amateurs to stretch their show budgets further.



  2. #82
    Join Date
    Jan. 25, 2011
    Location
    Southern Pines, NC
    Posts
    2,336

    Default

    [QUOTE=Pennywell Bay;6798956]
    Quote Originally Posted by GingerJumper View Post
    I'm looking at the prize $$ I'll be trying to win as a pro, and looking at the money I can win now in junior classes, and wondering why anyone would want to show as a pro.
    QUOTE]

    Not being snarky, but show as a pro to get one's name out,gain clients and getting paid for all that showing a clients horse entails, without footing the bill for the vast majority. Ammys pay their own way and for all their expenses. Just saying. No dog in this fight.
    I do know what shows involve for pros, I was saying that because I own my own horse and paying his way won't be too fun as a young pro with such low prize money in return. I also understand that ammies pay all their own expenses because I'm currently a junior, paying my own expenses.

    Honestly, I wasn't trying to offend anyone, and the idea of eliminating ammy/pro status was NOT my idea originally, it was another poster's idea that I found thought provoking, and posted over here... I really meant no harm by saying it and I'm very sorry that I've clearly offended several people.
    I've heard there's more to life than an FEI tent and hotel rooms, so I'm trying it.



  3. #83
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,703

    Default

    I found his argument devoid of any real understanding of the business/economics of horses as well as he tends to make massive logical jumps in how the competitors would respond if his assertions were implemented.

    Let's consider the cost of upper level horses. Does anybody here think that the majority of amateurs and juniors could afford them today? It is not like the past where we made our own upper level jumpers. The costs involved with amateur competition are so high, prize money is a nice kudo for the work and in most cases comes no where near offsetting the costs of an upper level trainer, upper level horse, etc.

    The argument that prize money keeps folks in the amateur ranks is false and a weak attempt at creating a strawman to change the rules.

    Incentive to progress is not the domain of the competition or governing body. It is the domain of the TRAINER/TEACHER. How many of his junior and amateur riders consistently move up the levels?

    The only justification he has for his assertion is to help him make more money. He is hoisting a false argument seen on PRO. The justification is a red herring in an attempt to make it seem like he cares about the sport and the lower level riders.

    Yes, I like eventing where the amateur designation is weak. The divisions are Open and Restricted. Pro/non-pro. I ride in the Open simply because I have competed at the upper levels and it would be inappropriate for me to go restricted.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Oct. 21, 2009
    Location
    South Central: Zone 7
    Posts
    1,944

    Default

    The incentive to ride in the amateur only classes should be that you are doing it for the love of the sport NOT to win money. It is quite amazing that our sport allows amateurs to accept ANY kind of prize money- many other sports do not allow this. And this is why we have so many people refusing to give up their amateur status or blatantly cheating. We need to find ways to make showing less expensive- like bringing back B rated shows, and create a culture of horsemanship NOT the current of culture of "I'll do anything to win that prize money such as [lie about my amateur status, drug my horse, show every weekend without a break, etc]".


    2 members found this post helpful.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Feb. 1, 2001
    Location
    Finally...back in civilization, more or less
    Posts
    11,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hntrjmprpro45 View Post
    The incentive to ride in the amateur only classes should be that you are doing it for the love of the sport NOT to win money. It is quite amazing that our sport allows amateurs to accept ANY kind of prize money- many other sports do not allow this. And this is why we have so many people refusing to give up their amateur status or blatantly cheating. We need to find ways to make showing less expensive- like bringing back B rated shows, and create a culture of horsemanship NOT the current of culture of "I'll do anything to win that prize money such as [lie about my amateur status, drug my horse, show every weekend without a break, etc]".
    I just don't agree that there are tons of people out there who would be pros if only we eliminated the prize money in the amateur division.
    **********
    We move pretty fast for some rabid garden snails.
    -PaulaEdwina


    2 members found this post helpful.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2008
    Posts
    7,227

    Default

    I find laughable the assertion that Adult Jumper riders are staying at low levels so they can walk away with all sorts of prize money. Not one Adult Jumper rider on this thread, even very successful ones like Anticipation, has made money horse showing at this level. In fact, they've all spent a great deal of money -- just a little bit less than they otherwise would have.

    So we should pay out the nose with no chance to win anything because we love the sport? I, and others, have just as much love of the sport when we come back home having spent $500 instead of $1,500 that week because we did well in our classes. I promise.

    In fact, I love the sport more when I can play. I personally have started dabbling in other horse sports because this one has gotten prohibitively expensive. Taking prize money from the Adults and giving it to the pros is not going to lower the costs appreciably.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2003
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    1,262

    Default

    Yeah no kidding. I am there to compete, not to braid my horse and put on hoof polish. If I could move to a higher division would I ever, but time in the saddle and horse power prevent that. Why should I subsidise every other division? Why should the lower divisions be charged just as much but have no chance at any money? I can enjoy the sport of riding very much at home for 'free'. I would be happy to not receive any prize money if I were not paying several thousand dollars in entries that are subsidizing the marquee divisions. That's what sponsers are for.

    I don't see why I, as an amateur deserve no reward for doing well in my lowly division, in relation to my entry fees. When I go to my local 'A' show and pay $150 to enter a single stake class, and win $75 for first in that class with 10 or 15 entries, something is wrong. Charge me $20/class and give me a halter or at least give me the chance to recoup my entry fees. If it weren't for people like me you wouldn't be having a horse show and a lot of us are fed up of being charged out the nose to show when there's no reward for doing well.
    If there were any alterntive whatsoever to our local A show, I would be doing it, but alas they know they have a monopoly and because we love the sport we put up with it, just to have something to gauge the hard work we put in every night after our day job.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Mar. 22, 2000
    Posts
    1,171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wildlifer View Post
    Sorry, this eventer is still stuck back where YOU WIN MONEY AT SHOWS? Hahahahahhahahhahahaha. (Laughter of incredulity) I get....oh wait, nothing. I just love my sport and the journey. I often ride against pros, we never have amateur classes where I am and I hope they never do -- of course, our sport is much more objective than the hunters. So I lost to Michael Plumb, so what? He could have a bad day and I could beat him too, gives me incentive to keep working! But I guess I am not a ribbon chaser. You can still chase ammy points for end of year awards, but.....wait, you get money at a show???
    Unfortunately the Child/Adult Jumpers are not nationally recognized divisions, so if you show out of zone and state, you don't qualify for a year end award. The Junior/Amateurs are recognized nationally, so they have a shot at year end awards regardless of where they show.



  9. #89
    Join Date
    Apr. 13, 2003
    Location
    Wellington, FL
    Posts
    771

    Default

    Here's one of my thoughts about the whole concept. I think that what has happened with the whole Ch/Ad and Jr/AO prize money situation is that people are accustomed to winning it. If these divisions NEVER paid, who would care? No one. The horse show managers etc have created a false motivation to drive up entries in divisions and classes. When I started riding and showing, I never wanted to go to a horse show because I could win money or was intending on covering my entries with the cash I might win. Sure, having open add back classes, and Classics that pay out for the divisions are good motivators. At the end of the day, aren't Juniors, and Ammys showing for the love of the Horse, and the Sport? I know that's why I ride and work with horses (cause lord knows, there are many more professions where I would be making a whole lot more money, and I'd have a lot more leisure time). I've got to agree with Mr. Kappler here, if you want to win money, then put yourself out there with the big fish.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Jul. 19, 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    10,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hntrjmprpro45 View Post
    The incentive to ride in the amateur only classes should be that you are doing it for the love of the sport NOT to win money. It is quite amazing that our sport allows amateurs to accept ANY kind of prize money- many other sports do not allow this. And this is why we have so many people refusing to give up their amateur status or blatantly cheating. We need to find ways to make showing less expensive- like bringing back B rated shows, and create a culture of horsemanship NOT the current of culture of "I'll do anything to win that prize money such as [lie about my amateur status, drug my horse, show every weekend without a break, etc]".
    I'm trying to come up with a single sport with which I'm familiar comparable to horseback riding where amateurs are still 'pure' am with no compensation allowed. (And for the thousandth time, no, not skating. They stopped that at least twenty years ago so the Olympic side would quit bleeding athletes.) Even NDCA fudged their own rules to allow "scholarships" for pro-am dancers, as I've mentioned, that are comparable to h/j ammy prizes--not enough to offset the entire cost of your entry, usually, not everyone gets paid out, but it at least offsets a little cost to the people making up the bread and butter of the sport and makes them feel a little less like cash cows. I VERY much doubt there are a lot of adult amateur riders who are making such a killing in prize money they're not moving up. I CAN believe there are plenty who cannot devote the kind of time and money required to move up--they're comfortable at that fence height, they had a horse who can't go higher and they don't plan to sell him just to satisfy someone else's idea of 'moving on'. We have people blatantly cheating in part because they want the perks of being a pro without having to go into the Open classes (being able to make money while still working on their riding) and because the rules are so stringent for what constitutes 'payment' some people end up 'cheating' through sheer confusion.

    As far as juniors, I find it bizarre anyone (on this thread or elsewhere) would argue they SHOULDN'T win money as aren't we supposed to encourage young people to stay in the sport and become pros?



  11. #91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucassb View Post
    I just don't agree that there are tons of people out there who would be pros if only we eliminated the prize money in the amateur division.
    I don't think the argument is that they would be pros, but rather that they might show in open classes instead of amateur ones once their skills had improved to the point of being competitive against professionals. or not if they preferred to remain in amateur classes with less money on the line.



  12. #92

    Default

    I don't understand why this proposal makes people feel that jr/amateur jumpers would be subsidizing professional classes with their entry fees. I can understand it sounds like a bad idea if prize money went down but not entry fees - but I didn't see that anywhere in the article - in fact a big point of the idea is to drive entry fees down which is something everyone on both sides of the argument seems to agree should happen. Show managers might not like that idea but thats why we need the USEF to step in.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  13. #93

    Default

    And another thought- if we adjusted prize money down in amateur classes and took away the incentive for "shamateurs" to chase money in these classes, couldn't we consider getting rid of the whole "amateur owner" rule in the jumper divisions - make them all just "amateur" classes - starting at 1.00, then 1.10, 1.20, 1.30, 1.40 all with the same set of rules and all cross-enter able, with increasing prize money as you move up- none at 1.00, $1000 at 1.10, $2000 at 1.20, $2500 at 1.30 and $5000 at 1.40 . As the rules stand now, the adult jumper to low amateur owner jump is insurmountable for someone who can't afford to buy or own a horse. Why should adult jumper riders get to lease or borrow horses and show for lots of prize money, but low amateur owner riders have to buy their own horses and often compete for less. and why can low amateur riders cross enter into high amateur classes but adult riders can't cross enter into low amateur classes. It seems like this change would do much more to ease the affordability of moving up the levels for many more people than promoting prize money in amateur classes as a way to offset the expenses of owning a horse.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  14. #94
    Join Date
    Mar. 9, 2006
    Posts
    167

    Default

    We really need to keep some prize money in the weekend Classics, if for no other reason than not to look like such fools when the family and friends come to watch us show in the Sunday class. We don't want to be running around like idiots just to win a tiny ribbon, they already don't quite understand the whole horse and showing thing. Plus, a paycheck, no matter how small makes the husbands happy. Just don't let them see the entry fees.
    Really, somehow, even though the prize money is such a drop in the bucket compared to what is spent on the horses, it is fun to sometimes win a little.
    Many of us amateurs never intend to go above the 1.15 level. Let us have a little fun. The entry fees for the classic usually cover the prize offered. We don't need to subsidize the pros. They will get it back from us in training fees anyway.



  15. #95
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showjumper1 View Post
    I don't understand why this proposal makes people feel that jr/amateur jumpers would be subsidizing professional classes with their entry fees...
    Because they are. Without large sponsors, do you think that if only pros showed shows would be profitable? Do you think they could cover the costs?

    Figure about 75-85 percent of all competitors are amateurs and parents paying to show, yes, the amateur and junior sure as heck are subsidizing pro classes.

    There are A shows here that clear $300,000 a week in profit (after all expenses). I don't think the pros are doing that.



  16. #96
    Join Date
    Nov. 29, 2008
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    Per the article on page 3:
    http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/...ructure?page=3

    "
    Encourage Improvement
    As the system stands now, you’re not providing young riders, after their junior years, with an opportunity to make a living as professional riders. You’re not providing them any new goals. We have so many wonderful junior goals, like the equitation finals and the FEI North American Junior and Young Rider Championships.

    But the minute they turn 18, it’s like their life is over. They see this gap between being 18 and being a professional riding at the grand prix level. It’s not possible for them to become professional riders because they can’t support themselves........
    "

    I think He's pretty much answering His own question in the above quote.

    I think for many of the parents supporting junior riders, the sport is just a positive character building phase that they provide for their child, before that child moves on to collage and pursues a degree in preparation for meeting the expectations and demands of survival in our modern culture.

    The world needs thousands of good doctors, engineers, scientists, architects, etc.... But just how many professional riders does the world really *NEED*???

    See the point?

    So by bringing the Junior/amateur devisions closer towards resembling the professional, it brings those participants who will be pursuing an alternate career, an opportunity to fulfill this portion of their lives almost as though it was the professional levels... for them...

    The parents are happy, the children are happy, the show management is happy.

    Horseback riding is culturally after all, mostly a nostalgically glorious remnant from the past kept alive out of the esteemed association with it's historically integral elite provenance.

    We who love horse sports know why we do, but the current world economy has a basis in current technological innovation, and horse sports are not going to contribute integrally to building the world of the future.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  17. #97
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2009
    Location
    Lower Saxony, Germany
    Posts
    184

    Default

    Just some ideas

    http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/...se-show-system
    This is the system used in Germany! Work quite well!

    I believe what the main problem is, is the cost for showing. So i think there have to be some rules by the USEF about what fees a show can bill you with. It is an expensive sport but spending 1500 $ for fun on a weekend is silly! I think everybody would be okay with lesser prize money in the lower classes if you wouldn't have to spend so much money on getting there.

    If you would spend so much money on showing I think it would push some wheels. More people would show, more would show with out a trainer since you loose less money, more trainers would have the time to show themself because you wouldn't have to take 10 people through the small classes. some would do it without a trainer.
    And please get rid of the tiny courses at the big shows! It's hillarious! How good can somebody feel to say yay i won the ground poles class at that big time show where olympic riders compete and there where like three entrys in my class!

    Make some better rules for hosting a show. Would raise the level of the B and C shows and make the equestrians aspire to get better. Not be happy with cantering ground poles at a top show!



  18. #98
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2001
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Posts
    3,773

    Default

    Maybe some of our resident lawyers could chime in here - can USEF dictate to show managers how much they can charge for entries, or would that be some sort of restraint of trade? I just wonder if anyone can control that basic point of doing business.



  19. #99
    Join Date
    May. 2, 2012
    Location
    AIKEN SC
    Posts
    243

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
    Maybe some of our resident lawyers could chime in here - can USEF dictate to show managers how much they can charge for entries, or would that be some sort of restraint of trade? I just wonder if anyone can control that basic point of doing business.
    They already do that.
    There are caps on entry fees in Hunter Classics (10%) and caps in 25K + GP classes 2%. Along with that there are minimums for prize money depending on division rating.
    But the C rated Zone divisions are the cash cows. Other than the Classics for Hunters the amount of entry fee is unregulated no mimimum or maximum fees for classes with no prize money. In theory you could pay more in entry fees for a $2500 Adut Jumper class than you would for the $25K GP class.
    If USEF started regulating entry fees for these types of classes most of the shows would go unrated. Too many regional factors that impact costs to create a one size fits all approach.
    Fan of Sea Accounts



  20. #100
    Join Date
    Nov. 30, 2005
    Location
    Northfield MN
    Posts
    979

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meupatdoes View Post
    How do you think the entry fees will be brought down while maintaining high prize money???

    See my example:
    Pre green stake hunter class WITH prize money = $850 entry
    Pre greens at Old Salem WITHOUT prize money = $250 entry

    Kappler's article is about REDUCING show fees, by REDUCING the prize money expense to the horse show managers.

    People on this thread either can't do math or want to have it both ways.
    You have mentioned doing the math more than once so I will oblige you. The amounts listed are approximate, but realistic.

    Stall and office fees: $450
    Nominating fee: $175
    Shavings, hay, coaching fees: $200
    Entry fee for classic with no prize money $250
    Cost for this week: $1075
    No prize money, actual cost: $1075

    Same week with 15K classic:
    Fees same except entry increases to $850
    Cost for the week: $1675
    Prize money for winning classic: $4500
    Actual cost: A credit of $2825 Or enough to pay for almost two additional shows.

    This is the math that allowed a very financially challenged but very motivated and competitive junior to show at a national level. I'm sure she isn't the only one who has made it happened this way.

    I find it a bit concerning that those who oppose prize money in the junior/AOs are the ones who have the financial resources to compete without it. It's certainly an excellent way to keep a segment of talent out of your sandbox. Kappler talks about supporting young pros, but this plan decreases the opportunities for many young riders to reach the professional level.

    As there are always classes with no/minimum money, no one needs to pay the high entry fees.



Similar Threads

  1. 2013 EAP Applications Open January 15, 2013
    By PonyPenny in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Jan. 15, 2013, 10:37 AM
  2. Fred Kappler clinic?
    By turningpointequine in forum Dressage
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: May. 22, 2012, 03:38 PM
  3. Chris Kappler clinic...
    By tidy rabbit in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Nov. 9, 2010, 07:35 PM
  4. Chris kappler Clinic
    By twinkle in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Dec. 18, 2009, 10:32 PM
  5. Chris Kappler Clinic?
    By springdaisy in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Nov. 23, 2009, 06:56 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •