This isn't just in the jumper world, but that's where I've been for the last few days. How is Amateur status defined? Is not making money in horses
really enough? There were really good professionals at the Harvest Horse Show this week, but there were also some people who should never have been in that
class. Most of the riders rode twice, so you could see it was definitely their fault and not the horses. Jennine, you scared me half to death every time you
came in the ring. Protip: if you are too small and slender to control your horse on the flat without hauling on them with a number of contraptions, putting
jumps in the way will not make it better. Then there were Ammys who could have ridden rings around half the pros (sorry to say, but it was mostly the women
pros), but chose to stay at the Amateur level. I'm watching the Hampton Grand Prix right now, and some of the riders there consider themselves Amateurs. If
you're married to and coached by a top Pro in your sport, then compete in a open level class, how are you still an Amateur?
There are some people who stay at this level for their entire riding careers, when they could easily compete with the open riders. Women seem to be far more prone to this than male riders. I thought an amateur rider was supposed to be a weekend warrior level rider, pretty good but can't get to the big leagues due to lack of time or talent. These "Ammys" dominate their classes for years, instead of competing in the upper levels. Maybe it's not necessarily a bad thing, but if I get out of the novice classes, I'd want to be competing with other people at a similar skill level, ideally. When you're just point fodder for someone who is going to the world show or a Grand Prix event... I don't trust that everyone is moving up with their skill levels if they aren't required to. What are you getting out of it when you're your division's high point rider four years in a row? Maybe I'm just crazy here, but if everyone is an amateur, how can anyone know what classes are appropriate for them to enter? Is there any form of talent control for open and amateur riders?
Also, does anyone know who Alex Grenada or Alec Grenaldo (something like that) from CO is? He rode very well in one of the classes I saw, but I didn't catch his name so I can't google his website. The stupid program doesn't even have horse numbers in it.
There are some people who stay at this level for their entire riding careers, when they could easily compete with the open riders. Women seem to be far more prone to this than male riders. I thought an amateur rider was supposed to be a weekend warrior level rider, pretty good but can't get to the big leagues due to lack of time or talent. These "Ammys" dominate their classes for years, instead of competing in the upper levels. Maybe it's not necessarily a bad thing, but if I get out of the novice classes, I'd want to be competing with other people at a similar skill level, ideally. When you're just point fodder for someone who is going to the world show or a Grand Prix event... I don't trust that everyone is moving up with their skill levels if they aren't required to. What are you getting out of it when you're your division's high point rider four years in a row? Maybe I'm just crazy here, but if everyone is an amateur, how can anyone know what classes are appropriate for them to enter? Is there any form of talent control for open and amateur riders?
Also, does anyone know who Alex Grenada or Alec Grenaldo (something like that) from CO is? He rode very well in one of the classes I saw, but I didn't catch his name so I can't google his website. The stupid program doesn't even have horse numbers in it.
