AMHR Amateur Changes ?

[R Whiteman]

I was just reading the proposals for rule changes for amateurs on page 193 of the THE JOURNAL. Does anyone else see a problem with the proposal to revise Section III Part 3 ?

I am not sure how a wife , husband, or significant other of a professional trainer is any different than a person who has a horse in training with a professional trainer and shows in amateur classes.

Just curious,

Ron

 

[CLC Stables]

There is a major difference...........that amatuer owner might not be at the trainer's every day and handling the horse........I often times only handle my horses at the shows as my trainer is 2 hours away...........they know the trainer and show better for the trainer rather than myself.

A Amatuer/Wife etc etc can handle those horses daily, and work with the trainer husband/etc and is reaping the benefits of the money earned.

 

[ThreeCFarm]

I agree with CLC.

Besides, if the trainer gets really sick or hospitalized, who do you think will be out there doing the work? The significant other.

 

[Becky]

I see it a little differently in my situation. I train and show professionally. My daughter shows as an amateur. She is in college 3 hours from home. She only comes home on holidays and to attend a few shows a year. To not allow her to show as an amateur even though I train and show for clients wouldn't be fair?

 

[hhpminis]

This really all goes back to the definition of an amteur and a pro. It is not the level of experience or ability but whether you are earning monetary gain from what you do.

The spouse of a trainer is definitely benefiting by the moneys brought in by a trainer therefore they are not an amateur.

My husband is by no means a show person but he benefits from the money I earn as a trainer. He is not allowed to show in an amateur class.

If you had a client at the barn every single day learning and taking lessons they would still be an amateur as they are not benefiting from the income earned. They are paying rather than receiving pay.

Edited to add:

Becky, I dont have my journal yet but I dont think that this rule includes children just spouses and significant other correct?

 

[ThreeCFarm]

Becky, I agree that Cammie "shouldn't" be prevented from being an amateur. She doesn't live with you, she lives at school. However, I can also understand that sometimes you have to draw the line somewhere, so it is easy for everyone to understand. You can't make a rule for every exception, so it makes it difficult.

Besides, I thought this was just for significant others?

 

[CLC Stables]

The rule is already standing that Significant others and spouses are no longer amatuer.......................they might be trying to change it to include children, but I doubt that will pass.

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

This really all goes back to the definition of an amteur and a pro.  It is not the level of experience or ability but whether you are earning monetary gain from what you do.The spouse of a trainer is definitely benefiting by the moneys brought in by a trainer therefore they are not an amateur.

My husband is by no means a show person but he benefits from the money I earn as a trainer.  He is not allowed to show in an amateur class.

If you had a client at the barn every single day learning and taking lessons they would still be an amateur as they are not benefiting from the income earned. They are paying rather than receiving pay.

Edited to add:

Becky, I dont have my journal yet but I dont think that this rule includes children just spouses and significant other correct?

524254[/snapback]

​

couldnt have said it better myself

 

[R Whiteman]

A child in college receiving money from a professional parent to assist her with school could be considered receiving the benefit of moneys earned also. Notice, I did not say minor child.

I would agree that if the spouse were sick or injured the chores would most likely be done by the other spouse. But that would not be any different than boarding a horse. That doesn't mean they could step in and continue the training of a horse.

This rule could create more problems than it solves.

Thanks for the feedback,

Ron

 

[Becky]

I'll have to check the AMHR rulebook, but I was thinking that the current amateur rule was such that ANY one living in the same household as the 'trainer' couldn't show as an amateur? Family member or not!

Cammie doesn't hold an amateur card in AMHR for this very reason.

A child in college receiving money from a professional parent to assist her with school could be considered receiving the benefit of moneys earned also

I agree with that statement. But it does seem like there needs to be some method/rule/new classes? for relatives or others living in the same household that aren't professional trainers to be able to show in classes designated for others besides open classes showing against professionals when that person(s) may have no professional experience or desire to be so? Whew! I think I made that sentence a little long!

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

well I dont have the answer really at all but.. I dont get to upset about the ammy stuff cause while I Do show in it.. really the horse can be trained and conditioned and handled other then the 30 min class (talking Nationals here) by a professional and of course a good handler makes all the difference compared to a doofus like me.. the way i see it it really is a professional doing it all but the 30 min anway so while I agree with annettes definition of ammy i can see others points of view

to be honest what irks me more even though it isnt against the rules is kids older ones of course getting paid to train and handle horses making them a professional and showing in youth classes not open. but that is a whole different story

 

[minimomNC]

Maybe they need a non-pro division. That would be for anyone thats not a trainer but lives or is supported by one. The ones that aren't eligible for amateur by the rules but don't want to show open with trainers or want to show their own horses but fall out of the amateur rules.

 

[hhpminis]

Would someone who has there journal already or was at convention please relate to the rest of us with slow mail what the propostion actually says.

Thank you in advance

 

[CLC Stables]

I bet if you read carefully in that section it says PASS or FAIL behind it because they will have the convention highlights..............I think it is already a null and void question if it is already decided.

 

[alphahorses]

December 2005 Journal, p. 193 (please excuse the typos!)

Section III, Part 3 - Amateur, Paragraph B-1h, page 34 - Revised: A husband or wife or significant other of a professional trainer who solicitis, advertises whether it be in magazines, newspapers, handouts, websites, on vehicles and/or trailers or any other means of communication to the public, who trains equine in/for any other equine association (this would include donkeys and zebras) may not hold an amateur card in the ASPC/AMHR/ASPR nor can they show as an amateur in any sanctioned ASPC/AMHR/ASPR show unless they have notified the ASPC/AMHR/ASPR Registry in writing the date of which the training facility has been closed, all advertisements of solicitation of training have been removed from publications, websites, handouts, and any other form of public communications and the professional trainer along with their husband or wife or significant other must wait a period of one (1) year from the date of which said letter is received and recorded by the ASPC/AMHR/ASPC Registry. A lterrer from the ASPC/AMHR/ASPR Registry to the trainer along with their husband or wife or significant other giving them the official date of which they can reapply for their amateur cards and waiting their one(1) year period and meeting all qualifications of an amateur. Extraordinary for January 1, 2006. Committees referred to: General Rules Committee - PASSED

------------------------------------

Interesting - seems to define a professional as someone who advertises, not someone who gets paid. Also interesting that they excluded the new registry.

 

[kaykay]

i thought someone said they were going to do something about having a level one ammy program at convention?? Does anyone know if thats in there?? Still havent gotten my dec issue.

lisa i so agree. I cant believe how many youth are paid to show horses just like any other professional but can still show in youth classes. I just dont agree with that. These kids advertise etc just like the pros do

alpha i bet they didnt include nspr in there as its so new.

 

[hhpminis]

Thanks Alpha.

So it includes any breed of equine i.e. donkey/zebra.

This really is not that much different than it has been in the past just a little more specific.

You are right it does not say anything about money, but remember this is just a new amendment to an existing rule and to get the whole rule you need to read it in entirety including the other paragraghs of the rule, which state the forms of remuneration that make you a non amateur.

 

[Sunraye Miniatures]

IMO I feel like AMHR is complicating things alot more than they necessarily should.

The old rule is fine IMO and I see no reason for it to be changed.

 

[hhpminis]

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that it never stated that you couldn't train any other form of equine before. I think that is the new verbage in a nutshell. I am going off an old rule book, it is too cold to go get my newer one out of the truck.

I agree that it is frustrating that the rules have to keep being changed, however, we the human race are always looking for a loophole. When one is found then it needs to be tied up with a few more words.

It is just plain simple really. If you receive or benefit from money earned to train horses than you cannot be an amateur. Unfortunately, simple doesn't work with rules and legal issues.

Again, this has nothing to do with your ability to show horses. There are some really really good amateurs out there that can hold there own against any trainer. They have chosen to keep their ammy status by not taking remuneration for any of the listed restrictions.

 

[Karen S]

Hi to All:

As chairman of the ASPC/AMHR/ASPR Triple A Amateur Program I would like to comment on this recent thread.

First, the original rule was...."A husband, wife or significant other of a professional trainer may not hold an amateur card"...this rule went into effect January 1, 2004 by the BOD. We (the amateur committee) wanted to expand this rule to close as many loopholes that we could and word it in as simple language that anyone could understand.

A Significant other: is a person who is by common law your married partner (legal or not, someone that co-habitats with you). A child is not a significant other.

This rule was expanded due to the fact that we do have people holding amateur cards that were paid trainers in the donkey associations. We have some folks that hold a judges card with OTHER equine associations that also hold an amateur card, so we wanted to take out any loophole that would cause a problem. By including donkeys and zebra's (yes, they are part of the equine family) and ANY other equine association then we close as much of this loophole as we could. This rule was voted on last year at the 2004 convention and passed in committee but was sent back to the Amateur committee to add the additional vergiage regarding the donkeys and zebras.

What is remuneration? This rule comes from the US Equestrian Federation which some of our ASPC/AMHR/ASPR rules fall under (the Registry is a member of that association). When a person advertises as a trainer they set training fees. If they collect over $300 any one time for training then they are considered a paid professional. We do look into all complaints turned into the committee regarding people advertising as trainers or making a statement as being a trainer. If a complaint is found to be valid then it is sent to the office with the proof attached. Then the Director of Operations will contact the BOD. The BOD will make a ruling and then send back to me their findings as well. The person or persons involved will receive a letter from the Directors of Operations telling them they no longer qualify as an amateur and their amateur status will be revoked.

All of our Amateur rules start in Section III on page 33 of the 2005 Rulebook and then again on page 41, Part 4 Amateur. If you would like a new Amateur packet and you have a new ASPC/AMHR 2006 Amateur card please send to me an email with your mailing address and I will be happy to send you one. I'm in the process now of updating those packets and they will be ready after Christmas.

Thank you.

Karen Shaw

Chairman

ASPC/AMHR/ASPR Triple A Amateur Program