News: Articles: Opportunity for Amateurs

An Amateur Point of View

Has the time come to add ATR to the official spectrum of opportunity for amateurs?
by Russ Vento

Going from show to show, I can’t help but notice how the classes offered for amateurs and young riders break out. At some events, we get both owner to ride (AOTR or JOTR), as well as just plain ATR or JTR Youth Nationals allows young riders to take both designations all the way to the top—national championships in both JOTR and JTR are offered. U.S. and Canadian Nationals, however, do not accord the same treatment to adult amateurs. It is Amateur Owner to Ride, period.

It’s easy to understand why the traditional requirement of ownership might have been a good plan when it was founded: By requiring amateurs to own their horses, it promoted sales and gave these riders a deeper connection to the breed But looking at the show ring today, I think times have changed. When weighing the pros and cons of whether to add Amateur To Ride classes to shows large enough to use them, including the national championships, I can’t find many cons. The only stipulation I see—and this is very important—is that we should not allow cross-entering in AOTR and ATR classes.

Here are my thoughts on the situation. Right now, it is common to see junior rider classes in both JTR and JOTR divisions. Many Class A shows and regionals offer both for amateurs (AOTR, ATR, AATR and AAOTR). The trouble is that cross-entering is rarely prohibited, and the result is that we see the same horse and rider combinations going through the gate time and time again. That might create the impression perhaps another split isn’t needed after all, and at big shows, with more than one qualifying round, it can really get repetitive. But correct that one aspect, and each group becomes more manageable and exciting. Now we have a new concept that could add a whole new level of pizzazz to amateur competition, and allow some of the horses that couldn’t show because of ownership in the ring—but only in ATR and JTR

The positive aspects of adding ATR

First, there is the obvious advantage that it keeps the horse active when you can’t ride it—and once in a while, that happens to all of us. Perhaps it’s a time when your family has a fabulous trip planned, right on the dates of a show … or, if you’re a woman, it happens when you are pregnant. We have a young woman in our barn who had her child, but was ready to ride again only a month before Nationals, which, of course, didn’t work. She had to miss Nationals that year. If someone else could have shown it, her horse could have been qualified and ready for her to go in October. Allowing amateurs other than owners to ride keeps the horse in the ring and keeps classes full

Often, as we talked about in the last article, we don’t necessarily buy the right horses at the right time for ourselves. Maybe we get the horse home and find that it will be a year before we’re really ready to ride it, or it is ready for us. If we have been smart and purchased a true amateur horse and not an open horse, our trainer isn’t the best choice to ride it in competition. Maybe we have a friend with more experience who could campaign the horse for us during that learning period. We could still enjoy seeing our horse in competition, learn a little more about the horse, and when we’re ready for it, it is there waiting and ready for us.

Second, having both the AOTR and ATR divisions would increase participation. Include the horses whose owners can’t ride them for whatever reason, and there are more new combinations in the ring. Add to that, some people would choose their division simply because they feel they are best suited for the competition in that group.

Third—and this is important—the crowd would get more involved because it would be seeing an entirely new class. This is one reason why I specify no cross-entering. As it is now, when we have both divisions available, people enter both—with the result that a horse and rider go through the qualifying events (which at a large show might mean more than one class) in both divisions. By the time they get to the finals, the crowd has not only seen the same combinations several times, they have often seen the same combination win. I hate to say it, but from the viewpoint of the general public, that is probably a yawn, and sometimes may not even seem fair.

Another attractive point is that without the same horses in each division, the number of cuts would decrease, making each event newer and fresher.

Picture this extreme example of what is possible now. I’ll use the hunter and English horses—by the time they go to the Nationals, they can do the Junior Owner, the Junior Rider, the Equitation, the UPHA, and in the hunters, there is Junior Owner Equitation and Junior Rider Equitation, Hunt Seat on the Flat, and the USAE Medal. Ultimately, they can go nine times … the same horses, except for hunter equitation, before the same judges. Nine times out of 10, you will see the same champions ride.

Fourth, it would increase sales. Adding an ATR opens a whole new avenue for horses to be shown. For example, those with horses who eventually might become open-caliber can put amateurs on them and get them in the ring. This is particularly true at Scottsdale, which already has ATR western, hunter and country, some of which have age splits.

Scottsdale is a excellent example because it is the biggest marketplace we have for our horses. From December 15 th on, people are here to shop for horses. If they can find the right horses, they want to buy. We could take advantage of those classes! But once again, I have to emphasize that this builds our market only if we keep AOTR and ATR two separate entities, with no cross-entering.

Fifth—of course, an ATR division would allow people who can’t afford a horse to ride and compete. There are many people who devote themselves to Arabians, who work hard for the industry as a whole, but who cannot afford to buy their kids or their wives or whoever a horse. What a way to make someone’s dream come true! It is a way of saying, “You do all this for us. I have this horse I’m not going to show at Nationals or Youth Nationals (whatever fits) this year. You show it!” What a great gift for someone.

Another example of how this helps the cash crunch is what happens when kids are about to go to college. I’m the father of a 17-year-old daughter, and I’m not in a position to supply her with horses as I did when she was younger. I’m looking to her future, and some of the money I spent for her as a child now has to be targeted toward her college. Skyler and I made the choice that when she became a junior in high school, that we wouldn’t be showing for a few years, because I needed to get ready for her college. Now, if I could lease something or assume the horse’s expenses, while at the same time saving for college, that would be different. And I know I’m not alone in this situation—plenty of parents are there with me, wanting to the do the best they can for their children on all fronts.

Sixth, in some cases, an ATR or JTR division could keep our old show horses and national champions in the ring longer. Many of us who have ridden AOTR for years find ourselves with horses that are no longer competitive in our division, but which we don’t want to sell. Guarantee us a JTR division, and we can watch our former partners continue to compete in youth. What about that horse we bought, thinking it would be an adult horse or an open horse, only to find after training that it belongs in the amateur or youth division? Sure, we could sell it, but what if we don’t want to? What if it’s a horse that we’d like to keep for breeding later on?

And one of the greatest benefits of all, from a showing standpoint—how many wonderful open horses win only the one time, and then never come back? Many are owned by people who don’t even ride. They have this expensive horse, and he’s a national champion in open competition. They enjoy watching their horse, but now what? They’re done. Or they have to sell it. ATR or JTR opens the door to “Hey, I can still watch my horse!” How many people who don’t ride own halter horses? How wonderful it would be for a horse to be a national champion in the open ranks and come back as a national champion amateur horse. For owners, it would be a godsend; they could watch their horses continue their show ring careers in different divisions. Winning, say, National Champion Stallion would not mean that the only way you could see that horse in performance would be if he was good enough to go open or if you sold him.

Seventh, with another division, competitors could make even more of their time at nationals. These days, we have seen the Half-Arabian country and the Hunter divisions become so large that many people ride two horses. Wouldn’t it be nice if they had two different titles to win? How great would it be to have two purebred country horses or two Half-Arabian English horses, and show one in the AO and one in the AT? That’s something most people don’t think of. Many have a hunter horse and a western horse, or a purebred and a Half-Arabian; this opens the possibility of having two opportunities to compete in the division that is your favorite.

Overall, I think the introduction of ATR classes will enable us to see better combinations in the show ring. Right now, we have great amateurs on great horses and great amateurs on average horses; allowing amateurs other than owners to ride the great horses will improve the picture overall and give us more competitive classes. They do it at Scottsdale and the numbers are huge. Once again, I add—no cross-entering. On a show by show basis, if a horse is originally entered AOTR, then AOTR it must stay.

Are there reasons not to do it?

There is no issue without a downside, so I tried to think of what would fall into the “con” category. It was hard to come up with I viewed as a serious risk.

One fear I have heard is that having an ATR division would give rise to a group of “professional amateurs”—amateur riders who were so good that they could just get on anyone’s horse and win routinely. Okay, I’ll agree that we have some amateur riders who are so good that they can ride the hair off of anything. But they are good because they have put in their time and done their homework; they are not professional. They go to school, hold down jobs, and otherwise have commitments outside the horse industry, just as any amateur does. And I don’t care how good a rider is—put him (or her) on a lesser horse and you may be able to tell that he is a great rider, but he’s still going to be a great rider on a lesser horse.

I have to go back to one of my basic beliefs: If I’m worried about someone on the back of another horse, I am already our own worst enemy. I need to worry only about how I am riding. When I think about other riders, I should be thinking about what their real strengths are. Why do I think they are better than I am? Do they have a better horse? Do they practice more? Riding against good competition strengthens my own ride—it does not automatically mean that I’m going to get beaten. Another way to put it is that if we beat ourselves before we go into the bring, then yes, we’re going to lose.

In pursuit of getting better, the most useful advice I’ve had came from Ray LaCroix a long time ago. He was watching me go around the ring, nervous, overwhelmed and taking the wrong leads. “You have to start seeing the rides,” he said, “not the trophies.”

One legitimate fear about adding the ATR division is that smaller shows that might have trouble filling classes don’t need a whole new division. I agree. But there is a simple fix. Where there is doubt, make the Amateur classes ATR. Let the qualifying points count toward either AOTR or ATR. Regions 1, 2 and 7 (that I know of) already do this and it works well. If your name is on the horse’s papers, then your points can be applied toward AOTR (or JOTR, if you are a juvenile rider).

And what about at nationals? Does every discipline need dual divisions? Not at this point. Maybe a 16-horse class at the national level does not warrant having both AO and AT. But a 25- or 30-horse class that perhaps is looking at being split could give those people the option.

Why the key is prohibiting cross entering

I have continually emphasized that cross-entering must be prohibited, and that deserves one last mention. Youth Nationals hosts both JOTR and JTR classes. Every year except at the original show (where cross-entering was not allowed), riders and horses have permitted to participate in both classes, with the result is that our time is insane. And for what? We have the same judges for both divisions, and only a handful of riders aren’t in both classes. They win the JO, and they’re right at the top of the hunt for the JT. Eight times out of 10, the champions are the same in both. In any breed of horse, it’s hard to beat the champions; it’s hard to see a National Champion on Thursday and beat them on Friday. It does happen sometimes, but the majority of times it doesn’t

So think about it. Adding ATR opens a lot of doors. It will not result in more classes at nationals, because there will be no cross-entering. Riders must qualify and choose which division is right for them (that alone will cut down on qualifying events). If they want to do both divisions, they can purchase more horses or ride someone else’s.

It’s my belief that we can find a better way to organize amateur competition: one that offers more opportunity and less stress for everyone.

Related Links:

Show Results
Recent Sales
Articles
Calendar