I can't possibly compete with the trainer who should be a plumber.

In the last post I wrote - Taxes and Horse Show Handicaps - The Middle Class Gets Screwed. I discussed 2 criteria for many current handicaps and their flaws, even though I listed 3.  

1. What a person does for a living 
2. How successful a rider has been in the past
3. How successful a horse has been in the past

Today I will share my opinion on a handicap system using what a person does for a living as a way of leveling the playing field.

First my opinion, then the reasoning will follow

It is the most asinine handicap system ever developed. 

Now that is off my chest I will explain my reasoning why:

• What occupation a person decides to pursue, has nothing to do with their ability to train and show horses.
• What occupation a person decides to pursue, has nothing to do with their ability to learn how  to train and show horses.
• The only 2 things that have an affect on a persons ability to learn how to train and show horses; is their access to good coaching, and the time they can allocate to learning. 

This distinction of Non pro or amateur is designed to benefit a few. 
Unfortunately those few have convinced many that it is, the full time plumbers that decide to take peoples money to train horses part time that has the advantage.

Where is the logic in this thinking?

• If a plumber decides to take money for training a horse in the evening, he is an open rider.
• If a person who is financially able to ride most of the day and spends a majority of their time learning the craft of showing and training, but does not train horses for money, they are a non pro?

At best the concept of a non pro / amatuer is a marketing ploy for a sport with a poor handicap system.

"You will have to compete against 

million dollar horses and million dollar riders" 

BUT - 

"You will not have to compete against 

plumbers who claim to be horse trainers"

The need for an amateur division, stems from the concept, If you do not get paid, you can't be as good as those that do.  

There are many examples of this not being the case, this year the top non pro Reiner in the world is representing her country at the World Equestrian games? She is not the first non pro reiner to do so either, very often many of the riders representing their countries in international events are non pros. 

How can they possibly be good enough to beat

 all of those people who charge for training a horse? 

The funniest thing for me is that whenever someone suggests getting rid of the Non pro system and replacing it with a handicap system based solely on success in the show pen, many non pros say "heck no we can't possibly beat that plumber!"

Very often frustration erupts when  the less successful non pro realize that to win the big prizes, riders with only a few thousand in earnings won have to compete against the non pros with a million and half million dollar earnings.

This soon leads to more foolish suggestions of needing to limit the amount of money a non pro can win, this makes no sense. 

If a person was to suggest that a non pro can not win X amount of money against open riders, that would make sense. 
If someone suggested that placing in the medals at an open international competition would disqualify someone from the non pro ranks that would make sense. 
BUT suggesting they can't win X amount as a non pro makes no sense, when most of their earning are against other non pros and not open riders.

At this point in the discussion, you have to ignore the irony if you want to keep from laughing in the face of people who support this Non Pro concept.
A non professional being able to win that much money, and still claim they are NOT doing it for the money?

Then there are the suggestions that a trainers spouse shouldn't be a non pro? Lets review quickly.

The 2 best criteria to handicap a judged equine event are:

1. Horsepower 
2. The ability of the rider

• Time and access to good teachers is all that is needed to gain rider ability. 
• Access to money to pay good trainers or buy horses is all thats needed for acquiring better horsepower. 

Being a trainers spouse only guarantees access to one trainer, not the amount of time they have to ride, or the caliber of horse they get to show.

The other day I had the chance to ask a top non pros Father a question, his answer was interesting.  

My question was -  "What are people going to say now that your daughter has proven a non pro can beat the best in the world?" Referring to other Non pros who are always suggesting she is to good to be a non pro, and proposing rule changes to kick her out of non pro and into the open ranks.

His answer was - "She still needed the horse"

He didn't mention any of these other things that are used to defend the non pro system: 

• She is freakishly talented for a person who does not get paid for training horses.
• She is lucky to have access to great help - married to a million dollar trainer and daughter of a million dollar trainer 
• She has lots of time to practice and perfect her skills - works for the family business, but does not train horses herself. 
• She can ride as much as she needs to in order to stay on top.  - Works for the family horse training and breeding business.

Nope none of those reasons just she needed the horse?

Is it any wonder people in her position or similar positions are dominating the Non pro division?

• They have the time needed to get better
• They have access to many good trainers that help them get better 
• They do not need to charge for training to make a living
• They have access to many great horses

I am not saying they are cheating, they are just using the system to their benefit. 
I am not saying they should be kicked out of the Non pro when they won so much money either. I mentioned earlier why setting a limit on how much a non pro can win is wrong.
 
What I am saying is the Non pro system needs to go the way of the dodo bird. 

The Non pro system hurts growth as well

If a person is going to make a living training and coaching horses and riders, they have to charge a certain amount to make the venture viable and make a living.

If a plumber or horseshoer wants to train a few horses part time they do not need to charge as much to make a living. 

A Non pro system discourages those plumbers and horseshoers from training and coaching part time. The promise of easier competition in the show pen if they do not train and coach part time and become a non pro is a powerful incentive not to help others.

By using a non pro handicap:

1. We remove less expensive options for the help people need to enjoy an event.   
2. We do not allow this part time trainer to make a few extra  bucks which they will most likely spend on;

• Entries 
• Horses 
• Lessons from better coaches and trainers. 

They may even decide to become a full time coach and trainer after they build a clientele and has some success.

The Non pro system benefits 3 groups of people, the full time trainers, and professional non pros (people who make a living wage - breeding, training and showing their own horses) and mailbox millionaires.

1. Having a Non Pro systems takes part time competition away from the full time trainers. 
2. A Non Pro system allows the people who are in a financial position to spend all the time and money they want on improving as trainers and show persons to compete against those that can not spend the same money and time.
3. A non pro system allows a person who is capable of winning often by training and showing their own horses - to compete against others who do not win often, and have to pay someone to train their horse and coach them in showing.

This hurts the growth of the industry by :

1. Offering fewer less costly options for new people to learn the events ins and outs.   
2. Discouraging people who spend all their extra cash showing from making a few extra bucks from helping people.
3. Making the sport seem really elitists, when trainers and their wives and millionaire owners seem to win everything. 

Those people mentioned in number 3 above, would still win and do well under what ever handicap system is used.

So why have a system that does nothing to level the playing field, and causes less options for growth, and even discourages many from trying?

Thanks for sharing your time with me,

Rod