BSJA Amateur Classes

N

nokia

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 May 2007
Messages
627
Visit site
an amateur is understood to be someone who does something without pay or formal training ,a professional is someone who has received training in a particular area and who also makes a living from it.

The word amature comes from French, and can be translated as "lover of", reflecting the amateur's motivation to work as a result of a love or passion for a particular activity.

This seems very straight forward to me, so i can not understand why the bsja allows people to jump in this class who are on horses owned , ridden and currently jumping Internationally. And recently an amature class locally to me was won by a chap who has his own yard, rides horses for owners, deals horses and trains riders so how can he be an amature ?

What does everybody else think about these classes, is it just me missing something ?
 
The amateur classes have restrictions on riders appearing in the Top450 ranking list for the lower classes, and the top250 for the bigger classes. If your rider was any good, surely they would be ranked and therefore unable to compete in these classes.

You are making a fair point, but if the rider does not appear in the "List" then they still qualify as an amateur.
 
I agree but I think it would be very hard to strictly enforce the "amateur" definition - isn't it not to be ranked higher than XXX on a particular BSJA rider ranking list at the moment?

I compete BSJA and am amazed at the amount of people that I know work in jumping yards and compete for a living that the BSJA still define as amateur and so are eligible for the classes.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The amateur classes have restrictions on riders appearing in the Top450 ranking list for the lower classes, and the top250 for the bigger classes. If your rider was any good, surely they would be ranked and therefore unable to compete in these classes.

You are making a fair point, but if the rider does not appear in the "List" then they still qualify as an amateur.

[/ QUOTE ]

But calling them "amateur" is not strictly true. An awful lot of people who compete in these classes are not amateurs as they make their living riding/competing/dealing in showjumpers.
 
but the questions is where do you draw the pro/am line? If you are saying makes a living from horses then you will have to include farriers, vets, feed salepersons, saddlery owners etc etc etc all as professionals even if they can barely ride a leg of a horse. It would be far too hard to prove, regulate and police a policy of pros are those who make their living thruogh ridnig horses (as surely that should be the defining qualification) as the vast majority would claim they make their living selling horses or training others which does not qualify you as being able to ride. I know several dealers who can't ride a leg of a horse but they are a good salesperson and employ good riders to show off/ride the horses on their behalf. This is why BD won't take the pro/am stance and why in the US there is a big hoo ha as they do use the pro/am split.

At the end of the day you can't please everyone and personally currently I think the rankings list is the best way of pleasing the majority. Maybe restrict horses in the rankings lists as well as riders might be a good option?!
 
[ QUOTE ]
At the end of the day you can't please everyone and personally currently I think the rankings list is the best way of pleasing the majority. Maybe restrict horses in the rankings lists as well as riders might be a good option?!

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are completely right the horses should be restricted to !! look at towerlands the other week when dopey nuts on ben mahers speed derby horse one the amatuers there !! ok she is an amatuer but the horse certainly isnt !!
 
[ QUOTE ]
look at towerlands the other week when dopey nuts on ben mahers speed derby horse one the amatuers there

[/ QUOTE ]
shocked.gif
shocked.gif
shocked.gif
shocked.gif
grin.gif
grin.gif
 
I couldnt agree more, I think the horses need restricting to.

I am a "true" amatuer that has 2 competition horses of my own, works full time in an accounts job and enjoys going BSJA at the weekends as my hobby. Neither of my horses are going to be superstars but they will jump a decent size track.
I avoid the amatuer classes now as fed up with seeing people jumping them to win when really they shoudnt be in the class.
 
I think that the rankings list are the fairest way to split the riders. If they made it any lower than 250 in the bigger classes there wouldn't be enough people to jump in them, as it is the 1.20 is a direct qualifier. To be in the top 450 all you need to have done is to be placed in one 1.25 class on a Grade A.

I don't agree with limiting horses as it gives a horse a job when it can no longer compete at the highest level.
 
Ah but the rankings list are the previous 6 months arn't they? therefore a Grade A which has not been placed in a 1m25+ within 6 months would therefore be egliable.

I don't think it is a stretch that a Grade A in the top 250 or 450 (which realistically almost all would be ridden by a rider in top 250) should have a period of 6-12 months in which it must wait till being egliable to jump under 1m20 do you?
 
I don't see the problem personally
tongue.gif


There are enough fast horses with competent riders on their backs that aren't ex-speed derby winners or pro-riders to contend with that the (very) few who do push the boundaries are not worth worrying about imo.

To clarify too, the 'Amateur' classes being talked about here (at Towerlands CSI2*) weren't exactly your average National Amateur qualifiers. The Amateur GP carried a £1500 prize fund and was (from memory) 1.25m in the first round.

What you must remember is that on the international circuit there are CSI-A classes (Amateur classes) that run alongside other CSI's and they usually start at 1.20m and go up from there. The Towerlands AM classes need to be viewed in that context.
 
I think the definition is fine

If you buy a horse that has won a fair bit, you be stuck on classes you can compete in.

I work full time, but I can compete in both the progressive schedule and amateurs.

Amateurs are harder to win due to nippy smaller horses, but I still qualified my fatty for the final (he only has £3 notional winnings to his name.....)
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
look at towerlands the other week when dopey nuts on ben mahers speed derby horse one the amatuers there

[/ QUOTE ]
shocked.gif
shocked.gif
shocked.gif
shocked.gif
grin.gif
grin.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Dont ask !!
 
when u have an international horse there are very few people that will jump amateurs as theres not much money compared to what they could win else where. ive just come back from the amateur championships 2 days ago and there was no-one there i knew-the most faamous horse i saw was daniel nielson's late ride micklow madness, ridden by his neice laura ( i think?) but that was all i really recognised
 
I've jumped a few Amateurs and not had any problems with "pro's" beating everyone. Probably half the classes are made up of people who are dealers and make their sole-living off horses. However, I still think they're amateurs because just because someone deals in horses doesn't mean they can jump well IMO!

I think the only way the BSJA could possibly run these classes is by doing the top 450 / 250 lists. An "amateur" is different in the BSJA world.

I don't see why it's a huge problem letting amateurs ride top horses (although I thought only Grade C's could do amateur classes?) because it doesn't mean they can ride them well :P
 
As per my post above...this was not your average Amateur Class.

BTW...Mercurius was far from being the scopiest horse jumping the Am classes that weekend. Give Me Remus was there too (placed 2nd in the Hickstead Derby proper from memory) and another horse that has jumped Super League AND was on the reserve list for the Dutch Olympic team at Athens
blush.gif
The key point is they were all ridden by amateurs as defined in the rules of the competition.

Let's not forget, these horses may be bl**dy good...but they still have to be ridden. I'm sure many of us could get them round, and probably a fair few would get them round clear...but to get them round clear AND fast enough to win or get placed is still one hell of n achievement.

If I can use the analogy of Richard Hammond driving the F1 car on Top Gear on sunday i'm sure many of you will understand the point i'm trying to make
tongue.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
As per my post above...this was not your average Amateur Class.

BTW...Mercurius was far from being the scopiest horse jumping the Am classes that weekend. Give Me Remus was there too (placed 2nd in the Hickstead Derby proper from memory) and another horse that has jumped Super League AND was on the reserve list for the Dutch Olympic team at Athens
blush.gif
The key point is they were all ridden by amateurs as defined in the rules of the competition.

Let's not forget, these horses may be bl**dy good...but they still have to be ridden. I'm sure many of us could get them round, and probably a fair few would get them round clear...but to get them round clear AND fast enough to win or get placed is still one hell of n achievement.

If I can use the analogy of Richard Hammond driving the F1 car on Top Gear on sunday i'm sure many of you will understand the point i'm trying to make
tongue.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

yea but not all of us have the opportunity to have a horse like that do we - us poor amatuers could never afford a horse that good !!! anyway I wont and cant say what i really think so i wont !!!
 
I think it makes it more fun. Imagine if you beat it, then you can say you beat {insert amazing horses name here}!

IMO, you're all on equal ground. Your horse is capable of winning the class, as is theirs. In fact Id think that the pro horses would be MORE likely to knock a pole because the courses must be so small compared to what they're normally used to!
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As per my post above...this was not your average Amateur Class.

BTW...Mercurius was far from being the scopiest horse jumping the Am classes that weekend. Give Me Remus was there too (placed 2nd in the Hickstead Derby proper from memory) and another horse that has jumped Super League AND was on the reserve list for the Dutch Olympic team at Athens
blush.gif
The key point is they were all ridden by amateurs as defined in the rules of the competition.

Let's not forget, these horses may be bl**dy good...but they still have to be ridden. I'm sure many of us could get them round, and probably a fair few would get them round clear...but to get them round clear AND fast enough to win or get placed is still one hell of n achievement.

If I can use the analogy of Richard Hammond driving the F1 car on Top Gear on sunday i'm sure many of you will understand the point i'm trying to make
tongue.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

yea but not all of us have the opportunity to have a horse like that do we - us poor amatuers could never afford a horse that good !!! anyway I wont and cant say what i really think so i wont !!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually the ex-nations cup horse is owned and ridden by someone who certainly doesn't have unlimited funds...she just happens to be bl**dy good...I know because I compete against her regularly.

I think you just have a case of sour grapes tbh. Get over it is all I would say as our sport is riddled with rich people buying success. You can't and won't change it...
 
The only amateur result I have ever disagreed with is when Geoff Billington was placed 3rd in the Amateur class at Scope - ha ha that he got beaten. This was again about 1.30, so not a class for 'normal' people but I think that if you have jumped at the Olympics you shouldn't be jumping in Amateur classes - although of course that was what the Olympics were orignally aimed at - Amateur Riders.

If you want to jump Vetrans I don't think you are allowed to have competed in a 1.30 (might be 1.35) in the same year
 
I think they have made huge improvements restricting those who have appeared on teams. I do not have a problem with it.
 
" I think you just have a case of sour grapes tbh. Get over it is all I would say as our sport is riddled with rich people buying success. You can't and won't change it...

I am sorry but we are having a light hearted chat about these classes, and i think the above comment is very Unnecessary, i havent got sour grapes at all, i was just intrested in peoples comments.
 
[ QUOTE ]
" I think you just have a case of sour grapes tbh. Get over it is all I would say as our sport is riddled with rich people buying success. You can't and won't change it...

I am sorry but we are having a light hearted chat about these classes, and i think the above comment is very Unnecessary, i havent got sour grapes at all, i was just intrested in peoples comments.

[/ QUOTE ]

My reply was to StaceyTanglewood, not you, and I believe her comment warranted it.
 
[ QUOTE ]
yea but not all of us have the opportunity to have a horse like that do we - us poor amatuers could never afford a horse that good !!! anyway I wont and cant say what i really think so i wont !!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Rubbish - go to a sale and buy a decent youngster, then invest years training it. Your horse doesn't have to cost a fortune to be good and in SJ its not all about breeding though (although 'careful by insane jumper' lines help)
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As per my post above...this was not your average Amateur Class.

BTW...Mercurius was far from being the scopiest horse jumping the Am classes that weekend. Give Me Remus was there too (placed 2nd in the Hickstead Derby proper from memory) and another horse that has jumped Super League AND was on the reserve list for the Dutch Olympic team at Athens
blush.gif
The key point is they were all ridden by amateurs as defined in the rules of the competition.

Let's not forget, these horses may be bl**dy good...but they still have to be ridden. I'm sure many of us could get them round, and probably a fair few would get them round clear...but to get them round clear AND fast enough to win or get placed is still one hell of n achievement.

If I can use the analogy of Richard Hammond driving the F1 car on Top Gear on sunday i'm sure many of you will understand the point i'm trying to make
tongue.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

yea but not all of us have the opportunity to have a horse like that do we - us poor amatuers could never afford a horse that good !!! anyway I wont and cant say what i really think so i wont !!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually the ex-nations cup horse is owned and ridden by someone who certainly doesn't have unlimited funds...she just happens to be bl**dy good...I know because I compete against her regularly.

I think you just have a case of sour grapes tbh. Get over it is all I would say as our sport is riddled with rich people buying success. You can't and won't change it...

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm excuse me why would i be jealous of someone like that ???? I wouldnt want to be anything like her for all the money in the world !!!

what i have against her is nothing to do with who she rides or what she wins it is just a good example of someone winning an amatuer competition but having a good horse behind them !!
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
yea but not all of us have the opportunity to have a horse like that do we - us poor amatuers could never afford a horse that good !!! anyway I wont and cant say what i really think so i wont !!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Rubbish - go to a sale and buy a decent youngster, then invest years training it. Your horse doesn't have to cost a fortune to be good and in SJ its not all about breeding though (although 'careful by insane jumper' lines help)

[/ QUOTE ]

and if i was a proffessional that is what i would do unforunately an amatuer is someone who does it for fun not someone out to have a grand prix horse and when my youngster does get to that level i will ask someone else to ride them for me !!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top