New BE Championship rules esp GR

I agree about the terms amateur and having watched this debate in the USA it self regulates so people cannot get away with cheating. Yes the poor tack shop owner might be at a disadvantage as technically would be classed as earning a living from horses but with any parameters there will be people who fit or do not fit.

Sara Mayberry? was the lady on the grey?
 
BeckyD said:
That, I think, is the issue. I would say that people aspiring beyond BE100 are getting beyond the grass roots of the sport. Grass roots means exactly start - roots. i.e. bottom levels. I support Kerilli's view, that people who have bigger ambitions should really be leaving the GR to those people for whom that in and of itself, is the end goal. The fact that there is a big void in the middle echelons isn't the GR riders' fault, and I do think something needs to be done to give the good amateur (competing at Novice/Int) something realistic to aim for.
Click to expand...

This sums up my view too.

Whilst I think that there is probably a bit of a gap for the "inbetweeners" - I don't think GR is where they belong.

GR IMO is for those who will never go up through the levels - who have no ambitions beyond BE90/100 - its something to aim for if you can't /won't aim 'upwards.'

Even if you're not currently riding at Intermediate, if you have aspirations to do so, or have done so - then GR is not the place for you IMO. It should be the end goal, not a nice box to check off along the way on your young horse.

There probably should be something more accessible for the inbetween riders - though I think for me aiming at improving my own placings and doing well in each class would be enough.
 
MillbrookSong said:
I agree witn most point of this but what about the horse that are no longer able to go higher than novice but are owned by a rider who has done a few int - none with placings or points?
Click to expand...
That rider is not really grass roots? If they've done a few intermediates, that would kind of imply they've competed at a higher than average level, so should probably leave the GR champs to those who see them as the pinnacle of their eventing career.
 
hello

my horse has qualified for the grassroots regional final but I did intermediate - very badly - in 2002. Am i now in-eligible??

shame really as that was the end of my old horses career and i 2 kids later i am just playing around with a homebred with much lesser ambitions

ally
 
Gamebird said:
No, you're getting amateur and GR confused again!

For Amateur you have to go back to the dictionary definition and open it only to people who do not make their living (or the major proportion of it) from riding horses. It will upset some people, but every definition will (by definition! ;)). The BSJA (just about) manage to run amateur qualifiers on those lines so why can BE?

If the amateur has competed at 4* then so long as they are truly an amateur by whichever definition you set they should be eligible for Nov Am Champs. No cutoffs on level reached or achievement at X level, just on whether or not it is how they make their living, full stop.

People will now jump up and complain that it is difficult to define and whine that they'd be cut out but if you want to have a 'Novice Amateur Championships' that's how it should be.
Click to expand...

only_me has made exactly the point i was going to - Heinrich Romeike is an 'amateur' by your definition - but would you be happy to be competing against a rider of his skill at an 'amateur champs'? surely it is about the playing field being levelled in terms of the skill of the riders you are competing against, rather than some indeterminable pro/am separation - the pro/amateur line has always been impossibly difficult to draw fairly and decisively, so i think it would be far fairer to say it should go on what a rider has achieved already, be it completion at Int or Adv or at 3* or 4*, say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top