2008 AMHR Nationals Results

[garyo]

Precisely why people need to be sure of their facts before they start on their rampage. All this frustration for a rumor!!!

Matt, this seems to be more then a rumor. If in fact, it was a rumor it was perpetuated by AMHR itself when used as a reason for the Journal being late.

It is totally ridiculous when some owners of horses possibly affected were not notified officially by the registry. Jill and others involved, I feel for you.

Perhaps if both registries were more open and forthcoming about such issues the "rumor mill" would be closed down.

I am interested to see if there will be an official response by AMHR concerning this matter. If I understand correctly the Journal is the official mouthpiece of the registry, so I will be anxiously awaiting future issues of the Journal to see if this matter is addressed.

I do appreciate Belinda responding on this forum to attempt to clear up this matter.

Being one looking from the outside in, it seems as if this may have been a legitimate issue that has simply been swept under the rug.

I find it hard to believe that in this day and age of electronic communications that it is difficult to figure out what horses have been properly qualified. As said before, "it's not rocket science".

Maybe some good will come out of this with both AMHR and owners being more careful in the future.

Gary

 

[ClickMini]

yet we were told in November that they had not qualified

Jill, this is really the question. HOW DID YOU HEAR THEY DIDN'T QUALIFY???

Amy, are you sure this was the case for all horses in question? I appreciate the fact that in your friend's case this may be true, but there was more than one person questioned.

Lisa, I am NOT familiar with all of the situations, but I am familiar with three of the horses that were in question, all in training with my friend.

I can tell you that this particular trainer sits down at the beginning of the season, maps out the qualifying path for all the horses in her barn, notifies the owners that the horses need to go to all of the shows, and that is what is done! She doesn't haul horses to Nationals that aren't qualified! For heck's sake. For people living in the Central region, going to Nationals may be a bit of a haul, but really is just like going to any other big show. But when we go there from Washington state it is three full days of travel. And THOUSANDS of dollars to get a horse there to be shown. I ask you, what owner would pay to send their horses to Nationals with this trainer if they hadn't sent them to the qualifying shows? Also, let's think about this. How do trainers get their money? By taking horses to shows! Why in the world would a trainer keep a horse on their string if the owner didn't want to send them to the shows? It just doesn't make any sense, bottom line.

 

[Jill]

yet we were told in November that they had not qualified

Jill, this is really the question. HOW DID YOU HEAR THEY DIDN'T QUALIFY???

Right now, I'm not naming the source and that is because I'm seriously considering some options.

However, the question really shouldn't be who gave me my facts, but rather why doesn't AMHR to furnish proof of qualification for all horses concerned???

I've never taken a horse to a show and been unable to produce several pieces of evidence to the fact, and that goes for 4H, local open, and registry events. Of course the official show managers do so in their show reports and records as well. If there is proof -- well, why doesn't AMHR say that the horses were qualified and show us the proof, vs. stating that the original placements will stand without reason or explanation (let alone proof that the rules have been followed)?

From my point of view, that is really the reasonable question, Amy.

Precisely why people need to be sure of their facts before they start on their rampage. All this frustration for a rumor!!!

Matt, this seems to be more then a rumor. If in fact, it was a rumor it was perpetuated by AMHR itself when used as a reason for the Journal being late...

Thank you for that excellent point and observation, Gary.

 

[Amy]

QUOTE

Amy, are you sure this was the case for all horses in question? I appreciate the fact that in your friend's case this may be true, but there was more than one person questioned.

Lisa -- this is NOT my post-- I have no friend involved (that I know of) so did not do this quote. Thanks Amy

 

[midnight star stables]

QUOTE Amy, are you sure this was the case for all horses in question? I appreciate the fact that in your friend's case this may be true, but there was more than one person questioned.

Lisa -- this is NOT my post-- I have no friend involved (that I know of) so did not do this quote. Thanks Amy

LOL, Wrong Amy, Amy! LOL, I believe Lisa was directing her post to Amy/Click Mini.

Hope that make more sence.

 

[Amy]

QUOTE Amy, are you sure this was the case for all horses in question? I appreciate the fact that in your friend's case this may be true, but there was more than one person questioned.

Lisa -- this is NOT my post-- I have no friend involved (that I know of) so did not do this quote. Thanks Amy

LOL, Wrong Amy, Amy! LOL, I believe Lisa was directing her post to Amy/Click Mini.

Hope that make more sence.

No -- actually it doesn't make more sense to me since I have had a couple of strange messages regarding things I never said on here-- I "believe' we are to use our forum names on here -- since we could not pick one already in use -- so I have gotten a few comments on things "Amy" has written -- and I knew darn well they were NOT written by me.

I sure did not want any one thinking I knew anything about this mess for sure.

However, Jill also wrote to tell me that it was directed to another amy -- who, I believe should be referred to as clickmini -- that way there would be no confusion.

Amy has been my forum name since I first signed on here.

 

[tagalong]

Matt, this seems to be more then a rumor. If in fact, it was a rumor it was perpetuated by AMHR itself when used as a reason for the Journal being late.

Exactly - that is how it came across to most of us. Not a rumour. And not gossip. More of a Are You Kidding Me Wow They Better Sort This Out kind of thing.

Amy/Clickmini - I expect that if your friend (not that we don't know who you are talking about ) was in Jill's position though all this that they would be equally upset/mystified and looking for answers.

JMO - but I have always felt that in order to qualify for a National Show, you should have placed at a set number of shows previously. Otherwise - it is a walk in the park. No need for placings - no need for anything other than basic attendance.

I attended all my Algebra classes - but that certainly did not qualify this Completely Clueless One to move up to the next level...

 

[~Lisa~]

For both Amys

Not to make light of this but I just read the comments and was like WHOA I didnt say any of that then had to go back and re read and realize they were talking about comments made by a different Lisa..

This is exactly why I gave my kids uncommon names

 

[Amy]

Although it does not STATE that you must win a class or classes to go to the Nationals-- I really wonder how many people put out money to go to the National show with a horse that never won in a class or classes??

I think common sense enters somewhere in the equation as well.

 

[midnight star stables]

For both AmysNot to make light of this but I just read the comments and was like WHOA I didnt say any of that then had to go back and re read and realize they were talking about comments made by a different Lisa..

This is exactly why I gave my kids uncommon names

LOL! Who knew names were so difficult?

Sorry to bug, Amy.

 

[ClickMini]

I definitely do understand why Jill is upset. If I were in her shoes I would be very upset as well! The thing that I am saying, and this is definitely going to be my last post on the matter, is that it should never have been brought to light in the general population there was an inquiry, until the results of the inquiry were final and even then only if the results were negative and the results had been changed.

And Amy, I am sorry if you have received "odd" messages regarding stuff I have posted on the board! I have been a member for an awfully long time now and probably a good number of people know who I am in real life.

 

[Jean_B]

There is a master list of entered horses compiled by the show manager at every show. That list is part of the results included in the packet the show manager sends in to the show department at the home office - which must be sent in within 30 days of the show. That list includes every horse that ENTERS the show whether it places or not.
Not published, but available to the home office so they can verify.

Was NOT going to post on this topic at all....but thought I should point out....that as far as verifying whether or not a horse SHOWS at a show...the Master List is virtually WORTHLESS. All it does is verify whether or not a horse was on the showgrounds and whether or not it was measured and/or its previous show measurement recorded. Heck - in fact....that horse does NOT even have to be ON the show grounds if it was measured in the recent past!! All you need to do is show the steward your height card and the horse's papers - and it gets logged in as being there!!!!!!

It does NOT verify if in fact that horse entered the arena and was judged. I myself have brought a horse, had it measured, and then due to whatever, decided not to take that horse into the arena for any of its classes.

Was that horse on the Master List? Yes. Does it meet the requirement of having been judged? NO!

 

[Belinda]

Thank you Jean, I was working on that for my next post..!!! And everything you said is right on Target,

 

[Littleum]

There is a master list of entered horses compiled by the show manager at every show. That list is part of the results included in the packet the show manager sends in to the show department at the home office - which must be sent in within 30 days of the show. That list includes every horse that ENTERS the show whether it places or not.
Not published, but available to the home office so they can verify.

Was NOT going to post on this topic at all....but thought I should point out....that as far as verifying whether or not a horse SHOWS at a show...the Master List is virtually WORTHLESS. All it does is verify whether or not a horse was on the showgrounds and whether or not it was measured and/or its previous show measurement recorded. Heck - in fact....that horse does NOT even have to be ON the show grounds if it was measured in the recent past!! All you need to do is show the steward your height card and the horse's papers - and it gets logged in as being there!!!!!!

This is terrible.

No, really. This is TERRIBLE. My jaw just hit the floor. Then I burst out laughing.

Is this true? AMHR has no actual controls in place to verify that a horse was actually SHOWN under 4 judges? Really? Tell me I've missed something.

 

[LaVern]

For what we pay our computer guy and our promotion person they could take a note book to all the shows and write all the horses names down. WalMart sells paper note books and pencils really cheap.

 

[JMS Miniatures]

Then perhaps it should be changed that a horse MUST place to count going to Nationals. Same way to qualify but you must place. Doesn't matter in which class.

Cause if the master list doesn't mean squat then how do the show staff know if the horse was shown or not?

All I can say and it looks like their needs to be some change. Not some drastic change but some way to make it easier to understand.

Amy (clickmini) perhaps you should invite your friend and let her tell her side of the story.

 

[Russ]

I would tend to agree BUT here's something to consider.......will this effect the number of people/horses that actually end up going to Tulsa? Meaning, those who don't place at their qualifying local shows can't take a horse to nationals in the suggested senario?

I would hate to see the registry lose that potential income(if they want to go to nationals)....especially in these hard times. If someone has the money to get their horse to nationals.....even though it may not be a placer at the local level but is qualified under the 4 judge rule....who am I to deney their dream.

Also if you narrow it down to those only placing at a local show to qualify for nationals.....will we still have a 1,600+ horse count at nationals?

Trying to keep things business minded here...to keep a profitable show.....but yet a balance to keep things just and fair. A tough task, but as a strong registry we can do it!

I am not criticizing anyone for coming up with ideas to fix this from ever happening again....we need to band together and come up with a solution to fix this loop hole. If the only solution to fix this is by placing at a local show and qualifying under the set number of required judges...then I am behind the registry supporting it.

My heart goes out to those affected.....I feel very, very bad for you. Especially Jill.

I'd like to add a thank you to JeanB and her above post.......that was very helpful for all of us to see.

Then perhaps it should be changed that a horse MUST place to count going to Nationals. Same way to qualify but you must place. Doesn't matter in which class.

 

[Littleum]

I would hate to see the registry lose that potential income(if they want to go to nationals)....especially in these hard times. Also if you narrow it down to those only placing at a local show to qualify for nationals.....will we still have a 1,600+ horse count at nationals?

Trying to keep things business minded here...to keep a profitable show.....but yet a balance to keep things just and fair. A tough task, but as a strong registry we can do it!

That gets into an entirely different area of "should AMHR's qualification procedure be changed"....

Requiring a horse to ribbon might not actually solve the issue. If AMHR only maintains show records in relation to HoF points, and lesser placings get purged (ie, 5th out of 6) then the issue still exists. "Well, my horse showed and stood 5th out of 5" who's to say otherwise? No paper trail. Same problem, different day.

Until AMHR answers the question of "How will we handle our qualification data?" there's no point in changing the qualification process. A data integrity issue still exists.

One potential solution is actually somewhat in place and can use existing resources. At many shows there is a "gate manager" with an entrant list for each class. As the entries go in, they're checked off. Presto: entrant was confirmed by show staff to have entered the ring at least once. Now handling the data from here is a little bit murky but at least now there is an official record of the horse actually having entered the ring.

 

[littlearab]

I am off my soap box .. and I have a big flame suit on so fire away .. But remember We are ALL HUMAN and sometimes there are errors or mistakes if you wish to call it that .. [/size]

This is not meant as a flame, just a reply.

Too bad for the other guy who found the mistake HIMSELF,( showed a horse under the wrong papers by mistake and asked AMHR how to make it right) they did not see it a a simple mistake. But then again he was not a good ol boy was he??

I also so do not know why it has to done behind closed doors. And the people involed aren't even be told what was said or done on thier own case,even when they are right out side the door.

Not a flame mind you just a few ????s

 

[Minimor]

IF AMHR posts its show results promptly, the lesser placings are there for all to see...and if we can access the site & see who placed where in each class (can't remember if the non-placing horses are also listed on the AMHR site?) then certainly AMHR has access to those placings and can see which horses did actually show. Horsestudbook also lists all horses in the class--though I cannot say for sure if the listed horses are those entered, or those that actually went into the class and were judged.

I'm afraid that I do not see why AMHR can't make it a rule--as someone mentioned earlier--that if you want to have a sanctioned show then you MUST use the horsestudbook program. Then every show is using the same system, and it should be easy for office staff to verify entries prior to Nationals. Surely every show committee has at least one person that has access to a laptop and has the knowledge to figure out the program?