amateur or shamateur?

​I have already written on my thoughts on amateur riders and since then Patrick Mullins, I believe, has proved my point. Yet the more I consider the debate – it is a debate taking place in my head, not in the pages of the Racing Post – the more the differential between amateur and professional perplexes me. The whole thing with ‘amateur’ is that an amateur was always considered a gentleman, hence he is Mr. Bojangle, for example, whereas the professional was referred to by stewards as, Smith, Jones or Bojangle. John Francome took a stand against being referred to by his surname and would only reply to officialdom if addressed by his first name.
In earlier times, races were restricted to gentleman riders and anyone thought not a gentleman was looked down on. Indeed, if it were ‘proved’ that a winning rider was not considered a gentleman in society, disqualification was the order of the day.
Those days, of course, are, thankfully, long gone. Times change, the definition of ‘gentleman’ is no longer only ‘a man belonging to the landed gentry or nobility’ but also any man who is chivalrous, well-mannered and  honourable. Anyone who took part in sport was barred from earning money from his sporting endeavours. I would suggest that someone riding as an amateur receiving no fee is not in any sense an amateur if he or she earns their living from working at a professional racing stable and working alongside professional jockeys to whom he or she is considered equal in all respects.

At the advent of National Hunt, all jockeys were amateurs. Then the servants of owner/trainers were given the responsibility of riding in steeplechases, which led to some riders proving as capable as the leading amateurs, which eventually led to where we are now, with professional riders outnumbering amateurs on our racecourses.
I doubt if anyone would argue that Patrick Mullins and Derek O’Connor, to name but two of today’s leading amateur riders, are as competent in the saddle as the majority of professionals. In fact, to label either of them ‘amateur riders’ is almost derogatory given their level of professionalism and horsemanship. So why do we define riders as amateurs or professionals? Surely this is out-dated, a throw-back to an age long gone.
Due to the restrictions of his Irish riding licence Patrick Mullins is limited to less than two-dozen rides against professionals in any one season. This to me seems unfair, discriminatory, and perhaps a restraint of trade.
I believe all jockeys should be described under one heading, be that as rider or jockey, with the restrictions on their riding licence determining the type of race they can ride in.
For instance: I would have five categories of riding licence. Category 1 would allow someone to ride only in point-to-points. Category 2 would allow the licence-holder to ride in point-to-points, hunter chases and bumpers. Category 3 would allow the licence-holder to ride in all of the above, plus what are presently known as conditional/opportunity races. Category 4 licence-holders would be allowed to ride in all races outside of the defined National Hunt Championship races and the Aintree National. A Category 5 licence-holder would be able to ride in all races on a racecourse, and in point-to-points, except races restricted to conditional/opportunity riders. 
If this system was in place today, the likes of Patrick Mullins and Derek O’Connor would qualify to be category 5 licence-holders. O’Connor would still be able to ride in point-to-points and Mullins would still be able to ride in bumpers. If bumpers in Ireland were still to remain the domain of ‘amateurs’ or category 2 licence-holders as I would term those riders, perhaps a category 5 licence-holder would not be permitted a fee for riding in such races.
It seems unfair and invidious that ‘amateurs’ can ride in the same races as ‘professionals’, take the same risks, risk the same life-threatening injuries, and can display the same ability in the saddle, yet not receive a fee for their efforts, and in the case of Mullins and O’Connor do not have the benefit of claiming an allowance even though they are ‘amateurs’ in a professional sport.
We have grown-up with the concept of amateurs in our sport. We accept the concept, even though it has grown increasingly absurd to believe our top ‘amateur’ riders are anything but professional. Not that long ago someone working full-time for a trainer, as is the case with Patrick Mullins, would be considered professional and would not have been allowed to purport to be amateur. I would argue that Patrick Mullins is every bit as professional as Paul Townend and Danny Mullins and that he earns his living from working alongside them in a professional sport. The concept of ‘amateur’ should not be redefined but erased.