# British field trials?



## John Lash (Sep 19, 2006)

Just curious. I know little about them. I've seen videos of people hunting with them and little snippets of trials.
Dogs sitting at heel, the judge picks a dog to retrieve. What are the other requirements? Is a dog ever judged on a double or triple?
Can you handle on a mark? Is there ever a series with only blinds?


----------



## kennel maiden (Jun 11, 2012)

John Lash said:


> Just curious. I know little about them. I've seen videos of people hunting with them and little snippets of trials.
> Dogs sitting at heel, the judge picks a dog to retrieve. What are the other requirements? Is a dog ever judged on a double or triple?
> Can you handle on a mark? Is there ever a series with only blinds?


I'm not sure if you want an answer on British Trials based on British Trials in UK, or if you are talking about them in an American context? But I can give you an answer from a British perspective from UK.

Yes, dogs when they are under the judges are off lead at heel, either walking up or sitting in a drive. Each pair of judges judges a pair of dogs, and the dogs are run in numerical order, so there is a strict procedure as to who gets which retrieve. The judge doesn't just select. 

The trials are governed by rules/regulations laid out by the kennel club. You can read more here. http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/media/49562/ftregs.pdf
This tells you about procedure, rules and also describes some of the eliminating faults, major faults and credit points that the dog is measured against.

Because the trials are run on live shoot days, what each dog gets is completely unpredictable/random. There is nothing set up, and no two retrieves will be the same. For example, one dog might get a nice mark on a [email protected] bird, whereas the next might get a blind retrieve down the line on a hare. Yes, you can handle on a mark, but because each retrieve is looked at individually you will be judged accordingly. Some 'marks' are sometimes unmarkable, for the dog (due to terrain, several birds being shot at once, height of cover etc) .... lots of handling on a straightforward mark would be penalised, but on a tricky delayed mark with other factors some handling, as long as it is kept neat/tight, is acceptable. Again, it is very hard to generalise. You have to look at each scenario and judge accordingly.

Normally on a FT, the dog is only sent for one retrieve, and then it is the turn of that dog's partner to retrieve. So each dog is not sent for two or more retrieves consecutively, unless the 'partner' dog fails, and then the other dog performs an 'eye wipe' and then they will have another retrieve straight after, as 'their' retrieve.... confused yet?!!.... it is a bit complicated! (refer to J regs)

"is there ever a series with only blinds?" - theoretically you could end up with only blinds in a trial, or only marks, but in practise it is unlikely. You usually get a mixture, but sometimes you may have more of one than another. And the judges would want to see that a dog is fully tested in all areas, so they would try to make sure, where possible, towards the end of the stake that they had seen enough for that dog to have been completely tested and win. But sometimes you have to just work with what you have. In a driven stake, for example, it is likely that the majority of your retrieves are going to be cold blinds, often some time (an hour or more) after the birds have been shot. There is not so much opportunity for testing a dog's marking skills in a driven stake. Unless you can send it for a retrieve during the drive, which is not normally done, unless in the case of runners. 

Happy to answer any other questions you may have. Hope that helps.


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

John,

This is a brief description of what happens at a UK Retriever Field Trial: it's a cut 'n paste job from an old piece on Eric Begbies' site, written by my friend Jeff Boston an FT judge. I've deleted the bits about Spaniels and Pointers, and tidied up some other stuff. 

"In contrast to a US Trial, UK FT's are conducted on (as near as possible) a normal shooting day, nothing is set up, staged or artificial, so the concept of "series" that test for certain specific skills is unknown; as a handler in an FT you never know in advance what you will be asked to retrieve or from where. Many times the dog can be sent for a retrieve, flushing unshot game on the way out and back which the dog is expected to ignore. The dog is also expected to walk in a line of maybe six dogs, 3-4 judges, 6-8 guns, stewards and game carriers, at heel, off lead, while birds are flushed and shot also to sit quietly while another dog is working, *all without commands*. At a drive (as opposed to a walk-up) the dogs will sit quietly in the line while scores of birds are flushed by the beaters over the dogs and the guns in the line, many birds will fall some dead some wounded and flapping and some will get up and run, all of which can happen within a few yards of the sitting dogs. The three most crucial elements for a UK gundog are *gamefinding steadiness and obedience.*

In the UK our dogs are never expected to retrieve from 400 yards, multi entry, multi-point water blind etc. etc. This is not what UK gundog work is all about. The dogs are judged on their natural gamefinding abilities plus their response to their handler, on actual work in the shooting field. Dogs are trained to work in an entirely natural environment although 250 yard retrieves are not uncommon. In a UK walked-up Field Trial the birds are retrieved as they are shot. You could be asked to do a blind retrieve of snipe from a swamp for which you would be given a approximate guide as to the area, or a pheasant runner out of sight in dense woods, perhaps a wounded hare deep in a valley thick with bramble, maybe a small grouse from acres of gorse/heather covered moorland, geese or duck from lakes or rivers.

In UK trials, as well as being 'in-line' for long periods of time, the dog will be kept on the lead with the handler during the course of the day rather than in the truck. Therefore a dog could be on the lead for a couple of hours waiting to go in line while all around it game is being shot and seen to fall. The dog has to have the right temperament and training to be able to cope with this and then go 'in-line' and remain quiet and steady. When on the lead the dogs are not being technically judged, but they are still expected to remain quiet and not receive harsh corrections from their handler. Believe me, there can be lots of standing around waiting at UK trials, as you have to wait for sufficient game to be shot and retrieved by other competitors before your dog gets its chance.

How steady is steady? A dog is expected to sit quietly at heel throughout the time it is in the line unless called upon to retrieve. If walking-up the dog should be by the side of the handler, should stop when the handler stops and walk when the handler walks. If the dog is forging ahead of the handler and there is a gap between the dog and the handler it is too far and may result in disqualification, in any event it would be noted in the judges book and could count against it in the final stages of a trial. As far as noise, whining or giving tongue is an eliminating fault, *I have been trialing for many years and cannot ever remember a dog barking or yelping whilst under the judge*. The reasons behind these requirement is that if I am out shooting I want my dog to walk quietly at heel and off lead, stopping when I stop etc. and retrieving when commanded. I don't want a dog that is over excited and noisy, disturbing game and needing my attention to control him. I am shooting, the dog has his job.

Handling on marks: If at all possible it is avoided, but when constantly working on ground containing lots of game the dog can get sidetracked or perhaps the terrain may be difficult and so he may need handling onto the mark. Also, during a drive several birds may be shot in view of the dog, but the handler is usually directed by the judge to send the dog for a specific bird. The bottom line is that it is vital the bird is retrieved as failure could mean being put out. The judge will assess how much of the handling was acceptable and how well the dog responded and mark accordingly.

Blinds: These are situations where the dog hasn't seen the bird actually shot, the judge may seek confirmation from the Gun as to the location which may be fairly precise or at times approximate, again the judge will assess the quality of the dogs work, hunting and the ability of the handler to hold the dog in an area. If the dog fails to find, another dog will be called upon and given the exact same information. Subsequent dogs who were in the line at the time the bird was shot may be called on and will usually be sent from the same place. In the event of all dogs failing the judges will go forward and search the area, if they find the bird all dogs are disqualified. So again, in contrast to the US if your dog sees the fall, it's a mark; if he didn't it's a blind. In both cases you've got what you've got and must get on with it.
*
Structure of Trials*: You have to be a member of the club staging a FT in order to enter; there are probably 170 such clubs in the UK, retrievers, spaniels, HPR's plus breed specific clubs. Regarding retrievers there are mainly three kinds of FT. Novice, All Aged and Open. If the dog wins a novice it can only enter AA or Open, winning open stakes is the only way to achieve FTCh status and the only way of getting into the annual retriever championship. There are 1 day stakes [normally 12 - 16 dogs] and 2 day stakes [20 -24 dogs]. All FT's are grossly over subscribed therefore the runners are decided by a draw [this is the first bit of luck you need], it is also why most people are member of many clubs [28 in my case], so you also have to be prepared to travel.

*Judging*: Judges are appointed by the UK Kennel Club. To become a judge takes a few years, an obvious deep knowledge of FT's and the shooting scene, you must have handled a dog to at least one win. You start as a non-panel judge then move up to a 'B' panel and then an 'A' panel. In order to achieve B then A status you are judged by existing 'A' panel judges at a minimum number of trials over a minimum number of years, their evaluations are discussed by a meeting of the Field Trial committee at the Kennel Club and will determine the success or otherwise of an applicant.

There are two main judging systems for retrievers, 3 judge and 4 judge. Under a 3 judge system there will be six dogs in line, two for each judge and under a 4 judge system there will be four dogs in line, two for each pair of judges. Dogs are scored an a,b or c, + or -. In reality if a dog picks up a 'b' it is likely to be out as normally only 'a' retrieve dogs are taken forward to later rounds. If dogs are of a high standard even 'a-' will be dropped.

*Training*: UK training is mostly positive reinforcement; we do not use FF, ear pinch, nerve hitch, heeling stick, training table or e-collar. That is not to say some trainers are not heavy handed but it is not common, most training is reward based.

Hope this is of interest, Jeff"

_Following Jeff's post there was a question about how the award FTCh was earned. MattA99 advised:
_
FTCh (Retrievers) - achieved by winning at least 3 days worth of Open stakes (i.e 2 x 2 day stakes, 3 x 1 day stakes or a 2 day and a 1 day stake)

To qualify for opens you effectively have to have won a novice or all-aged stake. (You often can technically enter an Open without, but you will get less priority in the draw than qualified dogs and Opens are greatly over-subscribed so its not worth trying!)

To qualify for the Retriever Championships you need one 'A' qualification (1st place in a 2-day Open) or 3 'B' qualification (1st in a 1-day Open or 2nd in a 2-day)

The Retriever Championship is run along the same lines as a normal Open, but since 1996 (I think) has been run over 3 days rather than 2. There is no limit on the number of dogs running other than the number of qualifying events, it currently end ups being around 40 + runners.

The location for the Championships are organised more than a year in advance, and are greatly restricted by the number of shooting estates that could logistically hold such a large competition and provide sufficient game. Not many small estates would want a few hundred spectators descending on their ground!

FTW is not a title granted by the Kennel Club - a pedigree issued by the KC will only show FTChs. However it is commonly used to describe any dog that has won a field trial on breeders pedigrees. Consequently a FTW could have just won one trial or could have won a number of all-aged stakes and two 1-day Opens! (Some people only count a FTW if it is Open level)

*I have never known of anyone in the UK describing a FTW as 'titled', but have seen a few US importers of UK-bred labs describing them in that way on their web-sites. *(My bold, in this as in all others Eug)

FTAW - a dog that has won an award - certificate of merit or higher in a trial. This is another 'unofficial' term. Any trial award winner gets a 'stud book number' in the annual Kennel Club Stud Book. (They can also get this by winning certain show awards - the stud book contains all KC recogniosed breeds)


----------



## rmilner (Dec 27, 2005)

Eug,
A great job of painting a picture of British field trials. 

For those that might want some more detail and a lot of history, plus a wealth of excellent photographs, Graham Cox and Gareth Davies have just published a great book, _The Best Of The Best_. It is a history of theIGL Retriever Championship from its birth in 1909. It aslo includes some prior field trial history. Graham Cox and Gareth Davies are both “A” Panel judges and have great experience as field trailers. Both have made up field champions. Cox has judged the retriever championship, serves on the Kennel Club advisory committee, and writes regularly for Shooting Gazette Magazine. Davies has qualified dogs for 2 Championships and received awards of merit in both. The book is very well written and very informative on the early history of retrievers and field trials. 
The book is pricey at 60 GBP, which is about $98, but I found the high quality justifies the price. If you want to see the events and processes that gave rise to the ancestors of all our retrievers, this is a great read. 

I ordered one from Pernice Press by internet from PernicePress and had it in about a week. 

Here is a link to a photo of the jacket and a press release:http://duckhillkennels.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5035

Here is link to Pernice Press website: www.pernicepress.com


----------



## dogluvah (Apr 24, 2012)

Awesome descriptions, thanks. These do sound like true hunting dogs expected to use their nose, not just their eyes  Wish we had something like this here.


----------



## John Lash (Sep 19, 2006)

Thanks, there's a lot of talk on RTF about British dogs, trials and training. Positive methods, FF and collar vs. non collar.

I just wondered what was expected of them.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

dogluvah said:


> Awesome descriptions, thanks. These do sound like true hunting dogs expected to use their nose, not just their eyes  Wish we had something like this here.


We do. It's called hunting.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

HNTFSH said:


> We do. It's called hunting.


I, for one, am glad my hunts are not judged.-Paul


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

John Lash said:


> I just wondered what was expected of them.


What's _*not*_ expected of them, John, is water in any way, shape or fashion, unless it's found evaporated in the low-lying clouds over a British field trial.

Viva la difference and all that, but that's the _*biggest*_ difference - besides democracy (see Jeff Boston's comments above on how you "enter" a British FT) - in our trials v. theirs.

MG


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

paul young said:


> I, for one, am glad my hunts are not judged.-Paul


I judge plenty of them. From the next marsh over usually. ;-)


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

paul young said:


> I, for one, am glad my hunts are not judged.
> - Paul


Best training (or hunting) epigram ever.

MG


----------



## kennel maiden (Jun 11, 2012)

crackerd said:


> What's _*not*_ expected of them, John, is water in any way, shape or fashion, unless it's found evaporated in the low-lying clouds over a British field trial.
> 
> Viva la difference and all that, but that's the _*biggest*_ difference - besides democracy (see Jeff Boston's comments above on how you "enter" a British FT) - in our trials v. theirs.
> 
> MG


Water does not feature very much in Field Trials, but it is used in our Working Tests. Not to the extent that you guys do it, but there will be water tests.

One of the main differences between our Field Trials, and yours though, is that it is a completely natural, and random shoot. The retrieves are not 'set up' in any way like yours - the set up stuff is done, instead, on a more 'level playing field' through the medium of Working Tests, which are much more akin to your game - more technical, and more fake.


----------



## Ray Kirkpatrick (Sep 24, 2010)

"the dog will be kept on the lead with the handler during the course of the day rather than in the truck. Therefore a dog could be on the lead for a couple of hours waiting to go in line"

Does this mean a handler only has one dog to run in the event. Do you not have pros with many dogs to run?

thanks,


----------



## kennel maiden (Jun 11, 2012)

Ray Kirkpatrick said:


> "the dog will be kept on the lead with the handler during the course of the day rather than in the truck. Therefore a dog could be on the lead for a couple of hours waiting to go in line"
> 
> Does this mean a handler only has one dog to run in the event. Do you not have pros with many dogs to run?
> 
> thanks,


No, it's very hard to get a run in a trial. They are hugely over subscribed. A one day stake has 12 dogs and a two day stake just 24. It's a largely amateur sport, with only one handler really running dogs for more than one owner. On the whole, owners run their own dogs. And if they own more than one dog have to prioritise which one they will focus on for the season.


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

kennel maiden said:


> One of the main differences between our Field Trials, and yours though, is that it is a completely natural, and random shoot. The retrieves are not 'set up' in any way like yours - the set up stuff is done, instead, on a more 'level playing field' through the medium of *Working Tests, which are much more akin to your game - more technical, and more fake*.


L, we prefer "more challenging, and more artifice." That, n.b., test the same traits we want to see in our (duck)hunting retrievers, a/k/a waterdogs.

MG


----------



## rmilner (Dec 27, 2005)

I would guess that at least 90% of the Field Trial Champion titles earned in the UK are earned by dogs that are owned, trained and handled by their amateur (by our definition) owner. There is no delineation between amateur and professional in British retriever field trail rules. Professional (by our definition) trainers regularly judge field trials, frequently judge the IGL Championship, and serve on the Kennel Club Field Trials Sub-Committee and as members of Kennel Club Field Trials Liaison Council Representatives. 

There is however a restriction in the field trial rules of no more than two dogs for one handler in a given field trial.


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

rmilner said:


> Professional (by our definition) trainers regularly judge field trials, frequently judge the IGL Championship, and serve on the Kennel Club Field Trials Sub-Committee and as members of Kennel Club Field Trials Liaison Council Representatives.


For a one-day event that's a "normal shooting day" and most often spans a dozen dogs. Don't think their clients would be too chuffed - and understandably so - if _*our*_ pros gave up three or four days of training or trial time to judge a 100-dog open. Reckon, Mr. Purist?

MG


----------



## Bill Billups (Sep 13, 2003)

kennel maiden said:


> No, it's very hard to get a run in a trial. They are hugely over subscribed. A one day stake has 12 dogs and a two day stake just 24. It's a largely amateur sport, with only one handler really running dogs for more than one owner. On the whole, owners run their own dogs. And if they own more than one dog have to prioritise which one they will focus on for the season.


Do you feel that politics ever enters into the "draw"?


----------



## rmilner (Dec 27, 2005)

crackerd said:


> For a one-day event that's a "normal shooting day" and most often spans a dozen dogs. Don't think their clients would be too chuffed - and understandably so - if _*our*_ pros gave up three or four days of training or trial time to judge a 100-dog open. Reckon, Mr. Purist?
> 
> MG


I don't understand your question. Perhaps you could elaborate?


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

Oh, you "understand" it, or should I say your _*agenda*_ understands it. Bill's asked another pretty pertinent question, even for a 12- or 24-dog trial; maybe _*you*_ could elaborate on that.

MG


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

*Both Sides of the Pond*

Thanks "kennel maiden" and "Colonel Blimp" for your descriptions. Many years ago I spent a day at a "Working Test" in north Yorkshire (while on a business trip.)

The dogs were very nice looking and more uniform in conformation than North American field Labs, on the small-to-medium size for that comparison, and generally smaller than Norwegian ones I've seen earlier that trip in Trondheim. On the average, better looking than either. They also didn't look at all like American show Labs. 

Both the dogs and humans were well-mannered. I had a wonderful time and was greeted most cordially - well, except for a little razzing about repeating shotguns :wink:.

What that visit lets me add to my understanding of your comparison is a little better understanding of the conditions of "an ordinary day's "shoot"" (we call it "hunt"). They are vastly different on the two sides of the pond. For example, I've never hunted wild pheasants with my Labs at heel and other breeds flushing game (though I have heard of people in the MidWest who do. It's very rare.) In fact, one of the traits I prize in Labs is the ability to do the flushing job (as well as the ability to use their noses and other things prized in your trials). I've never even heard of a "drive" on wild birds. Waterfowl hunting here on land or water wouldn't compare to anything I saw, even though there was one (basic) water blind in the working test.

So while it is fair to characterize North American field trials and hunt tests as "fake", transplanting a British estate shoot here would not represent the conditions of our "ordinary day's "shoot"" either. (Our game laws likely would prevent making it "real" - even given other difficulties.)

Back then I very much wanted to see what you folks did so I could see if any of it could apply to trying to make North American Hunt Tests more realistic. And I think "realism" in hunt tests is less important than good preparation for real hunting. For me the games are only a pass-time and preparation for the real thing. Alas, I couldn't transplant any of it to tests. But I did enjoy the day an remember it fondly.


----------



## kennel maiden (Jun 11, 2012)

Sorry, by 'fake' I meant using dummies/bumpers/cold game and manufactured/man made scenarios that are the same for every dog running. It wasn't meant to offend! Just came out a bit wrong/negative!!


----------



## kennel maiden (Jun 11, 2012)

Bill Billups said:


> Do you feel that politics ever enters into the "draw"?


Not in England...


----------



## truthseeker (Feb 2, 2012)

*
Judging: Judges are appointed by the UK Kennel Club. To become a judge takes a few years, an obvious deep knowledge of FT's and the shooting scene, you must have handled a dog to at least one win. You start as a non-panel judge then move up to a 'B' panel and then an 'A' panel. In order to achieve B then A status you are judged by existing 'A' panel judges at a minimum number of trials over a minimum number of years, their 
evaluations are discussed by a meeting of the Field Trial committee at the Kennel Club and will determine the success or otherwise of an applicant.

Eug.
I really like the way you pick your judges. I wish we had something similar, seem a bit less political.

As far as the trials, you know us yanks, we go for more flash and dash. we like to look at more drive and style, them obedience. ( even though they have to be under control ) We have never be ones to be subdued !!!.

Keith *


----------



## Bartona500 (May 23, 2011)

crackerd said:


> Oh, you "understand" it, or should I say your _*agenda*_ understands it. Bill's asked another pretty pertinent question, even for a 12- or 24-dog trial; maybe _*you*_ could elaborate on that.
> 
> MG


It seems you like to read an agenda in Robert's comments. I understand that you may not like Mr. Milner's ways, but he just gave a simple answer to the question about ams/pros and how many dogs they run. I mean, really, your responses are a prime example of why these conversations always take a negative turn. It was a fun convo on field trial work, lots of new information, lots of questions asked/answered, and then you feel the need to jump on a comment, call someone a "purist", and then talk about hidden agendas. 

Goodness man, take something and relax.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

crackerd said:


> L, we prefer "more challenging, and more artifice." That, n.b., test the same traits we want to see in our (duck)hunting retrievers, a/k/a waterdogs.
> 
> MG


Did you just use Nota Bene?


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

paul young said:


> I, for one, am glad my hunts are not judged.-Paul


My hunts are the only thing I want to judge anymore.


----------



## Dave Flint (Jan 13, 2009)

The difference between retrieving on land in the British tradition vs. the water in American is relevant to what each culture regards as important. A long crippled pheasant that goes down across the fence into the woods is very likely going to run a long way from where the dog marks it. The ideal dog in this situation watches the bird for as long as he can see it and often has to estimate the distance it probably will land. Then he runs to that area but drifts a little w/ the wind to bring his nose into play until he either scents the bird or crosses it’s trail where he drops his nose to the ground & follows it until he catches it. 

This is not however quite as practical a strategy to use while swimming. Here, good eyesight and memory are the most efficient tools and since we think of retrievers as duck dogs, I’m sure that’s why they are more highly emphasized in our games.

I think the British strict demand for calm, quiet line manners has probably disqualified a number of outstanding retrievers for a squeak or bark that would only bring an admiring smile to the face of an American but on the other hand, I think the line manner standards of the US hunt tests are too low.

I find a lot to like about the British perspective of what constitutes good dog work and although the mechanics of their version of a day’s hunt aren’t similar to ours, I think their idea that the nose (rather than eyes) is the primary reason for the dog is the correct one.


----------



## Jennifer Henion (Jan 1, 2012)

Dave Flint said:


> The difference between retrieving on land in the British tradition vs. the water in American is relevant to what each culture regards as important. A long crippled pheasant that goes down across the fence into the woods is very likely going to run a long way from where the dog marks it. The ideal dog in this situation watches the bird for as long as he can see it and often has to estimate the distance it probably will land. Then he runs to that area but drifts a little w/ the wind to bring his nose into play until he either scents the bird or crosses it’s trail where he drops his nose to the ground & follows it until he catches it.
> 
> This is not however quite as practical a strategy to use while swimming. Here, good eyesight and memory are the most efficient tools and since we think of retrievers as duck dogs, I’m sure that’s why they are more highly emphasized in our games.
> 
> ...


A well thought out post! A pleasure to read.


----------



## Dooley (Feb 1, 2011)

Batona500, I'm glad you responded to Crackerd's not so nice and unnecessary comments.
There's always one in a crowd.


----------



## kennel maiden (Jun 11, 2012)

crackerd said:


> What's _*not*_ expected of them, John, is water in any way, shape or fashion, unless it's found evaporated in the low-lying clouds over a British field trial.
> 
> Viva la difference and all that, but that's the _*biggest*_ difference - besides democracy (see Jeff Boston's comments above on how you "enter" a British FT) - in our trials v. theirs.
> 
> MG



What do you mean, we don't take our water training VEEERRRRYYY seriously over here?!.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlwhemoHhdU


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

*OK...* L. And if *I* were judging, instead of say Nigel Carville...:wink:, that's going viral, plus getting you (and the dogs, of course) a femmes fatale guest appearance on "Death in Paradise," and probably an immediate offer to become Colin Farrell's retriever pro to boot.

All 10s on gamefinding - except for the reluctant one who nevertheless marked and knew where the bird was, so still gets a 9.

Now, how soon before the KC's convinced to add this worthy spectacle to your field trials?

MG


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

This is a link to a report (with pics) to the 2013 IGL held at Cawdor. Yes, that Cawdor, weird sisters and "Out out damned spot"! 

http://www.pernicepress.com/PDF_articles_Patrice_Fellows/IGL Ret Championship SG Feb 2013.pdf

Eug

PS Dog trainers who are not scholars of Shakespeare like what I are, don't perhaps realise that the spot mentioned is actually Spot, Lady Macbeths' Springer. She was shooing him out of the castle after he'd splodged the lounge carpet with muddy paw prints.


----------



## Rick Hall (Jan 21, 2003)

That link didn't take. Perhaps this one will: http://www.pernicepress.com/PDF_articles_Patrice_Fellows/IGL Ret Championship SG Feb 2013.pdf


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

Thanks Rick, fixed it.

Eug


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

Eug, how you say in Brummie "Out damned _*date*_!" - you've linked to the *2012* IGL sted of '13 at Lauder, for which the article might bearing some more familiar names.

MG


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

> Eug, how you say in Brummie "Out damned _*date*_!"


Sod it.

Eug


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

Well, sod it then - nice read nevertheless.

MG


----------



## Ray Kirkpatrick (Sep 24, 2010)

After reading through all of the entries herein, and after reading the very informative article from across the pond. It is my belief that the differences between the British dog games and the American dog games that I am familiar with are as far apart as the distance across said pond. Viva la differences…

Thanks for the study,


----------



## PhilBernardi (Jul 17, 2010)

Thanks to Col for the informative post. 

Seems to me there's more - slightly more - of an emphasis on upland work and related manners than water work. 

I agree that US line manners (and field) need vast improvement.

Drives are common in the US for actual field hunting but not testing (pheasants). Hell, we do drives here for deer. ;-)

In all, I like the approach of molding an "easy going" dog. Easy going for line manners and steadiness in the field; I also want the "I'm not giving up on this mofo" drive too, to get through tough situations in our marshes and fields (in the near harshest of conditions). I can't emphasis this enough: we hunt waterfowl pretty much wherever they are, and our dogs have to be able to retrieve in those conditions (ice, snow, sleet, windy days, thick cattails, thickets, etc., etc.).


----------



## dpate (Mar 16, 2011)

PhilBernardi said:


> I agree that US line manners (and field) need vast improvement.


This begs the questions. Does judging line manners in FTs and HTs need to improve? Does our criteria for breeding need to change to better select for these behaviors? Are they related? In other words, if whining, creeping, etc. is more of a genetic factor, would simply judging line manners more strictly (more along the lines of the Brits) while keeping our FTs and HTs format otherwise the same improve the breeding selection criteria?


----------



## PhilBernardi (Jul 17, 2010)

dpate said:


> This begs the questions. Does judging line manners in FTs and HTs need to improve? Does our criteria for breeding need to change to better select for these behaviors? Are they related? In other words, if whining, creeping, etc. is more of a genetic factor, would simply judging line manners more strictly (more along the lines of the Brits) while keeping our FTs and HTs format otherwise the same improve the breeding selection criteria?


The environment selects for fitness, and we humans are part of the environment that "selects". You tell me. ;-)


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Sign me up, as an owner of a calm, quite, utterly Obedient dog, who runs a quartering brace with upward to 8 akin well mannered dogs; who require no whistle to sit on flush and don't break; this driven hunt sounds like a good time in the field. Although I'm pretty sure my Lab she'll be giving those Beaters some interesting looks, wondering at the insanity of men who insist on doing her job. But hard to do better than a romp through some beautiful English landscape, with good company; we can drink tea and eat sausages with the best of them, only not sure where I'd find tweed in my size .


----------



## Dave Combs (Feb 28, 2003)

This is a very nice read and glad to see it hasn't turned into a 'who's better than who'. I pretty much have stopped posting/visiting this site bc of all the negativity towards the type of dog I choose to run. The qualities i look for when hunting or running a test seem to fit very nicely with what the UK looks for in its trials. Not everyone shares my opinion and I respect that.


----------



## Bill Billups (Sep 13, 2003)

I think the "problem" of noise and unsteadiness is vastly overstated. It is rare to see unsteadiness or whining in AA FT stakes. Unsteady whining dogs are very very unlikely to win an AA FT because a tractable team player is needed to do AA work. A lot of folks that characterize FT dogs this way I suspect have not watched an open.....


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

kennel maiden said:


> Not in England...


laura ,we have spoken about this before ,and you know that just is not untrue


----------



## Bartona500 (May 23, 2011)

I will say, if you can get your hands on some of the IGL DVD's from over there, you will see some awesome dog work. I love watching any sort of dog work on DVD, but the British Trials are my favorite because every retrieve is different, and every dog faces a new challenge.

I was really surprised when I first began watching them at how long some of the retrieves are. In the 2010 Irish Championship dvd you'll see dogs watching a drive from 125-150 yards off, with some of the retrieves being 225 yards over a stone wall into the woods. You will also see dogs crossing a very fast river to hunt for game in thick cover on the opposite side.

It's neat to watch, that's for sure.


----------



## rmilner (Dec 27, 2005)

Here is a video clip of a dog performing a behavior very highly valued by field trial judges. The dog is working well out in front of the line where there are a good number of yet unflushed pheasants, but he is ignoring scent other than the cripple he is tracking. It is not unusual for a dog in such a situation to flush a fresh bird. If he chases it he will be eliminated. http://youtu.be/u5wu3VCKrpM


----------



## Dooley (Feb 1, 2011)

Thanks for sharing Robert......that was well trained (without e-collar I might add) and a pleasure to watch, well done.


----------



## Dave Flint (Jan 13, 2009)

It is this aspect of dog work (trailing a running bird) that fascinates me more than any other. Probably because we humans can never truly know how they do it.

Very nice.


----------



## Bartona500 (May 23, 2011)

I almost posted that video yesterday. Fun track to watch! One of my bitch's is a sibling to that dog.


----------



## Jennifer Henion (Jan 1, 2012)

Barton, what about the video from this year's IGL of Kirsty Cousins and her black lab. It looked to be a 300 yd blind sent for a crippled bird. Dog had to go down a ravine and back up into heavy cover to hunt the crippled bird. On his way, he flushed a different bird. He sat to flush, the bird was shot, the dog then resumed his blind hunt for the crippled bird. Found it and came back in!! I thought I had that video on my FB page, but can't find it. It was really spectacular.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Jennifer Henion said:


> Barton, what about the video from this year's IGL of Kirsty Cousins and her black lab. It looked to be a 300 yd blind sent for a crippled bird. Dog had to go down a ravine and back up into heavy cover to hunt the crippled bird. On his way, he flushed a different bird. He sat to flush, the bird was shot, the dog then resumed his blind hunt for the crippled bird. Found it and came back in!! I thought I had that video on my FB page, but can't find it. It was really spectacular.


If it was the second day! ? that you speak . MORE LIKE 120 YARD.
Also not 'her' dog (not taking anything away) but Kirsty was handling only!...THING IS, THE DOG DID NOT RETRIEVE THE ONE AS DIRECTED !!.(If its the same retrieve we are talking about?) ....Good retrieve however, because the dog brought back the game?.....


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

So where's the video? The world wants to know. 

Eug


----------



## Jennifer Henion (Jan 1, 2012)

I'll check again. Was busy yesterday arranging for the transport of my new Golden puppy from Middlesbrough, England!!!!!  So excited!!!!


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Colonel Blimp said:


> So where's the video? The world wants to know.
> 
> Eug


Paul and Heather Bradley have done the commentary for the IGL Retriever.... DVD on track for expected release date of the 20th December


----------

