# Lining a blind



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

OK... I'm confused. At a HT recently, a friend said that a dog who lines the blind(s) has not demonstrated ability to be handled (guess this comes under the heading of trainability/biddability?), and that could hurt the dog's score.

If a dog theoretically stepped on each mark, lined the blinds... wouldn't that dog be batting a thousand?


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Whoever told you that was wrong. Lining the blind is the ultimate control. My information comes from the HRC Judges/Handler seminar. I don't know where your friend got his.


----------



## windycanyon (Dec 21, 2007)

They were just jealous.  I've heard that comment too. Crazy... I doubt a dog is going to line all of their tests, each series. If they can't handle, it'll show at some point, right?


----------



## John Lash (Sep 19, 2006)

I think lining a blind is great. But it's as much luck as control.

Many people think they lined the blind when they should have used two or three whistles.


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

John Lash said:


> I think lining a blind is great. But it's as much luck as control.


 If it is so much luck then why do some dogs do it a lot more than others? (a lot more than mine!)



John Lash said:


> Many people think they lined the blind when they should have used two or three whistles.


 Agreed, but the judges and gallery know the difference.


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

John Lash said:


> I think lining a blind is great. But it's as much luck as control.
> 
> Many people think they lined the blind when they should have used two or three whistles.


If the dog negotiated all the factors that the judges were looking at when they designed the blind then lineing the blind is absolutely a better score. If the dog skirts the factors and ends up downwind which allows him to come up with the bird,not so much.

Bert


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

"You lined the blind but your dog never showed it could handle." Old tired judges' joke but incredibly some folks think it's true. A true lined blind is as good as it gets. Why? Dog comes to the mat. Handler gives a direction. Dog takes that and burns a straight line to the bird. Perfect. End of story. 
There are inumerable other paths to the bird. But a true line from the original cast can't be beat.


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

1tulip said:


> OK... I'm confused. At a HT recently, a friend said that a dog who lines the blind(s) has not demonstrated ability to be handled (guess this comes under the heading of trainability/biddability?), and that could hurt the dog's score.
> 
> If a dog theoretically stepped on each mark, lined the blinds... wouldn't that dog be batting a thousand?


Thousand no, 10s yes. Ever seen a poorly trained dog line a blind with any factors? Rarely is lining a blind luck.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Losthwy said:


> Rarely is lining a blind luck.


Amen to that! Lining isn't a natural function, particularly on routes involving serious factors. If your dog lined the blind, he took handle #1 perfectly! That's why he didn't need handle #2.

Evan


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

The fella that told me this swears that this is what a judge told him when his dog got dropped. I'm assuming it was more than just the blind... but lining the blind didn't save him. I'm reading into the comment a lot... but he believes that lining the blind hurt his score rather than helped him.


----------



## Furball (Feb 23, 2006)

1tulip said:


> The fella that told me this swears that this is what a judge told him when his dog got dropped. I'm assuming it was more than just the blind... but lining the blind didn't save him. I'm reading into the comment a lot... but he believes that lining the blind hurt his score rather than helped him.


There's lining the blind and there's "woohoo he dun lined the blind!"
Big difference. Many new handlers are unable to see it.


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

1tulip said:


> The fella that told me this swears that this is what a judge told him when his dog got dropped. I'm assuming it was more than just the blind... but lining the blind didn't save him. I'm reading into the comment a lot... but he believes that lining the blind hurt his score rather than helped him.


IF that's true, and I doubt it is, shame on the judge. As Anne said, there is a water and land blind in master and senior, at some point, if the marks and blinds are set up with some thought, the handler is going to have to blow the whistle and the dog is going to have to take another cast or two. I've seen dogs line A blind but don't think I've ever seen one line the land and water blind in both in the same test.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Evan said:


> Amen to that! Lining isn't a natural function, .Evan


 

Usually, but not always true. I have a female that overall naturally holds a nice line in spite of the factors. Doesnt always happen but I believe her to be an above average natural linning dog. Bred her to Shaq and one of her puppies I am working with is showing the same ability at 7 months.


----------



## metalone67 (Apr 3, 2009)

So then a back cast from heel would be considered a handle? I saw the same thing the OP mentioned dog stepped on all three marks and lined the blind to within 2' of the bird and was never called back for the water.
The judge told him he showed nothing on how the dog handled. The next day he did a 2 whistle for the blind toot-back toot- back and was called back for water series. The dog stilled lined within a couple feet of the blind.


----------



## T. Mac (Feb 2, 2004)

1tulip said:


> The fella that told me this swears that this is what a judge told him when his dog got dropped. I'm assuming it was more than just the blind... but lining the blind didn't save him. I'm reading into the comment a lot... but he believes that lining the blind hurt his score rather than helped him.


Why do I want to bet he was talking about the senior water blind at NorCal GRC's Sunday test? Admittedly it was a fairly difficult blind by senior standards, but the number of handlers that failed to challenge the blind was mind boggling, and reflected in the number of ribbons handed out. The blind was a moderate diagonal water entry after about 40 yds of land with virtually no cover. A small island obstacle was just to the right of the true line where you might lose the dog behind it at the back side. The water was open running water from the island to the curved shoreline with minimal obstructions. Straight line from line to blind had the dog picking up the bird from the waters edge after going through the fat part of the water. Total distance of approx 75-80 yds. It was amazing how many handlers allowed their dog to run the bank or along the shoreline rather than requiring them to get into the fat part of the water. And then thought they had run a good blind. Needless to say, there were several disappointed handlers at the ribbon ceremony.

T. Mac


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

1tulip said:


> The fella that told me this swears that this is what a judge told him when his dog got dropped. I'm assuming it was more than just the blind... but lining the blind didn't save him. I'm reading into the comment a lot... but he believes that lining the blind hurt his score rather than helped him.


Was his name Fred and was he from Vegas?


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

metalone67 said:


> So then a back cast from heel would be considered a handle?


Yes. Most folks call that one the initial cast.

[/QUOTE]I saw the same thing the OP mentioned dog stepped on all three marks and lined the blind to within 2' of the bird and was never called back for the water.
The judge told him he showed nothing on how the dog handled. The next day he did a 2 whistle for the blind toot-back toot- back and was called back for water series. The dog stilled lined within a couple feet of the blind.[/QUOTE]

I wasn't there and neither was Paul Harvey (can't get the rest of the story), but that seems a little silly that dog 1 was not called back (provided dog 1 challenged the blind and navigated the "factors" on blind 1)


----------



## Dave Burton (Mar 22, 2006)

I lined a water blind a few weeks ago and I heard one of the judges behind me say "now your just showing off". Without even turning around I said "luck". She is a very good blind running dog and the truth was I sent her a little fat because everyone was going off to the right and getting in a little trouble but instead of taking my "fat" line she took a perfect line right to the bird. Luck


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

greg magee said:


> Was his name Fred and was he from Vegas?



ROTFLMAO!!!!!!


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

metalone67 said:


> So then a back cast from heel would be considered a handle? I saw the same thing the OP mentioned dog stepped on all three marks and lined the blind to within 2' of the bird and was never called back for the water.
> The judge told him he showed nothing on how the dog handled. The next day he did a 2 whistle for the blind toot-back toot- back and was called back for water series. The dog stilled lined within a couple feet of the blind.


Unless there was an obviouse factor that was cheated THAT is piss poor judgeing, and even if there was a cheat the dog should be back.

Bert


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

1tulip said:


> The fella that told me this swears that this is what a judge told him when his dog got dropped. I'm assuming it was more than just the blind... but lining the blind didn't save him. I'm reading into the comment a lot... but he believes that lining the blind hurt his score rather than helped him.


Ridiculous


----------



## GAbirdhunter (Mar 20, 2012)

Lining a blind would be the best possible execution of a blind retrieve, as long as the dog truly lines the blind. Some people may mistakingly think that if a dog finds a bird on a blind with no additional casts that this is lining, which is not necessarily the case. However, if a dog takes a fairly straight line and doesn't give in to factors or challenges, and keeps that line in a fairly narrow corridor, and doesn't establish a hunt until he/she is within reasonable distance to the objective, then he has lined the blind, and should be judged the highest mark for handling.

Your friend is wrong, and it is quite possible that he had a bad judge, or he doesn't understand what lining a blind really is.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

T. Mac said:


> Why do I want to bet he was talking about the senior water blind at NorCal GRC's Sunday test? Admittedly it was a fairly difficult blind by senior standards, but the number of handlers that failed to challenge the blind was mind boggling, and reflected in the number of ribbons handed out. The blind was a moderate diagonal water entry after about 40 yds of land with virtually no cover. A small island obstacle was just to the right of the true line where you might lose the dog behind it at the back side. The water was open running water from the island to the curved shoreline with minimal obstructions. Straight line from line to blind had the dog picking up the bird from the waters edge after going through the fat part of the water. Total distance of approx 75-80 yds. It was amazing how many handlers allowed their dog to run the bank or along the shoreline rather than requiring them to get into the fat part of the water. And then thought they had run a good blind. Needless to say, there were several disappointed handlers at the ribbon ceremony.
> 
> T. Mac


It was at NorCal, but not in Senior.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

1tulip said:


> The fella that told me this swears that this is what a judge told him when his dog got dropped. I'm assuming it was more than just the blind... but lining the blind didn't save him. I'm reading into the comment a lot... but he believes that lining the blind hurt his score rather than helped him.


That's the craziest thing I have ever heard. I remember running a NAHRA Intermediate test years ago, I trained with field trial guys at the time, so the 60 yard water blind was pretty easy for us and my dog lined it, not a banana around obsticals, a true line. As he swam back with the bird some in the gallery yelled out, "yeah, but can he handle?" I took it as a joke then and I still do.

What would the judges want your friend to do, whistle and cast the dog away from a perfect line to the bird, only to cast him back? That seems the ultimate ego move and as you just told the dog he was taking the wrong line, it might be hard to get him back on line cleanly. I still say it was either a joke, or your friend really didn't challenge the true line to the bird, even though he didn't blow a whistle.

John


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

John Robinson said:


> What would the judges want your friend to do, whistle and cast the dog away from a perfect line to the bird, only to cast him back?
> John


You hear all sorts of crazy things from time to time. I've heard folks say they'd sit the dog on the bird (not seat ) and then give it the toot-toot whistle.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

I've heard the same thing being said by a judge. Hopefully those judges are not judging much anymore that say that. Shame on them for having that easy of a blind if it was a master. The one that said it is the same one that dropped my friend for her dog being released on her number, and dropped for a switch when there was no bird there but the dog ran through the fall without hunting. When something like that happens, complain to the HT committee who picks the judges. Even better, write a letter and say you will not run the club trial if they are judging. The ones I have seen are 8 point judges but have not run or trained their own dogs and want to be king for a day. They also make themselves available when the clubs need slots to fill. In that case I avoid them. Occasionally I see them out of the area judging but not around here.


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

TN_LAB said:


> You hear all sorts of crazy things from time to time. I've heard folks say they'd sit the dog on the bird (not seat ) and then give it the toot-toot whistle.


That's not the same as poor judging , and stopping the dog on the bird IS a good idea, especially for a high roller.

Bert


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

TN_LAB said:


> You hear all sorts of crazy things from time to time. I've heard folks say they'd sit the dog on the bird (not seat ) and then give it the toot-toot whistle.


I was talking about the original premise of stopping the dog enroute to the bird, perhaps halfway there, the dog is on a perfect line and will hopefully continue on that "perfect" line, right to the bird. I was wondering what the judge wanted, if he wanted the handler to demonstrate the dog's ability to handle. I don't think the judge was talking about sitting the dog as he arrive at the bird, but who knows. All I could think of was he wanted the handler to stop the dog enroute, cast the dog off line, then sit the dog and cast him back on line, pretty stupid idea to me, but...

John


----------



## sterregold (May 27, 2005)

I truly hope this was not a case of a judge saying the dog didn't demonstrate control because the handler did not use a whistle if the dog truly remained in the corridor to the blind the whole time. If so, shame on those judges. A dog that can maintain that line is showing the ultimate in control and obedience in my estimation!

If however, the handler is claiming lining the blind on the basis of putting no whistles on the dog when whistle or whistles were actually needed, that is a different story. Following is an image of a test I watched--orange line is the line to the blind, and yellow lines are the marks. Wind from the west. The handler whose dog ran the pink line came off line all happy that their dog "lined it" as they had not used a single whistle, despite their dog falling off the hill towards the middle mark, and then running along a brush line until they winded the blind and made a sharp left to pick it up. They made no effort to run the blind presented, and then got snotty with the marshall when they got dropped, adamant that the dog had "lined it".


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

rbr said:


> That's not the same as poor judging , and stopping the dog on the bird IS a good idea, especially for a high roller.
> 
> Bert


Good point.

Maybe one day I'll have a dog like that.  Nah. I like my lil softy.


----------



## Joseph Kendrick (Mar 19, 2010)

East Arkansas HRC at their fall hunt test their water was way low. There was no cover around the area of the water line. Bird boy puts out bird for blind. I come up to the line and ask the judge if that white spot 55-60 yrds to my soft left was my blind. I attempt to get her on a good line to the bird. Well duh, she looks up at me like, you have got to be joking this is my blind. We line the "sight blind" that the test requires. Next person to the line was Chris Akin. You should have heard him yelling about making sure he go the same blind set up to the bird boys.


----------



## Brokengunz (Sep 3, 2011)

I have an old VHS tape put out by akc about hunt tests. not sure of the year it was published. It states in the video a lined blind get a "no score" NOT A "0" ZERO. Because the dog didnt show its ability to handle. A no score does not hurt the dogs over all score because it is NOT figured into the dogs score at all


----------



## Webbs515 (Feb 6, 2010)

i agree with wayne and evan. took handle 1 so no need for handle 2. lol. one thing i would like to say and hear comments about. i was running a senior tests couple years ago and the judges said to challenge the line. really wasnt that hard of a senior blind. anyways, i sat there and watched 2 or 3 BIG time hunt test pro's and they were lining dogs about 45 degrees to the right of the line. Why would they do this? to show the judges how well their dog could handle? i know that they can line a dog up right. but yet they have multiple whistles to had short blind. i am beginning to believe more and more that the pro's get away with alot more then am's. saw big time pro run blind recently and had multiple whistle refusals in first series. got carried to second. ran poor blind in second series yet still passed. didnt think with all those refusals in first he would have got carried to second.lol


----------



## T. Mac (Feb 2, 2004)

1tulip said:


> It was at NorCal, but not in Senior.



Ok, then I'm really confused. I was also in Master A. (Just for sake of full disclosure, my dog broke on the second series flyer.) First series was a land triple with a double blind. Like I said before, the senior blind was tougher than the Master. Master blinds were approx. 65 and 85 yds. Cover was about calf high grass at best. No obstacles or other impediments. Only factor was the gunning stations, previous marks and a crossing wind of 15-20 mph. Total dogs dropped after first series was something like 3 dogs out of the 48 entered. Total number of qualifying dogs was 36. So not like judges were going out of their way trying to drop dogs. 

The rest of my training group were in master B. Master B judges are both veryyyy long time hunt test judges and both very capable. I think both have judged longer than I have and that goes back at least 18-20 years. This is something I doubt either of them would have said except in jest. And definitely not something they would have based a judgement on. Further, I think if something like this had occurred, someone in my training group would have noticed and mentioned it during out next training session. 

T. Mac


----------



## Bill Davis (Sep 15, 2003)

Evan said:


> Amen to that! Lining isn't a natural function, particularly on routes involving serious factors. If your dog lined the blind, he took handle #1 perfectly! That's why he didn't need handle #2.
> 
> Evan


That's why the intial line is important and is concidered a cast. A poor intial line is concidered a cast refusal.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Bill Davis said:


> That's why the intial line is important and is concidered a cast. A poor intial line is concidered a cast refusal.


In what venue ? Where did that information come from?

john


----------



## wojo (Jun 29, 2008)

Bill Davis said:


> That's why the intial line is important and is concidered a cast. A poor intial line is concidered a cast refusal.


What, you must be joking.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Bill Davis said:


> That's why the intial line is important and is concidered a cast. A poor intial line is concidered a cast refusal.


I can see how the initial line could be considered a cast, as in you are casting the dog off the mat, but I don't see a poor initial line as anything more than a poor initial line. Then you have an opportunity to demonstrate handling by casting the dog back on line. I still would prefer a good itial line and line job regardless of what that old VHS video said about no score.

Can somebody find and post what the rulebook says about lining and handling dogs in Master? That high level computer stuff is over my head.

John


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

At least one venue's rule book refers to the initial send on a blind as a cast. If the dog does not god as sent, I can see why some may call that a cast refusal. Regardless of the specific term used, I would note a poor initial line (-IL) and score the dog relatively lower than a dog with a good initial line (+IL).


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

captainjack said:


> At least one venue's rule book refers to the initial send on a blind as a cast. If the dog does not god as sent, I can see why some may call that a cast refusal. Regardless of the specific term used, I would note a poor initial line (-IL) and score the dog relatively lower than a dog with a good initial line (+IL).


I agree with the second part of your statement, but are you saying the judges should stand behind the dog and handler to watch how well the handler lines his dog up before sending, then make a decision on whether the dog took that line (cast) or not? Like you said, I just note it as a poor initial line and score it relatively lower than a good initial line. Actually, based on your "specific term" comment, I think we both agree it's just semantics, and we probably judge blinds the same way.

John


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

captainjack said:


> At least one venue's rule book refers to the initial send on a blind as a cast. If the dog does not god as sent, I can see why some may call that a cast refusal. Regardless of the specific term used, I would note a poor initial line (-IL) and score the dog relatively lower than a dog with a good initial line (+IL).




If it was a 25 yd angle entry over two logs on the way ..and the dog did not enter the water on line without a subsequent handle, the initial send is a cast refusal ? What about a poison bird blind ? If the dog heads for the PB insted of leaving on line, it's a CR ?

john


----------



## Larry Thompson1 (Apr 19, 2011)

John Robinson said:


> That's the craziest thing I have ever heard. I remember running a NAHRA Intermediate test years ago, I trained with field trial guys at the time, so the 60 yard water blind was pretty easy for us and my dog lined it, not a banana around obsticals, a true line. As he swam back with the bird some in the gallery yelled out, "yeah, but can he handle?" I took it as a joke then and I still do.
> 
> What would the judges want your friend to do, whistle and cast the dog away from a perfect line to the bird, only to cast him back? That seems the ultimate ego move and as you just told the dog he was taking the wrong line, it might be hard to get him back on line cleanly. I still say it was either a joke, or your friend really didn't challenge the true line to the bird, even though he didn't blow a whistle.
> 
> John


I had a dog that linned the blind and heard the same thing from the gallery " Yeah but can he handle" I blew the whistle on his way in gave him an over cast then a back cast and then brought him in. Turned to the gallery and smilled.


----------



## Jim Scarborough (May 5, 2007)

At an Amateur Stake in Louisiana, one of the judges instructed the handlers to "handle your dog." The judge went on to state that this was a handling test, not a lining test, and he would drop anyone who "lined the blind." No one even came close to lining the blind, so it remains to be seen if someone would have been dropped at a field trial for actually achieving the excellence we all strive and train for.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Jim Scarborough said:


> At an Amateur Stake in Louisiana, one of the judges instructed the handlers to "handle your dog." The judge went on to state that this was a handling test, not a lining test, and he would drop anyone who "lined the blind." No one even came close to lining the blind, so it remains to be seen if someone would have been dropped at a field trial for actually achieving the excellence we all strive and train for.


That is beyond mindless! I hope someone got the AKC involved. If your tests aren't constructed well enough to separate dogs on relative merit, someone more experienced should be in the chair! Dropping dogs because they're trained too well for your tests simply reveals that you are over your head as a judge of that event.

Evan


----------



## Bill Davis (Sep 15, 2003)

wojo said:


> What, you must be joking.


Ok let's look at this way.... When you send you dog on a blind you are casting them.. correct? So if you line your dog up on the blind and they head out on say a 45 degree angle from the line to the blind. Why would you not call that a cast refusal? You casted the dog at the blind and he did not go that way. Whats the difference in a cast from the line not taken and a cast in the field not taken??????


----------



## HuntinDawg (Jul 2, 2006)

ltrollin said:


> I had a dog that linned the blind and heard the same thing from the gallery " Yeah but can he handle" I blew the whistle on his way in gave him an over cast then a back cast and then brought him in. Turned to the gallery and smilled.


I'm sure the gallery got a hoot out of that and you certainly made your point.

You probably know this, but a caution to others who may like this idea...if you do this, understand that your dog will be judged on whether or not it takes your commands and casts. The dog is still under judgment and you are forcing the judges to judge when you give unnecessary commands/signals. This is also true of handling the dog on the return to keep it from cheating. Even if the judges don't care if the dog cheats on the way back the judges will have to judge what happens when you try to handle the dog. I've done it before and will likely do it again, but you'd better be prepared for the consequences if your dog doesn't respond like you expect.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

On blind retrieves, wherever possible, the Judges shall plan their hunting situations taking advantage of hazards, such as islands, decoys, points of land, sandbars, ditches, hedges, small bushes, adjacent heavy cover, and rolling terrain. Despite such natural distractions, it shall be possible for a dog to find a well-planned blind-retrieve on the initial line from its handler; that it will do so is highly improbable because of those natural hazards, so it must be handled to the blind. The hunting situation should be planned so that the dog should be in sight continuously. A blind retrieve is a test of Trainability (control, response). A dog that is out-of-sight for a considerable period cannot be said to be under control. Utilizing natural hazards provides better opportunity to evaluate the abilities required of a superb Retriever.


----------



## BHB (Apr 28, 2008)

Evan said:


> That is beyond mindless! I hope someone got the AKC involved. If your tests aren't constructed well enough to separate dogs on relative merit, someone more experienced should be in the chair! Dropping dogs because they're trained too well for your tests simply reveals that you are over your head as a judge of that event.
> 
> Evan


Amen! 

I had an experienced judge tell me once that lining the blind is only an 8 in his book. If the dog shows that he can handle then the score goes up depending on the handle. 
I had a more experienced judge tell me that that was BS. That send off the line is the first handle. If he lines the blind then he is a great handling dog and deserves a 10! 

BHB


----------



## Larry Thompson1 (Apr 19, 2011)

HuntinDawg said:


> I'm sure the gallery got a hoot out of that and you certainly made your point.
> 
> You probably know this, but a caution to others who may like this idea...if you do this, understand that your dog will be judged on whether or not it takes your commands and casts. The dog is still under judgment and you are forcing the judges to judge when you give unnecessary commands/signals. This is also true of handling the dog on the return to keep it from cheating. Even if the judges don't care if the dog cheats on the way back the judges will have to judge what happens when you try to handle the dog. I've done it before and will likely do it again, but you'd better be prepared for the consequences if your dog doesn't respond like you expect.


Yes I thought of that and looked at the dog and thought he had better do this or were out.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

(3) *Response is all-important in handling tests*, and in situations where a dog must be brought back to the area of the fall when it has mismarked. *A dog that responds to direction should take the original direction given to it by its handler and continue on it until it either makes the find*, or until stopped by the handler and given a new direction. The dog shall then continue in this new direction until it finds, or is given further directions.
Lower scores, even to the extent of grading a dog zero (0) on Trainability based on a lack of response, may be the result of the following: *(a) not taking the direction originally given by the handler*, (b) not continuing in that direction for a considerable distance, (c) failure to stop promptly and popping-up and looking back for directions, (d) failure to stop promptly and look to the handler when signaled, (e) failure to take a new direction, i.e., a newcast, when given and (f) failure to continue in that new direction for a considerable distance.
The Trainability score for any or all of the foregoing will vary with both the Test being scored and the extent that a dog might be unresponsive. Before scoring a dog lower on Trainability for its failure to stop promptly at a whistle, Judges shall determine whether the wind, the cover, or the distance seriously interfered with the dog’s ability to hear its handler. In general, the response displayed shall be considered in its entirety; an occasional failure to take and hold a direction may affect a Trainability score only slightly, if offset by several other very good responses. To the extent that a dog might not receive a Qualifying score, a Trainability score must reflect repeated and willful disobedience of the handler’s orders. In addition, but to a lesser extent, a Trainability score must show that, after taking the proper direction, the dog did not continue on it as far as the handler desired. Stopping voluntarily to look back for
directions in an isolated instance may warrant a moderate or slight lowering of a Trainability score, but frequent stopping can result in a zero (0) score.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

kzunell said:


> On blind retrieves, wherever possible, the Judges shall plan their hunting situations taking advantage of hazards, such as islands, decoys, points of land, sandbars, ditches, hedges, small bushes, adjacent heavy cover, and rolling terrain. Despite such natural distractions, it shall be possible for a dog to find a well-planned blind-retrieve on the initial line from its handler; that it will do so is highly improbable because of those natural hazards, so it must be handled to the blind. The hunting situation should be planned so that the dog should be in sight continuously. A blind retrieve is a test of Trainability (control, response). A dog that is out-of-sight for a considerable period cannot be said to be under control. Utilizing natural hazards provides better opportunity to evaluate the abilities required of a superb Retriever.


Kelly, is that a quote from the rulebook or your own philosophy? It sounds like rule book wording and if it isn't it should be.

John


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

John Robinson said:


> Kelly, is that a quote from the rulebook or your own philosophy? It sounds like rule book wording and if it isn't it should be.
> 
> John


John, this is rule book.


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

I wasn't at the hunt test in question, but thought I would throw this info out.

At field trials, I have heard handlers boast their dog either one whistled or lined the blind. Those who actually watched the blind, including me, raised their eyebrows because the one whistle was at the end of the blind was necessary because the dog was so far off line by the time he got into the vicinity of the bird, the whistle was needed to get him over to the bird. 

Similarly, I have seen dogs "line the blind" who got no whistles when they were off line a country mile, but then winded the bird.

At a recent trial, a handler got dropped for failing a water blind. WHAT! The handler was outraged. He questioned the drop. As marshal, I had to approach both judges to question the drop. The dog clearly failed the blind. The handler had moved way off the mat, he had changed his position from the send, and in his excitement he handled on the blind according to where he was standing which completely altered the line to the blind. 

Adament about his great blind, the only way the judges could convince him otherwise was to let him explain his dog's route to the blind, and then make him stand on the mat and look at the real line to the blind. Only then did he realize what he had done. He had run a blind that was not the judges' blind. 

This happens far more than most handlers realize (just ask anyone who has marshalled at the line). Handlers can get off the mat to handle, but they better get back on the mat immediately to make sure they are running the judges' blind. 

Helen

PS - In trials, judges do not have to go into long explanations with handlers who question being dropped. They do not have to show them their judges sheets. These two judges went beyond the usual with this complaining handler because he was a long time, but elderly, handler. When I approached them to ask why dog #XX was dropped, they could have said "There is no mistake. The dog is dropped" and left it at that.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

8. Multiple cast refusals – failure to take lines and directions, or to hold lines and directions more than a short distance. 

This is from the list of moderate dog faults from the AKC rule book so an initial line that the dog does not take would be a cast refusal acording to the rule book. A bad initial line means either the dog did not take the handlers initial line or the dog did and the handler sent the dog on an initial line that was not toward the blind (possibly cheating the test or just bad handling). 


1. Excessive cheating on return – going out of the way by land from a “fall” to an excessive degree to avoid going into the water on the return from a water retrieve.

The excessive cheating on return is a minor fault per the AKC rulebook and might be a reason to handle on a return. However keep in mind judges have to decide what is excessive cheating.


----------



## JustinS (May 17, 2009)

If a dog truely lines a blind I dont think there should be any point docking if the handler does not challenge the line to the blind, and the dog is everywhere but somehow finds the bird, that is just hunting it up, I dont believe that is showing anyone your dogs handling abilities, and I dont consider a zig zag pattern to the blind a line


----------



## Mike Tome (Jul 22, 2004)

From this discussion, it's clear that not all "lined blinds" are created equal.

Having said that, watching a handler take the time to line up his dog properly, seeing the dog take the handlers cue and "look out there", then take off with purpose and carry a straight line through hazards to truly "line the blind" is a thing of beauty. To have someone say "that dog can't handle"(in a serious way... I'VE SAID IT JOKINGLY), or to deduct points or even worse drop a dog, is ludicrous. Those folks don't know dogs or understand the talent and training it takes to accomplish such a task.


----------



## Pudelpointer (Jul 27, 2010)

Year's ago when I was running retriever trials I was winning the open going into the water blind. There was a bush on the shoreline in direct line with the blind, if the dog went to the left he got in the water a little early if he went right he was off line as well. The judges NEVER said what side of the bush they wanted to see the dog. My dog went left continued on and lined the blind. I went to dinner that night feeling great until I got a knock on my motel room door saying I had been dropped. When I confronted the judges they said they wanted to see the dog handle and that he should have gone to the right of the bush. You never know!


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Lining a blind in a test is few and far between. I finally had a dog truly line a blind in a test two weeks ago. Hasn't happened in years with many dogs. Its a thing to behold when it really happens.

/Paul


----------



## Lee Jones (Mar 19, 2011)

Keeping a straight when given said line is a "quality" in a dog....just like marking, steaddiness, desire and trainability are all desired qualities.


----------



## DL (Jan 13, 2003)

Maybe someone was running a dog in a test for the fun of it that basically couldn't handle, and the dog lined the blind. I have done it.


----------



## Bob Tebbens (Sep 6, 2008)

Your friend has obviously taken something that has been said many times in humor literally. However,there are a lot less lined blinds then you may think.Sending a dog 10walker yards down wind so he winds it is not lining it.The line to the blind is the line to the blind.It's just that simple.Your better judges will drop a dog if the handler doesn't "Challenge "the blind.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Bob Tebbens said:


> Your better judges will drop a dog if the handler doesn't "Challenge "the blind.


as they should.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Bob Tebbens said:


> ...Sending a dog 10walker yards down wind so he winds it is not lining it.The line to the blind is the line to the blind.It's just that simple.Your better judges will drop a dog if the handler doesn't "Challenge "the blind.


Agree with all of this. But, at every weekend trial you see dogs get carried (at least in the Q) after winding the blind from 10+ yards away and taking an over cast, or even worse, just winding the bird and running to it without a cast. Not that they intentionally avoided the line, but they may have had a couple of cast refusals and a loopy down wind sit that put them there. Even by well known pro handlers allow it. It's almost as if they give a couple into the wind casts to get back on line, then just let the dog go until he winds it, not wanting to risk a third or 4th CR that will get them put out. Smart handling I guess because the extra CRs spell defeat, while the winding from 10 yards will get you called back many times.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

Bob Tebbens said:


> Your better judges will drop a dog if the handler doesn't "Challenge "the blind.


 I would rather see the handler challenge the blind and do a rough job then see a dog run around the obstacles and water and never have a whistle on the way to the bird.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

kzunell said:


> I would rather see the handler challenge the blind and do a rough job then see a dog run around the obstacles and water and never have a whistle on the way to the bird.


Same here.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

How wide is the "line" to the blind ???
At 50 yds, at 75 yds, at 100 yds out from the line?

Is the "line" really a line at all ? The rule of thumb, the STANDARD so to speak *use to be 10% of the distance from line,* so at 100 yds that would be 30 feet or 15 feet to either side.

This was refered to as a fairway and was shapped like a cone, narrow at the beginning and wider as you get further out...............
So if there are not enough factors in the blind to force the dog into deviating more than 5% in either direction to either side of the line, has not the dog "LINED" the blind ? 

john


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

john fallon said:


> How wide is the "line" to the blind ???
> At 50 yds, at 75 yds, at 100 yds out from the line?
> 
> Is the "line" really a line at all ? The rule of thumb, the STANDARD so to speak *use to be 10% of the distance from line,* so at 100 yds that would be 30 feet or 15 feet to either side.
> ...


I was taught to hold my index and pinky fingers up at arms length, keep the dog between those and you will usually be good. Caveat is if there is an obvious feature, tree, prominent bush etc on the edge of that, it would be smart to stay on the correct side of that feature.

John


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> I was taught to hold my index and pinky fingers up at arms length, keep the dog between those and you will usually be good. Caveat is if there is an obvious feature, tree, prominent bush etc on the edge of that, *it would be smart to stay on the correct side of that feature.*John


I don't like drop dead points or one sided blinds but..... I can live with then , if "TRY" were inserted and judged to mean to make an good faith effort(use up some whistles) to stay on the correct side of that feature.

john


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

john fallon said:


> I don't like drop dead points or one sided blinds but..... I can live with then , if "TRY" were inserted and judged to mean to make an good faith effort(use up some whistles) to stay on the correct side of that feature.
> 
> john


I agree with you, and that's the way I judge, but unfortunately many judges do make it a black and white issue.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

Sometimes it is black and white, if your dog doesn't get wet in the water blind then you might not pass the hunt test. I do not like to paint myself in a corner by saying a dog must do certain things enroute on the blind. Show me you and your dogs best work and do your best to challenge the blind.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

T. Mac said:


> Ok, then I'm really confused. I was also in Master A. (Just for sake of full disclosure, my dog broke on the second series flyer.) First series was a land triple with a double blind. Like I said before, the senior blind was tougher than the Master. Master blinds were approx. 65 and 85 yds. Cover was about calf high grass at best. No obstacles or other impediments. Only factor was the gunning stations, previous marks and a crossing wind of 15-20 mph. Total dogs dropped after first series was something like 3 dogs out of the 48 entered. Total number of qualifying dogs was 36. So not like judges were going out of their way trying to drop dogs.
> 
> The rest of my training group were in master B. Master B judges are both veryyyy long time hunt test judges and both very capable. I think both have judged longer than I have and that goes back at least 18-20 years. This is something I doubt either of them would have said except in jest. And definitely not something they would have based a judgement on. Further, I think if something like this had occurred, someone in my training group would have noticed and mentioned it during out next training session.
> 
> T. Mac


Mr. Mac... it's too bad your dog broke in that series because I swear the "orange" tape designating the blind was pale against a dark vegetation background and I know a lot of dogs were running to it. (Mine needed a few whistles, so not all were.)


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

Bill Davis said:


> Ok let's look at this way.... When you send you dog on a blind you are casting them.. correct? So if you line your dog up on the blind and they head out on say a 45 degree angle from the line to the blind. Why would you not call that a cast refusal? You casted the dog at the blind and he did not go that way. Whats the difference in a cast from the line not taken and a cast in the field not taken??????



Negative, poor intial line is not a cast refusal. A cast refusal from the line would be a no-go.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Clay Rogers said:


> Negative, poor intial line is not a cast refusal. A cast refusal from the line would be a no-go.


if you were judging this dog, how would you score it?

45 degrees off of the true line to the bird tells me the dog has VERY little respect for the handler and/or doesn't like what it sees in front of it. tough to salvage that kind of start.

even if the dog did well after that, i would have a hard time giving a master, NAHRA senior or finished dog more than 6 out of a possible 10 points. of course we don't use points, per se, in HRC tests.

i would judge a mid-level dog a little less harshly.

what you call it doesn't matter much. what it looks like, does.-Paul


----------



## rbr (Jan 14, 2004)

paul young said:


> if you were judging this dog, how would you score it?
> 
> 45 degrees off of the true line to the bird tells me the dog has VERY little respect for the handler and/or doesn't like what it sees in front of it. tough to salvage that kind of start.
> 
> ...


If the handler gives a quik whistle and the dog takes and holds that 1st cast and challenges the blind after that I wouldn't judge that any differently than any other hiccup in the blind. If the dog showed he still wanted to go there, different story.

Bert


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

paul young said:


> if you were judging this dog, how would you score it?
> 
> 45 degrees off of the true line to the bird tells me the dog has VERY little respect for the handler and/or doesn't like what it sees in front of it. tough to salvage that kind of start.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the heads up on how you judge, I will keep that in mind when I sign up for tests in the future. I can not and will not fail a dog for PIL, that may be the only hiccup in this dogs entire test. Would you fail a dog for one whistle or cast refusal on the entire test? I hope not. He would be dinged, but how severely would be dependant on several factors, like factors in the blind itself, how poor the inital line was, did the dog and handler make a good recovery? All those questions have to be answered.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

paul young said:


> if you were judging this dog, how would you score it?
> 
> 45 degrees off of the true line to the bird tells me the dog has VERY little respect for the handler and/or doesn't like what it sees in front of it. tough to salvage that kind of start.
> 
> ...


I agree. that is the most blatant case refusal, horrible way to start a blind. 

/Paul


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Clay Rogers said:


> Thanks for the heads up on how you judge, I will keep that in mind when I sign up for tests in the future. I can not and will not fail a dog for PIL, that may be the only hiccup in this dogs entire test. Would you fail a dog for one whistle or cast refusal on the entire test? I hope not. He would be dinged, but how severely would be dependant on several factors, like factors in the blind itself, how poor the inital line was, did the dog and handler make a good recovery? All those questions have to be answered.


Train or complain, we all do one or the other...

/Paul


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

paul young said:


> if you were judging this dog, how would you score it?
> 
> 45 degrees off of the true line to the bird tells me the dog has VERY little respect for the handler and/or doesn't like what it sees in front of it. tough to salvage that kind of start.
> 
> ...


I agree with your last sentence, but that's about it. I have seen dogs flair of an initial line for whatever reason, then tighten up with one cast and do well from there on. I knock off slightly for the poor IL, but judge the blind as a whole, hopefully there is a lot more test out there than just the IL.

John


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Train or complain, we all do one or the other...
> 
> /Paul



Post padder.


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

Cast Refusal: The dog refusing to respond to the direction or cast given by the handler. This is not a term that describes dog casting in the wrong direction, which is actually only a miscast. A Cast is a command to go, and is directional.


This is straight from Evan's glossary of terms. Please refer to second sentence.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Clay Rogers said:


> Cast Refusal: *The dog refusing to respond to the direction *or cast given by the handler. *This is not a term that describes dog casting in the wrong direction*, which is actually only a miscast. A Cast is a command to go, and is directional.
> 
> 
> This is straight from Evan's glossary of terms. Please refer to second sentence.


What ever its a quote from, sentence 1 and 2 contradict each other.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Clay Rogers said:


> Post padder.


Pot calling the kettle black....

/Paul


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

captainjack said:


> What ever its a quote from, sentence 1 and 2 contradict each other.


You will need to take that up with Evan, got it from his website, under glossary of terms.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Clay Rogers said:


> Cast Refusal: The dog refusing to respond to the direction or cast given by the handler. This is not a term that describes dog casting in the wrong direction, which is actually only a miscast. A Cast is a command to go, and is directional.
> 
> 
> This is straight from Evan's glossary of terms. Please refer to second sentence.


Quoting from the book of Evan. It all comes clear....




/Paul


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

I guess I don't care whether you term it a "cast refusal" or bad initial line, they are just dots on my judging sheet and I judge the overall blind. I have seen dogs lined up and sent with with their spine way off line, the dog launched, the handler recognized the bad initial line, stopped the dog and casted him back on line. That dog went right where he was sent, so it's not a cast refusal in my mind, just a bad line. But since I only judge what the dog does, I don't really care if it's the fault of the handler or dog, I'm judging the team, and I judge the blind accordingly. What you want to call it is just semantics to me.

John


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Pot calling the kettle black....
> 
> /Paul


Three hundred twenty seven post in four years compared to over seven thousand in ten, hardly. Not that there's anything wrong with a high post count...

John


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Pot calling the kettle black....
> 
> /Paul



Gun_Dog2002 790 posts per year and 2.16 posts per day(mostly useless dribble)

Clay Rogers 81.75 posts per year and 0.22 posts per day

Yep, I see the comparsion.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Clay Rogers said:


> Gun_Dog2002 790 posts per year and 2.16 posts per day(mostly useless dribble)
> 
> Clay Rogers 81.75 posts per year and 0.22 posts per day
> 
> Yep, I see the comparsion.


/Paul - Thousands of words written on how to train dogs.

Clay - Quoted a dozen words from another trainer that contradict themselves. 

Your right, no comparison....


/Paul


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> /Paul - Thousands of words written on how to train dogs.
> 
> Clay - Quoted a dozen words from another trainer that contradict themselves.
> 
> ...



/Paul-Legend in his own mind

Clay-Student of the game, willing to learn from many sources

I give, your right, no comparison.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Got to love the noobs. Read Wayne's thread yet....


/Paul


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Got to love the noobs. Read Wayne's thread yet....
> 
> 
> /Paul



I have and if you hadn't noticed, I dont have thin skin. Bring it on you old fart.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Clay Rogers said:


> Thanks for the heads up on how you judge, I will keep that in mind when I sign up for tests in the future. I can not and will not fail a dog for PIL, that may be the only hiccup in this dogs entire test. Would you fail a dog for one whistle or cast refusal on the entire test? I hope not. He would be dinged, but how severely would be dependant on several factors, like factors in the blind itself, how poor the inital line was, did the dog and handler make a good recovery? All those questions have to be answered.


Clay, Do you judge AKC or HRC?


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

Thomas D said:


> Clay, Do you judge AKC or HRC?



No, I do not. But I train everyday and run hunt tests most every weekend. Why?


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Probably because you state you can not and will not fail a dog for a poor IL. I agree with you by the way and people who run but don't judge can have a valid opinion on the matter, but your statement implies that you judge. No big deal to me, I just want to get past the post count pissing match which has nothing to do with the discussion.

John


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

John Robinson said:


> Probably because you state you can not and will not fail a dog for a poor IL. I agree with you by the way and people who run but don't judge can have a valid opinion on the matter, but your statement implies that you judge. No big deal to me, I just want to get past the post count pissing match which has nothing to do with the discussion.
> 
> John



As do I. And no one can say completely that they would either. Like I stated before, if that's the only hiccup in the entire test and the other blinds looked good, you would have a hard sell to fail that dog. But ultimately, it all depends on who holds the books, but I can give my opinion, which is what this site is about. Just because you are a judge, doesn't mean you can. A seminar, written test and apprenticeship and bam, your a judge.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

So perfect marks and a failed blind equals a pass?

/Paul


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> So perfect marks and a failed blind equals a pass?
> 
> /Paul


But that's the point; would you consider a dog who had a bad initial line, but was stopped quickly, casted back on line without dificulty and ran a perfect blind from that point a fail? I wouldn't, but apparently there are differing opinions on this.

John


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

The dog MUST go somewhere on the initial send , to not do so is the only thing chiseled in stone as grounds for elimination. 

I divide my blinds into thirds they have a beginning, the part that seems to be getting the lions share of attention in this thread, a middle, and an end. 

To me neither is more sacred than the other ........ a dog that has a great initial line but screws up the middle or the end is in the same predicament as the one with a poor IL and a great middle and end.

john


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

There are lots and lots of cases were a PIL would result in dog being dropped.
Say your on a mound and the line is 20 yards straight down into the water.
Dog flares the water, toot, needs big over to get back on line. PIL and failure to enter water is enough to send him home. Might even be asked to pick up instead of wasting time watching him swim.
I ran a blind were judges mowed paths in the high cover directly in front of the mat but angled to the left and right. If dog that didn't get that piece of cover right up front and jumped on one of the paths, bye bye, see ya.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> But that's the point; would you consider a dog who had a bad initial line, but was stopped quickly, casted back on line without dificulty and ran a perfect blind from that point a fail? I wouldn't, but apparently there are differing opinions on this.
> 
> John


I would consider that a miracle. Running perfect blinds doesn't happen very often. However if that is what happened the dog would get a 5 or 6 from me. Like Paul Y said. That's still a passing score by the way unless every blind is that bad

Paul


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

john fallon said:


> The dog MUST go somewhere on the initial send , to not do so is the only thing chiseled in stone as grounds for elimination.
> 
> I divide my blinds into thirds they have a beginning, the part that seems to be getting the lions share of attention in this thread, a middle, and an end.
> 
> To me neither is more sacred than the other ........ a dog that has a great initial line but screws up the middle or the end is in the same predicament as the one with a poor IL and a great middle and end.john


John, my husband is an 8/8 field trial judge. He also divides blinds into thirds -- beginning, middle, and end. He is a stickler for challenging the blind. If a dog gets off on a bad initial line, but is stopped, handled, and gets back on line and progresses to the blind it will not fail. A handler who sticks his hands in his pockets and makes no effort to get his dog back on line -- no matter where it is in the blind -- will probably get dropped. You either challenge the blind or you don't. If you don't, you and your dog won't get called back. This is a handling test. You've got to handle when necessary and the dog has to respond to that handle correctly. 

Helen


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

> S1) Steadiness to the extent of defining what constitutes a “break’’ is clearly presented in Section 26of the “STANDARD.’’ However, a degree of amplification might be helpful: Dogs on-line sometimes make varioustypes of movements when game is in the air (and/orwhen it is shot). Such movements may be interpretedas efforts by the dogs to improve their view of the “fall,’’and some occur through sheer excitement. Except foran occasional change in position in order to better seea “fall,” all such movements should be penalized asunsteadiness — the degree of penalty depending on the extent and the frequency of repetition of the offense or offenses. The requirement of steadiness is a veryimportant factor in judging the work of retrievers.(2) Control is closely allied to the dog’s response todirection, but it also includes obedience at all times.Control also includes “line-manners,’’ walking tractably“at heel,’’ assuming and staying in any designated position on-line, as well as remaining quietly on-line beside the handler after delivery of the bird to him.When called, a dog should return promptly to hishandler — particularly in those instances where Judges decide that he shall be tested again, at a later time, either because another dog “broke’’ or due to any one of avariety of other circumstance section 25 of the “STANDARD’’ provides that noisy or frequent restraining of a dog on-line by his handler,except in extraordinary circumstances, is sufficient cause to justify elimination of the dog from the stake. In less flagrant instances, the degree of the penalty should correspond to the extent and frequency of repetitionof the infraction. Although such is not required, it is a considerate gesture by Judges, if they are in agreement,to notify handlers when their methods of restraint are incurring penalties for their dogs.
> (3) Response to direction is all-important in handling tests, also whenever a dog must be brought back to the“area of the ‘fall,’ ’’ when he has mismarked. In such response to direction, a dog should take the original line given to him by his handler and continue on it until he either makes the “find,’’ or until stopped by the handler and given a new line. He should then continuein this new direction until he “finds,’’ or is given further directions, etc. Faults, or justifications for penalties, include the following: (a) not taking the line originally given
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 56
> by the handler, (b) not continuing on that line for a considerable distance, (c) stopping voluntarily, i.e.,“popping-up’’ and looking back for directions, (d) failure to stop promptly and look to the handler, when signaled,(e) failure to take a new direction, i.e., a new cast, when given, and (f) failure to continue in that new direction for a considerable distance.The seriousness of the penalty for any or all of theforegoing faults varies with the seriousness of theinfraction, whether that infraction was repeated and how often, and whether there was a combination of various infractions. However, before inflicting a severe penalty because of a dog’s failure to stop promptly at the whistle,Judges should determine whether the wind, the cover,or the distance seriously interfered with the dog’s abilityto hear his handler. In general, the performance in the test should be considered in its entirety; an occasional failure to take and hold a direction may be considereda minor fault, if offset by several other very good responses. A considerable penalty should be imposed for repeated, willful disobedience of the handler’s orders;and less penalty when, after taking the proper direction,he does not continue on it as far as the handler desired.Stopping voluntarily, to look back for directions, in an isolated instance, may be considered a minor fault, but frequent repetition may convert such “popping-up’’ into the category of serious faults.i


This is something to think about


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

> S1) Steadiness to the extent of defining what constitutes a “break’’ is clearly presented in Section 26of the “STANDARD.’’ However, a degree of amplification might be helpful: Dogs on-line sometimes make varioustypes of movements when game is in the air (and/orwhen it is shot). Such movements may be interpretedas efforts by the dogs to improve their view of the “fall,’’and some occur through sheer excitement. Except foran occasional change in position in order to better seea “fall,” all such movements should be penalized asunsteadiness — the degree of penalty depending on the extent and the frequency of repetition of the offense or offenses. The requirement of steadiness is a veryimportant factor in judging the work of retrievers.(2) Control is closely allied to the dog’s response todirection, but it also includes obedience at all times.Control also includes “line-manners,’’ walking tractably“at heel,’’ assuming and staying in any designated position on-line, as well as remaining quietly on-line beside the handler after delivery of the bird to him.When called, a dog should return promptly to hishandler — particularly in those instances where Judges decide that he shall be tested again, at a later time, either because another dog “broke’’ or due to any one of avariety of other circumstance section 25 of the “STANDARD’’ provides that noisy or frequent restraining of a dog on-line by his handler,except in extraordinary circumstances, is sufficient cause to justify elimination of the dog from the stake. In less flagrant instances, the degree of the penalty should correspond to the extent and frequency of repetitionof the infraction. Although such is not required, it is a considerate gesture by Judges, if they are in agreement,to notify handlers when their methods of restraint are incurring penalties for their dogs.
> (3) Response to direction is all-important in handling tests, also whenever a dog must be brought back to the“area of the ‘fall,’ ’’ when he has mismarked. In such response to direction, a dog should take the original line given to him by his handler and continue on it until he either makes the “find,’’ or until stopped by the handler and given a new line. He should then continuein this new direction until he “finds,’’ or is given further directions, etc. Faults, or justifications for penalties, include the following: (a) not taking the line originally given
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Page 56
> by the handler, (b) not continuing on that line for a considerable distance, (c) stopping voluntarily, i.e.,“popping-up’’ and looking back for directions, (d) failure to stop promptly and look to the handler, when signaled,(e) failure to take a new direction, i.e., a new cast, when given, and (f) failure to continue in that new direction for a considerable distance.The seriousness of the penalty for any or all of theforegoing faults varies with the seriousness of theinfraction, whether that infraction was repeated and how often, and whether there was a combination of various infractions. However, before inflicting a severe penalty because of a dog’s failure to stop promptly at the whistle,Judges should determine whether the wind, the cover,or the distance seriously interfered with the dog’s abilityto hear his handler. *In general, the performance in the test should be considered in its entirety; an occasional failure to take and hold a direction may be considereda minor fault, if offset by several other very good responses*. A considerable penalty should be imposed for repeated, willful disobedience of the handler’s orders;and less penalty when, after taking the proper direction,he does not continue on it as far as the handler desired.Stopping voluntarily, to look back for directions, in an isolated instance, may be considered a minor fault, but frequent repetition may convert such “popping-up’’ into the category of serious faults.i


This is something to think about, it kind of helps to see what is said in context.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

john fallon said:


> The dog MUST go somewhere on the initial send , to not do so is the only thing chiseled in stone as grounds for elimination.
> 
> I divide my blinds into thirds they have a beginning, the part that seems to be getting the lions share of attention in this thread, a middle, and an end.
> 
> ...


i also do this. remember i'm judging a HT, not a FT. I HAVE to assign a number score to the performance the dog and handler turn in.

what is 10 divided by 3? remember, the example given was that the dog took a line 45 degrees different than the one the handler gave it. that team is in the 6's somewhere on the basis of failing the start of the blind. if the handler quickly gets the dog back on a reasonable line to the bird and negotiates the hazards successfully they don't fail; they just don't get a great score.

a 10, for the sake of comparison, would be the dog that perseveres on a good initial line to the first point of suction, takes the cast given until it reaches the second point of suction, takes that cast and so on, until the bird is recovered. the dog finishes ON THE BIRD.

so you see, there is plenty of room in my book between 6 and 10. and a 10 is NOT ONLY for the dog that lines the blind.

in a HT, a 5 should be given to the dog that completes the test minimally. (sp?)

below that, the dog didn't really do the test, but recovered the bird. barely ok for hunting purposes, as the bird was recovered, but not good in a test.

a zero means the dog was picked up, or was totally out of the control of the handler for a period of time.

that's the way i judge blinds for HT's at the top levels. as i said earlier, i am more forgiving of the mid level dogs.

so there you go. folks can avoid my tests if they think i am too severe, or they can run them if they enjoy a challenge.-Paul


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

For what ever it's worth Paul, I don't think I would have a problem running your tests except for the fact you are soooo far from me.


----------



## Clay Rogers (Jul 8, 2008)

Paul Y, from the way it sounds, I would run your test anytime. I have ran under Thomas D. once or twice and he too is fair but challenging judge. And thats what most of the handlers want, someone thats fair but challenging. I want to earn the ribbon, not be given the ribbon. I want all this training we do to be tested. This weekend in at the Tidewater test Keith M. and Robert R. did just that and it was a great test. Poison birds, diversion birds and great bird placement provided for a challenging test all three series. Most handlers would rather see tests like that.


----------



## i_willie12 (Apr 11, 2008)

My dog has lined ALOT of his blinds!! Probably over half thats including land and water... Ever time he does the judges always complament him and say good job.. Most people know he runs blinds like this.. Alot of the judges are the same.. I will always let my dog line a blind!!!! Im not going to stop him If they drop me for that i will gladly get back on the truck!! The point of the blind is for the dog to run straight away from until i tell him to stop or he runs over the bird!!!!! That is what we have trained for.. I am mad if i have to use more than 2-3 whistles to get him to the blind!!!!


----------



## WhisperingHills (Mar 29, 2012)

John Lash said:


> ...I think lining a blind is great. But it's as much luck as control...


Luck? NOT! Lining a blind is a perfect blind - you can't do better than to release to line and then not have to give subsequent whistles and casts. 

The highest score you can get on a blind is to line the dog directly to the bird in a perfectly straight line, then give one stop/sit whistle when the dog is on the bird and have the dog wait for you to signal him to pick up the bird. Then the delivery should be on the same straight line the dog went out on. That's perfection.

But if you line the dog and then let him hunt (because he didn't actually take a direct line to the bird), then you have failed to handle him directly to the bird. That's a handler error. The judges want to see precision from the dog and good judgement from the handler. The dog should never be allowed to hunt on a blind.

Blinds are a test of control and response. If you can line so accurately that you never need to correct the initial line, stop your dog right on the bird and have him wait for you to tell him to pick it up, then you've demonstrated perfect control and a perfect response from your dog.

It's not luck - it the result of good training and good handling skills.


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

Last year when I ran my first Master test with my current dog, she picked up all marks clean, than when I lined her for the Blind, she took off straight, twirled around in a complete circle about 10 ft from me than truely lined the blind. On the second blind she did the same thing but barked at me then lined the blind again. After the honor was over I asked the judges how in the world do you judge that, He looked at me and said he had no freaken Idea. It was not a poor IL and I did not have to use a whislte. She passed that weekend. I also judge both HRC and AKC and know the difference between really lining a blind and SOB the blind.


----------



## 8mmag (Jan 1, 2010)

Karen Klotthor said:


> Last year when I ran my first Master test with my current dog, she picked up all marks clean, than when I lined her for the Blind, she took off straight, twirled around in a complete circle about 10 ft from me than truely lined the blind. On the second blind she did the same thing but barked at me then lined the blind again. After the honor was over I asked the judges how in the world do you judge that, He looked at me and said he had no freaken Idea. It was not a poor IL and I did not have to use a whislte. She passed that weekend. I also judge both HRC and AKC and know the difference between really lining a blind and *SOB the blind*.


May I ask what the bolded above stands for...if it can be written on this forum that is...?


----------



## Mike Tome (Jul 22, 2004)

8mmag said:


> May I ask what the bolded above stands for...if it can be written on this forum that is...?


SOB = Stumble On Bird.... finds the bird by luck after ramblin' around...


----------



## Ron in Portland (Apr 1, 2006)

My guess on the SOB blind, (if you're not talking about the judge or the dog  ), would be Stumble On Bird. 

I ran under a judge that referred to these as "neighborhood blinds". Your dog runs out, gets in the neighborhood of the bird, winds it and picks it up. He said at that point, you're done. Can't say how many times I've heard, "challenge the line to the blind".


----------

