# Let's have some fun - with the SRS!



## J Hoggatt (Jun 16, 2004)

I just looked @ the top 12 - after 2 series - of SRS in Alabama

Let the Lyle bashing begin (Kidding) - 5 of the top 12 dogs -WOW.....
After all the "stuff" - I think he didn't come to lay down -..... I think he thinks he can win again.........

don't bet against him --
You don't have to root for him , but don't bet against him 

Keep up the good work Lyle----


----------



## MRGD (Apr 9, 2007)

What "stuff"? I don't have cable, so I don't see any of the new SRS events.

tt


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Well, if one doesn't bet or give a flip, then they're good to go......;-)

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> Well, if one doesn't bet or give a flip, then they're good to go......;-)
> 
> kg



Let me interpret here, J.....it's Southeastern Irony......whereas a man pokes fun at an institution or process by creating a severe situation (a false situation, mind you....) that in the creator's mind (usually a _warped_ mind, mind you) is funny *IF* (and that's a *HUGE* "*IF*") taken in the proper context, which usually is the exact opposite of the orginally told story (or stories). 

IOW, it's just KG being KG.



/Paul


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Can't handle Ken so you're taking me on, huh, Paul?

_Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeak_..........................cross-posting from other forums, now? Needing an azzhat fix, are you? Fling away, my man....I'm here for you! 

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> Can't handle Ken so you're taking me on, huh, Paul?
> 
> _Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeak_.....................................................................
> 
> kg


Who can't handle Ken? I got tired of the whining in PM's. That little boy should get some therapy....your at least fun to mess with cuz you can put thoughts together....

/Paul


----------



## George C. Tull (Aug 25, 2006)

Was an interesting series to say the least.


----------



## Rich Schultheis (Aug 12, 2006)

Why so George, like to hear more bout it.


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

They're still using rubber duckies aren't they? If I ever need to have a dog trained to retrieve rubber duckies I'll give him a call.


----------



## Rich Schultheis (Aug 12, 2006)

Don't know him from Adam, but he did also just have 6+ dogs finish the master national.....just saying


----------



## David Barrow (Jun 14, 2005)

SRS,

Just a thought.

Could we unknowingly be supporting the folks that are against Hunting, the use of Live Flyers, Training dogs, etc..., by supporting these televised games that do not use Real Birds? 

I understand the games logistics and importance, and marketing needs, but is it truly what we need to be endorsing?


David Barrow


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

Southernman said:


> SRS,
> Just a thought.
> Could we unknowingly be supporting the folks that are against Hunting, the use of Live Flyers, Training dogs, etc..., by supporting these televised games that do not use Real Birds?
> I understand the games logistics and importance, and marketing needs, but is it truly what we need to be endorsing?
> David Barrow


Now your catching on!


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Southernman said:


> SRS,
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> ...


You got nothing to worry about. AKC will ensure you get to use live birds....

/paul


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> You got nothing to worry about. AKC will ensure you get to use live birds....
> 
> /paul


LOL.................


----------



## MRGD (Apr 9, 2007)

Southernman said:


> SRS,
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> ...


That one's been done to death. Just letting you know.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)




----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

And for those who want to drink a cold beer in style:

http://www.cafepress.com/chesbayretvr.50309494


----------



## MRGD (Apr 9, 2007)

Great pic FOM. Very appropriate.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

Southernman said:


> SRS,
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> ...


It has helped me get permission to train from local officials and land owners when they have "seen it on TV".

Tim


----------



## MRGD (Apr 9, 2007)

"It has helped me get permission to train from local officials and land owners when they have "seen it on TV"

Come to think of it, it has benefited me in this way as well.


----------



## Bruce MacPherson (Mar 7, 2005)

I know all the arguments but frankly just don't understand the apparent animosity by some to this venue.
Is it a purist thing, is it the money or does it just stray to far from what some think retriever games are supposed to be??
In the long run does it matter? These are obviusly good dogs and good trainers. Maybe something to be learned here.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

> Maybe something to be learned here.


Okay, fair enough....like what, for example?

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

saltmarsh said:


> Maybe something to be learned here.




Bruce, I like Jim Beam in my coke, some people like Jack Daniels. Some people drink swill whiskey blend, I prefer single malt. Some people like relish and mustard on their hot dog, others prefer chili and cheese. Either party will tell ya their meal was better, perfect in fact. We both know that alcohol and hot dogs will just give ya gas with no control over it. The same goes with retreiver people. 

Some people can't just accept the fact that another game is in town that is popular, more popular than theirs in some regards. Some people are just bigoted to their own sport and too close minded to realize that these great dogs are capable of actually playing two games.

Interestingly these prejudiced folks would rather run down the new game rather than do things to preserve or improve theirs....

/Paul


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

And some people insist on inserting themselves into the middle of a situation and offer only conflict and conjecture, rather than allowing the previous question to stand for an honest answer.

You dig?

Saltmarsh, I look forward to your answer about what can be learned from the SRS. Seriously.....

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> And some people insist on inserting themselves into the middle of a situation and offer only conflict and conjecture, rather than allowing the previous question to stand for an honest answer.
> 
> You dig?
> 
> ...


Keith, you asked me yesterday in a PM not pick on you. I did not reply to you nor direct my answer to you. You want to know what we can learn from the SRS. One thing we learn is exactly what I posted. People have different things they like, SRS is a different game. Rather than bashing that game all the time, why don't people just accept it as another game and focus on the game of their choice? Why do you have to tear down another game to build another one up? At the end of the day, the more the general public is aware of retrieving sports the better off we are. I'll provide an example if that helps.

I routinely ask people for permission to use their property for training purposes. I explain what we train the dogs for and explain we compete in FT's and HT's. I typically get a blank stare. I then ask them if they have ever seen the super retriever games or outdoor games on ESPN. A very high percentage of the time the answer is yes and they immediately change their attitude about what I'm asking for since they now have something to reference in their mind. 


If you naturally assume I'm picking on you with every reply, you'll just become paranoid. Honoring your request may be more difficult than I thought, but I'll try.

/Paul


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

K G said:


> Okay, fair enough....like what, for example?
> 
> kg


Maybe consideration for adopting a more defined scoring system for judges to use when evaluating dogs against a prescribed standard.
SRS is specific in 2 and 5 pts deductions. We can now have 1 judges 6 be another's 8.

You asked!! 

Tim


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Paul, you obviously have issues that can't be helped here.

What I asked you in my PM (which you didn't answer....I wonder why....) was, in essence, why you feel the need to insert yourself behind every post I put up and just WHAT your problem is. I suggested that if you would cease and desist ("pick on" was not used), that I would return the favor to you (if you check my post history, which you often do, I hardly EVER reply to anything you post unless you've decided to start misquoting me or attacking my side for no reason other than you can). You obviously have a problem with proper representation of a situation, which at least is consistent for you. Now, you leave me no choice but to do what needs to be done anyway....

Show me where I've done this:



> _Rather than bashing that game all the time, why don't people just accept it as another game and focus on the game of their choice? Why do you have to tear down another game to build another one up?_


*Show* me, Paul....not dodge and weave, no innuendo, no BS, no misrepresentations....cold, hard, solid proof that I have "torn down" or "bashed" the SRS by saying anything other than the truth. *Show* me, or shut up about it....or I can take this issue further if you wish. 

You dig? ;-)

kg

.........one more thing.....as far as accusing Ken of "whining" in a PM to you, too bad Ken chose not to publish your PM to him....that would have cleared up the "who" in the "whining" issue REAL quickly!!!


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Tim Carrion said:


> Maybe consideration for adopting a more defined scoring system for judges to use when evaluating dogs against a prescribed standard.
> SRS is specific in 2 and 5 pts deductions. We can now have 1 judges 6 be another's 8.
> 
> You asked!!
> ...


So you'd rather have _scorekeepers_ than judges in HTs, Tim? I'd rather see a difference between what judges see be a 6 and an 8, 'cause at least that averages at a 7 between them. SRS sometimes doesn't account for a judge's score 'cause they don't hit a _button_ fast enough? That's an "oops" that can't be recovered from. C'mon.............

I _answered_ regards,

kg


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2007)

K G said:


> *Show* me, Paul....not dodge and weave, no innuendo, no BS, no misrepresentations....cold, hard, solid proof that I have "torn down" or "bashed" the SRS by saying anything other than the truth.


Kg:

I would suggest that any of the following would qualify:

"Dominating a made-for-TV venue? Maybe he can pick up some of Michael Vick's lost endorsements.....UnderArmor, maybe?

Kg"

"It's all about the hype.....WWE for dogs.........

Kg"

"I love the way JT throws FT participant's names around in an attempt to grow Lyle's (and SRS's) credibility. That's too funny..........

If he's found a way to parlay his handling and dog-buying ability into a revenue stream, more power to him. This too shall pass....and now that he's the "Tiger Woods" of the SRS, let's see him come out and lay some of those big dogs on the line on the fall FT circuit.

Kg"

"It's just the latest installment of the soap opera that is the SRS.....the legend of the made-for-TV venue that everyday people think is real "dog" competition continues........

I love when people who know of my dog interests say "Hey...did you see that dog show on TV this weekend?" All I say is "Nope...didn't see it," 'cause I didn't....and I won't.

Kg"


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

K9Conundrum said:


> Kg:
> 
> I would suggest that any of the following would qualify:
> 
> ...


A jab, at worst....sarcasm, at best. If this offends you, you're way too sensitive to be in this sport. It's a made-for-TV venue. That's the truth. Other people have made comments about his outfits starting to look like a NASCAR driver's suit and _I'm_ the bad guy????? Or was it the Michael Vick reference that put it over the edge?



> "It's all about the hype.....WWE for dogs.........
> 
> Kg"


Another jab. The hype is true....the WWE part is only _marginally_ a stretch...perhaps they should add "ring girls"..... ;-)



> "I love the way JT throws FT participant's names around in an attempt to grow Lyle's (and SRS's) credibility. That's too funny..........


Again, the truth. It's on the SRS website.



> If he's found a way to parlay his handling and dog-buying ability into a revenue stream, more power to him.


A compliment....credit where credit is due.



> This too shall pass....and now that he's the "Tiger Woods" of the SRS, let's see him come out and lay some of those big dogs on the line on the fall FT circuit.
> 
> Kg"


Another compliment...comparing someone to Tiger Woods is NOT a negative. The rest was a challenge. Any untruths here? No.



> "It's just the latest installment of the soap opera that is the SRS.....the legend of the made-for-TV venue that everyday people think is real "dog" competition continues........


This needs a little contextual addition to be accurate, but it serves your purpose well.....that said, I think there have been enough confirmations by folks using the SRS "hype" to get training grounds suffices as "proof" that everyday people thing it's real "dog" competition. JT himself promotes the soap opera aspect. His comment about Lyle not being "his kind of guy" confirms the internal combustion that they promote. 



> I love when people who know of my dog interests say "Hey...did you see that dog show on TV this weekend?" All I say is "Nope...didn't see it," 'cause I didn't....and I won't.
> 
> kg"


Again, the truth. My personal answer to the question. That I say I don't watch SRS is a slam? Someone is holding one WAAAAAAAY too tight......

And Mr. Conundrum, at least Paul has the GUTS to use his real name.

kg


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

KG,
It's blatantly obvious that you don't think much of the SRS. But to say it's not a real "dog" competition is BS. It just happens to be a real "dog" competition that you don't particularly like. We get it. Just as we've gotten it over and over again from you. Gawd man, give it a rest!!


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Real dogs pick up real birds in real tests, Steve.

Please send me your best plastic duck recipe regards, 

kg


----------



## Bruce MacPherson (Mar 7, 2005)

K G said:


> And some people insist on inserting themselves into the middle of a situation and offer only conflict and conjecture, rather than allowing the previous question to stand for an honest answer.
> 
> You dig?
> 
> ...


Since I really am not that familiar with the venue I don't think I can give you a difinitive answer. Perhaps I should have phrased it more as a question, however, I think that situations arise in all the retriever venues that may provide a training opportunity or different thoughts about the way to approach a particular situation.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

saltmarsh said:


> Since I really am not that familiar with the venue I don't think I can give you a difinitive answer. Perhaps I should have phrased it more as a question, however, I think that situations arise in all the retriever venues that may provide a training opportunity or different thoughts about the way to approach a particular situation.


Thanks for the clarification. 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, agree or disagree. Let's get that out of the way now. I've never stated otherwise.

It's a made-for-TV game. Period, end of story. They can run it however they want. It's THEIR game. I've never stated otherwise.

I'm glad it's viewed positively by landowners who have potential training grounds for people to use. 

There. Hope that meets with everyone's approval.

Still won't watch it regards, ;-)

kg

.....by the way, Lyle came in 5th out of 5 in the finals. Good thing I didn't bet on him......


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> Paul, you obviously have issues that can't be helped here.
> 
> What I asked you in my PM (which you didn't answer....I wonder why....) was, in essence, why you feel the need to insert yourself behind every post I put up and just WHAT your problem is. I suggested that if you would cease and desist ("pick on" was not used), that I would return the favor to you (if you check my post history, which you often do, I hardly EVER reply to anything you post unless you've decided to start misquoting me or attacking my side for no reason other than you can). You obviously have a problem with proper representation of a situation, which at least is consistent for you. Now, you leave me no choice but to do what needs to be done anyway....
> 
> ...


 Well here you are again taking everything personal. First off, you do post after me, that quote of yours I used in this thread is exactly one example. You obviously have your own viewpoint of everything, which you always believe to be correct. So be it. You took my post personal once again in discussing those who are obviously prejudiced towards the SRS. If you feel guilty then that’s on you, I never said you were. 

Bashed, torn down or degraded. - You have called the SRS “a WWE” based event on numerous occasions. What a crock. Dogs are hardly capable of reading a script, the event is not predestined with a determined winner and the scoring system is open to all. 

Go ahead take it further. Tough guy. I just ask that you respect Chris’s board and keep it clean…

There is a post on here discussing judges moving memory birds during the test. Oh that sounds great, obviously no problems in FT’s there. This months issue of RFTN discussed judging problems written by Dennis Bath. Again, clearly no problems there. Oh and lets see, when was the last time a judge made an error, was called on it and he changed his mind to do what’s right….hmmmm in FT’s probably never. Judges don’t have to show their work, or justify their decisions. SRS does. 

As for Ken, he made public slanderous accusations of me in anger. I chose to reply in private out of respect for him and his stupid board with examples of his own actions done in public on this board that refute his accusations against me. I’ll post that message to him in public on his board if he pushes it. If he shared that with you, then I dare you to post that here or on his board. It will only prove that his actions, behaviors I pointed out are true. 

Get therepy my old friend…

/Paul


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Well here you are again taking everything personal. First off, you do post after me, that quote of yours I used in this thread is exactly one example.


In the spare time that you spend researching my posts, tally how many times I post after you out of the middle of nowhere, as you have developed a penchant for, with me, as of late. You knew what I meant, but twisting the point for your purpose worked better for you.



> You obviously have your own viewpoint of everything, which you always believe to be correct. So be it.


Always? Hardly. Why would I _ever_ bother to put "JMHO" on _anything_ if I thought that? 



> You took my post personal once again in discussing those who are obviously prejudiced towards the SRS. If you feel guilty then that’s on you, I never said you were.


I was gonna let this go, but you did it twice: it's "personally," not personal.

Wonder why I'd take it that way, do you? Let's review:


> _Rather than bashing that game all the time, why don't people just accept it as another game and focus on the game of their choice? Why do you have to tear down another game to build another one up?_


I'd like to visit that fantasyland you abide in sometime....the one where you make things up as you go. I'd ask you to show me where I've torn one game down in favor of another..."torn" being the operative word, but you look for the hardest interpretation of my words, so I'll let it go. I won't get a straight answer anyway. As for "guilt," I have none. Zero. 



> Bashed, torn down or degraded. - You have called the SRS “a WWE” based event on numerous occasions. What a crock. Dogs are hardly capable of reading a script, the event is not predestined with a determined winner and the scoring system is open to all.


Ahh....it's reappeared....your penchant for the literal to suit your needs....where did I say "WWE based?" "WWE" is a metaphor, Paul. I couldn't _imagine_ that you'd miss that one. You didn't.....I know....but that didn't suit your purpose.



> Go ahead take it further. Tough guy. I just ask that you respect Chris’s board and keep it clean…


You TOTALLY misinterpreted my meaning there. Not even _remotely_ close.....



> There is a post on here discussing judges moving memory birds during the test. Oh that sounds great, obviously no problems in FT’s there.


Yeah. No kidding. You mean the thread I posted on just before you did?



> This months issue of RFTN discussed judging problems written by Dennis Bath. Again, clearly no problems there. Oh and lets see, when was the last time a judge made an error, was called on it and he changed his mind to do what’s right….hmmmm in FT’s probably never.


There you go with that "Pacific Northwest Irony" again. "Probably never" means you know you're wrong...you just can't cite an instance. You should admit your limited experience with field trials and let this one stand on its own rather than, how is it you put it...."tear down" field trial judging? Pretty easy to do if you've never sat in the chair, huh....it's pretty obvious to anyone with functioning eyesight that there is an increased emphasis on improving the quality of judging and has been for the past couple of years. Sometimes goofy stuff happens anyway....you know, like the 6 inch creep line that supposedly got some dogs thrown out of this year's Master National. Did that make your "Master National BOD" thread?



> Judges don’t have to show their work, or justify their decisions. SRS does.


SRS has scorekeepers, not judges, Paul. At least acknowledge that.



> As for Ken, he made public slanderous accusations of me in anger. I chose to reply in private out of respect for him and his stupid board with examples of his own actions done in public on this board that refute his accusations against me. I’ll post that message to him in public on his board if he pushes it. If he shared that with you, then I dare you to post that here or on his board. It will only prove that his actions, behaviors I pointed out are true.


I just brought it up to make a point, a point you just reinforced. Thanks....and that "dare" thing was _so_ machismo of you..... 



> Get therepy my old friend…


It's "ther*a*py." I'm just fine, thanks. I just get a little cranky when people twist my words.

If I had one thing to do over with regard to all of this, I'd have PM'd you again and kept all this off the boards. Even when you didn't respond to my first PM and posted again on the board, I still should've kept it on PM status. Nobody, really, gives a crap about whatever is between you and me. I know that. The quicker you realize it, the better off we'll all be.

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Keith, posting after you or before you has nothing to do with posting a reply to you. If you don’t like me doing that, then quit posting. Thanks for correcting my grammar, I know that is one of YOUR diversion tactics, always has been. 

When I posted this “_Rather than bashing that game all the time, why don't people just accept it as another game and focus on the game of their choice? Why do you have to tear down another game to build another one up?”_ it was not meant to be directed at you personally, but rather in general to people who continue to claim FT’s are the holy grail of dog sports. Again, quit taking everything so personally. You’re caught. I’m not the only one who has noticed you bashing SRS. You of course have ways to explain your comments away, but face it you throw derogatory remarks out about it all the time. How about you’re little snide remark earlier about a “rubber ducky recipe.” Do you really think that’s a positive or even a neutral comment? You meant it to be negative. In fact by calling it a WWE event you have implied that it’s not even a “real dog sport.” You claim I have limited FT experience. How the hell would you know what experience I have? I have placed dogs in open all age FT’s in 3 different dog sports, herding, hounds and pointing, and I have ran retriever FT’s for some years. I have trained dogs that have placed in all 4 dog sports. I realize your experience is limited to just one dog venue, retrievers, so I’ll overlook your narrow viewpoints as coming from the lack of experience. Of course you judge a lot so that makes you an expert. 

As far Ken goes, you just admitted that you were speaking out your ass, don’t have a clue what happened between Ken and I that once again you’re blowing smoke. People may not care, but the more you post, the more the true KG gets exposed. 

Oh, and have a nice day….I have nothing further to say on this. 

Hey, look the ignore list is back. Bye Bye Keith...

/Paul


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

I guess I should go check the herding, hound, and pointing breed boards for your wisdom, but I doubt I'd see anything different than what we get from you here. 



> As far Ken goes, you just admitted that you were speaking out your ass, don’t have a clue what happened between Ken and I that once again you’re blowing smoke. People may not care, but the more you post, the more the true KG gets exposed.


As far as my "clue" goes, does this sound familiar: _Oh and lets see - BCS polls Oregon is #5 and Texas is #15 hmmm go ducks..._ How does that "smoke" smell now? Hmmmm? Out your ass _indeed_! 

Your need to be "seen" is more phenomenal than even *I* had expected. The "true" you changes with each post. If the chameleon fit as a retriever, pointer, hound, or herding dog, you'd be good to go. 



> Oh, and have a nice day….I have nothing further to say on this.


Being a bit disingenuous here, aren't you? But then again, what else should I expect........



> Hey, look the ignore list is back. Bye Bye Keith...


I can think of only one thing (okay, maybe two....) that would make me happier right now. As it is, I'll settle for this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

kg


----------



## MIDTNGRNHEAD (Jun 17, 2004)

K G said:


> Real dogs pick up real birds in real tests, Steve.
> 
> Please send me your best plastic duck recipe regards,
> 
> kg


How stupid is that. What the dog finds once it gets there is only a small part of the deal. Man up and come play. I know six plastic birds in one set up probably isn't enough of a challenge for you. But who knows, those SRS judges(scorekeepers, what ever you call them KG) might just dumb down the set up for you.


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

MIDTNGRNHEAD said:


> How stupid is that. What the dog finds once it gets there is only a small part of the deal. Man up and come play. I know six plastic birds in one set up probably isn't enough of a challenge for you. But who knows, those SRS judges(scorekeepers, what ever you call them KG) might just dumb down the set up for you.


Under KG's logic, I guess that if you train with bumpers or rubber ducks, that's not real dog training either.......I guess when the day comes that ALL the dog games use rubber ducks, and it will, then KG's blessed Field Trials won't be real dog games either.....


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Have either of you "manned up" and played the SRS game? Or is it just easier to bash somebody who isn't interested and isn't afraid to say so?

If I can help you guys get your "game" on with regard to pumping up the SRS, I'm here for you. Now that Paul has found the "ignore" setting (God LOVE him! That's ALL I asked for!;-)), someone's gotta pick up his slack.

Slings and arrows regards,

kg

....oh, and Steve....if field trials and hunting tests EVER get to the point of not using live birds, our "live" guns won't be far behind. You should give that some thought.


----------



## flatcreek (Jun 27, 2005)

For what ever it is worth I played the game this week. It is a blast. I have alway's ran HT and since it was in my back yard I decided to try it out. You really can not train for the set-up. From what I saw you need a dog with the ability to run really big technical FT length blinds and also a dog that can watch six birds go down right in your face and not go crazy. I agree that field trials are with out a doubt where the big dog's play but don't knock the SRS KG until you get involved and see what they are about. It is not only about the event but they also give back to the community when they come in for an event. I hosted several of the big name handler's out at my place this week and these guy's were true gentlemen. They were nice enough to sit down and do interview's,visit with local's who had never seen or heard of a retriever trial,answer training question's etc. Until you live in an area with as little organized of a retriever community as we have this was really a great event and has now added three new dog people to our group and it's only been here four day's. Here are a few pic's of one of the demos the SRS did for a local elementary school. See if you can pick out a few of the less fortunate children who could not keep from smiling the rest of the day. What ever your view's are about the event you have to give them credit for giving back. First time but not last time SRS handler regards.


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

K G said:


> Have either of you "manned up" and played the SRS game? Or is it just easier to bash somebody who isn't interested and isn't afraid to say so?
> 
> If I can help you guys get your "game" on with regard to pumping up the SRS, I'm here for you. Now that Paul has found the "ignore" setting (God LOVE him! That's ALL I asked for!;-)), someone's gotta pick up his slack.
> 
> ...


KG,
I don't need you to "help me" with anything. You are the basher here. You bash the SRS every time you get a chance. Then you proceed to deny it by hiding behind your innuendos and metaphors. You can kid yourself if you want, but you aren't fooling anybody else. It is very possible that bird flu will eventually deny the dog games the use of live birds, but will have NOTHING to do with our live guns being taken away. You should give that some thought.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Steve Hester said:


> KG,
> I don't need you to "help me" with anything. You are the basher here. You bash the SRS every time you get a chance. Then you proceed to deny it by hiding behind your innuendos and metaphors. You can kid yourself if you want, but you aren't fooling anybody else. It is very possible that bird flu will eventually deny the dog games the use of live birds, but will have NOTHING to do with our live guns being taken away. You should give that some thought.



Now Steve, don't you know he's "given" back all that he needs too to the sport...how dare you have a different opinion...

/Paul


----------



## DEDEYE (Oct 27, 2005)

Well, I think it sounds like fun. I bet the dogs think so too.....


----------



## Misty Marsh (Aug 1, 2003)

I think that you can like or dislike the SRS for whatever reasons you choose, be it rubber ducks, the fact that it's been embraced by TV, or it threatens your particular venue of interest, but how can you deminish the work that these dogs are dong by bashing it? I mean many of these dogs are FC, AFC, MH, etc.. and plenty accomplished, this is just another high level game.


----------



## MIDTNGRNHEAD (Jun 17, 2004)

Yes I have KG, matter of fact Huntsville was my 5th. Just as Flatcreek, we usually run only HT. Never suited up in white and picked up real birds. But, what ever game or games you choose to play, lets just further the sport we all love and get away from trying to tear down someone else's game with a keyboard and a mouse.

Flatcreek, enjoyed meeting you this week and good luck this duck season.


----------



## DEDEYE (Oct 27, 2005)

Well, I think it sounds like tons-o-fun!


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

K G said:


> SRS sometimes doesn't account for a judge's score 'cause they don't hit a _button_ fast enough? That's an "oops" that can't be recovered from. C'mon.............


Proves how much you think you know!


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Steve Hester said:


> KG,
> I don't need you to "help me" with anything. You are the basher here. You bash the SRS every time you get a chance. Then you proceed to deny it by hiding behind your innuendos and metaphors. You can kid yourself if you want, but you aren't fooling anybody else. It is very possible that bird flu will eventually deny the dog games the use of live birds, but will have NOTHING to do with our live guns being taken away. You should give that some thought.


Chill out, Steve. You're hanging on waaaay too tightly, dude.

And you most assuredly _are_ taking advantage of my offer of "help." It's okay...I offered...you might want to work a bit on not copying Paul's style so closely though....just a thought.

As for the H5N1 virus denying "dog games" the use of live birds, its arrival will most likely also dictate the cessation of hunting migratory birds. Hope you enjoy sporting clays if "avian influenza virus/bird flu" becomes a reality. What's next, now that I've given that some thought? 

Brandon's post was well-structured and very informative. Glad to hear there's some "give back" with the game, and that the participants are actively involved in that give back. I've said NOTHING negative about Avery's sponsorship of the games or SRS's adaptation of the sport originally created by ESPN. Hey...they found a niche and they filled it and turned it into gold, literally. Good on 'em. Creative marketing plus a receptive audience equals a well-received event. One cannot argue with the accomplishment of an intended purpose. J. Paul Jackson, Stacey West, and Lyle Steinman are the only pros that are involved in pretty much every SRS event that I've met and all three bring a lot to the party. 

I've stated many times, too many for folks to ignore, that if SRS/Waterdog TV/etc. can make a hit out of the game they've created, good for them. We don't all have to agree, and that disagreement does not necessarily have to be construed as bashing (that's a "differing opinion" for those of you keeping score..;-))...but if that's what you want to call it, my skin is thick enough to take it. Some folk's skin isn't, apparently.

At the end of the day, there is a certain reality that must be considered. *Considered*, not mandated, mind you. There's a difference (gotta spell that out here for some strange reason....) between the two. The more the non-hunting, retriever-loving public perceives that since folks have sooooo much fun watching dogs on TV pick up plastic ducks, why would anyone ever want to kill "Daffy" so that a dog could retrieve him? The end result provides more ammunition to the AR folks to take issue with the use of live ducks in field events, training, and even hunting. Don't think those folks don't know it. We ALL bash AR folks everyday, so don't EVEN act like those dots can't be connected. If we ALL don't at least have that *consideration* in the back of our minds, then we deserve what we get in the end.

Notice I'm not even talking about the "competition" itself. If you look at the entries for HRC and AKC field events, you'll see that there is no "threat" to their existence. Don't most of the pros that run SRS run hunting tests, mostly HRC, anyway? That argument doesn't hold water.

So I'm wrong Dman? Thanks for clearing up _how_ I'm wrong......;-)

Y'all enjoy the rest of your Sunday and have a good week. Go Colts and Titans!;-)

kg


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

K G said:


> So I'm wrong Dman? Thanks for clearing up _how_ I'm wrong......;-)


Neither you or Ken listened the first time you were told and I have absolutely no reason to assume either of you would listen the second time.

Ignorance is bliss......have a blissful afternoon! ;-)


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Then I have no choice but to assume I'm correct.;-) Fine ambassador for the SRS _you_ are........

Missed opportunity 'cause of a PPA regards,

kg


----------



## MIDTNGRNHEAD (Jun 17, 2004)

K G said:


> Y'all enjoy the rest of your Sunday and have a good week. Go Colts and Titans!;-)
> 
> kg


We finally agree on something.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

I suspect that, at the end of the day, we'd agree on more than you think. 

The world does _not_ revolve around the SRS, field trials, or pro football regards, ;-)

kg


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

K G said:


> The world does _not_ revolve around the SRS, field trials, or pro football regards, ;-)


That's the reason I'm not wasting my time trying to explain anything to you! Your opinion of the SRS, the dogs involved, the handlers and the judges is very well known and your so called facts are nothing more than things you have been told by those that share your opinion. You choose to believe them as facts.....proves my point.

You prove to me your statement "SRS sometimes doesn't account for a judge's score 'cause they don't hit a button fast enough? That's an "oops" that can't be recovered from." is a fact since you seem to know them all.

I also could care less what you or anyone else for that matter thinks about anything.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

You give new meaning to the word "pitiful," dman.

kg


----------



## Misty Marsh (Aug 1, 2003)

If you are concerned about the AKC, CKC, UKC, NAHRA, or governments forcing clubs to go to rubber ducks, I'd worry alot more about avian flu breaking out than the SRS using rubber ducks! This fall a very small outbreak in 1 chicken farm in Saskatchewan Canada this fall (Goose/Duck shang-gra-la) had US customs stop importation of 40,000 ducks/geese even though this strain of avian flu could not be transfered to migratory game. Just imagine how quick our sport will change if/when it is found in wild ducks/geese in any number?


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

You saw my reply to Steve above, right MM?

Avian influenza is predicted to be our next pandemic. I pray the prognosticators are wrong.

kg


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

What's the matter Keith? Can't prove that statement you made? Resorting to name calling now?


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Dman said:


> That's the reason I'm not wasting my time trying to explain anything to you! Your opinion of the SRS, the dogs involved, the handlers and the judges is very well known and your so called facts are nothing more than things you have been told by those that share your opinion. You choose to believe them as facts.....proves my point.


I compared SRS, Field Trials, and pro football. You didn't get my point. I'm not surprised. I asked you to educate me. You chose not to. Your call.



> You prove to me your statement "SRS sometimes doesn't account for a judge's score 'cause they don't hit a button fast enough? That's an "oops" that can't be recovered from." is a fact since you seem to know them all.


I'm gonna prove that to you and you're telling me nothing? Don't work that way, dude....but I am curious about one thing: how is it two judges can score a particular fault and the the third judge doesn't score it?



> *I also could care less what you or anyone else for that matter thinks about anything*.


All evidence to the contrary. You sure are spending a *whole* lot of keystrokes on an issue you don't "care" about....but that statement alone tells me everything I need to know about you, Derrick.

_Everything._

kg


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

K G said:


> Chill out, Steve. You're hanging on waaaay too tightly, dude.
> 
> And you most assuredly _are_ taking advantage of my offer of "help." It's okay...I offered...you might want to work a bit on not copying Paul's style so closely though....just a thought. kg


I'll give you credit for one thing; you truly are amazing. You intentionally stir the pot, looking for a rise out of someone. Then when you get that rise, you tell people to chill out. You need to get some better lines. Yours are way over used and very weak. I would continue to debate this with you, but it's very difficult to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Now _that_ was an original retort......copying one of the most used comebacks in the history of comebacks...........talk about "way over used and very weak." You didn't proofread this before you hit "submit reply," didja Steve? ;-)

As for your "debate," you've simply regurgitated old slams you've read and attempted to resharpen old points with a spent stone. You've "debated" _nothing_. A debate requires a little bit more effort than you've put forth. 

Just thought that point needed to be made. 

kg


----------



## Guest (Nov 5, 2007)

K G said:


> You sure are spending a *whole* lot of keystrokes on an issue you don't "care" about....but that statement alone tells me everything I need to know about you,
> 
> _Everything._
> 
> kg


I've been thinking that very thing this whole weekend about you KG. I'll bet the good people at Mobile wish you would have spent a fraction of the effort helping them put on their trial for your dog to run.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Had I not committed with my wife to keep my grandchildren Friday and Saturday for my stepson who was having a tumor removed from his inner ear on Friday, I would have been at Mobile, more than willing to help.

I bet I'll _never_ learn your name now, will I?!;-)

But thanks for your sincere concern.....

kg


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Well,

This subject line stated that the participants should have some fun.

Did you guys?

Seems like a waste of time and energy to me! Not to mention the little personal attacks flung liberally....

Please cool it guys.

Thanks,

Chris


----------



## Gordy Weigel (Feb 12, 2003)

THANK YOU CHRIS! 
It never fails to amaze me how web forums can bring out the pettiness in some and how they can put their foot in their mouth , trying to prove they are right.
Hey, I guess it really is true that misery loves company.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Dman said:


> That's the reason I'm not wasting my time trying to explain anything to you! Your opinion of the SRS, the dogs involved, the handlers and the judges is very well known and your so called facts are nothing more than things you have been told by those that share your opinion. You choose to believe them as facts.....proves my point.
> 
> You prove to me your statement "SRS sometimes doesn't account for a judge's score 'cause they don't hit a button fast enough? That's an "oops" that can't be recovered from." is a fact since you seem to know them all.
> 
> I also could care less what you or anyone else for that matter thinks about anything.


Does said party know that you were one of the judges during said event that is being used as fact? 

/Paul


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Gee, Gordy.....where were you two pages ago...... ;-)

kg


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

Bur Oak said:


> THANK YOU CHRIS!
> It never fails to amaze me how web forums can bring out the pettiness in some and how they can put their foot in their mouth , trying to prove they are right.
> Hey, I guess it really is true that misery loves company.


Yeah, thanks Chris. It never seems to amaze me either.


----------



## Ironwood (Sep 25, 2007)

Recently on a hunting trip to Alberta I and three of my fellow goose/duck hunters from BC had a opporunity to hunt with four very enthusiastic goose/duck hunters (Rich,Tyler, Danny and Savis) from California. Well those boys had more gear and ATV toys and goose load I had never heard of. On one of the evenings when we got together for dinner after the hunt I gave Rich a 30 minute DVD of the Lyle Steinman winning the SRS with River. They played it in their on board DVD player in their "Smoken" fully loaded truck. I guess it turned him on to competition sport as we had along discussion on the field dog sports one of the evenings. We we talked dogs and I explained as best I could the the difference between the respective field dog sports. 

Regardless of the sport, the top dogs that come out of HRC, SRS, Hunt tests run on either side of the 49th or field trials will be the producers of the pups these gentlemen will want to start with. And down the road these seasoned and proofed dogs will be at their masters side when the birds come pouring in, wings set and man and dog stoically wait with a stiff ice cold wind at their back. It will matter little to them what field venue their dog came from when the quality comes through.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Does said party know that you were one of the judges during said event that is being used as fact?
> 
> /Paul


He should....he knows everything else.


----------



## HarryWilliams (Jan 17, 2005)

Ironwood said:


> Recently on a hunting trip to Alberta I and three of my fellow goose/duck hunters from BC had a opporunity to hunt with four very enthusiastic goose/duck hunters (Rich,Tyler, Danny and Savis) from California. Well those boys had more gear and ATV toys and goose load I had never heard of. On one of the evenings when we got together for dinner after the hunt I gave Rich a 30 minute DVD of the Lyle Steinman winning the SRS with River. They played it in their on board DVD player in their "Smoken" fully loaded truck. I guess it turned him on to competition sport as we had along discussion on the field dog sports one of the evenings. We we talked dogs and I explained as best I could the the difference between the respective field dog sports.
> 
> Regardless of the sport, the top dogs that come out of HRC, SRS, Hunt tests run on either side of the 49th or field trials will be the producers of the pups these gentlemen will want to start with. And down the road these seasoned and proofed dogs will be at their masters side when the birds come pouring in, wings set and man and dog stoically wait with a stiff ice cold wind at their back. It will matter little to them what field venue their dog came from when the quality comes through.


I thought this post by Ironwood should be brought to the next page. It's worth reading again and is a refreshing perspective in a thread that has some folks showing their least attractive side. HPW


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

HarryWilliams said:


> I thought this post by Ironwood should be brought to the next page. It's worth reading again and is a refreshing perspective in a thread that has some folks showing their least attractive side. HPW


I agree

Isn't the idea for people to enjoy being with and working with their dogs?


----------



## Jason Brion (May 31, 2006)

Oh great another SRS thread.

Stearing Clear...................

I'd just like to say that instead of running any doggie games my BLF in four days hunted up 36 wild pheasants for three hunters in SD. Not to mention, 2 prairie chickens and 3 Sharptail grouse. 

Keeping it real,


Regards


----------



## Patrick Johndrow (Jan 19, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I agree
> 
> Isn't the idea for people to enjoy being with and working with their dogs?




AMEN!....that is all that it is about and how ever that enjoyment comes to you his how you should spend your time.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

The biggest problem with SRS is what that organization considers good dog work. Whoever wrote the rules had little understanding of what a good and well-trained retriever should be able to do.

First, it is the dog's job to find a mark. The best way to get a dog to stop marking is to handle them on each mark. I spoke to one of the event winners over dinner one night and they told me that the dogs running SRS are not that talented nor that well trained.

SRS uses the term "Field Trial like" to gain credibilty. There are very few similarities between the two!

It is the organizations hopes that more FT Pros will enter their events. Other than one big named Pro having sampled it to promote a new product, the good FT Pros are not going to enter their dogs in an event that has little understand of what great retriever work consist of.

If the A-List FT Pros wanted to play SRS, all the current big SRS names would be SRS nobodies. However, the A-List FT Pros know better than to get involed with amaturish rules and a made for TV rubber ducky event.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> The biggest problem with SRS is what that organization considers good dog work. Whoever wrote the rules had little understanding of what a good and well-trained retriever should be able to do.
> 
> First, it is the dog's job to find a mark. The best way to get a dog to stop marking is to handle them on each mark. I spoke to one of the event winners over dinner one night and they told me that the dogs running SRS are not that talented nor that well trained.
> 
> ...


 Actually I believe the two organizations have similar ideas on good dog work. The difference is in the rules, and how handlers find ways around the rules. You mention Marking so I’ll use that as an example. 

In SRS, timing plays a portion of obtaining a good score. We all know that a dog that marks well and runs right to the bird typically has the shortest overall time. But if the dog marks well, gets there and then hunts, it may be more advantageous for the handler to just hit the whistle and get the dog back to save time. In FT, we have determined that handling is a sure way to lose. So we see dogs that go out and hunt forever sometimes with the handlers letting them. FT judges reward this thinking through their placements. What if FT judges started rewarding those who just dropped a quick whistle on a dog hunting the AOF and got the bird back quickly without disturbing so much cover and wasting time? What if a dog that was given a quick whistle after getting to the AOF and bringing the bird back placed higher than a dog that put on a long extended hunt for the same bird? (I know some FT purist just bowled over in pain at that thought ) It would change the game and change the mentality in a heartbeat. Either way the way to win each event is for your dog to go out there and pin each bird. There is no way around that. 

I think you make some pretty sweeping generalizations about the dogs and how well their trained as well. There was an AFC that went out in the first series of the MN this year. Was that dog not trained well? Big name pro’s understand that FT/HT and SRS are all different games and you have to know the game and be prepared for the game. Mike Lardy went to Europe and played the game there. None of his dogs won, in fact he did average in that game. Is it because his dogs aren’t well trained? Is it because he’s not a big name pro? Come on, its Mike Lardy for pete’s sake, the guy has dominated FT’s for years. I visited his place in Georgia and saw all the training he was putting in to prepare for that trip. He admitted it was a different game that was going to take a bigger adjustment on him vs the dogs. That may be the hardest thing for some trainers to admit. They have to change themselves more than their dogs. I have to ask, did the event winner you talked too include his own dogs in that? If you look at the entire field of dogs, perhaps you could make that generalization. That could apply to any FT as well though. Look how many dogs enter FT’s every year and compare that to those that place, title, and qual for nationals. You could just as easily stereotype FT dogs as “not trained very well.” I guess we’ll never know if the A list FT pros could take out the SRS pros, since they won’t step to the line.

/Paul


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Actually I believe the two organizations have similar ideas on good dog work. The difference is in the rules, and how handlers find ways around the rules. You mention Marking so I’ll use that as an example.
> 
> In SRS, timing plays a portion of obtaining a good score. We all know that a dog that marks well and runs right to the bird typically has the shortest overall time. But if the dog marks well, gets there and then hunts, it may be more advantageous for the handler to just hit the whistle and get the dog back to save time. In FT, we have determined that handling is a sure way to lose. So we see dogs that go out and hunt forever sometimes with the handlers letting them. FT judges reward this thinking through their placements. What if FT judges started rewarding those who just dropped a quick whistle on a dog hunting the AOF and got the bird back quickly without disturbing so much cover and wasting time? What if a dog that was given a quick whistle after getting to the AOF and bringing the bird back placed higher than a dog that put on a long extended hunt for the same bird?
> 
> ...





It is the dog's job to find the bird. There is nothing wrong with a tight hunt in FT's. Dogs that hunt out of the area of the fall generally no not place in an AA stake. The quickest way to get a dog to stop marking, is to handle them on a regular basis to each mark. If a dog can not find the mark quickly, then drop the dog but, don't make the event a handling to the mark festival. 

I don't know Mr Lardy and have no idea why he entered overseas. Maybe he was just wanting to do something different and take a short break from US FT's. I have no problem with the UK game as it fits the way they hunt.

The very successful US FT Pros won't step to the line because they see and understand the faults of what constitutes great dog work in the SRS game. They are not going to do it to their dogs, their clients nor their reputations. Not to say that one one on occasion enter to promote an item, But, running SRS over a season or longer would be career suicide. SRS may get some UNsuccessful FT pros to play their game on a regular basis.

If someone enjoys playing SRS, more power to them. Just don't draw any comparisions to US FT's because they are few!

P S How come all these other games claim to have FT type test yet never are the FT type test above a Qualifying level when they do attempt to emulate US FT's?


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> P S How come all these other games claim to have FT type test yet never are the FT type test above a Qualifying level when they do attempt to emulate US FT's?


Please describe to me a typical FT type test above a Qual level.


----------



## Bruce MacPherson (Mar 7, 2005)

Every post that finds fault with the SRS has the same pattern the end of which is usually "Rubber Ducky Event". Who cares what it is? It's a GAME. If you run FTs good for you, if you run HTs good for you, if you just hunt good for you. I don't think one is trying to replace the other. They are different events, choose the one that suits you and go compete.
I guarantee when a dog goes to the line in any of these venues they aren't worried about what game they are playing they just want to do what they were trained to do.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

saltmarsh said:


> Every post that finds fault with the SRS has the same pattern the end of which is usually "Rubber Ducky Event". Who cares what it is? It's a GAME. If you run FTs good for you, if you run HTs good for you, if you just hunt good for you. I don't think one is trying to replace the other. They are different events, choose the one that suits you and go compete.
> I guarantee when a dog goes to the line in any of these venues they aren't worried about what game they are playing they just want to do what they were trained to do.


Nope you're exactly right SM...It's a handler ego problem.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Mr. Booty
Your point is well taken, from a FT perspective. Its always been that way and thus it’s the best way, I agree. Yet what if SRS was the 80 year old game and FT’s were the new game? Would the point of view be that not handling is the absolute crazy way to handle this? I guess that might be a Jack Handy Saturday Night Live moment. 

I think if you spent time training with these guys you quickly realize that the training is not very different. In fact many of them play both games, and their training is exactly the same. Danny Farmer said it well, "A trained dog is a trained dog." You have to admit that in the heat of battle regardless of the games, you do things that you would not “normally” do. I can provide examples where a technique in the trial, is different than what would normally do in training. 

I’m kinda confused, normal for me perhaps, but your ok with UK FT because it fits the way they hunt, but not ok with SRS because….? IMHO its just another game based on hunting and hunting scenarios…

How many very successful FT pros are you including here? What about the normal successful pro’s? I would agree that we probably won’t see Lardy, Gonia, Rorem running SRS anytime soon, they have an established career with an established business in place, why would they do anything to change that? Wouldn’t make great business sense I would think. I guess you have to think a bit about what constitutes success. Their successful in their game. Why risk not being successful in another? Does that make their game better? I guess…

I would agree that from a game and rule perspective there is nothing similar. From a competitive stand point and winner format, then it makes more sense to say “FT” type format then “HT” type format….

How come FT’s don’t simulate real hunting situations? Just kidding, we all know why. At the end of the day, they are vastly different games. Trying to make an Apple taste like an Orange so you can compare them really just doesn’t work. It’s a completely different game, different rules and I guess I just don’t understand why some have such strong negative feelings towards it? 

Oh well at the end of the day we can all agree on one thing. Agility dogs are the best trained dogs of all. 

/Paul


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Dman said:


> Please describe to me a typical FT type test above a Qual level.



Sure will Dman.

I'll describe the Open 1st series from this weekend's Cajun Riviera trial;

Triple with three retired guns.

First bird down was at 350 yards, it was a dead drake mallard thrown from right to left. A drake was used for visablity and it was a huge throw. The thrower retired into the woods and was well hidden. 

Second bird down was at 200 yards also thrown from right to left. The brid fell in heavy cover near a Pecan tree. The thrower retired into heavy cover behind and old tree covered with a holding blind. 

The last bird down was angled back from left to right, this was a shot flyer(200 YARDS) also in heavy cover. When the gunners sat down, they were not visable to the dogs. Duck feathers from the shot bird blew all over the heavy cover and dogs really had to dig the bird out of a lot of scent that covered a large fall area. This bird was on the right of the other two.

The line was on a levee top. The line to the flyer was straight across a drainage canal with water and cover. Dogs lost sight of the entire field while in the canal swimming. The line to the left bird was an extreme angle across the canal. If the dogs squared off the canal, they increased their chances of getting into trouble. Dogs that held the extreme angle across the canal were in better shape of doing a better job because the came out of the canal facing in the direction they needed to be facing.

The line to the long middle bird was less extreme across the canal. However, it was a wide open field with two dozen hay bails. Many dogs went to far to the left if they didn't mark the bird well. 

I beleive 40 percent of the dogs starting the Open did the marks well. The dogs did their jobs, they marked the birds and hunted the area in which the birds fell. The dogs that didn't hunt the area of the fall either eliminated themselves by having the handler pick them up or were not called back for the double land blind.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Mr. Booty
> Your point is well taken, from a FT perspective. Its always been that way and thus it’s the best way, I agree. Yet what if SRS was the 80 year old game and FT’s were the new game? Would the point of view be that not handling is the absolute crazy way to handle this? I guess that might be a Jack Handy Saturday Night Live moment.
> 
> I think if you spent time training with these guys you quickly realize that the training is not very different. In fact many of them play both games, and their training is exactly the same. Danny Farmer said it well, "A trained dog is a trained dog." You have to admit that in the heat of battle regardless of the games, you do things that you would not “normally” do. I can provide examples where a technique in the trial, is different than what would normally do in training.
> ...


Some techniques may be similar but, experience and the expectations of a higher level of performance are very different. 

I would say that the top 40 or so US FT trainers will never step to an SRS line more than once. Why? Because they see the holes in the way the dogs are evaluated. IT IS THE DOGS JOB TO HUNT THE FALLEN BIRD. Take that away from the dog and what do you have? A handling to marks festival? 

I agree that if the dog is lost it should not only he handled to a mark but dropped from the competition. But please, LETS LET THE DOG DO HIS JOB FIRST. A quick handle to the marks is not doing the hunter, dog game player or dog any good. _it is counter productive and sure to RUIN ANY INSTINCT the dog has for marking._


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Whatever it was, it's gone now.

Nevermind.

kg


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Thanks Bootay.

Not much different than at least two series I have helped set up and judged at two different SRS's.


----------



## Patrick Johndrow (Jan 19, 2003)

flatcreek said:


>



Now this is great stuff no matter what venue we are discussing...this is a win-win for retrievers, hunting and all the doggie games.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Dman said:


> Thanks Bootay.
> 
> Not much different than at least two series I have helped set up and judged at two different SRS's.


Dman, this was an Open I described. How come less than 1 % of those SRS dogs don't have an FC and/or AFC? Lets be real please, how many of the SRS dogs have earned their QAA at an Open ot Amateur?

I understand why SRS tries to position itself with US FT's. That's good marketing but not accurate. Those SRS dogs could not do a real US FT Open setup. I'm sorry but it is fantasy to think so.


I've seen some of those SRS setups on the boob-tube and have yet to see anything that resembles an Open. 

Please visit an Open this Winter in Texas and then tell me they are similar.

Thanks,


----------



## kip (Apr 13, 2004)

im not taking up for booty but the big difference and i mean the biggest difference is real birds. if you train your on dog or train with a pro you cant tell me when u use real birds it doesnt make a differencc.
The srs is a great venue. its made for television. it has sponsors that need revenue to operate. it has an owner that has to make a profit to put on the next. its not about theirs is bigger than yours. its just another game.
Can a great srs dog compete in an open. i dont think it can consistantly as great open dogs can. can a great field trial dog compete in the srs. yes i think it can. but in a field trial dog you start handleling on every mark he doesnt come up with quickly and you would have it popping like popcorn which sends you home in a hurry in an open.
its like apples and oranges. if you are all about the dogs then so the hell what. play the game you wont and shut the hell up about somebody elses game.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

kip said:


> im not taking up for booty but the big difference and i mean the biggest difference is real birds. if you train your on dog or train with a pro you cant tell me when u use real birds it doesnt make a differencc.
> The srs is a great venue. its made for television. it has sponsors that need revenue to operate. it has an owner that has to make a profit to put on the next. its not about theirs is bigger than yours. its just another game.
> Can a great srs dog compete in an open. i dont think it can consistantly as great open dogs can. can a great field trial dog compete in the srs. yes i think it can. but in a field trial dog you start handleling on every mark he doesnt come up with quickly and you would have it popping like popcorn which sends you home in a hurry in an open.
> its like apples and oranges. if you are all about the dogs then so the hell what. play the game you wont and shut the hell up about somebody elses game.


Thank you Kip.

How anyone can find fault with the above would be beyond me.

I do wonder how the SRS folks at the top of the game keep their dogs from popping!

Chris


----------



## kip (Apr 13, 2004)

after talking to a good friend that judged one it is common to see popping.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> IT IS THE DOGS JOB TO HUNT THE FALLEN BIRD.
> 
> But please, LETS LET THE DOG DO HIS JOB FIRST. A quick handle to the marks is not doing the hunter, dog game player or dog any good. _it is counter productive and sure to RUIN ANY INSTINCT the dog has for marking._


I agree. In AKC FT's, this is certainly the stance. In real life hunting, and other games, perhaps not. I would say, when I go hunting with most of my friends, the dogs ability to even see the marks is their last concern. Concealment and a dog that can dig out the birds via handling and nose is more important to them. Keep in mind, FT's idea of improving the breed is not always in line with what 99% of the hunting population look for in a dog.

/Paul


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> Dman, this was an Open I described. How come less than 1 % of those SRS dogs don't have an FC and/or AFC? Lets be real please, how many of the SRS dogs have earned their QAA at an Open ot Amateur?
> 
> I understand why SRS tries to position itself with US FT's. That's good marketing but not accurate. Those SRS dogs could not do a real US FT Open setup. I'm sorry but it is fantasy to think so.
> 
> ...


From your previous post it would appear that 60% of the FT dogs couldn't do the FT test either... Seriously though, I would be interested in knowing how many of the dogs play both games. Out of curiosity.

/Paul


----------



## kip (Apr 13, 2004)

if i just wonted a hunting dog i would get a british bred dog.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

kip said:


> im not taking up for booty but the big difference and i mean the biggest difference is real birds. if you train your on dog or train with a pro you cant tell me when u use real birds it doesnt make a differencc.
> The srs is a great venue. its made for television. it has sponsors that need revenue to operate. it has an owner that has to make a profit to put on the next. its not about theirs is bigger than yours. its just another game.
> Can a great srs dog compete in an open. i dont think it can consistantly as great open dogs can. can a great field trial dog compete in the srs. yes i think it can. but in a field trial dog you start handleling on every mark he doesnt come up with quickly and you would have it popping like popcorn which sends you home in a hurry in an open.
> its like apples and oranges. if you are all about the dogs then so the hell what. play the game you wont and shut the hell up about somebody elses game.


I do agree that real birds make a huge difference. I think if SRS used real birds you'd see much different performances out of the dogs and frankly more FT's. I do think that many people feel that running the event will contribute to the use of non live birds and they are categorically opposed to that. 

/Paul


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

The bird issue, as well as the whole rule thing were two of the primary reasons the World Retriever format ran its events in 05 and 06.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> The bird issue, as well as the whole rule thing were two of the primary reasons the World Retriever format ran its events in 05 and 06.


Chris, I can't remember. Did you use real birds for that?

/Paul


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Yes they did.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> Please visit an Open this Winter in Texas and then tell me they are similar.


If they're not held during hunting season, I plan on doing that.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

How would you describe this test?

Triple with two retired guns.

First bird down in moderate cover at 260 yrds. Thrown angled in left to right. Thrower retires.

Second bird down thrown left to right at 290 yrds. Gunner retires.

Third bird down thrown in heavier cover left to right at 140 yrds. Gunner remains visible.

Line located on top of hill. Line to last bird down straight down hill. Line to right bird, (first bird down) and left bird (second bird down) angled down same hill. Line to first and second bird down angled across a 4' deep x 10' wide dry creek bed 150 yrds from line. Dogs lost sight of entire field while in creek. Dogs that squared the creek, got in trouble.
After the marks were retrieved, run a 225 yrd blind just to right of right hand mark, but infront of creek.

All gunners wore white coats. The only series of the four where this was the case. 

I'm not saying this was a typical FT setup. What I'm asking is how you would describe this test to the handlers if the other series all had hidden gunners and shooting at the line except for the first series which was a double blind.

Would you call it a HT setup? FT like setup? What?

Remember the judges cannot do anything about the rubber ducks. They must be used.


----------



## Lab-Kid (Aug 26, 2005)

And don't forget, even in the "FT" setups the handler can't point out the gunners. That can be very informative as to how well a Field Trial dog actually "marks" birds.


----------



## Kevin White (Jun 21, 2005)

Mr. Booty, 

Who are you? I sit back and as you can see do not post very much on this forum because of people like you. I posted a picture a while back and got read the riot act by you about how it was too big and you had to scroll over to see it. And instead of offering some advice you chose to try and show someone up. You sit behind a keyboard and constantly criticize others for what they might like or be interested in. If they gave out FC's for keyboard jockeying you would definatley have a few under your belt.

We all know the Field Trials are the cream of the crop and there is no other that compares. We get it already. For you to sit back and say that all these SRS handlers wouldn't be anything if REAL FT'ers ran is assinine. I do not run the SRS nor have any affiliation to them, I am just tired of the all the jackass statements about the different venues. 

I am not sure but I would guess that the labrador breed was not started so that they could retrieve a bird hand thrown by a guy in a white coat at 400 yards. But we do not labor on that point, when you and some others are walking around with your chest poked out and nose in the air.

Who cares what type of venue you run in, it is all about you and your dog doing what you like. Too many people miss that point by constantly beating their chests and telling others how much better their dogs are. Most of the retriever community really admires what the great open dogs can do. You would be an idiot not to be able to appreciate the work. I have been to a few field trials as an observer and really enjoyed watching them work. 

But you know at the end of the day it was a Man/Woman and their dog making retrieves and enjoying the day in the field. The dogs could care less if you have a white coat, camo coat, or a khaki made for tv shirt on, and I can assure you that.

It's about the dogs not us!

I will try and get this right so that I might get into the cool kid group.

Lowly hunt test guy with a duck hunitng machine for a dog regards,

Kevin White


----------



## Patrick Johndrow (Jan 19, 2003)

flatcreek said:


>




How about less bitching and moaning both ways and more of this stuff....or dont you get it?


----------



## J Hoggatt (Jun 16, 2004)

GAWD-I AM SORRY...............

To almost all of you - I just wanted to stir it up a little -but not this much- I just wanted to have fun with it.....

First - 
Our hunting sporting is being attacked - 
Hunters are not replacing themselves.
YET-
They are a Thousands More people who hunt with NO Dog - and or Un-Trained Dogs.

SRS - does give us in the dog game- (mostly) positive exposure- what can are dogs do---most of you know other people who hunt with a relatively un-trained dog.

FT- Most Challenging etc- Stipulated
Other games are games
There is a lot of people - can't, won't participate in the FT game. - Why ruin it for them, by telling them they are full of "stuff"-

Lastly -
For at least twice this past few days- I agree with Kip's comments on this subject....
I am starting to get it -


PS.
as for all the animosity-(IMHO) is mostly about EGO and Money envy - as most conflicts....
If I could solve that - I would them go over to the Middle-East and solve something more important... just saying.....


----------



## Kevin White (Jun 21, 2005)

J Hoggatt said:


> GAWD-I AM SORRY..........


I doubt that. You posted this on multiple boards and got out of it just what you wanted.

Job well done.


----------



## J Hoggatt (Jun 16, 2004)

Yes- i did

but this has gotten a little out of hand - don't you think.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

J. Hoggatt wrote:



> PS.
> as for all the animosity-(IMHO) is mostly about EGO and Money envy - as most conflicts....


Respectfully, I disagree. I see your point, and I'll not attempt to speak for anyone else but myself.....but for me, those two have NOTHING to do with it. There are several here who will take issue with me on this, and that's okay. Honest to Pete.....neither are issues with me on the topic of SRS. 

Seriously.

kg


----------



## J Hoggatt (Jun 16, 2004)

K G said:


> J. Hoggatt wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Great- KG - and as a said "Mostly" - which isn't "all" - 
The "respectfully" is appreciated.

Sincerely-


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Point well taken.

I can, and will, _only_ speak for myself.

kg


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Since Kevin brought it up I'll say again that I'm not affiliated with the SRS either. I am not an employee, have no contractual relationship, am not an ambassador, have never been paid one penny by anyone associated with the SRS, and have absolutely nothing to gain or loose if they have 100 dogs per event or 10....... I have simply volunteered my time to judge several events just like I do for HRC and other organizations.

This whole FT thing was started by Ken after he didn't make it to the finals in the Hot Spring qualifier........I happend to have judged that event. During the first series handlers briefing which was a 390 yrd poison bird blind with a gunner in the field in a white coat throwing the poison bird, it was mentioned that this was a "white coat series". At no time was a comparison made with FT's. Make what you want to out of that, but it *is* and was an accurate description of the test. Ken and others made the comparison, not the judges.

Ken's dog ran an excellent blind but did not do the required work on the second series as well as some other dogs and therefore his combined series score was not low enough to advance to the semi finals. Period. End of story! Nothing else to it. No conspiracy. No manipulation of points.....Nothing!

I have never said, nor have I heard any other SRS judge say anything about comparing the SRS with FT's. I have always stated the SRS is not a FT or a HT just like I wouldn't say a HT is like a FT or a FT is like a HT.....It's the SRS..... a hybrid with it's own rules that are very different from the other games. If you don't understand the rules, or don't like them, that's fine, just stop telling me and everyone else on here you understand them and how they are applied.

Saying that the SRS judges are nothing more than score keepers is asinine and proves the ignorance of some on this and other boards. The judges I know have all had extensive experience training, hunting, and handling retrievers. Saying we don't know good dog work when we see it is another slap in the face. What facts have been used to support these conclusions?

I'm tired of having my name, the other judge's names, and everyone else associated with the SRS games, drug through the mud and stomped on public forums by people that don't have any idea, nor do they care to know, what the facts are, every time someone posts an SRS topic. These attacks are malicious and slanderous and enough is enough!


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Dman said:


> During the first series handlers briefing which was a 390 yrd poison bird blind with a gunner in the field in a white coat throwing the poison bird, it was mentioned that this was a "white coat series". At no time was a comparison made with FT's. Make what you want to out of that, but it *is* and was an accurate description of the test. Ken and others made the comparison, not the judges.
> 
> ...
> 
> I have never said, nor have I heard any other SRS judge say anything about comparing the SRS with FT's.


I run FT. I do not run HT. I do not run SRS. I don't care what other folks are doing if they are having fun. 

I am not going to engage in the silly banter about what dogs are best, what competitions are best, whatever ... At some point, they all seem to degenerate into mudslinging.

That being said, how can you say it was a "WHITE COAT SERIES" without thinking that people would draw a connection to Field Trials?


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

What would you have called it Ted? Do FT's have a patent on those words?
It was not a HT series or a hunting series so what would be an accurate description?
If you have a series with retired gunners, shooting in the field, and wearing white coats, I'll ask again. What should it be called?


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Dman said:


> These attacks are malicious and slanderous and enough is enough!


If you are going to post on this site don't do it with a thin skin! All too often someone thinks it's OK to slam someone else as long as that person doesn't slam back. & when the insult is returned they develop the "why are you nailing me" complex.

I've never seen an SRS event, but would like to! Can't seem to locate any schedule of when they might approach our part of the country. I've also never been to a Frisbee dog competition!

Have been to a HT, when the guns in the field yelled HEY HEY OVER HERE before they threw I'd seen enough. This was in a Master Stake. I'd also been to another where th 6 birds down looked more like throwing them in a pile. 

I am personally glad that these people do something with their dogs - & more so that it isn't the FT game as there are too many cluttering it up already!

But when they try to compare their venue with the FT game they are reaching. The FT game doesn't try to compare with anything - they are the original. I'll take my FT dog anytime when it comes to any venue - some dogs from other venues may be able to compete at the FT level - the big difference is that with a little conditioning the FT dog can compete in any venue, the reverse is not true.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Thanks for your concern Marvin. I assure you my skin is very thick.


----------



## Jay Dufour (Jan 19, 2003)

Handlers couldn't wear a white coat.The first 15 handlers were in the shadows.Some dogs were auto casting.It was a good test to break the ice with,whatever label you wanna put on it.......Poison bird shot three times.....hip pocket blind just deep of the gunners.There it is....one retrieve.


----------



## Kevin White (Jun 21, 2005)

ftrjuj said:


> But when they try to compare their venue with the FT game they are reaching. The FT game doesn't try to compare with anything - they are the original. I'll take my FT dog anytime when it comes to any venue - some dogs from other venues may be able to compete at the FT level - the big difference is that with a little conditioning the FT dog can compete in any venue, the reverse is not true.


fruitjuice, or whatever you name is,

you were doing so well but then you just couldn't help yourself. My weenie is bigger than your weenie took over. Arrogance is not bliss.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

ftrjuj said:


> But when they try to compare their venue with the FT game they are reaching. The FT game doesn't try to compare with anything - they are the original. I'll take my FT dog anytime when it comes to any venue - some dogs from other venues may be able to compete at the FT level - the big difference is that with a little conditioning the FT dog can compete in any venue, the reverse is not true.


Thank you Marvin, that is exactly what I was trying to point out in my post. By SRS saying that they have FT type test, they are not being accurate. I undertsand why the promoters of the SRS use it. It is very simple, Marketing 101. Always position your product up and never down. Avis positioned to Hertz, Lexus postioned to Mercedes Benz etc. 

And, like I said earlier, there are just too many holes in what they think constitutes great dog work. I too will take the game that has had their rules and expectations defined over the last 70 plus years by the best retriever minds ever.

It may not be perfect but, it is real.


----------



## Vicky Trainor (May 19, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Well,
> 
> This subject line stated that the participants should have some fun.
> 
> ...


Please explain to me what part of the above post by Chris some don't understand.  Please stop the personal attacks. They are not welcome on RTF. 

Everyone can have a different opinion.....that's human nature. Discussion can be done without resorting to personal attacks, back stabbing, etc.

Many of the participants in this thread are experienced retriever people. Let's show a little respect to everyone, please.

Thanks,
Vicky


----------



## JDogger (Feb 2, 2003)

Marv is it? wrote;

"I am personally glad that these people do something with their dogs - & more so that it isn't the FT game as there are too many cluttering it up already".

Now, there's a sensitive statement that makes me just wanna go out and help with a FT for the old Albuquerue Retriever Club, (remember us?)

Amazing.... simply,amazing.

Hugh


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Dman said:


> What would you have called it Ted? Do FT's have a patent on those words?
> It was not a HT series or a hunting series so what would be an accurate description?
> If you have a series with retired gunners, shooting in the field, and wearing white coats, I'll ask again. What should it be called?


Dman

Are you seriously going to tell me that you do not know that over the years, field trials have been called a "white coat" game? And that the test was referred to a white coat test, because the guys in the field wore white coats? No doubt when the gunners wore camo at SRS, the test was referred to as "camo coat" test, right?


Really, now ... 


And again, I don't have anything negative to say about SRS. I haven't played and don't intend to, but for those that do, more power to them.

Ted


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

What's really comical about all this Ted is that term has been used many times in certain SRS series. I don' t know exactly how many different handlers have heard it over the last few years, but Ken is the only one that has made an issue of it. It's also funny that Danny never said anything about it either. Seems the only person it bothered was Ken and his buddies.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Ted Shih said:


> Are you seriously going to tell me that you do not know that over the years, field trials have been called a "white coat" game? And that the test was referred to a white coat test, because the guys in the field wore white coats? No doubt when the gunners wore camo at SRS, the test was referred to as "camo coat" test, right


When I first started in FT's - at that time the only game - gunners wore camo &/or whatever - white was not the uniform of the day. White was instituted as a safety precaution as the falls became tighter & there was concern for the live gunners being able to see the other gun stations. With the use of white coats falls became longer - not necessarily better - but a dog could see the gunners at a greater distance.


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

ftrjuj said:


> With the use of white coats falls became longer - not necessarily better - but a dog could see the gunners at a greater distance.


Be careful there Marvin. You're starting to make too much sense.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Dman

Guthrie and I have had our share of run-ins, so I am hardly going to defend his conduct

But, Field Trials have been known as the "white coat" game for several years

In fact, it was often used by HT proponents in a derogatory way

So, I can certainly see how people would make the connection between "white coat" and "field trial"

As for the rest of the banter here

I will say what I have said from the beginning ...

If you are getting out with your dog and having fun

More power to you

Ted


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

Ted I have no beef with you. I have always respected what you have had to say.

I have never said a derogatory thing about any of the retriever games and can assure you that is not what was meant in this case.


----------



## moose203 (May 2, 2007)

Being new to the games regardless of what venue i chose to end up participating in i enjoy watching dogs working and having fun, from dock dogs to FT. it is guys or gals having fun with there best friend or a professional working for his or her lively hood it is still people having a good time enjoying there dogs. I can say i lurked around this site for a while before ever posting and the kind of behavior that is going on in this thread could easily put someone off about participating in any dog event in fear of being ridiculed by others IMO.
Every one knows where stands on this topic so how about moving on to some thing else

Jason


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I think we are all working towards a big group hug .....


----------



## Mark Littlejohn (Jun 16, 2006)

Well, this has been about as lively as any RTF thread lately.

I'd like someday to see one of my dogs with the entire alphabet in front of and behind his name: GHRCH, FC-AFC, MH, SRS, whatever. I can't imagine that anyone would argue that to play and taste success in all the retriever games would be a huge accomplishment.

But my greatest thrill will still be when me and a bunch of my buddies show up on opening day, we're covered in ducks, and I've brought the only dog. ;-)

ml


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

Mr Booty said:


> Thank you Marvin, that is exactly what I was trying to point out in my post. By SRS saying that they have FT type test, they are not being accurate. I undertsand why the promoters of the SRS use it. It is very simple, Marketing 101. Always position your product up and never down. Avis positioned to Hertz, Lexus postioned to Mercedes Benz etc.
> 
> And, like I said earlier, there are just too many holes in what they think constitutes great dog work. I too will take the game that has had their rules and expectations defined over the last 70 plus years by the best retriever minds ever.
> 
> It may not be perfect but, it is real.


Sorry, but I don't see anything "REAL" about Field Trials. Unless you mean it has real birds. That's the only thing real about it. It certainly doesn't simulate duck hunting. But I don't have anything against FT's, just not a game that interests me personally.


----------



## HarryWilliams (Jan 17, 2005)

Does anyone know what Rodney King is doing now a days? HPW


----------



## Paul Rainbolt (Sep 8, 2003)

Steve Hester said:


> Sorry, but I don't see anything "REAL" about Field Trials. Unless you mean it has real birds. That's the only thing real about it. It certainly doesn't simulate duck hunting. But I don't have anything against FT's, just not a game that interests me personally.


Some like McDonald's some prefer fillet mignon. Enjoy


----------



## Dman (Feb 26, 2003)

HarryWilliams said:


> Does anyone know what Rodney King is doing now a days? HPW


Sweeping floors In jail?


----------



## HarryWilliams (Jan 17, 2005)

I heard Rodney was opening up a fast food chain called "Filet's Are Us". I hope he does better than "can't we all just get along". HPW


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

This is a quick housekeeping note. 

After this note, I am locking the thread.

You guys are all free and welcome to fire up a new SRS thread, if you like. 

MANY of the combatants in this discussion have been contacted via PM. In some cases, it has been from me, some from Vicky. Some to only one combatant, some to multiples.

I want to ask you all this: When you are asked to modify your behavior due to slinging personal attacks, please do not respond with worries about the other guy and what he or she is doing. Let's be accountable for our own actions.

As we have written on here before, the Golden Rule should be your guide. How would YOU want to be treated? Please think about that and treat the others the way you yourself would like to be treated.

If you guys want to pour passion into something, pour it into your families and your loved ones. 

Kristie Wilder and her family need your support, prayers and friendship. Surely we all can agree on this.

Sincerely,

Chris Atkinson


----------

