# Judging bias



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

Saw a post on FaceBook regarding field trial judging bias and how HT people have no or little chance of winning or placing. Personally, I haven't seen it. The field trails I have been at and watched all of the dogs, the dog that I thought won did end up winning, and the placements were pretty close as well. 

I wonder if that perception is a lack of understanding due to the difference in judging between the two types of events. To me HT judges put a lot more emphasis on blinds and seem they use the blind as their only manner to eliminate dogs. It may be due to limited distances on marks or lack of knowledge on placing marks. FT judging emphasizes marks (consistent with the rules). I have seen HT folks in the gallery say, "That dogs marks were better, but my dogs blind was better." To me that shows a lack of understanding. What are your thoughts?

Also there seems to be some selective memory of all handlers regarding their and other dogs. 

PS. Please no names of judges or events if you use an example.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

I haven't seen any bias. Occasionally I will run under a judge that will avoid in the future. Right now I can only think of one and I haven't seen him judging in a long time.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

bjoiner said:


> Also there seems to be some selective memory of all handlers regarding their and other dogs.


This most likely.

As a judge, I get a number from the handler coming to the line and write down in my book what the dogs do. It is rare when I am working through placements that I have a clue what dog/handler team belongs to the number. Often the ribbon ceremony is when I find out who actually won.

I don't think blinds get more emphasis in FTs vs HTs. I could argue it is even the opposite. It may look that way to those called back from the marks, do an okay blind and are dropped, but I think that is more likely that they combination of the two no longer has them in the trial.

I do however think the standards are higher. What might be an okay blind in a MH test, may well fail in a Q and is highly unlikely to get you back in an AM. However, if your dog passes the blind and has good marks, it keeps playing.


----------



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

By emphasis I don't mean judged easier in FT. It just seems to me that HT judges, in general, tend to use the blind to drop dogs rather than marks.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

DoubleHaul said:


> This most likely.
> 
> As a judge, I get a number from the handler coming to the line and write down in my book what the dogs do. It is rare when I am working through placements that I have a clue what dog/handler team belongs to the number. Often the ribbon ceremony is when I find out who actually won.
> 
> ...


Handlers in HTs when running FT Quals have a tendency not to challenge the blind and many times are subsequently dropped for poor blinds . My observation as a judge (eights points plus HT and FT) they seem to fear the blind more, hunt testers. It appears in my opinion as a judge and a contestant in the Master stake, there are far more training issues with blind work. Ran a Master a few weeks ago and some of the dogs were 50 yards off line trying to do a land blind and had many , many whistles on their water blinds. Now this is regional in the mid-west, can't speak for the rest of the country. Mostly amateur handlers, Pros do a much better job of blind handling, probably because of more confidence in the trainability factor. A very hacky. slip whistles, cast refusals, and poor initial lines in the AKC hunt tests are going to be penalized , sometimes severely along with a double handling on marks, is probably going to get you tossed.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

Bubba I thought about getting the popcorn out but then thought better! 
Facebook posts, Rtf posts and opinions in general all come from the eyes of the beholder. Exam the experience, success and the path taken to those lofty heights of opinion. 

Now we enter, judge and enjoy both venues. What i have seen is the dogs dont really care about the venue and in the end it is about dogs picking up birds. If your going to have success at the ft level you better be committed both with your effort level and your pocketbook plus it helps to have a good well trained pooch and have the "dog gods" smiling on you at the correct time. 

At the ht level always remember it is your team against the standard and if the goal is simply a ribbon well that can be achieved over time however if you can try to master the test you generally can walk away with something to work on 

When I judge seldom do I know anything but the number and at times it gets laughable when a pro brings up 20 or so dogs and he gets the names mixed up. The really successful handlers ( mostly) are humble, dedicated folks working to get thier team better. 
My opinion 
Dk


----------



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

Dave Kress said:


> The really successful handlers ( mostly) are humble, dedicated folks working to get thier team better.
> Dk


That is absolutely true, no matter what venue.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

_To me HT judges put a lot more emphasis on blinds and seem they use the blind as their only manner to eliminate dogs._

Au contraire_!!!_ Ain't nobody going to beat my little HT dog on blinds, but she sometimes defeats herself on marks.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

bjoiner said:


> I wonder if that perception *is a lack of understanding due to the difference in judging between the two types of events. *To me HT judges put a lot more emphasis on blinds and seem they use the blind as their only manner to eliminate dogs. It may be due to limited distances on marks or lack of knowledge on placing marks. FT judging emphasizes marks (consistent with the rules). I have seen HT folks in the gallery say, "That dogs marks were better, but my dogs blind was better." To me that shows a lack of understanding. What are your thoughts?
> 
> Also there seems to be some selective memory of all handlers regarding their and other dogs.
> 
> PS. Please no names of judges or events if you use an example.


I saw the post as well:



> _*The politics in field trial judging is a joke...*_


This was my reply:



> *Get into the game, pay some dues and take your lumps, and start judging. People will look at you differently when they know that they have to come under your sharp pencil.*


i do think a). there are some people who are political and that's just the nature of competitive sports. I know 2 judges that as long as their one close friend doesn't pick up, there friend will win or place. Well known in my circuit. I had two members of a field trial committee and a placing contestant apologize to me at one trial when I got the RJ. Everyone knew what happened. To pretend it doesn't happen would be living in a fairy tale. I just won't run under those types of judges, as I would get more pleasure by flushing my entry fee down the toilet one dollar at a time and watching the swirl. But clubs should just not ask these people to judge. *In large, I think there are more people who try and do the right thing by the dogs than to pick based on who is running the dog. * 

and b: there are hunt test people who don't understand the judging of field trials. I was running my own dog in a qual against a well known hunt test pro. To this day, I am sure he still thinks he beat my dog because my dog hooked a retired gun (something I personally believe is impossible since you can't hook what you can't see) and pinned a mark. His dog went straight to the area, and put up a moderate hunt. His line may have been better, but my dog's mark was clearly superior. He felt that because he was in the area of the fall, the hunt really didn't matter. This shows a lack of understanding to me.

So, I think there is some of both. but it exists in hunt tests as well. People who get passes that barely meet the standard.


----------



## Trevor Toberny (Sep 11, 2004)

I ran a derby where one of the amateurs that was running was friends with the judge and helped marshal. His dog had fairly large hints on every mark in the derby and that dog got 4th and should have a jam at best. There is politics in everything, you hope it doesn't affect placings but it does. There definitely is a buddy buddy system in field trial judging.... Disclaimer: I have only been around a short time so maybe it was just the couple I watched but I even over heard people in gallery comment on that dog has had big hunts on every bird and cheated water but will probably place because he was friends with judge. Was even standing up with judges while they were picking marks


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

If you are in this game long enough, you will see some strange results at the end of trials. Some are accidental, some not so much. This is debated here often... Doesn't matter your background. Take a look at Bon's signature line. Pretty true statement by Lanse.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Anyone with decades or more in the dog games will have their stories. When I first started running hunt tests in the 1980's I was given a zero in trainability because I lined the blind. It was changed by the co-judge. I had a fourth place in a field trial open all-age stake in the fifth series to break the tie for a winner, guess who was in the running for the win? Dog got out 10 feet too early on the water blind, ran down the shore and they only awarded three places. I received nothing. There are many more would sound like sour grapes could fill up a legal pad page or two. Had some gifts too, judges fell asleep on a water blind , closed eyes and all. Dog disappeared in the tules, dog came out, judges woke up, said oh she got the bird. Figured I was out, dog was out of sight for awhile. Started to drive down the road, marshal called out that I was back for the water marks. She won the Amateur all-age stake after pounding the water marks. It goes on...others have the same stories I am sure like Lanse Brown's signature line. Make note, deal the hand that your dealt and move on or get out of the game and take up golf. Judging is not an exact science even though crunching numbers sometimes has become the norm in hunt tests. My opinion only.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

"Make note, deal the hand that your dealt and move on or get out of the game and take up golf. Judging is not an exact science even though crunching numbers sometimes has become the norm in hunt tests. My opinion only."

And your opinion is spot on. Guess that's why I enjoyed judging with you. Hope to do so again.

Bob Swift


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

When you thought you did well and did not win it is easier to blame the judges than to look into the mirror.


----------



## Sundown49 aka Otey B (Jan 3, 2003)

*The really successful handlers ( mostly) are humble, dedicated folks working to get thier team better. 
My opinion *

very well said Dave


----------



## Scott Adams (Jun 25, 2003)

If I saw Angelina Jolie walking down the street and I noticed she had a pimple on her forehead. I probably wouldn't spend much time focusing on that.


----------



## John Montenieri (Jul 6, 2009)

EdA said:


> When you thought you did well and did not win it is easier to blame the judges than to look into the mirror.


Very true and well said. Most everyone doesn't see all the dog work in a stake nor do they have the birds eye view of the judges. We all tend to look closely at our results, good/bad, and not give enough attention to the rest of the field.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

I'm like most who have run FTs for a while. You get less than you think you should on occasion & get more credit than you think you should other times, but most times you get just what you earned. I've won a couple of times when I thought I was behind some dogs. I have not won when I thought my dog was the best. But most times I get just what I should. As for what handlers, owners & spectators sometimes question in terms of a winner can come from a dog that hammers the 4th but those in attendance didn't see the performances in the 1st-3rd to get the complete picture. The answer is to train diligently, be as prepared as possible, then do your best & leave the judging to the judges who are doing their best to get placements right. Some have mentioned what I think most relative new comers don't seem to understand immediately & that is how to run a good the water blind.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Luke T said:


> I ran a derby where one of the amateurs that was running was friends with the judge and helped marshal. His dog had fairly large hints on every mark in the derby and that dog got 4th and should have a jam at best. There is politics in everything, you hope it doesn't affect placings but it does. There definitely is a buddy buddy system in field trial judging.... Disclaimer: I have only been around a short time so maybe it was just the couple I watched but I even over heard people in gallery comment on that dog has had big hunts on every bird and cheated water but will probably place because he was friends with judge. Was even standing up with judges while they were picking marks


I'm sorry you had such bad experiences in the few trials you have run, I think that has skewed your perception a bit. I know there are some dishonest judges out there that will give a buddy an undeserved placement, but I believe they are more rare than you perceive. I know that I have received a few greenies where I and others in the gallery thought a placement was in order, but I'll tell you from a judges perspective, once you get past the first two or three placements, separating fourth from the RJ and best of the JAMs is very difficult. You are in essence weighing faults on different marks and blinds trying to figure out better work amongst dogs that can be very close.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Some times your the windshield. Sometimes the bug. 

While it happens, I would wager that most every person sitting in a chair for the weekend tries to do right by each and every dog and handler and not skew things unfairly. 

And many times a handler has a slightly different view of the actual work in front of him/her than the judges. And let us not forget, there are 2 people coming up with the numbers and placements.

As far as an actual FT/HT bias: In my VERY limited experience with FT's vs HT's, the level of quality and expectations of a FTer vs a HTer are vast and IMO the main reason that the HTer does poorly in a FT.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Umm Bias in anything...umm...never happens...umm; This is why I don't have a book listing clubs, judges, who trains with who, and results of, nor do I call people up to ask about such things before I enter a trial, hunt test or anything. However it's almost impossible to keep a outright winner out...if there's no outright winner 1st & 2nd are usually pretty correct ...placements after that we'll umm.. 3,4,RJ placements can be highly subject to interpretation . 

Still if your worried about a HT bias, take all the titles off your entry express account, remove sire -dam info, only nod whenever anyone mentions HT;s at the trial and they'll won't know where you come from


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

Same thing can be said about women, goldens, chessies, and labs other than black.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

JusticeDog said:


> I saw the post as well:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


With all due respect Susan, your reply to the facebook post only proves the point of the original poster. 

Get in the game and pay some dues? People look differently when you might be judging them? 

That's the kind of talk that supports people's theories (most of which are really false). I've heard the same thing from plenty of amateur field trialers that were beaten by an established pro as well.

By and large I think the best dog/handler team wins every weekend. There will never be a world without bias but I think those patterns become apparent very quickly. 

Mostly, I think people who don't run trials and complain about politics are just looking for an excuse not to get out and lose every weekend for the first 100 weekends they run.

When 4 out of 75-100 dogs a week get a placement, odds are 90+% are gonna lose. You have to accept that to play and most people don't have the stomach for those odds.

There are a ton of people on our local circuit that run week after week and rarely if ever place. They do it because they love and it and one day... they will be in the ribbons. 

It's no different than shooting sporting clays, some days I have a good day and my partners (who are all better shots than me) have a bad one and guess what? I win! Most of the time though, I have to settle for taking the clinic they put on every Sunday. It's OK. I love it. If I had to win every week I wouldn't be able to play.


----------



## vanman (Sep 26, 2007)

DarrinGreene said:


> With all due respect Susan, your reply to the facebook post only proves the point of the original poster.
> 
> Get in the game and pay some dues? People look differently when you might be judging them?
> 
> ...


Been judging and running dogs for 18 yrs.Not a pile of experience but enough.I started in HRC,went to a couple grands.Ran master and went to MN.Got a puppy that was gonna be a hunt test dog but a guy a had just met recognized him and said I should run Derby's with him.I didn't know crap about field trials .He said stick with me and I'll show you.I've been training with him 11 yrs now and have become close friends.He gave me these words of wisdom after I started running all age stakes and I'll never forget them." If u win or place , thank the judges and go home.If u think u got screwed , thank the judges and go home because a:sooner or later it will come your way and b:nothing u say will change the outcome.U have to have a measure of thick skin to play the trial game and if u don't, u won't b around long."Came from a guy with over 50 yrs training dogs and running field trials.I'll never forget those words


----------



## Bill Cummins Jr. (Aug 2, 2011)

bjoiner said:


> By emphasis I don't mean judged easier in FT. It just seems to me that HT judges, in general, tend to use the blind to drop dogs rather than marks.


 It could be a accumalation of things that make it appear at the time of being dropped, that is was the blind. When all it was, is the final straw that broke the camel's back.

Bill


----------



## vanman (Sep 26, 2007)

That could be it too ha ha.....good point!


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

EdA said:


> When you thought you did well and did not win it is easier to blame the judges than to look into the mirror.


Video doesn't lie Ed. Dogs that hooked the gunner won and dogs that went straight to the bird without a hunt didn't place. How can we collectively make judging more objective?


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

thebigcat said:


> Video doesn't lie Ed. Dogs that hooked the gunner won and dogs that went straight to the bird without a hunt didn't place. How can we collectively make judging more objective?


You talking about a derby?


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

You can figure it out for yourself, Ie GDG, but regardless judging in FT gets worse if they follow Susan's methodology.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

If the FT game is ever to progress to engaging younger/amateur participants, the politics need to change. Otherwise it'll be a bunch of 60-80 year old trailers who feel because they showed up they need to place. Period. End of story. 

If a young boxer knocks out De La Hoya and loses because he's a no name from a small town, what does that do for the sport? Exactly the same thing it does for the FT COMMUNITY, discourages competing against the well known handlers/owners because there's no chance of placing. With all due respect, screw Susan's thought process, because it does nothing but facilitate the status quo.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> With all due respect Susan, your reply to the facebook post only proves the point of the original poster.
> 
> Get in the game and pay some dues? People look differently when you might be judging them?
> 
> ...


Actually it doesn't Darrin. The point is, let people get to know you and vice versa. The things I mentioned show you're serious, want to help and want to learn, and give back to the sport. Not just be an internet know it all. If 2 dogs do exactly the same work, which dog will you pick? Your friend's dog, or the club member that works his behind off, or the one you don't know? What is human nature? Did you read the statement in red? More people try to do the right thing than not, but if you only want to show up once or twice and whine, then you will never learn what it is that judge's expect. 

To make the comment that you do, just goes to show the bias you have. And that you don't really understand the game. 

There are some of us to realize that the dogs have no choice regarding who owns them or brings them to line.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

vanman said:


> .He gave me these words of wisdom after I started running all age stakes and I'll never forget them." If u win or place , thank the judges and go home.If u think u got screwed , thank the judges and go home because a:sooner or later it will come your way and b:nothing u say will change the outcome.U have to have a measure of thick skin to play the trial game and if u don't, u won't b around long."Came from a guy with over 50 yrs training dogs and running field trials.I'll never forget those words


Wise words. It is easy to sit back and dismiss a whole group of people. Without ever having really participated. 

You don't have to go right home. You can go have a beer or two with your friends first.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> Video doesn't lie Ed. Dogs that hooked the gunner won and dogs that went straight to the bird without a hunt didn't place. How can we collectively make judging more objective?


What happened on the other seven birds?


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

huntinman said:


> You talking about a derby?


Yes. They are. The trouble is, some people think that hooking a gun in a derby is a mortal sin. Some people just judge the Mark, not the lines. Devote enough time to the sport, and you learn what certain judges like and don't like.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> What happened on the other seven birds?


All marks are on video Susan. You know better than that, a derby isn't a one mark trial.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> All marks are on video Susan. You know better than that, a derby isn't a one mark trial.


I asked a question. You only gave the example of one bird, didn't you? You never mentioned what happened on the other seven birds.


----------



## J Hoggatt (Jun 16, 2004)

Help me out a little, because I'm too lazy..... I'm looking for the section in the rule book regarding "hooked guns". Thanks.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> Yes. They are. The trouble is, some people think that hooking a gun in a derby is a mortal sin. Some people just judge the Mark, not the lines. Devote enough time to the sport, and you learn what certain judges like and don't like.


What judges "like" versus "don't like" shouldn't be taken into consideration and is frankly irrelevant when judging talent. It's about the dog work, not who donates a a bird thrower, trains with the judges or donates land to compete on. I'm sure more undergrads would go to the Illinois Institute of Technology to complete their law degree if they knew that you could gain acceptance by being a steward of the game.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> I asked a question. You only gave the example of one bird, didn't you? You never mentioned what happened on the other seven birds.


Ignorance is bliss isn't it? Next time I'll pluralize gun and bird.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> What judges "like" versus "don't like" shouldn't be taken into consideration and is frankly irrelevant when judging talent. It's about the dog work, not who donates a a bird thrower, trains with the judges or donates land to compete on. I'm sure more undergrads would go to the Illinois Institute of Technology to complete their law degree if they knew that you could gain acceptance by being a steward of the game.


The rule book is open to interpretation. Maybe that's what some people don't understand as well. So instead of hiding behind a handle taking pot shots at my profession (and my law degree does not say IIT) , why don't you come out of the proverbial closet and tell us who you really are. Are you the dogs owner? Or just a friend of the trainer? 

I got a discussion of the other seven birds are just irrelevant. It seems to be focusing around one bird.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> The rule book is open to interpretation. Maybe that's what some people don't understand as well. So instead of hiding behind a handle taking pot shots at my profession (and my law degree does not say IIT) , why don't you come out of the proverbial closet and tell us who you really are. Are you the dogs owner? Or just a friend of the trainer?
> 
> I got a discussion of the other seven birds are just irrelevant. It seems to be focusing around one bird.


Says "Justice Dog".


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> Says "Justice Dog".


Your friend or pro did well and should be proud of himself and the dog. Finished a 32 dog derby along with some really heavy hitters. And it wasn't too long ago he was just running hunt tests. People have no idea how hard it is to finish a trial these days, and that green ribbon is something to be proud of. I keep each and every one of mine.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> What happened on the other seven birds?


One more thing Susan, you weren't there. If you were maybe this whole conversation would be avoided.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> Your friend or pro did well and should be proud of himself and the dog. Finished a 32 dog derby along with some really heavy hitters. And it wasn't too long ago he was just running hunt tests. People have no idea how hard it is to finish a trial these days, and that green ribbon is something to be proud of. I keep each and every one of mine.


It doesn't matter if he was previously collecting change in Cook County, you're missing the point of the thread. This could be his first dog or 100th derby dog, the outcome is what matters. All of the points you've brought up lead to the inequalities in FT judging.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> One more thing Susan, you weren't there. If you were maybe this whole conversation would be avoided.


You're the one talking about one bird. I wasn't there. But I also know that you were not holding the book that weekend. But you're wanting to armchair quarterback and be the judge. This whole conversation is one that should've been just left at the bar and not on Facebook or retriever training form. If I were this guy's friend, I would be telling him what a great job he did that weekend. I have seen this guy's dogs run. He will be back to the fourth on a frequent basis.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> It doesn't matter if he was collecting change in Cook County, you're missing the point of the thread. This could be his first dog or 100th derby dog, the outcome is what matters. All of the points you've brought up lead to the inequalities in FT judging.


maybe you need to go back and reread things. While there is bias in every competitive sport, for the most part I think that field trial judges try to be fair to the dogs. I also said that people change venues from hunt tests to field trials, they sometimes misinterpret the dog work.


and maybe you should try telling us who you are. Instead of hiding behind a handle.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> It doesn't matter if he was previously collecting change in Cook County, you're missing the point of the thread. This could be his first dog or 100th derby dog, the outcome is what matters. All of the points you've brought up lead to the inequalities in FT judging.


The only inequality I see is sour grapes, Shirley.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> You're the one talking about one bird. I wasn't there. But I also know that you were not holding the book that weekend. But you're wanting to armchair quarterback and be the judge. This whole conversation is one that should've been just left at the bar and not on Facebook or retriever training form. If I were this guy's friend, I would be telling him what a great job he did that weekend. I have seen this guy's dogs run. He will be back to the fourth on a frequent basis.


I'm NOT talking about one bird. Videos were taken of every series. Keep in mind I didn't start the thread, I'm just trying to keep all the naysayers honest. I'm extremely proud of the dog and handler, but wish JUSTICE would've been done in this instance, I'm sure you can relate.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> maybe you need to go back and reread things. While there is bias in every competitive sport, for the most part I think that field trial judges try to be fair to the dogs. I also said that people change venues from hunt tests to field trials, they sometimes misinterpret the dog work.
> 
> 
> and maybe you should try telling us who you are. Instead of hiding behind a handle.


You went from "take your lumps" to "I've seen his dogs run, he'll be in the 4th series frequently". I'll take that as a victory. 

This isn't the first trial that this specific dog has "taken lumps". Seems to be more of a pattern than the FT community would like to let on. You saw that trial, so maybe you can comment. Don't incriminate yourself though, don't want your dogs to suffer on a young and comers behalf.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> The only inequality I see is sour grapes, Shirley.


In my mind sour grapes are worth the reach. As long as the team that's judging the ability to reach the grapes is HONEST.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> I'm NOT talking about one bird. Videos were taken of every series. Keep in mind I didn't start the thread, I'm just trying to keep all the naysayers honest. I'm extremely proud of the dog and handler, but wish JUSTICE would've been done in this instance, I'm sure you can relate.


Yep. I have taken my lumps. Still do. But I just looked at the entries. You've got a couple out of state people that placed. Amateur handled dogs and pro handle dogs. There is no outward bias. 

I know it's a big disappointment. But sometimes you just have to put it behind you and move on. Your only other choice is to run someone over with a bus, and that is just not legal. . Like I said, the handler will be back on a frequent basis for the fourth series. People will get to know him. It's like what Vanman earlier, you got to develop a thick skin. 

Dave Rorem always said focus on the attainment. What did you do better during this field trial than the last one. If you don't find something else to focus on, you don't last very long in the sport, or any competitive sport.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> You went from "take your lumps" to "I've seen his dogs run, he'll be in the 4th series frequently". I'll take that as a victory.
> 
> This isn't the first trial that this specific dog has "taken lumps". Seems to be more of a pattern than the FT community would like to let on. You saw that trial, so maybe you can comment. Don't incriminate yourself though, don't want your dogs to suffer on a young and comers behalf.


sorry shirley. I saw one series. And not even an entire one series. and I'm not even sure which black dog i saw running. I saw two different ones I believe. I haven't changed my opinion, Shirley.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> Yep. I have taken my lumps. Still do. But I just looked at the entries. You've got a couple out of state people that placed. Amateur handled dogs and pro handle dogs. There is no outward bias.
> 
> I know it's a big disappointment. But sometimes you just have to put it behind you and move on. Your only other choice is to run someone over with a bus, and that is just not legal. . Like I said, the handler will be back on a frequent basis for the fourth series. People will get to know him. It's like what Vanman earlier, you got to develop a thick skin.
> 
> Dave Rorem always said focus on the attainment. What did you do better during this field trial than the last one. If you don't find something else to focus on, you don't last very long in the sport, or any competitive sport.


Thank you Susan for your kind words. I believe you now get my point. At first you were strongly argumentative and now seem empathetic. He will be back for sure and people will get to know him. As stewards of the game we need to continually question and put pressure on those who control the quality of trials and judging which we partake in. In an intensely competitive game, it only makes sense that we do so because we want to win.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

thebigcat said:


> Thank you Susan for your kind words. I believe you now get my point. At first you were strongly argumentative and now seem empathetic. He will be back for sure and people will get to know him. As stewards of the game we need to continually question and put pressure on those who control the quality of trials and judging which we partake in. In an intensely competitive game, it only makes sense that we do so because we want to win.


actually,
my position has never changed. Your position, the way you are presenting yourself will only hurt the dog and handler. because people may take the way you are presenting yourself as the way that this young handler is presenting himself. you were the 1 who was on attack calling names and taking cheap shots while hiding behind a handle. Think about how are you may be hurting the dog and your friend. over a green ribbon on a finish he should have been proud of. it's this kind of behavior that just lessened the value of that green ribbon. and make people not want to judge. good job Shirley.


----------



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

I have heard the argument that friends or workers get preferential treatment by judges. I think the opposite may occur at times. 

A couple of trials I have judged a friend won. Unfortunately, after I looked at the placements and saw it was my friend, I went backed and re-reviewed my results to make sure. Fortunately, the results didn't change and me and my co-judge had the same placements. What bothers me is if it was not a friend, I don't think I would have thought twice about the placements.


----------



## thebigcat (Feb 17, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> actually,
> my position has never changed. Your position, the way you are presenting yourself will only hurt the dog and handler. because people may take the way you are presenting yourself as the way that this young handler is presenting himself. you were the 1 who was on attack calling names and taking cheap shots while hiding behind a handle. Think about how are you may be hurting the dog and your friend. over a green ribbon on a finish he should have been proud of. it's this kind of behavior that just lessened the value of that green ribbon. and make people not want to judge. good job Shirley.


Just so we're clear, your position is that FT judges are predominately fair but you acknowledge that there is a political factor involved in judging. If you look back at my original post I simply asked what can we do to make judging more objective. All you have provided are excuses for why the FT world is the way that it is. You're suggesting that people should just "adapt" to the current practices by being a steward of the game, taking their lumps and trying again. See the attached image for some perspective on "change". 

The sheer fact that you believe the way I'm presenting myself on a public forum will negatively impact the dog or handler is evidence that there is definitive political ramifications to one's actions completely separate from the dog work. That's a huge issue for me. A judges job should be to evaluate the talent in the field aside from any preconceived notions about the handler.

I didn't call anyone names or take cheap shots Susan. I didn't reference any judges, participants or dogs in any of my posts. I was simply applying your thought process and statements to a different venue so you could see how ridiculous it sounds. If that hit too close to home then I'm sorry you were offended. 

Our interchange over the last ~12 hours hasn't done anything to lessen the value of the green ribbon. I'm still very proud of the team and will continue to support them. If for some reason a potential FT judge doesn't want to participate because he/she is afraid that they may be biased in their judging, then those are the type people that shouldn't be holding the book.


----------



## jhnnythndr (Aug 11, 2011)

@bigcat
Ill tell you what. I've never judges nor run a trial nor judged a test. I can answer your question though, regarding how we can make judging more objective. Do not, as a handler, gallery member or member of any certain camp be a distraction. The reason Lanse and some of the others say thanks and walk away from gift or a screwing the same is because to do otherwise colors people's perspectives- and makes I more difficult to judge objectively. It's not politics its human nature- if one is seen as a jackass, it's easier to see what that individuals dog / the dog they are rattling about is doing wrong than it is to see what's doing right

Do yourself , your dogs, and your friends a favor and quit being a distraction. 

Were I judging the aforementioned dog in a derby I would know for a fact that the camp behind him is an asspain waiting to happen- and I would damn sure be ready to deal with it... All if which might serve to sour me a little on the dogs performance. Or it might not. But if objectivity is what you crave... Don't be so distracting- people will miss the dog work while lookin out for whatever poop they think will start flying when you're about. 


Another way to look at it... If you always are demanding a justification for not placing- people will always have a justification for not placing you.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

thebigcat said:


> View attachment 19451
> 
> 
> Just so we're clear, your position is that FT judges are predominately fair but you acknowledge that there is a political factor involved in judging. If you look back at my original post I simply asked what can we do to make judging more objective. All you have provided are excuses for why the FT world is the way that it is. You're suggesting that people should just "adapt" to the current practices by being a steward of the game, taking their lumps and trying again. See the attached image for some perspective on "change".
> ...



El Gato,

I don't know you and was not at the trial in question... But your approach needs some work. Reminds of myself a little actually. The field trial world is a small one. It is not hard for anyone with a brain to figure out which trial you are talking about in today's electronically connected world. So the fact that you didn't come right out and name the judges means nothing... The fact that you don't identify yourself means more... Though that shouldn't be hard to figure out either if one was so inclined.

Have you ever judged a trial?

Have you ever been to the line at a trial? 

Care to share a little more about your experience level to back up your proclamations? 

You seem to think you have the game figured out... After all, the video doesn't lie you say. Unfortunately, there is no instant replay in Field Trials at this point. The judges decisions are final. You can disagree. But to do it publicly is unsportsmanlike... When I was younger, I had to learn that lesson the hard way. Fortunately for me, I wasn't suspended, but I could have been. What I am saying is, even the top dogs... National Champs, don't place every time they think they should. You can't huff and puff and get mad. You pull your boots up and come back and get them next week. As long as we have humans judging this sport there will be folks who disagree with the outcome... 

I might point out... I too am highly critical of some judging... I am also an all age judge. 

Good luck in the future.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

thebigcat said:


> What judges "like" versus "don't like" shouldn't be taken into consideration and is frankly irrelevant when judging talent. It's about the dog work, not who donates a a bird thrower, trains with the judges or donates land to compete on. I'm sure more undergrads would go to the Illinois Institute of Technology to complete their law degree if they knew that you could gain acceptance by being a steward of the game.


I think you are misinterpreting what Susan meant by what certain judges "like". I don't think she meant like as in the judges like certain handlers or dogs and will give said an undeserved placement. I think she was referring to how they perceive "good dog work". Some judges are all about the line and not cheating a little bit and will ignore a hunt at the end of the perfect line, while others place more emphasis on the dog that appeared to mark the bird even if he took a banana line. Just an example, there are many more ways judges are different in how they evaluate talent.

Regarding your situation, you were there, we were not, plus you have video evidence, so maybe this was one of those cases where somebody really did get screwed. I still believe those kind of politics are rare. I also know from having seen it over and over, that many people have an inflated view of their dogs performance relative to the rest, hence we tend to be skeptical when we read post about a screw job, so you tend to be painted with that broad brush when you post a story like that.


----------



## Labs (Jun 18, 2008)

What about instances when the rules are "black and white" but judges choose to ignore them for their set up? If you call them out on it at a test or a trial, you put a big red X on yourself...where is it that we can have some meaningful conversation about this? What recourse does a handler have, besides, "suck it up and try again"? Or do you simply not run under that judge again and get accused of judge shopping?


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

To make it more objective, we put the judges in an enclosed box, ship them to the trial. Just give them dogs #'s and don't let them see who's running the dog, nor know who the dog is. Keep them in their little box, until after they've turned in their placements. Then we see who wins .

I don't like the "pay your Dues" mentality, this mentality is pretty much stating that the FT's are inherently unfair and inherently bias. If a dog can't show up run and win on skill, but needs to pay dues, to get placements, the dog shouldn't be placing. If a judges is gonna give a ribbon to someone they know-like, when dogs are tied, there's not enough separation, or because the handlers "paid their dues" they shouldn't be judging. If you have tie btw dogs, run another series to separate or skip a placement (nothing says you have to give out all placements, give Jams instead). No one should ever have to pay dues, if their dog does the work.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Labs said:


> What about instances when the rules are "black and white" but judges choose to ignore them for their set up? If you call them out on it at a test or a trial, you put a big red X on yourself...where is it that we can have some meaningful conversation about this? What recourse does a handler have, besides, "suck it up and try again"? Or do you simply not run under that judge again and get accused of judge shopping?


If the judge is blatantly ignoring the rules and you feel it poses a risk to your dog, bring it up to the Field Trial Chairman through the marshal. There is a system. But not anarchy. Take your issue to the marshal and they can address it with the judges.. If you are worried about safety, scratch your dogs..

You are right... You don't have to run under the same judges next time. 

If you are worried about being accused of "judge shopping", you don't have much to worry about IMO.


----------



## No Drive (Jul 9, 2014)

thebigcat said:


> If the FT game is ever to progress to engaging younger/amateur participants, the politics need to change. Otherwise it'll be a bunch of 60-80 year old trailers who feel because they showed up they need to place. Period. End of story.
> 
> If a young boxer knocks out De La Hoya and loses because he's a no name from a small town, what does that do for the sport? Exactly the same thing it does for the FT COMMUNITY, discourages competing against the well known handlers/owners because there's no chance of placing. With all due respect, screw Susan's thought process, because it does nothing but facilitate the status quo.


What irritates me as an amateur who is first and foremost a hunter with gun dogs who actually hunts my dogs, not simulated hunts, is people who send their dogs to top pros and then brag how good THEY are ay handling this same dog. Nothing, I repeat nothing wrong with sending a dog to a pro if you can afford it, but put credit where credit is due, with that PRO not the person writing the checks.

I play the game some, never complain I love good dog work and often go to just watch good dogs go. Seems to me the people writing the checks are the complainers not the Pros who did the work. My ribbons come from impossible retrieves breaking ice by a young dog, priceless. No judges, no excuses, no ribbons, no dinner parties, dog trained by me, shotgun, decoys, and God.


----------



## Kajun Kamakazi (May 17, 2011)

Where is this thing at on Facebook anyways? Gotta be entertaining, and as a "Hunt Tester" running Field Trials, I haven't seen any bias.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

No Drive said:


> What irritates me as an amateur who is first and foremost a hunter with gun dogs who actually hunts my dogs, not simulated hunts, is people who send their dogs to top pros and then brag how good THEY are ay handling this same dog. Nothing, I repeat nothing wrong with sending a dog to a pro if you can afford it, but put credit where credit is due, with that PRO not the person writing the checks.


Training and handling are two different things. Not all amateurs who use a pro to train their dogs are great handlers, but some are as good as anyone.

I personally have a lot of respect for the good handlers out there. Even if a pro trains a dog, not everyone can take the dog off a pro's truck and win an open and do so consistently.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

and we wonder why its getting harder and harder to get people to accept judging assignments...


----------



## DSemple (Feb 16, 2008)

thebigcat,

Let it go for gosh sakes, it's only one weekend of a derby, geez. If you don't like the judges avoid running under them again in the future, it happens.

And keep in mind, all your complaining probably won't affect the judging one way or the other, but don't think for a minute the bird throwers don't notice. 


Don


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> To make it more objective, we put the judges in an enclosed box, ship them to the trial. Just give them dogs #'s and don't let them see who's running the dog, nor know who the dog is. Keep them in their little box, until after they've turned in their placements. Then we see who wins .
> 
> _I don't like the "pay your Dues" mentality, this mentality is pretty much stating that the FT's are inherently unfair and inherently have a bias. If a dog can't show up run and win on skill, but needs to pay dues, to get placements, the dog shouldn't be placing. If a judges is gonna give a ribbon to someone they know-like, when dogs are tied, or there not enough separation, they shouldn't be judging. If you have tie btw dogs, run another series to separate or skip a placement (nothing says you have to give out all placements, give Jams instead). No one should ever have to pay dues, if their dog is does the work_.


I don't like that mentality either, and heard that a lot when I started running trials. Fortunately it isn't the truth, there are quite a few new people running out here who broke in winning and placing over many old timers. These are natural students of the game, born hard working competitors who just happened to get a really good dog as their first dog, I'm envious but admiring. I've been in the game a while now and believe I have paid my dues and that for the most part judges are rooting for me and my dog, but that doesn't seem to play into their judging. If my dog doesn't do the work he doesn't place or JAM, simple as that.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

DSemple said:


> thebigcat,
> 
> Let it go for gosh sakes, it's only one weekend of a derby, geez. If you don't like the judges avoid running under them again in the future, it happens.
> 
> ...


Spoken like a true old timer;-)


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

BonMallari said:


> and we wonder why its getting harder and harder to get people to accept judging assignments...


LOL. I was just thinking how much fun it going to be this fall season since it seems now there are all these instances where we as judges can blatantly ignore the rules in our setups and not have to hear a thing about it.

I am thinking three or four diversion birds on the land blind, maybe spread out along the way. Don't like it, you better keep your mouth shut and run it or you will go on the secret list where you will never have a shot at winning any trial anywhere.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

JTS said:


> FYI............
> 
> Remember you are always advertising to prospective clients..........and the list may have just got a lot shorter.............


Exactly what I was thinking, one never knows where the next client might come from or not.......


----------



## No Drive (Jul 9, 2014)

DoubleHaul said:


> Training and handling are two different things. Not all amateurs who use a pro to train their dogs are great handlers, but some are as good as anyone.
> 
> I personally have a lot of respect for the good handlers out there. Even if a pro trains a dog, not everyone can take the dog off a pro's truck and win an open and do so consistently.


You are so right. Just curious, I am a hunter mostly, but I train my own dogs which is the part I enjoy most but.......How about putting Lottie, or Nick of Time Lone Ranger or anyone of the the great ones you pick many out there........on my truck, just a thought..............wonder how I would do compared to running my dog?? HMMMMMM


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

No Drive said:


> You are so right. Just curious, I am a hunter mostly, but I train my own dogs which is the part I enjoy most but.......How about putting Lottie, or Nick of Time Lone Ranger or anyone of the the great ones you pick many out there........on my truck, just a thought..............wonder how I would do compared to running my dog?? HMMMMMM


What is the question? How would you do at what? Hunting? Fine... Al age trial... Not so much without some actual experience. Dogs like that might do some of the tests in spite of you... But if you don't have experience at those type of tests... You won't be any help to the dog.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> To make it more objective, we put the judges in an enclosed box, ship them to the trial. Just give them dogs #'s and don't let them see who's running the dog, nor know who the dog is. Keep them in their little box, until after they've turned in their placements. Then we see who wins .
> 
> I don't like the "*pay your Dues" mentality, this mentality is pretty much stating that the FT's are inherently unfair and inherently bias.* If a dog can't show up run and win on skill, but needs to pay dues, to get placements, the dog shouldn't be placing. If a judges is gonna give a ribbon to someone they know-like, when dogs are tied, there's not enough separation, or because the handlers "paid their dues" they shouldn't be judging. If you have tie btw dogs, run another series to separate or skip a placement (nothing says you have to give out all placements, give Jams instead). No one should ever have to pay dues, if their dog does the work.


That's pretty bogus. Part of paying your dues is to learn what people are after as a judge. They may learn that maybe their dog really didn't do as well as they thought.


----------



## No Drive (Jul 9, 2014)

huntinman said:


> What is the question? How would you do at what? Hunting? Fine... Al age trial... Not so much without some actual experience. Dogs like that might do some of the tests in spite of you... But if you don't have experience at those type of tests... You won't be any help to the dog.



Really thanks for the info that it's mostly the handler, heck I guess all I need to do is hire Lardy for trial time only then AA stakes should be no problem for my dog, thanks for the info. Sure puts the dogs talent on the bottom of the list. I myself, tend to give the credit to the dog after all been a long time since I had to swim and break ice to get a duck I shot. Please don't let my dog know this cuz I got a feeling if he ever finds out....... that I am taking most of the credit for his hard retrieves because I handled him correctly, he may just put his middle paw toe up at me!


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

No Drive said:


> Really thanks for the info that it's mostly the handler, heck I guess all I need to do is hire Lardy for trial time only then AA stakes should be no problem for my dog, thanks for the info. Sure puts the dogs talent on the bottom of the list. I myself, tend to give the credit to the dog after all been a long time since I had to swim and break ice to get a duck I shot. Please don't let my dog know this cuz I got a feeling if he ever finds out....... that I am taking most of the credit for his hard retrieves because I handled him correctly, he may just put his middle paw toe up at me!


I didn't say it is mostly the handler... *I said you wouldn't be much help to the do*g. It is a team sport, it takes a damn good dog and most of the time a damn good handler at the top level...


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

huntinman said:


> I didn't say it is mostly the handler... *I said you wouldn't be much help to the do*g. It is a team sport, it takes a damn good dog and most of the time a damn good handler at the top level...


Come on, Bill. You know that the handler only has to take the bird from the dog and hand it to the judge


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Like a spectator watching a football (soccer) match ,real life and on here. You can comment ,but any decision you make don't change the result. The guy(s) on the field and the Guy(s) making the decisions determine the result .The rest are are 'Pundits' !.......If you enter with a mindset of success and come out with a mindset of wrong decisions ,then perhaps that mindset of success was a wish


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

DoubleHaul said:


> Come on, Bill. You know that the handler only has to take the bird from the dog and hand it to the judge


Well, in the crowd you hang with, thats probably true...;-)


----------



## No Drive (Jul 9, 2014)

huntinman said:


> I didn't say it is mostly the handler... *I said you wouldn't be much help to the do*g. It is a team sport, it takes a damn good dog and most of the time a damn good handler at the top level...


Bill don't mean to offend you, remember I am a hunter not a trial gypsy. I pheasant as much as snow/canada goose hunt. Pheasant hunting my dogs does it all, auto pilot I just shoot, and badly at that! She produces the birds with NO handling raw drive and talent. Duck hunting not so much, mostly blind retrieves so she relies on me as a team as you say. This trail game seems to riddled with politics, whining, and excuses why someone didn't place were they thought they should have.

I prefer the potholes and pheasant fields none of that occurs there, I have learned much form field trial people and all of my dogs are NFC FC AFC bred so appreciate what it takes to get there. Just seems the fun doesn't drive most folks in hunt test/trials thats my only point. Trials seem much more like the Kentucky derby with the hats on women who don't hunt, men who have the cigars bragging on their latest stock reports, the only thing missing is the mint julep!
I live for my dogs, the training, the hunting, the test, all of it and sending my dogs off to a pro (if I could afford it, then would have to hunt less!) I would loose all of the joy form me in order to say I won! I can't replace my dogs squealing to like puppy when they see the shotgun go into the truck and the dekes in the trailer, pricless.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

No Drive said:


> Bill don't mean to offend you, remember I am a hunter not a trial gypsy. I pheasant as much as snow/canada goose hunt. Pheasant hunting my dogs does it all, auto pilot I just shoot, and badly at that! She produces the birds with NO handling raw drive and talent. Duck hunting not so much, mostly blind retrieves so she relies on me as a team as you say. This trail game seems to riddled with politics, whining, and excuses why someone didn't place were they thought they should have.
> 
> I prefer the potholes and pheasant fields none of that occurs there, I have learned much form field trial people and all of my dogs are NFC FC AFC bred so appreciate what it takes to get there. Just seems the fun doesn't drive most folks in hunt test/trials thats my only point. Trials seem much more like the Kentucky derby with the hats on women who don't hunt, men who have the cigars bragging on their latest stock reports, the only thing missing is the mint julep!
> I live for my dogs, the training, the hunting, the test, all of it and sending my dogs off to a pro (if I could afford it, then would have to hunt less!) I would loose all of the joy form me in order to say I won! I can't replace my dogs squealing to like puppy when they see the shotgun go into the truck and the dekes in the trailer, pricless.


Not offending me. I have been a hunter all my life. You asked a question and I tried to answer it based on my experience. Closest thing I have seen to your question was an FC AFC being run by a handler with early onset dementia. He could not remember the order of the birds in an all age test... As such was not much help to the dog. She marked them all in spite of him... Somehow lined the blinds... And WON the trial! Granted, it was a small trial... But an amazing feat by a talented dog... And very sad at the same time for the handler who had been in the game over 30 years. 

No matter how great these dogs are, on MOST all age tests today, the dog needs an immense amount of help from it's handler. 

All the other stuff, politics, etc... Thats just stuff. When I was younger I worried more about all that. All you need to waste energy on is what YOU can control. For me... That boils down to my handling and my dogs training. Thats about it.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

John Robinson said:


> I don't like that mentality either, and heard that a lot when I started running trials. Fortunately it isn't the truth, there are quite a few new people running out here who broke in winning and placing over many old timers. .


That's Refreshing, I'm heading up to MT this Thurs, to run HRC, I'll be staying a bit. Perhaps I'll put in a few trials and see these things. Unfortunately most trials I've been to have seem to be "pay your dues" trials, who does who train with, who's client is the judge, who owns property. Same blind on the same property, in 2 separate trials (a week apart), a blind that is pretty evidently, ran by the locals; Dogs don't just come to the line and pin-point a blind. I'm hoping it's just the few trials I've been to, but I'm learning pretty quickly to pay attention to who's judging which trial, and their connections to participants. I prefer to be an optimist that most people & judges are fair, but my experiences is leading me in other directions. Has nothing to do with sour-grapes, my dog or her performance, just interesting, bird-throws, call-backs, placements, and other items that keep coming up.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> That's Refreshing, I'm heading up to MT this Thurs, to run HRC, I'll be staying a bit. Perhaps I'll put in a few trials and see these things. Unfortunately most trials I've been to have seem to be "pay your dues" trials, who does who train with, who's client is the judge, who owns property. Same blind on the same property, in 2 separate trials (a week apart), a blind that is pretty evidently, ran by the locals; Dogs don't just come to the line and pin-point a blind. I'm hoping it's just the few trials I've been to, but I'm learning pretty quickly to pay attention to who's judging which trial, and their connections participants. I prefer to be an optimist that most people & judges are fair, but my experiences is leading me in other directions. Has nothing to do with sour-grapes, my dog or her performance, just interesting, bird-throws, call-backs, placements, and other items that keep coming up.


Why bother?


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> That's Refreshing, I'm heading up to MT this Thurs, to run HRC, I'll be staying a bit. Perhaps I'll put in a few trials and see these things. Unfortunately most trials I've been to have seem to be "pay your dues" trials, who does who train with, who's client is the judge, who owns property. Same blind on the same property, in 2 separate trials (a week apart), a blind that is pretty evidently, ran by the locals; Dogs don't just come to the line and pin-point a blind. I'm hoping it's just the few trials I've been to, but I'm learning pretty quickly to pay attention to who's judging which trial, and their connections to participants. I prefer to be an optimist that most people & judges are fair, but my experiences is leading me in other directions. Has nothing to do with sour-grapes, my dog or her performance, just interesting, bird-throws, call-backs, placements, and other items that keep coming up.


After looking at your signature line I wonder why you regularly post about field trials when you obviously participate in other venues. Report back to us when you have something gleaned from personal field trial experience other than what you heard or might have seen from a brief visit to the gallery.


----------



## Dan Storts (Apr 19, 2011)

EdA said:


> After looking at your signature line I wonder why you regularly post about field trials when you obviously participate in other venues. Report back to us when you have something gleaned from personal field trial experience other than what you heard or might have seen from a brief visit to the gallery.


Since you brought this up. It appears he ran or runs NAHRA in the past or currently. Thus, it is a "GMHR" not "GMRH" which is in his signature line? What do I know?


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

polmaise said:


> Why bother?


Oh so Many Reasons  Hunting season is months away; I've already finished the other venues. Then there's the tempting QAA letters to ensure my dog is well rounded. I get to combat stereotypes I've heard over & over that meat dogs with questionable pedigrees are somehow inferior, that a working person can't compete. Plus a rule I live by; is one shouldn't offer opinions, judgements, nor make generalizations on other venues, activity's, etc. unless they've actually tried it (So I'm tiring it). Did I mention I'm a sadist and I like abuse 

Oh then there's the comments made by the theoretically untouchable and unquestionable FT people, who haven't ran anything but FTs, don't hunt, and get to pass judgement on everybody, who isn't like them, always fall back on the talk to me when you've done something. Get to stand on a soap-box, and intimidate people on an internet forum, poke fun at grammar-spelling, titles whatever; but what do I know  And now I'm done with this thread, we must all have our dalliances, but nothing can be accomplished here


----------



## Brad (Aug 4, 2009)

HA.Ha.Ha.Ha


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Oh so Many Reasons  Hunting season is months away; I've already finished the other venues. Then there's the tempting QAA letters to ensure my dog is well rounded. I get to combat stereotypes I've heard over & over that meat dogs with questionable pedigrees are somehow inferior, that a working person can't compete. Plus a rule I live by; is one shouldn't offer opinions, judgements, nor make generalizations on other venues, activity's, etc. unless they've actually tried it (So I'm tiring it). Did I mention I'm a sadist and I like abuse
> 
> Oh then there's the comments made by the theoretically untouchable and unquestionable FT people, who haven't ran anything but FTs, don't hunt, and get to pass judgement on everybody, who isn't like them, always fall back on the talk to me when you've done something. Get to stand on a soap-box, and intimidate people on an internet forum, poke fun at grammar-spelling, titles whatever; but what do I know  And now I'm done with this thread, we must all have our dalliances, but nothing can be accomplished here


.Are you absolutely sure you are not me 
Have a good season.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Oh so Many Reasons  Hunting season is months away; I've already finished the other venues. Then there's the tempting QAA letters to ensure my dog is well rounded. I get to combat stereotypes I've heard over & over that meat dogs with questionable pedigrees are somehow inferior, that a working person can't compete. Plus a rule I live by; is one shouldn't offer opinions, judgements, nor make generalizations on other venues, activity's, etc. unless they've actually tried it (So I'm tiring it). Did I mention I'm a sadist and I like abuse
> 
> Oh then there's the comments made by the theoretically untouchable and unquestionable FT people, who haven't ran anything but FTs, don't hunt, and get to pass judgement on everybody, who isn't like them, always fall back on the talk to me when you've done something. Get to stand on a soap-box, and intimidate people on an internet forum, poke fun at grammar-spelling, titles whatever; but what do I know  And now I'm done with this thread, we must all have our dalliances, but nothing can be accomplished here


So is invoking righteous indignation a tactic employed in high school debate class?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I have read this thread with amusement and bemusement, intermixed with some amazement and frustration.

Field trial judges are a cross section of society. If a group of people engage in a task, there will be:
- People who are diligent and talented at the task
- People who work hard, but lack talent
- People who have talent, but are lazy
- People who have neither talent nor dedication
- People who are crooked
- People who relish the wielding of power

You come across these people every day - or at least I do.

So, I'm not surprised (disappointed perhaps) when I come across them at Field Trials or any other event. Because I have seen people in all these categories in elementary school, junior high, high school, college, law school, in the workplace, etc. throughout my life

Why should Field Trials be any different than other aspects of my life?

If you are going to participate in FT and enjoy the time you spend doing so, you have to learn how to enjoy working with the dogs, and let the other stuff pass by.


----------



## Bill Billups (Sep 13, 2003)

This thread gives one the impression that politics and screwings are rampant in FTs. I have been running FTs for 8 years and can think of only one trial that we got a jam when I thought we should have placed in a Q. I can think of more times that we placed and I thought we might have been dropped on the water blind if I'd been judging. Maybe politics is more prevalent in other areas but I've just not seen it. 

In FTs there are many variables that can affect your success. Lighting,changes in visibility, whether you run early, wind changes, tests set ups that favor your dogs strengths( or not )are all things I find much more important to our success at a given trial than politics. 

Most FT folks I know of don't measure success with the results of one trial. They run multiple trials and hope for success in one or more. As time goes on you hope your percentage of successful trials increases but you always know the variables are part of the sport. It seems to me after judging quite a few minor stakes that quite a few hunt testers try ONE trial and base their opinions on success or not in that single experience where they don't always know what is expected moving from HT to FTs. 

If you want to know how your dog stacks up don't just run one trial.....enter several, train with folks that know what's expected, come to the line, hope the stars align ,and maybe things work out to get a colored ribbon.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

Right on #92 -


----------



## Scott Adams (Jun 25, 2003)

And don't enter a drag race with your pinto. Soup it up a bit first.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Having worked many FTs, I do not know a single person other than the judges that watch each and every dog, plus take notes on their performance in order to even begin to second guess placements, let alone determine any bias? And even if a person did this, unless they sit on the line, they have no clue about the details of what is happening. Every trial I've been to, the contestants and all the workers are busy and not paying attention. 

I think over the long haul, you get some breaks and you take some lumps, but in the end, it all evens out. 

FOM


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

This thread is a huge disappointment because once again field trialers get portrayed as evil dog-cheating elitists by people who haven't paid their dues, which means *being a student of the game. Taking your lumps is a lesson.... *if one spent half as much time learning what constitutes a stellar performance in a field trial rather than b**^tching and moaning about being screwed, you would be far ahead. If you feel you have been screwed weekend after weekend, then it's time to take off the rose colored glasses and look in the mirror. It's time to ask someone with knowledge to assess where you Are at. It's time to re-look at your videos which show a hard working volunteer contemporaneously drawing in their book while the dog is running. 

While there are a few bad apples, like in any competitive sport, most people try to do right by these amazing creatures that work their hearts out for us. I have met some very fine people in this sport, and if you choose not to partake, it will be your loss.....


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I find it amusing that years ago, when I said that newcomers need to earn respect, Susan and Lainee jumped all over me. And now?


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I find it amusing that years ago, when I said that newcomers need to earn respect, Susan and Lainee jumped all over me. And now?


Bull. Everyone comes with the respect due to any human being. And, neither Lainee or i ever whined on the internet for repeatedly getting green ribbons. I think our definitions are quite different. Get over yourself. That has never changed.



I still find it amusing that some people don't recognize that the game is bigger than they are, regards-


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Susan you crack me up. Everyone gets respect as a human being. You earn respect as a competitor. You didn't understand it then. You espouse it now. Take a look in the mirror dear.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Susan you crack me up. Everyone gets respect as a human being. You earn respect as a competitor. You didn't understand it then. You espouse it now. Take a look in the mirror dear.


Ted, go pound sand. You didn't "get it" years ago and you still don't. Actions speak louder than words "dear" and my vision is very very clear because I have "seen" a whole host of actions with my 20/20 vision. I have always had true respect for a good competitor. I don't have respect for those who claim to be or only do the right thing when it benefits themselves personally. Maybe some people just need new glasses. 

More for my amusement file, regards.


----------



## No Drive (Jul 9, 2014)

JusticeDog said:


> This thread is a huge disappointment because once again field trialers get portrayed as evil dog-cheating elitists by people who haven't paid their dues, which means *being a student of the game. Taking your lumps is a lesson.... *if one spent half as much time learning what constitutes a stellar performance in a field trial rather than b**^tching and moaning about being screwed, you would be far ahead. If you feel you have been screwed weekend after weekend, then it's time to take off the rose colored glasses and look in the mirror. It's time to ask someone with knowledge to assess where you Are at. It's time to re-look at your videos which show a hard working volunteer contemporaneously drawing in their book while the dog is running.
> 
> While there are a few bad apples, like in any competitive sport, most people try to do right by these amazing creatures that work their hearts out for us. I have met some very fine people in this sport, *and if you choose not to partake, it will be your loss.....*


*

*Just curious, how much hunting time does your dog see and much training have you done yourself? Seems if you live in Chicago not many ducks hunts there nor training grounds. I say the same, if you choose not to train nor hunt your loss....and your dogs loss. They were bred to hunt and I sure enjoy training myself, the bond I have with my dog cannot be matched if my dogs live on a pro's truck. 

Seems the field trial folk only need to get together with some drinks and we have an old fashion bar brawl!


----------



## DSMITH1651 (Feb 23, 2008)

Wow. This thread makes me really question my sanity for becoming a FT judge and having my integrity questioned on the internet by a bunch of people that did not see everyone run from the line and take notes on each and every performance.

I have only been involved with FT for 6 years. not long, but I have been a stakes chair or FT chair for every trial my club has held in those 6 years and I have had the pleasure to train with some of the best in the sport.

I personaly have not seen one case whare a judge was being dishonest, I have seen things and setups that I did not like, but nothing that was perposley unfair or dishonest. The one thing I have seen a lot of is handlers coming off of the line commenting how there dogs pined the marks or did a wonderful blind when in reality there dog did average at best and as soon as the callbacks or placements are called out the bitching and complaining starts about they are getting screwed and they surely did better then Billy Bob over there so the judges must be dishonest or blind. Example One handler last year got a standing ovation by the gallery on a hard land blind to that was requiring lots of handling and he lining the bind well I was up on the line taking birds at that time and I heard the one judge say to the other "I don't know why their clapping that dog was at least 30yds off line"! I guess what I am getting at is unless you have watched every dog from the line and taken detailed notes give the judges the benefit of the doubt the just may have seen something you didn't.
Duane
PS the best and most successful people in a compeditve sport I have ever seen have always taken there lumps and went and worked harder not bitch and complain about how unlucky they are or how so and so is out to get them.

*luck is when hard work and preparation meets opportunity*


----------



## J Hoggatt (Jun 16, 2004)

DSMITH1651 said:


> Wow. This thread makes me really question my sanity for becoming a FT judge and having my integrity questioned on the internet by a bunch of people that did not see everyone run from the line and take notes on each and every performance.
> 
> I have only been involved with FT for 6 years. not long, but I have been a stakes chair or FT chair for every trial my club has held in those 6 years and I have had the pleasure to train with some of the best in the sport.
> 
> ...


Completely Agree!!
Some on here - have made very generalized and offensive comments! Rarely offended by people not willing to share their name, but in this thread
I find myself there.


----------



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

So what is "hooking" a bird? Somebody asked earlier when the discussion was centered around that particular bird at a test. 

Sorry, I don't have anything to add to the judging bias. I don't keep lists of judges. I go to enjoy the competition, have fun running the dogs, learn, socialize, drink and eat and if We are fortunate to earn a ribbon, good for us. Human nature is what it is. I don't particularly worry about bias. I don't think the FT group are villains.  I enjoy learning from them and respect their abilities.

So what is hooking a bird? 

Sue Puff


----------



## priceskeet (Jun 30, 2008)

Life is not always fair. Haven't been in the game along time like alot of you. Mostly Hunt test run several Q's. Who cares if you run your own dog or a pro runs him.
It don't matter if he hunts or never hunts. I do it because I like working with my dogs and like the friends I have made in the dog world !!!!!! I will never have enough money to have a NFC or NAFC but I still like to run. Judges I have run under try to a good job. So far I have never been put out when I though I shouldn't have. I have stayed in when I didn't think I should have. We should enjoy our DOGS and have FUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

What a bunch a hooey. HTers aren't treated any worse than anyone else at FT. I ran HT for 12 years before I ever put on a white coat. You can get hosed in any venue, you can get a gift in any venue, that's just how the dice rolls with any sport, or pretty much anything involving humans. The ones who think there's some prevailing conspiracy or good ol' boys' club with judging FT are just wrong. Heck, some of the judges I've run under I've met at HT. Sure, there are groups that would appear from the outside to be "cliques", but mostly, that's because they've known each other for a long time, competed against each other, trained together, nothing more, nothing less. If you walk up and talk to them, they turn out to be, well, human. Sometimes, the buddies talking with the judges are BSing about stuff completely unrelated to the trial or even dogs, vs the conspiracy that they are helping set the test or whatever. 

Whoever posted and claimed the blinds are set up and obviously trained on by the "buddies" beforehand, good lord what a bunch of hogwash. In training grounds, there are only so many options for blinds and marks and if the are grounds used regularly (as in, get out and train often, because it actually takes work to train/run a dog successfully), you betcha some of the locals are going to have seen the same or similar setups. But it isn't a conspiracy, it's just how it works when there are only so many ponds and fields available. And it can just as often work against the local dog as not. 

I think some people go in with a chip on their shoulder just looking for ammo. I think others are expecting to have a red carpet rolled out and a brass band playing, because they are "new and the sport needs new blood" and when that doesn't happen, when the reality is that FT are tough competition and work and talent and luck and the ribbons can be few and far between, they cry. The experienced people see it over and over and get tired of it and maybe don't act quite so warm and fuzzy to every noob that comes up to them blathering about their pup that's going to get on the Derby list no problem blah blah blah. I think that's what paying the dues means, not that you need to be someone to place, but that you need to earn the respect, not just expect to get a ribbon because YOU think your dog did great. You can't possibly have watched every dog from the line to know what the judges saw. No way, no how. If you love the sport, you stick around and train harder and better and learn the ropes and realize, eventually, that you have to take out of it whatever makes you satisfied and happy. If you're looking for excuses to not be successful, you'll find them.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Sue, hooking is when dog does not take a straight line to the bird but runs to either right or left of bird and turns into the bird when reaches the appropriate distance. In derby this is not judged in a negative way.

My two cents on FT which is based on one derby. I found the two judges to be very helpful to a newcomer. I didn't get a ribbon but I was very pleased with the test and judges.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Rainmaker said:


> Whoever posted and claimed the blinds are set up and obviously trained on by the "buddies" beforehand, good lord what a bunch of hogwash. In training grounds, there are only so many options for blinds and marks and if the are grounds used regularly (as in, get out and train often, because it actually takes work to train/run a dog successfully), you betcha some of the locals are going to have seen the same or similar setups. But it isn't a conspiracy, it's just how it works when there are only so many ponds and fields available. And it can just as often work against the local dog as not.


In my experience, unless the grounds are really distinctive--say severe terrain or whatever--the folks that train on them regularly and right before the trial are probably hurt as much as helped. Chances are the judges might see the "go to" setups but run it differently enough that you are better off coming in cold than having the dog remember how it ran it Monday through Thursday.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

No Drive said:


> [/B]Just curious, how much hunting time does your dog see and much training have you done yourself? Seems if you live in Chicago not many ducks hunts there nor training grounds. I say the same, if you choose not to train nor hunt your loss....and your dogs loss. They were bred to hunt and I sure enjoy training myself, the bond I have with my dog cannot be matched if my dogs live on a pro's truck.
> 
> Seems the field trial folk only need to get together with some drinks and we have an old fashion bar brawl!


You wouldn't know if I hunt or not. You don't get 507000 miles on your truck sitting home. You get it my working and training your dogs in addition to trialing. Seems like you know nothing about where our training grounds in Chicago are located either. Your just wanting to be a hunting snob without any information. And I would match the bond I have with my dogs to anyone's. They work their hearts out for me. 

I find it curious that someone who hides behind a handle and just joins on 7-9-2014 is attacking people they don't know. Another noob with an agenda it seems to me.

And you're right. My dogs never have any fun. This dog never set a paw on a pro truck. And just so we're clear, that would be 28 greenheads and 5 woodies pulled out of the Mississippi when it was as cold as ice.... matter of fact, there was ice.




have a good day, Shirley.


----------



## rboudet (Jun 29, 2004)

No Drive said:


> [/B]Just curious, how much hunting time does your dog see and much training have you done yourself? Seems if you live in Chicago not many ducks hunts there nor training grounds. I say the same, if you choose not to train nor hunt your loss....and your dogs loss. They were bred to hunt and I sure enjoy training myself, the bond I have with my dog cannot be matched if my dogs live on a pro's truck.
> 
> Seems the field trial folk only need to get together with some drinks and we have an old fashion bar brawl!


Do you have as much disdain for retriever folks that choose other venues to compete with THEIR dog (agility, ob., etc...) or just a pet? I think you would be very surprised with the amount of "FT" dogs that hunt. Am I ok if I have a hunting dog at home and have a dog to compete in FTs? And why does it matter to you what people do with their dogs?


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

No Drive said:


> Seems if you live in Chicago not many ducks hunts there nor training grounds. I say the same, if you choose not to train nor hunt your loss....and your dogs loss.


I have done a lot of pheasant and duck hunting about an hour south of Chicago. Some really great opportunities in the area--Chicago is actually much closer to decent hunting than my current home, even with traffic.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

No Drive said:


> [/B]Just curious, how much hunting time does your dog see and much training have you done yourself? Seems if you live in Chicago not many ducks hunts there nor training grounds. I say the same, if you choose not to train nor hunt your loss....and your dogs loss. They were bred to hunt and I sure enjoy training myself, the bond I have with my dog cannot be matched if my dogs live on a pro's truck.
> 
> Seems the field trial folk only need to get together with some drinks and we have an old fashion bar brawl!


No Drive, you seem to have a few issues. You say you have never run a FT, yet you attack Ft and the folks who run them in every post. You seem to think a dogs ONLY purpose is to hunt (though that is a noble one).

You seem to think because someone lives in or near Chicago, they don't hunt (tells me you are pretty young). 

For someone who hasn't been around the game at all (so you say), to come out doing nothing but attacking it seems a little disingenuous at best. 

I suggest you either go to a few trials and learn something... Or just stop talking about them... Because you clearly have no idea WTH you are talking about. 

PS... Notice my handle? I am a hunter first... FTer second.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I find it amusing that years ago, when I said that newcomers need to earn respect, Susan and Lainee jumped all over me. And now?


I don't recall that, but I do recall you questioning my commitment and dedication to the sport....but that is history. Some things change with time, including opinions, so maybe we did argue opposite points in the past but I have not once said newcomers need to earn respect, I think everyone coming into the game should be given respect until proven otherwise...


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

I have limited experience at the FT line , but I will say I have never felt hosed by a judge. I have personally met a few folks on this thread and hope to one day meet a few more of them in person. (I've even managed to piss 1 or 2 of them off I'm sure ,but still have great respect for them) The ones I have met have been very encouraging and sincerely congratulate anyone that does a good job. 
I have great respect for anyone willing to judge and set themselves up each week for 4 people to like them and the rest of the crowd to pass negative judgement on them. I feel before I could criticize someone about their job I need to fully understand what their job is.....I've got a long way to go before I can criticize a judge!

Learn to take your lickin and keep on tickin....life aint all t!ts and ice cream.

P.S I cant decide which is more exciting , taking my FT dog hunting or running my hunting dog in FT's.


----------



## No Drive (Jul 9, 2014)

huntinman said:


> No Drive, you seem to have a few issues. You say you have never run a FT, yet you attack Ft and the folks who run them in every post. You seem to think a dogs ONLY purpose is to hunt (though that is a noble one).
> 
> You seem to think because someone lives in or near Chicago, they don't hunt (tells me you are pretty young).
> 
> ...


Bill you are wrong on many things here. One,I don't desire to "attack" field trials one only has to read a very limited posts to se FT people attacked themselves with no problem, all one needs to do and sit back and read, they fight amongst themselves enough to entertain me. Second, you feed your dog, be it a couch dog, FT dog, or hunter I have no issues either way. I also have run a few Qs and derbies, I like trials and met some great people. Most important saw some very good dog work.I will run more this next spring Q and derby and I will not complain or whine win or loose, I will enjoy the ride.

Also I am glad you think you got good hunting in liberal ultra gun control state Ill, that way you can leave the hunting alone here in North Dakota. My dog retrieves more birds on one day of snow goose hunting then most will in 5 seasons hunting in Ill. 

For the record I have been to more then just a "few" trials, worked many of them. Maybe you should hunt a day or two where I do, then you would know what you are talking about when it comes to hunting.

Enjoy your dogs,


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

shawninthesticks said:


> I have limited experience at the FT line , but I will say I have never felt hosed by a judge. I have personally met a few folks on this thread and hope to one day meet a few more of them in person. (I've even managed to piss 1 or 2 of them off I'm sure ,but still have great respect for them) The ones I have met have been very encouraging and sincerely congratulate anyone that does a good job.
> I have great respect for anyone willing to judge and set themselves up each week for 4 people to like them and the rest of the crowd to pass negative judgement on them. I feel before I could criticize someone about their job I need to fully understand what their job is.....I've got a long way to go before I can criticize a judge!
> 
> Learn to take your lickin and keep on tickin....life aint all t!ts and ice cream.
> ...


Good post. Sometimes three of the four aren't happy;-)


----------



## No Drive (Jul 9, 2014)

JusticeDog said:


> You wouldn't know if I hunt or not. You don't get 507000 miles on your truck sitting home. You get it my working and training your dogs in addition to trialing. Seems like you know nothing about where our training grounds in Chicago are located either. Your just wanting to be a hunting snob without any information. And I would match the bond I have with my dogs to anyone's. They work their hearts out for me.
> 
> I find it curious that someone who hides behind a handle and just joins on 7-9-2014 is attacking people they don't know. Another noob with an agenda it seems to me.
> 
> ...


Shirely glad to see one of your dogs was trained by you, good feeling isn't it? Not a hunting snob at all and my just joining states nothing of the fact I have been training hounds and retrievers for more than 30 years. No I can't brag I put 500,000 miles on my truck, (hell couldn't even afford the gas for that trip!) but I will tell you I have a lot of miles in my boots setting up snow geese dekes, pounding cattails in 8 below weather chasing pheasants, and I have a shotgun with thousands and thousands of rounds dropping wild game for my retrievers while guiding clients on hunts.

Secret: I have no idea where you hunt, but Woodies are the first ducks to leave North Dakota when it gets cold. They are long gone by the time the water turns hard here so glad you shot them on a day with ice.

PS; Hint...those are not Greenheads, those are Canadian geese, google them, there is a difference between green heads and geese.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

No Drive said:


> Shirely glad to see one of your dogs was trained by you, good feeling isn't it? Not a hunting snob at all and my just joining states nothing of the fact I have been training hounds and retrievers for more than 30 years. No I can't brag I put 500,000 miles on my truck, (hell couldn't even afford the gas for that trip!) but I will tell you I have a lot of miles in my boots setting up snow geese dekes, pounding cattails in 8 below weather chasing pheasants, and I have a shotgun with thousands and thousands of rounds dropping wild game for my retrievers while guiding clients on hunts.
> 
> Secret: I have no idea where you hunt, but Woodies are the first ducks to leave North Dakota when it gets cold. They are long gone by the time the water turns hard here so glad you shot them on a day with ice.
> 
> PS; Hint...those are not Greenheads, those are Canadian geese, google them, there is a difference between green heads and geese.


12 if my dogs have been trained by me @@###wipe. you don't know how much time my dogs have spent on a pro truck or not. and you don't know what kind of birds they have picked up and when. as I said, just another jerk with an agenda. & I know what we hunted. & I know when we hunted. and you don't know me at all shirley. Instead of hiding behind a handle, why don't you make yourself known? and now you want to claim you you ran field trials I know so much. Why don't you post up your results?And I'm sure you leap tall buildings with a single bound. With a cape with a big red s on it. Shirley.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

No Drive said:


> Bill you are wrong on many things here. One,I don't desire to "attack" field trials one only has to read a very limited posts to se FT people attacked themselves with no problem, all one needs to do and sit back and read, they fight amongst themselves enough to entertain me. Second, you feed your dog, be it a couch dog, FT dog, or hunter I have no issues either way. I also have run a few Qs and derbies, I like trials and met some great people. Most important saw some very good dog work.I will run more this next spring Q and derby and I will not complain or whine win or loose, I will enjoy the ride.
> 
> Also I am glad you think you got good hunting in liberal ultra gun control state Ill, that way you can leave the hunting alone here in North Dakota. My dog retrieves more birds on one day of snow goose hunting then most will in 5 seasons hunting in Ill.
> 
> ...


I'm not wrong on one thing.

You don't know WTH you are talking about. You just talk.


----------



## rboudet (Jun 29, 2004)

There could be a problem shooting "Canadian" geese. You should stick to the Canada's or Just stick to killing those Sky Carp! Your holy than thou attitude is getting old, although entertaining. We have a few birds down south also. Take a look at the harvest numbers by state. AND we use dogs to retrieve our birds. Crazy huh!


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

I've never seen much of a retrieving challenge for a dog when 50 sky carp are landing 20 yds from them .JS


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

No Drive said:


> Bill you are wrong on many things here.
> 
> *Maybe you should hunt a day or two where I do, then you would know what you are talking about when it comes to hunting.*
> 
> Enjoy your dogs,


Maybe...


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

No Drive said:


> Shirely glad to see one of your dogs was trained by you, good feeling isn't it? Not a hunting snob at all and my just joining states nothing of the fact I have been training hounds and retrievers for more than 30 years. No I can't brag I put 500,000 miles on my truck, (hell couldn't even afford the gas for that trip!) but I will tell you I have a lot of miles in my boots setting up snow geese dekes, pounding cattails in 8 below weather chasing pheasants, and I have a shotgun with thousands and thousands of rounds dropping wild game for my retrievers while guiding clients on hunts.
> 
> Secret: I have no idea where you hunt, but Woodies are the first ducks to leave North Dakota when it gets cold. They are long gone by the time the water turns hard here so glad you shot them on a day with ice.
> 
> PS; Hint...those are not Greenheads, those are *Canadian* geese, google them, there is a difference between green heads and geese.


Did you mean "Canada Geese?"

I thought so..................

If I may add....I have not run any FT's with my current dog.
I have worked a few at my club.
I have sat in gunners stations and watched entire stakes.

I am NOT a FT judge, though I dabble in judging HT's.

However, I keep an eye on what I think is fine dog work.
And in every trial but 1 that I have watched (maybe 80% of all runs) I agreed with the judges choice for #1.
The one time I would have picked another, he finished 2nd.

Not sure what this means, if anything, but I shared that observation and was asked to post it, so I did!

*I think the Judges may be biased towards GOOD dog work!!!*

I love to watch GOOD dog work.
I have an idea in my mind what that is.

I know a relatively experienced FT'r and FT Judge that has posted in this thread.
He came to the RTF training day last year (without a dog) and threw birds all day long for us (most being primarily involved in HT's).
He displayed NO bias.............


I guess the beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as well as the ugly!


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

No Drive said:


> Bill you are wrong on many things here. One,I don't desire to "attack" field trials one only has to read a very limited posts to se FT people attacked themselves with no problem, all one needs to do and sit back and read, they fight amongst themselves enough to entertain me. Second, you feed your dog, be it a couch dog, FT dog, or hunter I have no issues either way. I also have run a few Qs and derbies, I like trials and met some great people. Most important saw some very good dog work.I will run more this next spring Q and derby and I will not complain or whine win or loose, I will enjoy the ride.
> 
> Also I am glad you think you got good hunting in liberal ultra gun control state Ill, that way you can leave the hunting alone here in North Dakota. My dog retrieves more birds on one day of snow goose hunting then most will in 5 seasons hunting in Ill.
> 
> ...


First what does it matter if a person trains their own dog or even hunts at all, our sport is about the dogs and retrieving at a high level. The fact that you put a heavy emphasis on hunting with your dogs is great for you and your dogs, but it doesn't make them any better than anybody else's dog. Our sport is comprised of a variety of successful FTer's, some hunt some don't, some use a pro full time, some just send their dogs on the road with a pro for the winter if they live and work up north, or visa versa if they live down south, some day train with a pro and some are completely amateur trained. Come the weekend field trial the judge doesn't ask which category you fit in, they just judge your dog. As for fighting on this thread, I think that's pretty typical of any internet forum with different personalities.

For the record I started in hunt test, have run field trials for 18 years, judge 2-3 trials a year and take every hunting season off from October 1st to early January to hunt my dogs.


ps: You do know that Illinois borders the upper Mississippi River and that great flyway with millions of birds, many are born in your pot hole duck factory. I wouldn't put down hunting in any State, but Bill lives in Tennisee and lived for a long time in Alaska, Bill knows hunting.


----------



## Cimaroc (Jul 23, 2014)

I am entering my first post on rtf and I normally would not do so but, I happen to be the field trial chair for the controversial derby. My name is Dan Sayles, and I am also a pro trainer and have been for 30 yrs. along with myself and 3or 4 others we are the guts of our club. We have prided ourselves on putting on a quality event with the upmost respect for our handlers. This particular trial we spent over 2000 dollars bringing in judges from all parts of the country, and they did a fantastic job. Our derby judges that have been so falsely accused of bias have over50 yrs of experience in training, judging, and competing in this game that so many of us love. Neither of them had any vested interest in any pros or amateurs running the trial. In fact until the places were signed into the books, the only thing they knew were the numbers. Now to put things in perspective. We had people from all over the US here, and we really appreciate it and to let you newcomers know how hard it is to put on a quality event some of the out staters are very generous in their offers to help work at times. Example Rick VanBergen offer to stake chair open after he ran dog 2 in the open. Wayne Schochenski judged the quality, and then helped with the amateur and tailgate party. Jeff Lyons from out east offers to do whatever he can to help, Jeff Bandel offers to throw for the open on Sunday and Danny Farmer always is gracious with his help and equipment. Those are just a few examples of how this game is supposed to work. To sit and video a stake for the sole purpose of causing trouble, I would advise you to look in the mirror and see if you truely have a passion for this game. Too many good people busts their butts and give up weekends away from their families to keep this sport vibrant. In closing i would like to thank everyone that participated in our trial, attended our tailgate party, and gave a weekend out of their lives to help us. In the words of Bobby Smith's 3 yr old granddaughter: you get what you get and you don't pitch a fit. Thanks again


----------



## DSMITH1651 (Feb 23, 2008)

Wow Dan, did not know what derby this fit was over but I know one of the judges personally and I can promise you he is not bias to anyone if he placed a dog over another there was a reason.
Duane
PS thanks for putting on a nice trial.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Im not a field trialer.......... Period.......

I did run a derby right befor Flinch aged out, just to see how she would do.

She went out first series right out of the gate.
The folks that were running that trial, and the Judges,were the most friendly,personable people I have ever run into running Hunt Tests.
This was my first FT experience, and it was wonderful!
The members of the comitee, talked to the judges, and us handelers that were dropped, were told we could continue to paly but, we were out of competition.
Flinch and I were able to run as test dog for the following series. I remember the series going extra in number so the judges could get answers about the dogs that were still in contention.
I was very proud that Flinch got to sit at a FT line, and was able to do an OK job on the remaining series. It was a wonderful experience.

Now,,all that said:

I am a realist. I do NOT think I have the rescources to have a REAL possibility to compete in FT. I am an awful Handler... I have an average dog.

The HT game, for ME, is a realistic venue for me to enjoy.
I too have been chastised for my lack of commitment to the sport..
I train everyday, on the limited grounds I have available to me.
There is a FT training group. led by a very respected Pro that lets me join in on the weekends!
My experience with her, has been absolutely positive.
I am busy enough, and my "dedication" MUST go to TRAINING my young dog...
Some of us have Goals very different than others. I think we ALL need to respect that.

I wont post on this thread again, but thought I would express my experience with FT people.. It has been wonderful!.,,, and I DO hunt.

A TRULY competitive FT dog, is a very special animal,, I dont think many HT folks understand the training and talent by BOTH the handler and dog goes into the success of a FT title..


----------



## DSMITH1651 (Feb 23, 2008)

No Drive said:


> Shirely glad to see one of your dogs was trained by you, good feeling isn't it? Not a hunting snob at all and my just joining states nothing of the fact I have been training hounds and retrievers for more than 30 years. No I can't brag I put 500,000 miles on my truck, (hell couldn't even afford the gas for that trip!) but I will tell you I have a lot of miles in my boots setting up snow geese dekes, pounding cattails in 8 below weather chasing pheasants, and I have a shotgun with thousands and thousands of rounds dropping wild game for my retrievers while guiding clients on hunts.
> 
> Secret: I have no idea where you hunt, but Woodies are the first ducks to leave North Dakota when it gets cold. They are long gone by the time the water turns hard here so glad you shot them on a day with ice.
> 
> PS; Hint...those are not Greenheads, those are Canadian geese, google them, there is a difference between green heads and geese.




Woody's are around until the end of the season here not allot but their here. We have some great field shoots for them at the end of the season.
Duane


----------



## No Drive (Jul 9, 2014)

shawninthesticks said:


> I've never seen much of a retrieving challenge for a dog when 50 sky carp are landing 20 yds from them .JS


My clients do not always "drop" them 20 yds away. If you have ever snow goose hunted they are very tough birds to decoy. They are hunted 9 months of the year. Many and I repeat many are "winged" and glide 300 plus yes away. Great blind work every hunt, also dropping 10 or more birds and your dog remains steady is a challenge for my high drive dogs out of Ranger. Glad you refer to them as "sky carp" then should never see Missouri plates in my state for spring season.

Not here to knock anyone's passion be a pet, FT dog, or meat dogs. I don'y know any of you here on RTF I don't judge others. I have done and worked some trials and met great people, learned alot, and my dogs are all out of FC dogs.. It seems RTF attracks the complainers and know it alls.The trials I have worked and competed in the judges did great job, I did not win nor should I have, no complaints, train more.

I know nothing, only a guide, taxidermist, and amateur dog trainer but liven the life I love.


----------



## labsforme (Oct 31, 2003)

No Drive said:


> My clients do not always "drop" them 20 yds away. If you have ever snow goose hunted they are very tough birds to decoy. They are hunted 9 months of the year. Many and I repeat many are "winged" and glide 300 plus yes away. Great blind work every hunt, also dropping 10 or more birds and your dog remains steady is a challenge for my high drive dogs out of Ranger. Glad you refer to them as "sky carp" then should never see Missouri plates in my state for spring season.
> 
> Not here to knock anyone's passion be a pet, FT dog, or meat dogs. I don'y know any of you here on RTF I don't judge others. I have done and worked some trials and met great people, learned alot, and my dogs are all out of FC dogs.. It seems RTF attracks the complainers and know it alls.The trials I have worked and competed in the judges did great job, I did not win nor should I have, no complaints, train more.
> 
> I know nothing, only a guide, taxidermist, and amateur dog trainer but liven the life I love.


If that is the case then why in the world are you peeing on someones Cheerios?

Jeff G


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Some of these folks that have posted are poor misguided souls who are basically full of themselves (FOS) . The derby judge in question that are being thrown under the bus I have known for many years and have run under him, top notch. Dan Sayles who finaly posted is one of the most respective Pros in his neck of the woods , along with many of the contestants that run. In fact Dan ran a dog in the derby and if no one noticed did not make the cut. Lastly those who post of their great hunting adventures and drawn inferences that us "high then mighty" field trial and hunt tests folks don't hunt much with their dogs. Please go to facebook do a search of Goose Geezers and see what working folks who train dogs and hunt do, I am proud to be a associate of that group. Lets end this BS with folks who refuse/decline to identify themselves and who we are being fed with various negativity from their own comments.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

I wish there was a like button, well said Earl.


----------



## mohaled (Oct 7, 2007)

Amen, I hunt and run ft big deal no need to brag


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Perhaps it's just gone all too 'Commercial' - These Games we play or play in?
We in the other hand have a different view 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-OvpaDIBWQ


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Criquetpas said:


> Some of these folks that have posted are poor misguided souls who are basically full of themselves (FOS) . The derby judge in question that are being thrown under the bus I have known for many years and have run under him, top notch. Dan Sayles who finaly posted is one of the most respective Pros in his neck of the woods , along with many of the contestants that run. In fact Dan ran a dog in the derby and if no one noticed did not make the cut. Lastly those who post of their great hunting adventures and drawn inferences that us "high then mighty" field trial and hunt tests folks don't hunt much with their dogs. Please go to facebook do a search of Goose Geezers and see what working folks who train dogs and hunt do, I am proud to be a associate of that group. Lets end this BS with folks who refuse/decline to identify themselves and who we are being fed with various negativity from their own comments.


Amen.......


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Cimaroc said:


> Jeff Bandel offers to throw for the open on Sunday


I see you were smart enough to turn him down. If you had not, there would be a separate thread about how bad the throwing was for the last series of the open.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Holy Batman! This is about a derby? I have only read some of the posts.

Any id on the facebook post?
Who is Shirley?


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Wayne Nutt said:


> Holy Batman! This is about a derby? I have only read some of the posts.
> 
> Any id on the facebook post?
> Who is Shirley?


I do not think this violates any RTF rules since this information is publicly available

Given the information posted here it is not difficult to figure out

https://www.facebook.com/sbollman2?fref=ts

https://www.entryexpress.net/loggedin/viewentries.aspx?eid=6439

Shirley is a pseudonym

Also such public tirades are not immune from potential Unsportsmanlike Conduct charges and possible suspension


----------



## Glenda Brown (Jun 23, 2003)

I thought long and hard before posting anything here, and I am not trying to get into a slanging contest, just wanted to present another perspective. I started in hunt tests and probably have had and run about 15 MH --none pro trained. I judged a National Amateur and have and had titled field trial dogs. When the term "paying your dues" comes up I don't look upon it as a chance to get "brownie points to help me with the judges," for me it meant and still means -- giving back to the sport. Also, it is the best way in the world to learn. Much better than sitting in the gallery and listening to the crowds. I marshalled the first seven field trials I ever ran and it was a tremendous eye opener. Watching the set ups and how the dogs ran them. Seeing different pros and how they and their dogs were on line---still remember watching Bill Eckett as a young red-cheeked "kid" in one of my earliest trials. Watching the top handlers and trying to see through their eyes how to run the test. As a marshal, I met a lot of the contestants, and some were kind enough to take me under their wing. I would be watching a test and someone like Jay Walker would come up and ask me what I thought was wrong with a set up. Would have another tell me "to let the judges judge my dog", --Dick Greenleaf told me that after I turned and told him I had wished my dog had run a better trial under him! Another would point out that if the judges had moved the flyer over there, they would have gotten a lot more out of the test. All grist for the mill. Many pros were very generous with their comments and support even tho I was not a client. So paying your dues isn't just a way to gain brownie points but to benefit yourself in becoming a better handler and trainer and to learn more about the game. Plus, you are helping the Club put on the trial. I think Susan would agree with me on this.

When judging field trials, I can really only remember at most two, possibly three times when my co-judge and I didn't have the same winner. In one case, there was some favortism coming into play as his training buddy had run a beautiful trial until the last bird when the dog left California, crossed over into Nevada, swung through Vegas and spun the wheels then returned and found the bird. When I suggested we go over our top two dogs, bird by bird, my co-judge soon realized that maybe his wasn't the best choice and it all worked out. In one of my early judging assignment with a National Judge, at the end he asked me who I had down as the winner. I told him and he had the same dog. We both looked at each other, agreed we both couldn't stand the owner who we thought was an ass, but the dog had definitely won. Once, neither of us realized who had won, and actually we thought another dog had, until we saw who got called out for second and then who walked up for the blue ribbon. We were looking at numbers not at owners' names while going through our callbacks.

Life is not fair--my Dad told me that a long, long time ago. But, I don't know of anyone who judges who wants to put on a miserable trial. As someone once remarked, you really don't want people talking about your tests once the trial is over as usually they do that only if they are unhappy!
Sure, there are a few, and they soon get known, who are outright crooks---some slightly biased or some who don't know enough to put on a good, fair trial or have even read the rules. But it is also unfair to damn a whole sport because of possibly one or two bad experiences or experiences which are perceived to be unfair. All judges have a bias or two, I love fast, stylish dogs who know where the birds are located. Some don't like a noisy dog because they have had one and didn't enjoy it whereas another may forgive a noisy dog because he had one and understood what the handler was having to deal with. Lanse is right, it all balances out. Thank the judges---they have given time, energy, often paid a lot of their own expenses and were trying their best to put on a good, fair trial. If you disagree, fake it! Be courteous and realize that one of these days, you, too, may be judging a trial where things didn't go quite as you envisioned---but, you still found a winner who you felt was the best dog on that weekend.

Bill D---think I was at the same trial you were where the owner of the dog stood facing the wrong way, pointing with a shaky hand, and the dog went straight to every bird without any help from the handler. I don't know about you, Bill, but I had tears running down my face. That was the handler's last trial.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

glenda brown said:


> i thought long and hard before posting anything here, and i am not trying to get into a slanging contest, just wanted to present another perspective. I started in hunt tests and probably have had and run about 15 mh --none pro trained. I judged a national amateur and have and had titled field trial dogs. When the term "paying your dues" comes up i don't look upon it as a chance to get "brownie points to help me with the judges," for me it meant and still means -- giving back to the sport. Also, it is the best way in the world to learn. Much better than sitting in the gallery and listening to the crowds. I marshalled the first seven field trials i ever ran and it was a tremendous eye opener. Watching the set ups and how the dogs ran them. Seeing different pros and how they and their dogs were on line---still remember watching bill eckett as a young red-cheeked "kid" in one of my earliest trials. Watching the top handlers and trying to see through their eyes how to run the test. As a marshal, i met a lot of the contestants, and some were kind enough to take me under their wing. I would be watching a test and someone like jay walker would come up and ask me what i thought was wrong with a set up. Would have another tell me "to let the judges judge my dog", --dick greenleaf told me that after i turned and told him i had wished my dog had run a better trial under him! Another would point out that if the judges had moved the flyer over there, they would have gotten a lot more out of the test. All grist for the mill. Many pros were very generous with their comments and support even tho i was not a client. So paying your dues isn't just a way to gain brownie points but to benefit yourself in becoming a better handler and trainer and to learn more about the game. Plus, you are helping the club put on the trial. I think susan would agree with me on this.
> 
> When judging field trials, i can really only remember at most two, possibly three times when my co-judge and i didn't have the same winner. In one case, there was some favortism coming into play as his training buddy had run a beautiful trial until the last bird when the dog left california, crossed over into nevada, swung through vegas and spun the wheels then returned and found the bird. When i suggested we go over our top two dogs, bird by bird, my co-judge soon realized that maybe his wasn't the best choice and it all worked out. In one of my early judging assignment with a national judge, at the end he asked me who i had down as the winner. I told him and he had the same dog. We both looked at each other, agreed we both couldn't stand the owner who we thought was an ass, but the dog had definitely won. Once, neither of us realized who had won, and actually we thought another dog had, until we saw who got called out for second and then who walked up for the blue ribbon. We were looking at numbers not at owners' names while going through our callbacks.
> 
> ...




that's why this lady is a champ ^^^^^^^


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

BonMallari said:


> that's why this lady is a champ ^^^^^^^


Exactly... 

I was thinking as I was reading Glenda's post... All those folks helped you along the way because you are YOU... Anyone ever see Glenda without a smile on her face?


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

No Drive said:


> Bill don't mean to offend you, remember I am a hunter not a trial gypsy. I pheasant as much as snow/canada goose hunt. Pheasant hunting my dogs does it all, auto pilot I just shoot, and badly at that! She produces the birds with NO handling raw drive and talent. Duck hunting not so much, mostly blind retrieves so she relies on me as a team as you say. This trail game seems to riddled with politics, whining, and excuses why someone didn't place were they thought they should have.
> 
> I prefer the potholes and pheasant fields none of that occurs there, I have learned much form field trial people and all of my dogs are NFC FC AFC bred so appreciate what it takes to get there. Just seems the fun doesn't drive most folks in hunt test/trials thats my only point. Trials seem much more like the Kentucky derby with the hats on women who don't hunt, men who have the cigars bragging on their latest stock reports, the only thing missing is the mint julep!
> I live for my dogs, the training, the hunting, the test, all of it and sending my dogs off to a pro (if I could afford it, then would have to hunt less!) I would loose all of the joy form me in order to say I won! I can't replace my dogs squealing to like puppy when they see the shotgun go into the truck and the dekes in the trailer, pricless.


No Drive, I just read this post and would like to comment. Field Trials and Hunting; I do both. I've had the same hunting buddy for 21 years, he hand carves the decoys, I supply the well trained dogs and we both build our duck boats from scratch. I help him and he helps me on the builds. We hunt local waters 2-3 times a week, take one obligatory trip to Freezeout Lake each season and three or more other pheasant hunts in Eastern Montana, so I totally get your "priceless" comment about a great hunt with your dog. That said going series by series in a field trial with top quality work each series is a rush like no other. Standing at the tailgate at the end of the day with a small group of competitors as they pass by your number naming first the JAMs, RJ and lower placements, meaning you placed high or won is right up there with those memorable hunts you mentioned.

Sure there are disgruntled handlers from time to time, but overall the atmosphere at a field trial is relaxed and fun, (especially Canadian trials ). Regardless nobody is forcing you to enter field trials, it is super hard work and for the most part pretty thankless, but those few times you do well and place makes it all worthwhile for some of us. The great thing about our dog sports is the dogs don't care whether they are running AKC HT, NAHRA, HRC or field trials, they love it all and they love hunting best of all. Do whatever you want, just try not to insult other venues when you don't really know what they are all about.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Don't call me Shirley. Anyone remember that line?


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

huntinman said:


> Exactly...
> 
> I was thinking as I was reading Glenda's post... All those folks helped you along the way because you are YOU... Anyone ever see Glenda without a smile on her face?



I believe it's referred to as "phase 3." 

1. learning
2. know it all
3. learning and taking it to a new level


----------



## No Drive (Jul 9, 2014)

John Robinson said:


> No Drive, I just read this post and would like to comment. Field Trials and Hunting; I do both. I've had the same hunting buddy for 21 years, he hand carves the decoys, I supply the well trained dogs and we both build our duck boats from scratch. I help him and he helps me on the builds. We hunt local waters 2-3 times a week, take one obligatory trip to Freezeout Lake each season and three or more other pheasant hunts in Eastern Montana, so I totally get your "priceless" comment about a great hunt with your dog. That said going series by series in a field trial with top quality work each series is a rush like no other. Standing at the tailgate at the end of the day with a small group of competitors as they pass by your number naming first the JAMs, RJ and lower placements, meaning you placed high or won is right up there with those memorable hunts you mentioned.
> 
> Sure there are disgruntled handlers from time to time, but overall the atmosphere at a field trial is relaxed and fun, (especially Canadian trials ). Regardless nobody is forcing you to enter field trials, it is super hard work and for the most part pretty thankless, but those few times you do well and place makes it all worthwhile for some of us. The great thing about our dog sports is the dogs don't care whether they are running AKC HT, NAHRA, HRC or field trials, they love it all and they love hunting best of all. Do whatever you want, just try not to insult other venues when you don't really know what they are all about.


If you would have read my posts the trials I have helped be a bird boy or ran my dog have all been positive, no I did not place,nor will I ever likely too. As a note top field trial competitor said to me, "ain't got the time to take off training/competing nor want to give my dog bad habits by hunting him" That being said I will never be at that level with my dog, I pheasant hunt them too hard. The Qual is within reach but above that doubt it for me.

Don't know what I posted where you remotely get that I insulted other venues, please read before you post, MY DOGS ARE OUT OF FC dogs, I appreciate the tops dogs in trials hence I have paid a pretty good price to get dogs directly out of Ranger and NFC Boo. No need for you to look for a fight when no one is interested most of all me in slinging mud anywhere.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Time to just leave him be... Seems he doesn't comprehend his own posts.🙈🙉🙊


----------



## Scott Adams (Jun 25, 2003)

No Drive said:


> Also I am glad you think you got good hunting in liberal ultra gun control state Ill, that way you can leave the hunting alone here in North Dakota. My dog retrieves more birds on one day of snow goose hunting then most will in 5 seasons hunting in Ill.
> 
> For the record I have been to more then just a "few" trials, worked many of them. Maybe you should hunt a day or two where I do, then you would know what you are talking about when it comes to hunting.
> 
> Enjoy your dogs,


Wow. ..........
Short sighted arrogance to an extreme.

Will your dogs seat on a duck?


----------



## Labs a mundo (Mar 20, 2009)

John Robinson said:


> Sure there are disgruntled handlers from time to time, but overall the atmosphere at a field trial is relaxed and fun, (especially Canadian trials ).


Hey thanks John!! We do have an awful lot of fun! ...........sometimes we have too much fun.


----------



## TDMITCH (Mar 24, 2006)

welcome back backwater


----------



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

bjoiner said:


> Saw a post on FaceBook regarding field trial judging bias and how HT people have no or little chance of winning or placing. Personally, I haven't seen it. The field trails I have been at and watched all of the dogs, the dog that I thought won did end up winning, and the placements were pretty close as well.
> 
> I wonder if that perception is a lack of understanding due to the difference in judging between the two types of events. To me HT judges put a lot more emphasis on blinds and seem they use the blind as their only manner to eliminate dogs. It may be due to limited distances on marks or lack of knowledge on placing marks. FT judging emphasizes marks (consistent with the rules). I have seen HT folks in the gallery say, "That dogs marks were better, but my dogs blind was better." To me that shows a lack of understanding. What are your thoughts?
> 
> ...


Boy. I wish I had not started this post. I apologize to all that have been offended by anyone's post.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

bjoiner said:


> Boy. I wish I had not started this post. I apologize to all that have been offended by anyone's post.


You asked some good questions... We blew it up from there...


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

bjoiner said:


> Boy. I wish I had not started this post. I apologize to all that have been offended by anyone's post.


Actually that you brought it to the attention of the retriever community is a good not a bad thing.


----------



## M&K's Retrievers (May 31, 2009)

Who was that masked man?


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

huntinman said:


> Exactly...
> 
> I was thinking as I was reading Glenda's post... All those folks helped you along the way because you are YOU... Anyone ever see Glenda without a smile on her face?


I don't know Glenda. But, am sure that is true.
I would like to add....Many FTers are willing to help new people. But only to those who are willing to help themselves.
Like Glenda...


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Wayne Nutt said:


> Don't call me Shirley. Anyone remember that line?


Classic from "Airplane".


----------



## Greg Lee - Timberpond Retrievers (Mar 11, 2009)

Haven't read all the posts however IF a Judge has any kind of bias or prejudice, and/or shows favoritism to one over another THEY shouldn't be behind the book!
Every entry should just be a number until placements or HT judgments made.

Greg Lee 
Timberpond Retrievers


----------



## Nate_C (Dec 14, 2008)

I think the bias part has been beat to death and I agree with most, there is a little bit of bias here and there but 99% of the time judges try to be fair and are great people. Sometimes they make decisions that you don't agree with, I have been on both sides of that, both placed high then I though and lower but in both cases it always seemed in the realm of fair to me.

However, getting away from all that, I think there is some room for improvement. First, in reading the AKC rules they have alwys seemed vague to me. I have always thought that they should be a little clearer. Same with the actual scoring. If it was broken down abit more I think it might increase consistancy in placements. You cannot define every little thing but a little more structure I think might help and communicate that to the handlers so they have a clear understanding of what is going on.


----------



## ebenezer (Aug 19, 2009)

Glad someone mentioned the rule book. I can't speak for the AKC rules but the CKC rules for setting up the tests are pretty vague. The one section that does lay out specifics is the Classification of Faults, lists minor, moderate and major faults. You also need to remember that a series of minor faults builds into a moderate and then on into a major. From the judge's seat you are seeing all of this. Handlers need to understand that it is not just the dog running out to pick up the bird but also all of the training that goes into forming a partnership.


----------



## younggun86 (May 2, 2013)

I think people like nodrive use "my dog is a hunting dog" as an excuse to not run trials or tests. there is nothing wrong with meat dogs Ive several until last year when the bug bit me. I think its unfair and wrong for people like nodrive to come out here and bash people and start running there mouths to people who have been in the game or helped the game or breed of retrievers in anyways. Being a newcomer to the sport I have to say that I have met some of the nicest people I have ever met and I feel have made some very close friends. My dog also hunts, his first duck hunt was at 7 months old and was pheasant hunted regularly and will again this year. Field trials are a bonus for me and I love every minute of the training and spending time with my dog. Ive learned that in this sport(in the short time ive been in it), a person needs humility. I just want to say thank you to people like justicedog, eda, huntinman and many more for keeping the sport a live and strong for us young newcomers who love running dogs and training. One of my favorite things is hearing some of the stories for some of the oldtimers that have forgotten more then ill ever know. If nodrive had a clue he would show some respect and maybe try and learn a thing or two


----------



## WBF (Feb 11, 2012)

Every Judge is not the same, they all have differences in what they see and like. All we can do is run and just be proud of the hard work that our teammate has accomplished. Yeah of course we all feel at times that we didn't get a fair shake, but it is what it is. Its how we deal with it that makes the difference. In the field trial game if you step on all the birds you are more than likely getting color, so thats what we train to do. Tripping over every bird will more than likely get blue every time period. I had an older wise gentleman tell me once that, "At the end of the day just be proud of your dog, don't let someone take that away from you." If you are taking home color every trial than you are doing something right. Keep running until you can't be denied what you deserve!! Good luck to all.

Danny Haas

WBFs Man On The Stand "Maestro"


----------

