# CA trials



## Kris Hunt (Feb 25, 2005)

Nothing on the CA trials this weekend?

Kris


----------



## RickyBobby (Feb 7, 2008)

It's California, the dogs are already placed before they run.


----------



## Boondux (Feb 10, 2006)

You know who I'm rooting for, Kris!


----------



## Yayhoo#1 (Jan 29, 2008)

RickyBobby said:


> It's California, the dogs are already placed before they run.


I support this statement.


----------



## Lynn Moore (May 30, 2005)

RickyBobby said:


> It's California, the dogs are already placed before they run.


What the heck does that mean????????
LM


----------



## Yayhoo#1 (Jan 29, 2008)

Means what it says, plain and simple. A.K.A. back scratching.


----------



## Fred Warf (Mar 7, 2005)

Yahoo - your geography looks to be equal to your statement


----------



## Yayhoo#1 (Jan 29, 2008)

It's Yayhoo, not yahoo, and I said I supported the stament, not that I stated it.


----------



## Josh Conrad (Jul 3, 2005)

This weekends results are posted.
http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=22686

To those of you that believe "back scratching" and pre placements have been awarded, I would encourage you to take a look at who has won each of the last trials and other placements. It is all over the board and hard to find "back scratching".

don't get me wrong, I believe that there is some of that that goes on, but don't believe that it controls this sport.

don't be bitter regards.


----------



## Yayhoo#1 (Jan 29, 2008)

It's an opinion formed over the last few years, not the last few weekends.


----------



## Josh Conrad (Jul 3, 2005)

Yayhoo#1 said:


> It's an opinion formed over the last few years, not the last few weekends.


Hey, I'm fine with opinions.  We all have one.


----------



## Fred Warf (Mar 7, 2005)

Yayhoo - Don't know who you think you are to sit in judgement of so many judges, field trial committees and competitors. To claim they are all cheaters is very bold and outragious statement. The fact that the judges and the winners are mostly not from California shows just how wrong you are. Add to that you stating that these same competitors received their placement by cheating and colusion between judges and field trial committees, and not by long hours of training, is very troubling to me. 
Would you please tell us of just 1 instance or time that what you claim happened.


----------



## Yayhoo#1 (Jan 29, 2008)

Freddy, don't get your shorts in a knot, it's just my opinion. I've been a little deeper in this game than you, and I'm not going to drag names out in here. Never said anybody was a cheater by the way ;-)


----------



## zipmarc (Jan 23, 2006)

ACEBLDRS said:


> Hey, I'm fine with opinions.  We all have one.


What?? Only one??:razz:


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

Yayhoo#1 said:


> Freddy, don't get your shorts in a knot, it's just my opinion. I've been a little deeper in this game than you, and I'm not going to drag names out in here. Never said anybody was a cheater by the way ;-)


No, you just agreed with Ricky B's post that said in short,that all the places had already been decided before the trial started. What woud you call that just a friendly advantage?

Just what this sport needs is unresponable info being posted or allegations being made that have no thread of truth to them. This kind of crap is uncalled for and totally unacceptable!!!

And if you are as deep into this game as you say, you would know where I'm coming from. I guess that's where the Yayhoo comes in ! But let's not drag names around here!


----------



## Yayhoo#1 (Jan 29, 2008)

Barry said:


> No, you just agreed with Ricky B's post that said in short,that all the places had already been decided before the trial started. What woud you call that just a friendly advantage?
> 
> Just what this sport needs is unresponable info being posted or allegations being made that have no thread of truth to them. This kind of crap is uncalled for and totally unacceptable!!!
> 
> And if you are as deep into this game as you say, you would know where I'm coming from. I guess that's where the Yayhoo comes in ! But let's not drag names around here!


It was a formed OPINION, but Hey looks like you're climbing back onto your soapbox, congrats!


----------



## Fred Warf (Mar 7, 2005)

YA HOOOOOOOOOOOOO - to late - back scratching is not cheating - placement all ready 
decided not cheating - Get real - easy to sit behind a key board and make statements and innuendo and then claim you did not. you need some help!


----------



## zipmarc (Jan 23, 2006)

Yayhoo#1 said:


> Freddy, don't get your shorts in a knot, it's just my opinion. I've been a little deeper in this game than you, and I'm not going to drag names out in here. Never said anybody was a cheater by the way ;-)


Dear Mr.or Ms. Anonymous - from a fake location. You claim to have been a little deeper in this game than Fred. You've been on this discussion board less than 2 months, posted a few times, and have contradicted yourself several times already. 

Do you dare to stand up and identify yourself? If not, stay the coward you are. You have no credibility in my books. Your heckling comments about California trials made in this context show you are nothing but a troll.


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

zipmarc said:


> Dear Mr.or Ms. Anonymous - from a fake location. You claim to have been a little deeper in this game than Fred. You've been on this discussion board less than 2 months, posted a few times, and have contradicted yourself several times already.
> 
> Do you dare to stand up and identify yourself? If not, stay the coward you are. You have no credibility in my books. Your heckling comments about California trials made in this context show you are nothing but a troll.


Mimi, your getting a little testy? Blood preasure and deep breaths now. Being from California I know how it can get.
You go girl !


----------



## Yayhoo#1 (Jan 29, 2008)

You go girl! I don't care about your books. By the way Nacogdoches is in Texas. Some of you people need to open your eyes.


----------



## zipmarc (Jan 23, 2006)

Yayhoo#1 said:


> You go girl! I don't care about your books. By the way Nacogdoches is in Texas. Some of you people need to open your eyes.


Still too chicken to stand up and be identified, eh? Nacogdoches may be in Texas somewhere, but that doesn't mean you are.

Go ahead, keep up the pot shots. You are losing credibility by the nanosecond, books or no books. Congratulations, you are doing a good job on yourself!


----------



## Yayhoo#1 (Jan 29, 2008)

Thanks for the geography lesson. You're still talking, eh?


----------



## J. Torrey (Nov 11, 2007)

"Placements already decided" May be a bit extreme? I'm sure some favoritism regretfully happens all over the country. Including Texas. I have to believe it is the exception and not the rule. The cream usually rises to the top. To paint CA with such a broad brush is excessive to say the least.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

J. Torrey said:


> "Placements already decided" May be a bit extreme? I'm sure some favoritism regretfully happens all over the country. Including Texas. I have to believe it is the exception and not the rule. The cream usually rises to the top. To paint CA with such a broad brush is excessive to say the least.


Your posts mark you as a reasonable person so you'll get a straight answer. This is my experience.

On the circuit I run when I have a dog capable we also get the CA dogs. The worst combination is a CA dog that needs something with a lead judge from CA. The outside dog will not be looked at any way but critically, while the CA dog usually gets the Rose Colored Glasses treatment. Especially if it's owned by a perceived icon from CA.


----------



## straightlines (Jun 3, 2005)

Has any one taken a really good hard look at what is going on in Niland, California....

Now that is a subject all it's own!!!


----------



## J. Torrey (Nov 11, 2007)

ftrjuj said:


> Your posts mark you as a reasonable person so you'll get a straight answer. This is my experience.
> 
> On the circuit I run when I have a dog capable we also get the CA dogs. The worst combination is a CA dog that needs something with a lead judge from CA. The outside dog will not be looked at any way but critically, while the CA dog usually gets the Rose Colored Glasses treatment. Especially if it's owned by a perceived icon from CA.


Not being at the trial you described and taking your description as truth, I would agree those are not good judges and would not run under them again. I still have trouble believing that is common and CA is the hot bed of fixed trials. 

Poor judging or favoritism doesn't happen across the country???? 

If it's that obvious, why are the judges ever asked to judge again?

Since Pros are not allowed to judge, what does the Amatuer have to gain by putting up a dog that doesn't deserve to win? 

I don't have the answers. Just opinions.

Putting the few bad apples aside, I want to believe that the cream rises to the top and hard work will be rewarded. This is a wonderful sport don't let one bad experience ruin it for you and your dog. 

Good luck in the future.


----------



## maydayretrievers (May 30, 2005)

Well said Jeff..You could argue the point of any trial any were ..but to blame ca trials or any other state is not good. 
As for niland I have run thier several years now ..and the dogs that are winning thier have deserved it..and the people are great I have never ever had a bad time at a Niland,Ca trial....and the judge;s have been fair and done a good job..

So most the clubs if not all throw a great dinner or tail gate party call it what you want..But I have always had good time with all the pro's, judge;s,gallery..

You can say what you want about judging or favorites ect ect ect ect but it real simple run your dog let the chips fall...


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

i was going to stay out of this but i have to stand up for the judges, because my brother was one of the Open judges at last years San Diego Ret club trial...he is Clint Mallari M.D. ...anyone who has trained/trialed with him know that his integrity is beyond reproach...that is one of the reasons he is always asked to judge trials..Clint has been in and out of the field trial game since he was a starving college student at Texas A&M back in the 70's...so Yayhoo or whoever else questioned the judging at that particular trial or any calif.trial for that matter is barking up the wrong tree.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

J. Torrey said:


> Not being at the trial you described and taking your description as truth, I would agree those are not good judges and would not run under them again. I still have trouble believing that is common and CA is the hot bed of fixed trials.
> 
> Poor judging or favoritism doesn't happen across the country????
> 
> ...


It would be trials as it has happened multiple times. 

As for questionable calls - they have been going on since I 1st ran the AA which is circa 1966.

It happens in all the placings - not just 1st.

As for them being asked to judge again - they got the trial over in time - which is all the club is interested in - there is no judges evaluation system - so no one knows what happened. Unless you get a post like we saw about the person going out to shoot when their dogs were to run #2 & #4 in the rotation.

As for reasons - the person left out you won't see for a long time but the person who was given the favor you're going to see at a trial in 2 weeks. Isn't it much easier to have a pleasant conversation with someone than a "why didn't my dog get something in your trial". If a person is being complained about enough those who fail to think for themselves will say there may be credibility to those statements. Especially if those statements come from someone who is supposedly "in the know".

It's more than a few "bad apples". Look at the APPROVED page on my website. When an individual has no measurable "experience with dogs in the field" does it make any difference whether they do not know what constitutes a credible performance at that level or just have preconceived notions of who they "want to win". The result is generally the same - the intent may not be.

Have a nice day Jeff & thanks for the reply


----------



## J. Torrey (Nov 11, 2007)

straightlines said:


> Has any one taken a really good hard look at what is going on in Niland, California....
> 
> Now that is a subject all it's own!!!


CA is not blessed with endless training areas like other states. We use a lot of private property to hold our trials. I say, "God bless those who spend there own money to acquire training and trial grounds". We need more people with the means to step up and develop land for the future of the sport. 

I'm not really sure what your complaint about the area is? 

Good luck.  Don't let the little things rob you of your joy. Training retrievers is a blast.


----------



## straightlines (Jun 3, 2005)

J. Torrey said:


> CA is not blessed with endless training areas like other states. We use a lot of private property to hold our trials. I say, "God bless those who spend there own money to acquire training and trial grounds". We need more people with the means to step up and develop land for the future of the sport.
> 
> I'm not really sure what your complaint about the area is?
> 
> Good luck.  Don't let the little things rob you of your joy. Training retrievers is a blast.



The complaint is...8 plus AKC licensed field trials held on 3 pieces of property that are very very unique...and they do not allow any training on these grounds other than themselves...you tell me how wonderful they all are!!!


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

straightlines said:


> The complaint is...8 plus AKC licensed field trials held on 3 pieces of property that are very very unique...and they do not allow any training on these grounds other than themselves...you tell me how wonderful they all are!!!


Mark P is this coming from you? What about your property?


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

straightlines said:


> The complaint is...8 plus AKC licensed field trials held on 3 pieces of property that are very very unique...and they do not allow any training on these grounds other than themselves...you tell me how wonderful they all are!!!


 
Straightlines, you are full of crap! You are very misinformed. It is easy to slander the owners when you hide behind anonymity. If you went down this week, you would see mostly non owners training on the properties. If you were down there, you could be training on them. You are either a liar or ignorant.

Russ Stewart


----------



## J. Torrey (Nov 11, 2007)

straightlines said:


> The complaint is...8 plus AKC licensed field trials held on 3 pieces of property that are very very unique...and they do not allow any training on these grounds other than themselves...you tell me how wonderful they all are!!!


I have been invited to train several times to the Nyland properties?? My travels have not taken me that direction. I also understand some of the properties are open to ever requests entrance. Maybe you know something I don't? If the water is very technical, Maybe you should make a trip out and expose your dog to it? 

It's not an easy thing to be a land owner. If some are protective of the grounds they created, I don't blame them. SOME "day trainers" have no regard to the damage they do while they train. For instance, Driving through fields, Rutting up wet roads, Shoreline/levy/point erosion, and even property damage. Some one is paying to have it fixed. I don't think any of those grounds charge an entry fee? Maybe the should? 

Still, I'm thankful for any grounds that we are lucky enough to hold trials on. With out the support of land owners, our sport would quickly dissapear. 

Good luck.


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

They do not charge an entry fee and right now they are loaded with non-property owner trainers.


----------



## zipmarc (Jan 23, 2006)

> .....Driving through fields, Rutting up wet roads, Shoreline/levy/point erosion, and even property damage. Some one is paying to have it fixed. I don't think any of those grounds charge an entry fee? Maybe the should? .....


The trial held on our ranch a few years ago resulted in $8,000 of damage which we didn't charge the club. Why. Because it was not the club's fault - but certain individual trialers who acted irresponsibly. At that trial, I saw other trialers out there with shovels, attempting to repair some of the deep ruts made off road where vehicles were not permitted to be driven.

The solution for us was not to charge an entry fee which we never did. No more trials here! And training open only to my own training group and friends which include two pros. It's not the quantity of the users, but the quality of the users that protect the land.

Training ground is scarce, much less trial ground. Be kind to your land owner.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Russ said:


> Straightlines, you are full of crap! You are very misinformed. It is easy to slander the owners when you hide behind anonymity. If you went down this week, you would see mostly non owners training on the properties. If you were down there, you could be training on them. You are either a liar or ignorant.
> 
> Russ Stewart


Aaah.....the bane of any message board.....the assassin who hits and runs without the 'nads to identify him/herself.

Thing is, Russ....they can afford to be _both_ a liar AND ignorant if they don't have to say who they are.

And so it goes regards........

kg


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

Per Straightlines:

"and they do not allow any training on these grounds other than themselves...you tell me how wonderful they all are!!!"

I have not seen a defense of this libelous statement yet.

Russ Stewart ( my real name, not a coward's)


----------



## waggontail (Oct 10, 2007)

Well, I have not been in the Niland the area for awhile. But I have heard some harsh words. I must note a couple things: No mention of all the real variables, public vs private, lost hills grounds, prado, and some history of the trial grounds in socal. First, its not easy to just state this or that problem or condition. I have judged, worked many trials, and never trained on any privated property niland. I have never used my dogs on setup day. For the record I have judged at Mels, Mag 7, ( A team land marks) and all public grounds. I served on board worked public and private lands. I again never trained on privated land in Niland area. And I have asked before . I like many others use public or remote river paleverde yuma whatever. There is much more to this tail then can be told. With that being said: I would run any trial down there. Most of the lands owners that I have met are very good well rounded feild trial representatives. I do not expect red carpet from competitors, legitimate or not. But I do think it is the best gathering of dog people. I heard from some one that the breaks you take equal the breaks you make

Patrick O'Neill


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

There would not be so many people wintering down in the Niland area if they could not train. Access has improved greatly over the last ew years. I have heard from several owners that they are being restricted from training on their own land as much as they want use it.


----------



## J. Torrey (Nov 11, 2007)

RickyBobby said:


> It's California, the dogs are already placed before they run.


What do ya think of the season so far? It's been extremely Random from my point of view. Congrats to all the owners and dogs who have placed. Your hard work is paying off. 

Good Luck.


----------

