# Williamsburg Hunt Test...HOLY CRAP!



## GilWlsn (Jan 18, 2008)

Who do these 2 clubs prepare and get enough resources when the night before the closing they have 60 Master dogs and when the dust settles the next day.,.....they have 194!!!!!!


----------



## davewolfe (Mar 22, 2010)

Hopefully people that have dogs to run will jump in and help where they can. Also might throw in a shot gun and offer to shoot some birds. I'm not running this h/t but I try to help where I do run. A lot of people don't realize how much work these test are to put on.

Good luck to every involved


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

the bane of the online entry, who would have thunk up such a thing?
I guess you blame it all on Shayne?



.


----------



## Joe Dutro (Nov 20, 2007)

The new "Normal "trend is for everyone to wait until the last day to enter. The problem with this is that the clubs are left scrambling at the last minute to find workers, get more hotel rooms, and line up more Marshalls and Stake Managers. But again it is the norm.

As the chair for the Ohio Valley HT with 3 days until the close I find myself checking EE every chance I get. Right now we stand at 47 Friday Master dogs, 52 Saturday Master dogs and 18 OHQ dogs. Last year we were around 86 Master dogs each day and 30 OHQ dogs. Will we hit the 90 mark and make my life a little more dramatic??? We will see.


----------



## vScottv (Apr 22, 2010)

Having the ability to limit entries would help event committees alot. If there is a potential to get "locked out" of an event, that would force people to sign up earlier rather than wait till the last minute. However, I dont see the AKC allowing us to limit entries as that limits their revenue stream. I also understand the handlers desire to wait till the last minute, as that gives them a better idea of where they stand with there dogs closer to test day. I'm guessing the pros wait so they can decide which dogs there going to load up on the truck closer to test date (whos ready, who needs a little more time?)


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

How many did they have for their last Spring test? 

I think it's wise to use last year's test as a gauge, if/when possible.


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

vScottv said:


> Having the ability to limit entries would help event committees alot. If there is a potential to get "locked out" of an event, that would force people to sign up earlier rather than wait till the last minute. However, I dont see the AKC allowing us to limit entries as that limits their revenue stream. I also understand the handlers desire to wait till the last minute, as that gives them a better idea of where they stand with there dogs closer to test day. I'm guessing the pros wait so they can decide which dogs there going to load up on the truck closer to test date (whos ready, who needs a little more time?)


Let's not be so quick to blame AKC. Let's blame ourselves for not demanding control of OUR sport. I have heard that there is a proposal for the RHT advisory committee to present to AKC. I heard a comment from someone that they tried it before, and club members were filling up the available spots and others were unable to enter. I know in our area, Our club members could not fill up an entire event. I would like to see a system that would advertise a event with a designated size of event and a defined opening and stay open until filled or closing date 7 to 10 days prior to the event regardless of entries. They should NOT allow day of- walk up entries.

I think you will see the events fill up on the first few days of the opening. 

I would much rather go to an event where the clubs have had time to prepare properly, make sure they have adequate grounds for the events they have committed to. Have judges that committed months in advance and understood in advance they would probably be judging a full flight of dogs.

I'm interested in what others think! How about HT Secretaries and Chairpersons what do you think? Let's hear it!


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

I would love for our club to have a double master, but we simply cant because the AKC wont limit the number of entries. We might could survive if we had a double and 1 split, but if we had a 3 way split, we would go down in flames.

I personally think limiting the entries would be much better for the sport. Most clubs would start to offer doubles which would get you more bang for your traveling dollar. Not to mention be easier on the club as they would know entry size many weeks in advance verses days. That would make the secretaries life so much easier.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

I do not understand at all why you would wait till the last minute to enter a hunt test unless you had something personal going on and werent sure you could make it. What possible difference could it make when you enter??????????


----------



## Joe Dutro (Nov 20, 2007)

Steve Shaver said:


> I do not understand at all why you would wait till the last minute to enter a hunt test unless you had something personal going on and werent sure you could make it. What possible difference could it make when you enter??????????


I agree Steve. But thats not the norm. I personally don't think an extra week of training will make the difference.


----------



## Zman1001 (Oct 15, 2009)

I have to agree that it is very frustrating to wait until close to see what the final numbers are going to be, especially when trying to plan for an event. However, the reason for the lateness is because EE made the fee for everyone $4.50, without early registration discount, so why not wait until the last possible minute to enter. No reason for me to give EE my money earlier than absolutely required.

Now with that being said. If MAX entries is not a possibility, I think we need to start realizing that ALL master tests will be above the 60 dogs from here until the future (when the Master National is within reasonable distance away - i.e. East Coast and Mid-West for Alabama this year). because the AKC has now created the Master National Hunter designation where people need to pass multiple MN events before getting the designation. 

From here on out, every single club should prepare for splitting when considering to run a hunt test, and then cut back in the event a split is not needed. I know that creates some problems, but I just ran a hunt test where a split was required. This club decided that both A and B stakes would run the same exact test. They had all series already set up with holding blinds and wingers and when one finishes, they just went to the open series. It went smooth. It was effiicient....etc. No need for more grounds. Yes there were more workers required as each flight kept their workers, but it was not much more.

Just my opinion.


----------



## luvalab (Oct 10, 2003)

Steve Shaver said:


> I do not understand at all why you would wait till the last minute to enter a hunt test unless you had something personal going on and werent sure you could make it. What possible difference could it make when you enter??????????


Just off the top of my head:


Dog may come into season a few weeks early--try to avoid the trouble of a scratch by waiting until the last moment.
Unexpected vet bill or car repair--want or need to wait a payday to see if you can afford the test and travel.
Spring test--the Old Man may or may not be in condition to run a double master, wait until the last moment to decide what to do.
Waiting to hear if a work opportunity or obligation might come up for that weekend.
Dog has only been in water 4 or 5 times this season--two blowups, two or three pretty-goods... wait till the last weekend of training to decide whether to throw the money at it.
Just plain nervous--want to see what kind of event it looks like before throwing 80, 160, 240, 320 dollars at it plus as much in gas and hotel.
I think perhaps most of the above applies to amateurs doing their own thing with one or two dogs???


----------



## luvalab (Oct 10, 2003)

At some point, a club is going to say, "We can't do a triple (or whatever) split on these grounds/with these workers/with looking for judges/etc.," and the money will be returned.

THEN something might change.

With every new split crisis overcome, clubs are teaching the AKC that they can handle it, so why would it change?


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Steve Shaver said:


> I do not understand at all why you would wait till the last minute to enter a hunt test unless you had something personal going on and werent sure you could make it. What possible difference could it make when you enter??????????


 
why???
because they can, that is why.
Do you all remember when the random draw was done "In public" with two or three members of the retriever club at the secretaries kitchen table. All the entries in a salad bowl and you all took turns plucking out names to get a running order???? And every time, EVERY TIME, ten minutes before the close there were cars in the driveway and knocks on the door with folk with ether cash in hand or even better, the ever popular dated check!!! It has always been this way. But I still blame it all on Shayne!;-)
　
　
.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Zman1001 said:


> I have to agree that it is very frustrating to wait until close to see what the final numbers are going to be, especially when trying to plan for an event. However, the reason for the lateness is because EE made the fee for everyone $4.50, without early registration discount, so why not wait until the last possible minute to enter. No reason for me to give EE my money earlier than absolutely required.
> 
> Now with that being said. If MAX entries is not a possibility, I think we need to start realizing that ALL master tests will be above the 60 dogs from here until the future (when the Master National is within reasonable distance away - i.e. East Coast and Mid-West for Alabama this year). because the AKC has now created the Master National Hunter designation where people need to pass multiple MN events before getting the designation.
> 
> ...


"the Master National has no effect on our weekend tests"-author unknown, circa 2010 on RTF.

there is not one club in New England that could deal with 194 master dogs. the grounds here will not support those numbers.

the whole AKC hunt test game is on a course that cannot be sustained unless they give clubs the ability to limit entries.-Paul


----------



## WRL (Jan 4, 2003)

Why blame AKC? Why blame late entries?

Why don't the clubs move the closing dates up. Instead of closing 7 to 10 days before the event, close 30 days before the event?

If someone can't plan that far in advance, they can either lose their entry fee or enter a later event.

WRL


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

luvalab said:


> Just off the top of my head:
> 
> Dog may come into season a few weeks early--try to avoid the trouble of a scratch by waiting until the last moment.
> Unexpected vet bill or car repair--want or need to wait a payday to see if you can afford the test and travel.
> ...


 

Most of this is pure speculation or the info is there to make the decision.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

A big heads up is having that many the evening before the close. At 60 you can easily plan on twice that much if not more. It depends on the judges you have also and the nearest conflicting test. It helps to know your pro's and amateurs. They usually talk in the gallery about how many they need to qualify for master national etc. I pretty much take that all in consideration as the close gets closer and I see who is entering. It really shouldn't be _that_ big of a surprise once Wednesday morning rolls around.

We were worried about having much more then we did last weekend. We were ready with extra equipment borrowed from nearby retriever clubs and the paid bird boys are pretty easy to find. The grounds would have been compromised with the bad weather that was predicted but it was doable. The biggest snaffu was getting the judges. It was a bad weekend in that department.

We were 3 entries over the 60 per flight cut off. We called AKC and asked if we could leave our test at two master flights. The expense for another flight for just 3 dogs would have been ridiculous. Another consideration along with the lack of judges. They were very accomodating,

Angie


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

WRL said:


> Why blame AKC? Why blame late entries?
> 
> Why don't the clubs move the closing dates up. Instead of closing 7 to 10 days before the event, close 30 days before the event?
> 
> ...


I'm thinking the same thing though a month is a bit much. 2 weeks is not a bad idea though.

Angie


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

If you don't want big entries,,, don't make your club a Master National club. 

Pretty simple.

Angie


----------



## luvalab (Oct 10, 2003)

Steve Shaver said:


> Most of this is pure speculation or the info is there to make the decision.


Yes, true. But. Still. People wait. I wait. It's the way I'm wired, I guess.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

People also wait to see if they will pass that last test on the weekend before close. There is no penaltyn for entering at the last minute for the person running the dog. there might be a headache and a hassle scathing a dog that you entered early.


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

WRL said:


> Why blame AKC? Why blame late entries?
> 
> Why don't the clubs move the closing dates up. Instead of closing 7 to 10 days before the event, close 30 days before the event?
> 
> ...


I hope your kidding Lee. It takes several months to find judges. Not to mention with I call the bird guy 4 months in advance and tell him we are going to need from 150 to 350 birds, you are going to get laughed at. 30 days wouldn't do you much good. It takes more than 30 days for the AKC to get the damn judges panel approved, or not. Most of the leg work to get an event ready is done 5+ months in advance and you hope and pray everything works out. UKC did it right when they limited the entries IMHO.


----------



## GilWlsn (Jan 18, 2008)

Desire Dogs said:


> I agree Steve. But thats not the norm. I personally don't think an extra week of training will make the difference.


Ditto. The interesting piece is looking at some of the entries that showed up last day, they'll be the same people filling out a premium day of at HRC. Do because you can I guess


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

OK it seems there is enough interest to present a proposal to the RHTAC so they will put it in front of AKC. 

Anyone see a reason NOT to present a proposal? What would be the biggest negative?


----------



## Zman1001 (Oct 15, 2009)

paul young said:


> "the Master National has no effect on our weekend tests"-author unknown, circa 2010 on RTF.
> 
> there is not one club in New England that could deal with 194 master dogs. the grounds here will not support those numbers.
> 
> the whole AKC hunt test game is on a course that cannot be sustained unless they give clubs the ability to limit entries.-Paul


Paul,

The OP was not completely honest in his post. It is not one club that has 193 dogs. It is two separate clubs that are each holding a Master on the same grounds, on the same dates. 

Whenever you have two clubs get together to be able to host a "double" master, they should expect that each master would split. If both clubs do not expect to split when a "Double" Master is being held, it is bad planning, and therefore, BOTH tests should not beld held in same town on same weekend, if access to enough grounds are a problem. There are 93 dogs in one club's master and 101 in the other clubs master.

In 2010, I would agree with your statement about the Master National not affecting local hunt tests, but that is because the Master National had nothing to do with AKC and really was it's own entity. But in 2011, the AKC came out with the MNH designation, which means it gives people one more thing to push for, if they so deem necessary.


I agree with your last statement.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

savage25xtreme said:


> I hope your kidding Lee. It takes several months to find judges. Not to mention with I call the bird guy 4 months in advance and tell him we are going to need from 150 to 350 birds, you are going to get laughed at. 30 days wouldn't do you much good. It takes more than 30 days for the AKC to get the damn judges panel approved, or not. Most of the leg work to get an event ready is done 5+ months in advance and you hope and pray everything works out. UKC did it right when they limited the entries IMHO.


If you closed your entries a month in advance how would that change anything? You have to do all the prep work 6 months in advance as you stated. I don't see how one has anything to do with the other? As a matter of fact it would work better for your bird man because he would know a fixed number of birds needed way before the event.

Angie


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Kyle Bertram said:


> OK it seems there is enough interest to present a proposal to the RHTAC so they will put it in front of AKC.
> 
> Anyone see a reason NOT to present a proposal? What would be the biggest negative?


It's been done before and shot down.

Don't make your club a Master National club. Don't host your event with another clubs event and try to work with another "local" retriever club to hold a conflicting hunt test.

It's really very easy to get your numbers down if you choose.

Angie


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

Angie B said:


> It's been done before and shot down.
> 
> Don't make your club a Master National club. Don't host your event with another clubs event and try to work with another "local" retriever club to hold a conflicting hunt test.
> 
> ...


Great attitude.....do everything except change the problem.....WAY TO GO!!!!!


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Kyle Bertram said:


> Great attitude.....do everything except change the problem.....WAY TO GO!!!!!


What??? I offer 3 ways to effectively reduce numbers. That is changing the problem if the clubs care to do it. And they are relatively easy and painless. Once again we want to make "big brother" fix our venue's number problem which is really a good problem to have. Being a victim of our own success is a good thing.

Angie


----------



## Jeannie Greenlee (Apr 15, 2009)

> Don't make your club a Master National club. Don't host your event with another clubs event and try to work with another "local" retriever club to hold a conflicting hunt test.
> 
> It's really very easy to get your numbers down if you choose.


I am the chair for the Golden Hunt test you are talking about. We could chose not to be MNRC member, but we would like to accomodate those that are trying to qualify for the Master National. I think that is a good policy.
We lost our grounds at our original date due to MDC rule changes, hence the teaming up with another club so that we could use their weekend.
It's really easy to criticize when you don't have all the facts.
We have our judges now, we will have enough workers and grounds. Those who are coming on Friday, if bring your shot gun just in case we need help it would be greatly appriciated. 
We just wanted to hold a hunt test this spring and this was our only opportunity.
I for one would love to see the option for a club to limit entries. AKC allows it in agiltiy and obedience, why not other venues?


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

Angie B said:


> If you closed your entries a month in advance how would that change anything? You have to do all the prep work 6 months in advance as you stated. I don't see how one has anything to do with the other? As a matter of fact it would work better for your bird man because he would know a fixed number of birds needed way before the event.
> 
> Angie


30 days in advance isn't enough time to grow more birds. They need more like 3.5 months. If I called our bird guy 30 days before the HT and said...You know we guessed we would need 200 birds, but we really need 350 he would say you are #[email protected]^ed. Could I find 2 more sets of quality judges 30 days before a HT?? Ummmm, negative.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Jeannie Greenlee said:


> I am the chair for the Golden Hunt test you are talking about. We could chose not to be MNRC member, but we would like to accomodate those that are trying to qualify for the Master National. I think that is a good policy.
> We lost our grounds at our original date due to MDC rule changes, hence the teaming up with another club so that we could use their weekend.
> It's really easy to criticize when you don't have all the facts.
> We have our judges now, we will have enough workers and grounds. Those who are coming on Friday, if bring your shot gun just in case we need help it would be greatly appriciated.
> ...


That's great and you did what you had to do. We also last weekend had to team up with another club due to a date conflict. We were ready to accommodate the extra entries if need be. But I'm not going to complain about it. I'm not so naive to think a big entry won't happen with 2 clubs holding their tests together on the same grounds. Because that is what will happen as you found out. That's poor planning.

Being a Master National club is nice if you can accommodate being a Master National club. If you can't because of the numbers then you need to reconsider that status. You can't talk out of both sides of your mouth.

You also don't have to offer all three stakes. You can do just two if you don't have the man power or the grounds.

If limiting entries like agility and obedience was feasible I'm sure it would have been done already. Why wouldn't it have been? It's been brought up enough.

Angie


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

savage25xtreme said:


> 30 days in advance isn't enough time to grow more birds. They need more like 3.5 months. If I called our bird guy 30 days before the HT and said...You know we guessed we would need 200 birds, but we really need 350 he would say you are #[email protected]^ed. Could I find 2 more sets of quality judges 30 days before a HT?? Ummmm, negative.


Give him a range like you stated in your original post. If you anticipate a big entry because you live close to the currant years master national, plan ahead. The number isn't fixed in stone and you can always take less. Bird suppliers aren't having a hard time moving any extra birds they may have. At least not the good ones. Don't you tweak your order the last minute anyway?? I'm not talking hundreds of birds I'm talking by something like 50 birds. And even if you did take all the birds you certainly wouldn't have a hard time selling the leftovers at the test. I could have sold a hundred yesterday.

Yes,,, you will have a easier time finding judges 30 days out then 10 days out. You're preaching to the choir here.

Angie


----------



## troy schwab (Mar 9, 2010)

Its all about the benjamins........


----------



## Jeannie Greenlee (Apr 15, 2009)

> Its all about the benjamins........


I don't get paid. I didn't get any pressure from our club to put on a hunt test so that we could make money. 
Enough said.


----------



## troy schwab (Mar 9, 2010)

Do you really think that was aimed at you? ROFL


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

Angie B said:


> Give him a range like you stated in your original post. If you anticipate a big entry because you live close to the currant years master national, plan ahead. The number isn't fixed in stone and you can always take less. Bird suppliers aren't having a hard time moving any extra birds they may have. At least not the good ones. Don't you tweak your order the last minute anyway?? I'm not talking hundreds of birds I'm talking by something like 50 birds. And even if you did take all the birds you certainly wouldn't have a hard time selling the leftovers at the test. I could have sold a hundred yesterday.
> 
> Yes,,, you will have a easier time finding judges 30 days out then 10 days out. You're preaching to the choir here.
> 
> Angie


Angie, I KNOWWWW I'm preaching to the choir here, but it doesn't have to be this way!!! 

We had the opposite problem with birds, I found a guy to commit to 250 birds, if we needed more than that tough - he couldn't provide. The only other guy with birds wouldn't sell to just our HT he wanted both FTs which had already been booked with a different guy.....These are just the headaches before you can even finalize the event....This all reminds me of that one time I herded cats.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

savage25xtreme said:


> Angie, I KNOWWWW I'm preaching to the choir here, but it doesn't have to be this way!!!
> 
> We had the opposite problem with birds, I found a guy to commit to 250 birds, if we needed more than that tough - he couldn't provide. The only other guy with birds wouldn't sell to just our HT he wanted both FTs which had already been booked with a different guy.....These are just the headaches before you can even finalize the event....This all reminds me of that one time I herded cats.


If it wasn't this problem it would be another one. Every club is having that same problem if you don't have a contract with a big supplier. It has little relevance to the closing date or the size of the event. It's just another problem.

Angie


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

troy schwab said:


> Do you really think that was aimed at you? ROFL


I thought that too... Pretty funny. I don't think retriever events pull in enough income to AKC to warrant a whole lot of change.

Angie


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

Angie B said:


> If it wasn't this problem it would be another one. Every club is having that same problem if you don't have a contract with a big supplier. It has little relevance to the closing date or the size of the event. It's just another problem.
> 
> Angie


Ya so fixing multiple problems with one fell swoop probably isn't worth it, your right.

IMHO its pure greed from the AKC that keeps us from limiting entry size.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

savage25xtreme said:


> Ya so fixing multiple problems with one fell swoop probably isn't worth it, your right.
> 
> IMHO its pure greed from the AKC that keeps us from limiting entry size.


It won't... believe me it won't. Why do you think HRC clubs work to have a huge raffle?? Because the entries don't cover the event. Not usually. 

Get this,,, Some HRC clubs will buy the pro's lunch because they're so thrilled they are there with their numbers even though they are only allowed 8 dogs per event,,, but I hear that's going to change to 12 I believe.

So you want to hustle a big raffle or be better organized?

The grass is NOT always greener my friend.

Angie


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

I am all for a big event, hell I think my club could do a double senior/junior and 3 master stakes 60 dogs in each. If we knew it was coming!


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

savage25xtreme said:


> I am all for a big event, hell I think my club could do a double senior/junior and 3 master stakes 60 dogs in each. If we knew it was coming!


Well if you put in your premium that you were having a double junior/senior and were ready with 3 Master flights what do you think would happen?? Hello??

You might have to split the senior but the master maybe will stay at 2 flights. Move the master judges down to the senior and you'll be covered if that splits and if you need all three flights of master and another flight of senior it's pretty easy to pull in 2 senior judges. It's harder to find the master judges if you need another flight of master.

Problem solved... 

I should get paid for this... "Hunt test planner"

Angie


----------



## twall (Jun 5, 2006)

savage25xtreme said:


> IMHO its pure greed from the AKC that keeps us from limiting entry size.


I don't think the AKC would even notice, financially, if retriever events dropped of the face of the earth. Look at litter registrations, dog show entries, etc. for income. A big dog show will have several thousand entries each day plus obedience, agility, etc.

Tom


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

twall said:


> I don't think the AKC would even notice, financially, if retriever events dropped of the face of the earth. Look at litter registrations, dog show entries, etc. for income. A big dog show will have several thousand entries each day plus obedience, agility, etc.
> 
> Tom


Yes, yes and yes... We are a very small blip on the AKC radar..

Angie


----------



## BuddyJ (Apr 22, 2011)

well said Steve


----------



## maryandkimo (Sep 29, 2004)

savage25xtreme said:


> IMHO its pure greed from the AKC that keeps us from limiting entry size.


Many other AKC venues do limit entry size. Agility and tracking are done by runs/dogs and obedience judges have an 8 hour limit. I am pretty sure conformation judges have a dog or time limit also. 
mary


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

Lots of reasons not to sign up at the last minute some already mentioned ,one being the $$$the entry fee is just a drop in the bucked its easily $300 for the weekend.so why commit until you have to 
I've been in the games a short time and have frequented both their events without really knowing any of these folks but the events seemed to run smoothly and all workers where very helpful and welcoming, been to a couple others up north and wasn't to impressed with the orginzation or welcoming. That said if your signed go have a good time! And help out if you have time
If you dont wana go then scratch you dog.


----------



## bmccoy (May 29, 2009)

I don't usually reply to much on here, I just usually like to read the comments and go on. This thread happens to have struck a nerve. There absolutely should be a limit. After reading all the comments there were alot of good ideas, if we lived in a perfect world where we didn't have to worry about a BUDGET. I have been president of our club once before,served on the board for 6 years and am the current president now. Take into consideration AKC has upped the amount they take from the entry fees, EE has also, we are now paying 5dollars more per duck this year than last year, AKC just last year mandated that master and senior dogs must see 1 live flyer, which increases the amount of birds on the order. We have upped our entry fee as much as possible to try and compensate, but will still lose money. Judges expenses will be much greater because of gas prices and because of the availability of judges we will have to get from farther away from us. Oh let's touch on that subject, AKC is making it far more difficult for a judge to get qualified. A new judge will have to work their way up, before they can judge a senior they will have to have 2 points in JR first. So no more getting a new judge for a JR sat. and a SR Sun. Does AKC care if the clubs are making enough money to sustain themselves? NO!!!! If they did, when a club has 127 master dogs signed up ,they would actually try to work with the club. This has happened and happened when I was president the last time and I'm sure it will happen again. Master splits after 60 per flight in case someone is wandering where I'm going with this. That means 7 dogs made the test split. AKC wouldn't let us remain with two flights. Ok so now we have three flights of master. I get two more judges, two more hotel rooms, more birdboys (at 60 dollars a piece)and two more marshalls. The day of the test we have 11 scratches in master alone. Which puts us at 116 master dogs(58 dogs for two flights if AKC would have worked with us and cared about the expenses they were incurring on us). Now your stuck with two more judges expenses,two more hotel rooms,300 dollars for extra birdboys and this is just the highlights. Oh to answer the question before it is asked, the 11 scratches' money isn't refunded, but comes nowhere close to covering the cost of the split. The puspose of LIMITING entries, is not to make sure we have a small test. I want to have a big test ,but not at the Club's expense. The purpose of limiting entries would allow clubs the benefit of planning a test that wouldn't bankrupt the club. AKC is getting their money, regardless. Limiting entries would help retriever clubs from becoming extinct. Everybody likes to run their dog and there's nothing wrong with it, but hardly anyone thinks of the expenses and the work it takes to put on a hunt test. I'm not saying that anyone's comments on this thread is not valid or without good merit. The one thing that I think we need to consider is, at the heart of every hunt test you have or will ever attend or run your dog at, is a retriever club. Without that club, you wouldn't be running in that area. If we could place a limit on entries we would have a better platform for clubs to have a budget.


----------



## Joe Dutro (Nov 20, 2007)

bmccoy said:


> I don't usually reply to much on here, I just usually like to read the comments and go on. This thread happens to have struck a nerve. There absolutely should be a limit. After reading all the comments there were alot of good ideas, if we lived in a perfect world where we didn't have to worry about a BUDGET. I have been president of our club once before,served on the board for 6 years and am the current president now. Take into consideration AKC has upped the amount they take from the entry fees, EE has also, we are now paying 5dollars more per duck this year than last year, AKC just last year mandated that master and senior dogs must see 1 live flyer, which increases the amount of birds on the order. We have upped our entry fee as much as possible to try and compensate, but will still lose money. Judges expenses will be much greater because of gas prices and because of the availability of judges we will have to get from farther away from us. Oh let's touch on that subject, AKC is making it far more difficult for a judge to get qualified. A new judge will have to work their way up, before they can judge a senior they will have to have 2 points in JR first. So no more getting a new judge for a JR sat. and a SR Sun. Does AKC care if the clubs are making enough money to sustain themselves? NO!!!! If they did, when a club has 127 master dogs signed up ,they would actually try to work with the club. This has happened and happened when I was president the last time and I'm sure it will happen again. Master splits after 60 per flight in case someone is wandering where I'm going with this. That means 7 dogs made the test split. AKC wouldn't let us remain with two flights. Ok so now we have three flights of master. I get two more judges, two more hotel rooms, more birdboys (at 60 dollars a piece)and two more marshalls. The day of the test we have 11 scratches in master alone. Which puts us at 116 master dogs(58 dogs for two flights if AKC would have worked with us and cared about the expenses they were incurring on us). Now your stuck with two more judges expenses,two more hotel rooms,300 dollars for extra birdboys and this is just the highlights. Oh to answer the question before it is asked, the 11 scratches' money isn't refunded, but comes nowhere close to covering the cost of the split. The puspose of LIMITING entries, is not to make sure we have a small test. I want to have a big test ,but not at the Club's expense. The purpose of limiting entries would allow clubs the benefit of planning a test that wouldn't bankrupt the club. AKC is getting their money, regardless. Limiting entries would help retriever clubs from becoming extinct. Everybody likes to run their dog and there's nothing wrong with it, but hardly anyone thinks of the expenses and the work it takes to put on a hunt test. I'm not saying that anyone's comments on this thread is not valid or without good merit. The one thing that I think we need to consider is, at the heart of every hunt test you have or will ever attend or run your dog at, is a retriever club. Without that club, you wouldn't be running in that area. If we could place a limit on entries we would have a better platform for clubs to have a budget.


Well said- Thank you for posting.


----------



## Jim Spagna (Apr 21, 2008)

kzunell said:


> People also wait to see if they will pass that last test on the weekend before close. There is no penaltyn for entering at the last minute for the person running the dog. there might be a headache and a hassle scathing a dog that you entered early.


This is a BIG one. If a dog need one pass for a MH title or to qualify for MN, most people will wait to see how this weeks test goes to avoid unneeded expenses. My dog need 1 pass to qualify for MN. He's running in a double at Black Warrior this weekend. There are no guarantees he's going to pass so, since Magnolia closes before he runs this weekend, I'll enter him in that test. 

One way to combat this is to "over-plan" from the beginning. Black Warrior, for example, figured 5 flights for each of their hunt tests this weekend. When entries closed, they decided to go with 4. I'm not sure that was a great idea, hoever, the point is, they felt it was easier to drop a flight than add one at the last minute.


----------



## Olddog (Feb 28, 2009)

Some events have one entry fee for early entries & another (higher fee) for later entries, this might provide some motivation. If this were to happen I would think that the club should receive the additional amount.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

OK. I admit it. I did not slog thru all the pages of comments so ignore me if this repeats another post.
The RHTAC has a proposal under consideration to amend the current rules to allow clubs the right to limit entries. Contact chair Bill Teague with your thoughts. If you don't have his contact info send me a PM and I'll give you his email.


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

Good Dogs said:


> OK. I admit it. I did not slog thru all the pages of comments so ignore me if this repeats another post.
> The RHTAC has a proposal under consideration to amend the current rules to allow clubs the right to limit entries. Contact chair Bill Teague with your thoughts. If you don't have his contact info send me a PM and I'll give you his email.


Thanks, I'll contact him with my thoughts. Hopefully this time around we will get something done!


----------



## labraiser (Feb 5, 2004)

Desire Dogs said:


> Well said- Thank you for posting.


I understand your concerns, but i think you were asking for it as a club by running a O/H Q and a double master, senior and a double JH. I think you had to expect the worse. Sometimes things sound good, but in reality don't work out.

Scott


----------



## Zman1001 (Oct 15, 2009)

labraiser said:


> I understand your concerns, but i think you were asking for it as a club by running a O/H Q and a double master, senior and a double JH. I think you had to expect the worse. Sometimes things sound good, but in reality don't work out.
> 
> Scott


Can't forget the weekly reminders in the event section too.........


----------



## Joe Dutro (Nov 20, 2007)

labraiser said:


> I understand your concerns, but i think you were asking for it as a club by running a O/H Q and a double master, senior and a double JH. I think you had to expect the worse. Sometimes things sound good, but in reality don't work out.
> 
> Scott


Asking for what? We ran the same test format last spring and had 263 dogs. I think things went pretty smooth last year and I expect they will go smoothly this spring as well.

We have judges in place for the Master split for Saturday. Friday hasn't split yet but we currently have 1 judge waiting and I have a call into another. We have the workers for another split. We have the equipment (and if we don't I think I know where I can find some very quickly;-)). We have the list of Marshalls and our new Stake Managers in place. Plus the grounds are in better shape this year than last year. 

So I hope we are ready.


----------



## labraiser (Feb 5, 2004)

You guys were talking about splits and cost and limiting entries. So I was just thinking and expressing that you got no reason to complain, because clubs create their problems by putting on test that could attract a lot of entries.


----------



## Joe Dutro (Nov 20, 2007)

labraiser said:


> You guys were talking about splits and cost and limiting entries. So I was just thinking and expressing that you got no reason to complain, because clubs create their problems by putting on test that could attract a lot of entries.


Please understand, I wasn't complaining. We knew when we took this format on last year it may draw larger entries. We felt in the spring we could handle it. This is why in the fall we drop back to a Single Master, Double Junior and Double Senior. The grounds would not allow it.

While I do believe limiting entries would be easier for a club to prepare for an event. I didn't say OVRC could not handle a bigger event. I do think our location and time of year allows OVRC to put on a larger test without being out of control. If we tried to do this in June with more Pros up north it would probably be larger than we could handle. But its April in Ohio and some people just aren't going to make the trip up north when you never know what the weather will be. 2 days ago it was 80 degrees. Tonight it is going to be in the 30's.


----------



## Rip Shively (Sep 5, 2007)

Just saw this thread and figured I would comment since I am the hunt tet chair for the MRRC. People can throw stones and accuse us of poor planning, that's your right. We did move the location of the grounds from where we have held previous events and we went from our normal 2 day to a 3 day Master. One of the reasons we decided to have a joint test with the Golden club is because both our our clubs were suffering from lack of interest in hunt test game. Truth be told, I was willing to just dedicate my efforts towards the Golden club's effort to hold one test and our club to surrender our date. Others in our club didn't like that option and I understand their point of view. Let's face it, for this game to endure we all have to take our turn, rather it be judging, putting on a test or trial, or helping out at the events we run.

I did contact AKC over the weekend and asked if we could run a 3-day Master with slightly over 90 dogs and pointed out that Metro Alliance exceeded the 60 dog limit per flight for a 2-day Master. I was told no. As one person pointed out, chances are we won't have 90 dogs start the stake but we will split as required by AKC. I am worried about having a quality event. Due to the unseasonably warm weather some fields we were planning on using have been plowed and planted. Recent and forecasted rains could further limit access to test grounds. Chances are we will be short on bird boys to staff a stake the way I would like to see to allow the judges flexibility in setting up their tests. To top it off a vast majority of our entries consist of pros and it might be tough finding volunteers from the gallery. I could go on but there's no point. Our test will happen this weekend and I will be glad when it's done.


----------



## labraiser (Feb 5, 2004)

I do not favor limiting entries. I think pro's would take a lot of spots that regular people could use. Look at the trials where the pro's run 20 dogs. That's not fair to the regular handler. Good luck next weekend.

Scott


----------



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

Joe OVRC has one of the best run HT's going. Speaking from running there and judging there. Last year it was a smooth as butter.........


----------



## mostlygold (Aug 5, 2006)

To bmmccoy
You stated my sentiments exactly. We've had that "had to split because of 7 or 8 dogs" scenario many times, only to get that many or more scratches and ended up losing money because of the extra expenses. If clubs could set their own limits on entries, based on that club's grounds, work force, etc., it would help the club in planning the event. It is always tricky the years the MN is around. You have to plan for a huge entry, but sometimes you don't get it. More than birds and grounds even (though our grounds are severely limited), is work force and judges. Our work force is our club members. We simply don't have and can not find bird boys to work our events. Unfortunately we live in the Northeast where most young people are not familiar with firearms or hunting. We simply don't have a resource pool for bird boys in this area that the South and Midwest seem to have. We only have a finite amount of members to work events, so having multiple flights (more than 2) is simply not possible. If either of the clubs I belonged to had to split to 3 flights, we would have to cancel the event. We do not have the grounds or the workers to support that. 

I would love to see a proposal to AKC to allow clubs to limit entries based on the club's needs. As I have stated before. Retriever HT are the ONLY venue that are not allowed to limit their entries.

Dawn Terrill


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

If Rip is involved it will run fine.

How you been Rip? Miss training with ya

/Paul


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

labraiser said:


> I do not favor limiting entries. I think pro's would take a lot of spots that regular people could use. Look at the trials where the pro's run 20 dogs. That's not fair to the regular handler. Good luck next weekend.
> 
> Scott


This is a potential problem. Let's get a proposal to the RHTAC that acknowledges this problem. And propose a solution. I suspect this is the reason it was shot down in the first place. 

I think of hunt tests as a amateur sport. It should be governed by us amateurs, but the pros are an important aspect. I will be the first to admit the pro in our area kept us going when the interest waned a few years back. He is still the biggest supporter of our club and it's efforts. Pros earn their $ from this sport, they have a lot to lose if they are limited. I think all pros should give back their fair share (or more). But we have to support them too. I know a lot of pros that support and run many clubs. Kudos to them that do. I also know a lot of pros that don't judge, don't work at the set-up, don't do anything that gives back to our weekend. Show up run their dogs, earn way more money on that weekend than I do, get in their truck and home by 6 pm. Shame on them. I never get in bed on hunt test weekend before midnight. Sorry if this offends but it is true!

limited entry closings would indicate which clubs will fill up quicker, giving the pros the option of running another test if they don't get in the one they prefer. 

I think the 200 mile radius rule would become less of a factor. Events scheduled on the same weekend close together would be closer in numbers instead of one with 300 dogs and one with 50. This will allow clubs to possibly pick a weekend that coincides with a club fairly close and not suffer monetarily. 

One of the unfortunate side affects of large master numbers that are unpredictable, is this limits the club's ability to hold a double junior/senior. These events are generally easier to manage, completed earlier and earn more $ for the club because they are 1 day events, yet 2 day master events control the grounds. Often the 2nd junior/senior is the first cut. Other venues have upper level events that last one day. Essentially your revenue is doubled!!! Now I'm not saying we should double our entry fees, but rather acknowledge the positive aspects of our AKC events and work toward improving the clubs ability to maintain financial soundness by changing unsound practices! Our current system frustrates me personally in the planning stages.....our budget is a moving target for sure!!!!!! 

SO how about preferential treatment to pros that their designated kennel address is within 200 miles of the hosting club and they are active members of that same club. Watch how many pros become active and support the clubs!

Anyone with more than 6 dogs (or a number that is found reasonable) is lumped in with the pros whether they earn their living doing it our not. If you don't like it limit the number of dogs that your name is on as handler. It would certainly cut out the handler name game to get into certain flights.

With the exception of a pro that belongs to the hosting club a random draw to determine who gets in if it becomes necessary.

I know you can find major fault in all of these proposals, but we have to start somewhere with the discussion.


----------



## Joe Dutro (Nov 20, 2007)

Pros who don't belong to a club do give to the club in the way of entry fees. Without the Pros many clubs would be in the red at the end of the weekend.

At this point in our Friday Master- Out of 79 dogs entered I'm seeing 44 Pro entries. 56% Pro. With a 3 day format and no Pros we would loose our behinds.

Everyone gives in someway come HT weekend. Time, equipment, and some money (pros). And some of us give all 3.;-)


----------



## MDowney (Mar 22, 2008)

do both masters start on friday with the Golden club and the MRRC?


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

Desire Dogs said:


> Pros who don't belong to a club do give to the club in the way of entry fees. Without the Pros many clubs would be in the red at the end of the weekend.
> 
> At this point in our Friday Master- Out of 79 dogs entered I'm seeing 44 Pro entries. 56% Pro. With a 3 day format and no Pros we would loose our behinds.
> 
> Everyone gives in someway come HT weekend. Time, equipment, and some money (pros). And some of us give all 3.;-)


I hate to argue........ but the pros $ are coming from the amateurs. They are there making a living doing this. I am all for the pros being in our sport and they ARE necessary but Let's not be held hostage to the pros saying they spend money cause that is not the truth!!! Pros limit the number of dogs they own because it limits their income.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

This whole argument was played out here over the large numbers at field trials sometime ago. People were calling for limiting entries for the same reasons that are stated here. Yes field trials do NOT limit entries.

The solution has worked well without limiting entries by holding conflicting trials. I believe I've stated that in a previous post. You can do this now.. If the other club is within the 200 mile radius just send in a letter with your application stating that both clubs agree to have a conflicting test. Once again very simple.

I am NOT in favor of AKC limiting entries. It would take more then a few years to work the kinks out and that option has it's problems too.

The options I've stated have worked before quite easily by other clubs to keep their numbers small.

I am a pro. I pay back the sport that keeps a shirt on my back by working 2 field trials and 2 hunt tests. I chair one of those hunt tests. 

I see as many amateurs not helping a club out as pro's. 

Angie


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

Angie B said:


> This whole argument was played out here over the large numbers at field trials sometime ago. People were calling for limiting entries for the same reasons that are stated here. Yes field trials do NOT limit entries.
> 
> The solution has worked well without limiting entries by holding conflicting trials. I believe I've stated that in a previous post. You can do this now.. If the other club is within the 200 mile radius just send in a letter with your application stating that both clubs agree to have a conflicting test. Once again very simple.
> 
> ...


Angie,

I agree there are some pros that giveback. So thank you and all the other pros that provide help, insight and experience! I agree there are many more amateurs that don't. None of the amateurs earn a living directly and indirectly from these events. So I feel a bit more onus should be applied to all pros to participate. But amateurs are not exempt from responsibility. 

I respect your opinion that entries should not be limited. My opinion differs. I think it will be the best thing for the hunt test sport if we tackle and wrestle this problem head-on and not keep finding work-arounds that lower numbers, but you still have a potential for major entry swings. I would be fine if AKC required a minimum of 120 master dogs. and a required junior and senior for a two day test. I think this is reasonable for most clubs to handle. Except for the last year or so our numbers generally ended up in that range anyway. I just think in the future we are going to see numbers that exceed way beyond our historical data.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Angie B said:


> If you don't want big entries,,, don't make your club a Master National club.
> 
> Pretty simple.
> 
> Angie


If you don't want big entries, don't hold a doubleheader Master....and start Master on Friday.

Even simpler.... 

k g


----------



## Joe Dutro (Nov 20, 2007)

One thing clubs need to do is GET ORGANIZED. Start on time, keep things moving, avoid lag time between series, have equipment there and set up before the start time, ect.....

How many times do you see an event that is suppose to start at 8am throw the first bird at 9am? Too much unfortunately. If the club cannot handle that then they should do things to restrict their entries as Angie has mentioned.

Another thing is to stagger start times. Get the big events running first. Allow the club to focus on 1 stake and get it up and running and give youself and extra half hour before you start the next stake. It make life much easier.

Doing some of these things will allows club to better deal with larger enties.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

AKC already has a couple of different ways they can limit entries in different venues that are tried and true and would be very easy to apply to hunt tests. the limiting numbers would probably based on number of flights.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Kyle Bertram said:


> Angie,
> 
> I agree there are some pros that giveback. So thank you and all the other pros that provide help, insight and experience! I agree there are many more amateurs that don't. None of the amateurs earn a living directly and indirectly from these events. So I feel a bit more onus should be applied to all pros to participate. But amateurs are not exempt from responsibility.
> 
> I respect your opinion that entries should not be limited. My opinion differs. I think it will be the best thing for the hunt test sport if we tackle and wrestle this problem head-on and not keep finding work-arounds that lower numbers, but you still have a potential for major entry swings. I would be fine if AKC required a minimum of 120 master dogs. and a required junior and senior for a two day test. I think this is reasonable for most clubs to handle. Except for the last year or so our numbers generally ended up in that range anyway. I just think in the future we are going to see numbers that exceed way beyond our historical data.



Sure seems like you've spent hours in the gallery discussing this, pissing and moaning about waiting on pro's to run their dogs while you have to sit on your a$$ and complain. I don't know any pro that just shows up, runs their dogs and is home by 6pm. I know I haven't experienced that. besides when you get home you have to unload all the dogs, clean kennels and feed. Just about every pro I know does huge things to support clubs, and are generous to a fault. 

/Paul


----------



## Leddyman (Nov 27, 2007)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Sure seems like you've spent hours in the gallery discussing this, pissing and moaning about waiting on pro's to run their dogs while you have to sit on your a$$ and complain. I don't know any pro that just shows up, runs their dogs and is home by 6pm. I know I haven't experienced that. besides when you get home you have to unload all the dogs, clean kennels and feed. Just about every pro I know does huge things to support clubs, and are generous to a fault.
> 
> /Paul


/paul, How's it going?

Kyle doesn't sit on his ass and complain. He is the one running around like a chicken trying to get all of the crap straightened out at the last minute because of the last minute entries. He is directly dealing with this issue. I wondered how he maintained his cool at the last HT.

I don't know what the answer is. I just show up with my shotgun and my dog. I shoots some birds and runs my dog. I shoots 'em pretty too.

Your comment to Kyle was wrong, he works hard to make the HT work.


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Sure seems like you've spent hours in the gallery discussing this, pissing and moaning about waiting on pro's to run their dogs while you have to sit on your a$$ and complain. I don't know any pro that just shows up, runs their dogs and is home by 6pm. I know I haven't experienced that. besides when you get home you have to unload all the dogs, clean kennels and feed. Just about every pro I know does huge things to support clubs, and are generous to a fault.
> 
> /Paul


We all have those responsibilities to the dogs, after the RC trailer is packed away and organized for the next event.

Pros work hard for their money, NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. How many vacation days do pros get? Not damn many. On the road every weekend.

We all work hard at this game we play, would be nice if the governing body would help the clubs out a little is all I'm getting at.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Sure seems like you've spent hours in the gallery discussing this, pissing and moaning about waiting on pro's to run their dogs while you have to sit on your a$$ and complain. I don't know any pro that just shows up, runs their dogs and is home by 6pm. I know I haven't experienced that. besides when you get home you have to unload all the dogs, clean kennels and feed. Just about every pro I know does huge things to support clubs, and are generous to a fault.
> 
> /Paul


Wow Paul you sure seem to think Hunt Test Chairmen like Kyle don't do anything but sit around and piss and moan. Being a Hunt Chair is the hardest and most time consuming job for the test. Having a sudden split means finding more workers and more gunners, more equipment, more birds, and way more headaches.

Pro's work very hard and I don't have a problem with them not working at tests because they are already working.


----------



## mostlygold (Aug 5, 2006)

Friday MH starts are hurting the amateurs. Most people work and can't keep taking Fridays off to run HT.

dawn


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Sure seems like you've spent hours in the gallery discussing this, pissing and moaning about waiting on pro's to run their dogs while you have to sit on your a$$ and complain. I don't know any pro that just shows up, runs their dogs and is home by 6pm. I know I haven't experienced that. besides when you get home you have to unload all the dogs, clean kennels and feed. Just about every pro I know does huge things to support clubs, and are generous to a fault.
> 
> /Paul


This is why we can't agree on anything to get anything postive accomplished Too many folks don't know **** from shinola!!!


----------



## Rip Shively (Sep 5, 2007)

I certainly don't claim to have all the answers but I know there are some challenges to the HT game. Fewer and fewer owners are running their dogs and interest in belonging and participating in a club is waning in my neck of the woods. Before moving to Missouri I belonged to the same club as Paul and we had an extremely active and motivated club. It was not unusual for the day of test setup and showing the judges the grounds to have 10-12 club members on the grounds to help, not to mention the help the day of the test. There were other clubs in the Northwest that have the same approach (e.g., Oregon Hunting Retriever Club).
We will make the test happen this weekend, but to be honest that's my goal isn't just putting on another test. I like to have plenty of help, quality grounds, good judges, and a respect for good time management that makes the event enjoyable for most who participate. You will never please everyone.

Paul, tried to send you a PM earlier. In short things are fine here although I still miss the PNW. Please tell everyone in UVRC I send my regards.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Leddyman said:


> /paul, How's it going?
> 
> Kyle doesn't sit on his ass and complain. He is the one running around like a chicken trying to get all of the crap straightened out at the last minute because of the last minute entries. He is directly dealing with this issue. I wondered how he maintained his cool at the last HT.
> 
> ...


His comments about pro's were wrong. Now he knows how it feels. Its easy to sit back and bitch about those not working, to stereotype all Pro's or all am's is not fair.

/Paul


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

kzunell said:


> Wow Paul you sure seem to think Hunt Test Chairmen like Kyle don't do anything but sit around and piss and moan. Being a Hunt Chair is the hardest and most time consuming job for the test. Having a sudden split means finding more workers and more gunners, more equipment, more birds, and way more headaches.
> 
> Pro's work very hard and I don't have a problem with them not working at tests because they are already working.


I fully understand. 

/Paul


----------



## podunkccrs (Nov 3, 2008)

As handlers.....we could just recognize what a pain in the butt this is for clubs and we could enter earlier......
I would feel pretty guilty being dog 61 or 91 on 11:59pm Weds night for a test I intended to enter for months.....
Let's at least try to give the clubs and hardworking members some help where we can. Although there are times that have been brought up earlier of why we wait to the last minute.....that is not the majority of the time.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

FWIW
I think it's in the best interest of our sport to allow clubs the option of limiting entries, as long as it's done in a fair and transparent manner. With the near universal use of EE that is achievable. This is what I sent to the RHTAC:

I'm following up on the proposal to allow clubs to limit entries. There has been some "chatter" on the internet - most of it uninformed - and a couple of clubs I work with have issues with big entries. Mainly a shortage of capable workers and very limited grounds. 

I suggest an amendment to the HT regs that would allow any club to limit entries with the following conditions:
The limits must be at least the maximum "split" limit under the regs. That is, no fewer than 60 in a 2 day master, 90 in a 3 day, etc. So a club could limit to a single master or some number of master entries up to 60/90 each. The club may elect to limit one or more stakes.
The decision to limit must be posted on the premium.
All entry fees - including "administrative" fees - must be returned to any entrant who does not make the cut.
The premium must state the time and date for entry opening as well as closing. 
Advance notice of the opening and closing dates must be posted if using an on-line service such as EE so folks have adequate notice of the limits and can plan accordingly.
Entries close on the earlier of the closing date or the limit reached in those stakes only. 
Early entries must be refused. (That's easy w/ EE.)
A handler with multiple dogs who bridges the split may only enter the dogs below the "cutline" or may scratch, w/o penalty all of his/her dogs, and those handlers above the cut are entered in the order of their application. 

That's about as simple as I can make it and I believe it's consistent with the regs in other venues where limits are premitted.


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

Good Dogs said:


> FWIW
> I think it's in the best interest of our sport to allow clubs the option of limiting entries, as long as it's done in a fair and transparent manner. With the near universal use of EE that is achievable. This is what I sent to the RHTAC:
> 
> I'm following up on the proposal to allow clubs to limit entries. There has been some "chatter" on the internet - most of it uninformed - and a couple of clubs I work with have issues with big entries. Mainly a shortage of capable workers and very limited grounds.
> ...


Nicely done Bob. Thanks. 

So, shall those of us in favor of this notify the RHTAC indicating our support of this proposal?


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Good Dogs said:


> FWIW
> I think it's in the best interest of our sport to allow clubs the option of limiting entries, as long as it's done in a fair and transparent manner. With the near universal use of EE that is achievable. This is what I sent to the RHTAC:
> 
> I'm following up on the proposal to allow clubs to limit entries. There has been some "chatter" on the internet - most of it uninformed - and a couple of clubs I work with have issues with big entries. Mainly a shortage of capable workers and very limited grounds.
> ...


So how do you know this won't hurt am's? 

/Paul


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Good Dogs said:


> FWIW
> I think it's in the best interest of our sport to allow clubs the option of limiting entries, as long as it's done in a fair and transparent manner. With the near universal use of EE that is achievable. This is what I sent to the RHTAC:


In the early days we had limited entries. However, some clubs, and one in particular, were known for opening entries to club members before they were announced to the public. By the time they were opened to the public, perhaps 10 out of 50 spaces would be left. Once, supposedly, the test was completely filled with "friends and family" entries and if you didn't know someone, you didn't get in.

AKC got tired of this nonsense and passed the unlimited entry change. A great hue and cry went throughout the land. "oh woe is me, what'll we do?" A couple months later, nobody even mentioned the change. Folks adapted.

How will your proposal preclude the goings on in the entry process as I've described.

Eric


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

i find it interesting that the people whose clubs have the greatest amount of resources (grounds, available workers, etc.) are happy with the status quo, concerning limiting entries, while those with extremely limited resources are not.

anyone else notice this?

has anyone else noticed that large MASTER entries are the problem being discussed? i wonder why that is?-Paul


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

paul young said:


> i find it interesting that the people whose clubs have the greatest amount of resources (grounds, available workers, etc.) are happy with the status quo, concerning limiting entries, while those with extremely limited resources are not.
> 
> anyone else notice this?
> 
> has anyone else noticed that large MASTER entries are the problem being discussed? i wonder why that is?-Paul


There is always grounds and workers for less??


----------



## clipper (May 11, 2003)

This is not sudden. I belong to 2 clubs and the work keeps filtering down to fewer and fewer amateurs. I remember the days when we didnt have to hire help. I remember when at a master all the owner/handlers were there pulling for each other. It was fun.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Eric Johnson said:


> In the early days we had limited entries. However, some clubs, and one in particular, were known for opening entries to club members before they were announced to the public. By the time they were opened to the public, perhaps 10 out of 50 spaces would be left. Once, supposedly, the test was completely filled with "friends and family" entries and if you didn't know someone, you didn't get in.
> 
> AKC got tired of this nonsense and passed the unlimited entry change. A great hue and cry went throughout the land. "oh woe is me, what'll we do?" A couple months later, nobody even mentioned the change. Folks adapted.
> 
> ...


Well said, Eric.

There's no way AKC is going to limit entries under ANY circumstances, so everyone's energies are best served finding other solutions that WE/the sport can control rather than waiting for the AKC to provide one.

As I opined earlier, the FASTEST way to limit the size of any event is to NOT hold a double-Master test. It is EASY to double a Junior or Senior test and hold a single Master, even if you have to split it....but with everyone trying to get all the Master passes they can get in the shortest amount of time on as many dogs as possible (wonder _why_, I say tongue firmly in cheek....), double Masters that then must be split will be the rule rather than the exception.

A Friday start is a good way to limit entries too, because for some reason a TON of folks in the HT game won't travel on a Thursday evening to run a test that starts on Friday.....UNLESS it includes a double Master.

Remember the days when the primary goal you had when running a Master test was to get a Master title? Yeah...those were the days.... 

Vuja de (we've never been here before) regards, ;-)

k g


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

K G said:


> Well said, Eric.
> 
> There's no way AKC is going to limit entries under ANY circumstances, so everyone's energies are best served finding other solutions that WE/the sport can control rather than waiting for the AKC to provide one.
> 
> ...


Yes, those were the days. Now gone forever in the quest to collect the most dinner plates in the least amount of time.- Paul


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

K G said:


> Well said, Eric.
> 
> There's no way AKC is going to limit entries under ANY circumstances, so everyone's energies are best served finding other solutions that WE/the sport can control rather than waiting for the AKC to provide one.
> 
> ...


You could see the writing on the wall when the AKC MNH title was announced. All those extra required passes to get to go to the big show at least three times to get it are what is sinking this ship.

Be careful what you ask for...you might get it!


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> Well said, Eric.
> 
> There's no way AKC is going to limit entries under ANY circumstances, so everyone's energies are best served finding other solutions that WE/the sport can control rather than waiting for the AKC to provide one.
> 
> ...


It is too bad. The MN is a cool event. Unfortunately its molded the sport into something that distracts from the real fun, training dogs. I will say though that in the two HT's I've ran dogs in this year have been low key and a lot of fun. Almost reminds me of the good old days from years past...

/Paul


----------



## GilWlsn (Jan 18, 2008)

podunkccrs said:


> As handlers.....we could just recognize what a pain in the butt this is for clubs and we could enter earlier......
> I would feel pretty guilty being dog 61 or 91 on 11:59pm Weds night for a test I intended to enter for months.....
> Let's at least try to give the clubs and hardworking members some help where we can. Although there are times that have been brought up earlier of why we wait to the last minute.....that is not the majority of the time.


EXACTLY!! Hard to believe those 60ish dogs entered on the last day where all a part of an exception!


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

But what difference would it make if you entered earlier or at the last minute?..the entries are still way high, additional judges still have to be found, extra equipment, more land, etc...the problem is that the quest never ends now that there is a MNH title and additional recognition even after that goal is reached.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Lady Duck Hunter said:


> But what difference would it make if you entered earlier or at the last minute?..the entries are still way high, additional judges still have to be found, extra equipment, more land, etc...the problem is that the quest never ends now that there is a MNH title and additional recognition even after that goal is reached.


One advantage of setting the closing date for, say, 2 to 3 weeks prior to the event, would be the head-start they'd get on acquiring additional judges, birds, help, etc. rather than having just over a week to pull it all together.

Yes, it would be FABULOUS to be able to have extra judges, birds, help, etc. lined up weeks in advance so that it wouldn't matter how many splits you had to have. That might actually allow clubs to get "new" (to their area) judges rather than going to an already-overused judging pool...but that will necessitate another thread entirely.... 

k g


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Lady Duck Hunter said:


> You could see the writing on the wall when the AKC MNH title was announced. All those extra required passes to get to go to the big show at least three times to get it are what is sinking this ship.
> 
> Be careful what you ask for...you might get it!


Vicki I don't think the ship is sinking at all. Just going through some growing pains. It requires clubs to be more organized and to take their event a little more seriously then in the past. There is some very serious planning that needs to be addressed quite a bit in advance more so then ever before.

I don't think that's bad. If it's too much for a club or clubs to take on they can always not do a hunt test? That's not the end of the world either. There will always be hunt tests somewhere in this country on any given weekend.

If that's the worse thing that happens then so be it. But you can guarantee some other club will offer a hunt test on that same weekend not too far away.

Angie


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

K G said:


> One advantage of setting the closing date for, say, 2 to 3 weeks prior to the event, would be the head-start they'd get on acquiring additional judges, birds, help, etc. rather than having just over a week to pull it all together.
> 
> Yes, it would be FABULOUS to be able to have extra judges, birds, help, etc. lined up weeks in advance so that it wouldn't matter how many splits you had to have. That might actually allow clubs to get "new" (to their area) judges rather than going to an already-overused judging pool...but that will necessitate another thread entirely....
> 
> k g


Now Keith,,,, there you go offering another viable idea to help clubs work their numbers... Fly judges in?? Good god man!! What a concept....

Angie


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

paul young said:


> i find it interesting that the people whose clubs have the greatest amount of resources (grounds, available workers, etc.) are happy with the status quo, concerning limiting entries, while those with extremely limited resources are not.
> 
> anyone else notice this?
> 
> has anyone else noticed that large MASTER entries are the problem being discussed? i wonder why that is?-Paul


Nobody has unlimited resources Paul. And if that indeed were the case it wouldn't be long before that would change.

Angie


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Angie B said:


> Now Keith,,,, there you go offering another viable idea to help clubs work their numbers... Fly judges in?? Good god man!! What a concept....
> 
> Angie


Yeah...that would be too much like field trials, wouldn't it...sorta like that "Friday start" thing...my bad.... ;-)

k g


----------



## Leddyman (Nov 27, 2007)

Angie B said:


> Now Keith,,,, there you go offering another viable idea to help clubs work their numbers... Fly judges in?? Good god man!! What a concept....
> 
> Angie


You used to think it was bad just having to volunteer and be second guessed by the gallery...

Now you have to get your scrotums groped by the TSA for the privelege.

Sheeesh!~


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Leddyman said:


> You used to think it was bad just having to volunteer and be second guessed by the gallery...
> 
> Now you have to get your scrotums groped by the TSA for the privelege.
> 
> Sheeesh!~


Had my first "behind the curtain" screening recently because I had forgotten an arthritis tablet in my pants pocket. That "anomaly" was one I won't be repeating anytime soon....

k g


----------



## Nate L (Jul 21, 2008)

Oh come on. Who doesn't like organizing the logostics of 9 flights of Master, 4 flights of Senior, and 2 flights of Junior in a week and a half! Add to that a 100 year flood the week before the test. I personally look at it as a team building exercise for the club members.......


----------

