# Please define secondary selection



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

I'm watching the Total Retriever Marking and they've set up an out of order flier (first bird down, thrown in toward the middle), a short middle bird thrown in the direction of the flier that retires and a long bird off to the right.

I'm just seeing them take them the birds up in order right to left. So maybe I don't understand the terminology. I must be missing something.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Second bird selection, last bird down retrieved first, shorter of the remaining marks retrieved second


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Secondary selections means the dog gets the last bird down first and then you choose the next one...usually the shortest one...Steve S


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

steve schreiner said:


> Secondary selections means the dog gets the last bird down first and then *you choose the next one*...usually the shortest one...Steve S


*Bold* by me.

Sorry Steve, there is no choice in the matter, the shorter of the two memory birds is to be picked up 2nd and the long bird last. Dave Rorem has a term for picking up the long bird 2nd. I believe he calls it Ideal selection. I don't know if he does it with all his dogs or just a few.

I spend a lot of time training secondary selection, picking out the short retired with a visible long gun out.


----------



## jeff evans (Jun 9, 2008)

Howard N said:


> *Bold* by me.
> 
> Sorry Steve, there is no choice in the matter, the shorter of the two memory birds is to be picked up 2nd and the long bird last. Dave Rorem has a term for picking up the long bird 2nd. I believe he calls it Ideal selection. I don't know if he does it with all his dogs or just a few.
> 
> I spend a lot of time training secondary selection, picking out the short retired with a visible long gun out.



Hypothetical test. Triple technical water, long retired bridge mark L to R (230), thrown at the heels of the flier L to R short (80yds), left stand out gun (190) true line across two points one on right other on the left thrown down a peninsula (a bit of a technical mark), if they miss one of the points they end up way behind gun. Lots of in and outs to both memory birds. Order.... long/middle 1, Left 2, flier 3. How do you pick them up, or attempt to pick them up?....your the first dog to run and the test dog blew up.....? Oh and it's a trial. 

I would like to hear what "ideal selection" is? I was under the impression that secondary selection was training the dog to select what ever bird the handler wants after retrieving the (primary bird) go bird? Is that not accurate? None the less I work very hard on selection, including selecting the long bird second. Seen some great dogs that were/are expert at it....such a invaluable tool.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

The problem is once a dog has gone long, getting them to go short is very difficult. Pull next shortest bird out then go long. Ideal selection takes a very good dog, comfortable and relaxed on the line and excellent marker. 

/Paul


----------



## jd6400 (Feb 23, 2009)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> The problem is once a dog has gone long, getting them to go short is very difficult. Pull next shortest bird out then go long. Ideal selection takes a very good dog, comfortable and relaxed on the line and excellent marker.
> 
> /Paul


Agree and can be one of the hardest things for a dog, I train for this in gundog situations and feel it is very important.


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Here is an article about Ideal Selection. It was written by Dave Rorem and published in Retriever News:

http://www.theretrievernews.com/RNews/Ask-The-Pro/09-2010ROREM.pdf


----------



## Rnd (Jan 21, 2012)

Thanks Mitty, That was a good read.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

_*I was under the impression that secondary selection was training the dog to select what ever bird the handler wants after retrieving the (primary bird) go bird?*_

Yes... that was what I thought secondary selection was and when they took the marks "in order", I was confused. So what I get from this is that it has to do with the short mark. Next question... is "short" a relative term? If the marks are (say) 275 yd., the middle 320 and the go bird 300, does distance alone mean you shouldn't pick them up in order? Would you necessarily go outside, outside in?


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

I think people get too hung up on the names rather than focusing how to pull birds out of the test and why...... Before, we just argued over primary and secondary selection, and now Dave has added Ideal selection to the next. Is more advantageous to just know the principles of what you are doing then what it is called....

You have to decide your strategy when you go to line, and sometimes even base it on the dog you are running.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

There are many different ways to pickup the birds in competition. However, if you engage in *secondary selection*, the order is as follows:

- First, pick up last bird thrown (go bird)
- Second, pick up shortest remaining bird next
- Third, pick up the shortest remaining bird next (if triple)
- Fourth, pick up the shortest remaining bird next (if quad)

So under *secondary selection* principles, after the go bird, pick up the shortest remaining bird


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Howard N said:


> *Bold* by me.
> 
> Sorry Steve, there is no choice in the matter, the shorter of the two memory birds is to be picked up 2nd and the long bird last. Dave Rorem has a term for picking up the long bird 2nd. I believe he calls it Ideal selection. I don't know if he does it with all his dogs or just a few.
> 
> I spend a lot of time training secondary selection, picking out the short retired with a visible long gun out.


No matter what Dave wants to call choosing the long bird over the short on for his choice of second pick up it is still secondary selection ...secondary means second....It is all about semantics...and trying to convey a thought to others....Ideal takes longer to become confident with, but it sure is pretty when the handler and dog can do it with confidence...Steve S


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

steve schreiner said:


> No matter what Dave wants to call choosing the long bird over the short on for his choice of second pick up it is still secondary selection ...secondary means second....It is all about semantics...and trying to convey a thought to others....Ideal takes longer to become confident with, but it sure is pretty when the handler and dog can do it with confidence...Steve S



I disagree. It is not about semantics - it is about convention. When most field trial people speak and us the term "secondary selection" they are referring to the concept of - after picking up the last bird down first - picking up the shortest remaining bird next. Using your definition of secondary selection, when I pick up the remaining bird of a double, I am in engaging in secondary selection.


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

What I gather from having attended the Dave Rorem handling seminar here earlier this year, is that Ideal Selection occurs when you let Fido decide what order to pick up the birds. With secondary selection, you direct Fido to pick up the short birds first, even if Fido has his eye on that long flyer. With secondary selection, you direct Fido to to pick up the short retired, then the long flyer. 

The problem is that Fido wants that flyer.

Enter Ideal Selection. With Ideal Selection you are not imposing your will on Fido, you can let him get the flyer first, and still count on him to pick up the short retired. He said that a dog who can do Ideal Selection has a higher success rate on those kinds of setups than if you do Secondary Selection.

Apologies to Mr. Rorem if I have that wrong. I believe he credited Rex Carr with the concept.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Ted Shih said:


> I disagree. It is not about semantics - it is about convention. When most field trial people speak and us the term "secondary selection" they are referring to the concept of - after picking up the last bird down first - picking up the shortest remaining bird next. Using your definition of secondary selection, when I pick up the remaining bird of a double, I am in engaging in secondary selection.


Ted, I also included the words "conveying a thought " Isn't that what you are trying to do..? I understand the need(desire) for all retriever people to have the same meaning attached to all terms and words use in communication so there is no confusion in the communication process...We all form the same picture in our minds....I'm just saying secondary means second choice....Steve S


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

mitty said:


> What I gather from having attended the Dave Rorem handling seminar here earlier this year, is that Ideal Selection occurs when you let Fido decide what order to pick up the birds. With secondary selection, you direct Fido to pick up the short birds first, even if Fido has his eye on that long flyer. With secondary selection, you direct Fido to to pick up the short retired, then the long flyer.
> 
> The problem is that Fido wants that flyer.
> 
> ...


This is what it is all about ...Can the dog maintain memory of all the bird on the field ...I believe any interruption into the dogs mind as he/she goes about their task clouds this memory...Primary or secondary does just this ...But letting the dog get them the way they want to has less negative effect on the dogs memory ....If the dog knows where the bird is ,it will go get it....Steve S


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> I'm just saying secondary means second choice....Steve S


Yup, and that's the next shortest bird in secondary selection.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

JusticeDog said:


> I think people get too hung up on the names rather than focusing how to pull birds out of the test and why...... Before, we just argued over primary and secondary selection, and now Dave has added Ideal selection to the next. Is more advantageous to just know the principles of what you are doing then what it is called....
> 
> You have to decide your strategy when you go to line, and sometimes even base it on the dog you are running.


Agree I just want to git the chickens and when I train train. At a hunt test or trial if my dog wants the shortest bird last or the longest bird or something inbetween it's OK I just want to make it to the next series.
Each dog as Susan indicated might do things a little different. Example if your at a hunt test or trial, one might say (watched it as a judge many times) I gonna make him get that bird, I can see the guy/gal with their taillights going down the road after that series in my mind now.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Howard N said:


> Yup, and that's the next shortest bird in secondary selection.


Have it your way Howard...stay warm up north and enjoy the day ....Steve S


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

steve schreiner said:


> Ted, I also included the words "conveying a thought " Isn't that what you are trying to do..? I understand the need(desire) for all retriever people to have the same meaning attached to all terms and words use in communication so there is no confusion in the communication process...We all form the same picture in our minds....I'm just saying secondary means second choice....Steve S


Steve

If you want to simplify communication, you comply with convention and accept traditional meaning to terms.
If you want to complicate communication, you buck convention and create new meanings for traditional terms.
You are free to use the term "secondary selection" however you choose. However, your use is contrary to how most people in the sport use it.

Ted


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Criquetpas said:


> Agree I just want to git the chickens and when I train train. At a hunt test or trial if my dog wants the shortest bird last or the longest bird or something inbetween it's OK I just want to make it to the next series.
> Each dog as Susan indicated might do things a little different. Example if your at a hunt test or trial, one might say (watched it as a judge many times) I gonna make him get that bird, I can see the guy/gal with their taillights going down the road after that series in my mind now.


Most of the instructional materials use jargon. If one doesn't understand the jargon, one cannot learn the lesson that is presented in them. Hence, the OP's question. She did not understand the discussion about bird selection strategies because she did not understand the jargon. 

I thought the definition of secondary selection was standard, so this has been a great thread as I have learned that it is not!

Cart before the horse regards...


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Actually, Steve is not alone in his definition, and I wouldn't say "most" field trial people use the term in that manner. I have found that many people use it in that manner, focusing on the portion of the word "second" in the term "Secondary".... that is why I suggest to people coming into the sport to NOT focus on definitions, but on what you actually need to do in order to get birds out of the field. Worry about what to call it later.... and if you do it properly, you can just call it *success*. I just don't think it's a good thing to focus on the semantics of a definition, but would rather spend my time being helpful to the person with the actual question and look at what they are trying to achieve.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Not to get in a semantics issue and having trained many retrievers over the years , advised by those with many more pelts then I have/had, secondary selection as I was taught, is getting the next shortest bird second after the go bird in training. At a trial or hunt test well see #19 post.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

mitty said:


> Most of the instructional materials use jargon. If one doesn't understand the jargon, one cannot learn the lesson that is presented in them. Hence, the OP's question. She did not understand the discussion about bird selection strategies because she did not understand the jargon.
> 
> I thought the definition of secondary selection was standard, so this has been a great thread as I have learned that it is not!
> 
> Cart before the horse regards...


Yeah, sometimes you have to ask an additional question or two, so you know if you are on the same page or not. With Total Retriever marking, a quick look at the DVD if you don't recall would tell an experienced person what was happening. 

We are taught to pick up birds in reverse order of the way they go down, except in February, when there are 29 days, and you need to pick up the next shortest bird. But, if Fido wants the filet mignon, and it's not the next shortest bird..... what do you do? 

Get a thorough understanding of what you are doing and why, then add the definitions in later.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Criquetpas said:


> Not to get in a semantics issue and having trained many retrievers over the years , advised by those with many more pelts then I have/had, secondary selection as I was taught, is getting the next shortest bird second after the go bird in training. At a trial or hunt test well see #19 post.


I agree Earl.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Secondary selection taught to me by those much more accomplished then myself is picking up the second shortest bird after the go bird in training. It is a long standing field trial term as I have been taught since the early 80's . Now lets not talk about primary selection! See post #19 everything has a label I realize, but, secondary selection is secondary selection ultimate goal of many trialers, have not heard the term around hunt testers. Have run many hunt tests, but, always with dogs that were trial trained.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

1tulip said:


> I'm watching the Total Retriever Marking and they've set up an out of order flier (first bird down, thrown in toward the middle), a short middle bird thrown in the direction of the flier that retires and a long bird off to the right.
> 
> I'm just seeing them take them the birds u p in order right to left. So maybe I don't understand the terminology. I must be missing something.



Here is the original post. Thus, contrary to what Susan said, the poster is asking about terminology. Moreover, in this thread, most field trial people take the term "secondary selection" to mean picking up the shortest bird remaining after picking up the go bird. See

- Ed Aycock, post 2
- Dave - Rorem, post 8
- Howard Niemi, post 18
- Earl Dillow, post 24

It is unclear what Susan believes the term means, but I would agree with Ed, Dave, Howard, and Earl - as a matter of terminology. See post 12.

As to what to do in competition, that is another question - one not asked by the OP and one far more complicated to boot.


----------



## kip (Apr 13, 2004)

Had a good friend ask me today why I train by myself and not in a group with a other Ams. I told her I got tired of the pissing matches between everyone on who knew more than the other, threads like these prove my point


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

kip said:


> Had a good friend ask me today why I train by myself and not in a group with a other Ams. I told her I got tired of the pissing matches between everyone on who knew more than the other, threads like these prove my point


ROFL

ya funny how a dozen different people can come on, say the same thing, but since the said it now its hard fact from expert testimony. 

/Paul


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

kip said:


> Had a good friend ask me today why I train by myself and not in a group with a other Ams. I told her I got tired of the pissing matches between everyone on who knew more than the other, threads like these prove my point



Classic stuff there Kip


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Here is the original post. Thus, contrary to what Susan said, the poster is asking about terminology. Moreover, in this thread, most field trial people take the term "secondary selection" to mean picking up the shortest bird remaining after picking up the go bird. See
> 
> - Ed Aycock, post 2
> - Dave - Rorem, post 8
> ...


Really Ted? There is *NOTHING* contrary to what I wrote in the OP and I certainly didn't say that the OP wasn't asking about terminolgy. I was expressing *my* opinion that people get hung up on definitions and so focused on it, they fail to understand the task at hand. (I wasn't aware that i needed to raise my hand, or ask for an audience from OZ to express my opinion, BTW.) I also stated that I have met many people who define Secondary Selection as Steve does, and that I would not dream of criticizing them for having a different definition than what I may have - unlike others who may feel that it is necessary to brow beat someone into strict obedience. I also stated that the best approach was to help them understand the task at hand in order to achieve success. It can also be easily seen in post 26 that I agreed with Earl Dillow's definition of Secondary Selection. But, unlike others, I would not be so bold to speak for the entire field trial community as to what they believe, or may not believe. I know of no poll that has been held regarding this definition. And, before anyone tries to start a poll on this matter on RTF, I would have to say that I don't think RTF represents the entire field trial community. Of course, I also didn't know of any dog food poll at any national because I was never asked. I believe it was ASSumed what my dog was fed. 

Lastly, I agree with Kip, on post #29. Hope that is clear enough for all.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> say the same thing, but since the said it now its hard fact from expert testimony.
> 
> /Paul


Yep. Dr. Ed had it in post #2. But, 

OZ has spoken! (picture a gong, smoke, etc..... )


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

JusticeDog said:


> Really Ted? There is *NOTHING* contrary to what I wrote in the OP and I certainly didn't say that the OP wasn't asking about terminolgy. I was expressing *my* opinion that people get hung up on definitions and so focused on it, they fail to understand the task at hand. (I wasn't aware that i needed to raise my hand, or ask for an audience from OZ to express my opinion, BTW.) I also stated that I have met many people who define Secondary Selection as Steve does, and that I would not dream of criticizing them for having a different definition than what I may have - unlike others who may feel that it is necessary to brow beat someone into strict obedience. I also stated that the best approach was to help them understand the task at hand in order to achieve success. It can also be easily seen in post 26 that I agreed with Earl Dillow's definition of Secondary Selection. But, unlike others, I would not be so bold to speak for the entire field trial community as to what they believe, or may not believe. I know of no poll that has been held regarding this definition. And, before anyone tries to start a poll on this matter on RTF, I would have to say that I don't think RTF represents the entire field trial community. Of course, I also didn't know of any dog food poll at any national because I was never asked. I believe it was ASSumed what my dog was fed.
> 
> Lastly, I agree with Kip, on post #29. Hope that is clear enough for all.


Don't worry Susan, he's just stating what he was told by someone. Whats missing from the discussion, which I added, is the reason for secondary selection. Why it even exists. The behavior that drives the need for training on it. You basically said a similar thought.

/Paul


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Here's an opinion from December 2008:




RetrieversONLINE said:


> From North of the Border:
> SO much snow to shovel that I missed the start of this discussion-but here’s my thoughts.
> 
> History of Selection (in brief)
> ...


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

mitty said:


> Here's an opinion from December 2008:


If secondary selection caused this much turmoil , what about Jack Gwaltney's idea of "positivity marking" vs "ideal selection" ...? Ted , Ed . Howard, Paul, John , and any others are welcome to comment on these two ides of picking up the birds...This is to help the OP to understand there is far more to selection than just which bird to get second....Steve S....


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

My singular response to the inquiry is based on the definition of selection in general as defined by Rex and well chronicled by Dennis and others. My first exposure was in 1980 when first bird selection was in vogue. We spent an inordinate amount of time working on the concept in training but as Dennis stated not all dogs were reliable selectors in competition including my Percy (FC-AFC Trumarc's Hot Pursuit). Sometime in the next generation of dogs we followed the principles of second bird selection as defined by Rex and my post #2. Later Rex adopted the let the dog get whatever bird it wants approach which has come to be defined as "ideal selection". While I am still philosophically wedded to second bird selection I find strict adherence to the principle is at times disadvantageous and I stray to some hybrid form of selection. What I have learned is that sometimes you have to try to influence your dog and sometimes you have to let your dog influence you. Such are my objections to hypothetical dog training and labeling. The important part is pick a system which suits you and your dog and be consistent, dogs tend to thrive on order and consistency.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

EdA said:


> My singular response to the inquiry is based on the definition of selection in general as defined by Rex and well chronicled by Dennis and others. My first exposure was in 1980 when first bird selection was in vogue. We spent an inordinate amount of time working on the concept in training but as Dennis stated not all dogs were reliable selectors in competition including my Percy (FC-AFC Trumarc's Hot Pursuit). Sometime in the next generation of dogs we followed the principles of second bird selection as defined by Rex and my post #2. Later Rex adopted the let the dog get whatever bird it wants approach which has come to be defined as "ideal selection". While I am still philosophically wedded to second bird selection I find strict adherence to the principle is at times disadvantageous and I stray to some hybrid form of selection. What I have learned is that sometimes you have to try to influence your dog and sometimes you have to let your dog influence you. Such are my objections to hypothetical dog training and labeling. *The important part is pick a system which suits you and your dog and be consistent, dogs tend to thrive on order and consistency.*






Agreed ...Also as you stated some times we must allow the dog the right to choose or run the show to be successful...
For argument purpose only ...
"Eventually, Rex Carr abandoned primary selection because dogs AND handlers were unreliable at doing it. It wasn’t reasonable to pursue with all dogs. Later, he pursued picking up the short bird last. Dave Rorem trained extensively with Rex in the early 90’s when Rex preached this approach. Dave adopted Rex’s philosophy and later coined the term “Ideal Selection” which today he defines as “getting any bird at any time”. Of course, because Rorem has pursued picking up the short bird last after one or two longer birds, now some people think Ideal selection is short bird last (*just as some thing secondary is always short bird second).* Steve S


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

If the dog wants to pick up the last bird down and is allowed/released to do so , is that any type of(handler) selection at all ?????

If the dog is pulled off the last bird down and sent to retrieve any other bird in the setup, is that not primary selection?

When the dog returns with the first bird it has picked up, and the handler then picks out and sends the dog for the second bird to be picked up, no matter in which order it was thrown, or where it resides in the field, why is that not termed secondary selection ? After all it is the bird the handler decided was to be picked up second.


john


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Ed's point about dogs is well described. One of my MH dogs, Trapper, has historically been great at selection for me. Regardless if its a flyer or not, he will pretty much let me pick the birds and off he goes. He is a full brother to Zeus (FC/AFC Pure Labs Skys The Limit) that Pete Goodale owned. While not quite as talented as his brother, he's a very good marking dog and is comfortable on the line letting me pull the trigger. The month we ran a master test at Peppers and in the first series the first bird was a little nothing bird thrown into water towards an island, the middle second bird was the key tough bird down a hill across a road across water onto the backside of an island with thick cover. Most dogs struggled on this bird. Go bird was a flyer down the shore shot into water/lilly pads. Trap watched the birds go down and immediately locked onto the middle bird and I once tried to have him come around for the flyer, he told me clearly he wanted that middle bird. There was no reason to argue with him, it was "the" bird in that series so I let him settle and sent him. Now this was probably the first time ever he's clearly communicated I need this bird and it worked out as he nailed the series and went on to pass. Next two series he was same old Trapper. There is a time and place for selection, regardless of a perceived definition of what it is. Handling is an art. Reading dogs is an art. Knowing the dog your working with is priceless. When i attended the Rorem seminar he talked about Ideal Selection and two things stuck in my head as he talked about it.

1. It takes a very good dog to consistently succeed at Ideal Selection. They have to be a great marker, calm, confident, and wise.
2. It takes an experienced handler to know when not to get in the way of a dog capable of Ideal Marking. In the rare dogs that can do this, handlers typically muck it up trying to follow traditional perceived handling methods brought on by rigid thinking of how things should be done. 

As Susan stated, you can debate the definition of what secondary selection is, at the end of the day you have to know your dog, know its strength/weaknesses and know what your game plan is for running the test in front of you. Call it what you want....

/Paul


----------



## jd6400 (Feb 23, 2009)

BonMallari said:


> Classic stuff there Kip


Absolutely


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Ed's point about dogs is well described. One of my MH dogs, Trapper, has historically been great at selection for me. Regardless if its a flyer or not, he will pretty much let me pick the birds and off he goes. He is a full brother to Zeus (FC/AFC Pure Labs Skys The Limit) that Pete Goodale owned. While not quite as talented as his brother, he's a very good marking dog and is comfortable on the line letting me pull the trigger. The month we ran a master test at Peppers and in the first series the first bird was a little nothing bird thrown into water towards an island, the middle second bird was the key tough bird down a hill across a road across water onto the backside of an island with thick cover. Most dogs struggled on this bird. Go bird was a flyer down the shore shot into water/lilly pads. Trap watched the birds go down and immediately locked onto the middle bird and I once tried to have him come around for the flyer, he told me clearly he wanted that middle bird. There was no reason to argue with him, it was "the" bird in that series so I let him settle and sent him. Now this was probably the first time ever he's clearly communicated I need this bird and it worked out as he nailed the series and went on to pass. Next two series he was same old Trapper. There is a time and place for selection, regardless of a perceived definition of what it is. Handling is an art. Reading dogs is an art. Knowing the dog your working with is priceless. When i attended the Rorem seminar he talked about Ideal Selection and two things stuck in my head as he talked about it.
> 
> 1. It takes a very good dog to consistently succeed at Ideal Selection. They have to be a great marker, calm, confident, and wise.
> 2. It takes an experienced handler to know when not to get in the way of a dog capable of Ideal Marking. In the rare dogs that can do this, handlers typically muck it up trying to follow traditional perceived handling methods brought on by rigid thinking of how things should be done.
> ...


At which Field Trials did Trap demonstrate his marking skills and you exhibit your prowess at reading and handling a dog?


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

What happens when you run a venue where the Judges can and do dictate order of pick up?

They may tell you in the briefing that the last bird down , is stone dead in the decoys, but, the second bird thrown in the multiple mark, was a crippled bird, and you must pick it up first.

So, dont those Dogs have to have a very good understanding of "selection" and be very compliant about which bird the handler MAY demand the dog to retrieve?

I suppose you call this "Primary" selection.


A dog that is consistently trained to pick up the next shortest bird after the LBD on a very regular basis,, tell me what is the Handler and dog selecting.

Isnt that "Secondary" selection then, just a consistent routine?


Gooser


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Why dont we just call the act of the handler making the decision of what bird to pick up,,,,, "Selection",, and leave the confusing adjective,, primary, secondary and Ideal (Which makes you think that's the "Best") off?


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> At which Field Trials did Trap demonstrate his marking skills and you exhibit your prowess at reading and handling a dog?



Either you need new glasses or you are purposely calling out Paul. No where did he say "trials". What he wrote is clear and concise. I find this interesting as you have stated before that this kind of behavior is not necessary. I agree its not. /paul had always been forthcoming about what games he plays and he certainly doesn't look down on people that don't run trials. He may be a smart ass, but he is not an elitist snob. Which does not serve our sport at all.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

MooseGooser said:


> Why dont we just call the act of the handler making the decision of what bird to pick up,,,,, "Selection",, and leave the confusing adjective,, primary, secondary and Ideal (Which makes you think that's the "Best") off?


This is the reason we ( they ) don't do it that way .......It has none thing to do with which is the best way to do it ...It's all about everyone being on the same page so to speak...Steve S
Quote Originally Posted by steve schreiner View Post 

Ted, I also included the words "conveying a thought " Isn't that what you are trying to do..? I understand the need(desire) for all retriever people to have the same meaning attached to all terms and words used in communication so there is no confusion in the communication process...We all form the same picture in our minds....I'm just saying secondary means second choice....Steve S


If you want to* simplify communication, you comply with convention and accept traditional meaning to terms*.
If you want to complicate communication, you buck convention and create new meanings for traditional terms.
You are free to use the term "secondary selection" however you choose. However, your use is contrary to how most people in the sport use it.

Ted


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> At which Field Trials did Trap demonstrate his marking skills and you exhibit your prowess at reading and handling a dog?


well without getting into details this particular dog has been plagued with a shoulder injury knocking him out for a year when he was almost 2, got salmon poisoning which about killed him and took him out for a major portion of a year and was also bit by a rattlesnake which again took him out during a major portion of a trial season. At this point this dog has shown me more guts, courage and heart than most people I know. However don't kid yourself, the dog has finished in the quals he was entered in and holds his own. My post was on topic. Your's is an example of the snobby elitist attitude you continue to display in most of your posts. Since you bring it up, I do mostly run HT's and train HT dogs. You should not be so quick to assume I've never ran or handled FT's. Opens included. Your more than welcome to come train or watch me handle a dog anytime. How about you tell us about your handling prowess recently when your aging FC went out due to handler errors on the blinds? 

/Paul


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

mitty said:


> Most of the instructional materials use jargon. If one doesn't understand the jargon, one cannot learn the lesson that is presented in them. Hence, the OP's question. She did not understand the discussion about bird selection strategies because she did not understand the jargon.
> 
> I thought the definition of secondary selection was standard, so this has been a great thread as I have learned that it is not!
> 
> Cart before the horse regards...


Even changes from region to region. I have been doing drills for years that I don't know what they are called, someone puts A tag on them. Didn't know what a W drill was, called it a split drill and did it for 30 years as a split drill. Just one example.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> well without getting into details this particular dog has been plagued with a shoulder injury knocking him out for a year when he was almost 2, got salmon poisoning which about killed him and took him out for a major portion of a year and was also bit by a rattlesnake which again took him out during a major portion of a trial season. At this point this dog has shown me more guts, courage and heart than most people I know. However don't kid yourself, the dog has finished in the quals he was entered in and holds his own. My post was on topic. Your's is an example of the snobby elitist attitude you continue to display in most of your posts. Since you bring it up, I do mostly run HT's and train HT dogs. You should not be so quick to assume I've never ran or handled FT's. Opens included. Your more than welcome to come train or watch me handle a dog anytime. How about you tell us about your handling prowess recently when your aging FC went out due to handler errors on the blinds?
> 
> /Paul


Yeah, but can you read a dog?;-)


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

if /paul posts a thoughtful and constructive answer on his first post and is ornery on his second post......is he a "secondary a-hole"? if he waits until his third post to be mean, is he an "ideal a-hole"?

if ted gives meaningful insight on his first post and waits until his second post to look down his nose on a hunt tester.....is he a "secondary snob"? if ted................you know the rest.

rtf cracks me up! 

note:
i would train with paul, he is not an a-hole.
i would train with ted, he is not a snob and has helped me personally.
i would train with kip, i don't see how but i guess he thinks i am a know it all? ;-)


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

huntinman said:


> Yeah, but can you read a dog?;-)


Nah, I taught him how to work the VCR so he can just watch the videos. Funny thing is he keeps putting in the instruction video on how to blow a duck call. I think he's trying to tell me something but I'm probley reading him wrong.

/Paul


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

EdA said:


> My singular response to the inquiry is based on the definition of selection in general as defined by Rex and well chronicled by Dennis and others. My first exposure was in 1980 when first bird selection was in vogue. We spent an inordinate amount of time working on the concept in training but as Dennis stated not all dogs were reliable selectors in competition including my Percy (FC-AFC Trumarc's Hot Pursuit). Sometime in the next generation of dogs we followed the principles of second bird selection as defined by Rex and my post #2. Later Rex adopted the let the dog get whatever bird it wants approach which has come to be defined as "ideal selection". *While I am still philosophically wedded to second bird selection I find strict adherence to the principle is at times disadvantageous and I stray to some hybrid form of selection. What I have learned is that sometimes you have to try to influence your dog and sometimes you have to let your dog influence you.* Such are my objections to hypothetical dog training and labeling. The important part is pick a system which suits you and your dog and be consistent, dogs tend to thrive on order and consistency.


Great post. Whatever you call it (and I am pretty surprised that there is a debate about it) the bolded part is the key and where the good handlers make a real difference at the line. 

What do I do when the dog comes back with a clear indication it wants a bird other than the next shortest? Let it get the bird it wants, essentially trusting the dog, or pull it off to the next shortest, essentially trusting that the training and repetition will let the dog figure it out? What if you are watching a number of folks do something different and being more successful with the setup than than those doing things in the more typical manner?

I seem to guess wrong every time this comes up, unless I know that the dog didn't mark one of the birds.


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

Can we get some diagrams of field setups that secondary selection would be used ?


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

shawninthesticks said:


> Can we get some diagrams of field setups that secondary selection would be used ?


 Secondary selection is used 90% of the time, it is the default, you might want a diagram showing the rare cases where primary selection would be used. Secondary selection is simply "last bird down, short to long", it's what almost everybody does even if they never had a name for it.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

DoubleHaul said:


> What do I do when the dog comes back with a clear indication it wants a bird other than the next shortest? Let it get the bird it wants, essentially trusting the dog, or pull it off to the next shortest, essentially trusting that the training and repetition will let the dog figure it out? What if you are watching a number of folks do something different and being more successful with the setup than than those doing things in the more typical manner?


Good question Double. Do you simply work this out in training, and if the dog is "right" most of the time do you let him pick the bird if he shows a strong preference for one of the remaining birds? Just from listening to folks talk at training days, etc., it seems most folks have good stories about flameouts at events when they tried to argue with the dog at the line. I would guess, like most things, it depends on the dog, and more specifically what the dog is doing that moment.

My dog is often wrong but rarely in doubt, so I guess I will just hang on for the ride and then go train some more.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

RookieTrainer said:


> Good question Double. Do you simply work this out in training, and if the dog is "right" most of the time do you let him pick the bird if he shows a strong preference for one of the remaining birds? Just from listening to folks talk at training days, etc., it seems most folks have good stories about flameouts at events when they tried to argue with the dog at the line. I would guess, like most things, it depends on the dog, and more specifically what the dog is doing that moment.
> 
> My dog is often wrong but rarely in doubt, so I guess I will just hang on for the ride and then go train some more.


"Selecting" is one of those things where your approach in training doesn't always translate to the field trial or hunt test, it also depends on the dog. I always select in training, 100% of the time and I insist that the dog gets the bird I select for him. At a trial I have a plan for which bird I want to pick up first, second, third, etc, but sometimes my dog has another idea, I have learned that insisting on selecting the birds in my order will usually backfire, with the dog going into a no-mans-land somewhere between where I sent him and where the bird actually is. 

I was judging an amateur a couple weeks ago, our birds were widely separated, a triple, short bird on the left about 160 yards, flyer up the middle (last bird down) about 220 yards and a far right birds on a hard to hold line through terrain, cover changes and an angle across a narrow strip of water about 325 yards. The left and right birds were over 90 degrees apart, the right hand bird was definitely the key bird. We had one handler and dog pick up the flyer, then the dog turns and faces the hard to get, way out there right hand bird, handler thought this is crazy, turned the dog 90 degrees left, pointed him at the much easier of the two remaining birds and sent him. The dog didn't even take a step in that direction, just blasted hard right, straight for that difficult punch bird. There were maybe four dogs out of 75 that ran right to that key bird, punched across the last water and pinned that bird, this dog was the best.

Always train for selection, but learn from experience how well your dog selects at a trial. Most labs are fairly compliant and select well at a trial, but there is the occasional excellent confident marker who can be trusted to pick his own bird.

John


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Thanks John. I am being taught to do the same thing in training, but I am also being taught that an event is not training and you do what it takes to get the bird and get called back.

That was a good setup you described there, and I bet it was something to see when those 4 dogs pinned that long bird. I assume that the wind was blowing right to left, and the dogs that weren't really honest in that narrow strip of water probably got too far out to the right and upwind of the bird?


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Ed's point about dogs is well described. One of my MH dogs, Trapper, has historically been great at selection for me. Regardless if its a flyer or not, he will pretty much let me pick the birds and off he goes. He is a full brother to Zeus (FC/AFC Pure Labs Skys The Limit) that Pete Goodale owned. While not quite as talented as his brother, he's a very good marking dog and is comfortable on the line letting me pull the trigger. The month we ran a master test at Peppers and in the first series the first bird was a little nothing bird thrown into water towards an island, the middle second bird was the key tough bird down a hill across a road across water onto the backside of an island with thick cover. Most dogs struggled on this bird. Go bird was a flyer down the shore shot into water/lilly pads. Trap watched the birds go down and immediately locked onto the middle bird and I once tried to have him come around for the flyer, he told me clearly he wanted that middle bird. There was no reason to argue with him, it was "the" bird in that series so I let him settle and sent him. Now this was probably the first time ever he's clearly communicated I need this bird and it worked out as he nailed the series and went on to pass. Next two series he was same old Trapper. There is a time and place for selection, regardless of a perceived definition of what it is. Handling is an art. Reading dogs is an art. Knowing the dog your working with is priceless. When i attended the Rorem seminar he talked about Ideal Selection and two things stuck in my head as he talked about it.
> 
> 1. It takes a very good dog to consistently succeed at Ideal Selection. They have to be a great marker, calm, confident, and wise.
> 2. It takes an experienced handler to know when not to get in the way of a dog capable of Ideal Marking. In the rare dogs that can do this, handlers typically muck it up trying to follow traditional perceived handling methods brought on by rigid thinking of how things should be done.
> ...


OK, good post and I get what you are saying,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but can you use a choke collar in Juniors?


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

John Robinson said:


> "Selecting" is one of those things where your approach in training doesn't always translate to the field trial or hunt test, it also depends on the dog. I always select in training, 100% of the time and I insist that the dog gets the bird I select for him. At a trial I have a plan for which bird I want to pick up first, second, third, etc, but sometimes my dog has another idea, I have learned that insisting on selecting the birds in my order will usually backfire, with the dog going into a no-mans-land somewhere between where I sent him and where the bird actually is.


I always select in training as well. So the question is when either one of us is thinking about doing something differently in a trial, what do I do? I have found that whatever it is, it usually leads to no-mans land. I am thinking of using the George Costanza approach and doing the opposite of what I think is right. So, when I think I should rely on our training, I should get the long one and when I think the dog knows what he is doing, I should pull him to the one I want.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

A few points:

1. A handler has the ability to influence what bird the dog sets up for upon returning on the mat. Many times when a handler says "My dog wanted that bird" what they are saying is I didn't act decisively in influencing what bird to retrieve next.
2. If you break your training rules in competition (sit standard, selection, etc.) on a regular basis, pretty soon your dog understands that in competition it gets to do what it pleases
3. There is a good reason that most of us insist on secondary selection in training. 
4. I would tend to follow secondary selection with a younger dog. I would tend to trust an older war horse.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> A few points:
> 
> 1. A handler has the ability to influence what bird the dog sets up for upon returning on the mat. Many times when a handler says "My dog wanted that bird" what they are saying is I didn't act decisively in influencing what bird to retrieve next.




That is a very good point. I have been working more on getting that 'first look'. When the dog comes back with a bird, I want him to look out at the bird that I want him to get first thing--before I take the bird or do anything else. It does minimize the times when the dog appears to want to do something else.


----------



## jeff evans (Jun 9, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> The problem is once a dog has gone long, getting them to go short is very difficult. Pull next shortest bird out then go long. Ideal selection takes a very good dog, comfortable and relaxed on the line and excellent marker.
> 
> /Paul


I disagree, It doesn't require an excellent marker, it requires a dog that can count and requires a good trainer and high standards. Any mutt worth trialing can be taught to ideal select, with the proper training. I wouldn't enter a dog in a Q unless it had learned secondary selection, and even understand what Dr. Ed said "hybrid selection" or "ideal". It's really fundamental for field trial retrievers and the ones with FC AFC in front of their name have mastered selection. If every dog is crashing and burning picking birds up in a certain order, you need the tool of selection....sometimes you look like a hero and sometimes you look like a jackwagon but you have to put your marbles on the table and select a bird sometimes


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

jeff evans said:


> Any mutt worth trialing can be taught to ideal select, with the proper training.



I disagree



jeff evans said:


> It's really fundamental for field trial retrievers and the ones with FC AFC in front of their name have mastered selection.



If by this, you mean secondary selection, I agree.If by this, you mean ideal selection, I disagree.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Over the years I had the opportunity to train with some folks who did quite well with their dogs. To quote the late Mike Greene "get the cripples out of the way before you go after the tough ones", which is a different way of saying shortest bird next in line, irrespective of order thrown. I also had the privilege of day training with one of the greats in this sport for over 20 years, all you had to do was watch the examples in training to see what worked well. 

The only time I believe you can have a problem is when it's difficult for the dog to recognize that there is a short bird next to be taken out of order. & that happens, then you have to prove your worth as a handler.


----------



## Rnd (Jan 21, 2012)

So after all this discussion. Does anybody train for "Ideal" selection as Dave describes?? 

eg; In training making the dog pick up the shortest bird last.......So that in a trial they can use "Ideal" selection vs Secondary????

Or do the you train with "Secondary" selection as your default?


This is an honest question. When I left the game it was "secondary" selection all the way. We trained that way and handled that way....

Has anything changed???


Curious, Randy


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Rnd said:


> So after all this discussion. Does anybody train for "Ideal" selection as Dave describes??
> 
> eg; In training making the dog pick up the shortest bird last.......So that in a trial they can use "Ideal" selection vs Secondary????
> 
> ...


No, I think most people train the way you did, secondary selection as the default. We occasionally do a delayed triple, or pull off a double to run a blind to spice things up.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

jeff evans said:


> I disagree, It doesn't require an excellent marker, it requires a dog that can count and requires a good trainer and high standards. Any mutt worth trialing can be taught to ideal select, with the proper training. I wouldn't enter a dog in a Q unless it had learned secondary selection, and even understand what Dr. Ed said "hybrid selection" or "ideal". It's really fundamental for field trial retrievers and the ones with FC AFC in front of their name have mastered selection. If every dog is crashing and burning picking birds up in a certain order, you need the tool of selection....sometimes you look like a hero and sometimes you look like a jackwagon but you have to put your marbles on the table and select a bird sometimes


Not sure what you disagree with?

/Paul


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Marvin S said:


> Over the years I had the opportunity to train with some folks who did quite well with their dogs. To quote the late Mike Greene "*get the cripples out of the way before you go after the tough ones", which is a different way of saying shortest bird next in line,* irrespective of order thrown. I also had the privilege of day training with one of the greats in this sport for over 20 years, all you had to do was watch the examples in training to see what worked well.
> 
> The only time I believe you can have a problem is when it's difficult for the dog to recognize that there is a short bird next to be taken out of order. & that happens, then you have to prove your worth as a handler.


Shows the difference in hunting and trialing or "an ordinary day's shoot". In hunting, the cripples are the tough ones... (If you care about losing them). Most often, in a hunting situation the stone dead birds will be the closest ones and the cripples will be the furthest away. So, when running a poison bird blind while hunting, you're running the dog past a dead bird to get a cripple. (At least in my experience, anyway). 

Another good reason for this type of training. Go to whatever bird you are sent for, long or short. It's a thing of beauty when they do it.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Marvin S said:


> Over the years I had the opportunity to train with some folks who did quite well with their dogs. To quote the late Mike Greene "get the cripples out of the way before you go after the tough ones", which is a different way of saying shortest bird next in line, irrespective of order thrown. I also had the privilege of day training with one of the greats in this sport for over 20 years, all you had to do was watch the examples in training to see what worked well.
> 
> The only time I believe you can have a problem is when it's difficult for the dog to recognize that there is a short bird next to be taken out of order. & that happens, then you have to prove your worth as a handler.


I would disagree with your statement wherein it implies that the shorter bird is not the tougher bird. That frequently is NOT the case i.e. A short retired in cover in front of a long standout {flyer?} bird with multiple gunners


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

jeff evans said:


> I disagree,* It doesn't require an excellent marker, it requires a dog that can count *and requires a good trainer and high standards. Any mutt worth trialing can be taught to ideal select, with the proper training. I wouldn't enter a dog in a Q unless it had learned secondary selection, and even understand what Dr. Ed said "hybrid selection" or "ideal". It's really fundamental for field trial retrievers and the ones with FC AFC in front of their name have mastered selection. If every dog is crashing and burning picking birds up in a certain order, you need the tool of selection....sometimes you look like a hero and sometimes you look like a jackwagon but you have to put your marbles on the table and select a bird sometimes


I agree with this ....It isn't the marking so much as the dog that will give his/her will over to the handler ....The dog has to have the memory to pick them up but the ability of the handler to teach the dog to take a back seat on the team is the hard part...Dogs can be very head strong in this area...This is the reason primary selection has been given up by most.....Steve S


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

> ...This is the reason primary selection has been given up by most.....Steve S


Was primary selection ever embraces by_ many_?

john


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

steve schreiner said:


> I agree with this ....It isn't the marking so much as the dog that will give his/her will over to the handler ....The dog has to have the memory to pick them up but the *ability of the handler to teach the dog to take a back seat on the team is the hard part*...Dogs can be very head strong in this area...*This is the reason primary selection has been given up by most.*....Steve S



And you know this ... how?


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

john fallon said:


> Was primary selection ever embraces by_ many_?
> 
> john


Probably not, but tried by many....As Rex stated and gave it up ...too hard to teach to most dogs ...the reason is because dogs can be head strong.....As Dennis has stated, it is practiced a lot in Canada...The reason is because of no flyers ,thus less of a temptation for the dog to choose which one it wants....If practiced a lot the concept must not be that hard to teach ...It is all about the dog giving to the handlers will...Steve S


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

steve schreiner said:


> Probably not ...As Rex stated and gave it up ...too hard to teach to most dogs ...the reason is because dogs can be head strong.....As Dennis has stated it is practiced a lot in Canada...The reason is because of no flyers ,thus less of a temptation for the dog to choose which one it wants....If practiced a lot the concept must not be that hard to teach ...It is all about the dog giving to the handlers will......Steve S



I repeat ... you know this ... how?


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I repeat ... you know this ... how?


I think it was the same poll that determined how most people in the sport use the term secondary selection and what most people in the sport feed their dogs. 

Respectfully, I disagree with Steve. I think it can be a very difficult concept to teach, that of running past a short gun and sending long in many instances. This means the dog may at times have to disregard their nose, And disregard a bird that is quicker to get to, And obviously knows it is there. I personally wouldn't classify it as an issue of a dog being head strong. In certain situations with the right dog, it can be a beautiful tool in your war chest. 

Interesting discussion as long as people are not being chastised or beat up.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

JusticeDog said:


> Interesting discussion as long as people are not being chastised or beat up.



And it is "beating" someone up, to ask how they know what they promote?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

steve schreiner said:


> If practiced a lot the concept must not be that hard to teach


What pros teach primary selection? What pros teach ideal selection? If they don't teach it, why not?


----------



## JeffLusk (Oct 23, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> And it is "beating" someone up, to ask how they know what they promote?


Haven't been on RTF in ages, and when I come back... Ted is still Ted!! Just glad I'm not on the receiving end!! 
Good to lurk around on here again!


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

JeffLusk said:


> Haven't been on RTF in ages, and when I come back... Ted is still Ted!! Just glad I'm not on the receiving end!!
> Good to lurk around on here again!


Isn't that the truth? Steve has been chastised throughout this thread, and was vindicated, and then someone thinks a question asked repetitively is going to be perceived as innocent. Go figure.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Ted Shih said:


> I repeat ... you know this ... how?


Ted,I'm sure you have read that statement many time in numerous discussion or comments about what goes on in Canada like I have...Dennis's own words...I have taught it to several dogs over the years...From my own experience the concept is not hard to teach if done with bumpers or dummies...Only when the objects become different and the dog has a preference the problem of who's will, will prevail...Steve S


----------



## JeffLusk (Oct 23, 2007)

JusticeDog said:


> Isn't that the truth? Steve has been chastised throughout this thread, and was vindicated, and then someone thinks a question asked repetitively is going to be perceived as innocent. Go figure.


For the record I didn't read through the thread besides the last couple of posts. So I have no idea.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

JeffLusk said:


> For the record I didn't read through the thread besides the last couple of posts. So I have no idea.


You didn't miss anything. As you indicated, Ted Is still Ted.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

AGAIN I ASK!


*What happens when you run a venue where the Judges can and do dictate order of pick up?

They may tell you in the briefing that the last bird down , is stone dead in the decoys, but, the second bird thrown in the multiple mark, was a crippled bird, and you must pick it up first.

So, dont those Dogs have to have a very good understanding of "selection" and be very compliant about which bird the handler MAY demand the dog to retrieve?

I suppose you call this "Primary" selection.

*
A dog that is consistently trained to pick up the next shortest bird after the LBD on a very regular basis,, tell me what is the Handler and dog selecting.

Isnt that "Secondary" selection then, just a consistent routine?


Gooser​


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

JusticeDog said:


> Isn't that the truth? Steve has been chastised throughout this thread, and was vindicated, and then someone thinks a question asked repetitively is going to be perceived as innocent. Go figure.



Vindicated? You have an odd interpretation of events, Susan.
Innocent? The thought never crossed my mind.
Curious as to his basis of knowledge, since he does not judge or run field trials? Absolutely
Satisfied as to his competence to support his claims? No, but this is the internet where - as the ad says - everyone who says that they are a French model, must be


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

JusticeDog said:


> I think it was the same poll that determined how most people in the sport use the term secondary selection and what most people in the sport feed their dogs.
> 
> Respectfully, I disagree with Steve. I think it can be a very *difficult concept to teach, that of running past a short gun and sending long in many instances.* This means the dog may at times have to disregard their nose, And disregard a bird that is quicker to get to, And obviously knows it is there. I personally wouldn't classify it as an issue of a dog being head strong. In certain situations with the right dog, it can be a beautiful tool in your war chest.
> 
> Interesting discussion as long as people are not being chastised or beat up.


This is not what primary selection was used for ...It was used to select the short one first as in the example of a short retired with a long flyer as the last bird down..That is exactly what happens every weekend...Dogs run by short retired to get a longer flyer....The reason for secondary selection is to get the short bird second ( most of the time ) after the dog has gone long for the flyer...My diffinition of head strong is not giving ones will over to another....If dogs were not head strong dog training would be a piece of cake....Steve S


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Ted Shih said:


> What pros teach primary selection? What pros teach ideal selection? If they don't teach it, why not?


Aa far as I know none do now...the reason is as plain as the nose on your face...When dealing with flyers the dogs will to get that hot bird is very difficult to over come....Steve S


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

steve schreiner said:


> This is not what primary selection was used for ...It was used to select the short one first as in the example of a short retired with a long flyer as the last bird down..That is exactly what happens every weekend...Dogs run by short retired to get a longer flyer....The reason for secondary selection is to get the short bird second ( most of the time ) after the dog has gone long for the flyer...My diffinition of head strong is not giving ones will over to another....If dogs were not head strong dog training would be a piece of cake....Steve S


I guess we have different definitions of headstrong. In your scenario Steve I see many people that will pull out the short retired before they will go get a long flier. Long flyers are not nearly as exciting as one that's up close and personal.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Vindicated? You have an odd interpretation of events, Susan.
> Innocent? The thought never crossed my mind.
> Curious as to his basis of knowledge, since he does not judge or run field trials? Absolutely
> Satisfied as to his competence to support his claims? No, but this is the internet where - as the ad says - everyone who says that they are a French model, must be



you're very amusing this evening. I think it is you that has the odd interpretation of events Ted. And yes, it is easily interpreted that you were being the bully. And that has no place on RTF as you have indicated many times. Sometimes the French model is really a bully in disguise.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

steve schreiner said:


> Aa far as I know none do now...the reason is as plain as the nose on your face...When dealing with flyers *the dogs will to get that hot bird is very difficult to over come*....Steve S



What is "plain as the nose on my face" is that the statement you made above contradicts your statement below



steve schreiner said:


> Probably not, but tried by many....As Rex stated and gave it up ...too hard to teach to most dogs ...the reason is because dogs can be head strong.....As Dennis has stated, it is practiced a lot in Canada...The reason is because of no flyers ,thus less of a temptation for the dog to choose which one it wants....*If practiced a lot the concept must not be that hard to teach* ...It is all about the dog giving to the handlers will...Steve S



If the concept is not that hard to teach, and the concept is as valuable as you claim, then why aren't any pros teaching it?


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> AGAIN I ASK!
> 
> 
> *What happens when you run a venue where the Judges can and do dictate order of pick up?
> ...


gooser- What venue do you run where the judges dictate the order you must pick up the birds? I have only run akc fts, akc hts, and Ukc hts.


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Ted Shih said:


> Vindicated? You have an odd interpretation of events, Susan.
> Innocent? The thought never crossed my mind.
> Curious as to his basis of knowledge, since he does not judge or run field trials? Absolutely
> Satisfied as to his competence to support his claims? No, but this is the internet where - as the ad says - everyone who says that they are a French model, must be


I ran field trials back in the early 80's before the hunt test game got started ...My first dog was QAA at 26 mths ....I trained pointing dogs for 10 years in the 70's and got my first lab at the age of 15 and trained to hunt...by the James Lamb Free book...I can't judge field trials because of my pro status....I have judged HT before they started keeping track of points...too many to keep track of now, but AKC can give you some info if needed.....Switched from the FT game to HT when our club wanted to become a licensed club...I hope this meets your need to know my bio...Steve S


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Ted , this is going to be my last post on the subject... You good and well know the reason it isn't done is because of the dogs desire to get the flyer...not the short dead bird....I also stated if all is equal the dog is not as hard to convince to give to the handler...Have a good night ...Steve S PS: I have had the privilege to sit beside Rex and talk dog for week at his place...In case you need to look for a feather in my cap.....


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

steve schreiner said:


> Ted , this is going to be my last post on the subject... You good and well know the reason it isn't done is because of the dogs desire to get the flyer...not the short dead bird....I also stated if all is equal the dog is not as hard to convince to give to the handler...Have a good night ...Steve S PS: I have had the privilege to sit beside Rex and talk dog for week at his place...In case you need to look for a feather in my cap.....


I would find your explanation as inexplicable and contradictory if you had 20 feathers in your cap.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Ted Shih said:


> Vindicated? You have an odd interpretation of events, Susan.
> Innocent? The thought never crossed my mind.
> Curious as to his basis of knowledge, *since he does not judge or run field trials?* Absolutely
> Satisfied as to his competence to support his claims? No, but this is the internet where - as the ad says - everyone who says that they are a French model, must be


Ted, there are people out there with dogs, believe it or not... Who don't run field trials who can primary select. I don't know what makes you think the whole world revolves around field trials? I've made this point before, but evidently you didn't get it. There are some well known pro's out there who don't judge (obviously) or run field trials... Does that make them unqualified to discuss primary selection? Maybe you even know one or two of them? 

I enjoy FTs more than the other dog games I have played, but there are many good dog people in the other games. Pull your head out of the clouds. Your condescension is showing...


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

JusticeDog said:


> gooser- What venue do you run where the judges dictate the order you must pick up the birds? I have only run akc fts, akc hts, and Ukc hts.


Respectfully Miss Susan, HRC.

Some folks, when there dogs are accomplished running seasoned tests, May run a Seasoned test or two and work on ( practice) SELECTION because Finished judges can and do dictate order of pick up.

Now to be fair and honest, it has been awhile since my Bailey has run a Finished test, but, my experiences of the past tells me many dogs in other venues primary select.
Could be wrong , wouldn't be the first time. MAybe it's a thing of the past, but I have experienced it often.

Gooser


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Despite what others think, I am very proud of my HRCH SH Bailey.
14 yrs old and on her last legs, but I have had a ball with her.

Gooser


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

MooseGooser said:


> *Despite what others think,* I am very proud of my HRCH SH Bailey.
> 14 yrs old and on her last legs, but I have had a ball with her.
> 
> Gooser


You should be proud of her man. If for no other reason than she is yours. The fact that she is 14 only makes it better. Awesome...


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

You are hunting a river channel. 

Several birds come in 

Theys all flyers.

the last one that falls lands stone dead on the near bank, but one a them is crippled, and is in river current swimming downstream. Which one a them flyers you goin after first?

and really how hard was it to train the dog to do it?


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

To the traing group I train with, who chastise me for running my mouth here, when I should be training instead.

Its 11:35 PM, I just got home from work,it's pourin rain. The sun ain't shinin, ( see other thread).
Mrs Gooser is asleep, Flinch don't go out in the rain, I don't have nothin better to do , so, I am eatin a doughnut, and postin my 2 cents.

You can take it out on me when Ya see me next. 

Gooser


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Ted, how many dogs have you personally trained, with no pro involvement, how many and what to titles? We all know you buy dogs and pay to have them trained. In a true training discussion the best you can do is repeat whatever pro you were paying at the time. I have no issue with your love for dogs, he sport, knowledge of judging and the rules but until you train a dog to do more than piss on a tree you might want to back down. Having money does not a dog trainer make. 

/Paul


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> Respectfully Miss Susan, HRC.
> 
> Some folks, when there dogs are accomplished running seasoned tests, May run a Seasoned test or two and work on ( practice) SELECTION because Finished judges can and do dictate order of pick up.
> 
> ...


Running HRC in the Midwest, I was never dictated the order in which to pick up a bird. Be that as it may, I think that the situation changes because of the distance. At the finished level, the long bird is not long as the ones you see in a field trial. Probably 1/3rd the distance. Therefore, the dog gets its rewards sooner rather than later. I think that makes it easier to primary select in this kind of venue. I believe it has to do with the timing of the reward, sooner rather than later. And there's nothing more exciting than a cripple.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> Despite what others think, I am very proud of my HRCH SH Bailey.
> 14 yrs old and on her last legs, but I have had a ball with her.
> 
> Gooser


Despite what others may think, I am pretty proud of my two HRCH, SH, QAA'D dogs. One is 12 and one is 11.5 years old. I trained them both. Some of the most fun I have had training dogs is with those two.  You should be proud of her, and you, for the journey you have taken.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

JeffLusk said:


> Haven't been on RTF in ages, and when I come back... Ted is still Ted!! Just glad I'm not on the receiving end!!
> Good to lurk around on here again!


Hey there Jeff, it is nice to see you looking around on RTF! I can totally relate to the demands of family and youngsters playing on the retriever addiction. (Assuming that is a factor in your not being around as much lately). 

I hope all is going great for you!


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Hey there Jeff, it is nice to see you looking around on RTF! I can totally relate to the demands of family and youngsters playing on the retriever addiction. (Assuming that is a factor in your not being around as much lately).
> 
> I hope all is going great for you!


 Obviously you don't know about Jeff and the Hitmen.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> You are hunting a river channel.
> 
> Several birds come in
> 
> ...


A "river wise" dog will run the bank past the long one then enter the river and intercept it, and on the return will pick the other one up and bring them both in at the same time to save a few steps

john


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

(QUOTE=john fallon;1145087]A "river wise" dog will run the bank past the long one then enter the river and intercept it, and on the return will pick the other one up and bring them both in at the same time to save a few steps

john[/QUOTE]

That's my Gus


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

When HUNTING.

Dont you guys think that MANY times there might not be true Last bird down? ( are you ALWAYS sure what bird fell last?)
I mean if even just 2 guys are hunting together, isnt the action a volly of shots,with birds falling prett much at the same time?

When thats over, Gooser's eyes are crossed, Hat is bakards, glasses have fallen off, from the recoil of them silly 4 7/8 Magnums 8 guage shells I is shootin..
The dog (If steady...(Never)) may be locked on a bird that is down,, but, many times, at least when Ya hunt with me,, there is a crippled bird tryin to escape..
Often, you may require the dog to "No" off a particular go bird, to pick up another..

I get told all the time when I give an example like this, folks say,,, " No WONDER your dog cant run tests!" 

Hunting.... Marks often are in current where the bird floats or swims off... Very seldom in a HT.
Hunting... Many times marks fall in open water with a splash,, but bird swims to heavy Catail cover, and you are left with a Hunt em up.

I think dogs HAVE to be able to "Select" whether it be primaryily ,seconadrily,, or in the perfect way, "Idealy" 

I get confused over all the terms.. and when hunting , dont have the time or mental capacity to stand there and figger out which one is which..

Ok,, Out the door to throw a couple a marks fer Flinch,, just in case training group is taken notes again on my wasting time...

Gooser

P.S.

Miss Susan,,, Like Ted would say,,,,, read the HRC rule book,, and attend a Handler seminar Just pullin your chain.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Was this entire thread really all about arguing different names for basic things, we do everyday?  Ummm who cares about a name as long as the dog get the birds, whether I select order, the dog selects order, or divine interference selects the order, if the dog picks them all up good, better than others; we'll I'm sure I meant to do it that way, and maybe I'll make up some words-develop methods to add a little confusion, on the proper way to teach a dog, and exactly why I choose to have my dog amazingly pick up this bird over that.  Or maybe I'll just teach my dog to mark everything, teach him to go where I send him, when I send him regardless of which order. Then I don't have to worry about verbiage, selection order names, or anything else because the dog goes where he's sent, bring back birds.

So was that; Divine influence selection process, or the Don't have a clue "pulled it out of your ..." selection process; either way it worked out real well, you should train for it


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

The beauty of this forum is that someone can pose a rather simple question which is promptly answered in a brief, clear, and concise manner and there ensues a 3 day debate which provides endless entertainment value but totally clouds the issue and confuses the OP.


----------



## SjSmith (Oct 25, 2011)

I've enjoyed it too.


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

EdA said:


> The beauty of this forum is that someone can pose a rather simple question which is promptly answered in a brief, clear, and concise manner and there ensues a 3 day debate which provides endless entertainment value but totally clouds the issue and confuses the OP.


You got that right Doc. 

But on the bright side ,it drew Jeff Lusk out of hiding.


----------



## jeff evans (Jun 9, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> What pros teach primary selection? What pros teach ideal selection?  If they don't teach it, why not?


ted, *I* don't know of any pros that train primary selection. But I'm quite certain that more great amateurs train on secondary selection, hybrid/ideal selection, than a pro with 20 dogs. Amateurs that train their own dogs have to beat 55 pro trained dogs in a 60 dog open with their one bullet. Wonder why Rorem calls it "Ideal" rather than "non ideal?" That's a serious question by the way.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> P.S.
> 
> Miss Susan,,, Like Ted would say,,,,, read the HRC rule book,, and attend a Handler seminar Just pullin your chain.


Well sir, I have read The HRC rule book on numerous occasions. And the issue is silent as to whether a judge can dictate or not dictate the order of picking up bird. However I would like my point out that my post said that I was never required in the Midwest to pick up birds in any certain order. Judges in my area tend to want to keep with real-life hunting situations. When you were out hunting, no one dictates the order of the birds you should pick up. It is up to the individual Hunter. And the hunter should be making those choices by determining what is advantageous to get the most game out of the field and not leaving dead birds behind. ie: hunt with a trained retriever. Certain types of tests are certainly regional in nature. And just for the mrecord I have been to judges seminars for HRC before. I made sure I knew the rules before I ever ran one. I only failed two. One was not my dog, and the other was my dog run by someone else. He wanted his mom To run him! 

And I really never follow what Ted would say.


----------



## duk4me (Feb 20, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Ted, how many dogs have you personally trained, with no pro involvement, how many and what to titles? We all know you buy dogs and pay to have them trained. In a true training discussion the best you can do is repeat whatever pro you were paying at the time. I have no issue with your love for dogs, he sport, knowledge of judging and the rules but until you train a dog to do more than piss on a tree you might want to back down. Having money does not a dog trainer make.
> 
> /Paul


WTH he judged the National and you are implying he hasn't trained a dog? I hope the hell you are wrong. Then again what is the saying? If you can't play it coach it if you can't coach it referee it. Oh that's football not dawgs.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

> WTH he judged the National


It was the National Am. but no matter... What are the qualifications to judge these events. 
From this outsider's perspective, Judging a National is as political as as it gets in the sport .

john


----------



## James Seibel (Aug 20, 2008)

john fallon said:


> A "river wise" dog will run the bank past the long one then enter the river and intercept it, and on the return will pick the other one up and bring them both in at the same time to save a few steps
> 
> john


I hunted the the Susquehanna River for over 20 years before I quite. I was there ever day from first day to last sometimes hunting both am and pm flights. We mostly hunted from floating blind but also shore blind. In the floating blind my dog Babe could not see the fall of bird. But she was 100% correct on direction of where the bird hit. How she do it ? Watched the gun barrels and also listened to birds it water I would guess. Sometime hand signals were need , but not much. 

I watched Babe as well as later Daisy 100% of time select the long bird , passing the short bird rater in goose field or on river. 

I seen Babe 100% time chase and select cripples over dead birds. In fact once she was chasing a cripple in a area with other ducks dropped. She came across a dead duck and started back with it. Spite it out is more like it and started mad search for the cripple . Which she got. 

I seen Babe 100% of time with many dead geese dead on the ground search and look for cripple . And in fact , If she had a dead goose in mouth would spin and look at the flock flying off. If there was a cripple in the air, she would drop the bird and chase the flock , many times coming back with the cripple that dropped out of the air. 

I call that :: Productive Reasoning :: The dog was born with it. Experience made her what she was, literally 100's of wild bird retrieves on the River and fields. !! 

Some cripples are best not chased on the river. Let them go and call the dog back. A healthy cripple that is . Then get in the boat and drop way down below and let the dog run the bank back up to where last seen the duck as I would motor up river . Then it was possible to get this healthy cripple when the dog found it. I never seen a dog as good as Babe was at that. Hunting a flooded Island or river in high water is no play ground. 

The only thing I miss about the river is The dogs that passed away.

JIM


----------



## jeff evans (Jun 9, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Ted, how many dogs have you personally trained, with no pro involvement, how many and what to titles? We all know you buy dogs and pay to have them trained. In a true training discussion the best you can do is repeat whatever pro you were paying at the time. I have no issue with your love for dogs, he sport, knowledge of judging and the rules but until you train a dog to do more than piss on a tree you might want to back down. Having money does not a dog trainer make.
> 
> /Paul


I guess the saying goes like this..."why beat around the bush.". I would also refer ted to post #112....


----------

