# Master Hunt Test Full



## Randy Crocker (May 19, 2014)

Good Afternoon, 

I just checked Entry Express to find that one of my favorite clubs, of which I am not a member, has opened its July test, and that all of the Master spots are already full. In February!

I am an amateur trainer. I have a two year old dog that got her Junior and Senior titles by her second birthday. She also passed a Master test and got her 1.5 Grand Master Pointing Title before her second birthday. I would really like to get her Master Title and maybe even get her Master National Qualified by July 31. I don't think I will be able to get her into the tests she needs. 

Does anyone know what if anything AKC is doing to address this problem for those of us with only one dog?

Thanks,


----------



## chuck187 (Feb 3, 2012)

Where are you located?


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

Everyone has their heads in the sand hoping it solves itself.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

The dreaded VIP program is gone. At least you know there aren't any pros with 20 dogs in the test


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

There are many recent threads on the subject.

Try using the search function. 

There are typically many scratches at or near the close. My guess is you'll be able to get in with a single dog if you watch EE.


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

Randy Crocker said:


> Good Afternoon,
> 
> I just checked Entry Express to find that one of my favorite clubs, of which I am not a member, has opened its July test, and that all of the Master spots are already full. In February!
> 
> ...


Nice to have goals, good luck. I hope you can do it.


----------



## P J (Dec 10, 2009)

Check the test on a regular basis, you may get lucky and look the same day someone else has scratched.


----------



## jacduck (Aug 17, 2011)

DoubleHaul said:


> The dreaded VIP program is gone. At least you know there aren't any pros with 20 dogs in the test


One pro has 23/60. Isn't that a bit overboard?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

jacduck said:


> One pro has 23/60. Isn't that a bit overboard?


That's impossible. The VIP program was not available.


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

Randy Crocker said:


> Good Afternoon,
> 
> I just checked Entry Express to find that one of my favorite clubs, of which I am not a member, has opened its July test, and that all of the Master spots are already full. In February!...


If your quest is mainly a personal goal to have a well-trained hunting retriever, you should consider NAHRA &/or HRC.


----------



## Gun Dawg (Dec 18, 2010)

One pro has 23/60, this is totally wrong...
AKC HT's were intended for the Amateur, NOT Pros running someone else's dam dog.
AKC needs to limit 3-5 dogs per owner and NOT some false co owned Pro/owner get around either.


----------



## Randy Crocker (May 19, 2014)

chuck187 said:


> Where are you located?


I am in Wisconsin. There are a large number of dogs entered under one pro handler.


----------



## trapperwalt (Jun 1, 2014)

The OP is exactly correct. I went on EE and looked at the posting, the club is the Blackhawk Retriever Club in Gilmanton WI. Jack Morris has 23 of the available entries tied up. He's listed as the handler on all 23 dogs. This kind of stuff needs to stop. Its early February and a July master test is full already. Give me a break. This is going to ruin this sport in the long run !


----------



## Rnd (Jan 21, 2012)

Gun Dawg said:


> One pro has 23/60, this is totally wrong...
> AKC HT's were intended for the Armature, NOT Pros running someone else's dam dog.


And you know this how ???

Sometimes that Pros truck is loaded with a bunch of little guys that can't afford to be there...

Check the windings of your armature before spouting off


----------



## Gun Dawg (Dec 18, 2010)

Randy
Sorry for misspelling, you're feak'in perfect... 
And if they can't be there, then it will make room for the guys that can, to run there own dog, as intended.
Obviously you don't get it.
Pro’s have polluted the AKC & HRC Hunt Test games


----------



## Mark Littlejohn (Jun 16, 2006)

Rnd said:


> Sometimes that Pros truck is loaded with a bunch of little guys that can't afford to be there...


Searching for the logic in this statement, unless you believe this pro only works for dwarfs and the grass at the grounds is too high...


----------



## Rnd (Jan 21, 2012)

Keith Stroyan said:


> If your quest is mainly a personal goal to have a well-trained hunting retriever, you should consider NAHRA &/or HRC.


Keith, 
I agree. After a brief phone conversation with another. (Past ) NAHRA member I think it's time to call NAHRA out....

The AKC can't or won't provide enough spaces for folks to run their dogs. NAHRA should step up....
Rubber duck gate is ancient history and the old guard is gone...
Maybe tweek the program..... The masses like marks and blinds and are averse to trailing...

This is exactly where and why NAHRA started in the '80's 

There was no room left for the hunter in AKC Trials.. 

P.S not preaching to you Keith, just using your Segway ....

Randy


----------



## Rnd (Jan 21, 2012)

Mark and Dawg,, not trying to pick sides or be condescending.

Just that I think you anger is miss guided.

The Pros aren't the problem (IMO) as somebody else pointed out the VIP program is gone....

I've been on both sides; Running other people's dogs and other people running mine....I do get it.

Randy


----------



## Brokengunz (Sep 3, 2011)

Keep your eyes on the entrys. One of our west coast test filled fast. Entries opened up before it closed. When it closed it was a few shy of the limit


----------



## blinddogmaddie (Mar 7, 2008)

I was at a AKC Judges/Handlers seminar over the weekend with a AKC personal giving the seminar. According to him, AKC is addressing the problems of the last year, along with EE, of having the tests fill up in 30 minutes with pros entering numerous dogs with the push of the button and many ameteurs not be able to get into their local tests. According to him, the VIP program has been eliminated as of Jan. 21, 2015. The only way you can enter multiple dogs at one push of the button via EE is to be the owner of the dogs. So as a ameteur, if you want to enter "your" multiple dogs in Masters with that one push of the button, you still can, as long as you are the owner of the dog. A pro would have to enter his client dogs individually, unless he is the owner of the dog/dogs. Now, they can still enter numerous dogs, but it will take longer. They are also working with EE on having the time and date of when you can enter the tests posted so everyone will know when it starts. They are not sure of when this will happen as EE is in the process of updating their computer hardware to be able to handle the rush of entries at one time when that comes about. There are other ways they are looking at to help eliminate the problem, but it all takes time. I hope I explained it so you can understand it.


----------



## mizzippi jb (Jan 22, 2014)

blinddogmaddie said:


> I was at a AKC Judges/Handlers seminar over the weekend with a AKC personal giving the seminar. According to him, AKC is addressing the problems of the last year, along with EE, of having the tests fill up in 30 minutes with pros entering numerous dogs with the push of the button and many ameteurs not be able to get into their local tests. According to him, the VIP program has been eliminated as of Jan. 21, 2015. The only way you can enter multiple dogs at one push of the button via EE is to be the owner of the dogs. So as a ameteur, if you want to enter "your" multiple dogs in Masters with that one push of the button, you still can, as long as you are the owner of the dog. A pro would have to enter his client dogs individually, unless he is the owner of the dog/dogs. Now, they can still enter numerous dogs, but it will take longer. They are also working with EE on having the time and date of when you can enter the tests posted so everyone will know when it starts. They are not sure of when this will happen as EE is in the process of updating their computer hardware to be able to handle the rush of entries at one time when that comes about. There are other ways they are looking at to help eliminate the problem, but it all takes time. I hope I explained it so you can understand it.


Steps in the right direction! Thanks for these explanations


----------



## championretrievers (Feb 7, 2008)

The VIP program was never the problem and this has been proved by suspending the program. The test in question has been open for at least a couple of weeks now. The problem isn't the pros either. Without the pros, clubs couldn't afford to put on the master test. So it is time that we quit trying to pit the two groups against each other. The problem began when the AKC made the MNH title official. Now with a title, it has made it worthwhile to go for the title. Hence, the numbers exceeded what local clubs could handle and they were allowed to limit test. Unless you look at the cause and address it or how to make it manageable for clubs, the problem will persist.


----------



## Larry Housman (Jun 4, 2012)

Rnd said:


> Keith,
> I agree. After a brief phone conversation with another. (Past ) NAHRA member I think it's time to call NAHRA out....
> 
> The AKC can't or won't provide enough spaces for folks to run their dogs. NAHRA should step up....
> ...


Pretty sure the masses aren't adverse to trailing; they just haven't ever done it in a controlled setting before. Once you get the dog used to doing it on command (which isn't very hard) most people find it the easiest series in a test. It's a skill a real hunting dog needs so why not test for it?

For those of you east coasters that don't get into Neuse River the weekend of April 18th, a new NAHRA club is forming on the Eastern Shore of Virginia and having their first test that weekend. Details aren't finalized yet but it will be held on my farm and a couple of others near Onancock, VA. PM if you are interested and I'll get you on the mailing list when our premium is finished.


----------



## allydeer (May 11, 2008)

wiregrass was filled in 4.5 min


----------



## The Snows (Jul 19, 2004)

blinddogmaddie said:


> I was at a AKC Judges/Handlers seminar over the weekend with a AKC personal giving the seminar. According to him, AKC is addressing the problems of the last year, along with EE, of having the tests fill up in 30 minutes with pros entering numerous dogs with the push of the button and many ameteurs not be able to get into their local tests. According to him, the VIP program has been eliminated as of Jan. 21, 2015. The only way you can enter multiple dogs at one push of the button via EE is to be the owner of the dogs. So as a ameteur, if you want to enter "your" multiple dogs in Masters with that one push of the button, you still can, as long as you are the owner of the dog. A pro would have to enter his client dogs individually, unless he is the owner of the dog/dogs. Now, they can still enter numerous dogs, but it will take longer. They are also working with EE on having the time and date of when you can enter the tests posted so everyone will know when it starts. They are not sure of when this will happen as EE is in the process of updating their computer hardware to be able to handle the rush of entries at one time when that comes about. There are other ways they are looking at to help eliminate the problem, but it all takes time. I hope I explained it so you can understand it.


Also add a scratch fee that hurts a little more than $4.50. If EE upped the ante for scratching a dog .... Like $25+ for scratching a dog, some people might think a little bit more before entering a test they may or may not be able to run!


----------



## allydeer (May 11, 2008)

just seen one that is 35 for a scratch


----------



## The Snows (Jul 19, 2004)

allydeer said:


> just seen one that is 35 for a scratch


Well that might just slow down some of those that are entering anything that they "may be" ready for or "may be" willing to attend!


----------



## Rnd (Jan 21, 2012)

Larry Housman said:


> Pretty sure the masses aren't adverse to trailing; they just haven't ever done it in a controlled setting before. Once you get the dog used to doing it on command (which isn't very hard) most people find it the easiest series in a test. It's a skill a real hunting dog needs so why not test for it?
> 
> For those of you east coasters that don't get into Neuse River the weekend of April 18th, a new NAHRA club is forming on the Eastern Shore of Virginia and having their first test that weekend. Details aren't finalized yet but it will be held on my farm and a couple of others near Onancock, VA. PM if you are interested and I'll get you on the mailing list when our premium is finished.



Larry,

Won't argue that trailing is easy to teach or that it is needed in a hunting retriever...

However, it seems to me that the GunDog tests are no longer run by hunters with their hunting dogs...

But, rather folks that want to play dog games... There is nothing wrong that. In fact, I think everybody can play...

The point I was trying to make is give the folks what they want... Whatever it may be.

NAHRA started this concept and lost out to the AKC.

The opportunity to regain momentum will never better....

And good for you and the new club to step up to the plate.

Best of luck, I Sincerly hope it goes well.

Randy


----------



## Brad B (Apr 29, 2004)

blinddogmaddie said:


> I was at a AKC Judges/Handlers seminar over the weekend with a AKC personal giving the seminar. According to him, AKC is addressing the problems of the last year, along with EE, of having the tests fill up in 30 minutes with pros entering numerous dogs with the push of the button and many ameteurs not be able to get into their local tests. According to him, the VIP program has been eliminated as of Jan. 21, 2015. The only way you can enter multiple dogs at one push of the button via EE is to be the owner of the dogs. So as a ameteur, if you want to enter "your" multiple dogs in Masters with that one push of the button, you still can, as long as you are the owner of the dog. A pro would have to enter his client dogs individually, unless he is the owner of the dog/dogs. Now, they can still enter numerous dogs, but it will take longer. They are also working with EE on having the time and date of when you can enter the tests posted so everyone will know when it starts. They are not sure of when this will happen as EE is in the process of updating their computer hardware to be able to handle the rush of entries at one time when that comes about. There are other ways they are looking at to help eliminate the problem, but it all takes time. I hope I explained it so you can understand it.


I'd like to know which AKC rep told you that pack of lies.


----------



## Jim Spagna (Apr 21, 2008)

DoubleHaul said:


> The dreaded VIP program is gone. At least you know there aren't any pros with 20 dogs in the test


Don't think that VIP has anything to do with that....


----------



## Jim Spagna (Apr 21, 2008)

championretrievers said:


> the vip program was never the problem and this has been proved by suspending the program. The test in question has been open for at least a couple of weeks now. The problem isn't the pros either. Without the pros, clubs couldn't afford to put on the master test. So it is time that we quit trying to pit the two groups against each other. The problem began when the akc made the mnh title official. Now with a title, it has made it worthwhile to go for the title. Hence, the numbers exceeded what local clubs could handle and they were allowed to limit test. Unless you look at the cause and address it or how to make it manageable for clubs, the problem will persist.


thank you!!!!


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

Spag said:


> Don't think that VIP has anything to do with that....


Good catch Captain Obvious.

Sarcasm escaped again regards

Bubba


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

championretrievers said:


> The problem isn't the pros either. Without the pros, clubs couldn't afford to put on the master test.


This is NOT correct. While it might be true that some clubs are dependent on Pro entries to make ends meet, it is NOT true for all clubs. Our club could get along just fine financially without the plate chasers. We may even be better off financially without them and that's something we're looking into at this time. This stupidity has to stop and the quickest way is kicking the MNRC to the curb.


----------



## Todd Caswell (Jun 24, 2008)

championretrievers said:


> The VIP program was never the problem and this has been proved by suspending the program. The test in question has been open for at least a couple of weeks now. The problem isn't the pros either. Without the pros, clubs couldn't afford to put on the master test. So it is time that we quit trying to pit the two groups against each other. The problem began when the AKC made the MNH title official. Now with a title, it has made it worthwhile to go for the title. Hence, the numbers exceeded what local clubs could handle and they were allowed to limit test. Unless you look at the cause and address it or how to make it manageable for clubs, the problem will persist.


Yep all clubs would fall flat on there face without the HUGE entry support of HT pro's, would never be able to afford to put on a test ever.. We owe it all to them that our grounds are still open, all I can say is thank you.


----------



## our3labs (Dec 7, 2009)

Do away with limited entries. Yes, I know some club's struggle with grounds or help. Or at least change it to a minimum limit of 180 for a 3 day, or 120 for a 2 day event. 

The Chesapeake Club is having a double header at H. Cooper Black, the grounds of the 2015 Master National. The problem is, each Master has a 60 dog limit. So just about every dog that entered one stake, is the same dog in the 2nd test. So essentially they are having a 60 dog test on grounds that will be used to hold a 800-1,000 dog National. So grounds apparently are not the issue.

I would say that I am a pretty active Amateur, I've run most of t he trials in the Southeast. Off the top of my head, I can only think of one test site that will struggle with more than 1 flight of Master dog's. This club also has the option of using the same Cooper Black grounds. 

I know grounds and help are real issues for many club's, with planning and hard work, those problems can be dealt with. 

Just my 2 cents, not trying to flame anyoune.


----------



## Bally's Gun Dogs (Jul 28, 2010)

This particular test was open for well over a week prior to being full and most clubs in the area had notes sent to membership that they were opening. Everyone should have had ample amount of time to enter...I wasted time and only got 3 of our 4 in as the last spots. This club is top notch, they run two masters and a qual on Friday then Juniors and Seniors on the weekend. A lot of the same help is there all weekend.

I would take that over the 8 minutes it took last Monday to fill up a 180 dog Texas test. I sat and hit refresh so I could get entered, then out of curiosity watched how quick it filled up. In my opinion, they did it right by giving opening date and time right in premium so everyone had a fair chance.


----------



## Troopers Mom (Nov 19, 2005)

You say "keep your eyes on the entries"????? Here's another problem that just happened to me. I got two dogs into a MH with a limit of "60" just the day that it was to close but couldn't get the 3rd one in. I watched it up until 10:59 "my time" and it still said 60. This morning I look and after it is closed it now says "58". So............ more imperfection in the system. Someone can pull out after the close and leave empty spaces that wanted and needed to be filled. This is more bullshit! I am pisssed! AGAIN.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

There's more to getting into a full test than just "watching EE for scratches". If that were the case it would be easy. Just take off your job for several weeks and sit by the computer or watch from you phone. Most don't have that luxury and it shouldn't be needed. The designated opening time as well as the waiting list will help a lot.
It would see like a designated opening time is within AKC authority without the need for countless committees/meetings.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

blinddogmaddie said:


> I was at a AKC Judges/Handlers seminar over the weekend with a AKC personal giving the seminar. According to him, AKC is addressing the problems of the last year, along with EE, of having the tests fill up in 30 minutes with pros entering numerous dogs with the push of the button and many ameteurs not be able to get into their local tests. According to him, the VIP program has been eliminated as of Jan. 21, 2015. *The only way you can enter multiple dogs at one push of the button via EE is to be the owner of the dogs*. So as a ameteur, if you want to enter "your" multiple dogs in Masters with that one push of the button, you still can, as long as you are the owner of the dog. *A pro would have to enter his client dogs individually, unless he is the owner of the dog/dogs*. Now, they can still enter numerous dogs, but it will take longer. They are also working with EE on having the time and date of when you can enter the tests posted so everyone will know when it starts. They are not sure of when this will happen as EE is in the process of updating their computer hardware to be able to handle the rush of entries at one time when that comes about. There are other ways they are looking at to help eliminate the problem, but it all takes time. I hope I explained it so you can understand it.


Not necessarily true, a Pro can add a dog to "My Dogs" - they don't have to be the owner. They can still enter a large number of dogs fairly quickly.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

our3labs said:


> Do away with limited entries. Yes, I know some club's struggle with grounds or help. Or at least change it to a minimum limit of 180 for a 3 day, or 120 for a 2 day event.
> 
> The Chesapeake Club is having a double header at H. Cooper Black, the grounds of the 2015 Master National. The problem is, each Master has a 60 dog limit. So just about every dog that entered one stake, is the same dog in the 2nd test. So essentially they are having a 60 dog test on grounds that will be used to hold a 800-1,000 dog National. So grounds apparently are not the issue.
> 
> ...


I agree with you that if the AKC would increase the split from the current 60/90 it would increase capacity. Some clubs would be able to limit at a higher amount that they could handle and still not split.

I disagree there is a lot of events in the region that could host many flights. Cooper Black is pretty much it around here and if the club doesn't have the help (or inclination--after all it is their event to run as they see fit) they may not do it even there. 

And the issue is not largely lack of planning and hard work by the clubs. Plenty of clubs work very hard to put on a HT but just don't have the grounds to run more than one MH.


----------



## Madluke (Dec 3, 2010)

our3labs said:


> Do away with limited entries. Yes, I know some club's struggle with grounds or help. Or at least change it to a minimum limit of 180 for a 3 day, or 120 for a 2 day event.
> 
> The Chesapeake Club is having a double header at H. Cooper Black, the grounds of the 2015 Master National. The problem is, each Master has a 60 dog limit. So just about every dog that entered one stake, is the same dog in the 2nd test. So essentially they are having a 60 dog test on grounds that will be used to hold a 800-1,000 dog National. So grounds apparently are not the issue.
> 
> ...


Spoken like a retired guy ? BTW those problems... Easier said than done


----------



## Coachtd (Mar 18, 2013)

Can someone give me an estimate of the number of master entries in a typical MN club test that enter simply for the sake of running their dog or getting a chance to title and have no interest in qualifying for the national. I am a relative newcomer to the game and was wondering if a club that had a limited entry of 180 dogs could divide this into separate tests giving 120 slots to those that want to qualify and 60 to those that just want the opportunity to run their dog and perhaps title. As I said, I am new to this and don't know all the regulations. You could have separate entries for each, possibly Master National Qualifier and non qualifier. Just an idea.


----------



## Jeff Huntington (Feb 11, 2007)

DoubleHaul said:


> The dreaded VIP program is gone. At least you know there aren't any pros with 20 dogs in the test


Look again shows one handler with a bunch of dogs If I'm looking at the right test in July


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

FOM said:


> Not necessarily true, a Pro can add a dog to "My Dogs" - they don't have to be the owner. They can still enter a large number of dogs fairly quickly.





Jeff Huntington said:


> Look again shows one handler with a bunch of dogs If I'm looking at the right test in July


Jeff ,
Anyone (even you or I) can enter as many dogs as they want to. VIP has nothing to do with that. Which is the reason suspending the VIP program had zero effect on the problem.


----------



## Nick Toti (Feb 3, 2011)

I just had a novel idea! I am going to hire a pro to enter me into these Master Tests. Similar to a handlers fee but for entries. Saves me from having to habitually check EE or scavenge up answers about when a test is opening.

Any Pros out there need a client?!


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Nick Toti said:


> I just had a novel idea! I am going to hire a pro to enter me into these Master Tests. Similar to a handlers fee but for entries. Saves me from having to habitually check EE or scavenge up answers about when a test is opening.
> 
> Any Pros out there need a client?!


It doesn't have to be a pro. Find a 14 year old kid and give him/her your CC #. ;-)


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

DoubleHaul said:


> I agree with you that if the AKC would increase the split from the current 60/90 it would increase capacity. Some clubs would be able to limit at a higher amount that they could handle and still not split.
> 
> I disagree there is a lot of events in the region that could host many flights. Cooper Black is pretty much it around here and if the club doesn't have the help (or inclination--after all it is their event to run as they see fit) they may not do it even there.
> 
> And the issue is not largely lack of planning and hard work by the clubs. Plenty of clubs work very hard to put on a HT but just don't have the grounds to run more than one MH.


I think the point was that some clubs are hosting dbl headers with limits. So, a 2 flight dbl only serves 120 dogs. With the same logistics, a single header of 4 flights would serve 240 dogs. Seems to me the point of allowing limited entries was for those clubs with limited resources. If a club has the resources for 2 tests, each w/ 2 flights, they have the resources for a single test with 4 flights.


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

Coachtd said:


> Can someone give me an estimate of the number of master entries in a typical MN club test that enter simply for the sake of running their dog or getting a chance to title and have no interest in qualifying for the national. I am a relative newcomer to the game and was wondering if a club that had a limited entry of 180 dogs could divide this into separate tests giving 120 slots to those that want to qualify and 60 to those that just want the opportunity to run their dog and perhaps title. As I said, I am new to this and don't know all the regulations. You could have separate entries for each, possibly Master National Qualifier and non qualifier. Just an idea.


AKC would not allow that. The draw is to be random not selected. Also AKC would not allow EE or any club to charge a scratch fee prior to the close date. After the close clubs have more leeway other than bitches in heat or injury or death of a dog. Club is to give a full refund on those. I truly believe the entry process should be owner handler only to enter, not who the handler is. Does not matter if the pro runs the dog but owner only is to enter. IT will not stop entries but will slow them down.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Good Dogs said:


> I think the point was that some clubs are hosting dbl headers with limits. So, a 2 flight dbl only serves 120 dogs. With the same logistics, a single header of 4 flights would serve 240 dogs. Seems to me the point of allowing limited entries was for those clubs with limited resources. If a club has the resources for 2 tests, each w/ 2 flights, they have the resources for a single test with 4 flights.


But, the members of the club want the opportunity for two passes in a single weekend. They are doing the work, so they should be the one to decide.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

Karen Klotthor said:


> Also AKC would not allow EE or any club to charge a scratch fee prior to the close date.


I'm not aware of any AKC regulation regarding scratch fees other than that requiring full refund for the stipulated medical reasons. Other than that clubs are free to formulate their own scratch policy as long as the policy is clearly stated in the premium. The scratch prior to close is, I believe, an EE construct.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

captainjack said:


> But, the members of the club want the opportunity for two passes in a single weekend. They are doing the work, so they should be the one to decide.


Fine. But don't blame EE, the MNRC or anyone else for the problem of getting entered in that event.


----------



## Goldenz (Sep 5, 2013)

I want to know how the club can limit the master test to 60 dogs with 2 flights of judges listed. The AKC site hasn't approved everything yet, so I'm not sure they should have even opened yet.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Good Dogs said:


> Fine. But don't blame EE, the MNRC or anyone else for the problem of getting entered in that event.


Agree 100% with that too.


----------



## Andy Brittingham (Mar 3, 2013)

If it's up to the clubs, I be all for not refunding entry fees with the exceptions of injury or coming into heat. I'm sure it wouldn't stop some people from entering all the tests and then scratching from the ones they don't want to run, but I'd certainly make sure I was running before I put up $85.


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

I am in the processing of taking the 100 question judges test and having to read the rule book again so will look up the pre close scratch and see if I can find out the answer for sure if the club can charge a fee prior to the close. I know in the past prior to closing all money had to be returned expect the 4.50 on EE. As long as they scratch at least a week before the close should not be a problem. it is the ones scratch at the last few minutes that really should be charged.


----------



## Troopers Mom (Nov 19, 2005)

Karen Klotthor said:


> I am in the processing of taking the 100 question judges test and having to read the rule book again so will look up the pre close scratch and see if I can find out the answer for sure if the club can charge a fee prior to the close. I know in the past prior to closing all money had to be returned expect the 4.50 on EE. As long as they scratch at least a week before the close should not be a problem. it is the ones scratch at the last few minutes that really should be charged.


I fully agree with your last statement. Plus it hurt others as well. I tried to get my one dog in because during the day yesterday, two slots came open and I got 2 in. I watched until close but couldn't get the other one in. Then this morning first thing, there were two slots open but it had closed. I called. The inconsiderate person that scratched left a phone message to EE at 8:00 pm which was well after they closed their office. So, naturally the slots were not opened in time to get in but I was also told that even though there were slots open, I couldn't put my dog in because it was after the close. YET YET YET...... they could still be scratched manually after the close. Now the club is out $150 for entry fees and my dog doesn't get to go. There is something really seriously wrong with this picture. My husband has to travel over 8 hours to get to this remote test and has to leave one dog home. 

I have dogs running in Texas where there is a big problem so brought two home to run here and still a big problem. I'm getting pretty close to being through with Hunt test. This was the year I needed the titles.


----------



## Joe Martin (Feb 1, 2006)

championretrievers said:


> Without the pros, clubs couldn't afford to put on the master test. .


I don't think that any club makes money on their Master stake. I have chaired events for several clubs and my analysis of our income and expenses shows that the lower stakes subsidize Master. I have absolutely nothing against professional handlers, but a Master stake is simply very expensive to put on and the costs are not covered by the entry fees.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Joe Martin said:


> I don't think that any club makes money on their Master stake. I have chaired events for several clubs and my analysis of our income and expenses shows that the lower stakes subsidize Master. I have absolutely nothing against professional handlers, but a Master stake is simply very expensive to put on and the costs are not covered by the entry fees.


What am I missing?

60 dogs x $80 = $4,800
2 judges in on Friday out on Sunday
Travel $600
Hotel $360
Meals $300
Gifts - $150
2 Live birds per dog x 60 dogs = 120 x 15 = $1,800 (most clubs don't do that many)
Lunches/drinks for Judges/BBs/Marshall/Stake Chairman etc. 9 x $10 x 2days = $180
ribbons/awards $200
Leaves $1,210 to cover other costs - batteries for radios, ice, etc...


----------



## Wyldfire (Sep 24, 2003)

EE fees, AKC fees, Porta potties, land rental or gifts, poppers, on.and on.


----------



## Wyldfire (Sep 24, 2003)

Insurance, worker comp insurance, ribbons. and workers (3 ×2×$80=$480)


----------



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

Why are tests opening months in advance? They are NOT all accidents like they were late last year. 

I don't get the point...


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

Joe Martin said:


> I don't think that any club makes money on their Master stake. I have chaired events for several clubs and my analysis of our income and expenses shows that the lower stakes subsidize Master. I have absolutely nothing against professional handlers, but a Master stake is simply very expensive to put on and the costs are not covered by the entry fees.


Thank You!

The financial outlook is the same for our club as well. The return for the efforts expended is just not there for the Master test. We feel that as an AKC Club we are still obligated to provide a Master test. However we are NOT obligated to be a member of the MNRC and provide opportunities for their plate chasers.


----------



## Remitaz (Oct 23, 2014)

Back to the OP all you can do is check back on EE esp. the last week and esp. the last day before it closes when people may scratch off. Sorry you could not get in


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

captainjack said:


> Jeff ,
> Anyone (even you or I) can enter as many dogs as they want to. VIP has nothing to do with that. Which is the reason suspending the VIP program had zero effect on the problem.


You can repeat this lie as many times as you like, but it won't change the FACT that the VIP program did give an unfair advantage to it members on getting entered in tests that were filling almost immediately after opening


----------



## Captzig (Jun 14, 2013)

There is software that will auto enter you into any Entry Express event the minute it opens. The software is similar to what scalpers use to buy concert and sports tickets. They are called "bots". More simply, a script can be written to monitor EE and email or text you the minute a test opens. An entrepreneurial minded capitalist will soon fill this niche if there is money to be made. Sad to see this will be necessary.


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

captainjack said:


> What am I missing?
> 
> 60 dogs x $80 = $4,800
> 2 judges in on Friday out on Sunday
> ...



Paid help, garbage, toilets, rent, lots of poppers, live rounds, and ribbons. Not much of $1200 left after that.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

mjh345 said:


> You can repeat this lie as many times as you like, but it won't change the FACT that the VIP program did give an unfair advantage to it members on getting entered in tests that were filling almost immediately after opening


Being a former licensed attorney, I would think you'd be a more rational thinker. 

Why are the tests still filling up in minutes and pros still getting the bulk of the slots?

It's not rocket science regards!


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Mike Peters-labguy23 said:


> Paid help, garbage, toilets, rent, lots of poppers, live rounds, and ribbons. Not much of $1200 left after that.


How does a full master test (60) come in at a net loss were a 30 dog senior makes enough money to carry the loss on the master? 

I ain't buying that.


----------



## Ron in Portland (Apr 1, 2006)

captainjack said:


> What am I missing?
> 
> 60 dogs x $80 = $4,800
> 2 judges in on Friday out on Sunday
> ...


Another factor to consider, in the cost of Master, is how does your equation look with 65 Master dogs? Now you have to split, double your judge cost, add three to four more bird boys, for an extra five entry fees? Yet another factory in limiting to 60 Master. (and yes, our club has had more than one test with Master numbers in the sixties).

We've made money on all our tests, nut definitely more on some tests than others. Availability of grounds, load on the workers and organizers, finding judges; all are reasons I would not want to see them do away with the ability to limit Master entries.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Ron in Portland said:


> Another factor to consider, in the cost of Master, is how does your equation look with 65 Master dogs? *Now you have to split, double your judge cost, add three to four more bird boys, for an extra five entry fees? Yet another factory in limiting to 60 Master.* (and yes, our club has had more than one test with Master numbers in the sixties).
> 
> We've made money on all our tests, nut definitely more on some tests than others. Availability of grounds, load on the workers and organizers, finding judges; all are reasons I would not want to see them do away with the ability to limit Master entries.


That is exactly the reason some clubs needed the limit even if grounds and help were available. Go from a money maker to money loser at 11:59 day of close. Any club that can't at least break even with a full flight in any stake needs to take a look at their pricing & costs.


----------



## Mike Sale (Feb 1, 2011)

I would be willing to bet , that if EVERY club ended their affiliation with the MN that a solution would come about rather quickly.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

Each club is free to do as they will regarding Master National affiliation. Certainly the MN has to accept some of the blame for the current crazy state of affairs. Clubs should also admit that they are part of the problem. Limits are certainly necessary for some clubs but how many unlimited tests are being hosted. I find it hard to believe that in 3 years we went from all tests unlimited to maybe 10 a year. Did all the clubs suddenly lose half their membership & half their grounds? 

With the current system, there is an incentive to keep people active in the game. How long must someone play the game before they become a competent marshal, committee member, bird steward, gun marshal, hunt secretary or hunt chair. My guess is it takes more than the 6 passes required for a MH. When I look at local clubs, it is the evil "plate chasers" that hold many of these jobs. 

Dropping a clubs MN affiliation will certainly result in smaller tests. In my area, it will also alienate many of the people that bust their humps to put on a test.

Now y'all can return to the regularly scheduled program of Master National bashing & I will try to resist my urge to respond


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Joe Martin said:


> I don't think that any club makes money on their Master stake. I have chaired events for several clubs and my analysis of our income and expenses shows that the lower stakes subsidize Master. I have absolutely nothing against professional handlers, but a Master stake is simply very expensive to put on and the costs are not covered by the entry fees.


I wonder if it is regional--I am sure it varies a bit from club to club--but the for the ones for which I am privy to the P&L, MH pretty much makes or breaks and if you get a good JH/SH turnout, that is gravy (but we often don't). We definitely could not put on a test without MH, though.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Captzig said:


> There is software that will auto enter you into any Entry Express event the minute it opens. The software is similar to what scalpers use to buy concert and sports tickets. They are called "bots". More simply, a script can be written to monitor EE and email or text you the minute a test opens. An entrepreneurial minded capitalist will soon fill this niche if there is money to be made. Sad to see this will be necessary.


I am not so well connected with script kiddies as I used to be, but probably this is correct, especially if they are still on .net. Regardless, I have heard some entrepreneurs are already working in this niche in more the old fashioned way.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

fishduck said:


> Each club is free to do as they will regarding Master National affiliation. Certainly the MN has to accept some of the blame for the current crazy state of affairs. Clubs should also admit that they are part of the problem. Limits are certainly necessary for some clubs but how many unlimited tests are being hosted. I find it hard to believe that in 3 years we went from all tests unlimited to maybe 10 a year. Did all the clubs suddenly lose half their membership & half their grounds?
> 
> With the current system, there is an incentive to keep people active in the game. How long must someone play the game before they become a competent marshal, committee member, bird steward, gun marshal, hunt secretary or hunt chair. My guess is it takes more than the 6 passes required for a MH. When I look at local clubs, it is the evil "plate chasers" that hold many of these jobs.
> 
> ...



Mark,

I've been running tests since 1991 and judging them since 1994.

When I started, HT's were about amateurs (mostly hunters) and gun dogs. Was this a flawed vision of what the venue was supposed to be about?

Now, AKC HT's are all about getting to the MN and getting an MNH title, with more and more dogs being Pro trained and handled from JH on up the ladder. The majority of dogs at the MN are handled by Pros. The amateur trainer/handlers are fewer each year. Is this a good thing?

HRC has become much the same, with Pros running a greater percentage of the dogs each year. The Grand is predominately Pro handlers, with few amateur trained and handled dogs passing the tests. This is certainly not what a program "by hunters for hunters" should have morphed into.

I don't get to Alabama or the deep south to run tests. From what I have read and heard, you have excellent grounds and a large pool of paid and unpaid workers. I think that's great, but I don't think it is typically the case for a lot of clubs across the nation. 

I belong to 2 clubs up here in the Northeast, and have chaired, been secretary, bird steward, marshal, equipment wrangler and thrown many thousands of birds and planted an equal number of blinds over the years. One club has around 60 members year to year. Of those folks, 3 regularly qualify for and sometimes run the MN. The other club has a few more members, fluctuating around 70 or so. Of those, 2 members regularly run the MN. So you can see that an extremely small percentage of the membership has MN involvement in these clubs. That means the heavy lifting is done mostly by folks who play the game with a different goal in mind, perhaps more in line with the origins of the sport.

I think it would behoove the parent organization(s) and their 'premier events' to not alienate these folks. Time for a 'reset'......-Paul


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

paul young said:


> ... Time for a 'reset'......-Paul


&


Rnd said:


> ...
> This is exactly where and why NAHRA started in the '80's


Maybe not exactly, but lots of similarities.


----------



## Final Flight Retrievers (Jan 23, 2010)

paul young said:


> Mark,
> 
> I've been running tests since 1991 and judging them since 1994.
> 
> ...



Question for you Paul "Why are your two clubs even MNRC members then if only 2 or 3 of your membership are attending MN? "


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

Great post #72 and as another example offered 

The Black Warrior club has members statewide and it is mostly blue collar meaning most folks have jobs. 
We charge no dues, we donate back to Forever Wild thus improving the grounds each year. I would guess the majority of active ht members try to qualify and attend the MN event and especially when it's in the mid country. 

The MNRC is alive, healthy and desired from most BWRC members. Also most of the members train their own dogs, SE participate in the UKC and many hunt. 
I believe the point is : each area is different and what works here may not work in other places 

Last point: our HT and Ft finish in the black. Not sure why that is however it's rare when we have a bad outing 
Retriever life is good in Alabama 
Dk


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Final Flight Retrievers said:


> Question for you Paul "Why are your two clubs even MNRC members then if only 2 or 3 of your membership are attending MN? "


One is a member club, the other is not. 

I honestly can't answer that question concerning the Member club. I can tell you however, that it has been debated at meetings several times going back at least 5 or 6 years.-Paul


----------



## wojo (Jun 29, 2008)

Dave 
I am indeed fortunate to live within reasonable driving distance from Black Warrior. But as you stated each area is different ie member profile, grounds, resources etc. therefore different problems. What is interesting to me is the lack of Pro response to helping resolve some of the problems. Many Pros do help and in many cases can impact the capacity problem. Not bashing them, just wondering why the Pros response to the capacity issue has been tepid.


----------



## John Gassner (Sep 11, 2003)

our3labs said:


> Do away with limited entries. Yes, I know some club's struggle with grounds or help. Or at least change it to a minimum limit of 180 for a 3 day, or 120 for a 2 day event.
> 
> The Chesapeake Club is having a double header at H. Cooper Black, the grounds of the 2015 Master National. The problem is, each Master has a 60 dog limit. So just about every dog that entered one stake, is the same dog in the 2nd test. So essentially they are having a 60 dog test on grounds that will be used to hold a 800-1,000 dog National. So grounds apparently are not the issue.
> 
> ...


Just to make sure we are talking about the same place-H. Cooper Black is not able to handle 1000 dogs and all the flights needed. Either flights will be literally bumping in to one another or other nearby grounds like Moree's will be utilized. Unless you run in the pine trees.


----------



## JoeOverby (Jan 2, 2010)

wojo said:


> Dave
> I am indeed fortunate to live within reasonable driving distance from Black Warrior. But as you stated each area is different ie member profile, grounds, resources etc. therefore different problems. What is interesting to me is the lack of Pro response to helping resolve some of the problems. Many Pros do help and in many cases can impact the capacity problem. Not bashing them, just wondering why the Pros response to the capacity issue has been tepid.


Ed, what "pro response" would you like to see?? I'm being serious now.


----------



## Rip Shively (Sep 5, 2007)

One step that could help alleviate the situation is for clubs in a regional area to band together when I club decides to offer unlimited entries or expand additional Master flights. For example, if a club felt like they could only host a 60 dog Master due to help, difficulty in obtaining judges if a split were necessary, etc. knowing they could rely on another club (or clubs), for help may help ease the anxiety the hunt test committee to expand the number or size of Master flights. I realize this would not work for clubs with limited grounds, but for those who worry about help, judges, etc. it might.

How many clubs currently discuss their plans with other clubs before making a decision about the size of test to be offered? Just a thought.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

JoeOverby said:


> Ed, what "pro response" would you like to see?? I'm being serious now.


Well, I'm not Ed, but I think a step in the right direction would be for the HT Pros to either join PRTA or form their own Association and put on 2 UNLIMITED ENTRY HT's per time zone annually.

We have repeatedly heard that the issue is one of demand outstripping supply. Doing so would increase supply, would it not?-Paul


----------



## JoeOverby (Jan 2, 2010)

paul young said:


> Well, I'm not Ed, but I think a step in the right direction would be for the HT Pros to either join PRTA or form their own Association and put on 2 UNLIMITED ENTRY HT's per time zone annually.
> 
> We have repeatedly heard that the issue is one of demand outstripping supply. Doing so would increase supply, would it not?-Paul


Paul, I am all for that. I already put on an HRC test every year at my place...I wouldn't have a problem in the world hosting an akc event. But I really want to know what response Ed is talking about.??


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

paul young said:


> Well, I'm not Ed, but I think a step in the right direction would be for the HT Pros to either join PRTA or form their own Association and put on 2 UNLIMITED ENTRY HT's per time zone annually.
> 
> We have repeatedly heard that the issue is one of demand outstripping supply. Doing so would increase supply, would it not?-Paul


I think it needs to be more especially the "traveling pros". It's just not good enough to just put on a HT or 2 with your home club if you are running 10+ tests a year! (Why anyone needs to run that many to get qualified is beyond me anyway.)


----------



## wojo (Jun 29, 2008)

Joe 
Askin for input from the Pros . How would they help increase capacity ,how would they purpose the workers get their dogs into an event they are working etc. I'm not anti Pro at all, have several as personal friends.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Rip Shively said:


> One step that could help alleviate the situation is for clubs in a regional area to band together when I club decides to offer unlimited entries or expand additional Master flights. For example, if a club felt like they could only host a 60 dog Master due to help, difficulty in obtaining judges if a split were necessary, etc. knowing they could rely on another club (or clubs), for help may help ease the anxiety the hunt test committee to expand the number or size of Master flights. I realize this would not work for clubs with limited grounds, but for those who worry about help, judges, etc. it might.
> 
> *How many clubs currently discuss their plans with other clubs before making a decision about the size of test to be offered? Just a thought*.


In 2007, the GMHTA was incorporated in MN as an organization of HT clubs. We include AKC,NAHRA and UKC clubs, 15 in all. ( we lost 1 club this year that is dropping HT's )

Annually we meet and one of the main topics of discussion is what we are going to hold. Each club has it's own unique situation and set their events accordingly. In our area, the problem is finding a date to add another test even if someone wanted to. We are pretty much booked from late April till September and many of us work more than just our own clubs events. So adding is really not an option for most clubs, and most *NEED* the limits to manage #'s because of the availability of dirt and water. The club I am a member of is in the unique position of not needing to limit because of ground constraints. What we have run into, is a lack of member participation in running the events. Because of this, we had to hire help for the first time since I have been a member, over 12 years, and discussions have evolved about dropping out of the M National club. I hope that does not happen, but it is being discussed as a way to control #'s without running a limited event. I would rather we be taking a lead role in working toward a nationwide solution that will help *EVERYONE.*

Dropping out of the M National is a cheap fix requiring no effort or original thought. And as one of the oldest HT clubs in the country, a solution that, IMO, would cheapen the history and standing of our club. 

I feel there is a workable solution to all of the issues we are currently facing , but it will require *ALL* of the players to be flexible and creative to find the answers


----------



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

I am probably biting off more than I can chew with this post. That said I have a few questions. Does at the end of a year a Master dog is qualified to go to Master National does they just go STUPID and need to be re-qualified when they regain their brains? Why keep running dogs that have qualified? The rate things are going now to enter a Master test the youngest dog you can qualify is probably about 8 Y.O. and not be trained as the trainer is sitting in front of a computer trying to get their dog in. Am I mistaken but does AKC strip a dog of a MH every year so they have to do it again?


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Let's see this year so far

Double Master in AZ 90 dogs, closed in 15 min. Close 81 dogs for both days (loss of $1600); Another club Central CA close 15min 90 dogs, closed Monday with 80 entries (loss of $800). 60dog in NV closed with 58 (loss of $160). Watching a 120 Central CA that's been closed since opening, we'll see what happens Mon. night. Seems something is off, like there needs to be a system that allows scratches til one time and then add ins until the another. I also know of people who will drop their spots if they title, Of course they won't know that until Sun. and have to scratch by Mon. This was a little more manageable when closes were on Wed. If clubs are losing ~10 entries a test on a 90, ~$800 which is pretty big $$$; if one 20 dog handler pulls out it would have an even larger affect; when your trying to make a test.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Let's see this year so far
> 
> Double Master in AZ 90 dogs, closed in 15 min. Close 81 dogs for both days (loss of $1600); Another club Central CA close 15min 90 dogs, closed Monday with 80 entries (loss of $800). 60dog in NV closed with 58 (loss of $160). Watching a 120 Central CA that's been closed since opening, we'll see what happens Mon. night. Seems something is off, like there needs to be a system that allows scratches til one time and then add ins until the another. I also know of people who will drop their spots if they title, Of course they won't know that until Sun. and have to scratch by Mon. This was a little more manageable when closes were on Wed. If clubs are losing ~10 entries a test on a 90, ~$800 which is pretty big $$$; if one 20 dog handler pulls out it would have an even larger affect; when your trying to make a test.


Granddaddy posted about this particular issue a week or so ago. EE is working on a wait list, where in scratches will auto fill from the wait list. Scratches will be done electronically by the person who entered the dog. Don't think he mentioned a rollout date.


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

captainjack said:


> How does a full master test (60) come in at a net loss were a 30 dog senior makes enough money to carry the loss on the master?
> 
> I ain't buying that.


30-40% more birds used in a master test compared to the senior test. I have done the math on this for 5 years and the Junior and Seniors alway pencil out ahead. Less work and less birds simple math. 

Junior and senior require at most 3-4 people and only have at most 6 birds.

Master needs up to 6 workers maybe 7 if the judges get too creative. I have ran in quads with a flyer and a double blind. That is six birds and required 7 workers. Mind you these judges were told they were short on help! This was not at my club by the way thankfully.


----------



## Kyle Bertram (Aug 22, 2006)

Mike Peters-labguy23 said:


> 30-40% more birds used in a master test compared to the senior test. I have done the math on this for 5 years and the Junior and Seniors alway pencil out ahead. Less work and less birds simple math.
> 
> Junior and senior require at most 3-4 people and only have at most 6 birds.
> 
> Master needs up to 6 workers maybe 7 if the judges get too creative. I have ran in quads with a flyer and a double blind. That is six birds and required 7 workers. Mind you these judges were told they were short on help! This was not at my club by the way thankfully.



Actually Masters are generally more consistently profitable in todays environment of limited tests. at our club it takes about 25 J/S dogs to break even. it takes about 45 dogs for a master to break even. Profitabilty per dog is very close to the same after you have covered your fixed costs. ARC does not generally even break the 25 dog number in J/S. But with a limited entry we are almost always at 60 dogs before scratches. So JR/ SR in the right circumstances can be very profitable....but not always!!


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

We use up so many more birds (dead ones that we can't replace for the next test) for Masters that really kills the profit. I think our club provides good birds for the tests and in August that can be a challenge.


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

I too have done the numbers for more than a decade and Mike Peters is correct. It takes more help to do a Master Test than a Qual, and far more than a Junior or Senior. Master Tests are a break even proposition at best. Perhaps the difference is here up north we average 50+ dogs in a senior and 50+ in a Junior. We work hard to promote the sport and bring new people to the game.


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Rnd said:


> And you know this how ??? *By looking at the entries, maybe?*
> 
> Sometimes that Pros truck is loaded with a bunch of little guys that can't afford to be there...*The "little guy" can afford to hire someone to train their dog. But can't afford to be there? *
> 
> Check the windings of your armature before spouting off


.............


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

our3labs said:


> Do away with limited entries. Yes, I know some club's struggle with grounds or help. Or at least change it to a minimum limit of 180 for a 3 day, or 120 for a 2 day event.
> 
> The Chesapeake Club is having a double header at H. Cooper Black, the grounds of the 2015 Master National. The problem is, each Master has a 60 dog limit. So just about every dog that entered one stake, is the same dog in the 2nd test. So essentially they are having a 60 dog test on grounds that will be used to hold a 800-1,000 dog National. So grounds apparently are not the issue.
> 
> ...


Yes, I agree it is an issue. NO, I don't agree planning and hard work for the most part will deal with the problem. Grounds are limited, and disappearing. Help is limited and increasingly will be playing more golf on summer weekends if they can't run their dogs.


----------



## Todd Caswell (Jun 24, 2008)

Losthwy said:


> .............


But if you look close some of them really are there sitting in there folding lawn chair sipping a coke in the shade. ( nothing better than casually going over calling them out by name and asking them to throw a bird. ) Doesn't matter if it's a trial or a test these people are the same.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Those of you that are bitching about pros, a thought for you... the AMATEUR ,that hires the pro to train their dog, for what ever reason they choose, supply the dogs to the pro. OBVIOUSLY the amateur still has the reins in the hunt test program. The amateur wants titled dogs and the pro gets it to happen. I am a pro and usually don't run but one or two of my personal dogs. Pros are not filling tests with their own dogs , they are filling tests with amateur's dogs.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

Then you really need to ask yourself...Why and why go forward if it is not worth it?....
Why am I doing this and what am I to gain from this? 
Am I not at least able to somehow enjoy what this is all about or you all tell me it is a waste of my time?
Is that fair to those who would like to at least get their feet wet and let them decide what is next? 
Please don't stop those that would at least like to try and let them decide what is next. Just saying


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Who are you talking about BJ? The amateurs that are living vicariously through their pro? Now do I believe that the pro should have any advantage to entering , absolutely not.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

I might also say that I have heard the doom to gloom several times in my lifetime, so now the question becomes _Quid pro quo????_


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Todd Caswell said:


> But if you look close some of them really are there sitting in there folding lawn chair sipping a coke in the shade. ( nothing better than casually going over calling them out by name and asking them to throw a bird. ) Doesn't matter if it's a trial or a test these people are the same.


That gets to down to the reality of the problem. Who's left to throw,shoot and bag the birds, if most of the dogs are run by a few handlers? Not the pros, they are busy running dogs, or over at another stake. Not the amateurs, they couldn't enter their dogs so they off are off to play golf or watching their kids playing soccer.
Once had a conversation with someone I'll refer to as L.B. who said "field trials are a dying sport". I don't think it will completely die but become a relic like polo. In my estimation field trials hit a high water mark a few years ago. This may be the high water mark of hunt tests.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

Bridget Bodine said:


> Who are you talking about BJ? The amateurs that are living vicariously through their pro? Now do I believe that the pro should have any advantage to entering , absolutely not.


OK...and I respect your opinion.


----------



## Troopers Mom (Nov 19, 2005)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Let's see this year so far
> 
> Double Master in AZ 90 dogs, closed in 15 min. Close 81 dogs for both days (loss of $1600); Another club Central CA close 15min 90 dogs, closed Monday with 80 entries (loss of $800). 60dog in NV closed with 58 (loss of $160). Watching a 120 Central CA that's been closed since opening, we'll see what happens Mon. night. Seems something is off, like there needs to be a system that allows scratches til one time and then add ins until the another. I also know of people who will drop their spots if they title, Of course they won't know that until Sun. and have to scratch by Mon. This was a little more manageable when closes were on Wed. If clubs are losing ~10 entries a test on a 90, ~$800 which is pretty big $$$; if one 20 dog handler pulls out it would have an even larger affect; when your trying to make a test.


I posted about the NV club earlier in this thread. Earlier on the day of close, two spots became open and I entered 2 of my 3 dogs. I watched until it closed at 10:59 my time. The next morning there were only 58. I called EE and also the club secretary. Found out that some person scratched their dogs by leaving a message at 8 pm which was well after EE office closed. There was no way for me to enter my 1 dog because after the close, nothing could be entered. Both the club secretary and I are upset because we needed that spot and they lost dollars because someone was very inconsiderate. So, just because it closed at 58 doesn't mean the demand wasn't there. There are many times extenuating circumstances that could have been remedied by the waitlist which I have been complaining about for some time. Now my husband has to travel over 8 hours to this remote test and leave 1 dog at home.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

captainjack said:


> Being a former licensed attorney, I would think you'd be a more rational thinker.
> 
> Why are the tests still filling up in minutes and pros still getting the bulk of the slots?
> 
> It's not rocket science regards!


It must be rocket science to you, because you still can't get it through your thick skull.
The VIP program DID give it's members an unfair advantage in getting entered.

Straighten up your skirt and I'll try to explain it to you. I promise to type real slow
They got one click entries, whereas the rest of us had to click on four different pages and fill out numerous lines of info. It only took an extra minute or so, but those minutes were frequently enough time for the test to be completely filled.

To be clear that is the only problem I had with the VIP program. I certainly hope they find a way to offer that service again to it's members. I think the $20,000+ that EE saved, and the help in delaying payment to the pros actually could benefit us all

Additionally I have no problem with the Pro's. The game needs them, and they have raised the bar for us all. The dogs and handlers have become better due to their presence 

That is as simple as I can make it. If you can't understand it then you are beyond help. Maybe your Granddaddy can splain it to you.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

mjh345 said:


> It must be rocket science to you, because you still can't get it through your thick skull.
> The VIP program DID give it's members an unfair advantage in getting entered.
> 
> Straighten up your skirt and I'll try to explain it to you. I promise to type real slow
> ...


Now I'm starting to get it. I was puzzled by how long it takes you to attack after I post something. 
Here is an example of what you were doing...

"FYI Swampie I'd much prefer a group that "excepts" lies; as opposed to low info neo cons such as your kind who repeatedly ACCEPT the lies you are spoonfed by your "fair and balanced" sources"

Maybe I should put to gather and start a "best of Marc Healey" thread of your 20 most recent RTF posts. It may be very revealing to you. It may even motivate you to seek help for your problem. 

And posting at 1:45 AM? You must have been up studying for the BAR exam.

I wonder how many of your 3,500+ posts are simply spewing hate and nonsense???

You certainly add nothing for the folks that came here because it's the "*Retriever Training Forum*"!


----------



## Joe Martin (Feb 1, 2006)

captainjack said:


> How does a full master test (60) come in at a net loss were a 30 dog senior makes enough money to carry the loss on the master?


Those 30 senior dogs that ran on Saturday show up on Sunday after having paid an additional entry fee. Less overhead than Master but 2 entry fees for the weekend.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Joe Martin said:


> Those 30 senior dogs that ran on Saturday show up on Sunday after having paid an additional entry fee. Less overhead than Master but 2 entry fees for the weekend.


Yes, thank you. I forgot about double seniors and juniors. We don't see them much any more. Not sure if it's because we were ending up with two, 15 dog tests and still losing $ or what. My initial thought on the small JH and SH entries in our region was that people couldn't get their Master dog in a test because it was full, so they just stayed home or went elsewhere. Or, I know I wouldn't pay travel expenses to go run a single JH or SH when I could go elsewhere and run a double for the same cost (less 1night hotel). The mh deal is affecting more than just mh though.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Joe Martin said:


> Those 30 senior dogs that ran on Saturday show up on Sunday after having paid an additional entry fee. Less overhead than Master but 2 entry fees for the weekend.


Around here it is more like 15 JH/SH dogs showing up to run two tests that weekend. It is really the judges expenses that hurts the return you get on those if you don't get big numbers, which we don't around here.


----------



## Madluke (Dec 3, 2010)

DoubleHaul said:


> Around here it is more like 15 JH/SH dogs showing up to run two tests that weekend. It is really the judges expenses that hurts the return you get on those if you don't get big numbers, which we don't around here.


Do you think we are seeing less participants at the lower levels overall ? If so, is less entries at lower levels indicative of what may be coming down the road with newcomers? Seems like clubs have been experiencing smaller entires at lower stakes for some time now but I'd like to know how those numbers are trending.


----------



## doverstreet (May 23, 2013)

I am a new comer to this game but I think the main reason you don't see big turn outs for the lower levels is there are no advantages to running the lower stakes in AKC hunt test. I am running HRC test until we are ready for Master. The points from the lower stakes in HRC count towards a finished title so there is a benefit in running them.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Actually there are.


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

If your club is only seeing 15 dog Junior and Senior tests, your Officers and Board should be sitting down and having a serious conversation to answer WHY? 

What are you doing? Where are your clubs efforts focused? Are you striving to build interest the sport of purebred dogs and build interest in training ones dog, or are you taking from the sport without putting forth the effort to build the next generation of club members. Tough questions to face, but none the less necessary for the continued existence of the Hunt Test Program for the long term. 

One of the major factors driving Limited Entries is a shortage of the human resources needed to add more opportunities. If you're not building interest in the program, offering learning opportunities to entice new members and managing your organization in such a manner to keep them, your club is headed in the wrong direction.

If your clubs primary reason for existence is to serve the whims of the pewter plate chasers you are missing what the purpose of the program is all about.


----------



## swampcollielover (Nov 30, 2012)

captainjack said:


> Now I'm starting to get it. I was puzzled by how long it takes you to attack after I post something.
> 
> 
> I wonder how many of your 3,500+ posts are simply spewing hate and nonsense???
> ...


captainjack....you like many others have figured out what mjh...is all about! He is number 1 on the ignore list.....for a good reason!


----------



## caryalsobrook (Mar 22, 2010)

fishduck said:


> Each club is free to do as they will regarding Master National affiliation. Certainly the MN has to accept some of the blame for the current crazy state of affairs. Clubs should also admit that they are part of the problem. Limits are certainly necessary for some clubs but how many unlimited tests are being hosted. I find it hard to believe that in 3 years we went from all tests unlimited to maybe 10 a year. Did all the clubs suddenly lose half their membership & half their grounds?
> 
> With the current system, there is an incentive to keep people active in the game. How long must someone play the game before they become a competent marshal, committee member, bird steward, gun marshal, hunt secretary or hunt chair. My guess is it takes more than the 6 passes required for a MH. When I look at local clubs, it is the evil "plate chasers" that hold many of these jobs.
> 
> ...


I picked your post because you have gotten to the very core of the problem. "Certainly the MN has to accept some of the blame for the current crazy state of affairs". I have a couple of questions. Do you think that the MN would even exist if the local clubs cease to? 2nd, don't you think that at the very least, the MN should have no impact on the local clubs. Ideally a POSITIVE impact but certainly not a negative impact. I believe that if the MN removed the 6 pass yearly qualification requirement, all negative impact on local clubs would be eliminated. Some have argued that the local clubs should solve the problem by recruiting new members and encouraging existing members to do more. Actually these are goals that a local club should persue regardless of the MN. I believe that removing the 6 pass requirement to yearly qualify for the MN and placing no further burden on the local clubs would end most if not all of the complaints expressed in the last 2 years. It will now take time but the anger held for many amateurs for the pros, the resentment of some volunteers for those who do not volunteer, the non-plate chasers for the plate chasers(I personally hate that term). This is anger and devisiveness that I feel may very well destroy some clubs. 

It took the MN very little use of brain cells and no use of sweat gland cells, to pass the 6 MH pass rule to yearly qualify for the MN. Eliminating that rule will for sure require far more brain cell activity and sweat gland activity. I do not for 1 second wish to make little of the difficulty of their task as a result. I do believe that in the end, both the local clubs and the MN will be better for it. I do believe that if the MN shows it wishes only to enhance and improve the status of the local clubs, it will see many who will step up and offer help to the MN. We must end this anger and bitterness. We should welcome and serve, amateurs and pros, members and non-members, volunteers and non-volunteers and see that it benefits all. 

Each that volunteers, does so for their own personal reasons. I want to volunteer for the pro as well as the amateur, the non-member as well as the member, and the non-volunteer as well as the volunteer and the plate seeker as well as the non-plate seeker. Every so often I look up the definition of "volunteer" in the dictionary. It means to provide a service without pay. To me 'special consideration" is the same as pay and something I choose to refuse. My reward is the opportunity to meet and help those who wish to play this game.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Swampcollie said:


> If your club is only seeing 15 dog Junior and Senior tests, your Officers and Board should be sitting down and having a serious conversation to answer WHY?
> 
> What are you doing? Where are your clubs efforts focused? Are you striving to build interest the sport of purebred dogs and build interest in training ones dog, or are you taking from the sport without putting forth the effort to build the next generation of club members. Tough questions to face, but none the less necessary for the continued existence of the Hunt Test Program for the long term.
> 
> ...


LOL. I have seen some condescending and self righteous posts, but this takes the cake.

I mention the average JH SH entries around these parts. I am just throwing out numbers. Why are those numbers the way they are? Largely because just aren't that many dogs and many move up and run MH eventually--or field trials. I see that as a good thing, frankly. You may not, but your sanctimonious attitude doesn't change the reality that more dogs run MH because they get the lower level titles move up and continue to run MH

Our club does more than any I know to help newcomers and bring them along in the dog games. Our members are some of the best and we have one of the most efficient group of folks working our events you will ever see. These are not simply pewter plate chasers. In fact, some of our best helpers do not run HTs at all--some run FTs and some just hunt but all are committed to the club and to putting on the best event we can for the folks who attend, regardless of whether they are dirty 'plate chasers' or even *gasp* evil pros. 

Perhaps we could petition the AKC for rule changes to make HTs invitation only so that only those as noble as you can attend. In the meantime, we will put on HTs as long as we can break even on them so folks in an area that is not well served with HTs have an option to run their dogs fairly close to home and have a good time for a weekend.


----------



## tbyars (Mar 29, 2005)

MN gets $3.50 AKC Entry Service Fee for each entry of a dog. It's not rocket science here - the more entries equates to more money! Having to qualify 6 times in a year is ridiculous. As stated in an earlier reply, a dog that has earned its MH does not suddenly "fall off the wagon". They don't need 6 passes in a year to run for a plate for God's sake.


----------



## Repaupo (Apr 28, 2005)

caryalsobrook said:


> I picked your post because you have gotten to the very core of the problem. "Certainly the MN has to accept some of the blame for the current crazy state of affairs". I have a couple of questions. Do you think that the MN would even exist if the local clubs cease to? 2nd, don't you think that at the very least, the MN should have no impact on the local clubs. Ideally a POSITIVE impact but certainly not a negative impact. I believe that if the MN removed the 6 pass yearly qualification requirement, all negative impact on local clubs would be eliminated. Some have argued that the local clubs should solve the problem by recruiting new members and encouraging existing members to do more. Actually these are goals that a local club should persue regardless of the MN. I believe that removing the 6 pass requirement to yearly qualify for the MN and placing no further burden on the local clubs would end most if not all of the complaints expressed in the last 2 years. It will now take time but the anger held for many amateurs for the pros, the resentment of some volunteers for those who do not volunteer, the non-plate chasers for the plate chasers(I personally hate that term). This is anger and devisiveness that I feel may very well destroy some clubs.
> 
> It took the MN very little use of brain cells and no use of sweat gland cells, to pass the 6 MH pass rule to yearly qualify for the MN. Eliminating that rule will for sure require far more brain cell activity and sweat gland activity. I do not for 1 second wish to make little of the difficulty of their task as a result. I do believe that in the end, both the local clubs and the MN will be better for it. I do believe that if the MN shows it wishes only to enhance and improve the status of the local clubs, it will see many who will step up and offer help to the MN. We must end this anger and bitterness. We should welcome and serve, amateurs and pros, members and non-members, volunteers and non-volunteers and see that it benefits all.
> 
> Each that volunteers, does so for their own personal reasons. I want to volunteer for the pro as well as the amateur, the non-member as well as the member, and the non-volunteer as well as the volunteer and the plate seeker as well as the non-plate seeker. Every so often I look up the definition of "volunteer" in the dictionary. It means to provide a service without pay. To me 'special consideration" is the same as pay and something I choose to refuse. My reward is the opportunity to meet and help those who wish to play this game.


WARNING, WARNING, WARNING !!! I have never run a dog in Master Class, only hope to some day, I read these posts because I have too much time on my hands.

The post I'm quoting seems to have such a simple solution i.e. why not adjust the 6 MH pass rule to a number (3 ?, 4 ?, 5 ? ) that would alleviate the current problems ? Wouldn't this fix the issue ?


----------



## Randy Crocker (May 19, 2014)

Good Afternoon, 

I want to thank everyone for their reply to my question. Since I posted it I have learned a number of things, and I understand that changes are being contemplated at AKC. We should support these changes. 

Four recommendations and conclusions are worth considering. First, the elimination of the VIP Program. At least all should have an equal chance to enter online. Next, posting the opening date in the premium. I have not seen that done, but at least a person would know when to try and enter. Next, carving out a percentage of the spots for club members who work. Finally a waiting list so that clubs do not lose out on spots that cannot be filled after the test closes and so that those who want to enter can get one of those spots. 

I appreciate the suggestion of checking EE often and I will do that. 

I do think the best answer lies with MN. If they eliminate the requirement of 6 passes every fiscal year, and come up with another definition of a Master National dog, then there will still be demand for Master passes, but not this unmanageable demand. 

I hope we can solve this problem in a way the continues the successful work of the pros, allows amateurs to run their dogs, and reflects well on the sport. If we use our brains the same way our dogs use their noses, this should be an easier task. Thanks for the response. 

Best, R


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

tbyars said:


> MN gets $3.50 AKC Entry Service Fee for each entry of a dog. It's not rocket science here - the more entries equates to more money! Having to qualify 6 times in a year is ridiculous. As stated in an earlier reply, a dog that has earned its MH does not suddenly "fall off the wagon". They don't need 6 passes in a year to run for a plate for God's sake.


The Master National Retriever Club is no different than any other club. Why on Earth would you think that the AKC would send them money or that they would share the Entry Service Fee? The AKC and the MNRC are in NO way related.

The 6 entry requirement was voted on by the membership clubs several years ago- that means by the guy sitting next to you in the gallery. Submit a proposal and get 2 clubs to agree to your ideas- that automatically puts you on the agenda at the annual meeting.

Hoping you can write cause you sure as hell can't read regards

Bubba


----------



## Duffy (Jun 4, 2014)

Has anyone considered using a web page monitor? Set up to monitor Entry Express test calendar. It will notify you when the web page changes. 

I have used Page Monitor before to find shooting supplies coming In Stock. Works great!


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Can someone educate me on what constitutes a HT Club? 
Thanks


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Wade said:


> Can someone educate me on what constitutes a HT Club?
> Thanks


My definition would be a club, licensed or member, who only puts on HT's as events and nothing else. Speaking AKC only.

Up until 2012, that would describe our club. Wanting to include an OH/Q in 1 of our tests, we became FT certified and now can hold both venues if we choose. Currently we hold 2 HT's, one with an OH/Q and a D/Q.


----------



## 2dc (Nov 7, 2011)

From what I have seen and heard from several different retriever clubs they are loosing members and workers because they can't get their dogs entered in their own club test. I have missed out on my own club. Club members are not going to spend their weekends throwing birds and not get to run their dog. They will either run field trials or spend more time fishing.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

This 3.50 a dog the Akc get equates roughly to a 120k a year. 
The ht entries are near 35k at 3.50 each 
That 120k won't go far in my world considering salaries, lights, equipment and so on. 
Our sport needs more entries and how to rise to that demand seems to be my question 
Dk


----------



## Madluke (Dec 3, 2010)

Dave Kress said:


> This 3.50 a dog the Akc get equates roughly to a 120k a year.
> The ht entries are near 35k at 3.50 each
> That 120k won't go far in my world considering salaries, lights, equipment and so on.
> Our sport needs more entries and how to rise to that demand seems to be my question
> Dk


Not sure I get the 120 K correlation given that AKC revenues greatly exceed what they derive from HT's. Albeit AKC is no doubt welcoming the money but MN has it in their powers to reduce the traffic without AKC. The qualifying guidelines are demoralizing clubs across the country and MN should consider doing what is right for the sport rather than continue with a divisive and disruptive rule. The MN venue is good only as long as it works in a constructive and cohesive way that supports its own membership. Currently, MN appears to be too self indulgent and taking atvantage of good clubs generosity.


----------



## Remitaz (Oct 23, 2014)

Randy other than rechecking EE all the time to get in, the only other thing you can do is join a retriever club (s) near you, offer to work and hope they can assist you when it opens so you can get in. Typically they will try and get members in who work if they can Besides the benefits joining your local club are many as well If you already in a club or two then disregard


----------



## Camo9244 (Jan 15, 2015)

wojo said:


> Dave
> I am indeed fortunate to live within reasonable driving distance from Black Warrior. But as you stated each area is different ie member profile, grounds, resources etc. therefore different problems. What is interesting to me is the lack of Pro response to helping resolve some of the problems. Many Pros do help and in many cases can impact the capacity problem. Not bashing them, just wondering why the Pros response to the capacity issue has been tepid.


Actually, it was a hand full of the Pro's that everyone is angry with that got together and submitted a list of proposal's to the AKC/HTAC which was given a big "NOT GOING TO HAPPEN" by the powers that be!!!


----------



## Mike Perry (Jun 26, 2003)

Camo9244 said:


> Actually, it was a hand full of the Pro's that everyone is angry with that got together and submitted a list of proposal's to the AKC/HTAC which was given a big "NOT GOING TO HAPPEN" by the powers that be!!!


Care to be more specific on the proposals? First I have heard this.
MP


----------



## krapwxman (May 24, 2009)

Mike Perry said:


> Care to be more specific on the proposals? First I have heard this.
> MP


Since you asked...

http://www.retrievertraining.net/fo...ter-of-suggestions-concerning-Limited-Entries


----------



## Camo9244 (Jan 15, 2015)

Mike Perry said:


> Care to be more specific on the proposals? First I have heard this.
> MP


I have looked all morning for the list but can't locate it! The only one I can remember off hand was to open up the distance of conflicting test from the current 250 mile radius to 150 mile radius! I will continue to try and find the list!


----------



## Camo9244 (Jan 15, 2015)

Mike Perry said:


> Care to be more specific on the proposals? First I have heard this.
> MP


RE: Suggestions for the limited entries problem.

1) Reduce the miles for Non-Compete clause. Let test compete with each other for entries. That has been very effective for field trials.

2) 75 Dog limit minimum (from 60) allowing a Club to also limit Seniors & Juniors. This will protect them from having spilt to Senior & Juniors. 

3) Allow clubs to also limit the Seniors & Juniors, this will allow a club to use higher limits on Master stakes. 

4) Allow a Club to host a 3 rd event each year. Currently clubs can offer a Junior and Senior event only. Allow this 3 d event to be a Master only or a combination of Master and/or Junior & Seniors.

5) Require Entry Express to post date & time that a test will open up (at least two weeks prior to the closing date. (No MIDNIGHT openings). Suggest all events limited or not, have a standardized opening time of 7:00 PM in the time zone the event is being held. Also ask that openings be no more than 30 days in advance. 

6) Allow clubs that have opened and filled up to add additional test or flights before the closing. 

7) Ask Entry Express to continue accepting entries after an event is filled for the purpose of creating a secondary list. This list will be used to auto-fill any scratches that may occur and will become the first entries accepted should a club decide to add another flight. 

8) Ask Club and Entry Express to move closing time to Noon, 1 PM or 2 PM. (To make sure Entry Express is open to make scratches so other people can enter).

9) Ask Club to include on application the past three years numbers. (ie: 2010: Masters (197); Seniors (49); and Juniors (35); 2011: Masters (157); Seniors (45); and Juniors (36). 2012: Masters (187); Seniors (35); and Juniors (39).

10) Require the club provide a short description of the land and water they have available for their event. This may include acreage and type and number of ponds available. If club is asking for a limited entry on their application, define limitations. i.e: available acreage, lack of suitable water, lack of help, etc. 

11) Any Doubleheader Master’s may NOT start on the same day.

12) Clubs that choose to limit entries. The mileage compete will be taken away. Also required to pay the AKC per dog rate as follows. 60 Dog Limit will be $ 18.00 Per dog. 120 Dog Limit $ 9.00 Per dog. 180 Dog limit will $ 6.00 Per Dog. 240 Dog limit $ 4.50 Per Dog. No limit (as it is now) $ 3.50.

Respectfully submitted,
Lyle Steinman
Jack Morris
Ray Shanks
Doug Shade
Proud members of The Professional Retriever Training Association


----------



## Camo9244 (Jan 15, 2015)

krapwxman said:


> Since you asked...
> 
> http://www.retrievertraining.net/fo...ter-of-suggestions-concerning-Limited-Entries


Thanx Krapwxman!


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

trapperwalt said:


> The OP is exactly correct. I went on EE and looked at the posting, the club is the Blackhawk Retriever Club in Gilmanton WI. Jack Morris has 23 of the available entries tied up. He's listed as the handler on all 23 dogs. This kind of stuff needs to stop. Its early February and a July master test is full already. Give me a break. This is going to ruin this sport in the long run !


Do clubs give a full scratch refund to an owner that entered a test months in advance other than for 2 reasons, 1) a bitch in season 2) an injury. 

Thanks


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Wade said:


> Do clubs give a full scratch refund to an owner that entered a test months in advance other than for 2 reasons, 1) a bitch in season 2) an injury.
> 
> Thanks


Before the draw yes. After the draw partial.. No show no dough.


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Golddogs said:


> Before the draw yes. After the draw partial.. No show no dough.


Are the full refunds for dogs that are outside the parameters I mentioned?


----------



## truka (Oct 13, 2010)

Wade said:


> Do clubs give a full scratch refund to an owner that entered a test months in advance other than for 2 reasons, 1) a bitch in season 2) an injury.
> 
> Thanks


Wade- our club provides full refund only for those parameters, bitch in heat or injury/medical issue with vet certificate submitted to the Secretary prior to the beginning of the stake. Scratch for any other reason is entitled to a partial refund after approval by the committee. We have issued partial refunds when a handler became sick and was unable to travel, we reduced the refund by the cost of birds and administrative fee as was stated in the premium scratch policy. 

-trudie kuka


----------



## Todd Caswell (Jun 24, 2008)

Camo9244 said:


> RE: Suggestions for the limited entries problem.
> 
> 1) Reduce the miles for Non-Compete clause. Let test compete with each other for entries. That has been very effective for field trials.
> 
> ...



That one really cracks me up


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Wade said:


> Are the full refunds for dogs that are outside the parameters I mentioned?


Before the event closes on Entry Express, full refunds, less the $4.50 EE fee, are given regardless of reason for the scratch. After the event closes, the scratch policy is handled by the club. 

There have been discussions about EE charging a fee for scratches .
Anyone who has handled CC processing knows that transaction fees are applied to both the initial charge and the refund. So an $80 entry and refund costs the merchant about $5.50. At $4.50 fee, EE is losing money on every scratch.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Wade said:


> Are the full refunds for dogs that are outside the parameters I mentioned?


Currently full refund only before the draw, unless in fits the AKC rule of heat, injury or death. And then they must have contacted EE to scratch prior to close and draw.


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Golddogs said:


> Currently full refund only before the draw, unless in fits the AKC rule of heat, injury or death. And then they must have contacted EE to scratch prior to close and draw.


Why would a club give a full refund regardless of when the scratch occurred?


----------



## truka (Oct 13, 2010)

Wade said:


> Why would a club give a full refund regardless of when the scratch occurred?


Prior to the event closing, EE manages scratches, not the club. https://www.entryexpress.net/exprocess.aspx - scroll to the very bottom of the page. 

One instance where our club has issued a full refund after the event closed occurred when a handler experienced a death in the family. However, I think your question is directed to why a club would issue a full scratch refund if someone decides they won't run an event far in advance of said event. In that case, EE manages the scratch.

-trudie


----------



## wayne anderson (Oct 16, 2007)

I believe scratch fees should be as most are now, full refund due to bitch in season or injury. Beyond that, I think the club's FT or HT committee should decide the appropriate refund. In the cases of those who enter way early, then scratch later for no obvious reason, as it appears to happen in the above-mentioned hunt test instances, I would favor no refunds whatsoever.


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

wayne anderson said:


> I believe scratch fees should be as most are now, full refund due to bitch in season or injury. Beyond that, I think the club's FT or HT committee should decide the appropriate refund. In the cases of those who enter way early, then scratch later for no obvious reason, as it appears to happen in the above-mentioned hunt test instances, I would favor no refunds whatsoever.


100% in agreement with this Wayne!!


----------



## wayne anderson (Oct 16, 2007)

Thank U, Wade. We are complaining down here about cold weather, lack of big-time water work, but guess should not bitch too much, given weather back in Minnesota now!


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

wayne anderson said:


> Thank U, Wade. We are complaining down here about cold weather, lack of big-time water work, but guess should not bitch too much, given weather back in Minnesota now!


Absolutely Beautiful!!!


----------



## John Gassner (Sep 11, 2003)

wayne anderson said:


> I believe scratch fees should be as most are now, full refund due to bitch in season or injury. Beyond that, I think the club's FT or HT committee should decide the appropriate refund. In the cases of those who enter way early, then scratch later for no obvious reason, as it appears to happen in the above-mentioned hunt test instances, I would favor no refunds whatsoever.


While I understand your feelings for no refunds without good cause, I don't quite agree. I do think that there should be a monetary penalty, however, if there is no refund at all, what incentive would there be for scratches before the close? If no refund, folks scratching would simply not show up and no one would be able to enter in there absence. This ultimately would lead to fewer dogs entered.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

John Gassner said:


> While I understand your feelings for no refunds without good cause, I don't quite agree.* I do think that there should be a monetary penalty*, however, if there is no refund at all, what incentive would there be for scratches before the close? If no refund, folks scratching would simply not show up and no one would be able to enter in there absence. This ultimately would lead to fewer dogs entered.


We feel about the same and a couple years ago increased the scratch fee to better reflect the costs associated per dog. We have been pretty lucky so far with few after the draw scratches but note it has been a bigger issue elsewhere.

Make the non-injury, heat, death scratch fee hurt and be sure it is enough to more than cover the losses.


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

John Gassner said:


> While I understand your feelings for no refunds without good cause, I don't quite agree. I do think that there should be a monetary penalty, however, if there is no refund at all, what incentive would there be for scratches before the close? If no refund, folks scratching would simply not show up and no one would be able to enter in there absence. This ultimately would lead to fewer dogs entered.


If a person enters a dog months in advance only to scratch the dog for no apparent reason there should be a penalty not just the standard $15 dollars or so. I guess then people would have to look no further than the mirror in the bathroom. You are either a good person who is honest or you are not.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

I fully agree with a hefty scratch fee, it would make people think twice


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

In discussions of a "scratch" on this forum, some folks are interchangeably discussing a scratch at EE prior to an event close, with an AKC defined scratch which occurs after the event is closed for entry, running order determined etc. - as if they are the same. The two scratches are not the same. "Scratches" prior to an event close, are not covered by AKC rules. If a club were taking manual paper entries, a person making such an entry could contact the club secretary before entries were closed, communicate that the dog entry sent should be cancelled, ask for and usually receive a refund. They might even get their uncashed check back, but the refund would not be governed by AKC rules. After the event close, a club likely would have taken action, incurred costs etc based upon that entry received and the "scratch" refund would be governed by club & AKC rules. Scratches at EE can only occur prior to the event close (EE cannot scratch or refund entries once entry closing occurs).

In this regard as previously announced, EE will soon introduce a new software release that will enable those who enter events online with EE to also scratch their entries prior to closing online, real time 24/7. A red-lettered scratch will appear by every dog you enter (but no one else's dogs) on the page where you "view entries". From that page location you will simply click the scratch label by your entry & follow the prompts. Your original means of payment will be credited the previously paid entry fee & a TBD fee for service will be charged.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

Thank you Grandaddy - so if I understood the above post EE is considering an administrative cost for withdrawing before the close. Then after close the AKC policies would be the "rule" 
Hopefully the EE number will not encourage " slickers" by some ( not sure if that's a word) but you get the picture 
Dk


----------



## John Gassner (Sep 11, 2003)

So if I have an injured dog or one that comes in season I could scratch ASAP so that others might enter. If I do this I would get a significant EE "fee". My other option would be to wait until after the close date, contact the club secretary and get a full refund for same dog per AKC rules minus the EE $4.50 service fee. In so doing no other dog could take my dog's slot since entries would be closed.

This might be a problem.

John


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

154 or John - you paint a photo of what could happen. But it seems to me EE is responding to the ones that used entries as placeholders then "scratched" This occurred likely as the opening was way to early 
Perhaps some entered early via the VIP as they didn't have upfront cost 

When I first heard of these mods I thought a large withdrawal fee was needed to deter placeholders. 
Now I am having second thoughts as this will put club in a position and leave openings not filled
Dk


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

John Gassner should be on the committee making rule/policy changes. Excellent foresight on what will happen if...


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Since there has been general agreement that there has been some entry abuse in limited master stakes, EE will impose the $25 service fee to scratch. Handlers will still get the entire entry fee back. I would suggest that clubs increase their scratch fees to $25 or more for post-closing scratches - fully allowed by AKC rules. This should provide the needed motivation for handlers to do the right thing. By doing that, clubs will only deal with bitches-in-heat or injuries, just as they have in the past.


----------



## Mike Perry (Jun 26, 2003)

When will this take place? Should be higher IMO if there are any allowed at all, other than a vet report of bitch in season or a legitimate injury.
JMHO
MP


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Mike Perry said:


> When will this take place? Should be higher IMO if there are any allowed at all, other than a vet report of bitch in season or a legitimate injury.
> JMHO
> MP


Mike, we are in the middle of testing the software now. The features described have been developed & I have tested them. EE staff will test them this week & then some others from the club & user community that have assisted us during this process. Once we are collectively satisfied the implementation is as intended we will load the release & go live. The process changes from a user perspective are very intuitive & easy to understand. I'm guessing mid-March for implementation on the live website barring any major issues identified.


----------



## dgreenwell (Apr 16, 2010)

Here is a concept that should not be foreign to hunters. What if dogs registered out of state paid a premium. If I go to hunt in another state, I pay for an out of state license. I do not think it would solve the problem, but it might reduce the numbers on some of the big trucks.


----------



## Frank Plewa (Feb 17, 2015)

I am not one to frequent or post on these types of forums but I do occasionally check this site to see what some of my old friends are into. It would be no secret as to why this particular thread caught my interest, particularly since NAHRA has been mentioned. I have been involved with NAHRA for 25 years but have tried other venues as well. As a hunter and guide, this one suited me best but I am not posting to give you my preferences. 

I just wanted to reiterate what a few have already said, NAHRA is still holding field tests and would love to have some new and old faces give us a try. We are very small organization in comparison to other venues making access to local tests a challenge but in another way, it can be an advantage as there is no problem getting a seat and you get where you are going pretty quickly. I am not suggesting anyone leave what they are doing now with their dogs, just saying there is another option until the problems you may be experiencing entering tests get worked out. In the process, some of our local clubs could use a shot in the arm with entries until you get back to doing what you like best.

NAHRA is particularly oriented toward the needs of the hunter and what comes with that is the upland and trailing tests. For those that prefer just marks and blinds, this may not be for you but maybe there are a few that might want to test the waters. At least until you can get back to what you are currently doing. If you can deal with the upland and trail for even a short time, in addition to our normal testing format, we have developed the Upland Retriever Program (URP). This pilot program is an amped up version of our regular upland test. The URP significantly increases the difficulty and diversity of our traditional upland test by incorporating a number of skills that are very much a fact of actual upland hunting. Thus far the tests have been very well received and will generate additional titles to participants. 

I am not trying to cherry pick here, just letting people know that we are still around and would love to have you try our game until current problems with entries get back on track. Take a chance and check out a NAHRA Field Test. You just might have some fun.


----------



## Rnd (Jan 21, 2012)

Hey Frank ,,, long time, hope everybody is healthy and happy....

look forward to catching up..... 

Randy


----------



## Addicted To Quack (Feb 22, 2015)

I am a newbie to the RTF, but thought I would throw out my .02. Why not limit a dog to 8 MH entries per year for qualification purposes to the MN. If a dog can't pass 6/8 tests, then they're probably not good enough to earn the title MNH. Better yet, why doesn't the MNRC reduce the number of passes for previously qualified dogs and require 75% pass rate on MH tests for the next qualification, say 3 of 4? I have competed in HTs and FTs off and on for several years, and I am amazed at how many pro-trained dogs are in HTs these days.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Because dogs that qualify keep running weekend HT. Because you can now get a MH12 designation or whatever, and lastly it's fun to run. The MN is only a small piece of the problem. All of this does not appreciably lower the weekend entries.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Addicted To Quack said:


> I am a newbie to the RTF, but thought I would throw out my .02. Why not limit a dog to 8 MH entries per year for qualification purposes to the MN. If a dog can't pass 6/8 tests, then they're probably not good enough to earn the title MNH. Better yet, why doesn't the MNRC reduce the number of passes for previously qualified dogs and require 75% pass rate on MH tests for the next qualification, say 3 of 4? I have competed in HTs and FTs off and on for several years, and I am amazed at how many pro-trained dogs are in HTs these days.


Because the more dogs that are entered in weekend and MN tests, the more money the MN club and AKC make. That would be asking them to come up with ways for them to make less money.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

Last I looked there were 3 HTs in VA open and not filled.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Are you judging there


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

Thomas D said:


> Are you judging there


Now that right there is funny


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

Swampcollie said:


> Thank You!
> 
> The financial outlook is the same for our club as well. The return for the efforts expended is just not there for the Master test. We feel that as an AKC Club we are still obligated to provide a Master test. However we are NOT obligated to be a member of the MNRC and provide opportunities for their plate chasers.



What is wrong with making the entry fee for a master test more in line with the costs? Instead of setting the fee at $80, why not $100 or $110?


----------



## Richard (Jul 29, 2010)

They should split the MHN east and west coast, and allow more clubs to run a akc event.


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

Buzz said:


> What is wrong with making the entry fee for a master test more in line with the costs? Instead of setting the fee at $80, why not $100 or $110?


Well, our club has discussed that topic in depth in the past as a way to get the entry situation under control. Raising the price to $125 would certainly help keep the Master test in the black, however it would force the majority of our club members out of the event. It would just plain and simply be beyond their means to continue playing. If they can't afford to play they will go elsewhere (HRC) or take up another hobby and that is not conducive to the long term health of our club. It makes far more sense for our club to drop the MNRC to get the entries back under control while keeping access open to everyone seeking to put a Master Title on their dogs.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Well said.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

Mike Berube said:


> Now that right there is funny


Very. Funny, that is. 
BTW - Nuese River and CRA in NC and Del Bay, MD open and not filled. And no, I'm not judging there either.


----------



## Terry Britton (Jul 3, 2003)

Swampcollie said:


> Well, our club has discussed that topic in depth in the past as a way to get the entry situation under control. Raising the price to $125 would certainly help keep the Master test in the black, however it would force the majority of our club members out of the event. It would just plain and simply be beyond their means to continue playing. If they can't afford to play they will go elsewhere (HRC) or take up another hobby and that is not conducive to the long term health of our club. It makes far more sense for our club to drop the MNRC to get the entries back under control while keeping access open to everyone seeking to put a Master Title on their dogs.



I am curious, if a club will have two MH tests on a weekend, or even multiple flights, can some of those tests be sanctioned to count for the Master National qualifier, and the other half not? If it were possible, that would allow the locals and club members easier access to play for the MH title when they may not have any interest or means to obtain the Master National title. Those going for the Master National seem to be what is clogging up the weekend tests when 10 years ago many wouldn't run their MH much more beyond the title.


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

Swampcollie said:


> Well, our club has discussed that topic in depth in the past as a way to get the entry situation under control. Raising the price to $125 would certainly help keep the Master test in the black, however it would force the majority of our club members out of the event. It would just plain and simply be beyond their means to continue playing. If they can't afford to play they will go elsewhere (HRC) or take up another hobby and that is not conducive to the long term health of our club. It makes far more sense for our club to drop the MNRC to get the entries back under control while keeping access open to everyone seeking to put a Master Title on their dogs.


The solution is simple. Add a $40 fee to all Master entries (maybe $30 maybe $50, I don't know what it is). If you work you get paid, $40 per half day. Everybody gets paid, Judges, Marshall, bird boy, shooters, tear down/pick up, everybody. A business model that requires people to volunteer their time so others can get paid is not sustainable. It will fold.

I hear it all the time, "We need workers. If you will help us please raise your hand. We never have enough help". Then I hear, "Pros fill up all the entires running dogs of absentee owner". If this is true then problem solved.

Obviously this does not solve the demand versus supply issue but at least clubs could put on test with plenty of help and maybe make a buck or two so they could afford to have a Qual in every Field Trial or maybe even an O/H Qual with a HT. But I digress to another issue.


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

Terry Britton said:


> I am curious, if a club will have two MH tests on a weekend, or even multiple flights, can some of those tests be sanctioned to count for the Master National qualifier, and the other half not? If it were possible, that would allow the locals and club members easier access to play for the MH title when they may not have any interest or means to obtain the Master National title. Those going for the Master National seem to be what is clogging up the weekend tests when 10 years ago many wouldn't run their MH much more beyond the title.


At this time the Rules are not written to allow for such a scenario (The MNRC's and the AKC's). 

The MNRC needs to address the issue and submit their proposed changes to the AKC for approval. That kind of process takes time to work it's way through all the channels along the way and requires some pressure to get things moving with the MNRC. As long as the weekend clubs continue to put up with things the way they are, the MNRC will do nothing to help them out with the entry situation. The immediate fix for weekend clubs in this situation is dropping their membership in the MNRC.

When enough clubs drop the MNRC that organization will get the hint that the status quo is not acceptable and will no longer be tolerated.


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

jtfreeman said:


> The solution is simple. Add a $40 fee to all Master entries (maybe $30 maybe $50, I don't know what it is). If you work you get paid, $40 per half day. Everybody gets paid, Judges, Marshall, bird boy, shooters, tear down/pick up, everybody. A business model that requires people to volunteer their time so others can get paid is not sustainable. It will fold.
> 
> I hear it all the time, "We need workers. If you will help us please raise your hand. We never have enough help". Then I hear, "Pros fill up all the entires running dogs of absentee owner". If this is true then problem solved.
> .



Interesting. Very interesting.

I wonder what others think of something like this?


----------



## caryalsobrook (Mar 22, 2010)

jtfreeman said:


> The solution is simple. Add a $40 fee to all Master entries (maybe $30 maybe $50, I don't know what it is). If you work you get paid, $40 per half day. Everybody gets paid, Judges, Marshall, bird boy, shooters, tear down/pick up, everybody. A business model that requires people to volunteer their time so others can get paid is not sustainable. It will fold.
> 
> I hear it all the time, "We need workers. If you will help us please raise your hand. We never have enough help". Then I hear, "Pros fill up all the entires running dogs of absentee owner". If this is true then problem solved.
> 
> Obviously this does not solve the demand versus supply issue but at least clubs could put on test with plenty of help and maybe make a buck or two so they could afford to have a Qual in every Field Trial or maybe even an O/H Qual with a HT. But I digress to another issue.


You pay everybody and I don't think that $200/entry would touch it. Furthermore, clubs would now be a for profit business and I don't think that government WLM areas would take very kindly to their grounds being used in such a manner. I have no idea as to how many clubs that would lose their grounds but I know of at least one that would.


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

caryalsobrook said:


> You pay everybody and I don't think that $200/entry would touch it. Furthermore, clubs would now be a for profit business and I don't think that government WLM areas would take very kindly to their grounds being used in such a manner. I have no idea as to how many clubs that would lose their grounds but I know of at least one that would.


Example: 60 dog Master test. $40 "worker fee" per entry. That would give you $40 to pay 15 people in the morning on Saturday and 15 in the afternoon, rinse and repeat on Sunday. If you can't run a Master test for half a day with 15 workers then you have more problems than can be solved on an internet forum. And just to note, the $40 "worker fee" doesn't come close to putting entries at $200.

Anyone else? Maybe Obamacare prevents it because the club would have to provide healthcare?


----------



## TN_LAB (Jul 26, 2008)

caryalsobrook said:


> clubs would now be a for profit business .


I think there are plenty of non-profits that have "employees" and pay folks. Too many to mention.


----------



## Deadbird (Feb 11, 2010)

TN_LAB said:


> I think there are plenty of non-profits that have "employees" and pay folks. Too many to mention.


Well said.


----------



## Deadbird (Feb 11, 2010)

caryalsobrook said:


> You pay everybody and I don't think that $200/entry would touch it. Furthermore, clubs would now be a for profit business and I don't think that government WLM areas would take very kindly to their grounds being used in such a manner. I have no idea as to how many clubs that would lose their grounds but I know of at least one that would.


200 won't touch it if everyone gets paid according to their position? 200 per dog. Really? Don't know how anyone does it on 80 then. I look to the future and I see 80$ entry's hurting the sport wearing people out for their passion and 200$ entry's helping the sport grow, clubs succeed, encouragement as well as incentive for people of all interests to help and put on a precise quality master test.


----------

