# Is this a Master Test? Yes or No



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

One of three series. NO extenuating/mitigating circumstances.

Single mark is thrown. Judges instruct handler to "leave" mark and pick up a blind.

Dog returns and is then presented with another mark. Dog now has two marks to pick up.

End of series.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

How you doing there Mr Mike. Tell Larry I said hello 
Dk


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Are you asking if it's legal or if it's master level?


----------



## hooked on quackers (Nov 7, 2010)

captainjack said:


> Are you asking if it's legal or if it's master level?


Illegal master test.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

hooked on quackers said:


> Illegal master test.


Curious as to why? Too few elements?

Ran an interrupted triple with double blind in a Master test a couple years ago. Fun test. Never ran an interrupted double in a master test though.

Thanks Mr. Jack

Edit: ran a similar test in an Amateur stake. But two birds were presented, pick up one, run a blind, pick up remaining mark. It was plenty hard, eliminating about 1/2 the field.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

hooked on quackers said:


> Illegal master test.


Why illegal?


----------



## Tony Marshall (May 15, 2013)

That was "multiple marks".


----------



## SWIPER (Sep 24, 2006)

No IMO. Weak for a master, even if the blind was very challenging. Master should have 3 challenging triples or a total of at least 9 marks in 3 series IMO! Why the need to try to get creative. IMO


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

SWIPER said:


> No. Weak for a master, even if the blind was very challenging. Master should have 3 challenging triples or a total of at least 9 marks in 3 series IMO! Why the need to try to get creative. IMO



Quote rulebook please.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Rulebook states: 
"Section 7. Master Hunting Test. Dogs shall be tested in a minimum of five hunting situations as
follows: multiple land marks, multiple water marks, multiple marks on water and land, a land blind and a water blind (at least one that shall be a double blind in any combination). There shall be at least three series. At least one of the series shall include a walk-up. Diversion birds and/or diversion shots such as described in Chapter 3, Section 24, must be used at least once. In Master tests, in at least two multiple marking situations the dog’s marking/memory will be tested with at least (3) falls before the dog is sent to retrieve. The (3) falls must be presented before a dog is sent to retrieve any mark or blind. During a double set of marks (2 falls) Master judges shall include additional elements of testing, i.e. walkup, diversion bird, diversion shot, blind/s etc"

As long as there were two other series with triple marks that were not "interrupted", I don't see where this would be an illegal test for MH. I don't see any language in the rules prohibiting this setup. If there is something in the rulebook that would indicate this is an illegal MH setup, please provide the language.


----------



## hooked on quackers (Nov 7, 2010)

captainjack said:


> Curious as to why? Too few elements?
> 
> Ran an interrupted triple with double blind in a Master test a couple years ago. Fun test. Never ran an interrupted double in a master test though.
> 
> ...


Glen, an interrupted triple would be legal in a master test but not a double. By the rules dog must see multiple marks. An interrupted double is a single, a blind, and a single.


----------



## HoHum's Retrievers (Mar 22, 2007)

I am not sure this is an illegal test. I would need to consult my rulebook to be certain on that. And I am not so sure it isn't a worthy test. It certainly can have a foundation in a true hunting scenario, especially if there is a diversion shot included. Scenario that a pair of ducks come into your decoy spread, two shots are fired, one bird falls and is seen by the dog, the other bird falls without the dog seeing it and it a cripple that escapes into cover. If I am hunting, I would like to think I would make an attempt to recover the cripple that escaped into the cattails while the "trail is still hot" assuming the "marked" bird is clearly dead and recoverable later. Continuing with the situation, upon the dog recovering the blind, a loner cups into the decoys and you dispatch that bird. 

So in theory, I think this reflects a realistic hunting scenario. The question I would have is do the two marked birds constitute a true multiple mark situation? Does a delayed double (that is the terminology I would use for this fall of the marks) fall into the acceptable and legal category? Does this delayed double qualify as a multiple marking situation?

I think to be on the safe side, I would be more inclined to throw the double, and then either direct the dog to recover the blind prior to recovering either mark or allow the dog to recover one of the marks, then recover the blind and then pick up the last bird. I think having two marked birds down could create a much tougher scenario for the dog and handler. It all depends on the placement of the marks and blind and the relationship to each other. Is the blind in close proximity to the mark or is the mark completely out of the picture? Where is the wind? Is the dog going to be challenged to go past the scent cone of the mark enroute to the blind?


----------



## hooked on quackers (Nov 7, 2010)

Rainmaker said:


> Rulebook states:
> "Section 7. Master Hunting Test. Dogs shall be tested in a minimum of five hunting situations as
> follows: multiple land marks, multiple water marks, multiple marks on water and land, a land blind and a water blind (at least one that shall be a double blind in any combination). There shall be at least three series. At least one of the series shall include a walk-up. Diversion birds and/or diversion shots such as described in Chapter 3, Section 24, must be used at least once. In Master tests, in at least two multiple marking situations the dog’s marking/memory will be tested with at least (3) falls before the dog is sent to retrieve. The (3) falls must be presented before a dog is sent to retrieve any mark or blind. During a double set of marks (2 falls) Master judges shall include additional elements of testing, i.e. walkup, diversion bird, diversion shot, blind/s etc"
> 
> As long as there were two other series with triple marks that were not "interrupted", I don't see where this would be an illegal test for MH. I don't see any language in the rules prohibiting this setup. If there is something in the rulebook that would indicate this is an illegal MH setup, please provide the language.


Single, blind, and single is NOT multiple marks


----------



## SWIPER (Sep 24, 2006)

IMO, Single, blind, and single is NOT multiple marks


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

hooked on quackers said:


> Glen, an interrupted triple would be legal in a master test but not a double. By the rules dog must see multiple marks. An interrupted double is a single, a blind, and a single.


Please quote the rule that says dog must see multiple marks in every series? The rules require 3 series, 2 of those series must have triples, ie, 3 marks down before dog is sent, there are no requirements for what the 3rd series must contain, only that all requirements be met within the 3 series. Two series could be triples with a single blind somewhere and the third series could be a walkup single mark with a double blind.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

SWIPER said:


> No. Weak for a master, even if the blind was very challenging. Master should have 3 challenging triples or a total of at least 9 marks in 3 series IMO! Why the need to try to get creative. IMO


devils advocate 
if you are testing the top hunting dogs in a way close to an average day in the field. Well a great many times 3 - 4 fellers will each empty guns and 1 duck will drop. Then that 1 bird that always swings back in gets dropped while dog is in the decoys and lands up on land in back of the hunting blind. Dogs get into training ruts, just like people. A dog that gets triples at tests every time every weekend test after test after test can expect it so much that the random double or single (delayed double) can throw it for a loop. And these top level hunting dogs will see, at times while hunting. only one bird drop. SO...... With proper bird placement It can be a great thing and save a club a worker and popper costs. Every body and penny counts these days.
Heck I shot birds at a field trial one morning on John and Martha's front lawn in stowe. Opening series was a land double that dropped more dogs than I had ever seen. None of those folks asked for a third mark.


----------



## doverstreet (May 23, 2013)

First series was a triple, with the first bird being a walkup, and a double blind.
Second series was as described above.
Third was a triple with a diversion.

FYI, the second series dropped 10 of the 34 running.


----------



## hooked on quackers (Nov 7, 2010)

Rainmaker said:


> Rulebook states:
> "Section 7. Master Hunting Test. Dogs shall be tested in a minimum of five hunting situations as
> follows: multiple land marks, multiple water marks, multiple marks on water and land, a land blind and a water blind (at least one that shall be a double blind in any combination). There shall be at least three series. At least one of the series shall include a walk-up. Diversion birds and/or diversion shots such as described in Chapter 3, Section 24, must be used at least once. In Master tests, in at least two multiple marking situations the dog’s marking/memory will be tested with at least (3) falls before the dog is sent to retrieve. The (3) falls must be presented before a dog is sent to retrieve any mark or blind. During a double set of marks (2 falls) Master judges shall include additional elements of testing, i.e. walkup, diversion bird, diversion shot, blind/s etc"
> 
> As long as there were two other series with triple marks that were not "interrupted", I don't see where this would be an illegal test for MH. I don't see any language in the rules prohibiting this setup. If there is something in the rulebook that would indicate this is an illegal MH setup, please provide the language.


You posted the rule yourself .MULTIPLE Marks in every series


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

hooked on quackers said:


> You posted the rule yourself .MULTIPLE Marks in every series


That's not how I read it. It does not say every series either. Multiple does not mean they can't be interrupted, except as the rule specifies, which is two triples without interruption. It says multiple land marks, multiple marks on water and land. It does not say they have to be thrown as a double or anything else, beyond the two triples required.


----------



## Tony Marshall (May 15, 2013)

If more than one mark was thrown in the series it was "multiple marks".


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

I sometimes wonder what the beginning of a week following a hunt test feels like to Jerry Mann. 



I wonder if at this point, he's "seen it all" or "heard it all".
My hunch is he already has a thought ready to state on whether this is kosher or not.

I've never judged an AKC HT, so I'm keeping my opinion on the test itself, to myself. :razz:

Chris


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Tony Marshall said:


> If more than one mark was thrown in the series it was "multiple marks".


I think that's the disagreement, what is meant by "multiple". The required elements are specified. If they meant doubles could not be interrupted, or no single could be thrown, I think that would have been specified as easily as they specified 2 uninterrupted triples have to be thrown. Guess it is open to interpretation as to what multiple means in this rule. I take it to mean dogs are going to see multiple, meaning more than one, marks throughout the test, on land and water, I don't read it as meaning minimum of a double thrown in every series.


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> Please quote the rule that says dog must see multiple marks in every series? The rules require 3 series, 2 of those series must have triples, ie, 3 marks down before dog is sent, there are no requirements for what the 3rd series must contain, only that all requirements be met within the 3 series. Two series could be triples with a single blind somewhere and the third series could be a walkup single mark with a double blind.


Kim in master you are not required to have 3 series, you can have more I had 4 once when I judged, But you must have 3 multiple marking situations. The way they have redefined what are multiple marking situations, I don't think this original test qualifies, your walkup single with a double blind, ce rtainly does not work! Although you can do a "double" in one series in Master, However, they have defined a double in senior as requiring 2 falls be presented before the dog is sent to retrieve. Thus the original scenario would not meet the definition of a double.


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

"Double" is defined in the senior test, "In Senior tests, a double mark is defined as two marks presented before the dog is sent to retrieve. Blinds shall not be run between marks in Senior Hunting Tests." (P. 33).

It the scenario presented, the dog is presented with two retrieves before it is sent to retrieve any marks. Sounds like a double to me.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

doverstreet said:


> First series was a triple, with the first bird being a walkup, and a double blind.
> Second series was as described above.
> Third was a triple with a diversion.
> 
> FYI, the second series dropped 10 of the 34 running.


You can make this setup plenty difficult as evidenced here, and the first bird down will have more memory burn (other mark plus a blind), than a standard triple.


----------



## hooked on quackers (Nov 7, 2010)

Rainmaker said:


> That's not how I read it. It does not say every series either. Multiple does not mean they can't be interrupted, except as the rule specifies, which is two triples without interruption. It says multiple land marks, multiple marks on water and land. It does not say they have to be thrown as a double or anything else, beyond the two triples required.


As you posted , multiple land marks, multiple water marks, and multiple land, water marks. You are right, it does not say double, triple or quad in that rule. It does however say MULTIPLE marks in every series


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Doug Main said:


> Kim in master you are not required to have 3 series, you can have more or less. I had 4 once when I judged, But you must have 3 multiple marking situations. The way they have redefined what are multiple marking situations, I don't think this original test qualifies, your walkup single with a double blind, ce rtainly does not work! Although you can do a "double" in one series in Master, However, they have defined a double in senior as requiring 2 falls be presented before the dog is sent to retrieve. Thus the original scenario would not meet the definition of a double.


You are required to have at least 3 series per rule for MH. I have seen 4. I have run MH that a series was a double blind. That did not have marks at all. There is nothing in the rule that I interpret as every series has to have marks for that matter. The rule for Senior is specified as double marks, the rule for JH as single marks, the rule for Master does not say doubles are required. So, IMO, multiple appears to be concrete as minimum of a double for some, but not up here. I've seen Seniors go 3 series because one series was a blind.


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

hooked on quackers said:


> As you posted , multiple land marks, multiple water marks, and multiple land, water marks. You are right, it does not say double, triple or quad in that rule. It does however say MULTIPLE marks in every series


Where does it say that? I do not see that statement.

Section 7. Master Hunting Test. Dogs shall be
tested in a minimum of five hunting situations as
follows: multiple land marks, multiple water marks,
multiple marks on water and land, a land blind and a
water blind (at least one that shall be a double blind in
any combination). There shall be at least three series. At
least one of the series shall include a walk-up. Diversion
33
birds and/or diversion shots such as described in Chapter
3, Section 24, must be used at least once. In Master
tests, in at least two multiple marking situations the
dog’s marking/memory will be tested with at least (3)
falls before the dog is sent to retrieve. The (3) falls must
be presented before a dog is sent to retrieve any mark
or blind. During a double set of marks (2 falls) Master
judges shall include additional elements of testing, i.e.
walkup, diversion bird, diversion shot, blind/s etc. in
testing the dog’s abilities.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

hooked on quackers said:


> As you posted , multiple land marks, multiple water marks, and multiple land, water marks. You are right, it does not say double, triple or quad in that rule. It does however say MULTIPLE marks in every series


Please highlight where the rule states every series has to have multiple marks. I don't see it stated that way. If it is, then I will change my opinion of the rule, but I'm just not seeing where it says every series must contain multiple marks.


----------



## Migillicutty (Jan 11, 2014)

When reading rules, contractual language or statue for that matter one must read carefully and look at the intent of the written word. In the absence of explicit text one can look elsewhere in the same clause for explicit text for reference as to intent of the author. I think that is the case in the following. The rule explicitly states the falls of marks in two triples (highlighted below), in which the dog must be presented 3 falls before being sent to retrieve. It is not explicit for the double or third series, and therefore a conclusion can be drawn that it is up to the discretion of the judge/test designer how those falls are presented as long as it is multiples(again an explicit rule). Conclusion, the aforementioned test is not "illegal". Whether it was "master level" all depends on placement of the birds, factors involved in the scenario. I am sure with the right grounds, wind conditions any seasoned judge could really challenge a field of master dogs with the above mentioned scenario. 



_Section 7. Master Hunting Test. Dogs shall be__
tested in a minimum of five hunting situations as
follows: multiple land marks, multiple water marks,
multiple marks on water and land, a land blind and a
water blind (at least one that shall be a double blind in
any combination). There shall be at least three series. At
least one of the series shall include a walk-up. Diversion
birds and/or diversion shots such as described in Chapter
3, Section 24, must be used at least once. In Master
tests, *in at least two multiple marking situations the**
dog’s marking/memory will be tested with at least (3)
falls before the dog is sent to retrieve. The (3) falls must
be presented before a dog is sent to retrieve any mark
**or blind.* During a double set of marks (2 falls) Master
judges shall include additional elements of testing, i.e.
walkup, diversion bird, diversion shot, blind/s etc. in
testing the dog’s abilities._


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

it doesn't. you don't even have to have a mark in a series. you can run a series with just blinds. but you have to have 3 multiple marking stiuations. so that requires more than 3 series!!!


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Doug Main said:


> it doesn't. you don't even have to have a mark in a series. you can run a series with just blinds. but you have to have 3 multiple marking stiuations. so that requires more than 3 series!!!


Help me out. I don't see that. Where does it say you have to have 3 multiple marking situations? I see where it says you have to have at least 3 series. I see where it says you have to have at least 2 series where dogs have to do a triple. I cannot find anywhere in which it is stated that multiple marks must happen in a 3rd series, or that there must be 3 series with multiple marks...


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Migillicutty said:


> When reading rules, contractual language or statue for that matter one must read carefully and look at the intent of the written word. In the absence of explicit text one can look elsewhere in the same clause for explicit text for reference as to intent of the author. I think that is the case in the following. The rule explicitly states the falls of marks in two triples (highlighted below), in which the dog must be presented 3 falls before being sent to retrieve. It is not explicit for the double or third series, and therefore a conclusion can be drawn that it is up to the discretion of the judge/test designer how those falls are presented as long as it is multiples(again an explicit rule). Conclusion, the aforementioned test is not "illegal". Whether it was "master level" all depends on placement of the birds, factors involved in the scenario. I am sure with the right grounds, wind conditions any seasoned judge could really challenge a field of master dogs with the above mentioned scenario.


I agree that the original test could be more challenging than an ordinary triple. 

The point you are missing is that this is not a double as a double was previously defined in the rules as 2 falls presented before the dog is sent.


----------



## doverstreet (May 23, 2013)

Is an interrupted triple really a triple? Or is it a single, then a double? My interpretation is it is a triple, just like the scenario above is a double.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

mitty said:


> Help me out. I don't see that. Where does it say you have to have 3 multiple marking situations? I see where it says you have to have at least 3 series. I see where it says you have to have at least 2 series where dogs have to do a triple. I cannot find anywhere in which it is stated that multiple marks must happen in a 3rd series, or that there must be 3 series with multiple marks...


I don't see it either. I wish someone would highlight the language that specifies it.


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

mitty said:


> Help me out. I don't see that. Where does it say you have to have 3 multiple marking situations? I see where it says you have to have at least 3 series. I see where it says you have to have at least 2 series where dogs have to do a triple. I cannot find anywhere in which it is stated that multiple marks must happen in a 3rd series, or that there must be 3 series with multiple marks...


Really? or you you just kidding?

look at the rule you quoted. of the 5 required hunting situations, 3 are multiple marking situations:

1- multiple land marks
2- multiple water marks
3- multiple land and water marks commonlhy referred to as the combination test


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Doug Main said:


> Really? or you you just kidding?
> 
> look at the rule you quoted. of the 5 required hunting situations, 3 are multiple marking situations:
> 
> ...


Couldn't you have a triple with 2 land marks and 1 water mark? Then another triple with 2 water marks and one land mark? Would that not satisfy the requirements in just 2 series?

Edit: if not, what am I missing? You have your two triples. You have multiples on land. You have multiples on water. You have two combo tests.

P.S. No need to be rude and insulting.


----------



## Migillicutty (Jan 11, 2014)

Doug Main said:


> I agree that the original test could be more challenging than an ordinary triple.
> 
> The point you are missing is that this is not a double as a double was previously defined in the rules as 2 falls presented before the dog is sent.


The clause doesn't state it has to be a double(I erroneously used that word), it states multiple marks. Is multiple marks defined as falls seen in succession prior to being sent somewhere in the rule book that I am missing? Not being argumentative, I've read the rule book word for word multiple times, but I've slept since then so I truly want to know. If so then I would stand corrected. 

As I read it, the explicit language only defines what must happen in two of the three series whereas a dog must see three falls before being sent to retrieve. The third series is not explicitly defined and therefore leads to the conclusion is up to the discretion of the judge/test designer.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

two marks were thrown before the dog was sent for them. Makes the series a multiple mark.


----------



## Migillicutty (Jan 11, 2014)

Tobias said:


> two marks were thrown before the dog was sent for them. Makes the series a multiple mark.


That is how I read it as well.


----------



## jacduck (Aug 17, 2011)

I love how we always stick to the specific question and not stray. Popcorn?

BTW Hi Mike hope you are surviving Linda.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Doug Main said:


> I agree that the original test could be more challenging than an ordinary triple.
> 
> The point you are missing is that *this is not a double as a double was previously defined *in the rules as 2 falls presented before the dog is sent.


But it is a multiple marking situation, which is what is being overlooked. First bird down is *NOT* retrieved until the blind is picked up. Retrieves are not begun *UNTIL* a second mark is down. So when sent to retrieve the marks, 2 are picked up without interuption. 

IMO, this is a multiple marking situation and meets the definintion and intent and seems to have done what the judges intended. Test the memory of the dogs.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

this scenario is not two singles, there is a memory bird, therefore it is multiple marks. Ok as a MH test in my book


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Legal?
Depends if you passed or failed test.


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

We (Skip Cannon and myself) set this up in a test years ago. The AKC field rep stood right there while the test was set up and while the test was explained to the handlers. No comment was made.


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

years ago there it would have been legal.


----------



## Mike Sale (Feb 1, 2011)

As long as all of the other requirements were met.... Totally fine in my book.


----------



## Final Flight Retrievers (Jan 23, 2010)

Golddogs said:


> seems to have done what the judges intended. Test the memory of the dogs.


 I can almost guarantee you with 99.9999% certainty that is NOT what the judges were testing !!!!!!


----------



## Tom Lehr (Sep 11, 2008)

Agree with Golddogs...it could be a good test of memory as well as control on the blinds. Seems perfectly legal to me


----------



## John Condon (Mar 27, 2013)

Bridget Bodine said:


> this scenario is not two singles, there is a memory bird, therefore it is multiple marks. Ok as a MH test in my book


Thank you!! Its just that simple!!!


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Bridget Bodine said:


> this scenario is not two singles, there is a memory bird, therefore it is multiple marks. Ok as a MH test in my book


100% incorrect 

Dog has multiple birds to retrieve, but has not seen multiple (>1) marks prior to the first send from the retrieving line. 

Great series, but doesn't meet the requirements for a multiple marking scenario.


----------



## Migillicutty (Jan 11, 2014)

Splash_em said:


> 100% incorrect
> 
> Dog has multiple birds to retrieve, but has not seen multiple (>1) marks prior to the first send from the retrieving line.
> 
> Great series, but doesn't meet the requirements for a multiple marking scenario.


please show this definition of multiple in the rule book.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Splash_em said:


> 100% incorrect
> 
> Dog has multiple birds to retrieve, but has not seen multiple (>1) marks prior to the first send from the retrieving line.
> 
> Great series, but doesn't meet the requirements for a multiple marking scenario.


Have to dissagree with you here. A mark is something seen from the line regardless if there is an interuption between marks thrown. In the situation the OP laid out, it cannot be a double, but most certainly is a multiple marking situation. The dog HAS seen multiple marks presented and has retrieved them as such.


----------



## hooked on quackers (Nov 7, 2010)

Has been shown several times in previous posts


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Migillicutty said:


> please show this definition of multiple in the rule book.


Page 33 is the first definition of a multiple mark where a double is defined as two birds presented before the dog is sent to retrieve. 

Top of page 34 states that a 3 falls must be used in at least 2 multiple marking scenario. The other marking scenario must include at least a double with additional elements of testing. 

Unless my math is completely wrong, 1 marked fall prior to the send from the retrieving line does not equal multiple


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Golddogs said:


> Have to dissagree with you here. A mark is something seen from the line regardless if there is an interuption between marks thrown. In the situation the OP laid out, it cannot be a double, but most certainly is a multiple marking situation. The dog HAS seen multiple marks presented and has retrieved them as such.


Show me in the rulebook where it meets the requirements please.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Splash_em said:


> Show me in the rulebook where it meets the requirements please.


There is nothing in the rulebook that defines " Multiple Marks " in a way that supports your arguement. Only " Doubles and Triples " are so defined. So i guess we will just have to dissagree on what " multiple marks " consist of. I am comfortable with my view and definition of what constitutes multiple marks.


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

Richard, I have to agree it is 100% legal. I believe the intent of stating multiple marks down prior to send is just for Marking not being sent on a blind. Dog sees mark, runs blind, sees a mark so has 2 birds down prior to sending for MARK.


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Golddogs said:


> There is nothing in the rulebook that defines " Multiple Marks " in a way that supports your arguement. Only " Doubles and Triples " are so defined. So i guess we will just have to dissagree on what " multiple marks " consist of. I am comfortable with my view and definition of what constitutes multiple marks.


Merriam-Webster defines multiple as "more than one". I don't think the Performance Department of the AKC has a different definition. 

I'm not only comfortable with my position, I'm confident that it is shared with several other people.


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Karen Klotthor said:


> Richard, I have to agree it is 100% legal. I believe the intent of stating multiple marks down prior to send is just for Marking not being sent on a blind. Dog sees mark, runs blind, sees a mark so has 2 birds down prior to sending for MARK.


Talk to the Performance Department and post your findings please.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Splash_em said:


> Merriam-Webster defines multiple as* "more than one". *I don't think the Performance Department of the AKC has a different definition.
> 
> I'm not only comfortable with my position, I'm confident that it is shared with several other people.


And there is more than one mark down by Websters definition. I am confident that several people share this view as well.


----------



## Jerry Beil (Feb 8, 2011)

Richard, I'm curious why you don't talk to the performance department and post your findings instead of telling Karen to?

To be clear, here is the scenario:

Mark A thrown
Blind 1 Run
Mark B thrown
Dog picks up Mark A and Mark B.

That's a multiple marking scenario because it's more than 1. 

Aside from the technicality of how you want to interpret the rule, what would be your reasoning for why this should not be allowed?


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Since you asked, I happened to have checked on this yesterday way before this thread was started. 

On Mar 7, 2016, at 8:44 AM

Russ,

How many marks must be presented prior to the first send from the retrieving line to constitute a multiple marking scenario?

Thanks


Response:
At least two. To be a triple for Masters three prior to the initial send.

Russ Reavis
303-550-2758
[email protected]
[email protected]
303-550-2758


----------



## HarryWilliams (Jan 17, 2005)

I haven't ran an AKC HT since last century. But I've gotten some enjoyment from reading this *discussion. *I do have at least a fair amount of knowledge on interpreting requirements for testing retrievers. Multiple marks means more than one mark. Could be two (a double), three (a triple), four (a quad) & so on. If you throw a mark and retrieve it. That's a single. Then if you throw another mark and retrieve it that is 2 single marks (not a double, not a multiple). In order for 2 marks to be a multiple mark, there would need to be a memory bird and a go bird. Interrupting the two marks (described in this thread) with a blind would not change it from being a multiple mark. There still is a MEMORY mark which is at the heart of the intent of multiple retrieves and there is a go bird. Memory is one of the things being tested.


----------



## HarryWilliams (Jan 17, 2005)

Splash_em said:


> Since you asked, I happened to have checked on this yesterday way before this thread was started.
> 
> On Mar 7, 2016, at 8:44 AM
> 
> ...


He answered your question BUT that does not address what is being discussed on this thread. There might be a difference from proving you are right and finding the correct answer.Harry


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

I just sent Russ an email with the entire scenario, will post reply


----------



## David Lo Buono (Apr 6, 2005)

SWIPER said:


> IMO, Single, blind, and single is NOT multiple marks


 how many "marked" birds are out in the field?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

I don't know what it is, but it ain't two singles by any stretch of the imagination. 

We call it an interrupted double. There is a memory bird and a go bird, iterupted by a blind. It is infinitely harder than the same marks ran as a traditional double. 

There are multiple marks thrown before any marks are retrieved. 

That doesn't make it legal, but acknowledge it for what it is.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Splash_em said:


> Since you asked, I happened to have checked on this yesterday way before this thread was started.
> 
> On Mar 7, 2016, at 8:44 AM
> 
> ...



The best way to ask the question would be to explain in detail the set-up and requirements. The way you posed the question adds quite an element of 'spin' to it...and does not allow for Russ to make any sort of judgement based upon the actual circumstances. Does he know that the first retrieve is a blind? Does he know two marks are thrown before the dog ever retrieves any mark?


----------



## Troy Tilleraas (Sep 24, 2010)

The dogs entered at Master level should have passed this... I believe Jerry Mann was asked this at a past judges seminar that was held-patiently awaiting an answer. Years ago it was the norm up here to watch all 3 go down, run a blind if not 1 or 2, and then pick up your triple. I can think of at least three tests that I was a participant in- and now that judge will be back with us judging in Minnesota. Better sharpen up.... I remember asking Lyle, Derek, and other pros at the time on how to handle this-TRAIN,TRAIN,TRAIN.


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I sometimes wonder what the beginning of a week following a hunt test feels like to Jerry Mann.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well Chris, that's what Jerry Mann gets paid to do.

I hope your hunch is right and Jerry provides us with his insight on this test. Clearly, there is much confusion for hunt test participants, judges, committee members, etc. A simple yes or no would speak volumes coming from the AKC Performance Events Department.

Time will tell.

Mike


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

captainjack said:


> I don't know what it is, but it ain't two singles by any stretch of the imagination.
> 
> We call it an interrupted double. There is a memory bird and a go bird, iterupted by a blind. It is infinitely harder than the same marks ran as a traditional double.
> 
> ...



Your definition of an interrupted double doesn't make sense to me.
An interrupted double would be when the dog is presented with two marks...is released to retrieve one...instructed to "leave" the other and run a blind/s...and then retrieve the remaining bird.

I would define the test as originally described as an interrupted single.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Mike Berube said:


> Well Chris, that's what Jerry Mann gets paid to do.
> 
> I hope your hunch is right and Jerry provides us with his insight on this test. Clearly, there is much confusion for hunt test participants, judges, committee members, etc. A simple yes or no would speak volumes coming from the AKC Performance Events Department.
> 
> ...


By now many people know what test it was, so I doubt if Jerry will knowingly post his opinion on a public site. If it wasn't a "legal test" I'm sure he will discuss it with the proper parties.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Mike Berube said:


> Your definition of an interrupted double doesn't make sense to me.
> An interrupted double would be when the dog is presented with two marks...is released to retrieve one...instructed to "leave" the other and run a blind/s...and then retrieve the remaining bird.
> 
> I would define the test as originally described as an interrupted single.


Two birds don't make a single IMO. So we disagree on the terminology. Not the end of he World.


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

jacduck said:


> I love how we always stick to the specific question and not stray. Popcorn?
> 
> BTW Hi Mike hope you are surviving Linda.


Some of the responses are bizarre, to say the least...hopefully AKC will clarify.

Linda and her dogs are having a great trip. She says hello.


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

Thomas D said:


> By now many people know what test it was, so I doubt if Jerry will knowingly post his opinion on a public site. If it wasn't a "legal test" I'm sure he will discuss it with the proper parties.


and the beat goes on....it is not Jerry's opinion that matters here as much as the ruling on the most basic tenant of the AKC Hunt Test (Master) Program...MULTIPLE MARKING. It's a very simple yes or no response.


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Tobias said:


> The best way to ask the question would be to explain in detail the set-up and requirements. The way you posed the question adds quite an element of 'spin' to it...and does not allow for Russ to make any sort of judgement based upon the actual circumstances. Does he know that the first retrieve is a blind? Does he know two marks are thrown before the dog ever retrieves any mark?


It's been asked exactly bird for bird and the answer still remains the same.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

OK Mike, pick nits if you want. Jerry can give his yes or no but still not on a public forum.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

hooked on quackers said:


> You posted the rule yourself .MULTIPLE Marks in every series


It's a double. If the handler had picked the first bird up before running the blind it would have been a single, blind single, but by leaving the first bird thrown till after the blind and second bird, it becomes an interrupted double, so multiple marks. It's legal and depending on bird placement could be a very challenging test worthy of a master test.


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

Thomas D said:


> OK Mike, pick nits if you want. Jerry can give his yes or no but still not on a public forum.


But Russ can have his response made public as in a previous post?


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Mike Berube said:


> But Russ can have his response made public as in a previous post?


I would imagine he didn't know it would be posted.


----------



## Billie (Sep 19, 2004)

Rainmaker said:


> Rulebook states:
> "Section 7. Master Hunting Test. Dogs shall be tested in a minimum of five hunting situations as
> follows: multiple land marks, multiple water marks, multiple marks on water and land, a land blind and a water blind (at least one that shall be a double blind in any combination). There shall be at least three series. At least one of the series shall include a walk-up. Diversion birds and/or diversion shots such as described in Chapter 3, Section 24, must be used at least once. In Master tests, in at least two multiple marking situations the dog’s marking/memory will be tested with at least (3) falls before the dog is sent to retrieve. The (3) falls must be presented before a dog is sent to retrieve any mark or blind. During a double set of marks (2 falls) Master judges shall include additional elements of testing, i.e. walkup, diversion bird, diversion shot, blind/s etc"
> 
> As long as there were two other series with triple marks that were not "interrupted", I don't see where this would be an illegal test for MH. I don't see any language in the rules prohibiting this setup. If there is something in the rulebook that would indicate this is an illegal MH setup, please provide the language.


THIS........ Thank you.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Tobias said:


> two marks were thrown before the dog was sent for them. Makes the series a multiple mark.


I replied earlier after reading just the first page or two. Now I've read through it all I can't believe how complicated people are making this. I agree with you Tobias, that scenario is a multiple mark. I don't judge hunt test so don't know if they have to have three triples vs a double and two triples, but this test would qualify as a double with a blind attached.


----------



## Tom Lehr (Sep 11, 2008)

Mike Berube said:


> and the beat goes on....it is not Jerry's opinion that matters here as much as the ruling on the most basic tenant of the AKC Hunt Test (Master) Program...MULTIPLE MARKING. It's a very simple yes or no response.


 Mike- what do you think? Is it legal and do YOU think these two marks with a blind in between make a multiple marking series?


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Splash_em said:


> Since you asked, I happened to have checked on this yesterday way before this thread was started.
> 
> On Mar 7, 2016, at 8:44 AM
> 
> ...


if that's the AKC interpretation the rule is poorly written and can not be enforced as it stands


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

From Russ 
"To clarify, a double is two birds seen before the initial retrieve. This was a single, a blind and another single. Not a legal test "
he forwarded to Jerry
From Jerry
Russ,

Same answer, the test did not meet the requirements of a “multiple marking” situation.

Thanks,

Jerry D. Mann
Field Director
Sporting Breeds

My reply was how can you say these were singles, there was a memory situation, awaiting response


----------



## Final Flight Retrievers (Jan 23, 2010)

and the plot thickens !!!!!!


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Bridget Bodine said:


> From Russ
> "To clarify, a double is two birds seen before the initial retrieve. This was a single, a blind and another single. Not a legal test "
> he forwarded to Jerry
> From Jerry
> ...


to me it's more like... how can you say this doesn't meet the rule as written? if it's not prohibited... it's allowed


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

I would think that "Being sent from the line on a retrieve" means retrieving a mark. There are 2 marks down in the field before the dog is sent to retrieve either one. The blind is totally unrelated to the marks, IMO.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

From Russ " Read Chapter 5 Section 6. A multiple marking situation is two or more birds presented prior to the dogs initial retrieve. Been this ways for years.? "


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Bridget Bodine said:


> From Russ
> "To clarify, a double is two birds seen before the initial retrieve. This was a single, a blind and another single. Not a legal test "
> he forwarded to Jerry
> From Jerry
> ...


Then the AKC has a different idea of what many retriever people consider a double (not aimed at you, Bridget, just using the rep's quote). The setup the OP describes would be called a delayed double, in my neck of the woods, maybe an interrupted double, but not singles. The rule is specific about the 2 triples, there is no question that three marks have to fall before dog is sent for any mark or blind. The rule for how doubles are to be thrown is specific in SH. The rule is not specific in that regard for MH. As the rule is written, it continues to be open to interpretation. Until the language is clarified IN THE RULEBOOK, there will be disagreement on it. Even if the rule was clarified to say marks thrown in multiples, vs multiple marks, I would still hold that this set up would be considered a double, to many people. If the rule is intended to mean that multiple marks means at least 2 marks have to be down before dog is sent for any mark or blind, then it needs to be changed to those specifics, same as the triple language. Multiple marks can be interpreted as more than one mark. I can throw a bunch of singles for my dogs and say they got multiple marks and be correct, as to the meaning of the words. "Multiple marks" does not in itself mean more than one mark thrown before dog is released for any bird. Does that make more sense as to how some read the word "multiple"? If a delayed marking scenario is not legal, then just specify it in the written rule for MH.


----------



## HarryWilliams (Jan 17, 2005)

So AKC Performance thinks a delayed triple is not. It must be a double and a single. A multiple but not a triple. HPW


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Bridget Bodine said:


> From Russ " Read Chapter 5 Section 6. A multiple marking situation is two or more birds presented prior to the dogs initial retrieve. Been this ways for years.? "


Chapter 5, Section 6 is for Senior Dogs. I don't see it referenced in Section 7, Master Dogs, as the definition of a double mark. In Section 6, it specifies for Senior tests. Still open to debate, in my opinion, since the requirements for SH and standards for MH aren't identical. 

Section 6. Senior Hunting Test. Dogs shall be tested in a minimum of four hunting situations that shall include one land blind, one water blind (that may be run as a double blind on land and water), one double land mark, and one double water mark. There shall be at least one diversion shot and at least one of the hunting situations shall include a walk-up. *In Senior tests, a double mark is defined as two marks presented before the dog is sent to retrieve. Blinds shall not be run between marks in Senior Hunting Tests.*(1) Hunting situations shall, to the extent that it is practical and realistic, make use of the natural hazards, numerous decoys, hunting equipment and obstacles that are encountered in true hunting.
(2) Dogs shall be steady on the line, but a controlled break or creeping shall result in a relatively lower score in Trainability, than a controlled break or creeping would in a Junior Hunting Test.
(3) A Senior Hunting dog must retrieve to hand. Failure to do so merits a grade of “0” in Trainability.
(4) Dogs may be sent to retrieve more than once, but only in cases of confusion as described in Chapter 4, Section 7.
(5) Dogs


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

So you have to look at Senior test requirements to find Master Test requirements?


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Thomas D said:


> So you have to look at Senior test requirements to find Master Test requirements?


Apparently.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Some appear to believe this test scenario is too easy for Master. I would note that it would not be legal in senior. And that's not because it's too easy.


----------



## Marty Lee (Mar 30, 2009)

well it seems to me if a double is "defined" in Sr then a double would be the same in Master. I have never set up"sr doubles" or "master doubles".
a double is a double regards


----------



## Mike Perry (Jun 26, 2003)




----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Marty Lee said:


> well it seems to me if a double is "defined" in Sr then a double would be the same in Master. I have never set up"sr doubles" or "master doubles".
> a double is a double regards


Bingo!! We have a winner!


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

captainjack said:


> Some appear to believe this test scenario is too easy for Master. I would note that it would not be legal in senior. And that's not because it's too easy.


Not because it is too easy, rather one of those unintended consequences of trying to be too specific about what a test should be.
As was pointed out long ago, all they had to do to make it legal was throw both marks before they run the blind! I doubt it would have changed the test that much!

It's like the poison bird rule in FTs doesn't really make sense.IMHO


----------



## Migillicutty (Jan 11, 2014)

It is beyond perplexing that anyone could consider this not a multiple mark. I agree with Darren, the rules need to be re-written if this is the intent of the rule committee, cause it most certainly is multiple, whether it meets the definition of "double" as defined in Chapter 5 or not. The Problem is the Master rules don't define it as having to be a double. It isn't a single. Last I checked 2 is multiple not singular, and there are most certainly 2 birds on the ground prior to retrieving. 

Ironically, according to the rule committee if a "double" is thrown and picked up, a diversion pop fired (satisfying the other factor requirement) and a blind run, that would be legal, but a tougher-longer memory-scenario as described by OP would not be. That sure doesn't make much sense. 

Lastly anyone think that just maybe the reason Chapter 5 states a blind can not be run in between marks is because it increases the difficulty and they are defining the rules for a senior level test?


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Migillicutty said:


> Lastly anyone think that just maybe the reason Chapter 5 states a blind can not be run in between marks is because it increases the difficulty and they are defining the rules for a senior level test?


That has not changed!! It's been there for at least the 25 years i've been running AKC hunt tests!!!


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Next time throw a "single" run a blind, throw another "single", shoot a flier and then let the dogs pick the marks up and call it a poison bird blind with a double! 

Sorry, in my mind it's an interrupted double, not a single, blind, single....but what do I know?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Doug Main said:


> That has not changed!! It's been there for at least the 25 years i've been running AKC hunt tests!!!


Ive seen big debates here and elsewhere as to whether "between" refers to location or timing. That's another can of worms.


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

captainjack said:


> Ive seen big debates here and elsewhere as to whether "between" refers to location or timing. That's another can of worms.


I asked Jerry Mann that exact question years ago at a judges seminar and he said "both!".


----------



## 2downtheshore (Feb 14, 2016)

Did you ask him why they don't clean the language up? As has been mentioned, the rule he sites has very specific limiting language, "*In Senior tests*, a double mark is defined as two marks presented before the dog is sent to retrieve. Blinds shall not be run between marks in Senior Hunting Tests." 
There should only be two inferences from that. It was intentionally limiting or it was "scrivener's error" saying "In senior tests" is simply superfluous and unnecessary words.
Given it was next to other language specific to limiting the complexity of a senior's work, one might think......

Just for thought, If you wanted to start a new Super master test and write specific more challenging rules, would one be at all limited by that definition and not be able to override it without changing the way it's now written and the section of the rules it's listed in (senior)?


----------



## SWIPER (Sep 24, 2006)

Unfortunately the reasons a true double is thrown in a master test is for lack of help, time and grounds. As a judge IMO a master test should have 3 triples that challenge the dogs and handlers. I've heard people say that that was a true hunting scenario but in a true hunting scenario you wouldn't be shooting Ducks at 150 yards that's another discussion. IMO


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Two things become immediately apparent in these types of discussions:

1. As a transactional lawyer (ie, one who stares at documents full of rules all day every day), I can make the quoted rule about two birds in master be just about anything I want it to be. There are several other provisions in the hunt test rules and the FT rules that are the same way. Query whether those rules need to be cleaned up or were left that way on purpose to leave maximum flexibility for the judges in a given situation with a given set of grounds.

2. Even if you wanted to go in and "clean up" one or both sets of rules, there is absolutely NO WAY you could cover everything. Even if you could, which side of this debate would win out? Would a "double" mean "two birds down in succession before a dog is released for either a marked or blind retrieve" or "two birds down in a setup"?

Two examples. I could certainly argue with a straight face that there is no common sense reason that the definition for a double in senior should be different that a definition for a double in master. I could also easily flip sides and say well the rules committee spoke specifically to the definition of a double in senior, so they were obviously aware of their ability to do that in the master section of the rules and they chose not to do so. Both make sense, but which one wins?

For the "this situation was not a double" folks, what does this do for the "interrupted triple" setup that seems to be pretty common for master tests? Assuming of course that you were relying on the interrupted triple setup as one of the two triples that have to be thrown per the rules cited earlier.

Please note that I have (very assiduously) avoided actually taking a position on the legality of the setup in question. My dog was at that test and having all he could handle in another master flight.


----------



## 2downtheshore (Feb 14, 2016)

Query whether those rules need to be cleaned up or were left that way on purpose to leave maximum flexibility for the judges in a given situation with a given set of grounds.

That would usually be beneficial but not when after the fact they say your "flexibility" did not satisfy the requirements. (see 85/86) Call it flexible, or ambiguous, if they always intended to make that black and white ruling, it really isn't a case of flexibility


----------



## hooked on quackers (Nov 7, 2010)

As Steve pointed out in #108 a double is defined in Senior but not in Master. Is a honor different in Senior And Master? Is a walkup different? Is handling the gun different? Is coming to the line different?


----------



## 2downtheshore (Feb 14, 2016)

"Section 3. *In Senior and Master *level tests, atleast one live flyer must be used unless the use of liveammunition is prohibited"

The rules are littered with clear level distinctions


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

hooked on quackers said:


> As Steve pointed out in #108 a double is defined in Senior but not in Master. Is a honor different in Senior And Master? Is a walkup different? Is handling the gun different? Is coming to the line different?


But blinds are handled differently between Senior and Master, you can have a controlled break in Senior but not Master and there other things mentioned in Section 7 for Master that refer to similar JH and SH sections, but the definition of a double is not one of them. There are differences. That's why JH, SH and MH each have their own section in Chapter 5. As others have said, Section 7 pertaining to Master is ambiguous in areas and can be taken several ways. There are many intelligent people reading this rule in various ways, it is obvious there is ambiguity, intentional by AKC or otherwise. If the current reps interpret it a certain way, that's their decision, there is no higher court to argue it in front of, but, that doesn't remove the fact that Section 7 as it is written in the rulebook contains some ambiguity, or there would not be these discussions.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Throw the Double, run one mark, then run the blind, then run the 2nd mark, that is an interrupted double. But the situation described in this thread, is a single, blind, single. Multiple marks refers to the number of marks presented to a dog prior to being sent on any retrieve, a blind is a retrieve. Expand this to 3 marks; dog sees a single, gets a blind, then sees a double; that is a single, blind, double. Not a true marked triple, nor an interrupted triple. An Interrupted triple would be 3 marks thrown, 1 or 2 picked up, then run a blind, pick up the last mark. The scenarios are different, very close but not the same. Just as a Momma-poppa (2 separate stations each throwing a single left and right) is different from a flower pot (1 station throwing both marks left and right). These rules, definitions, and how they are interpreted have been the same for years, it's always discussed in depth at any judging seminar, ad nausea (always the same arguments, always the same answer, the same response J. Mann sends out every-time). Now is this a legal MH test, YES it is as long as the dog has seen 2 true mulitple marking scenarios (multiple marking 2-3 throws presented prior to any retrieve) in the other 2 series, as well as 2 true triples.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

I have read this and now have a headache. One thing seems very clear. Judges put themselves in the hot seat when they accept an assignment. A big THANK YOU to all those that sit in the chair!!!! Without their dedication and sacrifice these games cease to exist.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

As an outsider looking in and soon to be on your shores ,what struck me was how many over 12 pages have an issue understanding the games they participate in. 
Respected folk within the game also appear to have an issue conveying the understanding of the games they have played in.

Perhaps the 'rules' of your game may require clarification/definition. I know one thing though ,just like our games the day after a dog has won a novice it is automatically an Open dog without any further training  so it must be the same with you guy's a competitor entering a Senior dog competing in a Master must have the ability to compete in a Master. 

Anyhow, should the dog not just go for the bird it was sent for, no matter if it's double ,triple single or blind or any combination that is set by the judges. 

I sometimes think even over here there are too many rules in text that are not realistic for what is required on the ground. 

pfft ! Some folk don't even understand what I say,never mind what I type .lol


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

polmaise said:


> pfft ! Some folk don't even understand what I say,never mind what I type .lol


If you'd quit talking with such a thick accent, we could!  I agree with you though. I think those who think this is not a legal test, do not think it is challenging enough...ei, not enough marks. Imagine said test with a momma/poppa double or 'two down the shore' as the 'supposed' singles, LOL


----------



## hooked on quackers (Nov 7, 2010)

Tobias said:


> If you'd quit talking with such a thick accent, we could!  I agree with you though. I think those who think this is not a legal test, do not think it is challenging enough...ei, not enough marks. Imagine said test with a momma/poppa double or 'two down the shore' as the 'supposed' singles, LOL


I never said anything about how hard the test was. They lost about 1/3 of the dogs so must have been hard enough. As previous posted by other people the AKC Per. Dept. thought it was an illegal test


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

fishduck said:


> I have read this and now have a headache. One thing seems very clear. Judges put themselves in the hot seat when they accept an assignment. A big THANK YOU to all those that sit in the chair!!!! Without their dedication and sacrifice these games cease to exist.


Haven't read any criticism of judges in this thread. Clearly it's split as to whether the test is legal, but I'm sure the judges weren't conspiring to have an illegal test.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Throw the Double, run one mark, then run the blind, then run the 2nd mark, that is an interrupted double. But the situation described in this thread, is a single, blind, single. Multiple marks refers to the number of marks presented to a dog prior to being sent on any retrieve, a blind is a retrieve. Expand this to 3 marks; dog sees a single, gets a blind, then sees a double; that is a single, blind, double. Not a true marked triple, nor an interrupted triple. An Interrupted triple would be 3 marks thrown, 1 or 2 picked up, then run a blind, pick up the last mark. The scenarios are different, very close but not the same. Just as a Momma-poppa (2 separate stations each throwing a single left and right) is different from a flower pot (1 station throwing both marks left and right). These rules, definitions, and how they are interpreted have been the same for years, it's always discussed in depth at any judging seminar, at nausea (always the same arguments, always the same answer, the same response J. Mann sends out every-time). Now is this a legal MH test, YES it is as long as the dog has seen 2 true mulitple marking scenarios (multiple marking 2-3 throws presented prior to any retrieve) in the other 2 series, as well as 2 true triples.


That makes no sense at all. With that logic, I could have the dog watch a bird run a blind, watch a bird, run a blind... Ten times and then pick all ten up and you say the dog em ran 10 singles because he did something in between watching each of them fall? Nope, not singles by any stretch.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

So what happens now that AKC says it isn't a legal test?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Thomas D said:


> So what happens now that AKC says it isn't a legal test?


Well the people who read rtf might not set it up when they judge.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

I don't judge hunt tests (they told me I must be an avid hunter-I'm not), but when I set up a test, I want to make sure it's safe, that the dogs can see the birds in the air and as they fall, that the handler can see the dog and the dog can see the handler. And then, for any test really, I want it to adequately test the natural and trained abilities of the dogs at the appropriate level. 

I believe a test run in the manner described can sufficiently test master level marking, memory, trainability, etc. and that's the bottom line for me.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

captainjack said:


> Well the people who read rtf might not set it up when they judge.


This debate has certainly been enlightening to me. I can't believe that was the intent of the original wording, but I guess it is what it is.


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

what most are forgetting, is the blind is a separate test from marks. You have 1 mark come out, than later another one while 1st still on the ground is multiple birds on the ground. Blind is judged separately from marks. Rules are there to help guide but should be interpreted differently in some cases.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Tobias said:


> If you'd quit talking with such a thick accent, we could!  I agree with you though. I think those who think this is not a legal test, do not think it is challenging enough...ei, not enough marks. Imagine said test with a momma/poppa double or 'two down the shore' as the 'supposed' singles, LOL


Legal part I never got (You sayin we should have Rosco P Coltrane to sort this out ?) 
YA turn up with yer' dug and ya send the dug tae the ones yae want . ..any test.! (imo) ..thems the rules .


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Do I need a shovel?


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

seriously... does the illegal test that wasn't caught by the judges or committee nullify the results or something? everyone gets a participation ribbon maybe?


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> seriously... does the illegal test that wasn't caught by the judges or committee nullify the results or something? everyone gets a participation ribbon maybe?


Yea they could. passes wouldn't count. Also both the judges and the hunt committee would be in serious trouble.


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

DarrinGreene said:


> seriously... does the illegal test that wasn't caught by the judges or committee nullify the results or something? everyone gets a participation ribbon maybe?[/QUOTE
> 
> IF it was illegal , which I say it is not, and the committee did nothing, handlers ran and did nothing than nothing happens, lesson learned, move on.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Doug Main said:


> Yea they could. passes wouldn't count. Also both the judges and the hunt committee would be in serious trouble.


Jail? ..Prison ? pelted with rotten tomatoes ?..
What is 'Serious Trouble' on your side of the pond ?
....
I have to ask 'Honestly' !! ..Who won this hunt test ? ..Was it deserved or not based on what dogs were there and how they performed on that day irrespective of what the series contained ,after all ,they all competed 'right' ?...nobody walked home before they entered ?


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Karen Klotthor said:


> DarrinGreene said:
> 
> 
> > seriously... does the illegal test that wasn't caught by the judges or committee nullify the results or something? everyone gets a participation ribbon maybe?[/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

Tom Lehr said:


> Mike- what do you think? Is it legal and do YOU think these two marks with a blind in between make a multiple marking series?


I never questioned whether it was "legal" or not. I simply asked if the test met the requirements for an AKC Master Test and I would answer all day long...ABSOLUTELY NOT. That response is based on what I learned from attending two previous AKC seminars, and multiple discussions with AKC field reps over the years. Well, the AKC has spoken, and we still have folks trying to justify "their" interpretation of the regulations. 

I hope this has cleared it up for you Tom.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Agree with Karen. Talked to AKC about the same thing. Ribbons are very rarely taken back. Happened about 15 yr ago in the Carolinas. Passes were not counted and entry fees returned by club as I recall. However I think that was a case where judges intentionally left out an element due to time or weather concerns. I wasn't there but two friends were and obviously a bunch of unhappy handlers. Travel expenses were not refunded as I recall.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

fishduck said:


> I have read this and now have a headache. One thing seems very clear. Judges put themselves in the hot seat when they accept an assignment. A big THANK YOU to all those that sit in the chair!!!! Without their dedication and sacrifice these games cease to exist.


This to the nth degree for sure.

One other thing this might point out is the need for a set of accepted definitions in the rules. As most of you probably realize, the beginning of any new endeavor is the learning of the new vocabulary that goes along with it. You still will not be able to eliminate everything that could possibly happen no matter how long and hard you try to do so, but definitions might be a really good step in the right direction.

Now, what's a double?


----------



## hooked on quackers (Nov 7, 2010)

IF it was illegal , which I say it is not, and the committee did nothing, handlers ran and did nothing than nothing happens, lesson learned, move on.[/QUOTE]

After the AKC has said it was NOT a legal test, what is your reason for thinking it is?


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

RookieTrainer said:


> Now, what's a double?


Two . Do I get a prize ?


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

polmaise said:


> Two . Do I get a prize ?


Yes, you have to watch Braveheart 5 times consecutively...my attempt at humor


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Mike Berube said:


> Yes, you have to watch Braveheart 5 times consecutively...my attempt at humor


I could play the part watched it and probably done the parts so many times . 
Makes you wonder how so many can't get yer 'Master Hunt test' understood ? ..my attempt at humor


----------



## Migillicutty (Jan 11, 2014)

RookieTrainer said:


> This to the nth degree for sure.
> 
> One other thing this might point out is the need for a set of accepted definitions in the rules. As most of you probably realize, the beginning of any new endeavor is the learning of the new vocabulary that goes along with it. You still will not be able to eliminate everything that could possibly happen no matter how long and hard you try to do so, but definitions might be a really good step in the right direction.
> 
> Now, what's a double?


Agreed and more importantly what is "multiple". Kind of curious how that would be defined, since 2 birds down before either is retrieved isn't currently.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

RookieTrainer said:


> Now, what's a double?


two shots, whiskey please.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Thomas D said:


> So what happens now that AKC says it isn't a legal test?


All the AKC rep. said was it was not a Multiple Marking test series, didn't say anything about the Entire test itself being illegal. As long as the other series, however many of them there were contained all the requirements of a AKC Master test, the test itself as a whole is legal. 

Really we can argue this forever, AKC and it's reps. instruct and are the final authority on how these things work, how the hunt test rules are to be interpreted. He has stated that this wasn't a multiple marking senario. All the Reps. instruct it exactly the same, in every judges seminar that takes place, perhaps some on here should invest in a AKC hunt test seminar, before putting their own interpretation on AKC hunt test rules. AKC can say what AKC wants, it's their test, their standard, their rules, individual interpretations on what is what do not matter, when AKC has already ruled on it.

I'll take that double shot now, but all at once; I don't want to have to wait for pouring inbtw


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Tobias said:


> two shots, whiskey please.


Well played. Make mine a Pappy 23. Dream big, right?


----------



## Furball (Feb 23, 2006)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> All the AKC rep. said was it was not a Multiple Marking test series, didn't say anything about the Entire test itself being illegal. As long as the other series, however many of them there were contained all the requirements of a AKC Master test, the test itself as a whole is legal.


This. It may not meet the requirements of at least two triples but if the other two series did have triples, then no problem. 

I did learn something from this thread. Ran a test a while back with an delayed triple -- throw one bird, run a blind, throw two more birds now pick them all up -- per the rules that is not a triple and does not satisfy the requirements of a master triple. I figured it was since three marks are on the ground before the dog is sent for a mark, but as the rule says, it is three marks on the ground before the dog is sent for any retrieve, mark OR blind.


----------



## stonybrook (Nov 18, 2005)

Here's another questionable wording issue, rule book says that there must be a water blind, a land blind and a double blind in any combination. Can you just run a water blind and a land blind as your double blind? Would you be required to run any additional blinds since you've met all 3 requirements?


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

stonybrook said:


> Here's another questionable wording issue, rule book says that there must be a water blind, a land blind and a double blind in any combination. Can you just run a water blind and a land blind as your double blind? Would you be required to run any additional blinds since you've met all 3 requirements?


No...........


----------



## Final Flight Retrievers (Jan 23, 2010)

Thomas D said:


> No...........


please explain why No .........


----------



## Scott Krueger (Jan 25, 2008)

hard to say, i have seen them "rush" a test before to finish it before the weather came. was very sad to say the least. had the right number of elements but they were junior level.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Scott Krueger said:


> hard to say, i have seen them "rush" a test before to finish it before the weather came. was very sad to say the least. had the right number of elements but they were junior level.


I think we've all seen this. It is disappointing. The test in question, IMO, does more to test the abilities of a master level dog than many tests that have the required elements".


----------



## HarryWilliams (Jan 17, 2005)

captainjack said:


> The test in question, IMO, does more to test the abilities of a master level dog than many tests that have the required elements".


So by "abilities" are you referring to acquired or natural. And if the answer is both which is being tested more.... acquired or natural? HPW


----------



## deadriver (Mar 9, 2005)

HarryWilliams said:


> So AKC Performance thinks a delayed triple is not. It must be a double and a single. A multiple but not a triple. HPW


Based on their interpretation that is the can of worms now opened....so many tests using it have failed to have the required 2 triples if the used this setup and then ran a series with a double.

AKC can rule on it, but a memory bird constitutes some forms of double when u just look at it rationally.....ergo a single can never be a memory bird by definition. That said, at least we know how akc rules it...


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Karen Klotthor said:


> what most are forgetting, is the blind is a separate test from marks. You have 1 mark come out, than later another one while 1st still on the ground is multiple birds on the ground. Blind is judged separately from marks. Rules are there to help guide but should be interpreted differently in some cases.


This is my thought marks and blinds are technically, on paper different series, there fore in series 3 the marks the dog was never sent for a bird until after both marks were down, just so happens that series 4 ran in between the throws.... ;-)


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

There you go. Voila!

In a poison bird blind, or with any kind of diversion bird, the bird thrown before the blind is not considered a mark. 

This is pretty clear in the rules.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

HarryWilliams said:


> So by "abilities" are you referring to acquired or natural. And if the answer is both which is being tested more.... acquired or natural? HPW


Both. Two marks, one blind
Line manners, delivery to hand, control on the blind...
Gonna say this test leans more toward trained abilities.

I prefer three or four good marks without interruption myself.

However, I was comparing this test (or this scenario as I didn't see this particular test) to "some tests I've seen". In which case this scenario tests more natural abilities and more trained abilities than a 2 minute triple with three bird flopped out of obvious holding blinds and laying in plain site from the line.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

mitty said:


> There you go. Voila!
> 
> In a poison bird blind, or with any kind of diversion bird, the bird thrown before the blind is not considered a mark.
> 
> This is pretty clear in the rules.


If dog watches bird go down from the line, it's scored as a mark. If it's a diversion bird as dog is coming in (or going out on a blind) it's not scored as a mark.
HRC might score differently.


----------



## djansma (Aug 26, 2004)

This just goes to show throw a bunch of master judges in a barrel shake it up and something comes out everybody sees thing a little different. the rule was changed about 2 yrs ago about all marks must be presented before the dog is sent,before this would be a legal test.Yes you can have more then 5 series they say minimum requirements


----------



## Troy Tilleraas (Sep 24, 2010)

djansma said:


> This just goes to show throw a bunch of master judges in a barrel shake it up and something comes out everybody sees thing a little different. the rule was changed about 2 yrs ago about all marks must be presented before the dog is sent,before this would be a legal test.Yes you can have more then 5 series they say minimum requirements


Folks, Rule book, The one currently used is Amended March 11,2015. Use the correct one.


----------



## djansma (Aug 26, 2004)

But before the yellow rule book you had to go to AKC board minutes to find the rule change I wish the AKC would email all affected judges the rule changes and still to this day I reread the rule book before a judging assignment to be sure 
and the wife and I have plenty of talks when we travel about rules and senerios we have seen and set up
David Jansma

i always download the rule book and have it on my iPad


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

Mike Berube said:


> One of three series. NO extenuating/mitigating circumstances.
> 
> Single mark is thrown. Judges instruct handler to "leave" mark and pick up a blind.
> 
> ...


After reading 15 pages of stuff here is my opinion...Yes this is a master test ...It just doesn't meet the requirements for one of the three marking series...call backs will be ready in a minute for the 4th series...steve s


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

steve schreiner said:


> After reading 15 pages of stuff here is my opinion...Yes this is a master test ...It just doesn't meet the requirements for one of the three marking series...call backs will be ready in a minute for the 4th series...steve s


that's an interesting idea... can you run a 2nd or 3rd series that doesn't meet requirements... cut dogs with it... then run a 4th series that does meet requirements to make the overall test "legal"? That being the case, if you have time for a few dogs to run a 4th... you can do whatever the heck you want in the 1st, 2nd or 3rd...


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

DarrinGreene said:


> that's an interesting idea... can you run a 2nd or 3rd series that doesn't meet requirements... cut dogs with it... then run a 4th series that does meet requirements to make the overall test "legal"? That being the case, if you have time for a few dogs to run a 4th... you can do whatever the heck you want in the 1st, 2nd or 3rd...


I've heard of a junior test with 6 singles. Opposite result in that at least one dog had 5 perfect marks (would normally be back at the hotel with a ribbon after 4), but failed the 6th so didn't receive a qualifying score obviously. 

The rationale was that the extra marks would give dogs a chance to improve on their score.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Have ran a MH test with 4 blinds, they put in an extra, in the last series. Also have ran separate Blind series, with call-backs making total MH series for the test 4. Also on one "weird" occasion, had to run a "single" Honoring series after dark in Senior, because the judges felt they had forgotten a requirement. I don't believe honor is "required" in senior, just something they usually do. Nothing against judges adding more series, if the feel they need to, to get answers, or make a test legal. Probably not popular but as long as they run enough series to get all the elements taken care of.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Well if this was an illegal test then there are a lot of MN Plates that need to be returned. 

/Paul


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Well if this was an illegal test then there are a lot of MN Plates that need to be returned.
> 
> /Paul


You are referring to the double/blind in the original post? If so, then I guess that answers the question!


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> ... I don't believe honor is "required" in senior, just something they usually do.


Chapter 5. Section 6(6) A dog shall be required to honor a working dog at least once, but Judges must allow greater leeway in scoring the Senior Hunting dog on its Trainability than would be allowed a Master Hunting dog.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> that's an interesting idea... can you run a 2nd or 3rd series that doesn't meet requirements... cut dogs with it... then run a 4th series that does meet requirements to make the overall test "legal"? That being the case, if you have time for a few dogs to run a 4th... you can do whatever the heck you want in the 1st, 2nd or 3rd...



But this test DID meet a requirement; the dogs ran a blind in between the 2 (ahem) single marks.

I almost fell into this trap MANY years ago. A MEATY POISON BIRD WATER BLIND sandwiched between two single marks. 

My co-judge and I had to run an extra series consisting of a double mark to satisfy the requirement. You have no idea how nervous we were that some dog with passing scores would break or fail for some other reason on that water double....

Homey don't play that game no more! -Paul


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Well if this was an illegal test then there are a lot of MN Plates that need to be returned.
> 
> /Paul


That's funny!


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

I can't believe that this has attracted so much attention.... Legal or Not, who cares....Dogs all competed on the same test... let the chips fall where they may...Isn't this all about having fun.... I think the Master National has thrown a curve ball into the "FUN" part


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

Terry Marshall said:


> I can't believe that this has attracted so much attention.... Legal or Not, who cares....Dogs all competed on the same test... let the chips fall where they may...Isn't this all about having fun.... I think the Master National has thrown a curve ball into the "FUN" part


And please tell us why it caught your attention. Who cares?...anyone who participates has an obligation to help maintain the integrity of OUR sport, yourself included.
The Master National has absolutely nothing to do with this post so try and stay on point.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

I seem to remember a single/blind combination used as a series at the MN the last time it was in region 1, but I could be mistaken.-Paul


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

paul young said:


> But this test DID meet a requirement; the dogs ran a blind in between the 2 (ahem) single marks.
> 
> I almost fell into this trap MANY years ago. A MEATY POISON BIRD WATER BLIND sandwiched between two single marks.
> 
> ...


Hadn't thought of it that way Paul.. Yep... it's just a blind... nothing "illegal" about it, in and of itself huh? As for your experience... yea... your dog passed the meaty blind.. and failed the silly double... yea... I can't imagine


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

Mike Berube said:


> And please tell us why it caught your attention. Who cares?...anyone who participates has an obligation to help maintain the integrity of OUR sport, yourself included.
> The Master National has absolutely nothing to do with this post so try and stay on point.


You're the reason I will retire from this forum TOO MUCH HATE


----------



## steve schreiner (Jun 15, 2009)

DarrinGreene said:


> that's an interesting idea... can you run a 2nd or 3rd series that doesn't meet requirements... cut dogs with it... then run a 4th series that does meet requirements to make the overall test "legal"? That being the case, if you have time for a few dogs to run a 4th... you can do whatever the heck you want in the 1st, 2nd or 3rd...


As stated this test did meet one of the requirements for the master hunter test...there is not a limit on the number of series the judges can run ...just a minimum of task the dog has to be tested on...time is always of the essence so most try to do all the requirements in 3 series though..each series needs to meet at least one point of the requirements...when I hear the question "is this test legal" the hair on the back of my neck stands up...the question should be ask " does this test meet the requirements for the master level" ....steve s 
ps:to answer the question can you cut dogs for failing a test ( even though it doesn't meet a requirement)
my opinion is yes...I can't think of a test that wouldn't contain some aspect of testing the dog in marking, trainability ...A master dog should be dropped if it couldn't do a single even though this will not me the requirements..


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

steve schreiner said:


> As stated this test did meet one of the requirements for the master hunter test...there is not a limit on the number of series the judges can run ...just a minimum of task the dog has to be tested on...time is always of the essence so most try to do all the requirements in 3 series though..each series needs to meet at least one point of the requirements...when I hear the question "is this test legal" the hair on the back of my neck stands up...the question should be ask " does this test meet the requirements for the master level" ....steve s
> ps:to answer the question can you cut dogs for failing a test ( even though it doesn't meet a requirement)
> my opinion is yes...I can't think of a test that wouldn't contain some aspect of testing the dog in marking, trainability ...A master dog should be dropped if it couldn't do a single even though this will not me the requirements..


Exactly .. Test is a test....get over the crying.


----------

