# Challenging the blind



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Anyone have a good photo that we can use for a discussion of "challenging the blind"?


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

How about any of the blinds from the recent National.....especially the 8th series with the long entry by the boat


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Don't want to get engaged in anything that might be construed as critical of existing judges, field trials, etc.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

You're right bad idea on my part


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Here's a few, don't know if they'll fit what you want.


----------



## tshuntin (Mar 22, 2003)

How's this?


----------



## tshuntin (Mar 22, 2003)

Or this if you ignore the ice.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

or what we call Betsy's Old Place, in Stowe


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Ok. Here we go. Open All Age Blind. 

Assume dogs are visible on line. 
Assume that if dogs fade to the right after ridge where road jogs to the right, the dogs are out of sight.
Assume dogs can see handlers and hear whistle. 

I have drawn the "ideal" line from mat to blind. 

What are the criteria that judges are likely to consider?
What is the corridor for the blind?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Someone remind me how to import photos from photobucket, so I can have a bigger photo


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I think the factors of the wind ,bird crates, sloping terrain,;and road will push the dogs right.

I think the corridor is between the bird crates on the right, and the small middle hay bales on the left.
I think judges will want to see the dog stay on the road as much as possible.


----------



## Erik Nilsson (Jan 16, 2011)

Ted Shih said:


> Someone remind me how to import photos from photobucket, so I can have a bigger photo


 upload photo to photo bucket
in dropdown menu of the photo left click on "IMG code"
in your message right click to paste the image code and you should be good to go


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Get the dog off the road.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 14, 2008)

I would expect the big dogs to want to go left not right. Keep them on the road, going off wont kill you but you better handle. Keep them to the right of the middle hay bale or I think you're done.
Walt


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

For reference, that blind is approx 300 yards. It is 345 yards if all the way to the treeline.

I agree with Walt, keep to right of hay bale, on the road til that point. For me, the big tree on the right would give me my visual corridor, going that far right after the hay bale would be trouble most likely.

I want to see dog take road if that's the line (some won't), get off road at the hay bale and continue straight without a battle to keep dog from taking the road further right or fading right with the wind.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Ted Shih said:


> Ok. Here we go. Open All Age Blind.
> 
> Assume dogs are visible on line.
> Assume that if dogs fade to the right after ridge where road jogs to the right, the dogs are out of sight.
> ...


Criteria: sun, wind, road and terrain or anything that suctions a dog (like a previous run mark nearby).
Corridor: Keep your dog on line suggested. Don't avoid any hazards. Take the instructions the judges set down.


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

I agree with Rainmaker about the line. Thank you Ted for starting this post. But Ted since you set up the blind at the end tell us the three parts of the blind (beginning, middle, end) that you as a judge are looking for. This is the hardest thing for me to determine what the judges want from the blind. Finding corridor is usually easy but the rest???


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

This one is a little trickier that it might look, with the disclaimer that I don’t really have an AA dog. Hill fades to left and the wind from that direction isn't the factor it might be further out from the line. Crate of birds on the right for suction that way. Lots of dogs are suspicious of running directly to an obvious road after being trained not to. A good initial line is going to be a challenge. For me, the first meaty part of that blind is the dog fighting the factors and taking a good line to where the road straightens toward the haybale. From there, the "middle" would be keeping dog on the road, or at least right of the bale, out to the haybale, away from the bird crates. At the crest of that little ridge, where the road goes right, I would likely stop the dog and give it a strong, possibly vocal, left back, assuming the dog is where I hope it is. Letting the dog go right at that point is trouble visually. Going left of the bale isn’t challenging that particular factor. Past the tree, it is going to be distance and wind at the end of the blind. You don’t want the dog getting to the right of that further bale out there and getting out of sight, but you want the dog downwind of the bird when it gets there.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Imust be looking at it wrong! Imagine that!

Kim says hill slopes LEFT???

Terrian looks to me to slope to the RIGHT all the way to the bird.

The wind is blowing to the RIGHT also.

The bird crates (suction) is RIGHT also.

Seems to me dogs go right.

The topic of the thread is Challenging the blind.

To challenge it, the judge has shown you his perfect line. It is right down the middle of the road. I would think you had better keep that dog on it, or very close to it to challenge it.

I dont want my dog right. I will then have to casrt into the wind to get him back on line..

Difficult blind right at the start.. many dogs wont want to stay in the road.. Remember,, Teds topic is CHALLENGING the blind.
Gooser


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Here is photo - full size - I hope. In deciding what the corridor for the blind is, it is useful to consider what a judge's book will look like. That is, what features of this photo are going to make it into the judges' diagram?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Here are the features that I would have in my judges' book


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Someone remind me how to import photos from photobucket, so I can have a bigger photo


Ted, you don't need to import from photobucket. Once you post your dinky pic on RTF, click it until it opens big. When it opens big, copy the URL from your address bar.

Now go to your post and click "Edit". Then click the insert picture icon, and select "from URL". Paste the URL that you already copied into that field. Uncheck the box. It will post your picture big. 

I already did it in your post....


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Now tell me what the overriding hazard of this blind is. I am off to walk the puppy.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 14, 2008)

We train to angle across roads, not run down them. We run at small stand out objects all the time to complete our blinds. We do a lot of keyhole blinds through 2 hay bales. That's why I think the dogs will be thinking left, all those pictures point left. 
I doubt there would be any special instructions from the judges on this blind, why box yourself in. 
One thing for sure, the initial line on this blind would be tough, at least for me. But that's what good judges want to see, you handling your dog.
Walt


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> Terrian looks to me to slope to the RIGHT all the way to the bird.



For purposes of discussion, assume hill fades downhill to the right


----------



## wetdog (May 2, 2010)

I am still learnin, so don't have a suggestion, except thanks to Ted. I have never thought about how to picture a blind based upon what is going to be on the judges notebook. A VERY good hint for me in the future. I will hazard a guess to Ted's question on the over riding hazard and that to me would be keeping the dog on the road for the length indicated from the photo. For me it is hard to get a dog to run down a road for any distance.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Get the dog off the road.


Thats the trick to this blind....

/Paul


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

The line to the blind is the line to the blind. Stay on the red. You already numbered the hazards. 

/Paul


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Sorry Gooser, the terrain out to the blind slopes left to right in general, yes, just that the mat is on a fairly sharp little hill that also fades left, which is why an initial line there is tricky, suction all kinds of ways. I shouldn't have posted, since I have run from there and know the grounds, so "see" more than what's in the photo.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

I think there is too much micro-managing of the dog's progression with most of the comments. I set-up to run the blind by lining my dog at the inside left edge of the bird crate, that gives me enough room to make a pleasing left back cast if the dog is on line & enables a continuation of the dog's momentum. I'm not particularly concerned about being on the road directly (& most dogs are trained to not run a road so that attempt would make the blind choppy (ping-pong) for most dogs. During the first 1/3 or the blind, I see a little more leeway on the left side of the road than most have indicated. So my first 1/3 of the blind parameters are inside the bird crate on the right & almost to the first hay bale on the left). With a crosswind from the left as indicated I will want to keep the dog a little left of center anyway to compensate for what casts I'll likely get when casting into the wind. By mid-blind, I want the dog right of the middle hay bale but not much right of the road as a right parameter. Then as the dog gets past the middle haybale my concern will be for the dog's tendency to hold onto the road as it curves (especially with the cross-wind from left) so the road right edge becomes my right parameter at that point. From there with minimal casts, the dogs momentum should enable the dog to carry its line directly toward the blind. If the dog is slightly up wind as it approaches the blind, I would stop the dog and cast slightly downwind which should not be too challenging given the cross-wind so that the dog winds the bird from just right of the blind.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Now tell me what the overriding hazard of this blind is. I am off to walk the puppy.


I think that overiding hazzard is the road, and how well you keep the dog on line. Dog wont want to run down it. (Road)
Keep the dog on the road till hay bale #5.. 
There you said (intitial assumptions,) where road curves right,, that hill that falls to the right,, the dogs will be out of site.
THATS the big hazzard.IMHO

Gooser


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 14, 2008)

Granddaddy said:


> I think there is too much micro-managing of the dog's progression with most of the comments. I set-up to run the blind by lining my dog at the inside left edge of the bird crate, that gives me enough room to make a pleasing left back cast if the dog is on line & enables a continuation of the dog's momentum. I'm not particularly concerned about being on the road directly (& most dogs are trained to not run a road so that attempt would make the blind choppy (ping-pong) for most dogs. During the first 1/3 or the blind, I see a little more leeway on the left side of the road than most have indicated. So my first 1/3 of the blind parameters are inside the bird crate on the right & almost to the first hay bale on the left). With a crosswind from the left as indicated I will want to keep the dog a little left of center anyway to compensate for what casts I'll likely get when casting into the wind. By mid-blind, I want the dog right of the middle hay bale but not much right of the road as a right parameter. Then as the dog gets past the middle haybale my concern will be for the dog's tendency to hold onto the road as it curves (especially with the cross-wind from left) so the road right edge becomes my right parameter at that point. From there with minimal casts, the dogs momentum should enable the dog to carry its line directly toward the blind. If the dog is slightly up wind as it approaches the blind, I would stop the dog and cast slightly downwind which should not be too challenging given the cross-wind so that the dog winds the bird from just right of the blind.


I can't put my dog that close to the bird crate, she turns strong to the right on a whistle sit. My main concern running this blind is, what am I putting in her head getting her down the road? For us, that's when the right hand factors become the issue. And the left side of the road is where I am looking as well, for that part of the blind.
Walt


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

My thinking is that my dogs will maintain a line past the crate before being casted. We all have certain querks we have to deal with with individual dogs. A loupy sit could be one of those that helps or hurts depending upon a right or left turner. Most of my dogs are left turners. My one dog that turns right reliably , sits on a dime so there is little concerned for that in this blind for me.

I didn't say in the first post that I like this blind. It has defined parameters & most of all enables a handler to maintain a dog's momentum with minimal casts which will yield a straighter, more aesthetically pleasing line in most cases.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> I think there is too much micro-managing of the dog's progression with most of the comments. I set-up to run the blind by lining my dog at the inside left edge of the bird crate, that gives me enough room to make a pleasing left back cast if the dog is on line & enables a continuation of the dog's momentum. I'm not particularly concerned about being on the road directly (& most dogs are trained to not run a road so that attempt would make the blind choppy (ping-pong) for most dogs. During the first 1/3 or the blind, I see a little more leeway on the left side of the road than most have indicated. So my first 1/3 of the blind parameters are inside the bird crate on the right & almost to the first hay bale on the left). With a crosswind from the left as indicated I will want to keep the dog a little left of center anyway to compensate for what casts I'll likely get when casting into the wind. By mid-blind, I want the dog right of the middle hay bale but not much right of the road as a right parameter. Then as the dog gets past the middle haybale my concern will be for the dog's tendency to hold onto the road as it curves (especially with the cross-wind from left) so the road right edge becomes my right parameter at that point. From there with minimal casts, the dogs momentum should enable the dog to carry its line directly toward the blind. If the dog is slightly up wind as it approaches the blind, I would stop the dog and cast slightly downwind which should not be too challenging given the cross-wind so that the dog winds the bird from just right of the blind.


Yes, I would line up towards bird crates, but I don't think I'd let dog get as far left as bale #4. I would not hammer them to keep them exactly on the road if they were running close enough parallel to it. I would like my dog somewhere between 1 & 2 out to bale #5.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Depends on the dog. Some dogs will avoid the road, others will stick to it. Either way you have work to do. Obvious issue is getting them off the road at the big turn in the distance, especially since its out of sight. Would be a tough blind for a wind save at the end due to the hay bail being in the way. 

/Paul


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Rainmaker said:


> Yes, I would line up towards bird crates, *but I don't think I'd let dog get as far left as bale #4*. I would not hammer them to keep them exactly on the road if they were running close enough parallel to it. I would like my dog somewhere between 1 & 2 out to bale #5.


Me either, "almost" but not as far as bale #4 (maybe 2/3 of the way from the road). This would set-up a better angle for a right back to get to the right of bale #5)


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

In my experience, dogs do not want to run on the road. So, to me, as a judge - or as a competitor - it would be important to me that the dogs run at least a section of the road.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

*Some tendencies...*









This is a placemarker, to be edited and worked upon over the coming couple hours.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> Me either, "almost" but not as far as bale #4 (maybe 2/3 of the way from the road).


Yes, and good points to remember about the wind/future casting directions. It sounds so simple but is something one really has to work on and cement in their head so it becomes good, fast decision making when at the line.


----------



## Kyle B (May 5, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> In my experience, dogs do not want to run on the road. So, to me, as a judge - or as a competitor - it would be important to me that the dogs run at least a section of the road.


Roads are fun and I've seen the best dogs in the country get on a road and not think twice about it! 

I doubt I would get too caught up with the road as either a judge or a competitor, seems a little nit-picky (was the dog in the right or left wheel track?). Likely considerations would be a smooth blind (ping-ponging would not be smooth) between 2, 5, 7 and finish hopefully to the left of 8, but that may not be as big a deal because of the distance and other factors considered.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

I would think that if you line your dog toward the crate then cast left back & then maintain a line toward the right side of bale#5, the dog would spend some time on the road between those points & again as it lines past bale#5. To focus on your dog actually running on the road will result in excessive whistles & a choppy ping-pong line (given that dogs are trained not to run down a road). As a judge, I am more likely to judge a ping-ponging down the road with excessive whistles as poor handling and demoinstration of a dog not carrying a line than a dog that maintains momentum while crossing the road at a very narrow angle between the crate and bale #4 & then again between bale #4 & bale #5. I'll take my chances against the other dogs & bet my line will be more acceptable relative to the competition.


----------



## Aaron Homburg (Sep 23, 2005)

*IMHO someone who lines the dog towards the crate or lines the dog towards the shrub 5 is not challenging the blind. I could see folks lining at 5 one whistle top of the hill, right hand straight up and your to the blind theoretically. Lining at the crate past the crate by the road one whistle back to the blind. Neither one of those 2 run the dogs on the road so in my mind don't challenge the blind.

Aaron *


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Aaron Homburg said:


> *IMHO someone who lines the dog towards the crate or lines the dog towards the shrub 5 is not challenging the blind. I could see folks lining at 5 one whistle top of the hill, right hand straight up and your to the blind theoretically. Lining at the crate past the crate by the road one whistle back to the blind. Neither one of those 2 run the dogs on the road so in my mind don't challenge the blind.
> 
> Aaron *


You have to give your dog room to cast (the #1 amateur handling issue, IMO). With the hazards as they are, most dogs will not carry a line down the road with an initial line. This has to be anticiplated. The left edge of the crate is not out of the corridor, IMO. But consider too that some dogs (most of mine) will natually flare a crate which also sets up an aesthetically pleasing cast if necessary. Remember, it is much easier to cast a way from a hazard than between a boundary parameter and a hazard. Sure a straight line is the best theoretically but is not practical. And you don't win trials on a land blind..........


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Bird crates may pose a problem and the wind - your dog may fade more towards the crate. Keeping the dog as true to the line as I can b/c if he does get to the crate he may go into hunt mode. Later in the blind you have to keep him between the bales out there. Often HRC training we ran to the bales for a blind.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Judging is a subjective matter. However, I think that there is a significant section of road in this blind to be negotiated. So, I think a dog had best run at least a section of it. 

Can dogs look choppy doing so? Absolutely.
But, dogs can look choppy on a long land entry water blind where they run on dirt a long way with water on their shoulder, before entering the water.
This is the Open. Just like I think a dog should be able to run on dirt a long way before getting into the water, I think a dog should be able to negotiate a section of road.

But, as I said .... that's just me


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Everything is relative.........


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I think that prominent hazard of this blind is having the dogs fall off the hillside and fading with the wind as the road disappears. See diagram

​


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Granddaddy said:


> Everything is relative.........



I have already said as much. But, if you are running the Open under me and don't get a section of the road, don't be surprised if you are dropped


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Aaron Homburg said:


> *IMHO someone who lines the dog towards the crate or lines the dog towards the shrub 5 is not challenging the blind. I could see folks lining at 5 one whistle top of the hill, right hand straight up and your to the blind theoretically. Lining at the crate past the crate by the road one whistle back to the blind. Neither one of those 2 run the dogs on the road so in my mind don't challenge the blind.
> 
> Aaron *


I'm not trying to line my dog to the crate, but I think my dog is going to fade left and I would try pointing her somewhere between #3 and the left side of the crate vs aiming her straight at the road. If she doesn't flare the crate or start fading towards the bales as I expect, then by #3, I still have enough room/time to stop her and cast left, to hopefully get her on the road. I don't like overly false lining a dog but do consider the factors for that dog, see what the other dogs are doing, etc. Maybe dogs are fading right hard, so I'd line her more towards bale #5 initially. But by #3, she needs to be pretty near or in a good position to put her on the road, or try to.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Here is generally how I view the corridor of the blind.


----------



## Kyle B (May 5, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> But, if you are running the Open under me and don't get a section of the road, don't be surprised if you are dropped


Fair enough and that's good to know if you are running an Open under Ted and he puts a road online, hopefully his co-judge agrees with him or that could be fun to watch.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I think a good Open dog should:
1. Get the first piece of grass (marker 1)
2. Be left of the bird crates (marker 2)
3. Get a section (note that I have never said all) of the road (marker 3)
4. Be right of marker 5
5. If you are wide left of markers 4 and 6 or wide right of markers 2 and 7, you are flirting with disaster
6. Being tight to marker 8 will earn you a gold star, but is not essential


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Kyle B said:


> Fair enough and that's good to know if you are running an Open under Ted and he puts a road online, hopefully his co-judge agrees with him or that could be fun to watch.



Obviously, any test is the product of two judges

When my co-judge agrees, I like to put a diagram in the holding blind, so that people know what the criteria for the blind are. I typically copy a sheet from my judging book and say : "This is the ideal line to the judge. However, callbacks are a function of both relative and cumulative work. Good luck!"


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

If you were inclined to include a poison bird in this blind, where would you place it and why?


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Here's how I picture a good run at this blind, with no direct attempt to run down the road (i.e., time on the road is a function of the line taken, therefore not eh focus):


----------



## Kyle B (May 5, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> Obviously, any test is the product of two judges
> 
> When my co-judge agrees, I like to put a diagram in the holding blind, so that people know what the criteria for the blind are. I typically copy a sheet from my judging book and say : "This is the ideal line to the judge. However, callbacks are a function of both relative and cumulative work. Good luck!"


With the exception of your almost absolute thoughts on the road, I generally agree with what you are saying. What I really think the pitfalls are for an Amateur on this blind is to get caught up with "the road" and hack this blind up and get dropped because of it. I would expect most dogs that are left or right of the road that for some reason get casts toward it will either cross it or head down the highway. If you are running a good line and the dog is cast towards the road and basically "bounces off the road", that could be judged as a cast refusal (do you go for 2?). 

Another possible topic to discuss would be whether crossing the road once and then running a tight parallal line down the road be good or should we burn some more casts crossing it again in an attempt to catch a bigger piece of it?


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Here's the response when things don't go exactly right but a blind that will still easily meet the criteria. Things could get progressively worse with more casts due to squaring the road which could eventually lead to a very choppy blind if the intial cast is not set-up & anticipated:


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> If you were inclined to include a poison bird in this blind, where would you place it and why?


Two obvious ones to me would be at bale #4, left to right, towards the line, though it isn't a great distance from the mat, there is suction with the wind direction. Another one would be somewhere around #7, thrown right to left. Really have to keep the dog from disappearing to the right then, adds a lot more suction for them to want to do so, and that far out, yowza.


----------



## John Montenieri (Jul 6, 2009)

Ted Shih said:


> If you were inclined to include a poison bird in this blind, where would you place it and why?


Plan A: Put the bird upwind, angle back throw, left to right, gunner left of #4 throwing up the hill towards #6. Gunner placement would be halfway between 4 & 6 with the bird landing left of 6. With the dog being downwind as it passes the poison bird, any over casts to the right would push the dog in a bad position. 

Plan B: I would put a poison bird right #7 so that the gunner would be visible as the dog leaves the line as well as crests the hill. A right to left throw such that the bird placement would be about where the bale(?) is right of #7 and angled across the road. Any dog that hooks right behind #7 would have a difficult time recovering.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Kyle B said:


> With the exception of your almost absolute thoughts on the road, I generally agree with what you are saying. What I really think the pitfalls are for an Amateur on this blind is to get caught up with "the road" and hack this blind up and get dropped because of it. I would expect most dogs that are left or right of the road that for some reason get casts toward it will either cross it or head down the highway. If you are running a good line and the dog is cast towards the road and basically "bounces off the road", that could be judged as a cast refusal (do you go for 2?).
> 
> Another possible topic to discuss would be whether crossing the road once and then running a tight parallal line down the road be good or should we burn some more casts crossing it again in an attempt to catch a bigger piece of it?


Kyle, using your idea & Ted's corridor, how would this blind be judged?


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Still trying to get an opinion on an acceptable blind but will give a general comment about poison birds (if you ever run under me as judge). I will never use a poison bird further than approx. 150 yds from the line because I strongly believe at distance a dog should honor his nose. And I will not purposely disadvantage a stylish, quick dog (distance causes a delay in a dog's response to the whistle & as well can erode control). So never plan B IMO......


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

> Kyle, using your idea & Ted's corridor, how would this blind be judged?


I think it looks like a good blind, but according to Ted's views on the road, you're likely out.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Charles C. said:


> I think it looks like a good blind, but according to Ted's views on the road, you're likely out.


But how does Ted throw me out when I remain within his corridor for the full length of the blind? That's the conflict I see between his corridor & comments. I understand what I would prefer as a judge but also what I likely will get.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> Still trying to get an opinion on an acceptable blind but will give a general comment about poison birds (if you ever run under me as judge). I will never use a poison bird further than approx. 150 yds from the line because I strongly believe at distance a dog should honor his nose. And I will not purposely disadvantage a stylish, quick dog (distance causes a delay in a dog's response to the whistle & as well can erode control). So never plan B IMO......


I don't like the blind you drew, because, while it may be in the corridor, it seems to be a deliberate attempt to avoid a factor, the road, IMO. It doesn't appear to challenge _the judges' _intent of the blind.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Rainmaker said:


> I don't like the blind you drew, because, while it may be in the corridor, it seems to be a deliberate attempt to avoid a factor, the road, IMO. It doesn't appear to challenge the intent of the blind.


That's why I drew it that way.....i.e., in the corridor but not what a judge might prefer. But not a deliberate attempt to miss the road (see left cast, just relatively poor timing and not getting exact casts desired - a common problem).


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

I think the first one you drew was pretty decent. I don't know if that last one would get you thrown out necessarily, would be better than a choppy, hackjob, IMO, but I think it misses what looks like an obvious factor for the judges.


----------



## Kyle B (May 5, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> That's why I drew it that way.....i.e., in the corridor but not what a judge might prefer. But not a deliberate attempt to miss the road (see left cast, just relatively poor timing and not getting exact casts desired - a common problem).


Agree, probably should have blown the whistle sooner....but it would carry (unless my co-judge or I (which I try to never ever do) made some type of abosolute statement aloud or posted it in the blind about the road).


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

But isn't the road kind of an unnecessary factor? What are we trying to accomplish with these blinds?


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Charles C. said:


> But isn't the road kind of an unnecessary factor? What are we trying to accomplish with these blinds?


I dont think so!

It is a great example of a judge setting up a blind that tests where a dog doesnt want to go. The dog wont want to stay in the road.

The STRAIGHT line to the bird,,is the line Ted drew originally. Dont you have to CHALLENGE that?

Grandaddy has TONS more experience than I do,, but in his acceptable drawing,, I think his second whistle was WAY late, The handler let the dog get off line. He was NOT CHALLENGING the direct line to the bird??
Gooser


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

MooseGooser said:


> I dont think so!
> 
> It is a great example of a judge setting up a blind that tests where a dog doesnt want to go. The dog wont want to stay in the road.
> 
> ...


Should have labled the drawings, referring to the first that I offered, the primary issue the road presents, IMO, is that it baits the handler to give it a primary focus. If you make the road the primary focus, IMO, the handler will likely be faced with an eventual cast that will be very difficult to complete successfully because you haven't given't the dog enough room (movement to one side of the corridor) to effectively accomplish a correction. The result will be another cast to correct the first one & on & on with the dog ping-ponging down the road. In the first example I presented, the road is not the focus but nonetheless the dog runs a considerable length of it going from the right side of the road to the left side between the crates and bale #5. And by allowing the dog's initial line right of the perfect line to the blind, you set-up an aesthetically pleasing actual line with few casts & the ability to accomplish the correcting cast required that should meet the criteria of even the most demanding judges.

My second drawing should be acceptable too but is what happens when you don't get what you want ideally. The 3rd drawing was intended to get Ted to commit (or others) to discuss the acceptable corridor versus hazard critieria & importance.


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

MooseGooser said:


> I dont think so!
> 
> It is a great example of a judge setting up a blind that tests where a dog doesnt want to go. The dog wont want to stay in the road.
> 
> ...


Yeah, but why doesn't the dog want to go there? Is it because it's well trained? The dog can be only a few feet off line and miss the road. Shouldn't a dog be able to be within an acceptable corridor and have a nice blind without hitting an arbitrary factor?


----------



## Gerard Rozas (Jan 7, 2003)

Ted,
The first thing that stuck out to me when I looked at your blind

It would be interesting to move the line a few yards to the left because 

1. They would have to cross the road twice. 
2. Looks like some higher cover right at the bottom of the hill. 
3. The angles when they first meet the roads are more obtuse and more interesting than square angles.
4. This would also tighten up the corridor while still being fair to dog and handler.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I think a good Open dog should:
> 1. Get the first piece of grass (marker 1)
> 2. Be left of the bird crates (marker 2)
> 3. Get a section (note that I have never said all) of the road (marker 3)
> ...


Being a late arrival to the discussion and not having read much of the narrative I concur with Ted's assessment and would view the blind similarly. That being said a good blind requires some of the following elements:
1. a line more or less in the direction of the blind
2. appropriate course corrections but not excessive ones to negotiate the hazards
3. hit all the obstacles (a function of being on line)
4. the performance should be smooth and pleasing to watch
5. everything in judging is viewed as a relative comparison of work 

I would much prefer smooth and pleasing to over emphasizing an obstacle which tends to make the blind hacky and unpleasant to watch. The road is certainly a portion of this blind and roads can be interesting because for some reason (probably our training) most dogs do not like to run down roads and tend to over correct to one side or the other and sometimes both sides. When judging remember to view the blind in it's entirety and do not focus on any single component so long as that component is negotiated satisfactorily. While the practice of evaluating blinds by some is pass/fail I think at some point you must compare the work of the potential placing dogs, dog to dog and bird to bird to arrive at a correct conclusion as to their relative merits.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Charles C. said:


> Yeah, but why doesn't the dog want to go there? Is it because it's well trained? The dog can be only a few feet off line and miss the road. Shouldn't a dog be able to be within an acceptable corridor and have a nice blind without hitting an arbitrary factor?


With some judges yes, with some judges no, depends on what the other dogs do as well, know your dog, know your judges preferences or listen carefully when they speak. As a contestant I intensely dislike mystery places in blinds, places that if your dog goes there you are automatically eliminated without ever having had an idea what the judges were looking at so when judging I tend to verbalize what I expect if it is vague (which rarely happens) but some tend to over or under analyze line to the blind. If the obstacle is a big point of land online to a water blind I think it is self explanatory that the land is a part of the blind but if the point is subtle or just a variation in shore contour a little advice from the judge like "all four feet dry" makes everyone play by the same rules and if you miss that portion of the blind you should be prepared to be dropped. The same can be said of obstacles on land blinds, if the blind is planted in such a manner that the line to the blind is over or through that hazard it probably means something and good handlers will do the blind as planted rather than challenging the judges as to their criteria.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

OK Ed, but that assumes that we can always put our dogs where we want them. In post 60, I drew a blind that met Ted's corridor criteria yet only intersected the road when crossed near bale #5. Would you consider that an acceptable blind or is running for some distance along the road a criteria within the corridor that has a greater significance than the corridor itself & the control demonstrated. And what if a dog ran the road at its nearest position to the line but then cast outside the corridor? Just trying to get a sense of how some view relative importance...


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

I don't like tests that reward a dog for contrary behavior such as running down a road or path.... So given this setup I would have shifted the line slightly to the left. and the bird to the slightly right and angled across the road, or, the line to the right and the bird to the left and parallel the roadway. Few if any of the rest of the factors shown would be adversely affected in doing so.

john


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Granddaddy said:


> OK Ed, but that assumes that we can always put our dogs where we want them. In post 60, I drew a blind that met Ted's corridor criteria yet only intersected the road when crossed near bale #5. Would you consider that an acceptable blind or is running for some distance along the road a criteria within the corridor that has a greater significance than the corridor itself & the control demonstrated. And what if a dog ran the road at its nearest position to the line but then cast outside the corridor? Just trying to get a sense of how some view relative importance...


Your blind as shown is definitely acceptable, if I had been running your dog I would have cast a bit sooner when it was evident that it was likely to miss the road to the right, I certainly would not drop you for that blind but it might make a difference if the final placements all other things being equal (which they probably would not be).

I very much agree that dogs do not always go where we want them to go or cast cast them to go so as handlers it is incumbent on us to make appropriate corrections. If there is an obvious hazard in a blind I do not think it is enough to try and get the hazard I think you must get the hazard or you have run a different blind than others have run.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

This is an off tangent question. The corridor as drawn is diverging lines(blue) with more area available on either side of the ideal line (red) as the blind nears completion. At the very end, the dog could be many yards downwind and still be in the corridor. An over from the right hand side at the end is neither pleasing to the eye or acceptable work. So at some point in the blind the corridor changes and the lines begin to converge. When does the corridor start to tighten?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I am training and it is hard to post with fingertip typing. Here are my general thoughts:

1. I don't like mystery criteria.
2. I don't like when judges announce criteria and then do not enforce them.

I, as the judge in this hypothetical Open, went to the trouble to tell the handlers what the criteria for the blind were.

Some handlers elected to ignore my stated criteria on the grounds that attempting to deliver what I wanted would make the blind less pleasing.

Is there really any mystery as to what is going to happen?


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Is there really any mystery as to what is going to happen?


Only perhaps if someone did not know you and fellow competitors did not choose to enlighten them...


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

fishduck said:


> This is an off tangent question. The corridor as drawn is diverging lines(blue) with more area available on either side of the ideal line (red) as the blind nears completion. At the very end, the dog could be many yards downwind and still be in the corridor. An over from the right hand side at the end is neither pleasing to the eye or acceptable work. So at some point in the blind the corridor changes and the lines begin to converge. When does the corridor start to tighten?



for me - generally speaking - the corridor gets wider as the dog gets farther away and control is diminished. Other people view the corridor as you do - shaped like a football


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

john fallon said:


> I don't like tests that reward a dog for contrary behavior such as running down a road or path.... So given this setup I would have shifted the line slightly to the left. and the bird to the slightly right and angled across the road, or, the line to the right and the bird to the left and parallel the roadway. Few if any of the rest of the factors shown would be adversely affected in doing so.
> 
> john



this is the open. There is no black and white. Only very subtle shades of grey.

A staple of Opens across the country is the long land entry shallow angle water blind - where the dog must run very close to the water without entering for a long distance.

It is the Open. A dog that wins an Open should run straight and cast.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> for me - generally speaking - the corridor gets wider as the dog gets farther away and control is diminished. Other people view the corridor as you do - shaped like a football


Thank you for your insightfull answer. My experience is mostly with hunt test blinds and a football corridor is more the norm. At 300+ yards instead of 100 many things are different.


----------



## Kyle B (May 5, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> Is there really any mystery as to what is going to happen?


I seriously doubt it, but I bet someone asks you to take another look at a page or two. Have fun training!

One of the funniest things I ever heard was an Open judge describing his parameters of an Open water blind before test dog ran. Very long difficult blind, mutliple points, angle entry, etc. In his description, he described this thin piece of cover that was at the waters edge that was probably 150-175 yards from the mat and how it was online (which was followed with continual discussion (mainly by Amateurs) of how it was online and an absolute for running this blind). After about half of the dogs had run the blind, most either pickups are complete failures, a very prominent pro comes up to me and says (with a big grin on his face) "How important do you think that little piece of cover is now?". "Mystery Criteria" is everyone's enemy, but you can weight the deck to later dogs when you are very explicit about instructions and what is and isn't online.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I was judging an Open in California. Told the handlers - verbally (I now put all such instructions in writing, so that there is no confusion, or advantage for the pros who come to the line often and are able to decipher what the judges want without instructions). 

I told the handlers "do not enter the water until after you pass the log"

Dog 55 entered the water early. It was dropped. Marshal comes up and says Dog 55 wants to know why he was dropped. I say "he got in water before log."

Marshal returns and says "He thought that was why he was dropped."


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Granddaddy said:


> But how does Ted throw me out when I remain within his corridor for the full length of the blind? That's the conflict I see between his corridor & comments. I understand what I would prefer as a judge but also what I likely will get.


The judge would have to be specific-like Ted says you have to take a portion of the road-it is not just his corridor but maybe some terrain etc you have to travel on in the corridor?!


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

By the way thanks for starting this discussion, it was great. Even though I did not participate in the discussion I read every post with interest. Thanks again Ted. Wish we could see more of this.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> this is the open. *There is no black and white*.* Only very subtle shades of grey.*
> 
> A staple of Opens across the country is the long land entry shallow angle water blind - where the dog must run very close to the water without entering for a long distance.
> 
> It is the Open. A dog that wins an Open should run straight and cast.


I dislike the ambiguity of the "grey" blind, where no one knows for sure but the Judges. I much prefer your ""do not enter the water until after you pass the log" blind........

john


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Mary Lynn Metras said:


> The judge would have to be specific-like Ted says you have to take a portion of the road-it is not just his corridor but maybe some terrain etc you have to travel on in the corridor?!


...........but shouldn't the relative merits of the field dictate what "had" to be taken?

john


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> I have already said as much. But, if you are running the Open under me and don't get a section of the road, don't be surprised if you are dropped


So you are saying that your standard is higher for the open?


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> Here's how I picture a good run at this blind, with no direct attempt to run down the road (i.e., time on the road is a function of the line taken, therefore not eh focus):


David, why would you false line your dog at the crate? Why not have faith in your well oiled machince and line her up straight down the target line?


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

Wade said:


> So you are saying that your standard is higher for the open?


Don't you think it _should_ be?

Evan


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Wade said:


> David, why would you false line your dog at the crate? Why not have faith in your well oiled machince and line her up straight down the target line?


Who said he false lined him? Maybe the dog took that line and the handler decided that it was close enough to the line and did not handle?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Wade said:


> So you are saying that your standard is higher for the open?



Of course it is. A pro with 10-15 dogs, 8 of which are Field Champions is going to eat this blind up.

Despite what others have written, I am pretty confident that the good pros are going to be able to negotiate the road with style.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

john fallon said:


> ...........but shouldn't the relative merits of the field dictate what "had" to be taken?
> 
> john


Yes but if the judge were to point out specifics he wanted taken in the corridor then take them just don't ride in the corridor. The corridor to me is a guide. Nice the judge gave it. Otherwise I use mine.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Wade said:


> David, why would you false line your dog at the crate? Why not have faith in your well oiled machince and line her up straight down the target line?


I can answer that in several ways, 1) I want to make sure that the dog stays between the crate & bale#4 & my dog turns left, 2) I think a dog has to be enough off line to obtain a good cast (stop & cast too soon or too close to the road & you will likely require another cast for the over-correction) & with the road hazard I'm thinking my dog (most dogs) would prefer to parellel the road closely rather than run on the road), 3) in my first picture example, my dog ran a considerable distance down the road which should satisfy even the most demanding but reasonable judges & 4) the excellent is the enemy of the good when it comes to blinds, IMO.

And one more thing, I don't consider the line taken a "false" line, I think rather that it is a line that considers the hazards & the subsequent casts over the length of the blind rather than just the attempt to center up on the road (which isn't likely with most trained "open" dogs) & react to what happens after that. I want as few surprises as possible & don't want a choppy blind by casting too soon or too often.


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Evan said:


> Don't you think it _should_ be?
> 
> Evan


Not really no. I'm judging the relativity of the work. I'm not judging to a standard. If that makes sense.

Should the work be better because it is an open, sure I guess because you are looking at 90% of the dogs handled by Pro's. By and large there isn't a lot of comparison when it comes to talent between the AM & the Pro. On top of that the poor little AM has 1 maybe 2 bullets where as the Pro has 10-20 shots.

I don't like to give any parameters to handlers when it comes to blinds. Here is the mat, there is the blind. Draw a straight line and there you have it.

It's all relative, if all 20 of the dogs you bring back miss an element you state is required what do you do, drop them all or scrap the test before #20 runs and start over?

Everyone is different in the way they see things. There is no right or wrong answer. What I see as important you may not and vice versa.


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> Of course it is. A pro with 10-15 dogs, 8 of which are Field Champions is going to eat this blind up.
> 
> Despite what others have written, I am pretty confident that the good pros are going to be able to negotiate the road with style.


How do we judge the 1 dog Amateur with regards to this. Does he/she get any leeway having the 1 bullet?


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

FOM said:


> Who said he false lined him? Maybe the dog took that line and the handler decided that it was close enough to the line and did not handle?


If memory serves me correctly, David stated he would line the dog up at the crate. Which is not on line to the blind


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Ted, rather than a poison bird, do you think you might get more out of running a short blind first?


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

My experience judging pros is that they take much more latitude with pushing the parameters of a blind than do amateurs. The result is that most pros run much more aesthetically pleasing blinds than do most amateurs who are overly concerned about maintaining the line to the blind. I think most pros don't attempt the excellent on blinds but are satisfied with the good, knowing that the trial will likely be won in the 4th series. But I can see both views but probably agree with Wade in general but understand that the judging is subjective & relative to the work of the field. For sure I will set up a more challenge set of tests generally in an open but the judging is still relative to the work of the entire field.


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> My experience judging pros is that they take much more latitude with pushing the parameters of a blind than do amateurs. The result is that most pros run much more aesthetically pleasing blinds than do most amateurs who are overly concerned about maintaining the line to the blind. I think most pros don't attempt the excellent on blinds but are satisfied with the good, knowing that the trial will likely be won in the 4th series. But I can see both views but probably agree with Wade in general but understand that the judging is subjective & relative to the work of the field. For sure I will set up a more challenge set of tests generally in an open but the judging is still relative to the work of the entire field.


Boy David, do I agree with the first part of that reponse!!! Judged an Open a couple of Summers ago in Virginia most of the Pro handled dogs didn't avoid the poison bird thrown to the tip of the point per say but they didn't exactly challenge it completely either. Where the Amateurs thought they couldn't get close enough to it and one after another they picked up the poison bird.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Gerard Rozas said:


> Ted,
> The first thing that stuck out to me when I looked at your blind
> 
> It would be interesting to move the line a few yards to the left because
> ...


After looking at the blind & reading the comments (& I realize it's your blind) The beginning hazard is too square, I've seen too many low quality dogs negotiate a road like this oblivious to what they were doing . 

I would as Gerard suggested move beginning to the left to create an angle, cross the original blind line at 3 & place them on line closer to the bush in the distance - it is hard to see if the dog would be OS in the swale to the left of the bush & that would be a controlling factor in the setting of the blind.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Wade said:


> I don't like to give any parameters to handlers when it comes to blinds. Here is the mat, there is the blind. Draw a straight line and there you have it.
> 
> It's all relative, if all 20 of the dogs you bring back miss an element you state is required what do you do, drop them all or scrap the test before #20 runs and start over?
> .



First, what is the big deal about telling people what you want? Why does it need to be a guessing game. 

Yes, of course, people say the line is obvious, but weekend after weekend, it is not. And it is not just a straight line. The discussion about the road demonstrates that fact. Some people think it is optional, others do not. Instructions eliminate the confusion. 

Second, read my general instructions again. I write "This is the ideal line to the blind. Callbacks are based upon relative and cumulative work."


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> First, what is the big deal about telling people what you want? Why does it need to be a guessing game.
> 
> Yes, of course, people say the line is obvious, but weekend after weekend, it is not. And it is not just a straight line. The discussion about the road demonstrates that fact. Some people think it is optional, others do not. Instructions eliminate the confusion.
> 
> Second, read my general instructions again. I write "This is the ideal line to the blind. Callbacks are based upon relative and cumulative work."


Ted, what you have quoted from me above is just my general observations of blind work, nothing more. As I mentioned, there is no right or wrong answer, every judge has their own way of doing things. Certainly no disrespect meant.


----------



## Sabireley (Feb 2, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> My experience judging pros is that they take much more latitude with pushing the parameters of a blind than do amateurs. The result is that most pros run much more aesthetically pleasing blinds than do most amateurs who are overly concerned about maintaining the line to the blind. I think most pros don't attempt the excellent on blinds but are satisfied with the good, knowing that the trial will likely be won in the 4th series. But I can see both views but probably agree with Wade in general but understand that the judging is subjective & relative to the work of the field. For sure I will set up a more challenge set of tests generally in an open but the judging is still relative to the work of the entire field.


A smooth, aesthetically pleasing blind goes a long way, even if the dog is not exactly on line. I have struggled (read "overhandled") to keep a dog right on line, when letting the dog zig zag across the line to the blind would have been much smoother and more pleasing to watch.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Sabireley said:


> A smooth, aesthetically pleasing blind goes a long way, even if the dog is not exactly on line. I have struggled (read "overhandled") to keep a dog right on line, when letting the dog zig zag across the line to the blind would have been much smoother and more pleasing to watch.


 I just learned that, at the Cape Fear clinic I just attended. Never having run a trial , I was amazed to learn that the corridor was much more lenient than I assumed it would be for FT's.


----------



## Deleted On Request (Jan 28, 2011)

Ted,

As this is all new to me, and with only an SHR to our name, when you say a section of the road should be part of the line, how much would be acceptable?

(Obviously, I'd love it if Tonka ran straight down the road from where he got on to where he needed to get off.)

And thanks! I get a lot out of these Socratic-style threads.


----------



## Randy Bohn (Jan 16, 2004)

Quit nit picking about a little left or a little right, this log that log, squared this n that...blah blah blah stop giving placements to the dogs who are scared and crawl on blinds, horrible to watch and judges are making them FC and AFC's...yuck...it's hard to lose a walker on blinds...Randy


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Bird crates at the beginning of a blind, no big deal. Dogs are still in control distance. A tree on the right at distance? Dogs don't want to hunt under trees. Not a place they want to be. Non factor. Hay bales confuse them. Way too many words in a lot of posts


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Nobody said the tree itself was a factor that I noted, the tree is being used as a marker for discussion purposes. Sorry all the words don't please you and others, Happy, but hey, it's a retriever training forum, how terrible to actually get differing opinions about running and judging a blind, without people getting ugly and threads getting locked. Not everyone is going to have the same viewpoint, run the same blind, doesn't mean any of it is wrong or stupid, just different. Some of us want to learn, takes lots of words to make a discussion sometimes.


----------



## jeff evans (Jun 9, 2008)

Randy Bohn said:


> Quit nit picking about a little left or a little right, this log that log, squared this n that...blah blah blah stop giving placements to the dogs who are scared and crawl on blinds, horrible to watch and judges are making them FC and AFC's...yuck...it's hard to lose a walker on blinds...Randy


Amen brother!!


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Randy Bohn said:


> Quit nit picking about a little left or a little right, this log that log, squared this n that...blah blah blah stop giving placements to the dogs who are scared and crawl on blinds, horrible to watch and judges are making them FC and AFC's...yuck...it's hard to lose a walker on blinds...Randy


Things must be very different where you run field trials as I see none of the behavior you have described where I compete and judge.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

EdA said:


> Things must be very different where you run field trials as I see none of the behavior you have described where I compete and judge.


We need you to come north and judge more.... cause things are very different..... I can get you booked up in a heart beat....  ( I'll air Holland for you....and feed him pizza... )
Ticky tacky nit picky blinds that reward slow dogs are common... 



> it's hard to lose a walker on blinds...Randy


But randy, while it's hard to loose a walker on blinds..... pigs don't float.....


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Bridget Bodine said:


> I just learned that, at the Cape Fear clinic I just attended. Never having run a trial , I was amazed to learn that the corridor was much more lenient than I assumed it would be for FT's.


The corridor is only as lenient as the best job allows it to be .


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Rainmaker said:


> Nobody said the tree itself was a factor that I noted, the tree is being used as a marker for discussion purposes. Sorry all the words don't please you and others, Happy, but hey, it's a retriever training forum, how terrible to actually get differing opinions about running and judging a blind, without people getting ugly and threads getting locked. Not everyone is going to have the same viewpoint, run the same blind, doesn't mean any of it is wrong or stupid, just different. Some of us want to learn, takes lots of words to make a discussion sometimes.


Huh? The tree had a number and was marked as a factor. Dogs don't like to hunt under trees last time I checked.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

I'm with randy on this one as well. A road, hay bales, potentially trying to judge a dog out of sight quickly, a road runner as I posted early.... Beep- beep

" put the bird where the dog doesn't want to go" applies here


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

I don't have a ton of FT experience, having run some Quals and a few Ams the last couple summers, worked/watched some Derby & Opens over the last 5-6 years. I can remember lots of stylish dogs, fun to watch, that make me strive to have dogs like them. I can remember only one "pig" that was painful to watch slink along on a blind, and a couple that looked heavily pressured and not happy to be doing what they're doing. I fail to see issues with using haybales in a field, roads, technical water, etc. If a dog is looking painful to watch, that's the result of the trainer's methods most likely, not because they used haybales and roads but because of how they did it. Not sure what some want, a big, open, empty field, run a blind up the middle? Factors test a dog and handler. I don't appreciate setups that have a dog disappear even if on line, but it happens, especially on water, so, training a dog to carry the line, is well, part of training. Learning to handle a dog, negotiate factors, putting the dog in the best spot, using wind, terrain, that's even harder, for many of us. I'm lucky to train weekly with some pretty good people, but, I train alone alot too. Having these kinds of discussions offers other ideas and perspectives. I just dislike when some come on and try to derail civil discussions with their negativity, when they have nothing to add that will help others.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Actually (& unfortunately) Justice Dog did describe a common occurrence with AA blinds, especially when judges don't set-up challenging 1st series marks & they are forced to progress toward the 4th series with agility-like blinds with lots of momentum breakers that result in tic-tac blinds that substantially favor slow dogs, in order to get to a workable number of dogs in the 4th.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> " put the bird where the dog doesn't want to go" applies here


Perhaps identifying those places might be helpful to support your argument.


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

Randy Bohn said:


> Quit nit picking about a little left or a little right, this log that log, squared this n that...blah blah blah stop giving placements to the dogs who are scared and crawl on blinds, horrible to watch and judges are making them FC and AFC's...yuck...it's hard to lose a walker on blinds...Randy


Randy--Do remember the third series water blind you ran in the National Amateur in Minnesota? I was working the line and saw your first two series and your water blind. Any comment?


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> Actually (& unfortunately) Justice Dog did describe a common occurrence with AA blinds, especially when judges don't set-up challenging 1st series marks & they are forced to progress toward the 4th series with agility-like blinds with lots of momentum breakers that result in tic-tac blinds that substantially favor slow dogs, in order to get to a workable number of dogs in the 4th.


LOL, guess I haven't seen an AA stake that didn't eliminate big numbers the first series up here.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

I run those WI trials on a regular basis & find them much like other areas of the country. Your prospective may be from the fact that many WI/MN trials have very large numbers & therefore you get a grind-up 1st as a result. Even so, I've been a part of some of those trials that didn't get enough out of the 1st series, so the blinds became the primary place to reduce numbers by default.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> I just dislike when some come on and try to derail civil discussions with their negativity, when they have nothing to add that will help others.



There will always be people who do not judge and/or do not compete who will try to derail discussions on subjects concerning judging and/or competition. That is the beauty of the "ignore" setting.


----------



## yellow machine (Dec 7, 2005)

junbe said:


> Randy--Do remember the third series water blind you ran in the National Amateur in Minnesota? I was working the line and saw your first two series and your water blind. Any comment?


 I remember that. Only Randy should enlighten the forum.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Granddaddy said:


> I run those WI trials on a regular basis & find them much like other areas of the country. Your prospective may be from the fact that many WI/MN trials have very large numbers & therefore you get a grind-up 1st as a result. Even so, I've been a part of some of those trials that didn't get enough out of the 1st series, so the blinds became the primary place to reduce numbers by default.


I also think that people set up tickytacky land blinds because there are some who feel that dogs are so good these days, that you do not typically get enough out of a land blind. So, they "create" factors ie: bales, trees, etc, or a "poof" of yellow cover that your feet must touch, to eliminate dogs. Based on today's seeming standards, I would view this blind as having a very narrow corridor. I would be pointing the dog at the right hand tip of bale #5. the tree on the right, #7, is not in play, and is a danger zone - for being too far right, and for loosing the dog to the right. the other danger is the road, that will allow them to get their legs under them and RUN. There is a critical casting point, at the crest, that you need to get in order to get them off the road and to the bird.


> The corridor is only as lenient as the best job allows it to be
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 And Marvin it the nail on the head with this statement. 

I think the phenomena of "methodical" dogs being rewarded can be seen when you run many trials in different places. Your perspective changes regarding running blinds with every 15 trials you run, and where you run them. Some dogs are born methodical, others are made that way. It is much easier to handle a dog that you have more than a nano second to make a decision on a cast - or not to cast, read their momentum, etc. 

with that being said, I'll keep my fire breathers...... I love the style and joy de vivre they exhibit. And, when things go well and the dog-handler team is working together, there is nothing better than a 1 whistle land or water blind.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Some general thoughts:

1. A good AA blind forces handling. It should be theoretically possible, but practically impossible to line the blind. You are trying to create separation between dogs that you can judge.

2. Some people have said that this blind will make the dogs look ugly. I disagree. I have seen plenty of dogs that could navigate this blind stylishly and well. 

I reject the notion that this blind could not be done stylishly or be done by a stylish fast mover. Obviously, there are those that disagree.

3. I think that people are focusing on the upfront part of this blind, which to me is simply to get handlers to use whistles early (I think a good handler could get a 30' section of this 90' section of road without too many whistles) and ignoring what I consider to be the real hazard of this blind. See photo below.

You have a wind and terrain pushing you right. You have a dog that you have used whistles on early (and is therefore more likely to be less compliant later). You need to be right of marker 5 when you cast left into the wind and against the terrain to safety. You could easily lose your dog as it crests the road and enters what is marked as the "danger zone."

I think that on this blind, you might see some choppy work up front (which would not result in failure), but you are very likely to see failure with dogs who fade hard with wind and terrain and end up near marker 7, where they cannot be handled to the bird.

In my opinion, callbacks will be driven more by

1. Work on the back half of the blind; and
2. Cumulative work

than how you negotiate a 90 foot section of road.

The road is there to make you handle, nothing more or less.


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

Ted please post more of these training exercises. I appreciate the discussions. I ran a similar blind with a road in an amat under two respected Judges in Maine. All I can say that's the blind and I got a call back to the water blind and that was a far as we got. I thanked the judges and said it was a great blind wish we could have done it correctly. Never made it threw corridor. Some blinds you just click and some just eat you up.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Marvin S said:


> The corridor is only as lenient as the best job allows it to be .



Maybe, if that is how you judge. I set my criteria, I tell you my criteria, and then you can make a decision on whether you want to satisfy those criteria. 

If you decide that you don't want to try, you have made my decision easy. My guess is that most handlers are not going to want to make that decision easy for me, and are going to work to hit the markers. If the whole field doesn't or can't, then I will have to adjust. But, I have judged enough Open dogs to know that there are going to be plenty of dogs who hit the markers and are called back. 

As an aside, one of the reasons that I have moved to detailing in writing what my criteria are is because it reduces questioning about callbacks. At one trial, my co-judge and I wrote "the judges believe that the shoulders of both mounds are on line" and placed it in the holding blind.

When one handler - who was running a very stylish blind - elected not to get either shoulder (which would have been very easy for him to accomplish), the gallery (which was very close to the line) gasped "didn't he read the note in the holding blind?" Like I have said previously, I don't like mysteries.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

[QUOTE " put the bird where the dog doesn't want to go" applies here[/QUOTE]

I have heard this said so many times it makes my head spin..

I have asked on many occation for someone who says it, to explain to me where in that exact particular blind, would that place be.
I always seem to get some kind of condescending answer that attacks my experience, or points out that I must not Hunt!

I,,,, like Dr Ed, would be interested if Happy, might start another thread, with a picture like Teds,, and have the topic "Places dogs wont go"

I bet the opinins would be all over the board.

One other thing.

I took the original title of the thread as "Challenging " the blind.

I didnt even consider that A person has to be a competitor, have a AA,BB ,or CC dog. It was a picture with a blind drawn. And the topic was "challenging" it.
After Ted drew the factors, and hazzards, to me,, it pretty much spells what the direct line to the birdis. If I run that blind,, I think I do have enough experience to draw a straight line. Then , its easy to *TRY* and challenge it. You can see by Teds straight line,, it includes Most all of the road. For me to challenge that,, I will most definatly have to handel ,,,ALOT.... Hopefully ,, the dog through training, will learn to navigate Many different factors and hazzards.
My view of the blind, wasthe factors, ALL would push the dog rigt off the road,, which I believe I had to keepthe dog on to challenge Teds blind. Therefore,, I dont want the dog RIGHT.... EVER I dont want to be off the road,,, and I dont want to have to cast into the wind. I dont want my dog anywhere downwind of bird crates.. I dont want to loose my dog out of sight, where the road turns right,and falls off the hill. I want to stay in the road,, or a bit left of its centerline.. THAT,,, to me ,,,,is challenging it..

The thread, in my opinin,, got hyjacked into how different judges may Judge this blind,, its fairness,, its sensibility ect. 
I would think,, if you compete, (again thats NOT ME) you would do everthing in your power to follow that straight line Ted drew,, because you have to have in the back of your mind,, there is prolly gonna be a dog that will run that road perfectly. So,,, I better do my best to Challenge it..


By the way,,, I think that this example CLEARLY demonstrates placing a bird whera dog wont want to go.. Its not the PLace exactly,, but the PATH the dog must take,, that makes you show control....... If you CHALLENGE it.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

I appreciate everyone who has shared their various experiences with judging/competing, I think it adds perspective, as long as it is constructive in some way and not descending into an argument and going off topic too far. FWIW, one of my blinds from this particular line, was slightly left of Ted's, using bales 5 and 6 as a keyhole and going parallel to the road for a bit. There were 3 marks out there as well, one of which held a line that was similar to Ted's blind, you can see two of the stickmen if you look hard. There was a blind sharply right using the tech water. My dogs that day were 18 months to 3.5 years, 4 running strictly HT so far, the 5th and oldest winning a Q this summer. Four of the five are fast, hard running dogs and while they may be HT, I train bigger and more technical these days. Even my then 5 month old pup was out there pushing 200 yards to marks among hay bales. I think it's fun and challenging and apparently, so do my dogs. If blinds at FT are ticky tacky, and I don't think this one is particularly, so be it, I want to be prepared to handle even my fastest dogs and be as ready as I can be. So, thank you to everyone for their input and let's hope we have people who will continue to contribute, even Gooser.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Sorry for the number of words.

I love these threads.. They,, to me,, are what should be discussed here more often..

And I like to participate,,beacuse even though my questions may seem uneducated or inexperienced,,, By asking them, or making the comment,, my question will be answered..... No doubt...

I Highly doubt I will ever run a FT.. I doubt I will participate in HT's..

I want a well trained,, talented dog.. Isnt THAT what all the rest of you basically have??

My Goal ,,, if you will,, is to someday step to the line,, and run one of "Power Companys" very tight set ups,, and complete their road blind,, and have the "Pitboss"tell me i did a great job!! That will mean more to me than a weekend ribbon.

Gooser


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Gooser, I hope you, and anyone else, aren't afraid to ask, to post, to give an opinion and get it critiqued on threads like this. We learn a huge amount from mistakes or from seeing what someone else would do instead. And I agree, going to the line with your dog, running her and both of you doing well in front of people you admire and respect, big, big high and very rewarding, with or without a ribbon. May not last long, dogs are so very humbling, but that high is worth the work, to me anyway.


----------



## Kyle B (May 5, 2005)

Good teams complete most blinds succesfully.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 14, 2008)

I enjoy these threads. While I'm looking at these pictures, I'm running my dog in my head, trying to mitigate our weakness's and exploit our strengths. Every post that suggests a certain way of handling and I'm running it again, trying it to see if it works for us. 
An experienced and respected all age judge took the time to show me a blind, I'm not interested in who thinks it's any good. And maybe someday someone will be able to teach me tactics to get around the line to the blind and make it aesthetically appealing, or how to put a bird where the dogs wont go (without it being by mistake), but for now I just want to run the line to the blind.
Walt


----------



## Final Flight Retrievers (Jan 23, 2010)

Ted

What r ur thoughts and opinion if the bird crate was moved to the other side of the road about 30 to 40 yards in front of bale #4. I would think that with the bird crate on the other side of the road would tend to pull more dogs off the road thus giving u more answers???? Thoughts??


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

bird crate on left would create more action to right. I put it on right to make corridor more obvious


----------



## jeff evans (Jun 9, 2008)

Rainmaker said:


> I don't have a ton of FT experience, having run some Quals and a few Ams the last couple summers, worked/watched some Derby & Opens over the last 5-6 years. I can remember lots of stylish dogs, fun to watch, that make me strive to have dogs like them. I can remember only one "pig" that was painful to watch slink along on a blind, and a couple that looked heavily pressured and not happy to be doing what they're doing. I fail to see issues with using haybales in a field, roads, technical water, etc. If a dog is looking painful to watch, that's the result of the trainer's methods most likely, not because they used haybales and roads but because of how they did it. Not sure what some want, a big, open, empty field, run a blind up the middle? Factors test a dog and handler. I don't appreciate setups that have a dog disappear even if on line, but it happens, especially on water, so, training a dog to carry the line, is well, part of training. Learning to handle a dog, negotiate factors, putting the dog in the best spot, using wind, terrain, that's even harder, for many of us. I'm lucky to train weekly with some pretty good people, but, I train alone alot too. Having these kinds of discussions offers other ideas and perspectives. I just dislike when some come on and try to derail civil discussions with their negativity, when they have nothing to add that will help others.



Why not set up blinds that favore fast stylish dogs? Doesnt the book want stylish dogs? What are dogs going to look like running land blinds in 20 years? We all want to win... I rarely see blinds ran across the lines to marks which dramatically makes a simple blind difficult. Key holes, regards


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

jeff evans said:


> Why not set up blinds that favore fast stylish dogs? Doesnt the book want stylish dogs? What are dogs going to look like running land blinds in 20 years? We all want to win... I rarely see blinds ran across the lines to marks which dramatically makes a simple blind difficult. Key holes, regards



Who says that a fast, stylish dog could not run this blind well?


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Who says stylish equals fast? What's wrong with a solid, methodical, thinking dog working with its handler on a blind? I'm not talking a slinking, tail-tucked, pressured piggy dog, that's another thing altogether. Why does a dog have to be a speed demon vs one taking a nice, steady clip on a line? Why is faster better?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

jeff evans said:


> Why not set up blinds that favore fast stylish dogs? Doesnt the book want stylish dogs? What are dogs going to look like running land blinds in 20 years? We all want to win... I rarely see blinds ran across the lines to marks which dramatically makes a simple blind difficult. Key holes, regards



And what do you mean by "keyhole". Because I don't see one.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

jeff evans said:


> Why not set up blinds that favore fast stylish dogs? Doesnt the book want stylish dogs? What are dogs going to look like running land blinds in 20 years? We all want to win... I rarely see blinds ran across the lines to marks which dramatically makes a simple blind difficult. Key holes, regards


Why set up any test that favors any particular type dog? Fast and stylish are not always synonymous and can be separate qualities. Is it fun to watch a speed demon run a blind under good control, certainly, and the rules allow for rewarding style or penalizing lack of style "up to and including elimination from the stake". It is not pleasant to watch any dog, fast or slow, on a blind if they are not under control. Please describe an all-age land blind that "favors fast stylish dogs", would that be one where they don't have to stop and handle?


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

EdA said:


> Why set up any test that favors any particular type dog? Fast and stylish are not always synonymous and can be separate qualities. Is it fun to watch a speed demon run a blind under good control, certainly, and the rules allow for rewarding style or penalizing lack of style "up to and including elimination from the stake". It is not pleasant to watch any dog, fast or slow, on a blind if they are not under control. Please describe an all-age land blind that "favors fast stylish dogs", would that be one where they don't have to stop and handle?


Jeff is a WSU Cougar fan - that should tell you a lot .


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Judging by the responses to a few simple comments about the blind I made which I though were relevant to the conversAtion boy, some people sure are up tight. I though I just thought a had a flash back and was reading comments from Felony.


----------



## twall (Jun 5, 2006)

I have a dog that loves to go right. He's very happy to go right without an excuse to go right. For this blind I would line him up straight and not let him get right of the road. The bird crates on the right would help me, they would push him left. I don't think he would avoid the road. In fact, I'd worry about him wanting to stay on the road too much. The point where the road drops off to the right would be my biggest concern.

Good thread.

Tom


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> bird crate on left would create more action to right. I put it on right to make corridor more obvious


Is it the combination of other factors which makes this opposite when placed downhill? Pulling downhill?


----------



## scott spalding (Aug 27, 2005)

jeff evans said:


> Why not set up blinds that favore fast stylish dogs? Doesnt the book want stylish dogs? What are dogs going to look like running land blinds in 20 years? We all want to win... I rarely see blinds ran across the lines to marks which dramatically makes a simple blind difficult. Key holes, regards


The book wants stylish dogs that can run a blind. Often times owners of so called stylish dogs forget that being under control is an important factor when running a blind. I have witnessed and participated in the reluctance to handle as a judge and a handler.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Ted Shih said:


> Who says that a fast, stylish dog could not run this blind well?


They could!!!!


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> And what do you mean by "keyhole". Because I don't see one.


For all intents and purposes the entire length of the road is a loooooooong keyhole .

If the road were not there, the line to the blind would still be the same ..........it's just that being off to the left or right of it by a few yards would be viewed in a different light,

john


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

john fallon said:


> For all intents and purposes the entire length of the road is a loooooooong keyhole .
> 
> If the road were not there, the line to the blind would still be the same ..........it's just that being off to the left or right of it by a few yards would be viewed in a different light,
> 
> john


So a long keyhole is not really a keyhole at all. A long keyhole is really just a decent-sized piece of the true line to the blind with easily defined guardrails on either side.....right?


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> So a long keyhole is not really a keyhole at all. A long keyhole is really just a decent-sized piece of the true line to the blind with easily defined guardrails on either side.....right?


That is true and if treated as such there would be no problem. But if you removed the "guardrails" and ran the blind Dave Didler showed us as an example of staying in the fairway no one would have had a problem with calling it a credible attempt. With the road there the response was different.

john


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Call it what you want, the line to a blind is a corridor of varying width depending on the level of competition, the competence of the handlers, and the preference of the judges. The use of obstacles, cover changes, off line out of sight components, ditches, mounds, and other irregular terrain features create a situation wherein the line to the blind is not ill defined and arbitrary. Negotiating such a blind tends to insure that all contestants are, more or less, running the same blind.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

john fallon said:


> That is true and if treated as such there would be no problem. But if you removed the "guardrails" and ran the blind Dave Didler showed us as an example of staying in the fairway no one would have had a problem with calling it a credible attempt. With the road there the response was different.
> 
> john


I see your point. But responses are like elbows...most all of us have one or two...who cares? Step up and show the judges your best attempt at excellence. In the end, excellence, not "good enough", is what should win a field trial.

Let's face it. An All Age blind should be a demonstration of teamwork and precision. If you can't demonstrate as much precision and teamwork as the other guy, do you deserve to be placed ahead of him? (And yes, I totally realize marking is another important factor here.)

Chris


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

EdA said:


> Call it what you want, the line to a blind is a corridor of varying width depending on the level of competition, the competence of the handlers, and the preference of the judges. The use of obstacles, cover changes, off line out of sight components, ditches, mounds, and other irregular terrain features create a situation wherein the line to the blind is not ill defined and arbitrary. Negotiating such a blind tends to insure that all contestants are, more or less, running the same blind.


Thank goodness you post here. Common sense isn't so common apparently. If the blind Mr. Ted showed was a keyhole, I'm an astronaut.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Good grief. A road is a long key hole?????????????

Why do I even bother to post?


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I see your point. But responses are like elbows...most all of us have one or two...who cares? Step up and show the judges your best attempt at excellence. In the end, excellence, not "good enough", is what should win a field trial.
> 
> Let's face it. An All Age blind should be a demonstration of teamwork and precision. If you can't demonstrate as much precision and teamwork as the other guy, *do you deserve to be placed ahead of him?* (And yes, I totally realize marking is another important factor here.)
> 
> ...


No, they do not, and with _comperable marks_, the dog that stays within the ''guardrails" should be placed higher..........

john


----------



## MikeBoley (Dec 26, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> First, what is the big deal about telling people what you want? Why does it need to be a guessing game.
> 
> Yes, of course, people say the line is obvious, but weekend after weekend, it is not. And it is not just a straight line. The discussion about the road demonstrates that fact. Some people think it is optional, others do not. Instructions eliminate the confusion.
> 
> Second, read my general instructions again. I write "This is the ideal line to the blind. Callbacks are based upon relative and cumulative work."


To this effect and I have used it since. I believe it was Don Driggers who placed a log on a very wide point. His instructions and his Co Judge Linda Noga agreed were that "we" prefer you be left of the log. Good instructions but left themselves room to judge.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

I think that within the past half dozen or so posts, progress has been made. 

Part of it is terminology. And in the end, who cares if you call it a long keyhole, or a corridor? Step up and show excellence.... That should increase one's chances of moving on to the next series!

Chris


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

john fallon said:


> For all intents and purposes the entire length of the road is a loooooooong keyhole .
> 
> If the road were not there, the line to the blind would still be the same ..........it's just that being off to the left or right of it by a few yards would be viewed in a different light,
> 
> john


I would not call the road a key hole - just a feature or terrain to be included in your blind? The judge has said you must include this in your blind- a certain portion.IMHO


----------



## Deleted On Request (Jan 28, 2011)

I'm somewhat confused. No, I don't now run or judge this level of competition, but I would like to learn. That is why I asked what I guess is a stupid question about how much of the road should be included in the dog's line in order to even have a chance at a call back. It was not an attempt to derail, etc. It was a serious question from someone who is a neophyte to these games, but would like to learn.

My guess is that the best answer is more than the next guy, but is that really true?


----------



## Randy Bohn (Jan 16, 2004)

Sure i remember the 2nd series and the 3rd series blind at the Nat.Amat...like it was yesterday...BUT i'm taking the high road on that remark...no comment no comment no comment..ask me in person and you'd get a very accurate response from me.Randy


----------



## Sabireley (Feb 2, 2005)

FinnLandR said:


> I'm somewhat confused. No, I don't now run or judge this level of competition, but I would like to learn. That is why I asked what I guess is a stupid question about how much of the road should be included in the dog's line in order to even have a chance at a call back. It was not an attempt to derail, etc. It was a serious question from someone who is a neophyte to these games, but would like to learn.
> 
> My guess is that the best answer is more than the next guy, but is that really true?


The amount of road is all relative to what the rest of the field does. A blind has a begining, middle, and end. The road is in the first third or so. Did you try to maintain the line, did your dog stop on the whistle, and did your dog change direction and carry the cast? Your dog might line right down the road and angle off perfectly into the field, or you might struggle to keep your dog on the road, or you might struggle to get your dog off the road before it goes out of sight. Everyone else running faces the same similar issues with the road, sucking in or flaring the flyer crates, and the bales, running up the hill, or falling off the hill. Run the blind, anticipate the hazards, know your dog, and try to recover gracefully when you or the dog screws up.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

This is just like a field trial.

Don't give instructions, and people complain that you have mystery criteria.
Give instructions, and people complain that you should have a different blind.


----------



## Sabireley (Feb 2, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> This is just like a field trial.
> 
> Don't give instructions, and people complain that you have mystery criteria.
> Give instructions, and people complain that you should have a different blind.



No truer words have been spoken.


----------



## Dan Storts (Apr 19, 2011)

A judge cannot just place a crate a birds in the field to create their blind. The first series was likely ran here with 60 to 70 birds being shot. The main reason you are going to lose the dog at the end of the blind because all the birds being shot from right to left. Thus,staying to the right of 5 & 6 could be a problem.

However, you can run you blind off of the flier station.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> This is just like a field trial.
> 
> Don't give instructions, and people complain that you have mystery criteria.
> Give instructions, and people complain that you should have a different blind.


It is too bad, it goes this route, possibly a function could be added that would allow thread starters to delete posts that ruin the intent of a thread. Please understand that many are appreciative of the efforts by some on here to discuss and debate the actual subject.


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> Good grief. A road is a long key hole?????????????
> 
> Why do I even bother to post?


To better the sport & educate those who need it.


----------



## Deleted On Request (Jan 28, 2011)

Sabireley said:


> The amount of road is all relative to what the rest of the field does. A blind has a begining, middle, and end. The road is in the first third or so. Did you try to maintain the line, did your dog stop on the whistle, and did your dog change direction and carry the cast? Your dog might line right down the road and angle off perfectly into the field, or you might struggle to keep your dog on the road, or you might struggle to get your dog off the road before it goes out of sight. Everyone else running faces the same similar issues with the road, sucking in or flaring the flyer crates, and the bales, running up the hill, or falling off the hill. Run the blind, anticipate the hazards, know your dog, and try to recover gracefully when you or the dog screws up.


Thank you. For someone used to a "standard" sometimes these threads are above me, but much like I will never play in the NHL (if there is one after this year) I still want to know how the game is played to enjoy watching it.

Also, Ted, thanks for these types of threads; us slower folk enjoy learning from them.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Ted Shih said:


> This is just like a field trial.
> 
> Don't give instructions, and people complain that you have mystery criteria.
> Give instructions, and people complain that you should have a different blind.


You can't win!


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> This is just like a field trial.
> 
> Don't give instructions, and people complain that you have mystery criteria.
> Give instructions, and people complain that you should have a different blind.



Would you like to borrow Achmed??!!










I always wanted to hang him in a holding blind.......


----------



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

Thanks to all for this thread. Ted I really like these threads that you start. I gets me thinking aas how I would handle a dog to meet the criteria that is set up. Personally since I know my dog best and am blessed he will go where sent about 90% of the time the first section I would line him up and let him roll. Before the road slopes off to the side i would stop and give a left angle back to get him off the road and still be visable. short whistle and a right angle back and hope he holds the cast to the blind. May not be the best way to run this blind but it would work for my dog. That's the general idea to get your dog to do the best they can.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> It is too bad, it goes this route, possibly a function could be added that would allow thread starters to delete posts that ruin the intent of a thread. Please understand that many are appreciative of the efforts by some on here to discuss and debate the actual subject.


Kim

You misunderstood my post. It really is just like a field trial. Judges set up a blind, dogs get dropped - "Contestants say I didn't know that the ___ was on line." 

You set up a blind, tell the contestants the criteria, and they say "That isn't the way the blind should be judged."

It doesn't matter what you do, someone is going to complain.

Ted


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Thanks, Ted, I understand that nothing is going to make everyone happy, it is no different in HT for that matter. I've seen handlers badger judges at the scenario with the test dog, until they finally drew a map of where they wanted the dog on the blind and posted it in the holding blind. I appreciate when judges say something like, "we'd like to see the dog hit the first point, we'd prefer to see the dog not get on the second point". When I lost control of my dog and she got on the 2nd point, I knew why I wasn't going to the 4th. And I trained harder on blinds. I wasn't suggesting there be no debate or disagreement. Just that it seems some people's only intent is to mock or potstir, which gets tiresome. More and more, we are left with nothing but GDG. I think there was very good debate on this thread, good points made, from multiple and sometimes opposing views. That's what makes people think. Over 8,000 views now, I think shows how hungry people are for this kind of discussion, so, well done and thank you, again.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Ted 
I really enjoy your posts also.

I am well aware of the fact I dont compete, and have litttle experience.
I post my views knowing full well, that there are others that would want to ask the same thing,, but are nervous about ridicule.

I WANT the ridicule,, and enjoy someone picking apart my thoughts..

Its all about discussion.. It makes you think..

Its funny actually,, Ted can start a thread like this.. He is the ONLY one that will take the time to start one..
Then it never fails,, 

Why dont some of the other talents here start threads like these?? Lets hear Your expertise.

Gooser

P.S.

Still wondering about places dogs dont wanna go.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Mike

Overall, I think you ask good questions. So, I wouldn't stop asking them now.

I want to discuss what you said earlier about the line to the blind is the line to the blind - just run it (I am paraphrasing).

Sometimes it is, sometimes it is not.

David (Granddaddy) was correct, oftentimes, you do not have to run the precise line to the blind to get called back.
But, sometimes you do.

As Lisa Van Loo would say, "it depends"

It depends on the Judges. 

In this scenario:
a) Ed Aycock as judge says David's blind is fine.
b) Ted Shih as judge says, "no road, no call back."
So, maybe you need to fight for the road, maybe you don't.

To a large extent, it depends on the judge. That, in part, is why, I like to provide handlers with details on what I want. So that there is no mystery. My position is the minority position in Field Trials.

It depends on how good your work is to this point:
a) If you are running a great trial, you can be more conservative
b) If you are running a so-so trial, you have to be more aggressive, and take chances
c) If you are running a poor trial, you must be very aggressive, take chances, and be so good that no one would dare drop you

It depends on your dog:
a) If you have a great blind dog, you can be very aggressive
b) If you have a young dog, you probably only have so many whistles or casts, and you need to be careful where and how you use them

So, when you are handling your dog, you have to factor in these aspects - and more

Ted


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Ted I am thankful for your willingness to share and educate.....thank you!!! Happy Thanksgiving!! everyone.....


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Got behind in reading this thread and only read the first 3 or 4 pages but looks like a good discussion.
To me it looks like everything pushes right wind bird crate and terrain. With my dogs I would first be concerned with the initial line. I think my dogs may want to go a little left here if my communication with them is not precise but I think they need to stay right of bale #5 and take a good part of the road. Then the biggest danger is loosing sight of the dog if he goes right at the ridge. If you loose him there your toast and it looks to me that everything terrain and wind may push him that way plus if you get a perfect initial line and run him up the road he may want to continue to follow it at the top of the ridge. Once passed that point I think you could relax a bit as the corridor is a little wider with less likely spots to really loose the dog.
To me the meat of this blind is right up front and as much as I would like my dog to take the perfect initial line up the road I think I would be happy if my dog hit some part of the road and stayed right of bale #5. I think you have a slightly wider corridor to the right of the road but then you have the danger of the bird crates and worse falling to the right after the ridge.
One thing that I have noticed in this thread and others is people say well the dog isnt going to want to run the road because he is *TAUGHT* not to. Or in other cases it has been said the dog will want to get in early on a long angle entry water blind because he was *TAUGHT* to seek water or he wont want to hit that point because he was *TAUGHT* the stay in the water and I have heard some pretty good pros say this too ( he's just trying to be good by getting in the water). I dont understand this. To me this is a lack a of balance in training. I am a very literal trainer and will do things up the road as well as parrallel the road on the point as well as past the point. The only thing I want my dog to think he *HAS *to do is follow my direction and the trick is to be able to precisely comunicate what I want to the dog. I take the word blind to mean two things. A bird down that my dog didnt see fall and I want my dog to be *blind* to everything but what I tell him to do. Of coarse as you know this is easier said than done but this is my goal in each and every blind I run.


----------



## JS (Oct 27, 2003)

It never occurs to me what I might “get away with”. I can stand on the mat and look at the pin and KNOW what is the perfect line. That’s where I want my dog to run. In this case, it is pretty clear the road is on that perfect line ... why would I not try for it???

Now it goes without saying, you must know your dog; his strengths and weaknesses. “What can I anticipate in the initial line?” “How will she handle the sloping hillside?” “The wind?” “Does she sit right or left?” “How many whistles before she will start to overcast?” “How careful must I be in the ‘danger zone’?”

Run the dog you brought and get the best line you can. When the callbacks are read, you’ll know if you did what the judges wanted. And if your number is not called, at least you’ll know you gave it your best shot.

JS


----------



## Erik Nilsson (Jan 16, 2011)

So Im a bit confused here so just trying to educate myself re blinds
so why is the cone reversed at the bird in the origional blue line?, I always thought that the closer your dog got to the bird the cone diminished like my yellow lines? I saw somewhere it was touched on but would we not expect our dogs to carry the line when judging? If I had to give a dog an over at the end because the margin near the bird is rather forgiving, I would most likely be out?

What wrong with a whistle at the end of the road with a left straight up back and let the dog roll and one or two more to maintain the line

Am I being too critical?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Erik Nilsson said:


> Am I being too critical?



I think so. A blind is a test of a dog's ability to line and take casts. The closer the dog is to the mat (and the handler), the better its response to direction should be: the handler is closer, it is easier to see, it is easier to hear, etc. The farther out a dog gets, the less control a handler has: a) visibility becomes an issue; b) hearing becomes an issue; c) control in general becomes an issue. Consequently, I think that the corridor expands as you go farther out and does not contract.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Mike
> 
> Overall, I think you ask good questions. So, I wouldn't stop asking them now.
> 
> ...


Thank You Ted

In TRAINING,, I think people would have a very high standard to attack the blinds straight line..

As a very New Amature attending a trial,, I may not know the Judge, and what he expects.. I really think your idea of having SOME instructions in the holding blind is a GREAT help..

If none are there,, and I dont know the Judge,, But I do know Ted Shih is running right behind me,, and I do know also,, that his dog will run straight down that road,, and never even think twice about it,,, Then I have NO CHOICE but to attack the blind very aggressivly, that is of course,, if I want to try and win.

The more I watch dogs that run really straight,,, the expectation of the dogs initial line has gotten MUCH MUCH longer than it use to be for me.
With the road bing at the first part of the blind,,, an *EXPERIENCED* dog,, I would think,, would take most of the road with its initial line.

Is that way of thinking to positive?

Gooser


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Ted Shih said:


> Maybe, if that is how you judge. I set my criteria, I tell you my criteria, and then you can make a decision on whether you want to satisfy those criteria.
> 
> As an aside, one of the reasons that I have moved to detailing in writing what my criteria are is because it reduces questioning about callbacks. At one trial, my co-judge and I wrote "the judges believe that the shoulders of both mounds are on line" and placed it in the holding blind.
> 
> When one handler - who was running a very stylish blind - elected not to get either shoulder (which would have been very easy for him to accomplish), the gallery (which was very close to the line) gasped "didn't he read the note in the holding blind?" Like I have said previously, I don't like mysteries.


One of the reasons the sport needs a large judging pool is that folks do not always agree about the importance of certain elements. That most clubs do not practice that is the fault of the AKC & RAC for not encouraging same. While I have not been as prolific a book holder as yourself, I have never felt the necessity to insert my personality into the proceedings. Set the test, if it requires explanation it is probably lacking as a test. Only in one instance has that created a ruckus, when someone went fat on an obvious test that 21 of the 22 dogs & handlers back recognized. As someone stated who knew the dog "it would help if the dog did not like water like a cat". So I have little concern what people say - You are not there to be popular, just to find the dog that is performing best on the course you set that weekend which is a decision of you & your fellow judge.

Having run about 500 AA stakes - 1 dog (personally trained with ample assistance from many more knowledgeable than I) at a time, I have seen a lot of really poor decision making & also some folks who really know how to set a course that tests the dogs abilities to the maximum. Many of those folks who knew how to do that were never asked to judge the big one so apparently what I believe constitutes good judging & what those in charge think may be on different planets? 

As one does trials they develop a group that evaluates tests & the work on same objectively, it is always interesting to compare outcomes during the award ceremony with inputs by the performing pairs during the competition. 

I won't go into details of the various things I've seen during my time competing but will say that was one of the reasons I built the database about judges. It verified what I had observed & others had told me over the many years I have enjoyed the sport. Folks with little experience with dogs in the field do not have the background to be evaluating the work of others. 



twall said:


> I have a dog that loves to go right. He's very happy to go right without an excuse to go right. For this blind I would line him up straight and not let him get right of the road. The bird crates on the right would help me, they would push him left. I don't think he would avoid the road. In fact, I'd worry about him wanting to stay on the road too much. The point where the road drops off to the right would be my biggest concern.
> 
> Good thread.
> 
> Tom


Why do I get the feeling that this is not a dog that we are used to seeing at an AA stake? I believe it emphasizes my point of rewarding dogs that are not ready to dance at the Big Dogs ball .


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Well put Marvin.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> As a very New Amature attending a trial,, I may not know the Judge, and what he expects..


I think this is very true of any new person that comes into the sport, and really always centers around the expectations of a blind. I once posted a question on this board regarding whether a blind is a tight rope or a corridor. And it varies according to who is judging. And who is running. One old pro in Texas tended to run his blinds like a tightrope. Tight lines, lots of whistles, but no refusals. This is also true of a competitor or two here in the midwest. Others view blinds like a corridor, and like blinds where dogs can open up and run. With certain key factors along the way. 

I started to keep notes on judges I run under, which includes the types of tests they set up, how they judge them, etc. I do a sketch of the test in a book. Over time, you will see a trend. I recommend that for everyone. 



> I really think your idea of having SOME instructions in the holding blind is a GREAT help..


Key instructions are always a help. There is a faction of relatively new people in the sport who advocate the use of a map, such as the pics that Ted is showing here. I think that is too much, and as a judge, I don't want to be that boxed in. You are then leaving out the interpretation of the blind, and leaving only the implementation for the dog handler team. 




> With the road bing at the first part of the blind,,, an *EXPERIENCED* dog,, I would think,, would take most of the road with its initial line.


I think you are absolutely correct, and many experienced AA dogs could perform the initial portion of this blind readily. The end of the blind would be the key, where they have to negotiate the wind, get off the road, not roll down the slope of the terrain, etc.

Cherylon is a great mentor for you. i wouldn't be surprised if we see you and Flint running a Q one day.... Just remember to put on your pants with the white coat!


----------



## jeff evans (Jun 9, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> First, what is the big deal about telling people what you want? Why does it need to be a guessing game.
> 
> Yes, of course, people say the line is obvious, but weekend after weekend, it is not. *And it is not just a straight line*. The discussion about the road demonstrates that fact. Some people think it is optional, others do not. Instructions eliminate the confusion.
> 
> Second, read my general instructions again. I write "This is the ideal line to the blind. Callbacks are based upon relative and cumulative work."


???



Marvin S said:


> One of the reasons the sport needs a large judging pool is that folks do not always agree about the importance of certain elements. That most clubs do not practice that is the fault of the AKC & RAC for not encouraging same. While I have not been as prolific a book holder as yourself,* I have never felt the necessity to insert my personality into the proceedings. Set the test, if it requires explanation it is probably lacking as a test.* Only in one instance has that created a ruckus, when someone went fat on an obvious test that 21 of the 22 dogs & handlers back recognized. As someone stated who knew the dog "it would help if the dog did not like water like a cat". So I have little concern what people say - You are not there to be popular, just to find the dog that is performing best on the course you set that weekend which is a decision of you & your fellow judge.
> 
> Having run about 500 AA stakes - 1 dog (personally trained with ample assistance from many more knowledgeable than I) at a time, I have seen a lot of really poor decision making & also some folks who really know how to set a course that tests the dogs abilities to the maximum. Many of those folks who knew how to do that were never asked to judge the big one so apparently what I believe constitutes good judging & what those in charge think may be on different planets?
> 
> ...





Marvin S said:


> Jeff is a WSU Cougar fan - that should tell you a lot .


Marvin, now that made me chuckle, what it does tell you is I'm not a front runner but damn they suck. My high school football team could beat them, if they keep it up maybe we go to the PAC 11! I should have stated that IMO this is a decent blind, both amateur or open. And the remark about "keyhole" obviously doesn't apply to this perticular blind. What I was trying to convey, and do agree with *multiple posts* by active field trialers that "tick tack" blinds do favor slower, methodical dogs. In addition with those type of land blinds we loose some great water dogs before they ever see water, that's the progression of the land blind, like it or not. If I stand on the middle of the mat and put a pencil on the bird and close one eye, as a handler if I hit everything my pencil covers did I challenge the blind or not? On a lighter note, I've yet to see a slow, stylish dog IMO, no offense intended, and I'm not referring to slowing down due to age


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

JusticeDog said:


> Cherylon is a great mentor for you. i wouldn't be surprised if we see you and Flint running a Q one day.... Just remember to put on your pants with the white coat!


I doubt I will ever run a FT... I am a HORRIBLE handler... Gettin better though..


I feel very blessed to get to spend a day or two with Cherylon.. Aside that she is a great with dogs ,, She is just a wonderful person..

I was on the phone with her earlier this week.. I guess ,,, tomorrow,,, Flinch is going to run her first blind!! She just had her 1 yr birthday on Tuesday of this last week.. 

To say I am excited is an understatement..

Its gonna be sloppy,,, but I cant wait til tomorrow..

Gooser


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

GREAT thread, especially for those of us who are learning there is a little more to it than walking up, pointing your dog, yelling "back", and seeing what happens. Thanks for all the replies. 

On the judging issue, a little different perspective here from a handler who is just contemplating getting into some tests. I would really like some idea of what it is I am supposed to do on the blind. Put another way, if I go out I would like to have at least some idea without having to guess. If the judge said you have to do A, B, and C and I miss a couple of them, I know why I didn't get to keep playing. I may still disagree with the test as set up, but at least I know why I didn't get called back.

If some of the controversy about test/trial judging is a tenth as bad in reality as it sometimes seems to be on this board, I really have to wonder why I would pay for the privilege of knowing I might get jobbed every weekend. Not to mention all the other time and effort required.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

RookieTrainer said:


> On the judging issue, a little different perspective here from a handler who is just contemplating getting into some tests. I would really like some idea of what it is I am supposed to do on the blind. Put another way, if I go out I would like to have at least some idea without having to guess. If the judge said you have to do A, B, and C and I miss a couple of them, I know why I didn't get to keep playing. I may still disagree with the test as set up, but at least I know why I didn't get called back.



As a proponent for the use of instructions, I would ask that those who oppose their use respond to you. However, I will say that those who get involved in FT, rarely do so in isolation. For example, when Gooser runs his first field trial, he will be able to speak to Lainee, John, David, me or any of the other members of our training group. And we would give him our best guess. 



> If some of the controversy about test/trial judging is a tenth as bad in reality as it sometimes seems to be on this board, I really have to wonder why I would pay for the privilege of knowing I might get jobbed every weekend. Not to mention all the other time and effort required.



Like all things in life, sometimes the judging is very good; sometimes it is very bad. Mostly it is somewhere in between. Those who do this for a long time, do it because they enjoy working with the dogs. Those who do it purely for the sake of collecting placements don't tend to last very long.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

RookieTrainer said:


> GREAT thread, especially for those of us who are learning there is a little more to it than walking up, pointing your dog, yelling "back", and seeing what happens. Thanks for all the replies.
> 
> On the judging issue, a little different perspective here from a handler who is just contemplating getting into some tests. I would really like some idea of what it is I am supposed to do on the blind. Put another way, if I go out I would like to have at least some idea without having to guess. If the judge said you have to do A, B, and C and I miss a couple of them, I know why I didn't get to keep playing. I may still disagree with the test as set up, but at least I know why I didn't get called back.
> 
> If some of the controversy about test/trial judging is a tenth as bad in reality as it sometimes seems to be on this board, I really have to wonder why I would pay for the privilege of knowing I might get jobbed every weekend. Not to mention all the other time and effort required.


Don’t worry about the online BS or think that you’re going to get screwed every time you run, that mindset will just ruin you. Mostly judges want to see good dog work, are as helpful as they can be, and the clubs are working hard to put on a good test. Make of running your dog what you want it to be. There are politics in FT and every personality that covers the human spectrum. It’s a sport, being judged subjectively by humans, no one is going to be happy at every test/trial. Don’t let some ugly ones ruin your joy with your dog, they aren’t worth it. I had bad experiences with some “FTers” when I was running HT early on that turned me off before I ever saw one, left me with a bad taste and that was a big mistake, to let some buzzkills keep me from having fun and challenging my dogs. So when I run into buzzkills now, I don’t let them ruin my joy, this is about me and my dogs. The more they poke at me, act condescending and rude, the sweeter is it when my dogs do well. If they are that miserable, then feel sorry for them. Both HT and FT have plenty to offer and you will meet many fine people, see wonderful dogwork, make a new group of friends. So ignore the BS on here, learn what you can while weeding out the bitching and backstabbing, in the real world, you’ll be out with your dog building a team and having the time of your life. If you can work in person with someone to help show you and critique your handling, show you how to train better, nothing online or in videos or books can replicate that. There is good stuff here, arm yourself with as much knowledge as you can, but some things really need hands on help to show, because timing is as critical as the how, where and why.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Good grief. A road is a long key hole?????????????
> 
> Why do I even bother to post?


Exactly why many don't post anymore. Ignorance has run rampant on the board...

/Paul


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

RookieTrainer said:


> If some of the controversy about test/trial judging is a tenth as bad in reality as it sometimes seems to be on this board, I really have to wonder why I would pay for the privilege of knowing I might get jobbed every weekend. Not to mention all the other time and effort required.


what you are seeing is just a discussion of different points of view regarding judging and the interpreation of the different rulebooks. That's why there are two judges, though. The consensus is what determines the placements. I've only had a big disagreement on one occassion of judging. And that was negotiated... otherwise, the placements typically fall into place. Even if you go through the series bird by bird. It's not political. Too bad that even had to be suggested. There are some great people running field trials that will be very helpful to you if they know you are serious about learning. 

Personally, I like my winners to be "the Total Package" of being excellent marking dogs, and great team members on the blinds. 

Also, if you are just starting out, it's important to remember that Ted's drawings/pics discussion relates to AA stakes. You could run a very similar blind in a Qual, however, there would/should be more leniencey in the judgement, ie: wider corridor, etc. 

Good Luck Rookie! Just go and have fun with your dog..


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Of course there are politics in FT and HT, just as there are in many other aspects of our lives. The AKC itself is political, fighting to keep public lands for hunting/training or using birds is political. Politics does not have to equal bad, though it usually is taken that way, but politics are how things are done, managed, voted upon, decided, judged, who gets what, when and how, blah blah blah. I think the good dogs and handlers, the big majority of the time, rise to the top. I think most judges and clubs, overall, do their very best and are very supportive of the sport. I was not implying politics, as in some kind of favoritism, are what determine placements, though I’m pretty sure it might have happened at least once in the history of FT. But no politics in FT? Not sure that’s possible in any organization involving humans. There are a few, very few, judges I would never run under, because I know they would let their personal agendas color their decisions towards me and my dogs, but they are fortunately in a very small minority and easily avoided. Overall, I am in love with this game, would encourage anyone to run, in whatever venue, at whatever level they want. It is addicting and a huge part of our lives, for my husband as well as me, and we wouldn't be so enthralled for so long if it was ruled by ugly people and not fun. Make it about the dogs and you can't go wrong, Rookie.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

JusticeDog said:


> what you are seeing is just a discussion of different points of view regarding judging and the interpreation of the different rulebooks.
> 
> Personally, I like my winners to be "the Total Package" of being excellent marking dogs, and great team members on the blinds.


Unless I have failed to keep up, I believe rule book is singular . 



Rainmaker said:


> Of course there are politics in FT and HT, just as there are in many other aspects of our lives. The AKC itself is political, fighting to keep public lands for hunting/training or using birds is political. Politics does not have to equal bad, though it usually is taken that way, but politics are how things are done, managed, voted upon, decided, judged, who gets what, when and how, blah blah blah. I think the good dogs and handlers, the big majority of the time, rise to the top. I think most judges and clubs, overall, do their very best and are very supportive of the sport. I was not implying politics, as in some kind of favoritism, are what determine placements, though I’m pretty sure it might have happened at least once in the history of FT. But no politics in FT? Not sure that’s possible in any organization involving humans. There are a few, very few, judges I would never run under, because I know they would let their personal agendas color their decisions towards me and my dogs, but they are fortunately in a very small minority and easily avoided. Overall, I am in love with this game, would encourage anyone to run, in whatever venue, at whatever level they want. It is addicting and a huge part of our lives, for my husband as well as me, and we wouldn't be so enthralled for so long if it was ruled by ugly people and not fun. Make it about the dogs and you can't go wrong, Rookie.


They may rise to the top but that does not necessarily mean they will achieve that reward - but after you've played FT's for awhile & have had your dog be blatantly screwed out of several rewards it should have received come back to this forum & apologize for being another of the enablers . It makes no difference whether the bookholders were crooked or incompetent, the result tends to be the same .


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

For those of you reading this thread, I suggest you go to:

The AKC Judges Website, http://www.akc.org/judges_directory/, and check to see how often a poster has judged field trials

And

The Entry Express Website, https://www.entryexpress.net/LoggedIn/search.aspx and see how often a poster has competed in field trials. 

Then you can see whether the poster has the knowledge and experience to support his/her opinions.


----------



## wojo (Jun 29, 2008)

Thank You Ted. 
I'm a HT guy but value your postings. Lots of the concepts and insights can be used in my game. I will be "Happy " to check some of the poster credentials as they pertain to proficiency. Look forward to more of your knowledge sharing.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Ted Shih said:


> For those of you reading this thread, I suggest you go to:
> 
> The AKC Judges Website, http://www.akc.org/judges_directory/, and check to see how often a poster has judged field trials
> 
> ...



Ted, your AKC judges link is a good suggestion, even though it doesn't show all of a judges points.... I think it goes back to 1998... I first judged all-age in 1989... and that does not show up.

As for Entry Express... That is valid for someone that has run all-age in the last 9 years... Personally, I ran all-age stakes with several dogs from 1989-2003... Never used EE, although there is a hunt tester with the same name there... 

All I am saying is that there are probably many people on this forum that have the knowledge and experience to support their opinions without having been blessed by Entry Express.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

huntinman said:


> All I am saying is that there are probably many people on this forum that have the knowledge and experience to support their opinions without having been blessed by Entry Express.


True. And just because someone judges a lot, doesn't mean they are a good judge. It just means that they are available and willing to hold the book. there is one judge that I have told my pro that if I ever enter another FT under that person again, just to remind me of my feelings... because I would get more pleasure from flushing my entry fee down the toilet one dollar bill at a time and watching the swirl, than I do from running one of his/her tests. They are not a bad person or competitor, just some very weird ideas of judging.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

huntinman said:


> Ted, your AKC judges link is a good suggestion, even though it doesn't show all of a judges points.... I think it goes back to 1998... I first judged all-age in 1989... and that does not show up.
> 
> As for Entry Express... That is valid for someone that has run all-age in the last 9 years... Personally, I ran all-age stakes with several dogs from 1989-2003... Never used EE, although there is a hunt tester with the same name there...
> 
> *All I am saying is that there are probably many people on this forum that have the knowledge and experience to support their opinions without having been blessed by Entry Express.*


If this were a true open forum where ideas and opinions are welcomed, one shouldn't have to come with a resume in order to express an opinion.....let people decide who they want to listen to and who they dont...when people are challenged due to their lack of expertise or experience they tend to leave the RTF...we have already witnessed what that has done to participation on the RTF...

and I will save everyone the time on EE...I ran one trial with two different dogs in 2011...went out in the first series of the Amateur....

I for one welcome everyone's opinion from novice to expert...kind of what makes the RTF enjoyable


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

BonMallari said:


> If this were a true open forum where ideas and opinions are welcomed, one shouldn't have to come with a resume in order to express an opinion.....l



I would expect nothing less from someone who would send an email to scores of people then when confronted by the subject of that email about its truth, reply "I was only the messenger."


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

huntinman said:


> Ted, your AKC judges link is a good suggestion, even though it doesn't show all of a judges points.... I think it goes back to 1998... I first judged all-age in 1989... and that does not show up.
> 
> As for Entry Express... That is valid for someone that has run all-age in the last 9 years... Personally, I ran all-age stakes with several dogs from 1989-2003... Never used EE, although there is a hunt tester with the same name there...
> 
> All I am saying is that there are probably many people on this forum that have the knowledge and experience to support their opinions without having been blessed by Entry Express.





Ted Shih said:


> For those of you reading this thread, I suggest you go to:
> 
> The AKC Judges Website, http://www.akc.org/judges_directory/, and check to see how often a poster has judged field trials
> 
> ...


As you can see from Bill's post your post is lacking, unusual for you. But I'll add a little - you weren't around when Water Blinds were the last series & around here you did not go into that series tied with any of Vance Morgan's dogs. You weren't around when folks came with only one (or two at the most) as they were going to put a shift in the field or some other task to expedite the trial. But I have every issue of RFTN (back to 1956 when it was the Field & Trial News, a publication of the WI Amateur Field Trial Club) or Retriever News as it is now called so can find that information in a heartbeat . In those days most Amateurs did a significant amount of their own dogs training, a subject you & I have discussed in these threads. 

Your attempt to lash out at those who find fault with your pontification says a lot, but remember there are those whose info available probably trumps anything you have knowledge of. I will not comment further on your attempt to show knowledge on Blinds as I believe it to be misleading to the novice trainer of which most who post here are .


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> For those of you reading this thread, I suggest you go to:
> 
> The AKC Judges Website, http://www.akc.org/judges_directory/, and check to see how often a poster has judged field trials
> 
> ...


I know of at least one "judge" who would pass both of your tests. I wouldn't run under him again if the trial were across the street from my house.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

JusticeDog said:


> True. And just because someone judges a lot, doesn't mean they are a good judge. It just means that they are available and willing to hold the book. there is one judge that I have told my pro that if I ever enter another FT under that person again, just to remind me of my feelings... because I would get more pleasure from flushing my entry fee down the toilet one dollar bill at a time and watching the swirl, than I do from running one of his/her tests. They are not a bad person or competitor, just some very weird ideas of judging.


Good point Susan... And by the same token, just because someone has been to the line with a dog many times doesn't mean that person has any idea whatsoever why a dog does what it does. Or how to set up a test to get any kind of separation... Or that they know anything about time management. Or that they think about the mechanics of a trial. Many times a lot of EE entries could mean that person just has someone train their dog, then showed up and ran the trials... How would anyone know if they ever really learned anything?


----------



## wojo (Jun 29, 2008)

Good Post Bill


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

huntinman said:


> Good point Susan... And by the same token, just because someone has been to the line with a dog many times doesn't mean that person has any idea whatsoever why a dog does what it does. Or how to set up a test to get any kind of separation... Or that they know anything about time management. Or that they think about the mechanics of a trial. Many times a lot of EE entries could mean that person just has someone train their dog, then showed up and ran the trials... How would anyone know if they ever really learned anything?



Very true Bill. Nothing like training a dog on our own and figuring out why they did what they did, or why they didn't so something, etc. in training. And learning to read a dog and its behaviors. Your post made me think of one judge I know that I swear will get down on all fours and measure the height of the cover... never trained a dog on his/her own. Not sure they ever even raised a puppy. The tests are pretty much all training tests.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Originally Posted by *JusticeDog*  


> what you are seeing is just a discussion of different points of view regarding judging and the interpreation of the different rulebooks.
> 
> Personally, I like my winners to be "the Total Package" of being excellent marking dogs, and great team members on the blinds.





> Unless I have failed to keep up, I believe rule book is singular :smile:.


Sorry Marv... bad choice of words. I was actually referring to the HT and FT rule book since many posters come from the HT perspective and are most familiar with that book... i should have clarified that better.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

BonMallari said:


> If this were a true open forum where ideas and opinions are welcomed, one shouldn't have to come with a resume in order to express an opinion.....let people decide who they want to listen to and who they dont...when people are challenged due to their lack of expertise or experience they tend to leave the RTF...we have already witnessed what that has done to participation on the RTF...
> 
> and I will save everyone the time on EE...I ran one trial with two different dogs in 2011...went out in the first series of the Amateur....
> 
> I for one welcome everyone's opinion from novice to expert...kind of what makes the RTF enjoyable


I agree with this statement and in order to learn and start in FT or HT you need to start by making opinions about what is presented (right or wrong), ask questions, participate and listen. How else will you learn. I have not run any FT except 2 QAs. I enjoyed it immensely and want to continue to learn more despite my less experience than some. I am persistent. As the one writer posted - it is about you and your dog! Have fun! Thanks to Ted and you all who posted for your input.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Mary Lynn Metras said:


> I agree with this statement and in order to learn and start in FT or HT you need to start by making opinions about what is presented (right or wrong), ask questions, participate and listen. *How else will you learn*. I have not run any FT except 2 QAs. I enjoyed it immensely and want to continue to learn more despite my less experience than some. I am persistent. As the one writer posted - it is about you and your dog! Have fun! Thanks to Ted and you all who posted for your input.


The rule book is readily available to the novice. It should be read and reread until a thorough understanding of what it contains is in your possession. At this point you are in a position to possibly grasp the nature of the diverging views and ask a question or two, but are still a long way away from being able to offer insightful commentary.........and perhaps more listening than participation might better serve you on your quest to learn. 

john


----------



## RF2 (May 6, 2008)

john fallon said:


> The rule book is readily available to the novice. It should be read and reread until a thorough understanding of what it contains is in your possession. At this point you are in a position to possibly grasp the nature of the diverging views and ask a question or two, but are still a long way away from being able to offer insightful commentary.........and perhaps more* listening *than *participation *might better serve you on your quest to learn.
> 
> john


Those are pretty rude and condescending comments. Nice contribution.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

It was not meant to be such, I'm sorry if it sounded that way........



john


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

john fallon said:


> The rule book is readily available to the novice. It should be read and reread until a thorough understanding of what it contains is in your possession. At this point you are in a position to possibly grasp the nature of the diverging views and ask a question or two, but are still a long way away from being able to offer insightful commentary.........and perhaps more listening than participation might better serve you on your quest to learn.
> 
> john


Thank you I have downloaded the AKC Field Trial rule book and I purchased Retriever Field Trial judging. I am working on understanding both of those sources. So is it another book you are referring too? I think I should have stated that a different way rather than say how else can you learn. Well there are a variety of ways to learn and the internet forum would not be my first choice-no offence to anyone but there is a plethy of knowledge on this site but you should not rely on this as your main source. It is good to discuss and put your points down stating how you see and would do Ted's diagram, ask questions and learn from the discussion. IMO Thank you


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Guidelines: No one is supposed to discuss, even in general theory, handling, judging, rule interpretations or setups on this forum. If you dare to bring up such a subject, you will rattle the resident hive and draw out the swarm, the hive doesn’t like anyone disturbing their playground. If you aren’t allergic to bees and ignore them, they’ll move off a ways, keeping to mocking and ridicule, as they really have nothing of substance behind their buzz. 

But you must still pass through the gauntlet of dripping condescension because you do not have enough experience, or, the right kind of experience. Caution! Do not attempt to gain such experience, especially not on a public forum for retriever training. Stay in your hole and be quiet. Do not ask questions. To actually offer any opinion, personal experience or viewpoint, you must have an acceptable body of work on EE, with the caveat that EE is not complete, nor does quantity always equal quality. Or vice versa.

If you do meet (or ignore) the necessary, convoluted criteria entitling you to express an opinion, and attempt to debate varying viewpoints civilly, you are using too many words, which will again rattle the hive. The hive is a simple beast and doesn’t like to be distracted from its more inane amusements, like beavers and cougars. 

If you are diligent in wading through the buzzing, then you will hear testimony about field trials being so badly run and judged that some have been screwed out of titles during their entire participation in them and that you are an enabler if you aren’t ranting against them too. Apologize now, just to get that out of the way. It won’t hurt, promise.

Pigs are running, well, walking their way to titles and we have the mythical robot dog as well. Simply push a button and they take a magic line. Or you can choose a real snorting firebreather, they have the most style and all tests should be set up to accommodate them. They can’t be expected to have enough control to handle through a keyhole. Even though keyholes have now reached epic and often invisible proportions. 

Regardless, a big water entry will overcome the potential of losing your dog over a **** or bank, however briefly. My dog already goes so high and hard into the water, I fear for her safety, but possibly we should train to jump even higher and further, so no rules are circumvented. It hasn’t been determined yet if this is easier than teaching a dog to carry a line. But don’t be surprised if a training DVD regarding this becomes available for purchase soon.

However, if one can navigate (or just ignore) the prescribed, sometimes arbitrary regulations and the buzzing, take heart. You have thickened your skin a bit, maybe picked up a tip or two, have learned to snort and poke at the ironies and foolishness and, most of all, you have realized that running your dogs in the real world is nothing like this, and is the only thing that really matters.    (another guideline, use emoticons, sometimes, it appeases the hive)


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Rainmaker said:


> Guidelines: No one is supposed to discuss, even in general theory, handling, judging, rule interpretations or setups on this forum. If you dare to bring up such a subject, you will rattle the resident hive and draw out the swarm, the hive doesn’t like anyone disturbing their playground. If you aren’t allergic to bees and ignore them, they’ll move off a ways, keeping to mocking and ridicule, as they really have nothing of substance behind their buzz.
> 
> But you must still pass through the gauntlet of dripping condescension because you do not have enough experience, or, the right kind of experience. Caution! Do not attempt to gain such experience, especially not on a public forum for retriever training. Stay in your hole and be quiet. Do not ask questions. To actually offer any opinion, personal experience or viewpoint, you must have an acceptable body of work on EE, with the caveat that EE is not complete, nor does quantity always equal quality. Or vice versa.
> 
> ...



NIcely Done Kim.


Hit the Nail on the Head Regards


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Golddogs said:


> NIcely Done Kim.
> 
> 
> Hit the Nail on the Head Regards


That's confusing. Too many words.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> That's confusing. Too many words.



x2!
I think she is miffed at Ted??
but am not sure.
I was tedding hay one time and ran over a ground nest of wasps and they swarmed the old 8N until it ran out of gas.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Buzz buzz buzz go the little worker bees, can their queens be far behind? C'mon guys, don't make it so easy.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Thread is locked, it has run its course and has degraded...


----------

