# Getting started in field trials



## Newf (Jul 13, 2010)

So a couple of the other threads on here got me thinking...just how does one get started running field trials?? I'm sure there are probably a few others that may be wondering the same thing, so why not put together a list of things a newbie needs to know before showing up at their first trial. Personally I know very little about them, so maybe some of the experienced folks can post some tips/information resources, etc. Try to keep it serious and provide legitimate information for anybody who wants to know. Personally I've went and watched 2 separate trials, one being the Canadian national amateur last year, and that day I think I was easily the youngest person there (33) I could be wrong but it seems to me it could very well be a dying sport. So how about it folks how about a little FYI/FAQ for Newbie Field Trialers. 

For a starting point, let's say we already have:
* field trial quality pup
* a copy of one of the training programs (Lardy/Graham/etc)

Personally my biggest question would be:
* what should the dog be capable of handling? (Training requirements?)


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

A good dog (black ) able to be trained is key!! Along with what you mentioned. I believe another thread talked about dog's pedigrees which is important in selecting a dog. IMO A place to train and join a club to support the sport. Your own training equipment (throwers, BB etc) if you will be training alone at times. IMO Good luck to you!!!


----------



## Mike Perry (Jun 26, 2003)

You will think this is not serious but it is.

1) Get a checking account with a lot of money in it that you don't need or want.

2) Get a thick skin.

3) Be prepared mentally to never have a winner.

4) Find a good pro and send the best dog you have to him/her and just wait.

It is a tough game and not for the impatient or faint of heart. The top 1/10 of the top 1% of talented dogs in the country are successful. Al the rest never see a blue ribbon.

Others may see it different, bit that is my take.

MP


----------



## TRUEBLUE (Aug 27, 2007)

Mike Perry said:


> It is a tough game and not for the impatient or faint of heart. The top 1/10 of the top 1% of talented dogs in the country are successful. Al the rest never see a blue ribbon.
> 
> Others may see it different, bit that is my take.
> 
> MP


Pretty accurate statement, Mike.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

1. access to a variety of training grounds

2. supportive spouse

3. flexible job or self employed

4. competitive spirit

5. mentor with previous success in field trials


----------



## ebenezer (Aug 19, 2009)

Or you could do what we did get up the nerve to send in an entry. You never know what will happen and the game is looking for people to get involved here in Canada. You are right our ages are getting up there. You will have to make so choices as training a dog takes a great deal of time and/or money if you go the pro route.


----------



## Greg Heier (Jan 3, 2009)

Step One: Get a good dog
Step Two: Train until you think your dog is ready for the level you will be entering than double that amount of training before you actually enter.
Step Three: Pay your money and take your chances
Step Four: Learn through competition that there are better dogs with better training
Step Five: Humbled, go back to Step Two and repeat until you either start having success or realize that you really need to go back to Step One and start a different dog
Step Six: Repeat for a lifetime

Greg


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

Pay your entry fee and start running. It's between you and the dog. It's not what other people think it's what you think about the trial you ran. Win or lose just love being at the line with your dog that you trained and handled and running the setup.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

You coulda said the same thing about the sport dying out 30 years ago about field trialing. Back then mostly the more "mature" folks were the ones who were running dogs. It helps to have retired with some savings.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

The Op has a fair question however lots of answers are available. 
If you like outdoors, training a dog(s) , being committed, have available grounds, time , etc , have disposable funds, like to travel, be disappointed a lot, realize that a lottery ticket has about as much chance as all of us do( there is a group that has good success however they are mostly very experienced) then the retriever sport will enrich your life. 

While it is about winning or achieving a standard the really successful folks enjoy a special relationship with their dog. If you go out in the first series or pickup in the 4th or perhaps finish; it is really about the team and are YOU happy with the work. 

Enjoy the journey and you may find the destination changed. 
Dk


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

Pay your entry fee and start running. It's between you and the dog. It's not what other people think it's what you think about the trial you ran. Win or lose just love being at the line with your dog that you trained and handled and running the setup.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I think that Mike Perry got the downside of Field Trials right, but Greg Heier got the essence of field trials. If you enjoy working with the dogs, If you enjoy watching your progress as a trainer and a handler, and your dog's progress, and are able to separate yourself from the need to acquire ribbons, you will be hooked for life. If you are doing this to acquire "success," you will be miserable.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

I think all the answers are good ones. I'm giving it some thought, but don't know any FT'ers in my neck of the woods. I have a pup from FC dam AFC/FC sire with a good derby-date birthday so if anyone can give me any contact information... I'd be grateful.

Having said that, maybe one other thing should be added to the list for the OP. I have a lot of training information and it's all going to be vital. But Retrievers Online is the first resource I've read that really dissects the sport and analyzes concepts that a FT dog must know. It provides illustrations and the writing style is very readable.


----------



## Jennifer Henion (Jan 1, 2012)

1tulip said:


> I think all the answers are good ones. *I'm giving it some thought, but don't know any FT'ers in my neck of the woods*. I have a pup from FC dam AFC/FC sire with a good derby-date birthday so if anyone can give me any contact information... I'd be grateful.
> 
> Having said that, maybe one other thing should be added to the list for the OP. I have a lot of training information and it's all going to be vital. But Retrievers Online is the first resource I've read that really dissects the sport and analyzes concepts that a FT dog must know. It provides illustrations and the writing style is very readable.



Bolding is mine. Trust me, "if you build it, they will come." I live in a remote area, but when I started going to Derbies (which was last year with my very first field dog), I met a lot of field trial people who were very kind and willing to train with me. It would mean some traveling, but so does everything else. If you show up to a trial, you will meet some great people who will help you learn more than you could imagine. Seek and ye shall find! 

Dave Kress really said it for me in navigating this sport with my first dog: Changing your destination from winning a ribbon to making it to the next series and sometimes just learning something new. That's the ticket to enjoying the sport in my view.

Here is my take on how to get started in Field Trials:

1. Read the rules, get familiar with Entry Express to find a stake near you. Go watch one first if possible. Research what a stake will present.

2. Train for that level.

3. Go do it. It's so much fun!!!!!


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

moscowitz said:


> Pay your entry fee and start running. It's between you and the dog. It's not what other people think it's what you think about the trial you ran. Win or lose just love being at the line with your dog that you trained and handled and running the setup.


This.

If you want to be one of the top dogs in the dog game, run nationals every year, etc., you need either a lot of time or a lot of money and a lot of both is better.

But if you love running the dog and training when you can and doing better over time than you used to, it is a great way to spend a weekend. Make your own yardstick for success or failure (at first, my measure of success was not having to do the walk of shame  )other than ribbons because more often than not they go to the folks mentioned above. However, when you get a ribbon it is all the more sweet.

The people who run FTs are a small group and when you first show up they won't know you and may appear closed but they will know you the second time and will be very helpful and supportive, especially once they know where on your truck your cooler tray is and where you keep the liquor


----------



## Newf (Jul 13, 2010)

Great info so far folks...I might get picked on for this one, but here goes anyway...

What about the actual requirements for a Field trial? Where would a person find that info? I know when I was training my dog for hunt tests I had an actual list of requirements for each level. Ie SH= double marks @ 100, blind @ 100,walk ups, etc. Is there a similar set of elements a judge has to follow to create a fair trial? Or a similar yardstick to measure an individuals training so that can at least "think" they are ready to enter a trial?


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Greg Heier said:


> Step One: Get a good dog
> Step Two: Train until you think your dog is ready for the level you will be entering than double that amount of training before you actually enter.
> Step Three: Pay your money and take your chances
> Step Four: Learn through competition that there are better dogs with better training
> ...


I think you nailed it Greg! Don't collect dogs is one of the hardest for new folks to deal with in field trials too! Halo effect. The training level is another. Field Trials are a good money hole.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Money hole. That's so true. Whenever I've spent a slug of $$ on the game, I just turn to hubby and say "But sweetie. At least I'm not in love with horses!" Or sometimes... "Don't worry, I won't be buying that bass boat."


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Newf said:


> Great info so far folks...I might get picked on for this one, but here goes anyway...
> 
> What about the actual requirements for a Field trial? Where would a person find that info? I know when I was training my dog for hunt tests I had an actual list of requirements for each level. Ie SH= double marks @ 100, blind @ 100,walk ups, etc. Is there a similar set of elements a judge has to follow to create a fair trial? Or a similar yardstick to measure an individuals training so that can at least "think" they are ready to enter a trial?


There is no substitute for real life experience. Go watch, meet some field trial people, most are more than willing to help newcomers. Learning about field trials on the internet would be like trying to learn to play golf on the internet.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

EdA said:


> There is no substitute for real life experience. Go watch, meet some field trial people, most are more than willing to help newcomers. Learning about field trials on the internet would be like trying to learn to play golf on the internet.


That about sums it up! Especially about training and running "big dogs", in Championship pointed stakes where the points count towards field championship or amateur field championship titles and what those magnificent animals are capable of doing each and every weekend. Go watch the minor stakes, Derby and Qualifyings, then go watch the Opens and Amateurs. Your questions will be answered, welcome!


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

Newf said:


> Great info so far folks...I might get picked on for this one, but here goes anyway...
> 
> What about the actual requirements for a Field trial? Where would a person find that info? I know when I was training my dog for hunt tests I had an actual list of requirements for each level. Ie SH= double marks @ 100, blind @ 100,walk ups, etc. Is there a similar set of elements a judge has to follow to create a fair trial? Or a similar yardstick to measure an individuals training so that can at least "think" they are ready to enter a trial?


In the Derby, which is for dogs under two years old, you will usually see several double mark series, some on land and some on water. The distances are usually under 300 yds.

In the Qualifying you would be normal to see a land triple, a land blind, a water blind and water triple the distances are usually under 300 yds on these but there is no limitation in the rules. The marking tests usually have one retired gun. The series may be combined, so you may have a land triple in conjunction with a land blind.

In the All Age stakes (Open & Amateur) there is usually a land and a water marking series as well as a land and a water blind series. Because the competition is stiffer than the Qualifying, the distances are longer and there are more factors in All Age stakes. The judging is much tighter at this stake. On blinds there are often poison birds, scented points and the dog should be able to be handled on and off of points with little effort. The dog should be able to drive tight past the short bird to the long punch bird.

I believe the Retriever News site has some videos and diagrams of past Nationals that give some idea of how tough the All Age tests can be. A search of YouTube should also come up with some videos of individual tests at a trial. The best thing to do is to go watch one.


----------



## Spry (Dec 29, 2013)

I like all the info offered here. I signed up for our states retriever events e mails and just got one showing the activities
for the year. So just sent em back a mail asking if I could volunteer at the events as a helping hand. I'm a good listening laborer. Figured that way I could have fun, watch dogs run, be useful and learn all at the same time. Then see if we could play.

Lee


----------



## Malcolm (Oct 13, 2006)

1. Learn how to to train your own dog. using written material and help from a pro or accomplished Amateur.
2.This will give you the skills to determine if your dog is ready.
3.I would have my dog doing Master hunter work before entering a Derby. It will give you and the dog tools to understand concepts that won't set your training back six months. 
4.Be humble, and don't set unrealistic expectations. 85% of the dogs don't reach there prime until 6 years of age. (All Age Stakes)
5.Follow a proven program step by step. This should probably be #1.
6.Dedication breeds success, there aren't any shortcuts. 
7.A Good DOG??? The most misused statement in competition!! Being a great handler is the key. Most dogs go out on handler era, not because they lacked talent.


Newf said:


> Great info so far folks...I might get picked on for this one, but here goes anyway...
> 
> What about the actual requirements for a Field trial? Where would a person find that info? I know when I was training my dog for hunt tests I had an actual list of requirements for each level. Ie SH= double marks @ 100, blind @ 100,walk ups, etc. Is there a similar set of elements a judge has to follow to create a fair trial? Or a similar yardstick to measure an individuals training so that can at least "think" they are ready to enter a trial?


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

Malcolm said:


> 1. Learn how to to train your own dog. using written material and help from a pro or accomplished Amateur.
> 2.This will give you the skills to determine if your dog is ready.
> *3.I would have my dog doing Master hunter work before entering a Derby.* It will give you and the dog tools to understand concepts that won't set your training back six months.
> 4.Be humble, and don't set unrealistic expectations. 85% of the dogs don't reach there prime until 6 years of age. (All Age Stakes)
> ...


The Derby stake is age restricted (2 yrs old or younger)...if you are doing MH work at age 2 or younger, as Phil Robertson would say " ..now we're cooking with peanut oil"


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

Master Hunter is not normally in the field trial progression. Early on most trainers are focusing training towards all age stakes. In training, most derby dogs are doing complex blind work. The factors, distance and required precision are very different in trials than in a MH event. Successful trial dogs are trained 5 or more days per week.

A very good dog is essential in trials. The "A" level pros run dogs at all levels except Amateur. You will not see them make a lot of handlers errors. That is the competition and most of them do not have the patience to keep a mediocre dog on the truck. 

If anyone thinks that any old pure bred retriever can compete in trials, look at some completed trials on entry express. Check out the pedigrees of the finishing dogs. You will find that a large number come from parents that each have championship titles. I suspect most of them have a majority of titled ancestors in the last three generations.


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

Don't let folks discourage you ...

1. Do you have a flexible work schedule?
2. Are you competitive by nature?
3. Are you committed to learning as much as possible?
4. Can you accept some failure?

If you answered yes, go to some trials, find some good training partners and patiently train your dog to be the best it can be. Don't fall in love with a particular dog, though. You can't turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. Sometimes, you create issues with a dog. Don't be afraid to seek the advice and help of a pro.


----------



## Bill Billups (Sep 13, 2003)

Newf said:


> So a couple of the other threads on here got me thinking...just how does one get started running field trials?? I'm sure there are probably a few others that may be wondering the same thing, so why not put together a list of things a newbie needs to know before showing up at their first trial. Personally I know very little about them, so maybe some of the experienced folks can post some tips/information resources, etc. Try to keep it serious and provide legitimate information for anybody who wants to know. Personally I've went and watched 2 separate trials, one being the Canadian national amateur last year, and that day I think I was easily the youngest person there (33) I could be wrong but it seems to me it could very well be a dying sport. So how about it folks how about a little FYI/FAQ for Newbie Field Trialers.
> 
> For a starting point, let's say we already have:
> * field trial quality pup
> ...


If you have any experience with hunt tests its not hard to make the jump to the Q. The best way to learn what you need to train for is to enter one and step to the line with your dog. When I ran my first trial I had never even seen a FT before. Everyone was very supportive and it had me hooked.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Russ said:


> Master Hunter is not normally in the field trial progression. Early on most trainers are focusing training towards all age stakes. In training, most derby dogs are doing complex blind work. The factors, distance and required precision are very different in trials than in a MH event. Successful trial dogs are trained 5 or more days per week.
> 
> A very good dog is essential in trials. The "A" level pros run dogs at all levels except Amateur. You will not see them make a lot of handlers errors. That is the competition and most of them do not have the patience to keep a mediocre dog on the truck.
> 
> If anyone thinks that any old pure bred retriever can compete in trials, look at some completed trials on entry express. Check out the pedigrees of the finishing dogs. You will find that a large number come from parents that each have championship titles. I suspect most of them have a majority of titled ancestors in the last three generations.


I agree, in fact running hunt tests with a young derby dog is something I wouldn't do. Many field trialers train from the beginning of a goal of a all-age dog (not a QAA dog) but, a dog that can compete for championship points and make progress towards a field champion and/or amateur field champion title. This starts in the Derby and many dogs have won or placed in all-age stakes as older derby dogs. If one were selecting a puppy from well bred parentage ,and field trials were the goal, I would continue to train at a very high standard, not hunt test training. Run hunt tests later if that's your desire. I assure you a well trained field trial older derby dog say 20 plus months can do high level hunt tests, some younger.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Spry said:


> I like all the info offered here. I signed up for our states retriever events e mails and just got one showing the activities
> for the year. So just sent em back a mail asking if I could volunteer at the events as a helping hand. I'm a good listening laborer. Figured that way I could have fun, watch dogs run, be useful and learn all at the same time. Then see if we could play.
> 
> Lee


That's the best way hands down! A worker at a field trial most always gets the attention of those experienced folks. Birds and places help too, if you have access to those! or can you shoot flyers and make them immediately dead! in a hula hoop area . I'am stretching it a bit.


----------



## Scott Adams (Jun 25, 2003)

Great info so far.
Russ gave you the details you were looking for.
The resources you mention prove that you are on the right track.
IMO there is a HUGE value in hooking up as much as possible with people who are current and active. They will give you the best perspective on the demands you face in the field & otherwise. Be prepared to prove that you are worth their effort to teach you. For every 20 newbies that come along maybe one is not a time waster for us. Be patient and measure your expectations against your experience.
Ignore the naysayers.
There is far more to this than ribbons and titles. Field trials people and dogs are entertaining from all angles.


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Scott Adams said:


> Great info so far.
> Russ gave you the details you were looking for.
> The resources you mention prove that you are on the right track.
> IMO there is a HUGE value in hooking up as much as possible with people who are current and active. They will give you the best perspective on the demands you face in the field & otherwise. Be prepared to prove that you are worth their effort to teach you. For every 20 newbies that come along maybe one is not a time waster for us. Be patient and measure your expectations against your experience.
> ...


Scott explain time waster? so someone has an idea what you are expecting from a newcomer. ML


----------



## Scott Adams (Jun 25, 2003)

A time waster is someone who comes out to learn how to train, regularly for a week or month, and in that time gets all kinds of advice for the price of throwing a few birds, and then "POOF" they are gone.
Each session an hr or more is taken to go over all the basic details of training etc. Then they are gone. Despite their claims they never really were keeners. Out our way we have not seen a dedicated person join us in a least 6 years.


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

If you want to get into field trials, jump all in that is, you will have a better experience and better chance of succeding if you connect to the hip of a well connected mentor whom you can train with on a regular basis. (Daily or at least all weekend, every weekend) Secondly besides just helping you learn dog training your mentor will ideally be grooming you to judge trials and if you're a good enough student help set you up with judging assignments. You would be well advised to have at least 2 judging assignments on your circuit yearly starting as soon as possible.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Breck said:


> You would be well advised to have at least 2 judging assignments on your circuit yearly starting as soon as possible.


I would suggest tapping the brakes on that one until said person has participated in the last series more than occasionally.


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Ed I agree with you, of course, and was always loth to run a 4th when one judge had never ever finished AA stake and likely had never hung around late Sunday afternoon to have even seen one. 
But the point of my advice is that if one wants to be taken seriously they need to let folks know they will be seeing them in the chair often.


----------



## afdahl (Jul 5, 2004)

There's a lot of good advice here. I'll just add that because most dogs don't measure up, the question often arises what to do with those that don't. Some folks wash them out, sell them, and start over with a new prospect. Some see that dog through and may compete with it for its entire working life, even if it's not a strong prospect (you see this some with Chesapeakes); they start again when the current dog gets old. There are a few people out there who have repeatedly had good/great dogs, Derby champions, National winners and finalists, who if you go visit them you will meet their washouts hanging around the kitchen. People in the last category have an exceptional success ratio or they couldn't do this; the kitchen would be too crowded.

Amy Dahl


----------



## Huff (Feb 11, 2008)

There are lots of other ways to prove that you are serious about the trial game than judging. Too much knowledge needed to judge for a beginner to just jump in the chair to prove that. You can volunteer as trial chairman or secretary for your local club and see what goes on behind the scenes to put on a trial. It is a ton of work that not many people are willing to do. Its a job that is important because without someone orchestrating the event there are no events. Same with judges.

Russell


----------



## John Lash (Sep 19, 2006)

"Money hole" Call name Pit...


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

I agree with those who have said you need successful, real life mentors to help you prepare a dog for trial. You can hire a pro or do it yourself, depending on your situation/goals/desires/resources.

There are a few things that I think are critical for a newer person in terms of being accepted and getting others to give you the help you need. I say this having trained with many FT amateurs and more dog training professionals than most people will ever see. Just to qualify that last statement, I worked a job for two years where there were 90-100 trainers on board at any given time. There were pros from HT/FT, Military and Law Enforcement, all kinds of dog sports including agility and schutzund. 40 year old guys who legitimately had been training professionally for more than 20 years.

Some things to be aware of about the environment you are entering:

1. Remember that anyone whose not getting paid to help you most certainly doesn't have to put up with you. even if they are getting paid there will be a limit to their patience.

2. You know NOTHING about dog training in the eyes of someone who has trained 1000's of dogs, unless you too have trained 1000's and even then you may not know anything about their venue. I don't care how talented you are.

3. If you are talented in one venue or another you might get some respect from people in another venue but they still view themselves as being superior in terms of knowledge (and in many cases they are).

4. There are many many people who are VERY set in their ways, due to success over many dogs and years. They may not be open to new ideas. 

5. Personalities still exist. Someone can be an excellent dog trainer and not do very well interacting with people. Be prepared to either seek out an interpersonal style that matches your needs or adapt to what you find in the pursuit of knowledge. 

Some things you should do when interacting with experienced trainers. 

1. Remember my first 5 points, ALWAYS.

2. Talk less and listen more. 

2a. Other than animal abuse, don't come with any pre-disposed notions of how YOU want to train, unless you know the group agrees with your philosophy.

3. Practice your personal handling/training skills away from the group. 

4. Be respectful of people's time. Be punctual. Do your share of the work. Be dedicated. 

5. Remember that everyone's success in a training group depends on everyone else pitching in and doing a quality job. The bird boy can be more important than the handler in a lot of situations. Learn how to FOLLOW DIRECTIONS. 

6. Be gracious and grateful.

7. Ask questions and LISTEN to the answers. Put the answers into practice. Advice given but not applied (within a group of experienced people who are on the same page) is viewed as a waste of effort. Wasted effort = lack of effort later. People will stop advising you if they don't see you put their advice into practice.

Finally...

A good dog really helps, so start with the best dog you can find and don't be afraid to change dogs if necessary.


----------



## Huff (Feb 11, 2008)

Good post Darrin.

Russell


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

read between the lines a little, when I said have a training mentor who can also guide you into judging assignments, it meant that they would be mentoring you in proper training techniques and things important to judging at the same time often by giving you responsibilities of increasing difficulty on training days. If things go reasonably well they'll have you finishing trials sooner than the average bear. If you start with a baby puppy, have a good mentor and are a good student, by the time you are breaking your dog out in Derby you will maybe apprentice that season (per latest rules) and line up your first assignments. Try to insure at your early minor stake judging assignments you are paired with a seriously good judge, preferably one who has judged a National or at least has finish and placed in numerous trials.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Breck said:


> read between the lines a little, when I said have a training mentor who can also guide you into judging assignments, it meant that they would be mentoring you in proper training techniques and things important to judging at the same time often by giving you responsibilities of increasing difficulty on training days. If things go reasonably well they'll have you finishing trials sooner than the average bear. If you start with a baby puppy, have a good mentor and are a good student, by the time you are breaking your dog out in Derby you will maybe apprentice that season (per latest rules) and line up your first assignments. Try to insure at your early minor stake judging assignments you are paired with a seriously good judge, preferably one who has judged a National or at least has finish and placed in numerous trials.


I can only speak from the perspective of learning to judge HT but I think you're on target with telling folks to think about and prepare to get in the chair Breck. 

It made me a much better handler.

It is critical to everyone else though, that your mentors only put you in the chair when you're REALLY ready. 

Just taking the AKC judge's seminar, if that's your venue will help you as a handler immensely, especially if judges are really fluent and judging the way the AKC wants it done.


----------



## Scott Adams (Jun 25, 2003)

Judging is a big responsibility in terms of knowledge, experience, and awareness of risks at all angles, especially where safety is concerned. New folks can learn almost as much wearing a marshals hat, as they can judging.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Time wasters are also people who ask for everyone's advice and take no one's


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Hi Dr. Ed,

I like the new avatar!

Chris


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

In their infinite wisdom, the founding fathers of the field trial game set the total number of points needed by the* pair *of judges to allow that pannel to judge a Derby, the last time I looked neither need to have 8 points much less to have judged a National.

john


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

john fallon said:


> In their infinite wisdom, the founding fathers of the field trial game set the total number of points needed by the* pair *of judges to allow that pannel to judge a Derby, the last time I looked neither need to have 8 points much less to have judged a National.
> 
> john


at some point in the equation, one of them has to have 8 because the other one will have 0... then 7-1 and so on down the line...


----------



## canuckkiller (Apr 16, 2009)

*Old ways v. New*

The underlying idea that judging assignments for the 'novice' teaches
the F.T. game is Dangerous & puts "the cart before the horse".
Experience and adequate knowledge develops from proper and timely
apprenticeship as an active club member, volunteering & working all possible
club duties, acquiring a well bred dog from recognized F.T. lines, working the
many jobs at club & AKC Licensed trials, TRAINING ONE'S OWN DOG, and ...
seeks out and benefits from the guidance of one or two respected Mentors.

Hopefully, if one's peers recognize his or her's sincerity & commitment, they 
will line up early judging assignments based on "accomplishment" in the above 
areas and Co- judges will be good ones intent on teaching ... right from wrong 
as well as the rules ... and the student will be respectful and appreciative.

Bill Connor


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> at some point in the equation, one of them has to have 8 because the other one will have 0... then 7-1 and so on down the line...


Obviously, on *that singular occasion*, in order to arrive at the total required number, which is eight, one needs to have all of them. 

john


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Just because something can be done, does not mean that it should be done.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

canuckkiller said:


> The underlying idea that judging assignments for the 'novice' teaches
> the F.T. game is Dangerous & puts "the cart before the horse".
> Experience and adequate knowledge develops from proper and timely
> apprenticeship as an active club member, volunteering & working all possible
> ...


Post of the Month!!


----------



## Greg Heier (Jan 3, 2009)

From the standard procedures for retriever field trials,


> In a Derby and Qualifying Stake the experience of
> the Judges selected shall be such that their combined
> experience satisfies at least one of	the following
> standardsa) the judging of two stakes carrying
> ...


Not that it is a good idea, but the rules require relatively little combined judging experience between two judges to judge the qualifying or the derby.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Some of the worst Derby horror stories I have ever heard ended with, "and they were both eight point judges" ;-)

john


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

john fallon said:


> Some of the worst Derby horror stories I have ever heard ended with, "and they were both eight point judges" ;-)
> 
> john


While some of the worst occurred when neither was an 8 point judge


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

EdA said:


> While some of the worst occurred when neither was an 8 point judge


You aren't intimating that the one excuses the other are you ? No,of course not.

By some accounts the latter is to some degree occasionally to be expected; the former not so much so....

john


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

john fallon said:


> You aren't intimating that the one excuses the other are you ? No,of course not.
> 
> By some accounts the latter is to some degree occasionally to be expected; the former not so much so....
> 
> john


I am not intimating anything, just disputing what you have allegedly heard.


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Look, my advice regarding getting out and judging early in ones career was not about "learning" necessarily. Several of you old timers should know just what I was getting at.
And john my point was a new judge stands to loose a lot getting stuck judging with those floating on the margins. I'll say again, for a serious newbie, chose carefully who you pair up with, holding out for a prev national judge or someone with oddles of judging points and or had derby dogs with lots o points. Exhaust your efforts to hook up folks like that or similar before settling for whomever.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

EdA said:


> I am not intimating anything, just disputing what you have allegedly heard.


Allegedly, I suppose your not intimating anything there either ?

Well Ed, I'm doing a search now for some threads germane to the subject, It may take a while so you keep an eye out for them ya hear.

john


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

john fallon said:


> Allegedly, I suppose your not intimating anything there either ?
> 
> Well Ed, I'm doing a search now for some threads germane to the subject, It may take a while so you keep an eye out for them ya hear.
> 
> john


Eyewitness accounts preferred to internet accounts, glad I do not share your retriever field trial cynicism, if I did I would probably quit.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

EdA said:


> Eyewitness accounts preferred to internet accounts,* glad I do not share your retriever field trial cynicism,* if I did I would probably quit.


I am not a cynic... When one tasks one judging pannel to judge both a 90 dog open and then jam a Derby into the remander of a Sunday afternoon as you profess subscribing to, it is not conducive to anything more than what you get.... 

Read the first several pages of this thread from 09-09-2004, http://www.retrievertraining.net/fo...like-to-see-in-a-DERBY&highlight=Derby+Judges
Then tell me who is the cynic....

john


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> I can only speak from the perspective of learning to judge HT
> 
> It made me a much better handler.


That must have been quite the master test you judged in 2010....


----------



## duk4me (Feb 20, 2008)

EdA said:


> While some of the worst occurred when neither was an 8 point judge


Hey Doc Ed I scored 8 points in a 7th grade basketball game. We won 12 to 8 I was a hero. Of course it was B team but does that count for anything?


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> If you think the AKC Judges seminar(s) and the apprenticeship teach you nothing about being a better handler, I'm not sure you got the point of the exercise.
> 
> That's if you've ever done them. I don't know because I don't care to waste my time looking up your background.


I'm not the one bragging about how much I have learned judging. You are. Yes, I can see how apprenticing one test, and judging one test would be soooo beneficial to your handling. But then again, you have not even entered a test or trial for 2.5 years. 

I do get the point of your exercise-----


Hyperbole regards-


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

JusticeDog said:


> I'm not the one bragging about how much I have learned judging. You are. Yes, I can see how apprenticing one test, and judging one test would be soooo beneficial to your handling. But then again, you have not even entered a test or trial for 2.5 years.
> 
> I do get the point of your exercise-----
> 
> ...


 I was referring to the two days spent with Jerry Mann when I said PREPARING to judge would make you a better handler. 

It did me. Maybe it wouldn't someone else. I don't know, but it certainly opened my eyes to a lot of little things I didn't realize before I went through the process.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> I was referring to the two days spent with Jerry Mann when I said PREPARING to judge would make you a better handler.
> 
> It did me. Maybe it wouldn't someone else. I don't know, but it certainly opened my eyes to a lot of little things I didn't realize before I went through the process.


Ok, I'll call Jerry Mann and ask him this next week, since nothing else you have said is true, I won't hold my breath about this either.

reminds me of someone else on this board who claims he has trained with and for famous people. Trouble is, they are all dead. Can't ask them except through a Ouija Board.


back peddling regards -


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

It is very true that sitting in the chair judging field trials or hunt test teaches you a lot as a handler, that does not mean every new up and comer should be given a judging assignment. It may be good for him or her, but they might not be good judging material. As John and Ed both say, bad test and bad judging can involve both the very experienced and inexperienced, but assuming similar talent, knowledge and inherent judgment, you would have to deduct that judges only get better with experience.

edit: I just read the last two post, certainly attending a judging seminar is good for anybody.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Interesting to see that the Holiday Season did nothing to change some dispositions.


----------



## CindyGal (Mar 6, 2012)

Ted Shih said:


> Interesting to see that the Holiday Season did nothing to change some dispositions.


My thoughts exactly. Holy smokes!


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Interesting to see that the Holiday Season did nothing to change some dispositions.


Yes, that's true, isn't it.


----------



## Denver (Dec 10, 2007)

Like!!!!!!!


Ted Shih said:


> Interesting to see that the Holiday Season did nothing to change some dispositions.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I don't think that the fact that a person trains his/her own dogs necessarily means that person will be a good judge.
I don't think that the fact that a person competes with his/her own dogs necessarily means that a person will be a good judge.
I don't think that the fact that a stake may be judged by people with the minimum number of points needed means that the stake will be poor.
I don't think that the fact that a stake may be judged by people with considerably more than the minimum number of points needed means that the stake will be good.
But, the odds are sure stacked that way.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> I just read the last two post, certainly attending a judging seminar is good for anybody.


Hard to imagine that being exposed to different ideas could be bad for you.


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Newf said:


> So a couple of the other threads on here got me thinking...just how does one get started running field trials?? I'm sure there are probably a few others that may be wondering the same thing, so why not put together a list of things a newbie needs to know before showing up at their first trial. Personally I know very little about them, so maybe some of the experienced folks can post some tips/information resources, etc. Try to keep it serious and provide legitimate information for anybody who wants to know. Personally I've went and watched 2 separate trials, one being the Canadian national amateur last year, and that day I think I was easily the youngest person there (33) I could be wrong but it seems to me it could very well be a dying sport. So how about it folks how about a little FYI/FAQ for Newbie Field Trialers.
> 
> *For a starting point, let's say we already have:
> * field trial quality pup
> ...


*
*


This was the OP

And you wonder why newbies say the hell with it??


----------



## RetrieverNation (Jul 15, 2012)

Kind of seems like the person who likes to be the underdog, learn the hard way and defy the odds is the perfect fit for Field Trials regardless if they are successful or not!


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Newf said:


> Great info so far folks...I might get picked on for this one, but here goes anyway...
> 
> What about the actual requirements for a Field trial? Where would a person find that info? I know when I was training my dog for hunt tests I had an actual list of requirements for each level. Ie SH= double marks @ 100, blind @ 100,walk ups, etc. Is there a similar set of elements a judge has to follow to create a fair trial? Or a similar yardstick to measure an individuals training so that can at least "think" they are ready to enter a trial?


In that regard, the FT rules are less helpful than the HT rules, since it isn't going against a standard, there isn't a standard. The judges toss out what they think is a good test to find the best dogs. You mentioned in your first post that you had Lardy or Graham's training materials. Look at the flow chart. Pretty much all of the Advanced stuff mentioned and more.

You really have to see to appreciate what a 100 dog open looks like


----------



## Jacob Hawkes (Jun 24, 2008)

Have Santa drop off several sacks full of money. 

Pray that you get *the* dog. 

Hope for no injuries.

Find the perfect trainer for said dog. 

Ask Santa to deliver more sacks of money. 

Forget you ever had said money & pray that he/she doesn't crash & burn in The FT.


----------



## ebenezer (Aug 19, 2009)

Newf, went back to your original post. You say you attended the National Amateur so I take it you are in the western zone I also think you posted somewhere that you have run hunt test. If you live close to where the Am National was run why don't you contact that club and talk to them about coming to a training day. You can probably find information about clubs in your area on the National website. Your dog is going to need to handle all the things it handles in a hunt test at much greater distances. You saw the marks and blinds at the National, they are much like the marks and blinds you would find at a weekend field trail, the judging is just tighter. You can get a copy of the Field Trial rules from the Canadian Kennel Club.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

My take Judging is about giving back, not about what one can take from it; it's not about what you can learn by judging. Sorry but it sort've gets to me when people suggest judging as a way to learn about dogs, or learn to be a better handler. A judge should already have a vast amount of knowledge, and already know how to run and read dogs. A judge should have a bunch of dog experience, and a pretty good idea of factors, landscape, how to setup marks, influences etc. They should have already been there and trained a dog in the division which they are judging. I don't particularly like the idea of judges learning these lessons, nor deciding to judge with the intention of learning (that can be done from the gallery, or in the marshals chair, or in a gun station). I want a judge who has already been there, already knows, and chooses to give back; otherwise how can I respect their evaluation of mine or any dogs.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

No one said that JUDGING was a good way to learn anything. It was said that PREPARING TO JUDGE was a way to learn.

There's a big difference between med school and being a doctor. Judging is no different.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> My take Judging is about giving back, not about what one can take from it; it's not about what you can learn by judging. Sorry but it sort've gets to me when people suggest judging as a way to learn about dogs, or learn to be a better handler. A judge should already have a vast amount of knowledge, and already know how to run and read dogs. A judge should have a bunch of dog experience, and a pretty good idea of factors, landscape, how to setup marks, influences etc. They should have already been there and trained a dog in the division which they are judging. I don't particularly like the idea of judges learning these lessons, nor deciding to judge with the intention of learning (that can be done from the gallery, or in the marshals chair, or in a gun station). I want a judge who has already been there, already knows, and chooses to give back; otherwise how can I respect their evaluation of mine or any dogs.



This is a great ideal. However, the harsh reality is that there are not enough of the people you describe for the judging openings that must be filled.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Ted Shih said:


> This is a great ideal. However, the harsh reality is that there are not enough of the people you describe for the judging openings that must be filled.


Alas I fear your right, probably why I got strong armed into starting judging, and why our club has been sponsoring, instructing and cough(black-mailing) others to start . It is a clubs responsibility to ensure they get qualified people to judge, it is a very big responsibility that should be taken seriously, and not done just to fill spots.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Alas I fear your right, probably why I got strong armed into starting judging, and why our club has been sponsoring/black-mailing  others to start.



I support the FT apprentice program (although many do not) because it helps newcomers get a feel for all that is involved in judging, without the pressure of having to make decisions about tests, call backs, and placements


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

I believe it would be most beneficial to have someone with a history as an educator develop a curriculum of study, include a reasonable apprenticeship and throw away the existing test(s).

I don't think anyone will argue the wording on the existing tests does not promote long term retention of the rules or a thorough understanding of the rule book. Every person I know who has taken the test always gripes and complains about the ridiculousness of the wording. People who re-take the test seem to complain louder and they've probably taken it 6+ times.


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I support the FT apprentice program (although many do not) because it helps newcomers get a feel for all that is involved in judging, without the pressure of having to make decisions about tests, call backs, and placements


How far in advance does one have to express an interest in apprenticing? i.e, is it something that needs to be submitted and approved by AKC? Tacky, but can I assume that all expenses are paid by the apprenticing judge?

Thanks!

M


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Miriam Wade said:


> How far in advance does one have to express an interest in apprenticing? i.e, is it something that needs to be submitted and approved by AKC? Tacky, but can I assume that all expenses are paid by the apprenticing judge?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> M


It's the clubs responsibility. Also, for HT it's now about a 7 year process is what many people figure and you pay all of your own way and don't get to run your dog.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Miriam Wade said:


> How far in advance does one have to express an interest in apprenticing? i.e, is it something that needs to be submitted and approved by AKC? Tacky, but can I assume that all expenses are paid by the apprenticing judge?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> M


From the Rule Book, Page 7




> Upon receipt of a request any field trial club may, with the approval of the designated stake judges, authorize a person who is an amateur in good standing with the American Kennel Club and who has not previously judged an all-age stake to participate as an “Apprentice Judge” at an all-age stake. Such person shall, at his or her own expense, listen to and observe all aspects of the all-age stake including the entire set-up day; the conduct of the stake itself including call backs and the placement process as well as all mechanical aspects of the stake. An Apprentice judge may not serve either on the Event Committee or as the Event Secretary. The report of the Field Trial Secretary to the American Kennel Club shall include the name and address of any Apprentice Judge and the identity of the stake observed. No person may participate as an Apprentice Judge in more than one all-age stake at any given field trial. The assigned judges must sign the Apprentice Judge Form included in the event kit if they are in agreement that the individual has successfully completed the Apprenticeship assignment. Judge qualifications may be found under Standard Procedures, Section 23.



Rule Book page 31




> No person who has not previously judged an all-age stake shall be approved to judge a stake carrying championship points unless that person has satisfied at least one of the following requirements: (a) completion of two assignments as an Apprentice Judge; or (b) completion of one assignment as an Apprentice Judge and experience as the judge of two, or more, minor stakes; or (c) experience as the handler of a dog in fifteen or more all-age stakes in the previous three years resulting in the award of a judges’ award of merit or a place in, at least, one such stake. The process to become an Apprentice Judge and their responsibilities are explained in Chapter 5, Section 4 (page 7).


I would find a good judge, ask him/her and the co-judge whether, they would be willing to have you apprentice, and then contact club. If you find a club near home, expenses should be minimal. With right judges/teachers could be a great learning experience.


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> It's the clubs responsibility. Also, for HT it's now about a 7 year process is what many people figure and you pay all of your own way and don't get to run your dog.


I'm not as interested in HTs as in FTs. I do wonder if one were judging/apprenticing a minor stake if it would be appropriate to have someone running your dog in an All Age stake at that trial.

M


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> From the Rule Book, Page 7
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks Ted. A huge help. I would think apprenticing in the minor stakes would be the first step? Do the judges you apprentice with typically offer feedback as to why they do what they do and welcome questions?

M


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Miriam Wade said:


> I'm not as interested in HTs as in FTs. I do wonder if one were judging/apprenticing a minor stake if it would be appropriate to have someone running your dog in an All Age stake at that trial.
> 
> M



The Rule Book does not prohibit it. Nor, do I believe that good taste would prohibit it. Give it a whirl.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Miriam Wade said:


> Thanks Ted. A huge help. I would think apprenticing in the minor stakes would be the first step? Do the judges you apprentice with typically offer feedback as to why they do what they do and welcome questions?
> 
> M



I think that - like most things - it depends. 

I know that Chris Atkinson apprenticed with Andy Whiteley and me in the River King Open a couple of years ago. The three of us walked the fields together, discussed marks and blinds, and set up tests together. That approach was appropriate because of Chris's skill level. It probably would not be appropriate for someone with less dog experience. 

We discussed dog work as the dogs performed, worked on call backs together. When it came for time to place dogs, we each worked on placements separately. We had Chris tell us his placements and defend his decisions. Then Andy and I discussed placements while Chris watched. Basically, Chris participated - and helped - in all aspects of the judging process. I thought it was a good learning experience for all of us. Having to explain why you do things a certain way makes you really examine the process.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> The Rule Book does not prohibit it. Nor, do I believe that good taste would prohibit it. Give it a whirl.


Somewhat commonplace. Fairly certain I recall a minor stake judges dog being run by a friend in an AA stake at the same trial. Didn't bother me any. It would case an issue with an O/H stake.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> I think that - like most things - it depends.
> 
> I know that Chris Atkinson apprenticed with Andy Whiteley and me in the River King Open a couple of years ago. The three of us walked the fields together, discussed marks and blinds, and set up tests together. That approach was appropriate because of Chris's skill level. It probably would not be appropriate for someone with less dog experience.
> 
> We discussed dog work as the dogs performed, worked on call backs together. When it came for time to place dogs, we each worked on placements separately. We had Chris tell us his placements and defend his decisions. Then Andy and I discussed placements while Chris watched. Basically, Chris participated - and helped - in all aspects of the judging process. I thought it was a good learning experience for all of us. Having to explain why you do things a certain way makes you really examine the process.


Ted, with apprenticeship being the last step before actually getting an assignment, wouldn't you think that the apprenticeship as you described it, and nothing less, would be the only appropriate situation? It is a test of the apprentice's skills, at the end of the day, correct? The judges involved have to sign off on the apprentice being ready to judge at that point, as I understood it when I did my HT apprenticeship.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Miriam Wade said:


> I'm not as interested in HTs as in FTs. I do wonder if one were judging/apprenticing a minor stake if it would be appropriate to have someone running your dog in an All Age stake at that trial.
> 
> M


I have done it many times, both ways, someone runs your dog in a minor stake or someone runs a dog in the stake your not judging. Example a few years back my training partner judged a open and I ran test dog in the open , ran three dogs in the Amateur. Other times someone ran my derby dog in the Derby and I judged the Open or the Amateur. The only thing is sometimes if your partner is running a dog under you (one you don't own) and you share a motel room , then that dog he is running wins, hmm home cookin? or some would think. Most of the time we are very ethical. Funny story to prove a point ran a open, did great until the last series water quad with a double handle, finished and he wouldn't give me a JAM. I whined for the entire 10 hour ride home. No compromise there.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Miriam Wade said:


> Thanks Ted. A huge help. I would think apprenticing in the minor stakes would be the first step? Do the judges you apprentice with typically offer feedback as to why they do what they do and welcome questions?
> 
> M


Just to be a little technical, the rules for apprentice judges are for AA stakes only. There is no provision for being an apprentice in a minor stake. You could probably work it out, but it would not count as an apprentice assignment.

One very good way to ease into it is to judge a club trial with a good experienced judge or even 'apprentice' at one.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> Ted, with apprenticeship being the last step before actually getting an assignment, wouldn't you think that the apprenticeship as you described it, and* nothing less*, would be the only appropriate situation? It is a test of the apprentice's skills, at the end of the day, correct? The judges involved have to sign off on the apprentice being ready to judge at that point, as I understood it when I did my HT apprenticeship.


My vote is for something less.

Per the rules , other than safety considerations etc. between the event committee and the judges... I do not feel that there should any consideration given to the opinion of a third party with regard to the quality of the dog work when judging an AKC Field Trial.



john


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

My take on apprenticeships. There has been a trend lately in the Midwest anyway ,for various folks serving apprenticeships with experienced judges who have never completed a all-age stake, or even got through the first series. Some of these folks now have a few Major points under their belt. There are some judges judging at the all-age level, 8 point majors, who don't even have enough minor points. Some believe that are on various committees selecting judges on how hard a worker at club events works. No reference to their ability or experience in running dogs. On the circuit there are judges in the field trial game who have never placed a dog or even finished a dog in a all-age stake. Many suggest that if you haven't trained your own dog , how can you judge, that's pure hogwash. There are many out there in the field trial world, pro trained dogs run by amateurs, who run many weekends, finish trials, place dogs and title them. I have judged with those who have owned National Field Champions, who didn't have a clue on setting up tests or looking at good dog work. On the otherside have judged with those who just try to get to the water blind to get in the last series , have JAMed or placed a few times, but, are excellent at setting up tests and know good dog work. What we are developing are a list of Performance Judges listed on the AKC site that may or may not be qualified to even judge ! I think the committees that select judges rather then judge swapping or local availability, should do some "homework" on who is selected to judge. If not this "apprenticeship pool" is not contributing to the best interest of the sport, in my opinion.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Criquetpas said:


> ran a open, did great until the last series water quad with a double handle, finished and he wouldn't give me a JAM. I whined for the entire 10 hour ride home. No compromise there.


Too bad. You deserved it. handle on one bird, and you didn't give me a jam... that'll teach ya!  Ha ha!!!!


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Criquetpas said:


> My take on apprenticeships. There has been a trend lately in the Midwest anyway ,for various folks serving apprenticeships with experienced judges who have never completed a all-age stake, or even got through the first series. Some of these folks now have a few Major points under their belt. There are some judges judging at the all-age level, 8 point majors, who don't even have enough minor points. Some believe that are on various committees selecting judges on how hard a worker at club events works. No reference to their ability or experience in running dogs. On the circuit there are judges in the field trial game who have never placed a dog or even finished a dog in a all-age stake. Many suggest that if you haven't trained your own dog , how can you judge, that's pure hogwash. There are many out there in the field trial world, pro trained dogs run by amateurs, who run many weekends, finish trials, place dogs and title them. I have judged with those who have owned National Field Champions, who didn't have a clue on setting up tests or looking at good dog work. On the otherside have judged with those who just try to get to the water blind to get in the last series , have JAMed or placed a few times, but, are excellent at setting up tests and know good dog work. What we are developing are a list of Performance Judges listed on the AKC site that may or may not be qualified to even judge ! I think the committees that select judges rather then judge swapping or local availability, should do some "homework" on who is selected to judge. If not this "apprenticeship pool" is not contributing to the best interest of the sport, in my opinion.


Earl, you bring up a good point that I have been thinking about since this thread turned more to judging qualifications and Ted alluded to it earlier as well. There are in fact many very experienced judges who are not as good as some who are less experienced. As well, there are many people who aren't there at the end of every trial who are very good--in fact I know a few who were very darn good at bird placement before they entered their first field trial, but just don't have the dog yet to be there at the end.

One thing I want to add, though, to folks just getting in is that, in my experience many of the judges with lots of points are not good co-judges for a newer judge (some are just not good co-judges at all). If you are going to progress in those first assignments, it is way better to have a judge who will give you input, even if they have to explain to you why they don't like your ideas, than the ones who set up the test and could not care less about your thoughts. Luckily most experienced judges will listen even if it is your first assignment, but there are those out there who will not.


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Criquetpas said:


> I think the committees that select judges rather then judge swapping or local availability, should do some "homework" on who is selected to judge. If not this "apprenticeship pool" is not contributing to the best interest of the sport, in my opinion.


I agree. And I don't believe that experience in other venues really counts. It may make you a quicker study, but ... There is a difference in field trials, and until you have stepped to line and gotten your behind handed to you on a platter on more than one occasion I don't think you really appreciate the differences.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Criquetpas said:


> My take on apprenticeships. There has been a trend lately in the Midwest anyway ,for various folks serving apprenticeships with experienced judges who have never completed a all-age stake, or even got through the first series. Some of these folks now have a few Major points under their belt. There are some judges judging at the all-age level, 8 point majors, who don't even have enough minor points. Some believe that are on various committees selecting judges on how hard a worker at club events works. No reference to their ability or experience in running dogs. On the circuit there are judges in the field trial game who have never placed a dog or even finished a dog in a all-age stake. Many suggest that if you haven't trained your own dog , how can you judge, that's pure hogwash. There are many out there in the field trial world, pro trained dogs run by amateurs, who run many weekends, finish trials, place dogs and title them. I have judged with those who have owned National Field Champions, who didn't have a clue on setting up tests or looking at good dog work. On the otherside have judged with those who just try to get to the water blind to get in the last series , have JAMed or placed a few times, but, are excellent at setting up tests and know good dog work. What we are developing are a list of Performance Judges listed on the AKC site that may or may not be qualified to even judge ! I think the committees that select judges rather then judge swapping or local availability, should do some "homework" on who is selected to judge. If not this "apprenticeship pool" is not contributing to the best interest of the sport, in my opinion.


Earl

There is no perfect system. The ideal situation is to have great judges who are also great teachers. Just as there are judges who have no business teaching apprentices because of lack of judging skills, there are great judges, who have no business teaching apprentices because of lack of teaching skills. 

The problems that you raise about judging in general, and about the apprentice system as well, are in no small measure the responsibility of the individual clubs. The clubs need to be more discriminating and engage in more long term planning about judges - if they want to have better trials. Look at EE and look at how many trials coming up in the next few months do not have their judges listed. If you wait to the last minute to do things, then don't be surprised if things aren't optimal.

I also think that that the individual needs to take more responsibility for his/her education. When I first started out, before I accepted an assignment, I wanted to know how my co-judge was. And even after I found out, I would not make a commitment until I had spoken to John Goettl and others, who had been in the game a long time, gave me the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval. My second AA judging assignment was with Judy Powers, whose first words to me were "I heard I passed the background check." As in all things, good basics go a long way. If I were a newcomer being asked to judge, I would be very selective in who my first co-judges were. I would want not only a good judge, but someone with the patience and willingness to help me learn. 

Ted


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> Earl
> 
> There is no perfect system. The ideal situation is to have great judges who are also great teachers. Just as there are judges who have no business teaching apprentices because of lack of judging skills, there are great judges, who have no business teaching apprentices because of lack of teaching skills.
> 
> ...


Ted

I know I come from the "caveman era" and only judge a few trials a year now, but, still train my dogs and try to stay in touch with the contemporary sets-ups and what good dogs can do in field trials. Having said that years ago when I got my first eight points in the 1980's (AKC doesn't even keep track) everyone I judged with at that time had judged a National event. How that worked out I don't know but I learned a lot. I also trained with a fellow that had about 85 all-age points judging so that helped. What really helped me as a judge was "paying my dues" as it was called by judging numerous minor stakes before getting my first point at the Madison Retriever Club. Now those "dues " went back" to the late 1960's in sanction trials , until my first licensed derby in the 1970's judging assignment. Mostly because I was the Qualifying guy who ran a few all-age stakes with no success. When I got a second place in a Amateur all-age at Virgina Minnesota, shortly after was asked to judge my first major stake. Apparently this new trend of folks need this instant gratification. I ask whats wrong with clubs and some do, ask you to do a minor stake first,check you out, even if you are a eight point major stake, then ask you to judge an all-age? Whats wrong with starting off in the minors, then advancing to the majors? I think it is the host club's responsibility , not the AKC, to monitor the qualifications. Apprenticeships are good, something is better then nothing, but, the responsibility is with all of us in the field trial game, we have to police ourselves. Like a fellow once told me no one pays attention to you unless you are holding "the book" . 

Earl


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

john fallon said:


> My vote is for something less.
> 
> Per the rules , other than safety considerations etc. between the event committee and the judges... I do not feel that there should any consideration given to the opinion of a third party with regard to the quality of the dog work when judging an AKC Field Trial.
> 
> ...


I didn't take Ted's response to say that Chris had input on placements, just that he was asked what his were and for the rational, and then the JUDGES made the decision.

Ted knows full well the rules and doesn't seem to me as a gentleman who would be in the business of breaking them.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> I didn't take Ted's response to say that Chris had input on placements, just that he was asked what his were and for the rational, and then the JUDGES made the decision.
> 
> Ted knows full well the rules and doesn't seem to me as a gentleman who would be in the business of breaking them.



The Rule Book does not specify what the apprentice can or cannot do. 

As to whether Chris had any input into callbacks - or placements - he did not. But, we did ask him to tell us his process of decision making as to both. 

In fact, very early on, as the two of us were waiting for Chris to gather his thoughts, we both told Chris the importance of saving time, by thinking about callbacks, as you go along in a trial, rather than waiting to do callbacks until after the test is completed. One of the things that I think Andy and I impressed on Chris is the importance of time management. 

I think that the apprentice program has merit and wish that it were implemented more often.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

While I agree that apprenticeship has merit given the time constraints and pressures of judging I consider it less than ideal and would not have much interest in participating. I think there are potentially better ways and some years ago I proposed a type of mentoring for prospective judges by a qualified all-age judge not judging the stake. There were a number on inherent problems associated with such a process including the second guess factor on the judges of record. Still I think there must be a better way although there seems to be little interest from anyone in authority.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> I didn't take Ted's response to say that Chris had input on placements, just that he was asked what his were and for the rational, and then the JUDGES made the decision.
> 
> Ted knows full well the rules and doesn't seem to me as a gentleman who would be in the business of breaking them.



The point I high lighted was addressing your question.


> Ted, with apprenticeship being the last step before actually getting an assignment, wouldn't you think that the apprenticeship as you described it, and* nothing less*


 It was highlighted for clarity I guess I should have enlarged it also.

You said that* nothing less *would do for ALL apprenticing ....I said (that in keeping with the "two judge" portion of the rules) *something less *would do..

A case on point would be the affect an apprentice's compelling arguments made "off the record" so to speakthat that may have un/subconcously swayed one or both judges to any degree in their placements. No Darrin, Imput from ANY third party during placement deliberation is not a good thing in my estimation .

john


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

newf,

as others have said, get involved with a good training group, join a club, work some trials(throw birds, shoot birds etc.), enter and run your dog, marshall a few stakes. do these activities in any order you want, none are prerequisites for others.

if you are forward, interested and respectful enough to listen, field trial people will go out of their way to help you.(at least until you have a dog that can beat them;-)) 

i rarely post anything that can be taken seriously on this forum. what i am about to post is an exception. three years ago i decided i was going to "run some trials". in that time i have made the aquaintance and friendship of many people, many are legendary in this sport. from more than a few of this sport's elite competitors i have recieved advice and counsel, trained with, been granted open access to the property of, hung out with, discussed litters and breedings, talked progress of puppies from the same litters with, discussed problems and solutions with and on and on. field trial people have been very gracious to me, those you may consider "unapproachable" because of their success have been even more gracious.

in terms of the opportunity of sport let's say i am a golfer. can i enter and be paired with mickelson........no! if i play basketball can i enter and play with lebron and wade.......no! but if my dog is running good and i think i want to go compete with ted and dr. ed and danny farmer and hugh arthur or whoever, i just load up my truck and go take a whack at it! where else can an average guy like me ever hope to compete(i didn't say be competitive) in an elite level athletic team sport with the best in the sport on any given weekend?

i may never have a great dog. i may have a great dog now? but i have fun!


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

You know I respect your viewpoint John but I hope you're underestimating the ability of the judges to make their decisions independent of discussion with an apprentice.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Criquetpas said:


> My take on apprenticeships. There has been a trend lately in the Midwest anyway ,for various folks serving apprenticeships with experienced judges who have never completed a all-age stake, or even got through the first series. Some of these folks now have a few Major points under their belt. There are some judges judging at the all-age level, 8 point majors, who don't even have enough minor points. Some believe that are on various committees selecting judges on how hard a worker at club events works. No reference to their ability or experience in running dogs. On the circuit there are judges in the field trial game who have never placed a dog or even finished a dog in a all-age stake. Many suggest that if you haven't trained your own dog , how can you judge, that's pure hogwash. There are many out there in the field trial world, pro trained dogs run by amateurs, who run many weekends, finish trials, place dogs and title them. I have judged with those who have owned National Field Champions, who didn't have a clue on setting up tests or looking at good dog work. On the otherside have judged with those who just try to get to the water blind to get in the last series , have JAMed or placed a few times, but, are excellent at setting up tests and know good dog work. What we are developing are a list of Performance Judges listed on the AKC site that may or may not be qualified to even judge ! I think the committees that select judges rather then judge swapping or local availability, should do some "homework" on who is selected to judge. If not this "apprenticeship pool" is not contributing to the best interest of the sport, in my opinion.


I have the 1965-2009 stats to back up what you post except it may be worse than you think. & it's not much better at the National level. Judges who lack experience with "Dogs in the field" will many times make those mistakes that affect the placings at many trials. Those placings will go to the well connected more often than not . That's why there is no uproar .



EdA said:


> While I agree that apprenticeship has merit given the time constraints and pressures of judging I consider it less than ideal and would not have much interest in participating. I think there are potentially better ways and some years ago I proposed a type of mentoring for prospective judges by a qualified all-age judge not judging the stake. There were a number on inherent problems associated with such a process including the second guess factor on the judges of record. Still I think there must be a better way although there seems to be little interest from anyone in authority.


For those of you who fly - I mentored many young engineers in the decision making process during my working years. I know how it's done successfully & for those who fly you better hope so , the apprentice program does not meet that criteria. 

AS Roseberry in his post states, "this is a sport an average joe can enjoy & rub up to the big-wigs". What he has said is there are no standards to meet as there were in the sport's beginning (started by entrepeneurs) & the RAC has made sure in their pronouncements that there will be little as they come from an environment that does not have exacting standards. They may be ethical as can be & I believe they are, they just do not know how to set a requirement necessary to meet a goal. 

& unless you go to the college level in the STEM world do not say the education establishment should have a say in the setting of those standards .


----------

