# Dog A vs. Dog B



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

This is a follow up to the thread i started earlier. http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14958

Basically:

You have a double. A 75 yard go bird, a 300 yard memory bird. Clearly the go-bird is the easier mark and the memory bird the tougher mark.

Dog A runs. Hunts the go-bird, smacks the memory bird.
Dog B runs. Smacks the go-bird, hunts the memory bird.

I don't care if you call it a 15 second hunt, tight hunt, or whatever. The dogs stayed in the area and both hunts were identical.

Based on these marks alone. Which dog is your winner. There is no next series. There are no ties.

Shayne


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

This is no fun if you don't say what you picked!

What does the 50/50 split thus far tell you?

Shayne


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

> What does the 50/50 split thus far tell you?


It says it was a tie....now on to the next series before we lose our daylight.


----------



## DKR (May 9, 2003)

Shayne Mehringer said:


> What does the 50/50 split thus far tell you?
> 
> Shayne



Half the dogs win one weekend the other half the next.

We live in a subjective world.


----------



## The King (Apr 15, 2004)

*Dog A or B*

Dog B


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

155 Views, 21 votes. COME ON PEOPLE!!!! Don't be afeared.

Shayne


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

Doesn't how each dog performed in the previous series come into play in a field trial?
M


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Miriam Wade said:


> Doesn't how each dog performed in the previous series come into play in a field trial?
> M


They were 100% equal in the prior series. BASED ON THESE TWO MARKS ONLY... who is your winner?

Shayne


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

*Neither*

Shyane, I ain't gonna vote on your poll cause I can't find the definition for......

"money bird".

Is this in the rule book?


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Dog C, since she marked both birds well and had an excellant water blind!


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

*Re: Neither*



Ken Guthrie said:


> Shyane, I ain't gonna vote on your poll cause I can't find the definition for......
> 
> "money bird".
> 
> Is this in the rule book?


My poll does not mention "money bird".

The only way you would vote is if one of them handled on a mark, he'd be your clear winner. :lol: :lol: 

Shayne


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> Dog C, since she marked both birds well and had an excellant water blind!


This is a derby. Dog C handled in the 2nd. Guthrie has him winning the whole thing.

Shayne


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

> What does the 50/50 split thus far tell you?


A) That deciding 3rd and 4th in the Derby sucks.

B) If you pick one person from each list to judge your next minor stakes, you will have an entertaining trial!

Lisa


----------



## Pasquatch (Jun 1, 2004)

Dog B Wins.
Dog B does it the way it should be done- Smacks the easy one ; quick hunt on the memory bird.

Dog A has a quick hunt where he should not have (not that a quick hunt is a bad thing).
Even though Dog B nails the memory bird he cannot makeup what he lost on the 1st bird

If I have to choose - that's it.


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

One last question. Did either of the dogs pick the birds up out of order? I don't like it when a dog/handler picks my birds up out of order when I'm judging. Course that could be another thread!

I'm judging. A wins. All Bs are wrong. What good is power if you don't use it.


WAH - Tried to post 30 minutes ago and had some bad "carma" or server problems!


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

To Quote LVL, "It depends" - which one is yellow? :lol: :wink:


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

WAH said:


> I don't like it when a dog/handler picks my birds up out of order when I'm judging.


Boy me either! It damn near pisses me off... :lol: 

Shayne


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Shayne Mehringer said:


> This is a derby. Dog C handled in the 2nd. Guthrie has him winning the whole thing.
> 
> Shayne


Was that handle on the retired gun? Was the dog handled to the bird or handled at the bird? Need more info to make a decision!


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

I had some trouble, too. Couldn't post, and couldn't access the site. Tossed my cookies and entered through Retrievertraining.net's main site-no problem. We'll see if I can get back on through my shortcut.

Lisa


----------



## Mark Chase (Jul 24, 2003)

According to the regulations dog B wins. I might be impressed with dog A for nailing the hard bird, but it would probably not make up for the ding in marking ability due to the hunt on what should have been an easy bird. That being said, there is always the possibility of extenuating circumstances.


----------



## AmiableLabs (Jan 14, 2003)

I can't believe all the people voting for A?!?! :shock: 

Dog A's performance is at best a wash, it has to be held over for further evaluation to see which mark was the fluke -- the hunt on the go bird, or the pinning of the long bird. You can't say one cancels out the other, you can only wait and see.

Dog B's performance was as desired. 

Dog B wins.


----------



## Steve Bean (May 3, 2004)

Both dogs did an admirable job of marking. However, I'm more impressed with the long mark (that is what memory is about), plus if I have to go out and pick up a bird, I'd rather only walk 75 yds than 300.....soooooooo *DOG A*


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

After you have determined the size of the AOF for the _go bird_.
If the dog "A"'s hunt stays in it for the _GO BIRD_,
Dog "A" gets my vote.
john


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

How do you win a HT? I say both senior dogs pass.........just kidding.....JUST KIDDING already.....sheesh... hey I have a started cat for sale......

/Paul

oh I voted B...


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> ... hey I have a started cat for sale......


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA thats genius!!!

Shayne


----------



## Gerard Rozas (Jan 7, 2003)

Which handler said "Good Dog" - A or B?


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

There is no difference between a started cat and a finished cat. Started cat: poops in box, doesn't shred furniture. Finished cat: poops in box, doesn't shred furniture.

In my _limited_ experience, "poop in box" and "don't shred furniture" are about the limit of feline trainability. But they are _damned_ good markers.

Lisa


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Gerard Rozas said:


> Which handler said "Good Dog" - A or B?


Dog C... that is why he's not in this series. :lol: 

Shayne


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

You have a point there LVL.....a started cat and a finished cat will both stay in the area of the fall if they want to or leav the area if they want to. it is all a matter of what the cat wants.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Lisa Van Loo said:


> There is no difference between a started cat and a finished cat. Started cat: poops in box, doesn't shred furniture. Finished cat: poops in box, doesn't shred furniture.
> 
> In my _limited_ experience, "poop in box" and "don't shred furniture" are about the limit of feline trainability. But they are _damned_ good markers.
> 
> Lisa


Actually this cat as been forced on back..... :lol: 

but I have to say it cheats water like a golden...oh crap, did I type that out loud.....fetchitgold is going to kill me....

/Paul


----------



## captdan (Jan 25, 2004)

Shayne,

Why did you set up a test with a "hard" mark and an "easy" mark? If you are going to set up a test with two marks, why aren't they both challenging, each having terrain and cover factors. That way you get more separation, and more of a knowledge of what the dawgs can do. If one of the birds is a "no challenge" bird, why bother--run a single with some teeth in it and call it a day.

Dan


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

captaindan said:


> Shayne,
> 
> Why did you set up a test with a "hard" mark and an "easy" mark? If you are going to set up a test with two marks, why aren't they both challenging, each having terrain and cover factors. That way you get more separation, and more of a knowledge of what the dawgs can do. If one of the birds is a "no challenge" bird, why bother--run a single with some teeth in it and call it a day.
> 
> Dan


Prolly cuz i'm a bad judge!

Even a gimme mark at 75 yards on fairway grass adds value to a multple.

Shayne


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

I had a finished cat! Talk about prey drive, this kitty had it all. The cat was half Abysinian and half Manx. The little sucka hunted everything, birds and rodents. She would even hunt in big oak trees for squirrel. Unfortunitly, she disappeared one Winter. I think she met her match, a hungry coyote.


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

captaindan said:


> Shayne,
> 
> why aren't they both challenging, each having terrain and cover factors. That way you get more separation, and more of a knowledge of what the dawgs can do. If one of the birds is a "no challenge" bird, why bother--
> Dan


I didn't see where it was a "no challenge" bird. One was easier than the other which means one was tougher than the other. I thought they were both tough birds. One was 300 yds and one was 75 yds. Both tough. My dog (Dog A) burns memory on the 75 yard mark but has a better/longer memory than dog B. Dog B "marked" the short bird better, big deal. Dog a "remembered" the long bird better. I don't judge marking. I judge memory. Especially in hypersterical ****uations!

WAH


----------



## Jerry (Jan 3, 2003)

WAH said:


> captaindan said:
> 
> 
> > I don't judge marking. I judge memory. Especially in hypersterical ****uations!
> ...


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Let me try this _again_..... :roll: .....


From the Supplement to the Standard Procedure:



> *In general*, the "area of the 'fall"' for a single should be relatively small; _the area for a first retrieve in a "double" should be smaller than for the second bird_.....
> 
> 
> and both of these should be larger in a "triple," and larger still for the third bird in it. Also, "the area" for short retrieves should _*certainly*_ be *smaller* than for longer retrieves. Since there are so many conditions and variables to be taken into consideration, it is obvious that each Judge, and for every series, must attempt to define for himself a hypothetical "area of the 'fall"' for each bird, and then judge the dogs accordingly. However, the penalties inflicted should vary in their severity, depending on the distance which individual dogs wander out of the area, the frequency of such wanderings, the number of birds mismarked in a given test, and by the amount of cover disturbed in these meanderings.
> ...


The words in red have no bearing on the original scenario as presented.

In short, assuming the dogs retrieve the short bird first, the hunt on the second retrieve is more permissable than the hunt on the first retrieve (all other things being equal).

Clear as mud, right????? :? ..............

Keith :drinking: Griffith


----------



## Canman (Jan 24, 2003)

Keith

I think you are correct. The problem is what happens at many weekend trials. The dog that hammers the perceived "money" bird wins the trial, sometimes despite a hunt on a "go" bird. 

Whether it has become "tradition" or not, many judges seem to apply a difficulty factor (like in diving) to each mark when evaluating dog work. In your opinion, does the Standard allow this leeway?

James


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Keith Griffith said:


> Let me try this _again_..... :roll: .....
> 
> 
> From the Supplement to the Standard Procedure:
> ...


So the key to winning is not necessarily doing good on the hard stuff, just not doing bad on the easy stuff? :wink: 

Shayne


----------



## AmiableLabs (Jan 14, 2003)

Rulebook, schmulebook.....

*The Internet Rules!*

:twisted: 

:wink:


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

> So the key to winning is not necessarily doing good on the hard stuff, just not doing bad on the easy stuff?


The key to winning is to survive to the next series.

The key to judging is to not let yourself get into a "one mark decides it" situation in the first place.

Lisa


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

Jerry said:


> WAH said:
> 
> 
> > I don't judge marking. I judge memory. Especially in hypersterical ****uations!
> ...


If more people read what I write on RTF then I should never be asked to judge again! Bummer. NOT :lol: :lol: There is a method to my madness.

WAH - I'm just happy when my dog can remember where the line is whenever he stumbles on a bird!


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

This is a hypothetical, so let's have another series is not an option

I pick dog B

As defined in the hypothetical

As Keith properly observes - AOF is smaller for first bird selected (and I am assuming no primary selection here), therefore

1) Dog B's hunt on the long bird is not bad - and depending on the terrain and the rest of the field, may be very good

2) Dog A's hunt on the short bird is a problem for it.


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

You can't go by the rule book! There are to many "In generals" "smallers" "largers" "should bes" "area of the fall" "short retrieves" "long retrievers" ....etc. None of which is definant about anything. The rule book is only for when you get into technicalities. Then it will really clear things up.

WAH - Just sayin'


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

WAH said:


> ...The rule book is only for when you get into technicalities. Then it will really clear things up.


Like what you can and can't say to a dog while he's working?

Shayne


----------



## Canman (Jan 24, 2003)

Shayne Mehringer said:


> WAH said:
> 
> 
> > ...The rule book is only for when you get into technicalities. Then it will really clear things up.
> ...


That is in the Tradition Supplement. :lol: 

James


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Canman said:


> Shayne Mehringer said:
> 
> 
> > WAH said:
> ...


Traditionally... the dog that smacks the KEY mark of a test and gets the hoops and hollers from the gallery will win.

Shayne


----------



## Jerry (Jan 3, 2003)

If one sets the test up properly, in a perfect test, there is no such thing as a "Key Mark". EACH mark should have an influence on each of the following, or preceeding marks, regardless of the distances.

This influence can be related to distance invloved, close proximity to the other marks, but best of all is the location of the mark. Like put the sucker where the dog would not normally go.

JMHO

Jerry


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Jerry said:


> If one sets the test up properly, in a perfect test, there is no such thing as a "Key Mark". EACH mark should have an influence on each of the following, or preceeding marks, regardless of the distances.
> 
> This influence can be related to distance invloved, close proximity to the other marks, but best of all is the location of the mark. Like put the sucker where the dog would not normally go.
> 
> ...


If i take everything i read here from the Dog B folks....

A dog that takes 2 passes to pick up a wipe bird at 20 yards, but creams a 400 yard retired mark - will be beaten by a dog that runs right to the wipe out bird and takes 10 passes to get the 400 yard mark.

The easier the go bird is and the harder the memory bird is, the more important the easier bird becomes. :wink: 

Shayne


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

every ft double i have ever seen consisted of 2 TOUGH marks. i guesS sometimes someone gives one away, but never when i'm at the line! :lol: 

shorter marks are not always easier than long ones. as long as neither mark was a "gimme", i don't see how you could separate the performances, unless one of the hunts expanded beyond the AOF.-paul


----------



## Jerry (Jan 3, 2003)

Shayne Mehringer said:


> Jerry said:
> 
> 
> > If one sets the test up properly, in a perfect test, there is no such thing as a "Key Mark". EACH mark should have an influence on each of the following, or preceeding marks, regardless of the distances.
> ...


C'mon Goober, you change the scenario with each post!!! Make up your mind and stick with it.

Jerry


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Shayne wrote



> If i take everything i read here from the Dog B folks....
> 
> A dog that takes 2 passes to pick up a wipe bird at 20 yards, but creams a 400 yard retired mark - will be beaten by a dog that runs right to the wipe out bird and takes 10 passes to get the 400 yard mark.
> 
> The easier the go bird is and the harder the memory bird is, the more important the easier bird becomes.


It is easy to be the Head Instigator when you change the hypothetical to fit your needs

We started with a 15 second hunt for each dog, with a 75 yard short bird, and a 300 yard long bird

You have now changed the situation to 

2 passes for a 20 yard bird 
and 10 passes for a 400 yard bird

Hardly the scenario the folks in this thread discussed


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

My thought's too. If the hunt is the same, then:

2 passes for a 20 yard bird 
and 2 passes for a 400 yard bird 

or

10 passes for a 20 yard bird 
and 10 passes for a 400 yard bird 

Dog B still comes out ahead!

FOM


----------



## Aussie (Jan 4, 2003)

paul young said:


> every ft double i have ever seen consisted of 2 TOUGH marks. i guesS sometimes someone gives one away, but never when i'm at the line! :lol:
> 
> shorter marks are not always easier than long ones. as long as neither mark was a "gimme", i don't see how you could separate the performances, unless one of the hunts expanded beyond the AOF.-paul


I have observed only 2 US derbies. 

I would prefer Dog A, because of our point system. For example, you allocate a total of 30 points. Ten points for go bird, 20 points for the memory bird. 

Obviously I am maybe confused, AGAIN, LOL.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Apparently you're in good company, Aussie, but for the wrong reasons! :wink: !

Keith G.


----------



## Polock (Jan 6, 2003)

Agree whole heartedly with Keith and Dawg B for the exact same reason, Rulebook.............................................. :wink:


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

I'm not changing the hypothetical, but expanding on the grounds of which many folks chose Dog B.

We start with...
Same hunt long bird, same hunt short bird - Dog B'ers, claim the penalty is worse for the hunt on the short bird than the hunt on the long bird. The easier the mark, the bigger the penalty for a hunt. Right? Stop me right here if i'm wrong. If not, keep reading...

So... based on what i have learned from Dog B'ers... you all will also agree that the dog who takes a couple passes at the really easy 20 yard wipe out bird and smacks the really hard 400 yard retired mark will take 2nd to the dog that runs right to the wipe out bird but has a small hunt on the 400 yard mark. Right? If i am wrong, tell me where i'm missing it?

If i'm wrong in the second scenario, then you have switched from assessing penalities to determine the winner, to giving credit to determine the winner. That's judging from both sides of the book. (tradition vs rulebook) :wink: 

Shayne


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Dear Mr. Flip Flop

This is your first hypothetical



> You have a double. A 75 yard go bird, a 300 yard memory bird. Clearly the go-bird is the easier mark and the memory bird the tougher mark.
> 
> Dog A runs. Hunts the go-bird, smacks the memory bird.
> Dog B runs. Smacks the go-bird, hunts the memory bird.
> ...


This is your second hypothetical



> A dog that takes *2 passes* to pick up a wipe bird at 20 yards, but creams a 400 yard retired mark - will be beaten by a dog that runs right to the wipe out bird and takes *10 passes *to get the 400 yard mark


. 

Thus, your statement that



> *I'm not changing the hypothetical*


Is to be generous - disingenuous at best

The hunts of dog A and dog B are not identical - to be specific 2 passes do not equal 10 passes

Thus, the hypotheticals are not identical

And, correspondingly, your conclusion is invalid

Now, that you have flopped, where would you like to flip?


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Quit going attorney on me... thats not fair.

The original hypothetical stands. But based on what i've heard from the Dog B'ers, i'm asking if the same applies for the other scenario... i knew the technical answer before i ever posted this morning, but i wanted to set up the wipe out and 400 yard retired gun scenario.

So my question is. Does your answer for the original hypothetical still stand for the exagerated wipe out/400 yard scenario?

Shayne


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Futhermore....

You state 2 passes at the wipe out does not equal 10 passes at the 400 retired. True enough...

But you agree that the easier the mark, the more severe penalty for the hunt. So i started with 75/300 with equal hunts and moved both directions and changed the hunts relatively.

I'm just trying to get someone to tell me that a small hunt on a 20 yard wipe out bird has more influence on the outcome of the trial than a dog doing a face plant on a 400 yard retired mark... come on SAY IT DAMMIT!!! hehehe

Shayne


----------



## KJB (Jul 1, 2003)

Dang, now my head hurts. :roll: 

Which dog is for sale?


----------



## Jerry (Jan 3, 2003)

My answer is "if my co-judge is an RTR'er, your AZZ is dropped!!!"

Scenario is: because next week we would have set something else up and your dog probably couldn't have done it or last week we know you couldn't have done that one, therefore "What's the breeding on that dog??"

Jerry


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Shayne wrote:



> The easier the mark, the bigger the penalty for a hunt. Right? Stop me right here if i'm wrong.


*NO! NO!! NO!!! STOP RIGHT HERE!!!*

It's the order of the RETRIEVES that makes the short bird easier in your first scenario. Period! End of Story! Do you have ADD, Shayne???? :shock: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



> ....you all will also agree that the dog who takes a couple passes at the really easy 20 yard wipe out bird and smacks the really hard 400 yard retired mark will take 2nd to the dog that runs right to the wipe out bird but has a small hunt on the 400 yard mark. Right? If i am wrong, tell me where i'm missing it?


If, by a "couple passes," you mean a hunt on the wipe out bird like dog 2 had on the long bird, *IT STILL GOES BACK TO THE ORDER OF THE RETRIEVES!!!!!*  (All other things being equal, of course, which some folks have had a BEAR of a time understanding........ :roll: :roll: :roll: ).

Dog A takes the wipeout bird first and has a small hunt.....then slams the 400 yd retired bird. Dog B steps on the wipeout bird first, then has a small hunt on the 400 yd retired.

Dog B wins....YET AGAIN!!!!!  For the same *$&^#%@ reasons Dog B won in the first scenario!

ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

Keith Griffith


----------



## Steve Bean (May 3, 2004)

Boy that sure looks like a lousy way to 'win' 2nd place.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

AKC


> Ability to "mark" does not necessarily imply "pin-pointing the fall." A dog that misses the "fall" on the first cast, but recognizes the depth of the "area of the fall," stays in it, then quickly and systematically "hunts-it-out," has done both a creditable and an intelligent job of marking. Such work *should not be appreciably out-scored *by the dog that "finds" or "pinpoints" on his first cast


It is now late( no time for a fifth series) Sunday afternoon and these two dogs are still knotted up.
It's down to these two dogs for the blue with these two marks being the deciding factor.Your co-judge won't move off of his/ her choice :wink:
Who wins the dog that had a little hunt on the go bird, per the above, and then front foot's the Money Bird is my choice

No one will ever know why a dog with a nose 5000 times better than ours can't come up with a bird that it _Marked_ and was so close to for 15 seconds
I normally chalk it up to S*1t Happens, as it often does in training when one is involved with Marks for 18 dogs daily.
john


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

I missed this one on the first pass.....



> A dog that takes 2 passes to pick up a wipe bird at 20 yards, but creams a 400 yard retired mark - _will be beaten by a dog that runs right to the wipe out bird and takes *10 passes* to get the 400 yard mark_.


Shayne, if you even _remotely_ picked that up from our original discussion on dog A and dog B, please sell me your two FCs and get out of the game....*now*.

I'm going to assume that this was a faux pas on your part and move on...that you couldn't have been joking more if you _tried_.

Keith G.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Steve Bean wrote:



> Boy that sure looks like a lousy way to 'win' 2nd place.


Yeah, that pesky rulebook can really louse things up.

When all of this is said and done, placing/calling back dogs _rarely_ *IF EVER* comes down to this simple of a scenario. That's why the rulebook lists 7 mitigating factors in the section of the Supplement to the Standard Procedure prior to the section relative to the size of the area of the fall relative to the order of retrieves.

At the end of the weekend, the best dog through all aspects of the trial wins...._usually_.....  !!!!!!!!!

Keith Griffith


----------



## Polock (Jan 6, 2003)

Polock....................just a grinin' an a pickin'..................being thrown 75' feet out of a vehicle must of done more damage then dem doc's in NY was willin' to talk about........................and ta think I'm bringin' 'em back to judge for AFFR an NFRA in 2005............................... :?

KG be right on with Dawg B.....................but Arkie boy.....well.....he's just Arkie boy................................... :roll:


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Okay so what about those that chose Dog A? Dog Bers have been asked to defend their positions - let's hear from the other side.

FOM <~~~ Dog B all the way if all things are kept equal, SHAYNE


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Shayne

You set up a hypothetical that makes a comparison possible. All things are identical except _______

A comparison, theoretical though it may be, is possible

Then you set up a hypothetical where all things are not identical

A comparison, therefore, cannot be made

There is not enough data

As Lisa Van Loo would say, it depends

You seem to want to make judging something you can color by numbers
Or at least you want to rabble rouse and for the moment claim that you do

It is convenient never to take a real stand - it allows you to change sides whenever you feel a wind shift coming

But as one of my students once said

*If you is what you ain't
You ain't what you is*

So flip flop at your own peril


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I also think that people who claim that Dog B backed into the win are:

Ignoring the fact that Dog B may have done a pretty good job. Think about it. He pins the last bird down at 75 yards, then has a "tight" hunt on a difficult 400 yard bird. 

Yes, Dog A hammers the 400 yard mark, but has to hunt the first bird selected , which is also far shorter - about 1/5 the distance of the first bird selected. Overall, his work is worse than Dog B. *Because the AOF for the bird on which he hunted is smaller than the AOF for the bird that dog A hunted.*

It's all relative.

If you don't like it, go to another series. But, Shayne's hypothetical denied that option. So, if you want to play his game, you must choose.

As for those who say that the dog who pins the marks in the last series - and particularly, the tough memory bird - gets the cheers from the crowd

Yes, that is true

But, if their body of work over four series is not solid - all they may receive is green.

Correspondingly, the winner may receive no ovation at all.

But, the judges have watched every dog and every bird, and who in the gallery can make that claim?


----------



## W Knight (Sep 2, 2003)

Boy am I glad my dog came in season and was scratched from this trial.

In fact I?m beginning to understand why I don?t understand call backs most of the time.

*Good Knight* 8) 8) 8)


----------



## Jerry (Jan 3, 2003)

W Knight said:


> Boy am I glad my dog came in season and was scratched from this trial.
> 
> In fact I?m beginning to understand why I don?t understand call backs most of the time.
> 
> *Good Knight* 8) 8) 8)


WUSS!!!!

Jerry


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

I haven't flip flopped, i've just debated from both sides. I know the rules and i know B should win, _*per the rules*_, but i do not think B would win most of the time in a trial.

The White one's comments about not understanding why he was not called back somewhat touches on my "big picture" point. Someone who's been around the game for 30 years.... watches even 90% of the field run, and not understand what the judges are thinking on callbacks is flat out amazing.

Judges are all over the place in this sport.

Between the....
The unwritten rules.
The pet peeves.
The traditional rules.
The rulebook purists.
And the clueless.

Ya never know whatcha gonna get!

Oh well. I don't have a solution, it's just fun to talk about.

Shayne - half clueless/half rulebook purist


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Shayne


> Judges are all over the place in this sport.
> 
> Between the....
> The unwritten rules.
> ...


_......And there you have it_


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

In this scenario, we are to pick a winner between dog A and dog B, based on a double mark?all other factors are equal. Many of the arguments are predicated on giving 50% of the weight on the go bird and 50% of the weight on the memory bird. Since we are to back up the argument based on the rule/guidelines/recommendation/procedure book, I have not found that argument presented. Could you enlighten me? Maybe this is based on common sense?or is this based on lack of common sense? Judging is an art, not a science.

Jack


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Shayne Mehringer said:


> I haven't flip flopped, i've just debated from both sides. I know the rules and i know B should win, _*per the rules*_, but i do not think B would win most of the time in a trial.
> Shayne - half clueless/half rulebook purist


Shayne

Your statements point out the value - or lack thereof - of your hypothetical. 

You say Dog A would win "*most of the time*." Well, *most of the time*, there are four series - and rarely is there only one series. 

Just how many derbies do you know of where there was only one series and this happened?

Ted


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

Gasoline, gasoline...(pour, pour, pour)

Those who picked dog A, do you have an image in your head of the dog pinpoint marking the memory bird? Because I have an equally valid image of a dog going as sent and getting lucky with the wind just as he passed over the bird...

This is the problem with hypotheticals. 

Lisa


----------



## Canman (Jan 24, 2003)

Although judging may be looked at as an Art, it should still be based on a standard to give some uniformity to the sport. This question has demonstrated pretty well how many people feel the game should be judged, regardless of the standard.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Shayne wrote:



> Judges are all over the place in this sport.
> 
> Between the....
> The unwritten rules.
> ...


That's why their names are listed on the premium! Make a few phone calls...send a few e-mails....I _guarantee_ you that you can find out if you want to run under them or not!

I would submit that the greater problem is among the participants that _think_ they know the rules/regs/guidelines/Standard when they truly don't have a _clue_....

Keith G.


----------



## Gerard Rozas (Jan 7, 2003)

Guys and Gals,

It really is not that difficult - once you seen a few thousand dog butts running away from you and picking up things - it becomes second nature.


----------



## Vickie Lamb (Jan 6, 2003)

I don't mean to offend anyone by the question I am about to ask, but for the purposes of this discussion it appears that there may be some folks that do not quite grasp what AOF means and/or its reference used in the rulebook.

Does everyone understand AOF and how it is applied in the rulebook as per this discussion? If not, that may account for some of the confusion.

Just thinking...


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

Aussie said:


> I would prefer Dog A, because of our point system. For Example, you allocate a total of 30 points. Ten points for go bird, 20 points for the memory bird.


What if the go bird is picked up second so that it is actually the Go bird "and" the memory bird, or is it no longer the go bird? Ya gotta have rules. (WOW, I think I am confusing myself... again). Or do the birds points(here it is aof) change just because the/a/some handlers choose to pick them up "out of order?"(Here is America we do wierd stuff like that if there is no RULE(/unwritten rule) that tells us which one to pick up first)(some people call it cheating... some say it's not in the rules to tell me I can't.... have to have a rule for every little thing.. when it's convenient). I'm sure the Aussie rules designate which one to pick up first, don't they?.

WAH


----------



## bull (Apr 9, 2004)

First I believe that Keith has started wearing Liz's drawers. I don't
think you could get that excited in a good pair of boxers. At least
not replying with colored letters.

Second all of you who picked dog b makes an assumption that was
not given and that is that the hunts by either dog are out of the
area of the mark. Because the area is smaller for the short bird 
does NOT mean that the hunt at any time was outside the area of the fall. Because the area of the fall is larger doesn't mean that the dog hunted out of the area. We only know that two dogs had similar hunts on
different birds, the facts don't tell us where the hunt started, the line to the mark, or the area covered by the hunt, only that each dog
had the same hunt on different birds. And because I don't know that
either dog hunted out of the area of the fall, I would choose the dog
that had the great mark on the long bird. I would say that he
"was more pleasing to the eye".


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

Jerry said:


> True, but if I choose to pick up what I think is the most difficult bird first, then I have less leeway regarding the AOF on that bird. By rule, I have more leeway on the following birds.
> This has NOTHING to do with the order in which they were shot, only my selection of the order in which I choose to retrieve them.
> Jerry


The above would apply if they are picked up in the "correct" order.(Last bird down first) You are changing the way the marks are picked up but keeping the same criteria for the aof. The rule doesn't say which one to pick up first regarding aof. I think you are bending the rules. But I could be the victim of incorrect thinking. It has happened before.:lol: 
So, if you pick up the 300(400) yard mark first and then come back for the 75(35) yard mark, your aof(more leeway) would be MUCH bigger than the aof of the long bird just because you got it second! Does not compute. I must be missing something! :wink:


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> You say Dog A would win "*most of the time*." Well, *most of the time*, there are four series - and rarely is there only one series.
> 
> Just how many derbies do you know of where there was only one series and this happened?
> 
> Ted


It's been my recent experience that many derbies are won or lost on one or two marks. A big hunt and your green.

Shayne


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Gerard Rozas said:


> Guys and Gals,
> 
> It really is not that difficult - once you seen a few thousand dog butts running away from you and picking up things - it becomes second nature.


Doing something for many years does not make you good at it. 

If # of butts watched = your strength as a judge, then # of years in the sport should = your success. Dog training, and judging, is not a union. Tenure is of value, but quality of performance is how you get promoted.  

Just sayin'.

Shayne


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Keith Griffith said:


> I would submit that the greater problem is among the participants that _think_ they know the rules/regs/guidelines/Standard when they truly don't have a _clue_....
> 
> Keith G.


Yeah, but that clueless participant is the same sumbitch your running under next weekend!!!!!!!!! That very thing is what makes this sport is so much fun to talk about.

Shayne


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Bull (Steve O'Connell) wrote:



> First I believe that Keith has started wearing Liz's drawers. I don't
> think you could get that excited in a good pair of boxers. At least
> not replying with colored letters.


I was simply trying to get a point across. I'm not sure even that worked....and Liz's drawers wouldn't fit over one of my _legs_....and I'm not a boxer kind of guy! :wink: !



> Second all of you who picked dog b makes an assumption that was
> not given and that is that the hunts by either dog are out of the
> area of the mark. Because the area is smaller for the short bird
> does NOT mean that the hunt at any time was outside the area of the fall. Because the area of the fall is larger doesn't mean that the dog hunted out of the area. We only know that two dogs had similar hunts on
> different birds, the facts don't tell us where the hunt started, the line to the mark, or the area covered by the hunt, only that each dog


I assumed nothing, other than Dog A had a 15 second hunt on the first retrieve, and that Dog B had a 15 second hunt on the second retrieve. Hunting out of the area had -zero- to do with my position. My position is that the rulebook that we run under allows for the smallest area of the fall to be on the bird retrieved first. Dog A hunted longer in the smallest area of the fall than Dog B. Dog B hunted longer in the larger area of the fall where a longer hunt could be forgiven more readily (the second retrieve) than a longer hunt on the first retrieve where the AOF is smaller.

That's it, and that is all.

Keith G.


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

> Does everyone understand AOF and how it is applied in the rulebook as per this discussion?


Not a rude question, when taken in the spirit it was given. And absolutely spot-on to this discussion.

Lisa - wonderin' how many HT judges even know what AOF is.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Keith wrote



> I assumed nothing, other than Dog A had a 15 second hunt on the first retrieve, and that Dog B had a 15 second hunt on the second retrieve.


This was - after all - the hypothetical that was *initially* proposed. 

Ted


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Vickie Lamb said:


> I don't mean to offend anyone by the question I am about to ask, but for the purposes of this discussion it appears that there may be some folks that do not quite grasp what AOF means and/or its reference used in the rulebook.
> 
> Does everyone understand AOF and how it is applied in the rulebook as per this discussion? If not, that may account for some of the confusion.
> 
> Just thinking...


Lookie here Vickie Lamb Free.... 

That's a valid question.

Shayne


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Shayne wrote



> It's been my recent experience that *many* derbies are won or lost on one or two marks. A big hunt and your green.


When you say *many* - how many?


Of those *many* derbies

1) How many did you judge?
2) How many where you watched all the dogs pick up all the birds?


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Shayne wrote
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In all 4 that i judged this fall, there was some point of seperation decided by one hunt. Was it a hunt on a money bird or a go-bird? Either or, maybe the same hunt on the same mark, maybe the same size hunt to pick up an easy mark vs a hard mark (per the hypothetical). Doesn't matter.

How many have you judged? And is your experience to the contrary to of mine, in that none of your placements where determined by one mark/hunt?

Shayne


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I have judged two derbies. I have run 30 or so.

In the derbies I have judged, one bird did not make the difference and the work for the first and second place dog was not *identical* except for the fourth series.

In the derbies I have run, when I won - with one exception - the judges and my competitors told me that my dogs had won the derbies running away, that no one was close.

In the AA stakes 

I have judged seven trials- one bird never made the difference and the work between the first and second place dog was not *identical *except for the fourth series. 

In the AA stakes I have won, my dogs were either perfect, or my dogs did signficantly better than the rest of the field on the last series - water marks - both conclusions were made by my competitors as well as the judges.

In the past four years - where I have run probably 60 AA stakes - I have never been part of a trial where the judges and/or the competitors said that two dogs work was* identical *through three series, and in the fourth series, one dog had a tight hunt on the go bird, and one dog had a tight hunt on the memory bird and that all that separated them was their work in the fourth series.

That is why I think your extrapolated conclusions are unfounded.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Please note that I do not mean to say that trials can be won or lost in the fourth series - in my experience, they often are

But, in all of the stakes in which I have participated, I have never seen or heard that 

the first and second place dogs had *identical *work through three series

And in the fourth series, the dogs had *identical* hunts on different birds

And that the *only* thing separating first and second place was whether the *identical* hunt was on the short or the long bird.

Which lest we forget was your hypothetical and the bases for your conclusions

Particularly when the fourth series is tough, one dog will *significantly* distinguish itself from the pack - and if that dog's work has been consistently good throughout the trial - that dog is a winner. What you are seeing in the fourth series - and the placements - is the product of a solid weekend effort.


----------



## bull (Apr 9, 2004)

Keith

I believe you assume that if you have two identical hunts
on different birds and neither is out of the area of the fall
that the dog who has a larger area of the fall should be rewarded
and I don't believe that is true. We only penalize dogs that hunt
out of the area that you as a judge determine before the first dog
runs. Why reward a dog because the area of the fall is bigger.
The hunts are the same. 

Don't you think we should reward great marks? And who believes
that going straight to the short mark is a great mark.

Steve O'C

And I want to learn how to print in color.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Stevie O wrote:



> I believe you assume that if you have two identical hunts
> on different birds and neither is out of the area of the fall
> that the dog who has a larger area of the fall should be rewarded
> and I don't believe that is true.


Stevie, you're killin' me.....

This not an issue about how large the area of the fall is...at all.

This is an issue about which dog is going to be ahead at the end of this double retrieve: assuming they both retrieve the 75 yd bird first....Dog A, who hunts the 75 yd bird for 15 seconds (for the sake of clarity, let's say it's a tight hunt, since Shayne _did_ say that originally) and then steps on the long bird...or Dog B, which steps on the short bird and then has a 15 second hunt tight to the area on the long bird.

I say Dog B, and I believe the rulebook supports that view, all other things being equal.

To print in color, all you have to do is highlight what you want to color by clicking the mouse in front of it and dragging the mouse to the end of what you want to color. It will then be highlighted. Then, click on the dropdown menu next to the word "Font colour:" and find the color you want. Click on that color, and the highlighted area will become that color. Be sure to go back to the drop down menu after you've finished and change your default color back to Black after you're done.

It's just that simple! :wink: !

Keith G.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Hmmm 

Let me see if I can do this *color* thing. 

Voila! Pretty nifty! Thanks Keith!

Steve

Are you so certain that a 15 second hunt on the go bird with a pin is more pleasing to the eye than

A pin on the go bird with a 15 second hunt on the long bird.

I continue to support Keith in his response to the hypothetical as posed and not as it has morphed over this thread

How's that for *color*?


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> Please note that I do not mean to say that trials can be won or lost in the fourth series - in my experience, they often are
> But, in all of the stakes in which I have participated, I have never seen or heard that
> the first and second place dogs had *identical *work through three series
> And in the fourth series, the dogs had *identical* hunts on different birds
> ...


There are no other series in this "*poll*". This is not a FT. It is not a HT. It is a club training day and we are trying to decide which one of our new members will get a ribbon and take home the "Club Training Trophy"! And anybody in his right mind knows that it is either dog A or dog B. How can everyone believe so much that it is their A or their B but the score is tied at 36. There is no wrong. Everyone is right. 

WAH


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Keith wrote:


> This not an issue about how large the area of the fall is...at all. /quote]
> 
> :?: :?: :?: :?:
> 
> ...


----------



## Jerry (Jan 3, 2003)

Let me try this. If I can do it, a fence post can do it.

Jerry


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

> It is a club training day and we are trying to decide which one of our new members will get a ribbon and take home the "Club Training Trophy"!


Well, why didn't you say so in the first place?

The person who brings the most beer to share with the judges wins! That is the tie-breaker rule at all Picnic Trials.

That was easy!

Lisa


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

Lisa Van Loo said:


> > It is a club training day and we are trying to decide which one of our new members will get a ribbon and take home the "Club Training Trophy"!
> 
> 
> Well, why didn't you say so in the first place?
> ...


Yes but......
What if they brought the same amount of beer. They had both consumed the same amount of their own beer. They had shared with friends the same amount of beer. They had dropped the same amount of beers in same aof. And now guess what..... they have the same amount left for the judges. Whoda thunkit!


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

At a recent Derby, 14 dogs were called back to the last series which was a water double, a very demanding memory bird, and a short diversion live-flyer duck. Two of the dogs were perfect going into the last series?both judges agreed to that fact. All of the dogs took the live flyer as the go bird. Seven of the dogs did perfect on the go bird. Let us say Dog B was one of the perfect dogs going into the last series and did perfect on the go bird. The other 7 dogs had hunts in the area of the fall. The perfect dog, Dog A, fell into the latter category. Let us say the judges used a point system to judge and the 7 perfect dogs got a 10 and the other 7 dogs got a 9. The memory bird was a completely different story. Half of the dogs could not get to the area of the fall and were picked up. Three of the dogs had moderate hunts and the judges gave them 7 points. Dog A hammered this mark. Both judges gave the dog a 10. Dog B had a hunt in the area of the fall, and both judges gave it a 9. Both judges say they have a winner and the trial concludes. Since I am one of the judges, I have decided Dog A is the winner. My co-judge disagrees. He says we must judge according to the rules and give Dog B the win. I said would you please explain what rule you are using. My co-judge says I will get the rule book and produce the rule which says we must give Dog B the win. I have been waiting in the car for 4 hours and my co-judge hasn?t returned. What should I do?

Jack


----------



## Gerard Rozas (Jan 7, 2003)

I think Jack should raid his co-judges ice chest and drink all of his beer.


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

Keith Griffith said:


> From the Supplement to the Standard Procedure:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Jack Unbehaun wrote:



> My co-judge disagrees. He says we must judge according to the rules and give Dog B the win. I said would you please explain what rule you are using.


Is this a "rules vs. standing recommendations vs. supplement" question?

'Cause if I'm your co-judge, and I know you'd _love_ for me to be, we'd be going another series........ :wink: !

WAH wrote:



> So now the short retrieve should certainly be smaller. So which is it. You can't have it both ways unless you bend the rules.


I suggest you petition the RAC for an answer to that question. My quote came directly from the rulebook. In the scenario as originally quoted, the short bird and the first retrieved bird were the same.

Keith Griffith


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

Keith

I'll see you Monday morning and we'll bring 7 dogs back. Glad we both agree!

Jack


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

:BIG: !!!!!!!!!

KG


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

Keith Griffith said:


> WAH wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


but then you said


Kieth Griffith from page 6 of this said:


> My position is that the rulebook that we run under allows for the smallest area of the fall to be on the bird retrieved first.


no mention of longer or shorter. You convinced Jerry that he can change the aof by picking up birds out of order but you haven't convinced me...yet.

WAH - Who thinks he smells a crawdad! NR JK JUSK KIDDING


----------



## Arturo (Jan 10, 2004)

bull said:


> Keith
> We only penalize dogs that hunt out of the area that you as a judge determine before the first dog runs.


What about the people that pick up the birds "out of order" to try and make the judges predetermined aof incorrect.



bull said:


> Don't you think we should reward great marks? And who believes that going straight to the short mark is a great mark.
> 
> Steve O'C


I know going straight to the short mark it is a great mark. I know because my "friends" say to me "great mark" when my dog gets something hand thrown off line that Stevie Wonder could find. Oops, can I say Stevie Wonder?

WAH - My friends would't lie to me.... would they?


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

I will justify why I chose Dog A as the winner based on the rules. The purpose of a non-slip retriever is to determine the relative merits of retrievers in the field. Since this is a Derby, natural abilities take precedence over trained abilities. Memory is a key component of natural ability, in my opinion Dog A should win. The area of fall argument should be considered secondary, since it is a recommendation and not a rule.

Jack


----------



## Shayne Mehringer (Jan 3, 2003)

junbe said:


> I will justify why I chose Dog A as the winner based on the rules. The purpose of a non-slip retriever is to determine the relative merits of retrievers in the field. Since this is a Derby, natural abilities take precedence over trained abilities. Memory is a key component of natural ability, in my opinion Dog A should win. The area of fall argument should be considered secondary, since it is a recommendation and not a rule.
> 
> Jack


YOU ARE THE MAN JACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You should have followed that with, BEYOTCH!

Shayne


----------



## Aussie (Jan 4, 2003)

Phew, what a confusing thread. 

Thank heavens the discussion was only over a double, just imagine if it was a triple or quad. 

More confused than ever, on US scoring and I thought I know a tiny tiny bit.


----------



## Steve (Jan 4, 2003)

bull said:


> Second all of you who picked dog b makes an assumption that was
> not given and that is that the hunts by either dog are out of the
> area of the mark. Because the area is smaller for the short bird
> does NOT mean that the hunt at any time was outside the area of the fall. Because the area of the fall is larger doesn't mean that the dog hunted out of the area. We only know that two dogs had similar hunts on
> ...


I was kinda thinking the same thing. Per the rule books the judges are to determine the area of the fall. If both dogs hunt within the area on different marks, then I'm looking at STYLE


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Shayne Mehringer said:


> junbe said:
> 
> 
> > I will justify why I chose Dog A as the winner based on the rules. The purpose of a non-slip retriever is to determine the relative merits of retrievers in the field. Since this is a Derby, natural abilities take precedence over trained abilities. Memory is a key component of natural ability, in my opinion Dog A should win. The area of fall argument should be considered secondary, since it is a recommendation and not a rule.
> ...


True then and still true Six months later :wink: 
john


----------



## Marty N. (Nov 28, 2003)

Dog A without a doubt is the winner, smacking a hard mark weighs more than picking up the go bird.
Marty


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Everybody watch out....Fallon is bored again.......... 8) ..............

Keith Griffith


----------



## redline (Apr 19, 2003)

> Memory is a key component of natural ability


So forgetting a bird in 15 to 20 seconds is OK?
How about disturbing cover?
A+B=20
Ok how much more does an A bird count?
(a+1)+(b-1)=20? 
In other words how bad does B have to be to before it is not even scored
and only A is?
Jan


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

redline said:


> > Memory is a key component of natural ability
> 
> 
> So forgetting a bird in 15 to 20 seconds is OK?
> ...


Jan-
Are you channeling John Fallon?!? :shock: 

I ran a hunt test (yea-I know I know) a few weeks ago. A double goes down-both marks parallel to each other-good separation, but again-same distance. Dog picks up whichever mark you choose & has a diversion on the way back. Pick up diversion & leave memory bird to run a pretty challenging water blind then go back & pick up the memory bird. Because of terrain changes many dogs had a depth perception issue with the go bird-my dog included. She had an extended hunt on the go bird. Very  as I don't recall this ever happening before on a go-bird. Good job on the diversion & beautiful water blind (really!  ) She was the only dog to strut right out & nail the memory bird. That mark was a bear for the dogs. Sooooo... ..in my mind-while it doesn't cancel out the poor go-bird (of which there were many) I'd much rather have a dog that can show memory on the tough bird.

M


----------



## Steve Bean (May 3, 2004)

Of course another way to look at it is as each bird being a single, with a big TV crowd watching.

Dog A, hunts for the 75 yd bird, which by in large all dogs eventually pick up.....most folks not impressed, because most all the dogs pick it up.

BUT, Dog A steps on the long 300 yd bird, which compared to most others either didn't pick up or had hunts......just like Dog B ...Which one do you think the crowd will remember and become the next American Idol?

Steve, who is still sticking to his signature line.


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

Steve Bean said:


> Of course another way to look at it is as each bird being a single, with a big TV crowd watching.
> 
> Dog A, hunts for the 75 yd bird, which by in large all dogs eventually pick up.....most folks not impressed, because most all the dogs pick it up.
> 
> ...


Yea, but I have a big, fluffy Golden so I get voted off the island anyway!! :wink: 

M


----------



## Roger Perry (Nov 6, 2003)

Sorry, looks like you will have to have another series.


----------



## redline (Apr 19, 2003)

redline said:


> > Memory is a key component of natural ability
> 
> 
> So forgetting a bird in 15 to 20 seconds is OK?
> ...


This is bad I'm quoting my self! But no one really addressed it.
Please tell me so I know.
Which is worse?
Dog A hunts deep of the "shorter easy/simple" bird and finally comes up with it then smacks the ball buster bird.
Dog B be does the opposite.
Dog C gets the buster bird first and then hunts like A on the "shorter easy/simple" bird.
Dog D has moderate hunts on both birds.
GPS readings indicate all dogs disturbed exactly the same amount of ground.
Lets for one time talk about what's worse not better. 
Is it lack of memory that caused dog A to hunt the short bird or lack of marking?
And please tell me how you know what a hard or easy bird is to a dog.
Thanksque
Jan


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Add two more birds—which they both crush— to the test and there you have it a *'nother series *in an AA :wink: 

_Analytic philosophy _regards
john


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

john fallon said:


> Shayne Mehringer said:
> 
> 
> > junbe said:
> ...


and now it is 2 years later :wink: :wink:


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Bump...*



Dog A vs. Dog B 

This is a follow up to the thread i started earlier. http://www.retrievertraining.net/for...ic.php?t=14958

Basically:

You have a double. A 75 yard go bird, a 300 yard memory bird. Clearly the go-bird is the easier mark and the memory bird the tougher mark.

Dog A runs. Hunts the go-bird, smacks the memory bird.
Dog B runs. Smacks the go-bird, hunts the memory bird.

I don't care if you call it a 15 second hunt, tight hunt, or whatever. The dogs stayed in the area and both hunts were identical.

Based on these marks alone. Which dog is your winner. There is no next series. There are no ties.

Shayne

Click to expand...

*The results are within the margin of error we need some more votes

john


----------



## i_willie12 (Apr 11, 2008)

I would say Dog A, cause I would rather have a dog at that level that can nail the 300 yard bird than the 75 yard bird. My 9 month old can nail a 75 yard bird! Just my thought

This is really old but I'll help you out John :wink: 

Why dont we have a thumbs up smilly face?????


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

i_willie12 said:


> Why dont we have a thumbs up smilly face?????


You don't know John very well do you?

/Paul


----------



## i_willie12 (Apr 11, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> You don't know John very well do you?
> 
> /Paul


NOPE not at all


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Well there you go....

Please refer to post #118, made on 6-2-05.....

Smilly face _indeed_ regards,

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

i_willie12 said:


> NOPE not at all


He's just posting on threads he can remember.. 

/Paul


----------



## i_willie12 (Apr 11, 2008)

Damn didnt go through all of them!!! Just went to the end and made a post. Now I see 

Well then my vote for A didnt help the situation out any then did it!!!!!


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

i_willie12 said:


> Damn didnt go through all of them!!! Just went to the end and made a post. Now I see
> 
> Well then my vote for A didnt help the situation out any then did it!!!!!



*Amazing* what you can learn when you know the whole story *before* you ACT, ain't it......

Fallon is _counting_ on more people like you regards, ;-)

kg


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

There have been quite a few Dog A or Dog B threads over the years most of them provide stimulating food for thought. This one is no exception.

i_willie12, When you learn who some of the people are who voted (either way) and read and are able to understand the rational they presented for doing so, you will see what a classic these threads are.

BTW check out how many times KG posted on this thread, his exchange with *Junbe* starting on about 100 something is great stuff.
Read his exchange with Arturo also arround this time


john


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

And i_willie12, while you're at it, try and find ANY thread _that John has originated_ that didn't take issue with a rule, regulation, guideline, or recommendation.

That'll keep you busy for _awhile_ regards,

kg


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

It seems to me (as a neophyte) that the difference in length of the two marks is addressed by saying, in the original hypothetical, that both dogs stayed in the AOF for both birds. Presumably that means that dog B was closer in absolute terms to the short bird that dog A was, in absolute terms, to the long bird. If their hunts were truly identical, as stated in the hypothetical, *relative to the appropriate AOF* for the bird, their performance would be judged equally and another series would be in order. If logistical issues made another series impractical, as a member of the gallery, I would go with dog A since we've already violated the spirit of the rules by not having another series and the long bird is the harder bird. In a derby, based on the RFT Judging Manual, the difference in scoring between a tight hunt and a pin should not be very great anyway.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Has the RFT judging manual replaced the AKC Field Trial Rules and Standard Procedure for Retrievers in giving guidance to judges?

kg


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

K G said:


> Has the RFT judging manual replaced the AKC Field Trial Rules and Standard Procedure for Retrievers in giving guidance to judges?
> 
> kg


The what 

john


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

john fallon said:


> The what
> 
> john


See Jeff Goodwin's (Yardley Labs) post before mine, John....

kg


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

K G said:


> See Jeff Goodwin's (Yardley Labs) post before mine, John....
> 
> kg


Ah Yes ! The "Blue-Book". 
The group effort of FTers with 300 years of experience,1,000 points, many Nationals, and over 1oo titled dogs between them ......

If pressed I will look up the exact words you used to extol its virtues as a supplemental information on the nuances of good judging, and your suggesting that it be mandatory reading for prospective judges.

It seems as though your questioning of Jeff (Yardley Labs) in this manner is at odds with that former position.

Now , to set the record straight, In your opinion, in plain English, Should the "blue-book" be used *in any manner* to supplement any portion of the _italicised _printed guidelines within the RR&G , to assist in the interpretations of the non italicised FT Rules and Regs?????????????

Or should it not?

"Reasonable, understandable, and consistent parameters" regards

john


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

john fallon said:


> If pressed I will look up the exact words you used to extol its virtues as a supplemental information on the nuances of good judging, and your suggesting that it be mandatory reading for prospective judges.


I *do* think it should be mandatory reading, just like the AKC Field Trial Rules and Standard Procedure for Retrievers should be. Look up what you want, but that's where my "endorsement" stops with regards to discussion about rules, recommendations, guidelines, and regulations, particularly relative to this thread.



> It seems as though your questioning of Jeff (Yardley Labs) in this manner is at odds with that former position.


It's because YOU _want_ to see it that way....you're looking to pick a fight, and you'll get no such pleasure from me. I'm on the record on this thread, and that's ALL you're gonna get outta me on the subject of Dog A v. Dog B.



> Now, to set the record straight, in your opinion, in plain English, should the "blue-book" be used *in any manner* to supplement any portion of the _italicised _printed guidelines within the RR&G, to assist in the interpretations of the non italicised FT Rules and Regs?????????????


No. Plain english enough for you?;-)

The existing rules, regulations, guidelines, and standing recommendations do a fine job of standing on their own, IMHO. The "blue book" is GREAT for creating scenarios and suggesting the ways that the RR&G might be interpreted (particularly for newbies), but it is NOT or should it in any way, shape, or form be interpreted as GOSPEL nor should it be endorsed as as a replacement for the RR&G.
kg


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> The existing rules, regulations, guidelines, and standing recommendations do a fine job of standing on their own, IMHO. The "blue book" is GREAT for creating scenarios and suggesting the ways that the RR&G might be interpreted (particularly for newbies), but it is NOT or should it in any way, shape, or form be interpreted as GOSPEL nor should it be endorsed as as a replacement for the RR&G.
> kg


Thanks Keith.

Non gospel regards,


----------



## Tom Mouer (Aug 26, 2003)

One of the dogs was a "ringer" and was DQ'ed. Your choice?


----------



## TANK (Oct 25, 2007)

Is that your new secretary in the avatar? LOL


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Good thread for a snowy mornings read.

john


----------



## sandyg (Feb 10, 2010)

Have things gotten so bad on RTF that we have to revisit seven year old threads to read anything interesting anymore?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Some of us - not me - are mired in the past

I would love it if you started a new thread on something of interest

Ted


----------



## ReedCreek (Dec 30, 2007)

In the first scenario, UNLESS the short bird is a hen pheasant, landing in wet cover - IMO, Dog B wins.


----------

