# Judges-Check your Qualifications



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

It is so hard to get judges line up for upcoming tests. There is so much confusion about the regulations that many don't realize that they are not current with their qualifications to continue judging.

Our club put on an AKC Judges Seminar this past summer, not heavily attended, and now suddenly there are many of our Texas judges that need one. Obviously it is too late for any club to get one in before the Spring tests begin. So the pool gets even more shallow.

Ever since the judges tests were put into effect, there are fewer and fewer seminars being given, therefor fewer new judges being put on the list, because those to run the clubs don't need a seminar, therefore they don't bother to schedule one. 

Everyone wants to play the game but fewer and fewer are helping to keep the judging pool refreshed.
Are we going to allow our sport to collapse because of lack of new and current judges?

Getting off my soap box for now, but if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Interesting..

I am curious!

What qualifications are needed to Judge AKC tests?

Just the cliff Notes please...... Hard for some of us to decipher the rule book.


Gooser


----------



## Rnd (Jan 21, 2012)

Is it also true that if a club sponsors a seminar there is a minimum requirement for attendees??? So if the club gets say 19 and the cut off is 20 they have to cancel?? 

Those are random numbers.. I don't know the actual numbers or even if this is the case...


But if it is indeed the case I would think that the governing body (AKC) may carry some of the responsibility....

Randy


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

It is complicated....

To maintain your judging status you must take a second seminar within 3 years of the first one or must have accumulated 6 master judging points. If you have had 2 seminars or have judged master at least 6 times, you must take and pass the open book judges test with a score of 90 or above. Once you have taken the test, you must take it again every 4 years to remain eligible to judge.

You also must be active in the sport by qualifying a dog at least every 7 years.


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

Rnd said:


> Is it also true that if a club sponsors a seminar there is a minimum requirement for attendees??? So if the club gets say 19 and the cut off is 20 they have to cancel??
> 
> Those are random numbers.. I don't know the actual numbers or even if this is the case...
> 
> ...


Yes, there is a minimum. The sponsoring club can opt to pay for empty seats.

In Texas there used to be at least one judges seminar held per year and they were always well attended. Since the judges test policy came in, many who are in charge of their clubs don't need a seminar, so they don't push to sponsor one or even spread the word when one is offered.

This doesn't bode well for the future of the sport.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Hey Mike

The Fort Collins Retriever Club is hosting a seminar on February 22. I was thinking of attending - just for curiosity sake. Why don't you go, too?

Here is the information I received:

Fort Collins Retriever Club will be hosting an AKC Hunt Test Seminar on Saturday February 22, 2014 with Jerry Mann @ Sportsman Warehouse,
1675 Rocky Mountain Avenue, Loveland, Co 80538 970-461-5000. If you have any questions regarding the Seminar, please contact Jeff Schoonover @ 970-227-1284
Or e-mail @ [email protected]


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

But to become a judge you must also apprentice at each level, right? It's not simple to become a judge...I wished I had done it long ago when I first got involved, because of how hard it is now I won't. I don't run HTs in general but I do help with putting one on for my club and enter it for fun, too.

it would be nice to be able to fast track judges who have experience...I find it funny that I'm not qualified to judge at least a Junior stake...oh well.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I do not intend to judge. But I am curious as to how hunt tests are judged


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I dont think I would Judge either,,At least not till we accomplish something..

It would be interesting though to attend a seminar so as to understand the comment coming from behind me,, "wheres the popcorn" when we are running..

I'll go with you Ted,, as long as you promise to keep me in line...

Gooser


----------



## Joe Brakke (Jul 3, 2008)

It costs the club $500 per seminar which goes to AKC for the Reps expenses. So the club needs to set a cost per seat prior to the event and then advertise it in the hope they break even. In the case where we did not cover our costs we felt it was a small price to seed the judges pool.

You do need to apprentice first and attend your first seminar. They also have additional requirements that the clubs are to evaluate of a potential judge and those requirements are not under the AKC's jurisdiction. Fore instance, they put a rule in that requires a Master judge to have handled and qualified a dog in that level within a 7 year period. This is something the AKC will not track but has placed this upon the Club to validate.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I do not intend to judge. But I am curious as to how hunt tests are judged


Good luck getting that at a seminar

/Paul


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

What was the requirement to become a judge 15 years ago? Are all the judges that started 15 years ago so bad they had to make a bunch of new rules, requirements and hoops to jump through to make sure that a bunch of bad judges don't start volunteering? 

Im ok always the first person to raise my hand to help and volunteer when work needs to be done but, I just don't see myself doing all the apprenticing and traveling to judge rather than running my own dog. I think it's sort of leaning on having folks become judges who do not train their own dogs for the most part. If you train and run your own dog I don't see how you can have time to become qualified to judge very easily. One person who is involved can only volunteer so much time before getting stretched too thin.

I've taken the seminar and honestly did not find it to be what I expected on an educational level.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

Great thread- 
Lets applaud the AKC as their constituents spoke and they listened. 
The Hunt Test advisory committee made suggestions about changing the credentials to judge. 
The AKC had 3 actions to take - no action or leave things as they were - stiffen the suggestion or lighten the suggestion. The AKC actually changed the requirement on time from 5 years to 7 years. 
The Rhtac is actually made up of active ht members and one lives in Texas and another in Colorado. 
I don't believe the rhtac acted in the dark either as when these mods were presented they had a long list of supporters and suggestions. 

As in the FT side of our sport if you inspect the judges directory i believe we will see many folks with the qualifications to judge however only a small percentage do. 

I do agree these new qualifications to judge may make it more difficult to judge however lets hope the folks that do judge understand the rules and whats expected as we try to be more consistent 
Has anyone besides me stood in front of judges that lacked knowledge, did not know the rules, did not understand what their test was doing and so on. 

I believe these judge mods were aimed at education and "better" judges. Time will tell. 
The HT side of the sport definitely has more hurdles to be able to judge than the FT requirements. 
My views and mine only 
Dave Kress


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> I do not intend to judge. But I am curious as to how hunt tests are judged


Once Ted takes his seminar, you folks out there should get him qualified and start working on his campaign for MN judge. That would be way cool


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> What was the requirement to become a judge 15 years ago? Are all the judges that started 15 years ago so bad they had to make a bunch of new rules, requirements and hoops to jump through to make sure that a bunch of bad judges don't start volunteering?
> 
> Im ok always the first person to raise my hand to help and volunteer when work needs to be done but, I just don't see myself doing all the apprenticing and traveling to judge rather than running my own dog. I think it's sort of leaning on having folks become judges who do not train their own dogs for the most part. If you train and run your own dog I don't see how you can have time to become qualified to judge very easily. One person who is involved can only volunteer so much time before getting stretched too thin.
> 
> *I've taken the seminar and honestly did not find it to be what I expected on an educational level.*



Gooser is able to get education from about any source.
There is a documentary on TV that I really enjoy about Springfield Missou. It tells the story of a typical american family that lives there ,along with many different characters in the town.. It really more reality TV I guess,, but I get a LOT out of it.. so much so,, I would consider moving there..

The show is called THE SIMPSONS... Very good...


----------



## Margo Ellis (Jan 19, 2003)

Were is the judges list kept? I actually used to be on it and wondered if I still was.

Never mind I found it, it appears I am off the list and would need to start over from square one.


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Lady Duck Hunter said:


> It is complicated....
> 
> To maintain your judging status you must take a second seminar within 3 years of the first one or must have accumulated 6 master judging points. If you have had 2 seminars or have judged master at least 6 times, you must take and pass the open book judges test with a score of 90 or above. Once you have taken the test, you must take it again every 4 years to remain eligible to judge.
> 
> You also must be active in the sport by qualifying a dog at least every 7 years.


Does anyone know the reasoning behind taking the 2nd seminar if you don't have the Master points? Not really intereted in judging Master, but I love to watch and judge the Junior and Senior dogs.


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Margo Ellis said:


> Were is the judges list kept? I actually used to be on it and wondered if I still was.


http://www.akc.org/judges_directory/index.cfm?action=performance

You can search by name or state.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Lady Duck Hunter said:


> It is complicated....
> 
> To maintain your judging status you must take a second seminar within 3 years of the first one or must have accumulated 6 master judging points. If you have had 2 seminars or have judged master at least 6 times, you must take and pass the open book judges test with a score of 90 or above. Once you have taken the test, you must take it again every 4 years to remain eligible to judge.
> 
> *You also must be active in the sport by qualifying a dog at least every 7 years.*


Does this mean a Dog YOU have trained,, or a Dog YOU own? Does Qualify mean just pass a test (1)? at the level you want to Judge??
Can the dog be just anyones dog?


Gooser


----------



## Margo Ellis (Jan 19, 2003)

Yeah I am still actually listed for Montana but all the information for contact is wrong plus I haven't any approvals because it has been so long from my last seminar / test. 
Oh well. I don't see that happening any time soon.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> Never mind I found it, it appears I am off the list and would need to start over from square one.


Margo 
You don't have to start over. If you were recorded in the 80's or 90's they still have the proof it,, just takes a while for them to catch up and stick it in your new records.
No apprenticing involved.
Pete


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> Does this mean a Dog YOU have trained,, or a Dog YOU own? Does Qualify mean just pass a test (1)? at the level you want to Judge??
> Can the dog be just anyones dog?
> 
> 
> Gooser


It can be any dog and you need to get a qualifying score at the level you want to judge or higher. This is to be checked by the club that hires the judge.

But what I am talking about is the failure of judges who are in the pool to keep current, by proactively attending a seminar when it is given in their area, encouraging their own clubs to hold a seminar, or to request the test to be mailed to them, if that is all they need to be updated. 

So I wanted to remind everyone currently on the judges list to check their information to make sure they remain current.


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

Splash_em said:


> Does anyone know the reasoning behind taking the 2nd seminar if you don't have the Master points? Not really intereted in judging Master, but I love to watch and judge the Junior and Senior dogs.


No, I don't know the reasoning, but that is what's in the rules. 3 years after your 2nd seminar, you may request the test and be able to continue to judge JH SH levels for another 4 years.....rinse and repeat.


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Lady Duck Hunter said:


> No, I don't know the reasoning, but that is what's in the rules. 3 years after your 2nd seminar, you may request the test and be able to continue to judge JH SH levels for another 4 years.....rinse and repeat.


I understand the rule about it, just not the logic. If you are active with your local club, apprenticing Master means you lose a marshal or gunner for the weekend. So your only option is to give up another weekend from the family to sit behind 2 people holding a pencil and pay for 2 nights in a hotel or give up another weekend for the seminar. Either way, something about that just doesn't seem quite right if we are truly trying to encourage people to remain current or start judging. 

Sorry about taking the thread off subject, but this just doesn't seem real logical to me.


----------



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

Splash_em said:


> Does anyone know the reasoning behind taking the 2nd seminar if you don't have the Master points? Not really interested in judging Master, but I love to watch and judge the Junior and Senior dogs.


Right on Richard... I like the young dogs and new handlers and don't want to judge Masters.......Guess I will have to take another in a couple of years.


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

I am with you Richard and Otey, I do not wish to judge master either. Our club holds an AKC seminar every 3 years and Dave and I both attend even though it isn't required for us. It helps to notice who the new people are who want to get into the judging pool. 

Richard, the seminar is less than a full day, so you are not giving up a weekend to attend, unless your local club doesn't want to put one on.


----------



## djansma (Aug 26, 2004)

Bessie and I can judge any level of hunt test and really do not enjoy the 100question test have already taken it 2 times
The last two 4yr cycles if a judge has judged forever just send them a copy of the rule changes


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Just a couple of things ...

1. To those who say the seminar is a waste of time, it is not intended to teach what good dog work is or how to place birds so they'll represent a real test. It is assumed that this part of your education is largely a function of the training you do with a dog and your experience with tests. Some judging stuff will be covered as an example but the bulk of the seminar material covers the first half of the book, which hardly anybody reads. What is typically done is a sample piece of terrain is drawn and then birds are added to show how the same terrain could be used for all three tests and then a discussion occurs on the various grading strategies. All in all, it's a pretty effective use of 1 day in terms of teaching a fairly arcane subject manner with a little bit of "how to..." thrown in. It will not take a crack bowler and turn them into a hunt test judge.

2. The thing that you all should be concerned about is that the judges you all saw last year are now a year older. Right here in Alabama, I think I'm correct in saying this ... at least 3 8 point Master judges and some SH and JH judges have elected to bow out due to age. I suspect that the Alabama situation is much the same as the other states. Where are you going to get judges in the next 3-5 years. Those judges that are retiring put pressure on others to judge more and soon enough, you'll have more retirements. So, while you are all chatting about what a thankless task it is, soon enough you'll start having tests cancelled due to inability to find judges.

If you're training your second dog or have 5 years of training/testing, it's time to take a seminar and test and start to ready yourself. Agree to apprentice a JH stake and see just what goes on. If you hate it, fine. At least you could sit JH if no other judges are available. This sport doesn't do well if everyone says, "Let somebody else do it."


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Maybe it is time to star pyong judges like conformation does.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Here's the cliff notes of a seminar. Draw two large circles on a whiteboard and repeat after me. The area of the fall defies definition. Repeat 20 times, eat lunch sign form drive home

/Paul


----------



## Dan Wegner (Jul 7, 2006)

There are plenty of qualified judges out there that are never asked for one reason or another. It's funny how the same people seem to be judging multiple tests in a certain area every season. I, for one, am qualified to judge all three levels of HT's, but have only had one invite in the last 3 years (unfortunately had to decline due to a work conflict). 

I started running field trials 4 or 5 years ago and judging minor stakes. I know many hunt test clubs prefer judges with higher pass rates, resulting in more ribbons and happier participants, so I have to wonder if the perception is that those who cross over to field trials are no longer good hunt test judges and would be too tough. I would like to think that's not the case. I understand the rules and differences in each of the games and if anything, running and judging trials has broadened my experience level. Conversely, I know a number of hunt test judges that borrowed someone else's dog to run one time in order to qualify to judge at the next higher level. Some of those folks are asked to judge frequently. I just don't get it. Maybe it's just because I don't run many hunt tests anymore.... who knows.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

MooseGooser said:


> Gooser is able to get education from about any source.
> There is a documentary on TV that I really enjoy about Springfield Missou. It tells the story of a typical american family that lives there ,along with many different characters in the town.. It really more reality TV I guess,, but I get a LOT out of it.. so much so,, I would consider moving there..
> 
> The show is called THE SIMPSONS... Very good...


Writing in third person dialog doesn't really help anyone understand what you mean and i don't think you have the right state. Mizzou is coached by a bunch of guys from Wa btw.


----------



## Kyle Garris (Oct 27, 2005)

Is there a link to all upcoming seminars? Or, do you just have to find them individually? 

Thanks!
Kyle


----------



## bakbay (May 20, 2003)

Kyle Garris said:


> Is there a link to all upcoming seminars? Or, do you just have to find them individually?
> 
> Thanks!
> Kyle


http://www.akc.org/clubs/seminars/seminars.cfm?page=5 then select Hunt Test Retrievers


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Dan Wegner said:


> There are plenty of qualified judges out there that are never asked for one reason or another. It's funny how the same people seem to be judging multiple tests in a certain area every season. I, for one, am qualified to judge all three levels of HT's, but have only had one invite in the last 3 years (unfortunately had to decline due to a work conflict).
> 
> I started running field trials 4 or 5 years ago and judging minor stakes. I know many hunt test clubs prefer judges with higher pass rates, resulting in more ribbons and happier participants, so I have to wonder if the perception is that those who cross over to field trials are no longer good hunt test judges and would be too tough. I would like to think that's not the case. I understand the rules and differences in each of the games and if anything, running and judging trials has broadened my experience level. Conversely, I know a number of hunt test judges that borrowed someone else's dog to run one time in order to qualify to judge at the next higher level. Some of those folks are asked to judge frequently. I just don't get it. Maybe it's just because I don't run many hunt tests anymore.... who knows.


Good post Dan.

And yes...there are concerns at times. It's disingenuous to look for the 'easy' judge ribbon factory as much as the 'hard' judge who only expects to pass 30% of the dogs before even seeing the grounds.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

My experience with the seminar was like what Paul Cantrell pointed out. I took it about 5 years ago in hopes of learning more about the game as a complete beginner, with no intention of judging. Now, further on down the road, I would love to offer my time to judge juniors and maybe soon seniors. I can't find another seminar anywhere near me and worse yet there are only two hunt tests a year in NM and I hope to run my dog. There does not seem to be a viable option to become a judge of any level. Oh well, once when I was marshalling back east, I got bitched at because I did not know how to drive the ATV they had there. The guy said, "You took the AKC seminar, you know damn well you have to drive ATV as a Marshall!". Oh yeah, I was a volunteer and it was a Field Trial I was marshalling. Who knew how important some of that stuff at the seminar would be some day!


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

The seminar needs to be longer, more thorough and have a curriculum developed by an educator. I do not believe the seminar really should require continued attendance unless the seminar itself advances and brings a higher level of education with each progressive step. It is logical for just about anyone in a professional position to take continuing education classes as their career advances. It isn't logical to take the same class over and over again.


----------



## JDogger (Feb 2, 2003)

Carol,
There are 4 AKC tests in NM. Two in the spring and two in the fall. There are at least another half dozen in CO all an easy drive.
There is a seminar in CO in Feb. Hugh


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

HNTFSH said:


> Good post Dan.
> 
> And yes...there are concerns at times. It's disingenuous to look for the 'easy' judge ribbon factory as much as the 'hard' judge who only expects to pass 30% of the dogs before even seeing the grounds.


wow, you find a judge that only passes 30% hard? While just about every judge I've worked with is pretty determined to set a solid test that meets the standard, I think stats would show you that 30% is a pretty solid average of passes in this sport. I find it ironic that in one sentence you condemn clubs shopping for easy judges and yet believe 30% is a hard judge. What do you believe the pass rate should be?

/Paul


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

There shouldn't be a pass rate....it's a standard. On any given weekend it could be 100% or 0%...


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

However Lainee I think it's the thinking behind those perceived pass percentages that drive the behaviors

/Paul


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> However Lainee I think it's the thinking behind those perceived pass percentages that drive the behaviors
> 
> /Paul


I don't argue that point...


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

It's the only way to make it competitive. See people post on FB, RTF and other sites how only "X" percentage of the dogs could pass the MH test and we were one of them or, my dog didn't pass and it was a tough test because only "X" number of dogs could pass..... Again, the mentality of it runs deep. Seem to forget they are running just a standard not a competition.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

FOM said:


> There shouldn't be a pass rate....it's a standard. On any given weekend it should be 100% or 0%...


Given the same field of dogs, if the tests are within the regulations and appropriate to the level being tested, there is no way it could be 100% one weekend and 0% the next.

I do, however agree that there should not be an "expected pass rate".

20+ years of judging HT's for all 3 orgs has borne out the following AVERAGES.... (my experiences ONLY!)

HRC STARTED- 80-90%
SEASONED- 50-60%
FINISHED- 30-40%

NAHRA STARTED- 60-70%
INTERMEDIATE- 30-40%
SENIOR- 30-40%

AKC JUNIOR- 60-70%
SENIOR- 50-70%
MASTER-25-50%


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

I agree paul. I have on a personal judging record a 38% pass rate. I would say in my opinion that a lot of dogs running the tests I've judged would have passed on any other given weekend, they either just made a major fault, ie breaking, or it was just not their day

/Paul


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> I agree paul. I have on a personal judging record a 38% pass rate. I would say in my opinion that a lot of dogs running the tests I've judged would have passed on any other given weekend, they either just made a major fault, ie breaking, or it was just not their day
> 
> /Paul


Bert Carlson told me recently, "I've never had to place a dog in a single field trial I've ever judged. The dogs placed themselves."


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

paul young said:


> Given the same field of dogs, if the tests are within the regulations and appropriate to the level being tested, there is no way it could be 100% one weekend and 0% the next.
> 
> I do, however agree that there should not be an "expected pass rate".
> 
> ...


I didn't qualify my statement with "the same field of dogs" - I just said it could be 100% or 0%...there should not be a pass rate percentage to contend with...it's a standard. I also never qualified my statement with the likelihood that there would be 100% or 0% pass rate...but it is possible, just like it is suppose to be possible to line a blind, but rarely does it truly happen!


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

FOM said:


> I didn't qualify my statement with "the same field of dogs" - I just said it could be 100% or 0%...there should not be a pass rate percentage to contend with...it's a standard. I also never qualified my statement with the likelihood that there would be 100% or 0% pass rate...but it is possible, just like it is suppose to be possible to line a blind, but rarely does it truly happen!


LOL. I am sure some judges have been tempted to go with 0%, but want to judge again. I have never seen 100% but have seen some where over 90% have passed that were good solid MH tests. I have even had my dog fail one where over 90% passed. Around these parts, I would say that the 30-60% is fairly common. It is rare to see many outside of that range.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> wow, you find a judge that only passes 30% hard? While just about every judge I've worked with is pretty determined to set a solid test that meets the standard, I think stats would show you that 30% is a pretty solid average of passes in this sport. I find it ironic that in one sentence you condemn clubs shopping for easy judges and yet believe 30% is a hard judge. What do you believe the pass rate should be?
> 
> /Paul


Pay attention Paul. I said:


HNTFSH said:


> It's disingenuous to look for the 'easy' judge ribbon factory as much as the 'hard' judge who only expects to pass 30% of the dogs before even seeing the grounds.


The latter meaning an elimination of dogs not based on pass/fail of the standard they set but judging dogs against each other, against the standard. We all know it happens, as does the inverse. Not unlike some favoritism in a field trial, with some judges.

The pass rate should be the pass rate. No need coming into it with one in mind.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

DoubleHaul said:


> LOL. I am sure some judges have been tempted to go with 0%, but want to judge again. I have never seen 100% but have seen some where over 90% have passed that were good solid MH tests. I have even had my dog fail one where over 90% passed. Around these parts, I would say that the 30-60% is fairly common. It is rare to see many outside of that range.


Agreed....


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

So why do the weekend tests have a faction of folks "needing the master national judges"? Seems people expect more of a test coming from a MN judge. How does that thought process strengthen the foundation of the notion we are testing the dogs and not competing for a ribbon?


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

The that back together with the fact it will take normal people 5-8 years if they want to become a judge- the old guard of judges is pretty secure on the throne for a while.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

DoubleHaul said:


> LOL. I am sure some judges have been tempted to go with 0%, but want to judge again..


I know this happened years ago in Maine but it may have been a NAHRA senior, not an AKC master, Paul Y do you recal?
and if you do gosh I hope you were not one of the judges !!!


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> I agree paul. I have on a personal judging record a 38% pass rate. I would say in my opinion that a lot of dogs running the tests I've judged would have passed on any other given weekend, they either just made a major fault, ie breaking, or it was just not their day
> 
> /Paul


Completly agree with this statement. Passed 11 of 36 last spring at a senior and am convinced we would have had at least 6-7 more if we had a normal spring. As it was, dogs had only had water work for a couple weeks, and it showed.

A standard is a standard Regards


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

HNTFSH said:


> Pay attention Paul. I said:
> 
> The latter meaning an elimination of dogs not based on pass/fail of the standard they set but judging dogs against each other, against the standard. We all know it happens, as does the inverse. Not unlike some favoritism in a field trial, with some judges.
> 
> The pass rate should be the pass rate. No need coming into it with one in mind.


well that ain't what you wrote. I don't recall ever having a co judge say anything about the dogs entered or how they stack against other dogs in the field. Most of them don't even know who is entered. I don't bother looking, mostly want to know how many I got to run and what grounds do I have to work with

/Paul


----------



## mostlygold (Aug 5, 2006)

I personally would never attend another seminar up unless they change how they are setup and run. I attended 3 before they changed the rules. As bad as the HT judges test is, the seminars are worse. You spend most of the day listening to a rep read misconduct rules out of the book and then briefly go over the standards for each level. Included are also things like the color of the ribbon, entering the tests, secretary stuff, club admin stuff, really who cares about that. It doesn't pertain to judging dogs. There is very little discussion about actually judging dogs. I have to pay to sit for 8 hrs and listen to someone read out of a book. Huge waste of time and money. You learn dog work by watching dogs work and training with people who know how to set up marks and blinds, know what the hazards are in the setups and understand why dogs get in trouble with setups. That can't be learned from a seminar or from apprenticing a test. It comes from years of working a dog.

Dawn


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> So why do the weekend tests have a faction of folks "needing the master national judges"? Seems people expect more of a test coming from a MN judge. How does that thought process strengthen the foundation of the notion we are testing the dogs and not competing for a ribbon?


Why expect more, they are picked by popularity not skill. 

/Paul


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Why expect more, they are picked by popularity not skill.
> 
> /Paul


That certainly isn't how they fill other slots....lol


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> well that ain't what you wrote. I don't recall ever having a co judge say anything about the dogs entered or how they stack against other dogs in the field. Most of them don't even know who is entered. I don't bother looking, mostly want to know how many I got to run and what grounds do I have to work with
> 
> /Paul


I could post what I wrote again but you'd likely miss it, again. Nor would it matter if you knew the field to judge with an expectation to pass a %, if that's what you chose to do.

So there's Paul's opinion. There are only judges who judge too easy and freely pass too many dogs, on purpose.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

HNTFSH said:


> Good post Dan.
> 
> And yes...there are concerns at times. It's disingenuous to look for the 'easy' judge ribbon factory as much as the 'hard' judge who only expects to pass 30% of the dogs before even seeing the grounds.


Here I'll save ya. Read what you wrote. What you hear in your head is not what you wrote

/Paul


----------



## Vicky Trainor (May 19, 2003)

Ken Bora said:


> I know this happened years ago in Maine but it may have been a NAHRA senior, not an AKC master, Paul Y do you recal?
> and if you do gosh I hope you were not one of the judges !!!


Many years ago, there was a Master test set up and judged in the MD/DE area. One of the judges was a prominent judge scheduled to judge the next Master National. It was told that after the 2 judges conferred, no dogs had passed. The Hunt Test Committee asked (begged) them to pass at least one dog. One dog passed.


----------



## HNTFSH (Feb 7, 2009)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Here I'll save ya. Read what you wrote. What you hear in your head is not what you wrote
> 
> /Paul


Well hell. I'll start checking with you on what I mean from now on. In the context if Wengers post - me thinks your assumptions hasty.


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> So why do the weekend tests have a faction of folks "needing the master national judges"? Seems people expect more of a test coming from a MN judge. How does that thought process strengthen the foundation of the notion we are testing the dogs and not competing for a ribbon?


That's an easy question to answer - "Normal" weekend people need to see the future MN judges to hear and see their version of what testing to the maximum of the standard is. This would be the only way that anyone would see the full definition since you can easily have a bunch of hot air blown about the subject when you ask about it.

Damn sure don't ask about the financial sheets or you will see more twisted up panties than a tornado going through a Victoria Secret factory.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Splash_em said:


> That's an easy question to answer - "Normal" weekend people need to see the future MN judges to hear and see their version of what testing to the maximum of the standard is. This would be the only way that anyone would see the full definition since you can easily have a bunch of hot air blown about the subject when you ask about it.
> 
> Damn sure don't ask about the financial sheets or you will see more twisted up panties than a tornado going through a Victoria Secret factory.


yes I know the answer. It's too bad they are trying so hard to push the limits and drive the average joe away from the sport. Pretty much why I started running trials. Weekend judges pretending it's a MN every weekend. 

And - I have brought up financials here and as a result was threatened with never passing a test under a MN judge by a high ranking MN official who didn't like my opinions. Pretty sweet club.


----------



## Splash_em (Apr 23, 2009)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> yes I know the answer. It's too bad they are trying so hard to push the limits and drive the average joe away from the sport. Pretty much why I started running trials. Weekend judges pretending it's a MN every weekend.
> 
> And - I have brought up financials here and as a result was threatened with never passing a test under a MN judge by a high ranking MN official who didn't like my opinions. Pretty sweet club.


We can run in the same flight then as far as I'm concerned. Right now, I wouldn't walk across the street to urinate on the party tent if it was on fire.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Are you guys saying test at the Master National are typically harder than typical weekend Master test? Honest question, I had two MH dogs but never saw any reason to travel to a National.


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

I was going to just monitor this thread but thought it got interesting as my training partner is going through a process now, where he had to drive 6 hours for his seminar, now has to take the test to be current on his judging. He has finished one MN and one Grand (HRC ) made four MH dogs, Derby List two QAA dogs and one that needs a win to finish FC and or AFC. He is a eight point major field trial judge. He has to jump through so many hoops in the past few months it is unreal. An amateur trainer who works A FULL-TIME JOB 40 TO 60 HOURS A WEEK. Profile wise I would think this is the sort of fellow the AKC clubs in general would like to have judge. 

I also discussed this with my daughter who is about to Judge her second Master National in 2014 and has judged about 60 or 70 Master, Senior and Junior stakes, plus a few minor trial stakes. She has judged from Oregon to Florida and parts in between. Competed in many Master stakes with four dogs and hunts. I watched her progress over the years to get to the level where she is now. It has been a uphill battle all the way, from "good ole boy" stuff to your a woman, why we need to put a man in there that you can learn from. (hell she shot a Moose and bow hunted deer for years) . I think the sport and it is a sport and it is competitive trying to get the 10's no matter the Standard. It is now mostly at the Master level a pro dominated sport, many, many, pro trained dogs and that's good I think to keep the standard up. Unfortunately it is going the way of field trials, where, many judges know only what they have seen the pros set up or what they saw last weekend at another hunt test. In field trials many have learned that until you "hold the book" no one will give you the nod. That appears to be the issue sometimes at Hunt Tests or the pass rate is high to be popular, damn the standard or they , like field trial judges sometimes want to remembered on how difficult their test was, thus a much lower pass rate. I have judged 15 or 20 Master Stakes over the years and have come from the field trial ranks much longer before . I judge both Hunt Tests and field trials. My reputation as a hunt test judges from the "behind my back folks" if you run under him it will be a field trial. Have judged with my daughter on several occasions and she gets accused of me setting the tests up. Far from the truth in fact we have very different views on some set-ups and judging differences. I think the AKC should take a step back look at their criteria for judging, once you pass the tests and judge I think like field trials it should be for as long as you are asked. Perhaps have a evaluation maybe every five years for judges and go from there. Also, more folks should step up to the plate, quit complaining, and jump through the hoops, as my training partner has, and judge. It's like voting, if you don't vote, then you give up your right to complain. I know of several folks who frequent this forum, field trialers, who have run some hunt tests and have jumped through the hoops to judge from the Junior level through Master, just to give back to their home clubs! some are lurkers and some have posted. If we don't you are going to be looking at the same faces for a long, long time , many of whom won't have run a dog in years! Some insight and my two cents.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

I spent a very enjoyable weekend judging with Mr. Dillow so I respect his opinions and agree with his post. Especially the part about not complaining if you have not taken the time to work the book for several weekends. On the other side there is still, despite efforts by the AKC, a wide discrepancy in HT judging, and, as in any human endeavor, too much politicking and favoritism. There are judges who have never worked with a dog in actual hunting situations, don't train their own dogs much less compete with them and, in some cases, don't even own a dog. The only way to change that is get engaged with your club(s) and step up to the line. 
Happy and Safe New Year to all. 

Bob Swift


----------



## Joe Brakke (Jul 3, 2008)

To the OP's point, I feel that a judge should know their status with the AKC and not accept an assignment until you are current. Judges qualifications are part of the rules and the judge should know those rules inside and out. No surprises.

I think judges need to develop a CV or Resume of sort, call it a Bio, that addresses all of the other qualifications beyond what the AKC tracks (Tests, Seminars and contact information).

I will try to attach the questionnaire I developed for our club to insure we were compliant with the new rules. Its a 1 st draft and a little rough, some of the date questions can be streamlined as the transition year is over and now is fully in effect for 2014.


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

Joe Brakke said:


> To the OP's point, I feel that a judge should know their status with the AKC and not accept an assignment until you are current. Judges qualifications are part of the rules and the judge should know those rules inside and out. No surprises.
> 
> I think judges need to develop a CV or Resume of sort, call it a Bio, that addresses all of the other qualifications beyond what the AKC tracks (Tests, Seminars and contact information).
> 
> I will try to attach the questionnaire I developed for our club to insure we were compliant with the new rules. Its a 1 st draft and a little rough, some of the date questions can be streamlined as the transition year is over and now is fully in effect for 2014.



Thanks, Joe, and thanks for including your questionnaire. I appreciate you guiding this discussion back in the intended direction.


----------



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

FOM said:


> There shouldn't be a pass rate....it's a standard. On any given weekend it could be 100% or 0%...


on any given weekend the pass rate depends on the field of dogs. Dogs that are ready to run usually pass. Those that are not ready usually fail themselves. You cannot determine a pass rate for all tests without knowing what the field was on that given day. Have had all pass in the WORST weather possible and a few on a great day.....just saying......


----------



## Susan Young (Apr 13, 2004)

The new AKC 7 year requirement only requires the judge to walk to the line with a dog who passes a test. There is no requirement that the judge has actually TRAINED a dog. I could have met the requirement by borrowing my friend’s FC AFC and running her in Senior. What would that have shown other than my friend trusted me with his dog for the day and I knew how to write a check for the entry fee? Certainly nothing about my skills for dog training, bird placement, test set up, and test management. To make sure I would be up to date for the 7 year requirement, I chose to instead dust off my own retired HRCH MHR UH SH, which I had trained and run to her titles for better or worse, and run her in Senior. It cost me well over $100 just to be able to continue to donate my time as a judge, and that was with the dog passing on our first try. 

There are many experienced judges in my area who are in similar situations to me. That is, their dogs are members of their families, and there are only so many spaces on the bed. They mostly train and run their own dogs, and may only get a new puppy every 5-10 years as space sadly becomes available. If they are blessed with dogs that have long lives, it may be more than 7 years before they title another dog at a given level. But they have years of experience training dogs, titling dogs, running and working hunt tests. 

There are a lot of very good judges, with years of experience training and judging, who may be cutting back on the number of dogs in their lives as they near retirement. These are still excellent, knowledgeable judges, who may have the time to judge because they don’t have their own dog to campaign at the moment. I would much rather run under them than someone who had more recently fulfilled their judging requirement by running a dog someone else had trained.

I judge for all three organizations, so please allow me to make a comparison here. HRC requires a judge to have owned, trained and handled a dog to begin judging at that level, and then requires them to keep current by judging and attending seminars. Personally, the initial requirement to have owned, trained, and handled the dog has more meaning to me than the AKC requirement that could allow a judge to just write an entry check and borrow a dog to take to line every 7 years, without ever having been active in a dog’s training.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Susan Young said:

*I judge for all three organizations, so please allow me to make a comparison here. HRC requires a judge to have owned, trained and handled a dog to begin judging at that level, and then requires them to keep current by judging and attending seminars. Personally, the initial requirement to have owned, trained, and handled the dog has more meaning to me than the AKC requirement that could allow a judge to just write an entry check and borrow a dog to take to line every 7 years, without ever having been active in a dog’s training.
**
I agree with this 100%....

I will take it one step farther and also say,,that in your traing groups,, there may be people there that dont run dogs in tests, but have HUGE knowledg as to how to place birds, set up senarios, and train dogs...
On those training dyas, when one of those people come to me and say, You dog did well today,,, it means one He!! of a lot more to ME,, that a ribbon given to me by someone I dont know from Adam..

I go to tests and test my dog to see how she performs in MY eyes..

I know what I want,, and know what she is capable of..

Like I have said before,, sometimes we are our worse critic. but we can also be the most fair, cause we know our dog..**

*


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

Susan Young said:


> The new AKC 7 year requirement only requires the judge to walk to the line with a dog who passes a test. There is no requirement that the judge has actually TRAINED a dog. I could have met the requirement by borrowing my friend’s FC AFC and running her in Senior. What would that have shown other than my friend trusted me with his dog for the day and I knew how to write a check for the entry fee? Certainly nothing about my skills for dog training, bird placement, test set up, and test management. To make sure I would be up to date for the 7 year requirement, I chose to instead dust off my own retired HRCH MHR UH SH, which I had trained and run to her titles for better or worse, and run her in Senior. It cost me well over $100 just to be able to continue to donate my time as a judge, and that was with the dog passing on our first try.
> 
> There are many experienced judges in my area who are in similar situations to me. That is, their dogs are members of their families, and there are only so many spaces on the bed. They mostly train and run their own dogs, and may only get a new puppy every 5-10 years as space sadly becomes available. If they are blessed with dogs that have long lives, it may be more than 7 years before they title another dog at a given level. But they have years of experience training dogs, titling dogs, running and working hunt tests.
> 
> ...


I have not judged at the HRC level, but, have titled two HRCH dogs in the past 5 or 6 years. It is the closest to hunting that one can get. I do have friends who judge HRC and have to agree the requirements for judging are more stringent then the AKC Hunt Tests at present. My membership is still active in HRC and I am a member of a HRC club. Although I disagree with some of the HRC testing, I have to admit the AKC Hunt Tests could take a few lessons from the HRC especially in the Finished area , such as "real" gun handling, shooting, swinging on birds, setting up tests, getting approval from committee , etc. HRC at the site of the Hunt Tests, in my opinion tends to be more organized then some AKC Hunt test events.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Ken Bora said:


> I know this happened years ago in Maine but it may have been a NAHRA senior, not an AKC master, Paul Y do you recal?
> and if you do gosh I hope you were not one of the judges !!!


I do recall that test, Ken.

It was an HRC Finished test in Maine which was set up by the (then) President of HRC. I believe that Lousiana boy was trying to make a statement. He did just that and it will be a cold day in Hell when he gets invited to judge up here again.

I ran the ONE dog that passed out of a full flight. It didn't make me proud. Quite the opposite, actually. 29 dogs got SCREWED that day to feed his ego. -Paul


----------



## hownagytoo (Jun 26, 2011)

*Judges, qualifications and results*

I realize that this thread is well over 2 months old, but it discusses issues that have been bothering me for some months. What prompted me to post was a recent HT in Texas that closed within 1 hour of opening for entries on EE. In the Master test it appears that only 10 to 12 handlers out of 120 dogs are amateurs, the remainder of dogs are handled by a pro. But I digress, I'm questioning judges qualifications.

#1 The host club is charged with policing the qualifications of their invited judges. What happens when it is easily determined that one of the master judges has not met all of the requirements? The one I am questioning is handling and qualifying a dog at the level they will judge within the past seven years, no matter whether it's their dog or not. How do you either ask the club or the AKC (we all know what their answer will be) without sounding like a jerk, crybaby or whiner about this judge?

#2 If a judge has been posted in an approved event and they are not qualified because they haven't handled and qualified a dog in the past seven years (any level) are the test results valid? Interesting question...

#3 How many dogs should qualify in a typical master test? Let's face it, over the past 3 decades that the hunt test program has been in existence (starting with good 'ol Richard Wolters and his challenge to the AKC with the first NAHRA tests), the bar has been substantially raised for the dogs' performance, but the standards have remained basically the same. Dedicated amateurs have worked diligently to train to the standard, and the pro trainer (with the help of their paid assistants) works daily with their dogs, continuing to raise that bar. It's really a vicious cycle. The dogs are wonderful and take it and keep showing us what they are made of. However, please consider, Master hunter dogs of 20 years ago would most likely not be able to pass the master tests of today. Also, Field champions at trials of 20 to 30 years ago, would not be able to pass the Open FT today. How do you judge this, other than to make the tests/trials harder and the subjective opinion of the judges more critical?

I could go on: pro handlers vs. amateurs; limited entries; club members working for the 1 or 2 pros that were able to enter their test (are we subsidizing the profits of the pro in this case?); the judging pool; the validity of judges seminars: overused judges in particular areas of the country; etc., etc., etc.
I've been involved in the game since about 1987, I keep seeing the wheel going around, but no real new inventions/solutions. I am a master level judge, taken the seminars and the tests and was fortunate enough to have some master dogs. But, I've seen little over the years that can address many of the issues, just Band-Aid solutions.
Looking forward to your comments! ;-)


----------



## Joe Brakke (Jul 3, 2008)

BINGO on #1 and #2. What does happen when a judge has not met the requirements that clubs have been deemed responsible for verifying. We have no data base..

When the rules were being discussed, I was not a fan of it and felt the AKC was setting the requirement, then they should then provide the information to verify and QUALIFY a judge. The intention of the rule change was lost when they failed to provide a method to honestly verify it. The AKC now just lists the approved judges, meeting certain administrative requirements.

My other thought is how a certain judge may own a dog that is with a Pro and that Pro then lists the owner and Pro as the handlers for that weekend's event. Is that now a record or fact that the owner now has qualified a dog at that level, and if that judge is a Master Level judge, he or she can point to the EE record and state, "I handled the dog during the that test and qualified the dog", thus the requirement has been met to continue judging. Coming this year this requirement will become in affect so I suspect this loop hole will be used for evidence that a judge not meeting his requirement has been met it. Verifying or contesting this would just be a he said she said and life goes on.


----------



## Troy Tilleraas (Sep 24, 2010)

"How do you either ask the club or the AKC (we all know what their answer will be) without sounding like a jerk, crybaby or whiner about this judge?"

Call or e-mail the test secretary and have them verify that "judge x" is eligible. The judge in question may have very well indeed forgot about the rule change and when asked about it may say-indeed I am not eligible... 

The system works if you speak up! That's a rule to keep the judges up to date with handling dogs and to be judged by your peers!


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Just as there are some good judges being passed over because of this new rule, there are some who literally fall asleep in the chair, judge as pass or fail, or give incorrect information in the judges briefing. Hopefully, no one will give them a dog to qualify and restate their judge credentials.


----------



## Pam Spears (Feb 25, 2010)

You'd think that the AKC would limit the judges directory itself to those who are qualified instead of dumping the responsibility for verifying information on clubs. Why are there judges listed in the directory who haven't met the qualifications?

Thanks for sharing your questionnaire, Joe, I might be using it this year


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Assuming that most folks are honest, why wouldn't the search function on EE serve to allay many (most?) fears? Search for the person's name and you'll find the dog's name and test(s) he was in. Then look at the test record or search for the dog's name to find the pass/fail. It's not fool-proof but it's a step in the right direction.


----------



## mostlygold (Aug 5, 2006)

Because as previously stated many dogs are listed with multiple handlers, especially dogs being run by pros. How are you going to know if the dog was run by the pro or the owner? I guess you would have to take the owner's word that they were running the dog that day, because most people aren't going to remember who ran a dog in a specific test 4-5 years ago.

I did not like the rule when it was put in place. I know it's intention was to try to get judges that remained active in retriever sports but as stated previously there are many people who are very active training, hunting and working in their clubs that don't run or title a dog every 7 years. I have been judging since mid 1990 at all levels but would not have been eligible a few years back if this rule had been in place. I lost a 6 yr old dog up expectantly after getting her MH at age 4. My other 3 dogs were older and I did not have the resources to get another puppy for several years. By the time I trained and ran him at MH level it was 8 yrs from the time I last ran MH. During that time however,I was training dogs, judging and was very active in my club. I would have been one of those people who would not been eligible to judge. It is just a rule that can't be enforced and limits some very good people from judging.

Dawn


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

One handler per dog. Putting three handlers on an entry just so you can hang out with certain people just causes problems for hts.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Eric Johnson said:


> Assuming that most folks are honest, why wouldn't the search function on EE serve to allay many (most?) fears? Search for the person's name and you'll find the dog's name and test(s) he was in. Then look at the test record or search for the dog's name to find the pass/fail. It's not fool-proof but it's a step in the right direction.


 search function not very functional


----------

