# Ideas needed on how to make the Master test entry system fairer



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Entering a limited Master test has become an exercise in futility for people who type slowly or with slow internet.
They instituted the $25 scratch fee and $10 wait list idea over a year ago to solve the problem and it has failed.

There is something fundamentally unfair about a system that allows someone to enter 15, 20,30 or more dogs while numerous other people can not even get one dog entered. There is no other competition where the ability to enter and compete is determined solely on your ability to get entered as fast as possible.
In limited Master Hunt test all of the entries are awarded based solely on the basis of how fast you can get entered. 

I would propose that we change the system to give as many people as possible to participate.
My idea would be to allow every HANDLER the opportunity to enter one dog before allowing anyone to enter a second dog.
After 15 minutes, an hour, a day or whatever you allow those who have more than one dog to enter a second dog,; but nobody can enter a third dog until everyone has a chance to get their second dog entered. 
Continue with this scenario until the test is filled.

I welcome everyone's thoughts on how to fairly address this issue


----------



## careljo (Sep 15, 2014)

How about a truly random draw for entry spots after the first 3 days or so that entries are open? Although it is always subject to the potential shenanigans of the people doing the draw, it is the way that AKC handled the influx of agility entries when they first started out and there was much more demand than capacity at most trials. Any time demand exceeds capacity the entry procedure will seem flawed to one group or another. Why not also address the demand portion of the equation? The supply of tests is necessarily limited by the number of available weekends in a year, limited land available for use and limited amount of workers (either paid or volunteer.)


----------



## chesaka (Dec 13, 2007)

mjh345 said:


> There is something fundamentally unfair about a system that allows someone to enter 15, 20,30 or more dogs while numerous other people can not even get one dog entered./QUOTE]
> I asked this question before but got no real answers. How are the pros able to get 10 dogs entered and I find it very challenging to get one dog in and more often than not have been waitlisted. I was told to preload my profile, use a faster server, etc. I did all that and that did not help much. What I don't understand is how the pros are doing it? How are they entering blocks of dogs at the same time? And yes, it's grossly unfair. When these tests are filling up in 2-3 minutes because a few pros are taking up half the slots,it is time for EE to fix it. One suggestion is that if you have a dog that comes into season after the close date and you want to scratch to open up a place for another person, don't charge the scratch fee.


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

I was going to try to figure out how some seem to be gaming EE but lost interest in it. 
Basically for an entry form process as ee does it it's relatively easy for someone to write a bit of code to automatically enter dogs for a particular event when clock ticks 12. Forget the exact method and terminology I found out about but seemed fairly simple. 
Probably an easy way to determine if anyone is using code to process entries is to see which people are successfully entering multi dogs repeatedly especially where two of those events closed on same day.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Breck said:


> I was going to try to figure out how some seem to be gaming EE but lost interest in it.
> Basically for an entry form process as ee does it it's relatively easy for someone to write a bit of code to automatically enter dogs for a particular event when clock ticks 12. Forget the exact method and terminology I found out about but seemed fairly simple.
> Probably an easy way to determine if anyone is using code to process entries is to see which people are successfully entering multi dogs repeatedly especially where two of those events closed on same day.


I'm sure this is what's happening and no one is willing to pay someone to stop the jamming. The rules need to be changed then so it is fair for everyone, so enter one at a time or 3 at a time and that's it.


----------



## CanAmMan (Sep 28, 2007)

The simplest solution I see is limit the number of dogs a handler can run to no more than 10%. So a 60 dog test you have a 6 dog per handler limit. 90 dog test a 9 dog limit per handler, etc.


----------



## Keith S. (May 6, 2005)

Do they still offer an early entry to those who volunteer to work tests? I've never entered a master test before but hope to this year.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

chesaka said:


> mjh345 said:
> 
> 
> > There is something fundamentally unfair about a system that allows someone to enter 15, 20,30 or more dogs while numerous other people can not even get one dog entered./QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

2 closing dates:
Test must be available to enter 60 days before the first day of the test. For the first 30 days no individual may enter as handler or co-handler for more than 3 dogs in a Limited Master test. Handler changes for dogs entered during the first 30 days are prohibited and the dog will be considered a scratch(refund at the discretion of the HTC). After the first 30 days the entry is open for handlers, until final close, to enter additional dogs or place initial entries if space is available.

This could be an option given to clubs that would require the policy be published in the premium. If EE can not accommodate this method then clubs will seek an alternative to EE.

Tim


----------



## red devil (Jan 4, 2003)

Thomas D said:


> chesaka said:
> 
> 
> > Please explain why EE should be the one to fix this.
> ...


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Breck said:


> I was going to try to figure out how some seem to be gaming EE but lost interest in it.
> Basically for an entry form process as ee does it it's relatively easy for someone to write a bit of code to automatically enter dogs for a particular event when clock ticks 12. Forget the exact method and terminology I found out about but seemed fairly simple.
> Probably an easy way to determine if anyone is using code to process entries is to see which people are successfully entering multi dogs repeatedly especially where two of those events closed on same day.


I doubt it's anything that nefarious, but I've been wrong before. The way a pro gets many dogs in is simple, they have a list they check the dogs they want to enter then they go through the same transaction scheme we all do. Only when they get through to the server and hit confirm they take 10, 15, 20 spots instantly, still with as fast as everyone's hitting confirm they still might not get all their dogs in, but EE now has a priority list as well so you assign 1-20 or however many dogs, which ensures the most important dogs get in first and the later dogs, end-up wait-listed, if there's not room. It's actually fair in the scheme that everyone is trying to reach the server at the same time, the "unfairness" come from when a single person gets the server and takes a high percentage of slots.


----------



## Jim Danis (Aug 15, 2008)

Limit the number of dogs any single handler can enter. I like CanAmMan's 10% figure. As is I enter my own dog and run him myself. It can be a chore to get him entered at times.


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

Thomas D said:


> chesaka said:
> 
> 
> > Please explain why EE should be the one to fix this.
> ...


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

freezeland said:


> I don't have any skin in the HT game, but I would agree with Breck's observation in post #4. From a developers standpoint I'd lay odds that there has been code developed to make multiple entries with a single mouse click. They only way would be for EE to limit the handlers entries, and even then the developer could just modify the code to accommodate limited entries and still enter the event faster than anyone can type. I hope you guys find a fix.


Nothing fishy going on. A handler attaches all dogs they run to their profile. If they have 20 Master level dogs, when they Select 'Enter Test', they get a page with all their dogs listed with checkboxes to choose which stake they wish to enter with each dog. The pro clicks the 20 check boxes to enter all dogs in the master stake and hits 'Submit'. Entire entry process takes probably 30 secs


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

bamajeff said:


> Nothing fishy going on. A handler attaches all dogs they run to their profile. If they have 20 Master level dogs, when they Select 'Enter Test', they get a page with all their dogs listed with checkboxes to choose which stake they wish to enter with each dog. The pro clicks the 20 check boxes to enter all dogs in the master stake and hits 'Submit'. Entire entry process takes probably 30 secs


Jeff I think your intent was to quote me, not Thomas D. Not sure what you did there for the post quote to come out appearing like that.


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

Fixed. Thanks. Had to do with the quote block hanging out on your post.


----------



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

Take all entries until closing. Random draw by EE that club members/secretaries can't touch. After the 60 or 120 are chosen, then secretaries get access to adjust runnng order.


----------



## John Gianladis (Jun 23, 2012)

There have been some very good ideas presented here! I would like to hear some suggestions from some of the Hunt Test pros, as well. 

Johnny G


----------



## Peter Balzer (Mar 15, 2014)

There should be no limit on worker codes PERIOD. If someone is willing to work the test, they get an entry. If they no-show and burn a voucher they never get one again, pretty simple. 

The remainder of the slots go to the public with who can enter the fastest. In a nutshell this is the fairest of all, those that are willing to work are rewarded with a spot.


----------



## The Snows (Jul 19, 2004)

Or ..... go and play another HT game .... NAHRA, HRC or CKC .... or stick with the AKC and look at running Quals.

I have a wonderful dog who went 6 for 6 in AKC master tests just before this entry craziness started. Seriously tried to get the two additional passes I needed for that year's Master National as two of the tests were run at non-Master National clubs. (I was just learning the MN rules as these were the first AKC tests I had ever run). Tried to enter to get these two needed passes and due to the insanity of that had started in trying to enter tests, we were unable to enter and gave up. 

I am still running this dog, as well as her son and daughter and would love to run them all in AKC master tests. But until things this craziness changes (as I don't have the time or patience) the CKC, NAHRA and HRC will get my hunt test entry $$'s. It's unfortunate but I know the big AKC money machine will never even miss my $$$$'s from north of the border!


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

bamajeff said:


> Nothing fishy going on. A handler attaches all dogs they run to their profile. If they have 20 Master level dogs, when they Select 'Enter Test', they get a page with all their dogs listed with checkboxes to choose which stake they wish to enter with each dog. The pro clicks the 20 check boxes to enter all dogs in the master stake and hits 'Submit'. Entire entry process takes probably 30 secs


It may not be happening but someone software savvy could write a custom routine, populated and queued up ahead of time, to enter dogs without someone physically clicking on anything in 0sec.


----------



## LabskeBill (Nov 12, 2012)

Breck said:


> It may not be happening but someone software savvy could write a custom routine, populated and queued up ahead of time, to enter dogs without someone physically clicking on anything in 0sec.


It is my understanding that it happening. To stop this (in my opinion) EE could program a change but would have to be blessed by AKC.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

red devil said:


> Thomas D said:
> 
> 
> > Two reasons Tom:
> ...


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

LabskeBill said:


> It is my understanding that it happening. To stop this (in my opinion) EE could program a change but would have to be blessed by AKC.


This seems like a simple fix, much like many websites (sport/concert tickets, etc) make you type in random numbers/letters (called CAPTCHA) to make sure you are a "human" or click on a check box that says "i am not a robot."


----------



## mizzippi jb (Jan 22, 2014)

Ticket scalpers use bots (programs) all the time to snatch up 2-300 tickets to big name shows. These shows don't sell out to people buying 2-6 tickets at a time in 2 to 3 minutes. It's totally possible that folks could be using these bot type programs or codes to beat you to the punch. I did my tour of duty in master tests last spring. No desire to keep going or try to qualify for MN. Sooo glad it's over for this dog. Maybe by the time I get another one, it'll be cleared up.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

This is a great topic folks and it's been rehashed more than once but yet again and I ll faithfully fall on the sword! 

Post 1 indicates the 25 scratch fee and wait list fees are failures - I counter the scratch fee was inserted after numerous deceased/ retired dogs were entered as place holders and with a wink and phone call they were scratched to allow another entry . thus the waitlist came about after loudly proclaimed on this site to be much needed. The above stopped the abuse of the entry system and enabled an orderly process. It's not prefect but it works.

The entry system when it strikes 8 goes very fast, the bandwidth where I live is slower than say someone in a university town, my keyboard skill are nor as adroit as some and perhaps my machine isn't the latest and most advanced so with Nano seconds hanging I m just slower as maybe others are. However when it hits the EE portal it's all the same thus explaining why you get 2 in and 2 others are on the waitlist. With no special programs and using auto-fill your entry is done quickly. 

For those wanting to limit entries by individuals and steps of that nature it's rather simple. Get the AKC to change the rules. Write your RHtac committee , write the performance department but gum banging here will not get the job done.
So send your ideas and thoughts to the above as I believe they want a solution

Just today we had this debate- for you movie goers if the show sells out before you get your ticket you don't get mad at the ticket agent. We have a popular sport and more demand than slots. People live in subdivisions and they have dogs that they want trained. Our society is changing and people don't live out on land and have time to train ( well some of us do) thus we need professional trainers and I get it. These people are preforming a service and the the ones that are successful work hard at all aspects of the sport. Not all trainers are equal thus some fade while others excell. We need the pro trainers.

For those that desire a random draw of sorts- if the pros get 80% of the slots now then they'll get 80% of the random draw slots . Imagine the conversation when someone gets in several tests in a row and another is left out of all those.

For those that believe EE makes a lot of money - just do the math - say 40,000 ht entries at $4.50 ea = 180k.
Pay a worker, the rent, turn the lights on and keep the equipment up- that doesn't leave much. Did I mention all the supervision and oversight is by volunteers. I don't believe EE is the problem. The owners of EE are the 2 National Retriever Clubs ( open and amateur) my take is the national clubs have a break even philosophy and while I may be wrong my suggestion is talk to these fellow Retriever enthusiasts 

Lastly this notion exists that many are entering multiple tests and while true a handful had 20 master passes last year the overwhelming majority of master passes to any one dog was in the single digits. No one is scamming the system in my view. We have a popular sport with more demand than supply. While the solutions are not readily apparent to me it has to begin with more tests, more judges and you need to ask yourself " AM I doing my part" .

These views are mine and just my 2 cents worth 
Dave Kress

These are my


----------



## Rip Shively (Sep 5, 2007)

I favor some type of system where at least initially the number of entries can be limited by handler. After a set time period, open it up to all so the club can fill the test in a timely fashion. I agree with Dave, many ideas have been presented but it's up to the HT community to submit ideas to the HT Rules Advisory Committee and be willing to keep submitting ideas until a satisfactory outcome is achieved. What a satisfactory outcome will be is based on your perspective. 

For now, I have decided with my next dog to train with the intent to run the derby and then qualifying stakes. What happens after that will depend on the talent of the dog. With my current MH I plan to run some more Amateur stakes and see how we do. I will opportunistically run HT when they are close by and I can get worker code(s). I don't intend to give up on the HT program, but I will give more of my time to volunteer at field trials.


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Look, the fact is online entry was approved to take the place of paper entries. Last I looked, one akc official paper entry was required per dog/per event. 
So, without any akc input ee could change online form to limit # of dogs processed to one per entry. 
This wouldn't violate spirit of the online service vs paper form deal. 
?


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

Breck said:


> I was going to try to figure out how some seem to be gaming EE but lost interest in it.
> Basically for an entry form process as ee does it it's relatively easy for someone to write a bit of code to automatically enter dogs for a particular event when clock ticks 12. Forget the exact method and terminology I found out about but seemed fairly simple.
> Probably an easy way to determine if anyone is using code to process entries is to see which people are successfully entering multi dogs repeatedly especially where two of those events closed on same day.


:-....you nailed it


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

Rip Shively said:


> I favor some type of system where at least initially the number of entries can be limited by handler. After a set time period, open it up to all so the club can fill the test in a timely fashion. I agree with Dave, many ideas have been presented but it's up to the HT community to submit ideas to the HT Rules Advisory Committee and be willing to keep submitting ideas until a satisfactory outcome is achieved. What a satisfactory outcome will be is based on your perspective.
> 
> For now, I have decided with my next dog to train with the intent to run the derby and then qualifying stakes. What happens after that will depend on the talent of the dog. With my current MH I plan to run some more Amateur stakes and see how we do. I will opportunistically run HT when they are close by and I can get worker code(s). I don't intend to give up on the HT program, but I will give more of my time to volunteer at field trials.


This is going to be my new direction...Tired of the HT BS...got a dog...let's play


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I think non Titled dogs should be given preferential consideration...


There was a comment made here once that said "weekend Master dogs are just "Typical"....... Just Irked the piss out of me....
I have also listened to Master handlers exclaim that "Whether you like it or not (Hunt tests) Are a competition.." 

A LOT of things have to change to get me interested again...

Training serves the purpose for me... I don't feel the need to prove anything to ANYONE... by running over populated tests.
Gooser


----------



## Jamee Strange (Jul 24, 2010)

Keith S. said:


> Do they still offer an early entry to those who volunteer to work tests? I've never entered a master test before but hope to this year.


yes but it is only 15% of the entries. When I received the codes for our limited master (60) we got 9 codes and that was it. That number is designated by the AKC so we weren't able to get more if we needed them. We have a small club so don't ask me how the big clubs handle that. My guess would be they use a lottery system. Good luck,.. I wanted to enter a different test the next weekend that opened at 8:00 and was full by 8:01 and had a waitlist of 15 at 8:10....I'm running a field trial that weekend instead now


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

As has been noted above and every time this discussion ensues, EE cannot make any changes in the way entries are accepted without AKC approval. You can bang away on RTF all you want but the decision will ultimately have to go through the RHTAC and then to Raleigh. EE is not the problem. Limited entries are not the problem. That was a "solution" clubs demanded as they did not have the resources sufficient to handle multiple flights of master dogs. Any "solution" is likely to have unintended consequences and that's what we got. 
When demand and supply is imbalanced you can do one of two things. Limit demand or increase supply. Do nothing and allow the system to get so untenable that folks go elsewhere to play. Or suck it up and help your or another club put on more events. Petition for an increase in worker allotments, do away with the 200 mile radius rule, eliminate the cap on the number of events any one club can run, allow more frequent master only tests, allow a limit on the number of dogs any one handler can run.
Our sport is growing and that's a good thing. It's up to all of us collectively to manage that growth.


----------



## Zach Fisher (Jan 16, 2015)

^^Like Button for this post ^^


----------



## wsumner (Mar 5, 2004)

Good Dogs said:


> , EE cannot make any changes in the way entries are accepted without AKC approval.


Did the AKC approval the addition of the waiting list?


----------



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

No. It's Ridiculous.


----------



## jacduck (Aug 17, 2011)

I have a stand type popcorn popper. I ran 5 batches yesterday. What are the bets that I will need more?


----------



## Rob DeHaven (Jan 6, 2003)

Pretty sure EE doesn't need approval to only limit the number of dogs that can be entered at one time. Why not make it that the only person that can enter a dog has to be the owner.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Rob DeHaven said:


> Pretty sure EE doesn't need approval to only limit the number of dogs that can be entered at one time. Why not make it that the only person that can enter a dog has to be the owner.


I like this. Put the responsibility of entry into the hands of the owner.
allowing master only tests and eliminating the cap on the number of tests a club can put on would also be beneficial - as Good Dogs mentioned.


----------



## jacduck (Aug 17, 2011)

I've said this before and will again. I see the need for a pros only circuit, owners pay the price anyway so why not have the real cost of a HT put on by a pro group and let the folks who are currently providing the HT service have an AM HT that they work instead of supporting a 12 dog pro truck. I know AKC rules and all but.........

The field trail idea is gaining ground with a few folks I have talked to here in MI, I am starting to lean that way also.


----------



## Final Flight Retrievers (Jan 23, 2010)

jacduck said:


> I've said this before and will again. I see the need for a pros only circuit, owners pay the price anyway so why not have the real cost of a HT put on by a pro group and let the folks who are currently providing the HT service have an AM HT that they work instead of supporting a 12 dog pro truck. I know AKC rules and all but.........
> 
> The field trail idea is gaining ground with a few folks I have talked to here in MI, I am starting to lean that way also.


It coming just be patient !!!!!


----------



## casjoker (Dec 22, 2016)

New to the game so have no real insight but this exact conversation was had today at a club training event. I was amazed 120 entry MH HT was filled in 4 minutes. The pros were even complaining they couldn't get any of their dogs in. Several people said the 12 month period required for getting enough passes for the National Test was causing the biggest bottleneck. I did find it odd an AM has to battle for 1 slot when a Pro was entering 20+ dogs. To a newbie, the system does appear to be flawed. My guess if both levels are complaining then maybe some sort of change should be considered. Maybe if everyone is equally pissed then the system isn't as broken as it seems...


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

wsumner said:


> Did the AKC approval the addition of the waiting list?


From the rulebook, page 4: "Clubs that limit the number of entries in the Master
Hunter test must establish a waiting list in order that
entries that scratch prior to the closing date and time can
be replaced."


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

This is a no brainer. Make the AKC HT program a Owner/Handler/Amateur event- as it was always intended to be.

Need to get back to the basics regards

Bubba


----------



## SWIPER (Sep 24, 2006)

Owner entry system is the most fair way to go about this, if you don't get in you can't blame anyone !! I don't think the pro should be able to enter the dogs, put the responsibility on the owner if they want to play this game. 
Some people are saying you shouldn't have to qualify each year, I think you should have to qualify each year to run the master national!


----------



## Captzig (Jun 14, 2013)

When demand is greater than supply the answer is not limiting demand. The answer is increasing supply. Limiting anyone or group is not good for the sport, which is what is happening now. So the issue to solve, in my opinion, is how to run more tests.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Cant believe some of the responses here. Many are just plain ridiculous and none will solve the problem. Didn't read them all, don't have to. There are only 2 ways to solve the problem. One is to have more tests or unlimited entries but that is far fetched because I don't think the clubs can handle it. Second would no doubt solve the problem but will never happen. I have said it before and will say it again. Get rid of the Master National. I can just hear the eyes rolling.. If you want to try something after MH go run a qual.
I would seriously like to know why people that run and run and run Master tests just to chase the Master national instead of jumping up to the qual.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

I try to hold myself to one post on any thread however I left something important out of post 26.
First though I applaud the effort at civil debate and input on this delicate topic. 
What I left out and very important to me/ others is the ht participants that are constrained on travel. Their near home tests are very important for them to continue in the sport. We all know someone that is maybe older, constrained by job, family, fianances, health that can't flit off each weekend to some far flung test. These folks need to be in any equation 
Life is not always fair and we each travel though on different tracks however this is a dog sport funded with discretionary monies. A good solution for our entry issue that works in Alabama may not be the best solution for the Southern Calif groups for example. 

I really don't believe the AKC will do anything that discriminates toward any group and I believe they want your input. Please write to them via email, snail mail or however you communicate 
Dk


----------



## Julie R. (Jan 13, 2003)

Good Dogs said:


> From the rulebook, page 4: "Clubs that limit the number of entries in the Master
> Hunter test must establish a waiting list in order that
> entries that scratch prior to the closing date and time can
> be replaced."


This should be modified to take it a step further; if horse racing can do it (where there is money at stake thus more incentive for people to game the system) there's no reason at all why AKC can't. Take 10 or so of those waitlisted dogs and call them an also-eligible list and let them replace scratched entries at any time prior to the start of the test. Those involved with the running of tests know that it's not unusual for a 60-dog master to scratch down to 45 or fewer dogs after closing, and that's a money loser for clubs.

There is a lengthy tread on my Facebook page with a very civilized discussion that had several good ideas. Yes there are some people that have figured out a way to game the system with fancy codes/software. Heard about this from several folks. So that needs to stop, but one way to end it is to make EVERYONE enter one master dog at a time, and enter one test at a time (more on this below). 

As the system is now, you just check all the dogs you want to enter and hit submit, so a 20-dog pro can enter one in the time it takes us suckers with slow internet to submit our one-dog entry. Yes it is a convenience for pros to enter their whole truck with one click, but the dogs can still all go for the Entry Olympics by having the owners enter their own dogs at 8:00:01 like the rest of us. There are, after all, some owners who have dogs on pro trucks who are part of the problem--they do not belong to clubs and they do not volunteer at tests. They could, at least, enter their own dogs! 

Clubs: STOP PUTTING ON DOUBLE 60-dog MH tests!! Yeah, I like being able to run two tests in one weekend as much as the next person but the same 60 dogs always run both, so that shuts out 60 dogs whose owners tried to enter. One 120 dog master allows 60 more people a chance to enter/run their dogs. Personally I don't think this needs to be an AKC mandate, because there may be times when clubs need to attract entries (such as when clubs hold tests during the MN and now the Am MN) and so this should be an option they can decide for themselves. Problem is, the BODs of clubs voting to have 2 60 dog masters instead of one 120 dog split event are the ones guaranteed to get their dogs in both because they control the worker codes. And yes, there will be those that bitch because in a single 120 dog master that is split, they don't get to decide which judges to run under. But it's hardly feasible to judge-shop any longer when it's so hard to get in any damn test! And if a club does elect to have 2, 60-dog masters over a single 120-dog master, make the two entries separate: you can't enter both with one click. Again, gives people with slower internet a chance to get in one.

AKC needs to change the mileage rule, especially on the East Coast. It's not needed and since supply so greatly exceeds demand, it's stupid. They should also allow clubs to hold as many MH tests as they want. New rules say clubs can now have a 3rd test and it can be Master only (presumably because some are afraid juniors and seniors will disappear?) Clubs will still offer junior and senior because those are where they make their money.


----------



## chesaka (Dec 13, 2007)

Dave Kress said:


> This is a great topic folks and it's been rehashed more than once but yet again and I ll faithfully fall on the sword!
> 
> Post 1 indicates the 25 scratch fee and wait list fees are failures -
> 
> ...


----------



## Julie R. (Jan 13, 2003)

chesaka said:


> Dave Kress said:
> 
> 
> > This is a great topic folks and it's been rehashed more than once but yet again and I ll faithfully fall on the sword!
> ...


----------



## cowdoc87 (Dec 18, 2014)

Demand is already being limited somewhat based strictly on the hassle of it all. There's a huge market for the pros at this level, and that IS the cause of the problem,IMO- those of us with one dog and limited time find it too much trouble to fight it, so we don't. But as long as the pros continue to fill up the tests, I doubt they'll be any changes for the little guys who just want to sign up and run events within a reasonable distance. It seems it would be easy to let the amateurs sign up first and the pros get whats left, but I know that's unrealistic


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

If it's being done by robots then a simple verification code that we see used all over the internet is a simple answer. No need for AKC to approve of EE not wanting hackers infiltrating their systems.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

As for solutions it has been discussed many times. I think the first step to really resolving it would be to understand the objectives of the various stake holders. 

If you limit a handler to 3 entries - pros are going to drop out and entries might even suffer, so the club objective of "just enough but don't go over" would be sacrificed. That's just an example. 

You might also limit a handler to 3 dogs and have a pro show up with 7 handlers to cover his trailer - none of which put in an ounce of effort. That's no solution either.

I think as a strategic effort the various groups must be defined and consensus as to their objectives reached before long term action can be taken to really solve the problem. Someone has to care enough to lead the charge there and I doubt AKC will ever do so.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

I still say there's a business opportunity here for someone with a group of workers and a mobile hunting test set up.


----------



## Brad B (Apr 29, 2004)

red devil said:


> Thomas D said:
> 
> 
> > Two reasons Tom:
> ...


----------



## Julie R. (Jan 13, 2003)

cowdoc87 said:


> Demand is already being limited somewhat based strictly on the hassle of it all. There's a huge market for the pros at this level, and that IS the cause of the problem,IMO- those of us with one dog and limited time find it too much trouble to fight it, so we don't. But as long as the pros continue to fill up the tests, I doubt they'll be any changes for the little guys who just want to sign up and run events within a reasonable distance. It seems it would be easy to let the amateurs sign up first and the pros get whats left, but I know that's unrealistic


 I don't see how you can blame this on pros, after all they are doing what the dogs' owners want them to do, aren't they? Pros have definitely upped the game, when I first became involved in HTs, not really that long ago, 2002 or so, they were always part of the HT game, but I'd say more amateurs ran their own dogs, even if they used a pro for training. The tests weren't as hard either, hell I've seen senior tests harder than a lot of the masters from back then. The pros have upped the training and the dog work is better, and better at a younger age. Also remember before the MN became such a big deal (My MH is better than your MH) a lot of people didn't run as much once the dog titled, now they do even if they don't want to run the MN, they still want to say their dog qualified. But one thing there is more of, and that is pro trained dogs owned by people who do not belong to clubs, they don't volunteer at tests and they don't do anything to give back, and when they do come to tests they sit on their asses. The sport definitely does not need any more of those! If the titles and bragging rights were all I cared about, I'd rather have a race horse. The cost is about the same, no problem entering and at least you could win back money from purses or getting it claimed.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

Julie R. said:


> The pros have upped the training and the dog work is better, and better at a younger age. Also remember before the MN became such a big deal (My MH is better than your MH) a lot of people didn't run as much once the dog titled, now they do even if they don't want to run the MN, they still want to say their dog qualified. /SIZE]




Simple solution: Raise the QUALITY of the dog work required to qualify for the MN and to complete the MN. The MNH title does not have its own performance standard, like the other HT titles, maybe it needs one.

Tim


----------



## MAJohnson (Dec 2, 2004)

SWIPER said:


> Owner entry system is the most fair way to go about this, if you don't get in you can't blame anyone !! I don't think the pro should be able to enter the dogs, put the responsibility on the owner if they want to play this game.
> Some people are saying you shouldn't have to qualify each year, I think you should have to qualify each year to run the master national!


I've been saying this for forever. Every dog entered MUST be entered by the owner of the dog, that would immediately stop the mass entry system and make it straight forward. Right now, the amateur owners are rarely entering their dogs, leaving it up to mass entries from pros. If every person had to individually enter their own dogs, things would be slowed way down because the majority of the dogs are owned by regular Joe amateurs who can't sit there at their computer at 7:55 refreshing and refreshing until it opens. Instead, people will enter when they're off work/free making the entries slower and give everyone a chance.


----------



## CanAmMan (Sep 28, 2007)

MAJohnson said:


> I've been saying this for forever. Every dog entered MUST be entered by the owner of the dog, that would immediately stop the mass entry system and make it straight forward. Right now, the amateur owners are rarely entering their dogs, leaving it up to mass entries from pros. If every person had to individually enter their own dogs, things would be slowed way down because the majority of the dogs are owned by regular Joe amateurs who can't sit there at their computer at 7:55 refreshing and refreshing until it opens. Instead, people will enter when they're off work/free making the entries slower and give everyone a chance.


Two problems here, number on how can you enforce that the owner is the one entering the dog? Secondly, it will add a large percentage more people bombing Entry Express at 8:00 on Wednesday nights. Lets face it most people are off work and home by 8:00 and even if not with a Smart Phone you can be on line from about anywhere. So if you have two pros entering 15 dogs each and lets say each of them is running one dog they own, that is 28 more people hitting Entry Express at the exact same time. It's not going to slow anything down, it's going to crash Entry Express.

Alsoto add this is not a problem that is just happening to amatuers, there are pros that get shut out tests every week, they just don't come and complain on RTF.


----------



## swliszka (Apr 17, 2011)

How many of you have Hunt Tested (AKC) further than 250 miles from your residence? You will find some regions have better judges, grounds unlike others and be challenging and have entry slots. Urban centers are limited as are many suburban areas due to the simple demographics. Confirmation , agility , obedience on to HT. FTs no way. Come on mikey , try it. That is why I busted my butt to get you newbies in back in 1984. You have nothing to fear except fear itself. Walter what a character.


----------



## cowdoc87 (Dec 18, 2014)

Julie R. said:


> I don't see how you can blame this on pros, after all they are doing what the dogs' owners want them to do, aren't they? Pros have definitely upped the game, when I first became involved in HTs, not really that long ago, 2002 or so, they were always part of the HT game, but I'd say more amateurs ran their own dogs, even if they used a pro for training. The tests weren't as hard either, hell I've seen senior tests harder than a lot of the masters from back then. The pros have upped the training and the dog work is better, and better at a younger age. Also remember before the MN became such a big deal (My MH is better than your MH) a lot of people didn't run as much once the dog titled, now they do even if they don't want to run the MN, they still want to say their dog qualified. But one thing there is more of, and that is pro trained dogs owned by people who do not belong to clubs, they don't volunteer at tests and they don't do anything to give back, and when they do come to tests they sit on their asses. The sport definitely does not need any more of those! If the titles and bragging rights were all I cared about, I'd rather have a race horse. The cost is about the same, no problem entering and at least you could win back money from purses or getting it claimed.


Julie,
I'm not blaming this on the pros-they're providing a service that's in high demand- but they are filling up spots that the non-pros ( and other pros) may be displaced from. No doubt the demand for spots is far exceeds the supply for those spots, and the pros take up a bunch of them. Didn't mean to cast any negative light on the guys trying to make a living at it-more power to 'em


----------



## Captzig (Jun 14, 2013)

DarrinGreene said:


> I still say there's a business opportunity here for someone with a group of workers and a mobile hunting test set up.


Absolutely agree that Capitalism could solve the problem. If the clubs can't put on 6 tests per year, they could sub it out.


----------



## Mark Couch (Jan 20, 2017)

Swliszka, We have 6 tests in Alaska. If you lived right in the center of them and you went to all 6 you would travel over 200 miles to 4 of them. if you lived near Anchorage you would drive about 370 or so to 2 of them if you were near Fairbanks the 2 farthest would be about 420 miles there are of course plenty of places in the state where it would be much more inconvenent. This applies to any of the stakes. Is there now a rule you must live with in 250 miles of a test to enter?


----------



## Trevor Toberny (Sep 11, 2004)

everyone gets to enter and they get a # for the order that they entered then its a random draw for the 60 or however many spots are available. pro's get first choice at cancelations.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

CanAmMan said:


> Two problems here, number on how can you enforce that the owner is the one entering the dog? Secondly, it will add a large percentage more people bombing Entry Express at 8:00 on Wednesday nights. Lets face it most people are off work and home by 8:00 and even if not with a Smart Phone you can be on line from about anywhere. So if you have two pros entering 15 dogs each and lets say each of them is running one dog they own, that is 28 more people hitting Entry Express at the exact same time. It's not going to slow anything down, it's going to crash Entry Express.
> 
> Alsoto add this is not a problem that is just happening to amatuers, there are pros that get shut out tests every week, they just don't come and complain on RTF.


Agreed.Having the owners enter their own dogs will only clog the system more.
Would still have the problem of a handler getting so many spots that it mucks up the mechanics of the test. The Kansas City Retriever Club had a test a few years back that had two handlers with 56 of the 60 spots. It was a nightmare logistically, especially when you have to deal with honors
Not only is there an element of fundamental unfairness to allow one handler to get 20 or 30 dogs entered which denies 19 or 29 handlers a chance to get even one dog in; but it also really makes the mechanics of the test more difficult.

Additionally that handler with 20 dogs can not ever be available to help throw a bird, shoot a flyer, rebird or any of the other tasks neccessary to put an event on

One other problem that hasn't been mentioned and may be making things worse this year is the Master National Amatuer; which is in it's inaugural year. They have a different qualifying calendar than the Master National does, which puts even more pressure on the overloaded system. If these two groups would syncranize their qualification periods it would assist somewhat.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Peter Balzer said:


> There should be no limit on worker codes PERIOD. If someone is willing to work the test, they get an entry. If they no-show and burn a voucher they never get one again, pretty simple.
> 
> The remainder of the slots go to the public with who can enter the fastest. In a nutshell this is the fairest of all, those that are willing to work are rewarded with a spot.


I think this idea has some merit; although there is room for abuse.
I have worked my ass off to help put on many events and
Someone ready willing and able to help should Definitely be encouraged and welcomed


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Are you saying one person gets one code? What about the person who has two dogs or the pro who has 10?


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

Captzig said:


> Capitalism could solve the problem.


Supply and demand:
Remove the mileage protection for clubs that elect to limit their entry. This would create more entry slots to that geographic area for that weekend. If that area has the demand for 100 dogs but the club can only handle 60. Give another club the right to attract the overflow.

Tim


----------



## Feather Point Retrievers (Nov 23, 2015)

If our sport is growing why not accommodate and have more master flights per test? Places like cooper black have enough room to have 3 or 4+ master flights. I understand that not everywhere has that kind of room but for the grounds that do have the room. If there are 5-8 tests a season at Cooper Black that have more flights, it may alleviate the need for mass entries at other smaller tests. Clubs that did this would make more money per test as well. Then where will you get the bird boys? With some of the extra money made, pay the day labor and you will find someone to work. Just a thought.


----------



## jacduck (Aug 17, 2011)

Hmmmm, not gonna take the time to calculate distance but MI to TX, MS, AL, LA, ND, MT, ME, NC does that count and I have training partners that have made very similar agendas. OH yeah I forgot WI which is a neighbor state but 500 miles no matter which way you go around Lake Michigan.

Judges are judges no matter where, grounds may be different but they all are populated by pretty darn good dedicate hunt testers.




swliszka said:


> How many of you have Hunt Tested (AKC) further than 250 miles from your residence? You will find some regions have better judges, grounds unlike others and be challenging and have entry slots. Urban centers are limited as are many suburban areas due to the simple demographics. Confirmation , agility , obedience on to HT. FTs no way. Come on mikey , try it. That is why I busted my butt to get you newbies in back in 1984. You have nothing to fear except fear itself. Walter what a character.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Tim Carrion said:


> Supply and demand:
> Remove the mileage protection for clubs that elect to limit their entry. This would create more entry slots to that geographic area for that weekend. If that area has the demand for 100 dogs but the club can only handle 60. Give another club the right to attract the overflow.
> 
> Tim


I honestly think part of the problem is clubs and committees not wanting to put on extra tests - after all no one gets paid for any of their effort. Can't say I blame them. It's a lot of work. That's why I said someone should have a business. I just don't know how profitable it would be. I think it would be an absolute meat grinder with the amount of travel someone would have to do.


----------



## Captzig (Jun 14, 2013)

DarrinGreene said:


> I honestly think part of the problem is clubs and committees not wanting to put on extra tests - after all no one gets paid for any of their effort. Can't say I blame them. It's a lot of work. That's why I said someone should have a business. I just don't know how profitable it would be. I think it would be an absolute meat grinder with the amount of travel someone would have to do.


I agree with Darrin again. I haven't seen a master test balance sheet, but would assume the margins are slim. However, I think most would assume that if someone such as a pro enters more than 2 dogs per test they might be willing to pay an additional surcharge for multiple dogs. It would be the client's $$ anyhow and would not impact their bottom line. Not sure if AKC would allow it, but a $50 fee per dog over the allotted 2 could be considered. I greatly appreciate running tests with the pros and would hate to see pros and ams be separated as mentioned in earlier posts. But maybe part of the solution is having the pros help fund the additional tests or larger events.


----------



## jacduck (Aug 17, 2011)

Darrin said "I honestly think part of the problem is clubs and committees not wanting to put on extra tests - after all no one gets paid for any of their effort. Can't say I blame them. It's a lot of work. That's why I said someone should have a business. I just don't know how profitable it would be. I think it would be an absolute meat grinder with the amount of travel someone would have to do. "

I have thought of hiring the local Amish kids for just that but then how many would show up to a test that starts Wed and has to be done by dark on Friday? Another great idea for the reconsider later barrel.


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

Institute a simple lottery. 
It has been suggested many times but one more time won't hurt. Handlers with more than one dog assign a priority to their entries (1-n). At the closing all the #1 dogs are automatically entered (with that handler ONLY). Then if there is additional room ALL the #2 dogs are entered (again with that handler ONLY). Continue until the limit is met. Completely fair, everyone is guaranteed at least one entry and most importantly, the folk's that are contributing to the effort are not excluded. The pros simply auction off the premier holes and their income remains the same. Could possibly even lead to the owners actually learning to run their own dog?

Fair and balanced regards

Bubba


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

I did a quick look at a random test (120 dogs entered). In one flight alone, 50 of 60 dogs entered are run/handled by a pro. Only 14 of the 60 were already titled (MH).

This is so unfortunate. Hunt tests were NOT meant to be put on for pros to handle dogs..... The rules should dictate only amateurs can handle/run a dog. If you want to hire a pro to train your dog or help you train your dog, sweet. But man up and step up to the plate and handle your own dog, for criminy sake.


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

Tobias said:


> I did a quick look at a random test (120 dogs entered). In one flight alone, 50 of 60 dogs entered are run/handled by a pro. Only 14 of the 60 were already titled (MH).
> 
> This is so unfortunate. Hunt tests were NOT meant to be put on for pros to handle dogs..... *The rules should dictate only amateurs can handle/run a dog. If you want to hire a pro to train your dog or help you train your dog, sweet. But man up and step up to the plate and handle your own dog, for criminy sake*.


While I understand your intent, this is a ridiculous statement. And would never happen. I love to run and prefer to run my own dog but not so for other people. And whether you like it or not, pro's make the HT (and FT) world go 'round. In a 120 dog test, I strongly believe you would NEVER fill 120 spots and get 120 different handlers to come enter and handle their dogs. People don't have the time or don't want to sit at a HT all weekend. Sure, it would certainly open up a lot of Master spots if they "dictated only amateurs can handle/run a dog." But that would be bad for the sport in my opinion. Pros would lose half their "good" or "repeat" clients, pro's wouldn't be going to tests, etc etc etc.


----------



## CanAmMan (Sep 28, 2007)

So what about the amateur that can not get off work every weekend to run. It is easier to send the dog to a pro and let them run'em.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Yes, it is easier. Obviously... or 50 of 60 dogs entered in a test wouldn't be pro trained/handled.....As long as you have a little extra cash laying around, just buy the dog send it to a pro for 2-4 yrs, get a title.... 

At least 50% of entries should be for amateur handlers. Again, MHO.

How many people with agility or obedience dogs send their dogs to a 'pro' or have their dogs handled by a 'pro'? (Honestly, I have no idea). Is there such a thing? I don't buy the 'can't get the weekend off'.... If people really want to play, they find a way.


----------



## Mike Perry (Jun 26, 2003)

Tobias said:


> I did a quick look at a random test (120 dogs entered). In one flight alone, 50 of 60 dogs entered are run/handled by a pro. Only 14 of the 60 were already titled (MH)..


IF and that is a big IF, this is true, then the venue is meeting the intent. 46 non titled dogs are getting a shot at a pass toward a title. 
I emphasize the IF.
MP


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

I would like to see hunt test Pros organize something akin to the FT- PRTA (professional retriever training Assocation) and put forth some work to put on a few tests, rather than always relying on an amateur ran club to put them on. FT the PTRA does host their own trials. It would provide another test or two and It would go a long way, to helping with some of the animosity btw Pros-Am. We can say all we want about Clubs needing to put on more tests, but they are pretty much taxed to their limit putting on the test that they already do; it's not easy, it's not fun to host these events; it's hard work, planning for mulitple months, and dealing with all the issues that come up. The long and short of it is Pros make a lot of their living running these tests, and it is mostly off volunteer work of others. Not saying pros do not give back some do; and when your running many dogs, you might not have the time to help as you would like; but they are utilizing most of the resources, and providing minimal returns (yes they pay entry fees, but so do those who are working the test and clubs are non-profit organizations-where as Pro trainers are not). Nothing is stopping a pro or a group of them from putting on a test, taking on the responsibility of organizing and running it. I would definitely run it and most likely feel a bit better about having to throw birds for an endless line of 10-20 pro dogs, when that pro has provided a testing opportunity and thrown birds for me-others. It's pretty much feeling akin to slave labor to work these tests these days; as a club representative it doesn't make me want to put forth any effort to run more stakes with more dogs, or more tests than we already do. Heck historically cutting back and putting in stricter # stakes-limits, makes life easier, and keeps workers- club members happier.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Bubba said:


> Institute a simple lottery.
> It has been suggested many times but one more time won't hurt. Handlers with more than one dog assign a priority to their entries (1-n). At the closing all the #1 dogs are automatically entered (with that handler ONLY). Then if there is additional room ALL the #2 dogs are entered (again with that handler ONLY). Continue until the limit is met. Completely fair, everyone is guaranteed at least one entry and most importantly, the folk's that are contributing to the effort are not excluded. The pros simply auction off the premier holes and their income remains the same. Could possibly even lead to the owners actually learning to run their own dog?
> 
> Fair and balanced regards
> ...


Good suggestion that would be fair and address the issue. It should be very workable as EE already has a feature to prioritize your dogs


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> I would like to see hunt test Pros organize something akin the the FT- PRTA (professional retriever training Assocation) and put forth some work to put on a few tests, rather than always relying on an amateur ran club to put them on. FT the PTRA does host their own trials. It would provide another test or two and It would go a long way, to helping with some of the animosity btw Pros-Am. We can say all we want about Clubs needing to put on more tests, but they are pretty much taxed to their limit putting on the test that they already do; it's not easy, it's not fun to host these events; it's hard work, planning for mulitple months, and dealing with all the issues that come up for a club to put them on. The long and short of it is Pros make a lot of their living running these tests, and it is mostly off volunteer work of others. Not saying pros do not give back some do; and when your running many dogs, you might not have the time to help as you would like; but they are utilizing most of the resources, and providing minimal returns (yes they pay entry fees, but so do those who are working the test and clubs are non-profit organizations). Nothing is stopping a pro or a group of them from putting on a test, taking on the responsibility of organizing and running it. I would definitely run it and most likely feel a bit better about having to throw birds for an endless line of 10-20 pro dogs, when that pro has thrown birds for me and others. It's pretty much feeling akin to slave labor to work these tests these days; and a a club representative it doesn't make me want to put forth any effort to run stakes with more dogs, or more test than we already do. Heck historically cutting back and putting in stricter # stakes-limits, makes life easier.


The pros in my area are putting on tests. It is IMHO very good PR. This past fall I ran an O/H Qualifier and pros volunteered to throw birds all day.


----------



## T. Mac (Feb 2, 2004)

Tobias said:


> ..... Only 14 of the 60 were already titled (MH)......


Our last test had 62 out of an entry of 113 that where MH titled (or better) per ee's data. Next test it is 39 out of 60.


----------



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

Hunt'EmUp said:


> I would like to see hunt test Pros organize something akin to the FT- PRTA (professional retriever training Assocation) and put forth some work to put on a few tests, rather than always relying on an amateur ran club to put them on. FT the PTRA does host their own trials. It would provide another test or two and It would go a long way, to helping with some of the animosity btw Pros-Am. We can say all we want about Clubs needing to put on more tests, but they are pretty much taxed to their limit putting on the test that they already do; it's not easy, it's not fun to host these events; it's hard work, planning for mulitple months, and dealing with all the issues that come up. The long and short of it is Pros make a lot of their living running these tests, and it is mostly off volunteer work of others. Not saying pros do not give back some do; and when your running many dogs, you might not have the time to help as you would like; but they are utilizing most of the resources, and providing minimal returns (yes they pay entry fees, but so do those who are working the test and clubs are non-profit organizations-where as Pro trainers are not). Nothing is stopping a pro or a group of them from putting on a test, taking on the responsibility of organizing and running it. I would definitely run it and most likely feel a bit better about having to throw birds for an endless line of 10-20 pro dogs, when that pro has provided a testing opportunity and thrown birds for me-others. It's pretty much feeling akin to slave labor to work these tests these days; as a club representative it doesn't make me want to put forth any effort to run more stakes with more dogs, or more tests than we already do. Heck historically cutting back and putting in stricter # stakes-limits, makes life easier, and keeps workers- club members happier.


First, several of the hunt test pros do belong to the PRTA. PRTA is not just for FT pros.

Second, some of the PRTA HT pros DID put on a hunt test in Texas last year. I think it was near Giddings. I know one of training partners who winters in Georgia judged the event and a friend who is a pro down there that summers up North here and runs the hunt test I chair was pretty involved in the event.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

HoHum's Retrievers said:


> First, several of the hunt test pros do belong to the PRTA. PRTA is not just for FT pros.
> 
> Second, some of the PRTA HT pros DID put on a hunt test in Texas last year. I think it was near Giddings. I know one of training partners who winters in Georgia judged the event and a friend who is a pro down there that summers up North here and runs the hunt test I chair was pretty involved in the event.


Good for them, in my area I've only seen them host FT's, and looking on their list not; one of the pros that I see at every event with a string of dogs that I've been throwing birds for; at hunt tests in the last multiple years, are members of PRTA. Where-as all the FT pros, I'm familiar with in this area are; most likely why FT are more supported out here. PRTA is just an example of an organization that is comprised of pros that is providing resources. I believe the FT Pros at least from my observation in this area, have more of a handle on realizing the need to give back, to keep these events running. Not saying a pro needs to be members of PRTA, we have 2 pros out here who created clubs and hosted events this year (FT & HRC, but that doesn't provide more AKC hunt tests). Which is what is needed, and while I do see participation from a few individual pros across venues, I don't see this same participation with many of the AKC hunt test pros, who are taking up the majority of the spots in the hunt test events, these events are their livelihood, they need to catch-up.


----------



## LGH (Oct 20, 2013)

What about a 5 dog limit before having to re-enter? I just can't see it being profitable for a pro running any less than that when you factor in 2 nights in hotel fees, fuel and food. I train, and run my own dogs 95% of the time, but I shift work and some weekends it's not possible to get off. A friend of mine who"s a pro will run for me on those occasions. If I don't forget to enter exactly at 8 o'clock I normally get in. PS it's Wednesday night!


----------



## bruce (May 18, 2004)

The real answer is to have the MNRC eliminate the requirement that a MN participant qualify each year and open the MN to all MH dogs. Ooops that would result in a massive MN event, that leads to the discussion of Regional Qualifiers etc. and the Merry Go Round spins again ...


----------



## LabskeBill (Nov 12, 2012)

As David Kress stated earlier, all this debating will accomplish absolutely noting. RHTAC, AKC, and the MNRC are whats in charge. As I understand it, to change an AKC rule, clubs must submit the proposed change to the RHTAC. They will eval and either reject or modify, or approve and sent to AKC , where The AKC BOD has to approve. To change a MNRC rule, two clubs can submit a proposal. Will either be sent in snail mail or to the annual meeting at the MNRC depending upon the time of the year submission is made.. I think either 66% or 75% of the delegates must vote for the change. Many proposal have been submitted but few have been adopted.
my 2 cents worth
BillB


----------



## Rusty Champion (Feb 13, 2012)

I’ve thought quite a while about this and I think we sometimes miss the root of the issue. Obviously there is more demand for some (or maybe most) master tests than can be accommodated in a 60/90 dog test. You definitely do not want to limit the demand for everyone, but rather I think the solution is to limit the number of dogs with X number of attempts. In August when the qualifying period starts, every dog should have a clean slate and entry to master tests will be first come first served. This is just how it is now and would certainly lend itself to the same issues we experience now with fast internet connections and those with multiple entries having a distinct advantage. However, if you put a counter in place that places a dog in an automatic waitlist for a 24hr period once they’ve ran in 8 or 10 master tests, then you begin to see these “career master” dogs who compete in numerous events in a year having to allow those who haven’t competed an opportunity to do so. I am a proponent of a 75% pass rate for master national qualification as opposed to just 6 for 8. A dog may fail 3 tests early in the year, but given enough tests they can achieve that pass rate needed to qualify for MN, but those dogs that can’t do it in 8 or 10 tests are then put in jeopardy since they’re waitlisted every test. I don’t know that this is the best solution, but it is something to discuss.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Send it to RHTAC and see what they say.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

A rule to limit entries in field trials was proposed a decade ago and it went nowhere. It is very simple and equitable to all, everyone enters one dog, the process continues until a predetermined number is met then everyone gets to enter one more. The entry is spread equitably and people with a few dogs are guaranteed a spot. Those with multiple dogs have a priority list for entry.


----------



## cripes (Aug 14, 2011)

freezeland said:


> Thomas D said:
> 
> 
> > I don't have any skin in the HT game, but I would agree with Breck's observation in post #4. From a developers standpoint I'd lay odds that there has been code developed to make multiple entries with a single mouse click. They only way would be for EE to limit the handlers entries, and even then the developer could just modify the code to accommodate limited entries and still enter the event faster than anyone can type. I hope you guys find a fix.
> ...


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

EdA said:


> A rule to limit entries in field trials was proposed a decade ago and it went nowhere. It is very simple and equitable to all, everyone enters one dog, the process continues until a predetermined number is met then everyone gets to enter one more. The entry is spread equitably and people with a few dogs are guaranteed a spot. Those with multiple dogs have a priority list for entry.


Would welcome a system built along these lines.
In a situation where there is limited supply of resources for example a 60 dog Master it is unfair to allow one person to take 30 or more of the spots and deny 29 other people from having a chance to even get one spot


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I posted the following in the 60 dog double master thread.. Prolly should been here...


I agree with folks not being Nobel... But maybe its time for SOME to consider developing a standard of etiquette when it comes to testing dogs...

Fishermen have LONG had to deal with crowded conditions.. think of the amount of resource they have to enjoy their popular activity.. Dog people generally have far less rescource available.. Etiquette MUST be instilled in my humble opinion..

This is one example of an unwritten law when fly fishing Western rivers..

*Don’t be a “hole hog” and sit in the same water for several hours. If you have caught several trout move on to another location, or offer others the opportunity to fish in the same run and enjoy success like you have experienced. Share the wealth*!

So,,,,what if we applied the same type courtesy?? If you are Titled,,maybe step back and realise the desired of others to achieve the same title as you have.. Don't take advantage of the testing arena to Train, and keep your dog in a test atmosphere, when you are already titled..

I understand the desire for the Master National ,but , If you really don't have any desire to actually attend,,OR you have already attended several with the same dog,,and that dogis a 30 times Master National success,,,, well maybe consider someone else instead of YOU!!!

Running Master tests with a dog that is already Titled, just so you can exclaim to the world that your dog Qualified,and you have no intention of going to the event ,,in MY OPINION,,, that is selfish... In the same vein, If you have a Titled Master dog,,,and you attended several Master Nationals,,and have a 5 times Master National Champion..... Read the fishing etiquittett above,, and move on from your hole to something else..

The sport of dog testing is popular.... so much so,, people make a lucrative living doing it... There has to be a distinction between those people and a hobbiest.... but BOTH entities should have SOME degree of etiquette..

I think an attitude like this would go a LONG, LONG way..

As usual,,just my opinion..


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

EdA said:


> A rule to limit entries in field trials was proposed a decade ago and it went nowhere. It is very simple and equitable to all, everyone enters one dog, the process continues until a predetermined number is met then everyone gets to enter one more. The entry is spread equitably and people with a few dogs are guaranteed a spot. Those with multiple dogs have a priority list for entry.


Would think it would be impossible for FT to limit as the entire premises of the sport is to find the best dog through competition; how can you say you had the best dog of all comers if you limited who could participate. Takes a heavy tole on the club, but any type of limit in FT just strike me as counter to the venues overall goal

HT on the other hand are simply to a standard, and AKC has already allowed clubs to limit, I feel it's only a matter of time before they in someway limit the # of dog a single handler can run-sign up etc.; It would be the simplest and most effective solution. UKC-HRC has already limits a handler to 12 or 8 dogs, makes every thing run way more smoothy; sign-ups, test, organization etc. when your not waiting for one person to travel through all the different stakes with overly many dogs


----------



## SWIPER (Sep 24, 2006)

1) Let clubs have at least 25% of the entry, for codes for people who work at the test. This will increase help for clubs to put on the test. This will also free up help for
other stakes.
2) Why not let owner handlers enter the 1st hour the test opens, this would encourage handlers to run their own dogs.
3) Owner entry system, to make the owners more responsible if they want to play the game and not just throw money around and have the pro take care of it.
4) Go to a maximum 3 dog entry before you have to re-enter, this allows more chances to enter. 

1) People don't realize that clubs went and put limits on the entry because a lot of clubs don't have the members that want to bust their ass and then listen to people complain about limits and not enough help at tests. Not everyone can be a Marshall or take birds at the line.
2) All clubs are the same no matter how many members they have, they always need help to make things run smoother on a weekend. 
3) The answer isn't just go and hire help, cuz anyone who hires help knows that it's expensive and usually don't show up next time.
4) All the people that go to the Master National help to make things go smoothly. And these are the same people that clubs put on the test for. 

I know there are people that help but every Club always needs a few more.


----------



## jforqueran (Apr 12, 2015)

2) Why not let owner handlers enter the 1st hour the test opens, this would encourage handlers to run their own dogs.


I have been reading all of the responses to date. Some pretty good ones so far, the one above is the one that makes the most sense to me. This sport was created to allow the amateur a venue to compete in besides the FT game. It is primarily dominated now by Pros. The most frustrating thing to me is that one Person (Pro) can get 15-20 or more dogs entered and I cant even get my 1 dog entered.

These test are put on by people like my self and others that only have one or a few dogs. I have worked my arse off for almost the last two years getting her ready to run Master. I have another almost ready to run, don't know how this is going to go if I cant even get my one that is ready to run in!! I have been attending test, volunteering my time to learn about the sport. I currently only belong to one club but, I volunteer to help at every test I attend.

I do not have the answer to solve this problem. But, I know something has to be done to give this sport back to the amateur that it was created for. The above solution makes sense to me. This will allow the amateur the best chance at succeeding to get entered. Maybe this will force the businessmen (Pros) to figure out how to make their living somewhere else. While I realize that they did not create the problem, they are part of the problem. You do not see any amateur filling 15-20 spots in every test. If something can be done to help us amateurs out, and they (Pros) are real good businessmen. They will not be affected!


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

SWIPER said:


> 1) Let clubs have at least 25% of the entry, for codes for people who work at the test. This will increase help for clubs to put on the test. This will also free up help for
> other stakes.
> 2) Why not let owner handlers enter the 1st hour the test opens, this would encourage handlers to run their own dogs.
> 3) Owner entry system, to make the owners more responsible if they want to play the game and not just throw money around and have the pro take care of it.
> ...



It just amazes me!! Great big test. lots of people/ handlers... Each handler assigned a number.... A LOT of people/handlers sitting in gallery just making comments....

Seems to me,, there could be a required rotation using handler running numbers as to WHO When and where those people go out and help...

The only time I can remember running a test where I didn't go throw, plant blinds, shag birds ect, ect,,, was when I was running for my master Title.... The powers to be TOLD ME,, ORDERED me to sit down and concentrate at the task at hand..... I appreciated it,, but,, In reality,,,, probably wouldn't have hurt a thing for me to help..

Everyone gets a chance to run,and returns the favor to throw for the next guy..

Don't give me that some cant throw.... I'm not very good at it......There are devices.... They use a stick on me,,, but there are other methods..


----------

