# Master vs QAA



## Black Duck Dog (Jan 5, 2015)

what are some of the diff between running master hunt tests and running Q's? Thanks in advance


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

this is a Q water series


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

This is a master water series


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Kind of surprised the Q test had the long bird as a stand out gun and not retired.

REALLY surprised the right hand bird in the Master test was not across the second body of water.

BUT-I wasn't there and I wasn't judging. It's all good. -Paul


----------



## Illini Coot Killr (Feb 21, 2011)

Lots better quality camera man in the Master. Lol!


----------



## bamajeff (May 18, 2015)

To speak to the original question. The differences between a Q and a master test are:
1. Marks and blinds are longer and usually more technical
2. Most of the guns in a Q are marked with white coats
3. You usually have a retired in one/both of the marking series
4. Blinds are separate series from the marks
5. Callbacks are usually less lenient in a Q than a master test.
6. The biggest difference that I would address in training for a Q vs a master test is you need to get your dog ready to make long(250+) yd swims. They will usually get at least 2-3 between water marks and the water blind.

If you have a solid master dog who is a strong marker, with a few months of the right training you should be able to not be overwhelmed in a Q. I enjoy running both.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

Kind of surprise to see an almost 14 minute set of water marks in a Q. 

The judges either had a lot of time or only a few dogs survived the blinds ( maybe that is why all guns are out) which in general demand more precision at greater distances than those in a Master.

Tim


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Masters (Hard to get in and will last all weekend) A series is Blinds and Marks, there are 3 series in a master test (land, water and Land-water) at least 2 triples, required; 3 blinds and 1 will be a double blind
Qual (can get in usually will only last a single day, some go on until the next but usually much quicker; I've never had to run a Qual by head-lights, very rare to see a 60 dog qual field) A series is a set of marks, blinds are usually a separate series; if the blinds and marks are in conjunction the setup is considered 2 series. There are usually 4 series, land marks, land blind, water marks, water blind. They can have a double as a marking series, seems they oftentimes do. 

Try them both see what floats your boat.

Commentary on video
The Qual is pretty wide open and has very long swims, not what I have seen usually will be more technical water, entries and exits rather than just long open water swimming. Surprising that the guns were not retired; look more akin to what I've seen in derby.
The Masters; the outside right mark would usually be across the 2 ponds on the land on the other side. The series seem to be very short marks, and very wide open from what I usually see judges put on. Also usually don't see many marks land in the water, although I like the grassy water they were using; it's not often you get big splashes unless it's a breaking bird/flyer.


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

Black Duck Dog said:


> what are some of the diff between running master hunt tests and running Q's? Thanks in advance


Based on the videos posted by Tobias, the difference is roughly 10 minutes per dog.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Bamajeff outlined the differences pretty well. -Paul


----------



## ripline (Jan 12, 2009)

Been a couple decades since I ran a dog in Masters, but I remember them being substantially longer! We only had a couple dozen entries back then too.... I think I have to go and watch some Master tests again! 
Nice videos Tobias!!


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Anybody want to know what I think?


----------



## Mark Littlejohn (Jun 16, 2006)

A qual will have 1 or 2 guys leaving happy.
A master can (theoretically) have everyone leaving happy.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

ripline said:


> Been a couple decades since I ran a dog in Masters, but I remember them being substantially longer! We only had a couple dozen entries back then too.... I think I have to go and watch some Master tests again!
> Nice videos Tobias!!



I didn't spend a lot of time looking, lol.. just wanted to show the differences  .. I agree the master seem pretty short.


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

There’s a lot of difference in a master test and a Qual. The primary difference is the Master is against a standard that is a bit flexible and the Qual is looking for the best dog in the field that day. 

With that said many solid and experienced Master dogs are competitive at the Qual 

I ve been in both worlds. No rose colored glasses in the Ft world 
Dk


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

In HRC finished you'll never have a set of marks without a blind. 

I assume they had two blinds in the land series on that Master test?


----------



## DavidC (Feb 2, 2015)

Mark Littlejohn said:


> A qual will have 1 or 2 guys leaving happy.
> A master can (theoretically) have everyone leaving happy.


^^^This......

Also.....handling on one mark in a Q series will "usually" get you dropped.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Dogs are judged on their relative merits in the field. So you don’t have to meet a standard, but rather be better than other dogs. If your dog’s performance isn’t in the top 1/2 of dogs run, you should be concerned about not being called back to next series. 

The guns in a Qual, by rule, shall be stationed as to be conspicuous to and easily identified by the dog.

You can point the guns out to the dog prior to signaling to the judge that you are ready. 

You can not speak (quietly or otherwise) to your dog while on honor. 

Actual tests can range from easy master level to difficult amateur level. Depends on the judges and the field of dogs/handlers. Some tests will favor the more experienced dogs and the 4-5 year old hunt test dog can perform better than many of the 2 year old trial dogs. Other tests will favor the trial dogs that are just coming out of derbies. 

Bama Jeff laid out more details.


----------



## Mark Littlejohn (Jun 16, 2006)

There are some great marking MH dogs. What usually has me shaking my head in the O/H quals I've judged is the quality of the blind work. Too many HT dogs and handlers don't appreciate the precision and skills required to pass an AA-level blind. 

Whatever guidance these guys received prior to running a FT blind is either misguided or misunderstood. 25 whistles usually isn't going to cut it, nor is "lettin 'em roll" outside the corridor, or fat around the factors.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Bryan Parks said:


> In HRC finished you'll never have a set of marks without a blind.
> 
> I assume they had two blinds in the land series on that Master test?


A double blind is required in one of the marking series. 3 sets of marks, normally 2 with blinds of which one must have a double blind. If time allowed, judges could have a blind in the remaining series, if they so desired.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Here is a Q stake with a retired gun 




here is a video of one of the series of the MN this year https://vimeo.com/297384672


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Barely a whisper about the National Retriever Championship and two pages about the Qualifying Stake?:shock:


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

EdA said:


> Barely a whisper about the National Retriever Championship and two pages about the Qualifying Stake?��




It was a cold national this year and I, for one would be interested in hearing how the weather played a roll in the set ups the judges designed and how it affected the dogs (if it did to any great extent).. Since you were one of the judges, I would be interested in a thread separate from this one, maybe?


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

EdA said:


> Barely a whisper about the National Retriever Championship and two pages about the Qualifying Stake?


The reason is besides the blog nobody really knows what goes on. There is only so much you can get from the descriptions and it takes a ton of time to read through it all. 

IMO FTs in general do a terrible job of promoting. You can hardly find any videos while everyone and their dog "literally" posts videos of themselves running hunt tests. 

At least last year we had some drone footage of the test dogs. I can't believe with all the money floating around in FTs we can't get some decent footage. 

There were hundreds of people chatting and watching the SRS crown on livestream just before the NRC. 

I think the Pick em at least had some people keep up with a little more but those people were already probably going to.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

EdA said:


> Barely a whisper about the National Retriever Championship and two pages about the Qualifying Stake?:shock:


Content here is usually pretty basic subject matter and those who've been around FT a long time seem to have lost patience.


----------



## swliszka (Apr 17, 2011)

You and Chuck did a great job. I do not know the 3rd judge. Let sleeping dogs lay...atta boy.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

swliszka said:


> You and Chuck did a great job. I do not know the 3rd judge. Let sleeping dogs lay...atta boy.


I could fill a book about 14 days in Paducah KY but no one would read it.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Bryan Parks said:


> The reason is besides the blog nobody really knows what goes on. There is only so much you can get from the descriptions and it takes a ton of time to read through it all.
> *
> IMO FTs in general do a terrible job of promoting. You can hardly find any videos while everyone and their dog "literally" posts videos of themselves running hunt tests.
> 
> ...






I think most people running trials are just more focused on the task at hand than taking video. As for the national I do wish there could be more video for those of us that cannot attend. Also I believe hard core trial people are far out numbered on RTF. I also think FT people have less of a need for internet dog training and simply use the blog to keep up dated and informed on the call backs. It would be nice if someone like YBS broadcasting would do full coverage of the national. A few years back, don't remember which year, there were lots of video and interviews at the National.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

EdA said:


> I could fill a book about 14 days in Paducah KY but no one would read it.






Not so Ed. I would love to read it so start writing!!!!


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Unfortunately the culture of RTF is now rush to answer a question even if you have never run the venues and answer using youtube. 

Congratulations Dr Ed on running what sounds like a very smooth National


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Steve Shaver said:


> Not so Ed. I would love to read it so start writing!!!!


What Steve said


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Anybody want to know what I think?






Sure why not.
You probably should change your name though. drunkenpoacher don't sound too good, at all. Is there a meaning behind the name?


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Steve Shaver said:


> IIt would be nice if someone like YBS broadcasting would do full coverage of the national. A few years back, don't remember which year, there were lots of video and interviews at the National.


AKC covered it once or twice several years back. The problem with videoing a National event is several fold the main one being production cost, it would be like covering a week long golf tournament. Additionally it is necessary that any filming would not interfere with the dogs. No one is willing to invest the resources with little hope of return on investment. The Blog is very sanitized and if you compared it to my sheets you could see that it has very little value beyond pictures of tests and Jean Wu’s incredible drawings. Pat Burns did not attend this year hence no drone footage. I will try to post a few things over the course of several days as my time permits.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

EdA said:


> AKC covered it once or twice several years back. The problem with videoing a National event is several fold the main one being production cost, it would be like covering a week long golf tournament. Additionally it is necessary that any filming would not interfere with the dogs. No one is willing to invest the resources with little hope of return on investment. The Blog is very sanitized and if you compared it to my sheets you could see that it has very little value beyond pictures of tests and Jean Wu’s incredible drawings. Pat Burns did not attend this year hence no drone footage. I will try to post a few things over the course of several days as my time permits.





Totally understand the issues involved in filming the National Ed. As mentioned in my previous post people running the National are focused on the task at hand and not at all concerned about promoting their performance on video.
I would VERY much love to hear anything you have to say about your experience but I would assume you would have to be careful about revealing some details on your sheets. Again Ed I would love to hear all about it!


----------



## Dave Kress (Dec 20, 2004)

Guys we re kinda hi jacking the original thread here 

The recent past Nationals ( open and Amateur) have had interviews and drone footage posted to you tube via Pat Burns . Many know Pat by his excellent work shops 
Pat was not able to attend the NRC event year 

My belief is Nationals are hard to report, too much on the blog and the writers are judging and to little info feels like all the dogs are doing the same work. I think the folks that did the blog work long hours, it was cold this year and cold fingers and feet make computers work slower

Anyway we had 106 of the top Ft retrievers in North America and there are other really good dogs that just didn’t qualify like mine that needed 1 point and others that had the points but not the win It’s hard to get there 

Many of these folks are out training this morning as the slate is clean and you start the qualifying effort all over again. These Ft pro trainers are working and when they get in tonight they are still busy with life and managing a business. 

I get they don’t post but they re ready for a break after the day and who wants to debate with someone via the Internet with only a downside outcome 

Ed it was a good National and I was there just 1 day shorter than you . Write your story and I would be honored to ask you to autograph it 
Dk


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Steve Shaver said:


> Sure why not.
> You probably should change your name though. drunkenpoacher don't sound too good, at all. Is there a meaning behind the name?


Years ago I was unjustly accused of being one.


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

Steve Shaver said:


> Bryan Parks said:
> 
> 
> > The reason is besides the blog nobody really knows what goes on. There is only so much you can get from the descriptions and it takes a ton of time to read through it all.
> ...


I totally agree. IF the question is why there isn't as much interest in FTs or why there isn't as much talk about the NRC then I just think that is why. 

I think the SRS did a pretty good job but supposedly it is going to be aired on the Discovery channel. It's a shame in my opinion that more people can't be exposed to the best retrievers and trainers in the world. 

I'm not sure of the cost but if someone did a full coverage DVD of the NRC I'd be first in line to drop a decent amount of $$ on it.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

I agree Dave we have hijacked the thread. I am reluctant to comment on Master vs QAA as it could turn ugly. I started out running HT but now much prefer FT but that is just my preference. I have nothing against HT and may run a master or two in the spring. With that being said I have a 1 year old female that could run and pass the master featured in videos posted here. Thanks for the video Tobias! As for the qual video I would like to know how that dog placed as well as the other placements.
I am sorry if I offend anyone but watching a trial set up and especially the National keeps my mind turning and on the edge of my seat. Watching a master to me is just kind of ho hum although I have run some very nice master tests. Again I have nothing against running HT but cannot run both so I made my choice. I have said it many times and I will say it again, the Master National has done more harm than good to the Master level of the HT game


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

ErinsEdge said:


> Unfortunately the culture of RTF is now rush to answer a question even if you have never run the venues and answer using youtube.


Take **** from people who think that a retriever is some sort of alien creature unlike other dogs and field trials happen on the planet Uranus where only the elite (in their own mind) know what could possibly solve a problem. 

Receive many private emails and messages asking for further assistance and admiring your thick skin and dedication to learning, experimenting and trying to advance the art of training.

It's like everywhere else in social media land. People attack what they don't understand and refuse to believe anything but their own crap.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Any dog that finishes a Qual is above MH level.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> People attack what they don't understand and refuse to believe anything but their own crap.


A stroke of brilliance? I know what I witness


----------



## labguy (Jan 17, 2006)

DarrinGreene said:


> Take **** from people who think that a retriever is some sort of alien creature unlike other dogs and field trials happen on the planet Uranus where only the elite (in their own mind) know what could possibly solve a problem.
> 
> Receive many private emails and messages asking for further assistance and admiring your thick skin and dedication to learning, experimenting and trying to advance the art of training.
> 
> It's like everywhere else in social media land. People attack what they don't understand and refuse to believe anything but their own crap.


Amen to that. People get stuck in their own little worlds and refuse to think that their training philosophies could possibly evolve and that things could be done better.

Or worse yet, their egos get in the way of learning something new and better.

Too bad for the dogs.......


----------



## Black Duck Dog (Jan 5, 2015)

Thanks Tobias for the videos and for everyone's response. answered alot of questions. Tobias how far was that long swim in Q's video seems like a long ways with really nothing technical?


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Any dog that finishes a Qual is above MH level.


Disagree, and I fear we are going to get into the subject of "mine is bigger than yours". 

Still there's so much difference btw the 2 venues they can't be compared. I've also seen several dogs, finish, place, or win Quals and not be ready for masters. These tend to be young dogs, that just did very well that day in a Qual (against that field)and then fail MH due to lack of experience. In a Hunt test a dog has to maintain through multiple combined series; they also need to be mannered on line and not break. Sometimes this is too much for young or overly excited dogs. Now I will say these are real MH tests, not a few I've seen lately with marks a JH level dog could most likely do with success . 

Can't say I'm greatly experienced in FT, I've ran maybe 8-10 times in 12yrs. When I first tired the Qual; I was rather underwhelmed by the dog work, compared to the masters I was running at the time. As a handler I completely failed (pointing out stations and No gun threw me). But then I had a much better handler run my dog; and we were knocking on the door to placing, whelp until the last bird . The Qual is an interesting INBTW stake you never know what your going to get and you can have a wide range of dogs running it, very young dogs, very experienced dog; all running together and the judges tasked with separating them. As an INBTW stake it caters well to INBTW dogs. I would say that a talented marking-senior level dog, could go into Quals and just might do OK, just as derby dogs oftentimes seamlessly transfer to the Qual. Training-running them both is only going to give you a more all around dog. All these venues just come down to a dog picking up birds; sign up run the venue and find out what you need to work on, rinse-repeat.

As for the National talk on this thread; from the outside coverage is terrible; You'd have to actually be there to appreciated it, and I'm sure that everyone that was there was having a great time, good conversations, a little one up manship on who was going to take the day. But watching it from the internet, call-backs and series take forever to get published. The Master National coverage is better, but still horrible in comparison to the Grand. The Facebook page on the grand is updated practically by the hour, *scores are published* as soon as they come out, and they get very interesting conversation going on the page . Much akin SRS crown *scores are out minute by minute*, so you know who's winning at anytime. Even golf has scores put up every hole. If they don't publish the scores and you don't get to see the dog work, all you can really follow is call-backs which take forever to be put up and there's no way to gauge contenders. It would be exciting to see scoring series by series, but that would open a big can of worms; the national is more a venue for the participants not a casual internet observer.


----------



## big trax (Mar 31, 2015)

I just started running some Q's this year with two of my girls who earned their master titles in the fall of 17. We got our A$$ handed to us lol. These girls ate master tests up. Both failed a master test or two, but one was the youngest dog in every master we ran except one. She never technically failed a test, but I did pick her up multiple times for cheating water. That said- for us- running Q's was a MAJOR jump. I thought whats the big deal with a retired gun? Everything they'd seen their entire lives was from a hidden gun so easy transition right?? Wrong lol. When I started training with white coats- they started looking for white coats. 

The major differences have been outlined well in previous posts. However, I will say that I genuinely believe in order to be successful in trials one needs: serious water to train on- you can make a hunt test dog on stock ponds- not so for a trial dog, some training partners (have a bird boy, but he can't throw a triple by himself) and you need a heaping helping of humility and be prepared to come home empty handed...often.

One myth I'd like to dispel- as a long time hunt tester, I was told repeatedly that the field trial crowd is filled with uppity folks who won't help you and their all know-it-all better-than-you types. Believe me...that is the prevailing belief among most...not all, but most of the hunt test crowd. I was welcomed by the field trial crowd. Everyone was nice and helpful. Judges offered advice and were very courteous. I was told more than once in the fourth series of a Q to go ahead and handle my dog to the long retired- I'd at least get a jam ribbon. Just can't make myself do it...when they blow it- and they have every time on the fourth on the LAST DANG BIRD lol- I get frustrated and pick them up. I've found the trial crowd to be as friendly and helpful as they can be. I did pitch in and help. I've shot flyers and helped move tests etc when I can and I've gained access to some great training grounds and training partners in the process.

As a long time member of the hunt test crowd, and as an HRC judge, I can relate that many make excuses about trials. They call them reasons, but they are really excuses: Hunting dogs don't need to pick up 400 yard marks, no white coats in the field, trials aren't that different than hunt tests...just longer etc etc etc. If you spend much time around a gallery at a hunt test, you'll hear plenty of reasons to stay away from trials. However, the reality, in my opinion, is that participating in trials is easy and requires no more work than training your dog for a hunt test. Being competitive is another story. It is simply better dog work. Period. It requires really genuinely teaching concept marking for instance and a top notch dog is a must. I can't imagine any of us want less than the best we can get from our dogs. I can tell you I hunt...a lot and my dogs are better hunters this season than last and the primary reason is because we trained for trials all year. 

The difference in master tests and Q's? Q's on the whole, require much better dog work. 

I am a member of various Facebook groups. In one such group, a new person asked a question about tests and trials etc and what the difference in titles is. I posted a synopsis and explained there are many events just like there are many horse races, but there is only one Kentucky Derby. The National and National Am are the derbies of the dog world. A guy commented after me stating that according to his measuring stick, the SRS Crown was the true champ. I think like someone else commented, the live stream and media coverage the SRS gets helps with popularity and it is good dog work...or should I say nice handling lol. However, in my mind's eye, proves the lack of knowledge out there. Guys really have no idea what a national caliber judge is capable of setting up and what a national caliber dog / handler team is capable of picking up. We must figure out a way to better celebrate the Nationals and get the exposure up. 

Ed A., I for one am all ears...


----------



## red devil (Jan 4, 2003)

Big Trax....I completely agree with your observations and sentiments. I might add, as a long time HT participant and judge, the far higher level of handler needed to survive past the first series in any trial from Derby to Open. I have seen more than capable dogs flame out at trials simply because the handler did not take the time nor understand the support required from the handler. As a FT newcomer, I have become a far, far better handler than I ever was at HT's. This has helped me enormously in running HTs, in hunting with my dog and in Judging HTs.

I will also concur wholeheartedly with your comments regarding FT training and participating. I have received a very warm welcome from both pros and amateurs in getting started. I still get pigheaded and need to pee on the electric fence several times before the lessons take hold, but my mentors (and there have been many) have been patient and understanding. I would encourage more people in HTs to drop the attitude and give it a try....who knows, maybe you'll have fun (and learn something).


----------



## chesaka (Dec 13, 2007)

Black Duck Dog said:


> Thanks Tobias for the videos and for everyone's response. answered alot of questions. Tobias how far was that long swim in Q's video seems like a long ways with really nothing technical?


Yes, thank you Tobias for the videos. I remember that Q at Pt Mac. The long swim was LONG!! Some of the dogs got hung up on the left hand mark going for the long. I'm guessing 400 plus yards. Anyway, before I go I want to say that it's too bad RTF has become such a snarky place. I don't have a fix for it, except to visit less often. I noticed a shift a while back when someone would ask a question and the answer would be "asked and answered. go to the archive." Not friendly and not helpful especially for the more novice trainers. There are people on here with expertise that should be shared. Members of my non-virtual world training group also provide support to each other. If all they do is criticize, they don't get invited back. Keep the site alive. Be nice.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Any dog that finishes a Qual is above MH level.


Not where I run.


----------



## Bryan Parks (Aug 19, 2015)

With regard to the comment about the SRS being the "real champ"

Did anyone notice this year's crown champion was an 8 year old dog with an amateur win? 

He made it look easy!

https://huntinglabpedigree.com/pedigree.asp?id=16160


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

ErinsEdge said:


> A stroke of brilliance? I know what I witness


It's not an introspective comment, if that's what you mean Nancy. 

People around here are too hung up on training like people who have achieved things they never have or will. The average person just wants a good dog and doesn't want to spend 3 mos choking the **** out of them to make them steady. It's not that hard to do and doesn't require beating the dog into thinking they're never getting a retrieve ever again. Sorry, just doesn't. 

If people don't like me saying that because it conflicts with their beliefs or business model - OH WELL.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

big trax & red devil I concur


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Any dog that finishes a Qual is above MH level.


Simply not true in my experience. Had a very nice young dog that placed 4th in the O/H Q and couldn't complete the first series in the next days Master test. Have watched Friday's Q winner blow up on the Saturday Master. These are real life examples from 10 years of running tests and a few trials.

I will give you compliments on your pot stirring abilities!!!


----------



## Huff (Feb 11, 2008)

Steve Shaver said:


> I agree Dave we have hijacked the thread. I am reluctant to comment on Master vs QAA as it could turn ugly. I started out running HT but now much prefer FT but that is just my preference. I have nothing against HT and may run a master or two in the spring. With that being said I have a 1 year old female that could run and pass the master featured in videos posted here. Thanks for the video Tobias! As for the qual video I would like to know how that dog placed as well as the other placements.
> I am sorry if I offend anyone but watching a trial set up and especially the National keeps my mind turning and on the edge of my seat. Watching a master to me is just kind of ho hum although I have run some very nice master tests. Again I have nothing against running HT but cannot run both so I made my choice. I have said it many times and I will say it again, the Master National has done more harm than good to the Master level of the HT game



I agree with this statement. This is the same reason I prefer to run and work at trials over hunt tests. Still work and support my club hunt test though.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

fishduck said:


> Simply not true in my experience. Had a very nice young dog that placed 4th in the O/H Q and couldn't complete the first series in the next days Master test. Have watched Friday's Q winner blow up on the Saturday Master. These are real life examples from 10 years of running tests and a few trials.
> 
> I will give you compliments on your pot stirring abilities!!!


Yep. Won Q on Friday, couldn't do the MH on Saturday. Though one got Qual 2nd and finished MH same day. They are nice dogs, that can do both, and switch back and forth, same day/weekend.


----------



## chesaka (Dec 13, 2007)

fishduck said:


> Simply not true in my experience. Had a very nice young dog that placed 4th in the O/H Q and couldn't complete the first series in the next days Master test. Have watched Friday's Q winner blow up on the Saturday Master.


I agree. They are different games and take different approaches to training to succeed. I saw Roy McFall fail hunt tests with his field trial champion dogs several times when he decided to give it a try. He didn't fail for long. By the end of the summer he was getting passes. But again, what a shame that there is such lack of respect from some people on this forum to immediately turn a comparison of MH and field trials into a competition about which has the better dogs.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

fishduck said:


> Simply not true in my experience. Had a very nice young dog that placed 4th in the O/H Q and couldn't complete the first series in the next days Master test. Have watched Friday's Q winner blow up on the Saturday Master. These are real life examples from 10 years of running tests and a few trials.
> 
> I will give you compliments on your pot stirring abilities!!!


I actually edited some things out before posting in an attempt not to stir. Guess I failed;-)


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> It's not an introspective comment, if that's what you mean Nancy.
> 
> People around here are too hung up on training like people who have achieved things they never have or will. The average person just wants a good dog and doesn't want to spend 3 mos choking the **** out of them to make them steady. It's not that hard to do and doesn't require beating the dog into thinking they're never getting a retrieve ever again. Sorry, just doesn't.
> 
> If people don't like me saying that because it conflicts with their beliefs or business model - OH WELL.



Are you referring to the post I made outlining the method I would use to steady a 1 year old dog with bad habits?

I certainly hope not. If so, I don't know how you would derive that I was advocating "choking the ****" out of a dog *AT ALL,* to say nothing of doing it for months.- Paul


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> Yep. Won Q on Friday, couldn't do the MH on Saturday. Though one got Qual 2nd and finished MH same day. They are nice dogs, that can do both, and switch back and forth, same day/weekend.






Well ya, **** happens but over all I would agree with Big Trax and Red Devil posts 45 and 46. I had a dog that couldn't find the flyer in the first series qual but Jammed the open at the same trial and she was only 29 mo old. Also had a dog (daughter to the one just mentioned) Jam the derby and pass her first Master on the same weekend at 18 months old. Over all I would rather go from Qual to Master than Master to qual.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Big Trax, you have stated it very well! It's my love of the training and precision that guided me to trials. I've never won a Q, but have 4 jams and one RJ that mean the world to me as a total "home schooler"!&#55358;&#56611;


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Steve Shaver said:


> Well ya, **** happens but over all I would agree with Big Trax and Red Devil posts 45 and 46. I had a dog that couldn't find the flyer in the first series qual but Jammed the open at the same trial and she was only 29 mo old. Also had a dog (daughter to the one just mentioned) Jam the derby and pass her first Master on the same weekend at 18 months old. Over all I would rather go from Qual to Master than Master to qual.


Yes, stuff happens, that was a bit tongue in cheek response to a blatant overstatement. ;-) All my dogs that go to my pro these days are trained on a "FT" basis, they only switch to HT stuff later. Much easier transition. I enjoy FT more. Doesn't mean I don't appreciate and support HT either. FT training is a whole different level than HT, they are different games. Once I ran my first Qual with my homebred girl and got a 4th place, that was it for me, that high is altogether different than a HT pass. My first blue, that buzz, wow, still remember the roaring in my ears, the shakes, as they gave out ribbons and it got closer to the end. Even if it was "just" a Qual (see, any accomplishment can and will be looked down upon by someone who thinks they are higher up the food chain). A Derby green standing at the end with the likes of Judy Aycock, Ken Neil, well, I was still green enough myself for that to matter. Getting to the WB in an Am. It's all personal bests sometimes, when it comes to FT. That's probably the biggest difference between HT and FT, chasing that "high" of beating the other dogs, being the best that day, or maybe even just making it further than you have before. You don't understand it until you do it. All the technical differences have been listed. It's the mindset at the line that is the biggest difference jumping from MH to Qual. Train and play to win, not pass.

And to further my personal agenda, ;-), I can say I prefer to run FT myself without disparaging HT. HT gets a lot of people into the game. Maybe JH ribbons are easy, maybe that title is meaningless to the veterans, but, it is a gateway. I can't even count anymore how many of my puppy buyers have come here, seen my dogs do a demo in my yard, and mind you, this is pretty basic stuff, but it blows them away. They want it. They want a steady dog that heels when told, a dog that can pick up multiples, that will stop on a whistle and take a hand signal. Even if they are just a weekend warrior type hunter. That is the gateway. Once they get into that, they find a trainer or buy a program, join a club, start working, HT and FT, figure out if they want or have the time for upper level HT or try FT, or they are having fun just training their hunting dog and shooting some birds at a test or trial to help out. Or get turned off altogether because of poor experiences within the game. 

Train your dogs and run to the level you want, support HT and FT, they go hand in hand and you can have fun at every level, just watch a new person run and pass their first Junior, their sheer nerves, forgetting to breathe, feeling half sick. Remember that feeling. THAT is what this is supposed to be about, us and our dogs, whatever we may choose to run.


----------



## H2O_Control_guy (Jul 14, 2009)

Hi Kim,
You pretty much summed it up for me. Worst (best actually) thing I ever did was when a certain then pro we both know allowed me to run a blind with an AA dog. I was hooked and wanted one of them. Ribbons are few and far between in the FT game so you savor the ones you get. I think the experience you have with the FT and HT crowd can be directly related to pitching in and helping out. People notice when you pitch in and you tend to get invited into training groups that have experienced folks. If you pay attention you can learn something.

Best thing I like about the Q vs Master test is you generally get done in one day. If it is a 40 dog Q with pros and the top amateurs it may run into the 2nd day and you can count on the tests being dang near AA level. That is the only way the judges can get the separation needed to find a winner.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

paul young said:


> Are you referring to the post I made outlining the method I would use to steady a 1 year old dog with bad habits?
> 
> I certainly hope not. If so, I don't know how you would derive that I was advocating "choking the ****" out of a dog *AT ALL,* to say nothing of doing it for months.- Paul


No - sent you a PM


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> The average person just wants a good dog and doesn't want to spend 3 mos choking the **** out of them to make them steady. It's not that hard to do and doesn't require beating the dog into thinking they're never getting a retrieve ever again. Sorry, just doesn't.


Who exactly is advising this method? That is a huge turnoff with you even saying it


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> No - sent you a PM



Thank you.- Paul


----------



## labguy (Jan 17, 2006)

ErinsEdge said:


> Who exactly is advising this method? That is a huge turnoff with you even saying it



I think Darrin is referring to the tried and true methods used to address steadying/line manners/noise/creeping etc. which are widely employed by many trainers both Pro and amateur alike.

While these discipline type methods work to an extent they are tough on the dog and not necessary and have unintended consequences, especially in a high drive, big running dog.

Darrins approach seems to be to let the dog make the choice to behave appropriately and then it gets the reward....the retrieve. 

Once I got the hang of this concept and it's application, the results have been far superior and longer lasting than heeling sticks and other punitive measures. Plus the dogs are much more relaxed and happy.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> I think Darrin is referring to the tried and true methods used to address steadying/line manners/noise/creeping etc. which are widely employed by many trainers both Pro and amateur alike.



Well, I've never known any of those pros, not even close. Steadying was a very short progression as in usually a couple of days. It's like we have witnessed a different world unless of course thats what he was taught to do.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

I think that if you have a very consistent MH, one that is qualifying in 80% or more of the tests entered, and you wish to test it against other dogs, entering Qualifying Stakes makes a lot of sense. If your dog is not performing at a really high level in Master tests, you will probably not have much success, however.

It will require much different training progressions, scenarios, standards and expectations to be successful. Some people (and dogs) will really like the challenges and flourish. Others, not so much.

I know that I enjoyed it very much with the dogs I have had that had the talent required. I will always cherish those Blue ribbons!-Paul


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> Well, I've never known any of those pros, not even close. Steadying was a very short progression as in usually a couple of days. It's like we have witnessed a different world unless of course thats what he was taught to do.


I would add that there is a world of difference between shaping a puppy's behavior so that it is a good citizen and steady throughout the training process and fixing a steadiness problem that has been reinforced through months or years of unacceptable behavior. Neither requires brutality, however. -Paul


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Any dog that finishes a Qual is above MH level.





paul young said:


> I think that if you have a very consistent MH, one that is qualifying in 80% or more of the tests entered, and you wish to test it against other dogs, entering Qualifying Stakes makes a lot of sense. If your dog is not performing at a really high level in Master tests, you will probably not have much success, however.
> 
> It will require much different training progressions, scenarios, standards and expectations to be successful. Some people (and dogs) will really like the challenges and flourish. Others, not so much.
> 
> I know that I enjoyed it very much with the dogs I have had that had the talent required. I will always cherish those Blue ribbons!-Paul


It sounds to me like we are in agreement on this.
What do you think Paul?


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

paul young said:


> I would add that there is a world of difference between shaping a puppy's behavior so that it is a good citizen and steady throughout the training process and fixing a steadiness problem that has been reinforced through months or years of unacceptable behavior. Neither requires brutality, however. -Paul


I agree completely. There are people that come with a dog to fix, but I have witnessed, with multiple of these same good trainers, a different dog in a week or two. One dog, who had a terrible report, after 3 weeks of training mind you, came to my trainer for a read and within a couple of weeks was told his dog was good enough to run derbies in time and he never saw the reported washed out dog behavior. If I ever saw "3 mos choking the **** out of them to make them steady" I would tell anyone that asked this is not a good trainer to trust. If choking is what people are seeing done to dogs, I would suggest they haven't researched trainers well, because these are NOT "tried and true methods used to address steadying/line manners/noise/creeping etc. which are widely employed by many trainers both Pro and amateur alike." If thats what is out there, it is rubbish.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Somewhat.

To be competitive in the Q I think you need an above average marker that can perform on retired marks as opposed to Hidden gun marks, and be precise on land and water blinds at distances greater than found at a Master Hunt test. A lot of that has to do with the handler, in the case of blinds.

Most successful Trainers are doing these types of blinds with MH dogs anyway. It's the precision that differs.

What is most different is the mindset of the trainer, and the fact that you have to be in the top 2 dogs on any given weekend to have real success (QAA status). It's entirely different from a HT. Hard to compare the two, really. -Paul


----------



## Dave Farrar (Mar 16, 2012)

ErinsEdge said:


> Well, I've never known any of those pros, not even close. Steadying was a very short progression as in usually a couple of days. It's like we have witnessed a different world unless of course thats what he was taught to do.


In Dr. Ed's thread he mentions "extreme creeping and general unruliness on line" as reasons that dogs were eliminated last week from the NRC. Maybe there is more to steadying a dog than meets the eye. Or at least more than one successful method. (My way has certainly not been successful...)


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Steve Shaver said:


> Over all I would rather go from Qual to Master than Master to qual.


I agree with this, My feeling is if your going to do both. A good progression if you have a dog that is good at marking and likes to go long; Would be SH to Qual to Masters. Why because the Qual is only 4 individual "series" and is a pretty good gauge at what a dog can do; particularly blind work. Also very good at showing what a dog needs to work on; before you start focusing on surviving 3 all inclusive series. Now I'm not saying your just gonna go out and win or even be competitive, but your gonna get line time; experience and a good Idea of what your dog can and cannot do. The Qual was always designed as a stake to help with progression (these are dogs usually beyond derby but not ready to play with the big boys). It's also a good place for a handler to get his feet wet in FT. When your finishing quals, it pretty much shows a solid skill-set and that you're ready to move on. The Qual wasn't really designed as a stake, to just stay in forever, (if it were it would be more robust and have points etc. associated with placements not just 1st-2nd for QAA) The whole point of the stake is to help dogs and handlers progress.


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

Irrelevant to the original post, but I am enjoying seeing a little bit of life breathed into RTF recently...even if people disagree. There is a more focused (and smaller) group of people with opinions on RTF versus the "retriever groups" on Facebook which have 1,000's of people who just comment to comment. Way to go RTF'ers!


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

birddogn_tc said:


> Irrelevant to the original post, but I am enjoying seeing a little bit of life breathed into RTF recently...even if people disagree. There is a more focused (and smaller) group of people with opinions on RTF versus the "retriever groups" on Facebook which have 1,000's of people who just comment to comment. Way to go RTF'ers!


While this might be true, it gets harder and harder to sift thru the cracker jacks to find the peanut. RTF has changed over the years. At one time the dog advice you got was from some of the best Ams in the game.


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

Thomas D said:


> While this might be true, it gets harder and harder to sift thru the cracker jacks to find the peanut. RTF has changed over the years. At one time the dog advice you got was from some of the best Ams in the game.


yeah, but that's kinda my point, less posts/comments to sift thru on RTF then on Facebook groups.


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

DrunkenPoacher... I generally agree with you but it's just not that black and white (as people have mentioned.)

Let's say you wanted to buy a great "finished" dog. There are three dogs for sale, all 3 black lab males, and they are all 3 years old with similar pedigrees... 

Dog 1 is a MH
Dog 2 is QAA
Dog 3 is MH QAA

Which one do you buy? 

I think the answer is simple. You would want to see all of them work and probably even work with them before you could consider buying one. There is no way to tell which of the 3 dogs listed is the best dog for you by looking at titles. Only you would know your goals for the dog. Maybe the MH dog is the best dog out of the bunch but just hasn't run any Quals yet? Maybe the QAA dog has failed 8 master tests in a row for some reason? 

So, point being, it's just not as black and white as "QAA is above MH." I think you could agree with that, no?


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

birddogn_tc said:


> yeah, but that's kinda my point, less posts/comments to sift thru on RTF then on Facebook groups.


That logic applies only if you’re on the FB groups also.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

While the titles do not indicate "best dog" they can provide insight into the dog's training background prior to you purchase

A few general observations:

The 3yo QAA dogs tend to creep and break when running HTs. They are not use to multiple short birds, walk-ups and quacking noises. Line manners deteriorate.
The 3yo MH dogs in FTs have trouble identifying long guns they are not use to looking past a visible flyer station and on blinds many have trouble taking a "back" after 150 yds, they tend to "see saw".

Depending your interest which title you buy will probably determine focus YOUR training take. 

tim


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

birddogn_tc said:


> DrunkenPoacher... I generally agree with you but it's just not that black and white (as people have mentioned.)
> 
> Let's say you wanted to buy a great "finished" dog. There are three dogs for sale, all 3 black lab males, and they are all 3 years old with similar pedigrees...
> 
> ...


I would agree, you can't tell from the pedigrees or the titles which of the three is best. 
Consider there are two groups of dogs 50 QAA and 50 MH. 
I think the odds of picking out a "finished" dog *should *be equally high with either group. 
I think the odds *are* much better for the QAA group.


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

Ed, you better find a new thread.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

In regard to post #77.
Let me preface my comments by saying I don't have a problem with those that have their dog professionally trained and live on a pro truck 11 months of the year.

I want a dog that will be my buddy, live in the house with me and stay with me in my old age. So titles isn't a consideration for me. I would not buy a finished dog but a puppy to train myself. That is the enjoyment for me. But titles and accomplishments of the dam and sire are important to me for the puppy I would buy.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Wayne Nutt said:


> In regard to post #77.
> Let me preface my comments by saying I don't have a problem with those that have their dog professionally trained and live on a pro truck 11 months of the year.
> 
> I want a dog that will be my buddy, live in the house with me and stay with me in my old age. So titles isn't a consideration for me. I would not buy a finished dog but a puppy to train myself. That is the enjoyment for me. But titles and accomplishments of the dam and sire are important to me for the puppy I would buy.


Me too, raising and training my own puppy is the only option for me.

birddogn tc's post is just a good hypothetical question.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Me too, raising and training my own puppy is the only option for me.
> 
> birddogn tc's post is just a good hypothetical question.


In complete agreement with this statement. The joy of the process is in training and learning to work as a team. I could give up tests, trials and judging but I will always fool with a retriever and plan on hunting that dog as long as I am physically able.


----------



## birddogn_tc (Apr 24, 2015)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Me too, raising and training my own puppy is the only option for me.
> 
> birddogn tc's post is just a good hypothetical question.


Correct, was just a hypothetical question. I too prefer to own a dog from 7 weeks old. I have only owned two dogs but have always owned from a puppy.


----------



## Wayne Nissen (Dec 31, 2009)

In most Qs the long gun would be retired.


----------



## Gray_Chin (Feb 24, 2017)

I have only trained for, and competed in FT, but I think one difference has not been mentioned. From my experience, those that are serious about FT, are not training for the Q, but the end goal of a competitive AA dog. I think that can make your goal more long-term, and obviously much more challenging...how well, really, can you and your dog, as a team, work together against some of the most experienced handlers and dogs out there. I feel like this difference in perspective is significant and more than just distance and duck calls. 

With that said, I also hunt my dogs in some of the most challenging conditions in the country, so I'm testing my hunting standard on a regular basis throughout the season...so, maybe oddly enough, I don't feel the need to HT. Like some of you others, I raise, train, hunt, run, love, laugh, and cry with these dogs, and the journey is worth more than any ribbon...but I'll be gunning for one again next spring.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Gray_Chin said:


> I have only trained for, and competed in FT, but I think one difference has not been mentioned. From my experience, those that are serious about FT, are not training for the Q, but the end goal of a competitive AA dog. I think that can make your goal more long-term, and obviously much more challenging...how well, really, can you and your dog, as a team, work together against some of the most experienced handlers and dogs out there. I feel like this difference in perspective is significant and more than just distance and duck calls.
> 
> With that said, I also hunt my dogs in some of the most challenging conditions in the country, so I'm testing my hunting standard on a regular basis throughout the season...so, maybe oddly enough, I don't feel the need to HT. Like some of you others, I raise, train, hunt, run, love, laugh, and cry with these dogs, and the journey is worth more than any ribbon...but I'll be gunning for one again next spring.






Yep could not agree more.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Gray_Chin said:


> I have only trained for, and competed in FT, but I think one difference has not been mentioned. From my experience, those that are serious about FT, are not training for the Q, but the end goal of a competitive AA dog. I think that can make your goal more long-term, and obviously much more challenging...how well, really, can you and your dog, as a team, work together against some of the most experienced handlers and dogs out there. I feel like this difference in perspective is significant and more than just distance and duck calls.
> 
> With that said, I also hunt my dogs in some of the most challenging conditions in the country, so I'm testing my hunting standard on a regular basis throughout the season...so, maybe oddly enough, I don't feel the need to HT. Like some of you others, I raise, train, hunt, run, love, laugh, and cry with these dogs, and the journey is worth more than any ribbon...but I'll be gunning for one again next spring.


Very well said


----------



## Jeremy Gibbons (Apr 18, 2017)

Rainmaker said:


> Yes, stuff happens, that was a bit tongue in cheek response to a blatant overstatement. ;-) All my dogs that go to my pro these days are trained on a "FT" basis, they only switch to HT stuff later. Much easier transition. I enjoy FT more. Doesn't mean I don't appreciate and support HT either. FT training is a whole different level than HT, they are different games. Once I ran my first Qual with my homebred girl and got a 4th place, that was it for me, that high is altogether different than a HT pass. My first blue, that buzz, wow, still remember the roaring in my ears, the shakes, as they gave out ribbons and it got closer to the end. Even if it was "just" a Qual (see, any accomplishment can and will be looked down upon by someone who thinks they are higher up the food chain). A Derby green standing at the end with the likes of Judy Aycock, Ken Neil, well, I was still green enough myself for that to matter. Getting to the WB in an Am. It's all personal bests sometimes, when it comes to FT. That's probably the biggest difference between HT and FT, chasing that "high" of beating the other dogs, being the best that day, or maybe even just making it further than you have before. You don't understand it until you do it. All the technical differences have been listed. It's the mindset at the line that is the biggest difference jumping from MH to Qual. Train and play to win, not pass.
> 
> And to further my personal agenda, ;-), I can say I prefer to run FT myself without disparaging HT. HT gets a lot of people into the game. Maybe JH ribbons are easy, maybe that title is meaningless to the veterans, but, it is a gateway. I can't even count anymore how many of my puppy buyers have come here, seen my dogs do a demo in my yard, and mind you, this is pretty basic stuff, but it blows them away. They want it. They want a steady dog that heels when told, a dog that can pick up multiples, that will stop on a whistle and take a hand signal. Even if they are just a weekend warrior type hunter. That is the gateway. Once they get into that, they find a trainer or buy a program, join a club, start working, HT and FT, figure out if they want or have the time for upper level HT or try FT, or they are having fun just training their hunting dog and shooting some birds at a test or trial to help out. Or get turned off altogether because of poor experiences within the game.
> 
> Train your dogs and run to the level you want, support HT and FT, they go hand in hand and you can have fun at every level, just watch a new person run and pass their first Junior, their sheer nerves, forgetting to breathe, feeling half sick. Remember that feeling. THAT is what this is supposed to be about, us and our dogs, whatever we may choose to run.



So Very Well Said 

Newb here


----------



## Jeremy Gibbons (Apr 18, 2017)

H2O_Control_guy said:


> Hi Kim,
> You pretty much summed it up for me. Worst (best actually) thing I ever did was when a certain then pro we both know allowed me to run a blind with an AA dog. I was hooked and wanted one of them. Ribbons are few and far between in the FT game so you savor the ones you get. I think the experience you have with the FT and HT crowd can be directly related to pitching in and helping out. People notice when you pitch in and you tend to get invited into training groups that have experienced folks. If you pay attention you can learn something.
> 
> Best thing I like about the Q vs Master test is you generally get done in one day. If it is a 40 dog Q with pros and the top amateurs it may run into the 2nd day and you can count on the tests being dang near AA level. That is the only way the judges can get the separation needed to find a winner.


My pup's pro let my pup's uncle help show me how to handle like that, pretty damn awesome being at the helm. That and the watching them train, and gunning and throwing for them for ten days was extremely inspiring. I love watching the big dogs from the throwing/gunning vantage point. 3 of them were running at Paducah a few weeks ago. I'm a long way away from even running derby, but I want to one day!
I'll be thrilled with a SH pass in a few months. 
So true about pitching in.


----------

