# Derby H2O Questions



## Labs Will-Do (Jan 31, 2007)

I realize there have been several threads recently on derby expectations, but I wanted to ask the question regarding the water marks that are generally seen and the dog work on such. What setups have you seen as for distance from line to entry, swim distance, exit land distance. What type water. Is there usually similiar water distance in the both marks of the double or shorter mark thrown in, is there a dry and wet mark together. How much cheaty potential in general are marks to bank.The dogs that fair well... do they handle water marks perfect? Seems that with a younger dog that the water is place of concern at least from my perspective. I'd like to get others insight on this side of a derby trial.


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

Labs Will-Do said:


> I realize there have been several threads recently on derby expectations, but I wanted to ask the question regarding the water marks that are generally seen and the dog work on such. What setups have you seen as for distance from line to entry, swim distance, exit land distance. What type water. Is there usually similiar water distance in the both marks of the double or shorter mark thrown in, is there a dry and wet mark together. How much cheaty potential in general are marks to bank.The dogs that fair well... do they handle water marks perfect? Seems that with a younger dog that the water is place of concern at least from my perspective. I'd like to get others insight on this side of a derby trial.


Every kind of water cheating opportunity imaginable can appear in the Derby. Distance is irrelevant, but you'll get that, too. Long, hundred yard plus entries to small pieces of water, multiple re-entries, down the shore bank-runners, everything. I feel that a thoroughly de-cheated pup is essential to success. And yes, the top dogs consistently nail the hard marks.


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

Definitly what Mark said. Also expect to loose sight of your derby dog in the water.


----------



## Russell Archer (Jul 8, 2004)

Every derby is differnt, much of what you asked depends on the available grounds. In general, the water marks are the most difficult marks of a derby. Multiple entries, angle entries, hitting points, missing points & swimming parallel to the shore are all common in derbies. 

Distances vary greatly. Sometimes the dog is required to stay in the water for a long swim, 100+ yards. Other times the dog has to get out of the water early and not "swim the shore".

The big thing is that these derby dogs are getting so good they will have many concepts thrown at them, even to include a retired gun.

As for importance.......all series are judged equally. BUT, a trial is WON or LOST in the WATER.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Russell Archer said:


> The big thing is that these derby dogs are getting so good they will have many concepts thrown at them, even to include a retired gun.


The day I have to retire a gun in the Derby will be the day I no longer judge Derbies. IMHO, retired guns in the Derby are WRONG. Period. I'll throw three spread 90 degrees apart before I retire one.....and I really can't see myself in a situation where I'd throw three.....



> As for importance.......all series are judged equally. BUT, a trial is WON or LOST in the WATER.


THIS statement is as true as they come AS A GENERAL RULE. It takes four SOLID series of performance to win, though.....

JMHO as always....

kg


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

Haven't seen any actual retired guns in Derby but I have seen a couple where the seated gunners had a similar effect. I agree that retired marks are a no-no and unnecessary.


----------



## Labs Will-Do (Jan 31, 2007)

I have watched a few land series and only one water series in the derby stake. And as stated I can see the water possible being the make or break if it is setup as such. I notice that most dogs I see entered on EE are closer to aging out than the 1 yr to 1.5 yr age, I would think that water control/honesty experience is more instilled in them. I appreciate the replies and insight thus far.


----------



## Russell Archer (Jul 8, 2004)

I agree that we don't see "true" retired guns in the field in derbies (yet). We do see guns that are about as close to being retired as you can get, without being retired by definition.

I think that it is only a matter of time that retired guns will be common place in a derby, it is the natural progression of our sport. All you have to do is look at the Q & the major stakes and see how they have progressed with the retired gun(s).

Talk with the top young dog pro's and ask them what they were training derby dogs to do 15 years ago v. today.

p.s.

Keith.....Looking forward to have Louie run under you at Middle TN.


----------



## Ga Woodrow (Mar 4, 2006)

....................


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

The last D/Q I judged the same dog won both.
A difficult Q that had an AA mark in it. In this case it was a _kick azz_ retired punch bird.

The Derby Dog was one or the few that "DID" the mark.

john


----------



## Marty Bullington (Dec 15, 2005)

Ga Woodrow said:


> I will disagree with, you NEED 4 solid series. You can drag the first, have a good 2nd and 3rd, and are the only dog in the field to hit the 4th, you gonna win. I do believe all four should be judged Equally, but I rarely see that.


I agree with GA WOODROW. I have seen a lot of dogs smack the land series and my dog have a so-so land series and smack the water and make up tons of ground. If you watch enough derbies, you will see that a lot of those that crush the land drop like flies. Some will cheat, some will get out early, ect...IMHO generally all FT stakes are won or lost in the water!


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Ga Woodrow said:


> You can't win if you don't get to the fourth. I agree with Russ on seeing alot of semi retired guns. Seems to be getting more common. Keith I agree with you. I hope it never progresses to retired guns. I do not see the need for the natural progression. I have yet to see a derby where it was needed, and I have seen some monsters lately.


Proper use of wind, terrain, cover, distance, and bird placement shouldn't be substituted for with a retired gun in the Derby.



> I will disagree with, you NEED 4 solid series. You can drag the first, have a good 2nd and 3rd, and are the only dog in the field to hit the 4th, you gonna win. I do believe all four should be judged Equally, but I rarely see that.


The first series is "usually" the easiest. Any dog that "drags" it with the kind of Derby dogs that are running today will find it hard to win after four. 

A Derby is made up of 8 marks at a minimum, IMHO. Sure, there will be 7 bird Derbies when the first "setup" is a single and a double....but there shouldn't be more than one of those in a four series Derby, again IMHO. As the series progress, they should test the dog's marking abilities and courage/perseverance more with each series. They are (or should be, IMHO) judged "equally" among the dogs that run them. At the end, the dogs that have done the best job on all 8 birds with due consideration given for the "toughest" birds should be the highest placing dogs. That's why there are, or should be, 8 retrieves. Thorough testing of marking ability CANNOT be substituted for in the Derby...again, IMHO.



> Keith.....Looking forward to have Louie run under you at Middle TN.


I enjoy judging Quals and Derbies most of all, especially when there is a competitive field. The grounds at MTARC will hopefully be in good shape; they've got some of the best grounds in the country when they've been taken care of. Plenty of spring rain should give us some interesting water to work with.

kg


----------



## Ga Woodrow (Mar 4, 2006)

......................


----------



## Paula Richard (Jun 18, 2004)

K G said:


> The day I have to retire a gun in the Derby will be the day I no longer judge Derbies. IMHO, retired guns in the Derby are WRONG. Period. I'll throw three spread 90 degrees apart before I retire one.....and I really can't see myself in a situation where I'd throw three.....
> 
> kg





Goldenboy said:


> Haven't seen any actual retired guns in Derby but I have seen a couple where the seated gunners had a similar effect. I agree that retired marks are a no-no and unnecessary.



We ran our dog in a derby that had a retired gunner. It was a single but it messed up a lot of dogs.

Paula


----------



## Ga Woodrow (Mar 4, 2006)

.....................


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Whatever happened to raise your ire is a mystery to me....but...it's easy to take shots at somebody when you're anonymous.

kg


----------



## Ga Woodrow (Mar 4, 2006)

.....................


----------



## Ga Woodrow (Mar 4, 2006)

.....................


----------



## Ga Woodrow (Mar 4, 2006)

.........................


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Ouch. Hitting somewhere it hurts......reality...

/Paul


----------



## Guest (Mar 19, 2008)

This was a good thread.


----------



## Jason E. (Sep 9, 2004)

you can count on 2 down the shore about 80 percent of the time.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Ga Woodrow said:


> It just made me laugh bcause kg THOUHT HE WAS THE MAN. wHAT HE SAYS AND WHAT HE DOES ARE ........


Now you're quoting yourself, so you must be REALLY impressed with what you THINK you know.

If you were shooting the flyer, how do you know what happened in the discussions between my co-judge and me? How do you know what extenuating circumstances occurred to cause us to make the call we made? Did you ever ASK, or did you just decide to do like some of the other pontificators here and lay in wait for your opportunity to strike out? If you were shooting the flyer, then your comments are from what you THINK you know. 

If you think we made a mistake with our placements, that's certainly your prerogative. I personally believe that if there is an opportunity to give the benefit of the doubt to a dog, especially a young Derby dog, then it should be given. If you don't believe that, then you can invoke whatever standard you think you should follow when you judge.

You....DO....judge, don't you Mike? Or are you like every other Monday Morning Quarterback that thinks they know everything from 120 yds away? I just don't remember you being ANYWHERE NEAR the running line at that trial so that you could SEE the work from our vantage point. I also don't remember you being in any of the discussions about callbacks. If you want to engage in character assassination from a distance, feel free. You'll be in good company with a couple other people on this site that do it regularly.

And Mike....while you're promoting that masterful memory of yours....check the catalog from last year's CSRA trial....Mitch Patterson didn't _run_ a dog in the Derby.;-) 

4 consecutive posts in less than an hour last night, Mike....I suggest you find a new hobby, 'cause you're hangin' on WAY to tightly to this one.....I'm really amazed that if whatever you THINK happened bothered you that much, that you didn't confront me personally at the time. I guess it's just MUCH more fun to attempt to embarrass someone on the internet and not even know who the handler was with the dog you're talking about....

Nice try, though. At least one person besides you enjoyed it....but that's no surprise, either.;-)

kg


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Well, this is the first account that we've locked in quite a while.

Woodrow, you should still have PM capability. Buddy, we can't have that kind of language on RTF. Please see your PM and let's find a way for you to use RTF as intended.

Thanks,

Chris


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: - PRICELESS!!!!!!!

I checked this thread out this AM as the great one had posted - several times - so had to see what it was about. Pardon my intrusion.



K G said:


> I personally believe that if there is an opportunity to give the benefit of the doubt to a dog, especially a young Derby dog, then it should be given.


Does it make any difference who owns the dog??????



> You....DO....judge, don't you Mike? Or are you like every other Monday Morning Quarterback that thinks they know everything from 120 yds away? I just don't remember you being ANYWHERE NEAR the running line at that trial so that you could SEE the work from our vantage point. I also don't remember you being in any of the discussions about callbacks. If you want to engage in character assassination from a distance, feel free. You'll be in good company with a couple other people on this site that do it regularly.


How many Derby setups have you witnessed from the line - as a sole Owner-Handler?


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Let me make a suggestion to all of those on this site who see as their purpose in the life to slander and besmirch others......channel your energies toward the support of an honorable man and his wife in their time of need.

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=23912

Thanks.

kg


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Marvin, 

This is a thread about what to expect in a derby. Please take your ongoing battle with Keith private.

Thanks,

Chris


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

K G said:


> .You....DO....judge, don't you Mike? Or are you like every other Monday Morning Quarterback that thinks they know everything from 120 yds away? I just don't remember you being ANYWHERE NEAR the running line at that trial so that you could SEE the work from our vantage point. I also don't remember you being in any of the discussions about callbacks. If you want to engage in character assassination from a distance, feel free. You'll be in good company with a couple other people on this site that do it regularly. kg





ftrjuj said:


> How many Derby setups have you witnessed from the line - as a sole Owner-Handler?





Chris Atkinson said:


> Marvin,
> 
> This is a thread about what to expect in a derby. Please take your ongoing battle with Keith private
> 
> Chris


I understand - this is not about any battle with anyone - it was a question about his experience as a Derby Owner Handler so the people who read this thread could evaluate his qualifications to say what he was saying. I happen to know from his own posts & my database how experienced Keith is & remember several Derby threads where he was posting as an expert which is a long way from reality. 

May be Keith will now answer my original post?


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

Back to our regularly planned program.

As the owner of a recently aged out derby dog you will see all sorts of different marks from a 75 yard single to a 400 yard memory bird. As for placements in the trials I have run you will be called back with average 1st series work but have a hard time making up ground. The dogs are good enough to have 8 very good marks. Finishing may get you a greenie but at least when I ran the dog had better be on its A game to place.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Come on folks.

This was a straightforward request for information that is legitimate and helpful. Heck, I personally can learn from this one. But instead RTF'ers truly seeking valid info are having to wade through stuff that doesn't belong.

Marvin, I'm sorry sir, but I've asked you politely one time too many.

It need not be forever, but for now, you're "read-only".

You can still PM and you have one from me in your inbox.

Chris


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

A few thoughts on this matter if I may. 

To my way of thinking*.........If* Marvin's premise about the _hands on Derby experience_ of this poster is accurate, it is contextually valid on a "Derby" thread where advice is being given.

If it is not, a simple rebuttal with his pertinent Derby record would settle the matter in short order.

john


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

I've seen and run many a Derby.

I have yet to see a judge call a "no bird" on a bird that was still flapping and not stone dead. In fact, if I were running any stake, I would want the good fortune of a flapping flyer.

A Derby dog should certainly be able to handle a crippled flyer!

I'm off to meet the duck lady for this weekends Cajun Riviera trial. I'll check back tonight to see if anyone disagrees with Derby dogs being able to handle a flyer.


----------



## Andy Carlson (Jan 3, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> I'll check back tonight to see if anyone disagrees with Derby dogs being able to handle a flyer.


I don't care if it is a Derby dog or a Junior Hunter, if you are running a dog in a test or a trial it had better pick up a cripple or it has no business being run. 

Nothing makes my dogs happier than a flappin' cripple regards,

Andy


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

What you get in the derby is a function of:

- How many entries there are. Is the trial big? Or small?
- Who the judges are. Are the judges experienced? Or judges who meet the bare minimum of experience necessary?
- The quality of the grounds. Did the judges get good land and water? Or the leftover scraps?
- Time. Did the judges get sufficient time to run four hard series? (For example, did they have to wait for dogs from other stakes, such that they were pressed for time?)

I have run plenty of derbies. I have judged a few. 

Although I know others will disagree, I thought that the derbies were better overall when I first began nine years ago. Why? Because the trials were smaller, and the Open judges also judged the derby. Now, more often than not, because of trial size, most clubs get a third set of judges and - on average - that set is not as good as those who judge the Open.

When I judge what like to do is as follows:

1) Wide open land double. Dead bird, then flyer. No mark shorter than 150 yards. Why? Wide open, so no issue with switching or hunting an old fall. Long, because the young ones have been sitting in the truck for a longggggggg time, and I want them to stretch their legs. Let them get the run out. If possible, I want everyone to experience success in the first series.

2) More land. Wide open double. More factors. Why wide open? I don’t like to tempt the little ones to switch or hunt an old fall. Why more factors? Time to start creating separation. Why not water? Because time usually dictates that you can get two land series in on Saturday, but that you cannot get a land and water in on Saturday.

3) Water. Wide open. Straight entries. Medium distance. Some factors. No cheating birds. Why? I want to see how the little ones deal with water. But, again, I do not want to tempt them into sin. 

4) Water. Wide open. Maybe angle entries. Money bird, big swim. Many factors if possible. Why? I am now working to find a winner. I think that you do not find out how good a dog is unless you make them swim, and find out who has the heart to go the distance and who does not. One of my pet peeves is a judge who says "I don’t want to watch them swim." I don’t want to give a placement to a dog who isn’t willing to stay in the water and drive. 

I try not to use the same configuration twice. That is I would try to mix up the following:
- Two birds thrown to the left
- Two birds thrown to the right
- Two birds converging
- Two birds diverging

Obviously, in series 1-4, I would use wind, terrain, etc. to vary the difficulty of the test. I would not retire a bird, although the guns may be out of sight as the dogs make their way to the bird. I would not use a triple. Unless, I absolutely had no choice, I would not throw tight marks. I want to see the dogs’ marking ability, not their training.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

john fallon said:


> A few thoughts on this matter if I may.
> 
> To my way of thinking*.........If* Marvin's premise about the _hands on Derby experience_ of this poster is accurate, it is contextually valid on a "Derby" thread where advice is being given.
> 
> ...


I think you are taking the context out of context John. K G and Marvin have been trading this sort of unproductive stuff for ages. 

Please read the original poster's question. Clearly, if K G or anyone has knowledge of what happens in a typical derby, they have a place to answer. And others on this thread have an opportunity to take it in and learn, without a pissing match about who has more derby experience, who consulted who before a re-run, and other childish nonsense.

When one of the moderators on a board tries to restore order and asks an offender politely to stop doing something, it sure makes things flow nicely if the person cooperates, at least a little. 

When the offender essentially dares the person to do something about it, well, you can imagine the position it puts one in.

Marvin has been picking fights routinely with more than one person on RTF for a while and it is unacceptable in my opinion. Why? It violates "The Golden Rule".

John, please ask yourself, would you like to be Keith Griffith, and respond to Marvin's repeated jabs? Honestly. I doubt that you would.

I can handle it John. Here's a fairly recent example of something that I felt was similar to your post here: 

http://retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=20900&highlight=milner

John, I am like the rest of RTF's users. I, too, prefer to be treated with "The Golden Rule". I have sent you PM's on this in the past...for example the attack on Dennis Bath, which you may recall.

I'm going to ask you directly John. Please post with the Golden Rule in mind. Hopefully you can see this request as reasonable and polite.

Treat others in a manner which you would like to be treated. Expect the same from others on RTF. 

It will all be good.

Finally, I've offered to talk live with you in the past when these things come up. I will offer again. 217-454-0361 Chris Atkinson, Mt. Zion, IL. Call me when you like, or PM with your phone number. I think we could be famous friends.

Chris


----------



## Polock (Jan 6, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> What you get in the derby is a function of:
> 
> - How many entries there are. Is the trial big? Or small?
> - Who the judges are. Are the judges experienced? Or judges who meet the bare minimum of experience necessary?
> ...


Excellent post Ted, definitely helps keep the youngins playin' and makes the owner/handlers want to continue to play our sport........thanks for your contribution........well respected indeed...........;-)


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

Polock said:


> Excellent post Ted, definitely helps keep the youngins playin' and makes the owner/handlers want to continue to play our sport........thanks for your contribution........well respected indeed...........;-)


Respectfully, blah, blah, blah, Dan. 

Yep, keepin the "youngins playin" and owner/
handlers hap-hap-happy is what it's all about. I also want to submit to the RAC that they dispense with placements and hand out "participant" ribbons so that everyone leaves with something. 

Field Trials, at every level, were formed as a competition. The UKC has a perfectly lovely program to keep dogs "playin" and handlers happy.

The derbies that I have most enjoyed, as a participant and a spectator, are those that do test the training of the dogs, with the primary focus on their marking abilities. No retired guns, no triples, just concept-driven marking tests and rewards for dogs who run straight. I, too, like a straightforward opening set-up to give every dog a chance to compete for at least one series.

I train my dogs in the hope of one day being all-age competitiors. I look at the Derby as a stepping stone towards that goal and train them from a young age accordingly. Given the generally strong caliber of Derby dogs these days, our performance against them serves as a benchmark of our training and a motivation to do better. 

I believe that the vast majority of people who get involved with Field Trials do so because they are competitive people and they want to see where they, and their dogs, stack up.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Given the verbiage of the AKC Regs & Guidelines on Derby marks, how many *factors* requiring *trained responses* should be incorporated into a set of Derby marks.........and if they are there, how should they impact the scoring ???

Unadultrated Marking regards,

john


----------



## Labs Will-Do (Jan 31, 2007)

Thanks for the post that discussed what setups to expect and possible train for in derby. I've got a 13 month old that I am really enjoying and trying to train different from my hunt test dogs. I will attend the derby next Fri at Cooper Black in SC (spectator only) to again witness a test. As I stated earlier the honesty around water is of concern and I wouldn't want to enter a test until I was confident that the dog would not have a problem. I dont want to be in a situation in which I could not solve or correct and generate additional problems in the dogs work.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Goldenboy said:


> Yep, keepin the "youngins playin" and owner/
> handlers hap-hap-happy is what it's all about. I also want to submit to the RAC that they dispense with placements and hand out "participant" ribbons so that everyone leaves with something.
> 
> Field Trials, at every level, were formed as a competition. The UKC has a perfectly lovely program to keep dogs "playin" and handlers happy.


Mark 

You seem to believe that a judge in the derby has to "eliminate" dogs from the get go. I disagree. I think you can create plenty of separation in the first series with wide open marks. And I think from there on out if you make the tests increasingly difficult, by the end of the trial there is a clear cut winner without having to pencil whip the placements.

I think you can have plenty of competition for the old hands and still let the newbies play

But, that's just me

Ted


----------



## Marty Bullington (Dec 15, 2005)

Labs Will-Do said:


> Thanks for the post that discussed what setups to expect and possible train for in derby. I've got a 13 month old that I am really enjoying and trying to train different from my hunt test dogs. I will attend the derby next Fri at Cooper Black in SC (spectator only) to again witness a test. As I stated earlier the honesty around water is of concern and I wouldn't want to enter a test until I was confident that the dog would not have a problem. Idont want to be in a situation in which I could solve or correct and feel that this could generate additional problems in the dog.


I would plan to watch both water series. You will benefit greatly. Good luck to you!


----------



## Labs Will-Do (Jan 31, 2007)

Thanks Marty... I watched Palmetto spring test a couple weeks ago through 3rd series whihich put them into water but didn't see final series in water. I certainly can understand that each test could be totally different based on all factors that come into play. I'm just interested in getting a better handle on training setups.


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> Mark
> 
> You seem to believe that a judge in the derby has to "eliminate" dogs from the get go. I disagree. I think you can create plenty of separation in the first series with wide open marks. And I think from there on out if you make the tests increasingly difficult, by the end of the trial there is a clear cut winner without having to pencil whip the placements.
> 
> ...


Ted, 

I don't think that our ideal Derbies are all that disimilar. Mine might just be a little more on the meaty side than yours. Finding a balance is definitely an art form.

The best Derbies have judges who sincerely want and encourage the participants to do well, apply the rules evenly to all competitors, and who test the best qualities of the dogs.

At the end, there is a winner, some placers, and a bunch of losers. Hopefully, most leave satisfied or further motivated to succeed.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Goldenboy said:


> Respectfully, blah, blah, blah, Dan.
> 
> Yep, keepin the "youngins playin" and owner/
> handlers hap-hap-happy is what it's all about. I also want to submit to the RAC that they dispense with placements and hand out "participant" ribbons so that everyone leaves with something.
> ...


So in other words, "kill em all, let god sort them out" mentality. Sure beats judging dogs.

/Paul


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> So in other words, "kill em all, let god sort them out" mentality. Sure beats judging dogs.
> 
> /Paul


Ha ha Paul, you kill me!

I in no way advocated a slaughter. Some people enjoy challenges and rising to them, others are content achieving mediocrity. I like to be challenged and my psyche can handle the inevitable set-backs and disappointment. Obviously, I run Goldens!


----------



## DEN/TRU/CRU (May 29, 2007)

Ted, I Agree With You 100%. The Derby Is Supposed To Test The Marking Ability, Throw In Some Clear Cut Factors Where The Dog Has A Black And White Picture Of Whether Or Not To Take The Cover / Obstacle . Setting Up Cheating Marks Can Set A Young Dogs Training Backwards. 
I've Got A 1 Yr. Ylm And Will Be Running The Derby Sometime This Summer And Would Love To Run When Your Judging.

Dennis


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

DEN/TRU/CRU said:


> Ted, I Agree With You 100%. The Derby Is Supposed To Test The Marking Ability, Throw In Some Clear Cut Factors Where The Dog Has A Black And White Picture Of Whether Or Not To Take The Cover / Obstacle . Setting Up Cheating Marks Can Set A Young Dogs Training Backwards.
> I've Got A 1 Yr. Ylm And Will Be Running The Derby Sometime This Summer And Would Love To Run When Your Judging.
> Dennis


At what point do you gentlemen advocate decheating your pups?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Terry

For purposes of this thread, I am talking about competition, not training.

I don't like cheating marks in the minor, and for that matter, in the major stakes

I want to reward the dog who is seeking water, and is willing to drive through the big water to get a bird.


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

Well I was very surprised to see the amount of cheaty marks in Derbies. They were there to such a degree that I needed to stop running the for awhile and excellerate my decheating training. I don't have much of an opion as to whether or not cheaty mark should be in derby but they are. I do think they belong in stakes above derby as one of the factors for which a dog should be trained. I am coming over from the hunt test game where cheaty marks are not normally setup by good judges for Junior. But expect to see some in Senior and in Master about anything goes. My pup had both a JH and SH title before we went into derby but he was not prepared for the cheatiness we encountered.


----------



## Russell Archer (Jul 8, 2004)

I agree with a lot of what Ted said, with a couple notes.

First off let me say that the average derby that I and/or my dog has competed in, ranges from 25 to 65 dogs and usually over 1/2 of the entries are handeled/trained by Pro's. The majority of these dogs range from good to excellent derby dogs. I also think that it is critical as a judge to set up the first and even second series in a way that the new people in our sport are able to compete and enjoy the fruits of their labor. But, ofter the second series it is time to get serious. There is nothing worse than finishing a derby or any other stake and have 4 or 5 people thinking that they have won.

Cheating marks: I don't see a problem with using this in a series. Yes, you can argue that it is training and not marking but, you can also argue that it is a function desire and desire scores very high in my book.

Retired guns: To me, retired guns are the true definition of marking. Granted I would not have a gunner go behind a holding blind in a derby but, I would use the terrain in such a way that the gun(s) are not visible to the dog for the majority of the retrieve.

If the last series are not extreamly difficult then too much of the placements are determined by if a dog made 1 loop or 2.


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

Terry Thomas said:


> Well I was very surprised to see the amount of cheaty marks in Derbies. They were there to such a degree that I needed to stop running the for awhile and excellerate my decheating training. I don't have much of an opion as to whether or not cheaty mark should be in derby but they are. I do think they belong in stakes above derby as one of the factors for which a dog should be trained. I am coming over from the hunt test game where cheaty marks are not normally setup by good judges for Junior. But expect to see some in Senior and in Master about anything goes. My pup had both a JH and SH title before we went into derby but he was not prepared for the cheatiness we encountered.



I've avoided this thread other than reading, but Terry echoes my thoughts. The Derbies I ran very much favored the technically trained dogs. Let me clarify that by saying that there were absolutely some phenomenal marking dogs in those Derbies. Their training enhanced what they brought to the table, but they were clearly naturally talented dogs. But, the diamond in the rough dogs couldn't exist on raw talent alone. Perfect lines w/ hunts trumped a cheat w/ a front footed mark.

M


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

One of the criteria for judging is, from the rule book, "their abilities acquired through training", which takes many forms.

Terry asked an excellent question. Ted, since you chose to answer Terry's question, at what age, or stage of training, does your young dog pro de-cheat your dogs? 

And cheating marks occur, and are entirely appropriate, at all levels. Cheating cover, cheating diversions, cheating water. They provide a valuable tool in judging, and testing, dogs throroughly under the rules.


----------



## Goldenboy (Jun 16, 2004)

Lardy promotes early de-cheating around the time dogs start double-T. An amateur doesn't need a pro, or a pros grounds, to de-cheat a dog. Whose tag line is "train don't complain"?


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

Goldenboy said:


> Lardy promotes early de-cheating around the time dogs start double-T. An amateur doesn't need a pro, or a pros grounds, to de-cheat a dog. Whose tag line is "train don't complain"?


Well-sometimes you don't know what you don't know. Just spent 13 hours driving (each way) to find water I couldn't walk on so that I could remedy this very situation!



M


----------



## Labs Will-Do (Jan 31, 2007)

Terry...you brought up what I would be hesitant of regarding running a dog in the derby .... the angle entry and pull around water may be not handled correctly by the dog and I would be stuck with letting him get by with it.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I think you guys are making this way too complicated

The dividing line cannot be as black and white as you want to make it - or want me to make it .... between trained and untrained responses

I don't know of any dog that can win a derby without SOME training
Sit is a trained response. The return is a trained response. The drop is a trained response. The retrieve may or may not be a trained response. So obviously, it is a matter of degree.

A good mark is going to have factors in it - terrain, wind, cover, etc. Obviously, a winning dog is going to have to negotiate them. If you have those factors in a mark, training will have SOME impact. If you only had marks that had NO FACTORS in them, you would have no marks.

Are you going to say if a dog is decheated at 1 year, 1 1/2 year, 2 year - you pick the time, that makes a cheating mark ok? And if you are going to apply that standard, whose pro becomes the baseline? And even if you could establish a particular pro as the baseline ... aren't you assuming that all of his/her dogs are alike?

Look, when you judge, you can throw all the cheaty marks you want

I think you can do the job without them


----------



## Russell Archer (Jul 8, 2004)

Labs Will-Do said:


> Terry...you brought up what I would be hesitant of regarding running a dog in the derby .... the angle entry and pull around water may be not handled correctly by the dog and I would be stuck with letting him get by with it.




I have seen so many times......a angle entry where the dog will cheat and run the shore. The worse thing about it is that the handler does NOTHING. If you let a dog cheat in a test it will only get 10x worse. Blow that whistle...NO..cast into the water. True, it is an extreamly difficult thing to do and you just donated 65$ but, it will pay off in the long run.


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

Russell Archer said:


> I have seen so many times......a angle entry where the dog will cheat and run the shore. The worse thing about it is that the handler does NOTHING. If you let a dog cheat in a test it will only get 10x worse. Blow that whistle...NO..cast into the water. True, it is an extreamly difficult thing to do and you just donated 65$ but, it will pay off in the long run.


I definitly agree with this. When Metoo had only one more week of derby eligability and needed a third or better to make the derby list, I stopped him and called him back to the line for cheating a corner of water on the last series. We were doing really good in that test up till then.


----------



## Hambone (Mar 4, 2003)

I have to say that I like Ted's philosophy on this. I was new to the FT game last year and decided to test the waters with my pup. I learned a whole lot about what it would take to be competetive and that I needed to step up my training and my standards to do it. Letting the new dogs work through a series that is relatively simple to get started is great and probably does more for the inexperienced handlers than the dogs. If I had gone and washed out the first series of every test I'm not sure I would have gone back. I expected things to get tougher as we progressed. Even the simple tests eliminated a lot of dogs. By the third series of my first derby it was clear to me that I had not done enough de-cheating. The second derby - holy cow! Imagine a ditch, 10 feet wide, mark falls on the opposite side about 100 yards away. Dogs, to stay on line, had to enter the ditch about 10 yards in front of the line and swim up and across the ditch for 90 yards - 10 ft across the ditch in 90 yards - pretty steep angle! There are roads on both sides of the ditch! I only saw one dog stay in the water. Most ran the road to the gun station and squared the water. I spent a lot of time running lines up irrigation ditches in training after that one! The point is, I got to run my dog and usually made it to the third and sometimes fourth series which kept me motivated and working with my dog to correct the holes in my training plan.


----------



## Jim Pickering (Sep 17, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> What you get in the derby is a function of:
> 
> - How many entries there are. Is the trial big? Or small?
> - Who the judges are. Are the judges experienced? Or judges who meet the bare minimum of experience necessary?
> ...


Lightening may strike me, but I agree with Ted on this one.



Goldenboy said:


> Every kind of water cheating opportunity imaginable can appear in the Derby. Distance is irrelevant, but you'll get that, too. Long, hundred yard plus entries to small pieces of water, multiple re-entries, down the shore bank-runners, everything. I feel that a thoroughly de-cheated pup is essential to success. And yes, the top dogs consistently nail the hard marks.


Unfortunately Mark’s assessments is correct far too often, but this is not what a derby stake should be about. The rules call for derby dogs to be judged on their natural abilities which are Marking including memory of marks, Attention, Intelligence, Courage, Nose, Perseverance and Style.



> PART II — EVALUATION OF DOG WORK - Page 47
> “The Judges must judge the dogs for (a) their
> natural abilities, including their memory, intelligence,
> attention, nose, courage, perseverance and
> ...


Certainly abilities acquired through training cannot be totally ignored given that a derby dog should be reasonably steady on line and must deliver to hand. The more advanced concepts should IMHO be avoided to the extent possible. These concepts including overly cheaty water marks, extremely tight marks, and retired guns are more a function of abilities acquired through training. 

That said, the judges are above all responsible for achieving sufficient separation to rank the best five dogs on that weekend. Because the derby dogs today are so talented and invariability the derby judges are given the worst of the grounds and water the judges often have no choice but to resort to testing abilities acquired through training. However, in some cases the advanced concept derby tests are a function of inexperienced judges paroting a lack of understanding of the derby stake they have seen previously.

PS I might ad that the derby stake is IMO the most difficult to judge in accordance with the rules, simply because abilities acquired through training should NOT be a part of the testing.


----------



## Pheasanttomeetyou (Jan 31, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> Are you going to say if a dog is decheated at 1 year, 1 1/2 year, 2 year - you pick the time, that makes a cheating mark ok? And if you are going to apply that standard, whose pro becomes the baseline? And even if you could establish a particular pro as the baseline ... aren't you assuming that all of his/her dogs are alike?


Cheaty marks or gunners sitting in the shade aside, Mike Lardy stated in his Marking series that he runs derby dogs at an older age, so they have time to train them.

Like it or not, Derby no longer gages raw marking abilities, but rather how well the dog is trained on technical concepts. A poor marker will not do well in Derby. But an under trained dog will not do well either- even if he/she has great, natural marking abilities.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Pheasanttomeetyou said:


> Cheaty marks or gunners sitting in the shade aside, Mike Lardy stated in his Marking series that he runs derby dogs at an older age, so they have time to train them.
> 
> Like it or not, Derby no longer gages raw marking abilities, but rather how well the dog is trained on technical concepts. A poor marker will not do well in Derby. But an under trained dog will not do well either- even if he/she has great, natural marking abilities.


You are mixing apples and oranges.

Lardy is looking to the All Age. Mike doesn't run his dogs in the Derby until they have the skills to run the Qual. Consequently, what Mike says or does in his TRAINING program is irrelevant to what should be done in COMPETITION.

Yes, the well trained dogs do better at the derby. Part of this is because the judges set up TRAINING tests (can you say two down the shore) as opposed to MARKING tests. (This is a problem in the All Age Stakes as well)

My thoughts are based on what I think should be, not what I observe them to be. I think we should have MARKING tests in the derby, all too often I think we have TRAINING tests in the derby. And sometimes we have neither - all we have is a mismash. It is frustrating to me.


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> You are mixing apples and oranges.
> 
> Lardy is looking to the All Age. Mike doesn't run his dogs in the Derby until they have the skills to run the Qual. Consequently, what Mike says or does in his TRAINING program is irrelevant to what should be done in COMPETITION.
> 
> ...


Ted or Ed A. , do either of you find that judging todays Derbies with entries ranging from 15-25 on a week in week out basis is easier or tougher than years past when they were in the 30-40 dog range?
Thanks


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Better question for Ed than me.

I have neither competed in nor judged a 30+ dog derby

Ted


----------



## Pheasanttomeetyou (Jan 31, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> You are mixing apples and oranges.
> 
> Lardy is looking to the All Age. Mike doesn't run his dogs in the Derby until they have the skills to run the Qual. Consequently, what Mike says or does in his TRAINING program is irrelevant to what should be done in COMPETITION.
> 
> ...


Well, I agree with you --- but I don't agree with you.

*What should/can be done in competition?* My understanding of Derby is that it was originally suppose to measure young dogs' natural marking abilities. But the Derbys have gradually moved away from testing marking to testing levels of training. 

The horses of left the barn - the genie is out of the bottle. WHAT CAN YOU/WE DO ABOUT THIS? PRACITCALLY SPEAKING! HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE EVEN INTERESTED IN RETURNING THE DERBY TO ITS ORIGINAL ROOTS?

*Timing the Entry.* Should not most of us look to the All Age? What's wrong with waiting till your dog is ready for the next level of competition and has gained a certain level of maturity before entering Derby or Qual? And if an increasing number of amateur handlers and Pros follow this practice, won't this affect the judges' test designs and scoring? 

Perhaps I'm not mixing apples and oranges as much as chickens and eggs with horses and carts.


----------



## Juli H (Aug 27, 2007)

maybe the derby age limit should be shortened to 18 months......still about marking....less about training (trained responses).

I have never run a derby - just watched a couple...that is it...so don't bite my head off...PLEASE.;-)

Juli


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

We have run our share of Derbies and have judged same . Examples that I have experienced, much depends on the age, caliber of what is entered. Many judges take into account ,if you have a Derby with many older dogs many who are pointed, then the difficulty of the tests are set up accordingly. A 20 to 24 month old Derby dog with "solid water training" , is much different then a 16 month old "marking machine" on land but still cheaty in the water. Examples from past years on how the Derby changes. 

Example #1 had a Derby dog while Lottie was running , enteries were small at the time, but, if you had 10 or 15 dog enteries there might be 100 or more points running among them. (Candlewoods Tanks alot- Lottie) We had only 16 points for the Derby List that year and the last six points were fourth places! If you hooked a gun then it was green or 4ths. 

Example# 2 In one era of Derbies, was running a different Derby dog, for water they would use the two water marks of the Open as the last series in the Derby! The opens were finished on late Saturday mostly (smaller enteries). Since the Derby started on Saturday the water marks were run on Sunday. This wasn't a hundred years ago either, last 15 or so.

Example #3 Another era older Derby dogs were being run in the Qual too. The same judges were used for the Qual and the Derby (some still do I am judging one this Spring) You have to get it over. Derby starts on Saturday AFTER the qual on Friday. Hang on to your hats with these, they will be mini double all-age tests with very high training standards, especially in the Derby. Object here make Derby List and be Qual all-age while still in the Derby. Had a few Derby dogs in this era. 

Example #3 Current you can have all of the above. Many Derbies start on Friday and are in concert with the Open (mostly Pros run the Derby in the Midwest and upper midwest).
Many of the older Derby dogs are months away from the all-age. The Quals are on Saturdays they are much larger stakes and have a larger number of Hunt Test dogs entered. Therefore the Derby can be a little of everything as far as water is concerned.
Cheaty water marks with long enteries, guns that are retired from the line anyway( if guns sit down dogs can't see them from the line)

The above have been my experiences over the past 25 years or so of having Derby List dogs. I am sure others from other areas of the country can relate thier own experiences.

The bottom line in my opinion, you should train for the all-age and run the derbies as you see fit, if line manner issues, cheating etc, become issues then it should be the trainer/owners responsibilty to fix the trainablity issues before running any additional derbies!!


----------



## Pheasanttomeetyou (Jan 31, 2004)

Criquetpas said:


> The bottom line in my opinion, you should train for the all-age and run the derbies as you see fit, if line manner issues, cheating etc, become issues then it should be the trainer/owners responsibilty to fix the trainablity issues before running any additional derbies!!


Ciquetpas, that is exactly my way of thinking.

If I'm hearing Ted correctly, he thinks the derby should be "true" to its original intentions, regardless of the training of the entries. The judges should design tests that evaluate natual marking abilities and score accordingly. Handlers could exhibit the dogs' training status in QAA and All-age.

Is Ted right? If yes, how can his ideas be realized?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Don’t put words in my mouth

As judge, you do what you need to do in order to complete the trial on time. So, I do not believe that there can be hard and fast rules cast in stone about how the derby should be run. 

However, I believe that given:
- Sufficient time
- Good terrain
- An appropriate number of entries

Judges can set tests that sufficiently separate the field without pencil whipping the dogs - and resorting to technical tests.

I have competed in derbies where time, terrain, and entries were in judges’ favor, and they chose to run technical tests. I think that is a mistake.

However, I believe that the same thing is true in the All Age Stakes. 

Eight years ago, where the grounds were good, you were likely to see a wide open triple, with two well placed retired birds. Now, the judges are more apt to set up a concept, than to set their birds in accordance with the grounds. Today, you are more apt to see a tight, technical test, and perhaps even a quad with a momma/poppa arrangement. 

Some of the change is attributable to larger trials and the pressure that they put on judges. 

I think more of the change is attributable to a change in the judges. More and more of the folks who trained their own dogs are retiring from judging. Replacing them are people who have pros train their dogs. The latter are more likely to set training set ups than competition set ups at a field trial. I think that this is true in the derby ... and this is true in the All Age Stakes.

In the same vein, I see marks being judged more for the tightness of the line, than the quality of the mark. In my opinion, it is a function of the amateur whose dog is pro trained have more of a training mindset than a competition mindset. 


I think a concerted effort should be made to change this, but see no momentum to do so.


----------



## Pheasanttomeetyou (Jan 31, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> I think more of the change is attributable to a change in the judges. More and more of the folks who trained their own dogs are retiring from judging. Replacing them are people who have pros train their dogs. The latter are more likely to set training set ups than competition set ups at a field trial. I think that this is true in the derby ... and this is true in the All Age Stakes.
> 
> In the same vein, I see marks being judged more for the tightness of the line, than the quality of the mark. In my opinion, it is a function of the amateur whose dog is pro trained have more of a training mindset than a competition mindset.
> 
> I think a concerted effort should be made to change this, but see no momentum to do so.


I agree completely. The same thing is happening at hunt tests.


----------



## Tom H. (May 17, 2005)

Here is a question for you FTer's . How many derby dogs would have problems with running an inline double , say with the memory bird at 100 yrds and the go bird at 25 yrds ? 

Do you think that the short bird would really screw with the young dogs ?
________
U Transmission


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

And exactly why would you want to throw a 25 yard bird whose only purpose would be to induce a break or disrupt concentration on the long bird?


----------



## Patrick Johndrow (Jan 19, 2003)

Tom H. said:


> Here is a question for you FTer's . How many derby dogs would have problems with running an inline double , say with the memory bird at 100 yrds and the go bird at 25 yrds ?
> 
> Do you think that the short bird would really screw with the young dogs ?


Do you run a lot of HRC test? I know those guys LOVE breaking birds


----------



## Tom H. (May 17, 2005)

I run some hrc stuff , not a lot anymore . I just thought I'd ask and see what the responses would be . I figure a judge could run a set up like this and get some answers really quick . 

I would also use that breaking bird to test the dogs memory of the long mark -
________
MARIJUANA TEST


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Tom H. said:


> I run some hrc stuff , not a lot anymore . I just thought I'd ask and see what the responses would be . I figure a judge could run a set up like this and get some answers really quick .
> 
> I would also use that breaking bird to test the dogs memory of the long mark -


Not anything I would choose to do


----------



## jeff t. (Jul 24, 2003)

Tom H. said:


> Here is a question for you FTer's . How many derby dogs would have problems with running an inline double , say with the memory bird at 100 yrds and the go bird at 25 yrds ?


I wouldn't do it.

The derby dogs that could survive a 25 yd go bird flyer without breaking are likely to lack the style I want to look at for 3 more series.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

He's not looking for style

He's looking for answers

But for what questions?


----------



## Kris Hunt (Feb 25, 2005)

Oh I just love this same old debate of 'field trial dogs can't run hunt tests' and vice verse. Nonsense. A 25 yard breaking bird might surpise a few derby dogs, but not likely to mess with their mind so badly they can't finish the 100 yard mark. The only difference I see between hunting tests and field trials is the distance the dogs routinely run and there are some very subtle differences in what they train for. Both my All Age qualified dogs are MH titled and I didn't change up a thing in their training, one dog got his MH and QAA within a month of each other. I think the other dog got his MH in the spring and 2 months later won an Amateur. I may have added a few more diversion shots and duck calls in preparation for a hunt test, but otherwise the training has been the same. I find it quite interesting that when I show up at a hunt test I hear people chattering 'oh, that is a field trial dog', like that has any significant meaning.

Now that I'm training professionally (which I'd like to be out training right now, but having big Easter dinner) I have 3 dogs coming in for training that want to run both hunt tests and field trials, those dogs are going to be trained to bring out the best in that dog, if they've got what it takes to be an FC that's our goal. I'm not concerned that when I run a derby that the dogs won't run a 400 yard mark and I'm not concerned that when I run a hunt test they are going to panic when they see a 25 yard mark. I'm focusing on training them to do whatever is asked, whether it is a Junior or an Open.

Off the soapbox and back to preparing the feast

HAPPY EASTER EVERYONE

Kris


----------



## Patrick Johndrow (Jan 19, 2003)

Kris Hunt said:


> I'm not concerned that when I run a derby that the dogs won't run a 400 yard mark and I'm not concerned that when I run a hunt test they are going to panic when they see a 25 yard mark. I'm focusing on training them to do whatever is asked, whether it is a Junior or an Open.
> 
> Kris





My question about running HRC was one on curiosity more than anything. People who come through the HRC program see a lot of “breaking bird” and therefore are inclined to use them in other venues. But if I was training dogs professionally (which I would NEVER do and Lord bless the person that deals with doggie clients) I would train them for the venue they are running.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Kris Hunt said:


> Oh I just love this same old debate of 'field trial dogs can't run hunt tests' and vice verse. Nonsense. A 25 yard breaking bird might surpise a few derby dogs, but not likely to mess with their mind so badly they can't finish the 100 yard mark. The only difference I see between hunting tests and field trials is the distance the dogs routinely run and there are some very subtle differences in what they train for. Both my All Age qualified dogs are MH titled and I didn't change up a thing in their training, one dog got his MH and QAA within a month of each other. I think the other dog got his MH in the spring and 2 months later won an Amateur. I may have added a few more diversion shots and duck calls in preparation for a hunt test, but otherwise the training has been the same. I find it quite interesting that when I show up at a hunt test I hear people chattering 'oh, that is a field trial dog', like that has any significant meaning.


Kris

Who is debating FT v HT?

But, let me ask you this
- Are you saying that you would throw a 25 yard mark in the derby as part of a double?
- If so, what do you believe that 25 yard mark does other than induce dogs to break?

Ted


----------



## Tom H. (May 17, 2005)

Ted - 

I'm not looking for anything in reality , just thought I'd throw the question out there .
________
VAPORIZER INSTRUCTIONS


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Tom

When I judge or when I compete, I want each mark to test the dog's marking ability.

There are always exceptions, but I would not throw a bird whose purpose was to cause a dog to break. Similarly, I do not like throwing birds whose purpose is to wipeout the memory of another bird. In the ideal world, I am looking for two birds (double) or three (triple) which can stand on their own merits

But, that's just me

Ted


----------



## Tom H. (May 17, 2005)

I'm just trying to learn Ted -
________
Buy solo vaporizer


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Tom H. said:


> I run some hrc stuff , not a lot anymore . I just thought I'd ask and see what the responses would be . I figure a judge could run a set up like this and get some answers really quick.


The converse of that is....if you ask the wrong questions, you'll invariably get the wrong answers.

The inline 100 yd/25 yd set up you described is contrary to what the intent should be in testing Derby dogs.

IMHO, of course....;-)

kg


----------



## Patrick Johndrow (Jan 19, 2003)

Tom H. said:


> I'm just trying to learn Ted -


Hey it was obvious to me your experience had been HRC where breaking birds and wipeout birds are a standard. If you don’t ask the question you will more than likely find out the hard way. Field Trials are just another dog game with a little different spin on it.


----------



## Tom H. (May 17, 2005)

What if you took the inline out of it and threw the 25 yrd mark off to the side so there was a lot of seperation . Even if it is a breaking bird the dog still has to mark it . And if the dog can mark at 300- 400 yrds , it should be able to pick up an easy 25 yrd mark .
________
Weed vaporizers


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Tom

If you wanted to see if a dog could mark, why wouldn't you do everything in your power to let it see ... and concentrate on the mark

For example

- Make sure that the guns are visible
- Make sure that the birds are visible
- Eliminate clutter that would distract a dog (noisy background, people walking to and fro in the field)
- Call for the birds in a deliberate fashion

In short, give the dog every chance to see the birds.

In that vein, I would not throw a breaking or wipe out bird

Because I want to see them mark

Ted


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Quote:

Tom

If you wanted to see if a dog could mark, why wouldn't you do everything in your power to let it see ... and concentrate on the mark

For example

- Make sure that the guns are visible
- Make sure that the birds are visible
- Eliminate clutter that would distract a dog (noisy background, people walking to and fro in the field)
- Call for the birds in a deliberate fashion

In short, give the dog every chance to see the birds.

In that vein, I would not throw a breaking or wipe out bird

Because I want to see them mark


I wish every HT judge would read this sugestion, ad follow it to the letter!!!

I LOVE running hrc tests!

But what I find troubling is trying to figure out what Judges are trying to test.

I believe the intent for most all veneues is to test the MARKING abiity of dogs! All this other trickery stuff thrown in,, in MY OPNION ,,is just pure ego.

Well put TED!!

(like you need compliments from the Gooser)


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Tom H. said:


> What if you took the inline out of it and threw the 25 yrd mark off to the side so there was a lot of seperation . Even if it is a breaking bird the dog still has to mark it . And if the dog can mark at 300- 400 yrds , it should be able to pick up an easy 25 yrd mark .


Why throw an easy mark? It is a waste of a bird. 

Why wouldn't you want to throw a more meaningful mark?


----------



## Tom H. (May 17, 2005)

Can ya tell I don't run many FT's Ted 
________
Umw Toyota Motor (Malaysia) History


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Tom

You don't have to run field trials to have an idea what you want to do, if you want to see if the dogs can mark.

Just put two nice birds out in the field and see what they can do

Ted


----------



## Kris Hunt (Feb 25, 2005)

Ted Shih said:


> Kris
> 
> Who is debating FT v HT?
> 
> ...


It just sounded like it was going to be a debate  and I was bored 

I would not set up a 25 yard breaking bird in a trial. What I was trying to make a point of is that if my dogs see one at a trial, I hope that my training has prepared them for it. The same as when I go from a hunting test to a field trial, the dogs see the 400 yard marks and if I did my job, that dog is prepared to run it. I don't train the field trial dogs any differently than the hunt tests dogs, or the gundogs for that matter, at least not the foundation work, I need the same tools to advance the dog no matter what venue they are going to run.

I agree that ever mark should have substance to, every mark should have a meaning.

Kris


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Tom H. said:


> What if you took the inline out of it and threw the 25 yrd mark off to the side so there was a lot of seperation . Even if it is a breaking bird the dog still has to mark it . And if the dog can mark at 300- 400 yrds , it should be able to pick up an easy 25 yrd mark .


What Ted said.

Earlier in this thread Ted posted the "basics" about derby setups relative to which direction you throw the birds. Those are the four variations that are used, sometimes all four, sometimes not....but a liberal dose of _reasonable_ cover, proper use of terrain, preferably downwind birds, and good bird placement (the four configurations properly separated) make for a derby that will find a winner and three places after 4 series..........._usually_!!! ;-)

Saw a 7 series Derby ONCE regards, 

kg


----------



## Tom H. (May 17, 2005)

I agree with you guys and gals are saying . It was a hypothetical question . 

Off to take care of sick kids regards -
________
Mexico city hotel


----------



## HuntsmanTollers (Feb 20, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Why throw an easy mark? It is a waste of a bird.
> 
> Why wouldn't you want to throw a more meaningful mark?


I know almost everyone on this list has more experience and knowledge than me but having a 25-40yd memory bird after a dog has just run a long mark will really test a dogs marking abilities. Just wait and see how many dogs blow by the "EASY MARK" and miss it.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Are throwing the bird because dogs will fail it?
Or because it is a good mark?

If the former, go ahead
If the latter, I think not

No one so far has persuaded me that they are throwing this mark for any reason other than to get the dogs


----------



## krakadawn (Jan 8, 2006)

HuntsmanTollers said:


> I know almost everyone on this list has more experience and knowledge than me but having a 25-40yd memory bird after a dog has just run a long mark will really test a dogs marking abilities. Just wait and see how many dogs blow by the "EASY MARK" and miss it.


Your reference to completing a short mark after picking up a long bird will 'really' test a dogs marking abilities is lacking in understanding. This type of mark(could be longer than your reference of 25-40 but significantly shorter than the long mark) is referred to as a check down bird.To train for these requires the development of communication between you and the dog regarding the nature of the retrieve.
So a question for you-would you treat the send as you would for any other retrieve? Would it be quiet or louder?Would you cue your dog so that he understands it is short? Would you use your hand on the send? These questions will help you understand the complexity of these short birds and yes a significant amount of training is required if your dog is to perform these on a regular basis.
I would be extremely disappointed to see a check down bird in the derby for this goes much further than 'natural marking' abilities.

I have read this thread from the start. If more people were on the same page as Ted S. we might avoid some of the current problems faced in the Derby or Junior as we call it in Canada-he has given some excellent advice.
Let me describe the opening Derby series in a recent US trial I attended.Dog positioned somewhat on the backside of a bump.Flyer is about 175 yds. thrown right to left-there are 3 people at this station. The memory bird is about 300(give or take)-it is thrown right to left in a pattern commonly referred to as 'hip-pocket'. The line to the memory bird backsides the flyer guns by about 25 feet. It gets more complicated as the line to both birds is down and across a deep ditch(4-5 ft deep and about 30 ft. across) Ditch has almost swimming water in it. The line to both birds requires an ANGLE in and an ANGLE out. The dog loose sight each time of both gunning stations while traversing the ditch.Made further difficult as memory bird has one gunner only and is sitting down.
What are we testing here?

Personally I rarely run my young dogs in Derbies but that's me.I'd rather wait until I have them well schooled and not expose them to this type of series.

From reading Ted's responses I'm sure this does not reflect the approach he would suggest become more common in today's Derby.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

HuntsmanTollers said:


> I know almost everyone on this list has more experience and knowledge than me but having a 25-40yd memory bird after a dog has just run a long mark will really test a dogs marking abilities. Just wait and see how many dogs blow by the "EASY MARK" and miss it.


I agree with Ted, don't like this test much either, and especially hate short flyers in minor stakes, but if you think derby dogs cannot remember a 25-40 length memory bird, I think you are wrong. A couple of weeks ago there was a bird this short, retired, in the Qual, dogs had no problems.


----------



## Wade Thurman (Jul 4, 2005)

That short flyer was more the norm more than not 20 years ago in the derby stake but with everything times change. I think years ago there was more of a consistent thought to setting up tests closer to those you would find in a hunting situation.

Ted, how do you feel about wide out birds in the AA stakes?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Wade said:


> That short flyer was more the norm more than not 20 years ago in the derby stake but with everything times change. I think years ago there was more of a consistent thought to setting up tests closer to those you would find in a hunting situation.
> 
> Ted, how do you feel about wide out birds in the AA stakes?


 
I don't like either wipe out or breaking birds. Have not thrown either when I have judged, but there is a first time for everything, I suppose


----------



## JeffLusk (Oct 23, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> Are throwing the bird because dogs will fail it?
> Or because it is a good mark?
> 
> If the former, go ahead
> ...


Not trying to debate, but whats the difference from throwing a short mark to get the dogs to blow by it, or mark at 400 yards with a small puddle to get the dogs to cheat the water and fail the mark??


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

lillusk3 said:


> Not trying to debate, but whats the difference from throwing a short mark to get the dogs to blow by it, or mark at 400 yards with a small puddle to get the dogs to cheat the water and fail the mark??


Not trying to debate??????????

Who said anything about a 400 yard mark in the derby?
And who said if you cheated the water you failed?


----------



## JeffLusk (Oct 23, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> Not trying to debate??????????
> 
> Who said anything about a 400 yard mark in the derby?
> And who said if you cheated the water you failed?


My fault. 250 yard mark, and if they cheat the water it can throw them off the line and get lost from the bird. What's the difference, other than distance. Both can be difficult and the short bird challenges another factor.

Don't get me wrong I think the marks should be longer in a field trial and should test tougher marking. So I do agree with you, But a little spin would make it difficult to some dogs that are use to running 2-300 yards.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

Wade said:


> That short flyer was more the norm more than not 20 years ago in the derby stake but with everything times change. I think years ago there was more of a consistent thought to setting up tests closer to those you would find in a hunting situation.
> 
> Ted, how do you feel about wide out birds in the AA stakes?


I don't like wipe out birds either, probably because my dogs are terrible at them, but I do think they are legitimate in an AA stake. But please, there must be something else judges can do besides sticking a flyer in the face of young dogs. Also a dog that can navigate an obstacle at 400 yds and still know where the bird is has a good mark in my book.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I have never said that either a wipe out or breaker is not legitimate. I don't like them, and typically, I think you can do better as a judge. Just my preference. 

As for obstacles, in the derby, I don't like little slivers of cover or water in the path, I prefer that the obstacles be more substantial. That is, I want the choices to be more black and white for the youngsters.

But, again, that's just me.


----------



## JeffLusk (Oct 23, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> I have never said that either a wipe out or breaker is not legitimate. I don't like them, and typically, I think you can do better as a judge. Just my preference.
> 
> As for obstacles, in the derby, I don't like little slivers of cover or water in the path, I prefer that the obstacles be more substantial. That is, I want the choices to be more black and white for the youngsters.
> 
> But, again, that's just me.


sounds reasonable. afterall they are still puppies


----------



## HuntsmanTollers (Feb 20, 2003)

Ted,

Thank you very much for clearly explaining your reasoning and position on this subject. It is nice to hear explanations on why people use or avoid particular setups. Thank you for explaining it to me.

Matt


----------

