# Entering a Master test is more of a nightmare than ever.



## Don Smith (Mar 23, 2004)

As many know, over the last few years, it's generally been difficult to enter a dog in Master. Usually, if you weren't on the computer at 7 PM Central, you'd end up on the waitlist. Things got a little tougher when the "Worker Code" system began, giving those who could volunteer to work the event a code number so they could enter a day early. I've never had a problem with that although I'm usually not able to take advantage of it because I usually have dogs in every stake. I also don't have people working for me who I can "volunteer" to work in order for me to get worker codes. At some point in the last few years, EE started a "Captcha" system in an effort, as I understand, to defeat people from using a robot to enter virtually instantaneously as soon as entries open to everyone. In the past, I generally haven't had a problem entering one or two dogs in Master. Occasionally, I'd end up with a low position on the wait list, but I'd always get in. Recently, the 25/35% amateur set aside (https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn-origin...1/RHT-Reduction-of-Mileage.Amat-Set-Aside.pdf) has kicked in and for many, including me, entering has become impossible. The last 3 Wednesdays I've tried to enter 3 tests. I refresh the computer screen at precisely 7 PM Central to eliminate the worker code boxes so I can enter. Even though it's taken me less than one minute to enter every time, I ended up 12 on the waitlist in the first, 9 on the wait list in the second. In the second test, I've now dropped to #5, so I may get in before closing next Monday. Last night, I got to the third screen in less than 20 seconds. I saw that I was only going to be charged $10 and that I would be 22 on the waitlist. At that point, I just backed out of the system. There is no way that 22 dogs will be scratched before closing. It would have been just another waste of $10. In those same three test, some pros got multiple dogs entered. One was able to enter 14 in the first of those tests, 8 in the second and 15 in the third. If we're all using the same system, I fail to see how that's possible. In one of those tests. there were 26 dogs entered early with worker codes. That's fine, but a few entered 2 dogs with worker codes and 1 entered 3 - and those people don't have people to volunteer for them. If a worker code is for volunteering to work, I fail to see how anyone can work 3 jobs.

Requalifying a dog every year for Master National and earning a Master Hunter 75 or whatever is fine, but I believe that the primary purpose should be to Master title a dog. One fix would be to eliminate the requirement to requalify for Master National every year. HRCH dogs are not required to requalify every year for the International Grand. Regardless, we'll never see that happen. One reasonable fix, however, would be to set aside a percentage of the slots for dogs that have not yet titled. It seems to me that an untitled set aside is a reasonable solution -- and, of course, to make sure that we're all entering on the same playing field.

OK, rant over.


----------



## Garza7585 (Apr 9, 2020)

I'd say the main reason I will not run Master after we title is the entries. I've been able to get into most of the ones I tried, but I have to be ready to go constantly refreshing at 7:59 EST and have the fastest fingers ever to get my entry in. Many times i've entered and been really close to the wait list. And i've been on the waitlist a couple times after entering in less than 1:30.

It blows my mind how I can barely get in one dog, but others can get 10-15 in. 

I really enjoy playing the Master game, it's been fun and i've met some great people but i'll probably take a step back after we title.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

The answer to high demand is to increase the supply. In this case, my guess is, it will happen slowly if at all.
In the mean time there are field trial Q's every weekend with unlimited entry.


----------



## careljo (Sep 15, 2014)

drunkenpoacher said:


> The answer to high demand is to increase the supply. In this case, my guess is, it will happen slowly if at all.
> In the mean time there are field trial Q's every weekend with unlimited entry.


Some of us have a breed that is not eligible for field trials unfortunately. The hunt test game is our only option.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

HRC is becoming difficult as well. NAHRA - crazily enough - does not seem to be catching the 'overflow'. It should, but I would guess most people simply don't want to train for steady to flush/shot/fall and the trail.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

Try giving up a weekend to judge and then repeatedly getting waitlisted. Then listen to the same handlers that get 10+ dogs into every test you were trying to enter rant and rave about the test you set up. It is enough to make you put your judges bag in the closet and let it rot!


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

fishduck said:


> Try giving up a weekend to judge and then repeatedly getting waitlisted. Then listen to the same handlers that get 10+ dogs into every test you were trying to enter rant and rave about the test you set up.


And that comes after seminars, tests, apprenticing, judging JH&SH tests and running JH&SH tests just to prove you are worthy to set up a basic triple and a few short blinds for a MH test. 
I am amazed that there are any HT judges.


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

This evidently has not been an issue in tests in my area.

From Entry Express this morning (May 27th) there are still 16 openings in Master 

Entries open: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 8:00:00 PM CT 
Workers/Amateur Set Aside open: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:00:00 PM CT 

Entries Close: Monday, May 31, 2021 11:59:59 PM CT


----------



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

Getting in either Finished or Master is a crapshoot for sure. The one thing i dont get is why folks dont move on to the Qs after several master passes. You can always get in, yes they are harder, but at some point JR and SR were harder too. You definitely have to check your ego in FT competition because its not a ribbon giving arena, but also much more rewarding! I only have one ribbon displayed in my office and its a 3rd in a Q.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Gregg0211 said:


> The one thing i dont get is why folks dont move on to the Qs after several master passes.


We've got a pot stirrer here folks.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Gregg0211 said:


> The one thing i dont get is why folks dont move on to the Qs after several master passes.


Because their pro trainer does not run qualifying stakes, most likely.


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

The only way to fix this is for EE to change the program so that once a entry is accepted, a timer kicks in and won't let the user enter another dog for say 30 seconds. That could be done but watch the screaming take place.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Eric Johnson said:


> The only way to fix this is for EE to change the program so that once a entry is accepted, a timer kicks in and won't let the user enter another dog for say 30 seconds. That could be done but watch the screaming take place.


That is one option, and yes, there would be tears.

A better option would be if more people trained and handled there own dogs.
There is a reason that there aren't amateur stakes in hunt tests


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

DP - The timer approach is something that could be implemented immediately. Yours, while admirable, would take years.


----------



## Gregg0211 (Feb 11, 2015)

drunkenpoacher said:


> We've got a pot stirrer here folks.


Not really, just me personally, Id rather try to move on and test me and my dogs. Actually I love the competition. I realize most folks done have the time or grounds to train for bigger stuff, but some do...


----------



## Don Smith (Mar 23, 2004)

drunkenpoacher said:


> That is one option, and yes, there would be tears.
> 
> A better option would be if more people trained and handled there own dogs.
> There is a reason that there aren't amateur stakes in hunt tests


True, but there is now a mandatory 25-35% set aside for amateurs which exacerbates the problem. I like the timer option. I've run a few qualifying stakes, but I've got clients who want me to run hunt tests. This was a topic of discussion this last weekend at the test I was at. There are some who insist that the only way some pros are getting a bunch of dogs in while others can't get one is they're hiring someone who has a service which can enter robotically and defeat the CAPTCHA system. I don't know, but it can't be luck, not when I'll be 22 on the waitlist in 20 seconds.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

drunkenpoacher said:


> We've got a pot stirrer here folks.




Oh I am tempted but dont have time right now, maybe later. This is a real sore spot for me and the main reason I despise hunt tests now days


----------



## kbuckley1 (Aug 28, 2012)

As a hunt test judge that is giving up at least 3 weekends this summer to judge, and has a Master level dog ready to roll, it is frustrating to say the least to not be able to get into tests. I am not always able to sit at my computer at the time the test opens. The test I was going to enter last week ( although I areas knew would be a futile attempt ) was full with 31 on the waitlist within minutes after opening. 
1) Workers codes are somewhat of a joke. Many that ask for them don't really work. They say they will but want the easier less demanding jobs. Most will not load, or are not physically able to load, a winger. Many HT chairs give them out to who they know and not based on what they can contribute. I know because I chair hunt tests as well and deal with that process every year.
2) Entering a slew of dogs is the same as buying up all the toilet paper. It's saying "f" you, I have a job to do or my situation is just more important than. yours. It's hoarding of a different kind. I love the pros in my area. Many are friends and I know they have a job to do, but at whose expense? The amateur set aside was put in place to help with this issue. What is didn't account for is the amateurs with lots of dogs that just aren't pros. Just like the grocery store that limited how many rolls of TP your could buy, Hunt tests need to somehow limit how many dogs you can enter in the first 24 hours, period. Since people won't work together to solve the problem, then you need to do what you need to do.
3) There is definitely a technology to scam the system. Take a look at the entries and your area for the past year's tests. Same people getting in with tons of dogs? Yep. Not statistically possible.
4) We are seeing more mid-week Master tests pop up in our area. Maybe that will help some but I honestly think you could have one every day here and they would fill.
5) MNRC and MARC seem like great events and I hope to run one someday. But they have created the monster and are the root of the problem you are seeing now. Needing to requalify every year is just plain stupid and puts the strain on the entire system. Until that is fixed those chasing titles will always be impacted by those chasing plates.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Is the am set aside mandatory? I don't think so. The reason some pros are able to enter multiple dogs is internet speed. For instance my internet speed is pretty slow compared to the speed when I visit Best Buy and upload a video.
Also if you save all you information on Google the entering process goes much quicker.
Recently my son, for the first time ever, successfully entered his dog in a master test. He is not particularly computer wise but followed the instructions I gave him.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Don Smith said:


> True, but there is now a mandatory 25-35% set aside for amateurs which exacerbates the problem.


I did not expect that the rule would help. How is it making things worse?



Don Smith said:


> I've run a few qualifying stakes, but I've got clients who want me to run hunt tests.


I do not blame pros for the problem. Few if any clubs could fill a 66 dog master without pros entering.


----------



## Dirty Doug (Sep 4, 2017)

I just tried to enter a master and at one minute of opening I was 33 on the wait list.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

kbuckley1 said:


> As a hunt test judge that is giving up at least 3 weekends this summer to judge, and has a Master level dog ready to roll, it is frustrating to say the least to not be able to get into tests.


If people that gave their time to judge field trials were denied entry in future trials the pool of judges would be gone in one year.



kbuckley1 said:


> There is definitely a technology to scam the system.


Always will be.
One way to counter that would be unlimited entry. Of course that would mandate judging to a higher standard in order to complete the test in a weekend. I'm guessing that would not be popular.


The entry for a HT not far from me closed with 29 dogs entered in the master. They are not a master national club and do not want to be. The members just want local amateurs to be able to run the test.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

drunkenpoacher said:


> If people that gave their time to judge field trials were denied entry in future trials the pool of judges would be gone in one year.
> 
> 
> Always will be.
> ...


Or let as many people enter that wanted to and then have a drawing for the final number of entrants after the event closes for entry.


----------



## Dan Wegner (Jul 7, 2006)

I ran hunt tests years ago before entry limits were introduced. If more than 60 entered, the club had to secure a 2nd set of Master judges after closing and the secretary would move half of those entered to the newly added flight. Some club Secretaries took care of Club members and friends by ensuring they stayed in the original flight while non-club members were moved to the newly added flight under judges they didn't sign up for and may have never wanted to run under.

The problem was that at that time, the Master National qualification allowed only 2 failures in a given year and many participants were not excited to run under the new set of judges, so they scratched after the close, to avoid a potential failure. After scratches, some tests ended up with fewer than 60 Master entries, but still had to go with two Master flights. The limits were introduced to remedy these issues, but have caused entirely new and different problems.

I got tired of playing the entry game and moved on to Field Trials years ago. While I still run trials, I thought it would be fun to put Master titles on a couple dogs I have now, but if I can't get entered, that could be a problem. 

Like Don, I completed the entry process in Wednesday night in less than 30 seconds and would have been 22nd on the wait-list. Yet a pro was able to enter 15 dogs in the first 30 seconds... This is just ridiculous. 

The Master National and Master Amateur qualification requirements are making it difficult, at best, to title new Master Hunters and something needs to change.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Tobias said:


> Or let as many people enter that wanted to and then have a drawing for the final number of entrants after the event closes for entry.


Pros would then scratch all their dogs if they didn't get enough entries to make it a profitable weekend.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Steve Shaver said:


> Oh I am tempted but dont have time right now, maybe later.


You're chicken if you don't.


----------



## jjbuckley (Sep 19, 2019)

Don Smith said:


> As many know, over the last few years, it's generally been difficult to enter a dog in Master. Usually, if you weren't on the computer at 7 PM Central, you'd end up on the waitlist. Things got a little tougher when the "Worker Code" system began, giving those who could volunteer to work the event a code number so they could enter a day early. I've never had a problem with that although I'm usually not able to take advantage of it because I usually have dogs in every stake. I also don't have people working for me who I can "volunteer" to work in order for me to get worker codes. At some point in the last few years, EE started a "Captcha" system in an effort, as I understand, to defeat people from using a robot to enter virtually instantaneously as soon as entries open to everyone. In the past, I generally haven't had a problem entering one or two dogs in Master. Occasionally, I'd end up with a low position on the wait list, but I'd always get in. Recently, the 25/35% amateur set aside (https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn-origin...1/RHT-Reduction-of-Mileage.Amat-Set-Aside.pdf) has kicked in and for many, including me, entering has become impossible. The last 3 Wednesdays I've tried to enter 3 tests. I refresh the computer screen at precisely 7 PM Central to eliminate the worker code boxes so I can enter. Even though it's taken me less than one minute to enter every time, I ended up 12 on the waitlist in the first, 9 on the wait list in the second. In the second test, I've now dropped to #5, so I may get in before closing next Monday. Last night, I got to the third screen in less than 20 seconds. I saw that I was only going to be charged $10 and that I would be 22 on the waitlist. At that point, I just backed out of the system. There is no way that 22 dogs will be scratched before closing. It would have been just another waste of $10. In those same three test, some pros got multiple dogs entered. One was able to enter 14 in the first of those tests, 8 in the second and 15 in the third. If we're all using the same system, I fail to see how that's possible. In one of those tests. there were 26 dogs entered early with worker codes. That's fine, but a few entered 2 dogs with worker codes and 1 entered 3 - and those people don't have people to volunteer for them. If a worker code is for volunteering to work, I fail to see how anyone can work 3 jobs.
> 
> Requalifying a dog every year for Master National and earning a Master Hunter 75 or whatever is fine, but I believe that the primary purpose should be to Master title a dog. One fix would be to eliminate the requirement to requalify for Master National every year. HRCH dogs are not required to requalify every year for the International Grand. Regardless, we'll never see that happen. One reasonable fix, however, would be to set aside a percentage of the slots for dogs that have not yet titled. It seems to me that an untitled set aside is a reasonable solution -- and, of course, to make sure that we're all entering on the same playing field.
> 
> OK, rant over.


Our retriever club decided to join the Master National Club a few years back while I was on the board. We debated the issue of number of entries. We now have more entries than spots available. Entry Express just adds to the problem with multple master entries. The Master National compounds the problem. It's a cluster.


----------



## mwk56 (May 12, 2009)

Just stop the Master National and problem solved : )


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

careljo said:


> Some of us have a breed that is not eligible for field trials unfortunately. The hunt test game is our only option.


It's unlikely you have 15 of that breed and can't get into a HT by volunteering.


----------



## saltgrass (Sep 22, 2008)

yes i know its a prob and has been for yrs.

I have entered 1 test and was lucky enough to get in. on the Friday and Saturday test. the Saturday test had so many on the wait list the club opened a seconded flight for Sat.

I have entered 2 test for June 1 in GA and one in MS but was under the new Armature spots set aside that opens a day early.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Sorry I used the new AM entry to enter a double master test on Tuesday. I was worried that perhaps it would close up in 5 mins, and yes they got to 21 entries pretty quick, but those were the 35% Am and the worker codes. Which ends up being 23 Am spots, and 9 worker spots so 32 spots; still less than 1/2 the field. There were still a few Am spot left on Wednesday before it opened publicly. Over all I really like the Am option because I'm not competing against list of 10-15 dogs that get put in one shot. I mean I guess I could list 1-2 Ams that have maybe 4 personal dogs, still its not the 10-15. While I have pity for those that still have to do the Wednesday and yes do think they could stop this by having a limit on # of dogs put in at one time, or # of dogs ran by a single handler period. Hopefully the new Am option will get more handlers or even pro clients running their own dogs. Realistically more people their running dogs, equates to shorter times waiting for large input handlers, more volunteers, and maybe even more judges in the future. If you are a Pro and this is your living, or even just a single dog handler. Remember everyone is doing this for free; most of the people throwing your birds, the club members, the judges, are not getting paid and yet they continue to do it. Perhaps start a club and put on a test or two yourself, provide the grounds, have clients staff it etc. The Am 35% is an option and if it's your club you give out the worker codes, plus you put on a test = more tests. Another option give up a running even just 1 test and judge, a bunch of clubs will give out worker spots for people who have judged for them. Pay a kid to throw birds for the club, get in the clubs good graces and yes they do give out workers spots even to Pros.


----------



## J. Marti (May 2, 2014)

More options would equal better opportunities for all.

First: clubs.

1. Give club members an option to pay more in dues to trade in money for hours working at tests. If your club's annual dues are $35, give people an option to belong for annual dues of twice that, or three times that or whatever works for you. Lots of clubs do this nowadays.

2. Not everyone can work a test. In my best hunting days, shooting I would have given you 1 in 3 no birds. Now in old age, I would be even more disastrous.  Sure, I could marshall, or load wingers, or plant blinds. But don't make people do it for 8 hours a day. Give workers shifts of 4 hours and 4 hours ONLY. That way a club member could enter a dog (s) at a test, work 4 hours on Saturday and 4 hours on Sunday, but still have time to run and take care of their own dogs.


----------



## Don Smith (Mar 23, 2004)

drunkenpoacher said:


> I did not expect that the rule would help. How is it making things worse?


When I said that the am set aside exacerbates the problem I meant only that more slots are taken before some can enter; nothing more. It's not a judgment. But, it one can't enter under the am set aside, fewer slots are available. BTW - I've seen as many as 6 am set aside slots going to the same person.

Perhaps the worker codes, when given to friends, etc. is a bigger problem. As I said in my first post, in one upcoming test, 26 worker codes were given away and and at least 4 got two codes and 1 got three.


----------



## Don Smith (Mar 23, 2004)

Wayne Nutt said:


> Is the am set aside mandatory? I don't think so.


Yes it is. Required for all tests approved by AKC after April 1, 2021. Here's the AKC notice - https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn-origin...1/RHT-Reduction-of-Mileage.Amat-Set-Aside.pdf



Wayne Nutt said:


> The reason some pros are able to enter multiple dogs is internet speed. For instance my internet speed is pretty slow compared to the speed when I visit Best Buy and upload a video.
> Also if you save all you information on Google the entering process goes much quicker.
> Recently my son, for the first time ever, successfully entered his dog in a master test. He is not particularly computer wise but followed the instructions I gave him.


I think it's more than internet speed. I use Google and all of my information automatically populates. That's how I was able to get to the third screen last Wednesday in less than 20 seconds, when I saw I'd be 22 on the waitlist if I completed the entry. It takes my computer 7 seconds to refresh with a fresh screen so I can enter when I refresh at exactly 7 PM Central. I just timed it with the stopwatch on my iPhone to verify how long it takes. From that point, when I click submit to get to the next screen, it instantaneously goes to the next screen. I takes a couple of seconds after the first screen (list of dogs) to scroll down to the submit button. From that point, everything automatically populates. I fail to see how anyone can go faster unless they're using a robot.

I've thought that an untitled dog set aside would be a solution. Perhaps it would but perhaps it would create more problems. Perhaps Eric's idea of EE only permitting someone to enter one dog every thirty seconds would be a better solution. Regardless, in my opinion, a solution is needed.

As a happy aside, I was 9 on the waitlist for an upcoming test that closes next Monday. I dropped to #5 a couple of days ago. Last night, I got a bank alert that EE had submitted a charge to my account. There had been 5 more scratches.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

"I fail to see how anyone can go faster unless they're using a* robot.*"

That is exactly what is happening. -Paul


----------



## Thomas Dorroh (Jul 9, 2020)

Wayne Nutt said:


> Is the am set aside mandatory? I don't think so. The reason some pros are able to enter multiple dogs is internet speed. For instance my internet speed is pretty slow compared to the speed when I visit Best Buy and upload a video.
> Also if you save all you information on Google the entering process goes much quicker.
> Recently my son, for the first time ever, successfully entered his dog in a master test. He is not particularly computer wise but followed the instructions I gave him.


Exactly


----------



## Matt McKenzie (Oct 9, 2004)

Everything stems from the qualification requirements of the Master National and Amateur Master National. There's no reason that a dog that already has an ashtray should have to re-qualify to run one of these events. If they could be convinced to eliminate the annual qualification requirement, the weekend tests wouldn't clog up like they do. 

What is the reason for requiring a dog to qualify year after year? Limiting MN entries? Generating revenue for AKC? Generating revenue for the MN clubs? Emulating the FT Nationals? Ensuring dogs are truly qualified? How would a dog who's already finished a MN not be qualified? Is anyone asking these questions of the folks who make the decisions for the National clubs? Do the board members of these organizations understand the impact? Maybe. Or maybe since they don't personally have problems getting in, they don't really care.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Matt McKenzie said:


> What is the reason for requiring a dog to qualify year after year?





Matt McKenzie said:


> Generating revenue


You answered your own question.

Increasing the number of tests and or level of performance required to pass are both terrible ideas that I won't suggest.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

As of may 12th 757 dogs qualified. How special is that?! Personally I'd rather place in a 25 dog weekend qual than spend two weeks traveling and running the master national. Hell Id rather go spectate or work the real National than compete in the Master National. But thats just me.
I often wonder how much it is costing someone to participate in the MN especially when they are paying someone else to train and handle their dog when they could do it their self . Wish I had their money.


----------



## jacduck (Aug 17, 2011)

My observation from worker/Am entry at a recent midwest test. 1st entry A got 3 dogs in, shortly down the list another Am got 5 dogs in. From somewhere I remember that that was a limit of two dogs per Am. Can anyone confirm or absolutely refute my understanding? No I did not get in as W/A was filled in less than 30 seconds. I don't have the solution yet but see movement to the Pro only circuit quietly happening with the mid week tests. Yes I got in Weds eve was very close to last in 2 minutes.


----------



## Don Smith (Mar 23, 2004)

jacduck said:


> My observation from worker/Am entry at a recent midwest test. 1st entry A got 3 dogs in, shortly down the list another Am got 5 dogs in. From somewhere I remember that that was a limit of two dogs per Am. Can anyone confirm or absolutely refute my understanding?


There is no limit on the number of Amateur set-aside entries of which I am aware, John. Clubs are required to set aside either 25 or 35%.

What does upset me is that sometimes hunt test secretaries give away "left over" worker codes without requiring work just because someone asks for one. I know for a fact that happens. Then, I also see those who get multiple worker codes. I'm not sure how someone works more than one job.

I'm of the opinion that there are two viable solutions - a percentage set aside for dogs not yet Master titled or, as Eric suggested above, for EE to configure the entry system so that one can only enter one dog every 30 seconds (or some number of seconds).


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Clubs can and do give worker codes to whoever they choose. Keep in mind that a lot of work occurs before an event.


----------



## Don Smith (Mar 23, 2004)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Clubs can and do give worker codes to whoever they choose. Keep in mind that a lot of work occurs before an event.


I know that. I was hunt test secretary for a club for many years. I also know they're sometimes given away if unused.


----------



## saltgrass (Sep 22, 2008)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Clubs can and do give worker codes to whoever they choose. Keep in mind that a lot of work occurs before an event.
> [
> Yes, but when 1 person gets 5 plus.





drunkenpoacher said:


> Clubs can and do give worker codes to whoever they choose. Keep in mind that a lot of work occurs before an event.


Yes. But not one person should get 6 to 8 codes, when there are people working that wasn't offered one either.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

saltgrass said:


> Yes. But not one person should get 6 to 8 codes, when there are people working that wasn't offered one either.


Maybe not but I don't think it violates any rules.


----------



## saltgrass (Sep 22, 2008)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Maybe not but I don't think it violates any rules.


I'm sure. but has happened a few times with the same club under the new pres...


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

I count a dozen Master tests on EE this morning that are not full.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

drunkenpoacher said:


> I count a dozen Master tests on EE this morning that are not full.


Think of it as a woman putting on jeans.
The ones she wants to get into do not fit.
And the ones that fit she does not want to get into.😉


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Kenneth Niles Bora said:


> Think of it as a woman putting on jeans.
> The ones she wants to get into do not fit.
> And the ones that fit she does not want to get into.😉


If your wife asks "Does this outfit make me look fat"? 
Do not reply with "No, it's your fat that makes you look fat".


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

drunkenpoacher said:


> I count a dozen Master tests on EE this morning that are not full.


Half of which are mid-week tests. Perfect for the Amateurs with jobs.....not. If you're a Pro, or retired, mid week tests are great. For the vast majority of HT participants they are just an insult.
Most of the others that are not full are in some pretty out of the way places. But hey, you'd drive from Wisconsin, where the tests are full, to Idaho, where they're not right? Sure you would.  - Paul


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

paul young said:


> Most of the others that are not full are in some pretty out of the way places. But hey, you'd drive from Wisconsin, where the tests are full, to Idaho, where they're not right? Sure you would.  - Paul


No, I would not. Mostly because I don't care to run hunt tests. If I did, Blackhawk's weekend master test is not full and it is on the same grounds the NARC was just held. As you know, that's a very pretty out of the way place.


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

None of the tests that I have gone to are close to DFW. The closest test was in vicinity of Tyler TX which was about two-three hours for me. Recently a test has been started in Bonham TX which is only two hours away. But most have been four hours away. On a Friday afternoon it takes at least an hour to clear DFW. 
Pros seem to be driving great distances to get additional tests. Some in TX have been driving to KS, CO. That's a long haul.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Good news.
Ten master tests open for entry this morning that are not full. Some have OHQ's as well.


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

That is a little bit disingenuous. Very few people are interested except in the tests that are near them. This probably means that there is 1 test that is open for most people.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Eric Johnson said:


> This probably means that there is 1 test that is open for most people.


Is that not good news?


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Eric Johnson said:


> That is a little bit disingenuous. Very few people are interested except in the tests that are near them. This probably means that there is 1 test that is open for most people.


Not disingenuous; he doesn't really care. He just likes to stir the pot.....


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

paul young said:


> Not disingenuous; he doesn't really care. He just likes to stir the pot.....


Mentioning master tests that aren't full is stirring the pot?


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Mentioning master tests that aren't full is stirring the pot?


I honestly don't know why you bother to post on threads that are about anything pertaining to HT's. You don't like to run them, you don't judge them, and you don't serve as a chairman, secretary or committee member on them. All I'm left with is that you like to stir the pot whenever problems that actually concern those who do participate are being discussed. - Paul


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

paul young said:


> I honestly don't know why you bother to post on threads that are about anything pertaining to HT's.


I honestly think it is great when people train and run their own dogs in events they enjoy.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

The Lake Champlain Retriever Clubs AKC Hunt Test double master single senior & junior closes in 8 days. Has 10 entries left in one master and 8 in the other. Beautiful rural Vermont on grounds that have been National Amateur test sites.
Enter and I'll toss you a duck!😄


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Good news.
> Ten master tests open for entry this morning that are not full. Some have OHQ's as well.


We tried the OHQ a couple times and stopped. The cost of a set of judges was not ofset by the number of hunt testers wanting a blue ribbon.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Disclaimer,
I'll only toss you a duck if you enter the master that starts on Friday or the Junior on Sunday. As my truck and I are chief clutter hollers for that set of judges. Look for the rolling dumpster (what it turns into by events end) with the loud Chesapeakes parked between the line and gallery.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Kenneth Niles Bora said:


> We tried the OHQ a couple times and stopped. The cost of a set of judges was not ofset by the number of hunt testers wanting a blue ribbon.


Our club had an OHQ this year at the request of some members. Chris Atkinson was kind enough to judge for us. It went very well from what I heard. I was working at the NARC which finished the same weekend.
We will have one next year if there is still interest among the members. I might even enter Lily.


----------



## bjoiner (Feb 25, 2008)

Another solution addresses two issues. Judge shortage and entry frustration for judges. Give judges credit for 3 or 4 workers/judges codes for every time they judge. Even allow them to be shared.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

bjoiner said:


> Another solution addresses two issues. Judge shortage and entry frustration for judges. Give judges credit for 3 or 4 workers/judges codes for every time they judge. Even allow them to be shared.


Good idea IMO, but I'm not sure how it would work. 
As far as the judge shortage, there will always be one unless something is done about the requirements for becoming a judge.
Being an 8 point field trial judge does not qualify you to judge a junior HT, ridiculous.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

paul young said:


> I honestly don't know why you bother to post on threads that are about anything pertaining to HT's. You don't like to run them, you don't judge them, and you don't serve as a chairman, secretary or committee member on them. All I'm left with is that you like to stir the pot whenever problems that actually concern those who do participate are being discussed. - Paul


I have often wondered the same thing when you post on threads pertaining to FT's.


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

Because P


Marvin S said:


> I have often wondered the same thing when you post on threads pertaining to FT's.


Because Paul is the Grand Pubah of everything related to Hunt Tests and Field Trials....NOT


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Marvin S said:


> I have often wondered the same thing when you post on threads pertaining to FT's.


Because when I had the right dogs, I ran them and was successful, Marvin.
I also have judged a dozen or so. 
I'll run some more if the next dog has what it takes. -Paul


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Mike Berube said:


> Because P
> 
> Because Paul is the Grand Pubah of everything related to Hunt Tests and Field Trials....NOT


Well, Mike, I know a couple things about you.
There's 2 places you'll never be seen....throwing birds at a test, or judging one.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

paul young said:


> I also have judged a dozen or so.


In out of the way places where nobody wanted to go?


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

It's all on the AKC website. Look it up if you're really interested. Your record is there, too. -Paul


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

paul young said:


> *I honestly don't know why you bother to post on threads that are about anything pertaining to HT's.* You don't like to run them, you don't judge them, and you don't serve as a chairman, secretary or committee member on them. All I'm left with is that you like to stir the pot whenever problems that actually concern those who do participate are being discussed. - Paul



Probably because of the same reason I do. I am tired of hearing the whining about what a S#!* show the master has turned out to be.
I started in HT and it taught me how to train dogs. I no longer care to run them but still wish they could go back to what they used to be. Again the advent of the "master national" has ruined that. I recently was going through results on a HT and noticed a dog that had 58 master passes  . I cant help but wonder why anyone would bother to do that rather than stepping up to a qual and trying something a little more challenging. 58 passes!!!!!!!!!!!!! At lets say $90 entry fees that's $5220.00 Holy$#!t I would get way bored with that. Then also taking the time and spending the money to travel to run the master national that over 1000 dogs qualify to run???????? What's the point????????????????????????????????????


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Steve Shaver said:


> was going through results on a HT and noticed a dog that had 58 master passes  . I cant help but wonder why anyone would bother to do that rather than stepping up to a qual and trying something a little more challenging. 58 passes!!!!!!!!!!!!! ..........What's the point????????????????????????????????????


Easy answer - because they can. LOL! However, in the case of an amateur owned/trained dog (vs pro traine), it might just be that is what they like to do with their dog(s), and nothing wrong with that. Personally, I'd rather put the entry fees toward running a different venue. There are three to choose from so why not change it up a little for trainer/handler/dog?


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

I've been toying with a reply for some time. This really isn't an answer so much as an observation.

When the hunt test was in it's very formative years, the folks in the lead made an interesting turn and the AKC went along with it. The obedience world had gone through all the same issues as the hunt test dogs . . . topping out and handlers wanting to do more with their highly trained dogs. The hunt test world dreamed up a national event with many (most?) of the trappings of the NFC and AFC. The obedience world figured out how to do this without the huge expense and jockeying for validating entries. The obedience world came up with what is called the Obedience Trial Champion or OTCH. It's a title that attaches to a dog when earned and it is at the front of the name. The OTCH is earned by competing in week-end trials and earning points. 200 points is the title. The points are earned by winning 1st or 2nd in the combined scores of the top two stakes in a week-end trial.The number of dogs "defeated" in the combined stakes sets the number of points earned. In this regard, the dog competes against a standard but the result is used to earn the points.

Interestingly the scores in obedience as much "stricter" than in the hunt test world. We require 7's from both judges to earn the ribbon or 70%. In the obedience world, 70% earns you a trip home in total failure. In the obedience world, a 90% is the barely pass score. The score is out of a 200 points and in many states the obedience folks have the vanity plate "NQ179".

So, if the obedience model had been used for hunt tests, the dogs would compete in local events and earn "HTCH" points depending on the crowd of competitors. You wouldn't have a 2 week period each year of a huge expense. You'd also not have this cut-throat entry process that exists in many areas of the hunt test arena. Don't think however that the obedience people aren't intensely competitive. An acquaintance on the west coast won't even enter an obedience trial unless her dogs are potentially 200 out of 200 point dogs.She has had so many perfect scores that that has become her standard and she's become the one to beat in any trial she attends.

If we could spin the clock back 30 years and the other turn made, perhaps the things would be different.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

When something is working well, it becomes popular and you have too many people running it and not enough tests, hard times getting in etc. Master hunt test entries, just go to show that the HTs are doing well people enjoy them; and yes people like them enough to run them over and over; with the same dog and prehaps never even think of a National. Heck they have become so popular that a great many trainers can make their living running dogs in them, just for an Ugly Orange Ribbon. But as they have become popular there hasn't been a great influx of new clubs or new-more tests to support the growing popularity; HTs have these problem because HTs are popular (period). Can the same be said for the FT's? IMO NO; if anything FT are getting less and less popular, demand is going down as time go on, a few new people may come in but, not enough to replace those old who are going out (usually age related), at seemingly at a increasing frequency of late. We always get this question why run the masters over and over, and not go to FT's? I'm not sure its the handlers that need to answer that question. It's the FT community that needs to look into this issue, if they would like to survive and or grow. They need to be encouraging HT to try the FT's, not looking down their nose at them. Saying thing like "why don't you run something actually worth something?" step up to the qual? The Qual realistically it's just 2 sets of marks and 2 blinds. Marks and blinds aren't even together but becuase it's a competion it MUST BE WORTH MORE?. These type of comments just breed animosity btw the groups, something that really doesn't help either one. What about putting on a Master HT with a FT, prehaps encourage a bit of cross-over. Keep your FT callbacks lenient, cater to people just trying it, get them a couple of series for their $$. Maybe the FT community can figure a way to actually make money on masters tests, somehow they survive year after year with minimal FT's entries. We've run OHQ in conjuction with HTs they don't make enough money to break even, when you ask the MH handlers why they don't run them, it's mostly in reguard to this HT vs. FT animosity; most people would rather enjoy their time at a test. All I know is HT interest is Growing and will continue too, FT IMO are waning. I like that both are available, but this THEM vs. US mentality, hurt both venues.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

You know,
It's such a wide spread cliche. There must be a kernel of truth to it. But I, personally myself. What I have experienced. I have never been looked down upon when training with the field trial folks. I show up, the NAHRA Chesapeake feller. And am welcomed with open arms. And if I may need to move up in a setup. Im not out in the field alone. They grab chsirs and blinds and move up with me and give me a running line. It must happen someplace. But I toss ducks with everyone. And I never seen the look down upon thing.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

drunkenpoacher said:


> In out of the way places where nobody wanted to go?


Hey!
We are not that out of the way!😃


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> When something is working well, it becomes popular and you have too many people running it and not enough tests, hard times getting in etc.





Hunt'EmUp said:


> It's the FT community that needs to look into this issue, if they would like to survive and or grow. They need to be encouraging HT to try the FT's, not looking down their nose at them.





drunkenpoacher said:


> The answer to high demand is to increase the supply. In this case, my guess is, it will happen slowly if at all.
> In the mean time there are field trial Q's every weekend with unlimited entry.


In the third post of this thread I addressed both points.
I am sincere in encouraging people to enter Q's (or derbies). I think it is a great way to progress as a handler. Most judges will carry as many dogs as time permits in a Q, especially those run by amateurs.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Kenneth Niles Bora said:


> You know,
> It's such a wide spread cliche. There must be a kernel of truth to it. But I, personally myself. What I have experienced. I have never been looked down upon when training with the field trial folks. I show up, the NAHRA Chesapeake feller. And am welcomed with open arms. And if I may need to move up in a setup. Im not out in the field alone. They grab chsirs and blinds and move up with me and give me a running line. It must happen someplace. But I toss ducks with everyone. And I never seen the look down upon thing.


Several hunt test people train with my groups. Everyone is happy to have them and more than willing to accommodate. 
The problem is they just don't want to, or can't, train very often.


----------



## J. Marti (May 2, 2014)

Steve Shaver said:


> I recently was going through results on a HT and noticed a dog that had 58 master passes  . I cant help but wonder why anyone would bother to do that rather than stepping up to a qual and trying something a little more challenging. 58 passes!!!!!!!!!!!!! At lets say $90 entry fees that's $5220.00 Holy$#!t I would get way bored with that. Then also taking the time and spending the money to travel to run the master national that over 1000 dogs qualify to run???????? What's the point????????????????????????????????????


I think some people run hunt tests as a form of social involvement and for a hobby and social event. 

For field trials, one would need access to grounds where 400-yard marks could be run, correct? And I imagine you would need some real technical water? (I don't know--just asking.) 

I know a lot of hunt test or would-be hunt test people struggle with finding access to grounds that one can run a 100-yard mark on, let alone 300-400 yard multiple marks. And then there is technical water--yikes, that is difficult to find. (I mean access on a regular basis, not once a month with a 6 hour round trip to get there.)

But I understand what you are saying too. Onward and upward, right? Would probably be fun for the dog, too.


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

J. Marti said:


> *
> I know a lot of hunt test or would-be hunt test people struggle with finding access to grounds that one can run a 100-yard mark on, let alone 300-400 yard multiple marks. And then there is technical water--yikes, that is difficult to find. (I mean access on a regular basis, not once a month with a 6 hour round trip to get there.)*



I laughed out loud at this section... because I have been there... driving 7.5 hours round trip to train on 'big technical water' - far less than once a month (try 2-3 times a year)

Not everyone has access to proper grounds and training groups for FT - so hunt tests are the next best option for many - even if they might 'wish' to try and run FT's.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> When something is working well, it becomes popular and you have too many people running it and not enough tests, hard times getting in etc. Master hunt test entries, just go to show that the HTs are doing well people enjoy them; and yes people like them enough to run them over and over; with the same dog and prehaps never even think of a National. Heck they have become so popular that a great many trainers can make their living running dogs in them, just for an Ugly Orange Ribbon. But as they have become popular there hasn't been a great influx of new clubs or new-more tests to support the growing popularity; HTs have these problem because HTs are popular (period). Can the same be said for the FT's? IMO NO; if anything FT are getting less and less popular, demand is going down as time go on, a few new people may come in but, not enough to replace those old who are going out (usually age related), at seemingly at a increasing frequency of late. We always get this question why run the masters over and over, and not go to FT's? I'm not sure its the handlers that need to answer that question. It's the FT community that needs to look into this issue, if they would like to survive and or grow. They need to be encouraging HT to try the FT's, not looking down their nose at them. Saying thing like "why don't you run something actually worth something?" step up to the qual? The Qual realistically it's just 2 sets of marks and 2 blinds. Marks and blinds aren't even together but becuase it's a competion it MUST BE WORTH MORE?. These type of comments just breed animosity btw the groups, something that really doesn't help either one. What about putting on a Master HT with a FT, prehaps encourage a bit of cross-over. Keep your FT callbacks lenient, cater to people just trying it, get them a couple of series for their $$. Maybe the FT community can figure a way to actually make money on masters tests, somehow they survive year after year with minimal FT's entries. We've run OHQ in conjuction with HTs they don't make enough money to break even, when you ask the MH handlers why they don't run them, it's mostly in reguard to this HT vs. FT animosity; most people would rather enjoy their time at a test. All I know is HT interest is Growing and will continue too, FT IMO are waning. I like that both are available, but this THEM vs. US mentality, hurt both venues.




Sounds to me a little like the pot calling the kettle black. When I was running HT nobody looked down their nose at me, unless they were a lot taller 😉. And I certainly would not do so myself. In fact it was me that had the attitude you describe as a HT guy towards FT people. I had the attitude that FT people were snobs until I started running them and found that to not be true. You spun my post into this. Stepping up to run the qual was really not meant to be my point although to me would be the logical thing to do. My point was why spend 5 grand plus to go out and run and pass 58 masters and qualify for the master national? That was just entry fees for 58 passes not to mention travel expenses and failures and most likely paying a pro to train their dog. Now I like to play with my dogs as much as anyone but I would just as soon spend my time training my dog and taking hunting trips. Hell I could go buy a brand new truck for that kind of money. I guess it must be just a social thing to spend that kind of time and money running HT.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

J. Marti said:


> I think some people run hunt tests as a form of social involvement and for a hobby and social event.
> 
> For field trials, one would need access to grounds where 400-yard marks could be run, correct? And I imagine you would need some real technical water? (I don't know--just asking.)
> 
> ...



Again my point was not onward and upward. I have plenty of land to train on but good quality technical water is in short supply without putting in some serious drive time which I dont do often. Im thinking that a person that runs and passes that many tests has to put in a lot more travel time than I do. Im lucky if I can run 6 or 7 trials a year. I would have to put in a ton of travel time and money to run more than that


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Several hunt test people train with my groups. Everyone is happy to have them and more than *willing to accommodate.*


There is a limit. We won’t blow duck calls or wear camo.


----------



## caryalsobrook (Mar 22, 2010)

Steve Shaver said:


> Sounds to me a little like the pot calling the kettle black. When I was running HT nobody looked down their nose at me, unless they were a lot taller 😉. And I certainly would not do so myself. In fact it was me that had the attitude you describe as a HT guy towards FT people. I had the attitude that FT people were snobs until I started running them and found that to not be true. You spun my post into this. Stepping up to run the qual was really not meant to be my point although to me would be the logical thing to do. My point was why spend 5 grand plus to go out and run and pass 58 masters and qualify for the master national? That was just entry fees for 58 passes not to mention travel expenses and failures and most likely paying a pro to train their dog. Now I like to play with my dogs as much as anyone but I would just as soon spend my time training my dog and taking hunting trips. Hell I could go buy a brand new truck for that kind of money. I guess it must be just a social thing to spend that kind of time and money running HT.


Steve, I don't mean to pick on you but I will just take your last sentence. When I first started this game, I was at a business of a dear friend of mine who sold bateries. While working on a wingger, he had customer that came in and asked me what the winger was. When I explained that it was really just a remote slingshot to throw ducks so I could train a dog, he said "Some people have more money than they know what to do with". Your last sentene reminded me of that.

There are all sorts of people involved with hunting and some simply want a dog that will go out and pick up a duck that they killed and if the dog did not see it, they will have a pocket full of rocks to throw in the right direction. I promice you they are just as proud of their dog as anyone in with an NAFC. They are what I call "weekend warriers", whose lifetime goal is to train a dog to the level of HRCH. 

My point is that there are a host of reasons that people become involved in this game. I am not about to say the reasons that I got involved because that would take a book. Some may even even own a dog that a pro trains and runs but will still help at a HT. Some may even judge and NEVER run a dog. I would not be surprised if there has been a major league umpire that never played baseball past high school but is an outstanging umpire. It takes a number of people to put on a HT and a FT, most of which are volutneers. Some give a lot of time and others give less but we should never judge them by how much or how little. We should just be thankful that they contribute to the sport. 

I will be 78 next month and really have no idea what my goals will be even next week. I don't have the stamina that I once had even a few years ago. My first dog to get an HRCH title was in 2011. I am diabetic, can't see well and have terrible neuropathy whick also gives me problems. But I do love the sport and those that I have met because of it. Yes, I guess that part is also "social".


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

If anyone is interested there are 8 or 9 master tests open for entry and not full yet in Nebraska, Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan.


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

More than a dozen of the most recent master stakes have closed not full.


----------



## jforqueran (Apr 12, 2015)

drunkenpoacher said:


> More than a dozen of the most recent master stakes have closed not full.



I don't think you will see the problem arise again until after the MN. I may be wrong though!


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

The new regulations and the current Master openings are no help for the dogs no longer running. Probably won't bring anyone back to the sport that called it quits.


----------



## ChesapeakeRebel (Apr 10, 2020)

drunkenpoacher said:


> Our club had an OHQ this year at the request of some members. Chris Atkinson was kind enough to judge for us. It went very well from what I heard. I was working at the NARC which finished the same weekend.
> We will have one next year if there is still interest among the members. I might even enter Lily.



we drove up from Alabama for this oh/q
We enjoyed it 
& ended up with a jam 
Plan to attend next year too


----------



## drunkenpoacher (Dec 20, 2016)

Congratulations and thanks for making the trip. Hope to see you there next year.


----------

