# Judging question



## Pupknuckle (Aug 15, 2008)

Master Hunt Test. Honor series, Honor dog breaks then working dog breaks. Are both out?


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

Pupknuckle said:


> Master Hunt Test. Honor series, Honor dog breaks then working dog breaks. Are both out?


Honor dog is out. Working dog should be given a re-run due to interference by the honor dog.

M


----------



## bakbay (May 20, 2003)

Miriam Wade said:


> Honor dog is out. Working dog should be given a re-run due to interference by the honor dog.
> 
> M


Sorry, can't agree with that, assuming this is an AKC master and also assuming the judge has not released the running dog to retrieve. Both dogs are out. From page 30 of the Retriever HT regulations "(5) A Master Hunting dog must be steady and must deliver to hand. Failure to do so must be graded “0” in Trainability." NO leeway for steadiness requirement. 

The section on page 22 relating to interference states: "Section 11. Interference. In a Senior or Master Hunting Test, _when_ a dog is ordered by the Judge to retrieve a fall, and another dog breaks for the same fall and interferes with the working dog to the extent of causing it in any way to make a faulty performance, the dog interfered with shall be considered as not having been tested and given another evaluation." The red, italic font is mine to emphasize that interference occurs only if the running dog has been released by the judge to retrieve.


----------



## Pupknuckle (Aug 15, 2008)

bakbay said:


> Sorry, can't agree with that, assuming this is an AKC master and also assuming the judge has not released the running dog to retrieve. Both dogs are out. From page 30 of the Retriever HT regulations "(5) A Master Hunting dog must be steady and must deliver to hand. Failure to do so must be graded “0” in Trainability." NO leeway for steadiness requirement.
> 
> The section on page 22 relating to interference states: "Section 11. Interference. In a Senior or Master Hunting Test, _when_ a dog is ordered by the Judge to retrieve a fall, and another dog breaks for the same fall and interferes with the working dog to the extent of causing it in any way to make a faulty performance, the dog interfered with shall be considered as not having been tested and given another evaluation." The red, italic font is mine to emphasize that interference occurs only if the running dog has been released by the judge to retrieve.


Thanks, that's what I thought. Just want to be prepared should the situation ever arise.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

Why is number always required?
Can not interference occur if the honor creeps in front of the working dog blocking their view or excessive barking causing the working dog to turn their head?
Interference is a call for the judges to make based on a dog's reaction, as explained in very next section of page 22:
"Section 12. Unfair Tests.
If there is an occurrence which makes for a relatively unfair test of a dog’s abilities, the Judges shall exercise their discretion in determining
how to score the abilities of the dog in that series. In doing so, the Judges may decide that it is necessary or unnecessary to re-run the dog....."

When did the working dog go? Was the honor dog handler yelling NO, HERE, blowing a whistle, etc??
Lots of variables. That is why it is called judging not score keeping!

I would tend to give the working dog the benefit of any doubt.

Tim


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

I have seen it done both ways. As Bruce said and the other is giving running dog a rerun if they get it under control. I agree with Bruce and believe rule book justifies his call me.


----------



## bakbay (May 20, 2003)

Tim Carrion said:


> Why is number always required?
> Can not interference occur if the honor creeps in front of the working dog blocking their view or excessive barking causing the working dog to turn their head?
> Interference is a call for the judges to make based on a dog's reaction, as explained in very next section of page 22:
> "Section 12. Unfair Tests.
> ...


There are certain absolutes...can't eat birds, gotta be steady. The question was NOT whether the running dog's ability to perform the test was impacted but whether the running dog is allowed to break. If the honoring dog was jumping around, interfering with the running dog's ability to accurately mark, the judges should stop the test and excuse the honoring dog. If the running dog broke before being released by a judge to retrieve, they are out.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

I guess I'm a push over, benefit of doubt goes to working dog assuming the dog was reasonably under control up to the point. If working dog was creeping and not at heel, then I might be a hard ass and drop him, but in general I try and give the dog the benefit of doubt.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

In field trials (I have no knowledge of Hunt tests) steadiness is absolute and there are no exceptions. The burden for steadiness is applied equally to both the working dog and the honoring dog, there are no exceptions. Interference is a different issue! If a dog breaks it breaks interference does not apply.


----------



## djansma (Aug 26, 2004)

in my book if the honor dog breaks that is definitely interference with the working dog and when either dog breaks that test is over 
see the working dog in 3 dogs that's my opinion but have been at the line when the honor dog creeped and my dog creeped and than they both broke and we both were dropped 

David Jansma


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

djansma said:


> in my book if the honor dog breaks that is definitely interference with the working dog and when either dog breaks that test is over
> see the working dog in 3 dogs that's my opinion but have been at the line when the honor dog creeped and my dog creeped and than they both broke and we both were dropped
> 
> David Jansma


Interference with what, the obligation to be steady? What if the working dog breaks and the honor dog breaks, did the working dog interfere with the honor dog, what is the difference?


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

EdA said:


> Interference with what, the obligation to be steady? What if the working dog breaks and the honor dog breaks, did the working dog interfere with the honor dog, what is the difference?



And if the working dog breaks & your honor dog stays pat, you have to stick around and honor over again with the next working dog to the line. Been there and done that...


----------



## golfandhunter (Oct 5, 2009)

"If there is an occurrence which makes for a *relatively unfair test* of a dog’s abilities..."
unless every dog is required to be steady when the honor dog breaks, I can see how that could be considered a *relatively unfair test *by a judge.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

golfandhunter said:


> "If there is an occurrence which makes for a *relatively unfair test* of a dog’s abilities..."
> unless every dog is required to be steady when the honor dog breaks, I can see how that could be considered a *relatively unfair test *by a judge.


That is out of context and not in the rule book related to steadiness, while honoring a dog that breaks or having the honor dog break is unfortunate it has absolutely no bearing on the fairness of the test or the obligation for steadiness. Cherry pick all the phrases in the rule book you wish but none apply, the obligation for steadiness is absolute!


----------



## djansma (Aug 26, 2004)

page 22 hunt test rules

Sectioin 11 Interference In a Senior or Master
Hunting test, when a dog is ordered by the Judge to
retrieve a fall, and another dog breaks for the same fall
and interferes with the working dog to the extent
of causing it in any way to make a faulty performance,
the dog interfered with shall be considered as not 
having been tested and given another evaluation


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

djansma said:


> page 22 hunt test rules
> 
> Sectioin 11 Interference In a Senior or Master
> Hunting test, when a dog is ordered by the Judge to
> ...


If the dog is ordered to retrieve that means it did not break, if it broke it would not have been ordered to retrieve.


----------



## djansma (Aug 26, 2004)

I am going to leave this alone now the poster asked about a Master Honor and I have judged plenty of them and that is my opinion as per my interpretation
of the rules 
David Jansma


----------



## BBnumber1 (Apr 5, 2006)

In the Field Trial Standards and Procedures it FIRST says this:

 
13. If, when a dog is ordered by the Judge to retrieve a fall, another dog breaks for the same fall and interferes with the working dog to the extent of causing him in any way to make a faulty performance, the dog interfered with should be considered as not having been tried and given a chance for another performance. 

14. If there is an occurrence which makes for a relatively unfair test for a dog, the Judges shall exercise their discretion in determining how to form a judgment of the quality of the work of the dog in the series notwithstanding the unfairness. In forming such judgment the Judges may decide that it is necessary or unnecessary to re-run the dog. If they decide the latter, they may waive delivery to hand of the mark or blind in which the unfairness occurred; if they decide the former, the dog shall be picked up immediately and tested on a new set of birds, if practicable, after waiting behind the line until several other dogs have been tested 

And Later says this:

26. *Movement on Line: *In an All-Age stake, if a dog makes a movement which in the opinion of the Judges indicates a deliberate intent to retrieve without having been ordered to do so, that dog shall be deemed to have broken and shall be eliminated. In any stake other than an All-Age stake, if a dog makes a slight break and is brought immediately under control, the dog need not be eliminated, but shall be penalized for unsteadiness 

This tells me that in Field Trials, the judge has the abiltiy to weigh the unfairness of the test, including all things that happen on the line, even prior to the dog being released. I found no Absolute, that overrides "the Judges shall exercise their discretion". Shall, not should.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Your argument is only valid to the extent of the phrase "when a dog is ordered to retrieve", if the dog breaks there is no such order given.


----------



## BBnumber1 (Apr 5, 2006)

number 14 has no "when a dog is ordered to retrieve" associated with it. It is a stand alone statement.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Like others, I have been involved with breaking both as the handler of the honor dog & also of the running dog that broke after the honor dog. Being in very good shape in an open 4th series where the honor dog crept in front of my dog (running dog), then continued to creep completely on the other side of my dog, then breaking - I was looking at the judge to call interference before the honor dog actually broke. But the judge did nothing except continue to call for the birds. Honor dog breaks & then my dog broke. I attempted to negotiate a rerun claiming interference. Judge threw both the honor dog & my dog out. Reflecting on the events which all happened very quickly, I determined that in any future similar situations where honor dog was obviously interfering with my running that I would verbally heal my dog off the line thereby giving the judge time to think about the situation, the interference, require the honor dog to be on lead & give me another opportunity. Of course the judge could still throw me out for taking my dog off the line but without my dog breaking, I stood a better chance of getting relief than if my dog broke. I also decided that in future situations if my dog as the honor dog began creeping to the point of interfering (in my opinion) with the running dog that I would command heal/sit. This would likely keep my dog from breaking & more importantly save the running dog too.

As a judge, if a dog is creeping to the point of interference, I will step in front of the running dog, calling interference at the same time. I have done the same thing when I have a close flyer no-bird. I want the running dog to have every opportunity to get it right.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

So following your line of logic if a flier is missed causing a no bird and the dog breaks there should be no penalty for lack of steadiness because the missed flier created an unfair situation. How many different scenarios can you concoct to forgive breaking?


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

EdA said:


> So following your line of logic if a flier is missed causing a no bird and the dog breaks there should be no penalty for lack of steadiness because the missed flier created an unfair situation. How many different scenarios can you concoct to forgive breaking?


If this is addressed to my post#21, I didn't say anything about forgiving a break. I can't ignore the rule - if the dog breaks, he is eliminated but as a judge, if I can intervene immediately at the point that a no-bird is being called, then running dog hasn't broken & will be given a rerun. I would justify being quick to call for a no-bird & stepping in front of the running dog at the line as just part of my routine for any no-bird situation.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

Pupknuckle said:


> Master Hunt Test. Honor series, Honor dog breaks then working dog breaks. Are both out?


Depends. Did the first breaker interfere w/ the working dog? If so, and its my book, WD gets a do over. But if the HD just takes off and the WD takes off after, how is that different from HD taking off after the WD? Both dogs are required to be steady and all dogs must honor another dog's work. But it is a call made by the judges based on what they see. (Watched a nice dog actually get bumped by a breaking HD. Both dogs dropped. Me, I would have called for a do-over for the WD and asked the HD handler to rope his dog and hang around for the next dog.) Granddaddy is right that handler and judges need to be aware of potential problems w/ creepers that get out too far. In that case I'll pull my dog rather than risk a fight. Been there, done that. Not going back.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

The absolute worst thing is for judges to sit there looking at each other as to what to do. Take charge quickly and prevent a dog fight.


----------



## Labs (Jun 18, 2008)

First of all, we aint talking field trials, so field trial rule interpretations don't apply here. Second of all, I guess we don't have enough information from the OP. When did the honor dog break? After all three marks were down or after bird 1 or 2? Did it break in such a fashion that it crossed in front of the working dog? Was the working dog animated at the line before breaking, ie, did it look like he was going to go prior to the honor dog breaking?

What's the harm in a re-run for the working dog that broke after the honor dog broke? To me, the working dog didn't get a fair shake at watching his three marks go down, uninterrupted. The working dog will show you whether or not the re-run was warranted either when he comes up for the re-run or when he is sitting in the honor box. The dogs that aren't ready/steady at this level will take themselves out. As a judge, why paint yourself into a corner?


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

I 100% agree with Dr Ed. Steadiness is absolute.

Just finished judging a Master test last weekend. I have judged more than 20 Master tests.

If either dog breaks, then they are out. It doesn't matter who broke first.


----------



## Huff (Feb 11, 2008)

I agree steadiness is steadiness regardless of the venue. It doesn't mean two different things. If either dog breaks before being released they are out.


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Labs said:


> What's the harm in a re-run for the working dog that broke after the honor dog broke? To me, the working dog didn't get a fair shake at watching his three marks go down, uninterrupted. The working dog will show you whether or not the re-run was warranted either when he comes up for the re-run or when he is sitting in the honor box. The dogs that aren't ready/steady at this level will take themselves out. As a judge, why paint yourself into a corner?


Yes If the honor dog broke, and the working dog didn't. Then Yes, I would give the working dog a rerun, as the the honor dog interfered with the marks. 

But if it broke . . . then they're both out!


----------



## Labs (Jun 18, 2008)

Doug Main said:


> Yes If the honor dog broke, and the working dog didn't. Then Yes, I would give the working dog a rerun, as the the honor dog interfered with the marks.
> 
> But if it broke . . . then they're both out!


So since the OP didn't state when the break occurred....Honor dog on the left of the working dog...right mark goes down, and the honor dog runs past the working dog...close enough to brush whiskers...then the working dog breaks, they are both out in your opinion or do you give the working dog a re-run? The right bird is the last bird down, so the HD techinically didn't interfere with the working dog's ability to mark the marks.


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

Labs said:


> First of all, we aint talking field trials, so field trial rule interpretations don't apply here.



From what I have seen posted here, the verbiage from both rule books is identical. So I'm not sure I agree with this statement.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Labs said:


> So since the OP didn't state when the break occurred....Honor dog on the left of the working dog...right mark goes down, and the honor dog runs past the working dog...close enough to brush whiskers...then the working dog breaks, they are both out in your opinion or do you give the working dog a re-run? The right bird is the last bird down, so the HD techinically didn't interfere with the working dog's ability to mark the marks.


First of all your scenario should never happen, if I was honoring and a working dog approached my dog that close I would heel my dog off line and let the judges sort it out, I can't imagine judges just standing with their hands in their pockets while two dogs get that close to each other. Judges should always take the proximity of working/honor dog lines into consideration when they set up the test, it is a rare judge who wants the honor dog to break, so most set the honor up outside the test so that the working dog does not creep or even run past the honor dog when released. 

Other than extreme hypotheticals how is a honor dog breaking after a the working dog leaves the line before his number is called any different than breaking after the working dog leaves with his number? I had a situation last winter, honor mat well back from the line on a fourth series quad, working dog breaks, judges stand up, handler yells at his dog who runs back to the line, past handler and judges and attacks my dog still sitting on the honor mat. A dog fight ensues as my dog remains planted firmly on the mat. That dog was retired on the spot and the judges thought my dog had been tested well enough for steadiness and released from the honor.


----------



## Labs (Jun 18, 2008)

John Robinson said:


> First of all your scenario should never happen, if I was honoring and a working dog approached my dog that close I would heel my dog off line and let the judges sort it out, I can't imagine judges just standing with their hands in their pockets while two dogs get that close to each other. Judges should always take the proximity of working/honor dog lines into consideration when they set up the test, it is a rare judge who wants the honor dog to break, so most set the honor up outside the test so that the working dog does not creep or even run past the honor dog when released.
> 
> Other than extreme hypotheticals how is a honor dog breaking after a the working dog leaves the line before his number is called any different than breaking after the working dog leaves with his number? I had a situation last winter, honor mat well back from the line on a fourth series quad, working dog breaks, judges stand up, handler yells at his dog who runs back to the line, past handler and judges and attacks my dog still sitting on the honor mat. A dog fight ensues as my dog remains planted firmly on the mat. That dog was retired on the spot and the judges thought my dog had been tested well enough for steadiness and released from the honor.


John, How many Master tests have you run where they put the HD on the side away from the go bird? So as to be not so enticing to the HD, and to not have the WD dog run past the HD. Happens in almost every MH test I have seen. The example I gave, no one would be standing around with their hands in their pockets...stuff happens, and it happens pretty damn quick.

My point in all of this, is that there isn't a right answer...at least not on the RTF forum. The judges are the ones with the book and the ones to see the dog work...not us. It's a judgement call on whether either dog interfered with the other...To the OP...the correct answer to your question is "depends"....As soon as you go into a test with a concrete answer in your head, and it doesn't work out the way you thought it should, you will be chapped and wondering "wth?"...and most likely posting about it on Monday...

Too many variables regards -


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Labs said:


> John, How many Master tests have you run where they put the HD on the side away from the go bird? So as to be not so enticing to the HD, and to not have the WD dog run past the HD. Happens in almost every MH test I have seen. The example I gave, no one would be standing around with their hands in their pockets...stuff happens, and it happens pretty damn quick.
> 
> My point in all of this, is that there isn't a right answer...at least not on the RTF forum. The judges are the ones with the book and the ones to see the dog work...not us. It's a judgement call on whether either dog interfered with the other...To the OP...the correct answer to your question is "depends"....As soon as you go into a test with a concrete answer in your head, and it doesn't work out the way you thought it should, you will be chapped and wondering "wth?"...and most likely posting about it on Monday...
> 
> Too many variables regards -


Ok, in the real world chances are if your honor dog breaks after the working dog, you will be dropped. If there are extreme circumstances such as you describe, some judges might take that into consideration and give you a re-run, but they might not.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> First of all your scenario should never happen, if I was honoring and a working dog approached my dog that close I would heel my dog off line and let the judges sort it out, I can't imagine judges just standing with their hands in their pockets while two dogs get that close to each other. Judges should always take the proximity of working/honor dog lines into consideration when they set up the test, it is a rare judge who wants the honor dog to break, so most set the honor up outside the test so that the working dog does not creep or even run past the honor dog when released.
> 
> Other than extreme hypotheticals how is a honor dog breaking after a the working dog leaves the line before his number is called any different than breaking after the working dog leaves with his number? I had a situation last winter, honor mat well back from the line on a fourth series quad, working dog breaks, judges stand up, handler yells at his dog who runs back to the line, past handler and judges and attacks my dog still sitting on the honor mat. A dog fight ensues as my dog remains planted firmly on the mat. That dog was retired on the spot and the judges thought my dog had been tested well enough for steadiness and released from the honor.


John I was in the holding blind in an Amateur, where something extreme like the above happened. The judges did nothing. The honoring dog was creeping out 10-20 yards on the two birds before the flyer. The judges did nothing. The honoring dog ran out on the flyer across the working dog's face. The working dog could not stand any more and went. 

Ted


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Oh, the honoring dog returned after running out 25 yards after the flyer. The running dog did not return. The running dog was dropped. The honor dog was not. 

I think sometimes judges are stunned and do not react promptly. In such events, should they not admit their error after the fact?


----------



## huntinman (Jun 1, 2009)

Ted Shih said:


> Oh, the honoring dog returned after running out 25 yards after the flyer. The running dog did not return. The running dog was dropped. The honor dog was not.
> 
> I think sometimes judges are stunned and do not react promptly. In such events, should they not admit their error after the fact?


Yes.......


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> Oh, the honoring dog returned after running out 25 yards after the flyer. The running dog did not return. The running dog was dropped. The honor dog was not.
> 
> I think sometimes judges are stunned and do not react promptly. In such events, should they not admit their error after the fact?


Each and every time!!!


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

The first order of business is to stop things and prevent a dog fight. Judges standing there with dazed looks while out of control dogs are racing to the bird is unacceptable.


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

EdA said:


> Interference with what, the obligation to be steady? What if the working dog breaks and the honor dog breaks, did the working dog interfere with the honor dog, what is the difference?


I agree. A dog told to sit/heel/steady/mark must do so until the handler releases the dog to retrieve. An honor dog breaking is not justification for a working dog to break. Stay/heel/steady means just that, not stay/heel/steady until another dog runs in front of you. If you dog breaks because the honor did, it is greedy and zeros trainability in my book. A working dog should not move until released by the handler.


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

badbullgator said:


> I agree. A dog told to sit/heel/steady/mark must do so until the handler releases the dog to retrieve. An honor dog breaking is not justification for a working dog to break. Stay/heel/steady means just that, not stay/heel/steady until another dog runs in front of you. If you dog breaks because the honor did, it is greedy and zeros trainability in my book. A working dog should not move until released by the handler.


I agree with this and I have seen much better replies to my question than mine. That said, it isn't always black & white. The honor dog breaking isn't justification for the working dog to break, but there ARE times when the honor dog breaks AND interferes with the working dog. In a HT the handler of the honor dog must also keep his dog under control in a manner not considered to interfere with the working dog. Why would this be part of the rules if interference were not thought to have an impact on a dog's performance?

I had an instance where my dog was the working dog. While the marks were going down the honor dog crept a considerable distance, barked and was basically out of control. My dog stayed steady, but when he was released the honor dog was in hot pursuit. The dog was eventually brought under control and my dog remembered his marks, but it was stressful for both my dog and I.

M


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Labs said:


> John, How many Master tests have you run where they put the HD on the side away from the go bird? So as to be not so enticing to the HD, and to not have the WD dog run past the HD. Happens in almost every MH test I have seen. The example I gave, no one would be standing around with their hands in their pockets...stuff happens, and it happens pretty damn quick.


This is a fairly important point, I think. Good judges don't just pick any old place for the line and the honor box. They think through it a little more and try to (hopefully) not try to make one or the other break but also to lessen the damage if one does. As folks have said, bad things could happen quickly, but even if not you still might be costing the host club unnecessary fliers and eating up a bunch of time with poorly thought out placement of the respective dogs.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

badbullgator said:


> I agree. A dog told to sit/heel/steady/mark must do so until the handler releases the dog to retrieve. An honor dog breaking is not justification for a working dog to break. Stay/heel/steady means just that, not stay/heel/steady until another dog runs in front of you. If you dog breaks because the honor did, it is greedy and zeros trainability in my book. A working dog should not move until released by the handler.


The test of the interference may not be whether the running dog remains steady or not, the interference may just be that the running dog is distracted and doesn't see the marks. That is why it is important for the judges to always be prepared to act quickly in determining interference, calling a no-bird situation, disqualifying the honor dog & giving the running dog a rerun before something worse happens. And judges can help themselves a lot by not setting up the potential for confrontation between the honor & running dogs.


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Granddaddy said:


> The test of the interference may not be whether the running dog remains steady or not, the interference may just be that the running dog is distracted and doesn't see the marks. That is why it is important for the judges to always be prepared to act quickly in determining interference, calling a no-bird situation, disqualifying the honor dog & giving the running dog a rerun before something worse happens. And judges can help themselves a lot by not setting up the potential for confrontation between the honor & running dogs.


The question was if the working dog breaks, not if it was interfered with and couldn't see the marks. That is a different scenario altogether, but still would not excuse a working dog from breaking. Breaking because the working dog breaks would be no different from breaking if a rabbit ran across the field. The dog sits until released to retrieve.
I fully agree judges must set test that allow for the safety of all dogs in the test, but again the question was about a working dog breaking because the honor dog did. Nothing about an in proper set up, nor was the question "is this a poorly set up test that caused the working dog to break".


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Miriam Wade said:


> I agree with this and I have seen much better replies to my question than mine. That said, it isn't always black & white. The honor dog breaking isn't justification for the working dog to break, but there ARE times when the honor dog breaks AND interferes with the working dog. In a HT the handler of the honor dog must also keep his dog under control in a manner not considered to interfere with the working dog. Why would this be part of the rules if interference were not thought to have an impact on a dog's performance?
> 
> I had an instance where my dog was the working dog. While the marks were going down the honor dog crept a considerable distance, barked and was basically out of control. My dog stayed steady, but when he was released the honor dog was in hot pursuit. The dog was eventually brought under control and my dog remembered his marks, but it was stressful for both my dog and I.
> 
> M



Interference is not breaking. Yes a breaking dog can easily cause interference that leads to a rerun. Maybe, just maybe, and even that is a big maybe, if the honor dogs name is close to the honor dogs and the handler of the honor dog makes a huge commotion and keeps yelling his dogs name I might, just might write it off to confusion and interference. That is a BIG maybe and highly unlikely to happen in my book.

The working dog remains at heel until released by the handler. It may well get a rerun if it sits there, but break and he is out.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

badbullgator said:


> The question was if the working dog breaks, not if it was interfered with and couldn't see the marks. That is a different scenario altogether, but still would not excuse a working dog from breaking. Breaking because the working dog breaks would be no different from breaking if a rabbit ran across the field. The dog sits until released to retrieve.
> I fully agree judges must set test that allow for the safety of all dogs in the test, but again the question was about a working dog breaking because the honor dog did. Nothing about an in proper set up, nor was the question "is this a poorly set up test that caused the working dog to break".


Yes, and I previously answered that the rules clearly prohibit breaking. But the question progressed to interference, which if called in a timely fashion by an attentive judge might prevent a subsequent break due to circumstances that the other dogs in the event do not have to face. But using your example since the rabbit caused an interference that was unique causing that particular dog to be subject to conditions not faced by the other dogs in the event, if the judges are attentive & quick to call interference, it would preclude a potential break due to unique & unfair circumstances.


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Granddaddy said:


> Yes, and I previously answered that the rules clearly prohibit breaking. But the question progressed to interference, which if called in a timely fashion by an attentive judge might prevent a subsequent break due to circumstances that the other dogs in the event do not have to face. But using your example since the rabbit caused an interference that was unique causing that particular dog to be subject to conditions not faced by the other dogs in the event, if the judges are attentive & quick to call interference, it would preclude a potential break due to unique & unfair circumstances.


I do not agree that a judge need to stop a test to prevent interference unless you have a dangerous situation like a potential of two dogs getting too close. A dog breaking and running to a mark is not a dangerous situation in most cases as long as the other dog stays put as it should. 
I would not call interference for a rabbit crossing the field, at least not in a master test. I would be disappointed in a judge who did. What could be more realistic that a wild animal in a hunting scenario? Who ever said the test is exactly the same for each dog in a hunt test. Conditions change throughout the day and may things can change that influence the test and how a dog runs it at different times. 
God forbid a small furry animal runs out while pheasant hunting or coots land in your spread.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Labs said:


> The example I gave, no one would be standing around with their hands in their pockets...stuff happens, and it happens pretty damn quick.
> 
> My point in all of this, is that there isn't a right answer...at least not on the RTF forum. The judges are the ones with the book and the ones to see the dog work...not us. It's a judgement call on whether either dog interfered with the other...To the OP...the correct answer to your question is "depends"....As soon as you go into a test with a concrete answer in your head, and it doesn't work out the way you thought it should, you will be chapped and wondering "wth?"...and most likely posting about it on Monday...
> 
> Too many variables regards -


Agreed, Stuff can happen QUICKLY!!
There are no absolutes in judging, because there are countless variables.
You have to let judges judge based on what they see.
Honor dog breaking may not be much of an interfering steadyness factor or it could be a huge interference.
IT DEPENDS on the situation


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

Not to hi-jack anyone's thread but two questions come to mind when reading the numerous opinions on this subject.
1. Working dog handler is asked to re-heel their dog. They are loud and clearly causing the honor dog to become unsteady with numerous HEEL, HEEL, HEEL. At what point would/should the judges step in and ask the working dog to rope their dog?
2. Honor dog clearly breaks...when can the working dog handler either verbally, or by whistle "sit" their dog? 
Thanks.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

mjh345 said:


> There are no absolutes in judging


Perhaps a review of Field Trial Rules and Standard Procedures would reveal otherwise. These are a few that come to mind
1. Retrieving a decoy
2. Eating a bird
3. Interfering with the working dog
4. Initiating a dog fight
5. Various forms of unsportsmanlike conduct
6. Breaking before being released by the judges whether the working or honoring dog
7. Returning to the handler without a bird 
8. Switching
9. Returning to and systematically hunting an old fall


----------



## truthseeker (Feb 2, 2012)

A break is a break. There is no gray area here.

Keith


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Mike Berube said:


> Not to hi-jack anyone's thread but two questions come to mind when reading the numerous opinions on this subject.
> 1. Working dog handler is asked to re-heel their dog. They are loud and clearly causing the honor dog to become unsteady with numerous HEEL, HEEL, HEEL. At what point would/should the judges step in and ask the working dog to rope their dog?
> 2. Honor dog clearly breaks...when can the working dog handler either verbally, or by whistle "sit" their dog?
> Thanks.


1) The answer to the first is a judgment call. Hopefully the judges are aware and on top of it and will do what is necessary to make it as fair as possible. That said I have had to honor through long torturous honors. Once after my dog was the first to really do this test the gunner radioed in that they were out of birds, woops now we have to bag up birds for an unexpected re-bird, then the 4 wheeler was out of gas, back to the truck for a gas can, then the re-bird, finally after a loooong time we are ready for the next dog. This guy steps out of the holding blind and his dog races ahead 20 yards into the field, the handler is yelling at his dog to re-heel back into the holding blind, not going to happen. His voice is raising higher and higher, my poor dog is so nervous he's trying to climb up on me, the handler final walks up to the line and still after much yelling his dog won't heel back to the mat. Finally the judge just calls for the birds, gives a number and says GO!

2) After the judge gives you your number or tells you to re-heel, hopefully he's on top of it and does that quickly. I actually had that happen at a trial I was judging. Due to these bad stickers in the middle of a dirt road we were running off of, we had the honor dog far right with me standing by to watch and release the honor while my co-judge was far left to call for birds and release the working dog. Well this one honor dog creeps way out there, more as each bird goes down, you could tell he was going to break which he did as the flyer was shot. The honor dog handler yells SIT! and I hear the working dog handler yell SIT! My co-judge and I have a little pow-wow and he tells me he also saw the honor dog breaking and the second the flyer was shot he gave a number, so technically the dog broke on his number. We gave the dog a re-run and he placed third. Had we had judged that working dog as breaking with the honor dog he would have been out. 

John


----------



## Mike Berube (Feb 8, 2003)

Let me be a little more specific in regard to my second question. Honor dog clearly breaks...honor dog handler is yelling for his dog to stop and come back as in "NO...HEEEERE".

As we all know this happens in super slow motion yet in real time warp speed. Once the honor dog handler starts yelling at his/her dog, when can the working dog handler say anything to his/her dog?

Thanks


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Mike Berube said:


> Let me be a little more specific in regard to my second question. Honor dog clearly breaks...honor dog handler is yelling for his dog to stop and come back as in "NO...HEEEERE".
> 
> As we all know this happens in super slow motion yet in real time warp speed. Once the honor dog handler starts yelling at his/her dog, when can the working dog handler say anything to his/her dog?
> 
> Thanks


In AKC, the handler would have to wait until the judge either releases the dog or tells him to heel his dog.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Mike Berube said:


> Let me be a little more specific in regard to my second question. Honor dog clearly breaks...honor dog handler is yelling for his dog to stop and come back as in "NO...HEEEERE".
> 
> As we all know this happens in super slow motion yet in real time warp speed. Once the honor dog handler starts yelling at his/her dog, when can the working dog handler say anything to his/her dog?
> 
> Thanks


The simple answer is before your dog breaks, if the judges are too involved with the antics of the honor dog they could forget to excuse you in a timely fashion. If you thought your dog might break I would quietly take him off line and let the judges sort it out. If your dog breaks there is no remedy. As John stated by rule you should not leave the line until excused but if that does not happen in a timely fashion what have you got to lose by excusing yourself before your dog commits a fatal error.


----------



## rookie (Sep 22, 2003)

Ok Doc ED how about this! Working dog breaks and mark is right in front of the honor dog but falls short. Working dog breaks and runs straight at the honor dog. Honor dog bolts to the right but makes no attemp to retrieve the bird! A defensive move by the honor dog but both dogs were dropped. It happened to me at Copper River club. Yes there were two dog fights during that series but not my dog. Poor setup but you paid for their opinion. To me that was interference and my dog should not have been dropped. Guess that is why I run FTs judging is better for the most part and I like the challenge!
Warren Price
www.trainrite.net



EdA said:


> Perhaps a review of Field Trial Rules and Standard Procedures would reveal otherwise. These are a few that come to mind
> 1. Retrieving a decoy
> 2. Eating a bird
> 3. Interfering with the working dog
> ...


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Warren
Does that mean we won't be seeing you in any more HT?


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

rookie said:


> Ok Doc ED how about this! Working dog breaks and mark is right in front of the honor dog but falls short. Working dog breaks and runs straight at the honor dog. Honor dog bolts to the right but makes no attemp to retrieve the bird! A defensive move by the honor dog but both dogs were dropped. It happened to me at Copper River club. Yes there were two dog fights during that series but not my dog. Poor setup but you paid for their opinion. To me that was interference and my dog should not have been dropped. Guess that is why I run FTs judging is better for the most part and I like the challenge!
> Warren Price
> www.trainrite.net


The interference clause is not applicable because there was no interference with the working dog by the honoring dog. If I correctly understand the scenario the working dog broke, not for the bird but for your dog. If that is correct the working dog is excused and possibly written up in the field trial report. If I understand the scenario I would give the honor dog an opportunity to recover from the incident, ask the handler if he was ready and call the next dog to line the honor dog again under judgement. That being said I do not think that if the honor dog so threatened was disturbed enough it would be wrong to rule it had fulfilled the honor, excuse it, and have a bye dog on lead to honor for the next working dog.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

JMHO and I mean that, but I believe that this thread is making a mole out of an ant hill. Do what is best for the team and let the dice roll. Afterwards...communicate for reason or explanation after test.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

A long time ago I was running with Jim Gonia on honor. As the flyer went off my dog lifted his butt and Gonia's dog broke off the honor. Jim a big tall, intimidating handler yelled SIT so loud my dog practically s--t his pants and sat like a rock.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

John Robinson said:


> A long time ago I was running with Jim Gonia on honor. As the flyer went off my dog lifted his butt and Gonia's dog broke off the honor. Jim a big tall, intimidating handler. He yelled SIT so loud my dog practically s--t his pants and sat like a rock.


LOL. I got an visual of that.


----------



## rookie (Sep 22, 2003)

Tom
I ran my last one after the MN in Alabama! I like the FT much game better but never say never! I have a lot of friends that love the H/T like you. Just my humble opinion but a F/T is a far bigger challenge than a Master Hunt test! You should try it if you like competition. Hope all is well with you and the wife.
Warren


Thomas D said:


> Warren
> Does that mean we won't be seeing you in any more HT?


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

badbullgator said:


> I do not agree that a judge need to stop a test to prevent interference unless you have a dangerous situation like a potential of two dogs getting too close. A dog breaking and running to a mark is not a dangerous situation in most cases as long as the other dog stays put as it should.
> I would not call interference for a rabbit crossing the field, at least not in a master test. I would be disappointed in a judge who did. What could be more realistic that a wild animal in a hunting scenario? Who ever said the test is exactly the same for each dog in a hunt test. Conditions change throughout the day and may things can change that influence the test and how a dog runs it at different times.
> God forbid a small furry animal runs out while pheasant hunting or coots land in your spread.


I don't believe interference isn't limited to whether working dog can see the marks or whether the interference presents potential danger (examples you used in previous posts) while both could be interference the circumstances of interference are subjective & can be called by a judge at his discretion. In your post above you mention a rabbit & indicate its running across the setup would not be grounds for calling interference. I would disagree. If that rabbit got the attention of the working dog causing the dog to potentially miss other marks thrown it is interference. I would certainly call interference because this is a circumstance the judge can control & which the other working dogs didn't face. Weather conditions are not circumstances that the judge can control, nor time of day - and lest you forget we are not hunting where there are a number of circumstances potentially to be faced that cannot be controlled by the judges - and you don't stop hunting because the dog didn't respond as you would like. Certainly we all want a dog that can handle any interference without blinking but reality indicates that doesn't happen, so as the judge you attempt to create a scenario that is repeatable & reasonably equitable to all of the working dogs - and the rules clearly allow it. And this applies in potential breaking situations. If a judge is alert and quick to call interference the moment it occurs, it can save a working dog from potentially being eliminated by breaking. IMO, that is good judging & should be the aim of the judges.


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

John Robinson said:


> A long time ago I was running with Jim Gonia on honor. As the flyer went off my dog lifted his butt and Gonia's dog broke off the honor. Jim a big tall, intimidating handler yelled SIT so loud my dog practically s--t his pants and sat like a rock.


I laughed out loud on this. My dog broke after smoking (of course) a SR test. The judges and I were sort of having fun with it and said I did the same thing to the by dog for our honor.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

rookie said:


> Tom
> I ran my last one after the MN in Alabama! I like the FT much game better but never say never! I have a lot of friends that love the H/T like you. Just my humble opinion but a F/T is a far bigger challenge than a Master Hunt test! You should try it if you like competition. Hope all is well with you and the wife.
> Warren


I'm liking running HT less. Still enjoy judging them though. Last yr I ran my first HT in 30 years. Got a jam in Q. Don't know if I will do more but it was enjoyable. I'm getting old and so are dogs!


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

EdA said:


> Perhaps a review of Field Trial Rules and Standard Procedures would reveal otherwise. These are a few that come to mind
> 1. Retrieving a decoy
> 2. Eating a bird
> 3. Interfering with the working dog
> ...


You got me Ed; I used an absolute in saying that there are NO absolutes.

My point was that there is ALMOST always a grey area that requires some judgement as to constitutes a violation. I believe this would pertain to all of your examples listed above except for 1 & 7


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Interpretation of the rules or not. In practice if the honor dog takes the working dog with them, or the working dog takes the honor dog with them both are out . Most of the time if either working dog or honor dog interferes with the other, by moving toward the other dog close enough to cause an issue, the offender and other dog will go out. I've had the working dog move over and sit in front of my honor dog, had the honor dog do the same to the working dog. Both situtation enough for the judge to call the test, still usually the judges don't stop the test till the birds are down if one breaks & they both go. Both are out.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Too many times judges wait to see the performance of the working dog (if honor dog is interfering) hoping all will work out ok. Judges need to step up stop the test rope the honor dog and re run working dog in 3.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

Granddaddy said:


> I don't believe interference isn't limited to whether working dog can see the marks or whether the interference presents potential danger (examples you used in previous posts) while both could be interference the circumstances of interference are subjective & can be called by a judge at his discretion. In your post above you mention a rabbit & indicate its running across the setup would not be grounds for calling interference. I would disagree. If that rabbit got the attention of the working dog causing the dog to potentially miss other marks thrown it is interference. I would certainly call interference because this is a circumstance the judge can control & which the other working dogs didn't face. Weather conditions are not circumstances that the judge can control, nor time of day - and lest you forget we are not hunting where there are a number of circumstances potentially to be faced that cannot be controlled by the judges - and you don't stop hunting because the dog didn't respond as you would like. Certainly we all want a dog that can handle any interference without blinking but reality indicates that doesn't happen, so as the judge you attempt to create a scenario that is repeatable & reasonably equitable to all of the working dogs - and the rules clearly allow it. And this applies in potential breaking situations. If a judge is alert and quick to call interference the moment it occurs, it can save a working dog from potentially being eliminated by breaking. IMO, that is good judging & should be the aim of the judges.


Well said.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Only replying because I didn't see where anyone mentioned the risk in this situation. That being the potential dog fight that could occur, causing injury and more consequences for one or both dogs.

Due to the risk of a dog fight, I see no problem with the working dog's handler IMMEDIATELY taking the dog off line in the event of the honor dog breaking. Safety first. I don't want two dogs trying to retrieve the same bird and getting into a fight in the process. 

As a the working dog handler I'm going to get my dog OUT of that potentially bad situation ASAP by whatever means necessary.

If they happen to both break (honor dog first), then let the working dog play. He not only has to sit steady after breaking once (and potentially getting rewarded), but then he has to honor. Likelihood of him dropping himself in one or the other of those situations is very high. No need to get into a dispute with anyone over the rule (one man's break is another man's interference). Give the working dog benefit of the doubt and save yourself the Monday morning QBing on RTF.

What's the worst thing that happens? The working dog passes? Likelihood of another dog failing for the exact same situation is very low, especially if they are all treated equitably. Very few chances for argument when another dog breaks from either position.

This is for HT only. In a FT any dog that breaks probably has no chance of contending for a ribbon and thus, should be dropped.


----------



## Labs (Jun 18, 2008)

DarrinGreene said:


> Only replying because I didn't see where anyone mentioned the risk in this situation. That being the potential dog fight that could occur, causing injury and more consequences for one or both dogs.
> 
> Due to the risk of a dog fight, I see no problem with the working dog's handler IMMEDIATELY taking the dog off line in the event of the honor dog breaking. Safety first. I don't want two dogs trying to retrieve the same bird and getting into a fight in the process.
> 
> ...


Agree....I said this back on post 26...;-)


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

mjh345 said:


> You got me Ed; I used an absolute in saying that there are NO absolutes.
> 
> My point was that there is ALMOST always a grey area that requires some judgement as to constitutes a violation. I believe this would pertain to all of your examples listed above except for 1 & 7


Not to further hijack the thread but I don't follow your post #66. 
I have seen circumstances that would, IMO, absolve the dog for some of the listed disqualifications. #7 An un-shot flyer that sneaks away w/o anyone realizing it? Yes, a good hunting dog should chase down a cripple, but a bird w/o blood scent that runs through a field of previously shot flyers is not, IMO, a fair test for the dog. #6-I noted in an earlier post a working dog that was bumped - and bumped hard - by the breaking honor dog. Was it fair to drop the WD? 
As for the rest I can't come up with any passable excuses, stuff happens. And judges need to be aware of situations that might require consideration for the dog. 
But that's just my opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it.


----------



## Mark Littlejohn (Jun 16, 2006)

I'm not sure whether I'm more disheartened or frightened for the sport. 
3 days, 70 posts later and there are still arguments for allowing a break in a Master test.
Save the trees. Don't print rulebooks.


----------



## dexdoolittle (Apr 26, 2008)

And then people wonder why there are 1769 dogs qualified for the MN 


Mark Littlejohn said:


> I'm not sure whether I'm more disheartened or frightened for the sport.
> 3 days, 70 posts later and there are still arguments for allowing a break in a Master test.
> Save the trees. Don't print rulebooks.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Mark Littlejohn said:


> I'm not sure whether I'm more disheartened or frightened for the sport.
> 3 days, 70 posts later and there are still arguments for allowing a break in a Master test.
> Save the trees. Don't print rulebooks.


I don't see many if any arguing for a break being acceptable. I have heard folks say there are times dogs break, get thrown out & had there been competent & alert judging the situations might have been different....


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

dexdoolittle said:


> And then people wonder why there are 1769 dogs qualified for the MN


801 so far this year. Where did the other 968 come from?


----------



## Mark Littlejohn (Jun 16, 2006)

Granddaddy said:


> I don't see many if any arguing for a break being acceptable. I have heard folks say there are times dogs break, get thrown out & had there been competent & alert judging the situations might have been different....


Would you prefer I had said a break being "excused"? I see plenty of posts suggesting that interference should merit a rerun for a working dog that breaks. (See #'s 26 & 70). If that's not suggesting that there are circumstances wherein a break is acceptable, then I suppose my reading comprehension could use some work.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Mark Littlejohn said:


> Would you prefer I had said a break being "excused"? *I see plenty of posts suggesting that interference should merit a rerun *for a working dog that breaks. (See #'s 26 & 70). If that's not suggesting that there are circumstances wherein a break is acceptable, *then I suppose my reading comprehension could use some work*.



Apparently so, if 2 posts out of 78 are considered a lot.........


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

I think without reading back through every post there was a consensus that for the most part both dogs would be dropped. There were a few, not a majority, trying to envision some extreme circumstance where interference could be interpreted. This is typical RTF where we dwell on the 1% exception to what happens 99% of the time.


----------



## dexdoolittle (Apr 26, 2008)

The other 968 came from Sarcasm :razz:


Good Dogs said:


> 801 so far this year. Where did the other 968 come from?


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

If I'm handling the working dog according to a lot of you guys I'm getting dropped for talking to her because when the honor dog goes, we're outta there.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Kinda like leaving before judge calls a no bird.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

DarrinGreene said:


> If I'm handling the working dog according to a lot of you guys I'm getting dropped for talking to her because when the honor dog goes, we're outta there.


For the sake of argument let's assume the honor dog breaks clean for the flyer, not crossing near the working dog, wouldn't you sit quietly with arms at your side and your dog sitting at heel until the judges instructed you to heel off line?


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> For the sake of argument let's assume the honor dog breaks clean for the flyer, not crossing near the working dog, wouldn't you sit quietly with arms at your side and your dog sitting at heel until the judges instructed you to heel off line?


What if the judges seemingly forgot to release you and you had been sitting there for much longer than anyone else and your dog started to stand? Would you wait for the inevitable break or would you be a clever handler and act like you had been excused.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

John Robinson said:


> For the sake of argument let's assume the honor dog breaks clean for the flyer, not crossing near the working dog, wouldn't you sit quietly with arms at your side and your dog sitting at heel until the judges instructed you to heel off line?


Probably not John. I don't think so. No, not with the dog I have right now. Maybe with a lesser drive dog, but not with this one. If she went I'd have weeks of work to correct it, not to mention she would likely beat the honor dog to the bird and has no problem getting in a dog fight if she feels like her things are being take away. 

She's just not the right dog to take that chance with. 

In general though, I think in a hunting test the dog's safety is worth losing the ribbon over. 

Make it the 4th series of a 100 dog open where we are clean and I might think differently 

Keep in mind also, I can run 10 tests a year withing a couple of hours drive of home. It's not like I drove 8 hours and spent 2 nights in a hotel to walk off the line without giving her a chance. That might change my mindset also.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

EdA said:


> What if the judges seemingly forgot to release you and you had been sitting there for much longer than anyone else and your dog started to stand? Would you wait for the inevitable break or would you be a clever handler and act like you had been excused.


I don't think I'd try to be clever either Dr. Ed. I think I'd just get off the line and take my chances. The judges might give me a break if I "panicked" and broke the rule. They are much less likely to do so if the dog breaks, I think. At least there's an argument to be made that I was just trying to keep everyone safe and prevent a problem. If the dog breaks, no arguments.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Thomas D said:


> Kinda like leaving before judge calls a no bird.


Same thing but I think that's a different situation Tom (low risk to my dog).


----------



## Wayne Nutt (Jan 10, 2010)

Once in a hrc hunt test the judges obviously forgot about me while I was honoring. I just left the line.


----------

