# Qaa2



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

If I remember from the way back days, being qualified all age was not a title, it was sort of something that described your competitive status. At least I don't recall it was on any pedigrees. I don't know... maybe it was, but it was sort of like getting a JAM. (_meh_) 

I dropped into a time warp when the kids came along and now only do HT's. Is QAA and QAA2 a for real title?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

QA2 is now a title. QAA is a designation.


----------



## BJGatley (Dec 31, 2011)

1tulip said:


> If I remember from the way back days, being qualified all age was not a title, it was sort of something that described your competitive status. At least I don't recall it was on any pedigrees. I don't know... maybe it was, but it was sort of like getting a JAM. (_meh_)
> 
> I dropped into a time warp when the kids came along and now only do HT's. Is QAA and QAA2 a for real title?


 Oh Lord…you are going to create a hornet’s nest…
I know what would be said from the trial folks…
BJ


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

I hope not. I only just left Dog-a-holics Anonymous a few years ago when I fell off the wagon and got into HT's. This is something that happened when I wasn't paying any attention. I thought it was some sort of short hand that FT'ers were using these days until I saw a list of AKC titles. 

So, what are the criteria for QAA2?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

1tulip said:


> I hope not. I only just left Dog-a-holics Anonymous a few years ago when I fell off the wagon and got into HT's. This is something that happened when I wasn't paying any attention. I thought it was some sort of short hand that FT'ers were using these days until I saw a list of AKC titles.
> 
> So, what are the criteria for QAA2?


Requirements of QAA met 2 times.

So, 2nd or better in a Qual or JAM or better in an AA stake. Any combination done 2 times.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

BJGatley said:


> When they can't make it...then QAA it is...
> You are an a$$ big time and really don't understand the dog games and what is involved...


Benny, are there no treatment facilities in Blackfoot?


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

captainjack said:


> Requirements of QAA met 2 times.
> 
> So, 2nd or better in a Qual or JAM or better in an AA stake. Any combination done 2 times.


Don't forget that you have to write AKC a check for this title


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

mjh345 said:


> Don't forget that you have to write AKC a check for this title


I like the idea of an official QAA title, but AKC made it too easy and kind of light in my opinion. I don't think two second places in a Qual should amount to any kind of title. I think the CKC method of requiring a win plus five additional points is better. There are many untitled dogs running all age stakes with a multitude of AA Jams and placements who's owners didn't feel it was worth it to file for a QA2 title.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

BJGatley said:


> When they can't make it...then QAA it is...
> You are an a$$ big time and really don't understand the dog games and what is involved...


What on earth is your problem?


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

I think it's a Jam in an Open or a Place in an AM for QAA


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

John Robinson said:


> I like the idea of an official QAA title, but AKC made it too easy and kind of light in my opinion. I don't think two second places in a Qual should amount to any kind of title. I think the CKC method of requiring a win plus five additional points is better. There are many untitled dogs running all age stakes with a multitude of AA Jams and placements who's owners didn't feel it was worth it to file for a QA2 title.


I thought the QA2 title, if they were going to create one, should be linked to the requirement to run a Restricted AA stake. But, it is what it is.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Ken Barton said:


> I think it's a Jam in an Open or a Place in an AM for QAA


It's not. It's a JAM in any AA stake.


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

Do any of you know when the term "QAA" was introduced to retriever field trailers and why? It has a very interesting history.


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

Ok can you quote the rule book for that?


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Ken Barton said:


> Ok can you quote the rule book for that?


This is the application form with the requirements. http://images.akc.org/pdf/events/fi...ion.pdf?_ga=1.106131395.1783438510.1469571608


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

junbe said:


> Do any of you know when the term "QAA" was introduced to retriever field trailers and why? It has a very interesting history.


would love to hear it


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Ken Barton said:


> Ok can you quote the rule book for that?


Yes I can.


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

This came up recently at a trial, and I thought it was as you say but I was corrected-unless it's changed from the 2015 October Rulebook page 21 you can continue to run Qualifying after you Jam an Amateur but not after a Jam in an Open hence you are not Qualified


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

I think this is a common misinterpretation of the Rulebook which is easily done since the verbiage is often convoluted


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Ken Barton said:


> This came up recently at a trial, and I thought it was as you say but I was corrected-unless it's changed from the 2015 October Rulebook page 21 you can continue to run Qualifying after you Jam an Amateur but not after a Jam in an Open hence you are not Qualified


Qualified All Age means Qualified to run a limited All Age Stake. This is a JAM in an any AA stake or 1st or 2nd in a Qual. 

You are speaking of the ability to continue running the Qual. You can be QAA or QA2 for that matter and continue to run the Qual.

This is clear in the rule book.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> I like the idea of an official QAA title, but AKC made it too easy and kind of light in my opinion. I don't think two second places in a Qual should amount to any kind of title. I think the CKC method of requiring a win plus five additional points is better. There are many untitled dogs running all age stakes with a multitude of AA Jams and placements who's owners didn't feel it was worth it to file for a QA2 title.






Totally agree John. I have a dog that got 2 wins in the qual last year but I am not applying for the title. That is my problem with QA2, you have to apply AND pay for it unlike any other title. I know what my dog did and I am proud of him but paying $20 to have it officially printed on a pedigree doesn't change anything. I am just happy to say he is QAA.


----------



## Jared McComis (Aug 12, 2013)

Fairly new to all of this in the grand scheme of things but as a rookie I do like to see the QAA status. To me I look at it as greater than the Hunt Test Titles and less than titles earned from running the Open. Something to shoot for being new in the games, a place where someone stopped who might be operating with limited funds, or a great stopping point for an amature.


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

Ok maybe I'm misinterpreting-a Qualifying or Owner-Handler Q SHALL be for dogs which have never won 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th place or a JAM in an Open, Limited, Special, or Restricted or 1st, 2nd ,3rd, or 4th in an Amateur All-Age or O/H Amateur All-Age Stake or won 1st Places in Qualifying Stakes at licensed or member club trials. Again it's in the Rulebook -you said you could quote the rules- I guess you could enter and run Q's after doing the above because probably no one would notice or care but besides being poor form what's the point.


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

Have the rules changed to accommodate the new QA2?


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

If you don't have a Rulebook-you can download one to your PD


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Ken Barton said:


> Ok maybe I'm misinterpreting-a Qualifying or Owner-Handler Q SHALL be for dogs which have never won 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th place or a JAM in an Open, Limited, Special, or Restricted or 1st, 2nd ,3rd, or 4th in an Amateur All-Age or O/H Amateur All-Age Stake or won 1st Places in Qualifying Stakes at licensed or member club trials. Again it's in the Rulebook -you said you could quote the rules- I guess you could enter and run Q's after doing the above because probably no one would notice or care but besides being poor form what's the point.


You are reading the rule that says when you can no longer run the Qual. That has nothing at all to do with you being Qualified All Age. 

If you get a 2nd in the Qual, your dog is QAA, if you do it again, your dog is QA2. And you can continue to enter Quals.

Read the requirements to run a limited. That is where you find what the requirements are to be QAA. I don't believe QAA is defined in the rule book, but maybe it is.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Ken Barton said:


> If you don't have a Rulebook-you can download one to your PD


I could, but I already know the rule. Did you download one? If so, keep reading.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

junbe said:


> Do any of you know when the term "QAA" was introduced to retriever field trailers and why? It has a very interesting history.


Do not know the date but the term QAA was established to set criteria for awarding championship in the Open and Amateur. A stake was/is required to have an adequate number of dogs to provide a sufficient caliber of competition to merit the awarding championship points. That # is and has been 12 for many decades. It is not usually an issue with todays entry numbers( except in some specialties) but in its origins it was.

Tim


----------



## Rip Shively (Sep 5, 2007)

Here's the language from the application on the requirements for the QA2 title "Any dog that on two occasions has met the qualifications to enter a Retriever Field Trial Limited All-Age stake is eligible to be awarded the Qualified All-Age 2 title (QA2). A limited all-age stake shall be for dogs that have previously been placed 1st – 4th or awarded a JAM in an open all-age, limited all-age, special all-age, restricted all-age, amateur all-age, O/H amateur all-age or that have placed 1st or 2nd in a qualifying or O/H qualifying stake. (Chapter 14, Section 10 of the AKC Retriever Field Trial Rules)"


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

Ok so a Qualifying Stake is defined under Limited and not on the previous page under Qualifying Stakes


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

Ok white flag I don't consider myself an expert on the Rulebook and I don't have an IFC but I just got off the phone with Jerry Mann and a Jam in an Amateur does NOT count for a QAA said he would be glad to explain it to you if you called


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

captainjack said:


> You are reading the rule that says when you can no longer run the Qual. That has nothing at all to do with you being Qualified All Age.
> 
> If you get a 2nd in the Qual, your dog is QAA, if you do it again, your dog is QA2. And you can continue to enter Quals.
> 
> Read the requirements to run a limited. That is where you find what the requirements are to be QAA. I don't believe QAA is defined in the rule book, but maybe it is.


Ok, but off the top of my head, I didn't think receiving a Jam in an amateur qualified you for a restricted. I'm too lazy to look it up right now, will later. I qualified all my dogs the old fashioned way with a win in he qual before we moved up.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

John Robinson said:


> Ok, but off the top of my head, I didn't think receiving a Jam in an amateur qualified you for a restricted. I'm too lazy to look it up right now, will later. I qualified all my dogs the old fashioned way with a win in he qual before we moved up.


It doesn't qualify you for restricted, only limited and special (if within time frame).


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Ken Barton said:


> Ok white flag I don't consider myself an expert on the Rulebook and I don't have an IFC but I just got off the phone with Jerry Mann and a Jam in an Amateur does NOT count for a QAA said he would be glad to explain it to you if you called


He couldn't be more wrong. Maybe he needs to call me so I can explain it to him?

Or both of you can read post #31.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Page 25
Must certify that at least 12 starters were eligible to run limited, special, or restricted.

Page 21
Limited All-Age stake shall be for a dog ... Or Awarded a JAM in an... , Amateur or Owner-Handler Amateur...

So a JAM in an Am or O/H Am means the dog is "qualified" to run a Limited or Special All-Age stake. 

Being "qualified" to run a Limited All-Age stake meets the 12 dog minimum for stakes carrying championship points. 

Any combination of two of the criteria that make a dog eligible to run a Limited All-Age stake meets the requirements for the QA2 title. 

Yet some don't think a JAM in a Am or O/H Am makes your dog a "Qualified All-Age", a designation not even expressly defined in the AKC rule book?

Ok then.


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

Wow somehow I don't think I'll be telling Jerry Mann to call you to get straightened out -you the man


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Ken Barton said:


> Wow somehow I don't think I'll be telling Jerry Mann to call you to get straightened out -you the man


I'm not the man. The book is the book. 

https://images.akc.org/pdf/events/field_trials/retrievers/QA2_Title_Announcement.pdf

I also think Jerry Mann may have been involved in the writing of this.

Likely you are misquoting him.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Field Trial Rules and Standard Procedures for Retrievers pg 21-22
A Limited All-Age Stake at a Retriever trial shall be 
for dogs that have previously been placed or awarded a Judges’ Award of Merit in an Open All-Age Stake, Limited All-Age Stake, Special All-Age Stake, RestrictedAll-Age Stake, Amateur All-Age Stake, or Owner-Handler Amateur All-Age Stake carrying Championshippoints in each case, or that have been placed first orsecond in a Qualifying Stake or an Owner-HandlerQualifying Stake. 

Further clarification no dog is eligible to compete in the Qualifying stake that has won 2 Qualifyings, placed or Jammed in an Open All-Age, Limited All-Age, Restricted All-Age, or who has been awarded a place in an Amateur All-Age or Owner Handler All-Age stake.

This are separate rules and only affect who is eligible to compete in various stakes.


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

No it's just the difference of what constitutes QAA -can run Limited for life and Special temporary and needs a Place to run Restricted and can continue to run Q's with a Jam in Amateur but not with a Placement in an Amateur so I guess if you get an QAA2 with 2nds or a Jam in an Amateur you can continue to run Q's but not if you win 2 or Jam an Open or Place an AM?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Ken Barton said:


> No it's just the difference of what constitutes QAA -can run Limited for life and Special temporary and needs a Place to run Restricted and can continue to run Q's with a Jam in Amateur but not with a Placement in an Amateur so I guess if you get an QAA2 with 2nds or a Jam in an Amateur you can continue to run Q's but not if you win 2 or Jam an Open or Place an AM?


Exactly right.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

captainjack said:


> Exactly right.


Like you say, it is what it is, but that's a pretty watered down title.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Don't believe most people put in for the official title, just tend to put the letters at the end of the name as they do QAA. Honorary title still didn't know QAA could be gotten by Jamming an Am. I didn't think you got anything for jamming any stake except getting kicked out of the Qual. Not that I think many people would care to run the Qual if they are Jamming opens. Learn something new. So really no need to try to hit 1st or 2nd in a qual with an older dog to get QAA, just run the Am. right  Still for an unofficial title no-one seems to give much credit to. I seem to see a lot of those QAA-QA2 on puppy-stud advertisements, just saying .


----------



## Renee P. (Dec 5, 2010)

I think the title is useful in that others can see that a particular dog has some accomplishments that aren't otherwise apparent. When I look at a pedigree, there are a lot of dams with no credentials, but if the QA2 title shows up then at least it is easy to see that the dam is/was more than a brood bitch. When puppy shopping, the dam with QA2 looks more appealing to me than one with a JH.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Renee P. said:


> I think the title is useful in that others can see that a particular dog has some accomplishments that aren't otherwise apparent. When I look at a pedigree, there are a lot of dams with no credentials, but if the QA2 title shows up then at least it is easy to see that the dam is/was more than a brood bitch. When puppy shopping, the dam with QA2 looks more appealing to me than one with a JH.


I agree. But with EE available, you can see all you need to see for current dogs.


----------



## Ken Barton (Jun 7, 2010)

You are right -it's very clear, I think...


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

*A little background on the use of the acronym QAA. In the late 40’s, the Golden Retriever Club noticed a difference in show and field dogs. They devised a scheme to identify field Golden Retrievers. This is what they call the star system. They used from one to five stars, depending on the qualifications of the dog. The purpose was for buyers and sellers to give notice that the dog had field ability. Reference to this is the 1948 Golden Retriever Yearbook. Later the Chesapeake Bay Retriever Club introduced a similar star system, but slightly different. Again the purpose was to identify field bred puppies for buyers and sellers. Retriever Field Trial News in the late 1960’s began publishing ads where the dog’s field ability was noted. Some ads actually defined what a 3 star dog was. Basically a 3 star dog is a dog qualified to run a Limited All-Age stake. Later they just called this a Qualified All-Age dog and then finally just the acronym QAA. This designation has been repeated so many times it is now part of retriever folklore. This was first published in ads the early 1970’s. Please note that AKC has never defined the term “qualified all-age.” A Club’s catalog is considered an AKC publication and only approved titles can be used. To use QAA(also ***) in a AKC publication as a title is prohibited. AKC staff is very negligent in not enforcing this rule. *


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

It is no longer folk lore.
The title "QA2 Qualified All-Age 2" gives the criteria for being eligible to run a Limited All-Age stake, met 2 times as the criteria for (or definition of) the Qualified All-Age 2 title. Thus, it stands to reason that meeting any of the criteria one time would be the implied definition of Qualified All-Age.


----------



## dorkweed (Apr 14, 2009)

Follow the *$$$$$$$$$*


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

dorkweed said:


> Follow the *$$$$$$$$$*


BINGO!!
Would have to be brain dead to pay AKC for this "TITLE"


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

I fail to see why anyone cares what people have as their goals for their own dogs, or if they consider QA2 a title and want to pay for it to show up on a pedigree. People should be encouraged and commended for running their dogs, in anything. I think it was Dr. Ed who said something along the lines of now we have QAA snobs? That made me chuckle.


----------



## dorkweed (Apr 14, 2009)

I have no skin in this game as I don't run AKC FT's or hunt tests. Twas just basing my post off of reading here about the various AKC schemes/programs/etc. to generate $$$$. The retriever hunt test and FT world, as far as AKC is concerned, is "small potatoes" when compared to other dog areas for them.

Could it also be that some folks just want a trophy.............whether they have to pay for it or not????


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Rainmaker said:


> I fail to see why anyone cares what people have as their goals for their own dogs, or if they consider QA2 a title and want to pay for it to show up on a pedigree. People should be encouraged and commended for running their dogs, in anything. I think it was Dr. Ed who said something along the lines of now we have QAA snobs? That made me chuckle.


Some discount the title, but I think most discount the need to pay AKC for it. 

I'd have liked to see the same requirement as to run a restricted. This may have encouraged people to run the Am rather than stop with the Q. Plus it would be something that you could look at to see which dogs were eligible rather than go through EE or elsewhere to confirm. But, it is what it is and that's fine, but why should you have to pay money for it, when you don't for JH, SH, MH, AFC, FC, NAFC, or NFC? That part stinks.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Don't believe most people put in for the official title, just tend to put the letters at the end of the name as they do QAA. Honorary title still didn't know QAA could be gotten by Jamming an Am. I didn't think you got anything for jamming any stake except getting kicked out of the Qual. Not that I think many people would care to run the Qual if they are Jamming opens. Learn something new. *So really no need to try to hit 1st or 2nd in a qual with an older dog to get QAA, just run the Am. right  *Still for an unofficial title no-one seems to give much credit to. I seem to see a lot of those QAA-QA2 on puppy-stud advertisements, just saying .


Absolutely, especially for an older dog, but I think it is considerably easier to win a Qual than JAM an amateur.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

captainjack said:


> Some discount the title, but I think most discount the need to pay AKC for it.
> 
> I'd have liked to see the same requirement as to run a restricted. This may have encouraged people to run the Am rather than stop with the Q. Plus it would be something that you could look at to see which dogs were eligible rather than go through EE or elsewhere to confirm. But, it is what it is and that's fine, but why should you have to pay money for it, when you don't for JH, SH, MH, AFC, FC, NAFC, or NFC? That part stinks.


I totally agree, why is there a fee for a title? That part is ridiculous, no doubt.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

captainjack;156628
why should you have to pay money for it said:


> A few thoughts:
> If AKC was really just after the $$$$$ they would start charging for the other title certificates, especially HT titles. There are many times more of them awarded per year than QA2s. A lot more money to be made.
> 
> If when a dog earned an AFC,FC, NAFC or NFC title it cost $100 would many complain? Most would be happy to write that check!
> ...


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Tim Carrion said:


> A few thoughts:
> If AKC was really just after the $$$$$ they would start charging for the other title certificates, especially HT titles. There are many times more of them awarded per year than QA2s. A lot more money to be made.
> 
> If when a dog earned an AFC,FC, NAFC or NFC title it cost $100 would many complain? Most would be happy to write that check!
> ...


I disagree. to start charging for the other titles will reverse a long-standing policy, to start charging for the new title did not.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Hey... if I qualified for an All Age title, I'd find the next hundred dollars to be able to use the title my dog earned. But I would be steamed... the reason you enter AKC events, the reason you pay a couple bucks to register your dog's pedigree... the reason you do all that is that the AKC is a closed shop. So we're playing by their rules, supporting the clubs and sports that make the organization what it is... 

It would just be wrong to begin going down the road road of adding a new layer of fees.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

1tulip said:


> Hey... if I qualified for an All Age title, I'd find the next hundred dollars to be able to use the title my dog earned. But I would be steamed... the reason you enter AKC events, the reason you pay a couple bucks to register your dog's pedigree... the reason you do all that is that the AKC is a closed shop. So we're playing by their rules, supporting the clubs and sports that make the organization what it is...
> 
> It would just be wrong to begin going down the road road of adding a new layer of fees.


I bet you are not alone in your thinking.


----------



## dorkweed (Apr 14, 2009)

But all dogs deserve trophies!!!


----------



## wojo (Jun 29, 2008)

It is very disappointing to come on to RTF and a see topic that could be very informative or to have a pleasant debate. But , then it starts and over time the naysayers, the contrarians, the chronic negatives and the just plain angry take over and the post dies. Not necessarily just this post.

Lets look at the title perhaps differently. I am 75 and train my own dogs to run The Hunt Test sport. Many look at my choice with wrinkled nose and belittle my accomplishments as puny. I have run a a few Q's and haven't come close to any sort of ribbon. But if I ever do I will be happy for me and my buddy because we as a team have accomplished something for us. And if we ever get a Q title I will proudly post next to my dogs name. I won't post anything on RTF because I would not want to annoy the elitist that seem to have hijacked the forum. We as dog people should share the same passion regardless of the event we participate in. 

My master national plates are proudly displayed. And if you stop to have a brew just ignore them ,their not worth much anyway. 

So my dogs friends you have a bless day. Me and my curs are going to run a wimpy triple and 
perhaps they will be fortunate enough to stumble on to a couple of blinds. 

I grew up in Wisconsin and have been duck hunting sense I was 10. Killed few ducks in my life,just sayin. Very sad to see what the dogs game have morphed into, way to much anger.

"The journey is the reward " Tao saying


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

wojo said:


> It is very disappointing to come on to RTF and a see topic that could be very informative or to have a pleasant debate. But , then it starts and over time the naysayers, the contrarians, the chronic negatives and the just plain angry take over and the post dies. Not necessarily just this post.
> 
> Lets look at the title perhaps differently. I am 75 and train my own dogs to run The Hunt Test sport. Many look at my choice with wrinkled nose and belittle my accomplishments as puny. I have run a a few Q's and haven't come close to any sort of ribbon. But if I ever do I will be happy for me and my buddy because we as a team have accomplished something for us. And if we ever get a Q title I will proudly post next to my dogs name. I won't post anything on RTF because I would not want to annoy the elitist that seem to have hijacked the forum. We as dog people should share the same passion regardless of the event we participate in.
> 
> ...






Seems as though you interpret some of these posts different than I do but you are entitled to your opinion. I don't think anybody belittled another's accomplishments. Everybody is entitled to their opinion just as you are. For me personally I was plenty happy with the QAA designation and did not see the need for a QA2 title but if someone wants to fork out the $$ for the title that's ok with me and they should be proud of it. For me I am proud of accomplishing it but it is just milestone on the road to a higher goal which I may or may not reach. I'm not happy with a 2 pound large mouth I want a 12 pound hawg but that's just me.
I see you have titled some std poodles. Not my cup of tea but dude now that's an accomplishment, congratulations!!!!!!


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

John Robinson said:


> Absolutely, especially for an older dog, but I think it is considerably easier to win a Qual than JAM an amateur.


Most likely but it, Really depends on the dog, the judges and the field. Realistically with the Qual you never really know what your going to get. Have seen quals put on by judges that were pretty much the open, have seen others that are basically a SH test, with an added mark. Also when there's 27 Ams and 45 qual dogs realistically the odds favor 4 placements and Jams out 27, over only 1st and 2nd out of 45 in a Qual. Done the Qual a few of times, everyone has been over 35 dogs. Just seems to me there's more bang for the investment in the Am. Sure a a jam can get you QAA, but a placement can get you more. Got to go to the line and pick the birds up in either one, got to make it from series to series in either one, but got to beat everyone including a line a Pro dogs in the Qual. If a dog is ready might as well move them up.


----------



## wojo (Jun 29, 2008)

Thank You for the complement. I was trying to remind us all that we are all on the same side. And goals and results are the only difference


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> Just seems to me there's more bang for the investment in the Am. Sure a a jam can get you QAA, but a placement can get you more. Got to go to the line and pick the birds up in either one, got to make it from series to series in either one, but got to beat everyone including a line a Pro dogs in the Qual. If a dog is ready might as well move them up.


If you can't place in a qual, good luck with the Am, no matter how small the entry. I see people that move up because they are embarrassed to keep running the Q, and they rarely start placing in the Am. We don't have many quals that are like seniors around here either. There is more arguing about the qual on here. People should just do what they want to do, and not worry about what others think.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> If you can't place in a qual, good luck with the Am, no matter how small the entry. I see people that move up because they are embarrassed to keep running the Q, and they rarely start placing in the Am. We don't have many quals that are like seniors around here either. There is more arguing about the qual on here. People should just do what they want to do, and not worry about what others think.


ii
It is all about what you and your dog can accomplish, if your level is the Qualifying and you and your dog enjoy that level then good for you but don't give up at that level, strive for more. I have run a couple of qualifyings where the marks were about Amateur level but the blinds were not and the competition was relatively light as compared to an all-age stake. At the risk of being labeled elitist I remind everyone that there is a reason the Qualifying Stake is classified as a minor stake.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> It is all about what you and your dog can accomplish


I think most owners in the Q want more, but in the Q they get more line experience, and sometimes that's what some dogs need to move up; they need to be successful.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Most likely but it, Really depends on the dog, the judges and the field. Realistically with the Qual you never really know what your going to get. Have seen quals put on by judges that were pretty much the open, have seen others that are basically a SH test, with an added mark. Also when there's 27 Ams and 45 qual dogs realistically the odds favor 4 placements and Jams out 27, over only 1st and 2nd out of 45 in a Qual. Done the Qual a few of times, everyone has been over 35 dogs. Just seems to me there's more bang for the investment in the Am. Sure a a jam can get you QAA, but a placement can get you more. Got to go to the line and pick the birds up in either one, got to make it from series to series in either one, but got to beat everyone including a line a Pro dogs in the Qual. If a dog is ready might as well move them up.






Guess it depends on where your running. I ran 11 quals last year in UT and ID and all were pretty much average and decent quals. One had 30 dogs and one had 29 but there was a scratch or two most averaged 24 to 25 entries. Not one was anywhere near an open or a senior hunt test. Good competition at all of them but not much in the way of major pros. A couple of major pros but they only had one or two dogs. Personally I like running against the big pros. Qual in Niland in two weeks only has 19 dogs
*"IF *the dog is ready might as well move up". Well now that if a pretty darn big if. I won two quals last year and now I have to move up but READY? That's a pretty tall order to fill!


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Like Ed said, I have seen over the top Qual first series that were equal to or harder than the Open first, but after that the balance shifts back to the Open. There is no comparison between most AA blinds and Qual blinds. Not saying it never happened, but 99% of the time over four series, the AA stake is going to be significantly harder than the Qual.


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

It's been my experience (limited to 6-7 trials per year), that many times you have to be perfect to win the Q. In fact, I've been perfect and got a 4th. Not poor judging or complaining, likely there were 4 dogs very near perfection. The difficulty of the AA stakes makes it extremely rare that a dog, or 4 dogs finish without a bobble. 

I've finished 3 Amateurs with a dog that just couldn't put a perfect Q together. Maybe if I kept her in the Q she would have, but she was doing so well that I started double staking her and got an Am 3rd pretty quickly.


----------



## Huff (Feb 11, 2008)

ErinsEdge said:


> > It is all about what you and your dog can accomplish
> 
> 
> I think most owners in the Q want more, but in the Q they get more line experience, and sometimes that's what some dogs need to move up; they need to be successful.



And sometimes us handlers need the line time too.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

captainjack said:


> It's been my experience (limited to 6-7 trials per year), that many times you have to be perfect to win the Q. In fact, I've been perfect and got a 4th. Not poor judging or complaining, likely there were 4 dogs very near perfection. The difficulty of the AA stakes makes it extremely rare that a dog, or 4 dogs finish without a bobble.
> 
> I've finished 3 Amateurs with a dog that just couldn't put a perfect Q together. Maybe if I kept her in the Q she would have, but she was doing so well that I started double staking her and got an Am 3rd pretty quickly.


Much better verbiage than I, but basically this is my take as well. Seems in a Qual several dogs will finish, very strong if not perfect and only 2 of those dogs will get 1st or 2nd=QAA, just depends on how the judges place them that day. So you got a dog that is finishing the Qual but not getting 1st or 2nd for whatever reason. Why is it a "sacrilege" to think that dog just might do better in the Am. if QAA or Q2A is the goal, as it is for many people who tend to run mulitple venues? Just might be the better way for some, particularly older more experienced dogs, who like running tough blinds .


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Much better verbiage than I, but basically this is my take as well. Seems in a Qual several dogs will finish, very strong if not perfect and only 2 of those dogs will get 1st or 2nd=QAA, just depends on how the judges place them that day. So you got a dog that is finishing the Qual strongly but not getting 1st or 2nd for whatever reason. Why is it a "sacrilege" to think that dog just might do better in the Am. if a QAA is a goal, as it is for many people who tend to run mulitple venues? Just might be the better way for some.


It's not a sacrilege, if your dog is ready for the all age, you should run all age. I was just saying, IMO it is easier to place 1-2 in a Qual than Jam an amateur.

On the other hand, I have a dog who totally makes yours and CaptJack's point. When he was 2 -1/2, he was training on all age test during the week, then running Qs on the weekend. With all age test he had to bear down a work, then he would see a relatively easy Qual test and relax enough to do it but not do it well enough to win. I ran him in a tough amateur on his third birthday where he got a reserve jam, so I see your point.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

mjh345 said:


> BINGO!!
> Would have to be brain dead to pay AKC for this "TITLE"


Guess I must be brain dead. I paid for the title, why you may ask? Because Bullet was my first FT dog and when his body said no more and I had to retire him before I wanted, I knew he would never finish his FC or AFC title even though he had his Am win and enough points for his FC. I also had to scratch him from his last Master test, which would of been his title. I did it for ME! I wanted something to frame and hang on the wall....something that made him an officially titled dog....it was all for me! It doesn't matter whether it shows up on his pedigree because he never sired any litters. 

If if you don't like the idea of paying for the title then don't. However, sometimes things aren't what they appear on the surface...

FOM


----------



## wojo (Jun 29, 2008)

For me a Q title is the goal. And that my friend is enough. I love the Master National experience. perhaps not much of an achievement for some ,but for me and many others it's a big deal.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

wojo said:


> For me a Q title is the goal. And that my friend is enough. I love the Master National experience. perhaps not much of an achievement for some ,but for me and many others it's a big deal.


I see a lot of MH and HRC titles there, quite impressive! My goal for my first dog was just to reliably swim out as far as the decoys to retrieve a duck. Early on we discovered hunt test, then a JH title became our goal. That dog and I learned the ropes together as we moved up from junior to senior and finally master. With our next dog field trials were our goal, ultimately QAA and MH were as far as we got with that dog, (Cody in my avatar). At that point my wife and I agreed that future goals were to take each dog as far as the dog was able as long as he enjoyed it.

We've been blessed to be able to make all four of our field trial dogs QAA, put all age points on three, make the derby list and run two Nationals, but our main goal is for the dogs to keep having fun.


----------



## BrettG (Apr 4, 2005)

I have run 2 quals with my girl (first field trial dog). She ran 2 others on her trip up north this summer. She got 2nd in only the 2nd Q I've seen. I moved her up to the am 2 weeks later but she came in heat so we had to scratch. If I get a chance for the title I'll pay for it but I want run any more quals. For me its all a learning experience and I'm too poor to run a bunch of trials so In the spring when I get to run It'll be in the am trying to survive and learn as much as I can. Right now I'm still tickled to have a QAA dog that I trained.


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> I see a lot of MH and HRC titles there, quite impressive! My goal for my first dog was just to reliably swim out as far as the decoys to retrieve a duck. Early on we discovered hunt test, then a JH title became our goal. That dog and I learned the ropes together as we moved up from junior to senior and finally master. With our next dog field trials were our goal, ultimately QAA and MH were as far as we got with that dog, (Cody in my avatar). At that point my wife and I agreed that future goals were to take each dog as far as the dog was able as long as he enjoyed it.
> 
> We've been blessed to be able to make all four of our field trial dogs QAA, put all age points on three, make the derby list and run two Nationals, *but our main goal is for the dogs to keep having fun*.



How can you not agree with everything this guy just said..... We all have our own goals..

Boring anecdotal story to follow,,,,,

I was training one day at Cherylons... Flinch wasn't very old..She had only been outa the yard for a short time,and hadn't run many true cold blinds.. The FT group set up a blind... Cherylon suggested we run it.. We did... When Flinch picked up the bird, Cherylon said to me "That was really a pretty decent job..... I walked away from the line ,headed back to my truck feelin pretty good.. As I passed TEDS truck, he commented out his window, that we had done a nice job on that blind.... I will never forget that day!! It means more to me than many of the ribbons we have received..

I have gotten to the point where Training is much more enjoyable for ME than running tests..


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

FOM said:


> Guess I must be brain dead. I paid for the title, why you may ask? Because Bullet was my first FT dog and when his body said no more and I had to retire him before I wanted, I knew he would never finish his FC or AFC title even though he had his Am win and enough points for his FC. I also had to scratch him from his last Master test, which would of been his title. I did it for ME! I wanted something to frame and hang on the wall....something that made him an officially titled dog....it was all for me! It doesn't matter whether it shows up on his pedigree because he never sired any litters.
> 
> If if you don't like the idea of paying for the title then don't. However, sometimes things aren't what they appear on the surface...
> 
> FOM


Exactly. And good for you, Lainee.


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

captainjack said:


> I agree. But with EE available, you can see all you need to see for current dogs.


Not true these days. I can't even find the record on some of my own dogs and much of their profile information is no longer there, though I updated everyone when asked to do so earlier this year. Not to mention if you are looking up a popular dog, say Ali, there are a zillion entries to go through to try to find the one with the actual trial record. Not arguing your point, I used to use EE to verify dogs myself, but it has become an exercise in frustration now, too often. I go to Retriever Results instead.


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

FOM said:


> Guess I must be brain dead. I paid for the title, why you may ask? Because Bullet was my first FT dog and when his body said no more and I had to retire him before I wanted, I knew he would never finish his FC or AFC title even though he had his Am win and enough points for his FC. I also had to scratch him from his last Master test, which would of been his title. I did it for ME! I wanted something to frame and hang on the wall....something that made him an officially titled dog....it was all for me! It doesn't matter whether it shows up on his pedigree because he never sired any litters.
> 
> If if you don't like the idea of paying for the title then don't. However, sometimes things aren't what they appear on the surface...
> 
> FOM


My apologees Lainee. 
I misstated my message

Bullet was a great dog. 
My point was not that people are brain dead to pay for the title, but that the AKC is a bunch of money hungry whores.
You earn a title, you don't buy it; you should not have to pay for a title.

Bullet was a great dog. The fact that he had an all age win and over ten AA points proves that he was also a great and talented performer

Bullet IMHO is a great example of The hypocrisy of the AKC charging for this title.
Why should a dog such as Bullet with an AA win and 10+ AA points not be titled if his owner refused to pay the AKC their $20 while a dog that may have gotten a couple of jams or 2nd places in a MINOR stake have that title if his owner pays the $20?


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

mjh345 said:


> My apologees Lainee.
> I misstated my message
> 
> Bullet was a great dog.
> ...


+1,000!!!!


----------



## younggun86 (May 2, 2013)

You are wrong and whoever you talked to, if you JAM in any all age stake you are QAA, i took and RJ in and AM this fall and was now QAA.




Ken Barton said:


> Ok white flag I don't consider myself an expert on the Rulebook and I don't have an IFC but I just got off the phone with Jerry Mann and a Jam in an Amateur does NOT count for a QAA said he would be glad to explain it to you if you called


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

captainjack said:


> Page 25
> Must certify that at least 12 starters were eligible to run limited, special, or restricted.
> 
> Page 21
> ...


So reading this Q2A requires doing the above "quotes" 2 times; Historically if I recall correctly "never official" QAA was always given if a dog took 1st or 2nd in the Qual. a JAM in the Open, and I thought an Am. Placement. all done a single time, either that or they were somewhat considered the requirements for not-being eligible to run the Qual. But the rule book doesn't define QAA, it does define Q2A is awarded for doing the requirements for a limited 2 times which includes Jamming an Am. So as that is defined the assumption is QAA is after such requirements are met once, which makes since as it's 1/2 to a Q2A. Sounds like the rule-book isn't clear on QAA as it's not a title; but the requirements for Q2A outline 2 Am. Jams being a way to it. So general feeling is if you Jam an AM. you are QAA, guess people are going to have to look into those EE records if they are interested in exactly how it was accomplished. Dang might have to outline QAA officially in the rule-book stop any confusion. As you can bet most people will continue to use the unoffical title, as they always have.

Never really understood why you would need a placement in an Am to be considered QAA, no points etc. are awarded in a qual nor for QAA, the ability to finish a Major stake, also equates to 0 points, but it definitely illustrates something, seems like a good marker. Whereas placing in a Am. gives AA points, which goes to an official record, which I believe "most" would consider carries a tad more impact than QAA or Q2A.


----------



## JKOttman (Feb 3, 2004)

Maybe... with an emphasis on maybe... a way to look at one aspect of this discussion is that QAA is a qualification and QA2 is a title.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> So reading this Q2A requires doing the above "quotes" 2 times; Historically if I recall correctly "never official" QAA was always given if a dog took 1st or 2nd in the Qual. a JAM in the Open, and I thought an Am. Placement. all done a single time, either that or they were somewhat considered the requirements for not-being eligible to run the Qual. But the rule book doesn't define QAA, it does define Q2A is awarded for doing the requirements for a limited 2 times which includes Jamming an Am. So as that is defined the assumption is QAA is after such requirements are met once, which makes since as it's 1/2 to a Q2A. Sounds like the rule-book isn't clear on QAA as it's not a title; but the requirements for Q2A outline 2 Am. Jams being a way to it. So general feeling is if you Jam an AM. you are QAA, guess people are going to have to look into those EE records if they are interested in exactly how it was accomplished. Dang might have to outline QAA officially in the rule-book stop any confusion. As you can bet most people will continue to use the unoffical title, as they always have.
> 
> Never really understood why you would need a placement in an Am to be considered QAA, no points etc. are awarded in a qual nor for QAA, the ability to finish a Major stake, also equates to 0 points, but it definitely illustrates something, seems like a good marker. Whereas placing in a Am. gives AA points, which goes to an official record, which I believe "most" would consider carries a tad more impact than QAA or Q2A.


how difficult is this to understand?

Field Trial Rules and Standard Procedures for Retrievers pg 21-22
A Limited All-Age Stake at a Retriever trial shall be
for dogs that have previously been placed or awarded a Judges’ Award of Merit in an Open All-Age Stake, Limited All-Age Stake, Special All-Age Stake, RestrictedAll-Age Stake, Amateur All-Age Stake, or Owner-Handler Amateur All-Age Stake carrying Championshippoints in each case, or that have been placed first orsecond in a Qualifying Stake or an Owner-HandlerQualifying Stake. 

Further clarification no dog is eligible to compete in the Qualifying stake that has won 2 Qualifyings, placed or Jammed in an Open All-Age, Limited All-Age, Restricted All-Age, or who has been awarded a place in an Amateur All-Age or Owner Handler All-Age stake.

This are separate rules and only affect who is eligible to compete in various stakes


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

Just reading this thread with the differences of opinions and confusion to me is a good reason why I really don't care for the QA2 title, that and along with the requirement to apply and pay for it. I really don't understand the point of the title.
This may open another can of worms but this discussion has gotten me to thinking about the derby. Does AKC officially recognize the derby title? Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think so.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Steve Shaver said:


> Just reading this thread with the differences of opinions and confusion to me is a good reason why I really don't care for the QA2 title, that and along with the requirement to apply and pay for it. I really don't understand the point of the title.
> This may open another can of worms but this discussion has gotten me to thinking about the derby. Does AKC officially recognize the derby title? Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think so.


The current award for high point Derby dog is the Country Life Trophy and carries no official designation. The upcoming National Derby Championship will be recognized as NDC, the third such title with the National prefix (NFC and NAFC).


----------



## Justin Allen (Sep 29, 2009)

That is an absolute fact!!



John Robinson said:


> Absolutely, especially for an older dog, but I think it is considerably easier to win a Qual than JAM an amateur.


----------



## Justin Allen (Sep 29, 2009)

You think the AM isint full of pro trained dogs? There is no comparison between the level of work requires in a Q vs an AM or open. We're talking a totally different level of work


Hunt'EmUp said:


> Most likely but it, Really depends on the dog, the judges and the field. Realistically with the Qual you never really know what your going to get. Have seen quals put on by judges that were pretty much the open, have seen others that are basically a SH test, with an added mark. Also when there's 27 Ams and 45 qual dogs realistically the odds favor 4 placements and Jams out 27, over only 1st and 2nd out of 45 in a Qual. Done the Qual a few of times, everyone has been over 35 dogs. Just seems to me there's more bang for the investment in the Am. Sure a a jam can get you QAA, but a placement can get you more. Got to go to the line and pick the birds up in either one, got to make it from series to series in either one, but got to beat everyone including a line a Pro dogs in the Qual. If a dog is ready might as well move them up.


----------



## Dan Wegner (Jul 7, 2006)

Justin Allen said:


> That is an absolute fact!!


Not always, I have a Flat-Coat that had multiple 3rd, 4th, RJ and JAM ribbons in Quals, but the Blue and Red seemed a little elusive. Since he was finishing trials at a pretty consistent rate, I decided to give the Amateur a shot. After a few trials he stepped up and earned an Amateur 4th. Just like that he was QAA and could no longer enter Quals. Did I mention this was a FLAT-COAT? 😆


----------



## Justin Allen (Sep 29, 2009)

That doesn't mean the work in the all age isint more difficult than the Q. Not to say there aren't outliers but the Q is not the same level of work as all age. It is not supposed to be either. How did the other trials go, has the dog been consistently placing in the AM like the Q? One trial doesn't really prove the point your trying to make. Regardless congrats on an all age placement. I'm still trying to get off the green. 





Dan Wegner said:


> Not always, I have a Flat-Coat that had multiple 3rd, 4th, RJ and JAM ribbons in Quals, but the Blue and Red seemed a little elusive. Since he was finishing trials at a pretty consistent rate, I decided to give the Amateur a shot. After a few trials he stepped up and earned an Amateur 4th. Just like that he was QAA and could no longer enter Quals. Did I mention this was a FLAT-COAT? ��


----------



## Dan Wegner (Jul 7, 2006)

Justin Allen said:


> That doesn't mean the work in the all age isint more difficult than the Q. Not to say there aren't outliers but the Q is not the same level of work as all age. It is not supposed to be either.


No, I don't disagree with you. Both the Amateur and Open are quite a significant leap from the Qualifying, or at least they should be. My point was that a good dog, who is capable of routinely finishing Quals, with a little more training, may not be that far away from being able to finish AA stakes.

Didn't you run the Open I judged at Black Warrior in October? That was a fun test. Wish I could've run it.


----------



## Justin Allen (Sep 29, 2009)

Yes, well my dog did anyway. Made a giant mess of your 4th series. I didn't get to see the first but heard it was a very nice test.


----------



## wojo (Jun 29, 2008)

So,,,,, is there anything positive about the Q program? Why was it created? Last question why are dogs folks so thin skinned?


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

I have posted this before in a different thread but it applies here too.
Had a 2.5 year old female that liked to run big so I thought I'd try the open. This was her first open and mine as well. Also had her double staked in the qual. Ran the qual first and went out in the first series. Never picked up a bird. She couldn't find an 80 yd flyer in knee high grass. Heard people coming to the qual that had run the open talking about what a ball buster the first series was there. Well my nerves went out the window not expecting to do well. Looked at the test and thought holy $#!*. Went up and she slammed it!! After the first series she not only was called back but at the top of the heap. She ended up getting a jam nd with 11 other finishers she was the only one that wasn't FC or AFC. You would have thought I had just won the national. Turned out to be a curse. She had only run 3 quals but she was done. She just had an awesome day but was not ready to play with the big boys on a regular basis. I feel she would have benefitted greatly by running the qual as a 3 year old.

PS Wojo, I see nothing but positive about the qual program Great place for dog and handler alike to get their feet wet. Jumping up TOO SOON can be a killer.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

wojo said:


> So,,,,, is there anything positive about the Q program? Why was it created? Last question why are dogs folks so thin skinned?


The Qual is absolutely positive for a few reasons; 

1) For the talented field trial dog, it is a place to get your feet wet going four series in a mark-blind-bind-mark format, like all age lite.This is good practice for the all age, heaven forbid you bump out of the Qual before the dog is really ready for AA. I think most f those dogs win two or just naturally move up around three years old. 

2) It's a perfect place for the dedicated hunt test guy with a nice master hunter who wants to try field trials to start. 

3) Some dogs just don't have the talent to ever get an FC or AFC title, the QAA designation is an honor that shows a relatively high level of accomplishment in the dog world.

I can't answer you last question.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I am in agreement with what John wrote. I think that the Q has value in:

1. Teaching a young dog about marks and blinds in a competition setting.
2. Teaching an inexperienced handler about marks and blinds in a competition setting.
3. Giving people who want a place to run their dogs for the sheer fun of it.
4. Relieving the mental pressure of training on a dog, but showing the dog the fun of the end product - competition.
5. Giving inexperienced judges a place to learn about the fundamentals of judging.

Ted


----------



## labsforme (Oct 31, 2003)

Agree with what John and Ted said. Has helped me immensely learn more about the game. 

Thank you,
Still wet behind the ears and learning regards,

Jeff


----------

