# QAA is it just made up?



## eire (Jul 25, 2010)

I seen a stud that had QAA next to the info but it wasn't on the "official" AKC papers. I seen a few forums about the issue but they all seem to make even lawyers sound like straight talkers. 
What is QAA. I see Candlewoods Cash on the Line with QAA next to his name. No other JH, SH, MH or FC or AFC
I would think that if your QAA (as some stated that they "really could if they wanted to ") can run in trials..... you should knock out anyone of these other "titles" if you needed breeding credentials which is what one person commented about the QAA.... that its a sheep in disguise of a qualified dog and that it has no merit? Is this the case. Is it just a marketing ploy? One forum said that it was only created to sell dogs by placing "something" that looked qualifying in the ad but the registration will not show it. I'm quite curious but I don't want all the QAA fans gumming up the question with "opinion". I want the real facts. There is no QAA in any rule book for AKC, I did an extensive search. Another forum stated that a QAA can be unsactioned... somewhat like a backyard brawl and that only a few really seen the dog perform and putting "QAA" is ok *wink, wink*. Another forum stated that QAA is Qualified All Ages but you don't get any registry for it because it really isn't a title just something to do.
Let me know someones thoughts if they have experience with this. I see some pups for sale, ancestory looks good for trainability and prey drive, but they seemed to fall short on the stud which had only the "QAA" and nothing else.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Ask them what the dog did to achieve "QAA" status....the answer should tell you everything you need to know.

k g


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

QAA, means Qualified All-Age. It is often shown as a suffix of ***.

It's not a Title, but it does mean the dog has proven it has talent to a level, that many consider higher than MH. Basically, the dog has "titled" in the Qualifying Stakes of FT.

There are many dogs, that get enough points for an FC Title, but never win a blue ribbon.

The AKC doesn't recognize a MN or MNH "title" either, but I think a dog that has passed two Master Nationals, deserves some kind of credit. Just as I feel a QAA dog is pretty special as well.


----------



## tracyw (Aug 28, 2008)

My female ran hunt tests for 3 years and passed the Master National before trying a Qualifying. QAA may not have a title that the AKC recognizes but it is a heck of a lot harder than any hunt test will ever be! I think it is a necessary step before you try to play with the big boys in the Open and the Am. I hope someday it is recognized by the AKC. I personally think it means more than MH.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

I believe Cash has 1st or 2nd in the qualifying and he had at least 2 all age 2nds and some more points in licensed trials so he definately "earned" the distinction. I'm sure Lorri Oliver can speak for his exact record but yes there is no "title" of QAA that comes through on AKC papers but people usually do not term a dog QAA if the dog ran in sanctioned or club trials. And yes it's true, a dog can place in all age stakes and never have a "title" like JH. Some people just choose to run field trials, less titles, and less ribbons.


----------



## Tatyana (Nov 6, 2007)

You can always attend a Qualifying stake at a field trial near you to see what level of work is expected from the dogs to become QAA.


----------



## LabLady (Jan 27, 2003)

In order to be Qualified All Age the dog would need a first or second in a Qualifying or receive a JAM (Judges Award of Merit) in an All Age stake (Open or Amateur). 

The AKC then recognizes that dog is now "qualified"/eligible to run a Limited All Age Stake. That same dog is also qualified/eligible to run in a Special All Age Stake if it qualified during the previous calendar year and the current calendar year prior to the closing date of the trial.

LL


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

Pete you've got to be kidding with that question.



Pete said:


> May be this should be a new topic ,,,but what exactly makes a qualifying or an open harder than a master?


----------



## Pat Oneill (Jun 10, 2009)

I think the important relivance regarding QAA is what was done to make this notation, 2nd in qual verse Open Jam. I have seen many (2) qual 1st place finishers never jam an Open. 

As far as Hunt Tests go, I have seen varied levels, not all appear to be equal. Some parts of the country, whether it be terrain or water, type of primary hunting , are open to interpretation.

Field trials on the other hand, are consistantly, tough.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Pete said:


> May be this should be a new topic ,,,but what exactly makes a qualifying or an open harder than a master?


 

the judges


----------



## Guest (Jul 25, 2010)

Pete said:


> Actual Breck
> 
> I thought I would give an answere viewed from a totlly rational objectional and obscured point of veiw
> 
> ...


Do we need to do an intervention here?


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

your extensive search.......wasn't very extensive. look at section 10 of AKC field trial procedures, pages 20 and 21. you can google them or do a search thru the AKC website.

what a dog needs to do to earn the designation and what it is actually "qualified for" can be found there.

you can also do a search on goodoginfo or entry express to see where the particular dog you're interested in qualified and what stake it was entered in.

quite a first post, by the way.-Paul


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Pete said:


> May be this should be a new topic ,,,but what exactly makes a* qualifying *or an open harder than *a master*?


I couldn't tell ya... this past weekend I didn't finish in either:

john


----------



## Guest (Jul 26, 2010)

john fallon said:


> I couldn't tell ya... this past weekend I didn't finish in either:
> 
> john


But you have good news about the Open, right? :razz::razz:


----------



## Leddyman (Nov 27, 2007)

Fish on?


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

eire said:


> I seen a stud that had QAA next to the info but it wasn't on the "official" AKC papers. I seen a few forums about the issue but they all seem to make even lawyers sound like straight talkers.
> What is QAA. I see Candlewoods Cash on the Line with QAA next to his name. *No other JH, SH, MH *or FC or AFC
> 
> I see some pups for sale, ancestory looks good for trainability and prey drive, but *they seemed to fall short on the stud which had only the "QAA" and nothing else.*


If'in I ever decides to breed my QAA bitch, I'll run out and git me one of them there JH's so's I can meet with your approval.


----------



## eire (Jul 25, 2010)

Paul Young
I used your reference and I had looked over that section prior to posting. Do you see something that I don't? I'm being serious! If you read that section of the book, it describes multiple scenerios to attain a "Qualifing Stake". QAA does not annotate anything in my humble opinion. What did the dog really do. Was it ran on a limited or restriced stake? QAA itself doesn't do anything but waterdown other dogs achievements to me.... I know thats harsh to some but what else is it? If your dog has MH and QAA (like someone was nice enough to send me a private reply), I think your on it. It says that I made achievements and I'm either working on more or I decided on a different path but at the end of the day, the dog has clearly shown to be trainable and have drive to attain a goal by the MH title. I'm still honestly confused with a dog that has QAA when puppies are being sold and nothing else (the registry shows nothing also). The argument that field over hunt is especially difficult doesn't hold that much water for me. I belong to a retriever club that runs both and as long as you have good breeding, training time and committment, your training avenue will lead you toward the goal. You might not reach it but you can work your socks off to get further than most. Which comes down to my point. Does something listed only as QAA waterdown others achievements. If its combined with sanctioned event titles, I'm all for it. But I guess I look at the standalone QAA as ........ good try, on your way, but your not there? It might be similiar to the analogy that 
_*"I went to college... yea but I dropped my third year... but I could have made it if I wanted to.. really."*_
I do like the info you gave to look up the events. I wouldn't expect most buyers to know that info. Thanks! I learned something new there!


----------



## WRL (Jan 4, 2003)

eire said:


> Paul Young
> I used your reference and I had looked over that section prior to posting. Do you see something that I don't? I'm being serious! If you read that section of the book, it describes multiple scenerios to attain a "Qualifing Stake". QAA does not annotate anything in my humble opinion. What did the dog really do. Was it ran on a limited or restriced stake? QAA itself doesn't do anything but waterdown other dogs achievements to me.... I know thats harsh to some but what else is it? If your dog has MH and QAA (like someone was nice enough to send me a private reply), I think your on it. It says that I made achievements and I'm either working on more or I decided on a different path but at the end of the day, the dog has clearly shown to be trainable and have drive to attain a goal by the MH title. I'm still honestly confused with a dog that has QAA when puppies are being sold and nothing else (the registry shows nothing also). The argument that field over hunt is especially difficult doesn't hold that much water for me. I belong to a retriever club that runs both and as long as you have good breeding, training time and committment, your training avenue will lead you toward the goal. You might not reach it but you can work your socks off to get further than most. Which comes down to my point. Does something listed only as QAA waterdown others achievements. If its combined with sanctioned event titles, I'm all for it. But I guess I look at the standalone QAA as ........ good try, on your way, but your not there? It might be similiar to the analogy that
> _*"I went to college... yea but I dropped my third year... but I could have made it if I wanted to.. really."*_
> I do like the info you gave to look up the events. I wouldn't expect most buyers to know that info. Thanks! I learned something new there!


QAA is not a title, its a designation.

QAA stands for Qualified All Age.

The original intent, was for there to be quality dogs competing for Championship points. Therefore, in order for points to be awarded towards Field Champion and Amateur Field Champion titles, a minimum of 12 dogs MUST be QUALIFIED. 

It explains in the rule book how a dog can become "Qualified". 

Only dogs that are Qualified can run in some "selected" Opens. It also explains (in the rulebook) what the qualifications are for Restricted, Limited and Special Opens.

While the AKC does not YET recognize a "Qualified" title, the Canadian Kennel Club does (just within the last few years). Its "possible" that the AKC might grant a "Qualified" title at some point in the future.

As far as how a QAA dog stacks up, I would say most QAA dogs are more accomplished than a MH but not as accomplished as a FC.

Keep in mind, a dog with 100 Open Points but NO WIN is still only a QAA dog. That's why many people will put how many pts in a dog has earned listed behind their name if they are lacking a requirement for an AKC recognized title.

WRL


----------



## eire (Jul 25, 2010)

WRL.. very good response, I appreciate your insight. The avatar is a bit disturbing when reading your text...... very sick. lol


I found this thread very interesting. Page 4 by junbe gives a historical version.

http://new.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=27880&page=4


----------



## Kyle B (May 5, 2005)

eire said:


> _*"I went to college... yea but I dropped my third year... but I could have made it if I wanted to.. really."*_


If you read what Keith said early on in this thread, it may make more sense. Your analogy is a little off as it would assume that all University's are the same and all level of degrees are the same. Clearly a law degree from Harvard is much more of an achievement than a paralegal certificate from an online school out of the Bahamas? 

Working Certificates and hunt tests are great venue's, but there simply is no comparison between the level of a WC, WCX, JH or a SH to a MH or QAA dog. Where the waters really get muddy is to compare a dog that's crowning achievement is obtaining QAA status (notice I didn't say title) and one who saw that status in the rear view mirror months or years ago and is grinding it out on the weekends in the All-Age stakes getting JAMs and Placements.

.....signed the Owner of one "QAA" dog with 6 All-Age Points and numerous JAMS (who first became "QAA" before he was 3) and one "QAA" dog with 1 All-Age Point and enough green ribbons for me to sew a pair of pants out of (who first became "QAA" at 3).


----------



## Ken Newcomb (Apr 18, 2003)

Somebody knows way to much to know so little.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## TIM DOANE (Jul 20, 2008)

Ken Newcomb said:


> Somebody knows way to much to know so little.
> 
> hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm


My thoughts exactly, sounds like someone is being called out here.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

as i said- QUITE a first post.-Paul


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

Pete said:


> May be this should be a new topic ,,,but what exactly makes a qualifying or an open harder than a master?


Seems to me it's equally as easy, to EFF UP either one!

Oh, and if you doubt the dog's QAA accomplishments, simple enough for someone to show you the event history either on entry express or from another credible source like Retriever FT news. Qualifying stake results are readily available and you now know the criteria.


----------



## g_fiebelkorn (Jul 31, 2006)

john fallon said:


> I couldn't tell ya... this past weekend I didn't finish in either:
> 
> john


Ouch, I hate it when that happens. I wish I had a dollar -- or better yet $140 dollars, for each time I had such a weekend. Especially hard to take on a hot, dry weekend.

george Fiebelkorn


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Not made up, but not a title...

From Working Retriever Central...
http://www.working-retriever.com/library/fldtrial.html

The Qualifying Stake 

The Qualifying Stake is open to all dogs who have not won two Qualifying Stakes, have not received a Judges Award of Merit in the Open All-Age Stake, and have not received a placement in the Amateur All-Age Stake. The most common marking tests in a Qualifying Stake are triple retrieves with all guns visible, even though retired gunners (who hide after the bird is shot) are often used. Blind retrieves are also required in the Qualifying Stake, although abilities acquired through training are of less importance in the Qualifying stake than in those carrying championship points. *The status recognized as "Qualified All-Age" allows a dog to be eligible to run a "Limited All-Age Stake", which, at some field trials with large entries, is an "Open All-Age Stake" that "limits" the entry to "Qualified All-Age" dogs. A dog placing first or second in a Qualifying Stake is recognized as "Qualified All-Age." (A dog may also become "Qualified All-Age by receiving a Judges Award of Merit or better in a major stake.)*


----------



## Dan Wegner (Jul 7, 2006)

Erie,

Just because the QAA "status" doesn't show up as a "title" on the AKC records, like JH, SH or MH, make no mistake.... It IS a valid demonstration of field ability.

Many owners choose to partipate in field trials and never even enter a hunt test, so no HT titles on the dogs name. In FT's there are only two titles; Field Champion (FC) or Amateur Field Champion (AFC). Many dogs training toward those titles become Qualified All-Age along the way. A handful actually earn their FC or AFC but many other very good dogs never do simply due to needing a win over other very good dogs.

I have personally titled a couple of Master Hunters and been to a Master National. I wanted more of a challenge, so I stepped up to FT's and have been running Qualifyings for a couple of years. A couple placements (3rd & 4th) and JAM's but still not QAA. Not only is the difficulty level and distances greater than Master, but the fact that you have to compete against other good dogs makes a huge difference. Your dog can do a creditable job and still get dropped due to the strength of the rest of the field. At a hunt test, they hand you a ribbon for that, not so in a field trial.

Not all QAA dogs are created equal. A dog that earns a 1st or 2nd in a small (10 dog) Owner/Handler stake may not have even finished at a larger Qual open to pros. A dog that earns a JAM in an Open or AM to become QAA may have more potential than a dog that finished in the top 2 of a Qual. You just never know, but you CAN look to see how they became QAA and how many dogs they had to defeat to do it. Might help tell you somehting about the accomplishment. You can also talk to people that competed against the dog to get the skinny on their perception of the dogs ability.

I've seen plenty of MH titled dogs that passed 6 out of 6 tests for their title and others that ran 20+ tests to get those 6 passes for their title. They both have the same title. Do you honestly think those dogs are equals from a talent and training perspective? I'm not knocking Master Hunters, it's a great achievement. But, I would tend to place more value on a dog that earned it's QAA status, because it had to outperform the rest of the field at least once, and that's not easy to do. A dog that has both a MH title and is QAA (***) is likely a pretty fine animal in my opinion.

Your statement about QAA being "unsanctioned" or like a backyard brawl where only a few have seen the dog perform and "decide" it's okay to classify the dog as QAA is way off the mark. It has to be earned in front of AKC FT judges and the placements ARE recorded. Like someone else said, you can verify the accomplishment by looking at Entry Express, Retreiver Entry or the Retreiver FT news if you are questioning whether the dog is truly QAA or not. Just because QAA is not a title should not diminish the accomplishment that earned that distinction.


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

eire said:


> Let me know someones thoughts if they have experience with this. I see some pups for sale, ancestory looks good for trainability and prey drive, *but they seemed to fall short on the stud which had only the "QAA" and nothing else.*



Yes the stud is definitely lacking.

So was Esprit's out of the Woods*** Tiger 

http://www.angelfire.com/film/millermacy/esprit.html


----------



## tbyars (Mar 29, 2005)

Dan Wegner said:


> Erie,
> 
> Just because the QAA "status" doesn't show up as a "title" on the AKC records, like JH, SH or MH, make no mistake.... It IS a valid demonstration of field ability.
> 
> ...


As concise and well thought out response that I have seen. Great post Dan!


----------



## GulfCoast (Sep 24, 2007)

I have seen many a MH dropped in a Q, and I have seen many a *** dog go out in a master test. They are different games, both fun, and both worthwhile. However, its an apples and oranges comparison. There is no doubt the Q is more difficult and is dog vs. dog not dog vs. standard. The end result, however, is the same in my mind. The desired result is to end up with better dogs to breed. And 90% of MH's and 90% of *** dogs are welcome in my blind, any day. I have spent several pleasant mornings standing in flooded timber in the Mississippi delta watching dogs that were "only" *** picking up stringers of ducks. You just can't beat a good day with a good dog! 

Peace out.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Buzz said:


> Yes the stud is definitely lacking.
> 
> So was Esprit's out of the Woods*** Tiger
> 
> http://www.angelfire.com/film/millermacy/esprit.html


or Super Powder who produced 39 FC or AFC


----------



## Charles C. (Nov 5, 2004)

tracyw said:


> My female ran hunt tests for 3 years and passed the Master National before trying a Qualifying. QAA may not have a title that the AKC recognizes but it is a heck of a lot harder than any hunt test will ever be! I think it is a necessary step before you try to play with the big boys in the Open and the Am. I hope someday it is recognized by the AKC. I personally think it means more than MH.


What you said. Being qualified all age is substantially more difficult than being a MH, HRCH or whatever, whether it's recognized as a title or not.


----------



## Cthomas (Sep 21, 2003)

captainjack said:


> Not made up, but not a title...
> 
> From Working Retriever Central...
> http://www.working-retriever.com/library/fldtrial.html
> ...


There was another thread. It said Qual status is only good for a year if it is to used to run specialties. 

If it has been over a year since the dog was awarded QAA status can they again start entering Quals again?


----------



## captainjack (Apr 6, 2009)

Cthomas said:


> There was another thread. It said Qual status is only good for a year if it is to used to run specialties.
> 
> If it has been over a year since the dog was awarded QAA status can they again start entering Quals again?


Good question. I don't know...


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Cthomas said:


> There was another thread. It said Qual status is only good for a year if it is to used to run specialties.
> 
> If it has been over a year since the dog was awarded QAA status can they again start entering Quals again?


I may be wrong, but I think that a dog can be run in Quals until it has won two of them, placed or jammed in Open, Limited, special or Restricted all-age or place in an amateur all-age or O/H am.

The Special All-Age stake is for dogs who have done one of the above in the previous calendar year and current year up to the date the entries close.

So, if you won a qual two years ago, you can keep running quals, run limiteds but can't run specials.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

DoubleHaul said:


> I may be wrong, but I think that a dog can be run in Quals until it has won two of them, placed or jammed in Open, Limited, special or Restricted all-age or place in an amateur all-age or O/H am.
> 
> The Special All-Age stake is for dogs who have done one of the above in the previous calendar year and current year up to the date the entries close.
> 
> So, if you won a qual two years ago, you can keep running quals, run limiteds but can't run specials.


you are mostly right so you cannot be wrong..

A Special All-Stake is nothing more than a Limited All-Age Stake with the time constraints that it was accomplished in the current or previous calendar year, hence at a minimum a 2nd place or better in the Qualifying or a JAM or a placement in an All-Age Stake


----------



## limiman12 (Oct 13, 2007)

Buzz said:


> Yes the stud is definitely lacking.
> 
> So was Esprit's out of the Woods*** Tiger
> 
> http://www.angelfire.com/film/millermacy/esprit.html


Just think how good those FC AFC offpring might have been if their papa would have had an actual title ;-)


----------



## limiman12 (Oct 13, 2007)

Who would you rather have proofreading....

A person that got A's in spelling

Or the second place finsher at a spelling bee.....

A spelling test, you are going to have 20-30 words to know, a spelling Bee will have a list of several hundred, a spelling test you can miss a few and get an A, a spelling bee you miss one and you are out......

HT's are spelling tests, FT's (and Q's) are spelling bees, a runner up, or JAM in a spelling Bee says more even if they don't have a reportcard or trophy


----------



## Kevinismybrother (Aug 3, 2009)

> Just think how good those FC AFC offpring might have been if their papa would have had an actual title


I LOVE THIS LOGIC!!!!:razz:

So last year, my Hook pup got SO much better because 1) Hook won the National Am, and 2) his dam went from "just" QAA to an FC!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just wish the pup would realize it and act so much better:razz:


----------



## limiman12 (Oct 13, 2007)

You mean it did not instantly start running 500 yard blinds with one whistle five yards from the blind?!?!?!?


----------



## dmac1175 (May 10, 2010)

I love this comparison (is that how you spell that?). The spelling bee/spelling test thing that is very good! Field trials are in my oponion a lot like the olympics. Only the best of the best even compete. Many of the great athletes in the olympics go home with no medal. Does that mean they were not good athletes.


----------



## eire (Jul 25, 2010)

Dan, great response

Well I appreciate all the responses. I've learned a few new things and see some new clarity in the issue (love forums that are active). A few dingy remarks but all in all some well explained views that pointed some errors in my way of thinking. Yes a QAA is a great accomplishment. I have been hung up on the concept of "full potential". I always wonder whether the dog was limited by its breeding, talent, the composition of the field or in the end..... the trainer (in my case its the trainer because the dog does no wrong). For those that listed the QAA breeding info on pups that went to become champs, its even more incredible when you look into the ancestory and see studs or bitches that had no marks that produced a champ, that was bred with a no mark that produced a champ, that produced a champ. Some breeding just fits and thats the eye/talent of a few breeders (usually).
Again thanks for the responses!


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

eire said:


> Some breeding just fits and thats the eye/talent of a few breeders (usually).


sometimes it is just plain old unadulterated luck

one very productive field trial breeding in the 80s multiple breedings produced multiple talented titled field trial dogs from untitled parents who were both well bred but both lacked ability and desire, no one would have ever thought of breeding either one much less to each other but they were owned by the same people who loved them and thought them worthy of reproducing...


----------



## limiman12 (Oct 13, 2007)

Some of the "no marks" that throw champs are dogs that were bought simply to be brood bitches if I am not mistaken. If you see a sire that is FC or more bred to a no mark female, look at what the female is out of, or what she is a littermate to. Chances are that you will find something.

But yes, some luck is probably involved as well. 


Here is one for you that makes you wonder about breeding decisions. A friend of mine raises cattle, had a cow that he AI'ed to a good bull, and the calf turned out way better then either of the to parents. He was told not to breed back to the same bull because the "chances of lightening striking again" are so low. He and I spent some time dicussing what that meant about looking at bloodlines when in the end you were hoping for lightneing to strike, and should not do a repeat. but that is the way of thinkin gin the club calf world apparently


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Dan Wegner said:


> Erie,
> 
> Many owners choose to partipate in field trials and never even enter a hunt test, so no HT titles on the dogs name. In FT's there are only two titles; Field Champion (FC) or Amateur Field Champion (AFC). Many dogs training toward those titles become Qualified All-Age along the way. A handful actually earn their FC or AFC but many other very good dogs never do simply due to needing a win over other very good dogs.
> 
> ...


After getting MH titles on my first two dogs I ran the second in field trials and barely got him QAA with a second in a Qual at age six. My third dog was much better and I only ran him in FTs. He earned a few derby points, and won back to back Quals at age 2 1/2. He won an open just before he turned five, then a series of injuries led to a shortened career so I retired him without any title, but believe me, he was ten times the dog over my two master hunters. I did run him in two NAHRA Seniors (Their MH), and he breezed through with ease. I never did run him in an AKC hunt test, I didn't see the point as we were competing in field trials, I also view the QAA as more an accomplishment than a MH, though I'm not saying FTs are better than HTs...

John


----------



## signgirl (Jun 4, 2006)

Well, for once the Canadians perhaps hqve a solution for your "QAA" not being a title.

The Canadian Kennel Club now has pair of titles that were introduced a few years back and appear on the pedigree.

JFTR - 10 Junior (Derby) points including a win 

and 

QFTR - 10 Qual points including a win.

I think you would be well served to propose this to the AKC.


----------

