# Limit Amateur Status?



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

I've pondered this before; I have no merit in suggesting this and have nothing more than an idea in the back of my head regarding this suggestion. I thought it might be a good discussion or, maybe its a stupid suggestion to make and someone will shoot a hole in my suggestion?

We all know of "Amateurs" (I'm talking Field Trials)who probably don't have a normal job if one at all, train multiple times a week with a pro(or, train with the pro and dogs stay with the pro), have multiple dogs, breed multiple litters a year, are basically "on the circuit" yet, still maintain Amateur status? Why not come up with a simple formula that puts a few more restraints on those who are running as Amateurs to even the playing field with those who by all definition, are "real" Amateurs? 

Say, if a person runs X amount of trials per year and has X amount of dogs, then they can only run X amount of trials as "Amateurs". 

Maybe not take away the ability to run Am status but, at minimum, limit it? Most Am's I know might run 8-12 trials a year at most. The Am's I'd suggest limiting are ones who will run all over a large territory and run multiple stakes, multiple dogs and have a truckload of other peoples dogs they may be "running/handling" for them? 

This is where I have an Amateur disconnect?


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

This falls under the "don't hate me because I'm beautiful" category. What I mean by that is, just beacuse these people have the means (time, money, resources, etc) doesn't mean I should be so jealous as to try and "even" out the playing field by coming up with some silly rules.

It's a bad mentality to get into.

Am I jealous as hell that some people are out training today while I'm stuck at work - yeah!

Am I jealous cause some people have their own land with water to train on - yeah!

Am I jealous some people can actually afford to hire their own bird boys - yeah!

Am I jealous some people can travel all over the place to run trials - yeah!

It is what it is and just because I can't have it too, doesn't mean I should try and regulate those who do have such privileges.....

I will retire some day from my desk job and I plan to be one of those who can train all week and travel around and run dogs....until then I just get to suck it up!

Off my soap box now....

FOM


----------



## signgirl (Jun 4, 2006)

we have this discussion often in Canada.....maybe we working stiffs are jealous of someone who can dedicate their retirement to dog trialing/training and has the funding to do it in a big way. If clubs have an issue with someone running multiple owner's dogs in an Am. then they can make it owner/handler. I cannot see restricting someone running their own dogs..no way, no how.


----------



## Jay Dufour (Jan 19, 2003)

Remember, its your judging pool too.The crusty ole am that is out there all the time training can teach us all alot.


----------



## Uncle Bill (Jan 18, 2003)

Jay Dufour said:


> Remember, its your judging pool too.The crusty ole am that is out there all the time training can teach us all alot.


 
Thar ya go...spoken like a guy that's been there, done that MANY TIMES, AND IN MANY VENUES.

Also loved the spunky Lainee's comments. Great to see owner/trainers with no class envy. 

But I thought you told me you were marrying into "millions", Lainee? Don't tell me David didn't get that claw to drop on the correct jewel. I hate it when that happens.

UB


----------



## dnf777 (Jun 9, 2009)

I'd love to see amateur status limited to guys and gals who work more than 60 hours per week, only have one dog, (a black lab from west of the Mississippi), have at least 6 children involved in at least 4 extracurricular activities, and have a spouse who nags that you're not spending enough "family time" and dog training don't count in that category!

In the mean time, I'll just have fun trying!


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Lets just do away with the Am. and all just run the Open.

john


----------



## Kevinismybrother (Aug 3, 2009)

Maybe Paul has an idea - just the wrong implementation. Think of horse racing and handicapping - adding weight to the faster horses so the slower ones can compete.
We should have some method of making the marks and blinds a little, or a lot, tougher for dogs if their owners have more time and resources for training. 

here's one thought - let's put a "jump/obstacle" on the line to the mark/blind and add boards to make it higher for the more "able" amateurs to have to negotiate, thereby leveling the playing field for all??? Or maybe not retire a gun for the less able handler and dog??

all done stirring now:razz:

IF it doesn't need "fixing" regards


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

"kevin" if we go with your plan, does that mean I can use a 6 foot ladder at the line so I can see my dog on blinds because I'm vertically challenged? I think all tall handlers should have to handle on their knees.....

FOM


----------



## Kevinismybrother (Aug 3, 2009)

FOM

I accept your proposed method of unhandicapping the field!!!

All in favor???

LOL


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

FOM said:


> This falls under the "don't hate me because I'm beautiful" category. What I mean by that is, just beacuse these people have the means (time, money, resources, etc) doesn't mean I should be so jealous as to try and "even" out the playing field by coming up with some silly rules.
> 
> It's a bad mentality to get into.
> 
> ...


No, I see your point and I don't feel that way at all. I see how some might see it as such. I just wonder at what point are you really a Professional and not an Amateur? If you run everyones' dogs who trains with your professional's training group but, take no money, I guess you are an amateur? How amateur are you if you sell dogs with titles for profit multiple times a year? 

I wasn't suggesting changing the game in any way shape or form. there are certainly amateurs who bring the game to a higher level and can beat a pro any day of the week, not challenging the value of good work in the field as I think a few here are suggesting. 


*am·a·teur*

_noun_ 
\ˈa-mə-(ˌ)tər, -ˌtu̇r, -ˌtyu̇r, -ˌchu̇r, -chər\
*Definition of AMATEUR*

1
*:* devotee, admirer 

2
*:* one who engages in a pursuit, study, science, or sport as a pastime rather than as a profession


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

Field trials are not an economic event for the middle class...its actually a sport like horse racing that appeals to the middle class, so they beg, borrow and mortgage themselves to the hilt to play a very expensive game...My brother is a prime example of this addiction..anyone who thought my brother went to med school out of some deep passion to heal the masses could not be further from the truth...He did it to pay for his field trialing habit. He started in this game competing against the wealthy likes of David Crow,August Belmont,and Dr M.Stroud, and he knew the only way to ever compete with them on a weekly basis was to increase his income....

There is no way short of hitting the lottery that anyone will be able to match the wealth of today's FT gazillionaires, but the Amateur event is the one area that the playing field is level...what most people fail to realize is the dogs you face in the Open on Friday's are the same dogs you face in the Am on Sat..I know many amateurs that relish competing against all comers in the Open, but just as many that are intimidated and think they have no shot in the Open...remember that a GREAT dog is a GREAT dog and doesnt know what stake they are running


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

BonMallari said:


> what most people fail to realize is the dogs you face in the Open on Friday's are the same dogs you face in the Am on Sat..


Well, I guess in many ways you hit the nail on the head on what I was "wondering" if people feel should or shouldn't be? 

As I said, not for changing the game- but, I'd bring you a box to stand on if you want any day. Doesn't bother me none.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I just wonder at what point are you really a Professional and not an Amateur? If you run everyones' dogs who trains with your professional's training group but, take no money, I guess you are an amateur? How amateur are you if you sell dogs with titles for profit multiple times a year?


Your concerns have been beat to death on a number of occasions.

I do not agree with someone running a bunch of dogs from their Pro's truck just to run the dogs. I do believe that was why the O/H Am was created. But even that can't truly stop a person who wants to skirt the rules (co-ownerships).

I wished I was able to have dogs with titles to sell multiple times, but I don't think that would really make you a Pro, just someone with a means to an end.

One thing I've learned in my short time in this game is I can spend all my time worrying about what others are doing and just how unfair it is or I can pull up my big girl panties, focus on running my dog and do my best.

There will always be a few who skirt rules and try to take advantage of any situation, especially when there is competition involved, but my Dad always taught me, what comes around goes around....and you know, he was right.

FOM


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

FOM said:


> Your concerns have been beat to death on a number of occasions.
> 
> I do not agree with someone running a bunch of dogs from their Pro's truck just to run the dogs. I do believe that was why the O/H Am was created. But even that can't truly stop a person who wants to skirt the rules (co-ownerships).
> 
> ...


I don't think that it is skirting the rules if it is not in the rules?


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

Time and money can't take the place of talent. And it does take talent and feel to compete successfully. The wealthiest amateur in the world isn't going to win anything unless they put the time in and have some level of talent beyond having a bank account. 

Regardless of what sport one pursues, there is always someone with more talent/money/etc. but if you really want it badly enough, there is always a way. It takes sacrifice and dedication but it is possible. And the amateurs who are winning are also working very hard at it...it takes a lot more than just showing up at trials.


----------



## Golden Boy (Apr 3, 2009)

SoundS like a bunch of insanity.
Play within the rules of the game. 
*Train your dogs and stop looking for excuses that the dogs aren't getting the job done. Put in the work and have the right dog you'll put ribbons on the wall. Sit around coming up with reasons why the other guy is winning and you aren't and you'll keep getting disapointed every weekend. 

*
Insanity by definition doing the same thing over & over and expecting different results.


----------



## Dave Plesko (Aug 16, 2009)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I've pondered this before; I have no merit in suggesting this and have nothing more than an idea in the back of my head regarding this suggestion. I thought it might be a good discussion or, maybe its a stupid suggestion to make and someone will shoot a hole in my suggestion?
> 
> *We all know of "Amateurs" (I'm talking Field Trials)who probably don't have a normal job if one at all,* train multiple times a week with a pro(or, train with the pro and dogs stay with the pro), have multiple dogs, breed multiple litters a year, are basically "on the circuit" yet, still maintain Amateur status? Why not come up with a simple formula that puts a few more restraints on those who are running as Amateurs to even the playing field with those who by all definition, are "real" Amateurs?
> 
> ...


Just keep spending this much time on RTF while at work and you might find out what that is like!


----------



## J. Walker (Feb 21, 2009)

I'm of the opinion that the Amateur should be just that: amateur handlers running amateur trained dogs. To me, it's hardly "amateur" to have one's pro who trains the dog six days a week on hundreds of acres with technical ponds, flyers, and bird boys to run the dog in the Open then turn the dog over to be run by the owner or another "amateur" in Amateur at the same trial. I know it would be almost impossible to enforce this limitation but one can dream.


----------



## Tom Watson (Nov 29, 2005)

I hate to see the "Class Envy" so well promulgated and perpetuated by liberal politicians spilling over into our sport, as it has into many walks of life. I am a workng stiff with job and family obligations who puts in 50-60 hours a week at work and utilizes a pro to have my dog be competitive. I train when I can, educate myself as much as I can, and realize that I can't outspend the deep pockets in the sport. I go to the line and take my chances with the "amateur pros". Sometimes we do well, sometimes we don't. I realize how the game is played and choose to continue. If it were unacceptable, I'd find another avocation, not whine about it.

Just my $0.02.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

J. Walker said:


> I'm of the opinion that the Amateur should be just that: amateur handlers running amateur trained dogs. To me, it's hardly "amateur" to have one's pro who trains the dog six days a week on hundreds of acres with technical ponds, flyers, and bird boys to run the dog in the Open then turn the dog over to be run by the owner or another "amateur" in Amateur at the same trial. I know it would be almost impossible to enforce this limitation but one can dream.


Do you think it's really such a huge advantage to just show up, pull the dog off a pro truck, and run it?
I sure don't, because it has never worked very well for us.....

It can be an advantage to run multiple dogs, have them pro trained, sure. But, it is also a disadvantage to never have your hand over those dogs in training, have no relationship with them. IMO
It's a team sport, and you and the dog better be on the same page.....

As for grounds, ponds, flyers, bird boys..
Those things are necessary, amateur or pro.


----------



## rsfavor (Jul 9, 2007)

This idea sounds like some sort of Field Trial Welfare Act imposed by the Obama administration. Take away from the people who spend their time and effort to train and somehow reward those who don't put in the same amount of time or effort.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I don't think that it is skirting the rules if it is not in the rules?


I say "skirting the rules" because behind any rule there is always an intent. The intent of the O/H Am is to keep an amateur from running all the dogs off a Pros truck. 

I believe co-ownerships are okay and those shouldn't be disallowed, but when a person co-owns dogs just to co-own dogs so they can run the dogs, you know that they are trying to skirt the rules. Fortunately, I don't know of anyone who is blatantly doing this, so it seems the intent of the O/H Am is working. (I could be wrong and I'm sure if I am someone will correct me via PM).

FOM


----------



## signgirl (Jun 4, 2006)

If I had my dog with a Pro, I would not be a happy camper if some amateur was handling my dog during training. That is not what I am paying for. It would be interesting to know just how many Pros let non owners put their hands on dogs other than their own. Mine sure doesn't.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

signgirl said:


> If I had my dog with a Pro, I would not be a happy camper if some amateur was handling my dog during training. That is not what I am paying for. It would be interesting to know just how many Pros let non owners put their hands on dogs other than their own. Mine sure doesn't.


There is another way of looking at it, sometimes it helps the dogs respond to the owners better if the dogs are not always handled by the pro in training, especially if the owner is rarely there. It's not easy to walk in and handler your dog at a trial.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> There is another way of looking at it, sometimes it helps the dogs respond to the owners better if the dogs are not always handled by the pro in training, especially if the owner is rarely there. It's not easy to walk in and handler your dog at a trial.


 

When a client brings a dog with line manner issues to my pro, Cherylon Loveland, and she has gotten the issues under control when she is running the dog, she will often have other people run the dog to see if the line manners are still under control and if not get a correction in.

Moral of the story: It is not always a bad thing to have other amateurs run the dogs in training.


----------



## Kelly Greenwood (Dec 18, 2008)

It is a good thing to have other people handle your dog, even if you don't use a pro, sometimes it lets you see just how well trained your dog is or is not trained, sometimes it shows you just how many mistakes you make handling your own dog.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

I know I've seen occasions recently where an emergency arose and another friend jumped in to handle a persons' dog. It does highlight the need for relationships. 

To those making comments that I am whining or have some other "have not" complex you haven't read what I wrote or took it the wrong way. I was only thinking about it and thought it "could" be a good discussion until folks start increasing their font size and typing in bold to make sure everyone sees their short-order disapproval of any discussion.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Dave Plesko said:


> Just keep spending this much time on RTF while at work and you might find out what that is like!


I put my hours in.....

in that respect, it would be nice to be on Obama-unemployment- lasts a couple years, pay isn't bad?


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I know I've seen occasions recently where an emergency arose and another friend jumped in to handle a persons' dog. It does highlight the need for relationships.


This is where common sense should come into play....if it is an O/H then there isn't much a person can do if there is no "relationship" therefor the dog must be scratched, but in the case of a non O/H event, then a friend stepping up to help out is just that and other handlers shouldn't get the undies in a wad...

FOM


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

FOM said:


> This is where common sense should come into play....if it is an O/H then there isn't much a person can do if there is no "relationship" therefor the dog must be scratched, but in the case of a non O/H event, then a friend stepping up to help out is just that and other handlers shouldn't get the undies in a wad...
> 
> FOM


No just a QAA stake. Nobody was upset in any way shape or form. It was a am dog and another am handler filled in.


----------



## Jay Dufour (Jan 19, 2003)

rsfavor said:


> This idea sounds like some sort of Field Trial Welfare Act imposed by the Obama administration. Take away from the people who spend their time and effort to train and somehow reward those who don't put in the same amount of time or effort.


bwahhhahhhaaa ....Good one Ricky


----------



## WRL (Jan 4, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I know I've seen occasions recently where an emergency arose and another friend jumped in to handle a persons' dog. It does highlight the need for relationships.
> 
> To those making comments that I am whining or have some other "have not" complex you haven't read what I wrote or took it the wrong way. I was only thinking about it and thought it "could" be a good discussion until folks start increasing their font size and typing in bold to make sure everyone sees their short-order disapproval of any discussion.


Or some people see through you and believe it is the tip of the iceberg.

Everyone here knows if you got something like that through in the rules the next rules to follow would be those with the ULTIMATE handicap "Chessie Owners" would start asking to play from the "ladies' tees"........

WRL


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

I dont know about the rest of you but I would much rather face the amateur handler whose dog is pro trained than the amateur trainer who has nothing else to do but train dogs all day ....either way more often than not a dog like Shaq is going to beat you most of the time whether it s Don Remien handling in the Open or Bill Fruehling his owner


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

rsfavor said:


> This idea sounds like some sort of Field Trial Welfare Act imposed by the Obama administration. Take away from the people who spend their time and effort to train and somehow reward those who don't put in the same amount of time or effort.


It would only be that if it was imposed without discussion and the people did not have an open forum to comment or make a choice regarding the situation.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

WRL said:


> Or some people see through you and believe it is the tip of the iceberg.
> 
> Everyone here knows if you got something like that through in the rules the next rules to follow would be those with the ULTIMATE handicap "Chessie Owners" would start asking to play from the "ladies' tees"........
> 
> WRL





I can't wait to suggest this to my husband! I've been telling him he is a handicap to his chessie


----------



## Sabireley (Feb 2, 2005)

I would rather run against the best handlers and dogs in both the Am and the Open. It makes placing even more of an accomplishment. That said, I have not been at the end too many times, but enough to keep training to improve my skills and those of my dogs. 
Steve


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

As an amatuer trainer I understand your frustration. I am relegated to the minor stakes due to my lack of talent, time and grounds. I would love a chance to run in competition against my peers. Maybe in 20 years I can become what I now only envy.
Mark Land


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

just to be clear, I have no level of frustration or reason to be. I've entered and gone out quickly in two derbies and I freely and openly acknoledge myself as my own dogs handicap, nothing more, nothing less. 

As I said in the OP, I was just thinking it in the back of my head driving home and wondering about it- seems some folks are really touchy at the suggestion though


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> just to be clear, I have no level of frustration or reason to be. I've entered and gone out quickly in two derbies and I freely and openly acknoledge myself as my own dogs handicap, nothing more, nothing less.
> 
> As I said in the OP, I was just thinking it in the back of my head driving home and wondering about it- *seems some folks are really touchy at the suggestion though*


I think its because we come into this game from so many different angles and after that continue to evolve. I know a lot of old school amateurs that started in the 70s or 80s, had success as amateurs then had to drop out of the sport to raise a family, and are now retired empty nesters able to devote their retirement time and money resourses to pursue this sport with a passion. If they were into some other sport or hobby, they would probablt be just as passionate about it. 

Then there are those of us who moved into FTs after being successful in hunt test, are competitive by nature and wanted something more. I was a charter sailboat captain, owned my own boat and loved yacht racing. Believe me, competing in FTs is much harder and much more frustrating. There are a lot of us who have to balance full time jobs and family commitments with dog training and trialing. That usually leads to utilizing a pro a good percentage of the time, espcially if you live in cold, dark northern climates.

FTs are so hard and the competition so fierce that no matter which group you are in, it is very tough to title a dog. So your suggestion of some way to limit Amateur status opens a whole can of worms, with most paths leading to a very slippery slope. I would be so very proud to have my dog (working on FT dog #4 right now) titled. In the unofficial status point leader board, it would be awesome to do it all myself, but utilizing a pro and having us both get points on my dog is almost as good.

So the question is, who is a true amateur? A working guy who does it all himself in the hours after work and on weekends? How about that same guy ten years later, when he and his wife are retired, love their dogs and the sport enough to spend their whole retirement on a trailer, training grounds and good dogs, then dedicate their life to a vagabond existence of moving from area to area, up at the crack of dawn to air and feed dogs, train all day which means throwing birds for other retired amateurs. Is that guy still an amateur, or is he too good now and must be considered a semi-pro. Where do guys like me fit in who train at home when they can, but a lot of our dog's life is on the road with a pro, or even us down at the pros to train with him on weekends. Then there is the guy who's dog is on a pros truck 90% of the time. Not my cup of tea, but some have to do it by necessity.

In the past there have been those who looked down their nose at those who use a pro a lot, use a pro a little, consider the hard core full time training amateur practically a pro, believe that 100% amateur trained dogs are the only pure AFC, and argue about 100% amateur trained (ever day-train with a pro or use a break out trainer to build in basics?). These arguments have led to heated debates in the past and you thread just opened up old wounds.

John


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> We all know of "Amateurs" (I'm talking Field Trials)who probably don't have a normal job if one at all, train multiple times a week with a pro(or, train with the pro and dogs stay with the pro), have multiple dogs, breed multiple litters a year, are basically "on the circuit" yet, still maintain Amateur status?


I don't know of anyone on my circuit that fits this profile


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> The Am's I'd suggest limiting are ones who will run all over a large territory and run multiple stakes, multiple dogs and have a truckload of other peoples dogs they may be "running/handling" for them?


I don't know of anyone that fits this profile either


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

Paul, 
Your goal to limit Amateur entries is admirable. Defining what is an amateur handler/trainer or dog has been beat to death and no changes are on the horizon.
Many of the goals you wish to achieve with your proposal could be reached if clubs were allowed to control their own trial mechanics of stakes offered, dogs/ stake and dogs/handler.
There is a growing interest by clubs (so far not the AKC or SOR) in having these controls as clubs find it increasingly difficult to hold the traditional 4 stake trial.

Tim


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Ted, I admire you, but thats BS. You know as well as the rankest beginner that both types exist.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> I don't know of anyone on my circuit that fits this profile


Ditto.....



Ted Shih said:


> I don't know of anyone that fits this profile either


Ditto......


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

2tall said:


> Ted, I admire you, but thats BS. You know as well as the rankest beginner that both types exist.




Is there no escape from this crap?
I have people telling me that I should not use Pet Plan

Now I have someone telling me what I know
And that I am making things up

I don't know what you think know
But, I can tell you that in my circuit, neither exist
Period

Here are the pro trucks I compete against in MY circuit

- Eckett
- Farmer
- Knutson
- Peterson
- Schrader
- Trott

Here are the pro trucks I occasionally see from time to time

- Dewey
- Gunzer
- Remien
- Totten

In case, I have been less than clear, I have not seen any client of the above, RUN THE TRUCK. PERIOD. REPEAT. PERIOD. 

PERIOD.

So, if you think it is BS where you run (and by the way, how many AA stakes have your run?), then FINE. 

But don't you dare tell me what is happening in the areas where I run. That is BS.

As for amateurs who load up their trucks with other people's dogs and travel all over the country, I say the same. 

The people that I know who travel over the country and compete in a wide territory ... and who are successful

Sharon Gierman, Bill McKnight, Mike Moore, .... RUN THEIR OWN DOGS. REPEAT. THEY RUN THEIR OWN DOGS.

As for people regularly selling and training dogs and then selling them for money ... I haven't seen it.

If you have a great bitch, maybe you make money. Or maybe like Mike and Lynn Moore, you end up getting your bitch spayed. If you look at the time consumed in raising and selling puppies, the rate of return on investment in time and money is low.

As for people selling their dogs for money, most of what I see is people cutting their losses, not making money

I REPEAT, I HAVE NOT SEEN WHAT THE OP CLAIMS EXIST

PLEASE DO NOT BOTHER TO TELL ME WHAT I HAVE SEEN

OR THAT I AM POSTING BS, UNLESS YOU CAN TELL US THAT YOU RUN IN MY CIRCUIT 

WHAT UTTER CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Jay Dufour (Jan 19, 2003)

Haha.........Hummmm....Hahha !!


----------



## frontier (Nov 3, 2003)

FOM said:


> This falls under the "don't hate me because I'm beautiful" category. What I mean by that is, just beacuse these people have the means (time, money, resources, etc) doesn't mean I should be so jealous as to try and "even" out the playing field by coming up with some silly rules.
> 
> It's a bad mentality to get into.
> 
> ...


My sentiments exactly...I do not want the rules to change. looking forward to my retirement years of doing the same thing you described god willing..


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ted Shih*
> _I don't know of anyone on my circuit that fits this profile_
> 
> ...




Me three..


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> Is there no escape from this crap?
> I have people telling me that I should not use Pet Plan
> 
> Now I have someone telling me what I know
> ...


Ted, I feel I personally have a lot of respect for the game and the people responsible for making it everything it is today. I only intended to bring some discussion to light. I had no intention of pointing fingers or name dropping. I don't ever see validity in points made by folks who qualify their worth by saying this is whi I've...etc. Honestly just had a short sighted thought. I'm definately not out to change the world. I might suggest one mighr "relax" a tad. Your post comes across as being "up-tight" as they can come. Just thinking out loud as stupid as I may be.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

John Robinson said:


> I think its because we come into this game from so many different angles and after that continue to evolve. I know a lot of old school amateurs that started in the 70s or 80s, had success as amateurs then had to drop out of the sport to raise a family, and are now retired empty nesters able to devote their retirement time and money resourses to pursue this sport with a passion. If they were into some other sport or hobby, they would probablt be just as passionate about it.
> 
> Then there are those of us who moved into FTs after being successful in hunt test, are competitive by nature and wanted something more. I was a charter sailboat captain, owned my own boat and loved yacht racing. Believe me, competing in FTs is much harder and much more frustrating. There are a lot of us who have to balance full time jobs and family commitments with dog training and trialing. That usually leads to utilizing a pro a good percentage of the time, espcially if you live in cold, dark northern climates.
> 
> ...


John, you make a number of valid points. Truly a thoughtful post.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Ted, I feel I personally have a lot of respect for the game and the people responsible for making it everything it is today. I only intended to bring some discussion to light. I had no intention of pointing fingers or name dropping. I don't ever see validity in points made by folks who qualify their worth by saying this is whi I've...etc. Honestly just had a short sighted thought. I'm definately not out to change the world. I might suggest one mighr "relax" a tad. Your post comes across as being "up-tight" as they can come. Just thinking out loud as stupid as I may be.




I think you are trying to solve a non-existent problem

Don't you find it curious that the people who run and judge AA stakes are telling you that there is no problem to be solved?

As for my being "uptight" ... I think Carol is full of crap for telling me that a problem exists in a circuit where she has never run, and in telling me that my observations are nothing more than BS ...and if you don't like the manner in which I tell her so .... well, I don't really don't much care


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I only intended to bring some discussion to light. I had no intention of pointing fingers or name dropping. I* don't ever see validity in points made by folks who qualify their worth by saying this is whi I've...etc*.


No, of course, this is the internet. 

Why would we possibly want people to base their opinions on what they have actually observed?

It is much more interesting for people to issue opinions based on what they speculate is true or upon what they may have read somewhere else or heard third hand from someone

Why doesn't it surprise me that you would not see any "validity in points made by folks" who bother to base their opinions on what they have observed? 

It's much more entertaining to have discussions with no basis in reality, but I am not sure what significance they have.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Let's engage in a factual inquiry, instead of unsupported speculation about what actually happens at a Field Trial

Here are the Results from the Amateur held by the Montana Retriever Club in Billings, Montana (which I chose for demonstration because it was an Amateur, not an O/H Amateur, and which was large - 69 entries)

I have listed - to the best of my ability - where:

a) The dog and handler are both Amateur Trained
b) The dog and/or handler have had some level of Pro Training; and the name of the Pro
c) I simply don't know

A few important notes:
- I deliberately used an "Amateur" rather than an "O/H Amateur" because the broader category, offers the opportunity to "run the truck" and eliminates the purported need for a co-ownership subterfuge
- If a person spent time training with a pro, where the pro offered advice about handling and/or training, even if the person held the transmitter, I have listed that dog as being pro trained (see e.g. Lanse Brown, Ken/Esther McCartney)
- If a dog spends most of its time being trained by its owner, but spends the winter being trained by a pro, I have listed that dog as being pro trained (see e.g. Dewitt Boice, Sr.)
- I don't know who did the basics on the vast majority of these dogs, so I have not based my qualifications on whether a pro did the basics, but you could do so, and I would expect that more dogs would qualify as pro- trained

1) 59	FC/AFC Hardscrabble Carbunnation, Judy Rasmuson Pro: Gunzer
2) 16	FC AFC Chippewa Wilson	Barbara Furlano Am
3) 25	FC/AFC Eva-Ethyl-Proby-Weber	Alanson C. Brown III Pro: Rorem
4) 55	FC FTCH LKY's Controlled Burn	Brad Clow Pro: Trott
RJ) Fox Haven's Chantilly Lace SH Terry Scott Don't know
J) FC Shadow's Whiteshoes	Glenda Brown Pro: Gunzer
J) FC-AFC Tartan Prime Time	Barb Howard Pro: Trott
J) Maple Ridge's Sooner Boomer	Martha McCool Pro: Baird
SCR) Taylorlabs Right on Q	Sydney Gardave Pro: Gunzer

2	FC Sanpitch River Shore Thing, Steve Bechtel Jr Pro: Totten	
3	World Famous Emasculator-Shemale, Alanson C. Brown III Pro: Rorem	
4	Right-On Target Red, Elaine Klicker Don't know
5	FC/AFC Freeridin Smooth Operator	Ted Shih Pro: Loveland	
6	FC AFC Wood River's Franchise	Bill Fruehling Pro: Remien
7	Candlewood's Code Black	Glenda Brown Pro: Gunzer	
9	Biggun's Wild Rose Warrior	Alice Woodyard Pro: Erhardt	
10	Doogie Bowzer MD	Lorraine Boice Pro: Farmer
11	FC AFC Fat City Pacer	D Boice	D Boice Pro: Farmer/Loveland
12	FC AFC Hanna's Eye of the Tiger	John Pampy	John Amateur
13	Topbrass Caleb UD Judy Rasmuson Pro: Gunzer
14	Hasty Pudding's Black Irish	K. Thomas Vaughn Pro: Schrader
15	Nightwinds Sharp Shooter	Steve Bechtel Jr Pro: Totten	
17	AFC Black Magic's Woody Too Dewitt Boice Pro: Farmer/Loveland
18	Prairie Peak Prima Donna	Esther McCartney Pro: Schrader
19	Catalina's Trumarc	Carma Futhey Pro: Erhardt
20	FC/AFC Catalina's Pardon Me	Brad Clow Pro: Trott
21	Blue Line Boomer	Barbara Walters Pro: Remien	
22	Jazztime's Dust Devil Max	Diann Miller Pro: Gunzer	
23	Condoleezza Dobbs of Armagh MH	Nancy White Pro: Gunzer	
24	AFC Dust Devil's Black Blizzard MH	Mike Heard Pro: Totten
26	Aksarben's Black Skyy	Nate Limoges Pro: Erhardt	
27	FC Mr. Waylon of Rimrock	Ronald Kiehn Pro: Remien	
28	AFC Freeridin Maserati	Ted Shih Pro: Loveland
29	Sanpitch River Frank	Steve Bechtel Jr Pro: Totten	
30	Wood River's Little Diesel	Bill Fruehling Pro: Remien	
32	Catalina's Outlaw	Sydney Gardave Pro: Gunzer
33	Dancing With The Stars	Martha McCool Pro: Baird
34	Jazztime Bluegoose's Skatch	Larry Calvert Amateur
35	Midnight Sun Southpaw	Joe Braverman Pro: Totten
36	FC-AFC Topbrass Band On The Run	Judy Rasmuson Pro: Gunzer	
37	FC AFC Two Step's Tomboy	K. Thomas Vaughn Pro: Schrader	
38	Chippewa Tiger Lilly	Barbara Furlano Amateur
39	Dans L'esprit du Deux Paw	Ken McCartney Pro: Schrader	
41	AFC Huntersbest Sapphire Jubilee	Jean Wu Pro: Gunzer
42	Pekisko's Kiss My Grits	Barbara A Walters Pro: Remien
43	FC AFC Jazztime Hanging Chad	Steve Bechtel Jr Pro: Totten	
44	FTCH AFTCH Heads Up Fire in the Hole	Alice Woodyard Don't know
45	AFC Shadowpines Chabasco	Bob Byrum Don't know
46	Blue Water Pow Wow	John Pampy Amateur	
47	Black Magic's Patton's Little Bea	Dewitt Boice Pro: Farmer/Loveland
48	HMI'S My Lady Sadie	Harold Irving/Joseph Taylor Pro: Totten
49 AFC World Famous Rosa Barks	Alanson C. Brown III Pro: Rorem	
50	Belvedere Million Dollar Dolly	Carma Futhey Pro: Erhardt
51	FC/AFC Freeridin Vampire Slayer	Ted Shih Pro: Loveland
52 FC Wood River's Duck Tucker	Bill Fruehling Pro: Remien
53	Watermark's Power Punch	Glenda Brown Pro: Gunzer
54	FC Hardscrabble Ride the Wind	Sydney Gardave Pro: Gunzer
56	Levi's Stonewashed Button Fly	Anne Olson Don't know
57	FC Jazztime Empty Wallet	Steve Bechtel Jr Pro: Totten	
58	AFC Red Butte's Tiger Lilly	Joseph L. Taylor Pro: Totten	
60	FC Two Step's No. Ninety-Nine	K. Thomas Vaughn Pro: Schrader	
61	Coolwater's Moose Trax	Susan Wing Pro: Erhardt
62	Chippewa Ricochet Rikki	Barbara Furlano Amateur
63	Knollwood Sweet Lily	Nancy White Pro: Gunzer
64	Blue Earth's Riding With The King	John Terraciano Pro: Gunzer
65	Elk Run Sundance	David Kiehn	David Kiehn Pro: Remien
67	FC AFC CFC CAFC Jazztime Last Chance v Pekisko Larry Calvert	
Amateur
68	Bigwoods Hillbilly Hammer	Linda Johnson Pro: Remien	
69	Prairie Peak Player	Ken McCartney Pro: Schrader


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Some factual observations:

Out of 69 dogs, only a handful are completely Amateur trained. And I could be wrong about those dogs. The dogs that I have listed as Amateur trained are owned/trained/handled by individuals who are retired, have their own training grounds, and train year round.

It is very difficult to find dogs who training has no pro involvement. You could decide that dogs who owners train the dogs (hold the transmitter) while training with pros are "true" Amateurs I guess, see e.g. Lanse Brown. But, again you are looking at an individual who is retired, has his own training grounds, and trains year round.

You could decide that dogs that spend most of their time being trained by the amateur, but go south on the winter trip are "amateur trained" but to me, that would be a stretch. If you look at the people that own dogs that fit in that category (see Bill Freuhling, Esther McCartney), you are again looking at people who are retired, have their own training grounds, and train year round.

Let me make it clear that I have nothing against those people who are retired, own their own training grounds, and train year round. In fact, I am rather jealous. It is no small factor in their success. But, let's not confuse them with the blue collar working person who trains his dog before or after working a 40 hour job.

If you decide upon a restrictive definition of "Amateur", there will be no left to judge the stake.

Moreover, if you review the persons who ran the Amateur at Billings, you will find:

- No one "ran a pro truck"
- No one "ran a lot of other people's dogs"
- No one who has made a lot of money, training and then selling dogs
- No one who has made a lot of money, raising and selling puppies

In short, the evils that the OP wanted to address, don't exist - at least, in Montana
In short, the evils that TwoTall says exist everywhere - don't exist - at least, in Montana

But then, shame on me for basing my opinions on what I know


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Okay that's just way too much brain damage....

FOM


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Ted I am sorry my post caused such an explosion of defensiveness on your part, in future I will never ever question anything you say. Alright? In your lengthy reply listing the entries in an Am stake, there are several folks who fit one or both of the categories mentioned. I do not say this with any disrespect, I say let 'em all run, all I care about is what I can or can not do with my own dog. I simply said it is the worst kind of denial and defensiveness to say that people that operate on a daily basis the same way or with pros, do not exist in the amateur ranks. 

BTW, when I had never run a ft the most common dismissal of my thoughts or comments, was "well how many trials have you run". Now that I have taken the challenge and begun trying, its "well how many AA have you run". 

The old guard will never change, and will never acknowledge that change can occasionally be a good thing. Drive away all of us new people by your self righteousness, and see what you are left with at the end of the day.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Carol

Yes, that is the typical defense. You established types are picking on me. Oh, how unfair. What a bunch of bullies. Blah, Blah, Blah

I compete against these people, Carol. Do you?
I know them, Carol. Do you?
I know their dogs, Carol. Do you?
I know their pros, Carol. Do you?

I bet not. 
Why do I know these things that you do not?
Because I run AA stakes in this area - and you do not. That is why your experience - or lack thereof - is relevant.

But, Carol, you are willing to say that these people who you do not know that run dogs that you have never seen
- Run a pro truck
- Run other people's dogs all across the country
- Sell and train dogs for a profit on a consistent basis

And, so, Carol, it is obvious that I am being unreasonable. And, of course, I had no reason whatsoever to be offended by your saying that my comments about my observations of matters that you have not observed was "BS"

Obviously, all I was doing was picking on poor newbie you. 

Why don't you just admit that you made a broad sweeping generalization without any factual knowledge?

Instead of saying oh woe is me, the establishment is picking on me ....

Oh, I know why - it would require recognition of reality. And this is the internet, where reality is ignored.


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

Some posting on this thread should do a little bit more homework before you start dropping names as to who is doing what. I know for a fact that some on here are blowing a lot of smoke, and I'm speaking to both sides of this discussion. 

This type of class warfare doesn't do our sport any good. It also doesn't seem to be really addressing the problems or the needs of the sport.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Ted, I fully conceed that a few points I brought up or suggested are not valid in enough circumstances to quantify a turd. I see your point though. Without Pro trained dogs in the AM there would not be an AM stake.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Enough though, I just came inside to refill my coffee. Walking out the front door about 200 yards to the river to see if any more ducks are around to shoot.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

2tall said:


> Ted I am sorry my post caused such an explosion of defensiveness on your part, in future I will never ever question anything you say. Alright? In your lengthy reply listing the entries in an Am stake, there are several folks who fit one or both of the categories mentioned. I do not say this with any disrespect, I say let 'em all run, all I care about is what I can or can not do with my own dog. I simply said it is the worst kind of denial and defensiveness to say that people that operate on a daily basis the same way or with pros,
> 
> BTW, when I had never run a ft the most common dismissal of my thoughts or comments, was "well how many trials have you run". Now that I have taken the challenge and begun trying, its "well how many AA have you run".
> 
> The old guard will never change, and will never acknowledge that change can occasionally be a good thing. Drive away all of us new people by your self righteousness, and see what you are left with at the end of the day.


Ever wonder why something that is prevalent gets the reception that your remark received. It's because it is true. There are regular abuses of the system but those who believe they are beneficiaries do their level best to shut dissent up.

2tall - I have to hand it to you - not everyone can make can make Ted go ballistic as you did . Ted likes to bully the newbies of the sport. Ted would like you to believe he's one of the many that use Pro's, but in reality many who he mentioned on his various rantings do not receive the same level of hand holding that Ted receives. He's just a guy who shows up on the weekend with a truck load of dogs trained by someone else & he gets to sign autographs while playing the big shot. 

A few years back one of the icon Pro's was unable to make a trial so one of his Amateur clients took his truck to the trial & picked up all 8 placings available in the AA stakes. About that time there was a series of ads from Labby talking about "Rent a Handler". Humorous!!!!!!!!! So it does exist. The abuses in the Co-Owner category are legion. It wasn't too long age someone commented to me about a handler that runs several dogs also showing up at a trial with more dogs trained by his Pro that he did not own to run in the AA stakes. Same trial he conveniently mentioned to show everybody does it. The AKC does a poor job of policing abuse even though they are aware of what is happening.

But don't accept what he says as gospel, his praise of some & giving credit to others shows he has an immense lack of knowledge about what goes on. & rest assured their are many of the Old Timers that find his self congratulatory know it all style hard to stomach. 

As for the "Old Guard", they are always around. They only believe the newbies should exist to work for them & sell them their good dogs when they get one. 

But don't get discouraged - The sport is full of people that "if you were able to buy them for what they are worth & sell them for what they thought they were worth" you'd be quite wealthy. It also has several who are really nice people, just less of them, I'd rather associate with the latter group.


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> He's just a guy who shows up on the weekend with a truck load of dogs trained by someone else & he gets to sign autographs while playing the big shot.


I think you're wrong on this Marvin. Ted is very involved with training his dogs. 

I have a hard time thinking of Ted as the old guard. His hair isn't silvery enough.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Marvin, have no fear that I will be so easily discouraged. Thanks to my vagabond life over the past 12 months I have met field trialers and hunt testers all over the country. I can say without hesitation that the dog people I met are some of the best people I've EVER met. I think all of us get carried away on the net sometimes, its just too easy to poke a stick in that snake hole!;-)


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

Excuse me!

Ted doesnt need anybody as lowly as Gooser to defend him But,,,,,,,,

Ted has alway been more than gracious to me. He has extended an open hand to me and my very inexperianced HT dog to join their training group. 
He could EASILY belittle me and bully too! He has always been nothing more than a perfect gentleman to me, and my lack of inexperiance.
He has always made me feel more than welcome, answered my questions with direct and polite answers, and encouraged me to come back and join the group anytime I wanted. He knows derned well, I will always be a HT'r~~and has never displayed one bit of arrogance to me!

Joining in on his training days with the group he trains with, has always been a very enjoyable day with a great bunch of people, and a Pro trainer that is just a delight to be around.

Im sure Ted is a fierce competitor! Good for him,, thats the game you guys play!!I'm sure Ted does it well, based on his dedication to his dogs, and his hard work at those training days. He is VERY involved at those events. Many times with the Pro askin Ted his opinion.

Gooser


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

I think the am handlers should be treated like Q dogs. Two wins and you lose eligibility.

OK, I'm kidding.

Reading this thread makes it easy to forget that it's just a game.


----------



## Jeff Bartlett (Jan 7, 2006)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Enough though, I just came inside to refill my coffee. Walking out the front door about 200 yards to the river to see if any more ducks are around to shoot.


Instead of walking out to go see if there are any birds you 
Might. Want to train 
Like all the amateurs that do something at the trials that had full time jobs 
Who's dogs arnt trained by pros to name a few 
Marion
Crabb
BENTA
Gaffstra
And a few more


----------



## david gibson (Nov 5, 2008)

and you guys wonder why more HT people dont come over the the FT side..... sigh


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Without Pro trained dogs in the AM there would not be an AM stake.


No. There would be different dogs in the Amateur. At first these new dogs, on average, would not be the same caliber as the current dogs. Given time the quality would increase. This has been the history of field trials. 

Tim


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

I continue to be mystified at the myth of wealthy retired amateurs who run multiple dogs off successful professional trucks to be a widespread phenomenon. This myth is perpetuated by people who do not run field trials, have only run a few, run a few each year but only in their home area, or used to run them but haven't in a decade or two. 

Three people who do run field trials in different areas each year have repudiated this myth in this thread but the myth will not die. While I have not been competitive in all age stakes for several years (that is changing I hope) I do run dogs and have judged in many areas and there are simply no people who fit the description of those that Happy, 2Tall, and Marvin have alluded to.

Additionally the myth of widespread co-ownership to circumvent the Owner Handler Amateur All-Age stake is equally invalid. 

The entry at the National Amateur Retriever Championship increases annually yet rarely does anyone run more than 2 dogs which they own as the sole owner. 

Amateurs are the reason we have retriever field trials, they govern them, judge them, and finance them. To restrict their participation based on a self perpetuated myth would constitute institutional suicide.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

EdA said:


> I continue to be mystified at the myth of wealthy retired amateurs who run multiple dogs off successful professional trucks to be a widespread phenomenon. This myth is perpetuated by people who do not run field trials, have only run a few, run a few each year but only in their home area, or used to run them but haven't in a decade or two.
> 
> Three people who do run field trials in different areas each year have repudiated this myth in this thread but the myth will not die. While I have not been competitive in all age stakes for several years (that is changing I hope) I do run dogs and have judged in many areas and there are simply no people who fit the description of those that Happy, 2Tall, and Marvin have alluded to.
> 
> ...



Sooooooo..... there is not now, nor was there ever the need for the OH Am ?

john


----------



## David Carpenter (Jul 11, 2008)

Well put from Tom--

I have the advantage of a top level pro for help--but have had great advice from the "pro-ams" as well

Complain and agonize--or get to work and compete--


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

john fallon said:


> Sooooooo..... there is not now, nor was there ever the need for the OH Am ?
> 
> john


The abuses that led to the concept of the Owner Handler Amateur stake occurred 25 years ago, the existence of the stake is a deterrent to the repetition of those abuses.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

EdA said:


> The abuses that led to the concept of the Owner Handler Amateur stake occurred 25 years ago, the existence of the stake is a deterrent to the repetition of those abuses.


Gotcha..... It happened befo', but it don't happen no mo'. 

john


----------



## david gibson (Nov 5, 2008)

EdA said:


> The abuses that led to the concept of the Owner Handler Amateur stake occurred 25 years ago, the existence of the stake is a deterrent to the repetition of those abuses.


and hence we have hunt tests where the AmOH doesnt have to fear going against pros day in and dayout. in fact, they meet some good ones and a lot of knowledge is shared.

have we solved anything here??? ;-)


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

david gibson said:


> have we solved anything here??? ;-)


apparently not.........


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Howard N said:


> I think you're wrong on this Marvin. Ted is very involved with training his dogs.


I'll give you this as long as you're agreeing with the rest of my post . But TBS, a wage slave, no matter how highly paid is still that - there's only so many hours of daylight.



MooseGooser said:


> Ted has alway been more than gracious to me. He knows derned well, I will always be a HT'r~~and has never displayed one bit of arrogance to me! Gooser


Gooser - I just can't imagine you finding fault with anyone, we could stand a couple like you in this part of the country. 

But the fact is, Ted's tirade toward 2tall was out of line & I'll end it there. 



EdA said:


> I continue to be mystified at the myth of wealthy retired amateurs who run multiple dogs off successful professional trucks to be a widespread phenomenon. This myth is perpetuated by people who do not run field trials, have only run a few, run a few each year but only in their home area, or used to run them but haven't in a decade or two.
> 
> Happy, 2Tall, and Marvin have alluded to.
> 
> ...


As I fit none of the descriptions you presented I will continue. Your glasses are rose colored & that will never change, but that's your business. I respect you for your willingness to step into a thread & provide professional advice, but that's because you know what you are talking about professionally. What was described does exist, there's always someone trying to pick up a buck from the sport. when that happens there will be dishonesty. The sport has gone downhill ethically with all the money floating around  . 

The sport used to be a lot like HT's in the part of the country I started the sport in, it's no longer that way. Even then we would have good amateur handlers show up with a Station Wagon full of dogs, some that they did not own. Think they were doing it like an Am?

But naming names will not help, they need to be weeded out 1 at a time because they are there taking advantage & until the folks paying the fees & doing the work rise up, it's not going to happen.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Jeff Bartlett said:


> Instead of walking out to go see if there are any birds you
> Might. Want to train
> Like all the amateurs that do something at the trials that had full time jobs
> Who's dogs arnt trained by pros to name a few
> ...


Jeff, hopefully not to give anyone a bad reputation by association to me, you've named a few of my favorite people that I think are truley "classy" when it comes to amatuers. I appreciate the time the folks you've named spend bs'ig(tolerating) me asking questions and I thank you for promoting and encouraging young newbies into the sport. That's why the northwest folks will be strong rolling into the future and why our history is deep. Marvin, I've met you on a couple occasions although, I know you wouldn't know me by name. I did enjoy your commentary on the tests and willingness to share your knowledge. It was the AM at carlson's this year. The one with the little 30 yard blind at the base of the tree by the highway. Ducks were'nt in today. Goosin tomorrow mornin then off to watch the hawks! What a great weekend!


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

EdA said:


> I continue to be mystified at the myth of wealthy retired amateurs who run multiple dogs off successful professional trucks to be a widespread phenomenon. This myth is perpetuated by people who do not run field trials, have only run a few, run a few each year but only in their home area, or used to run them but haven't in a decade or two.
> 
> Three people who do run field trials in different areas each year have repudiated this myth in this thread but the myth will not die. While I have not been competitive in all age stakes for several years (that is changing I hope) I do run dogs and have judged in many areas and there are simply no people who fit the description of those that Happy, 2Tall, and Marvin have alluded to.
> 
> ...


Ed, based on Teds account of the MT trial and the entry he eloquently described, all but a few were AM trained dogs.


----------



## J. Walker (Feb 21, 2009)

cakaiser said:


> Do you think it's really such a huge advantage to just show up, pull the dog off a pro truck, and run it?
> I sure don't, because it has never worked very well for us.....
> 
> It can be an advantage to run multiple dogs, have them pro trained, sure. But, it is also a disadvantage to never have your hand over those dogs in training, have no relationship with them. IMO
> ...


I don't know of any folks who who don't spend _some_ time running their own dogs in training with their pros and getting instruction from the pros in the process. Yes, we all need grounds, ponds, etc. However, when most pros can walk out their back doors, load the dogs up, and take them to one of the five ponds on the property while shooting multiple flyers for every dog every week, that's a HUGE advantage for the pro-trained dogs as compared to the vast majority of purely amateur trained dogs.


----------



## John Montenieri (Jul 6, 2009)

Honestly I'm mystified by the broad brush charges of abuse. Ted doesn't need me to stand up for him as he is obviously quite capable. I run the same circuit as Ted and I can echo everything that Ted has said. I see hard working 9-5 folks trying to compete and also against the folks who are retired and/or have the means and money to be relevant. It is highly competitive but that is why we do this. To qualify what an Amateur is, as Dr. Ed says, is just nuts. More power to the Amateurs who have the money, time and space to excel in this sport. One day I hope to retire and do more training. Does that make me a Pro (Am)??? I'm certainly not an expert dog trainer and welcome the help and input on how to be better. I've been embraced by folks like Ted, who even give me advice while running a test. I've run, judged AA stakes and don't see the issues your eluding to.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

This is what Alex and I did yesterday while this debate contined to rage. Sorry Jeff, I take hunting season off to hunt my dog, that's the reason I got into training in the first place and I think it's good to keep that perspective.









Now, back to the debate. It seems there are two separate issues here, 1) should there be different classifications of amateurs to separate the 8-5 working guys who train after work, during breaks, evenings and weekends with a small amateur training group from the retired "semi-pro" amateur who devotes his and her whole life to the sport. Plus some are advocating we punish the group I belong to, who still works and so utilizes a pro to train and run their dog, especially durring the winter and early spring when it is cold, frozen and snow covered up here. 2) The issue some have brought up where an amateur runs a pro's truck in the amateur or co-owns a dog just to get around the OH rule.

Last first, I agree with Ted, other than one incident ten years ago where a very nice amateur we all know tried to help a friend she trained with occasionally, by running his dogs off their mutual pro's truck, when the friend had a last minute family emergency and couldn't make the trial, that was the only time I have ever seen that. Man you should have heard the hue and cry about it. As John Fallon pointed out, there must have been a time when it did happen, hence the OH rule, and this may be one of those regional things, but the circuit I run (Northern Rocky - NW for lack of a better definition), overlaps with Ted's curcuit on the east and Happy's curcuit on the west, I really haven't seen it here. Also I can see Ted getting upset as he was basically being called a liar, those are beyond fighting words in Montana, sounds like Texas is the same.

As far as different levels of amateurs, I think that is crazy talk. We all (I expect) want to beat the best at the top of their game. In reality this sport is a great equalizer. My wife is a chemical engineer and she went to work right out of college for Bechtel Engineering in San Francisco back in the late seventies. She and her fellow engineers thought Steve Bechtel was second only to God. Now thirty years later she has occasional contact with old coworkers for one reason or another, and she delights in surprising them by telling them we sit in the gallery and have conversations with Steve Bechtel who puts his pants on the same way we do and who's dog's occasionally blow him off by refusing that cast to get off the last point on a water blind just like our's do.

If you run this sport long and often you see folks who are successfull year after year with generation after generation of dogs. These people have for years been dedicated, good trainers and handlers, have a program that obviously works for them, travel a lot, learn and evolve, compare notes and techniques with other serious amateurs, but most of all are the same driven over-achievers that succeed in any walk of life, sport or business. Those are the guys I want to be. Those are the guys I feel best beating. Please don't take that opportunity away from my by looping me with the under achievers, who don't feel it's fair to have to compete against these "semi-pros".

John

Oh, I forgot to mention that Cheryl got Alex certified as a therapy dog last year and she has been taking him into our local nursing home where he is much fussed over. I went with them today after we washed the mud off from yesterday's hunt. These really are special animals.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> Also I can see Ted getting upset as he was basically being called a liar, those are beyond fighting words in Montana, sounds like Texas is the same.


 Actually, John it's Colorado, not Texas. But, you got the sentiment right.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

John Robinson said:


>


Where are the Honkers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



> Also I can see Ted getting upset as he was basically being called a liar, those are beyond fighting words in Montana, sounds like Texas is the same.


A little sensitive? We disagreed with him based on what we know & see. No one called him a liar, but because of those who defended him, you can question the motive. 

Again. as I posted to Gooser, Ted was Out of Line with his post to 2tall.




> Oh, I forgot to mention that Cheryl got Alex certified as a therapy dog last year and she has been taking him into our local nursing home where he is much fussed over. I went with them today after we washed the mud off from yesterday's hunt. These really are special animals.


Good for Cheryl    .


----------



## Jeff Bartlett (Jan 7, 2006)

John Robinson said:


> This is what Alex and I did yesterday while this debate contined to rage. Sorry Jeff, I take hunting season off to hunt my dog, that's the reason I got into training in the first place and I think it's good to keep that perspective.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


John we trained Saturday.and hunted today no pretty picture of ducks and geese because Ro was the only one to shoot anything and we lost it with our highly trained retrievers
He landed in big water and was gone 
Nice picture we probably would of made. The retrieve with Alex 
Happy hunten. And hunting. Is the reason we do this to 
Happy hunten maybe we will see you in. Spring


----------



## Golden Boy (Apr 3, 2009)

*All this time wasted when you could have been training your dog or out hunting with your dog. Now I see why you feel you need the rules changed. Just not enough time to train dogs and to post on RTF. 
Since my last post I did the following with my dogs

Friday took 2 dogs hunting and had a blast
Saturday trained dogs getting ready for the spring trial season. 
Sunday trained dogs getting ready for the spring trial season. 
**Winners Train Losers Complain*


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Jeff Bartlett said:


> John we trained Saturday.and hunted today no pretty picture of ducks and geese because Ro was the only one to shoot anything and we lost it with our highly trained retrievers
> He landed in big water and was gone
> Nice picture we probably would of made. The retrieve with Alex
> Happy hunten. And hunting. Is the reason we do this to
> Happy hunten maybe we will see you in. Spring


Hi Jeff,
Good hunting to you as well. I'm sure we'll see you at some trials in the spring.
John


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

I feel like I just read the Internet version of an MMA Octagon 
fight with Cain Velasquez vs. Pee Wee Herman.
Carol, you gotta learn how to tap out!




.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Marvin S said:


> *Where are the Honkers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*
> 
> 
> A little sensitive? We disagreed with him based on what we know & see. No one called him a liar, but because of those who defended him, you can question the motive.
> ...


No Honkers yesterday Marvin, but a flight of seven Tundra Swans flew right over us at about ten yards. Those birds are huge! 

John


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

6 on the ground and at least 7 misses. Great day in Fall City but I was shooting like crap and the hawks lost but freebie box seats on the 40 yard line after goose hunting was great! Back to the grind tomorrow am.


----------



## minnducker (Jan 29, 2010)

Boy what a great discussion. I haven’t run a field trial for years, but believe it or not, we have the same kinds of problems at our golf course. I play 2 or 3 times a week, and I try really hard. I maybe could play or practice more often, but with my schedule and everything else going on, it’s too “difficult”. 
The problem is, there are these guys who play almost everyday. On the days they don’t actually play a round, they spend time on the driving range. A few have even been caught paying a pro to give them lessons and tips on how to improve their game even more. Apparently they have unlimited funds as they also travel to other golf courses and play those. And don’t get me started on the school teachers who are members; they play a lot more than me during the summer. Maybe some of this other stuff should be taken into consideration; I don’t know, maybe there could be separate golf tournaments or handicap systems for those of us who can’t really spend as much time golfing as these other guys. Why should I have to compete against all this “unfairness”? What do you think?


----------



## Vicky Trainor (May 19, 2003)

minnducker said:


> Boy what a great discussion. I haven’t run a field trial for years, but believe it or not, we have the same kinds of problems at our golf course. I play 2 or 3 times a week, and I try really hard. I maybe could play or practice more often, but with my schedule and everything else going on, it’s too “difficult”.
> The problem is, there are these guys who play almost everyday. On the days they don’t actually play a round, they spend time on the driving range. A few have even been caught paying a pro to give them lessons and tips on how to improve their game even more. Apparently they have unlimited funds as they also travel to other golf courses and play those. And don’t get me started on the school teachers who are members; they play a lot more than me during the summer. Maybe some of this other stuff should be taken into consideration; I don’t know, maybe there could be separate golf tournaments or handicap systems for those of us who can’t really spend as much time golfing as these other guys. Why should I have to compete against all this “unfairness”? What do you think?


I think it stinks. 

Which would you handicap.....the dog or the handler? I've always felt it was the dog's "job" to mark the birds and do the work. As a handler, I am there to "assist" the dog if he gets in trouble or to help with setting him up properly on marks (which is "of primary importance"). On blinds, it's a team effort, but, personally, I still feel that the dog has the most responsibility on a blind.....to follow commands/casts, carry the cast and come up with the bird.

JMHO


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

minnducker said:


> Boy what a great discussion. I haven’t run a field trial for years, but believe it or not, we have the same kinds of problems at our golf course. I play 2 or 3 times a week, and I try really hard. I maybe could play or practice more often, but with my schedule and everything else going on, it’s too “difficult”.
> The problem is, there are these guys who play almost everyday. On the days they don’t actually play a round, they spend time on the driving range. A few have even been caught paying a pro to give them lessons and tips on how to improve their game even more. Apparently they have unlimited funds as they also travel to other golf courses and play those. And don’t get me started on the school teachers who are members; they play a lot more than me during the summer. Maybe some of this other stuff should be taken into consideration; I don’t know, maybe there could be separate golf tournaments or handicap systems for those of us who can’t really spend as much time golfing as these other guys. Why should I have to compete against all this “unfairness”? What do you think?


 Very funny and nice way to put it in perspective...


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

John Robinson said:


> Very funny and nice way to put it in perspective...


I could see the analogy if every time you played it was a tournament and you we trying to win and go to an invitational at the end of the year with more on the line than a cocktail and cigar at the end of each day.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I could see the analogy if every time you played it was a tournament and you we trying to win and go to an invitational at the end of the year with more on the line than a cocktail and cigar at the end of each day.


Yeah, if you qualify for a National, and you are not a professional, 

- You get to make no money for two weeks
- You get to spend money for two weeks on room, food, travel, and birds

And, at the end of the two weeks, if you and your dog are VERY GOOD and lucky, and manage to win the whole deal, you get you both get your name engraved on a silver trophy (which you don't get to keep), a blue ribbon, your photograph taken, and some dog food for the year. What a deal! 

And if you aren't very good and lucky, and you don't win, you don't get the engraving, ribbon, photograph or dog food. What a deal!

Oh, and I forgot, if you win, you get to host - and pay for - an open bar celebration. 

Cocktail and cigar sound after a golf tournament sound pretty good to me.

Anybody that thinks that people do this for the money are either ignorant or insane.


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2010)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I could see the analogy if every time you played it was a tournament and you we trying to win and go to an invitational at the end of the year with more on the line than a cocktail and cigar at the end of each day.


What is your motive here? Seriously. I don't know if you even run trials. Do you? If not, why are you so concerned about "the system" under which those that do run them?  

As has been stated, those that run trials find no need to change the way it stands. You do understand how this is making you look, right?


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

So Ted, are you saying golf is a more or less competitve sport than trials?


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Melanie Foster said:


> What is your motive here? Seriously. I don't know if you even run trials. Do you? If not, why are you so concerned about "the system" under which those that do run them?
> 
> As has been stated, those that run trials find no need to change the way it stands. You do understand how this is making you look, right?


Not sure exactly what you mean but I thought this could be an inters
Esting discussion and as I said in my first post, I have no MERIT in making the mention. Obviously, some people are up tight and very defensive which I don't understand but I am trying. I have not said or stood on a box shouting anything needs to be changed. It was a question and a simple "not a good idea because...." Would have sufficed. Some took this as a personal attack and I think that is a pretty silly soap box to stand on. I can't comment on how you think I look because I ask a question or throw out an idea rediculous as it may have been?

I'm not "concerned", more curious. As I said earlier, I've run two derbies and went out quickly. I credit that to myself nothing more nothing less. That experience has NOTHING to do with bringing up a topic for discussion. Replies like yours insinuate I'm stirring some imaginary pot. Obviously, Ted is pissed off I've made a suggestion or opened a discussion on this topic. 

Is there something about this topic which people feel is a personal attack or aimed at a person or person which I'm attempting to do something deviant? if so, someone send me a pm and I'll delete the thread if you think it is personally pointed at someone.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> Yeah, if you qualify for a National, and you are not a professional,
> 
> - You get to make no money for two weeks
> - You get to spend money for two weeks on room, food, travel, and birds
> ...


I think bragging rights are worth quite a bit  you can't buy those! seriously Ted, I'm enjoying most of the dialog and I wish it hadn't gone a little sideways. I see your point and that was all I've was looking for. I've seen posts on here get less grief when people come out and say, "this needs to be changed because....." 

I thought I worded my question "soft" enough that it would come across as more of a question which elicited some answers versus "attacks".


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

I'll edit a few things here......see if bold works....



Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I've pondered this before; I have no merit in suggesting this and have nothing more than an idea in the back of my head regarding this suggestion. I thought it might be a good discussion or, maybe its a stupid suggestion to make and someone will shoot a hole in my suggestion?
> 
> We all know of "Amateurs" (I'm talking Field Trials)who probably don't have a normal job if one at all, train multiple times a week with a pro(or, train with the pro and dogs stay with the pro), have multiple dogs, breed multiple litters a year, are basically "on the circuit" yet, still maintain Amateur status? Why not come up with a simple formula that puts a few more restraints on those who are running as Amateurs to even the playing field with those who by all definition, are "real" Amateurs?
> 
> ...


*I sort of feel like nobody read this for being a suggestion and now I'm trying to re-write rule books, trying to change field trials, I am a have not who is jealous of others, etc., etc., etc,*

*I'm not trying to change anything. Again, I thought it might be a good, "discussion". *

*I did ask people to put holes in my thought and I did say that it was "maybe a stupid suggestion". *


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I'll edit a few things here......see if bold works....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well you got that part. 

I really didn't take offence at your post. You listed your newness right up front. I just took it to be a naive idea. My post were more directed to some of the other more experienced field trialers who seemed to be buying into the idea or bringing up barely related amateur-pro issues. The reason some folks are very outspoken is because those of us who have seriously caught the FT bug are passionate about this. It's a disease where all other aspects of your life become secondary to running and competing in field trials and training, training, training in an attempt to become more competitive. After all this I would have hoped that you could at least understand that passion.

John


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2010)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> So Ted, are you saying golf is a more or less competitve sport than trials?


Paul, please...back away from the keyboard.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Obviously, Ted is pissed off I've made a suggestion or opened a discussion on this topic.
> 
> Is there something about this topic which people feel is a personal attack or aimed at a person or person which I'm attempting to do something deviant? if so, someone send me a pm and I'll delete the thread if you think it is personally pointed at someone.




I am not pissed off at you or the topic of this thread.
If you read my posts, you will see that I simply disagree with the premise of your original post. 

However, as John Robinson correctly noted, I am pissed off that Carol posted that I was lying about my observations about the circuit that I run - when she does not run FT in that circuit.

You will note that:
- John Robinson, who judges over and competes against the same amateurs that I do
- John Montenieri, who judges over and competes against the same amateurs that I do
- Ed Aycock, who judges over and competes against the same amateurs that I do

All said that the premise underlying your original post was unfounded, that my observations were the same as theirs, and that what Carol claims is the state of affairs is not in their neck of the woods.

Carol saw fit to claim that my response to your original post was nothing more than "BS". It is that unfounded accusation that got my dander up. No more, or less


----------



## Dave Plesko (Aug 16, 2009)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> "maybe a stupid suggestion". [/B]



Slappy,

It was a stupid suggestion.

Feel Better?

Regards,

DP


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Dave Plesko said:


> Slappy,
> 
> It was a stupid suggestion.
> 
> ...


Thanks Dave, I'm fairly certain I'm leaning towards agreeing with you wholeheartedly.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Thanks Dave, I'm fairly certain I'm leaning towards agreeing with you wholeheartedly.


I just read your Teddy Roosevelt signiture quote, seems that you had the answer right there the whole time.;-)

John


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I could see the analogy if every time you played it was a tournament and you we trying to win and go to an invitational at the end of the year with more on the line than a cocktail and cigar at the end of each day.


As I read through this, it actually reminded me of golf. I played in college and was very good. Not good enough to make it on the tour most likely, but played against a number of folks who were or still are on the tour and won my share. I got out of college and got a job. After two years of getting my butt handed to me in the US Amateur by folks in college who had nothing to do but practice and play, I figured I didn't have much chance. "Wait until you are old enough for the Mid-Am", I told myself. So a couple of years later, I went to the Mid-Am and got my butt handed to me by folks who took over their dad's insurance book or something and could play or practice some pretty much every day. I was really hacked off then.

Finally, I realized that I could either play in tournaments or not. If I played, I could worry about everyone else and their life relative to mine or I could focus on my game and the course and do what I could do. I didn't win many and haven't qualified for a national tournament in decades, but enjoyed it a lot more once I started focusing more on my game relative to my abilities and situation and not everyone else.

I am brand new to FTs and everyone is a better handler, has better dogs, better land on which to train, more money or some advantage over me. Still I enjoy it very much, even when I make a total fool out of myself (as was the case this weekend). I am learning, I like the people and like seeing the nice folks I have met do well and rooting them on. I doubt I will ever qualify for a national and probably won't ever win an all age stake. But I might--in golf, it is always that one pure contact that keeps even hackers out there. In the meantime, I will do what I can with what I have to work with and try to measure success and progress in a way other than winning.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

I figure I'd probably pay to sit and watch if I had to anyways so why not try and be ready to enter something someday? 

I'm not a bystander by anymeans either. I'm an active volunteer and spend a lot of time helping whereever anyone needs it no matter what the club. I think I had to decline helping once last year because the trial was on a weekend that I do an annual fishing trip that I haven't missed in 17 years. 

So, I'm not a guy who sits in the cab of the truck after running a dog and complain about the running order, marshalls, fliers that don't fly, if the test was within the rules or anything like that....I'm there setting up in the morning and there at night packing up the trailer sunday after everyone has gone home. (hunt tests and picknic trials)


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

I am the same. I love trials, tests, training, etc. but.....i am going to hell for this....DON'T TUG ON SUPERMANS CAPE, DONT SPIT INTO THE WIND, DONT PULL THE MASK OFF THE OLE LONE RANGER, AND DONT MESS AROUND WITH TED!.

I honest to god did not call Ted a liar, jus'bser. I know what I see, and I think most dog folks are wonderful. I met Dr Ed on a cold wet nasty day and he was a true gentleman and I loved the way he ran his dog. I love the game and the dogs.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

2tall said:


> I honest to god did not call Ted a liar, jus'bser. I know what I see, and I think most dog folks are wonderful. I met Dr Ed on a cold wet nasty day and he was a true gentleman and I loved the way he ran his dog. I love the game and the dogs.




Curious, isn't it

You claim that my comments are BS.

Yet
John Robinson makes the same observations as I do - and he lives in Montana
- Obviously, John's comments are BS

John Montenieri makes the same observations as I do - and he lives in Colorado
- Obviously, John's comments are BS

Ed Aycock makes the same observations as I do - and he lives in Texas
- Obviously, Ed's comments are BS

John, John, Ed, and I compete in AA stakes
John, John, Ed, and I judge AA stakes

You do neither,
You do not run the AA stakes
You do not judge the AA stakes

But, of course, your opinion has merit
Because this is the internet, where people can post about things of which they are ignorant.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

?????????????


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

2tall said:


> ?????????????


Happy made the following comments



> We all know of "Amateurs" (I'm talking Field Trials)who probably don't have a normal job if one at all, train multiple times a week with a pro(or, train with the pro and dogs stay with the pro), have multiple dogs, breed multiple litters a year, are basically "on the circuit" yet, still maintain Amateur status?





> The Am's I'd suggest limiting are ones who will run all over a large territory and run multiple stakes, multiple dogs and have a truckload of other peoples dogs they may be "running/handling" for them?




I commented that neither was an issue in my circuit.

My observation was echoed by:

Howard Niemi in Alaska
John Robinson in Montana
John Montenieri in Colorado
Ed Aycock in Texas 

Nevertheless, with all the vast experience that you have had running field trials you saw fit to state that my observations were nothing more than BS.

I simply noted that people who - unlike you -

- Ran AA stakes
- Judged AA stakes

shared my opinions 

and that if my opinions were BS, so were theirs.

However, if it is unclear, I give your opinions short shrift

It is easy for people who know nothing about a subject to claim differently on the internet


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Ken Bora, you are right. I tap out.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

About time


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Ted, I don't like posting names on the internet of non-participants in subjects but, my question\"suggestion was to raise a discussion nothing else. I have a few examples in mind of folks who fit my description but, no way I'd put names in this thread. I have nothing against them. One I knew before I even knew he had dogs about 5 years ago. The other two(maybe even two and a half) I've known of for 10 years and have been in the dog business double that period competitively. In my mind, by my description they exist. BUT, do I feel the rules NEED changing? Not really. Just trying to have a discussion. Honestly. I don't think you are any "righter" because a few people agree with you but, in debating points of discussions, you'd better have folk who have your back if the chAt becomes a bloodsport.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Happy

If you don't have any knowledge of a certain subject, as Carol clearly did not - don't claim to
If you don't have any knowledge of a certain subject, as Carol clearly did not, then don't tell someone else who does that his opinions are BS

It's not complicated
Don't claim to know what you don't 
Don't tell other people that they don't know what they do
And life will be fine

I have told you many times, I really take no offense to your post
I don't think your premise is founded
No more, no less

I am offended when someone who doesn't run AA stakes in FT, who doesn't judge AA stakes in FT, tells me that MY opinions about MY circuit are BS, when she knows NOTHING about MY circuit.

Don't call me a liar and expect to get a free pass


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

You set yourself up for this, if you've judged an AA stake I'd be willing to bet you've had BS called on you by a lot more folks than just Carol....sorry, couldn't resist-


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> You set yourself up for this, if you've judged an AA stake I'd be willing to bet you've had BS called on you by a lot more folks than just Carol....sorry, couldn't resist-


I'd be willing to bet you are talking about things about which you know nothing


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Aw common Ted, your way too serious about yourself. You use the words "I" and "MY" in one posr more than I have ever seen. I was trying to be light hearted because I'm sure when you judged, the guy who was number 2,3 and 4 thought it was great!


----------



## Janice Jones (Dec 22, 2008)

I am a "newbie" to the FT sport. The sentence that read "Ted is a bullie to the newbies" is flat out wrong and that statement is a lie! Ted has always been very respectful and genuinely helpful in giving me assistance in understanding the FT rulebook in circumstances that arose while I was Marshalling to standing on the line and running my dog. Bullying is the furthest word I would ever use to describe him.
Many people read this forum and this post. Spreading rumors like that is very wrong and not what this sport is about.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Janice Jones said:


> I am a "newbie" to the FT sport. The sentence that read "Ted is a bullie to the newbies" is flat out wrong and that statement is a lie! Ted has always been very respectful and genuinely helpful in giving me assistance in understanding the FT rulebook in circumstances that arose while I was Marshalling to standing on the line and running my dog. Bullying is the furthest word I would ever use to describe him.
> Many people read this forum and this post. Spreading rumors like that is very wrong and not what this sport is about.


Janice, I think the poster was pointing out his internet dialog. People come across much differently when speaking in written word than in person is what I've found. Sometimes not. 

Just my observation,


----------



## WRL (Jan 4, 2003)

2tall said:


> Ken Bora, you are right. I tap out.


OUT DAMN SPOT OUT!!! 

WRL


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

WRL said:


> OUT DAMN SPOT OUT!!!
> 
> WRL


The RTF octagon! Ground and pound!


----------



## WRL (Jan 4, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> The RTF octagon! Ground and pound!


Go eat your taters!

WRL


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

WRL said:


> Go eat your taters!
> 
> WRL


I found out they were communist potatoes, I was about to throw them out and I realized that communists need friends too and we live in America and every is allowed to have opinions until they tread on others. Especially when the communists want to share the hgomeland with Happy!


----------



## WRL (Jan 4, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I found out they were communist potatoes, I was about to throw them out and I realized that communists need friends too and we live in America and every is allowed to have opinions until they tread on others. Especially when the communists want to share the hgomeland with Happy!


LOL Maybe I should have said go have a beer??

WRL


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

WRL said:


> LOL Maybe I should have said go have a beer??
> 
> WRL


Thanks Lee. I'm decompressing by watching "The Muppets Take Manhattan"


----------



## WRL (Jan 4, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Thanks Lee. I'm decompressing by watching "The Muppets Take Manhattan"


Good stuff.....

WRL


----------



## Golden Boy (Apr 3, 2009)

I wish Lanse was here.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

Golden Boy said:


> I wish Lanse was here.


he's already read the thread..


----------



## Lynn Moore (May 30, 2005)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Aw common Ted, your way too serious about yourself. You use the words "I" and "MY" in one posr more than I have ever seen. I was trying to be light hearted because I'm sure when you judged, the guy who was number 2,3 and 4 thought it was great!


We were quite happy with second place last weekend. Nothing at all wrong with three points. The second place made our year! Running under Ted anytime.......and do you guys not understand you are arguing with a lawyer????? And to agree with Ted, there is no one up and down the coast that runs dogs in the Amateur off a pro truck, unless you are trying to insinuate that Mr. Bechtel does this? He owns all his dogs and so does everyone else that runs the Amateur out here in the west.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

Lynn Moore said:


> We were quite happy with second place last weekend. Nothing at all wrong with three points. The second place made our year! Running under Ted anytime.......and do you guys not understand you are arguing with a lawyer????? And to agree with Ted, there is no one up and down the coast that runs dogs in the Amateur off a pro truck, unless you are trying to insinuate that Mr. Bechtel does this? He owns all his dogs and so does everyone else that runs the Amateur out here in the west.


Who is arguing? Nothing was brought up by me about co-ownerships. Congrats on the second. I was tryting to be slightly humourous with that. Because someone is a lawyer gives them no more reason to be better than anyone else or make their "opinion" more valid than anothers. In fact, if you think about it, when lawyers argue they typically require a third party to intervene and in those arguments, one will be wrong even thought they spent countless hours convincing their client they were right!


----------



## HarryWilliams (Jan 17, 2005)

Persistence has removed any doubt. HPW


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Who is arguing? Nothing was brought up by me about co-ownerships. Congrats on the second. I was tryting to be slightly humourous with that. Because someone is a lawyer gives them no more reason to be better than anyone else or make their "opinion" more valid than anothers. In fact, if you think about it, when lawyers argue they typically require a third party to intervene and in those arguments, one will be wrong even thought they spent countless hours convincing their client they were right!


Would you like a backhoe to help you dig that hole or are you content to dig it with a shovel..........;-)


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Golden Boy said:


> I wish Lanse was here.


Contrary to rumor, Lanse is not, and has never been banned from RTF.

If Lanse chooses to post in this thread, he's welcome to.


----------



## Happy Gilmore (Feb 29, 2008)

EdA said:


> Would you like a backhoe to help you dig that hole or are you content to dig it with a shovel..........;-)


Just paid an extra $100 for same day delivery! Lol!


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Where is the "Good Dog" thread when you need it..........

john


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> I've pondered this before; I have no merit in suggesting this and have nothing more than an idea in the back of my head regarding this suggestion. I thought it might be a good discussion or, maybe its a stupid suggestion to make and someone will shoot a hole in my suggestion?
> 
> We all know of "Amateurs" (I'm talking Field Trials)who probably don't have a normal job if one at all, train multiple times a week with a pro(or, train with the pro and dogs stay with the pro), have multiple dogs, breed multiple litters a year, are basically "on the circuit" yet, still maintain Amateur status? Why not come up with a simple formula that puts a few more restraints on those who are running as Amateurs to even the playing field with those who by all definition, are "real" Amateurs?
> 
> ...





Ted Shih said:


> I don't know of anyone on my circuit that fits this profile





Ted Shih said:


> I don't know of anyone that fits this profile either





2tall said:


> Ted, I admire you, but thats BS. You know as well as the rankest beginner that both types exist.





Ted Shih said:


> But, I can tell you that in my circuit, neither exist
> Period
> 
> Here are the pro trucks I compete against in MY circuit
> ...





Jay Dufour said:


> Haha.........Hummmm....Hahha !!


Needed a resurrection  . Been busy preparing testimony on our little city's budget for next year. We have 7 days from the time it's released by the city to go through a 100 pages & prepare. But I managed about 15 minutes of testimony. Completely turned the spendthrifts off .

So I looked @ Ted's circuit on EE. Every club but one has O/H. There has to be a reason for that, anyone care to guess . But you can still see the Co Owner stuff & in that one trial, DH is back. So it looks like Paul hit a nerve based on the replys & Carol was right in calling BS . But I'll start a new thread to talk about the Am thing.


----------



## Alex (Jan 22, 2008)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Contrary to rumor, Lanse is not, and has never been banned from RTF.
> 
> If Lanse chooses to post in this thread, he's welcome to.


I would rather see Alex Washburn's input on the issues raised in this thread, rather than Lance Brown's


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

Alex said:


> I would rather see Alex Washburn's input on the issues raised in this thread, rather than Lance Brown's


That makes one of us.


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

Marvin S said:


> So I looked @ Ted's circuit on EE. Every club but one has O/H. There has to be a reason for that, anyone care to guess . But you can still see the Co Owner stuff & in that one trial, DH is back. So it looks like Paul hit a nerve based on the replys & Carol was right in calling BS :.


Great counter point Marvin,


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

greg magee said:


> Great counter point Marvin,


Thanks  . As a retired Engineer who spent my working career having to be correct, I like to do a little research before I post. 

But you'll notice - no rebuttal - they can go in the corner & act like a lap dog now.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> We all know of "Amateurs" (I'm talking Field Trials)who probably don't have a normal job if one at all, train multiple times a week with a pro(or, train with the pro and dogs stay with the pro), have multiple dogs, breed multiple litters a year, are basically "on the circuit" yet, still maintain Amateur status?



Nothing like selective reading and reasoning. This is part of Paul's original post. 

I am unaware of any people that meet the above criteria.
Other people, from other areas of the country have made the same observation.

The existence or absence of the O/H Amateur is simply irrelevant to that inquiry.

Nothing like setting up straw men and knocking them down.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> The Am's I'd suggest limiting are ones who will run all over a large territory and run multiple stakes, multiple dogs and have a truckload of other peoples dogs they may be "running/handling" for them?


Again, more selective reading and reasoning

This is another part of Paul's original post

I have not observed this where I run.
Other people from other parts of the country share this observation.

The reference to the O/H Am is nothing more than a red herring, intended to draw attention away from the true inquiry.

1) I posted the entries for the Amateur at Billings. It was an Amateur, not an O/H Amateur. There were no multiple ownerships, running the truck, etc.
2) If "fake" ownerships are as prevalent as some believe then the existence of an O/H Amateur would be irrelevant. People would be listed as owners on paper to skirt the O/H limitations

If there are people that fit the description in Paul's original post, I don't know them

More importantly, other people who run field trials in other parts of the country don't know of such people, either.

But, hey, why bother with facts or analysis?

It's much easier to argue about hidden conspiracies ....

The world is flat, after all, isn't it?


----------



## drbobsd (Feb 21, 2004)

OK after reading 15 pages of posts I fully understand what I'm getting into in AA stakes.

I pray that someday I can be competitive in the Amat and one day run an Open.

Feel bad for awesome dogs when Amat handler sucks.

I will continue to pay my dues. 

I won't worry about a National for now.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Alex said:


> I would rather see Alex Washburn's input on the issues raised in this thread, rather than Lance Brown's


OK???

I'd like to see my friend Alex post on RTF as well.

Does she have an account here?

Lanse spells his name with an "s". 

Chris


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Marvin S said:


> ......
> I like to do a little research before I post.
> ......


 
How about typing the names?
If some folk are sure they don’t 
And some folk are sure they do
Who are they? Lets have the list.
Maybe somebody could put up a web 
page and rate their qualifications and performance.;-)







.


----------



## drbobsd (Feb 21, 2004)

I think after 150 posts and pushing 8000 views this thread needs one thing to top it off. 

A post from "Qui Chang Trainer".


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

Chris Atkinson said:


> OK???
> 
> I'd like to see my friend Alex post on RTF as well.
> 
> ...


I think Alex is getting ready for the National...as is Lanse


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Paul "Happy" Gilmore said:


> Most Am's I know might run 8-12 trials a year at most. The Am's I'd suggest limiting are ones who will run all over a large territory and run multiple stakes, multiple dogs and have a truckload of other peoples dogs they may be "running/handling" for them?





Ted Shih said:


> Again, more selective reading and reasoning
> 
> This is another part of Paul's original post
> 
> ...


So dogs named Fat City Freeride, Flying High & Trident's High Order Detonation are just fictitious . I would consider Centennial, Cheyenne, Pikes Peak, CO Women's & Fort Collins your circuit. But along with Billings I see you also make Treasure State in July, coulda used that one but it would show you as one of the people Happy describes .

& I notice you weren't at Ft Collins for the Fall Trial but one of your dogs was!!!!! 

Your closing is getting feeble, when the dirt you shovel out keeps returning you've probably dug a hole as deep as needed . 

Now I don't agree with Happy's approach, but would not expect more from someone as unfamiliar with the terrain of FT's as he is. I believe there are levels of involvement that warrant someone calling themselves an Am, but also see others that are beyond the scope of the unenforced rules. Polite company precludes me from naming names, but there's a fairly extensive list. You know some of them personally  .

When I advanced my education I expected to receive input & counseling from somone who knew more than I. Any smart Am would do the same & I do not consider involvement with a pro as creating a taint. Beyond that, they are the most efficienct at setting up workouts. But the knowledgeable in this sport still have maximum time working with dogs in the field, Amateurs included, even as they muddle along .


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

BonMallari said:


> I think Alex is getting ready for the National...as is Lanse


Not Lanse.... he changed jockeys... told me he was too old and gets worn out to do the 2 week national stint.... as you know he just had his birthday - I told him he is only about 10 in dog years..... . (I just saw him in 'bama....


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

JusticeDog said:


> Not Lanse.... he changed jockeys... told me he was too old and gets worn out to do the 2 week national stint.... as you know he just had his birthday - I told him he is only about 10 in dog years..... . (I just saw him in 'bama....


just because Rorem is running him doesnt mean there isnt some other work to be done...He was in Houston on Mon/Tues...but he will not be staying in Miss...because as you stated..I think Rosa can go the distance, will be pulling hard for her..she is in good hands with Rorem...ck that she is in great hands with Rorem


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Talked to Lanse recently & finally have the feeling he is getting smarter. He has burned the candle at both ends in this sport, laughs at the people who can't find time to do their own training, but as far as I'm concerned is the consummate Amateur. Does all of his own training except for young dog breakout, as he says "I'm not the most patient guy", which would describe a lot of us. He's also a busy guy in real life, I can imagine being cooped up In a motel room with only 1 dog to run would drive him nuts. I wouldn't want to do that. It's nice that he has found someone he is comfortable with to run his dog. Haven't seen Rosa in about 2 years but what I did see was pretty impressive then, I'm sure she's much further along now. 

TBS, along with the much awaited Ed A's Honcho III, Vickie Lamb's next book, wouldn't it be neat if Lanse wrote a book about being a real Amateur dog trainer. Lanse is a treasure trove of knowledge .


----------



## Alex (Jan 22, 2008)

I agree with you Marvin that Lanse[with an s] is a real amateur and a treasure trove of information, I would love to see him write a book.

I also feel that Ms Washburn has learned many tricks from the Hillman camp; not all of them dealing with dog training


----------

