Question about gun dog vs. shooting dog.

[MTO4Life]

Hi All,

I tried searching, but couldn't find much on the forum, although I'm assuming that this would already be asked.

What can I expect for differences between a great gun dog run and a great shooting dog run? I don't know much about shooting dog stakes, so I'm curious as to the differences. Possibly some judges could chime in and give me some direction.

If there is already a link that deals with this, perhaps someone could let me know. Thanks for the help.

[MTO4Life]

Sorry, I should have been more specific. I meant a great gun dog trial stake. That is why I was hoping a judge or two would chime in. I do know that a shorter running dog would not make it as a shooting dog.

[Brittguy]

There are no AKC shooting dog stakes. Shooting dog stakes are an American Field term. Some trials are both Am. Field and AKC sanctioned so it turns out to be the same stake just different wording when it is reported.
There is a thought with many people that a shooting dog runs a litter bigger.

[MTO4Life]

There are no AKC shooting dog stakes. Shooting dog stakes are an American Field term. Some trials are both Am. Field and AKC sanctioned so it turns out to be the same stake just different wording when it is reported.
There is a thought with many people that a shooting dog runs a litter bigger.

I know the AKC runs gun dog stakes and AF runs Shooting dog. All things being equal, is it just a bit bigger run to be competitive in shooting dog? I've heard that AKC AA dogs are equivalent to AF shooting dogs. Is there any truth to this?

[Casper]

IMO they should be judged the same. The judgment should be in how the dogs applied themselves to that particular course on that particular day. It should not have anything to do with "running bigger".

I have never liked the term running bigger. It is a subjective term that can be viewed differently by each individual watching the same dog(s)

[mudhunter]

Just from what I have seen with my limited exposure. An All Age AKC dogs is equivalent in Range to an AF shooting dog. That is just what I have seen at trials in and around PA area. Many of the dogs I have seen run AKC Gun dogs were big foot hunting dogs in my opinion (not all, a few could really move).

[Birddog3412]

I thought that gundogs only had to be broke to flush, while shooting dogs were broke to wing and shot. Is this correct?

[PkerStr8Tail]

I don't know anything about AKC, but in AF trials gundogs and shooting dogs are very different. Gundogs are close working and are seen the whole brace for the most part. They are a dog that you can hunt off foot and would be a dog you take hunting on the weekend. A Shooting Dog (or maybe I should say Horseback Shooting Dog) is a totally different class of animal. They should possess tremendous class and style. They should have a far reaching forward race which results in portions of the brace where they are not visible. For an example, Elhew Hannibal is a multiple time shooting dog CH. I have watched here run a couple times. Once she leaves break away you will not see her and you find her standing on birds. Then you cut here loose again and she reaches out front and you find her standing. Like I said, I don't know anything about AKC standards, but in AF the two are very different from the trials I have watched that ran both classes.

[vzkennels]

Birddog your info is incorrect all dogs running in broke dog stakes whether gun dog,shooting dog,or AA have to be completely broke.

[Elroy's Bandit]

I believe the AF OSD stakes are all 1 hour, whereas the AKC Gun Dog stakes are 30 minutes. To say the least, a shooting dog must posses the endurance and stamina to not only run the hour, but to impress the judges by finishing the last 5 minutes as strong & stylish as the dog ran the first part of the brace. This, IMO opinion, is the biggest difference between OGD & OSD
Bill L.

[Neil]

There is a big difference in AKC walking Gun Dog and a horseback Gun Dog range to the degree AKC has included it in the rules. Although not in the rules, I have found a big difference in Open and Amateur horseback Gun Dog.

Many of the AKC All-Age dogs are really just AF Shooting Dog in range, but most do not have the handle to win consistantly.

The truth is that there is not have much difference in range in today's AF Shooting Dog and All-Age, either.

So to answer your question, the biggest running dog that finishes with birds is going to win most often, no matter the stake.

Neil

[Dave Quindt]

Birddog your info is incorrect all dogs running in broke dog stakes whether gun dog,shooting dog,or AA have to be completely broke.

Actually Ted, he's not wrong. You're not wrong either. The both of you are right, and this is a perfect example of why these terms are so vague to be nearly undefinable.

American Field allows clubs to run "gundog" stakes, which allow for judgment to cease at the flush. I happened to grab the 2/6 copy of the Field; turn to pg 46 to see a couple of clubs here in Illinois running gundog stakes. They clearly state that judgment ceases at the flush. So Birddog is right. But Ted, you are right as well, because in AKC gundog stakes, the dog must be fully broke.

The problem is that both organizations use the same term, to mean different things. The larger problem is that there is a tremendous amount of variation within what the AF defines as a Shooting Dog. There is also a tremendous amount of variation within what the AKC defines as a gundog. And there is a large degree of overlap between an AF Shooting Dog and an AKC Gundog, when you look at current judging standards.

The first AF trial I ever went to was an AF-sanctioned (not NBHA, US Complete or ABHA) walking shooting dog trial. I was always told that an AF shooting dog was bigger, by default, than an AKC gundog but I went anyways for the experience. It was actually the first time I had handled my dog in a broke dog stake; she was an AKC gundog so I expected to be outclassed. Over a decade later I'm still amazed at what I saw, in comparison to what I imagined. The course wasn't big enough to hold an AKC walking gundog stake, and may not have been big enough for an AKC hunt test. I was amazed to see they ran a basically empty back course with a bird field; never would I have imagined that there would be a bird field at an AF shooting dog stake. My dog blew a back in the bird field, so I was out of contention, but the dogs they put up were performances that were run of the mill AKC gundog walking trial stuff. The dog they put up 1st didn't have a bird find, so they planted a bird and let the handler walk the dog to the bird until he pointed it; certainly nothing I ever saw at an AKC trial.

Now, does this mean that every AF shooting dog stake is the same as an AKC Gundog stake? Nope! But the same "Shooting Dog" standard that was applied to that stake also applies to the horseback shooting dog championship stakes that PkerStr8Tail describes. The standard is very wide and very loose, and the same goes for the AKC Gundog standard.

Where folks get in trouble is when they assume that what defines a Gundog or a Shooting Dog in the venue that they participate in, in the area of the country that they run in, is the same for the rest of the country, and for every other organization that runs trials under AF or AKC rules.

There is just SO MUCH variation. In the Brittany world, virtually all of their weekend AKC gundog stakes are dual-registered as AF shooting dog stakes AND all of their hour-long championship shooting dog stakes are dual registered as AKC gundog stakes. So, basically in the Brit world they are the same. But, there is also a lot of difference between what it takes to win a 30 minute weekend stake and an hour-long championship stake.

The GSP world is even more convoluted, but very similar. A 30 minute weekend trial shooting dog is the same as a 30 minute weekend trial gundog, but a 60 minute championship stake shooting dog is often a lot more than the 30 minute weekend stake shooting dog.

I can think of a couple of GSPs that have done a LOT of winning and placing at weekend AF all-breed shooting dog stakes, both walking and horseback. Those dogs were pretty nice AKC gundogs when run at AKC trials. But even though they could win at the weekend AF trial level, they were no where close to being AF championship-stake winning dogs. They were not even dominant gundogs at AKC trials. I can think of a few other GSPs who have won AF shooting dog stakes including championships; and those dogs were not always considered All Age dogs in either AKC or AF trials. So the idea that an AKC gundog = AF Shooting Dog didn't hold water in that case either.

I could go on and on, but will stop here. You got to look at the venue you are playing in, and the region you run in, to see what the differences are.

JMO,
Dave

[Dave Quindt]

There is a big difference in AKC walking Gun Dog and a horseback Gun Dog range to the degree AKC has included it in the rules

Neil, the rules trying to define judging standards are basically irrelevant and we both know it. I've seen no change in AKC walking gundog standards since the rule changed, at least when there are intelligent bird dog folks in the saddle. Have you? And since the AKC clearly says that "judges discretion" rules the day, and they won't overturn a judges decision unless there is gross misconduct, there's no way to enforce the rule change. Heck, there's no way to define what the rule change really means.

Heck, the rule book still says that gundogs must demonstrate intelligence in quartering. In the dozens upon dozens of AKC gundog stakes you've judged, have you ever expected a dog to quarter?

FWIW,
Dave

[Dave Quindt]

I believe the AF OSD stakes are all 1 hour, whereas the AKC Gun Dog stakes are 30 minutes.
Bill L.

Bill, that's not correct. There are half-hour AF shooting dog stakes held all the time; there are entire weekend trials made up of nothing but 30 minute shooting dog stakes. There are also a number of 60 minute AKC gundog stakes. There are 60 minute AKC gundog stakes at weekend trials.

Your interpretation was very "GSP specific", and was fairly accurate from a GSP perspective. The problem is what goes on in the GSP world doesn't match the Brittany world, which doesn't match the AF pointer/setter world, where there is a tremendous amount of variation.

FYI,
Dave

[ElhewPointer]

I don't know anything about AKC, but in AF trials gundogs and shooting dogs are very different. Gundogs are close working and are seen the whole brace for the most part. They are a dog that you can hunt off foot and would be a dog you take hunting on the weekend. A Shooting Dog (or maybe I should say Horseback Shooting Dog) is a totally different class of animal. They should possess tremendous class and style. They should have a far reaching forward race which results in portions of the brace where they are not visible. For an example, Elhew Hannibal is a multiple time shooting dog CH. I have watched here run a couple times. Once she leaves break away you will not see her and you find her standing on birds. Then you cut here loose again and she reaches out front and you find her standing. Like I said, I don't know anything about AKC standards, but in AF the two are very different from the trials I have watched that ran both classes.

First of all I don't know how many times you've seen Kate run, but i'd have to disagree with you. Is she a big running shooting dog? Yes. Once she leaves break away you won't see her until on point. NO! I've seen her MANY times. Scouted for her. Sorry.

As far as AKC to AF. I agree there is a difference in range. I would say a BIG difference is in the way scouts can help out dogs. AKC is more strict on the scouting of dogs.

Vagas

[Neil]

Heck, the rule book still says that gundogs must demonstrate intelligence in quartering. In the dozens upon dozens of AKC gundog stakes you've judged, have you ever expected a dog to quarter?

FWIW,
Dave

Goodness no, point well made.

It is interesting the number of rules we have to ignore in finding the best dog.

My point was, and you and Vargas said it better, is there is not a simple answer, there are no clear lines of range. Still like my answer, the biggest running dog that does not get lost with birds will most often win. He can run against the wind, move on his birds, cut the course, blink a back, chase deer, etc, but if he stays the furthest from the judges, look for him to get the nod.

Neil

[RayGubernat]

I do not have as much experience with AKC stakes as some here, and my experience is most certainly localized. With that disclaimer

The biggest diffeence I have seen between an AF horseback shooting dog stake and an AKC Gundog stake is in the handle on the winning dogs. They go through the country bending with and staying with the handler who vocalizes very, very little. The AF shooting dog handler typically vocalizes much more. The pace is a flat walk in AKC. In AF it can sometimes be quite fast, if the handlers can pull the judges along.

When I asked an experienced judging pair about the judging criteria I was told: "The dog has to handle kindly with a minimum of direction from the handler. If you read the written standard, that is what it says. The farther out a dog ranges, and still handles without hacking, the better we like it."

If one wants to make comparisons, I guess the wiining AF walking shooting dog and the AKC horseback gun dog would deliver very similar performances. At least hearabouts.

RayG

[shags]

In my experience if you have a nice gundog that is sometimes 'too much' you might have a shooting dog. I cross over between the two stakes and have done well in both.
Seems to me that in shooting dog stakes judges look at more than range and manners, as compared with gundog stakes. Gait, class, and style carry more weight in SD whereas in gundog stakes manners and handling are key.
Watch The Field for weekend trials where there are 30 minute SD stakes.

[Joe Amatulli]

There is NO difference in range between an AKC gun dog and an AF shooting dog. The differences are the standards between the AKC and American Field. It is much harder to get a dog ready for 60 minutes verse 30 minutes, and what is expected from that 60 minute dog. Also many of the faults that are not expectable in AF seem to be tolerated in the AKC (low tails, poor gates, lack of intensity, lack of desire, lack of independence and many more). You will also find that the knowledge of the judges is much higher in the 60 minute stakes, not all the time, but most of the time that is true.

[PkerStr8Tail]

First of all I don't know how many times you've seen Kate run, but i'd have to disagree with you. Is she a big running shooting dog? Yes. Once she leaves break away you won't see her until on point. NO! I've seen her MANY times. Scouted for her. Sorry.

Vagas[/quote]
Like I said in my post, I have only seen her run twice (Egyptian and Southwest MO). That was how she ran those days. IMO, to win in OSD your dog better run close to that kind of range. I am not saying your dog will ALWAYS be out of sight and be found standing, but the dog better not be in site the whole brace. Of course, there a many variations on Judging so there may be a trial here or there that this doesn't apply, but typical your dog has to run to the front in and out of sight to win OSD. Just my opinion, there are many out there.

[Casper]

IMO what is become or becoming a problem is there are to many 'rules' being written and to many 'ideas' being created as to what the standard of a stake should be. AKC keeps amending their rule book to suit peoples -type- of dog. What I think is wrong with this is they are dumbing down the standard and the performance of the dog. These are "performance" events and we should be looking for the dog that applies its self the best to that particular course on that particular day under the conditions that they faced.

*Walking Handler Gun Dog range—In Walking
Gun Dog Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable
for the walking handler. Horseback Handler
Gun Dog range—In Horseback Handling Gun Dog
Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable for a
horseback-mounted handler taking into consideration
the cover and terrain.

What is that supposed to mean? What is suitable? So now we have a rule that allows a handler to argue the fact that "their" dog ran a 'suitable' walking range or 'suitable' horseback range but the dog that won RAN TOO BIG. Now you end up with a handler mad at the judges cause they didn't win or weren't considered for placement. That handler is now going to end up on the internet forums whining and complaining and saying that if you don't have a dog that RUNS BIG you cant win a FT. Suitable is a subjective word and will be interpreted differently by different individuals.

It kinda bothers me to see that across this country that people see things so differently. I see now why allot of people that start out in AKC move on to strictly AF events. The American Field isn't dumbing down the standard. At least not to my knowledge they aren't.

[Ron R]

Now you end up with a handler mad at the judges cause they didn't win or weren't considered for placement.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's always going to happen. I know I'm guilty of it.

Ron

[Casper]

Sadly there is only one happy handler and that is 1st place

[Elkhunter]

I don't know anything about AKC, but in AF trials gundogs and shooting dogs are very different. Gundogs are close working and are seen the whole brace for the most part. They are a dog that you can hunt off foot and would be a dog you take hunting on the weekend. A Shooting Dog (or maybe I should say Horseback Shooting Dog) is a totally different class of animal. They should possess tremendous class and style. They should have a far reaching forward race which results in portions of the brace where they are not visible. For an example, Elhew Hannibal is a multiple time shooting dog CH. I have watched here run a couple times. Once she leaves break away you will not see her and you find her standing on birds. Then you cut here loose again and she reaches out front and you find her standing. Like I said, I don't know anything about AKC standards, but in AF the two are very different from the trials I have watched that ran both classes.

So an AKC gundog does not have to have "tremendous class and style" to be a winning dog? Most all the dogs I have seen in the AKC gundog trials I have been to have "class and style".. I am all about race and like to see a dog cover some ground but I dont feel that our trials should be won by the dog that was only stopped by a bird. The best part of working a dog for me is watching my dog actually work. Not just cutting them loose and hoping a bird stops em. JMO

[Joe Amatulli]

AKC is not interested in improving the quality of performance dogs, all they are interested in is giving out more and more titles, simply each title means more money for them. I am sorry to say it, but that is a fact, all you need do is see some of the trials in the northeast and how they are manipulated to eliminate the type of dogs that can compete at the national level. Then I think you will understand why I say you can finish a poodle today, no offence to poodles. I unfortunately see way too many judges that either have no idea why a dog does what it does or simply have a personal agenda. And then you wonder why myself and others prefer to compete at the championship level.
Elkhunter this does not apply to all, but unfortunately is way too often, that the AKC gun dog does not have class, style or many other traits that we demand in a 60 minute dog.

[fuzznut]

Oh Joe.... I am almost positive you don't truly mean to slap all of us AKC dog folks in the face, do you? Geez, I sure hope not, or else I am truly sorry we asked you to judge out trial last year. If you feel our lowly AKC events are so beneath you, then you really shouldn't agree to judge, nor should you run your dogs in them and obtain AKC FCs on them.

it's really sad to know our dogs are so bad.
Fuzz

[ElhewPointer]

Actually, I don't think Joe is so far off base. In the AKC events i've attended it really surprised my the lack of style of some of these animals that win. After shot, i've seen a bunch of dog really let down or start flagging. You do that in AF, you're done! You better look like a rock through flush, wing and shot. I'm not saying that all judges will make you pick up, but you probably won't get much done. Down at the Missouri Open Shooting Dog Championship last year, I was riding and Dean Lord was running a dog, and doing a nice job. At about the 40 mark, dog goes on point, Dean flushes a nice big covey. Half the birds fly right over the dog. The dog looked hard over his left shoulder and his front left paw may have moved an inch. Dean didn't even look at the judge, just said, "thanks, for looking at him" and picked up the dog. The room for error is so minimal its almost gotten a little crazy. On the other hand, i've seen at AKC events, a dog dang near do a 90 degree turn to mark the bird and they went on with the dog. As I stated in the ealier post, I think the scouting of dogs in both venues is quite different as well. JMO

[Wagonmaster]

Its a good question and not a simple question to answer. As has been mentioned, Gun Dog is an AKC term and Shooting Dog an AF term. The difference between the two types of dogs is really a culture difference between the types of trials run under the umbrella of the two separate organizations, and being a culture difference, it is a slippery thing.

There are some stakes, usually run primarily as an AKC stake, that are cross-sanctioned, so a winner in a Gun Dog stake gets a Shooting Dog win - they are exactly the same dog and the same ground application. But that does not mean that the archetype Gun Dog and the archetype Shooting Dog are the same.

For a great many years AKC trials were held captive by the "yellow brick road" rules, rules that said in essence that a handler could not leave the horsepath, or go faster than a flat walk, and a scout could not be sent out without obtaining permission from the judge. These rules are on the books and there are still AKC judges who demand that handlers and scouts hold to them, and trials where the organizing committee instructs the judges to follow them.

AF is kind of a maze of different sets of rules, but the "yellow brick road" has never been honored in AF trials even though you could find rules that seem to require it. Handlers generally have "full use of the horse" and full use of their scout. In an AF trial, the whole grounds are the course, not just the part right off the horsepath. There are trials where scouts can't go without permission, but the regulation of scouts in those trials is completely different than under the "yellow brick road" rules.

In addition, AF trials were and are heavily influenced by the fact that most of the best AF handlers train on the prairies in the summer, where a dog looks "close" at half a mile. This is not to emphasize pure range, the fact is that patches of bird holding cover are generally very far apart on the prairie, and a dog that is out a hundred yards is often just running alot of bare ground. The dog that sees the next piece of good cover is a half mile away and goes to it, is the dog that finds birds and looks good doing it.

Add in the fact that AF trials were at one time (awhile ago) all wild bird trials and some still are, while there are no AKC wild bird trials at all that I am aware of. Most AKC trials are run on courses that are very heavily salted with birds. That is not meant as an insult to the dogs, there are some extremely nice dogs in the AKC trials, but the trials are set up so that most dogs will find birds whether they run intelligently or not. In wild bird trials birds are at a premium, and a dog that has the smarts to see places those birds are likely to be, and the horsepower to reach them, is going to be a valuable commodity.

So the real difference between a Gun Dog and a Shooting Dog has as much or more to do with the way the stakes are run and what the judges want to see, than with the dogs themselves.

If you ask a judge who has spent alot of time around AF trials to judge a Gun Dog stake, that judge is going to want to see a bigger running, more forward dog than one who has spent alot of time around "yellow brick road" trials.

In actual practice, the difference depends a great deal on who the judges are, what club is running the trial, and what type of grounds it is being held on.

There are Gun Dog stakes where the best dogs are the equal of any AF Shooting Dog, but in general, the AF Shooting Dog stakes call for a higher quality, more forward running, more stylish, and more accomplished dog.

Someone said they thought a Gun Dog had to be only partly steady and a Shooting Dog steady to wing and shot. There are quite a few retrieving stakes in AKC Gun Dog trials, and for those stakes a Gun Dog has to be steady to wing, shot and fall, and not go until sent to retrieve by the handler. It is then required to locate, pick up, and return the bird to hand. There are very few retrieving stakes in AF (only a couple of NGSPA trials that I know of). In all the rest of the AF trials birds are not killed, so the Shooting Dog needs to be steady to wing, shot and flush, but not to the fall of a bird, since that never happens.

[PkerStr8Tail]

Down at the Missouri Open Shooting Dog Championship last year, I was riding and Dean Lord was running a dog, and doing a nice job. At about the 40 mark, dog goes on point, Dean flushes a nice big covey. Half the birds fly right over the dog. The dog looked hard over his left shoulder and his front left paw may have moved an inch. Dean didn't even look at the judge, just said, "thanks, for looking at him" and picked up the dog. The room for error is so minimal its almost gotten a little crazy. On the other hand, i've seen at AKC events, a dog dang near do a 90 degree turn to mark the bird and they went on with the dog. As I stated in the ealier post, I think the scouting of dogs in both venues is quite different as well. JMO

I don't disagree with your observation as to how AF trials are judged. I have always thought it is crazy to ask a dog that has a bird fly 1 foot over the top of its head to not move a muscle, so one day we reviewed the rule book. I don't remember the exact wording, but what I remember reading was that it said a dog can turn to mark. In fact, it is a sign of a dog with high bird desire and not only is it not a negative, but a desirable trait.(of course that can not move towards the bird) No one judges this way, but many rules have drifted over time. I would rather see a dog that is acting naturally than see a robot that works bird mechanically. Mechanical wins though.

[PkerStr8Tail]

I don't know anything about AKC, but in AF trials gundogs and shooting dogs are very different. Gundogs are close working and are seen the whole brace for the most part. They are a dog that you can hunt off foot and would be a dog you take hunting on the weekend. A Shooting Dog (or maybe I should say Horseback Shooting Dog) is a totally different class of animal. They should possess tremendous class and style. They should have a far reaching forward race which results in portions of the brace where they are not visible. For an example, Elhew Hannibal is a multiple time shooting dog CH. I have watched here run a couple times. Once she leaves break away you will not see her and you find her standing on birds. Then you cut here loose again and she reaches out front and you find her standing. Like I said, I don't know anything about AKC standards, but in AF the two are very different from the trials I have watched that ran both classes.

So an AKC gundog does not have to have "tremendous class and style" to be a winning dog? Most all the dogs I have seen in the AKC gundog trials I have been to have "class and style".. I am all about race and like to see a dog cover some ground but I dont feel that our trials should be won by the dog that was only stopped by a bird. The best part of working a dog for me is watching my dog actually work. Not just cutting them loose and hoping a bird stops em. JMO

No comparisons between AKC or AF were made hence the opening line that says I know nothing about AKC. The only experience I have with AKC was hunt tests years ago. In that I saw some really below average dogs get titles. I have never been to an AKC field trial so I know nothing about the quality of those dogs.

[RayGubernat]

Actually, I don't think Joe is so far off base. In the AKC events i've attended it really surprised my the lack of style of some of these animals that win. After shot, i've seen a bunch of dog really let down or start flagging. You do that in AF, you're done! You better look like a rock through flush, wing and shot. I'm not saying that all judges will make you pick up, but you probably won't get much done. Down at the Missouri Open Shooting Dog Championship last year, I was riding and Dean Lord was running a dog, and doing a nice job. At about the 40 mark, dog goes on point, Dean flushes a nice big covey. Half the birds fly right over the dog. The dog looked hard over his left shoulder and his front left paw may have moved an inch. Dean didn't even look at the judge, just said, "thanks, for looking at him" and picked up the dog. The room for error is so minimal its almost gotten a little crazy. On the other hand, i've seen at AKC events, a dog dang near do a 90 degree turn to mark the bird and they went on with the dog. As I stated in the ealier post, I think the scouting of dogs in both venues is quite different as well. JMO

Vagas -

I do think yo are right about some of the nitpicking that can and does go on, but your example is one of the things that gets me crazy... Faulting a dog for marking flight make NO sense to me. It is faulting a dog for having the desire to see where the birds are going in case it has to retrieve one or go hunt some singles.

Another poster correctly stated that if a dog let down after the shot, but before you put your had on its collar, that dog lost ground. That also gets me nuts, again because it is true. After the flush and the shot, the judges should not even be looking at the dog, except to see that it does not move on its own towrd the bird(s). Short of the dog lying down on its belly, it should make no difference what it does. Unfortunately, a happy tail or a loss of "intensity" after fluysh and shot can be used against a dog and that ain't right.

Another poster decried the lack of style on some AKC dogs. If the judges are looking at the dog's tail, maybe, just maybe, they are looking at the wrong end.

One of the most spectacular points I ever witnessed was by a dog belonging to a friend of mine. The dog was scorching the ground and caught a whiff of scent and locked up as it was trying to turn. It was literally twisted around in half, very nearly pointing out from under its own butt. To me, that was an amazing display, but i am quite sure that there would be many judges that would look at that an not recognize it for the stellar piece of birdwork that it was. They would not look for the six feet of skid marks he dog's claws left in the dirt.

I guess what I am saying is that it kinda bothers me that we sometimes get so caught up in the minutia that we end up valuing form over substance.


Oh by the way, Fuzznut ran a dog that kicked my a$$ at the Setter Club at a Gundog stake. It did a very nice job and went with her and stayed with her, but always to the front without any hacking at all. Impressive.

RayG

[TAK]

Actually, I don't think Joe is so far off base. In the AKC events i've attended it really surprised my the lack of style of some of these animals that win. After shot, i've seen a bunch of dog really let down or start flagging. You do that in AF, you're done! You better look like a rock through flush, wing and shot. I'm not saying that all judges will make you pick up, but you probably won't get much done. Down at the Missouri Open Shooting Dog Championship last year, I was riding and Dean Lord was running a dog, and doing a nice job. At about the 40 mark, dog goes on point, Dean flushes a nice big covey. Half the birds fly right over the dog. The dog looked hard over his left shoulder and his front left paw may have moved an inch. Dean didn't even look at the judge, just said, "thanks, for looking at him" and picked up the dog. The room for error is so minimal its almost gotten a little crazy. On the other hand, i've seen at AKC events, a dog dang near do a 90 degree turn to mark the bird and they went on with the dog. As I stated in the ealier post, I think the scouting of dogs in both venues is quite different as well. JMO

There had to be some other reason than what you have discribed here.... Maybe he caught a bird on the flyby and swallowed it whole! But to pull him because of moving his foot an inch... Or even turning completly around to mark the birds down if they happen to be shot.... Just what is so special about a dog that aint got enough sense to mark a bird down?

[Joe Amatulli]

Well let me ask you something Bernee, what is when you try to run multiple stakes on a piece of ground that you have trouble getting 30 minutes out of and what is it when all the birds are planted 20, 30 yards off the horse path and what is it when the course is, break them away and make a hard right 50 yards from the break away and what is it when trackers are not permitted on a 180 acre course surrounded by fast roads and no fence.
Bernee you ran a nice trial and I truly enjoyed judging for you, but I would have a tough time believing that you have not seen the manipulating of AKC trials in the northeast. That you don’t think that there are people in this game that are only interested in themselves. I am not saying that this is true for all trials and all judges just some. And answer one more question how many of the GSP people that you know, that run these trial have ever run or been to the nationals.
Vegas keep in mind that I am talking about GSPs where the standard is very different for dogs that have to retrieve, and the marking of a bird is expectable, but I will be the first one to throw a dog out if he so much as moves one inch toward that bird.
Ray I totally agree with you.

[Sharon]

"I do think yo are right about some of the nitpicking that can and does go on, but your example is one of the things that gets me crazy... Faulting a dog for marking flight make NO sense to me. It is faulting a dog for having the desire to see where the birds are going in case it has to retrieve one or go hunt some singles.

Another poster correctly stated that if a dog let down after the shot, but before you put your had on its collar, that dog lost ground. That also gets me nuts, again because it is true. After the flush and the shot, the judges should not even be looking at the dog, except to see that it does not move on its own towrd the bird(s). Short of the dog lying down on its belly, it should make no difference what it does. Unfortunately, a happy tail or a loss of "intensity" after fluysh and shot can be used against a dog and that ain't right." quote

Do I ever agree with this.
Last trial my dog did great, but marked 3 pheasants who flushed on their own after her point. Was I suppose to try and flush and shoot from an empty bush when i got there, knowing the birds were well over to the left? Crazy.
The judge said, " Major fault Sharon."
Haven't trialed since. Not mad , just it's not making sense to me anymore. Maybe I'll get the spring bug.

[slistoe]

Last trial my dog did great, but marked 3 pheasants who flushed on their own after her point. Was I suppose to try and flush and shoot from an empty bush when i got there, knowing the birds were well over to the left? Crazy.
The judge said, " Major fault Sharon."
Haven't trialed since. Not mad , just it's not making sense to me anymore. Maybe I'll get the spring bug.

You win some, you lose some. If you don't enter you can be sure you will never win.

[fuzznut]

Point is.. if you don't like the game, don't play it! If you believe AKC trials are jokes, then don't enter them. If you think the dogs that run in these events are unworthy, they why enter a dog you believe is so over and above them all? And for heavens sake, if you really don't enjoy an akc gun dog, say no when asked to judge them!

Some of us don't have the opportunity to run dogs in big hour stakes. Some of us lowly breeds don't have these types of Ch's to run in, so we play the game we have to play.

Courses in the east are what they are, tight, small with turns every couple hundred yard. Dogs have to turn and go with you, not run the course they want to run. These are dogs that are supposed to work for you, go with you, find game for the gun. Or that is always what I thought. I have no problem with big going dogs, have had one or two that could kick up some dust of their own. But, if the course turns left, and they turn right and don't bother to come looking for me... I just wasted a whole lot of money on that entry fee.

If a gunner shoots a bird behind a dog, and that dog doesn't turn to mark .... in my mind that dog is gonna have one heck of a time finding that bird, especially if it was only wing clipped. Dog doesn't find the bird for the retrieve, dog is out of the stake. Dog spends 28 minutes putting down a great run, finds and points his birds high and tight, goes with the handler with ease... and then takes one tiny step.... and it's gets tossed? Sounds like fault judging to me.

Judge the whole dog.. not the hole in the dog.

I always believe it's a great thing when people find a niche that they enjoy.... so enjoy it. Maybe so many people don't go to the GSP nationals because it's a long long long way away from the east coast and the vast majority of them are working folk who can't take 2 wks off to go. I've only missed one GWP Nationals since 1980, I go because I enjoy it, I get to watch dogs I can only see once a year and I get to spend time with old friends. I know an awful lot who don't go, I wish they did, but it's their dollar.
Bernee Brawn, Justa GWP's
AKA Fuzznut

[Dave Quindt]

Add in the fact that AF trials were at one time (awhile ago) all wild bird trials and some still are, while there are no AKC wild bird trials at all that I am aware of.

John, that is not correct. The Brittany folks run all of their wild bird championships as both AKC and AF trials, including their cover dog classic held at Gladwin. The AKC has said for years that they will support any club's effort to run a wild bird trial under AKC sanctioning as long as the club puts it on the premium; the only difference is that you can't put a dog up on run alone in an AKC trial where you can in an AF trial.

There is nothing stopping us GSP folks from running AKC wild bird trials, or endurance stakes, or cover dog stakes, other than our own preconceptions about what the AKC will and won't allow. Write down the things that MUST and CAN'T occur (aka the rules) at an AKC trial and an AF trial and there is extremely little difference in the amount of hard and fast rules. Most of what we think of as "AKC rules" (i.e. your yellow-brick road example) are not rules but suggested procedures; no different than what exists in the AFTCA guidelines and procedures.

Someone said they thought a Gun Dog had to be only partly steady.........

And they were right; in AF gundog stakes judgment ceases at the flush.

FWIW,
Dave

[shags]

"Most of what we think of as "AKC rules" (i.e. your yellow-brick road example) are not rules but suggested procedures"

"The handlers shall remain on the
specified course in front of the Judges and in the
Judges’ line of travel, except as necessary to handle
a dog that is seen on point" (my emphasis).

The trouble is, there are some folks that believe judging makes them the Field Trial Police and they enforce the 'suggested procedures' to the letter.

[Elkhunter]

The problem with alot of us who are amateurs is we hunt with our dogs.. ALOT. Which means we kill birds and expect the dog to retrieve them. So if a bird flies over my dogs head I would fully expect him to either turn his body to mark the bird or do SOMETHING to mark the bird. Not just stand there with his head in the air and not move a muscle and have no idea where the bird went. They are hunting dogs. But I guess dogs that are on the major circuit rarely if ever have wild birds shot over them and retrieve them. But I also do know those guys are there to win trials and not hunt birds, it seems like one of those times when form prevents function. JMO

[dan v]

There had to be some other reason than what you have discribed here....

Maybe Dean Lord had been having some trouble with that particular dog in the not so distant past, and he was just letting the dog know, rules is rules...don't matter if it's training or competing.

[k2k]

I'm a newbie to trialng. This is a great discussion! Please keep rollng!

[Neil]

From the AFTCA Guidelines (which have been accepted by American Field):

Marking Flight Of Birds
Should a dog be penalized for movement in marking flight of the birds?
—No. A good dog should be intense in pointing and minimal movement in marking flight of the
birds is an extension of that intensity. Movement of the head or wheeling in the direction of flight is
permissible, but there should be no significant forward motion of the rear feet in the direction of the
bird's flight. What constitutes significant motion must be left to the discretion of the judge. A judge
would most certainly not want to throw out the best dog in the stake just because he moved one inch
more than what is specified.

I think that says it pretty well.

And as for staying steady after the shot, the first time I saw it in a Tracy dog I was impressed, but then I thought, "The dog's job is done when you fire the shot, as long as he does not delay chase, what does it add", and other than in the Northeast, I have not see it matter.

Nearly all the rules, written and oral, have to do with identifying the best dog, not as a degree of difficulty thing. Field trials are not ice skating, and should not be judge as such.

John Gardner and many of the other old top All-Age pros used to call their dogs to them after the shot and the dog had proven steady. It was fun to see.

Please do not misunderstand, I demand intensity on point in my dogs and those I judge, and if they have a docked tail, what they have of it, best be sticking straight up.

I just think there is so much more to judging a dog than if he remains motionless, but judges that know nothing about wild birds; habitat, wind, bird habits, intelligence, etc, can always seem to tell which dog was the furthest away and the one that moved the least. That is sad!

Neil

[ezzy333]

I thought it was interesting that many of the pointers in the pics of the National championship did not appear to have a 12 oclock tail when on point. They all had them up to some degree but not the 12 oclock we hear discussed so often.

Ezzy

[raven3]

What I would like to know is WHY certain people who feel the need to put down the AKC field trials in the northeast, compete in them ,and judge them, and then trash them.

Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

[Elkhunter]

From the AFTCA Guidelines (which have been accepted by American Field):

Marking Flight Of Birds
Should a dog be penalized for movement in marking flight of the birds?
—No. A good dog should be intense in pointing and minimal movement in marking flight of the
birds is an extension of that intensity. Movement of the head or wheeling in the direction of flight is
permissible, but there should be no significant forward motion of the rear feet in the direction of the
bird's flight. What constitutes significant motion must be left to the discretion of the judge. A judge
would most certainly not want to throw out the best dog in the stake just because he moved one inch
more than what is specified.

I think that says it pretty well.

And as for staying steady after the shot, the first time I saw it in a Tracy dog I was impressed, but then I thought, "The dog's job is done when you fire the shot, as long as he does not delay chase, what does it add", and other than in the Northeast, I have not see it matter.

Nearly all the rules, written and oral, have to do with identifying the best dog, not as a degree of difficulty thing. Field trials are not ice skating, and should not be judge as such.

John Gardner and many of the other old top All-Age pros used to call their dogs to them after the shot and the dog had proven steady. It was fun to see.

Please do not misunderstand, I demand intensity on point in my dogs and those I judge, and if they have a docked tail, what they have of it, best be sticking straight up.

I just think there is so much more to judging a dog than if he remains motionless, but judges that know nothing about wild birds; habitat, wind, bird habits, intelligence, etc, can always seem to tell which dog was the furthest away and the one that moved the least. That is sad!

Neil

+1

[TAK]

I just think there is so much more to judging a dog than if he remains motionless, but judges that know nothing about wild birds; habitat, wind, bird habits, intelligence, etc, can always seem to tell which dog was the furthest away and the one that moved the least. That is sad!

Neil

I don't really have a dog in this fight but this statement is just flat out AMAZING!

[dudleysmith]

Ane then everyone wonders why field trials are way down in partcipation and no really new people getting involved. Something to make you think about why do fieled trials have 25 dogs entered and a coon dog nite hunt has over 100??

[Ricky Ticky Shorthairs]

Ane then everyone wonders why field trials are way down in partcipation and no really new people getting involved. Something to make you think about why do fieled trials have 25 dogs entered and a coon dog nite hunt has over 100??

It may be like that in the NE, but not in the Midwest. Almost every horseback GSP trial I've been to in the last 6 or 7 years has close to or more than 100 dogs. Most of those trials are in Nebraska, but I'm also including Missourri, Kansas, Iowa, and Minnesota.

GSPC of Nebraska has 2 HB trials each year, and the spring trial has over 200 entries, and the fall trial has 300 plus. I guess it all depends on where you are. It'd be REAL HARD to finish a Poodle in that kind of a trial Joe.

I think that if some people don't like what they are seeing on the coast, then they should look elsewhere, because it ain't like that everywhere!

Look at the placements for the GSPCA Nationals for the last 10 years or so and see how many of them came from the states I mentioned above! A lot!

Doug

[RayGubernat]

Ane then everyone wonders why field trials are way down in partcipation and no really new people getting involved. Something to make you think about why do fieled trials have 25 dogs entered and a coon dog nite hunt has over 100??

Kind of an unfair comparison, I think. When you win an amateur fiield trial you get a $2 ribbon. When you win a coon dog contest the prize might be 25 grand. The entrie fees are a bit different though.

As far as entries being down, that they may be...slighlty. That is more a sign of economic times than anything, I believe. As far as no new folks entering, it does take some serious money to enter into horseback field trialing. By contrast, what does it take to break into coon dog competition??...a Plott hound, a pair of rubber boots, a headlamp and a day job so you can train your dog at night. One also has to enjoy thrashing around in the underbrush in the dark. Did it once...I'll pass.

The demise of field trialing has been predicted for about forty years now. The way I see it, they will be predicting it forty yeas from now also. As long as there are places to run the dogs, there will be trials.

RayG

[Karen]

Travis, I can only compare Brittany gun dog stakes to AF shooting dog stakes (horseback and run in NJ/NY/PA), but here have been my observations:

1. Yes, AF shooting dogs run bigger than AKC gun dogs.
2. They run with a pattern, holding their edges, something you see only occasionally at AKC Brittany trials.
3. The AF handlers (both pro and many amateurs) are WAY better than most you'll see at Brittany trials.
4. Scouting is VERY different. It's way more active at an AF trials.
5. The pace at an AF trial is much faster than at an AKC gun dog stake. You better be prepared to running walk/rack/canter for much of a stake, and your horse better be in shape and not get pumped up with speed (at least not more than you can handle).
6. The saying is you can't win from behind. If your dog has a find, you work it and then heel your dog back to the front at a canter or gallop (unless you're so far behind you can't catch up). Many AKC judges REFUSE to ride, but then a dog can come from behind the gallery repeatedly and win an AKC stake so riding isn't necessary. I've not seen that an an AF trial (yet).
7. Some of the AF judges won't use a Brittany, no matter what.
8. If you're an amateur, stick to amateur stakes (with a few exceptions).
9. If the premium says the trial is AKC and AF sponsorsed, you can be absolutely positive the AKC rules prevail (don't try to enter a dog over 2 in the Derby stake, even though they may qualify to run AF derby).
10. Don't, as a amateur, accept a cash purse in ANY STAKE if you're handling a dog you co-own (not with a member of your immediate family) or don't own (handling for a friend). AFTCA will immediately change your status to Pro, even though AKC still considers you an amateur.
11. It's been my experience that in the AKC, people will leave dogs on the ground until they are ordered up by a judge. If they take steps on their birds, have 2+ non-pros, mark with forward motion, etc., etc. It's all about what you can get away with at AKC trials. At AF trials, if a dog messes up, the handler immediately thanks the judge, and picks the dog up.
12. If a dog is up, people don't wait around. The judges and gallery leave immediately so that the handler can correct the dog the way they see fit. At AKC trials, it seems like half the gallery just sits there.

If you think you may be interested in running AF, definitely go to a few trials to see if you enjoy them. They ARE different. I really enjoy them and have several on our schedule this spring, but my dogs and I are also trained by a retired AF pro trainer/handler, so they are trained as shooting dogs.