MH as qualification for National Field Championships?

[gspguy]

I think it's much ado about nothing. For a variety of reasons I don't think there are that many MH owners that would enter their dog in a NFC trial.

[Greg Jennings]

I think a lot of us were coming at this from the GSP viewpoint where it's not the MH that's the issue but a more stringent all-around qualification. Just to make it easier to put on and attend. I mean, it's like two weeks long, with a considerable percentage of dogs that don't stand a chance.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Last yr it was more like 3 wks,my handler left to make it back in time for the Phez Ch at Wye Island he still had 4 or 5 dogs to run my dog being one of them.They had to delay starting the Phez Ch to allow a couple of the judges to fly in from Eureka.Some of the pros are not going to run OGD any longer because there are just too many & it runs into the Pez CH.When they have 100 dogs in OGD dog & only run 8 braces a day & that's with good weather & no delays.When it takes a couple travel days to get there & a couple to get back that's close to a month.This is something to think about when alot of people think these pros make so much money.

[RayGubernat]

Guys -

I would bet real money that most breed clubs would love to have the "problem" of having 100 dogs or more at their National Championships. At $100 -150 per entry that means the parent club has 10 to 15K to play with. You can put on one heck of an event with that kind of scratch and still have plenty left over to do neat stuff with the rest of the year.

I do agree that watching brace after brace of dogs that don't belong there is a real drag... not to mention a huge investment in time for the judges and reporter and I am sure it is a huge strain on the folks who are running the show.

Folks that run the GSP and Brittany nationals do, I think, have hard choices to make. It is a balancing act. Do you let everyone in who wants to run their dog as long as they meet the minimum requirements or do you raise the bar by requiring more? If so, how much more?

You want a quality event, but you also don't want to make the requirements so high that you cut the entries down below the level where you cannot put on a first class event and still break even and maybe make a few bucks.

RayG

.

[Greg Jennings]

Exactly, Ray. And at running 3 weeks, we're to the side where we could up the bar a bit, not hurt a thing, and maybe help things.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Also last yr winner of the OGD came from the very last brace so probably had the smallest Gallery so most never got to see the best.Like everything else the biggest has it's advantages & disadvantages.Sometimes bigger isn't always better.Some NFC probably need more entries to stay afloat but lowering the bar to get there I'm not sure is the best Idea but it seems alot of people would disagree with me.Again JMO

[RayGubernat]

Guys -

I agree that lowering the bar is not the way to go.

However, I simply do not see where allowing a Master Hunter dog that has shown itself in front of judges, to be stone broke and that will honor without a caution...is lowering the bar when a dog can entere a National championship with a first place in a derby stake...where the dog doesn't even have to be broke.

A broke dog that will point and back ...and retrieve on command and has done so multiple times is somehow a lesser dog than a dog that ran ONE nice race, pointed and then chased birds!! Let's just think about that one.

If the MH dog won't run and cover ground, and look good doing it, it won't matter how dead broke it is...but don't you think the person forking over the entry fee thought of that? Maybe some will not, but I betcha most will want to see what the dog will do in this new venue before entering. Nobody like to look foolish unless they are getting paid for it.

RayG

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Obviously Ray I'm talking from the GSP side of things & unless I read the qualifications wrong a derby win don't qualify a dog for the GSPCA NFC !!
On another note that just came to mind hunt test are not a competitive venue,don't you think it should take a comptitive venue to qualify a dog for a NFC trial???

[remington202]

I agree with your remarks. I get kinda tired of grinning and bearing it when those of us who have worked for many years and spent many dollars to produce and field trial "AKC" dogs get knocked. It's a tough row to how. We have to compete at all-breed AKC trials which do include dual-registered dogs. Yes, there are some not-really-bred-for-working AKC Pointers out there where the prior reference to "watching paint dry" might apply as they trot in the field. But, does everyone really think that at least some "AKC" breeders out there don't take field ability very, very, very seriously? (No need to answer, as that would be a whole new discussion! I just hope everyone doesn't really, truly think that, especially if you are judging Pointers : ) )

Some folks confuse how a dog is registered with how it is bred. An 'AKC dog' is not necessarily a lumbering bench-bred dog that dabbles in field activities.

FDSB registration does not guarantee a good trial dog, nor does AKC registration preclude it. A dual registered dog is the same dog whether it's running in an akc trial or a af trial.

And we can't forget regional differences either. It's likely that the same folks attend the same trials in their area, so the dogs we familiar with are the ones we believe are representative of the breeds as a whole, but in fact they usually are not.

[RayGubernat]

Vonzeppelin -

The following is taken directly from the first paragraph, first page of the 2009 APC National Field Trial championship premium:

"Dogs must have placed first second third or fourth in any Open or Amateur Gun Dog or All Age stake, or won first place in an open or Amateur Derby stake."

The qualifying criteria for a National breed trial may have changed since then, but that is what it was in 2009. As I said, not all breeds have the "problem" of too many entries.

RayG

[ezzy333]

Ray,

I am not questioning the quality, the abilities, or any other aspect of the MH dogs. I am questioning why they would be qualifies to run in the field tial championship when they have never run in the trials. The ones that want to run in the trials and thus qualify I have no problem with. Its kind of like not letting the Bears play in the World series. They play a different game.

Ezzy

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Ray like I said I'm speaking only about GSPS & I just checked again & it specifialy says A Derby placement will not qualify.
You know I think it would be much Cheaper to qualify via the MH route then the trial route!!!!!!!!!!!!
You don't have to defeat any number of dogs but pass six MH hunt tests & I'm not trying to say that's easy but it's just not competition where you get beat MORE then win!!

[RayGubernat]

Ray,

I am not questioning the quality, the abilities, or any other aspect of the MH dogs. I am questioning why they would be qualifies to run in the field tial championship when they have never run in the trials. The ones that want to run in the trials and thus qualify I have no problem with. Its kind of like not letting the Bears play in the World series. They play a different game.

Ezzy

Ezzy -

I don't agree with that opinion or your analogy.

The abilities and talents required for a dog to excel in either format are the very same with only ONE exception. The trial format requires the dog to hunt and handle in front of a horse(unless it is a walking event).

I think a better analogy might be American footbal verus Canadian football.

As far as VonZ's observation regarding the fact that the MH is not a competitive format in the truest sense...that is so.

However, the MH dog had to have performed at the MH level four or five times in front of four or five sets of judges on four or five different days. Either the dog was pretty consistent or it got lucky...four or five times.

The field trial dog only had to get lucky ONCE.

I remember something about a even blind squirrel will find a nut occasionally....

Anyhow, there is not much more I can say about this topic.

RayG

[shags]

Well I've heard of one breed club contingent that thought the MH qualification is too much, and rallied for a SH pass to be enough. Where does it end?

Trails and tests are different venues and should not be interchangeable. If a dog gets 6 derby placements should he be rewarded with an automatic JH? Should dogs with retrieving stakes wins get SH titles? Should retrieving-breed FCs or AFCs be called Master Hunters since the work is mostly the same?

[kensfishing]

Here's the link for the GSP National Walking championship. No MH for qualification. http://www.gspca.org/NAGDC/index.html

[hi-tailyn]

If they only gave out MH scores to the top 3 participants, then they would be about equal to winning a FT.

If they gave out FC titles to every dog that made it through 6 FT events clean and did retrieves, we would have a lot more FC's than we do today. The title would mean far less then it does today.

It takes a min. of Winning/Being Lucky at 3 stakes to obtain a FC title. Most often it is 4-6 times, due to the number of dogs entered in the event. You basically haft to BEAT min. of 60-100+ dogs to get a FC.

Passing 6 MH qualification IS NOT the same as BEATING 60-100+ other qualified participants.

As posted on the GSPCA website. Even a Amateur FC is not automatically qualified for the NFC. They raised the bar to keep the quality of dogs at their best. "The National Open All Age Championship is open to any German Shorthaired Pointer six months of age or older that has placed first, second or third in a two (2) point or greater All Age stake; or is currently a Field Champion of record, but not solely an Amateur Field Champion. Placements in derby stakes will not qualify.

All placements must be obtained annually between the closing of the entries for the previous German Shorthaired Pointer Club of America National Championship and the closing of the entries for the current year’s German Shorthaired Pointer Club of America National Championship."

I have done both. I prefer to compete, not just get by clean. MHO!
Scott

[kensfishing]

If they only gave out MH scores to the top 3 participants, then they would be about equal to winning a FT.

If they gave out FC titles to every dog that made it through 6 FT events clean and did retrieves, we would have a lot more FC's than we do today. The title would mean far less then it does today.

It takes a min. of Winning/Being Lucky at 3 stakes to obtain a FC title. Most often it is 4-6 times, due to the number of dogs entered in the event. You basically haft to BEAT min. of 60-100+ dogs to get a FC.

Passing 6 MH qualification IS NOT the same as BEATING 60-100+ other qualified participants.

As posted on the GSPCA website. Even a Amateur FC is not automatically qualified for the NFC. They raised the bar to keep the quality of dogs at their best. "The National Open All Age Championship is open to any German Shorthaired Pointer six months of age or older that has placed first, second or third in a two (2) point or greater All Age stake; or is currently a Field Champion of record, but not solely an Amateur Field Champion. Placements in derby stakes will not qualify.

All placements must be obtained annually between the closing of the entries for the previous German Shorthaired Pointer Club of America National Championship and the closing of the entries for the current year’s German Shorthaired Pointer Club of America National Championship."

I have done both. I prefer to compete, not just get by clean. MHO!
Scott

How do you figure it takes three events to win an FC? All you have to do is win two five point majors with four retrieving points to get an FC.

[shags]

From the book....

At present a dog of one of the Pointing Breeds will be
recorded a Field Champion after having won 10 points
under the point rating schedule below in regular stakes
in at least three licensed or member field trials,

[hi-tailyn]

At present a dog of one of the Pointing Breeds will be
recorded a Field Champion after having won 10 points
under the point rating schedule below in regular stakes
in at least three licensed or member field trials,

It is harder than you think. You can't believe how many dogs pass away with 9 pts. Just because you are broke doesn't mean you are going to win and get a FCor AFC in front of your name.
Scott

[snips]

I have not commented yet, but enjoyed reading...I basically think Hunt Test dogs are a totally different catagory...Not saying anything bad about them..But they are judged as hunting dogs...A field trial dog should be held to a different standard...It is a competition, not a test...So to qualify I feel they should qualify thru that venue...JMO...

[Joe Amatulli]

Passing a test is what I had to do in school, much of what they taught me has little to nothing to do with what I needed to succeed in life. Competing and winning a field trial has more to do with living life, after all we have to compete every day, be it for a job, a pay check, the girl of your dreams or even a seat on the bus. How on earth can you equate passing a hunt test to wining a field trial, totally escapes me? :roll:

Ray either you are making this argument for the sake of arguing, or old age is really affecting you in a bad way.

[baileydog2007]

The reason this really shouldnt matter is, how many guys who have a MH dog, and zero experience in FTs will actually go to the National trial for crying out loud. My guess, zero. You might get some clown who wants to say "I ran my dog at the National FT", and back in, if thats what you FT folks think thats doing, but its hardly going to effect the number of entries in bulk. Should they be allowed to?? FT guys say no, others say yes. Im sure there are FT dogs who arent worth a bullet/food, just like there are HT dogs that way. Trialers believe cuz a dog "trials", its a good dog it seems. Ive seen some of those dogs, some are very impressive, some you couldnt give me. Those who feel trial dogs are superior, blow my mind. Now there are obviously some that are, but its hardly because they trial, its because they are well bred and trained. Trialers are the worst kind of arrogant. Complain about numbers, then complain about a rule that would probably effect absolutely nothing at all.

[Greg Jennings]

He didn't equate passing a hunt test to winning a field trial.

The discussion is about the value of passing a hunt test as a MINIMUM qualification for entering an AKC breed club's national trial and especially one that has very few entries.

I would not want this for the GSPCA national trial, but, let's, for the sake of argument, say that the Spinone club put on a NFT. In that context, I'd be all for it.

BTW, Joe, I'm very sorry that you wasted your educational opportunity. Not a day goes by that I don't treasure mine and bless the folks that gave a poor red necked kid with a talent for mathematics an opportunity to better himself.

Greg J.

[phermes1]

The reason this really shouldnt matter is, how many guys who have a MH dog, and zero experience in FTs will actually go to the National trial for crying out loud.

Exactly. Like I said earlier, the VCA has this qualifitcation in place for their NGDC, and I don't know of any dogs that have run whose sole means of qualification was a MH title. Much ado about nothing, really.

It IS fun to argue about, though. Clearly.

[Chukar12]

by baileydog2007 » Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:12 pm

Trialers are the worst kind of arrogant. Complain about numbers, then complain about a rule that would probably effect absolutely nothing at all.

All of them, or a few, or one in particular?

How many have you encountered in the four months since April of this year that you began inquiring about trials?

I was just at a foot trial in Northern California this weekend where I watched a long time trialer/trainer who has put in a lot of work through the years helping at a club finally finish a dog, I saw a reformed golfer who is focusing now on dogs get a broke dog win and another placement, I saw a hunt test guy that is well known get all wadded up over the judges being honest with him...there were winners and losers it was a perfect snapshot of life. Perhaps most importantly I saw 75 or so dogs work (and once again the experience of observation taught me something) that were doing something that is akin to what they were bred for. Everyone of them seemed unaware of any arrogance, ego, or inferiority complex in their owners. It was why I went and it was certainly worth the effort.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

So Bailey since you have no experience in trialing you will never enter a field trial??? Do you think people are born into it??We all started with no experience don't you think.People that do hunt test do have some experience & that is more then a first timer but you have to get your feet wet sooner or later.If there is no chance of an MH dog entering why was that minumum requirement even put into the rules??
Wheter or not ANYONE ever takes advatage of that requirement I still don't think it belongs. NOT THE SAME GAME!!

[baileydog2007]

by baileydog2007 » Mon Aug 15, 2011 12:12 pm

Trialers are the worst kind of arrogant. Complain about numbers, then complain about a rule that would probably effect absolutely nothing at all.

All of them, or a few, or one in particular?

How many have you encountered in the four months since April of this year that you began inquiring about trials?

I was just at a foot trial in Northern California this weekend where I watched a long time trialer/trainer who has put in a lot of work through the years helping at a club finally finish a dog, I saw a reformed golfer who is focusing now on dogs get a broke dog win and another placement, I saw a hunt test guy that is well known get all wadded up over the judges being honest with him...there were winners and losers it was a perfect snapshot of life. Perhaps most importantly I saw 75 or so dogs work (and once again the experience of observation taught me something) that were doing something that is akin to what they were bred for. Everyone of them seemed unaware of any arrogance, ego, or inferiority complex in their owners. It was why I went and it was certainly worth the effort.

I havent met all of them obviously. I have been involved with or at retriever trials long before 4 months ago, and my OPINION stands, MOST trialers are arrogant and condescending. Not all, most, IMO. The few I have been to, as I said before, certainly are not what I would call friendly to new comers. "the guys who put it on just work too hard to be friendly, bla bla bla." Stupid comment, if they are supposedly worked too hard, try being proactive and get some new folks involved rather than be a prick about it. Id would have happily helped, if anyone would have wanted it. Watching the dogs is fun and educational, no doubt.

[baileydog2007]

So Bailey since you have no experience in trialing you will never enter a field trial??? Do you think people are born into it??We all started with no experience don't you think.People that do hunt test do have some experience & that is more then a first timer but you have to get your feet wet sooner or later.If there is no chance of an MH dog entering why was that minumum requirement even put into the rules??
Wheter or not ANYONE ever takes advatage of that requirement I still don't think it belongs. NOT THE SAME GAME!!

As to why thats the minimum requirement, thats a question best asked to the AKC wouldnt you say??? I just dont get the complaining about a rule that will virtually never be used anyways. Just to complain I imagine, cuz thats fun, and allows "trialers" to bitch about the lowley HT folk that couldnt find thier own "bleep".

Born into it?? No, even though most come off like they invented the sporting dog world single handedly.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Arrogant a word you have knowledge of. Field Trials not,did you ever think the reason the people at FT are not friendly towards you might have something to do with you??
Just asking!!

[baileydog2007]

Arrogant a word you have knowledge of. Field Trials not,did you ever think the reason the people at FT are not friendly towards you might have something to do with you??
Just asking!!

Very well could be. Im not arrogant, at all, but Ill call a spade a spade. If me showing up and asking questions set them off and made them be pricks, yup, it was me. Some of it wasnt even towards me, towards others, towards a kid who was "working" with them, I myself had limited conversations, but I have eyes and ears, and easy to see why they might have had trouble finding someone to volunteer to work with

[Joe Amatulli]

Trialers are the worst kind of arrogant. Complain about numbers, then complain about a rule that would probably effect absolutely nothing at all.

How on earth can you comment on something you know nothing about, other than you are just plain ignorant! Are there arrogant people in field trials, sure as there are in all aspects of life, but to call most field trailers arrogant simply says “YOU ARE TOTALLY IGNORANT”. It’s been my experience that the vast majority of field trailers are extremely friendly, willing to help and I call 90/95% of them my friends.

[Chukar12]

I havent met all of them obviously. I have been involved with or at retriever trials long before 4 months ago, and my OPINION stands, MOST trialers are arrogant and condescending. Not all, most, IMO. The few I have been to, as I said before, certainly are not what I would call friendly to new comers.

Whether we like it or not sometimes our opinions aren't just opinions; depending on the words we use here they can just be wrong. That is the case here you are just plain old wrong. It sounds like you have had a bad experience or two, but based on your propensity to sensationalize a limited number of experiences you are quick to generalize and your insecurities are projected outwardly and aggressively (see the words you choose) at a group of people you clearly do not know well. I can accept if my assessment is off and for the record I will provide my experiences, roughly 60 trials and maybe a thousand people over the last 36 months, and 10 or so in the 30 years prior to that. Please feel free to provide me the data base that supports your experience and justifies the public admonishment of a group overall if my suppositions miss their mark.

Just to complain I imagine, cuz thats fun, and allows "trialers" to bitch about the lowley HT folk that couldnt find thier own "bleep".

Born into it?? No, even though most come off like they invented the sporting dog world single handedly.

You know Bailey, the funny thing about this is in the basis of this thread you and I agree, I couldn't give a whit if they enter becasue the rule is in place for breed clubs with weak field dog followings. My opinion would change however if they took a spot in the more competitive horse back venues that dogs who earned a place through competition belonged. Your opinion and purpose can be served through words that aren't inflammatory or personal in nature. You open yourself up and derail conversations because for whatever reason you choose to go on the attack and get louder to be heard. Based on your reaction to people and limited experience in the subject matter I doubt but a few care what you think.

[baileydog2007]

^ It doesnt really matter if others care what I think, nor do I care if folks think IM ignorant. Could not care less. Doesnt change my opinion or the limited experiences I had. Calling me ignorant from your limited experiences with me, is no different than me forming an opinion based on limited experiences. Im sure your experiences are different, so you'll have a different opinion, thats how things work. I have had enough experiences in life to be able to draw conclusions. Find it highly unlikely if I went to more trials it would be any different, chances I went to the only 4 or 5 that had that going on is slim to none Im guessing. Are there some great folks involved, Im positive there is, I have yet come accross that tho.

[kninebirddog]

Well I do not see anything of value to be attained from this any more

So I am gonna be the wet blanket and lock it

PS I cleaned up some words remember this is a board for new people also foul language can stay at the bar leave it out of here Thank you