Saddle wrote:This is almost uniquely an AKC thing. If a dog wins the shooting dog in an American field trial he probably won't be in the mix in the all age nor should he be.
I have to agree a fish has never been a good runner, my 2c.Saddle wrote:I doubt it. The dog is either a shooting dog or an all age dog. Good judges know the difference.
JKP wrote:Questions to the topic meant to promote a little understanding of the differences...
1) Is distance/range the only difference between SD and AA?? Given equal desire, application, manners and style....what separates SD from AA??
2) Can't judges differ in their definition of what constitutes an SD or AA dog?? and still be within the respective definitions??
3) Haven't there been dogs that have run both types of performance??
4) If dogs are capable of adapting to the hunter on foot as opposed to the hunter on horseback, wide open grass as opposed to thick brushlands, etc.....couldn't a dog recognize certain conditions and adjust accordingly??
Francois P vd Walt wrote:A close working dog can never get out like a AA dog :roll:Saddle wrote:I doubt it. The dog is either a shooting dog or an all age dog. Good judges know the difference.
jasonw99 wrote:the question I have is
is Ames an "all age" course?
ezzy333 wrote:Your No. 4 question is the one that bothers me. Every time we have a discussion of this nature the same people who are now saying that there is a difference will say that the trial dog makes a great foot hunting dog because they are smart enough to adjust their range. I just don't see how you can be on both sides of the fence. A good judge can tell the difference is probably a true statement but the difference is the stake they are running in and not the dog. Trialers have taught me that good dogs do not come with labels but can adjust to the range and and capabilities needed for any type of activity from couch potato to mile or more range in the field. But now we are being told that isn't true, that good judges can tell if the dog is an AA or shooting dog by looking at the running order I guess or maybe from past performances.
It is always a problem when we need judges to decide who wins rather than results, no matter what venue such as diving, skating, or trialing compared to baseball, the hundred yard dash, or a even real life. Have you ever noticed that the judges are only needed for man made games and not for anything really important.
JMO
Ezzy
Ray, you must not have followed what I meant to say due to my inability to write. All I said was on one hand people say a dog can go from AA to foot hunting dog and then those same people question when a dog goes from AA to shooting dog. Don't believe I in anyway tried to change the rules and really don't see why that should be in a new thread when it is about someone saying a shooting dog can't win an AA stake or vice versa.RayGubernat wrote:ezzy333 wrote:Your No. 4 question is the one that bothers me. Every time we have a discussion of this nature the same people who are now saying that there is a difference will say that the trial dog makes a great foot hunting dog because they are smart enough to adjust their range. I just don't see how you can be on both sides of the fence. A good judge can tell the difference is probably a true statement but the difference is the stake they are running in and not the dog. Trialers have taught me that good dogs do not come with labels but can adjust to the range and and capabilities needed for any type of activity from couch potato to mile or more range in the field. But now we are being told that isn't true, that good judges can tell if the dog is an AA or shooting dog by looking at the running order I guess or maybe from past performances.
It is always a problem when we need judges to decide who wins rather than results, no matter what venue such as diving, skating, or trialing compared to baseball, the hundred yard dash, or a even real life. Have you ever noticed that the judges are only needed for man made games and not for anything really important.
JMO
Ezzy
What bothers me is when folks "change the rules".
WHO said, in this discussion that trial dogs make great hunting dogs? NOBODY. That is a cheap lawyer trick. Stick to the discussion or start one of your own.
RayG
On a prairie venue a shooting dog is a close working dog.Redneck wrote:Francois P vd Walt wrote:A close working dog can never get out like a AA dog :roll:Saddle wrote:I doubt it. The dog is either a shooting dog or an all age dog. Good judges know the difference.
A close working dog is also not a shooting dog.
From my experience this is right. I haven't run Coverdog but I have had and seen some very good hunting dogs do well in trials when they were older that had no prior trainig other than being allowed to range especially when you get on a horse or a 4 wheeler.Winchey wrote:I don't necessarily agree. I would imagine there are coverdogs and walking SD that could compete in the HB SD game given that the be brought along for it properly.
You could argue it both ways, are Richfields Silver Lining and Chasehills Little Bud HB dogs that have had success in the woods or are they coverdogs that have had success in thd HB world?
I spoke to a pro this fall who has had success in all venues and he told me that alot of the coverdogs could play the HB game given the chance, not all, but a fair amount.
Were it not I don't think those dogs with prairie A-A wins would do as well as they do at Ames.jasonw99 wrote:the question I have is
is Ames an "all age" course?
Isn't that what I said? There is no doubt that there are dogs who run in the events where shorter range and a more directed search is required that can and will stretch it out when given the opportunity, but this is most certainly not a given.Winchey wrote:I don't necessarily agree. I would imagine there are coverdogs and walking SD that could compete in the HB SD game given that the be brought along for it properly.
You could argue it both ways, are Richfields Silver Lining and Chasehills Little Bud HB dogs that have had success in the woods or are they coverdogs that have had success in thd HB world?
I spoke to a pro this fall who has had success in all venues and he told me that alot of the coverdogs could play the HB game given the chance, not all, but a fair amount.
Same here, a topic I enjoy discussing.Winchey wrote:Dog needs to be fairly short, since if it gets too far out out of bell range it is going to be hard to find, but it also needs an application compraible to the praries, no?
I don't want to come off as a know it all, I am very green in my particular venue. I just enjoy the topic.
Because people are breaking down the mental barriers that told them AA dogs couldn't do it?Neil wrote:A winning SHORT A-A dog is still in the major leagues.
One thing we have not talked about is we are seeing more Wright and Derig bred and developed dogs in SD and even Cover dog than we ever saw with Miller/Lester/House. I think I understand why, what do you all think?
Neil:Neil wrote:Ray,
Been hearing that about the Amasian standard for years now. I will argue it. I think it describes a trully top A-A dog. What part do you think says shooting dog?
Your description of cover dogs does not match my experience. Good cover dogs do go through the woods a high rate of speed and look animated while doing it. A good cover dog is certainly not running at a "hunting pace". Also where I trial the dog better be able to keep that pace up for an hour otherwise it won't earn many placements especially if it's a Championship.RayGubernat wrote:Winchey -
There is most definitely a physical aspect to the different games.
Many dogs that are in cover will pop and snap an look like a million dollars working through the cover. The majority of those dogs will also look good in more open terrain at a walking shooting dog (non cover) trial, but some will not. dogs that run in cover dog stakes and in walking stakes are NOT moving at top speed, but rather something more closely akin to a hunting pace.
A small segment of those who look good in both cover and walking venues will also look good at the higher speeds that the dog must maintain to becovering the additional ground and fill up the much larger envelpope that horseback handling both makes possible and in turn, demands of the dog. It si far, far rarer to see a dog that can still pop and snap at nearly full speed for an hour.
The horseback all age dog's performance envelope is(or should be) noticeably wider and should be prosecuted with the highest degree of independence possible, given the terrain. Thus if follows that the horseback all age dog that can run to the limits, at nearly full speed for an hour and still have both snap, crackle and pop AND the physical stamina to go pedal to ther metal for the last ten minutes of the brace, with no letup...is even rarer.
The Amesian standard is in fact a shooting dog standard. I don't think anyone will argue that.
What makes it special is that the dogs that run in the National Championship at Ames are those same horseback all age dog that are bred and trained and conditioned to go flat out, full tilt, balls to the wall for an hour solid. The prerequisite for entry into the National isn ot one but two WINS in just such competition. Then these highly trained athletes that are conditioned to put it all out there for 60 minutes, which is the typical length of a championship or other major stake, are asked to take it down a notch in terms of speed and ratchet it up significantly in terms of stamina and endurance, going from a one hour performance to a THREE hour performance. That kind of difference is like going from a 5K to a marathon. It is HUGE. That is why dogs that can do both...at THAT high level... are very special.
Hope some of this helps.
RayG
Neil wrote:That says to me he must know where the front is and stay there. They wrote funny 100 years ago. Does not say keep the handler in view, but his course.
To your point, there was not a Shooting Dog class then, so perhaps Ames did like a handy dog.
I have never been able to ascertain when they first allowed horseback handling at the NC, I know they were killing birds and retrieving in the 30's.
I do know that standard as applied by the judges most often results in the dog with the highest bird count being named Champion.
I am sure you well know that speed and range are not the same thing. They still want a fast dog. The terrain will slow them down a bit sure, but they also aren't burning down an edge rimming a field or going from objective to objective. My friend has a failed AA prospect, he isn't all that much faster then a fast coverdog, if any, the hard part was getting it out of the dogs head to not just blow out the front a mile in a straight line, you can go fast and stay in range.Neil wrote:Cover dog trials are still foot handled, right? And the scouts are on foot? So I think hunting dog pace accurate. Or are they handling at a run these days? Since the dog must stay within bell range, I think this is the closest running dogs, not saying that a bad thing. I have a lot of respect for these true wild bird dogs. Almost every other venue must release birds.
Yes they are on foot though it is anything but a hunting pace. For one the handlers are on a path and unless you're a lazy grouse/woodcock hunter you're not on a path much of the time. Second it is not uncommon for the judge to have to slow the handlers down otherwise they will run out of course. None of that matters though RayGubernat was talking about the dogs pace and I stand by what I said.Neil wrote:Cover dog trials are still foot handled, right? And the scouts are on foot? So I think hunting dog pace accurate. Or are they handling at a run these days? Since the dog must stay within bell range, I think this is the closest running dogs, not saying that a bad thing. I have a lot of respect for these true wild bird dogs. Almost every other venue must release birds.
I think your premise may be right if you call the changes in trialing advancements. I think things need to be put in one of three baskets, advances, changes, or retractions.Neil wrote:Ezzy,
Isn't that a bit like saying football was developed for 5'10" 170 pound guys with 11 second 100 yard time? Everthing seems to advance, not always for the better.
Your perception may be reality, but there is also the reality that a dog in front of a foot handler at "trial pace" in cover is not the equal to the dog in front of a horse in big country - the speed and endurance factors are multiplied.Grange wrote: Your description of cover dogs does not match my experience. Good cover dogs do go through the woods a high rate of speed and look animated while doing it. A good cover dog is certainly not running at a "hunting pace". Also where I trial the dog better be able to keep that pace up for an hour otherwise it won't earn many placements especially if it's a Championship.
I would say its an improvement to the world of bird dog trialing. For the VAST majority of bird hunters, its brings no advantage.And I would most certainly call an increase in stamina and speed of effective work an advancement to the world of bird dogs
I interpret that passage the same as Neil - the dog is always cognizant of the course the handler is setting and will show to the front.RayGubernat wrote:Neil:Neil wrote:Ray,
Been hearing that about the Amasian standard for years now. I will argue it. I think it describes a trully top A-A dog. What part do you think says shooting dog?
This part is what does it for me...
"He must be regularly and habitually pleasingly governable (tractable) and must know when to turn and keeps his handler’s course in view, and at all times keep uppermost in his mind the finding and pointing of birds for his handler."
I will grant you that there are other parts of the standard that seem to fit more with an All Age description.
However, the "keeping of the handler's course in view" statement is (to me), an integral and a definitive part of what a what a shooting dog should do. The desire to maintain tangible contact with the handler and to go "with" the handler...the level of independent search...is much of what I use to separate the two in my mind.
I should not have generalized. Point taken.
RayG
To the vast majority of bird hunters an overweight lab is the epitome of dogdom.JKP wrote:I would say its an improvement to the world of bird dog trialing. For the VAST majority of bird hunters, its brings no advantage.And I would most certainly call an increase in stamina and speed of effective work an advancement to the world of bird dogs
No it isn't the primary thing I want in a bird dog. I want a dog that can find birds, point them, and retrieve them as my primary qualifications. I want a dog that will range as far as I can see and will hunt as long as we are in the field with me. That means it will hunt objectives near and far and hopefully the near ones first. I want a dog that will hunt hard but stay somewhere in the general area I am which will vary according to cover. I find no glory is seeing how far a dog will range but rather in how far he needs to range to find birds but he gets no extra credit by hunting wide when there are birds closer. I have gone through an era when range and run were the main criteria in judging an AA dog. I have also seen in more recent years a trend in bringing finding birds back into the mix which is encouraging.slistoe wrote:Well Ezzy, what is it you think has changed? A dog with the will to run to the edge of his ability to keep in contact with the handler (not the other way around) and the sense to hunt intelligently and stay to the front - has that dog changed any over the years? I would say that handling to the front at the edge of the dogs ability to stay in contact is the same and that the dogs physical abilities have advanced such that they are capable of doing so at an increase in range - the thought process on the dog is not different, but the physical ability is. And I would most certainly call an increase in stamina and speed of effective work an advancement to the world of bird dogs - is it not in your world?
You are making some rash judgments that do not speak well for you. No dog is a washout because she messed up and was lost once. But you are right, she doesn't handle when she is on point. For a matter of fact the times she has been in competition she has always placed. I should have gone ahead and seriously trialed her as she is a good one and has produced some great pups that are performing well in their own areas.The pup I kept placed in the first and only trial I run him in but he went oversize so his competitive career ended and he now is in a great home in TN hunting quail.slistoe wrote:If we have dog owners who are unwilling/unable to teach handle to their dogs then we are breeding improperly by not offering up to them dogs whom are circumscribed in abilities?
PS - As described your female would be a washout from any trial venue because you cannot win with a lost dog that won't handle - even in All Age.
"as described" Wasn't the GPS working??She was right at least a 1/2 mile from where I was when I tried to bring her in. Luckily I knew what direction she was working and also that someone had seen her. Otherwise I had no way of knowing where she was and on top of that we didn't have permission to hunt that farm.
Something must be wrong here.....I understood you can always bring them in - that's why you breed them to hunt way out there.
