Back from First Field Trial

Buckeye_V · Post by **Buckeye_V** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 1:39 pm

I just got back from attending my first field trial. I was an observer, as we do not have a dog yet. This was an AKC trial put on by the Vizsla Club of Greater Cleveland. I had a great time and met a lot of nice people in the process. My breeder was in attendance and we are already acquainted rather well, so it helped with the meeting and learning process. I got to ride a couple braces in the gallery on a wrangler horse on the first day. I helped fill a few bird bags and pretty much just watched and asked questions.

The second day I learned how to plant birds and assisted with that for most of the day. I even got to watch our stud dog run in the Amature Limited Broke Gun Dog stake and run away with it. He had like 6 finds with a small creep on one that was running on him.

Anyhow, it was very wet the whole weeked but my wife and I had fun just the same. We got the opportunity to learn and meet new people all in one experience. Needless to say I am hopelessly hooked and can't wait for the next one!

On a sour note I did get to see some negatives, like a pro handler doing some underhanded things. I won't go into details, but that is not how I want to compete or do business.

original mngsp · Post by **original mngsp** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:41 pm

I'm glad the first trial went well. Sounds like your attitude to wanting to help made you fit right in. Every club always can use some extra manpower and is usually greatly apperciated.

I don't want to here the details of "the underhanded" things but they do occur at times, which is a shame becasue this was meant to be a gentleman's sport where honor and sportsmanship should mean more than an underhanded win.

The only way this crap stops is for people to stand up and not accept it anymore. The AKC publishes a very good manual on misconduct. They use a litmus test of "would what was seen be predjudicial to the sport if seen by someone attending thier first event" or something right along those lines. When this happens people have the duty to bring it to the event committees attention so they can invistagate the claim. If they chose to ignore it, in violation of the rules, you should contact the AKC.

This might not always be the most popular thing to do but cleaning up some garbage that happens will help the sport of trialing alot.

Buckeye_V · Post by **Buckeye_V** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:09 pm

Thank you for pointing that out. There were a lot of GSP's there and they ran pretty well. I met a couple nice GSP people. I hope to see them again.

original mngsp · Post by **original mngsp** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:45 pm

There are a couple of nice GSP people out there, not sure about the rest though

Buckeye_V · Post by **Buckeye_V** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 4:32 pm

Bill Fazio, Joe Bunk and Jim Wallace were their names. I'm sure there are a lot more out there. They were all judges and helped me with suggestions and answered questions. They also helped me with some horse issues

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 5:02 pm

I am not familiar with how trials work and am pondering the idea of getting into them. Could you please give me some examples of what would be considered "underhanded".
Thanks

larue · Post by **larue** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 8:08 pm

I would not get too worried about "underhanded" handling.
Most of the examples are just plain ignorance,I will give an example.
I was at a trial where both dogs where standing on point,
one close,and one far up the line.By the time we got to the far dog,the first dog had handled his bird cleanly.As the handler of the first dog was even with the dog that was still standing,he blasted his dog out with a loud whistle blast.This was bad manners as it could have made the still pointing dog move,yet is was done out of excitement,and a focus on only his dog,and trying to get the best out of it.
I have also watched two dogs with a shared find,yet only one guy fires his gun,underhanded,no poor handling on the 2nd handler.
In most cases it is a misunderstanding of the situation,not a attempt to make your dog wreck.
I have one simple answer for you if you think your bracemate's handler is messing with your dog,train your dog to a higher level,so that no matter what happen's he is honest.

Post by **Ayres** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:13 pm

larue wrote:As the handler of the first dog was even with the dog that was still standing, he blasted his dog out with a loud whistle blast. This was bad manners as it could have made the still pointing dog move, yet is was done out of excitement, and a focus on only his dog, and trying to get the best out of it.

This is why I don't train with a whistle!

Still, it does have an effect on an intense point, even if you train your dog to ignore them.

Buckeye_V · Post by **Buckeye_V** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 6:51 am

This was a professional handler who KNOWS better. I saw two examples. One involved the use of a whistle to drown out the commands of a non-whistle user. The other is best explained in a private format.

Wagonmaster · Post by **Wagonmaster** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:00 am

One involved the use of a whistle to drown out the commands of a non-whistle user.

I was not there, and do not know the circumstances, but have read this complaint here before. Commands are very rarely used in field trials. About the only occasion for a command is the use of whoa when a dog is on point. Often, handlers who do not have much experience with field trials think it is their job to command a dog to come here, go there, etc. Not only will that kind of performance lose 100% of the time, but a handler who is constantly commanding a dog, will often interfere with the other dog that is on the course. Run and handle (along with bird work of course), are what wins field trials.

The pros who use whistles, train their dogs to roll (run) on a whistle. They use the whistle when a dog is coming in to much. So situations do occur where one handler is hacking and commanding a dog too much and too often, and the pro, who knows that run wins, is trying to make sure his/her dog does not get caught up in it. Then the handler who thinks it is their job to command a dog around the course, believes the pro has done them wrong. Usually, it is the other way around. Or rather, a matter of the handler not having the experience to understand how the dog should run, and thus the handler is talking too much. The less said by the handler the better, and handling a dog is a matter of singing to it so it has the confidence to run (it knows where you are), and bringing it around the tight spots in the course.

One other problem that can arise is that inexperienced handlers sometimes train a dog to come on a whistle. Then, when a pro blows to get a dog to roll, the dog of the inexperienced handler comes in, so that handler starts talking to it to get it to run, which affects the pros dog, so the pro blows the whistle and it starts all over again.

Have handled, judged, or ridden in something over a hundred trials of all types. I would have to say I have never seen a handler attempt to intentionally interfere with another handler's dog. Unintentional interference does occur. But in order to win a stake, a handler needs to beat the other good dogs in the other braces in the stake, not just the bracemate, so there is nothing to be gained by spending your time messing with the bracemate. You are trying to show your own dog to best advantage.

Buckeye_V · Post by **Buckeye_V** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 12:16 pm

This one was intentional, as pointed out by an experienced individual. I just happened to be in the gallery when he pointed it out. The guy evidently does not have a good reputation.

Wagonmaster · Post by **Wagonmaster** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 12:41 pm

again, i was not there and do not know the circumstances. there are turkeys in every sport known to man, and probably those we do not know about too. but i would not believe every guy in the gallery. sometimes you get "lobbyists" in the gallery who say stuff trying to influence the judges, and lobbyists who have it in for a particular handler or pro.

the problem with these claims is, there is nothing to gain by spending time messing with your bracemate. if you take the most callous look, the purpose of cheating is to win by crook what you cannot win by skill and ability. but trying to interfere with a bracemate is not merely rude, it is wasting time, of which you only have a limited amount in an AKC half hour stake. you do not win by spending your time messing with someone else's dog. all you manage to do, if you succeed, is to take one of the dogs in the stake out of contention. that still leaves you with all the rest that you have to beat. and you have not been paying attention to your own dog while you were doing it. you win by getting the job done with your own.

Buckeye_V · Post by **Buckeye_V** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 2:10 pm

The person was not a lobbyist, but someone whom I trust. I understand what you are saying. I agree with what you are saying. I know what I saw and that is all I have to say about it.

wannabe · Post by **wannabe** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:09 pm

I have never heard of anyone drowning out a bracemates commands with a whistle, but I will be tooting on mine if my dog is coming in to see what my bracemate is jabbering about.

Wagonmaster wrote:Have handled, judged, or ridden in something over a hundred trials of all types. I would have to say I have never seen a handler attempt to intentionally interfere with another handler's dog.

I am suprised that you never ran into Mr. Wrenegade. I am still hearing stories about him even though he retired several years ago.

Wagonmaster · Post by **Wagonmaster** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:53 pm

Yes, I knew Mr. Wrenegade and still do.

Richard *UT* · Post by Richard *UT* » Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:33 am

Must be an inside joke.

Wagonmaster · Post by **Wagonmaster** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:53 am

no, a reference to a former, very highly regarded, colorful and unforgettable handler of shorthairs back in the day, a quarter century ago. the respect of two competitors, wannabe and Mr. Wrenegade, who at the time were among the best that were.

PS: Wannabe tells me I have the wrong guy, I don't know him, but Mr. Wrenegade was certainly among the best when he played. Handler of Dixielands Luke and NAFC Wrenegade's Gabriel.