Style v Efficiency, and or other arguments that divide

[Greg Jennings]

Maybe I'm in a cranky mood, but the tone of this thread rubs me the wrong way. I'm especially put off by the personal insults.

Please stay informational, please stay on topic, please refrain from argumentum ad hominem, please remember that there is a person on the other end of the wire, and, especially, remember that posts that are appropriate for the comments section of an SI.com article are not appropriate here.

[DonF]

Somehow this seem's to have turned to a field trial thread. So, I believe that all field trials should be closed, breed specific. When you judge one type dog against another type, the charitericks of the dogs seem's to follow the fastest breed. In Brittany's it used to be that one stake was closed. One of you britt guys can tell us. I think it does the breeds no good to run against other breeds with different expections. It has always seemed to me that most the breeds were in persuit of the pointer. That's sad. I recall a conversation I had one time with a nery knowledgeable trialer. Some of you may know him, Ray Calkins? He was explaining to me how I was lucky because I had dogs that would run. He said he had to teach his doge to run, Wirehairs.

What usefull purpose is there in taking a dog designed to work like a DD and making it run like a Shorthair, or a \Shorthair like a Pointer. When you get to open trials, quite often there were judges that judged according to the standards of their breed. I would assume that the only real bird dog is the Pointer as that is the standard most trialers seem to chase. Several of the contentional breed's do close their trials. I asked around years ago and the opinion of everybody was that those dog's could not compete with the more popular breeds. That's is probably true but the people with those breeds seem to know what type a dog they want and presue that, not a bad idea at all. When I asked those prople why they don't run against the Pointer's, they would tell me their dog doesn't run enough to win against them.

I don't believe any more that open trials are in the best intrest intrest of the dog's. I recall years ago a Guy named Gene Pullen judged a number of our trials but only Britt triald. The other breeds did not care for Gene as he would place dogs acording to the Britt standard. He died years ago while back at the Britt Nationals. It is very difficult to judge a trial with the different breeds of dogs and measure each against their own standard, the different standards get lost in the mix and the tuffest one is used.

If people really want to see how their dogs measure up to the Pointer, enter some Pointer trials! You'll have to go to the qualifing trials and place in order to get to championship trials.

[Chukar12]

Don,
It certainly wasn't the intention of the thread, the entire purpose was framed in the last question of the first post...but I have digressed as much as the next guy...

I think our continuing and developing problem in the traditional AF/AKC horseback type trial is the breed specific participation. There are the standard arguments of functionality for the average foot hunter that keeps some of them away, barrier to entry because of cost (horse, trailers, time, etc...), and in the west in particular travel to breed specific club trials. Other than the No Ca Brittany Club trial and No Nevada ...I travel at least 400 miles to trial on a weekend. It always costs me a minimum of 1 day off work.

I state that because opening the trials to other breeds is bringing people in regionally, the Brittany, GSP, GWP, Weim and Vizsla folks are interacting alot in trials out west and really for no other reasi=on than deffering cost and keeping articpant numbers high enough to be qualifying trials. The AF folks are mostly pointer/setters with some of us stopping in with other breeds once in a while. I have argued in the past and stand by the arguments that the breed clubs should reach out to the other venues that have gained popularity with the sporting dog masses...NAVHDA, NSTRA, BDC, etc...they have fewer barriers to entry and a partnership may create a gateway to traditional trials. It just seems to be good business to me.

regards, Joe

[tommyboy72]

So in other words out goes the idea of "If you want to be the best you have to beat the best" and in comes the idea of "No dog left behind". So you close your trials or refuse to place any dog that is not of your specific breed? Greg what that would lead to is a pissing contest between breeds and then all the GSP clubs would close their doors to all other breeds and so would the Brittany clubs and the Vizla clubs and then before long the Pointer clubs and in turn you have no overall measure of what you are looking for in a dog. Granted maybe you should not compare a GSP or Brittany or Wirehair against a Pointer but you have to have some sort of standard to measure against . Lets assign each breed a letter grade as an example just like school.

Pointer=A
GSP=B
Brittany=C
Vizla=D
Irish Setter=F

Now would you rather have let us say a Brittany that runs like a C level dog which is completely acceptable in Brittany competitions or would you like to have a Brittany that runs like an A level Pointer and excels far and above what is expected of him. By running big, covering lots of ground, running a fast race and pointing high on both ends, etc. In order to have the A level type dog you want then you have to compete against and if not beat at least place against the top level competition which just happens to be the Pointer right now and in order to compete against them you have to be compared to them. I guess in a long way I am trying to say you have to strive to be better than you are whether it be in dog trialing, school, work, whatever unless you are happy with a C level just passing grade.

[brad27]

Somehow this seem's to have turned to a field trial thread. So, I believe that all field trials should be closed, breed specific.

I don't think i agree with you Don. I think trial participation would drop overall and would completely disappear in certain places for some breeds. The ship has already left habor. It would be tough to change things now. I'm glad they have breed nationals.

edit. +1 chukar and tommy

[DonF]

Your probably right, the ship has left the harbor, to bad. We have seen to forming of new trial venues in the country that seem to be saying, what is being done in AKC and AF is not good for a lot of people. And it's not "no dog left behind", it's competeing against a standard for your own breed. Makes me think of boxing. You are in one class based on your weight. Imagine if a light weight had to fight heavy weight's. Then the outcome is pretty much decided before the fight ever start's.

[adogslife]

How about having judges who are unbiased, who are experienced and knowledgable on the different breed styles and accept the differences?
How about judging each dog against their standard of performance and placing the dog that best performs to their standard,instead of unfairly comparing each breed,ultimately defeating the purpose of a field trial.

[ezzy333]

Form does not follow function! That is always miss stated, that is Lamarckian evolution.

You need to run really fast so you get longer legs, nope not how evolution or changing a breed trait works. You have longer legs by some mutation or selective breeding that allow you to run faster (function follows form) Darwinian Evolution by natural selection. Pick any trait it always goes form first, then function second. The best example is, you cant see if you dont have eyes so which is it. Form or Function first? No brainer.


I like style and efficiency and if I may those FT's stock produce some of the best hunting dogs around.

I have been trying to tell people this for years and don't think it has gotten through to anyone yet.

Ezzy

[nikegundog]

How about having judges who are unbiased, who are experienced and knowledgable on the different breed styles and accept the differences?
How about judging each dog against their standard of performance and placing the dog that best performs to their standard,instead of unfairly comparing each breed,ultimately defeating the purpose of a field trial.

Do you think there is enough qualified judges with the knowledge of the 12 eligible breeds to make the decision? I really think you would have a hard time finding 1 judge that knew if a Sinone Italiano was preforming in the 98% percentile of his breed and judge that against a Werm that was preforming to the 95% of his breed and so on through all 12 breeds, brace by brace.

[slistoe]

Ezzy, can you point out how the Brittany breed standard should be used in judging style of the Brittany at a field trial?

I asked this question of Ezzy but I can redirect to all of you who are asking for dogs to be judged against their own breed standard. Show me the standard. To my knowledge there isn't one. No breed standard says how a dog should hunt. Prove me wrong.

Pointing dogs search for, find and point birds. That is the performance standard - for pointing breeds.

[northern cajun]

Form does not follow function! That is always miss stated, that is Lamarckian evolution.

You need to run really fast so you get longer legs, nope not how evolution or changing a breed trait works. You have longer legs by some mutation or selective breeding that allow you to run faster (function follows form) Darwinian Evolution by natural selection. Pick any trait it always goes form first, then function second. The best example is, you cant see if you dont have eyes so which is it. Form or Function first? No brainer.


I like style and efficiency and if I may those FT's stock produce some of the best hunting dogs around.

I have been trying to tell people this for years and don't think it has gotten through to anyone yet.

Ezzy

You are correct Ezzy the people that can understand this process don't have a clue.

[Chukar12]

I think Don's point was the breeds characteristics should stand alone without comparison to another, and if breed clubs only ran their own breed judges would make comparisons on which dog was the best and they would not be saddled with any off breed bias. The counter argument and current reality is that we almost all open our breed club trials to all registered pointing dog breeds. Therefore, the standard for a field trial is just that... a pointing dog performance based on the established pointing dog rules and the "breed standard" such as size for example is not part of the equation...and if you choose jusdges or support clubs that take somebody's money and then doesn't give their dog a fair shake because its coat or tail is different...then shame on you and you will surely deserve the discord and reputation that will come from the disgruntled.

[ezzy333]

So in other words out goes the idea of "If you want to be the best you have to beat the best" and in comes the idea of "No dog left behind". So you close your trials or refuse to place any dog that is not of your specific breed? Greg what that would lead to is a pissing contest between breeds and then all the GSP clubs would close their doors to all other breeds and so would the Brittany clubs and the Vizla clubs and then before long the Pointer clubs and in turn you have no overall measure of what you are looking for in a dog. Granted maybe you should not compare a GSP or Brittany or Wirehair against a Pointer but you have to have some sort of standard to measure against . Lets assign each breed a letter grade as an example just like school.

Pointer=A
GSP=B
Brittany=C
Vizla=D
Irish Setter=F

Now would you rather have let us say a Brittany that runs like a C level dog which is completely acceptable in Brittany competitions or would you like to have a Brittany that runs like an A level Pointer and excels far and above what is expected of him. By running big, covering lots of ground, running a fast race and pointing high on both ends, etc. In order to have the A level type dog you want then you have to compete against and if not beat at least place against the top level competition which just happens to be the Pointer right now and in order to compete against them you have to be compared to them. I guess in a long way I am trying to say you have to strive to be better than you are whether it be in dog trialing, school, work, whatever unless you are happy with a C level just passing grade.

If you are giving me a choice, I want a Britt that hunts like a Britt and a pointer that hunts like a pointer. Each have their place and one is not better than the other. If pointers were the hands down best hunting dog then we all would own Pointers but as you can see, even though Pointers are the cadillac of trial dogs they are not the most popular hunting dogs. Every breed has a place in the world but if I want a dog to hunt like a pointer then I would buy a pointer. Just not my choice.

Ezzy

[slistoe]

My bad. The Spinone is to work at an extended fast trot with intermittent periods of gallop.

I imagine a Spinone trial must be something like those timed money tournaments. First guy to the bird wins but no "running" allowed.

[adogslife]

Do you think there is enough qualified judges with the knowledge of the 12 eligible breeds to make the decision? I really think you would have a hard time finding 1 judge that knew if a Sinone Italiano was preforming in the 98% percentile of his breed and judge that against a Werm that was preforming to the 95% of his breed and so on through all 12 breeds, brace by brace.

Not a far fetched notion in NAVHDA and german testing.
Clock some miles,learn from those more experienced and knowldgable and you learn enough of each breed to make qualified judgments.

[tommyboy72]

I asked this question of Ezzy but I can redirect to all of you who are asking for dogs to be judged against their own breed standard. Show me the standard. To my knowledge there isn't one. No breed standard says how a dog should hunt. Prove me wrong.

Pointing dogs search for, find and point birds. That is the performance standard - for pointing breeds.

Good Point.

And it's not "no dog left behind", it's competeing against a standard for your own breed. Makes me think of boxing. You are in one class based on your weight. Imagine if a light weight had to fight heavy weight's. Then the outcome is pretty much decided before the fight ever start's.

You ever watch the old days of the UFC before it became so commercialized wussified like many of our sports these days? Remember Hoyce Gracie? He made a living by routinely beating people bigger and stronger than him. One of my favorite all time fights that comes to mind is Keith Hackney vs. Emmanuelle Yarborough. A 200 lb. kenpo fighter against a 600 lb. sumo wrestler. Check it out on youtube. Point is it can be done. You just have to have the best overall dog that day. Not against a breed standard, not against a jury of your peers, not according to biased judges but the best overall period.

I guess that is why I enjoy watching the dreaded BDC that everyone hates on so much. Line up a GSP against a Pointer or Brittany against a Setter or a Wirehair against a Spinone. It doesn't matter. Find the birds, point the birds, shoot the birds, and retrieve the birds in the fastest time and you win. No griping about judges being biased, no complaining about short trial grounds or too many turns in a course or a dog not running "pretty enough" just dogs finding birds, pointing birds and retrieving birds which is what they were bred for. I am probably comparing apples to oranges but that is just my take on it.

[northern cajun]

Form does not follow function! That is always miss stated, that is Lamarckian evolution.

You need to run really fast so you get longer legs, nope not how evolution or changing a breed trait works. You have longer legs by some mutation or selective breeding that allow you to run faster (function follows form) Darwinian Evolution by natural selection.[b/] Pick any trait it always goes form first, then function second. The best example is, you cant see if you dont have eyes so which is it. Form or Function first? No brainer.

I like style and efficiency and if I may those FT's stock produce some of the best hunting dogs around.

Thank you for making my point again. Behavior does not alter genetics, but genetics can alter behavior. Selective breeding - enforced by nature eliminating detrimental characteristics or altering characteristics by human intervention in breeding. Dog breeding should be based on performance, not a written physical breed standard. This is why field trials are important. Breeders are trying to breed better bird dogs, and the only way to do this is by testing performance. This is self-evident.Jean-Batiste Lamarck does not enter into the equation.

Form follows function.

With evolution, form does not follow function ask Darwin. Oh wait you know more than Darwin?

Giraffes do not have long necks because they want to eat leaves, humans did not develop thumbs in order to grasp things better.

If I have to explain this in more detail then you really do not understand the process of evolution and natural selection.

You are correct about one thing, Lamarck doesnt enter the equation because he was wrong!

Done with this thread.

[Chukar12]

I am entering this portion of the conversation delicately for two reasons ... the first is that I do not have enough confidence one way or another to establish my own position and secondly because form v function and evolution thrown in comes dangerously close to people's faith and that is ground that deserves the utmost respect...

Northern Cajun (and I respect that if you are) you say you are done with the thread but in your Giraffe example...what if a mammal existed that had varying forms of neck, and the environment changed in a manner that made their primary food alter? For instance a population explosion of smaller animals that more aggressively consumed the lower food, and the only animals that could survive were those that carried the genetics for long necks? The function was eating high leaves and the form was a long neck to do so. In our examples, sleeker faster dogs are genetically chosen by some for a specific function, even if that function is no small part aesthetics...no?

Well at least the converstaion is holding my interest and provoking some thought...

[proudag08]

In an effort to continue provoking thoughts from Chuckar ( ) I will add my .02:

As someone that is new to the sport but has done a lot of question asking and research I see it a little differently than what most people here do. By most people here I mean the ones that have made it a lifestyle, a way of living, the primary use of your extra time and resources.

The way I see it I have a choice to make when I go pick up my pup in exactly one week from today. That choice will determine how I train my pup, when I train my pup, how much time and money I spend on my pup, and what my eventual goal is for my pup. That choice will determine the type of advice I seek, who I seek it from, how I seek it and why I seek it.

The choice that I have to make is so frustratingly simple but so insatiably complex at the same time. I have to choose whether or not I want my dog to compete. I didn’t say win, I didn’t say test, and I didn’t say hunt. I said compete. Compete can mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people. Whether its competing with your hunting buddies dog or in the National Championship, some of us what our dog to compete.

If you decide you want it to compete, great, have a great time, don’t let it get to your head, and remember it’s just a game. If you don’t want your dog to compete, great, enjoy your dog for what you got him for and don’t get your panties ruffled because somebody says there dog is better.

Where the frustration that is the catalyst for all the threads on here that end up in EXACTLY the same argument (meat vs. trial dog = style vs efficiency = breed vs breed... they all end up here) is that most of us that are on this forum care enough about our dogs to want them to be the best they can be, competing or not, and that desire in itself unconsciously instills a since of competition with others. It makes us feel the need to defend our dogs like your best friend or brother might have in a school yard fight.

So, I say all of that to say this: I don’t know what decision I am going to make yet. And I probably won’t in a week from now. But I do know that whatever choice I make, it will be the right one.

[tommyboy72]

Northern Cajun (and I respect that if you are) you say you are done with the thread but in your Giraffe example...what if a mammal existed that had varying forms of neck, and the environment changed in a manner that made their primary food alter? For instance a population explosion of smaller animals that more aggressively consumed the lower food, and the only animals that could survive were those that carried the genetics for long necks? The function was eating high leaves and the form was a long neck to do so. In our examples, sleeker faster dogs are genetically chosen by some for a specific function, even if that function is no small part aesthetics...no?

What if frog's had wings? They wouldn't bump their a$$es when they hopped.

In this situation since most animals don't vary so tremendously within the species I suspect the point you were trying to make is that all the short neck animals would die off leaving only the long neck animals. Most likely all of the long neck animals are going to be closely related within the species and if the short neck animals die off then that is probably going to lead to a serious decrease in the breeding population in turn leading to inbreeding, in turn disease, mutation, weak immune systems and the entire species is most likely going to die off.

[Chukar12]

competing or not, and that desire in itself unconsciously instills a since of competition with others. It makes us feel the need to defend our dogs like your best friend or brother might have in a school yard fight.

Wow....you are probably right and if you are no amount of understanding each other or education will stop the madness...we are sentenced to wading through each others emotions to get to dog information..it's probably why so many of us drink after the hunt and the trial...

[jetjockey]

Do you remember our several conversations about how you were not going to hunt Kona because you did not want to ruin her for trialing and how we discussed you needing to get her on some at least partially wild birds. This is how a hunters sometimes see trialers and their dogs.

After the last several weeks talking to very experienced field trialers about their dogs, other peoples dogs, trials, judges etc. I believe I would trust a field trial judge about as much as I trust Obama. So while trial dogs are proven against a class of their peers, is it always fair and impartial?

In turn though I really like the dogs that trialers turn out not because of their titles but because of the physical and mental makeups, stamina, breeding, immune systems, general overall health, etc.

I guess my point is that there are perceptions of field trialers out there like this because they exist against and by plain old hunters like myself.
.

Trial judging isn't always fair and impartial.. Not by a long shot. You win some you deserve to lose and you lose some you deserve to win. But the good dogs are the dogs who consistently put down good braces and consistently get placed by numerous different judges. You see those dogs in the top 10-20 dogs in the various award standings on a consistent basis. I can see both sides of the issue. I grew up hunting over mediocre dogs I thought were great, now I go to trials and sit in the saddle on occasion and I get to see what good dogs really are. There is a big difference in the dogs I hunted over and the dogs I watch run at trials. I think hunters get a bit jealous of the trialers because their hunting dogs don't have titles, they don't get the ribbons, and they generally don't have the training that the trial dogs have. The Pro's probably get sick of the guys with hunting dogs bashing trial dogs because supposidly they don't know how to handle wild birds and cant be hunted over. At times, Im sure both of those arguements can be true. But I had a guy bash my dog and was willing to bet me several hundred dollars that his hunting dogs could smoke my trial dog while hunting wild pheasants. I politely told him that there was a venue for things like that, and gave him a list of trials to attend. He said the same thing, trial judges aren't impartial. Some aren't, but many are. And it goes both ways. Some judges won't place a brittany in a AF Pointer trial because they don't have a tail, and some judges won't place a pointer in a brittany trial because they think they have and advantage. heck, for that matter some brittany people don't want pros at their trials because they want the poins to try and finish their dogs FC's, and they probably won't get them if a pro shows up. Thats why I firmly believe that not all FC's are created equal.... Ahh the games we play.

BTW.. About the guy who bashed my dog. I politely told him that if he pinned and FC on any of his dogs, I would gladely take him up on his offer. I haven't heard from him since. Maybe because I told him my dog not only trials, but also hunts. And IMO, any trial dog should also be hunted, because thats what they were born to do.

[slistoe]

No griping about judges being biased, no complaining about short trial grounds or too many turns in a course or a dog not running "pretty enough"

In my experience in trialling the guy with 4 dogs on his string that are all finished FC never complained when he lost. It was the fellow with two fourth place ribbons in 3 5 starts and knows in his own mind that he has the best dog on the circuit that does the griping.

[Wenaha]

Thank you for making my point again. Behavior does not alter genetics, but genetics can alter behavior. Selective breeding - enforced by nature eliminating detrimental characteristics or altering characteristics by human intervention in breeding. Dog breeding should be based on performance, not a written physical breed standard. This is why field trials are important. Breeders are trying to breed better bird dogs, and the only way to do this is by testing performance. This is self-evident.Jean-Batiste Lamarck does not enter into the equation.

Form follows function.

With evolution, form does not follow function ask Darwin. Oh wait you know more than Darwin?

Giraffes do not have long necks because they want to eat leaves, humans did not develop thumbs in order to grasp things better.

If I have to explain this in more detail then you really do not understand the process of evolution and natural selection.

You are correct about one thing, Lamarck doesnt enter the equation because he was wrong!

Done with this thread.

Well, a semi-civil response, at least. Polish up your reading skills and have another run at understanding my post. Maybe the light will shine this time...

Giraffes do not have long necks because they want to eat leaves, humans did not develop thumbs in order to grasp things better.

Giraffes have long necks because they eat leaves, and all the short necked giraffes starved. Evolutionary anthropologists suspect that some similar benefit was associated with opposable thumbs. You might want brush up on the evolution of Darwinian biology as well.

[jcbuttry8]

No griping about judges being biased, no complaining about short trial grounds or too many turns in a course or a dog not running "pretty enough"

In my experience in trialling the guy with 4 dogs on his string that are all finished FC never complained when he lost. It was the fellow with two fourth place ribbons in 3 5 starts and knows in his own mind that he has the best dog on the circuit that does the griping.

I am still new at this trialing thing but seem to get reasonable info from the trials I go to. I can see how people could get turned off by the talk around the trial about certain events and how they are ran. I myself started to take the advice I had heard and not participate, but that is the wrong attitude to have. I myself believe that if it is open, everyone that wants to run should run. If they do run the trial biased then so be it. I don't know who will be judging but I have seen and talked to several judges at events. You want to know how a judge looks at a dog. Go to the trial and ask him. Most I have run into will tell you what they look for. As with everything we humans get involved with, the answers you recieve will have slight variations. I have even gone to them after an event and asked if there was anything they saw with my pup that stood out as needing to be changed. They were all very much willing to offer guidance.

My pup was placed behind the same pup for two weeks straight on the third week my pup placed higher than she had before and that same pup didn't even make the placements. It is all in the eye of the beholder. What one judge sees as good another judge may see as a mistake. The only thing you can hope for is a judge that is willing to judge all dogs fair.

I haven't seen to much in the way of complaining or griping but I am only in the puppy stage at this point. I am sure once you get to the upper levels and the cost of the event is much higher and the number of dogs increases there is much more bickering. I have heard of people getting upset about there dog being picked up for something they felt was not an infraction, but I think overall it is the more experienced people, the 4 to 5 champions on a string, that understand why and how the judge looked at it. Experience seems to be key in this sport, but everyone had to start at the bottom.

Joe

[slistoe]

I haven't seen to much in the way of complaining or griping but I am only in the puppy stage at this point. I am sure once you get to the upper levels and the cost of the event is much higher and the number of dogs increases there is much more bickering.

Again, my experience is that you will only see the bickering if you set out looking for it. It is not that prevalent.

I have heard of people getting upset about there dog being picked up for something they felt was not an infraction,

Been there. But a polite, yet firm discussion with the judge afterward showed him why he was wrong.

[Troy08er]

I don’t play the field trial games at this time but I buy my dogs off those lines. The areas I hunt have some much open ground and with field trial lines it just means less walking. My friends with labs just call me lazy LOL. I’ll let him range 400-500 yards but if I need I’ll reel him to 15 yards for those holders. I think the trialers and FT breeders do an awesome job producing dogs for us hunters. I don’t know any hunters buying from show lines at this time. All the trialers and breeders I’ve talk with have always been helpful and with loads of information. The only problem I’ve seen with them is that they all think they have the best dogs LOL.

With today’s technology you could run a trial with GPS collars and video cameras. By using the GPS and maps you could tell how well the they covered ground, if he covered it smartly ETC. By using video you could see how the dog was on point, if any flagging ECT. I would like to see more hour events, I think it shows stamina.

[slistoe]

With today’s technology you could run a trial with GPS collars and video cameras. By using the GPS and maps you could tell how well the they covered ground, if he covered it smartly ETC. By using video you could see how the dog was on point, if any flagging ECT.

[DonF]

There was a trial recently where the opposite was true. winning dog had the most finds, but looked like _____________.

I have seen this. Years ago in NSTRA we had a dog that did a lot of winning. That dog is now in the NSTRA Hall of Fame. Does hge deserve to be there? I guess they think so. The dog usually got rather low scores on finds but it usually had a lot of finds. It also seldom got to far out of gun range, covered ground like a vacume cleaner. Ther dog was a good dog but was just not good looking on the birds. It did have a lot of fun. At what trial" Most of them. I won't say he looked like a POS but he had a low tail and was low on style. About all anyone had to do to beat this dog was to have as many finds.

Now some years ago I got a second at a trial where the winning dog actually laid down on point. The handler picked it up then flushed the bird but didn't fire his blank gun. Walking back to the house with his dog, the judge told huim to fire the gun. That was his only find and every one that watched it and knows the dog believe it was a stolen point. Same routine every time the dog stole point.

[nikegundog]

But I had a guy bash my dog and was willing to bet me several hundred dollars that his hunting dogs could smoke my trial dog while hunting wild pheasants. I politely told him that there was a venue for things like that, and gave him a list of trials to attend. He said the same thing, trial judges aren't impartial. Some aren't, but many are.................................................................................
BTW.. About the guy who bashed my dog. I politely told him that if he pinned and FC on any of his dogs, I would gladely take him up on his offer. I haven't heard from him since. Maybe because I told him my dog not only trials, but also hunts. And IMO, any trial dog should also be hunted, because thats what they were born to do.

I'm still trying to figure this out still, the guy wanted to run his dog against yours on wild pheasants, and you told him a list of trials that had planted birds? And what are the venues to settle a bet on whos got the best dog on wild pheasants? I think he probably walked away smiling that day.

[RayGubernat]

But I had a guy bash my dog and was willing to bet me several hundred dollars that his hunting dogs could smoke my trial dog while hunting wild pheasants. I politely told him that there was a venue for things like that, and gave him a list of trials to attend. He said the same thing, trial judges aren't impartial. Some aren't, but many are.................................................................................
BTW.. About the guy who bashed my dog. I politely told him that if he pinned and FC on any of his dogs, I would gladely take him up on his offer. I haven't heard from him since. Maybe because I told him my dog not only trials, but also hunts. And IMO, any trial dog should also be hunted, because thats what they were born to do.

I'm still trying to figure this out still, the guy wanted to run his dog against yours on wild pheasants, and you told him a list of trials that had planted birds? And what are the venues to settle a bet on whos got the best dog on wild pheasants? I think he probably walked away smiling that day.

Nike -

I just could be that the poster was trying to tell the other person that they felt that hunting is for hunting and not a competition. It could also be that the poster wanted to eductae the hunter about the fact that his dog both hunted and trialed and a fair comparison betweeen the dogs required that he also successfullly trialed his supposedly superior dog, who was in fact untested.

We all have dogs that we are proud of, and that is as it should be. Our dogs give us everything they have.... That is NOT the isue. What trials and tests and competitions tell you is if someone else would also be proud to have that dog.


RayG

[nikegundog]

Nike -

I just could be that the poster was trying to tell the other person that they felt that hunting is for hunting and not a competition. It could also be that the poster wanted to eductae the hunter about the fact that his dog both hunted and trialed and a fair comparison betweeen the dogs required that he also successfullly trialed his supposedly superior dog, who was in fact untested.

We all have dogs that we are proud of, and that is as it should be. Our dogs give us everything they have.... That is NOT the isue. What trials and tests and competitions tell you is if someone else would also be proud to have that dog.


RayG

RayG, I get what your saying but this guy felt that trials and tests and competitions aren't a true test of a dogs ability and put out a challenge on wild phez. I'm not saying by any means that trial dogs can't hunt, however if a guy puts out a challenge like that, your proving nothing by doing what the poster did. Since the UFC has already been mentioned I will put out an analogy, a sumo wrestler challenges a boxer to a fight to see which one is the better fighter, the boxer says "I'll fight you, but its got to be in a boxing match", this is pretty much the way I the hunter saw this argument.

[jetjockey]

There is actually more to the story, but I didn't post all of it. Basically, he told me my trial dog couldn't hunt wild pheasants. I tried to explain to him that many trial dogs spend summers in SD being trained on wild birds (including mine), get hunted on wild birds as well, and can be very, very good wild bird dogs. He then told me that HB dogs run to big to hunt wild birds (mind you, this was after he told me my dog wouldn't run big enough to compete with his dogs and asked me if my dog could back from 200 yards). I tried to explain to him again that just because dogs run trials, doesn't mean they can't be very good foot hunting wild bird dogs as well. I then told him that Id take him up on his offer to hunt the dogs on wild pheasants together if he could pin a FC on any of his dogs. I also gave him a list of a few wild bird trials (run on chickens and quail, or pre-released quail), and planted bird trials that he could attend if he though his dogs could do better then trial dogs on any type of birds. I thought it was a pretty simple request. He could prove to me that his dogs had what it takes to become a FC, and Id prove to him a trial dog could also hunt wild pheasants. Unfortunately, he wanted nothing to do with it after I suggested he pin a FC on his dog. He was the perfect example of someone who didn't understand that many trial dogs are also very good hunting dogs. And for that matter, many hunting dogs could have been very good trial dogs if they were ever given the chance.

[RayGubernat]

There is actually more to the story, but I didn't post all of it. Basically, he told me my trial dog couldn't hunt wild pheasants. I tried to explain to him that many trial dogs spend summers in SD being trained on wild birds (including mine), get hunted on wild birds as well, and can be very, very good wild bird dogs. He then told me that HB dogs run to big to hunt wild birds (mind you, this was after he told me my dog wouldn't run big enough to compete with his dogs and asked me if my dog could back from 200 yards). I tried to explain to him again that just because dogs run trials, doesn't mean they can't be very good foot hunting wild bird dogs as well. I then told him that Id take him up on his offer to hunt the dogs on wild pheasants together if he could pin a FC on any of his dogs. I also gave him a list of a few wild bird trials (run on chickens and quail, or pre-released quail), and planted bird trials that he could attend if he though his dogs could do better then trial dogs on any type of birds. I thought it was a pretty simple request. He could prove to me that his dogs had what it takes to become a FC, and Id prove to him a trial dog could also hunt wild pheasants. Unfortunately, he wanted nothing to do with it after I suggested he pin a FC on his dog. He was the perfect example of someone who didn't understand that many trial dogs are also very good hunting dogs. And for that matter, many hunting dogs could have been very good trial dogs if they were ever given the chance.

I would disagree slightly with your conclusion. I would say it is a perfect example of someone who DID NOT WANT to understand, REFUSED to even try to understand the dismissed the other person's arguments and point of view. That is disrespectful. Although they sometimes go together, there can be a huge difference between obstinate and stupid.

RayG

[JKP]

Granted maybe you should not compare a GSP or Brittany or Wirehair against a Pointer but you have to have some sort of standard to measure against

If that's what you want, then expect the breeds to all start looking like Pointers. The problem with field trialing is to really compete across the breed spectrum, ALL dogs are going to have to be 40-50 lbs, white, short coated, long legged, lighter boned and field specialists. IF that's what you want...go for it. I have no problem with 2-300 yd AKC trial dogs. Sure, all the purists consider them 3rd class dogs, but who cares. If folks want a nice comfortable foot hunting dog with nose, manners and style, they have a right to it. Its that kind of AA/Shooting Dog arrogance that keeps folks away. It will be a sad day when all breeds want to be like Pointers.
One of the reasons I left the AKC GWP was that performance dogs (largely trial dogs) were being bred largely little white "whippets" to be competitive and then only a handful of them were really worth looking at. Pointers are great dogs...but they shouldn't set the agenda for all the other breeds.

There was a trial recently where the opposite was true. winning dog had the most finds, but looked like _____________.

I have seen this. Years ago in NSTRA we had a dog that did a lot of winning. That dog is now in the NSTRA Hall of Fame. Does hge deserve to be there? I guess they think so. The dog usually got rather low scores on finds but it usually had a lot of finds. It also seldom got to far out of gun range, covered ground like a vacume cleaner. Ther dog was a good dog but was just not good looking on the birds. It did have a lot of fun. At what trial" Most of them. I won't say he looked like a POS but he had a low tail and was low on style. About all anyone had to do to beat this dog was to have as many finds.

Now some years ago I got a second at a trial where the winning dog actually laid down on point. The handler picked it up then flushed the bird but didn't fire his blank gun. Walking back to the house with his dog, the judge told huim to fire the gun. That was his only find and every one that watched it and knows the dog believe it was a stolen point. Same routine every time the dog stole point.

Well....look at that...an example of an undeserving dog being awarded...who'd have thunk it!!! Still say....show me a dog that works hard to find birds, with some pop and attitude, and I'm betting it doesn't look like a POS on game...that's just an old tired argument. Just cause a dog can't win a trial doesn't mean its fertilizer.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Yrs ago I attended a NSTRA trial there was a GSP there out of Hickory "bleep" Doc.They were talking about the trials he had been wininning untill he got a nasal infection.He was a dog I wouldn't want in my back yard nothing that I would have even looked at & if that makes me arrogant so be it.I don't care how many birds he found.The dog was owned by Bill Drake who ran & owned some pretty nice dog but he couldn't have given that dog to me.

[ezzy333]

Yrs ago I attended a NSTRA trial there was a GSP there out of Hickory "bleep" Doc.They were talking about the trials he had been wininning untill he got a nasal infection.He was a dog I wouldn't want in my back yard nothing that I would have even looked at & if that makes me arrogant so be it.I don't care how many birds he found.The dog was owned by Bill Drake who ran & owned some pretty nice dog but he couldn't have given that dog to me.

I too tend to agree with this but I don't like to judge a dog by how it looks. I just am not going to keep what I think is an ugly dog. There are way too many good looking ones to have to do that everyday and luckily it does not cost more to have a good looking one that will do everything the ugly ones will do. And in my opinion the same thing goes for dogs that do not adhere to the breed standard. I am sold on having more than one breed of dog and the people who ignore their preferred breed standard are doing no one a favor now or in the future.

Ezzy

[birddog1968]

Form follows function....Look at what breed standards have done to the Labrador, Irish Setter............

[RayGubernat]

Granted maybe you should not compare a GSP or Brittany or Wirehair against a Pointer but you have to have some sort of standard to measure against

If that's what you want, then expect the breeds to all start looking like Pointers. The problem with field trialing is to really compete across the breed spectrum, ALL dogs are going to have to be 40-50 lbs, white, short coated, long legged, lighter boned and field specialists. IF that's what you want...go for it. I have no problem with 2-300 yd AKC trial dogs. Sure, all the purists consider them 3rd class dogs, but who cares. If folks want a nice comfortable foot hunting dog with nose, manners and style, they have a right to it. Its that kind of AA/Shooting Dog arrogance that keeps folks away. It will be a sad day when all breeds want to be like Pointers.
One of the reasons I left the AKC GWP was that performance dogs (largely trial dogs) were being bred largely little white "whippets" to be competitive and then only a handful of them were really worth looking at. Pointers are great dogs...but they shouldn't set the agenda for all the other breeds.

I

I actually agree with a good bit of this. There may well be a problem with AKC gundog judges and perhaps with AF shooting dog judges focusing on the run and range aspect of the performance...to the exclusion of the rest of what goes in to what I like to call ground application. There is a great deal in the Gundog standard besides range and YES I AGREE that a dog that is out of sight of the handler for half the brace IS NOT putting down a GunDog performance. Similarly, a dog that must be hacked and turned is also not putting down a gundog performance. It is supposed to handle kindly with a minimum of verbal direction from the handler and should HUNT in a manner consistent with what could be expected of a class hunting dog. It must also point staunchly, with intensity.

I see folks riding out for their dogs, calling them, chasing them, hacking them...and wanting them to be placed as Gun Dogs.

I put forth this for consideration... Dogs of different breeds, regardless of peculiarities of their breeds particular hunting style and within limits...regardless of range...CAN be relatively fairly compared in a Gun Dog trial format. Consideration of the total package of the ground application can serve to evaluate the dogs in a fair manner because the TOTAL package includes things like industriousness, thoroughness, confidence, boldness, intelligent search pattern ease and beauty of movement...and much, much more. On game...there are some who are enamored of a pointer's 12 o'clock tail and rigid, lofty stance. Some may prefer the setters more ethereeal appearance on point and so on down the breeds. The ONE thing that a bird dog absolutely must have...no matter what the breed. is INTENSITY. When you look into the dog's eye's on point...there has to be a killer in there for anyone to see...and I don't give a rat's patoot WHICH breed....if you don't see death in a dog's eyes when it is on point...that ain't a bird dog.

Where a breed like pointers shine, other breeds may not. However, I know the converse is also true. Other dogs have characteristic hunting traits that set them apart. In some of these areas, THEY excel...thus, making them excellent hunting dogs.

It is up to the clubs and the sposoring organizations to insist that the WHOLE dog be judged...not just bits and pieces...and that the standard for the stake be what is judged against.

RayG

[Wenaha]

...And in my opinion the same thing goes for dogs that do not adhere to the breed standard. I am sold on having more than one breed of dog and the people who ignore their preferred breed standard are doing no one a favor now or in the future.

Ezzy

While admitting that the Brittany people have done a better job aligning their breed standard with the requirements of a fully functional, capable bird dog, I disagree that breed standards are necessary to produce good bird dogs. The FDSB does not have 'breed standards' and I would argue that these FDSB dogs are at the top of the bird dog world.

The problem with the breed standard is that it is nothing more than a physical description - and does not address critical issues in either function or capability in the field. I keep, hunt and field trial FDSB registered English setters and from top field trial lines. When I compare these dogs to the AKC breed standard I have to laugh. And since the breed standard is owned by the breed club, and the breed club may, or may not, be striving for the finest performing bird dogs, I question the blind adherence to a standard that does NOT talk to the most important aspects of a bird dog - brains, bottom, nose, and the intangible ability to hunt successfully.

Off the soap box.

[adogslife]

Does shoulder lay,front/rear angulation,length of croup,length of back and loin have anything to do with performance?

[proudag08]

Does shoulder lay,front/rear angulation,length of croup,length of back and loin have anything to do with performance?

I would argue that there is probably an optimal ratio for all those things. Thats why cheetahs are faster than all other big cats. A cat's form, their biological structure, is condusive to moving "quickly" and "nimbly". However a cheetah's is MORE condusive to the "quickly" part of that last sentence. Some cheetahs are faster than others and that can come from breeding and environment. But if you compare the structure of a lion vs a cheetah you will see different "shoulder lay,front/rear angulation,length of croup,length of back and loin" ratios therefore proving why the cheetah can run faster. In other words, a cheetah is not just a spotted skinny lion that has been bred to run faster. Its genetics (read: shoulder lay,front/rear angulation,length of croup,length of back and loin) are such that speed is amplified.

So functionally across the breeds of gun dogs there is a difference in performance when looking at "shoulder lay,front/rear angulation,length of croup,length of back and loin". That is not to say that there is a large degree of difference but its hard to argue that the biological sructure has nothing to do with performance.

[RayGubernat]

Does shoulder lay,front/rear angulation,length of croup,length of back and loin have anything to do with performance?

Yes they have something to do with a dog's ability to perform.... but the optimal physical dimensions and ratios are worthless in the absence of a whole host of intangibles and immeasurables, like grit, biddability independence, front running tendency, etc.

But there is ONE intangible that trumps all the others... it is, to me the sine qua non of the real bird dog. That attribute is DESIRE.


You can take an optimal physical specimen to the field and get nothing because it has no desire. You can take a dog that is built all wrong and that dog can light up the place because that dog has an insatiable, unquenchable desire to find birds and will do whatever it has to do, however it has to do it...to get birds because every fiber of its being drives it to that end.

Obviously, one would hope that selective breeding can help get us to a melding of the best of both.

RayG

[birddogger]

So in other words out goes the idea of "If you want to be the best you have to beat the best" and in comes the idea of "No dog left behind". So you close your trials or refuse to place any dog that is not of your specific breed? Greg what that would lead to is a pissing contest between breeds and then all the GSP clubs would close their doors to all other breeds and so would the Brittany clubs and the Vizla clubs and then before long the Pointer clubs and in turn you have no overall measure of what you are looking for in a dog. Granted maybe you should not compare a GSP or Brittany or Wirehair against a Pointer but you have to have some sort of standard to measure against . Lets assign each breed a letter grade as an example just like school.

Pointer=A
GSP=B
Brittany=C
Vizla=D
Irish Setter=F

Now would you rather have let us say a Brittany that runs like a C level dog which is completely acceptable in Brittany competitions or would you like to have a Brittany that runs like an A level Pointer and excels far and above what is expected of him. By running big, covering lots of ground, running a fast race and pointing high on both ends, etc. In order to have the A level type dog you want then you have to compete against and if not beat at least place against the top level competition which just happens to be the Pointer right now and in order to compete against them you have to be compared to them. I guess in a long way I am trying to say you have to strive to be better than you are whether it be in dog trialing, school, work, whatever unless you are happy with a C level just passing grade.

If you are giving me a choice, I want a Britt that hunts like a Britt and a pointer that hunts like a pointer. Each have their place and one is not better than the other. If pointers were the hands down best hunting dog then we all would own Pointers but as you can see, even though Pointers are the cadillac of trial dogs they are not the most popular hunting dogs. Every breed has a place in the world but if I want a dog to hunt like a pointer then I would buy a pointer. Just not my choice.

Ezzy

Best post yet, IMO.

Charlie

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Here is a little thought that goes with conformation.I,we use to show Dobes & I have been to several hundred dog shows.Even in the show ring the dog with the most correct conformation does not always come out on top,so you should not expect the dog with the most correct conformation to always win at fieldtrials.Like F Trials there is more to it then that,the dog with the most heart,stamina, etc will win the most consistently & like Ray said all that boils down to is desire.The same happens in the show ring you have a dog that is conformationally correct but has no desire to be there so now here come a dog through the gate that is not as correct as the previous dog but thinks he cock of the walk & acts like it BINGO the winner.He is a SHOWDOG!!
Another thing to consider is the written standard can be taken different by every human,other then numbers like so many teeth or height,or weight, everything thing else is how each individual judge sees it.
I remember one pro handler had an over size weim that he use to win alot with & joke about it he said when they bring the measuring wicket out he will shrink to fit under it.
I mentioned numbers like teeth & friend of mine had a Dobe bitch he had shown for over a yr with placements & if I remember right even had 1 reserve winners bitch.We were at a specialty show in Cincnnati & she was DQed for TOO MANY missing teeth so what does that tell you? When humans are judging different interpetations of the standard & observations will exist as they do in F Trials.

[ezzy333]

When you go to any form of competion all you are asking is the judges OPINION. You as the owner,handler, breeder or whatever should already know how good the dog is and it is your job to show it so the judge will have the same opinion. But many times it doesn't happen for a host of different reasons.

Ezzy

[Winchey]

"you should already know how good the dog is" They should but most people see their dog's through rose coloured glasses, myself included, I have to make a conscious effort to keep that in check.

[JKP]

Does shoulder lay,front/rear angulation,length of croup,length of back and loin have anything to do with performance?

I assume you asked this as a rhetorical question...but the answer is ABSOLUTELY. What you describe goes a long way to determining how easily and efficiently a dog moves. All things equal.....a dog that floats over the ground has a huge advantage over a dog that chops, pounds and crabs to get forward....maybe not for a one hour stake...but from the age of 7-8 years on, the better put together dog will give you more service...probably less orthopedic problems too.

[Garrison]

My thanks to Ezzy for crafting the framework of a post that should allow the impassioned to state their case...

When I was a kid, I owned, sought and applauded a dog that could find the greatest possible amount of game for me. Sometimes it was in a hunt in the 400 acres across the hi-way, sometimes it was in 40 acres back behind the neighbors house, when I could drive it was in any place I could find. You might see me at this point as a peasant poacher hunting the land of the repressive royalty. As I matured and my resources grew and my discretionary time shrunk my habits changed, as did my hunts, and my appreciation for a dog.

Today I find those in my generation of similar mind to me IF they have hunted their entire life, those who have not, or have had a more casual and limited exposure to the hunt, may be of a different mindset on killing game. I wouldn't suggest that anybody's choice of hunting or hunting dog style is right or wrong, or that one is more advanced than another, I would suggest that EVRYBODY's view is a little different...and how people enjoy the sport is of little concern to me as long as they are safe, legal and don't cross moral boundries of reasonable common sense.

As a result, those in similar mindsets form clubs, and in some cases create tests and competitions to show their dogs. These tests and trials are administered by established rules and judged by third party experts. Therefore, they are lauded as a way of identifying animals objectively to breed to. In many of these instances the harvesting of game is disassociated with the process of working it with a dog and in fact, the "game" becomes a display of extremes. Herein we begin defining and refining style within the written standards.

I don't find that offensive or wrong, anymore than I do someone who finds pure enjoment in a pointing lab, or is fanatical about traditional European blood, or loves having a dog that points birds, runs deer and digs up gophers. I am however curious about those who do have an opinion as to why anothers choice of purpose for a dog is wrong.

“At first blush I am tempted to conclude that a satisfactory hobby must be in large degree useless, inefficient, laborious, or irrelevant.”
― Aldo Leopold

Why do people have an arguable opinion about style v efficiency when its outside their own personal purpose?

The preface to the question, does not make the question any less loaded. To answer the question we would have to agree that they are exclusive of one another, which many don't.

Winchey, I must have the same glasses because you have a fine looking Setter sir.

[solon]

Form does not follow function! That is always miss stated, that is Lamarckian evolution.

You need to run really fast so you get longer legs, nope not how evolution or changing a breed trait works. You have longer legs by some mutation or selective breeding that allow you to run faster (function follows form) Darwinian Evolution by natural selection. Pick any trait it always goes form first, then function second. The best example is, you cant see if you dont have eyes so which is it. Form or Function first? No brainer.


I like style and efficiency and if I may those FT's stock produce some of the best hunting dogs around.

I have been trying to tell people this for years and don't think it has gotten through to anyone yet.

Ezzy

You are correct Ezzy the people that can understand this process don't have a clue.

I think the controversy over this issue is a semantic one. We probably all agree that natural or artificial selection acts by biasing the gene pool in a direction that favors certain traits that are undergoing the selection. Thus the gene pool presents a variety of phenotypes that don't randomly contribute to the future genotypes due to the nonrandom probabilities of reproductive success. That is to say that the various genotypes have to provide the forms that selection can favor. The need for a given trait can not cause the gene pool to produce it as Lamarck postulated. Now what are the traits that are being selected? In performance breeds, these traits are functional. In the conformation arena, the traits being selected by the breeders are forms. The performance animal breeders are selecting for various performance qualities. Traits such as milk production for cows, speed for race horses, pointing instinct, speed and endurance, etc for bird dogs. The selection acts on the functional attributes; the mutations, cross breeding, and other genetic mechanisms affecting the gene pool generates the forms that will be most successful in the functions desired by the breeders, when measured in some way and the results used for breeding rights. So when one says that form follows function, it means that the selection is for function, first. The forms, that is the physical attributes, that best serve the desired functions will be selected secondarily as a consequence. Hence the other way to look at it is that the genotypic variations in the population will supply the forms that the breeder (or nature in the case of natural selection) will favor. So in that sense, the forms will precede the functions selected, but the forms that will be propagated are based on functional criteria.

In dog breeding the big division is over those that breed for a perceived optimal form without regard to function or testing for function versus those that breed for forms that support a set of given functions and the animals are tested for this set of functions.
So I would summarize it as form follows function if the selection being applied is for functional traits, and the opposite: function follows form when the selection is primarily for the form without regard to the function. It is the show vs field dichotomy. In nature, selection is for survival and reproductive success; whatever available forms that best accomplish this will be favored. This process is generally a very slow one compared to artificial breeding.

Well at least that is how I view this issue.