trial question

Post Reply
User avatar
steamer
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 2:53 pm
Location: central indiana

trial question

Post by steamer » Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:26 pm

ok so im running a fun trial using nstra rules. we are down to about 1 1-2 min left in our brace. my dog goes on point about 40 yrds away. i call point and start walking in . i want to produce this bird as we only had 1 on the card. my brace mate is behind me 30 40 yrds . i hear him calling his dog over but not really paying attention what is going on behind me . when my dog goes on point im looking in front looking for a safe place to shoot. so i walk in to flush the bird and hear my bracemate behind me say something but again im not listening to what is behind me. when i get to the bird i see its dead so i call over to the judge and he tells me to pick it up and throw it. so i throw it it goes 30 ft or so doesnt fly and hits the ground my dog goes and picks it up and retrives it to hand . that was time on the brace. so i take the bird to the judge and call my dog in and leash him up. my bracemate gets all mad at me because he wanted me to wait so he could get his dog over and get a back. so my question is am i responsible for waiting on my bracemate? i ask this because i dont know and want to run nstra later in the year. i run in the fun trials so we can work these things out before we get braced in a real trial with someone who is running for a championship and do something wrong. i asked around at the trial and no one had a good answer. is it a rule or just good practice to wait? if i was in a real trial and going for a win should i let my bracemate get a back and possibly beat me or go for the bird and get the win? again i ask these things because i dont know and would be greatfull for any help thanks

User avatar
Sharon
GDF Junkie
Posts: 8243
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 4:46 pm
Location: Ontario,Canada

Re: trial question

Post by Sharon » Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:46 pm

responsible for waiting on my bracemate?" No. It's nice to do if it can easily be done but you have no responsibility for that.

I don't care what the event is , someone will be mad about something.:)
" We are more than our gender, skin color, class, sexuality or age; we are unlimited potential, and can not be defined by one label." quote

BigShooter
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2514
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 6:20 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: trial question

Post by BigShooter » Sun Mar 25, 2012 6:01 pm

The only question is what the purpose of this fun run/not real trial was and how that purpose was communicated. If it had been made clear to everyone it was a "training day" then I could understand why the handler of a brace-mate would've been bemoaning the lost training opportunity. If the intention was to have a "mock" trial with all of the normal procedures & rules applied for the purpose of having everyone operate under the pressure & judgment that normally accompanies a trial, then Sharon's point is spot on.
Mark

Willows Back In The Saddle
Tall Pines Hits The Spot
Tall Pines Queen Eleanor
Bo Dixie's Rocky
TALL PINES MOONBEAM

______________________________________________________

If it ain't broke - fix it

User avatar
steamer
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 2:53 pm
Location: central indiana

Re: trial question

Post by steamer » Sun Mar 25, 2012 7:03 pm

its a season long for points type thing once a month sept.-may. some use it for training for nstra trials others are newbies that want to learn the game. its not strictly a training day though. its set up and ran like a nstra trial. its intended to be a competition.

User avatar
DonF
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3771
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:09 pm
Location: Antelope, Ore

Re: trial question

Post by DonF » Sun Mar 25, 2012 7:33 pm

I believe had you slowed down going to the bird, he could have got a back and even if time expired your given time to go and produce the bird. Don't remember how much. But these is nothing that say's you have to wait on the other handler. I would call it comon courtisey to do it though.
I pity the man that has never been loved by a dog!

User avatar
highcotton
GDF Premier Member!
Posts: 870
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 6:56 pm
Location: Alabama

Re: trial question

Post by highcotton » Sun Mar 25, 2012 7:58 pm

Page 7 section 1.02
When a dog establishes point, the handler will proceed
to their dog and begin to flush immediately. If the judge of
the pointing dog determines that the handler is not making
an aggressive attempt to flush, they will direct the handler to
relocate their dog. Judges may not communicate via radio
or any other means the desire of handler who wants a back
or the willingness of a handler to wait on their brace mate to
get a back.

romeo212000
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: trial question

Post by romeo212000 » Mon Mar 26, 2012 9:30 am

The answer in short is no you are not responsible for giving his dog an opportunity to back. There's a few reasons for this though.

The first reason is according to the rules if your dog is on point and time expires you have one minute to produce the bird and complete the retrieve to get credit for both pieces of work. If you produce the bird, but the dog does not retrieve it within the minute you will get credit for the find, but not the retrieve. All that being said, in your case where time was indeed a factor you need to be concerned about only one thing and that is completing the work. Even if his dog had backed I would not stop my flushing attempt to wait for the other handler to catch his dog because time is a factor and his dog will get credit for the back even if he breaks when the bird is produced. Some handlers might get mad about this, but if this is a competetive trial as you say where points are counted towards the end of the season then that's not the time to be cordial. I'm as nice as I can be under the tent, but when its time to hit the field it is time to be a competitor.

Which brings me to my next point. If this is indeed a competetive trial then people should treat it like one. I have tried to flush a bird as quickly as possible multiple times on order to keep another handler from getting back. This is usually because the other handler's dog is having a good run, and needs a back to increase his score to put himself in contention for a placement. If I have a dog already in contention for a placement I am going to do everything in my power not to give him that piece of work he needs to bump my dog down the placement list. However, I play in very competetive fields. That being said, I have given another handler an opportunity to back by flushing a little slower when I have absolutely nothing going that day. It's all a matter of the situation and you have to decide how competitive your fun trials really are both for you and on a larger scale.

All that being said, someone is always mad at a trial. Don't take it personal and move on. This is the toughest thing new handlers have a hard time grasping when the first show up at one of our NSTRA trials. If your dog gets a bad score, or even gets picked up it is not personal and we're not going to sit around and bad mouth your dog. You just have to understand that this is the way the game is played.

User avatar
Ron R
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1067
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:51 pm
Location: Bethalto, IL

Re: trial question

Post by Ron R » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:18 am

romeo212000 wrote:Even if his dog had backed I would not stop my flushing attempt to wait for the other handler to catch his dog
My understanding is that you must wait for the backing dog to be handled by either the handler or the dogs judge once that it has established the back regardless if you had already began your flushing attemp. Just stand in position ready to shoot if the bird pops.
romeo212000 wrote:If I have a dog already in contention for a placement I am going to do everything in my power not to give him that piece of work he needs to bump my dog down the placement list.
Great point!

Fun trials are usually ment to be just that...fun. I think, giving the circumstances being that you had only had one bird on the card and there was just a minute left in the brace, I personaly would have asked or waited to see if he wanted to get a back. If it was a real NSTRA trial you must and should flush immediately and if your judge see's you waiting to give a back to the other handler you will be warned and told to flush. The back will always be un-scored/taken away from the other dog and you would risk having your bird taken from you. That is called cheating and as mentioned by romeo can and will change the outcome of the placements. Does it happen...sure. Should it happen...never.
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=2786

Live a good, honorable life. Then when you get older and think back, you'll enjoy it a second time.

User avatar
Wagonmaster
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3372
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:22 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: trial question

Post by Wagonmaster » Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:59 am

It is common courtesy to wait for the backing dog if it is anywhere close. You don't want to put that dog in the position of seeing the flush, hearing the shot, and breaking simply because it was not ready for what was going to happen. That would especially be true of a fun trial, which is just a training situation anyway. If you are concerned about the judge thinking you are not being aggressive enough about flushing, then say something to the judge about letting the backing dog come in, or just point at the backing dog. If the judge is any good at all, they will get it.

The other reason you want to wait, is so as not to cause a train wreck involving your own dog. So lets say you fail to wait, you start to flush, the backing dog fails to back and charges in, your dog breaks point and comes with it, then there is a race for the retrieve and maybe a little "discussion" between the two dogs about who should make the retrieve. You are asking for trouble if you don't let the backing dog and its handler get set up for you to flush and shoot.

Unfortunately, lots of people don't understand common courtesy between dogs and handlers, and why such things exist, i.e., why we require a dog to back, and train it to do so. It is to avoid situations where there is direct competition between the two dogs over a bird, and a "discussion" occurs between the two, or worse yet, one hunter/handler tries to arbitrate the "discussion" and gets bit in the process.

Some years ago was on another board and a guy with a Weim was bragging about his dog's long legs and how his dog always got to the bird first, even if it was not the dog that pointed, and even if it had to take the other dog out to get there first. Just the kind of hunter/dog combination we would all just love to hunt with. Don't get into that.

romeo212000
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: trial question

Post by romeo212000 » Mon Mar 26, 2012 11:08 am

Ron R wrote:
romeo212000 wrote:Even if his dog had backed I would not stop my flushing attempt to wait for the other handler to catch his dog
My understanding is that you must wait for the backing dog to be handled by either the handler or the dogs judge once that it has established the back regardless if you had already began your flushing attemp. Just stand in position ready to shoot if the bird pops.
romeo212000 wrote:If I have a dog already in contention for a placement I am going to do everything in my power not to give him that piece of work he needs to bump my dog down the placement list.
Great point!

Fun trials are usually ment to be just that...fun. I think, giving the circumstances being that you had only had one bird on the card and there was just a minute left in the brace, I personaly would have asked or waited to see if he wanted to get a back. If it was a real NSTRA trial you must and should flush immediately and if your judge see's you waiting to give a back to the other handler you will be warned and told to flush. The back will always be un-scored/taken away from the other dog and you would risk having your bird taken from you. That is called cheating and as mentioned by romeo can and will change the outcome of the placements. Does it happen...sure. Should it happen...never.
Usually you are right about the handler waiting to flush until the backing dog is caught, but in the scenario the OP mentioned his time either had expired or was close to expiring. If your dog is on point when time expires you have one minute to produce the bird and get the retrieve to get credit for both pieces of work. If you only have one bird then I can see your point, but if you have a run going and are limited to the time constraint mentioned any judge with enough brains to pour piss out of a boot will allow leeway in this situation.

However, my understanding is this was a fun trial so that really changes the dynamics. I guess I'm speaking from the perspective of a competitive nstra trial.

romeo212000
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: trial question

Post by romeo212000 » Mon Mar 26, 2012 11:10 am

Wagonmaster wrote:It is common courtesy to wait for the backing dog if it is anywhere close. You don't want to put that dog in the position of seeing the flush, hearing the shot, and breaking simply because it was not ready for what was going to happen. That would especially be true of a fun trial, which is just a training situation anyway. If you are concerned about the judge thinking you are not being aggressive enough about flushing, then say something to the judge about letting the backing dog come in, or just point at the backing dog. If the judge is any good at all, they will get it.

The other reason you want to wait, is so as not to cause a train wreck involving your own dog. So lets say you fail to wait, you start to flush, the backing dog fails to back and charges in, your dog breaks point and comes with it, then there is a race for the retrieve and maybe a little "discussion" between the two dogs about who should make the retrieve. You are asking for trouble if you don't let the backing dog and its handler get set up for you to flush and shoot.

Unfortunately, lots of people don't understand common courtesy between dogs and handlers, and why such things exist, i.e., why we require a dog to back, and train it to do so. It is to avoid situations where there is direct competition between the two dogs over a bird, and a "discussion" occurs between the two, or worse yet, one hunter/handler tries to arbitrate the "discussion" and gets bit in the process.

Some years ago was on another board and a guy with a Weim was bragging about his dog's long legs and how his dog always got to the bird first, even if it was not the dog that pointed, and even if it had to take the other dog out to get there first. Just the kind of hunter/dog combination we would all just love to hunt with. Don't get into that.
There's a time to be courteous and there's times to be competitive. I'm not saying this was necessarily a time to be competitive but there are times for it. See my above posts.

User avatar
Buckeye_V
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1373
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:48 am
Location: Norwich, OH

Re: trial question

Post by Buckeye_V » Mon Mar 26, 2012 11:42 am

It sounds tome like the dog was not backing behind him and the handler wanted to bring it in for the back. 2 different scenarios. If the dog was already backing, then I would say wait. I don;t care what venue and what competition. That is dirty if you flush and fire without the other handler present (or another handler appointed by the judge).
We have done something with nothing for so long we are now qualified to do everything with anything....

http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=275

http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=520

romeo212000
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: trial question

Post by romeo212000 » Mon Mar 26, 2012 11:47 am

Buckeye_V wrote:It sounds tome like the dog was not backing behind him and the handler wanted to bring it in for the back. 2 different scenarios. If the dog was already backing, then I would say wait. I don;t care what venue and what competition. That is dirty if you flush and fire without the other handler present (or another handler appointed by the judge).
You say that until you miss out on a win because of it.

fuzznut
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 827
Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 4:52 am
Location: St James City, FL

Re: trial question

Post by fuzznut » Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:32 pm

I won't comment on the nstra format, because I don't do nstra and I don't know their rules. Because other event types have been brought up, I'll comment.
This is supposed to be a gentlemens sport, sportsmanship should be in play. I've watched some pretty downright dirty handlers over the years, watched them intentionally take out their bracemates, pull dogs off course, fire in a dogs face, allow their dogs to tag and chase their bracemate all with the intentions of ruining the other dogs performance. I've seen scouts take out a bracemate, send them in the wrong direction, send the other scout in the wrong direction etc.


I agree with Wagonmaster on this one. If the other dog is heading your way, it's in your best interest most times (and common courtesy) to hold up the flushing till the other dog is under control. Remember, what goes around, comes around.


I've lost respect for many so called Pro's and amateurs because of their actions, there is no room for it in our sport! Win on your dogs merits, not because you caused the competition to blow up.
Fuzz
Home of NAFC/DC Ariel's Justa Gotta Go Now- 2010 AKC Gun Dog 1 hr. CH R/U
http://germanwirehair.blogspot.com/

romeo212000
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: trial question

Post by romeo212000 » Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:39 pm

fuzznut wrote:I won't comment on the nstra format, because I don't do nstra and I don't know their rules. Because other event types have been brought up, I'll comment.
This is supposed to be a gentlemens sport, sportsmanship should be in play. I've watched some pretty downright dirty handlers over the years, watched them intentionally take out their bracemates, pull dogs off course, fire in a dogs face, allow their dogs to tag and chase their bracemate all with the intentions of ruining the other dogs performance. I've seen scouts take out a bracemate, send them in the wrong direction, send the other scout in the wrong direction etc.


I agree with Wagonmaster on this one. If the other dog is heading your way, it's in your best interest most times (and common courtesy) to hold up the flushing till the other dog is under control. Remember, what goes around, comes around.


I've lost respect for many so called Pro's and amateurs because of their actions, there is no room for it in our sport! Win on your dogs merits, not because you caused the competition to blow up.
Fuzz
I agree 100%. And just to be clear I'm talking about getting the work in so you can be scored on it before time expires. Not trying to ruin someone else's dog. That most certainly is dirty.

User avatar
Ron R
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1067
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:51 pm
Location: Bethalto, IL

Re: trial question

Post by Ron R » Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:55 pm

Wagonmaster wrote:It is common courtesy to wait for the backing dog if it is anywhere close.
That is not the way I see it. If a handler is stalling and killing time for the other handler to score a back that is cheating not common courtesy. If your dog is pointed you have to make every effort to find and flush the bird as long as there has not been a back established. I'm not certain of your definition of "anywhere close". If a handler just stalls for 5 seconds or less...that would go un-noticed but to set and fake catching your breath, tieing a shoe, or loading your gun to give a guy a un-deserved back that changes the placement order is wrong. If the dog is backing you wait for it to be handled by either the handler or judge.
Wagonmaster wrote:You don't want to put that dog in the position of seeing the flush,

If the dog is not backing yet, I'm flushing. I'm not one to care about random scenario's. If the other dog interferes with my retrieve it does not matter, I will still get scored for my retrieve per interference and move on to find more birds (hopefully).
Wagonmaster wrote:It is to avoid situations where there is direct competition between the two dogs over a bird, and a "discussion" occurs between the two, or worse yet, one hunter/handler tries to arbitrate the "discussion" and gets bit in the process.

I for one would never want to be involved in a dog fight at a field trial. It's too bad that birddog fighters are not permenently banned/black listed when caught red handed fighting another dog like they are in competition coonhunting. I have hunting dogs that will let another dog have the retrieve before fighting for it. I do feel there is a huge difference between a dog fighting for a bird and un-aggressively just trying to take it out of another dogs mouth.
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=2786

Live a good, honorable life. Then when you get older and think back, you'll enjoy it a second time.

romeo212000
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: trial question

Post by romeo212000 » Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:04 pm

Ron R wrote:
Wagonmaster wrote:It is common courtesy to wait for the backing dog if it is anywhere close.
That is not the way I see it. If a handler is stalling and killing time for the other handler to score a back that is cheating not common courtesy. If your dog is pointed you have to make every effort to find and flush the bird as long as there has not been a back established. I'm not certain of your definition of "anywhere close". If a handler just stalls for 5 seconds or less...that would go un-noticed but to set and fake catching your breath, tieing a shoe, or loading your gun to give a guy a un-deserved back that changes the placement order is wrong. If the dog is backing you wait for it to be handled by either the handler or judge.
Wagonmaster wrote:You don't want to put that dog in the position of seeing the flush,

If the dog is not backing yet, I'm flushing. I'm not one to care about random scenario's. If the other dog interferes with my retrieve it does not matter, I will still get scored for my retrieve per interference and move on to find more birds (hopefully).
Wagonmaster wrote:It is to avoid situations where there is direct competition between the two dogs over a bird, and a "discussion" occurs between the two, or worse yet, one hunter/handler tries to arbitrate the "discussion" and gets bit in the process.

I for one would never want to be involved in a dog fight at a field trial. It's too bad that birddog fighters are not permenently banned/black listed when caught red handed fighting another dog like they are in competition coonhunting. I have hunting dogs that will let another dog have the retrieve before fighting for it. I do feel there is a huge difference between a dog fighting for a bird and un-aggressively just trying to take it out of another dogs mouth.
Great post and 100% correct.

That being said, I have stalled flushing for maybe 5-10 seconds to give a handler a chance to work on backing at his request when I'm certain it will not affect the outcome of the trial. However, there is a huge difference between that and the cheating you described.

BigShooter
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2514
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 6:20 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: trial question

Post by BigShooter » Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:09 pm

If you're going to be in the trial business for very long bring your hard hat & thick skin. Not too different from life you'll find hard ball & soft ball competitors, ruthless & gentlemanly folks & everything in between. Common courtesy is fine as long as it's really just an unwritten rule that everyone rookie & pro are aware of, but of course the unwritten rules are just that -- not written down and not the rules of the game. That why we have written rules. If the common courtesy is important enough, get it written into the rules. It just doesn't digest well when an experienced trialer is pissed at a rookie for violating an unwritten rule of etiquette the rookie knew nothing about. A better course of action for the other guy would've been to seek to understand your actions first & then upon finding out you're new to the game, take it as an opportunity to educate. One way for him to start explaining would be to affirm the fact that you followed the written rules however .....glad we got a chance to talk. Welcome to the sport & and have a nice day!
Mark

Willows Back In The Saddle
Tall Pines Hits The Spot
Tall Pines Queen Eleanor
Bo Dixie's Rocky
TALL PINES MOONBEAM

______________________________________________________

If it ain't broke - fix it

User avatar
Buckeye_V
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1373
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:48 am
Location: Norwich, OH

Re: trial question

Post by Buckeye_V » Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:12 pm

Again, I think we are talking a lot of different scenarios here. Terrain, range, vision all affect the outcome and none of us were there to see for ourselves.
We have done something with nothing for so long we are now qualified to do everything with anything....

http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=275

http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=520

romeo212000
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: trial question

Post by romeo212000 » Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:16 pm

Buckeye_V wrote:Again, I think we are talking a lot of different scenarios here. Terrain, range, vision all affect the outcome and none of us were there to see for ourselves.
The biggest factor some here are continuing to ignore is the OP was under a tight time crunch to produce the bird.

BigShooter
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2514
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 6:20 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: trial question

Post by BigShooter » Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:20 pm

Not ignoring it just expanding to the bigger context of backing in a trial. It's clear there was a time crunch. It's also pretty clear he operated within the written rules.
Mark

Willows Back In The Saddle
Tall Pines Hits The Spot
Tall Pines Queen Eleanor
Bo Dixie's Rocky
TALL PINES MOONBEAM

______________________________________________________

If it ain't broke - fix it

User avatar
highcotton
GDF Premier Member!
Posts: 870
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 6:56 pm
Location: Alabama

Re: trial question

Post by highcotton » Mon Mar 26, 2012 6:41 pm

Those who understand NSTRA rules will also understand why you don't wait for a bracemate to get a back. To those who do not understand NSTRA, I can see why you would think it bad sportsmanship.

User avatar
Grousewing
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:08 am
Location: Michigan

Re: trial question

Post by Grousewing » Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:21 am

Being a NSTRA judge and trialing NSTRA for over 10 years I say the following. First off if you are following NSTRA rules the dead bird should have been picked up and no credit given. Second on the backing issue if its just for fun and your brace mate needs to work on backs with his dog and already told you this in the blind before the brace then I never want to give anyone a back. So in short don't feel bad about the backing issue if nothing was said up front. Also I never let anyone have a back so they can win a trial, never.
Bird dog training and game birds
www.bluegrousekennels.com

Post Reply