Great trial dog, great bird dog - One in the same?

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:42 pm

In your opinion, do the best trial dogs make the best hunting dog and the best hunting dogs make the best trial dogs? I asked a question awhile back about putting a ground pattern on a trial vs a hunting dog ( or something like that ) and some folks said they are sick of the distinction made between trial and hunting dogs because one is equivelant to the other.

So, what do you think?

romeo212000 · Post by **romeo212000** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:47 pm

I can only speak to the venue I am familiar with (nstra), but I will say in my experience every successful nstra dog can be a good hunting dog, but not every hunting dog can be a successful nstra dog.

brad27 · Post by **brad27** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:48 pm

Given the opportunity, I believe a good trial dog can be a good hunting dog.

Post by **slistoe** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:19 pm

I am, was and will be a hard core hunter. After owning a few dogs I had one that was truly a hunting dog - the once in a lifetime dog. I was of the opinion that trials were an anathema to the good hunting dog having been cultivated by the dog writers in my youth in the popular sporting press. At the encouragement of the dogs breeder I attended some trials and then entered some. They gave my great hunting dog a ribbon and at the same time I found out that my once in a lifetime dog was rather common. So I trialed with my hunting dog. Then I hunted with some trial dogs. Now I am back to having hunting dogs, but when time and finances permit I will be on the road trialing my hunting dogs again.
I can honestly say that I have never hunted over as good of dogs as I have since I became involved with organized competition with my dogs.

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:28 pm

slistoe, which venue/organization did you trial with?

Post by **slistoe** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:36 pm

American Field and CKC (Canadian equivalent to AKC) trials and tests.

Post by **slistoe** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:47 pm

IIRC, many years back near the birth of these BB on the net there was a fellow who ran a guiding service who did a little trash talking of trial dogs and how his "hunting" dogs were all that and more. He was challenged to put his money where his mouth was and he did. He took his best dogs and hit the trials with them - and after he figured out the ins and outs he was winning, then judging etc. I think he still shows up on some of these boards.

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 4:51 am

I understand Charlie (Rose) has been breeding on his line of Shorthairs since the '70s and only just started trialing in the last several years with really phenomenal success. I think he finished a few dogs in just a few trials, if memory serves.

ultracarry · Post by **ultracarry** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:04 am

It would be very hard to determine because there are very few "great" dogs. Just because you win a few trials, have a FC AFC doesn't mean the dog is great. Think that falls into the "good".

This question has been asked a few times although it has been worded different. I think trial dogs make good hunting dogs but a hunting dog will have a learning curve and can not just jump into trialing.

Grousewing · Post by **Grousewing** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:14 am

romeo212000 wrote:I can only speak to the venue I am familiar with (nstra), but I will say in my experience every successful nstra dog can be a good hunting dog, but not every hunting dog can be a successful nstra dog.

Very well said, could'nt agree more.

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:32 am

I think the GREAT trial dog can be a great hunting dog. But can the good trial dog be a great hunting dog?

Just as not every good hunting dog can be a great trial dog, not every good trial dog can be a great hunting dog. And those of you with knowledge of the sport of trialing know what I mean.

DonF · Post by **DonF** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:38 am

I don't think it's the dog that has a learning curve to overcome, it's the owner! Then I think that that holds true for all venues. Just becasue someone hunts wit5h a dog and that's it does not mean the dog couldn't have been trained differently and been used to trial. I think that the only venue where any dog stands anykind of chance of winning is NSTRA. It was developed just for hunting dogs. There it is about numbers. If the dog finds enough birds, you win. That's neither good or bad, just the way it is. AKC is more about run and perfection. There one little mistake takes you out to often. I have not run ARF but have judged one trial. I did it with a long time AF judge and what I found different about AF is that they don't pick dogs up for a mistake, they leave then down and judge to conclusion. There a dog does have a chance to over come a mistake, may be tuff but there is the chance. The hunting dog can be anything the owner say's. Many times we;ve had the discussion here and other places about finished dogs. One trial guy say's that to another and they know exactly what type a dog they are talking about. One hunter say's that to another and you've no idea what you might see. The learning curve to make a trial dog is more on the owner than the dog. A lot of dogs that may have made trial dogs don't for no other reason than the training it gets.

A great trial dog and a great bird dog are not one and the same. Some thing's that a great bird dog will do will get you thrown out of a trial. And there's more trial dogs that have never hunted wild birds than most would believe. To put them down on wild birds without some exposure first and the great trial dog looks worthless. All for lasck of allowing the dog to do what is needed with the wild bird.

Post by **ezzy333** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:49 am

DonF wrote:I don't think it's the dog that has a learning curve to overcome, it's the owner! Then I think that that holds true for all venues. Just becasue someone hunts wit5h a dog and that's it does not mean the dog couldn't have been trained differently and been used to trial. I think that the only venue where any dog stands anykind of chance of winning is NSTRA. It was developed just for hunting dogs. There it is about numbers. If the dog finds enough birds, you win. That's neither good or bad, just the way it is. AKC is more about run and perfection. There one little mistake takes you out to often. I have not run ARF but have judged one trial. I did it with a long time AF judge and what I found different about AF is that they don't pick dogs up for a mistake, they leave then down and judge to conclusion. There a dog does have a chance to over come a mistake, may be tuff but there is the chance. The hunting dog can be anything the owner say's. Many times we;ve had the discussion here and other places about finished dogs. One trial guy say's that to another and they know exactly what type a dog they are talking about. One hunter say's that to another and you've no idea what you might see. The learning curve to make a trial dog is more on the owner than the dog. A lot of dogs that may have made trial dogs don't for no other reason than the training it gets.

A great trial dog and a great bird dog are not one and the same. Some thing's that a great bird dog will do will get you thrown out of a trial. And there's more trial dogs that have never hunted wild birds than most would believe. To put them down on wild birds without some exposure first and the great trial dog looks worthless. All for lasck of allowing the dog to do what is needed with the wild bird.

Right on.

Ezzy

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:19 am

A great trial dog and a great bird dog are not one and the same. Some thing's that a great bird dog will do will get you thrown out of a trial. And there's more trial dogs that have never hunted wild birds than most would believe. To put them down on wild birds without some exposure first and the great trial dog looks worthless. All for lasck of allowing the dog to do what is needed with the wild bird.

Appreciate the honest opinion here. It goes for ALL competition/test formats. There are a lot of dogs from every venue that are largely uproven on wild game. Its the tough birds that define the dog, the tough retrieve....work under difficult conditions....not the liberated birds in hedgerows (eastern trials that i have seen) and certainly not the various test formats. IMO...we will not further our breeding goals as far as breeding great wild game dogs by using competition/tests as sole proof of ability. The only exception may be the dogs that run exclusively on wild game but even they are not really put in that many different situations.

I keep telling my colleagues in the Euro clubs...don't go by scores....you are setting yourself up for disappointment. Find the dogs that can score and hunt...pick the breeder...not the score.

adogslife · Post by **adogslife** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:45 am

The question then begs to be asked

during a field trial, are dogs expected to hunt?

It has been said that at Ames there are a wild population of quail. Are the dogs hunting? Are the dogs handled to stay on course therefore passing birds?

It has appeared to me for years that field trial dogs are all about flash and style first and hunt second.
As a sport this is acceptable.

If the same dog were hunted it would hunt more and probably have less flash.

Yes, no, maybe?

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:53 am

DonF wrote:A great trial dog and a great bird dog are not one and the same. Some thing's that a great bird dog will do will get you thrown out of a trial. And there's more trial dogs that have never hunted wild birds than most would believe. To put them down on wild birds without some exposure first and the great trial dog looks worthless. All for lasck of allowing the dog to do what is needed with the wild bird.

That depends on the trial venue or even specific trials you're talking about. There are some venues and trials run on wild birds in the same locations that a person would hunt those same birds. Talk to any trialer in these venues and trials and they will tell you the easiest way to get a good trial dog is to run on wild birds.

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:58 am

Is a good hunter a good trialer?.....better question.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:09 am

Stoneface wrote:I understand Charlie (Rose) has been breeding on his line of Shorthairs since the '70s and only just started trialing in the last several years with really phenomenal success. I think he finished a few dogs in just a few trials, if memory serves.

He started with a dog from outside of his own lines, so that's not a valid example. Bullet is a Rincon (RRB bred) dog.

jetjockey · Post by **jetjockey** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:14 am

I agree with what most everyone has said. A great trial dog can be a great hunting dog, but a great hunting dog can't necessarily make a great trial dog. I will also say that just because a dog runs trials, doesn't mean they can't hunt wild birds. Look at the amount of trainers who run summer camps in the Dakotas, Nevraska, Kansas, etc. All those trial dogs see in the summer is wild birds. It's one thing to run a dog in a small region like the Northwest, northeast, and southeast and win. But if a dog is going to run in the southeast on a tight course on liberated birds and turn around and win in Nebraska on wild chickens two weeks later, that dog better have seen wild birds. If you take a dog who has only run on tight courses on the east coast and turn around and run them in the prairies, they are going to struggle. Same thing if you take a dog from the prairies who is used to wide open spaces and then run them on a tight east coast course. The great dogs can do both, and win. On wild birds and liberated birds. And to win in both venues, the dog has to be introduced to both.... It's no different with trial dogs vs hunting dogs. Many trial dogs never get hunted. That doesn't mean they can't be hunted over however. And just because a hunting dog doesn't trial doesn't necessarily mean they can't do it either.

My Brit competes in AKC/AF horseback All Age trials. She started out as a GD but opened up as she got a little older and gained confidence. She has placed in 30 minute trials on the east coast and 1 hr championships in the prairies on wild birds. She finished in the top 10 in the country in AA points last year before she turned 3 1/2. She is currently back in the top 10 this year as well and she just turned 4 a couple days ago. She is a fantastic foot hunting dog. I've hunted her on quail in GA and Virginia. And ive hunted her on pheasants in PA for liberated birds and in SD for pheasants and sharp tail. She is a pleasure to hunt over and easily becomes a great meat dog off foot. She slows her speed in half and understands the difference between being run off a horse and run off foot. She's balls out off horse but paces herself off foot. It basically took 2 hunts after her initial training to figure it out. Just like wild birds vs liberated birds or trials in the prairies or the tighter courses on the east coast. If a dog is introduced to it, they can figure it out. But a hunting dog might not have the physical ability, the handle, style, or bidability To compete at the highest level with the top trial dogs. Most trial dogs can be slowed down to make good hunting dogs, and many do.

Post by **Greg Jennings** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:21 am

Stoneface wrote:I understand Charlie (Rose) has been breeding on his line of Shorthairs since the '70s and only just started trialing in the last several years with really phenomenal success. I think he finished a few dogs in just a few trials, if memory serves.

His dogs are very trial bred even before he started trialing. See http://wildrosegermanshorthairs.com/ima ... digree.htm .

Greg J.

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:29 am

Cajun Casey -

I for one give Charles Rose a great deal of credit. Despite his very apparent disdain for field trials, he recognized that a level of performance in them was something he needed to establish to improve the credibility of his kennel. I was one of those magpies on ther internet, way back when, who goaded him toward competing. He picked up the gauntlet that was thrown down... and put it on. Good for him.

He did that and did it well. He showed that he could train and handle a winning field trial dog and thereby, had an understanding of what it took to perform at that level. I have not followed his accomplishments but I would bet that if you were looking for a good hunting GSP, he could show you one. And if you were looking for a good hunting GSP that you could take to trials and be competitive, he could show you one of those too.

To the subject, I think that a pup that has what it takes to be a truly great trial dog certainly has what it takes to be a great hunting dog. a very great deal depends on how the dog is brought along. But truly great trial dogs are really pretty rare because they are that confluence of exceptional genetics, talented trainer, talented handler and financially willing and able owner.

There are, I believe a significant number of great hunting dogs that COULD have been great trial dogs, but never got the opportunity. The genetics is actually the most readily available part of the equation, IMO. The owner who is willing and able to campaign the dog to be able to achieve that greatness, is the hardest part of the equation to come up with, I think.

Of course there are many good hunting dogs that would not make competitive field trial dogs, for one reason or another. This is to be expected because in a competitive situation, EVERYTHING is on the table, everything is being looked at and everything is being evaluated. The trial dog cannot have any areas where their performance is less than good. If they do, they will not be competitive. The trial dog has to be a relatively complete dog. The hunting dog can have a weak area and still be a VERY good hunting dog.

As an example, a dog that does not and will not back can still be a fantastic hunting dog...all anyone could ever ask for... if it is hunted alone. A dog that does not back will get nowhere in competitions. Gotta have it, gotta see it.

RayG

DonF · Post by **DonF** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:49 am

RayGubernat wrote:Cajun Casey -

I for one give Charles Rose a great deal of credit. Despite his very apparent disdain for field trials, he recognized that a level of performance in themwas something he needed to establish to improve the credibility of his kennel. I was one of those magpies on ther internet, way back when, who goaded him toward competing. He picked up the gauntlet that was thrown down... and put it on. Good for him.

He did that and did it well. He showed that he could train and handle a winning field trial dog and thereby, had an understanding of what it took to perform at that level. I have not followed his accomplishments but I would bet that if you were looking for a good hunting GSP, he could show you one. And if you were looking for a good hunting GSP that you could take to trials and be competitive, he could show you one of those too.

To the subject, I think that a pup that has what it takes to be a truly great trial dog certainly has what it takes to be a great hunting dog. a very great deal depends on how the dog is brought along. But truly great trial dogs are really pretty rare because they are that confluence of exceptional genetics, talented trainer, talented handler and financially willing and able owner.

There are, I believe a significant number of great hunting dogs that COULD have been great trial dogs, but never got the opportunity. The genetics is actually the most readilyavailable part of the equation. The owner who is willing and able to campaign the dog to be able to achieve that greatness, is the hardest part, I think.

Of course there are many good hunting dogs that would not make competitive field trial dogs, for one reason or another. This is to be expected because in a competitive situation, EVERYTHING is on the table,everything is being looked at and everything is being evaluated. The trial dog cannot have any areas where their performance is less than good. If they do, they will not be competitive. The trial do has to be a relatively complete dog. The hunting dog can have a weak area and still be a VERY good hunting dog.

RayG

I have a trialing friend from long ago that is on, think it is, his third dog from Charley. You'll never hear a bad word out of him about Charley's dogs. He says they are the best he's ever owned. He is one that trials the trial season and hunts wild birds a lot.

Post by **slistoe** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:16 am

DonF wrote:Some thing's that a great bird dog will do will get you thrown out of a trial.

Could you elaborate on this some. This statement is bandied about like gospel by everyone who really wants to believe that trial dogs can't hunt but I have yet to see a dog get thrown out of a trial for doing anything that a superb hunting dog with manners would not do.

Post by **slistoe** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:22 am

Cajun Casey wrote:
Stoneface wrote:I understand Charlie (Rose) has been breeding on his line of Shorthairs since the '70s and only just started trialing in the last several years with really phenomenal success. I think he finished a few dogs in just a few trials, if memory serves.
He started with a dog from outside of his own lines, so that's not a valid example. Bullet is a Rincon (RRB bred) dog.

Sorry, Charlie always had dogs that heavily borrowed from field trial breeding.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:25 am

Will anyone comment on handlers concerns with their dog fndng TOO many birds, and it being problematic, as it cant showcase its RUN?

Or dogs winning trial and finding less birds than their bracemate?

Or trials where NO birds are ound by any dogs, yet a Winner is declared?

This system is so subjective and biased that it offers little to the vast majority hunters.

When is the last time anyone hunted off of horseback with spotters for their dogs, and didnt want their dog to find too many birds?

I could go on but Ill leave it at that

Vonzeppelinkennels · Post by **Vonzeppelinkennels** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:31 am

Bill you guys are all the same.Have you ever heard of a dog having 5 finds in a half hr stake & getting no placement because they were TOO BIG for the stake!!
I have so your statement of too many finds & not enough run is shot all to HECK!!

Post by **slistoe** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:36 am

BillThomas wrote:Will anyone comment on handlers concerns with their dog fndng TOO many birds, and it being problematic, as it cant showcase its RUN?

Or dogs winning trial and finding less birds than their bracemate?

Or trials where NO birds are ound by any dogs, yet a Winner is declared?

This system is so subjective and biased that it offers little to the vast majority hunters.

When is the last time anyone hunted off of horseback with spotters for their dogs, and didnt want their dog to find too many birds?

I could go on but Ill leave it at that

You can go on because you want very badly for there to be something wrong and so are not interested in the least in the actual answer to any of your questions because that would simply take away from your need to badmouth the dogs and thereby somehow make yourself feel better.
If your major concern is the number of birds found there are a great many like minded folks out there who formed and run in a format called NSTRA. If you want to compete you better bring enough dog because the format is no longer in it's infancy.

DGFavor · Post by **DGFavor** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:38 am

Great?? Doubtful, not sure what that is...good enough to serve as my hunting dog during hunting season then do duty as my field trial dog in the off season? Absolutely!:

Field Trial Placements:
2000 Utah Brittany Club Open Derby 3rd place (AKC)
2001 Oregon Field Trial Club All Age Derby 3rd place (Am. Field Open Stakes)
2001 Oregon Field Trial Club Shooting Dog Derby 3rd place (Am. Field Open Stakes)
2001 Eastern Idaho Shooting Dog Derby 2nd place (Am. Field Open Stakes)
2001 Everton All Age Derby Classic 3rd Place (Am. Field Open Stakes)
(January 2002-2003 – out with broken femur from hunting accident)
2004 Boise Valley PDC Robertson Ranch Open Shooting Dog 2nd place (Am. Field Open Stakes)
2004 Idaho State Open Shooting Dog Champion (Am. Field Open Stakes)
2005 Boise Valley PDC Milepost 9 Am. Shooting Dog 2nd place (Am. Field Amateur Stakes)
2005 Timpanogas Field Trial Club Open Shooting Dog 1st place (Am. Field Open Stakes)
2005 Inland Empire GSP Club Open All Age 2nd place (AKC - retrieving)
2005 Region 9 Shooting Dog of the Year (Am. Field Open Stakes)
2005 Region 9 Continental Dog of the Year (Am. Field stakes)
2006 Boise Valley PDC Milepost 9 Open Shooting Dog 2nd place (Am. Field Open Stakes)
2006 Boise Valley PDC Milepost 9 Am. Shooting Dog 2nd place (Am. Field Am. Stakes)
2006 NGSPA Region 9 Amateur Shooting Dog Champion (Am. Field Am. Stakes)
2006 NGSPA Region 8 Amateur Shooting Dog Championship - Runner Up (Am. Field Am. Stakes - retrieving)
2007 NGSPA Region 9 Open All Age Champion (Am. Field Open Stakes)

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:42 am

Vonzeppelinkennels wrote:Bill you guys are all the same.Have you ever heard of a dog having 5 finds in a half hr stake & getting no placement because they were TOO BIG for the stake!!
I have so your statement of too many finds & not enough run is shot all to HECK!!

You point out The exception rather than the rule, and my scenarios happen all to often.

And it usually sours the trial contestants, who see it happen frequently.

jetjockey · Post by **jetjockey** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:43 am

BillThomas wrote:Will anyone comment on handlers concerns with their dog fndng TOO many birds, and it being problematic, as it cant showcase its RUN?

Or dogs winning trial and finding less birds than their bracemate?

Or trials where NO birds are ound by any dogs, yet a Winner is declared?

This system is so subjective and biased that it offers little to the vast majority hunters.

When is the last time anyone hunted off of horseback with spotters for their dogs, and didnt want their dog to find too many birds?

I could go on but Ill leave it at that

Sure. Let's say a dog is having a great run and has enough birds to win. More birds won't necessarily help a dog win "more", yet one little mistake on a bird can take a dog out..... What you obviously don't understand is that in trials they judge the entire performance, just like every other sport. A diver doesn't win because his entry into the water was perfect yet the rest of the dive was crap. A gymnast may have a perfect performance on the bars yet the dismount may be crap. Either way, they don't win. In order for a dog to win they must have birds (with the exception of puppies), and the bird work better be pretty darn good. If a dog finds the most birds, but looks like crap doing it and doesn't handle or run well, it won't matter how many birds it finds, it won't win unless no other dogs have birds. When people question your intelligence on dogs it's because most people in the trial world, especially in AF and AKC understand that the entire dog is judged, not just the amount of birds it finds. You don't understand that apparently. All aspects of the dog are judged, not just its nose or the amount of birds it finds. It's no different then any other sport where they judge the entire application.

If your only goal is to kill as many birds as possible when you go hunting, I feel sorry for you because your missing the big picture. When you can learn to appreciate all aspects of what owning a dog and hunting and trialing are all about, then you can have an honest discussion. Until then, people will continue to question your intelligence because you can't appreciate what owning a bird dog is really about to most of us.

Elkhunter · Post by **Elkhunter** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:44 am

BillThomas wrote:Will anyone comment on handlers concerns with their dog fndng TOO many birds, and it being problematic, as it cant showcase its RUN?

Or dogs winning trial and finding less birds than their bracemate?

Or trials where NO birds are ound by any dogs, yet a Winner is declared?

This system is so subjective and biased that it offers little to the vast majority hunters.

When is the last time anyone hunted off of horseback with spotters for their dogs, and didnt want their dog to find too many birds?

I could go on but Ill leave it at that

Bill stop! Your just makin yourself look stupid.

orbirdhunter · Post by **orbirdhunter** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:48 am

Does the dog have a good nose, does it have the cooperation to handle, does it have the motor to get out and move, does it adjust its hunting range to the cover its in......if it can do those it can probably do trials and hunting just fine it seems to me. The rest is training.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:50 am

jetjockey wrote:
Sure. Let's say a dog is having a great run and has enough birds to win. More birds won't necessarily help a dog win "more", yet one little mistake on a bird can take a dog out..... What you obviously don't understand is that in trials they judge the entire performance, just like every other sport. A diver doesn't win because his entry into the water was perfect yet the rest of the dive was crap. A gymnast may have a perfect performance on the bars yet the dismount may be crap. Either way, they don't win. In order for a dog to win they must have birds (with the exception of puppies), and the bird work better be pretty darn good. If a dog finds the most birds, but looks like crap doing it and doesn't handle or run well, it won't matter how many birds it finds, it won't win unless no other dogs have birds. When people question your intelligence on dogs it's because most people in the trial world, especially in AF and AKC understand that the entire dog is judged, not just the amount of birds it finds. You don't understand that apparently. All aspects of the dog are judged, not just its nose or the amount of birds it finds. It's no different then any other sport where they judge the entire application.

I understand.

The winner must generally find Some birds (Not necessarily the most birds), AND look good doing it, above ALL else.

For clarification sake, I dont like subjective contests.
I prefer watching the Worlds Strongest Man or Powerlifting matches, to watching Bodybuilding contests.
Or Olympic decathalons over bodybuilding shows, with Tangible and objective Rules, as in the fastest, strongest, quickest, highest jumping, running, shotputting, discus throwing, pole vaulting, hurdling contestant wins.

I dont mind trialing, but I dont like believe it is 'the end all be all' for foot hunters (99% of hunting), as some here pretend it is.
Its a Sport and subjective one at that. The best Trial Dog wins, generally. Not necessarily the best hunting dog.
I hope on that we can agree..

Post by **slistoe** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:52 am

BillThomas wrote:
Vonzeppelinkennels wrote:Bill you guys are all the same.Have you ever heard of a dog having 5 finds in a half hr stake & getting no placement because they were TOO BIG for the stake!!
I have so your statement of too many finds & not enough run is shot all to HECK!!
You point out The exception rather than the rule, and my scenarios happen all to often.

And it usually sours the trial contestants, who see it happen frequently.

I have been on the losing end of your ubiquitous "finding too many birds scenario" and it certainly didn't sour me on trials. That is because I actually understand the concept and process and am not looking for things to argue about to boost my self worth.

And for the record, your example is as much an exception as Vonzeppelinkennels is.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:59 am

slistoe wrote:
BillThomas wrote:
Vonzeppelinkennels wrote:Bill you guys are all the same.Have you ever heard of a dog having 5 finds in a half hr stake & getting no placement because they were TOO BIG for the stake!!
I have so your statement of too many finds & not enough run is shot all to HECK!!
You point out The exception rather than the rule, and my scenarios happen all to often.

And it usually sours the trial contestants, who see it happen frequently.
I have been on the losing end of your ubiquitous "finding too many birds scenario" and it certainly didn't sour me on trials. That is because I actually understand the concept and process and am not looking for things to argue about to boost my self worth.
And for the record, your example is as much an exception as Vonzeppelinkennels is.

Your dogs found More birds than its bracemate, You Lost, and you still espouse this system of judging Bird dogs for hunting?

Are you out of your mind?

Pardon me for stating this, but I dont know how any right thinking individual could support such a venue in its present format with such a manner of 'judging'

Post by **slistoe** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:59 am

BillThomas wrote:The best Trial Dog wins, generally. Not necessarily the best hunting dog.
I hope on that we can agree..

The best trial dogs I ever had were also the best hunting dogs I have ever had. I believe I have had pretty good hunting dogs

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:01 am

I gotta go with this...

DonF wrote:I don't think it's the dog that has a learning curve to overcome, it's the owner!

and this...

RayGubernat wrote: There are, I believe a significant number of great hunting dogs that COULD have been great trial dogs, but never got the opportunity. The genetics is actually the most readily available part of the equation, IMO. The owner who is willing and able to campaign the dog to be able to achieve that greatness, is the hardest part of the equation to come up with, I think.

RayG

There are so many variables in measuring the differences between the dogs and the experience and education of the evaluator makes a ton of difference. I don't care whether it's a group of trialers or hunters I am of the opinion that far too many quit learning and listening far too quickly and they are clouded by the emotion of owning a dog or a breed of dogs. I usually hear about a dog's nose first from the inexperienced and in particular when someone is considering a backyard breeding. The puzzling piece to that is that it is the least understood factor of hunting dogdom to most; me included. Scent and scenting conditions are such an unstable factor that determining a dogs ability to actually truly smell something; whether it be pointing scent in the air, ground scent in tracking, a dead bird et al....is in my opinion impossible in general practice.

Natural ability in a hunting dog is a genetic crap shoot ( like any bet you can improve odds but there are no sure things two dogs from the same litter can and are different), experience in the field especially with lots of bird exposure will make dogs look better including average ones (duh), accomplished trainers make that even better. So, in conclusion I believe they are one in the same dog the X faxtor is who owns the dog and by what standard is great measured? Trial or test dogs in any venue generally have more exposure to handlers and trainers in the know. They have a better handle on judging a dog's natural ability, experience and training and can break down strengths and weaknesses and those in competition who are best at it end up in the winner's circle...a lot. In my experience and within the circle of breeders that I work with somewhere between 70-80% of the pups that are sold go to hunters, unless its a pre-arranged breeding for competition dogs and all pups are placed with pros, pro quality amateurs or kept.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:01 am

slistoe wrote:
BillThomas wrote:The best Trial Dog wins, generally. Not necessarily the best hunting dog.
I hope on that we can agree..
The best trial dogs I ever had were also the best hunting dogs I have ever had. I believe I have had pretty good hunting dogs

The only trial bred dog I had was the best 30 minute gun dog I ever had. 1 hour tops.
Ran frantically, as in it ran itself out, and was of little use after an hour.
My hunts generally last 2-4 hours and I needed a different tool.

But Im glad you are happy with your dogs.

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:03 am

BillThomas wrote:Will anyone comment on handlers concerns with their dog fndng TOO many birds, and it being problematic, as it cant showcase its RUN?
Or dogs winning trial and finding less birds than their bracemate?
Or trials where NO birds are ound by any dogs, yet a Winner is declared?
This system is so subjective and biased that it offers little to the vast majority hunters.
When is the last time anyone hunted off of horseback with spotters for their dogs, and didnt want their dog to find too many birds?
I could go on but Ill leave it at that

I'll comment

1. Finding TOO many birds. If a dog hits say a flight of woodcock during a trial the dog can easily point a dozen or more birds in an hour. It can keep pushing the same birds and just work them the entire hour. That won't show how well the dog hunts when it's not "tripping" over birds. I want to see if the dog hit the right cover on the course. It's not just about the run though I doubt you'll believe that.
2. Winning with less bird work. On multiple course trials some courses have better habitat and thus more birds. I've walked courses where the entire course was great bird habitat and courses where good bird habitat was more marginal. It's the luck of the draw. Some judges put more value on certain bird species or another so all else being equal (which not very common) finding say five woodcock is nice, but four grouse is better.
3. Winning a trial with no birds. I don't think I'ver ever seen that in a Shooting Dog. I've seen where placements of the 2nd and 3rd dogs were sorted out with planted birds before, but every other time placements were withheld. For derbies I've seen call backs as well. No bird work is needed for puppies.
4. System is biased. I personally haven't seen bias and I've run and placed breeds that aren't very common in AF. I can only speak for my experience though.
5. Hunted off horseback. I don't hunt on horseback, but I hunt with my trial dog a lot and know fellow trials that hunt with their trial dogs (horseback and walking).

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:03 am

Hey guys -

I have an idea!

How about if we all get together and say to Bill that the Deutsche Draathar is the ultimate hunting dog. it might help if we all go down on our knees and waved outr arms saying "Allah akb ah...Allah akbah" or somethinglike that.

Maybe we could declare his dog National hunting dog,bird dog, everything dog champion. I could make up a nice crown out of aluminum foil.

Maybe then he will be satisfied, becaus ewe will agree that his dogs are the best, his breed is the best and the4 way he hunts is the best.

Wht do you guys think. Will THAT shut him up??

This drivel gets really old the tenth or fifteenth time you hear it. Gawd!!

RayG

Vonzeppelinkennels · Post by **Vonzeppelinkennels** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:10 am

I think the example I gave & the replies given afterwards proves my point.I have been on both ends aswell & still enjoy the competition & format!!
I on the other hand don't like playing games where every one is a winner "NO LOSERS" so to speak that is not life or reality.

Post by **slistoe** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:11 am

BillThomas wrote:
Your dogs found More birds than its bracemate, You Lost, and you still espouse this system of judging Bird dogs for hunting?

Are you out of your mind?

Pardon me for stating this, but I dont know how any right thinking individual could support such a venue in its present format with such a manner of 'judging'

My dog found more birds than any other dog running in the stake and I got second place. I knew I was getting second place when I found the dog standing on it's last bird because I had watched all the braces run, I understood what it takes to be a winner and why, and that is all there is to that. The system works and is the sole reason we have the quality of bird dogs that folks enjoy today.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:13 am

Vonzeppelinkennels wrote:I think the example I gave & the replies given afterwards proves my point.I have been on both ends aswell & still enjoy the copetition & format!!
I on the other hand don't like playing games where every one is a winner "NO LOSERS" so to speak that is not life or reality.

In the game you just described (Trial), the Winner can be the loser and the loser can be the winner.

And no one has a problem with that.

It seems masochistic.

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:14 am

BillThomas wrote:Your dogs found More birds than its bracemate, You Lost, and you still espouse this system of judging Bird dogs for hunting?

Are you out of your mind?

Pardon me for stating this, but I dont know how any right thinking individual could support such a venue in its present format with such a manner of 'judging'

Why would anyone pardon you for overt rudeness? According to your bio you own a single dog a GWP? How many have you owned and trained over a lifetime? How many days a year do you hunt? Surely you would be better served reaching out with some photos as Doug has done above, or perhaps a short bio of the experience that has afforded you these suppositions that contradict a great many dog people with solid credentials.

Per chance do you have a pedigree for your GWP? How might you have selected the dog that you have? You seem to enjoy the lime light Bill and the banter, please help me know you and your experience a little better and we can have a bit more intellectual go at this rather than the emotional one...I know the moderators prefer that.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:15 am

slistoe wrote:
BillThomas wrote:
Your dogs found More birds than its bracemate, You Lost, and you still espouse this system of judging Bird dogs for hunting?

Are you out of your mind?

Pardon me for stating this, but I dont know how any right thinking individual could support such a venue in its present format with such a manner of 'judging'
My dog found more birds than any other dog running in the stake and I got second place. I knew I was getting second place when I found the dog standing on it's last bird because I had watched all the braces run, I understood what it takes to be a winner and why, and that is all there is to that. The system works and is the sole reason we have the quality of bird dogs that folks enjoy today.

Not sure what you consider with such results, as a system working..it sounds broken to me.

Find more birds, you lose.

Find less birds, but with bigger run and style, and you Win.

Either its way too convuluted for me, or Im too logical to participate in trials.

Post by **slistoe** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:19 am

BillThomas wrote:
slistoe wrote:
BillThomas wrote:
Your dogs found More birds than its bracemate, You Lost, and you still espouse this system of judging Bird dogs for hunting?

Are you out of your mind?

Pardon me for stating this, but I dont know how any right thinking individual could support such a venue in its present format with such a manner of 'judging'
My dog found more birds than any other dog running in the stake and I got second place. I knew I was getting second place when I found the dog standing on it's last bird because I had watched all the braces run, I understood what it takes to be a winner and why, and that is all there is to that. The system works and is the sole reason we have the quality of bird dogs that folks enjoy today.
Not sure what you consider with such results, as a system working..it sounds broken to me.

Find more birds, you lose.

Find less birds, but with bigger run and style, and you Win.

Either its way too convuluted for me, or Im too logical to participate in trials.

As I said, go run in a NSTRA trial. Better bring enough dog so you don't have to cry about that one too.
You are to full of your own self importance to run in a trial - everyone else is wrong

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:19 am

BillThomas wrote:For clarification sake, I dont like subjective contests.
I prefer watching the Worlds Strongest Man or Powerlifting matches, to watching Bodybuilding contests.
Or Olympic decathalons over bodybuilding shows, with Tangible and objective Rules, as in the fastest, strongest, quickest, highest jumping, running, shotputting, discus throwing, pole vaulting, hurdling contestant wins.

I prefer women's beach volleyball...but again, to each his or her own...

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:22 am

BillThomas wrote:....or Im too illogical to participate in trials.

I'm thinking it's this one.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:24 am

Chukar12 wrote: Why would anyone pardon you for overt rudeness? According to your bio you own a single dog a GWP? How many have you owned and trained over a lifetime? How many days a year do you hunt? Surely you would be better served reaching out with some photos as Doug has done above, or perhaps a short bio of the experience that has afforded you these suppositions that contradict a great many dog people with solid credentials.

Per chance do you have a pedigree for your GWP? How might you have selected the dog that you have? You seem to enjoy the lime light Bill and the banter, please help me know you and your experience a little better and we can have a bit more intellectual go at this rather than the emotional one...I know the moderators prefer that.

I hunt about 25-30 days per year, 1/3 of that are guiding. From Dove in Sept, through late season goose.
Ive hunted for 35 years, owned/trained GSPs, Setters, Beagles & a DD.

Im down to 1 dog now.
Mine is 10+now, Might have a few good years left, hopefully.
Im Looking for another but not real actively, Ive got dog that can do everything I need(ed) it to, and then some.
I might be Considering a Jadg terrier, and/or DK or another DD in the future.

My GWP is actually a DD. Many arent familiar with DD, so I make it less complicated for them and tell them its a GWP.
hope that clarifies your question(s).
If you want my dogs ahnentafel, Id be happy to pm it to you, its mostly out of Germany, so unless you have familiarity with pedigree like Vom Richtof, Donauck, Kornstube, Wachtersbach et al it would probably be meaningless to you.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:26 am

Chukar12 wrote:
BillThomas wrote:For clarification sake, I dont like subjective contests.
I prefer watching the Worlds Strongest Man or Powerlifting matches, to watching Bodybuilding contests.
Or Olympic decathalons over bodybuilding shows, with Tangible and objective Rules, as in the fastest, strongest, quickest, highest jumping, running, shotputting, discus throwing, pole vaulting, hurdling contestant wins.
I prefer women's beach volleyball...but again, to each his or her own...

I thought I had you pegged for womens mud wrestling?..