Gun Dog Forum

In a Gun Dog/Shooting Dog stake.

Is it up to the handler to set the pace?

If one handler is too fast or slow, can the other handler ask the judge what to do?

Can this be considered interference by pushing your dog off course, or so far ahead that judges can't see your dog as often as needed?

I believe it is the judges that need to control the pace. But what do you do if your brace mate is on a horse race and is 200+ yds ahead with your dog ahead of him.

The judges,if the other handler runs off stay with him, if you don't the dog will. Is it interference no,stupid maybe!!!! I can't judge what I can't see and Iam not going to chase you. I probably would sent the Marshall with a message.

I feel it is the judges who control the pace - some handlers like to push for whatever reason they feel necessary. In the end, if you feel your ability to handle is being interfered with by an out of control handler your best bet is to revert to the strategy you have planned and trained for in that eventuality - stay with your dog and handle him or sit back and let your dog show what his worth is on his own. Complaining to the judge - telling the judge he isn't doing his job - won't really help your cause much in that place and time.

I have been told , but I don't know if it is true that the handler sets the pace. I was told this when I was being told I could walk in a horse back trial. I would guess the judge would control the pace and if a guy was to ride off and they did not like it they would not follow which would put him out of contention.

However what I have seen is, it is different from trial to trial and even from brace to brace. I am not sure what the actual rule is I would like to know.
mm

mm wrote:I have been told , but I don't know if it is true that the handler sets the pace. I was told this when I was being told I could walk in a horse back trial. I would guess the judge would control the pace and if a guy was to ride off and they did not like it they would not follow which would put him out of contention.

However what I have seen is, it is different from trial to trial and even from brace to brace. I am not sure what the actual rule is I would like to know.
mm

Check out Section 6V, page 52 of the red book of AKC Field trial rules and guidelines.
The judges set the pace and HB handlers are to keep to a flat walk. In mixed braces ( walking and HB handlers) the judges set a reasonable pace to accommodate the walking handler. But that doesn't mean that a walker can loaf along expect the HB guy to stay with him

The book states that in drawing braces, HB handlers and walking handlers are not to be segregated. I wish that rule would be changed, because mixed braces seem to handicap both participants IME.

I agree shags.

The judges LIMIT the pace (you can go as slow as you want...but only as fast as the judges are willing to ride). Figuring out what their pace limit is can be tricky, as it does seem to change from brace to brace.

The rules say flat walk...except when braced with a walker.

I took a 3rd a few weeks ago when I was convinced that neither judge was in the least bit interested in my dog, yet I KNOW the 2nd place dog's handler rides way faster that I do. You never know.

Has anyone ever had it get totally out of control, or you know from past experiences, or get the feeling the other handler is using this tactic to prevent your way better dog from being in contention because the handler already has a good one in the books.
I know some will run their not even close to broke dogs in broke stake to takeout others.

I've had people do crappy things...like not let me get in front of my dog that's backing before they flushed and shot...or relocate their dog while mine is backing without giving me an opportunity to collar my dog. I've had people blow whistles and yell their heads off riding past my dog on point, hoping to take them with them. I've even seen one pro handler try to send another pro (new to the grounds) in the wrong direction on purpose. I've had a handler get in front of me me then stop dead going through a narrow cut in the woods in the hopes I'd lose my dog (I don't let the other handler get in front of me anymore....lesson learned), even release their dog and take off when both dogs were collared in the same area, but the perception of riding too fast is usually the result of a newbie + adrenaline OR a judge who refuses to ride faster than you could walk (and I usually don't enter under them again). I find that there is a HUGE difference in judging styles between a lot of the American Field judges and AKC judges.

I've found the crappy tactics USUALLY backfire on the handler. They're poorly executed and recognized for exactly what they are by the judges and other handler. And if they feel they have to pull crap, it's because my dog is just that much better than theirs.

I've never seen anyone enter their not-quite-broke dog for the specific purpose of taking another dog out....but I've been braced with plenty not-quite-broke dogs over the years, and even your most seasoned, reliable dogs can have a bad day.

It's the people that repeatedly enter FIGHTERS that I have no tolerance for. At what point did THEIR dog become more important, more valuable, and more worthy of competing than all the dogs that have been victimized by the dog?

Good judges set the pace, and it's the handlers responsibility to show his dogs attributes to the judges. Although it happens frequently, a judge should never let a handler drag him around the course. We can all pretend this is a gentlemanly sport, but pros and a lot of amateurs are out there to win and will use the rules and manipulate the judges to their advantage. Whether you agree if it is are right or wrong doesn't matter- it happens, and if you want to play the game your training program needs to allow you to deal with whatever situations arise.

On the other hand, in walking trials, more often than not, I see judges on horseback push the handlers beyond a true walking pace in order to avoid being trampled by the horses.

I don't buy into the line of an un-broke dog taking the other dog out. It may be a matter of what your definitions are, but if a dog is broke (by my definition) another dog isn't going to take him out. Blaming another dog for your dogs' short comings is just an excuse for your dogs training not being complete. I think one of the biggest mistakes, and find it foolish, is to run a dog in a finished stake before it is ready. It's a good way to allow a dog to develop bad habits and become trial wise, and creates problems that are difficult to repair without taking something out of the dog.

It's the people that repeatedly enter FIGHTERS that I have no tolerance for. At what point did THEIR dog become more important, more valuable, and more worthy of competing than all the dogs that have been victimized by the dog?[/quote]

That's is the judge's fault for not writing up the fighting dog. In AKC a dog only gets 2 write ups and they are done running in AKC, so if the judge is doing his job by writing up the offending dog, that problem will be solved

Judges should be setting the pace. The only thing that becomes tricky is when one person has a find and the other person is still moving around the course. Person with find is now obviously behind the other. General wisdom says you cant win from behind....
I havent been doing this very long. But i ride,scout and plant as much as i can. And i guess we are lucky in my area. But i see nothing but sportsmanship from amatuers and pros alike. Obviously everyone wants to do well. But everyone helps everyone around here. Everyone wants to see the best dogs that day, no matter whos it is.

When you get behind because of birdwork, all you have to do is ask the judge if you can regain the front. Unless the bracemate is way far ahead, judges are usually OK with it. I don't think they appreciate you getting up there at a full gallop, but you can hustle

hi-tailyn wrote:Has anyone ever had it get totally out of control, or you know from past experiences, or get the feeling the other handler is using this tactic to prevent your way better dog from being in contention because the handler already has a good one in the books.
I know some will run their not even close to broke dogs in broke stake to takeout others.

If your dog is "way better" then let him hang out there and let the other handler "hang" himself.

The odd time you hit a less than honorable handler - I always thought it was my job as a handler to be prepared for that - including dogs that were not as trained as they should be for the stake they are in.

Everyone who is there is out to win - and the rules are set to play within - winning usually involves playing at the edge regardless of what activity you are engaged in and field trials are no different. Because you play to win, run at the limits, it does not mean you are in any way "unsportsmanlike". The vast majority of folks I have encountered had only one thing in mind - finding the best dog to name the winner that day - and they all hoped that it would be their dog would be that dog.

Well said. My experience too. Only times I felt annoyed was when the other handled was more experienced than I, and used that experience to his advantage - and why not? I watched , learned and grew in experience myself.

IMO, it depends on where you are at, what the format is, and who is judging, and who the handler is and where it is being held....Hour CH, are different than weekend trials, VERY experienced judges vs newer judges, public trial grounds vs private sanctioned trial grounds... I have been under all circumstances. But to me the judges I will not run under again are the ones that have seen it all wanna control there other judge talk about what they know, who they know, who they put up yadda yadda yadda. All in all IMO the handlers set the pace, most judges will not say anything or they just will not judge the dog. That has been my experience in all stakes, Ch, weekend, both of them.
And that so called grwta judge that wants to tell you different, run under them first.....A few judges out there I will not run under again...

JMO

The judges SHOULD control the pace.

As has been said, that ain't always how it happens.

IMO, A handler that rides out after their dog and takes the other dog with themn IS most definitely interfering with the other handler's ability to run their dog. If the handler rides off with their dog and does not carry the other dog with them, it is not interference, butif the judges cannot see the dog, it is essentially out of judgement.


If more judges announced their intentions at the beginning of the stake and then sent the marshall to tell the very first offending handler to either get control of their dog and bring it back to judgement...or put a rope on it...

it would stop.

RayG

Wouldn't this depend on the type of trial? I have only been to a few trials other than AA qualifying events for Ames. In those, I don't believe the judges set the pace.

AA? The dog sets the pace. The rest best keep up.

Sharon wrote:AA? The dog sets the pace. The rest best keep up.

The experienced, knowledgable judges set tthe pace, it is only slightly faster in All-Age than Shoooting Dog, and at the NC it is slower than most. It is up to the handlers to present the dogs to the judges. In no case should the judges chase the handlets/dogs.

I know Sharon was being humorous, but I stilll wanted to correct. Not saying some judges won't chase dogs, just not the good ones, and certainly not at the highest level. At the NC it takes them 3 hours to cover 13 miles, just over 4 mph, that is a walking pace for some.

Neil wrote: it is only slightly faster in All-Age than Shoooting Dog,

When I rode all the braces of the Nat. Chicken Ch with my GPS and all the braces of the Shooting Dog Ch. that followed the results were quite interesting compared with the perceptions of many of the long time trialers around the campfire. The common belief was that they ran a slightly slower pace in the Shooting Dog, however such was not the case at all. The general pace of travel and the distance covered were nearly identical - but the Shooting Dogs finished up in a different location (seemingly shorter) on the same courses because the course of travel itself was less direct - taking the dogs closer to the objectives and meandering more.

Very interesting Neil and Slistoe.