The Spaniel Spot

[CDN_Cocker]

I will definitely check out that new gadget called a camera for future events .
Colorado is 1200 miles from us. I am thinking I need to get my head checked on this one. Also thinking I need to get a rent-a-springer so I can go to closer events.

Move to Canada - doesn't matter if you have a cocker or springer, all the same to us.

[Trekmoor]

Are there no "Any Variety" spaniel trials in America ? Although we have breed specific cocker or springer trials here we also hold trials where the dogs can be of either breed. Cockers have won these trials although I think most of them have been won by springers. A clumber enthusiast contacted me a couple of years back to tell me a clumber spaniel had managed to get into the awards at one of these stakes fairly recently...... I'd like to have been present at that trial to see what it was about the ground and/or it's cover that enabled a clumber to compete successfully against springers and cockers.
Working clumbers have greatly improved here in the last few years . It is a pity their gene pool is so small, they seem to have bred themselves into a corner.

We also hold trials for the "other" spaniel breeds. I have never seen one of those trials but I have talked to a few folk that have and also talked to a man who judged such a trial ......... he was not at all impressed which is what I would expect from someone who normally competes in and judges cocker and springer trials. I'd still like to see that kind of trial, it must be interesting to watch clumbers, sussex, field, welsh and the other spaniel breeds competing in the same trial. Cockers and springers are not allowed to compete in those trials .......... I wonder why !

Bill T.

[welsh]

A clumber enthusiast contacted me a couple of years back to tell me a clumber spaniel had managed to get into the awards at one of these stakes fairly recently...... I'd like to have been present at that trial to see what it was about the ground and/or it's cover that enabled a clumber to compete successfully against springers and cockers.

Mutant Clumber? Performance-enhancing drugs?

Surely the Clumber is the most maligned of spaniel breeds ... in all the books where Chapter 1, "Choosing your Spaniel," runs down the spaniel breeds with something nice to say about each, the praise for the Clumber is always ... muted. I was flipping through Ken Roebuck's book last night: "The clumber is a large, heavy-built, thick-coated dog with a tendency to be ponderous in gait and a plodder while hunting." I know a guy who judged a hunt test with a Clumber entered; he said the dog wasn't just a plodder, but showed really no interest in proceedings.

James Spencer tells us in his book that Clumbers routinely won early American trials before springers took over. It would be interesting to hop in a time machine and go back to those trials to see what the attraction was. I assume the breed has changed little except that the desire to hunt has dissipated. There is a lesson here about the subjectivity of trial judging: springers set the standard because the standard is the springer. Well, springers sure are more fun to watch.

In Canada as Cass pointed out all our trials are open to all spaniel breeds. In spite of this you will only see springers and cockers entered. No point in entering a dog that can't place. I have a Welsh (surprise!) who is a good hunter, but she can't possibly compete in a trial because she doesn't have the speed. I have run her in a brace with a springer and we are quickly behind on the course. That's just how it is. My attempts to light a fire under her only confused her: now she's hesitant in that "trial" setting, open field with guns on each flank. But performance in the field tells me that hunting instincts aren't lacking in this particular dog. I think these breeds are what they are and it's a pity there isn't greater effort to re-develop strong hunting lines.

[gundogguy]

Any Variety. It is a situation that is a real "Catch 22". If the Breeders and subsequent owners of the minor breeds,The Clumber, The Welch, The Sussex, The Field spaniel, The American water Spaniel and the Boykin would step up and and promote and posture their breeds they could run in spaniel type trial in the USA. But they do not!
Over the years I have trained and worked with all of the minor breeds. The folks that came to me over the years were highly motivated in confirmation, hunt testing, obedience and agility and tracking competitions. However very few were interested having their dogs judged in Trial. There was also a low interest in field sports in general, except getting a ribbon at a Hunt test was the biggest reason to even spend time and tide training with me. The situation here in the states is it is not a case that the Spaniel field trial community does not want them it is more like a case that the movers and shakers of the minor breeds do not want the Spaniel field trial community. Their love of Confirmation titles really is the big obstacle in moving to some form of "Any Variety Field trial".

[crackerd]

Are there no "Any Variety" spaniel trials in America?

Move to Canada - doesn't matter if you have a cocker or springer, Sussex or Boykin, Clumber or Tweed - all the same to us.

I've tried to help you out via Cass' er, emended comment, Bill. Otherwise, pay right close attention to what gundogguy's got to say - he is spot-on. (With the qualifier that Boykin folks are rather content to have their dogs eligible for AKC retriever hunt tests - and eventually, some of us are hopeful, retriever FTs as "the littlest retriever afoot." A Suss or two do the retriever thingy, too - 'case you ain't noticed. )

Any Variety. It is a situation that is a real "Catch 22". If the Breeders and subsequent owners of the minor breeds,The Clumber, The Welch, The Sussex, The Field spaniel, The American water Spaniel and the Boykin would step up and and promote and posture their breeds they could run in spaniel type trial in the USA. But they do not!
Over the years I have trained and worked with all of the minor breeds. The folks that came to me over the years were highly motivated in confirmation, hunt testing, obedience and agility and tracking competitions. However very few were interested having their dogs judged in Trial. There was also a low interest in field sports in general, except getting a ribbon at a Hunt test was the biggest reason to even spend time and tide training with me. The situation here in the states is it is not a case that the Spaniel field trial community does not want them it is more like a case that the movers and shakers of the minor breeds do not want the Spaniel field trial community. Their love of Confirmation titles really is the big obstacle in moving to some form of "Any Variety Field trial".

MG

[welsh]

It's a catch-22: from time to time you get a breeder who is genuinely interested in breeding minor breeds for the field but there aren't many of them because the market isn't there. The market isn't there because there are so few people genuinely interested in minor breeds for the field.

[crackerd]

Welsh, long time, no hear - but all the negatives and pejoratives you've outlined below that apply in N. America are slowly but surely giving way in the UK to the original Clumber, the working Clumber - which essentially has been "rebuilt" into a true field-bred spaniel.

Surely the Clumber is the most maligned of spaniel breeds ... in all the books where Chapter 1, "Choosing your Spaniel," runs down the spaniel breeds with something nice to say about each, the praise for the Clumber is always ... muted. I was flipping through Ken Roebuck's book last night: "The clumber is a large, heavy-built, thick-coated dog with a tendency to be ponderous in gait and a plodder while hunting." I know a guy who judged a hunt test with a Clumber entered; he said the dog wasn't just a plodder, but showed really no interest in proceedings.

James Spencer tells us in his book that Clumbers routinely won early American trials before springers took over. It would be interesting to hop in a time machine and go back to those trials to see what the attraction was. I assume the breed has changed little except that the desire to hunt has dissipated.

MG

[gundogguy]

Any Variety. There are anomalies in every part of the dog world. There will always be the exception to usual and expected.
From my earlier post earlier post..."more like a case that the movers and shakers of the minor breeds do not want". This the key to whole question of why there are no All Variety trials.
Springers and English Cockers are a divided breed. The division is between the Conformation bred style dog and the Field bred style dog. ( Cross breeding between Bench and Field serves neither side of the venues, dog show or field trials.) The main concern between the Parent Clubs of the various "minor breed spaniel is that a segment of their dogs would be bred for field work,thus trials only and then their breed would be divided like the Springers and English Cockers into two separate categories show and field are. The Field spaniel folks grappled with this concept 2.5 years ago and put the cabash on promoting the breed for entry into the Cocker trials,which by the way need some support here in the states. The feeling is that hunt tests are enough activity in the field for the minor breeds.

[welsh]

Welsh, long time, no hear - but all the negatives and pejoratives you've outlined below that apply in N. America are slowly but surely giving way in the UK to the original Clumber, the working Clumber - which essentially has been "rebuilt" into a true field-bred spaniel.

Hope so. Variety is the spice of life.

Incidentally, just asked a question on Hunt Ontario that I think you're the man to answer, re place boards. I think it was you marking the irony of Openshaw adopting place boards after NA retriever folks had started to abandon them, and I was wondering what they've been abandoned in favour of.

The main concern between the Parent Clubs of the various "minor breed spaniel is that a segment of their dogs would be bred for field work,thus trials only and then their breed would be divided like the Springers and English Cockers into two separate categories show and field are.

True, I have run into that. I recall reading something online from a guy who wanted a Welsh to hunt with, and he had some breeders saying they wouldn't sell a dog for hunting -- they felt the breed should not be used for that! (I pity their dogs....)

There are divisions ... the standard-issue Gun Dog magazine breed profile story I think had snide remarks from the breeder they interviewed about a group of breeders trying to restore the hunting qualities of the breed. She complained they didn't test their dogs in hunt tests so there was nothing to go by. So wait ... someone who says she's not trying to breed for the field criticizes people who are breeding for the field, because they aren't playing the right games? I think the group she was sniping at was spearheaded by Larry Hennessey, who bred field ESS as well as Welshies.

I kind of shudder now when people say, "One of the strengths of the <insert breed> is there is no division between show and field lines." In practical terms that means there are only show lines.

[chrokeva]

I guess splitting a breed up is difficult no matter what side you are on. Back many years ago when I trialing Border Collies there was a big movement to keep the show people from splitting up the breed by allowing the AKC recognize it as being able to compete in the conformation ring. In the end nothing stopped the forward motion and now the breed is split.
I have to wonder if the lack of difficulty in the junior/senior spaniel test levels is due to the lower expectations from the minor breeds? and if so how do the retriever folks keep there tests up to what seems to be a much higher standard?

[welsh]

I have to wonder if the lack of difficulty in the junior/senior spaniel test levels is due to the lower expectations from the minor breeds?

I believe it is from breeders, absolutely. I can't answer for retriever folks but the perspective from Canada is illuminating. In the States, being able to sell to hunters by sticking JH, SH, or MH after the sire's name is important. Here, it isn't. There isn't a big enough market in raw numbers for it to matter. And we don't see show-bred dogs entered in hunt tests; hunt tests are a thing the trialers do on the side for fun, partly because they offer challenges a typical trial does not.

In the US, I believe that market pressure acting through show breeders keeps hunt test standards lower. When people started to feel MH wasn't hard enough, instead of making the levels harder or creating a new level, they simply added legs to the MH and called it MHA.

Compare the AKC and CKC hunt test standards & you'll note that a CKC Senior Hunter test is actually harder than an AKC Master Hunter test: the dogs must flush more birds and retrieve over longer distances, and the rules specify that the retrieving exercises must be run in downwind or crosswind conditions. Compare the AKC MH to a CKC MH:

AKC Master Hunter
- find flush & retrieve 2 birds on land
- water mark, 40 - 45 yards
- water blind, 30 - 40 yards
- land blind, 55 - 60 yards

CKC Master Hunter
- find & flush 3 birds, retrieve 2 on land while running in a brace; all shot birds must be retrieved (i.e. 1 missed bird can count as test of steadiness but if the third bird is hit it must be retrieved)
- honour bracemate's retrieve
- water mark, 50 - 75 metres in downwind or crosswind
- land blind, 75 - 100 metres in downwind
- water blind, 35 - 50 metres in downwind
- double retrieve: land, 50 - 75 metres, water 35 - 50 metres through a spread of at least 5 duck decoys

We don't have a Master Hunter "Advanced."

[chrokeva]

I have to wonder if the lack of difficulty in the junior/senior spaniel test levels is due to the lower expectations from the minor breeds?

I believe it is from breeders, absolutely. I can't answer for retriever folks but the perspective from Canada is illuminating. In the States, being able to sell to hunters by sticking JH, SH, or MH after the sire's name is important. Here, it isn't. There isn't a big enough market in raw numbers for it to matter. And we don't see show-bred dogs entered in hunt tests; hunt tests are a thing the trialers do on the side for fun, partly because they offer challenges a typical trial does not.

In the US, I believe that market pressure acting through show breeders keeps hunt test standards lower. When people started to feel MH wasn't hard enough, instead of making the levels harder or creating a new level, they simply added legs to the MH and called it MHA.

Compare the AKC and CKC hunt test standards & you'll note that a CKC Senior Hunter test is actually harder than an AKC Master Hunter test: the dogs must flush more birds and retrieve over longer distances, and the rules specify that the retrieving exercises must be run in downwind or crosswind conditions. Compare the AKC MH to a CKC MH:

AKC Master Hunter
- find flush & retrieve 2 birds on land
- water mark, 40 - 45 yards
- water blind, 30 - 40 yards
- land blind, 55 - 60 yards

CKC Master Hunter
- find & flush 3 birds, retrieve 2 on land while running in a brace; all shot birds must be retrieved (i.e. 1 missed bird can count as test of steadiness but if the third bird is hit it must be retrieved)
- honour bracemate's retrieve
- water mark, 50 - 75 metres in downwind or crosswind
- land blind, 75 - 100 metres in downwind
- water blind, 35 - 50 metres in downwind
- double retrieve: land, 50 - 75 metres, water 35 - 50 metres through a spread of at least 5 duck decoys

We don't have a Master Hunter "Advanced."

That is a very interesting comparison. I see how the CKC program would be a much more challenging and worthwhile event to enter and train for.
Since my cocker is limited to entering cocker trials and those are very few and far between on the west coast I am starting to realize that hunt tests very well may be our future. With the way they are set up as of now it really does not offer much challenge for the life of my dog and I hope to see the AKC spaniel tests raise the bar a bit going forward but that is probably doubtful giving that there is a large group of people trying to lower the bar at the same time.
In the end I purchased a hunting dog and not a trial dog so if trials become a once in awhile thing I will still have the enjoyment of watching my little dog hunt the way she was bred to.

[Trekmoor]

If ....and it's a big "if" the clumber folk in Britain can continue as they have done in improving this breed as workers over the last 20 years or so then there is hope for the clumber breed here. I.M.O. the breed will never equal springers or cockers in field trials but not everybody wants a flying machine. Quite a number of people just want to shoot over a competent dog that hunts at an easy to keep up with pace. The best of the work bred clumbers being bred here now fill this niche.

The work bred dogs now look a bit like smaller, slimmer versions of the show type and their eyes don't have such droopy lids either. The K.C. has the unbelievable upper weight limit on the breed at 80lbs. !!! Even a big male working type clumber is probably about 20 -30 lbs below that weight.

The big problem the work minded breeders have is the small gene pool of decent working clumbers. I trained a male clumber I rated highly a few years ago and had enquiries from a breeder of some of Britain's best working clumbers about using him at stud. If that mating had taken place I wanted one of the pups. It did not take place, Big Ned's lineage was almost exactly the same as that breeders ! I'm really sorry I didn't get my hands on one of his puppies. He was not as fast a hunter as my cockers or my present springer pup but he went plenty fast enough for me ! He hardly even noticed when cover was in his way, he just bulldozed his own holes right through it.
He also loved retrieving and was very good at it although his blind retrieve direction taking left something to be desired ! He was soft mouthed on game and always utterly silent. I wish he'd been my dog and I am very sorry I had to hand him back over to his owner. I've never had any spaniel in for training that I liked more than him.

"Big Ned " + 2 cockers and a Brittany.



Bill T.

[polmaise]

We don't have a Master Hunter "Advanced."

All that sounds quite technical 'welsh' ,and must be difficult to replicate for every dog and handler to have the same .
We over here however do have an advanced which we call the 'Championships' .But every dog and handler are tested in every scenario that game and shooting can and will present on the day.

[gundogguy]

I have to wonder if the lack of difficulty in the junior/senior spaniel test levels is due to the lower expectations from the minor breeds?

I believe it is from breeders, absolutely. I can't answer for retriever folks but the perspective from Canada is illuminating. In the States, being able to sell to hunters by sticking JH, SH, or MH after the sire's name is important. Here, it isn't. There isn't a big enough market in raw numbers for it to matter. And we don't see show-bred dogs entered in hunt tests; hunt tests are a thing the trialers do on the side for fun, partly because they offer challenges a typical trial does not.

In the US, I believe that market pressure acting through show breeders keeps hunt test standards lower. When people started to feel MH wasn't hard enough, instead of making the levels harder or creating a new level, they simply added legs to the MH and called it MHA.

Compare the AKC and CKC hunt test standards & you'll note that a CKC Senior Hunter test is actually harder than an AKC Master Hunter test: the dogs must flush more birds and retrieve over longer distances, and the rules specify that the retrieving exercises must be run in downwind or crosswind conditions. Compare the AKC MH to a CKC MH:

AKC Master Hunter
- find flush & retrieve 2 birds on land
- water mark, 40 - 45 yards
- water blind, 30 - 40 yards
- land blind, 55 - 60 yards

CKC Master Hunter
- find & flush 3 birds, retrieve 2 on land while running in a brace; all shot birds must be retrieved (i.e. 1 missed bird can count as test of steadiness but if the third bird is hit it must be retrieved)
- honour bracemate's retrieve
- water mark, 50 - 75 metres in downwind or crosswind
- land blind, 75 - 100 metres in downwind
- water blind, 35 - 50 metres in downwind
- double retrieve: land, 50 - 75 metres, water 35 - 50 metres through a spread of at least 5 duck decoys

We don't have a Master Hunter "Advanced."

7 maybe 8 yrs ago My wife Nancy and I judged CKC Spaniel Hunt test in southern Ontario. I personally felt the CKC test had merit because of the training needed to pass at even the lower levels of testing. Delivery to hand, steadiness, brace, all are concepts that are dismissed in the AKC test at lower levels. If you Q the test in Canada your dog is prolly fairly honest gundog. I can not make that statement about the USA dogs that test in America. And I train a boat load of dogs for the tests here. If the AKC Flushing dog test mirrored the CKC spaniel hunt test, participation would go way down. .. as an aside, There is no Master Hunter Advance test or title here either!

[welsh]

All that sounds quite technical 'welsh' ,and must be difficult to replicate for every dog and handler to have the same .

Remember that we work with planted birds, unlike in the UK. For the blinds, for example, someone sets birds shot in the land test out at a location known to the judge. So the tests are easy to replicate if a little artificial.

[crackerd]

...If the AKC Flushing dog test mirrored the CKC spaniel hunt test, participation would go way down. .. as an aside, There is no Master Hunter Advance test or title here either!

Ah, but remember when there was, gundogguy? - "was" being the operative word that lasted about what, 15 minutes of fame (or was it 15 minutes of infamy?). Remember? It was called the MHX title - Master Hunter Excellent. And was held, what, about three times if that in the whole of the US. As trialers weren't interested in that advanced level of retrieving work and blinds, and hunt tests already had become the province of the show crowd, 99% of the dogs never could have attempted it given their level of training. Spaniel clubs, meanwhile, were reluctant to agree to staging the MHX because they knew the number of entries would be negligible, and thus it died an obscure if not ignominious death. Must've been about 2003-4 when it materialized, as one of my dogs had got her MH title at about 16 months old, and I was looking to see what kind of competition - short of hieing off to Canada for spaniel FTs - might possibly be ahead for her. Short answer, 12 years later: zilch.

Welsh, I'll skedaddle on over to the Hunt Ontario board and blabber about place boards, but don't take my word for it, as there are some retriever folk who still use them. And as I believe I've said before, many retriever field trialers use rubber mats in training for their dogs to sit on until released for their marks or sent for blinds. Not the same concept, exactly, but somewhat related.

MG

[chrokeva]

...If the AKC Flushing dog test mirrored the CKC spaniel hunt test, participation would go way down. .. as an aside, There is no Master Hunter Advance test or title here either!

Ah, but remember when there was, gundogguy? - "was" being the operative word that lasted about what, 15 minutes of fame (or was it 15 minutes of infamy?). Remember? It was called the MHX title - Master Hunter Excellent. And was held, what, about three times if that in the whole of the US. As trialers weren't interested in that advanced level of retrieving work and blinds, and hunt tests already had become the province of the show crowd, 99% of the dogs never could have attempted it given their level of training. Spaniel clubs, meanwhile, were reluctant to agree to staging the MHX because they knew the number of entries would be negligible, and thus it died an obscure if not ignominious death. Must've been about 2003-4 when it materialized, as one of my dogs had got her MH title at about 16 months old, and I was looking to see what kind of competition - short of hieing off to Canada for spaniel FTs - might possibly be ahead for her. Short answer, 12 years later: zilch.

Welsh, I'll skedaddle on over to the Hunt Ontario board and blabber about place boards, but don't take my word for it, as there are some retriever folk who still use them. And as I believe I've said before, many retriever field trialers use rubber mats in training for their dogs to sit on until released for their marks or sent for blinds. Not the same concept, exactly, but somewhat related.

MG

That is sad to hear. I really believe a advance title should include brace work but it seems that will not happen.
From what I understand there is a MHA is now in effect and AKC defines the title like this (from AKC web site):

"MASTER HUNTER ADVANCED
AN ADVANCED TITLE IS EARNED WHEN A DOG PASSES AN ADDITIONAL 5 TIMES WITH AN AVERAGE QUALIFYING SCORE OF 8.0 OR HIGHER AFTER EARNING ITS MH.
[ HUNTING TEST ]"

To me this seems like a way that AKC can continue to get money from people without raising the bar....sad really.
Maybe heading off to Canada is the answer.

[gundogguy]

...If the AKC Flushing dog test mirrored the CKC spaniel hunt test, participation would go way down. .. as an aside, There is no Master Hunter Advance test or title here either!

Ah, but remember when there was, gundogguy? - "was" being the operative word that lasted about what, 15 minutes of fame (or was it 15 minutes of infamy?). Remember? It was called the MHX title - Master Hunter Excellent. And was held, what, about three times if that in the whole of the US. As trialers weren't interested in that advanced level of retrieving work and blinds, and hunt tests already had become the province of the show crowd, 99% of the dogs never could have attempted it given their level of training. Spaniel clubs, meanwhile, were reluctant to agree to staging the MHX because they knew the number of entries would be negligible, and thus it died an obscure if not ignominious death. Must've been about 2003-4 when it materialized, as one of my dogs had got her MH title at about 16 months old, and I was looking to see what kind of competition - short of hieing off to Canada for spaniel FTs - might possibly be ahead for her. Short answer, 12 years later: zilch.

Welsh, I'll skedaddle on over to the Hunt Ontario board and blabber about place boards, but don't take my word for it, as there are some retriever folk who still use them. And as I believe I've said before, many retriever field trialers use rubber mats in training for their dogs to sit on until released for their marks or sent for blinds. Not the same concept, exactly, but somewhat related.

MG

That is sad to hear. I really believe a advance title should include brace work but it seems that will not happen.
From what I understand there is a MHA is now in effect and AKC defines the title like this (from AKC web site):

"MASTER HUNTER ADVANCED
AN ADVANCED TITLE IS EARNED WHEN A DOG PASSES AN ADDITIONAL 5 TIMES WITH AN AVERAGE QUALIFYING SCORE OF 8.0 OR HIGHER AFTER EARNING ITS MH.
[ HUNTING TEST ]"

To me this seems like a way that AKC can continue to get money from people without raising the bar....sad really.
Maybe heading off to Canada is the answer.

I think she got It I think she got!

[chrokeva]

I think she got It I think she got!

[CDN_Cocker]

In the end I purchased a hunting dog and not a trial dog so if trials become a once in awhile thing I will still have the enjoyment of watching my little dog hunt the way she was bred to.

This is how I feel. I really wanted to dive head first into trials but the travel required for me to even train with others makes it not likely. I do plan to enter the odd trial still that is within reasonable distance and I plan on trying hunt tests this year but as a young guy with a young family, as much as I love the spaniel training world - my daughter's sporting commitments and extracurriculars, work, and basic family life has to take precedence at this stage of my life. I can still get more than enough enjoyment out of our hunting trips.

[gundogguy]

In the end I purchased a hunting dog and not a trial dog so if trials become a once in awhile thing I will still have the enjoyment of watching my little dog hunt the way she was bred to.

This is how I feel. I really wanted to dive head first into trials but the travel required for me to even train with others makes it not likely. I do plan to enter the odd trial still that is within reasonable distance and I plan on trying hunt tests this year but as a young guy with a young family, as much as I love the spaniel training world - my daughter's sporting commitments and extracurriculars, work, and basic family life has to take precedence at this stage of my life. I can still get more than enough enjoyment out of our hunting trips.

Trialing or even training at a competitive level really does require a person to become a "road warrior" or put your dog out with a Pro. We have chose the later and have exactly no regrets. Zeta was an absolute joy for me to start and steady. I cannot count how many I have started and steadied over the years but she is my last one. She will be four in July and has already qualified to run in her 4th National Champ. 3 here 1 Can. Trialing used to be a way of life here but the travel and other interests have taken over,besides would like to takes the kids hunting.

[Jrg303]

Hi,

I have been reading this for him for a while now, but this is my first time posting. Are there any spaniel trainers in the Charleston, South Carolina area? I have a three-year-old Springer spaniel that I have been working with since I got her, but I know I haven't done her justice. I would love to talk to someone who could help steer me in the right direction.

Justin

[polmaise]

Trialing or even training at a competitive level really does require a person to become a "road warrior" or put your dog out with a Pro. We have chose the later and have exactly no regrets. Zeta was an absolute joy for me to start and steady. I cannot count how many I have started and steadied over the years but she is my last one. She will be four in July and has already qualified to run in her 4th National Champ. 3 here 1 Can. Trialing used to be a way of life here but the travel and other interests have taken over,besides would like to takes the kids hunting.

Ain't that the truth .
As I lag the years on them legs that carried me ,I like to enjoy the fruits from the tree rather than growing it these days.

I don't get a buzz any more from competing . I sure do hang on the line when it's one that has been here and is on the line with their owner. That's like ....Yea.
But I'll go out with mine and have a nice day.

[Sharon]

I'm in the same boat, but not as comfortable with the situation as you guys seem to be.

[polmaise]

I'm in the same boat, but not as comfortable with the situation as you guys seem to be.

That's because you are a young chick with years ahead of you ...lol

[CDN_Cocker]

besides would like to takes the kids hunting.

Agreed...

[CDN_Cocker]

Even when they can't always stay awake...

keiradeerhunt.jpg

[Trekmoor]

I still do enjoy competing but my ticker does not so I think I will have to stick to competing only in occasional tests now instead of trials. There is usually a lot less walking needing done in tests. I never have taken tests very seriously although I still like to win if I can.

For me tests are more about meeting up with friends again and slagging them off while they do the same in return ! Last year I bumped into a spaniel trialing friend at a test that I hadn't seen for about 25 years. He greeted me with the words, "Hi Bill, I'd heard you were dead but I can see you only look that way !"

Or how about this gem from a judge who claims to be a friend of mine's ? I'd lost my lead during a hunt and so the judge said at the end of the hunt ....." Here, I'll give you a lead for your dog , it's about all she's worth !"
You need a thick skin to survive here in Haggisland. :roll:

Bill T.

[gundogguy]

I still do enjoy competing but my ticker does not so I think I will have to stick to competing only in occasional tests now instead of trials. There is usually a lot less walking needing done in tests. I never have taken tests very seriously although I still like to win if I can.

Bill T.

Please explain The words in bold.& underlined.
Here in North America tests are pass/fail. the average hunting dog that passes is look at the same way the outstanding dog that passes. I always chalk it up our political correct society trying to make everyone feel good. I have suffered thru some really poor examples of working dogs and watch them title. Trialing just the opposite there is a Winner and the rest of the pack lost did not make the grade.

[Trekmoor]

In our trials and our tests there are 1st , 2nd etc. places . This may go down to either 3rd or 4th place in tests ....it depends on the club holding the test. Neither our trials or our tests are "Pass or Fail." I've seen retriever tests where the judges had to go down to 1/2 points in order to split the best dogs. It isn't all that uncommon for a retriever test winner to have scored 98 points out of a possible hundred.....or even more ! All of the other dogs are simply "also rans."
Your dog may only be 4 or 5 points below the winning dogs in a test and have scored more than 90 out of 100 but it is still just an "also ran."

Spaniel tests and HPR tests are marked and places awarded in much the same way as the retrievers but with these breeds the way the dogs have hunted gives 60 % of the total points. Spaniels and HPR's usually don't score close to the possible total of available points.
If you score more than 80 in a spaniel test you have done well, if you score somewhere around the 90 then you have probably won or at least been placed in the test.

Anyway, if I am "in it" then I try to "win it" because there are no "Pass " certificates awarded at all. Personally I think this pulls the general working standards upwards. Quite a lot of people would probably be happy to go home with a Pass Certificate but since there are none they train and then try harder to actually win next time out.

My testing and trialing motto was stolen from the old comedy films of "St. Trinian's School for Girls" school song.....part of that song is "Trample on the weakest and glory in their plight !" If you test dogs here it is a good motto to have !

I don't like being trampled on so I try to win.

Bill T.

[chrokeva]

In our trials and our tests there are 1st , 2nd etc. places . This may go down to either 3rd or 4th place in tests ....it depends on the club holding the test. Neither our trials or our tests are "Pass or Fail." I've seen retriever tests where the judges had to go down to 1/2 points in order to split the best dogs. It isn't all that uncommon for a retriever test winner to have scored 98 points out of a possible hundred.....or even more ! All of the other dogs are simply "also rans."
Your dog may only be 4 or 5 points below the winning dogs in a test and have scored more than 90 out of 100 but it is still just an "also ran."

Spaniel tests and HPR tests are marked and places awarded in much the same way as the retrievers but with these breeds the way the dogs have hunted gives 60 % of the total points. Spaniels and HPR's usually don't score close to the possible total of available points.
If you score more than 80 in a spaniel test you have done well, if you score somewhere around the 90 then you have probably won or at least been placed in the test.

Anyway, if I am "in it" then I try to "win it" because there are no "Pass " certificates awarded at all. Personally I think this pulls the general working standards upwards. Quite a lot of people would probably be happy to go home with a Pass Certificate but since there are none they train and then try harder to actually win next time out.

My testing and trialing motto was stolen from the old comedy films of "St. Trinian's School for Girls" school song.....part of that song is "Trample on the weakest and glory in their plight !" If you test dogs here it is a good motto to have !

I don't like being trampled on so I try to win.

Bill T.

Maybe that is what we need here in the US! Of course you would have to talk AKC into not being politically correct and doubtful that will happen.
Bill....sorry for my ignorance but can you explain how spaniel tests and trials differ there?

[polmaise]

For further clarification our 'tests' are all simulated set ups using bumpers and bangers.
Our 'Trials' are all using live ammunition and Live Game.
The Majority of Spaniel Trial' ers do not enter 'tests' .It would also be fair to say that especially with retrievers the majority of the competitors in Tests do not either shoot or trial.

[chrokeva]

For further clarification our 'tests' are all simulated set ups using bumpers and bangers.
Our 'Trials' are all using live ammunition and Live Game.
The Majority of Spaniel Trial' ers do not enter 'tests' .It would also be fair to say that especially with retrievers the majority of the competitors in Tests do not either shoot or trial.

Ahhhh thank you for the clarification. Tests are clearly much different there than in the US. Our tests do have a scoring system so we could do placements but you really have to work to even get a peak at your score (in my experience). There seems to be a bigger focus on the pass/fail rather than the quaility (score) of your run.

[crackerd]

For further clarification our 'tests' are all simulated set ups using bumpers and bangers.
Our 'Trials' are all using live ammunition and Live Game.
The Majority of Spaniel Trial' ers do not enter 'tests' .It would also be fair to say that especially with retrievers the majority of the competitors in Tests do not either shoot or trial.

Ahhhh thank you for the clarification. Tests are clearly much different there than in the US. Our tests do have a scoring system so we could do placements but you really have to work to even get a peak at your score (in my experience). There seems to be a bigger focus on the pass/fail rather than the quaility (score) of your run.

Psst! We're trying to get Cousin Polmaise into another kind of U.S. test so he can experience our system for himself. Hopeful that more details will follow.

MG

[Trekmoor]

There are a few "Pass or Fail" events held each year in Britain with certificates handed out (like confetti in my opinion) for passing but these events are for the H.P.R. ....The hunt , point, retrieve breeds. I took part in only one while running a dog for a client. The dog I was running passed but I wasn't happy with her run or with her point on caged quail. Several other dogs I didn't think much of also passed and I decided to give these events a miss in the future.

I think it is mainly the show folk trying to have some kind .....any kind.....of work qualification to swank about with that take part in those events.

Bill T.

[Trekmoor]

Quote ........."you really have to work to even get a peak at your score "

That is the same here even for the best of trainers.

Bill T.

[polmaise]

Ahhhh thank you for the clarification. Tests are clearly much different there than in the US. Our tests do have a scoring system so we could do placements but you really have to work to even get a peak at your score (in my experience). There seems to be a bigger focus on the pass/fail rather than the quaility (score) of your run.

'Peak' or 'Peek'
Scores by judges on each and every element of the 'test' is on display at the end of the day for all to see. Further clarification to what was posted earlier regarding Spaniel tests. It is 50% of the total score that is available for 'Hunting style' . which can put a dog in the awards even if it is a poor or failed retriever in any one element.
This can be subjective to the individual judges perception of what that hunting style is.
Trials however are marked on a Letter system rather than numbers or percentage of.
A+, A, b+,B ,and of course the infamous 'Eye-wipe' . which requires No judge or human decision

[welsh]

Scores by judges on each and every element of the 'test' is on display at the end of the day for all to see. Further clarification to what was posted earlier regarding Spaniel tests. It is 50% of the total score that is available for 'Hunting style' . which can put a dog in the awards even if it is a poor or failed retriever in any one element.

This would seem to be a critical difference.

In theory, hunt tests over here assess dogs on trained and natural abilities. The trained abilities are essentially pass/fail (either the dog is steady to flush, or it is not), and the natural abilities are assessed by subjective scores, where the dog needs a certain minimum score to pass. But in practice, judges pass or fail dogs based on the objective pass/fail elements and give at least minimum scores on the subjective elements. Consequently, a dog that meets all the objective requirements -- which are all a matter of training rather than natural ability -- can pass even if it does not demonstrate great natural ability. Field trials, OTOH, are decided mostly on the basis of subjective judgments and natural abilities, because the objective requirements are eliminating.

I realize this bothers some people to no end, but I don't really see it as a big problem. Tests are one thing and trials are another. A hunt test title means what a hunt test title means, nothing more, nothing less: the dog has demonstrated the trained ability to do the tasks described in the standard. I suppose maybe this doesn't bug me simply because a CKC MH is going to be a good hunting dog: regardless of whether it's also a field champion, it's going to be capable of things that are rarely required in the field and far, far above the level of your average "Saturday shooting spaniel," to borrow an Erlandsonism. Your show breeders looking to claim "working lines" aren't ever going to bring a dog to that level.

[polmaise]

Which is probably why the split between our 'test' competitors and 'Field Trial competitors' (over here) remains ever dividing 'welsh'. ?

[crackerd]

Which is probably why the split between our 'test' competitors and 'Field Trial competitors' (over here) remains ever dividing....?

I think it is mainly the show folk trying to have some kind .....any kind.....of work qualification to swank about with that take part in those events.

Would y'all believe that a great many of them who buy "English Labs" over here are of the misbegotten notion that Labs in the UK, to become a "show champion," must also hold some kind of field trial certification? When in fact it is as Bill noted "some kind.....any kind....of work qualification to swank about with" which means maybe one of these obesities (show Labs) will pick a dummy and get its paws wet stepping on the morning dew (actual water work for retrievers being out of the question over there, even in field trials).

MG

[polmaise]

Would y'all believe that a great many of them who buy "English Labs" over here are of the misbegotten notion that Labs in the UK, to become a "show champion," must also hold some kind of field trial certification? When in fact it is as Bill noted "some kind.....any kind....of work qualification to swank about with" which means maybe one of these obesities (show Labs) will pick a dummy and get its paws wet stepping on the morning dew (actual water work for retrievers being out of the question over there, even in field trials).

MG

I was commenting from 'both feet in the camp' , Retrievers and Spaniels.
Over here it's absolutely clear . 'FTCH' 'Field Trial Champion' is the only recognised accomplishment in the field of Gun dogs,and that requires live game. Any other title or variation or playing of words around this would be marketing by some and gullible by others.

Every thing else is fun and great training .What else do you do in the summer ? ..Go fishing !? ...well there is an idea

[crackerd]

Would y'all believe that a great many of them who buy "English Labs" over here are of the misbegotten notion that Labs in the UK, to become a "show champion," must also hold some kind of field trial certification? When in fact it is as Bill noted "some kind.....any kind....of work qualification to swank about with" which means maybe one of these obesities (show Labs) will pick a dummy and get its paws wet stepping on the morning dew (actual water work for retrievers being out of the question over there, even in field trials).

I was commenting from 'both feet in the camp' , Retrievers and Spaniels.
Over here it's absolutely clear . 'FTCH' 'Field Trial Champion' is the only recognised accomplishment in the field of Gun dogs,and that requires live game. Any other title or variation or playing of words around this would be marketing by some and gullible by others.

Yup, know well where you stand, Robt., and you know I stand behind British Labs and spaniels, which is why I called them "English Labs" above to differentiate. The marketing and gullibility stuff, well, we can only lead a Lab to water but we can't make a prospective owner drink of the idea that he or she's getting anything less than a future CH. or even FT-certified CH. from the "English" lines.

MG

[mnaj_springer]

Our tests do have a scoring system so we could do placements but you really have to work to even get a peak at your score (in my experience). There seems to be a bigger focus on the pass/fail rather than the quaility (score) of your run.

This must be a regional thing. All I've had to do is ask politely.

[chrokeva]

Our tests do have a scoring system so we could do placements but you really have to work to even get a peak at your score (in my experience). There seems to be a bigger focus on the pass/fail rather than the quaility (score) of your run.

This must be a regional thing. All I've had to do is ask politely.

I doubt it is regional but can't say for sure. If you go to the right person and they have not already put the scores up (like has happened to me a few times then yes they will gladly show you). I honestly don't even see why you should have to ask? I think they should be posted for everyone to see but that is my opinion. To me that was the purpose of entering (so I could find out what I was doing well and what I needed to work on).

[gundogguy]

Test scores are not very important. If your passes a test level that means your average score waas 7.5 and your dog scored at least a 5 over the various categories. If fail it means you scored less than 5 in a particular category. The idea that one judge score your dog a 8 when another scored it a 8.5 is really meaningless. The handler should know hi/her score in their own mind when they complete the test.back in the day many years ago I judge a few of these tests I only gave out 8's and zero. The dogs that should have passed did so and the dogs that did not make the grade did not.

Robert P are trials are scored by the judges in their books the same way as your, B+ A- A A+

[CDN_Cocker]

The first trial I ever went to see I was lucky enough to shag for a series. The judge I was with knowing I was new to the trial scene, swore me to secrecy but would pull me in after each run and share with me how he scored each dog and why. It was very helpful to see. He would also highlight things that I should focus on in training where commonly dogs do not do well. It was a great experience.

[polmaise]

Test scores are not very important. If your passes a test level that means your average score waas 7.5 and your dog scored at least a 5 over the various categories. If fail it means you scored less than 5 in a particular category. The idea that one judge score your dog a 8 when another scored it a 8.5 is really meaningless. The handler should know hi/her score in their own mind when they complete the test.back in the day many years ago I judge a few of these tests I only gave out 8's and zero. The dogs that should have passed did so and the dogs that did not make the grade did not.

Robert P are trials are scored by the judges in their books the same way as your, B+ A- A A+

'Tests' -using bumpers are scored with a point system for spaniels out of 100 for example .50 for Hunting style, 10 for drop to shot,10 for drop to shot with flush (tossed bumper) 10 for a marked retrieve and 20 for a blind =100 would be a typical scoring chart. all the retrieves would be preceded by a hunt in cover. The level of difficulty between Novice 'Tests' and 'Open tests' would be distance of the retrieves,wind direction ,remote send from stop rather than lining up and obstacles including water.

Yes 'Trials' are scored by the letter system.

[crackerd]

Yes 'Trials' are scored by the letter system.

Robt., my other devious plan during your visit was to get you an apprentice judging assignment for a US retriever trial. Anybody can do it, I think they've been thinking about digging up Jimmy Savile until the latest disclosures on his "professionalism" came to light. Anyhow, while other trials are scored by the letter system, our retriever FTs are scored by hieroglyphics . Maybe farmboy has some judging sheets via Big Farmboy to help prep you and get your "lines" - crooked, straight or bananas - engrained.

I agree with gundogguy as usual that test scores are irrelevant, it's pass/fail and any other "scoring" should be in your own head as handler on how your dog performed and what weaknesses you may need to work on going forward. Or, the way HTs work now and with the soccer-medal-for-everybody mentality, alas, how fast you can get that next rosette out of the judges' hands to add to your collection...

MG

[polmaise]

Yes 'Trials' are scored by the letter system.

Robt., my other devious plan during your visit was to get you an apprentice judging assignment for a US retriever trial. Anybody can do it,
MG

Thanks for the vote of confidence
However, Like everything in life and dogs . who or whom performs on the day and what is perceived to the one judging takes ones eye .
I do believe the cream always rises to the top all be it with a few who don't see it on the way up there,such is judging and competition ,and dogs btw !

If there is one thing that make you look a fool ,then that is a trained dog.
I reckon any one asked within your devious plan would either step up to the plate or decline.

A good judge would only comment on what they see in front of them that day.
Hope you can make that trip to Narleans .MG ? Sure would like to 'shoot the craw' and a beer