Gun Dog Forum

The "simple training method" post got me thinking about what a field trial dog needs to do that a good finished hunting dog doesn't. What makes training a trial dog so difficult?
My trial experience is very limited. The last one I attended was the GSP of Minnesota walking trial. In OLGD of the four top dogs only one retrieved. This was a very simple call back retrieve of about 20 yards. Never had a dog that wouldn't do that. They can't stay in my kennel if they don't retrieve.
Hard to understand running a dog in a retrieving stake who don't retrieve.
I have trained many Master level dogs, some of which have a mile or more range in the big open country. I find it neither complicated or difficult. Anybody with a bit of understanding of dog psychology, common sense and patience can do it. Most all mistakes involve not stopping and staying stopped.
I have never met a trainer named Smith, Lardy, Hickok, Hahn or any other name of the day. I am sure they are very good at what they do and have help many people have a better dog. I am also sure they good switch methods with each other and have nearly as good results. It is more timing and how they present the lesson than what they present.
Incidentally, I also taught all my kids to read by the time they were four years old.........Cj

I personally trial my hunting dogs so no difference in training other then them being on ground longer when hunting. As for the retrieving part it should be called force fetch call back because in no way does it represent a hunting situation more of a training situation. A true retrieving event should be first bird pointed.

cjhills wrote:The "simple training method" post got me thinking about what a field trial dog needs to do that a good finished hunting dog doesn't. What makes training a trial dog so difficult?
My trial experience is very limited. The last one I attended was the GSP of Minnesota walking trial. In OLGD of the four top dogs only one retrieved. This was a very simple call back retrieve of about 20 yards. Never had a dog that wouldn't do that. They can't stay in my kennel if they don't retrieve.
Hard to understand running a dog in a retrieving stake who don't retrieve.
I have trained many Master level dogs, some of which have a mile or more range in the big open country. I find it neither complicated or difficult. Anybody with a bit of understanding of dog psychology, common sense and patience can do it. Most all mistakes involve not stopping and staying stopped.
I have never met a trainer named Smith, Lardy, Hickok, Hahn or any other name of the day. I am sure they are very good at what they do and have help many people have a better dog. I am also sure they good switch methods with each other and have nearly as good results. It is more timing and how they present the lesson than what they present.
Incidentally, I also taught all my kids to read by the time they were four years old.........Cj

Please go win a few trials and it will answer your question. Sounds like it would be easy for you.

I'm not so sure they should even have a retrieving event. After all for most judges it's a pass/fail effort. When I judges years ago, I watched closely the retrieving, it should not be a pass/fail effort. I had a guy years ago really upset with me because the retrieve he got from his dog knocked him from a maybe second to a fourth and then only because I didn't have another dog to use for fourth. This past year I watched some call back's and was really impressed with how well some on the dogs marked a fall, went right to them and right back. Retrieving done well. And some of the dog's that placed I would not have placed based on their retrieving. I'm talking about dogs that really didn't mark the fall well and when finally finding the bird were slow to pick up and slow to retrieve. One thing in common with most of them was they all held the bird when getting back until asked for it by the handler. If credit for retrieving amounts to no more than it does, it should be eliminated.

To me a great wild bird hunting dog and a great wild bird trial dog are one in the same. Although I would probably still consider a dog that was only lacking in style or animation, or was just a bit short a great hunting dog still. A great hunting dog does not really need to be broke to be great in my eyes either, I don't think field trials should or ever should be about who's dog is broke the best.

I also don't think it is as difficult as people make it out to be, so long as you have the resources - ("bleep" good dogs, grounds, birds, money to travel, horses if your in HB stakes), time, willingness to learn and desire to do it, thick enough skin you can compete. It may take someone with average ability longer to get dogs ready and what not, but I don't see why a decent trainer can't train up a few dogs as well as a pro.

The biggest things IMO is getting your hands on the right dogs, and top pro handlers and top amateurs are friggin good, go watch some good ones and see how they can manage the crap out of a course like an F1 driver. They rarely make mistakes, and can take you out if they need to. They also have numbers which helps. Handling is a much bigger part of the equation then training IMO.

cjhills wrote:The "simple training method" post got me thinking about what a field trial dog needs to do that a good finished hunting dog doesn't. What makes training a trial dog so difficult?
My trial experience is very limited. The last one I attended was the GSP of Minnesota walking trial. In OLGD of the four top dogs only one retrieved. This was a very simple call back retrieve of about 20 yards. Never had a dog that wouldn't do that. They can't stay in my kennel if they don't retrieve.
Hard to understand running a dog in a retrieving stake who don't retrieve.
I have trained many Master level dogs, some of which have a mile or more range in the big open country. I find it neither complicated or difficult. Anybody with a bit of understanding of dog psychology, common sense and patience can do it. Most all mistakes involve not stopping and staying stopped.
I have never met a trainer named Smith, Lardy, Hickok, Hahn or any other name of the day. I am sure they are very good at what they do and have help many people have a better dog. I am also sure they good switch methods with each other and have nearly as good results. It is more timing and how they present the lesson than what they present.
Incidentally, I also taught all my kids to read by the time they were four years old.........Cj

To set the stage here, my comments are in context of retriever trials not pointing dog stakes. A finished hunting dog although worthy of merit is not on the same planet as an All Age retriever. All Age dogs are capable of extreme retrieving, retrieving under harsh conditions, difficult terrain, long distances and for multiple retrieves requiring keen eyes and strong cognitive memory.

If you get a chance, get to a National Retriever Championship for the last several series to see just how difficult and demanding the work can be.

When one asks the question what makes training a trial dog so difficult it clearly demonstrates a lack of understanding on the current demands put on those dogs in competition and the difficult and high level training required to get there not to mention that not all are even capable.

Very, very few amateurs can jump into the big leagues of competition as they are lacking in everything from training resources, knowledge and skills and certainly experience. You are correct in your comment about timing....timing is everything in dog training, but so is the knowledge and experience of being there. Knowing some of the people you quoted, I can tell you just how firm they are in their approaches....well developed and smartly sequenced learning with clear cut goals and standards.

My field trial dogs have always been hunted, that's just life for them. I can tell you that that field trailers who hunt their dogs have indeed some outstanding and capable animals, dogs that are capable of the extreme all the while being under control.....just like good kids are!

I don't run retrieving trials. However, I do think it is a part of a completely finished dog. I think callbacks in a trial are a joke. In a hunt test, they are simply broken out for better evaluation.

If you're running MH dogs with mile plus range why wouldn't you enter a trial?

ACooper wrote:If you're running MH dogs with mile plus range why wouldn't you enter a trial?

Time,money,lack of intrest and desire,countless other reasons.
Kraka, my question was about pointing dogs. I do realize retriever trials are a whole different ballgame. My brother runs and judges them and I attended the nationals in the late nineties. they were unbelievable.
While I am convinced I and many pro trainers and amateurs I know, could and probably have trained dogs to trial levels, I am also convinced I couldn't compete with the better handlers. Which I think would be much harder to learn than training the dog.....................Cj

I judged a guy with what may have been a mile plus dog in a hunt test. Beautiful pointer! Turned loose it took just seconds to go out of site. Never saw it again until we were just entering the bird field. Dog settled down then, I think birds were stopping it. I really liked the dog. I also failed the dog! No obedience at all and only saw it for about five mins of the test. For the average hunter, a one mile dog is totally worthless. In fact I doubt a hunter on foot could get to the dog, if he could find it, before the birds were gone! Most of the trial grounds I've ever been on, if your dog was out a mile it was way off the course. In which case, leave the dog on a tie out near the bird field for 25 mins then turn it loose in the bird field.

I hunt behind the same dogs I compete with in the local NSTRA trials. I work my dogs on point, steady to flush/shot and retrieve not only for hunting but for trialing. The only difference between the two is the time in the field and your dog competing against his/her brace mate in a trial. I am no means an expert trainer or trialer and I still consider myself an amateur trainer/trialer but by me competing in trials makes us a much better team when it comes to hunting. Trialing helps us both learn from each other and it helps us figure out what we need to work on when it comes to hunting. I enjoy spending time afield with my dogs weather it be hunting or at a field trial but in the end I train the same way for both.

Every Master Hunter pointing dog I have seen are broke enough to win any trial, perhaps too well broke to show proper independence and confidence in All-Age stakes. What they tend to lack is range, pace, class.

Unless you are running a Garmin, I have to question the 1 mile casts. Few, if any, can see a dog at a mile, at just a 1,000 yards a dog appears to be a one inch dot.

But the biggest difference in a hunting dog and a trial dog as it involves training is keeping them over the hill broke with all the distractions of horses galloping about, the bracemate's handler shouting, your shouting, point stealing etc.

Most any dog can be kept staunch if you keep them in sight, it is keeping them honest when they are routinely gone 8 - 12 minures at a time.

Then you have the nebulous quality of demonstrating they would find wild birds, were they available. That is hard to judge.

The biggest challenge is to not just leave independence in the dog, but to build it, something hunting dog and retriever trainers are not concerner with

+1 ^^
Especially the last sentence.

cjhills you just dont get it!

There is a lot more to winning trials than just being broke. Especially in wild bird trials!

I love the classic internet post, I could win if I want, but I dont want to.

Neil wrote:...................The biggest challenge is to not just leave independence in the dog, but to build it,...............................

Now there's something to think about. Deep.

Neil wrote:
The biggest challenge is to not just leave independence in the dog, but to build it, something hunting dog and retriever trainers are not concerner with

That last part is BS, how in the world do you know what all hunting dog and retriever trainers are concerned with.....give me a break.

Elkhunter wrote:cjhills you just dont get it!

There is a lot more to winning trials than just being broke. Especially in wild bird trials!

I love the classic internet post, I could win if I want, but I dont want to.

Elkhunter;
Did you read my post. You are right, that is why I asked the question. Never said anything about winning if I wanted to. Matter of fact, I sad I couldn't compete with the better handlers. I did say I didn't want to waste the time or money and lacked the interest.
Sorry if that upsets you....................................................Cj

birddog1968 wrote:

Neil wrote:
The biggest challenge is to not just leave independence in the dog, but to build it, something hunting dog and retriever trainers are not concerner with

That last part is BS, how in the world do you know what all hunting dog and retriever trainers are concerned with.....give me a break.

Some would consider you constant petty attacks stalking. I just think it pathetic.

I should have said, " In my experience independence is not something most hunting dog trainers concern themselves, and I have never even heard of a retriever trainer valuing it".

You need to get a life, anyone with even 5th grade reading skills would know I did not mean to speak for all trainers, just the majority of those I know.

cjhills wrote:

Elkhunter wrote:cjhills you just dont get it!

There is a lot more to winning trials than just being broke. Especially in wild bird trials!

I love the classic internet post, I could win if I want, but I dont want to.

Elkhunter;
Did you read my post. You are right, that is why I asked the question. Never said anything about winning if I wanted to. Matter of fact, I sad I couldn't compete with the better handlers. I did say I didn't want to waste the time or money and lacked the interest.
Sorry if that upsets you....................................................Cj

I would like to think trialing has not been a total wasre of my time and money.

Constant huh, some imagination you got there....we got in one debate on one thread. Don't flatter yourself.

so????????? and the purpose of your original post was.......????????? Was there a question asking for comments, or discussion?

Or was that just to show trialers that you think little of the sport and the dogs who are involved.....???

I'm finding that the same is all over the world!
.....
You wanna just take the jacket off and step outside?
Problem is...You can't!!
So, ..Tell us how good you are, or shut the feck up!..better still, show us how good you are, then there will be no need for words
Drink some water, and dunk yer head!..
I'm getting sick of this "bleep"! (ps, I've just had a perfect day with the dog's and good dog people and all the dog's did not perform!)......we were training! them to be Trial dog's!..not Testing them against each other :roll:

polmaise wrote:I'm finding that the same is all over the world!
.....
You wanna just take the jacket off and step outside?
Problem is...You can't!!
So, ..Tell us how good you are, or shut the feck up!..better still, show us how good you are, then there will be no need for words
Drink some water, and dunk yer head!..
I'm getting sick of this "bleep"! (ps, I've just had a perfect day with the dog's and good dog people and all the dog's did not perform!)......we were training! them to be Trial dog's!..not Testing them against each other :roll:

Dogs compete against each other under judgment to a standard of performance in a trial and perform compared individually to a standard in a test.

birddog1968 wrote:Constant huh, some imagination you got there....we got in one debate on one thread. Don't flatter yourself.

What about the "Why do you come on this forum" thread?

Please contribute, if you can,

Cajun Casey wrote:

polmaise wrote:I'm finding that the same is all over the world!
.....
You wanna just take the jacket off and step outside?
Problem is...You can't!!
So, ..Tell us how good you are, or shut the feck up!..better still, show us how good you are, then there will be no need for words
Drink some water, and dunk yer head!..
I'm getting sick of this "bleep"! (ps, I've just had a perfect day with the dog's and good dog people and all the dog's did not perform!)......we were training! them to be Trial dog's!..not Testing them against each other :roll:

Dogs compete against each other under judgment to a standard of performance in a trial and perform compared individually to a standard in a test.

and mine just go out shooting and are judged on their performance on that day, and when it does not perform I train till it does!...Then ...I allow any judge to see the results of what it can and can't do!

polmaise wrote:

Cajun Casey wrote:

polmaise wrote:I'm finding that the same is all over the world!
.....
You wanna just take the jacket off and step outside?
Problem is...You can't!!
So, ..Tell us how good you are, or shut the feck up!..better still, show us how good you are, then there will be no need for words
Drink some water, and dunk yer head!..
I'm getting sick of this "bleep"! (ps, I've just had a perfect day with the dog's and good dog people and all the dog's did not perform!)......we were training! them to be Trial dog's!..not Testing them against each other :roll:

Dogs compete against each other under judgment to a standard of performance in a trial and perform compared individually to a standard in a test.

and mine just go out shooting and are judged on their performance on that day, and when it does not perform I train till it does!...Then ...I allow any judge to see the results of what it can and can't do!

HPR, isn't it? While the UK dogs don't have the speed we look for sometimes in the US, the evaluations seem more demanding from what I've seen on blogs and webaites.

Y
I should have said, " In my experience independence is not something most hunting dog trainers concern themselves, and I have never even heard of a retriever trainer valuing it".
.[/quote]

I know what you're trying to say I just don't think you're saying it quite right. All hunters value independence in a dog, they certainly don't want to spend the day hacking him. But they don't want the dog out there 300+ yards from them. They want the dog to stay in contact with them. In my experience, the average hunter is pretty darn happy with a 100-150 yard dog.

I also strongly feel that for grouse and pheasant, those ranges are the ones that result in the most shot birds.

Retriever trainers do value independence, but at 30 yards, not 300.

Many hunters don't know how to hunt a dog to the best of that dog's abilities, but those that do value independence.

What I am calling independence, is just letting the dog hunt the birds and not directing them to where we think the birds are. The only place in fact thT retriever trainers do NOT value independence, is in a blind or secondary selection.

Cajun Casey wrote: HPR, isn't it? While the UK dogs don't have the speed we look for sometimes in the US, the evaluations seem more demanding from what I've seen on blogs and webaites.

I think our HPR trials are maybe quite a bit different from yours. Some of our dogs can run fast and far but if control is lacking or if the distance the dog runs out to does not suit the woodlands or other kinds of cover then the dog is likely to be eliminated from the trial.

I ran a stubble field and grouse moor dog in my very first HPR trial and got chucked out for the way in which she hunted woodlands in which she could not be easily seen. The judges commented that she was like Haile's Comet.....she could only be seen when she whizzed past once in every 86 years !

Our best HPR 's have to be able to hunt wide open grouse moors or thick cover changing their range and pace to suit the terrain. Not even the trial pointers and setters here are allowed or encouraged to go out really far. At their trials that I have attended it was rare to see a dog hunt more than about 200 yards to either side of it's handler.....but of course all of our trials are walking trials.

Bill T.

The OP's question was about greater difficulty in training a field trial dog, when I mentioned independence, I had previously (in the same post) spoke of dogs needed to be over the hill broke, being gone for 8 - 12 minutes at a time!

Look, few hunting dog trainers and no retriever trainers I know would value a dog out of sight for 12 minutes!

This is a strange discussion, usually the hunters are telling me how worthless an independent trial dog is.

BTW the trial dog must be trained to show himself at extended range, not yo-yo all way back to you, and that is hard.

I am just trying to answer the question,

Neil wrote:The OP's question was about greater difficulty in training a field trial dog, when I mentioned independence, I had previously (in the same post) spoke of dogs needed to be over the hill broke, being gone for 8 - 12 minutes at a time!

Look, few hunting dog trainers and no retriever trainers I know would value a dog out of sight for 12 minutes!

This is a strange discussion, usually the hunters are telling me how worthless an independent trial dog is.

BTW the trial dog must be trained to show himself at extended range, not yo-yo all way back to you, and that is hard.

I am just trying to answer the question,

Thanks.

Neil wrote:a
Look, few hunting dog trainers and no retriever trainers I know would value a dog out of sight for 12 minutes!

This is a strange discussion, usually the hunters are telling me how worthless an independent trial dog is.

,

You're right; I would never want either one out of sight for that amount of time. But that doesn't mean I don't value independence. You'd combining independence and range and though related, they are not the same. You could easily have a fiercely independent dog that never got over 30 yards from the handler.

My point was it is easier to keep a dog broke that is closer, than one over the hill. Debatable of how much, but some easier.

But since the OP has said he thinks trials are a waste of time and money, I question his sincerity in asking the question. It is more likely he was trolling. Let's not give him the satisfaction.

Gentlemen: The World Series is on. Get rid of all frustration by yelling at the ump.

Sharon wrote:Gentlemen: The World Series is on. Get rid of all frustration by yelling at the ump.

Good advice, I just switched from "The Kennedys".

Neil wrote:My point was it is easier to keep a dog broke that is closer, than one over the hill. Debatable of how much, but some easier.

But since the OP has said he thinks trials are a waste of time and money, I question his sincerity in asking the question. It is more likely he was trolling. Let's not give him the satisfaction.

As you or someone may have eluded to Neil, it's easy to say how great you or your dogs are on a keyboard. It's another to put up or shut up and I know you've done that. We only have the OP's say so that he could be successful in the trial game. Funny how many people spout that belief until they see a trial dog run.

Sharon wrote:Gentlemen: The World Series is on. Get rid of all frustration by yelling at the ump.

Come on Sharon, of mor importance, it' s the Packers against the Vikings!

gonehuntin' wrote:

Neil wrote:My point was it is easier to keep a dog broke that is closer, than one over the hill. Debatable of how much, but some easier.

But since the OP has said he thinks trials are a waste of time and money, I question his sincerity in asking the question. It is more likely he was trolling. Let's not give him the satisfaction.

As you or someone may have eluded to Neil, it's easy to say how great you or your dogs are on a keyboard. It's another to put up or shut up and I know you've done that. We only have the OP's say so that he could be successful in the trial game. Funny how many people spout that belief until they see a trial dog run.

Your reading comprehension is beyond belief. Never once said I could be successful in the trial game. I clearly said I couldn't compete with the pros or good amateur handlers and I do not have the interest or desire to try therefore it is a waste of my money. What you do with yours is no concern of mine. I also have seen a good number of trials and don't have a lot of interest. Can't see why that should be so upsetting to a few people. I asked what I thought was a good question. Some people just want to argue and insult so be it. Thanks to the people who had answers.
Wonder why the arguers get so much more active as it gets later. Have a nice night ........................................Cj

gonehuntin' wrote:

Sharon wrote:Gentlemen: The World Series is on. Get rid of all frustration by yelling at the ump.

Come on Sharon, of more importance, it' s the Packers against the Vikings!

No . Football will be on until February at least ; only 3 World Series games left. I'm not American , but I would sure like to see Boston win the Series considering the tough year the city has had.

CJ,

While you did admit that handlers might be hard to beat, you suggest there is little difficulty in the training.

Those top handlers have clients that will pay $40,000 for a dog that has been developed properly. So they, the clients and the handlers, must think the trainers add something of real value. Taking a $1,000 pup and selling it for 40 times that two years later says something.

It is just not the handler that beats us, but the dogs and how they were trained.

Neil wrote: It is just not the handler that beats us, but the dogs and how they were trained.

Decent handling can be learned. But if you don't have enough dog.......

Neil, when you pay 40,000 for a dog don't you think that you are not really paying for the time and effort that went into that particular dog, but rather the combined time and effort that went into the 10+ dogs that didn't make the cut to find that one dog that could do it.

slistoe wrote:

Neil wrote: It is just not the handler that beats us, but the dogs and how they were trained.

Decent handling can be learned. But if you don't have enough dog.......

Neil, when you pay 40,000 for a dog don't you think that you are not really paying for the time and effort that went into that particular dog, but rather the combined time and effort that went into the 10+ dogs that didn't make the cut to find that one dog that could do it.

In many cases that is true, but guys like Buddy Smith takes one and makes it. And even in the other cases, they develope and train the same. Some just take the lessons better. I don't think it refutes my position that the top developers of young dogs are paid a lot of money and are worth it.

Breeding, developing, and handling are all important.

I certainly wasn't trying to refute anything. If all it took was starting with 10 well bred pups and at the end of 2 years you would have yourself a Nat. Champion contender, we would all have one.

Handlers do make a difference, I always read online of people intimidated to show up to big trials.

I figured, heck they are just dogs, I have a dog, might as well enter him!

We have had some good success the first year, hope to have more. I really enjoy them, great people and good times.

Neil wrote: but guys like Buddy Smith takes one and makes it.

So my next pup I just send it to Buddy with a chequebook and I have a couple of years to plan the dinner?

LOL Let me know how that works. I'll start saving my money.

slistoe wrote:

Neil wrote: but guys like Buddy Smith takes one and makes it.

So my next pup I just send it to Buddy with a chequebook and I have a couple of years to plan the dinner?

Nope, there is a 4th leg, selection. So send Buddy a blank check, let him pick and develope the dog and you will have one that will qualify for Ames, getting on the steps takes some luck in the drawing.

As to learning to handle, yes you can, but only in the same sense that you can learn to hit a baseball. Sharon got me watching the World Series, and hitting looks pretty simple to me, just swing the bat.

gonehuntin' wrote:

Sharon wrote:Gentlemen: The World Series is on. Get rid of all frustration by yelling at the ump.

Come on Sharon, of more importance, it' s the Packers against the Vikings!

GH, Monday morning quarterbacking analogy: Would Aaron Rodgers be the NFC retriever Neil thinks of as paling in comparison to the Packers' rookie 4th-round draft choice OT "herding dog" in terms of training to the highest levels and executing at what he's trained to do?

And how 'bout that Eddie Lacy big dawgin' it with the best of 'em - Roll Tide! and Go Pack Go!

MG

It takes a combination of three things to make a great competitive dog. Take away any of the three and the dog will never achieve greatness.

1. The dog must have great natural ability and intelligence.
2. The dog must be thoroughly trained.
3. The dog must be campaigned.

Seems to me it was Rex Carr that used to say that. Breaks it down to the simplest terms.

gonehuntin' wrote:It takes a combination of three things to make a great competitive dog. Take away any of the three and the dog will never achieve greatness.

1. The dog must have great natural ability and intelligence.
2. The dog must be thoroughly trained.
3. The dog must be campaigned.

Seems to me it was Rex Carr that used to say that. Breaks it down to the simplest terms.

Well said.

Elkhunter wrote:Handlers do make a difference, I always read online of people intimidated to show up to big trials.

I figured, heck they are just dogs, I have a dog, might as well enter him!

We have had some good success the first year, hope to have more. I really enjoy them, great people and good times.

I am a rank amateur when it comes to handing dogs in a trial.

Here is my process.

1. Show up
2. Shut up and listen
3. Turn dog loose
4. Pray I find dog on point