PDA

View Full Version : fairness Question in Brit FT's



Pete
12-29-2008, 11:40 PM
I was reading in the event section of a british event which will take place I have heard a bit about these trials and that many dogs are on line and wait their turn to retrieve. Also all game is retrieved crippled or not. I was wondering about the last dog to work in that group of dogs. Lets say after an half hour of watching other dogs retrieve the dead birds,,,then you are sent and your bird is lightly crippled, and that it left the country a long time ago.
How does that work as far as judging.
It doesnt seem fair that that one dog has to track most likely in vein through all those other dog and bird scents
How is that judged
Pete.

rmilner
12-30-2008, 08:23 AM
First, that scenario is highly unlikely. The judges will always have the crippled birds retreived first. The judges instruct the handlers on which bird to retrieve.
However, if the scenario did happen, It would probably go like this:

The judges would send one dog for it. If he failed, they would send another. If he also failed they would go out and check for the bird. If they determined that the bird had run off 30 minutes prior, then they would probably not penalize either dog and would carry them to the next test.

Typically British trial judges are judging with the criteria of:

Collect all the birds.
Collect wounded birds first and dispatch them in minimum time.

A dog that does that efficiently and with good manners will score highly.

Typically the judges are experienced and cognizant of the factors affecting a dog's performance in retrieving. By the way, professional trainers are allowed to judge in British trials.


Best Regards,
Robert Milner
www.duckhillkennels.com

TroyFeeken
12-30-2008, 10:45 AM
Robert, I'm curious as to the retrieve the wounded birds first. How does that work with primary/secondary selection and marking? Is there a lot of handling in tests?

rmilner
12-30-2008, 12:28 PM
Troy,
Imagine that a line of pheasant hunters is walking line abreast across a beet field in North Dakota flushing pheasants and shooting them. There are 4 dogs (and 2 judges) interspersed across the line.
The guns knock down 3 or 4 birds. The line stops for the retrieves. The judge on the left side of the line thinks that a bird 75 yards out to the right has been crippled. He tells the handler of dog #3 to retrieve that bird. If dog #3 happens to have been looking to the right when that particular bird was hit, then it is a mark. If #3 happened to be looking to the left at other activities when that bird was hit, then it will be a blind. The judge doesn't care. He wants the dog to retrieve the cripple with a minimum disturbance of cover and without chasing any freshly flushed birds. He expects the dog to track down and collect the cripple, also without chasing freshly flushed birds. If it happens to be a blind for #3, then the judge expects the handling to be crisp, without undue noise from the handler. It is much more about getting the bird than it is differentiating between a mark and a blind.

Best Regards,
Robert Milner

TroyFeeken
12-30-2008, 01:39 PM
Thanks for the clarification Robert. So even more so than marking and handling, the dogs must be able to use handler selection.

What kind of distances are we talking here? I'm assuming they very greatly because of the attempt at a natural hunting simulation with wounded gliders and such.

TroyFeeken
12-30-2008, 01:41 PM
Also looking back to the fairness of the test, how can dogs be rated against each other as each one receives a different type of mark or blind? To one dog the bird is indented, to another it's not. Or inline, etc.

Sedric
12-30-2008, 01:54 PM
Troy will you be entering a dog?

rmilner
12-30-2008, 03:16 PM
Also looking back to the fairness of the test, how can dogs be rated against each other as each one receives a different type of mark or blind? To one dog the bird is indented, to another it's not. Or inline, etc.

Fairness is not considered and is not a concern. Each dog is judged on his performance on whatever test fate hands him. He is judged as to how well he does finding and retrieving the particular bird which he is instructed to retrieve.

rmilner
12-30-2008, 03:24 PM
Thanks for the clarification Robert. So even more so than marking and handling, the dogs must be able to use handler selection.

What kind of distances are we talking here? I'm assuming they very greatly because of the attempt at a natural hunting simulation with wounded gliders and such.

The distances do vary greatly. It is a common practice in walkups to have dogs and judges walking at near each end of the line, which could extend 200 yards across a field. Often the judges on the left end will send a dog from that left end to retrieve a shot off the right end, giving a retrieve of 150 yds +. Most of the retrieves are probably under 100 yds.

The big culture shocker to me at the first field trial I attended was watching a handler send a dog off into heavy tall cover for a bird. The dog is totally out of sight for 15 minutes and then reappears either with a bird or without. If he is without a bird, then the next dog is sent.

Pete
12-30-2008, 03:53 PM
Thanks Robert
I meant to post that question on the general forum
I goofed but it looks like it turned out fine.
British trials seem very difficult and a whole different ball game and training regiment
Thanks again
Pete

TroyFeeken
12-30-2008, 04:57 PM
Fairness is not considered and is not a concern. Each dog is judged on his performance on whatever test fate hands him. He is judged as to how well he does finding and retrieving the particular bird which he is instructed to retrieve.

I guess my thought wasn't so much on fairness as it was in judging the complexity of the task. All in all it's almost more of a crack shot as to what kind of difficulty the dog is being judged on. Say a large number of dogs receive the go ahead to pick up a bird in the water and one is required to pick up two down the shore or a very cheaty mark. Is that dog judged differently than the others because of the difficulty of the task at hand? Or are things like cheating water judged, just marking and picking up the bird and bringing it back...

TroyFeeken
12-30-2008, 04:58 PM
Troy will you be entering a dog?

No I will not. Just curiosity regarding the methods of a British type trial.

kindakinky
12-30-2008, 05:22 PM
This is why I asked in my thread about when the split in labs started. The British FT's are so different from the U.S. FTs. Did this difference contribute to the split?

Sharon Potter
12-30-2008, 07:39 PM
This is why I asked in my thread about when the split in labs started. The British FT's are so different from the U.S. FTs. Did this difference contribute to the split?

In my experience, the British field Labs don't look like our American show Labs, so my opinion, (for what's worth ;) ) is that the British field Lab has nothing to do with the American "split" between show and field.

Tim Carrion
12-31-2008, 12:07 PM
I was reading in the event section of a british event which will take place I have heard a bit about these trials and that many dogs are on line and wait their turn to retrieve. Also all game is retrieved crippled or not. I was wondering about the last dog to work in that group of dogs. Lets say after an half hour of watching other dogs retrieve the dead birds,,,then you are sent and your bird is lightly crippled, and that it left the country a long time ago.
How does that work as far as judging.
It doesnt seem fair that that one dog has to track most likely in vein through all those other dog and bird scents
How is that judged
Pete.

This was not just a "British thing" but early American FTs also had multiple dogs on the line. I recall hearing of the expression "wipe the eye"

1931 LRC trial:

"Two judges, the official guns and 2 handlers each with a competing dog(a brace) all walked in a line across the officially designated field. As the participants progressed across the test area, boys(hidden in cover) threw first one bird and it was shot threw another. ...The line stopped and the judge called one of two handlers to send his or her dog...
The judges approved of variant falls and cripples because these circumstances enabled the dogs to better demonstrate their natural hunting abilities...
If the dog failed, then the judge would call on the second dog. If the second dog found the bird the first dog missed the judges considered that an even more successful retrieve as he had " wiped the eye" of the first dog."

History of Field Trials in America The Early Years 1931-1941 page 10


Tim

Todd Caswell
12-31-2008, 04:26 PM
Thanks Robert
I meant to post that question on the general forum
I goofed but it looks like it turned out fine.
British trials seem very difficult and a whole different ball game and training regiment
Thanks again
Pete



Not to generalize but I would think it would be hard for "most" of our dogs to be competitive at there game as would it be for there dogs in our FT's.

rmilner
01-01-2009, 05:57 PM
(British) Kennel Club Field Trial Rules can be read here:

http://www.duckhillkennels.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=8

Best Regards,
Robert Milner

kindakinky
01-02-2009, 07:06 PM
Sharon,
With all due respect, weren't the British Field Labs of yesteryear also the foundation for the American and Field labs of today?

It used to be British Field Labs looked like American Show dogs and vice-versa because they were all the same thing.

So, my question remains: when did it start to split? At one time, they were the same.

Did the changes in Field trials in the U.S. (because British trials have largely remained the same) contribute to the split? And when? Is there a four way split: British Field lab, British show lab, American Field Lab, American Show lab?

Remember, the British Field Trials put a premium on crippled birds and manners at the line. In American Field Trials, a cripple is often called a "no bird" and LONG retrieves with handling are often the makers of trial champions.

Does this translate into why a British Field Trial champion may not be to do the work at an American Field Trial and vice-versa? And does this translate into the what is seen in the American conformation shows versus American Field trials vs. British Field Trials vs. British conformation shows?

Could a typical British Field Champion win in an American conformation show?

Just asking:p::p






In my experience, the British field Labs don't look like our American show Labs, so my opinion, (for what's worth ;) ) is that the British field Lab has nothing to do with the American "split" between show and field.

YardleyLabs
01-02-2009, 07:17 PM
Sharon,
....
In American Field Trials, a cripple is often called a "no bird" and LONG retrieves with handling are often the makers of trial champions.
....


My experience is somewhat limited, but I have never seen a cripple called a no bird except once when a pheasant escaped into the woods more than 100 yards from the original point of fall. I also saw one called a no bird in a senior hunt test under similar circumstances and a number of junior hunt test handlers complaining when their dogs were dropped for failing to pick up cripples. We train on live birds to help make sure that cripples are not a problem. Long retrieves with handling almost certainly will result in being dropped in a field trial since it represents a failure to mark. Long retrieves without handling are routine.

Sharon Potter
01-02-2009, 09:51 PM
Sharon,
With all due respect, weren't the British Field Labs of yesteryear also the foundation for the American and Field labs of today?

It used to be British Field Labs looked like American Show dogs and vice-versa because they were all the same thing.

So, my question remains: when did it start to split? At one time, they were the same.

Did the changes in Field trials in the U.S. (because British trials have largely remained the same) contribute to the split? And when? Is there a four way split: British Field lab, British show lab, American Field Lab, American Show lab?

Remember, the British Field Trials put a premium on crippled birds and manners at the line. In American Field Trials, a cripple is often called a "no bird" and LONG retrieves with handling are often the makers of trial champions.

Does this translate into why a British Field Trial champion may not be to do the work at an American Field Trial and vice-versa? And does this translate into the what is seen in the American conformation shows versus American Field trials vs. British Field Trials vs. British conformation shows?

Could a typical British Field Champion win in an American conformation show?

Just asking:p::p

In my experience and opinion, (which is worth exactly what you're paying for it :D:D) the show people created the biggest split...on both sides of the pond. I believe the British show dogs were first, and were quickly copied by the American show contingent, to the detriment of the breed. Neither has anything much to do with the field Labs from either origin.

As for the field Labs...they're bred to compete in a specific "game", with the two types of trials being quite different. That explains the split...the dogs are bred for a competition rather than to a standard.

As for one kind of trial dog being able to compete in the other venue...I think there are probably some dogs that could, with the proper training from the beginning and all the way through, compete in the other country's trials successfully. Problem is that it's two different games....not unlike expecting an NBA player to be a linebacker in the NFL or the other way 'round. Two great athletes but two different sports. But they're both supposed to be about hunting....well, sort of....just like football and basketball are both played with a ball. ;)

I know several British Labs, and you wouldn't be able to pick them out of a crowd of US field bred Labs by looks alone. And they've been trained to the American style....but more toward hunt tests than field trials.

Any time a breed is bred for a specific competition rather than to the standard, you'll eventually end up with a big split. As the competition gets tougher over the years, the dogs will be bred toward whatever wins that "game" rather than to the standard.

What started out to be an all-purpose gun dog has evolved into a split because of competitions. It's the games we play that changes things, and the evolution of the games will dictate the evolution of the dogs.

Clear as mud, right? :p