I don't understand the logic of the Master National causing the increase of distance. The Master National increases entries in the weekend tests due to dogs staying in the game after receiving their title. Larger entries causes judges to use shorter and tighter marks due to time restraints. People on this very forum complained that this years Master National series were to big and long because of the number of entries. So which way is it?
They increased the distance by 50%. Although distance by itself is not much of a factor, distance will increase the difficulty of most every factor in the field. Therefore, the difficulty of most concepts will increase by increasing the distance of the marks. Tougher tests equals smaller amount of qualifiers.
All true but going bigger takes more time. If the Master National causes larger entries doesn't it in turn cause shorter marks. Time is not an issue in a 10-20 dog trial. It can be in a 60 dog entry. Take the Master National out of the pictures entries drop. Judges then can do bigger marks, more blinds ect. I think many clubs would lose money and cease to exist if the National went away. We all would have less events to chose from.
Originally Posted by Jason Brion