"Do any of you guys besides /Paul and me judge Master tests?
I ask because with a 60 dog Master, a couple of 150 yard marks and/or Blinds is definitely going to affect the time management aspect of the test. Well placed marks and blinds under 100 yards will answer all the questions you should be asking as a Hunt Test judge. Quality always trumps distance, in my experience. I don't want to dumb down the final series because we chewed up too much time in the first two.-Paul "
I judge Master and fully understand the time management issue. If one of those "long" marks or blinds is needed for some reason, they are always placed in the last series where there are fewer players, or some other element is removed for time management. I try to be VERY efficient in the first 2 series so that the last series can include whatever mark/blind is needed.
But like others have said, there is much more to a mark/blind than pure distance if you have good grounds to work with.
I judge and run Finished/Master, hang around and train with some good FT folks, and I find the OP to be surreal on multiple levels. YMMV. ;)
Do you think HT judges are using longer distances to make the master test more difficult?
Could this be an effort to cut back on the number of dogs passing master tests, getting the MH title, and qualifying for the Master National ?
The MNRC Board's recent effort to make it more difficult to qualify for a master national failed. Clubs voted the rule down so the MNRC is still facing how to handle huge master national entries. The other day I saw that 710 had qualified to run this year. There will be more as there is still time to make the deadline.
I've run some really tough master test and none of them had marks that were hard because of distance.
I wouldn't overreact to this, as I really don't know how much a problem this really is. I know AKC changed the rules allowing for slightly longer marks and blinds, but nothing like 200 yards. If somebody ran a HT with 200 yard or over marks, I'm sure that is a very rare event and I would expect the HT committee to step in.
I don't mean to belabor the point but the recommendations are not voted on by the clubs or their representatives. Here is the report from the Master National meeting where the new rules were discussed. http://2012mnrcreport.theretrieverne...9_archive.html
Originally Posted by Hunt'EmUp
Seems to me that there was a vote at Master National several years ago to allow the distance at the Master National to extend to 150 yards. Maybe that is what you are remembering?
Originally Posted by Brad B
And some people just can't judge distances...I remember judging with a nice gentleman who insisted that we put a senior blind "next to that tree over there." I thought it looked a bit far and said so. He said no way that is longer than 85 yards. Well, I stepped it off and about half way there I turned around and said this is 90 paces right here. He thought I must be taking baby steps so he paced it off, too. We put the blind halfway to the tree. When someone arrived with a range finder, the blind stake was shot at 89 yards.
Here is the link to the set ups at the last MN. I really wouldnt say distance was the issue!!
Surely with so many dogs registered time restraints would not allow for the big marks. Anyway I wouldnt mind seeing big marks; Id rather them than the in your face memory bird!! Besides, my dog will see all of the above come hunting season!!
The MNRC has NOTHING to do with the rules other than the fact that usually the Hunt Test Advisory Committee annual meeting is held in conjunction with the MNRC business meetings.
Originally Posted by helencalif
You can spend all the time in the world typing in opinions and whatever Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr you can direct those comments to these folks:
The AKC Retriever Hunting Test Advisory Committee
It is the responsibility of the RHT Advisory Committee to provide input to the AKC Performance Events Department with regard to the Retriever Hunting Test Regulations. This may involve clarification of existing Regulations or new Regulations that are felt to enhance the sport. Topics for Advisory Committee discussion may originate from RHT participants or from the Committee members themselves. The Performance Events Department may also direct ideas to the Committee for consideration.
The Performance Events Department values the input of the Advisory Committee but is under no obligation to agree or act upon their suggestions. The Department may also, on occasion, act without Committee input.
Members of the Retriever Hunting Test Advisory Committee are:
Term Expires at end of:
Eastern Time Zone Representative
Robert Rascoe firstname.lastname@example.org 2016
242 Fairfax Drive 336-765-9420 (H)
Winston-Salem, NC 27104
Rocky Mountain Time Zone Representative
Jeff Schoonover email@example.com 2013
1432 Red Fox Circle 970-686-0714 (H)
Windsor, CO 80550 970-227-1284 (C)
Central Time Zone Representative
Richard Pyka firstname.lastname@example.org 2014
W 235 N 262-229-3031 (H)
9544 Mt. Vernon Dr.
Colgate, WI 53017
Pacific Time Zone Representative
Tom Quarles email@example.com 2015
12725 Jordan Road 360-691-2650 (off)
Arlington, WA 98223-9409 425-377-3793 (C)
Bill Teague firstname.lastname@example.org
734 CR 630 936-559-9007 (H)
Nacogdoches, TX 75964 713-252-3918 (C)
Take it to the front office- the receptionist donít give a shit regards
Thanks, Bubba, for posting the info on the Retriever Hunt Test Advisory Committee. It appears that the change from 100 yds. to 150 yds. max. was a suggestion that followed this process before it became a new rule. It either was a suggestion made to the RHTAC who agreed with it or they thought of it and then passed the suggestion to AKC ... or the change originated within the Performance Events Dept.
I knew I could not remember voting on it at any club meeting. This explains why.
Bubba makes a good suggestion. If you wish to express an opinion about the rule change from 100 to 150, contact your regional rep on the RHTAC and/or contact the chairman Bill Teague. Field trialers can't be blamed for hunt test changes and vice versa.