The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: Re-run in a field trial

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Grantville GA
    Posts
    2,334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    There is nothing hypothetical about the unfairness of giving one dog a bye on a mark. If the unfairness occurred before the dog popped why was it allowed to be handled to the bird. The lesson to judges should be that if you think an unfair situation has occurred you are obligated to pick up the dog immediately before it has retrieved the bird and bring it back later to be retested. To do otherwise reduces judging to speculation.
    I gave a plausible explanation to that question several posts ago. But yes, the unfairness to other dogs is hypothetical because the dog interfered with may be picked up on the next bird. The dog interfered with may not factor in placements for its other work unrelated to the interference. But here's another situation we all face as judges to which your hypothetical reasoning could also be applied (but isn't), it's a no bird where a dog gets two looks at a set of marks. No other dog not getting a no-bird gets two looks - either to it's benefit or detriment, the unfairness exists, so as a judge you deal with it in the most fair manner to all.
    David Didier, GA

  2. #22
    Senior Member Sharon Potter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Wisconsin Rapids, WI
    Posts
    2,881

    Default

    I was the gunner on the long bird at a trial where a similar situation happened. The judges took the interference into account and scored the dog accordingly (if I remember correctly, the dog got a yellow ribbon ).
    Sharon Potter

    www.redbranchkennels.net

    Chesapeake Bay Retrievers...too many to list.

    Team Huntsmith

  3. #23
    Senior Member EdA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    7,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Granddaddy View Post
    I gave a plausible explanation to that question several posts ago. But yes, the unfairness to other dogs is hypothetical because the dog interfered with may be picked up on the next bird. The dog interfered with may not factor in placements for its other work unrelated to the interference. But here's another situation we all face as judges to which your hypothetical reasoning could also be applied (but isn't), it's a no bird where a dog gets two looks at a set of marks. No other dog not getting a no-bird gets two looks - either to it's benefit or detriment, the unfairness exists, so as a judge you deal with it in the most fair manner to all.
    With all due respect there is no comparison to having a no bird versus retrieving a bird and then being scored on that mark on a rerun. Either there was unfairness in which case the dog should receive a rerun prior to retrieving the bird or there was no unfairness, there are no other acceptable scenarios.

  4. #24
    Senior Member Sabireley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Culpeper VA
    Posts
    1,111

    Default

    I had almost the same thing happen. I was interfered with by whistles from another stake. My dog had picked up the flyer and was hunting the second bird, in the AOF, when she sat on a whistle from the Open blind. Thankfully the judges heard it and had me pick her up before she retrieved the bird. The AM stake was halted until the Open finished the blind, and I got a rerun at the end and an AM 3rd.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Doug Main's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Galesburg, IL
    Posts
    867

    Default

    I agree with Dennis.

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    How can you score a rerun on a mark the dog has already retrieved? The standard for fairness also includes the other dogs, there is no way to rectify the issue without scrapping the test and starting over. When a judge recognizes an unfair situation the dog must immediately picked up before retrieving the bird and then given a rerun. After the bird has been retrieved there is no remedy other than a new test.
    With all due respect, I don't think the rule book mandates scrapping the test as the only alternative!

    Quote Originally Posted by RetrieversONLINE View Post
    I understand that may often be the best, most fair, course of action but my point was the Rule Book does not say you can't re-score that mark on a rerun (unless the unfairness occurred afterwards). If this was the 70th dog in an 80 dog Open would you scrap the test or would you try to be as fair as you could to the dog? As a competitor I would not feel hard done by because you gave another dog a best chance after an interfering unfairness as I described. As you know it is often tough for the dog to do a re-run well so it's not like you are giving him a cake walk!
    Realistically, nobody is going to scrap an open after 70 dogs have already run if they can avoid it! How fair would that be for the the dogs that have already run it?

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    There is nothing hypothetical about the unfairness of giving one dog a bye on a mark. If the unfairness occurred before the dog popped why was it allowed to be handled to the bird. The lesson to judges should be that if you think an unfair situation has occurred you are obligated to pick up the dog immediately before it has retrieved the bird and bring it back later to be retested. To do otherwise reduces judging to speculation.

    What if the dog wasn't handled to the bird, but instead went on it's own? After watching 70 other dogs, you are almost certain that the dog would have retrieved the bird cleanly had it not been interfered with causing the pop. Yet it was too close to the bird to get stopped and called in before it picked up the bird.


    It is called "Judging" not scorekeeping there is always an element of speculation involved. Making an "Intereference" call itself is speculation.

  6. #26
    Senior Member EdA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    7,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Main View Post
    What if the dog wasn't handled to the bird, but instead went on it's own? .
    But in our scenario that is not what happened so that is what the discussion is about or at least I thought that is what it was about.

    If the dog went on it's own and went to and found the mark there was no handler influence and if indeed the so called pop was in response to a whistle from another stake there is no problem and no need for a rerun.

    The question is how can you score a mark on a rerun when the dog has already retrieved that mark?
    Last edited by EdA; 10-29-2013 at 12:40 PM.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Doug Main's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Galesburg, IL
    Posts
    867

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    But in our scenario that is not what happened so that is what the discussion is about or at least I thought that is what it was about.
    I thought we moved beyond the initial scenario which did not have enough info to a more general discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    The question is how can you score a mark on a rerun when the dog has already retrieved that mark?
    I would say it depends. There are way too many variables to consider. A lot would depend on what the test was and what the "unfairness" was.

    In a perfect world, the judges would have the dog picked up the moment the unfairness happened and before it retrieved the mark. As we don't live in a perfect world and are mere humans, we try to do the best we can, as the rule states, "If there is an occurrence which makes for a relatively unfair test for a dog, the Judges shall exercise their discretion in determining how to form a judgment of the quality of the work of the dog in the series notwithstanding the unfairness."

    I completely agree with Dennis's comment:
    Quote Originally Posted by RetrieversONLINE View Post
    I think the Rulebook reference to not scoring a previously completed mark is referring to a mark completed before the point of unfairness.

    Consider a dog enroute to a mark and an unfairness occurs such as some interference in the field. However, the dog does get the bird albeit poorly while the judges are observing and deciding what to do. Not only do they then decide an unfairness occurred but that it affected the dogs performance and to the extent it would affect another 3rd bird perhaps.

    They declare a rerun and the dog gets scored from the point of the unfairness. In other words they score the mark again. If you think an unfairness occurred and caused a faulty performance you can't just pretend the dog did OK. And, you can't always get the dog picked up before the fetch!

    Perhaps above not a common scenario but do not think the Rulebook disallows re-scoring a mark unless it has been completed before the unfairness.

    Cheers
    I don't think the dog should be penalized simply because the judges didn't recognize the unfairness until after it picked up the mark. Nor do I think the only alternative is to scrap the test.

    What about a runner that nobody knew left the area until the dog picked it up well out of the fall area?

  8. #28
    Senior Member Huff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Bridge Creek, Oklahoma
    Posts
    352

    Default

    So if the judges weren't able to stop the dog at the moment of unfairness, they should allow that 1 dog a re run on a mark that they have already picked up? How is that fair to all the other dogs that have already completed that mark without a re run. Lets use the 80 dog open example and that is dog 70. It wouldn't be fair to the other dogs to allow one dog to re run a mark that it had already completed for a score. While it wouldn't be fair to the one dog to let a distraction affect his performance. That's why it is so important that the judges be on their toes and ready for a situation just as this.

    If the judges allow the dog to pick up a mark on the initial run it should be scored on that run. To allow that dog a second chance at a mark it has already picked up is an injustice to the other 79 dogs in the event.

    The rule of treat each contestant as if they had driven 500 miles with one dog to compete should come in play. Do your best as a judge to make it as fair as possible to all.

    Russell
    CH Chisholm Trail's Backdraft Bay MH**
    Chisholm Trail's Crossfire Sophie JH**
    "I say goodbye to my weakness, so long to the regrets"

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    181

    Default

    Your analysis is very good, Doug.

    Judging is an imprfect art form. Judges' responsibilities include common sense, fairness & following the rule book.

    Of ciurse, in the scenario between the point of bing sent and "the pop" it is important what line the dog had as that should be part of scoring on any re-run.

    Things are not set in cement.
    I saw the judges at the '99 Ardmore national carelessley allow Lean Mack hunt deep in the AOF's of all previous flyers (after a very short shot duck) extensively before finally calling him in and awarding a re-run. The damage had been done as that extensive hunt impacted his performance on the blind that followed.

    Yes, there may well be unexpected situations that impact/change the protocol of a test ...
    we must presume in this instance it was judges' error, yet they did their best for that dog and handler notwithstanding seeing the "test" twice ... which often happens.

    No one can or should predict how any particular dog will react on a re-run of any kind.

    Bill Connor
    Last edited by canuckkiller; 10-29-2013 at 04:13 PM.

  10. #30
    Senior Member EdA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    7,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Main View Post
    What about a runner that nobody knew left the area until the dog picked it up well out of the fall area?
    Doug, you continue to attempt to cloud the initial issue with alternative issues which are not relevant to the question.

    How can you evaluate a mark that the dog has previously retrieved?

    Please correct me if I am wrong but you seem to imply that the dog would have completed the mark successfully except for the unfairness. To complicate that you introduced 70 dogs having run which was not presented in the initial scenario. It is much more likely for the event to have occurred after the 7th dog than the 70th dog but even given that scenario can we wildly speculate that the mark was a very well placed middle distance retired gun that only that only 1 in 5 dogs found without handling and only 1 in 10 dogs did it well. Are we to reward a dog who admittedly had bad luck by judging him on a rerun on that bird that he has already retrieved?
    Last edited by EdA; 10-29-2013 at 07:09 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •