The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Gun Dog Broker
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 84

Thread: Judges-Check your Qualifications

  1. #71
    Senior Member Sundown49 aka Otey B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Ghent, Ky
    Posts
    2,486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FOM View Post
    There shouldn't be a pass rate....it's a standard. On any given weekend it could be 100% or 0%...
    on any given weekend the pass rate depends on the field of dogs. Dogs that are ready to run usually pass. Those that are not ready usually fail themselves. You cannot determine a pass rate for all tests without knowing what the field was on that given day. Have had all pass in the WORST weather possible and a few on a great day.....just saying......
    My Dad said to me ."Son, a man just needs three things to be happy....A good dog, a good gun and a good wife.....Thank God I have all three
    Home of HRCH Sundown's Loaded To The Maxx (FC AFC Jamie X Dixie QAA)
    Sundown's Boss of Delta Marsh JH (Louie QAA X Delta MH)
    Traveling Through The Graded Timber JH (2012 NAFC Trav X Timber MH QAA)

    Sundown's Ruff And Tuff (Boss JH X Lil Bit) best pup I have ever raised

    www.sundownlabs.com

  2. #72
    Senior Member Susan Young's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    166

    Default

    The new AKC 7 year requirement only requires the judge to walk to the line with a dog who passes a test. There is no requirement that the judge has actually TRAINED a dog. I could have met the requirement by borrowing my friendís FC AFC and running her in Senior. What would that have shown other than my friend trusted me with his dog for the day and I knew how to write a check for the entry fee? Certainly nothing about my skills for dog training, bird placement, test set up, and test management. To make sure I would be up to date for the 7 year requirement, I chose to instead dust off my own retired HRCH MHR UH SH, which I had trained and run to her titles for better or worse, and run her in Senior. It cost me well over $100 just to be able to continue to donate my time as a judge, and that was with the dog passing on our first try.

    There are many experienced judges in my area who are in similar situations to me. That is, their dogs are members of their families, and there are only so many spaces on the bed. They mostly train and run their own dogs, and may only get a new puppy every 5-10 years as space sadly becomes available. If they are blessed with dogs that have long lives, it may be more than 7 years before they title another dog at a given level. But they have years of experience training dogs, titling dogs, running and working hunt tests.

    There are a lot of very good judges, with years of experience training and judging, who may be cutting back on the number of dogs in their lives as they near retirement. These are still excellent, knowledgeable judges, who may have the time to judge because they donít have their own dog to campaign at the moment. I would much rather run under them than someone who had more recently fulfilled their judging requirement by running a dog someone else had trained.

    I judge for all three organizations, so please allow me to make a comparison here. HRC requires a judge to have owned, trained and handled a dog to begin judging at that level, and then requires them to keep current by judging and attending seminars. Personally, the initial requirement to have owned, trained, and handled the dog has more meaning to me than the AKC requirement that could allow a judge to just write an entry check and borrow a dog to take to line every 7 years, without ever having been active in a dogís training.

  3. #73
    Senior Member MooseGooser's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,972

    Default

    Susan Young said:

    I judge for all three organizations, so please allow me to make a comparison here. HRC requires a judge to have owned, trained and handled a dog to begin judging at that level, and then requires them to keep current by judging and attending seminars. Personally, the initial requirement to have owned, trained, and handled the dog has more meaning to me than the AKC requirement that could allow a judge to just write an entry check and borrow a dog to take to line every 7 years, without ever having been active in a dogís training.

    I agree with this 100%....

    I will take it one step farther and also say,,that in your traing groups,, there may be people there that dont run dogs in tests, but have HUGE knowledg as to how to place birds, set up senarios, and train dogs...
    On those training dyas, when one of those people come to me and say, You dog did well today,,, it means one He!! of a lot more to ME,, that a ribbon given to me by someone I dont know from Adam..

    I go to tests and test my dog to see how she performs in MY eyes..

    I know what I want,, and know what she is capable of..

    Like I have said before,, sometimes we are our worse critic. but we can also be the most fair, cause we know our dog..


    Last edited by MooseGooser; 12-31-2013 at 09:37 AM.
    It is far easier to spit on the work of others than it is to produce something better yourself.
    Brynmoors Prairie Sage JH ​(Sage) Just a dang fool huntin Dawg
    HRCH Calypso Seven Bales High SH (Bailey)
    HR Calypso Zoomin Loosies Mad Hader (Maddi) We loved you baby. R.I.P.
    FlatLanders Broken Pistol Ricochet (Flinch)


    My Christian Name is Michael Baker..
    I have gone by "Gooser" since I was a "gossling"

  4. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Illinois Wisconsin border
    Posts
    831

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Susan Young View Post
    The new AKC 7 year requirement only requires the judge to walk to the line with a dog who passes a test. There is no requirement that the judge has actually TRAINED a dog. I could have met the requirement by borrowing my friend’s FC AFC and running her in Senior. What would that have shown other than my friend trusted me with his dog for the day and I knew how to write a check for the entry fee? Certainly nothing about my skills for dog training, bird placement, test set up, and test management. To make sure I would be up to date for the 7 year requirement, I chose to instead dust off my own retired HRCH MHR UH SH, which I had trained and run to her titles for better or worse, and run her in Senior. It cost me well over $100 just to be able to continue to donate my time as a judge, and that was with the dog passing on our first try.

    There are many experienced judges in my area who are in similar situations to me. That is, their dogs are members of their families, and there are only so many spaces on the bed. They mostly train and run their own dogs, and may only get a new puppy every 5-10 years as space sadly becomes available. If they are blessed with dogs that have long lives, it may be more than 7 years before they title another dog at a given level. But they have years of experience training dogs, titling dogs, running and working hunt tests.

    There are a lot of very good judges, with years of experience training and judging, who may be cutting back on the number of dogs in their lives as they near retirement. These are still excellent, knowledgeable judges, who may have the time to judge because they don’t have their own dog to campaign at the moment. I would much rather run under them than someone who had more recently fulfilled their judging requirement by running a dog someone else had trained.

    I judge for all three organizations, so please allow me to make a comparison here. HRC requires a judge to have owned, trained and handled a dog to begin judging at that level, and then requires them to keep current by judging and attending seminars. Personally, the initial requirement to have owned, trained, and handled the dog has more meaning to me than the AKC requirement that could allow a judge to just write an entry check and borrow a dog to take to line every 7 years, without ever having been active in a dog’s training.
    I have not judged at the HRC level, but, have titled two HRCH dogs in the past 5 or 6 years. It is the closest to hunting that one can get. I do have friends who judge HRC and have to agree the requirements for judging are more stringent then the AKC Hunt Tests at present. My membership is still active in HRC and I am a member of a HRC club. Although I disagree with some of the HRC testing, I have to admit the AKC Hunt Tests could take a few lessons from the HRC especially in the Finished area , such as "real" gun handling, shooting, swinging on birds, setting up tests, getting approval from committee , etc. HRC at the site of the Hunt Tests, in my opinion tends to be more organized then some AKC Hunt test events.
    Earl Dillow

  5. #75
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oakdale,ct.
    Posts
    2,592

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Bora View Post
    I know this happened years ago in Maine but it may have been a NAHRA senior, not an AKC master, Paul Y do you recal?
    and if you do gosh I hope you were not one of the judges !!!
    I do recall that test, Ken.

    It was an HRC Finished test in Maine which was set up by the (then) President of HRC. I believe that Lousiana boy was trying to make a statement. He did just that and it will be a cold day in Hell when he gets invited to judge up here again.

    I ran the ONE dog that passed out of a full flight. It didn't make me proud. Quite the opposite, actually. 29 dogs got SCREWED that day to feed his ego. -Paul
    there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.

  6. #76
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1

    Default Judges, qualifications and results

    I realize that this thread is well over 2 months old, but it discusses issues that have been bothering me for some months. What prompted me to post was a recent HT in Texas that closed within 1 hour of opening for entries on EE. In the Master test it appears that only 10 to 12 handlers out of 120 dogs are amateurs, the remainder of dogs are handled by a pro. But I digress, I'm questioning judges qualifications.

    #1 The host club is charged with policing the qualifications of their invited judges. What happens when it is easily determined that one of the master judges has not met all of the requirements? The one I am questioning is handling and qualifying a dog at the level they will judge within the past seven years, no matter whether it's their dog or not. How do you either ask the club or the AKC (we all know what their answer will be) without sounding like a jerk, crybaby or whiner about this judge?

    #2 If a judge has been posted in an approved event and they are not qualified because they haven't handled and qualified a dog in the past seven years (any level) are the test results valid? Interesting question...

    #3 How many dogs should qualify in a typical master test? Let's face it, over the past 3 decades that the hunt test program has been in existence (starting with good 'ol Richard Wolters and his challenge to the AKC with the first NAHRA tests), the bar has been substantially raised for the dogs' performance, but the standards have remained basically the same. Dedicated amateurs have worked diligently to train to the standard, and the pro trainer (with the help of their paid assistants) works daily with their dogs, continuing to raise that bar. It's really a vicious cycle. The dogs are wonderful and take it and keep showing us what they are made of. However, please consider, Master hunter dogs of 20 years ago would most likely not be able to pass the master tests of today. Also, Field champions at trials of 20 to 30 years ago, would not be able to pass the Open FT today. How do you judge this, other than to make the tests/trials harder and the subjective opinion of the judges more critical?

    I could go on: pro handlers vs. amateurs; limited entries; club members working for the 1 or 2 pros that were able to enter their test (are we subsidizing the profits of the pro in this case?); the judging pool; the validity of judges seminars: overused judges in particular areas of the country; etc., etc., etc.
    I've been involved in the game since about 1987, I keep seeing the wheel going around, but no real new inventions/solutions. I am a master level judge, taken the seminars and the tests and was fortunate enough to have some master dogs. But, I've seen little over the years that can address many of the issues, just Band-Aid solutions.
    Looking forward to your comments!

  7. #77
    Senior Member Joe Brakke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    674

    Default

    BINGO on #1 and #2. What does happen when a judge has not met the requirements that clubs have been deemed responsible for verifying. We have no data base..

    When the rules were being discussed, I was not a fan of it and felt the AKC was setting the requirement, then they should then provide the information to verify and QUALIFY a judge. The intention of the rule change was lost when they failed to provide a method to honestly verify it. The AKC now just lists the approved judges, meeting certain administrative requirements.

    My other thought is how a certain judge may own a dog that is with a Pro and that Pro then lists the owner and Pro as the handlers for that weekend's event. Is that now a record or fact that the owner now has qualified a dog at that level, and if that judge is a Master Level judge, he or she can point to the EE record and state, "I handled the dog during the that test and qualified the dog", thus the requirement has been met to continue judging. Coming this year this requirement will become in affect so I suspect this loop hole will be used for evidence that a judge not meeting his requirement has been met it. Verifying or contesting this would just be a he said she said and life goes on.
    Joe B.

    Northern Colorado

    Lakotaridge Heartsome Tanner SH "Tanner"
    HRCH Bella's Devine Independence SH "Indy"
    Lakota Ridge Sage JH "Sage"
    SHR APR KB's Lakota Ridge Delaney "Del"
    RIP Oryan of Cork "Orion"

    "The solution is within the problem"

  8. #78
    Member Troy Tilleraas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Hastings MN
    Posts
    72

    Default

    "How do you either ask the club or the AKC (we all know what their answer will be) without sounding like a jerk, crybaby or whiner about this judge?"

    Call or e-mail the test secretary and have them verify that "judge x" is eligible. The judge in question may have very well indeed forgot about the rule change and when asked about it may say-indeed I am not eligible...

    The system works if you speak up! That's a rule to keep the judges up to date with handling dogs and to be judged by your peers!

  9. #79
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Boston, GA
    Posts
    2,558

    Default

    Just as there are some good judges being passed over because of this new rule, there are some who literally fall asleep in the chair, judge as pass or fail, or give incorrect information in the judges briefing. Hopefully, no one will give them a dog to qualify and restate their judge credentials.

  10. #80
    Senior Member Pam Spears's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    642

    Default

    You'd think that the AKC would limit the judges directory itself to those who are qualified instead of dumping the responsibility for verifying information on clubs. Why are there judges listed in the directory who haven't met the qualifications?

    Thanks for sharing your questionnaire, Joe, I might be using it this year
    Pam
    Sunshine Joliet Jake, "Jake," SH, RN, CGC, WDX
    Roughwater Stacked & Packed, "Babe" JH, CD, RN, CGC, WDQ

Posting Permissions

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