The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 158

Thread: AKC hunt test limit dogs per handler?

  1. #101
    Senior Member HNTFSH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,195

    Default

    [QUOTE=clipper;1184569]
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
    DR. Aycock and Ted Shih have proposed a pretty elegant solution.
    Allow the club to evaluate the logistics (hours of daylight/grounds/help/whatever) and come up wit a rough estimate of the number of dogs that they can run and still put on a quality event. Then open the entries to all. At the close of entries - select 1 dog from each owner - in the event of a co-owned dogs select only one instance such that any name appears only once. After the initial round if enough additional slots will support one more pass through the entries then a second dog from each owner (again with the co-owner caveat). Repeat until the clubs pre-established maximum is met and then close entries. Wallah- the club has control of the entries that will allow them to ensure that they won't be overwhelmed, the entries are divided without regards to race, religion, sexual preference or occupation (or lack of any of the preceding).
    Seems pretty simple and fair to me.

    This is a finite world that we live in and we are at the limits of finding new grounds/help/time/energy/whatever. Sure is interesting that the folks that are most interested in seeing the availability increase without bounds are also the same ones that don't have the time/energy/background/inclination to help out.



    All about fairness regards


    I LIKE IT!
    First ask your Club Secretary what they think!
    We shoot dogs with a Canon

  2. #102
    Senior Member Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    S.W. Washington
    Posts
    3,399

    Default

    You ain't bright are ya?

    I'll type this real slow so you can keep up. The COMPUTER does the draw (as it does now) independently of human intervention. So the order that the entries were received is immaterial. The only cooperation between AKC and anyone else is the process by which the AKC institutes a rule allowing this. If someone scratches a dog after the close- well the club just runs one less dog (as they do now).

    This isn't rocket surgery- I'll bet you a steak dinner that I could write a SQL stored procedure that would accomplish this in under an hour.

    It is absolutely fair- everyone is guaranteed at least one entry and additional entries as space allows. Once you start a second trip through the entries you have to pull one from every remaining owner's stack and same for subsequent trips.
    There are three classes of people: those who see...those who see when shown...and those who do not see. - Leonardo da Vinci

  3. #103
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    25

    Default

    I like Handler Error's idea. EE sets a closing time for all events, then they can also set an opening sign up time for all events. Say all events open for sign up at, say 6pm local time, four weeks in advance of the closing of the event on EE. But I would go a little further, you can only sign up, say six dogs at a time. This way, it's all a matter of luck if you get in, and pro's still have the same opp. to make money. Otherwise go to non Master National clubs and the problem will go away. But in time so will the master national. But that would be like throwing the baby out with the bath water for some. Me I don't care about the MN, and yes I work all my home club events, and when I'm at another clubs event, I always pitch in to help break down after a series, whether carrying things to the trucks or taking down holding blinds I always try to help. I also tire of waiting an hour or two for the pro to show up to the SH or JH stake because they have 15 master dogs, but that is the nature of the beast. Is there a fair way to get around that no probably not. I guess we could run NAHRA which doesn't seem to have the numbers, or pros, and are a lot more Am. friendly, but then AKC doesn't rec. those titles. Double edge sword I guess. Me I will keep voting no to MN for our club because I'm an AM. and want to run my dog and enjoy the day. Not work my azz off and be tied up for an extra 4 hrs. for the pros to make a living. I don't have anything against the pros, but it's my free time and I want to enjoy it with people like me who want to play with and talk about THIER dogs. Jim

  4. #104
    Senior Member HNTFSH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
    You ain't bright are ya?

    I'll type this real slow so you can keep up. The COMPUTER does the draw (as it does now) independently of human intervention. So the order that the entries were received is immaterial. The only cooperation between AKC and anyone else is the process by which the AKC institutes a rule allowing this. If someone scratches a dog after the close- well the club just runs one less dog (as they do now).

    This isn't rocket surgery- I'll bet you a steak dinner that I could write a SQL stored procedure that would accomplish this in under an hour.

    It is absolutely fair- everyone is guaranteed at least one entry and additional entries as space allows. Once you start a second trip through the entries you have to pull one from every remaining owner's stack and same for subsequent trips.
    I'm bright enough to see you have this about 1/2 baked at best.
    We shoot dogs with a Canon

  5. #105
    Senior Member Ted Shih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Golden, Colorado
    Posts
    4,992

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HNTFSH View Post
    It's not a solution that I can see has merit without other factors being applied. How would you allow an entry, allow a draw and then cancel the entry? As a club - without a huge manual coordination between a club and EE? Not to mention without an arrangement with AKC?

    You are suggesting a club secretary be the sole 'fairness' factor in who gets in. Who monitors that? Who audits it?

    How do you factor in the guy that waits till late in the open entry process versus the guy the was on top of it and was first in?

    I find it interesting that you are so critical about a process that you have taken so little time to understand. Here is the proposal that Ed and I submitted to the RAC:

    Designated Handler/Limited Entry Open


    In the Designated Handler/Limited Entry Open (the “Stake”), entries shall be limited to 65 dogs - or a slightly higher number, if necessary, as described below.


    In the Stake, each handler shall designate in numerical order those dogs which the handler wishes to enter in the Stake. Entries 1-5 shall be guaranteed admission into the Stake - whether or not total entries equal or exceed 65 dogs.


    If, upon the close of entries, the Field Trial Secretary determines that less than 65 dogs are admitted in the Stake, those handlers who have designated more than 5 dogs for admission in the Stake shall be permitted to enter the dog the handler has previously designated as dog no. 6 into the Stake. If after all such dogs have be admitted into the Stake, the Field Trial Secretary determines that less than 65 dogs are still admitted in the Stake, those handlers who have designated more than 6 dogs for admission in the Stake shall be permitted to enter the dog the handler has previously designated as dog no. 7 into the Stake. This process shall continue until the Field Trial Secretary first determines that entries in the Stake are 65 dogs or more.


    Consider the following examples


    A. The Field Trial Secretary determines upon the close of entries, that if all handlers are permitted to run the dogs that they have designated, including 5 dogs per handler for those handlers who have designated five or more dogs, that 75 dogs would be admitted in the Stake - then the Stake would proceed with 75 dogs, and handlers with more than 5 dogs designated would not be permitted to enter any further dogs in the Stake.


    B. The same situation, only the FTS determines that total entries, when handlers are permitted to enter 5 dogs into the Stake, are 64. Because total entries are less than 65, each handler who has previously designated a sixth dog for potential admission into the stake shall be permitted to enter that sixth dog in the stake. This is true even if the admission of each sixth dog designated by handlers with more than five dogs would result in the Stake having 80 dogs entered. All handlers who had six dogs designated for entry in the Stake would be permitted to enter the dogs that the handlers had previously designated as 1-6 in the stake.


    In the event that a dog is scratched for veterinary reasons, if applicable, the handler with multiple dogs may then substitute the next designated dog for inclusion in the Stake. For example, the FTS determines that all handlers with more than 5 dogs may enter up to 7 dogs. Handler X has designated 18 for potential inclusion in the Stake. Handler X’s entry number 6 has come in season. Handler X will be permitted to enter his previously identified dog no. 8 in the trial. However, he will not be permitted to enter dog no. 9 in place of the scratched dog.


    In the event that a handler must scratch from a trial, the dogs designated by the scratched handler may be transferred to a substitute handler, provided that: (a) the substitute handler has not previously entered dogs in the Stake; or (b) with the transfer of the scratched dogs, the substitute handler does not have more than the maximum number of dogs permitted per handler. For example, the FTS determines that all handlers with more than 5 dogs may enter up to 8 dogs in the Stake. Handler S has 5 dogs entered in the Stake. Handler T has 2 dogs entered in the Stake. Handler U has 6 dogs entered in the Stake. Handler U scratches from the trial for a family emergency. Handler U may not transfer his 6 dogs to Handler S. However, Handler U may transfer his 6 dogs to Handler T. Alternatively, Handler U may transfer 3 dogs to Handler S and transfer the remaining 3 dogs to Handler T.

    Notes




    1. This is not a first in process. The same deadline applies to everyone.
    2. The FT has no discretion in who gets in and who does not.
    3. There is a specified process for replacing dogs when a multiple dog handler has a scratch
    4. This process is discretionary, not mandatory. Each club gets to make its own decision.

    I think that there are legitimate concerns about this procedure, as there are about any new procedure. But, those issued by you have no basis in fact.



    Competition does not build character - It reveals it.

    Home of:
    FC/AFC Freeridin Wowie Zowie (2003 NARC Finalist)
    FC/AFC Sky Hy Husker Power
    FC/AFC Freeridin Smooth Operator
    FC/AFC Freeridin Vampire Slayer (2007 NARC Finalist)
    AFC Freeridin Maserati (Double Header Winner)

    www.freeridinretrievers.com

  6. #106
    Senior Member HNTFSH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Shih View Post

    I find it interesting that you are so critical about a process that you have taken so little time to understand. Here is the proposal that Ed and I submitted to the RAC:

    Designated Handler/Limited Entry Open


    In the Designated Handler/Limited Entry Open (the “Stake”), entries shall be limited to 65 dogs - or a slightly higher number, if necessary, as described below.


    In the Stake, each handler shall designate in numerical order those dogs which the handler wishes to enter in the Stake. Entries 1-5 shall be guaranteed admission into the Stake - whether or not total entries equal or exceed 65 dogs.


    If, upon the close of entries, the Field Trial Secretary determines that less than 65 dogs are admitted in the Stake, those handlers who have designated more than 5 dogs for admission in the Stake shall be permitted to enter the dog the handler has previously designated as dog no. 6 into the Stake. If after all such dogs have be admitted into the Stake, the Field Trial Secretary determines that less than 65 dogs are still admitted in the Stake, those handlers who have designated more than 6 dogs for admission in the Stake shall be permitted to enter the dog the handler has previously designated as dog no. 7 into the Stake. This process shall continue until the Field Trial Secretary first determines that entries in the Stake are 65 dogs or more.


    Consider the following examples


    A. The Field Trial Secretary determines upon the close of entries, that if all handlers are permitted to run the dogs that they have designated, including 5 dogs per handler for those handlers who have designated five or more dogs, that 75 dogs would be admitted in the Stake - then the Stake would proceed with 75 dogs, and handlers with more than 5 dogs designated would not be permitted to enter any further dogs in the Stake.


    B. The same situation, only the FTS determines that total entries, when handlers are permitted to enter 5 dogs into the Stake, are 64. Because total entries are less than 65, each handler who has previously designated a sixth dog for potential admission into the stake shall be permitted to enter that sixth dog in the stake. This is true even if the admission of each sixth dog designated by handlers with more than five dogs would result in the Stake having 80 dogs entered. All handlers who had six dogs designated for entry in the Stake would be permitted to enter the dogs that the handlers had previously designated as 1-6 in the stake.


    In the event that a dog is scratched for veterinary reasons, if applicable, the handler with multiple dogs may then substitute the next designated dog for inclusion in the Stake. For example, the FTS determines that all handlers with more than 5 dogs may enter up to 7 dogs. Handler X has designated 18 for potential inclusion in the Stake. Handler X’s entry number 6 has come in season. Handler X will be permitted to enter his previously identified dog no. 8 in the trial. However, he will not be permitted to enter dog no. 9 in place of the scratched dog.


    In the event that a handler must scratch from a trial, the dogs designated by the scratched handler may be transferred to a substitute handler, provided that: (a) the substitute handler has not previously entered dogs in the Stake; or (b) with the transfer of the scratched dogs, the substitute handler does not have more than the maximum number of dogs permitted per handler. For example, the FTS determines that all handlers with more than 5 dogs may enter up to 8 dogs in the Stake. Handler S has 5 dogs entered in the Stake. Handler T has 2 dogs entered in the Stake. Handler U has 6 dogs entered in the Stake. Handler U scratches from the trial for a family emergency. Handler U may not transfer his 6 dogs to Handler S. However, Handler U may transfer his 6 dogs to Handler T. Alternatively, Handler U may transfer 3 dogs to Handler S and transfer the remaining 3 dogs to Handler T.

    Notes




    1. This is not a first in process. The same deadline applies to everyone.
    2. The FT has no discretion in who gets in and who does not.
    3. There is a specified process for replacing dogs when a multiple dog handler has a scratch
    4. This process is discretionary, not mandatory. Each club gets to make its own decision.

    I think that there are legitimate concerns about this procedure, as there are about any new procedure. But, those issued by you have no basis in fact.



    Critical sans detail brother. That is where the devil lives.

    And what was the response to your proposal?
    We shoot dogs with a Canon

  7. #107
    Senior Member Ted Shih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Golden, Colorado
    Posts
    4,992

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HNTFSH View Post
    Critical sans detail brother. That is where the devil lives.

    And what was the response to your proposal?

    And what does that say about you? The RAC never brought it up for discussion.
    Competition does not build character - It reveals it.

    Home of:
    FC/AFC Freeridin Wowie Zowie (2003 NARC Finalist)
    FC/AFC Sky Hy Husker Power
    FC/AFC Freeridin Smooth Operator
    FC/AFC Freeridin Vampire Slayer (2007 NARC Finalist)
    AFC Freeridin Maserati (Double Header Winner)

    www.freeridinretrievers.com

  8. #108
    Senior Member shawninthesticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    north east mo
    Posts
    1,829

    Default

    Just for clarification Ted, you are proposing this for Field Trials? I was under the impression that the problems are in Hunt Tests., but I may have missed the part about FT's.

    Your proposal makes sense to me and seems to have been though out with more holes filled than any other proposal I've read from the numerous threads on this topic.
    Shawn White

    HR Big Creek Retrievers Independence Day JH QAA "Indy "

  9. #109
    Senior Member Ted Shih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Golden, Colorado
    Posts
    4,992

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shawninthesticks View Post
    Just for clarification Ted, you are proposing this for Field Trials? I was under the impression that the problems are in Hunt Tests., but I may have missed the part about FT's.

    Your proposal makes sense to me and seems to have been though out with more holes filled than any other proposal I've read from the numerous threads on this topic.


    This was a proposal that Ed and I made for FT many years ago. It was brought up in this thread in the context of HT.
    Competition does not build character - It reveals it.

    Home of:
    FC/AFC Freeridin Wowie Zowie (2003 NARC Finalist)
    FC/AFC Sky Hy Husker Power
    FC/AFC Freeridin Smooth Operator
    FC/AFC Freeridin Vampire Slayer (2007 NARC Finalist)
    AFC Freeridin Maserati (Double Header Winner)

    www.freeridinretrievers.com

  10. #110
    Senior Member shawninthesticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    north east mo
    Posts
    1,829

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Shih View Post


    This was a proposal that Ed and I made for FT many years ago. It was brought up in this thread in the context of HT.
    Ok ,thanks I must have lost it in the mix.
    Shawn White

    HR Big Creek Retrievers Independence Day JH QAA "Indy "

Posting Permissions

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