DISCLAIMER: The above post is the opinionated and biased view of your's truly, Lonnie Spann, and is in no way intended to reflect the opinions or views of the unfortunate individuals named below who just happen to be doomed with guilt by association.
Member of CAHRC and North AL HRC. I train with AND AM FRIENDS WITH: Fishduck, Laidback, Splash_Em, RF2, Drake2014, Claimsadj, Hooked on Quackers, RookieTrainer and Roseberry.
HRCH Spann's Quacker Jack "Jack" 500 Pt. Club (New & IMPROVED jacket).
First of all, when in doubt, the question of fairness goes to the dog. That said, there's a real difference between "didn't see" and "couldn't see". Even then, if the dog "couldn't see" was it because of a fault in the test or events or was it because of the way the dog was set up? "Didn't see" is not the judges' problem. "Couldn't see" because of the way the dog was set-up is also not the judges' problem.
I'm reminded of the time I ran Cheyenne (Toller) in a NAHRA Intermediate test judged by Jack Jagoda. The field was solid cover about 2 high and the gun stations were in trees throwing out into this cover. At the pre-test meeting I got down and confirmed my suspicions. Cheyenne wouldn't be able to see a thing. When it was our turn, I walked to the line and told her to get up on the bucket that was there for the handlers. Jack asked what I was doing. I indicated that since my dog could not see through or over the cover, the test was unfair so I was going to use the bucket. He thought a moment said, "OK ... but if she falls off, we're going to keep going." She did fine. Afterwards, he said that it was a good thing I'd done that as he couldn't see her once she was past 20 feet into the field.
All that said, it seems to me that we need to be careful in our answer from the standpoint of is the event a field trial or hunt test? In a field trial, since the dogs are judged against each other, I suspect that there is more tendency to call a "no bird" than at a hunt test. In a hunt test, the issue is "Is the bird retrievable?" rather than "How close to the throw for every other dog was that throw?" If the bird (HT) is retrievable, there's no reason to call "no bird." Simply judge the dog in terms of how well it accomplishes the task(s) set before him. If there was a really poor throw and the dog does really well, he maybe gets a point for "extra credit."
Am I correct?
WRC HR Lennoxlove's Run with Wolves JH, WCX ("Cheyenne") ... still so fondly remembered
HRCh Struan's Devil's in De Tails SH, WCX ("Lucy")
SR CH Struan's Flight of Fancy JH ("Muse")
Struan's Master of the Hunt JH, WC ("Charlie")
Struan's Just Plain Perfect ("Jane")
Struan's Driving Us Crazy ("Daisy") ... the baby in charge
I cannot think of any scenario when it would be appropriate to question a judge while on line about a fall, whether or not the handler considers it fair is irrelevant.
Judges judge, Handlers handle and Dogs dog- no scabbing allowed.
Run the dawg regards
There are three classes of people: those who see...those who see when shown...and those who do not see. - Leonardo da Vinci
What Bubba said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Agree this is preferable to querying the judge. I make it regular practice to have one gun station with a bumper placed a throws distance from the holding blind or stickman, If there is a gunner at this station they might shoot and make a throwing motion in the direction of the planted bumper. In any event the dog is sent using my routine "marking cues" and is sent on its name, I prefer this to cueing/running it as a blind because I cannot always be 100% certain that the dog has not seen the bird (after all, I am concentrating on the dog not the bird) and I don't want them thinking we are running a poison bird blind if they indeed marked the fall of a poor throw in a test.Originally Posted by L Spann
power without lumber, raciness without weediness
A big man never looks down on others.... instead, he is someone to look up to.
HRCH UH Ridgewood's Georgia Dawg (500 point club)
HRCH Ridgewood's Gold II
HRCH Hold My Beer & Watch This
Hope She's A Duk Dawg