The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 52

Thread: Proper way to approach a judge about no bird

  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kinston, NC
    Posts
    226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad Turner View Post
    I don't watch the birds go down, I am concentrating on my dog. It is the judges job to call no-birds. It's my job to run my dog.
    Well said Brad, thank you

  2. #42
    Senior Member DoubleHaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    N. Cackalacky
    Posts
    2,509

    Default

    Best thing is just to walk back to the truck like you are going to wait three. Adam Dunn shows good technique here: http://m.mlb.com/video/v4875541

  3. #43
    Senior Member Lonnie Spann's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    616

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carolinagold View Post
    If you know your dog could not see a bird due to a poor throw and the judges call for your dog how would be the best way to approach from this point?
    Easy, you line your dog up with the fall, only slightly downwind, and give the command "back"! Works every time and it helps if your dog's name rhymes with "back".

    Next question.

    L Spann
    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).

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,889

    Default

    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?
    Eric

    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

  5. #45
    Senior Member EdA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    6,694

    Default

    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.

  6. #46
    Senior Member Bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    S.W. Washington
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    ^^^^^^^^^Zackly Right^^^^^^^^

    Judges judge, Handlers handle and Dogs dog- no scabbing allowed.

    Run the dawg regards

    Bubba
    There are three classes of people: those who see...those who see when shown...and those who do not see. - Leonardo da Vinci

  7. #47
    Senior Member huntinman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,913

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
    ^^^^^^^^^Zackly Right^^^^^^^^

    Judges judge, Handlers handle and Dogs dog- no scabbing allowed.

    Run the dawg regards

    Bubba
    My sentiments exactly.
    Bill Davis

  8. #48
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    14

    Default

    What Bubba said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  9. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Vancouver CANADA
    Posts
    591

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    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.
    I agree completely.

    Quote Originally Posted by L Spann
    Easy, you line your dog up with the fall, only slightly downwind, and give the command "back"! Works every time and it helps if your dog's name rhymes with "back".

    Next question.
    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.
    power without lumber, raciness without weediness

    A big man never looks down on others.... instead, he is someone to look up to.

  10. #50
    Senior Member bjoiner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Albany, GA
    Posts
    1,014

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    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?
    No. I don't think this is correct. The marks should still be fair and relatively consistent. While you are testing against a standard, all dogs should see the same test. If a throw creates a different or unfair test, it should be a called no-bird.
    Bubba Joiner

    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

Posting Permissions

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