I find it odd that you have so much interest in judging yet you have never run a field trial nor do you have a prospect at this point. I think it should be obvious that field trial events do not lend themselves to accurate video recording. To support what you think (based on an equine arena event) might improve judging would require huge sums of money and manpower which is not available. Every field trial in the country (8-10 every weekend) would require a video crew with multiple cameras recording 7-10 hours daily and that for just one stake. Then a qualified person would spend hours reviewing those videos. Retriever field trials are generally a sport of gentlemanly men and women and we have done fairly well with the current system for almost 75 years. Are there bad judges, certainly, are there dishonest judges, occasionally but the general population tends to identify and weed those out given time.
To clarify a few a things, I do in fact have a prospect and do in fact plan on trying to run some FTs in the near future. I have purchased a fine dog that has a derby win and a RJ and several Jams in the Q(has run all age and is not a wash out). So my interest is not fleeting. I have an affliction of trying to learn as much as possible about any endeavor I involve myself in.
For further clarity, I certainly was not suggesting that FTs need to be videoed. I am not sure why you are hanging up on the videoing portion of my original post. I also think your lack of knowledge of equine events and their judging protocols caused for some miscommunication in to what I was speaking to. No one reviews the videos from an equine event. They are just used as back up in some instances should a complaint be filed. I realize that this wouldn't work for FTs, again it was just an example of some controls put in place, not a suggestion of something that should be done.
My main point was that it seems that there is not a general consensus on the application of certain rules/standards from what I have seen here and gathered from those I have spoken with actively involved in the sport. My curiosity begged the question as to why that was, and were there any controls in place to create such a consensus. I readily admit to my lack of knowledge and that this observation could be misguided. That is why I asked.
You need to realize this forum is not the real world. We take obscure points and present hypothetical scenarios that wouldn't happen in a thousand years, then argue them to death. I would bet that if you took two polar opposite posters and placed them in chairs as co-judges for a weekend field trial, there would be general consensus. Most of the things that get argued over ad infinitum would be readily agreed on if we were actually standing (sitting) there in person.
This sport is great, but could greatly use an infusion of young enthusiastic individuals with newer ideas.
Macgillicutty and his type need to be encouraged and welcomed, not ridiculed and scorned
at the end of the day all I want is:
1. a fair test, where my dog's safety will never be in question
2. the test will not favor one style of training over another
3. my dog will be judged fairly against the work of others on that test
4. the test will not be devised to trick or fool the dog, and my dog will be given every opportunity to show that they are able to challenge the test and excel
Owned and handled by Cruisin' with Indiana Jones, JH
Alternate Handler: Westwind Buffalo Soldier
Apprentice Handler: Snake River Medicine Man, SH