Saw a post on FaceBook regarding field trial judging bias and how HT people have no or little chance of winning or placing. Personally, I haven't seen it. The field trails I have been at and watched all of the dogs, the dog that I thought won did end up winning, and the placements were pretty close as well.
I wonder if that perception is a lack of understanding due to the difference in judging between the two types of events. To me HT judges put a lot more emphasis on blinds and seem they use the blind as their only manner to eliminate dogs. It may be due to limited distances on marks or lack of knowledge on placing marks. FT judging emphasizes marks (consistent with the rules). I have seen HT folks in the gallery say, "That dogs marks were better, but my dogs blind was better." To me that shows a lack of understanding. What are your thoughts?
Also there seems to be some selective memory of all handlers regarding their and other dogs.
PS. Please no names of judges or events if you use an example.