I thought long and hard before posting anything here, and I am not trying to get into a slanging contest, just wanted to present another perspective. I started in hunt tests and probably have had and run about 15 MH --none pro trained. I judged a National Amateur and have and had titled field trial dogs. When the term "paying your dues" comes up I don't look upon it as a chance to get "brownie points to help me with the judges," for me it meant and still means -- giving back to the sport. Also, it is the best way in the world to learn. Much better than sitting in the gallery and listening to the crowds. I marshalled the first seven field trials I ever ran and it was a tremendous eye opener. Watching the set ups and how the dogs ran them. Seeing different pros and how they and their dogs were on line---still remember watching Bill Eckett as a young red-cheeked "kid" in one of my earliest trials. Watching the top handlers and trying to see through their eyes how to run the test. As a marshal, I met a lot of the contestants, and some were kind enough to take me under their wing. I would be watching a test and someone like Jay Walker would come up and ask me what I thought was wrong with a set up. Would have another tell me "to let the judges judge my dog", --Dick Greenleaf told me that after I turned and told him I had wished my dog had run a better trial under him! Another would point out that if the judges had moved the flyer over there, they would have gotten a lot more out of the test. All grist for the mill. Many pros were very generous with their comments and support even tho I was not a client. So paying your dues isn't just a way to gain brownie points but to benefit yourself in becoming a better handler and trainer and to learn more about the game. Plus, you are helping the Club put on the trial. I think Susan would agree with me on this.
When judging field trials, I can really only remember at most two, possibly three times when my co-judge and I didn't have the same winner. In one case, there was some favortism coming into play as his training buddy had run a beautiful trial until the last bird when the dog left California, crossed over into Nevada, swung through Vegas and spun the wheels then returned and found the bird. When I suggested we go over our top two dogs, bird by bird, my co-judge soon realized that maybe his wasn't the best choice and it all worked out. In one of my early judging assignment with a National Judge, at the end he asked me who I had down as the winner. I told him and he had the same dog. We both looked at each other, agreed we both couldn't stand the owner who we thought was an ass, but the dog had definitely won. Once, neither of us realized who had won, and actually we thought another dog had, until we saw who got called out for second and then who walked up for the blue ribbon. We were looking at numbers not at owners' names while going through our callbacks.
Life is not fair--my Dad told me that a long, long time ago. But, I don't know of anyone who judges who wants to put on a miserable trial. As someone once remarked, you really don't want people talking about your tests once the trial is over as usually they do that only if they are unhappy!
Sure, there are a few, and they soon get known, who are outright crooks---some slightly biased or some who don't know enough to put on a good, fair trial or have even read the rules. But it is also unfair to damn a whole sport because of possibly one or two bad experiences or experiences which are perceived to be unfair. All judges have a bias or two, I love fast, stylish dogs who know where the birds are located. Some don't like a noisy dog because they have had one and didn't enjoy it whereas another may forgive a noisy dog because he had one and understood what the handler was having to deal with. Lanse is right, it all balances out. Thank the judges---they have given time, energy, often paid a lot of their own expenses and were trying their best to put on a good, fair trial. If you disagree, fake it! Be courteous and realize that one of these days, you, too, may be judging a trial where things didn't go quite as you envisioned---but, you still found a winner who you felt was the best dog on that weekend.
Bill D---think I was at the same trial you were where the owner of the dog stood facing the wrong way, pointing with a shaky hand, and the dog went straight to every bird without any help from the handler. I don't know about you, Bill, but I had tears running down my face. That was the handler's last trial.