RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Judging bias

42K views 158 replies 58 participants last post by  WBF 
#1 ·
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.
 
#2 ·
I haven't seen any bias. Occasionally I will run under a judge that will avoid in the future. Right now I can only think of one and I haven't seen him judging in a long time.
 
#3 ·
Also there seems to be some selective memory of all handlers regarding their and other dogs.
This most likely.

As a judge, I get a number from the handler coming to the line and write down in my book what the dogs do. It is rare when I am working through placements that I have a clue what dog/handler team belongs to the number. Often the ribbon ceremony is when I find out who actually won.

I don't think blinds get more emphasis in FTs vs HTs. I could argue it is even the opposite. It may look that way to those called back from the marks, do an okay blind and are dropped, but I think that is more likely that they combination of the two no longer has them in the trial.

I do however think the standards are higher. What might be an okay blind in a MH test, may well fail in a Q and is highly unlikely to get you back in an AM. However, if your dog passes the blind and has good marks, it keeps playing.
 
#5 ·
Handlers in HTs when running FT Quals have a tendency not to challenge the blind and many times are subsequently dropped for poor blinds . My observation as a judge (eights points plus HT and FT) they seem to fear the blind more, hunt testers. It appears in my opinion as a judge and a contestant in the Master stake, there are far more training issues with blind work. Ran a Master a few weeks ago and some of the dogs were 50 yards off line trying to do a land blind and had many , many whistles on their water blinds. Now this is regional in the mid-west, can't speak for the rest of the country. Mostly amateur handlers, Pros do a much better job of blind handling, probably because of more confidence in the trainability factor. A very hacky. slip whistles, cast refusals, and poor initial lines in the AKC hunt tests are going to be penalized , sometimes severely along with a double handling on marks, is probably going to get you tossed.
 
#4 ·
By emphasis I don't mean judged easier in FT. It just seems to me that HT judges, in general, tend to use the blind to drop dogs rather than marks.
 
#6 ·
Bubba I thought about getting the popcorn out but then thought better!
Facebook posts, Rtf posts and opinions in general all come from the eyes of the beholder. Exam the experience, success and the path taken to those lofty heights of opinion.

Now we enter, judge and enjoy both venues. What i have seen is the dogs dont really care about the venue and in the end it is about dogs picking up birds. If your going to have success at the ft level you better be committed both with your effort level and your pocketbook plus it helps to have a good well trained pooch and have the "dog gods" smiling on you at the correct time.

At the ht level always remember it is your team against the standard and if the goal is simply a ribbon well that can be achieved over time however if you can try to master the test you generally can walk away with something to work on

When I judge seldom do I know anything but the number and at times it gets laughable when a pro brings up 20 or so dogs and he gets the names mixed up. The really successful handlers ( mostly) are humble, dedicated folks working to get thier team better.
My opinion
Dk
 
#8 ·
To me HT judges put a lot more emphasis on blinds and seem they use the blind as their only manner to eliminate dogs.

Au contraire!!! Ain't nobody going to beat my little HT dog on blinds, but she sometimes defeats herself on marks.
 
#9 · (Edited)
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.
I saw the post as well:

The politics in field trial judging is a joke...
This was my reply:

Get into the game, pay some dues and take your lumps, and start judging. People will look at you differently when they know that they have to come under your sharp pencil.
i do think a). there are some people who are political and that's just the nature of competitive sports. I know 2 judges that as long as their one close friend doesn't pick up, there friend will win or place. Well known in my circuit. I had two members of a field trial committee and a placing contestant apologize to me at one trial when I got the RJ. Everyone knew what happened. To pretend it doesn't happen would be living in a fairy tale. I just won't run under those types of judges, as I would get more pleasure by flushing my entry fee down the toilet one dollar at a time and watching the swirl. But clubs should just not ask these people to judge. In large, I think there are more people who try and do the right thing by the dogs than to pick based on who is running the dog.

and b: there are hunt test people who don't understand the judging of field trials. I was running my own dog in a qual against a well known hunt test pro. To this day, I am sure he still thinks he beat my dog because my dog hooked a retired gun (something I personally believe is impossible since you can't hook what you can't see) and pinned a mark. His dog went straight to the area, and put up a moderate hunt. His line may have been better, but my dog's mark was clearly superior. He felt that because he was in the area of the fall, the hunt really didn't matter. This shows a lack of understanding to me.

So, I think there is some of both. but it exists in hunt tests as well. People who get passes that barely meet the standard.
 
#23 · (Edited)
I saw the post as well:



This was my reply:



i do think a). there are some people who are political and that's just the nature of competitive sports. I know 2 judges that as long as their one close friend doesn't pick up, there friend will win or place. Well known in my circuit. I had two members of a field trial committee and a placing contestant apologize to me at one trial when I got the RJ. Everyone knew what happened. To pretend it doesn't happen would be living in a fairy tale. I just won't run under those types of judges, as I would get more pleasure by flushing my entry fee down the toilet one dollar at a time and watching the swirl. But clubs should just not ask these people to judge. In large, I think there are more people who try and do the right thing by the dogs than to pick based on who is running the dog.

and b: there are hunt test people who don't understand the judging of field trials. I was running my own dog in a qual against a well known hunt test pro. To this day, I am sure he still thinks he beat my dog because my dog hooked a retired gun (something I personally believe is impossible since you can't hook what you can't see) and pinned a mark. His dog went straight to the area, and put up a moderate hunt. His line may have been better, but my dog's mark was clearly superior. He felt that because he was in the area of the fall, the hunt really didn't matter. This shows a lack of understanding to me.

So, I think there is some of both. but it exists in hunt tests as well. People who get passes that barely meet the standard.
With all due respect Susan, your reply to the facebook post only proves the point of the original poster.

Get in the game and pay some dues? People look differently when you might be judging them?

That's the kind of talk that supports people's theories (most of which are really false). I've heard the same thing from plenty of amateur field trialers that were beaten by an established pro as well.

By and large I think the best dog/handler team wins every weekend. There will never be a world without bias but I think those patterns become apparent very quickly.

Mostly, I think people who don't run trials and complain about politics are just looking for an excuse not to get out and lose every weekend for the first 100 weekends they run.

When 4 out of 75-100 dogs a week get a placement, odds are 90+% are gonna lose. You have to accept that to play and most people don't have the stomach for those odds.

There are a ton of people on our local circuit that run week after week and rarely if ever place. They do it because they love and it and one day... they will be in the ribbons.

It's no different than shooting sporting clays, some days I have a good day and my partners (who are all better shots than me) have a bad one and guess what? I win! Most of the time though, I have to settle for taking the clinic they put on every Sunday. It's OK. I love it. If I had to win every week I wouldn't be able to play.
 
#10 ·
I ran a derby where one of the amateurs that was running was friends with the judge and helped marshal. His dog had fairly large hints on every mark in the derby and that dog got 4th and should have a jam at best. There is politics in everything, you hope it doesn't affect placings but it does. There definitely is a buddy buddy system in field trial judging.... Disclaimer: I have only been around a short time so maybe it was just the couple I watched but I even over heard people in gallery comment on that dog has had big hunts on every bird and cheated water but will probably place because he was friends with judge. Was even standing up with judges while they were picking marks
 
#19 ·
I'm sorry you had such bad experiences in the few trials you have run, I think that has skewed your perception a bit. I know there are some dishonest judges out there that will give a buddy an undeserved placement, but I believe they are more rare than you perceive. I know that I have received a few greenies where I and others in the gallery thought a placement was in order, but I'll tell you from a judges perspective, once you get past the first two or three placements, separating fourth from the RJ and best of the JAMs is very difficult. You are in essence weighing faults on different marks and blinds trying to figure out better work amongst dogs that can be very close.
 
#11 ·
If you are in this game long enough, you will see some strange results at the end of trials. Some are accidental, some not so much. This is debated here often... Doesn't matter your background. Take a look at Bon's signature line. Pretty true statement by Lanse.
 
#12 ·
Anyone with decades or more in the dog games will have their stories. When I first started running hunt tests in the 1980's I was given a zero in trainability because I lined the blind. It was changed by the co-judge. I had a fourth place in a field trial open all-age stake in the fifth series to break the tie for a winner, guess who was in the running for the win? Dog got out 10 feet too early on the water blind, ran down the shore and they only awarded three places. I received nothing. There are many more would sound like sour grapes could fill up a legal pad page or two. Had some gifts too, judges fell asleep on a water blind , closed eyes and all. Dog disappeared in the tules, dog came out, judges woke up, said oh she got the bird. Figured I was out, dog was out of sight for awhile. Started to drive down the road, marshal called out that I was back for the water marks. She won the Amateur all-age stake after pounding the water marks. It goes on...others have the same stories I am sure like Lanse Brown's signature line. Make note, deal the hand that your dealt and move on or get out of the game and take up golf. Judging is not an exact science even though crunching numbers sometimes has become the norm in hunt tests. My opinion only.
 
#13 ·
"Make note, deal the hand that your dealt and move on or get out of the game and take up golf. Judging is not an exact science even though crunching numbers sometimes has become the norm in hunt tests. My opinion only."

And your opinion is spot on. Guess that's why I enjoyed judging with you. Hope to do so again.

Bob Swift
 
#17 ·
Very true and well said. Most everyone doesn't see all the dog work in a stake nor do they have the birds eye view of the judges. We all tend to look closely at our results, good/bad, and not give enough attention to the rest of the field.
 
#15 ·
The really successful handlers ( mostly) are humble, dedicated folks working to get thier team better.
My opinion


very well said Dave
 
#18 ·
I'm like most who have run FTs for a while. You get less than you think you should on occasion & get more credit than you think you should other times, but most times you get just what you earned. I've won a couple of times when I thought I was behind some dogs. I have not won when I thought my dog was the best. But most times I get just what I should. As for what handlers, owners & spectators sometimes question in terms of a winner can come from a dog that hammers the 4th but those in attendance didn't see the performances in the 1st-3rd to get the complete picture. The answer is to train diligently, be as prepared as possible, then do your best & leave the judging to the judges who are doing their best to get placements right. Some have mentioned what I think most relative new comers don't seem to understand immediately & that is how to run a good the water blind.
 
#20 ·
Some times your the windshield. Sometimes the bug.

While it happens, I would wager that most every person sitting in a chair for the weekend tries to do right by each and every dog and handler and not skew things unfairly.

And many times a handler has a slightly different view of the actual work in front of him/her than the judges. And let us not forget, there are 2 people coming up with the numbers and placements.

As far as an actual FT/HT bias: In my VERY limited experience with FT's vs HT's, the level of quality and expectations of a FTer vs a HTer are vast and IMO the main reason that the HTer does poorly in a FT.
 
#21 · (Edited)
Umm Bias in anything...umm...never happens...umm; This is why I don't have a book listing clubs, judges, who trains with who, and results of, nor do I call people up to ask about such things before I enter a trial, hunt test or anything. However it's almost impossible to keep a outright winner out...if there's no outright winner 1st & 2nd are usually pretty correct ...placements after that we'll umm.. 3,4,RJ placements can be highly subject to interpretation ;).

Still if your worried about a HT bias, take all the titles off your entry express account, remove sire -dam info, only nod whenever anyone mentions HT;s at the trial and they'll won't know where you come from
 
#30 · (Edited)
If the FT game is ever to progress to engaging younger/amateur participants, the politics need to change. Otherwise it'll be a bunch of 60-80 year old trailers who feel because they showed up they need to place. Period. End of story.

If a young boxer knocks out De La Hoya and loses because he's a no name from a small town, what does that do for the sport? Exactly the same thing it does for the FT COMMUNITY, discourages competing against the well known handlers/owners because there's no chance of placing. With all due respect, screw Susan's thought process, because it does nothing but facilitate the status quo.
 
#63 ·
What irritates me as an amateur who is first and foremost a hunter with gun dogs who actually hunts my dogs, not simulated hunts, is people who send their dogs to top pros and then brag how good THEY are ay handling this same dog. Nothing, I repeat nothing wrong with sending a dog to a pro if you can afford it, but put credit where credit is due, with that PRO not the person writing the checks.

I play the game some, never complain I love good dog work and often go to just watch good dogs go. Seems to me the people writing the checks are the complainers not the Pros who did the work. My ribbons come from impossible retrieves breaking ice by a young dog, priceless. No judges, no excuses, no ribbons, no dinner parties, dog trained by me, shotgun, decoys, and God.
 
#55 ·
I have heard the argument that friends or workers get preferential treatment by judges. I think the opposite may occur at times.

A couple of trials I have judged a friend won. Unfortunately, after I looked at the placements and saw it was my friend, I went backed and re-reviewed my results to make sure. Fortunately, the results didn't change and me and my co-judge had the same placements. What bothers me is if it was not a friend, I don't think I would have thought twice about the placements.
 
#57 ·
@bigcat
Ill tell you what. I've never judges nor run a trial nor judged a test. I can answer your question though, regarding how we can make judging more objective. Do not, as a handler, gallery member or member of any certain camp be a distraction. The reason Lanse and some of the others say thanks and walk away from gift or a screwing the same is because to do otherwise colors people's perspectives- and makes I more difficult to judge objectively. It's not politics its human nature- if one is seen as a jackass, it's easier to see what that individuals dog / the dog they are rattling about is doing wrong than it is to see what's doing right

Do yourself , your dogs, and your friends a favor and quit being a distraction.

Were I judging the aforementioned dog in a derby I would know for a fact that the camp behind him is an asspain waiting to happen- and I would damn sure be ready to deal with it... All if which might serve to sour me a little on the dogs performance. Or it might not. But if objectivity is what you crave... Don't be so distracting- people will miss the dog work while lookin out for whatever poop they think will start flying when you're about.


Another way to look at it... If you always are demanding a justification for not placing- people will always have a justification for not placing you.
 
This post has been deleted
#71 ·
FYI............

Remember you are always advertising to prospective clients..........and the list may have just got a lot shorter.............
Exactly what I was thinking, one never knows where the next client might come from or not.......
 
#60 ·
What about instances when the rules are "black and white" but judges choose to ignore them for their set up? If you call them out on it at a test or a trial, you put a big red X on yourself...where is it that we can have some meaningful conversation about this? What recourse does a handler have, besides, "suck it up and try again"? Or do you simply not run under that judge again and get accused of judge shopping?
 
#62 ·
If the judge is blatantly ignoring the rules and you feel it poses a risk to your dog, bring it up to the Field Trial Chairman through the marshal. There is a system. But not anarchy. Take your issue to the marshal and they can address it with the judges.. If you are worried about safety, scratch your dogs..

You are right... You don't have to run under the same judges next time.

If you are worried about being accused of "judge shopping", you don't have much to worry about IMO.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top