The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Gun Dog Broker
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: New AKC rules proposal

  1. #1
    Senior Member Steve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    620

    Default New AKC rules proposal

    Was there a discussion on this that I missed.

    There were several listed ( http://www.akc.org/pdfs/events/field...rim_Report.pdf ), but one very interesting one is:

    1. To judge an all age stake, judges must have completed 2 apprenticeships (at judges expense) or

    2. One apprenticeship and judge of two or more minor stakes or

    3. Handled a dog in at least 15 all stakes in the last 5 years with one placement or JAM.

    Seems like a nightmare to track all this. Also what about the judge who has been in the game for 20+ years, has judged over 20+ times, and is between dogs or on a bad luck streak. What value is there in this person apprenticing a stake.

    My guess is that this will get voted down, but who knows.
    Kelly, Weis, Willingham, & Davies

  2. #2
    Senior Member K G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    southeast us
    Posts
    5,350

    Default

    This proposal is for BRAND NEW JUDGES for AA stakes ONLY....someone who has NEVER judged an AA stake before.

    I don't know what the odds are of it passing. I can appreciate the effort, but I'm not sure it'll pass in its current form.

    kg
    I keep my PM box full. Use email to contact me: rockytopkg@aol.com.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Howard N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    7,688

    Default

    Wow, I just read the entire document. I think there's gonna be lots of discussion

    10 yards max for retired guns? I think they should be a little more lienient.

    Diversion birds not marks. My opinion, if the dog could see it go down it's a mark no matter how many blinds you run before picking it up.

    If I feel strongly about some of this there will be other people who feel just as strongly with the opposite viewpoint. I'd love to be at the meeting when this is all discussed and voted on.
    Howard Niemi

    You really gotta be careful about how high a pedestal you put your method, your accomplishments, your dog on. There's usually someone who's done more, somewhere. And they may have used a different method than you did! Chris Atkinson 2013

    get your dog out and TRAIN! caryalsobrook 2013

  4. #4
    Senior Member TxFig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bryan, TX
    Posts
    649

    Default

    I read all the proposals a couple of weeks ago, not because I run FT's, but because what shows up in the FT game has a habit of "tricking down" to the HT game. Where it applies, of course.

    That said, when I read the proposals, I was very pleasantly surprised - I agreed with all of them. Although like others have mentioned, the requirements for new judges (15 finishes) seems excessive (but I do agree with the reason behind it).



    Quote Originally Posted by Howard N
    10 yards max for retired guns? I think they should be a little more lienient.
    This is one of those things that won't filter to the HT game as retired guns aren't allowed in HT anyway. But I agree, 10 yards seems to be EXTREAMLY close. Otoh, I *liked* the idea that they had to move AWAY from the direction the bird was thrown.

    Diversion birds not marks. My opinion, if the dog could see it go down it's a mark no matter how many blinds you run before picking it up.
    Maybe diversions in a FT are different than in a HT? In a HT, the dog will almost never be on the line w/ the handler when the diversion bird is thrown. Meaning, the picture it has to retrieve the bird is different - sometimes DRASTICALLY different - than what it saw when the bird was in the air.

    Different background. Different distance. Different landscape.
    That's not a mark.



    If I feel strongly about some of this there will be other people who feel just as strongly with the opposite viewpoint. I'd love to be at the meeting when this is all discussed and voted on.
    How did I do above?
    --
    Chris Barnes

  5. #5
    Senior Member Steve Amrein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    St. Peters, MO
    Posts
    1,860

    Default

    I have heard of apprenticeships in HT but how do you apprentice in a FT ? Do you sit in the chair with the 2 actual judges and interact and ask ???? Be involved with set ups thru callbacks and placements ? Does that mean that a new AA judge gets to take time off from work, trialing or whatever plus travel expenses to go apprentice before he gets the chance to do it for real. That sounds like a big incentive to bring in new judges NOT
    "Communism only works in Heaven, where they don't need it, and in Hell, where they already have it" Ronald Reagan

  6. #6
    Senior Member EdA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    6,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Howard N
    Diversion birds not marks. My opinion, if the dog could see it go down it's a mark no matter how many blinds you run before picking it up..
    1000 dittos to that, here's hoping lots of people feel the same way we do

    all these ticky tacky proposals and not a single word on Limited Entry Open Stake proposal

  7. #7
    Senior Member EdA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    6,456

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Amrein
    That sounds like a big incentive to bring in new judges NOT
    not to mention the inconvenience factor for the judges who are already under considerable pressure, who would want to judge 80 all-age dogs with an apprentice looking over their shoulder

    and who chooses these apprentices and who chooses whose shoulder they look over, will it be voluntary for the judges to have an apprentice around????

  8. #8
    Senior Member Doug Main's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Galesburg, IL
    Posts
    801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard N
    Diversion birds not marks. My opinion, if the dog could see it go down it's a mark no matter how many blinds you run before picking it up..
    1000 dittos to that, here's hoping lots of people feel the same way we do

    all these ticky tacky proposals and not a single word on Limited Entry Open Stake proposal
    You beat me to it. I was going to say the same thing!!!

  9. #9
    Senior Member junbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    La Crosse WI
    Posts
    502

    Default

    I agree that these proposed rules are ticky tacky and do not improve the sport. Some in fact I think are against the principle that a judge should be able to use his/her background to set up tests fairly to evaluate dogs. I think simpler is better and I am definitely against micromanaging rules based on isolated incidents.

    Some important bookkeeping is completely ignored--it shows a complete lack of people updating the book. For example the restricted stake has no more status than the derby stake in the book--yet this is not updated. See Standard Procedure for Non-Slip Retriever Trials, sec. 44 under General Provisions. I find this lack of detail quite disturbing.

    Jack

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    297

    Default

    Are they talking about a hunt test diversion bird or bull dog as they were called in the FT game where the bird is thrown when the dog is returning with or on the way too another retrieve? If so, I agree with that rule because of the inequity of it. To many times a little slowness by the bird boy or judge signaling late and it is very unfair for the dog to mark the bird. Or are they also referring to the poison bird thrown before a blind? That is a mark and should be scored as such. Guess Ill have to read the link.

    LT

Similar Threads

  1. AKC FT Rules Vs. Regulations
    By Lab-Kid in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-06-2011, 06:54 AM
  2. AKC Field Trial Rules
    By born2retrieve in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 10-22-2009, 07:57 AM
  3. AKC FT HT Rules ?
    By john fallon in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-30-2009, 06:13 AM
  4. AKC Field Trial Rules
    By Jim Pickering in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-21-2009, 06:52 PM
  5. AKC rules change
    By D Osborn in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-21-2008, 10:53 AM

Posting Permissions

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