RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Judging a Path to the Mark:

1K views 8 replies 8 participants last post by  greyghost 
#1 ·
On short open type of marks with moderate cover.....Would you be inclined to mark a dog down for taking an easier path to the mark rather then going straight thru cover that may hold a hazard in the dog's mind? I'm not talking about long marks with different pieces of cover....I'm talking about 50-80 yard marks in shorter cover where the dog has a good view of the mark and does not have a hunt....he steps on the mark, but avoids a piece of cover that would be directly in line to the mark. A hunt test distance mark.
I have observed hunt tests where there has been a path thru cover that is not in a direct line to the mark, slightly off the direct line, and by taking this line the dog avoids the cover, but steps on the mark.
In my mind I do not believe that this is a big deal. That the test set-up is at fault. Dog should not be penalized for perceived "cheating cover" when the test set-up is the fault.
Would you mark a dog down for this and why?
I'm looking for feedback, hopefully from some of you experienced judges that would shed some light on this subject. And I am not looking for fault, I'm trying to look at this thru a dogs mind and a judges mind too. Now I know, at the moment, I have too much time on my hands!
I'm hoping to get constructive feedback. Thanks.....pete
 
See less See more
#2 ·
No mark down per say..............will make a note(draw a picture) though
What I would do as a judge is also use the little cheaty piece of cover to "My" advantage in my set-up. If the cheat is taken for example would put the dog at a disadvantage to find the bird or get him into an old fall or or or............ lots of differnet what ifs..........
Sue
 
#3 ·
On short open type of marks with moderate cover.....Would you be inclined to mark a dog down for taking an easier path to the mark rather then going straight thru cover that may hold a hazard in the dog's mind? I'm not talking about long marks with different pieces of cover....I'm talking about 50-80 yard marks in shorter cover where the dog has a good view of the mark and does not have a hunt....he steps on the mark, but avoids a piece of cover that would be directly in line to the mark. A hunt test distance mark.
I have observed hunt tests where there has been a path thru cover that is not in a direct line to the mark, slightly off the direct line, and by taking this line the dog avoids the cover, but steps on the mark.
In my mind I do not believe that this is a big deal. That the test set-up is at fault. Dog should not be penalized for perceived "cheating cover" when the test set-up is the fault.
Would you mark a dog down for this and why?
I'm looking for feedback, hopefully from some of you experienced judges that would shed some light on this subject. And I am not looking for fault, I'm trying to look at this thru a dogs mind and a judges mind too. Now I know, at the moment, I have too much time on my hands!
I'm hoping to get constructive feedback. Thanks.....pete


Lots of 'ifs' here, Pete. If this is a lower level hunt test, about the only time a dog is marked down on the line to a mark is if it's a water test, and the dog avoids all the water. Even then at the starting level, and due to a less than desireable water hole to work with, the dog that might cheat the path, but still gets the mark is seldom failed.

Even at the top levels, the line taken to a mark is seldom judged important, but cheating far off a direct line could get the dog in trouble, depending on the test set up. Judges setting up a line through some form of cover, or utilizing suction, is NOT a faulty set up, it's a test of the dog's abilities, not for elimination purposes, but for evaluation.

A dog at the top levels of hunt testing should be expected to handle those situations. Actual hunting will frequently penalize a dog for not going straight, or through undesireable cover, as it comes upon a FBD that it wasn't going for initially. Testing is designed to evaluate those abilities that are desireable in a top level hunting dog, and you should train for it, not view those opportunities to test your dog in these set ups by blaming the judges for a bad test.

UB
 
#4 ·
It won't affect the marking score. It may (or may not) affect the trainability and perseverence scores.

Eric
 
#5 ·
Let me start by saying that I don't know jack ****. But, I feel that lines to blinds should be judged, and not lines to marks. Unless you have a water mark, and the dog goes out of it's way to avoid getting wet. A good mark would be one placed so that if the dog cheats, it will have a heck of a time recovering. If it still stomps it, then it must have been a good mark.
 
#8 ·
If he goes to the AOF and finds the mark, he had a good mark. Makes no nevermind how he got there on the marking score. Makes a difference on the perserverance if I have set up the mark so cover plays a role in the design of the test.
Might also affect the trainibility if he disturbs to much cover unnecessarily.
 
#9 ·
Thanks for reply's.....only referencing short land marks...at the MH level. I understand the water cheating and dog should be marked down for perserverance...I'm only thinking of a short mark where dog may avoid small patch of cover that is inconsequential to the mark for the dog, BUT, the cover is directly in line to the mark. Dogs at the MH level have proven to some extent perserverance to get there. Dog just decides it's easier or safer in his mind to avoid a piece of cover....the dog isn't lazy, just avoids the land cover to get to the mark.
Reason I'm asking is that I will be judging Hunt Tests this late summer/fall and am going by past test set-ups I have observed. Looking for feedback and appreciate replys....and apologize for all the what if's....just want to do right for the dog and handler and looking for experienced judges/handlers/trainers comments.
 
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