RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

In an AKC Senior test, was this the "right call"?

15K views 210 replies 54 participants last post by  troy schwab 
#1 ·
AKC Senior test and the land double marks are being thrown. After the first bird lands, as the flyer is tossed, the dog starts prancing his feet and lifting his haunches (but does not move forward). The handler says "Sit."

The judges allowed completion of the series but told the handler she was out for her talking to her dog during the marks. Handler asked why wasn't this scored as a controlled break (allowed in Senior). One judge said: "Because you're an experienced handler and you should know better than to talk to your dog during the marks."

Right call?

Or should it be scored as a controlled break?
 
#138 ·
Put me firmly in the controlled break camp on this one.

The handler knows the dog, the judge doesn't. Some dogs creep out, take a hop or two and then they're gone giving lots and lots of warning. Others are gone in less than a blink, 0 to 60 instantly. By saying this isn't a controlled break the judges are saying they know this dog better than the handler does.

Pretty arrongant IMO.
 
#150 ·
Judges= their call is final. POINT BLANK

Where the judge make a bad call was when he told the handler Quote;
One judge said: "Because you're an experienced handler and you should know better than to talk to your dog during the marks."
The judge should be judging the current test and what he or she see's.
I don't care if you're the biggest hunt test pro in the nation. The judge needs to judge the test in front of them and not anything else. Every handler should be judged as if its' their first time at the line and judged with in the rules as set forth by the AKC. Handlers should not be judge on their amount of experience.

What the judge should have said was that you talked to your dog during the marks and that's what put you out. (Point Blank)

Note;
Judges should also never get into a debate with a handler.
 
#156 ·
Judges= their call is final. POINT BLANK

Where the judge make a bad call was when he told the handler Quote;
The judge should be judging the current test and what he or she see's.
I don't care if you're the biggest hunt test pro in the nation. The judge needs to judge the test in front of them and not anything else. Every handler should be judged as if its' their first time at the line and judged with in the rules as set forth by the AKC. Handlers should not be judge on their amount of experience.

What the judge should have said was that you talked to your dog during the marks and that's what put you out. (Point Blank)

Note;
Judges should also never get into a debate with a handler.
Actually in this case you are not quite right. Talking to the dog is a serious handler fault and in and of itself MAY be grounds to drop the dog. The penalty for this serious fault ranges up to dropping the dog so the handlers experience certainly does play a part in that decision by the judges. As I have said before, first time handler saying a word or two is a whole lot different than a pro who damn well knows better.
 
#151 ·
Again, as the handler - I absolutely did not get in a debate with the judges. I have way too much respect for what they're doing on the line to do that. I just happened to be talking to a friend afterwords who posted this up. I have never read or used this forum until she e-mailed me that it had caused so much debate. The comment that if I was a novice she would have overlooked it but because I was experienced she could not - thats what really stung as being unfair - and that's why I felt I was dropped.

It does seem that this has been beat to death and in all the banter back and forth my perspective is in line with Frenchy & Kristie ( THANKS!) - and as an experienced judge - the grey area is to allow the judging to be "reasonable" under the given circumstance. Way too often I see and hear judges that are looking for reasons to drop dogs (for technical faults) instead of looking for good dog work! When I judge I always give the benefit to the team and bring them back another series if there's any doubt at all that might have been misunderstood from the judges chair. If the dog work isn't there, they'll put themselves out.
 
#152 ·
Again, as the handler - I absolutely did not get in a debate with the judges.
I wasn't saying you got into a debate.
I was saying as a judge you should never get into a debate with a handler. As the test judge your call is final, don't debate the call you made. It makes you look unprofessional and undecided.

The comment that if I was a novice she would have overlooked it but because I was experienced she could not - thats what really stung as being unfair - and that's why I felt I was dropped.
I agree with you on the above and the judge should have never made that comment, and should have never judged you, your dog or any other team that way. I would have been PO'd at that point. Not because of being dropped but because of being judged to a different standard when this was only a hunt test not a FT.This type of judging is unfair for hunt tests. If thats the way a judge feels that judge should be judging Field Trials. Where judges opinion rules.
 
#163 ·
So when you are teaching a puppy to sit, do you make it put its but on the ground or is standing ok? Do you accept a crooked sit? I am saying that a standing dog is NOT sitting. In the eyes of the handler this could be seen as a violation of the sit command. Very high personal standards true, but if you do not accept a crooked sit as a sit when trainign SIT, how would you do with a standing dog???


Again, when starting my dog eight years ago, I had LOW OB standards. running blinds he will stop and most of the time stand waiting for the cast becaus eI let him get away with it. He is a creeping monster (getting better) and breaking is always in the back of my mind (broke on last series honor over weekend). I had LOW ob standards and was using the excuse that he has "so much drive that he can't sit still" That is NOT a mistake I will make again, and one that the handler chose not to make at a test with a young dog.

Good OB is not a sign of lack of style. If it were a dog that pranced at the line and then trotted to retrieve has more or less then the dog that is a statue then goes 0-60 in two strides......
 
#169 ·
iolated the sit command?? Seriously? Where do the rules say a dog has to stay seated? Damn you just don’t get style do you? I love a dog that stomps it feet, stands to see the birds, is rip roaring ready to go. That is a dog that loves what it is doing and is damn well ready to roll. I can’t tell you how many master dogs I have seen do exactly this. That dog has gone nowhere, never moved, just showed flat out desire. That is STYLE baby, nothing more and certainly not a break.
Violated the sit command……..wow…..sad/QUOTE]


I call that excitability and disobedience. None of that belongs in a duck blind. Or on the line. I don't consider stylish at all,,,.Just my opinion. I'm not a judge.

p
 
#172 ·
With all the talk that the handler was experienced (which IMHO is wrong to point out) the handler knows better than to talk to the dog when the guns go off. I sincerely doubt the "sit" was from a lapse of the rules, but the knowledge that the dog had butt up and was the type that would break. I would call it controlled break and I think most judges know that's why it was said. That the handler knew his dog and anticipated breaking. I know dogs like that-they don't creep, they break.
 
#173 ·
If a formerly sitting dog initiates a break, and the handler wants to stop it the instant it begins, what body position would the dog be in at that instant?

Would that instant be detectable by a person standing behing the dog?

Exactly when does the break begin?

In Senior, isn't the handler allowed to stop the break at that instant?
 
#193 ·
BBG, Looks like you dug a bunker and are making a stand 'till the death. At least you have some company in there with you.

I'd be interested in your answer to Jeff's question? Cause that's the telling part in my opinion.

Exactly when does the break begin?
Can a dog sit and stand at the same time? Can a dog that is sitting break without standing? If I control the dog at first movement with a whistle would that be controlling a stand or controlling a break? Or do you considered that talking to my dog? HPW
 
#177 · (Edited)
just because i love throwing extremes into debates... for those of you who say the judge must assume the handler knew the dog was going to break and commanded sit making it a controled break..if a dogs left ear twitches on the line and the handler says sit...is it talking to the dog or a controled break???? maybe the handler knows that if the left ear twitches the dog will break and is stiopping it before it happens?

ed samples
(yes i really am that nuts)
 
#178 ·
just because i love throwing extremes into debates... for those of you who say the judge must assume the handler knew the dog was going to break and commanded sit making it a controled break..if a dogs left ear twitches on the line and the handler says sit...is it talking to the dog or a controled break???? maybe the handler knows that if the left ear twitches the dog will break and is stiopping it before it happens?

ed samples
(yes i really am that nuts)

EXACTLY.......

really this might be my last post on this
 
#179 ·
OMG!
Controlled break! Absolutely.
Are we trying to find a reason to drop dogs?
The talking on the marks rule, IMHO, is to prevent helping the dogs find the stations and birds in the air. They should do that themselves.
This is one time I wish I knew who some of the handles belonged to.
Is this like avoidance training? :)
 
#180 ·
Hi Guys,
This is why I like a mat. Yet many hunt test folk are so very against the mat. And in a walk-up a mat is impractical. The hunt test substitute is a conversation with the co-judge and the establishment of a “creep line” This is very practical even with the walk up. You instruct everybody that when the working team passes ____ the test starts and if the dog ranges out to ___ it has broken. A simple heel of boot scuff in the dirt or a small piece of tree branch laid on the ground is all it takes. I feel it is more fair to the working team and easier from a judging standpoint. Inside that tree branch bounce around all you like, heck do back flips. If you think that will help the dog mark. Outside of that tree branch is “off the mat”. Time to see if you actually can control that break.
To the situation described in this particular case, standing is not going forward. But sometimes a $75 training session is needed, with any dog.

.
 
#181 · (Edited)
If you are a judge I don't think it is appropriate to 'assume' a handler knows what his dog is 'about' to do.... ie the ear twitch, the whine, the dropped head, etc etc... what if it's some behavior the handler sees on the way to the line? or in the holding blind? if the dog was breaking during the last group training session? etc etc etc.

I've seen many dogs get up off their butt that are very steady watch for birds ..I've seen dogs that were solid as a rock until all of a sudden the hair trigger was pulled... should a handler 'know' their dog? yes, of course..but the judges shouldn't infer that the handler does or does not know their dog. MHO Nor should the 'experience' of the handler come into play. If someone is running senior and it is their first time - odds are they ran jr's and know the rules (or should know the rules, ignorance is no excuse). If they are dropped because they held onto the lead, touched their dog, talked to their dog, released their dog before it was time, pointed out the guns, etc etc etc, that is all part of the learning curve as a new handler and I don't imagine they would completely run away from the hunt test game....I would certainly hope not.

Juli
 
#182 ·
Everyone look back at post #131 by Scott Spaulding. Here is the point he made that I am referring to:

"The problem I see is the handler is masking the dogs performance by taking a safety that is not allowed. Part of a controlled break is the handlers ability to bring the dog back under control after making a attempt to retrieve the bird. If it was me I would consider the dog done for the day but keep in mind I am not a hunt test judge and lack the complete knowledge to be one."

I also heard about the similar situation at Corning and debated for a few moments with someone on the phone about whether the judges can legally call this a controlled break or not.

A dog that breaks 'usually' ends up marking poorly. It all depends on which bird they break on. By saying the illegal "sit", the handler is avoiding the potential mess of calling the dog back, realigning, and maybe having to handle on a mark.

If a dog breaks after the first bird, that's the worst scenario:

1. Is he sitting and watching after being stopped while the 2nd bird goes down? If so, then he has to turn his back on the test while he returns to the line, possibly losing his orientation to the falls.

2. Is he returning to the handler at that moment with his back to the bird (or partially looking)?

Even after both birds go down, there is going to be re-heeling, which in itself CAN be a mess, with even MORE points off for lack of obedience!

What if we were talking about a Derby here? Still a double going down! Imagine the terrific advantage that handler would have by not messing up the dog's marking by giving a quiet "sit"!

Judges have to judge what they see and not intent.
Handler spoke after calling for the birds - (and I hate to say it, because I have been there)
INFRACTION FOR DQ.

Debbie Tandoc
San Jose, CA
 
#190 ·
Quietly telling the dog to sit while the birds are going down in any test or minor stake that allows for a controlled break is treated by me as a controlled break.

No matter how you argue it, I cannot justify a penalty being more severe than a controlled break. It just is not nearly as disruptive to the testing as a controlled break. With a controlled break not only has the dog broken, but you must also violate the rule about talking to the dog before being released in order to stop it.

Nobody is saying to ignore it. A controlled break is a major deduct in my book. Just not an automatic DQ.
 
#184 ·
RATS, forgot to bring up one more thing!

Will someone please contact the AKC Rep about this question? I have to pack for the Fallon test this weekend (leaving tomorrow), so no time!

Maybe there will be a rep at my test and or someone can ask a rep at their test this weekend.

I think we need to get a "for sure" answer, so people reading these posts will know what they can and can't do.

Debbie Tandoc
 
#185 ·
RATS, forgot to bring up one more thing!

Will someone please contact the AKC Rep about this question? I have to pack for the Fallon test this weekend (leaving tomorrow), so no time!

Maybe there will be a rep at my test and or someone can ask a rep at their test this weekend.

I think we need to get a "for sure" answer, so people reading these posts will know what they can and can't do.

Debbie Tandoc

You will never get a for sure answer. None of us saw this happen and each situation is different. In some cases it may be a controlled break and in others it is talking to the dog and if you ask 4 reps you will get four differnt answers. similar but different because this is open for interpretation
 
#186 ·
Interesting issue. Certainly has been a ton written on it. Here's a little more, not that anyone needs one more opinion on the subject.

I wouldn't criticize these judges--they were there, we weren't, and they have the discretion under the rules to drop the dog. There's nothing more obnoxious than internet criticism of judges from all of us who didn't witness the situation. I've been there and don't like it. So it was their call and they had the right to make it. Thanks to them for spending their time judging.

Having said that, there's always discretion and judgment in interpreting and applying the rules. I can't speak to this situation, but hypothetically, I wouldn't drop such a dog. I'd ding it for trainability--similar to a controlled break--I don't care if you want to define it as a controlled break or not. People have made very well reasoned arguments pro and con as to whether this is a controlled break or not. They are interesting to read, but ultimately inconclusive and unnecessary, imo.

I don't think you have to reach a definite conclusion on the controlled break issue. The rules do not say you must drop the dog for this infraction, so I think the judges have to consider the situation and apply their judgment under the rules. To me, that's what judging is about.

I would apply a common sense test which to me means that saying sit shouldn't be penalized more than actually having the dog go ahead and break and then bringing it back under control. If a controlled break is allowed in SH, then saying sit should be as well. As a judge I choose not to interpret a rule to reach an absurd result. That's where the judgment and discretion part come in for me. Others disagree, I understand, but that's where I come down.

And, on a related topic, someone, many posts earlier, said there's no controlled break in JH. I was recently at a seminar and the AKC rep said--certainly there can be. Which also makes sense to me.

Just my 2 cents on an interesting, but maybe a little overheated discussion.

Thanks
Dave B.
 
#189 ·
Okay BBG and Scott, we may never see eye to eye on this issue, but answer me this one question. Do you believe a handler telling his dog to sit while the birds are going down during a Senior test is serious enough fault to warrant a non qualifying score in most instances? I won’t even hold you to saying you’d always fail a dog and handler for the infraction.

I, like others, contend that there is plenty of latitude within the rules to allow this dog and handler to continue to play. I won’t go so far as to say they are going to pass, but I’m not willing to say they have failed for this single infraction either. The following is what I believe has been eluded to thus far, but here it is as it reads in the rules and regulations….

------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Chapter 5
Part II - Evaluation and Scoring of a Dog's Abilities

The evaluation of a dog's abilities can never be precise; it is not an exact science. However, the primary purpose of a Retriever is to get the birds to hand as quickly as possible in a pleasing, obedient manner; whether a dog accomplishes its primary purpose is determined by its possession of a unique set of both natural abilities, and abilities acquired through training. Part III of these Guidelines is a discussion of the natural and acquired abilities of Retrievers.

….snip…

A zero means that the dog did not perform minimally. For example, it would be difficult to assign a score other than zero in Perseverance when a Senior or Master dog failed to enter water after having been ordered to do so several times.

A zero score is very different from a "nonscore." A zero is computed into the dog's average for that ability while a non-score is not. The zero indicates that the dog had an opportunity to exhibit an ability, but failed to do so. The non-score says that such an opportunity did not present itself. An "X" should be entered on the scoresheet for non-scores

When both Judges grade a dog zero on the same ability, the dog can no longer receive a Qualifying score. Keep in mind that moderate to serious faults in an ability will often become more apparent through the series of tests. In questionable instances, give the dog the benefit of the doubt.

….Snip….

A Judge's responsibility is to determine, through the evaluation of abilities, whether or not a dog possesses sufficient abilities to be entitled to official AKC recognition of those abilities in the form of Junior Hunter, Senior Hunter or Master Hunter titles.

…snip…

Part III - The Abilities of Retrievers

IV. The final attribute to be evaluated by Judges is Trainability, that includes those abilities dogs acquire through training (steadiness, control, response and delivery). While not to be underestimated, acquired abilities must be viewed in a different perspective, being of somewhat lesser importance than natural abilities even though a Master Hunter must exhibit all that is desirable in a finished Retriever. The level that acquired abilities are developed will vary in different Test categories; for example, a reasonable degree of steadiness and general obedience are the requirements in the Junior Hunting Test. A greater degree of steadiness and some degree of the other qualities are expected in the Senior Hunting Test. There shall be expectation of full refinement in acquired attributes in Master Hunting Tests.


Classification of Faults

Classification of the many faults which may be exhibited by retrievers during the course of a hunting test shall be primarily in terms of generalizations. In the lists which follow, various infractions are cataloged as I. Serious Faults, II. Moderate Faults and III. Minor Faults. Each fault should be considered as a single occurrence, and only to an average degree. However, such infraction may be so minor in degree that it scarcely merits the indicated penalty. Conversely, the degree of a given instance of infraction may be of sufficient gravity to merit a much more severe penalty that is suggested - even to the point of elimination from the stake. Also, in each of these three general categories, all of the faults listed should not be given equal weight, since they are not of equal gravity or importance.

Repetition of a fault, particularly time after time, indicates a "weakness" or a bad habit, and justifies much more penalty than in an isolated occurrence of this fault. The same holds true when there is a combination of different faults. The listing of individual faults within each category has not been made in the order of their seriousness. A Judge may be thoroughly justified in moderating a penalty or even in failing to impose one, if, in his or her opinion, there have been extenuating circumstances to justify such action.

The faults included in this classification are limited to those which are observed most often at retriever Hunting Tests. Others may occur, such as the repeated failure to exercise gun safety, and this classification may serve as a helpful guide on such occasions in determining the relative importance of such unusual offenses.


---------------------------------------------------------------------


For the judge that is willing to zero out a dog/handler for saying “sit” while birds in the air, have you as a judge fulfilled your obligation to determine through the evaluation of abilities whether or not the DOG possesses sufficient abilities to be called a senior hunter.

Can you as a judge say with certainty that the DOG did not perform minimally in trainability/obedience and warrants a “0” without question, and the dog does not deserve the benefit of the doubt?

Given that the rules allow for even “serious” faults to be viewed as minor in the degree that it scarcely merits the indicated penalty, wouldn’t it be more prudent to allow the dog to continue on to see if such faults manifest itself to the degree that failure is warranted?
 
#191 ·
I do not know Frenchy........I'd have to be there on the spot to make a decision like that. I've been in situations where I made a handler error that should have probably dropped me. I was allowed to continue under those judges, I was lucky and willing to bet if it was another set I would have been dropped.

It is up to the discretion of judges, not the handler, handler uses the verbal command and opens himself up for a major fault, which to these judges was enough to drop them.
 
#195 ·
Directly from the AKC rules - emphasis mine (italic and underlined words and phrases)

Steadiness – dogs on line sometimes make various types of movement when game is in the air (and/or when it is shot). These types of movements may be interpreted as efforts by the dogs to improve their view of the fall, and some occur as sheer excitement. Except for an occasional change in position, in order to better see a fall, all such movements could be viewed as unsteadiness


  • a controlled break is generally when a dog leaves to retrieve before being sent, but is quickly brought under control by verbal command or whistle and returns to the handler.
  • Creeping is generally considered as leaving the handler on a tentative yet excited basis, short of leaving completely to retrieve the bird, or waiting to be sent to retrieve. General unsteadiness, short of breaking
  • It is generally understood that a break occurs when a dog makes a movement that, in the opinion of the judges, indicates a deliberate attempt to retrieve without having been ordered to do so and cannot be brought under the control of the handler.
I still believe the handler was rightly dq'd for speaking to the dog before the dog 'broke' ..the handler was 'correcting' a steadiness issue..which is NOT the same as breaking or creeping.

Juli
 
G
#201 ·
Directly from the AKC rules - emphasis mine (italic and underlined words and phrases)

Steadiness – dogs on line sometimes make various types of movement when game is in the air (and/or when it is shot). These types of movements may be interpreted as efforts by the dogs to improve their view of the fall, and some occur as sheer excitement. Except for an occasional change in position, in order to better see a fall, all such movements could be viewed as unsteadiness


  • a controlled break is generally when a dog leaves to retrieve before being sent, but is quickly brought under control by verbal command or whistle and returns to the handler.
  • Creeping is generally considered as leaving the handler on a tentative yet excited basis, short of leaving completely to retrieve the bird, or waiting to be sent to retrieve. General unsteadiness, short of breaking
  • It is generally understood that a break occurs when a dog makes a movement that, in the opinion of the judges, indicates a deliberate attempt to retrieve without having been ordered to do so and cannot be brought under the control of the handler.
I still believe the handler was rightly dq'd for speaking to the dog before the dog 'broke' ..the handler was 'correcting' a steadiness issue..which is NOT the same as breaking or creeping.

Juli
You need to emphasize the word GENERALLY and make it larger and bolder than you're other emphasis.
 
#197 ·
The rules state that the judges shall agree on what will be a controlled break in Junior and Senior tests. The rules also define a break as:

1. Break. It is generally understood that a break
occurs when a dog makes a movement, that, in the opinion
of the Judges, indicates a deliberate intent to retrieve
without having been ordered to do so, and cannot be
brought under control by the handler.

Leaves a lot of room for interpretation with respect to movement by a dog; enough to give the benefit of the doubt to the dog/handler team. Bottom line is it is up to the judges. As a handler, if the judges do not communicate this information in the handlers meeting, ask.

IMO, it was a controlled break and I would inform the handler after they ran the series.
 
#198 · (Edited)
Juli,

I think you are a too hung up on the definition of "break". In your above reference quotes did you notice every one of them starts with "generally". The definitions themself are not absolutes, but generalities. In my mind its moot whether you want to call it a controlled break or not. The infraction of speaking to your dog by saying a single "sit" does not warrant an instant DQ.

As a judge I haven't seen enough. I haven't fullfilled my primary responsibilites as a judge and adequately evaluated the dogs abilities. I'm making note of the infraction, but I'm going to CONTINUE to judge that dog.
 
#199 ·
Gray area, depends on the judge, could go either way. Should have asked the other judge if he agreed 100%, to drop a dog, both judges have to agree. Move on to the next test and try to improve and learn from what could happen in a test depending on what judges you have and their experience and attitude. I've heard of worse things coming from judges. Bud
 
#200 ·
if a dogs left ear twitches on the line and the handler says sit...is it talking to the dog or a controled break????
It doesn't matter what the sign is, it's the fact that the handler felt they needed the use of a word to stop an act they felt that was in motion. There are dogs that rock, jump, paw like they are going to break to a person that doesn't know them, and they are totally solid. The judges job is to judge what happens, not what they think will happen.
 
#202 · (Edited)
websters definition of generally : in disregard of specific instances and with regard to an overall picture.



I guess in my eyes, the overall picture of a dog breaking is that he has LEFT the line with intent to retrieve.

not at all the same as a dog that is 'itching to go'.

if creeping is not breaking, how can unsteadiness be breaking? (per the rules above)

Juli
 
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