Retriever Advisory Committee Rule Change Proposals

[EdA]

After decades of trying to define the Amateur maybe it would be better to define the professional.

A person will be considered a professional for the purpose of AKC Retriever FTs when:........

Possible criteria: X % of their total income is derived from the training, handling or sale of retrievers(over 6months old/ FT eligible).
$ X have been recieved in the calander year from the training, handling or sale of retrievers(over 6 months).


Tim

your intentions are good but who would submit their 1040 to scrutiny..

I have never understood the attempts to define amateur status as anything more than you are an amateur if you do not accept compensation for training retrievers for field trials, hunt tests, or hunting or you do not receive compensation for handling them in competition. Seems pretty forthright and simple which doesn't mean that some field trial committee could not decide otherwise but as long as that decision is left to field trial committee there can always be some incorrect interpretation of the rule. We have never considered peoiple who breed dogs, sell dogs, write books, make videos, or give seminars to be professional dog trainers. Professional trainers are people who train dogs for other people for money.

[Howard N]

Professional trainers are people who train dogs for other people for money.

Uh oh, Now I'm scared. I agree with Dr. Ed.

[FOM]

your intentions are good but who would submit their 1040 to scrutiny..

I have never understood the attempts to define amateur status as anything more than you are an amateur if you do not accept compensation for training retrievers for field trials, hunt tests, or hunting or you do not receive compensation for handling them in competition. Seems pretty forthright and simple which doesn't mean that some field trial committee could not decide otherwise but as long as that decision is left to field trial committee there can always be some incorrect interpretation of the rule. We have never considered peoiple who breed dogs, sell dogs, write books, make videos, or give seminars to be professional dog trainers. Professional trainers are people who train dogs for other people for money.

Aren't they also now considering people who raise puppies for others? (i.e. until they are 6 months old and can head off to a trainer)

[Hunt'EmUp]

#2 could be named the "Amateurs can't have sex with Pro's" rule. Or if you took the literal term of "Ongoing", you could have sex once but twice would make you a pro.

Hmmm a pro might make some money to "accidentally sleep with certain Amateurs" and get them out of a stake for 2 yrs It could be a new Pro service, to add to that 1040 Amateurs beware, Pros approaching with gifts and booze

[RetrieversONLINE]

Why change the rules to accommodate a small minority? In the end they are making it harder and harder for the true blue amateurs to play. Someone that has the time to produce videos, seminars ect, is that a true amateur?

Well, if that person also has and takes the time to train their own dogs 100% and nobody else’s ever for money, takes time to judge dozens and dozens of trials, does judging seminars, serves as President and more for FT clubs, serves as President for National, serves as a Director for such clubs, mentors many newbies for free, also conducts free seminars, my answer would be YES!--- that person is a true Amateur.

I’d also say if that person trained their own dogs for 30 years while working full-time and achieved much success and then retired and now with more time and more success produced a video and occasional seminars expressly to help the true blue Amateurs become better, I’d say that person is making it easier not harder for Amateurs to play.

Dr. Ed’s clear understanding of the definition and theRulebook (see post # 12) doesn’t seem to be so clear for everyone. Obviously some can’t see the clarity so, perhaps, RAC might have grounds to clarify the rules to accommodate a minority.


Just sayin’

[Bayou Magic]

...Professional trainers are people who train (and/or handle) dogs for other people's for money.

I really don't see what's confusing about the above definition (bold print added by me), but I have to admit that I like Kyle B's 2 poke per night interpretation.

[Tim Carrion]

Professional trainers are people who train dogs for other people for money.

Agree and it is the minority that will push any non-specfic definition beyond its intended limits when money is involved. As the dollars involved for trained dogs continue to escalate so will the abuses and confusion so long as there is not an objective criteria.

Tim

[rboudet]

Could someone please point out to me an instance where this rule has been violated? No names just the facts. Is this really that big of a problem in the sport? I just don't see it, at least not down here.

And let me get this straight, just because someone is having an intimate relationship (been to the promise land more than once) or even married to a pro, does that automatically make them a better handler with an unfair advantage? Heck there are many gundog and HT trainers that couldnt compete with the average AM FT trainer/handler.

And Dennis, I know of at least one RAC member that agrees wholeheartedly with what you stated above.

[RetrieversONLINE]

And Dennis, I know of at least one RAC member that agrees wholeheartedly with what you stated above.

Trust me, more than one does!

[EdA]

Could someone please point out to me an instance where this rule has been violated? No names just the facts. Is this really that big of a problem in the sport? I just don't see it, at least not down here.

The National Amateur Retriever Club refused the entries of an individual a few years back.