Putting Dr And Mrs Heise on that list is in poor taste, they are very nice people and shouldn't have their names singled out with the others listed
The state of the Amateur stake is part of the monster that has been built over the years, if you want to compete against smaller fields try the Utah trials, they could use the support
So is the frequency one judges supposed to be the new criteria for how one gives back to the sport and therefore how many dogs one can run? What about the person who doesn't judge but works from before the judges wake up until after they are three sheets to the wind to put on two FTs and two HTs per year? How many dogs would that person be allowed to run?
NOT ONE PERSON was singled out FOR ANY REASON and only the facts of 4+ dog handlers for the weekend of 5/17 were stated for discussion purposes.
I DID mention that Ann was judging, and I'm sure she would have run a dog or two if she wasn't judging. That is why Dr. Heise was running the dogs I'm sure.
Ann and Bob contribute VERY MUCH to the sport as you can see from their judging assignments. My apologies for the confusion.
ADDENDUM: I should have realized mentioning names would create misunderstandings, so they've been removed.
Aside from how much any one handler contributes to the sport, multidog handlers in the Open, Amateur and Qual create logistical problems for the clubs and their volunteers.
If a multidog handler is only entered in the Open, then there aren't the logistical problems of getting them from stake to stake.
If a mutlidog handler is entered in the Open and Am, then the club must adjust the running orders accordingly to accomodate them and prevent delays. This creates many inconveniences for not only the club, but other handlers who are forced to run out of order. It can also create a problem for judges in providing an honor in the last series.
Multidog handlers who enter many dogs in the Open, Am and Qual are very hard on the club logistically as it is almost impossible to be at 3 stakes at the same time. Almost everyone at the trial is inconvenienced in these situations.
For the most part the majority of the multidog handlers have been very accommodating. In the past it has been a very minor nuisance, but their numbers are growing. Hopefully there will be a workable solution for all involved.
I know multi dog handlers that work to put on ie: chair, chief marshall and so on that can run dogs be on time and be successful. I also know of multi dog handlers that dont do jack squat. I know single dog owners blah blah blah. Just like the federal gubment the RAc needs to take a step back and let the local folks who put on the trials have some control back. Heck even have term limits and actual elected members. But if they have that much time on to spend on minutia they could add 1 or 2 more trials a year that the RAC puts on.
OK now that I have ranted a bit back to lurking.......
"Communism only works in Heaven, where they don't need it, and in Hell, where they already have it" Ronald Reagan
At a local field trial recently it was discussed about how there are different rules in place for different sporting dog venues (coon hounds, pointers, etc) and in one type; I believe certain coon dog competitions, the competitors are allowed to buy back into the competition if their dog gets dropped from the competition similar to a mulligan in golf.
Everyone joked about how it would be good and bad for some as it’s very common to hear competitors say in the gallery, “Man if I only had one more chance at that mark or blind”. But what would the competitor say if after running the second time they got the same results?
So for those in favor of limiting entries I ask what will your excuse be when you don’t win after limiting your competition because that is all that would be accomplished by making that change. Maybe you could change the rules to judge on a curve for those competing with less than 3 dogs?
IF I ever win an AA stake I would want it to be because my dog was better than the other dogs available to compete not because I limited everyone to my personal situation as I don’t know how that would be fair to those being limited.
As far as logistical issues and people waiting for other competitors at other stakes, that is field trials. If you have never had to get an extra night’s hotel room or waited hours to just run the last dog that has been at another stake you haven’t been around the game very long.
Life is not fair and neither are field trials.
"Life is not fair and neither are field trials."
But we should strive to improve both.
You order a Lab; ask a Golden; but negotiate with a Chesapeake!
Do I wish I had a 4 or more dogs to run in a stake? You bet. Am I going to toss the flag and cry foul because someone else has more time and means? Hell no. This is America, We have a right to a flyer. We have the right to enter as many dogs as we can/want. We have the right to enter the trial we wish. We also have the right to run under the judge of our choice.
Jealousy is an emotion resulting in negative feelings based on insecurities, fear and resentment. We shouldn't hate on people because they have a perceived advantage based on one's self perceived disadvantage It's a game, learn to play it to "your" advantage. Just because some handlers have more bullets than others doesn't mean they are going to hit the target...a bad shot is a bad shot. I've judged/ran/trained with several that couldn't hit with Farmer's truck. On the other hand there's Charlie string, you better be on your A game because that team can play and they raise the bar. Either my dog is better that day or he is not. Field Trials determine a winner, it's the not a sport where they don't keep score and everyone gets a participation ribbon. Line them up and let the best dog win. If you don't win, try harder or find a different sport.
I've stated this before but I think Field Trials should be a little more like Hockey. If people were allowed to take care of their issues face to face and not take cheap shots from the gallery or on the internet there would be a little more respect given and received on the weekends so that the sport could police itself.
Last edited by Shawn S.; 05-09-2013 at 03:04 PM. Reason: add name
The original theme of the thread is about the RAC rules dictating 'Amateur' status, and my comments were directed toward the current status of the 'Amateur' stake and handlers.
I believe the spirit in which the 'Amateur' stake was created years ago has been lost. If you have been in field trials for any length of time, you know what I am talking about. In years past, the Amateur stake has consisted mainly of Amateurs who owned and ran a couple of dogs (even trained them themselves). Rarely were there handlers with more than two dogs, but now it is becoming commonplace.
The 'Amateur' stake seems to be going in a new direction by having a large number handlers with multiple dogs. Apparently I am old fashioned and need to get with the 'new' trend of the 'Amateur' stake since it seems to be fine with you youngsters, and oh yeah, this is AMERICA!!
Signed with my real name below,
Without a doubt the sport has evolved, as all things tend to do. We can choose to keep up with the times, hold back time or let the times pass us by.