The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40

Thread: 2013 Master National Qualifiers (312 to date) and 48 MH on one weekend

  1. #21
    Member Brian Welch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Mansfield, TX
    Posts
    31

    Default

    How about only allowing dogs to enter in 8 or 10 master hunt test per year. If the dog passes 6 they are allowed to participate in the MN. I see several dogs that ran 10-15 test before they get that 6th pass. Just my 2 cents.
    HRCH "Kennedy" MH

  2. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Cornish, Maine
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by copterdoc View Post
    I don't know about you guys, but I'd like the system to be geared towards qualifying the "cream of the crop", rather than "luck of the draw".

    There aren't as many A students, as there are C students. Not nearly.

    There isn't an AKC HT level higher than Master. That's why there is so much demand for something "more".
    The dogs that get a chance to prove that they are more than a run-of-the-mill MH, should first be required to prove that they are well capable of exceeding the standard.
    Of all the posts...someone finally has it right. Thank you copterdoc.

    Mike Berube

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    missouri
    Posts
    143

    Default

    How about requiring that entrants have spent a minimum of 10 days hunting the prior season?

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Green Mountain, Co
    Posts
    2,312

    Default

    East fix to reduced the number. Make it a Owner/Handler Master National. The solution is to make it so hard only a pro can qualify? The damn hunt test game has become geared for pros.This is insane and stupid. Let them go run the Open. And get back to what the Master is suppose to be about.
    Last edited by Losthwy; 04-30-2013 at 11:29 PM.
    What its prominence suggest, and what all science confirms is that the dog is a creature of the nose- A. Horowitz.

  5. #25
    Senior Member copterdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NW IL
    Posts
    2,458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Losthwy View Post
    The damn hunt test game has become geared for pros. The solution is to make it so hard only a pro can qualify?.
    So, you think the solution is to take the Pros out, and simultaneously make it so easy, that it doesn't mean anything more than a MH?

    The reason that the MN and Grand are dominated by Pros, isn't that the Ams can't achieve the talent and ability.
    They just don't have the time.
    Last edited by copterdoc; 04-30-2013 at 11:31 PM.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Green Mountain, Co
    Posts
    2,312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by copterdoc View Post
    So, you think the solution is to take the Pros out, and simultaneously make it so easy, that it doesn't mean anything more than a MH?

    The reason that the MN and Grand are dominated by Pros, isn't that the Ams can't achieve the talent and ability.
    They just don't have the time.
    This game is dying for that reason. The answer is raise the bar. I don't agree. Lack of Help, increased costs, sliding judging quality, trailing and and training grounds are going away. A endeavor that relies on volunteerism meets an influx of an commercial enterprise. Is what the game is having to deal with. Something has to give. What Will give in my opinion is less amateurs, less clubs, less knowable judges and search for interested participates who desire to host such events.
    What its prominence suggest, and what all science confirms is that the dog is a creature of the nose- A. Horowitz.

  7. #27
    Senior Member copterdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NW IL
    Posts
    2,458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Losthwy View Post
    This game is dying for that reason. The answer is raise the bar. I don't agree. Lack of Help, increased costs, sliding judging quality, trailing and and training grounds are going away. A endeavor that relies on volunteerism meets an influx of an commercial enterprise. Is what the game is having to deal with. Something has to give. What Will give in my opinion is less amateurs, less clubs, less knowable judges and search for interested participates who desire to host such events.
    Nonsense.

    The only thing that will kill it, is a ceiling. Where there is no such thing as more than a MH.

    Not growing, is dying.

    In the HT game, the required talent, grounds, experience and training are still easily achievable for the Am.
    It just takes the dedication and effort. And that's not going to change, for a very long time.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Margo Ellis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,420

    Default

    If people want more than a MH title why would they not go the path of the white coats? That is why the division originally happened and the Hunt test was developed. I don't have a dog in this fight due to the fact I don't aspire to run the MN, I get the MH on my dogs and that is the end of it for me. Would the option of running two MN a year be a possible better option to reduce numbers?
    I don't think offering or making it a requirement to pass both a regional and a national event will reduce the numbers you will just put more money in pro's pockets (note I have no issue with this bythe way).
    I know folks feel that unless your dog has an average score of XYZ they have not business at the MN, I disagree, now if you want to change the "standard" for the pass at the MN then make that change, make it harder to pass, right now the standard is the same as a weekend hunt, bump that up a notch or two then the "average" dog may not make the trip there. Just my thoughts.
    Margo Ellis

    “Any woman who does not thoroughly enjoy tramping across the country on a clear, frosty morning with a good gun and a pair of dogs does not know how to enjoy life.” ~ Annie Oakley
    ><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>¸.
    ·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>

    In All Thy Ways Acknowledge Him And He Shall Direct Thy Paths. Proverbs 3:6

  9. #29
    Senior Member Dan Wegner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    636

    Default

    I run my dogs in both hunt tests and field trials. I've run two Master National events myself and paid a pro to handle in another one. I passed last years Master National, running my own dog.

    The number of qualifiers is quickly becoming a serious problem for the logistics, grounds and workers. A viable solution needs to be found soon, but it should not penalize young dogs, old dogs, pros or amateurs. Whatever solution is put in place should focus on granting the opportunty to the most talented and consistent dogs in the hunt test game[.

    In the past, the MNRC required 5 passes in 7 attempts or 8 in total for the year. This was a good attempt, but the result was judge shopping. Many participants scratched dogs from weekend tests when a test split and new judges were brought in, because they either didn't know or like the judges and couldn't risk a failed test. As a result, some clubs with tougher perceived judges saw entry numbers decline and those with easier perceived judges filled quickly and split. For that reason, they eventually did away with the the 5 of 7 and went to a straight 6 passes.

    The proposal on the table, to require 6 passes after earning the MH title would likely reduce entry numbers and raise the experience level of dogs that qualify for the National. However, it could potentially exclude some talented dogs that marched right through their title in 6 or 7 passes too. Not the best answer, in my mind.

    Some have suggested limiting pro involvement or the number of dogs a pro can run. I don't have an issue with pro's running and limiting the number of pro run dogs is not a sensible solution, in my mind. The time and expense required to run the event (let alone any pre-national training) is too significant for most working amateurs that also have to use vacation time and money for their families, so they turn to a pro to run their dogs. In many cases it is an economical decision. Why should an owner be penalized by not being allowed to enter because their pro already has 8 or 10 other dogs qualified and entered??? Makes no sense to me, at all.

    Regional qualifying events have also been proposed, but that would limit amateur involvement when folks only have so much vacation time or money to go around.

    I feel the real problem is the wide range of abilities in titled Master dogs and no attempt to distinguish one MH from another when it comes to qualifying for the MN. Some dogs handle weekend Master tests like clockwork while others barely meet the standard and take numerous tests to title and/or attain the requisite 6 passes in the MN year (Aug 1 - July 31). Every year there are large drop rates in the 1st and 2nd series at the Master National. Some are good dogs that had a bad bird, bad series or a bad day, but I would bet the majority are dogs that met the minimum standard at weekend Master tests throughout the year.

    Owners enter because the dog finally qualified to run the MN and they are hopeful for a plate. Some of those dogs are run by pros. The more dogs a pro has, the more they can spread their expenses among the various clients, so they aren't going to discourage owners from entering. Unfortunately, they become casualties in the first or second series and then people point fingers at the judges or the MNRC Board for trying to get the numbers down, when in reality, the dog simply wasn't truly ready for a National caliber event.

    Someone proposed the idea of adding placements to Master tests, similar to Obedience and Agility where there is a minimum qualifying score and placements are also awarded. That seems like a very good solution. It wouldn't affect the standard used to pass dogs at the Master level, but if qualification for the MN required that a dog place in the top 4 at a weekend hunt test during the year plus X number of passes, that might really help to reduce numbers and raise the bar for those that choose to try and qualify for the MN.

    Another possibility would be to acquire X number of passes in a given year and have a lifetime Master pass rate of 70% or better.

    Another option might be for qualifiers to also run and finish a licensed Qualifying or O/H Qualifying stake during the year with a JAM or better, in addition to X number of Master passes.

    Just trying to think of other possible options that might reduce entry numbers and ensure that talented dogs are not excluded from the event. Afterall, it is supposed to be an event for the "cream of the crop".
    Last edited by Dan Wegner; 05-02-2013 at 08:04 AM.
    FCR "Ransom" - Coastalight Toodoggone Much CD MH *** (2012 MN Qualifier and All-Age pointed!)
    FCR "Legend" - Ryvertowns More Than A Memory CD *** (QAA and 2011 FCRSA Field Trial Trophy Winner)
    LAB "Traitor" - All Out Gone to The Dark Side (QAA and Nat'l Derby List)

  10. #30
    Senior Member HarryWilliams's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Losthwy View Post
    East fix to reduced the number. Make it a Owner/Handler Master National. The solution is to make it so hard only a pro can qualify? The damn hunt test game has become geared for pros.This is insane and stupid. Let them go run the Open. And get back to what the Master is suppose to be about.
    Is it possible that some have "lost their way" Losthwy? But I will say that I agree with Brian that an "Owner/Handler" would solve the issue of too high of entries. Plus there is a possibility that it could increase the quality/enjoyability of the entire event. Don't like crowds regards, Harry
    "Sometimes we just gotta do what is right". Jerry 2006

    See ya in the field. HPW http://www.sagaciouskennel.com/

Posting Permissions

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