The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 40 of 40

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

  1. #31
    Senior Member Margo Ellis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,412

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Wegner View Post
    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".
    The end of your message still sounds like a mini FT to me, you would have people that normally share the pit fall of the test to another handler not sharing and it would be them against us sort of thing. If the numbers are too high then they should go run a FT and go dog against dog. Make the Master National requirements more difficult then the weekend hunt up the standards. Yes you will have dogs that go that probably shouldn't be there but hell you have that at the weekend test now. Making in O/H is not going to fly the pro's are the key supporters to most of these events.
    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

  2. #32
    Senior Member Dan Wegner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Margo Ellis View Post
    The end of your message still sounds like a mini FT to me, you would have people that normally share the pit fall of the test to another handler not sharing and it would be them against us sort of thing. If the numbers are too high then they should go run a FT and go dog against dog. Make the Master National requirements more difficult then the weekend hunt up the standards. Yes you will have dogs that go that probably shouldn't be there but hell you have that at the weekend test now. Making in O/H is not going to fly the pro's are the key supporters to most of these events.
    Although I, personally, enjoy the challenge of running field trials, not everybody wants to step up, and that's their prerogative.

    Whatever solution is chosen, upping the standard for all dogs running weekend Master tests is not an option. Many run purely for the title or enjoyment and have no intentions of running the Master National. There is no reason to change the standard for those folks. I don't think requiring a "placement" for qualification, earning a ribbon in a qualifying, or maintaining a certain lifetime % pass rate in Master would impact dogs not trying to qualify for the MN, in the least.

    Dan
    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)

  3. #33
    Senior Member Dan Wegner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    627

    Default

    Some interesting statistics from the MNRC showing the growth in entries, breakdown of pro and amateur handled dogs, and qualification percentages by pro, amateur and flight for 2012. Unfortunately, it doesn't include information on how the dogs that ran or passed qualified for the event (how many weekend tests they ran...).

    http://www.masternational.com/Websit...s_Analysis.pdf

  4. #34
    Senior Member JS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    2,414

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Lash View Post
    Things will have to "evolve." I think they ran over 700 dogs last year, and over 900 qualified. I get that it's pass a standard, but what do you do when 1000 dogs pass?

    I don't run hunt tests, but someone posted awhile back that OB trials (I think) are "pass fail" but they award placings to the top 4 dogs in addition to all that pass. Seems like a good solution to someone who knows nothing about it...
    Quote Originally Posted by forhair View Post
    The more the better, is what I always say. I think it shows health in the sport or the industry if you prefer. I'm sure the local merchants are not complaining.
    Won't this "problem" eventually take care of itself?

    At some point, down the road when it becomes commonplace for a couple thousand dogs to get to the MN and pass, the prestige will be so diminished that no one will care. Who will be motivated to go through the time and expense involved to get a title that many others have??

    JMO

    JS
    “Don’t wave your phony patriotism in MY face! If you really love America, open your wallet and hire an American kid to build what you buy. Think of all our problems that might solve.” Doug Fraser (paraphrased) 1980

    Real Americans buy American.



    Snowshoe's All American Guy SH, UDX, WCX ... CODY ... at the bridge
    CH. Snowshoe's Girl Crazy MH, UD, WCX, SDHF, OS ... PRESLEY
    ... at the bridge
    Millpond's Baby Boomer MH*** ... BABE
    Snowshoe's Crazy For Lovin You SH ... NELSON

  5. #35
    Senior Member Doug Main's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Galesburg, IL
    Posts
    825

    Default

    I don't think there is any chance of solving this problem. Those that vote aren't really interested in selecting the "cream of the crop" to participate for fear that they will be excluded.

  6. #36
    Senior Member Kevinismybrother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Brighton, CO
    Posts
    519

    Default

    Some interesting statistics from the MNRC showing the growth in entries, breakdown of pro and amateur handled dogs, and qualification percentages by pro, amateur and flight for 2012. Unfortunately, it doesn't include information on how the dogs that ran or passed qualified for the event (how many weekend tests they ran...).

    http://www.masternational.com/Websit...s_Analysis.pdf
    The other thing that this doesn't show ( and may misrepresent) is where the event is held and the different number of nearby clubs which will promote some people to send "less than fully qualified" dogs and handlers.

    The last 2 were in the SE and East coast. More people with dogs to "run one of those MN test". The rest of the country is more likely to have a pro run their dog because of the ttime involved as many others have stated. The pro will try to add a few extra dogs that qualify but aren't up to the full MN just to have a full truck and spread expenses.

    I am trying to get my 2 qualified for this year's test in Kansas because it is the only one I have time to travel to. So I am one of those that fit the catagory I mention.

    Not sure this isn't just a "bubble" and quite the alarming trend the MN sees. But the Kansas event will likely show that. Not all dogs that "qualify" are actually entered. Don't recall seeing that statistic either.

    If it is a problem, go back to the % pass rule and get on the judges to be more consistent accross the country for criteria so "judge shopping " is less likely to occur.

    .02 worth
    "Too late smart, too soon old" - Now I finally get it Grandpa

    Dennis Long
    HRCH SHDW MTN Aces and Eights Toby MH "Toby"
    HRCH Barton Creek's Winner Take All MH "Rio"
    Ranger 1997 - 2012
    Ragin' Charge of the Light Brigade "Cannon"

  7. #37
    Senior Member JS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    2,414

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Main View Post
    I don't think there is any chance of solving this problem. Those that vote aren't really interested in selecting the "cream of the crop" to participate for fear that they will be excluded.
    Ding, ding, ding!!!
    “Don’t wave your phony patriotism in MY face! If you really love America, open your wallet and hire an American kid to build what you buy. Think of all our problems that might solve.” Doug Fraser (paraphrased) 1980

    Real Americans buy American.



    Snowshoe's All American Guy SH, UDX, WCX ... CODY ... at the bridge
    CH. Snowshoe's Girl Crazy MH, UD, WCX, SDHF, OS ... PRESLEY
    ... at the bridge
    Millpond's Baby Boomer MH*** ... BABE
    Snowshoe's Crazy For Lovin You SH ... NELSON

  8. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Posts
    182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Main View Post
    I don't think there is any chance of solving this problem. Those that vote aren't really interested in selecting the "cream of the crop" to participate for fear that they will be excluded.
    True, 100% true. Perfect!

  9. #39
    Senior Member Dan Wegner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Main View Post
    I don't think there is any chance of solving this problem. Those that vote aren't really interested in selecting the "cream of the crop" to participate for fear that they will be excluded.
    Couldn't agree more Doug!

    Many just want ribbons and titles. Perhaps if there was a carrot beyond the MH title, such as a MH2, MH3, etc. (like they have in Obedience and Agility) many of those attempting to qualify for and run the MN would choose not to. Not all OTCh2 or MACH7 dogs are entered in the National Obedience and Agility Invitationals.

    Wouldn't hurt the MN or change the standard for those dogs trying to earn their first MH title and judges wouldn't have to judge any differently.

    Passing 42 Master tests to say your dog is a MH7 isn't my cup of tea, but many would jump at the chance and never step up to run the MN or enter a Qual. Doesn't really hurt anything and AKC and clubs make more $. Not necessarily a bad thing.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Margo Ellis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,412

    Default

    I still struggle with the new proposal only because of where I live. With limited tests within a resonable distance would limit dogs from our area to run the MN. Is that fair? Like I said in my first post I don't have a dog in this fight. I don't want to run the MN for a lot of reasons but the biggest one right now if my free time. I choose to run the Grands with my dogs and I don't have to jump thru hoops each year to go. JMHO
    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

Posting Permissions

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