RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Re-run in a field trial

6K views 34 replies 15 participants last post by  huntinman 
#1 ·
Scenario: Dog picks up the go-bird of a triple and is sent for the second retrieve. Dog pops on the way to the second retrieve and is handled to that bird. The judges determine there is an unfairness, ask the handler to pick up the dog (before the dog retrieves the 3rd bird) and give this dog a rerun. Can the judges disregard the retrieve of the second bird (pop and handle), and rescore the second bird on the re-run? Here is what the AKC Rules say about re-runs. If there is an occurrence which makes for a relatively unfair test for a dog, the Judges shall exercise their discretion in determining how to form a judgment of the quality of the work of the dog in the series notwithstanding the unfairness. In forming such judgment the Judges may decide that it is necessary or unnecessary to re-run the dog. If they decide the latter, they may waive delivery to hand of the mark or blind in which the unfairness occurred; if they decide the former, the dog shall be picked up immediately and tested on a new set of birds, if practicable, after waiting behind the line until several other dogs have been tested. The re-run of a mark or blind which was not previously completed shall be scored by taking into consideration the combined performances of the dog prior to the point of unfairness in the initial run and after the point of unfairness in the re-run. If there shall be more than one re-run of that mark or blind, the Judges shall exercise their discretion in determining how to score it fairly. The re-run of a mark or blind which was previously completed shall be scored on the first completion and faults committed on such re-run shall be ignored except that if the dog (1) does not complete that portion in accordance with the Judges’ instructions for the test or (2) commits any of the faults set forth herein as usually justifying elimination from a stake, he shall be penalized in the same manner as the Judges would penalize him regardless of the re-run. Notwithstanding the last sentence of Standard Procedure 8, a handler is not free to select marked falls in a re-run in an order different from the order in which they were selected in the initial run, and if the handler deliberately attempts to do so the dog shall be eliminated from the stake.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
From the point of unfairness "The re-run of a mark or blind which was not previously completed shall be scored by taking into consideration the combined performances of the dog prior to the point of unfairness in the initial run and after the point of unfairness in the re-run. " If the unfairness was on mark 2 then it shouldn't come into play. If mark 3 then I would say yes the previous work is taken into consideration.
 
#3 ·
Insufficient information to respond
 
#5 ·
That is what I would say based on the rules. The go-bird was retrieved--and scored. The dog was sent for the second bird, popped and handled--and that retrieve is scored under the rules. The rerun would only be for the third bird, which was not retrieved on the first run. I don't have any more details on this. I am just trying to walk through it for my own education on what can be "scored" in a rerun situation.
 
#25 ·
I agree with Dennis.

How can you score a rerun on a mark the dog has already retrieved? The standard for fairness also includes the other dogs, there is no way to rectify the issue without scrapping the test and starting over. When a judge recognizes an unfair situation the dog must immediately picked up before retrieving the bird and then given a rerun. After the bird has been retrieved there is no remedy other than a new test.
With all due respect, I don't think the rule book mandates scrapping the test as the only alternative!

I understand that may often be the best, most fair, course of action but my point was the Rule Book does not say you can't re-score that mark on a rerun (unless the unfairness occurred afterwards). If this was the 70th dog in an 80 dog Open would you scrap the test or would you try to be as fair as you could to the dog? As a competitor I would not feel hard done by because you gave another dog a best chance after an interfering unfairness as I described. As you know it is often tough for the dog to do a re-run well so it's not like you are giving him a cake walk!
Realistically, nobody is going to scrap an open after 70 dogs have already run if they can avoid it! How fair would that be for the the dogs that have already run it?

There is nothing hypothetical about the unfairness of giving one dog a bye on a mark. If the unfairness occurred before the dog popped why was it allowed to be handled to the bird. The lesson to judges should be that if you think an unfair situation has occurred you are obligated to pick up the dog immediately before it has retrieved the bird and bring it back later to be retested. To do otherwise reduces judging to speculation.

What if the dog wasn't handled to the bird, but instead went on it's own? After watching 70 other dogs, you are almost certain that the dog would have retrieved the bird cleanly had it not been interfered with causing the pop. Yet it was too close to the bird to get stopped and called in before it picked up the bird.


It is called "Judging" not scorekeeping there is always an element of speculation involved. Making an "Intereference" call itself is speculation.
 
#26 · (Edited)
What if the dog wasn't handled to the bird, but instead went on it's own? .
But in our scenario that is not what happened so that is what the discussion is about or at least I thought that is what it was about.

If the dog went on it's own and went to and found the mark there was no handler influence and if indeed the so called pop was in response to a whistle from another stake there is no problem and no need for a rerun.

The question is how can you score a mark on a rerun when the dog has already retrieved that mark?
 
#10 ·
If it is assumed (insufficient information at this point) the interference caused the pop, are you going to penalize the handler & dog because the judge couldn't think on his/her feet quick enough to stop the retrieve at the point of interference and require the dog to be judged beyond the point of interference (in my hypothetical since we don't have enough info about the interference)?
 
#12 ·
If the point of unfairness was what caused the dog to pop, then the judges should have told the handler to not complete the mark but pick up the dog and come back for a re run. The fact that they let the dog complete the mark means that mark should be scored but the third uncompleted mark would be the only one left to score on the re run. Just my thoughts anyway.

Russell
 
#24 ·
I had almost the same thing happen. I was interfered with by whistles from another stake. My dog had picked up the flyer and was hunting the second bird, in the AOF, when she sat on a whistle from the Open blind. Thankfully the judges heard it and had me pick her up before she retrieved the bird. The AM stake was halted until the Open finished the blind, and I got a rerun at the end and an AM 3rd.
 
#28 ·
So if the judges weren't able to stop the dog at the moment of unfairness, they should allow that 1 dog a re run on a mark that they have already picked up? How is that fair to all the other dogs that have already completed that mark without a re run. Lets use the 80 dog open example and that is dog 70. It wouldn't be fair to the other dogs to allow one dog to re run a mark that it had already completed for a score. While it wouldn't be fair to the one dog to let a distraction affect his performance. That's why it is so important that the judges be on their toes and ready for a situation just as this.

If the judges allow the dog to pick up a mark on the initial run it should be scored on that run. To allow that dog a second chance at a mark it has already picked up is an injustice to the other 79 dogs in the event.

The rule of treat each contestant as if they had driven 500 miles with one dog to compete should come in play. Do your best as a judge to make it as fair as possible to all.

Russell
 
#29 · (Edited)
Your analysis is very good, Doug.

Judging is an imprfect art form. Judges' responsibilities include common sense, fairness & following the rule book.

Of ciurse, in the scenario between the point of bing sent and "the pop" it is important what line the dog had as that should be part of scoring on any re-run.

Things are not set in cement.
I saw the judges at the '99 Ardmore national carelessley allow Lean Mack hunt deep in the AOF's of all previous flyers (after a very short shot duck) extensively before finally calling him in and awarding a re-run. The damage had been done as that extensive hunt impacted his performance on the blind that followed.

Yes, there may well be unexpected situations that impact/change the protocol of a test ...
we must presume in this instance it was judges' error, yet they did their best for that dog and handler notwithstanding seeing the "test" twice ... which often happens.

No one can or should predict how any particular dog will react on a re-run of any kind.

Bill Connor
 
#31 ·
Picking a dog up in the midst of retrieving a set of marks can be far more of an unfairness to a dog than the original unfairness.
 
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