Re: is this a new trend in field trials - Page 5
The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Wildear
Retriever Coach
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 68

Thread: Re: is this a new trend in field trials

  1. #41
    Senior Member Mike W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    1,578

    Default

    Either invoke the "Owner/Handler Amateur All-Age Stake" or quit bitching.

    Now then the issue of what constitutes "Co-Ownership" is legit and is often a problem....that part can most certainly be unethical.
    Last edited by Mike W.; 08-13-2019 at 12:05 PM.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    RetrieverTraining.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    96

    Default

    No matter what rules are invoked, people will always find a way around them and it will still be unethical. This sport is no different than any other sport. When you are playing to win, some people will find ways to be deceitful to better their odds. Your only way to one up them is to have a better dog!

  4. #43
    Senior Member bjoiner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Albany, GA
    Posts
    1,703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Carrion View Post
    I'm confused! Please explain how these situations are different both seem to allow for a dog to be entered in a stake that it would not otherwise be eligible and the latter allows for a special " financial arrangement".

    Tim

    PS: How in the world can we expect a FTC that is responsible for determining the entry eligibility to sort through these private arrangements? IMHO we can not. Fortunately most play the game the right way but there has been and always will exceptions.
    The first is just to bypass a rule by putting someone else's name on the papers to run.

    The second involves an example of a true financial arrangement of a co-ownership.

    The FTC is not responsible for enforcing this. Both are technically legal.
    Bubba Joiner

    HRCH Hold My Beer & Watch This QA2
    Hope She's A Duk Dawg NDL, QA2
    This Beer Is Making Me Awesome

  5. Remove Advertisements
    RetrieverTraining.net
    Advertisements
     

  6. #44
    Senior Member bjoiner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Albany, GA
    Posts
    1,703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Shih View Post

    Bubba,

    You are equating ethics with the rules? Really?

    I show up at the Amateur (not O/H Amateur), I pull 15 dogs off the pro truck and run them in the Amateur. I own none of them. Legal? Yes. Ethical? I don't think so.

    Ted
    I don't feel a buddy running another buddy's dog is unethical. The well within the rules was intended to just imply that they aren't even pushing the rules. I agree with you that the amateur handling an entire pro's truck in the amateur is within the rules, but it is also unethical.
    Bubba Joiner

    HRCH Hold My Beer & Watch This QA2
    Hope She's A Duk Dawg NDL, QA2
    This Beer Is Making Me Awesome

  7. #45
    Senior Member EdA's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    9,089

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moscowitz View Post
    As a side note I believe bigger powers are watching and this will be deleted. My opinion to cover tracks.
    Now there is a conspiracy theory! Who or what might those “bigger powers” be?

  8. #46
    Senior Member bjoiner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Albany, GA
    Posts
    1,703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdA View Post
    Now there is a conspiracy theory! Who or what might those “bigger powers” be?
    I wish there was a like button.
    Bubba Joiner

    HRCH Hold My Beer & Watch This QA2
    Hope She's A Duk Dawg NDL, QA2
    This Beer Is Making Me Awesome

  9. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    SW LA
    Posts
    371

    Default

    4A4E5A50-FF01-40CC-80E3-58C01D36AAAB.jpg

    JeT fUeL cAnT mElT sTeEl BeAmS!

  10. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    1,702

    Default

    I guess than this won’t be deleted. And I have never posted anything about a conspiracy. Please EDA quote me on any of my posts where I say conspiracy. I do know ownership of a good dog who does the right thing and runs his heart out should be given the honor and dignity it deserves. I believe now there are four co owners. Lucky dog.
    Gentle in what you do. Firm in how you do it.

    CH SILVERCREEK MURRAY SAMUEL (MURRAY) WDQ CGC MH, QAA2 2/16/00 - 12/26/12
    WESTWIND WHISPERING COVE (LARRY son of Murray) WDQ MH, QAA2 8/5/05-3/20/18
    LPK DELAWARE RIVER WHISPERING COVE, WDQ, QAA2, MH (SAVAGE SAM son of FC Chester MH)
    WESTWIND WHISPERING COVE JAY QAA, MH (Larry's son and Murray's grandson)

  11. #49
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Oak Ridge, LA
    Posts
    37

    Default

    I'm just here to see someone fight Rich.

  12. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Tulsa
    Posts
    442

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moscowitz View Post
    I guess than this won’t be deleted. And I have never posted anything about a conspiracy. Please EDA quote me on any of my posts where I say conspiracy. I do know ownership of a good dog who does the right thing and runs his heart out should be given the honor and dignity it deserves. I believe now there are four co owners. Lucky dog.
    Quote Originally Posted by moscowitz View Post
    Is it a trend or has this always gone on: A pro uses a person with amateur standing to run other individuals dogs to put AFCs on the dogs and also qualify them for the National Amateur Retriever Championship so that the owners can run the National. And at the same time this Amateur Individual has his own dog but does not run it in the Amateur but runs it in the open when he is running the other dogs in the Amateur?
    Definition: Conspiracy (countable and uncountable, plural conspiracies)

    1) The act of two or more persons, called conspirators, working secretly to obtain some goal, usually understood with negative connotations.
    2) (law) An agreement between two or more persons to break the law at some time in the future.
    3) A group of ravens.
    4) (linguistics) A situation in which different phonological or grammatical rules lead to similar or related outcomes.
    5) A conspiracy theory; a hypothesis alleging conspiracy.

Posting Permissions

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