Handling on the way back? - Page 8
The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Wildear
Retriever Coach
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 80 of 80

Thread: Handling on the way back?

  1. #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Shreveport, LA
    Posts
    168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minnducker View Post
    Quoting from the rule book: “Derby stake tests are limited to marked retrieves and dogs which are handled on such retrieves shall be eliminated from competition.” Note that the rule book doesn’t say handling on a mark, and it doesn’t say handling on the way to a mark, it says handling on RETRIEVES. A dog is in the process of a RETRIEVE from when it leaves the handler’s side, until it delivers the bird. So handling the dog on the way back is clearly handling on a RETRIEVE. I’m not saying this is fair or unfair, or a good or bad rule, but it is a rule. Maybe it should be changed. I respectfully can't rationalize not eliminating a dog who is handled in a RETRIEVE when you read the rule book. I'm done, thanks.
    I sincerely hope you don't judge my upcoming derby dog or my all age dogs.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    RetrieverTraining.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Boxford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paul young View Post
    Where does the rule book support this? Page, Section and Paragraph, please. -Paul
    Where doesn't it support! This a common sense issue, hence the rule book is designed to give the judges leeway.
    A lot of people clearly aren't ready to hold the book! My advice would be to train with a knowledgeable Ft group and have this discussion during the setup.
    You will hopefully gain an understanding.

  4. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Boxford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    301

    Default

    Wayne, I hear you! WTH! Do any of them actually run field trials?????

  5. Remove Advertisements
    RetrieverTraining.net
    Advertisements
     

  6. #74
    Senior Member labsforme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Mission Valley,Mt
    Posts
    1,109

    Default

    The dog IS under judgement until done and behind the judges. I don't worry about the return unless the handler makes it a huge issue which the dog ignores. If cheating coming back that's the handlers problem to take care of in training.

    Jeff G
    Jeff Gruber
    working on pelts
    Duckponds Prize Package 5-2002-6-22-2017 RIP
    CK'S Contessa (avatar)
    Ice Cold Juice *** 1-17-2012 12-3-2018 RIP
    I Ain't No Tin Lizzy
    Mission Valley Hoping for a Repeat
    Franklin's 29 Degrees True North

  7. #75
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Anywhere we want, USA
    Posts
    4,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malcolm View Post
    Where doesn't it support! This a common sense issue, hence the rule book is designed to give the judges leeway.
    A lot of people clearly aren't ready to hold the book! My advice would be to train with a knowledgeable Ft group and have this discussion during the setup.
    You will hopefully gain an understanding.
    Malcom said: "No! The return is not under judgement!"

    You are dead wrong on this subject. There are six faults that can only be committed during the return.

    Minor fault number one, listed below, is the fault that was under discussion at the beginning of the thread. It's only a minor fault. No big deal. Certainly not a big deal in the Derby. Go home and address it in training.

    I have submitted a rule change request to the RAC. Strike the word "on" and replace it with the word "to" within Serious fault 17. We'll see if it goes anywhere.

    If you truly believe the return is not to be judged, perhaps it is you who is not ready to hold the book. -Paul

    Serious faults:

    5. “Switching birds,’’ i.e., giving up after a hunt in the area of the fall for one bird and going to and hunting “the area’’ of another “fall,’’ or dropping the bird being retrieved, and picking up another.

    10. “Hard-mouth,’’ or badly damaging a bird, which, in the opinion of the Judges, was caused solely by the dog without justification mandatory elimination under the “STANDARD.’’
    8. Retrieving a decoy, i.e., returning to land with itmandatory elimination under the “STANDARD.’’

    Moderate faults:

    5. Poor style, including a disinterested attitude, a slow or reluctant departure, quest for game, or return with it.

    Minor faults:

    1. Going out of its way by land, to an excessive degree, on the return from a water retrieve.
    4. Slow pick-up of a dead bird (except when fluttering or badly shot-up); dropping bird; handling game in a sloppy manner.
    11. Roughness with game.
    Last edited by paul young; 07-13-2020 at 10:15 PM.
    there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.

  8. #76
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Boxford, Massachusetts
    Posts
    301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paul young View Post
    Malcom said: "No! The return is not under judgement!"

    You are dead wrong on this subject. There are six faults that can only be committed during the return.

    Minor fault number one, listed below, is the fault that was under discussion at the beginning of the thread. It's only a minor fault. No big deal. Certainly not a big deal in the Derby. Go home and address it in training.

    I have submitted a rule change request to the RAC. Strike the word "on" and replace it with the word "to" within Serious fault 17. We'll see if it goes anywhere.

    If you truly believe the return is not to be judged, perhaps it is you who is not ready to hold the book. -Paul

    Serious faults:

    5. “Switching birds,’’ i.e., giving up after a hunt in the area of the fall for one bird and going to and hunting “the area’’ of another “fall,’’ or dropping the bird being retrieved, and picking up another.

    10. “Hard-mouth,’’ or badly damaging a bird, which, in the opinion of the Judges, was caused solely by the dog without justification mandatory elimination under the “STANDARD.’’
    8. Retrieving a decoy, i.e., returning to land with itmandatory elimination under the “STANDARD.’’

    Moderate faults:

    5. Poor style, including a disinterested attitude, a slow or reluctant departure, quest for game, or return with it.

    Minor faults:

    1. Going out of its way by land, to an excessive degree, on the return from a water retrieve.
    4. Slow pick-up of a dead bird (except when fluttering or badly shot-up); dropping bird; handling game in a sloppy manner.
    11. Roughness with game.
    Paul - I've been running FT's, training my own dogs, and Judging Ft's for close 20 years. I've never seen you walk to the line at a FT. We are looking for Natural ability, not trained ability in a Derby!
    Everything you have pointed out is always under judgement. You are making assumptions that these things happened. I don't recall these being mentioned in the thread.
    You have to know how to apply the rules! Handling on the return is done for many reasons, none having to do with the dog needing assistance to find the bird! That's the intent of the rule! I'm asked to judge multiple times a year, because I know how to set up tests and judge dogs "fairly".
    Its an evaluation of the total dog, not an elimination event! The Dog knowing where the bird is (Marking) takes precedent! The placements will sort themselves out. Allowing people to play is how they learn what is expected, not being dropped for a chicken shit reasons.
    This is how I judge and I believe others in the sport like to be judged!

  9. #77
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Anywhere we want, USA
    Posts
    4,934

    Default

    I don't know why you chose to make this so personal, but you have. Even going so far as to suggest I am not fit to judge, never ran a dog in a trial, etc. Allow me to enlighten you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Malcolm View Post
    Paul - I've been running FT's, training my own dogs, and Judging Ft's for close 20 years. 29 years for me. I've never seen you walk to the line at a FT. That's interesting. Your home club used to be Colonial. My dog, Canterbury's Daisy May won the Q at the Colonial spring trial, handled by me, in 1998. Another of my dogs, Northstar's Canadian Beauty, won the Q at Shrewsbury, also handled by me, in 2008. Both had other placements and Jam's. My first FT judging assignment was in 2002, for Westchester. 18 years ago. We are looking for Natural ability, not trained ability in a Derby!
    Everything you have pointed out is always under judgement. That is true. You are making assumptions that these things happened. I never made those assumptions. You stated the return was not under judgement. I pointed out that there were many different faults that could only be committed during the return from a retrieve in order to support my position that the return was, indeed, under judgement. I don't recall these being mentioned in the thread. They were not, in this, you are correct. What was under discussion was handling a Derby dog on the return from a marked retrieve in order to prevent it from avoiding water. This is a minor fault and would not even be considered by me when placing the dogs which finished the trial. Why anyone would want to potentially get into a battle with a dog in a situation where there is no possibility of correction is beyond me.
    You have to know how to apply the rules! I do. Handling on the return is done for many reasons, none having to do with the dog needing assistance to find the bird! That's the intent of the rule! I'm asked to judge multiple times a year, because I know how to set up tests and judge dogs "fairly". I like to think that I am asked to judge by the various clubs for the same reasons.
    Its an evaluation of the total dog, not an elimination event! The Dog knowing where the bird is (Marking) takes precedent! The placements will sort themselves out. Allowing people to play is how they learn what is expected, not being dropped for a chicken shit reasons.
    This is how I judge and I believe others in the sport like to be judged!
    Malcom, I remember judging a Q in a trial where you were judging Derby. There were only 5 dogs in the Derby. After 2 series all 5 were eliminated. Strangely enough, only one name appears in the Judges Directory for that trial and it is not you. However, I wonder if those folks felt that you "know how to set up tests and judge dogs "fairly"? Do you feel you Allowed people to play and learn what is expected on that day?

    There's nothing to be gained for continuing this dialog.

    Hopefully a poorly written portion of the rulebook will be revised, as I have requested. Serious faults, in my opinion, should not require judges to interpret anything. -Paul
    Last edited by paul young; 07-18-2020 at 06:15 PM.
    there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.

  10. #78
    Senior Member drunkenpoacher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    1,884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paul young View Post
    a poorly written portion of the rulebook
    That kind of blasphemous talk could incite a riot.
    "I'm thankful someone stood up to him, even if it was a woman." Franco 10/18/19

  11. #79
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Kevil, Kentucky
    Posts
    516

    Default

    can we all agree to use common sense? Handling in the derby is intended to eliminate a dog that cannot find the bird without assistance. Even supreme court justices have to consider the intent of a law or rule as the case may be. If all we can do is argue a part of a rule and not see the intent of the rule we might as well just give the job to a law clerk. We all know derby dogs are highly trained animals for their age. Trying to maintain that standard as long as it is not ugly or intensive should not be grounds for elimination. In the end it may effect the dogs total performance. If the rule book does not allow for interpretation and common sense our sport is in trouble.
    Brooks Gibson

    Bad things happen when you ask common dogs to do uncommon things.

  12. #80
    Senior Member Chris Atkinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Macon, IL
    Posts
    8,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captain2560 View Post
    can we all agree to use common sense? Handling in the derby is intended to eliminate a dog that cannot find the bird without assistance. Even supreme court justices have to consider the intent of a law or rule as the case may be. If all we can do is argue a part of a rule and not see the intent of the rule we might as well just give the job to a law clerk. We all know derby dogs are highly trained animals for their age. Trying to maintain that standard as long as it is not ugly or intensive should not be grounds for elimination. In the end it may effect the dogs total performance. If the rule book does not allow for interpretation and common sense our sport is in trouble.
    Well done Brooks! I like this!

    Good judging requires good judgement.

    Chris

Posting Permissions

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