[Renee P.]

Thanks all. Reading the rulebook cold, even with a highlighter in hand, trying to do a studious job of it... it's amazing what you can miss.

Since this was part of chapter one, I'm guessing that it was part of the earliest iteration of the rule book. (Those with more history with the movement than I, please correct me if I'm wrong.) It was likely put in there because FT was all there was in the earliest days of the HT game. So, (again... I'm trying to read the minds of people back then) they were setting up a boundary that made sense at that time.

Clearly this is a different day and age. You have two mature sports. The impetus now should be to cross-fertilize, since the overall aim should be to bring out the best in the retriever breeds. It shouldn't be a major deal to just apply some white-out to the "owner-handler" references.

You will get more clarification if you look at the Field Trial rules, which state that a FT has to offer more than one stake unless it is an O/H Q attached to a Master HT or a national championship trial:

"A club may not hold a field trial with only one stake except in the case of the National Championship, National Amateur Championship or an Owner-Handler Qualifying stake held in conjunction with a Retriever Hunting Test that includes a Master level test."

So if a club wanted to hold a regular Q in conjunction with their HT, they could do so by offering a second stake. Our club, for example, offers a D/Q on the Friday before the Sat/Sun hunt test.

 

[RookieTrainer]

I ran a couple last year and both times in the 4th. series the dogs that were left were the FT trained dogs, the HT dogs had a tough time with the land and water blind at the Q level.

I had the opportunity to judge an FT Q last October, and I have a dog who has had some FT training and is working on his MH title, and I would agree that this would be the first separation. It was also very instructive to get to see the pro handlers right next to the amateurs. Going too fast, not a high enough standard on line manners, and fiddling around too much at the line (guilty on all 3) are the main ones you see the amateurs doing.

I would love to get my rear end handed to me in some Qs (O/H or not) just for the line time, but since my dog only has one AKC parent he is not allowed even after losing his reproductive abilities to run HTs. Go figure.

 

[Mary Lynn Metras]

I had the opportunity to judge an FT Q last October, and I have a dog who has had some FT training and is working on his MH title, and I would agree that this would be the first separation. It was also very instructive to get to see the pro handlers right next to the amateurs. Going too fast, not a high enough standard on line manners, and fiddling around too much at the line (guilty on all 3) are the main ones you see the amateurs doing.

I would love to get my rear end handed to me in some Qs (O/H or not) just for the line time, but since my dog only has one AKC parent he is not allowed even after losing his reproductive abilities to run HTs. Go figure.

Steve do you not think Am have to start somewhere & those issues you wrote would come over time w/ experience & w/ doing the Qs. How do you all see Am's getting that experience so more would contend?

 

[Buzz]

I dont think enough hunt test people know enough about a Q to give it a try. I suspect many are intimidated by the thought of a field trial. I'm in that boat. I'd like to see a poll of HT amateurs and see how many have watched a Q in the last 5 years and which ones know if their Master dog could be competitive in the Q (no matter if they think their dog is not ready).

I have seen the degree of difficulty of quals vary across such a wide range, I'd think it would be hard to know if your dog is ready for a qual unless you train for all-age and wait to run your dog after you feel it is about ready to start running all-age stakes. After-all, they do call it "qualified all-age."

 

[1tulip]

Best of all possible worlds would be for HT and FT people to train together Sometimes the do. It's great when it happens.

 

[suepuff]

Mary Clark has it right from my perspective. Is wouldn't know where to begin...and field trials are intimidating.

 

[RookieTrainer]

Steve do you not think Am have to start somewhere & those issues you wrote would come over time w/ experience & w/ doing the Qs. How do you all see Am's getting that experience so more would contend?

Time and experience are the things that all of us rank amateurs need to get better, and the Qs would only help. I don't know why more people don't, because I would love to if I could. I think more folks just have to decide to take the leap.

I would also guess that a lot of folks don't have regular access to the technical water they would need to train to that level. But that's just a guess.

 

[Willie Alderson]

Answering solely from my experience it is the last reason. There is no way for me to search EE for Q's. So I pour through all the FT listings, and take whatever works with my schedule. I've about given up on finding the elusive O/H Q.

O/H Qual coming up April 19th...southwest Idaho!

 

[TexGold]

Here's an example for you- this weekend I ran a Qualifier that was not O/H. We got a RJ. The top four places went to pros. No other amatuer completed the final series. I'm not bragging or complaining, but it would seem had this been an owner handler, I would have won. Truth is though I am more proud of this RJ than I would have been with the win.

Last weekend we ran a Master and got a pass. So you can play both games.

It is different having pros in MH than Q's. In the MH you are not competing with them. In the Q and an Open, you definitely are. Heck, even in the Am one gets the chance to compete against other weekend trainers.

There is an O/H and HT coming up near San Antonio. Master is full. I could enter the O/H, but it is not worth a five hour drive if I can't get in both. There are closer FT and HT, but I do like it when I can get both in one shot.

 

[EdA]

Here's an example for you- this weekend I ran a Qualifier that was not O/H.

Congratulations for earning a Reserve Judges Award of Merit in the QUALIFYING stake, it's not a "Qualifier". Pet peeve

 

[junbe]

Congratulations for earning a Reserve Judges Award of Merit in the QUALIFYING stake, it's not a "Qualifier". Pet peeve

Also it's a AKC Hunting Test, it's not a UKC Hunt Test!

 

[wetdog]

Here's an example for you- this weekend I ran a Qualifier that was not O/H. We got a RJ. The top four places went to pros.

There seems to be an overwhelming fear of professional trainers when running field trial stakes that the pros are allowed to run. The last field trial I attended, the top four spots in the open all age stake went to amateurs. I think if you asked any pro, who they have the most concern over possibly beating them, they will tell you it is an amateur handler with a good dog or two, that knows what they are doing. A good amateur does not have to train 30 or so dogs a day and can devote their time really honing their dog(s). How do you get to being one of those good amateurs? Put the time in.

 

[RookieTrainer]

I think if you asked any pro, who they have the most concern over possibly beating them, they will tell you it is an amateur handler with a good dog or two, that knows what they are doing. A good amateur does not have to train 30 or so dogs a day and can devote their time really honing their dog(s). How do you get to being one of those good amateurs? Put the time in.

I think you are right as far as it goes. The follow up question would be how many amateurs are out there like that? Lanse Brown showing up is one thing. I am sure there is not one pro out there giving any thought to what might happen if I show up next week. It takes a LOT of time and experience, measured in years, to get to that point. Hard to do while you hold a full time job.

 

[Wade Thurman]

You will never know unless you try.

I don't believe Pro's are afraid of handlers, I do believe however they are afraid of good dogs.

 

[2tall]

O/H Qual coming up April 19th...southwest Idaho!

LOL Willie! Just my luck, if I were in Idaho now, I would be reading about an O/H Q in Eastern NC! I really liked ID. Hope to visit again sometime.

Back on topic , I love running quals even if I haven't made it past third series except for club trials. I am intimidated by hunt tests! Too much drama at the line and too many instructions! I get confused.😜😜😜

 

[Rnd]

I think you are right as far as it goes. The follow up question would be how many amateurs are out there like that? Lanse Brown showing up is one thing. I am sure there is not one pro out there giving any thought to what might happen if I show up next week. It takes a LOT of time and experience, measured in years, to get to that point. Hard to do while you hold a full time job.

Steve,

you have to want it. sacrifice, work, spend,,, its like most other things..

You can go as far as your talent and money will take you....

not everybody can pass the CPA exams either....need to want it

Randy,,

P.s. I've never won an AA stake ,,,, Yet

P.s,s. I run the Ontario circuit and some of the best AA handlers are not only amateurs but women....

 

[Ted Shih]

Here's an example for you- this weekend I ran a Qualifier that was not O/H. We got a RJ. The top four places went to pros.

There seems to be an overwhelming fear of professional trainers when running field trial stakes that the pros are allowed to run. The last field trial I attended, the top four spots in the open all age stake went to amateurs. I think if you asked any pro, who they have the most concern over possibly beating them, they will tell you it is an amateur handler with a good dog or two, that knows what they are doing. A good amateur does not have to train 30 or so dogs a day and can devote their time really honing their dog(s). How do you get to being one of those good amateurs? Put the time in.

David, I am pretty sure that I judged the Open that you mention in your post. That being said, I don't think that there is anything wrong in having an O/H Qualifying to encourage people to run their own dogs.

 

[RookieTrainer]

Steve,

you have to want it. sacrifice, work, spend,,, its like most other things..

You can go as far as your talent and money will take you....

not everybody can pass the CPA exams either....need to want it

Randy,,

P.s. I've never won an AA stake ,,,, Yet

P.s,s. I run the Ontario circuit and some of the best AA handlers are not only amateurs but women....

I hear you about wanting it, but I like to eat regularly, stay indoors with lights and water, and stay married to my lovely wife.

 

[Rnd]

I hear you about wanting it, but I like to eat regularly, stay indoors with lights and water, and stay married to my lovely wife.

Ya, can't argue with that

 

[John Robinson]

Here's an example for you- this weekend I ran a Qualifier that was not O/H. We got a RJ. The top four places went to pros.

There seems to be an overwhelming fear of professional trainers when running field trial stakes that the pros are allowed to run. The last field trial I attended, the top four spots in the open all age stake went to amateurs. I think if you asked any pro, who they have the most concern over possibly beating them, they will tell you it is an amateur handler with a good dog or two, that knows what they are doing. A good amateur does not have to train 30 or so dogs a day and can devote their time really honing their dog(s). How do you get to being one of those good amateurs? Put the time in.

This is true, plus the good amateur/good dog combo leads to a really good team and great bond between handler and dog.