[cakaiser]

I'm of the opinion that the Amateur should be just that: amateur handlers running amateur trained dogs. To me, it's hardly "amateur" to have one's pro who trains the dog six days a week on hundreds of acres with technical ponds, flyers, and bird boys to run the dog in the Open then turn the dog over to be run by the owner or another "amateur" in Amateur at the same trial. I know it would be almost impossible to enforce this limitation but one can dream.

Do you think it's really such a huge advantage to just show up, pull the dog off a pro truck, and run it?
I sure don't, because it has never worked very well for us.....

It can be an advantage to run multiple dogs, have them pro trained, sure. But, it is also a disadvantage to never have your hand over those dogs in training, have no relationship with them. IMO
It's a team sport, and you and the dog better be on the same page.....

As for grounds, ponds, flyers, bird boys..
Those things are necessary, amateur or pro.

 

[rsfavor]

This idea sounds like some sort of Field Trial Welfare Act imposed by the Obama administration. Take away from the people who spend their time and effort to train and somehow reward those who don't put in the same amount of time or effort.

 

[FOM]

I don't think that it is skirting the rules if it is not in the rules?

I say "skirting the rules" because behind any rule there is always an intent. The intent of the O/H Am is to keep an amateur from running all the dogs off a Pros truck.

I believe co-ownerships are okay and those shouldn't be disallowed, but when a person co-owns dogs just to co-own dogs so they can run the dogs, you know that they are trying to skirt the rules. Fortunately, I don't know of anyone who is blatantly doing this, so it seems the intent of the O/H Am is working. (I could be wrong and I'm sure if I am someone will correct me via PM).

FOM

 

[signgirl]

If I had my dog with a Pro, I would not be a happy camper if some amateur was handling my dog during training. That is not what I am paying for. It would be interesting to know just how many Pros let non owners put their hands on dogs other than their own. Mine sure doesn't.

 

[ErinsEdge]

If I had my dog with a Pro, I would not be a happy camper if some amateur was handling my dog during training. That is not what I am paying for. It would be interesting to know just how many Pros let non owners put their hands on dogs other than their own. Mine sure doesn't.

There is another way of looking at it, sometimes it helps the dogs respond to the owners better if the dogs are not always handled by the pro in training, especially if the owner is rarely there. It's not easy to walk in and handler your dog at a trial.

 

[Ted Shih]

There is another way of looking at it, sometimes it helps the dogs respond to the owners better if the dogs are not always handled by the pro in training, especially if the owner is rarely there. It's not easy to walk in and handler your dog at a trial.

When a client brings a dog with line manner issues to my pro, Cherylon Loveland, and she has gotten the issues under control when she is running the dog, she will often have other people run the dog to see if the line manners are still under control and if not get a correction in.

Moral of the story: It is not always a bad thing to have other amateurs run the dogs in training.

 

[Kelly Greenwood]

It is a good thing to have other people handle your dog, even if you don't use a pro, sometimes it lets you see just how well trained your dog is or is not trained, sometimes it shows you just how many mistakes you make handling your own dog.

 

[Happy Gilmore]

I know I've seen occasions recently where an emergency arose and another friend jumped in to handle a persons' dog. It does highlight the need for relationships.

To those making comments that I am whining or have some other "have not" complex you haven't read what I wrote or took it the wrong way. I was only thinking about it and thought it "could" be a good discussion until folks start increasing their font size and typing in bold to make sure everyone sees their short-order disapproval of any discussion.

 

[Happy Gilmore]

Just keep spending this much time on RTF while at work and you might find out what that is like!

I put my hours in.....

in that respect, it would be nice to be on Obama-unemployment- lasts a couple years, pay isn't bad?

 

[FOM]

I know I've seen occasions recently where an emergency arose and another friend jumped in to handle a persons' dog. It does highlight the need for relationships.

This is where common sense should come into play....if it is an O/H then there isn't much a person can do if there is no "relationship" therefor the dog must be scratched, but in the case of a non O/H event, then a friend stepping up to help out is just that and other handlers shouldn't get the undies in a wad...

FOM

 

[Happy Gilmore]

This is where common sense should come into play....if it is an O/H then there isn't much a person can do if there is no "relationship" therefor the dog must be scratched, but in the case of a non O/H event, then a friend stepping up to help out is just that and other handlers shouldn't get the undies in a wad...

FOM

No just a QAA stake. Nobody was upset in any way shape or form. It was a am dog and another am handler filled in.

 

[Jay Dufour]

This idea sounds like some sort of Field Trial Welfare Act imposed by the Obama administration. Take away from the people who spend their time and effort to train and somehow reward those who don't put in the same amount of time or effort.

bwahhhahhhaaa ....Good one Ricky

 

[WRL]

I know I've seen occasions recently where an emergency arose and another friend jumped in to handle a persons' dog. It does highlight the need for relationships.

To those making comments that I am whining or have some other "have not" complex you haven't read what I wrote or took it the wrong way. I was only thinking about it and thought it "could" be a good discussion until folks start increasing their font size and typing in bold to make sure everyone sees their short-order disapproval of any discussion.

Or some people see through you and believe it is the tip of the iceberg.

Everyone here knows if you got something like that through in the rules the next rules to follow would be those with the ULTIMATE handicap "Chessie Owners" would start asking to play from the "ladies' tees"........

WRL

 

[BonMallari]

I dont know about the rest of you but I would much rather face the amateur handler whose dog is pro trained than the amateur trainer who has nothing else to do but train dogs all day ....either way more often than not a dog like Shaq is going to beat you most of the time whether it s Don Remien handling in the Open or Bill Fruehling his owner

 

[Happy Gilmore]

This idea sounds like some sort of Field Trial Welfare Act imposed by the Obama administration. Take away from the people who spend their time and effort to train and somehow reward those who don't put in the same amount of time or effort.

It would only be that if it was imposed without discussion and the people did not have an open forum to comment or make a choice regarding the situation.

 

[2tall]

Or some people see through you and believe it is the tip of the iceberg.

Everyone here knows if you got something like that through in the rules the next rules to follow would be those with the ULTIMATE handicap "Chessie Owners" would start asking to play from the "ladies' tees"........

WRL

I can't wait to suggest this to my husband! I've been telling him he is a handicap to his chessie

 

[Sabireley]

I would rather run against the best handlers and dogs in both the Am and the Open. It makes placing even more of an accomplishment. That said, I have not been at the end too many times, but enough to keep training to improve my skills and those of my dogs.
Steve

 

[fishduck]

As an amatuer trainer I understand your frustration. I am relegated to the minor stakes due to my lack of talent, time and grounds. I would love a chance to run in competition against my peers. Maybe in 20 years I can become what I now only envy.
Mark Land

 

[Happy Gilmore]

just to be clear, I have no level of frustration or reason to be. I've entered and gone out quickly in two derbies and I freely and openly acknoledge myself as my own dogs handicap, nothing more, nothing less.

As I said in the OP, I was just thinking it in the back of my head driving home and wondering about it- seems some folks are really touchy at the suggestion though

 

[John Robinson]

just to be clear, I have no level of frustration or reason to be. I've entered and gone out quickly in two derbies and I freely and openly acknoledge myself as my own dogs handicap, nothing more, nothing less.

As I said in the OP, I was just thinking it in the back of my head driving home and wondering about it- seems some folks are really touchy at the suggestion though

I think its because we come into this game from so many different angles and after that continue to evolve. I know a lot of old school amateurs that started in the 70s or 80s, had success as amateurs then had to drop out of the sport to raise a family, and are now retired empty nesters able to devote their retirement time and money resourses to pursue this sport with a passion. If they were into some other sport or hobby, they would probablt be just as passionate about it.

Then there are those of us who moved into FTs after being successful in hunt test, are competitive by nature and wanted something more. I was a charter sailboat captain, owned my own boat and loved yacht racing. Believe me, competing in FTs is much harder and much more frustrating. There are a lot of us who have to balance full time jobs and family commitments with dog training and trialing. That usually leads to utilizing a pro a good percentage of the time, espcially if you live in cold, dark northern climates.

FTs are so hard and the competition so fierce that no matter which group you are in, it is very tough to title a dog. So your suggestion of some way to limit Amateur status opens a whole can of worms, with most paths leading to a very slippery slope. I would be so very proud to have my dog (working on FT dog #4 right now) titled. In the unofficial status point leader board, it would be awesome to do it all myself, but utilizing a pro and having us both get points on my dog is almost as good.

So the question is, who is a true amateur? A working guy who does it all himself in the hours after work and on weekends? How about that same guy ten years later, when he and his wife are retired, love their dogs and the sport enough to spend their whole retirement on a trailer, training grounds and good dogs, then dedicate their life to a vagabond existence of moving from area to area, up at the crack of dawn to air and feed dogs, train all day which means throwing birds for other retired amateurs. Is that guy still an amateur, or is he too good now and must be considered a semi-pro. Where do guys like me fit in who train at home when they can, but a lot of our dog's life is on the road with a pro, or even us down at the pros to train with him on weekends. Then there is the guy who's dog is on a pros truck 90% of the time. Not my cup of tea, but some have to do it by necessity.

In the past there have been those who looked down their nose at those who use a pro a lot, use a pro a little, consider the hard core full time training amateur practically a pro, believe that 100% amateur trained dogs are the only pure AFC, and argue about 100% amateur trained (ever day-train with a pro or use a break out trainer to build in basics?). These arguments have led to heated debates in the past and you thread just opened up old wounds.

John