[Chris Rosier]

dont they do that anyway....its not so much that they are retired, its that they are "economically advantaged"

The "economically advantaged" are usually the most successful in any venue. Bottom line is, the more cash you have, the more time and resources you can devote to whatever your desired game is. Thats why its so cool to see an average joe with an average job win something. Be it a Field Trial or a Saturday night dirt track race....

BTW, "economically advantaged" is a goodun. I'll have to borrow that.

 

[Mary Lynn Metras]

What a pile of crap!

I have tried to hold my tongue, but as I watch this thread devolve, I simply cannot.

How many of the people that have commented on this thread have actually run an Open or an Amateur, let alone a National Open or National Amateur? Have you observed what happens? Or are you simply guessing about what occurs and expressing your own biases?

At a weekend Open, the pros are busy discussing among themselves how best to approach a test. They talk with one another about whether to push or pull, which bird to pick up second. They discuss the best way to cast off a point on a given water blind.
- Do you want to stop those discussions? Why?
- If you don't want to stop them, then why wouldn't you want to allow an amateur to speak with a pro?

My pro does not run FT. So, when I go out to compete, I do not have the benefit of being able to consult with her. But, I have found that many of the pros, for example, Eckett, Rorem, Trott, Schrader are willing to discuss the test with a good listener. Emphasis on good listener. Most pros respect the Amateur who is a good student. But, there aren't many good students out there. Most amateurs want to talk, not listen.

By and large, the competitive Amateurs show up at the Amateur, and run. They don't have much time to assess the test, as they are usually running back and forth from the Open to Am and back. When they do have time to sit down and absorb a test (usually on Sunday, when the Open is over), they generally talk with one another about how to approach the test.
- Do you really want to stop Amateurs from talking with one another about the test?
- If so, why?

Underlying this thread is the implied opinion that Pros are coaching Amateurs to success. I have not seen this on weekends, nor have I seen it at the National.

There are no secrets to success in this sport, whether you train your own dog or have a pro train your dog

- A dog with very good natural talents
- A dog that is very well trained
- A handler that has spent the time with his/her dog to know what the dog's strengths and weaknesses are, and is able to read his/her dog
- A handler that thrives under pressure

If you have these things, you succeed on an infrequent basis.
If you don't have these things, you fail consistently.

A pro can offer advice, but the dog's behavior may render that advice meaningless. Moreover, the Amateur may be unable to follow the Pro's advice because he/she lacks the dog skills or calm necessary to execute the plan.

This sport rewards hard, thoughtful effort.
Does money help? Sure
Does time help? Sure
Do great training grounds help? Absolutely
Does a pro help? I think so

But, the rock bottom foundation of success in Field Trials is hard, thoughtful work.

Over the years, I have seen a lot of people say that they wanted to compete in Field Trials. I have seen very few that were prepared to make the sacrifice to win in Field Trials.

Do you really think that if you banned Amateurs from speaking with their pros that it would change the names of the people who bring home blue ribbons, week in, week out?

If you do, you are very naive.

The people that win are driven to win.

I don't think there is any need to get upset at the comments in this thread. No one said either that you don't need to do hard work. You do and it is relentless day in and day out. Of course money, time would be nice and property!!!. I thought some of the intent from the comments was to encourage more Amateurs to run and to bring more participants into field trials. Would you not agree to that??? and how to go about that?? As for stopping conversation between pros and Amateurs and Amateurs to Amateurs I thought that may decrease numbers in the Amateur division. But was not adverse to this comment. Now reading your comments you bring out many good points to dwell on. Just my thoughts??

 

[JS]

Ted scores again!!!

JS

 

[Golddogs]

I would like to know the name of one individual who was successful without the help of a pro in one form or the other at one time or the other.

From all accounts I have heard from, Jim Pickering comes to mind.I believe all of his dogs have been trainied by him and run by him. Not saying advice was not obtained, we all learn from teachers. But he has a pretty good record doing it pro-less.

 

[roseberry]

the desire to see greater amateur participation and success in field trials is discussed in this thread. then on another thread there is discussion of how unfortunate it is for one or two "new to the scene" amateurs to "show up" with resorces and become immediately competitive.

which is it? the sport needs more amatuers, but only those with one dog and a plastic crate in their station wagon who are willing to get beat up on for ten years? certainly not the guy who bought a "derby list" dog and became immediately competitive!(dude, are we kidding) certainly not the guy who has bought ten fc afc dogs and placed them at at six different trainers. certainly not the guy who trains his dog but had his dog force fetched by a pro and the pro told him his dog has exceptional talent.

you can count the ft's and derby's i have won on one hand.(if you are an amputee) read that NONE. but i wonder if and when i and my dogs do win will i be welcome, will i have done it the "right" way, will the gifts and talents i have been given and or worked for disqualify me and my dog/dogs in some way, will someone resent my am status because i sell dogs occasionally?

ted shih is correct, "the people who win are driven to win." those of us without the drive will always envy and or resent those that have it.

 

[scott spalding]

From all accounts I have heard from, Jim Pickering comes to mind.I believe all of his dogs have been trainied by him and run by him. Not saying advice was not obtained, we all learn from teachers. But he has a pretty good record doing it pro-less.

So would you agree that it would be a very small amature entry with The list we have generated so far? By the way my hats off to Jim I met him several years ago and seemed like a very nice guy.

 

[meat hunter]

This argument has been around for many years .I first became involved in field trials in the mid 70's the game at that time was dominated bye for lack of another word wealthy people I don't want wealthy to sound like it a bad thing it is a relative thing any way. I am not wealthy bye most standards but there are some that think just because I spend a large sum of money on my field trialing my dogs that I must be wealthy I am very rich to be able to spend all of my time field trialing and training my dogs. When I first started field trialing back in the seventies I made $8.00 dollars an hour and learned quickly that I couldn't compete with the wealthy of that era because of the time they had available to train and the help they bought from the pro's of the time the likes of Tommy Sorensen, Jim Kappes, and Bill Fabian were pro's where I grew up. In Minnesota We had at least 15-20 field trial clubs and we could go to a fun trial every weekend we used pigeons on land and ducks on the water too keep costs down and entry fee's were $5.00 so the working guy had a place to compete. I always thought I could compete with big guy's if I only had the money but after I started having children the time and money to compete on this level was not possible so I gave up the game but always stayed involved with dogs after my kids grew up and I was able to try the game again I found not much had changed the game was still dominated buy people with wealth but now as I said wealth is a relative thing and I had accumulated $250,000 and was elegable for social security and found if I used all of my funds to play the big game if I didn't mind risking being broke in a few years I figured what the hell its my money and waited for along time to be able to compete and now I had the time and money. I soon found out that I didn't have quite the understanding of the game and the things that go into making a dog able too compete and the knowledge too train a dog that can be comfortable in the situations we require them too be in so I could either send my dog too a pro or sacrifice all my money and time too aquire the equipment and knowledge too compete and put my dog in the right atmosphere to learn the skills and comfort to compete. For the record it is much cheaper to use a pro, the equipment, birds, and gas alone will kill you but if you want to do it you can but you will need the advice of pro's and amateurs and their help to expose you and your dog to the atmosphere and situations needed to grow your experience too a level that you can compete, so when you criticise those of us who have waited many years to be able too compete I don't think you see the whole picture you make choices and sacrifices to get what you want out of life and you can choose to do what it takes to compete or not but don't blame the people who sacrifice their wealth or time to compete, decide weather you want it that bad or not. We all need the help and advice of others to compete in this game weather you get it from Lanse Brown or Danny Farmer it is all the same and they received help along the way also. Ed K

 

[Ted Shih]

I don't think there is any need to get upset at the comments in this thread. No one said either that you don't need to do hard work. You do and it is relentless day in and day out. Of course money, time would be nice and property!!!.

You don't think that the thread implies that Amateurs would not be successful without coaching? Really?

I thought some of the intent from the comments was to encourage more Amateurs to run and to bring more participants into field trials. Would you not agree to that??? and how to go about that??

I think that the premise that NO COACHING = MORE AMATEURS is both ridiculous and unsupported by reality

As for stopping conversation between pros and Amateurs and Amateurs to Amateurs I thought that may decrease numbers in the Amateur division.

I don't think a speaking ban either increases or decreases number. I think it is simply another artificial construct composed by people who do not run FT

 

[Alec Sparks]

Over the years, I have seen a lot of people say that they wanted to compete in Field Trials. I have seen very few that were prepared to make the sacrifice to win in Field Trials.

Holy hell, that needs to be someones signature line!

 

[Mary Lynn Metras]

You don't think that the thread implies that Amateurs would not be successful without coaching? Really?




I think that the premise that NO COACHING = MORE AMATEURS is both ridiculous and unsupported by reality



I don't think a speaking ban either increases or decreases number. I think it is simply another artificial construct composed by people who do not run FT

I AM NOT DISAGREEING WITH ANYTHING YOU HAVE STATED. OF COURSE ALL AMATEURS NEED COACHING. AND YOU WHO HAVE BEEN IN FT FOR QUITE SOME TIME WOULD KNOW. I DON'T THINK A BAN WOULD BE THE WAY TO GO AFTER HEARING SEVERAL CONCERNS BUT SURELY THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE ENCOURAGED TO PARTICIPATE INTO FT. HOW YOU GO ABOUT THAT ??? I PROBABLY SEEING THIS FROM ANOTHER VIEW THAN YOU AND I CAN ONLY SPEAK FROM MY POINT OF VIEW. I TOOK OUT OF THE THREAD THAT FT NEEDS TO INCREASE IN NUMBERS. ALSO THAT AN AMATEUR SHOULD BE AN AMATEUR WITHOUT PRO HELP AND HOW WOULD THAT ASSIST FT. AND THE DISCUSSION WHO SHOULD TALK WITH WHOM AND HOW IT WILL ASSIST THE GAME? I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU ARE COMING FROM BUT I ONLY SAW THE THREAD AS TRYING TO GET SOME THOUGHT INTO PROMOTING FT AND WHAT WAS THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT THAT. I TRULY THINK THAT APPLIES TO ALL DOG OBEDIENCE, TRIALS AND TESTS. MORE CLUB MEMBERS AND NEW PEOPLE NEED TO BE WELCOMED!AND ENCOURAGED TO PARTICIPATE! TO GARNER THOUGHT PROVOKING DISCUSSIONS ALL OPINIONS ARE ON THE TABLE AND OPEN FOR DISCUSSION SO WE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING!IMO THANKS FOR YOUR HELPFUL COMMENTS.

 

[meat hunter]

Jim Pickering trains with a pro everyday all summer long and benefits from the atmosphere of being around a big truck of dogs. He is a nice man and competes the right way but we all need help to obtain the experience and atmosphere required to compete in the game. I also train with a pro most days they need people to throw birds and give advice also, we all need each other and if you want to compete you have find the way to improve you and your dogs ability. As for the wealthy if it wasn't for people willing to share their wealth we wouldn't have a place to train or to run field trials I train on other peoples property 85% of the time I hope that when I throw birds for them or offer advice that they know I'm giving back the only way that I can again we all need each other. The amateur stake is usually much easier set ups and allows for the less experienced handlers to compete The biggest dis advantage the amateur faces is the amount of times he goes too line.

 

[BonMallari]

You don't think that the thread implies that Amateurs would not be successful without coaching? Really?



I think that the premise that NO COACHING = MORE AMATEURS is both ridiculous and unsupported by reality



I don't think a speaking ban either increases or decreases number. I think it is simply another artificial construct composed by people who do not run FT

Ted : I will answer these since your ire seems to be directed at me..I came about the PREMISE after I spent some time reminiscing with my brother yesterday on his bday...we just got to talking about how things used to be when we were growing up...

the "what if...." as the title suggested came from me...it was not intended to cast aspersions toward anyone, it was purely a hypothetical pie in the sky look at things...call me naiive, call me uninformed, call me delusional, but I take sole responsibility for what I posted...my intent was to spark discussion,..if you check back at the response to your exit after the National,I actually congratulated you on an accomplishment that 98% on here will NEVER see....I don't think I have ever disrespected you here on the RTF, but I think you have read far too much into what I posted...

 

[Ted Shih]

I AM NOT DISAGREEING WITH ANYTHING YOU HAVE STATED. OF COURSE ALL AMATEURS NEED COACHING. AND YOU WHO HAVE BEEN IN FT FOR QUITE SOME TIME WOULD KNOW. I DON'T THINK A BAN WOULD BE THE WAY TO GO AFTER HEARING SEVERAL CONCERNS BUT SURELY THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE ENCOURAGED TO PARTICIPATE INTO FT. HOW YOU GO ABOUT THAT ??? I PROBABLY SEEING THIS FROM ANOTHER VIEW THAN YOU AND I CAN ONLY SPEAK FROM MY POINT OF VIEW. I TOOK OUT OF THE THREAD THAT FT NEEDS TO INCREASE IN NUMBERS. ALSO THAT AN AMATEUR SHOULD BE AN AMATEUR WITHOUT PRO HELP AND HOW WOULD THAT ASSIST FT. AND THE DISCUSSION WHO SHOULD TALK WITH WHOM AND HOW IT WILL ASSIST THE GAME? I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU ARE COMING FROM BUT I ONLY SAW THE THREAD AS TRYING TO GET SOME THOUGHT INTO PROMOTING FT AND WHAT WAS THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT THAT. I TRULY THINK THAT APPLIES TO ALL DOG OBEDIENCE, TRIALS AND TESTS. MORE CLUB MEMBERS AND NEW PEOPLE NEED TO BE WELCOMED!AND ENCOURAGED TO PARTICIPATE! TO GARNER THOUGHT PROVOKING DISCUSSIONS ALL OPINIONS ARE ON THE TABLE AND OPEN FOR DISCUSSION SO WE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING!IMO THANKS FOR YOUR HELPFUL COMMENTS.

Do you think you could type without all caps?

If you believe that the proposal would increase numbers of Amateurs in the sport, please explain why

 

[Golddogs]

So would you agree that it would be a very small amature entry with The list we have generated so far? By the way my hats off to Jim I met him several years ago and seemed like a very nice guy.

Not being dialed in to the FT scene, I would hesitate to answer in an absolute. But I imagine, the list is smaller than one where Am's run dogs trained by Pro's.

I would say, however, that without the ability to learn and get better, the Am will always finish out of the money regardless if he has a Pro trained dog or a " coach " on the sidelines. In my limited experience, you have got to put in to get out, and quite a few Am's are not willing or able to put in the time required to learn there dog. This is coming from a HT backround, but I believe it translates to FT as well.

Coaching only goes so far. The team has to execute the play.

 

[Golddogs]

Jim Pickering trains with a pro everyday all summer long and benefits from the atmosphere of being around a big truck of dogs. .

Training with, IMO, is quite a bit different than trained by. And I would love to have a chance to be in that situation. I would still want to do my own work however but having the expertise to help me be better would be wonderful.

 

[Ted Shih]

Ted : I will answer these since your ire seems to be directed at me..I came about the PREMISE after I spent some time reminiscing with my brother yesterday on his bday...we just got to talking about how things used to be when we were growing up...

the "what if...." as the title suggested came from me...it was not intended to cast aspersions toward anyone, it was purely a hypothetical pie in the sky look at things...call me naiive, call me uninformed, call me delusional, but I take sole responsibility for what I posted...my intent was to spark discussion,..if you check back at the response to your exit after the National,I actually congratulated you on an accomplishment that 98% on here will NEVER see....I don't think I have ever disrespected you here on the RTF, but I think you have read far too much into what I posted...

Bon

I was not personally offended.

I simply think that the entire concept is mis-informed and is based upon a lack of knowledge of how things are.

By and large, Pros do not advise Amateurs on the weekend trial. Moreover, unless the Pros come to the Amateur, I question how useful their advice would be. So, just where is the competitive advantage? And how would eliminating the "consultation" increase Amateur participation?

As for the Nationals - Open and Am - how many newbies think about them before deciding whether to join FT or not? So, how would eliminating "consultation" at Nationals increase Amateur participation in the sport?

If you want to equalize the playing field, we could all
- train on the same property
- train the same number of hours
- train with the same dog
- run the same tests

Then everyone would have equal opportunity. Of course, this is not feasible.
And, for me, at least, it is not desirable.

 

[helencalif]

Amateurs have opportunities to be successful in the Derby, in the Qual, and in the Amateur stakes. First, they have to have a good dog with potential, then they have to be good trainers to help that talented dog realize its potential.

There is great satisfaction in training and trialing your own Derby dog and to get your dog QAA. It's your choice to move on to the Amateur as competition there is pretty darn keen.

You have to be driven, absolutely driven, and you have to be a good amateur trainer and a few-mistakes handler to put an AFC on your dog.

The sport needs more dedicated amateurs who will work at becoming good trainers and handlers. The old amateurs aren't getting any younger, folks.

My 2-cents,
Helen

 

[Mike W.]

The sport needs more dedicated amateurs who will work at becoming good trainers and handlers. The old amateurs aren't getting any younger, folks.

Just out of curiousity, I wonder if they weren't saying the same thing 10 years ago? 20 years ago?

Was there ever a time when the average age of handlers was under 45?

 

[scott spalding]

Just out of curiousity, I wonder if they weren't saying the same thing 10 years ago? 20 years ago?

Was there ever a time when the average age of handlers was under 45?

Average age under 45 I can't think of five people in our area that are 45

 

[BonMallari]

Just out of curiousity, I wonder if they weren't saying the same thing 10 years ago? 20 years ago?

Was there ever a time when the average age of handlers was under 45?

Yes, when the the Judy Aycock,D. Farmer's, M.Lardy's,Don Remien's,the Erwins and all the current old guard was the young lions of the sport..circa 1974-84....