[Zman1001]

Here is a idea of what a recent Q I entered was like.

First Series - Land Triple with bridge bird on water, no retired

Video -

Second Series - Land Blind. Line for blind was moved inside first series set-up. They put a gunner station about 30 yards away from line that fired a dry pop while walking to the line, and about 10 yards to the right of direct line to blind. Once dog got out about 100 yards, the long gun from the first series came into view, although it was approx 20 yards to the left of the actual blind, for suction.

Picture -

Third Series - Water Blind, through keyhole, through stickpond.

Picture -

Fourth Series - Double, with retired gun. Long bird had three entry / exit from, water before having to push up hill to retired gun.

PIcture -

Some of the other Qs I have seen are as follows (note I have not run but a few)

First Series - Wide open triple, usually with long retired gun.
Second Series - Land Blind, usually with some interaction of guns in first series (whether it be a gun stays out to run past, flyer crate says out for suction, etc.
Third Series - Water blind with point cross, etc.
Fourth Series - Either water triple or double with retired. Bridge birds from one point to another. multiple entries.

I second, or third, attending one if you can prior to entering. It will give you a good idea of what you will be looking at.

I also second, or third, training above the level you are competing. You most likely heard when training for hunt test. be ready for senior before entering junior, be ready for master before entering senior. be completely finished before running master. The same concept applies here. If you train to the minimum, you will not have as much fun or success, than if you train to a high level.

Good luck. Take the plunge, and enjoy it.

 

[jeff evans]

From the judges manual....all age marks and less complex blinds. That's a good sentence to sum it up. I wish the AKC would encentivise the hunt test world to run the q. Do you all think the q's run at ht test is a good idea for field trials?

 

[Zman1001]

Good advice. A blind that is perfectly fine for a MH pass may not get you back in a Q. .

Very True. I was in a Q where a dog one whistled the land blind (albeit running 5+ yards to the left of the blind the entire way, until winding the bird once the first whistle was blown), and had a 2-3 whistle water blind (but letting the dog exit the water well right of the blind).

Dog got dropped after water blind, as the judges said they did not challenge either blind. BOTH of these blinds would have been very passable under the Master standard, but in a competition, they did not hold up.

Again, good luck. You will have fun

 

[Illini Coot Killr]

Zman - New to Q's. Never watched one. Was that acceptable work on the first series? Just asking. Not judging your dog.

 

[Guest]

Zman - New to Q's. Never watched one. Was that acceptable work on the first series? Just asking. Not judging your dog.

Very. Dog went behind the gun station on the last mark but that is fine. Zman, don't take the birds from your dog until he/she is sitting :razz: and you might want to do a lot of singles with long waits before sending in training if you aren't already.

Thanks for posting the link to that series. It's always fun to watch and definitely gives folks an idea of what to expect. For those planning to run Qs in the near future though, don't always expect nice big wide open stand up triples like this or like what Breck describes. If kjrice checks this thread, maybe he will describe one heck of a doozy that was thrown at him in one of his first trials.

 

[Rick_C]

Zman - New to Q's. Never watched one. Was that acceptable work on the first series? Just asking. Not judging your dog.

I know what you're asking but it's important to remember that "acceptable" or "passing" work, unlike in hunt tests, doesn't really exist in FT's. What the judges are looking for is the dogs work relative to the work of the other dogs in the field. So, not knowing what the other dogs did on this series, this could have been the best work of the series, or not.

edit; And, what Melanie said

 

[Breck]

Good post, Breck. Thanks for taking the time.

Thanks, one of my puppies just won a qualifying out your way near Spokane a few weeks ago.

 

[Rick_C]

Thanks, one of my puppies just won a qualifying out your way near Spokane a few weeks ago.

Nice! Was it the O/H qual or Spokane Retriever Club trial? Either way, I was there and would have saw them run. Congrats!

 

[Breck]

He won at Spokane and got a Greenie at the O/H.
Hoping he turns out to be a good dog!

 

[Guest]

I know what you're asking but it's important to remember that "acceptable" or "passing" work, unlike in hunt tests, doesn't really exist in FT's. What the judges are looking for is the dogs work relative to the work of the other dogs in the field. So, not knowing what the other dogs did on this series, this could have been the best work of the series, or not.

edit; And, what Melanie said

LOL. I was going to type what Rick said. Who knows how that dog's work looked in relation to the rest of the field but if that level of work wasn't called back to the next series there would have been something behind the scenes (bird crunching, etc) that couldn't be seen via video clip. That or the judges were high on dope. ;-)

My question to Evan earlier was in no way questioning training to a higher level before entering your dog in an event. That is my personal preference and my last three dogs were finishing Qs while still running Derby. However, the train for the Open comment was over the top and unrealistic. Most people, including Evan, have no concept of what it takes to "train for the Open" so I took offense to the comment as in, anyone could and/or should be doing it.

 

[Evan]

Most people, including Evan, have no concept of what it takes to "train for the Open" so I took offense to the comment as in, anyone could and/or should be doing it.

How would you know that, exactly? I've placed in multiple all age stakes, not that facts matter to you.

Evan

 

[Guest]

How would you know that, exactly? I've placed in multiple all age stakes, not that facts matter to you.

Evan

Oh brother. Give us your resume AGAIN. Remember to include years now y'hear. Oh, and facts matter a lot to me. A LOT. I'm a number minded person.

Can we get back to folks wanting to hear about what Qualifying stakes these days look like? From people who actually know?

 

[baggr]

In-lines and inverted triples seem to be favorites of "Q" judges I've run under. Also, getting the dog to turn with you is important since
there's no duck call to get their attention like you often have in HT's !!

 

[paul young]

Oh brother. Give us your resume AGAIN. Remember to include years now y'hear. Oh, and facts matter a lot to me. A LOT. I'm a number minded person.

Can we get back to folks wanting to hear about what Qualifying stakes these days look like? From people who actually know?

You have piqued my interest; do you train your own dogs? You seem very knowledgeable, judging from what you post on here. I ask because that is very rare in FT'S nowadays.-Paul

 

[Criquetpas]

Qualifying stakes, at least in the Middle West, can be very simple OR you believe it is a "light amateur all-age" . In our neck of the woods they sometimes use the same judges for the Derby and the Qual. In the O/H Quals attached to the Hunt Tests they can be very large with older dogs, say up to 5 years plus, many of the dogs shouldn't even be there, but, many want a QAA dog to go along with thier MH title. I have judged and run both , the Qual attached to the Hunt Test and the Qual as part of a four stake field trial. It is sometimes a difficult stake to judge because of the training level of the dogs . Not long ago it was common practice to try to qualifiy your Derby dog just before you age out at 2 years old. The little derby dogs were "marking machines" with sometimes marginal handling skills. Marking is primary correct? or so it is said. Many now choose to train for the "big stuff" all-age and kinda by-pass the qualifying to run the all-age when they are ready.

I think one has to decide thier goals in the dog game. If one has a three year old MH and has been trained at the Master level it could be
a very high mountain that you are looking up. If you just want to try to run a Qual and are happy to get a JAM or even finish that is another category. You will/must train at a much high level standard no matter the age. In-line triples with a retired gun, percision blinds that will require you to challenge the hazards on land and water (on points off of points etc) bird crates in the field, obscure guns, not always seeing the bird all the way to the ground or water ,I know you are suppose to in principal but sometimes principal doesn't play.
Tough honors (can't talk to the dog) , scented points sometimes, the ability to drive many yards past shorter guns, then come back and check up on the shorter gun,etc etc. My advice is get with a field trial group for training , run thier training tests, see what needs to be worked on and take "constructive advice" . One thing about field trials ain't no one gonna clap just because you finished the test and in training it is in your hands, the group shouldn't be about who won the training session. Try to train with a group of all-age trainers who have had sucess and thier hats fit thier heads without inflated egos. Just some friendly advice.

 

[Evan]

Oh brother. Give us your resume AGAIN. Remember to include years now y'hear. Oh, and facts matter a lot to me. A LOT. I'm a number minded person.

Can we get back to folks wanting to hear about what Qualifying stakes these days look like? From people who actually know?

Clearly not you, or you have already accurately answered your own mindless question. Were you still in an oxygen deprived coma when all of this was hashed out long ago? You're so eager to impune what you apparently wish were true that you ignore facts.

I gave the OP good advice. If you don't like that advice, don't take it. But that's too easy, isn't it? You're the only person involved in this thread who has offered nothing helpful to the OP.

Evan

 

[Justin Allen]

You're the one that derailed this thread. It seems as if you're obsessed with bringing Evan down, what gives?

Oh brother. Give us your resume AGAIN. Remember to include years now y'hear. Oh, and facts matter a lot to me. A LOT. I'm a number minded person.

Can we get back to folks wanting to hear about what Qualifying stakes these days look like? From people who actually know?

 

[DoubleHaul]

Most people, including Evan, have no concept of what it takes to "train for the Open" so I took offense to the comment as in, anyone could and/or should be doing it.

The open is the easiest stake to train for--for me. Training for the open you don't even have to worry about land blinds, much less any water work. I find that to give $85 to a homeless person while saying 'thank you judges' keeps us in top form for the open.

 

[T-bone]

I have a MH and am running a Qual this weekend and next. I'm pretty new to this game but the jump to field trials is big and my dog that doesn't have much trouble with the tight inline concepts in HTs is having trouble with the retired guns and I am having a hell of a time with the big tight blinds.

What I'll be thinking about this time is ... "To finish first you must first finish!". Win, lose or draw it'll be a day filled with antacids and excitement.

Get in with a good training group. Mine kicks me when I need it and has no problem telling me what skills I lack. Not a criticism of them in any way - that's what you need to succeed and I am grateful for their honesty. Now if they'd just pay for the counseling

 

[fishduck]

The open is the easiest stake to train for--for me. Training for the open you don't even have to worry about land blinds, much less any water work. I find that to give $85 to a homeless person while saying 'thank you judges' keeps us in top form for the open.

LOL!! "And the truth will set them free". I will stick to the stakes I have some chance of finishing.