If you know your dog could not see a bird due to a poor throw and the judges call for your dog how would be the best way to approach from this point?
Proper way to approach a judge about no bird
carolinagold
41 - 52 of 52 Posts
Well said Brad, thank you
Joined
·
3,256 Posts
Best thing is just to walk back to the truck like you are going to wait three. Adam Dunn shows good technique here: http://m.mlb.com/video/v4875541 
Joined
·
614 Posts
Easy, you line your dog up with the fall, only slightly downwind, and give the command "back"! Works every time and it helps if your dog's name rhymes with "back".
Next question.
L Spann
Joined
·
5,113 Posts
First of all, when in doubt, the question of fairness goes to the dog. That said, there's a real difference between "didn't see" and "couldn't see". Even then, if the dog "couldn't see" was it because of a fault in the test or events or was it because of the way the dog was set up? "Didn't see" is not the judges' problem. "Couldn't see" because of the way the dog was set-up is also not the judges' problem.
I'm reminded of the time I ran Cheyenne (Toller) in a NAHRA Intermediate test judged by Jack Jagoda. The field was solid cover about 2 high and the gun stations were in trees throwing out into this cover. At the pre-test meeting I got down and confirmed my suspicions. Cheyenne wouldn't be able to see a thing. When it was our turn, I walked to the line and told her to get up on the bucket that was there for the handlers. Jack asked what I was doing. I indicated that since my dog could not see through or over the cover, the test was unfair so I was going to use the bucket. He thought a moment said, "OK ... but if she falls off, we're going to keep going." She did fine. Afterwards, he said that it was a good thing I'd done that as he couldn't see her once she was past 20 feet into the field.
All that said, it seems to me that we need to be careful in our answer from the standpoint of is the event a field trial or hunt test? In a field trial, since the dogs are judged against each other, I suspect that there is more tendency to call a "no bird" than at a hunt test. In a hunt test, the issue is "Is the bird retrievable?" rather than "How close to the throw for every other dog was that throw?" If the bird (HT) is retrievable, there's no reason to call "no bird." Simply judge the dog in terms of how well it accomplishes the task(s) set before him. If there was a really poor throw and the dog does really well, he maybe gets a point for "extra credit."
Am I correct?
I'm reminded of the time I ran Cheyenne (Toller) in a NAHRA Intermediate test judged by Jack Jagoda. The field was solid cover about 2 high and the gun stations were in trees throwing out into this cover. At the pre-test meeting I got down and confirmed my suspicions. Cheyenne wouldn't be able to see a thing. When it was our turn, I walked to the line and told her to get up on the bucket that was there for the handlers. Jack asked what I was doing. I indicated that since my dog could not see through or over the cover, the test was unfair so I was going to use the bucket. He thought a moment said, "OK ... but if she falls off, we're going to keep going." She did fine. Afterwards, he said that it was a good thing I'd done that as he couldn't see her once she was past 20 feet into the field.
All that said, it seems to me that we need to be careful in our answer from the standpoint of is the event a field trial or hunt test? In a field trial, since the dogs are judged against each other, I suspect that there is more tendency to call a "no bird" than at a hunt test. In a hunt test, the issue is "Is the bird retrievable?" rather than "How close to the throw for every other dog was that throw?" If the bird (HT) is retrievable, there's no reason to call "no bird." Simply judge the dog in terms of how well it accomplishes the task(s) set before him. If there was a really poor throw and the dog does really well, he maybe gets a point for "extra credit."
Am I correct?
Joined
·
7,630 Posts
My sentiments exactly.
Joined
·
2,497 Posts
I agree completely.
Agree this is preferable to querying the judge. I make it regular practice to have one gun station with a bumper placed a throws distance from the holding blind or stickman, If there is a gunner at this station they might shoot and make a throwing motion in the direction of the planted bumper. In any event the dog is sent using my routine "marking cues" and is sent on its name, I prefer this to cueing/running it as a blind because I cannot always be 100% certain that the dog has not seen the bird (after all, I am concentrating on the dog not the bird) and I don't want them thinking we are running a poison bird blind if they indeed marked the fall of a poor throw in a test.L Spann said:
Joined
·
2,298 Posts
No. I don't think this is correct. The marks should still be fair and relatively consistent. While you are testing against a standard, all dogs should see the same test. If a throw creates a different or unfair test, it should be a called no-bird.
Joined
·
236 Posts
If the throws were all perfect and consistant, what would i use for an excuse?
Joined
·
15,660 Posts
41 - 52 of 52 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
