Thank You! for your help. The workers at all field trials including nationals are the backbone of our great sport. Young boy's and girls throwing birds all weekend for all of us sometimes in the rain or 100 degree weather is something I have to admit would not have appealed to me as a youth. The National grounds committee's in particular go so unfortunately unnoticed and give two full weeks of their time making everything look so smooth but work so very hard to achieve. I'm very proud to be a part of our sport, nothing like it in the world.Thanks for the clarification Mike!
I've only been to one National, the one in Oakdale a few years back, and I worked it for two days and then had to go back to work, so I didn't actually SEE alot of dog work or the tests. I think I saw one test, a land blind, and maybe 4 or 5 dogs run.
You got it right Sister!!!Because we already have problems with the number of entries on a weekend trial. Suppose the first x number of trials only will qualify you for a national....then all the entries are going to be "top heavy"...people rushing to enter those first trials to possibly qualify. That's going to really put pressure on clubs and workers.
Then, once the number runs out, sure some people will still run but it won't be the same if your points don't even count to qualify you for the national. Or worse, suppose people work during a school year and can only run summer trials? They can't ever qualify because they can't run in the beginning of the year?
So to me, it seems it's not fair to the trial worker bees or the everyday work-for-a-living bee either.
I did not mean to imply that chronologically,only the first first (x) number of Trials results would count, rather that the dog would have a finite number of trials in which to qualify.
Respectfully, are you kidding!!! Do you realize how diificult it is to win an open against the best dogs. This aint no hunt test against a standard. Respectfully.
I think you need to read the entire thread. I know what Ted posted. I have stated my opinion at length. It is very clear what I am stating. The thought of limiting the number of trials necessary to qualify for a National be it Open or Amateur is ridiculous. Right out of the handbook of what the MN had to do with little success at reducing their qualifiers as is reflected in their 400+ qualifiers. Lets also make something perfectly clear I advocate and support all forms of retriever events, hunt tests included so don't even go there. Your idea in my opinion is in a word lame!
Putting aside your opinion on the necessity of limiting entries at the National for a moment.
If one would have to limit entries at the National would it not be classified as a Championship stake?
I have taken the time to read the entire thread and have to agree, you have made your opinion on part one of Teds question very clear but............. In your 21 posts you have yet to address part two of Teds two part question.
Ted I said that the idea of increasing the National qualification is Ridiculous!
The Arthurs wouldn't have a problem there...they put on two trials a year at Central Savannah and work their rears off at 'em.
Mike
Maybe PRTA should be the National Open host club each year using their regional members. Club members put in trials and run their dogs each weekend. "Just throwing out an observation."The Arthurs wouldn't have a problem there...they put on two trials a year at Central Savannah and work their rears off at 'em.
Plus aren't there other PRTA trials and do the pros work those?
I'm NOT advocating this idea, just throwing in some observations
Really,
