Who do these 2 clubs prepare and get enough resources when the night before the closing they have 60 Master dogs and when the dust settles the next day.,.....they have 194!!!!!!
Williamsburg Hunt Test...HOLY CRAP!
GilWlsn
81 - 100 of 105 Posts
Joined
·
98 Posts
I certainly don't claim to have all the answers but I know there are some challenges to the HT game. Fewer and fewer owners are running their dogs and interest in belonging and participating in a club is waning in my neck of the woods. Before moving to Missouri I belonged to the same club as Paul and we had an extremely active and motivated club. It was not unusual for the day of test setup and showing the judges the grounds to have 10-12 club members on the grounds to help, not to mention the help the day of the test. There were other clubs in the Northwest that have the same approach (e.g., Oregon Hunting Retriever Club).
We will make the test happen this weekend, but to be honest that's my goal isn't just putting on another test. I like to have plenty of help, quality grounds, good judges, and a respect for good time management that makes the event enjoyable for most who participate. You will never please everyone.
Paul, tried to send you a PM earlier. In short things are fine here although I still miss the PNW. Please tell everyone in UVRC I send my regards.
We will make the test happen this weekend, but to be honest that's my goal isn't just putting on another test. I like to have plenty of help, quality grounds, good judges, and a respect for good time management that makes the event enjoyable for most who participate. You will never please everyone.
Paul, tried to send you a PM earlier. In short things are fine here although I still miss the PNW. Please tell everyone in UVRC I send my regards.
Joined
·
8,909 Posts
His comments about pro's were wrong. Now he knows how it feels. Its easy to sit back and bitch about those not working, to stereotype all Pro's or all am's is not fair.
/Paul
Joined
·
8,909 Posts
Joined
·
235 Posts
As handlers.....we could just recognize what a pain in the butt this is for clubs and we could enter earlier......
I would feel pretty guilty being dog 61 or 91 on 11:59pm Weds night for a test I intended to enter for months.....
Let's at least try to give the clubs and hardworking members some help where we can. Although there are times that have been brought up earlier of why we wait to the last minute.....that is not the majority of the time.
I would feel pretty guilty being dog 61 or 91 on 11:59pm Weds night for a test I intended to enter for months.....
Let's at least try to give the clubs and hardworking members some help where we can. Although there are times that have been brought up earlier of why we wait to the last minute.....that is not the majority of the time.
Joined
·
1,515 Posts
FWIW
I think it's in the best interest of our sport to allow clubs the option of limiting entries, as long as it's done in a fair and transparent manner. With the near universal use of EE that is achievable. This is what I sent to the RHTAC:
I'm following up on the proposal to allow clubs to limit entries. There has been some "chatter" on the internet - most of it uninformed - and a couple of clubs I work with have issues with big entries. Mainly a shortage of capable workers and very limited grounds.
I suggest an amendment to the HT regs that would allow any club to limit entries with the following conditions:
The limits must be at least the maximum "split" limit under the regs. That is, no fewer than 60 in a 2 day master, 90 in a 3 day, etc. So a club could limit to a single master or some number of master entries up to 60/90 each. The club may elect to limit one or more stakes.
The decision to limit must be posted on the premium.
All entry fees - including "administrative" fees - must be returned to any entrant who does not make the cut.
The premium must state the time and date for entry opening as well as closing.
Advance notice of the opening and closing dates must be posted if using an on-line service such as EE so folks have adequate notice of the limits and can plan accordingly.
Entries close on the earlier of the closing date or the limit reached in those stakes only.
Early entries must be refused. (That's easy w/ EE.)
A handler with multiple dogs who bridges the split may only enter the dogs below the "cutline" or may scratch, w/o penalty all of his/her dogs, and those handlers above the cut are entered in the order of their application.
That's about as simple as I can make it and I believe it's consistent with the regs in other venues where limits are premitted.
I think it's in the best interest of our sport to allow clubs the option of limiting entries, as long as it's done in a fair and transparent manner. With the near universal use of EE that is achievable. This is what I sent to the RHTAC:
I'm following up on the proposal to allow clubs to limit entries. There has been some "chatter" on the internet - most of it uninformed - and a couple of clubs I work with have issues with big entries. Mainly a shortage of capable workers and very limited grounds.
I suggest an amendment to the HT regs that would allow any club to limit entries with the following conditions:
The limits must be at least the maximum "split" limit under the regs. That is, no fewer than 60 in a 2 day master, 90 in a 3 day, etc. So a club could limit to a single master or some number of master entries up to 60/90 each. The club may elect to limit one or more stakes.
The decision to limit must be posted on the premium.
All entry fees - including "administrative" fees - must be returned to any entrant who does not make the cut.
The premium must state the time and date for entry opening as well as closing.
Advance notice of the opening and closing dates must be posted if using an on-line service such as EE so folks have adequate notice of the limits and can plan accordingly.
Entries close on the earlier of the closing date or the limit reached in those stakes only.
Early entries must be refused. (That's easy w/ EE.)
A handler with multiple dogs who bridges the split may only enter the dogs below the "cutline" or may scratch, w/o penalty all of his/her dogs, and those handlers above the cut are entered in the order of their application.
That's about as simple as I can make it and I believe it's consistent with the regs in other venues where limits are premitted.
Joined
·
291 Posts
Nicely done Bob. Thanks.
So, shall those of us in favor of this notify the RHTAC indicating our support of this proposal?
Joined
·
8,909 Posts
Joined
·
5,113 Posts
In the early days we had limited entries. However, some clubs, and one in particular, were known for opening entries to club members before they were announced to the public. By the time they were opened to the public, perhaps 10 out of 50 spaces would be left. Once, supposedly, the test was completely filled with "friends and family" entries and if you didn't know someone, you didn't get in.
AKC got tired of this nonsense and passed the unlimited entry change. A great hue and cry went throughout the land. "oh woe is me, what'll we do?" A couple months later, nobody even mentioned the change. Folks adapted.
How will your proposal preclude the goings on in the entry process as I've described.
Eric
Joined
·
6,293 Posts
i find it interesting that the people whose clubs have the greatest amount of resources (grounds, available workers, etc.) are happy with the status quo, concerning limiting entries, while those with extremely limited resources are not.
anyone else notice this?
has anyone else noticed that large MASTER entries are the problem being discussed? i wonder why that is?-Paul
anyone else notice this?
has anyone else noticed that large MASTER entries are the problem being discussed? i wonder why that is?-Paul
Joined
·
1,768 Posts
There is always grounds and workers for less??
This is not sudden. I belong to 2 clubs and the work keeps filtering down to fewer and fewer amateurs. I remember the days when we didnt have to hire help. I remember when at a master all the owner/handlers were there pulling for each other. It was fun.
Joined
·
5,356 Posts
Well said, Eric.
There's no way AKC is going to limit entries under ANY circumstances, so everyone's energies are best served finding other solutions that WE/the sport can control rather than waiting for the AKC to provide one.
As I opined earlier, the FASTEST way to limit the size of any event is to NOT hold a double-Master test. It is EASY to double a Junior or Senior test and hold a single Master, even if you have to split it....but with everyone trying to get all the Master passes they can get in the shortest amount of time on as many dogs as possible (wonder why, I say tongue firmly in cheek....), double Masters that then must be split will be the rule rather than the exception.
A Friday start is a good way to limit entries too, because for some reason a TON of folks in the HT game won't travel on a Thursday evening to run a test that starts on Friday.....UNLESS it includes a double Master.
Remember the days when the primary goal you had when running a Master test was to get a Master title? Yeah...those were the days....
Vuja de (we've never been here before) regards, ;-)
k g
Joined
·
6,293 Posts
Yes, those were the days. Now gone forever in the quest to collect the most dinner plates in the least amount of time.- PaulWell said, Eric.
There's no way AKC is going to limit entries under ANY circumstances, so everyone's energies are best served finding other solutions that WE/the sport can control rather than waiting for the AKC to provide one.
As I opined earlier, the FASTEST way to limit the size of any event is to NOT hold a double-Master test. It is EASY to double a Junior or Senior test and hold a single Master, even if you have to split it....but with everyone trying to get all the Master passes they can get in the shortest amount of time on as many dogs as possible (wonder why, I say tongue firmly in cheek....), double Masters that then must be split will be the rule rather than the exception.
A Friday start is a good way to limit entries too, because for some reason a TON of folks in the HT game won't travel on a Thursday evening to run a test that starts on Friday.....UNLESS it includes a double Master.
Remember the days when the primary goal you had when running a Master test was to get a Master title? Yeah...those were the days....
Vuja de (we've never been here before) regards, ;-)
k g
Joined
·
3,346 Posts
You could see the writing on the wall when the AKC MNH title was announced. All those extra required passes to get to go to the big show at least three times to get it are what is sinking this ship.Well said, Eric.
There's no way AKC is going to limit entries under ANY circumstances, so everyone's energies are best served finding other solutions that WE/the sport can control rather than waiting for the AKC to provide one.
As I opined earlier, the FASTEST way to limit the size of any event is to NOT hold a double-Master test. It is EASY to double a Junior or Senior test and hold a single Master, even if you have to split it....but with everyone trying to get all the Master passes they can get in the shortest amount of time on as many dogs as possible (wonder why, I say tongue firmly in cheek....), double Masters that then must be split will be the rule rather than the exception.
A Friday start is a good way to limit entries too, because for some reason a TON of folks in the HT game won't travel on a Thursday evening to run a test that starts on Friday.....UNLESS it includes a double Master.
Remember the days when the primary goal you had when running a Master test was to get a Master title? Yeah...those were the days....
Vuja de (we've never been here before) regards, ;-)
k g
Be careful what you ask for...you might get it!
Joined
·
8,909 Posts
It is too bad. The MN is a cool event. Unfortunately its molded the sport into something that distracts from the real fun, training dogs. I will say though that in the two HT's I've ran dogs in this year have been low key and a lot of fun. Almost reminds me of the good old days from years past...Well said, Eric.
There's no way AKC is going to limit entries under ANY circumstances, so everyone's energies are best served finding other solutions that WE/the sport can control rather than waiting for the AKC to provide one.
As I opined earlier, the FASTEST way to limit the size of any event is to NOT hold a double-Master test. It is EASY to double a Junior or Senior test and hold a single Master, even if you have to split it....but with everyone trying to get all the Master passes they can get in the shortest amount of time on as many dogs as possible (wonder why, I say tongue firmly in cheek....), double Masters that then must be split will be the rule rather than the exception.
A Friday start is a good way to limit entries too, because for some reason a TON of folks in the HT game won't travel on a Thursday evening to run a test that starts on Friday.....UNLESS it includes a double Master.
Remember the days when the primary goal you had when running a Master test was to get a Master title? Yeah...those were the days....
Vuja de (we've never been here before) regards, ;-)
k g
/Paul
Joined
·
431 Posts
EXACTLY!! Hard to believe those 60ish dogs entered on the last day where all a part of an exception!
Joined
·
3,346 Posts
But what difference would it make if you entered earlier or at the last minute?..the entries are still way high, additional judges still have to be found, extra equipment, more land, etc...the problem is that the quest never ends now that there is a MNH title and additional recognition even after that goal is reached.
Joined
·
5,356 Posts
One advantage of setting the closing date for, say, 2 to 3 weeks prior to the event, would be the head-start they'd get on acquiring additional judges, birds, help, etc. rather than having just over a week to pull it all together.
Yes, it would be FABULOUS to be able to have extra judges, birds, help, etc. lined up weeks in advance so that it wouldn't matter how many splits you had to have. That might actually allow clubs to get "new" (to their area) judges rather than going to an already-overused judging pool...but that will necessitate another thread entirely....
k g
Joined
·
5,856 Posts
Vicki I don't think the ship is sinking at all. Just going through some growing pains. It requires clubs to be more organized and to take their event a little more seriously then in the past. There is some very serious planning that needs to be addressed quite a bit in advance more so then ever before.
I don't think that's bad. If it's too much for a club or clubs to take on they can always not do a hunt test? That's not the end of the world either. There will always be hunt tests somewhere in this country on any given weekend.
If that's the worse thing that happens then so be it. But you can guarantee some other club will offer a hunt test on that same weekend not too far away.
Angie
Joined
·
5,856 Posts
Now Keith,,,, there you go offering another viable idea to help clubs work their numbers... Fly judges in?? Good god man!! What a concept....One advantage of setting the closing date for, say, 2 to 3 weeks prior to the event, would be the head-start they'd get on acquiring additional judges, birds, help, etc. rather than having just over a week to pull it all together.
Yes, it would be FABULOUS to be able to have extra judges, birds, help, etc. lined up weeks in advance so that it wouldn't matter how many splits you had to have. That might actually allow clubs to get "new" (to their area) judges rather than going to an already-overused judging pool...but that will necessitate another thread entirely....
k g
Angie
81 - 100 of 105 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
