RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

OVERALL, what best describes your opinion of Junior tests

  • Currently okay as "glorified puppy stakes"

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Currently okay exhibiting requirements of a "standard" JH

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Needs more emphasis placed on basic OB requirements

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Needs more "meat" added to the marks

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Needs BOTH of the above

    Votes: 0 0.0%
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,234 Posts
I am AGAINST making the marks anymore difficult. BUT....

Let's start requiring steadiness. My gawd, steadiness is the whole basis of "non-slip" retrievers. The non-slip retriever freed up the handler to use a gun safely. Another thing that in JH is an impossibility.

The founders of our games must be rolling over in their graves that we allow dogs to compete on lead on any level.

"More emphasis on basic OB" is the correct answer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
I voted for #2, but I think the existing standard of "lightly" restraining the dog at the line should be emphasized more.

I've seen too many handlers with their left arm 6 inches longer than their right arm after coming to the line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
The Junior needs more to be judged to a higher standards regarding both obedience and marks. I am weary of dogs that havent been taught any form of a trained retrieve, or sufficent general obedience. I have also had my fill of fifty yard long football field marks, and twenty yard water retrieves.
The arguement that it should be thus easy because "we need to encourage new people" dosent work well for me either. I tell my customers with a good (average) young dog 3-4 months of hard work, to run a compentent Junior. That at least in my mind isn't asking very much. If people arent willing to invest that amount of time or effort maybe they should find another hobby.
If the conformation folks are going to continue to use the JH as a proof of thier studs field prowess, maybe they should mean something a little more, wouldnt that be doing the breed a favor?

P.S. it should be noted that I watched an entire Junior series this weekend past, maybe I am just a smidge sensitive. :shock:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
I think steadiness should be reintroduced into the JH game. Then gun-handling is a no-brainer, and we could legitimately put walkups back into the Junior.

Actually, obedience and quality marks are BOTH written into the regulations as they are. It's just a matter of getting judges to heed the standard. I've never viewed a well-designed Junior test as a glorified puppy stake. I've seen some that were, but they were not good Junior stakes. Chances are, those same judges put together poor, overly-technical or tricky Masters when they judge that stake.

I voted "more obedience". There was some excellent dog work in the Junior I attended this past weekend. This was largely because the dogs were well-behaved on line, so were better able to focus on the marks.

Lisa
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
I voted for meatier marks and obedience but I'm really concerned by the number of people that want a JH to be an OB event and leave the marks as simple as possible.

Does that promote the type of dog you want to represent retrievers? Not for me, I would personally like to see the perfect obedience dog that walks out to marks and has to be encouraged all the way by the handler to be failed. If there is no desire or training DQ and go on. Test or judge for the dogs you want to represent the breed because that is what you will end up with. That's what the British did....... :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,234 Posts
SamLab1 said:
I voted for meatier marks and obedience but I'm really concerned by the number of people that want a JH to be an OB event and leave the marks as simple as possible.
"Leave them as simple as possible?" You believe that there are no meat at all on JH marks? Not where we run.

I say leave them the way they are. Not with "no factors" but with only "a few factors."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Every test and judge is different, the comments are only generalizations. I'm just trying to say our main goal is to produce retrievers not OB dogs.

At the last Judges seminar I attended Milton said a JH should be able to run any MH mark as a single except for the cheaty stuff. I agreed with him. What do you think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,252 Posts
I agree steadiness should be judged. I wouldn't be against still allowing the dog to come to the line on lead, but think the ones that come in on their back legs with eyes bulging and gagging because they are pulling so hard ought to be DQ. Most where we are seem to be fair marking tests of a young dog. But gun safety with a pulling dog on the lead is a joke--it's harder to handle a gun with the dog on lead anyway so if people choose to run on lead, they should flunk if the dog is jumping and dragging the handler.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
This is junior HUNTER. By its name it implys that this dog is a hunting dog, allbeit a beginner. You can't hunt holding onto your dog. You generally don't hunt without cover and getting some beefy marks. To mark adequately, steadiness is helpful. I still feel that the JH, at times, is not as challenging as what was really intended. After all, the only thing you are asking for is to pick up a single bird. I'm not saying it needs to be discouraging to new players, but it still needs to be in the context of what you want in a hunting dog that is expected to go on and play at the next levels as well. We need to bury the unwritten law that a dog needs to complete this by age 1. Heck, the dog probably shouldn't or hasn't even had its first real hunting season at that age yet. So how can it be called a HUNTER? Bean
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,140 Posts
I like steadiness in a dog. I love style in a dog. Marking is also important.

The JH is the introduction many have to field sports for dogs. Don't make it too difficult. But don't let plodding dogs stumble on birds and get a ribbon.

When we start with inexperienced and/or young dogs we first want that style and desire don't we? I know most dogs can be controlled at the line. I want to see dogs that want the bird and know how and where to find them with style.

Steadiness is important down the road and many JH dogs exhibit it which is great, but let the trainers/handlers concentrate on style and marking at first, especially the inexperienced ones.

Conformation dogs will always be around, so lets try to get some of them hooked on a great sport. The JH is not the be all end all. Anyone who is really trying to improve the breed will not look for a JH title to breed to for the best quality field pups. At the very least, the JH title shows that the dog-young or old, veteran or novice trainer, field stock or show dog has attempted and passed a MINIMUM level of proficiency in the field. Not all dogs or owners have this. We've all seen dogs and people turn their noses at the chance to pick up birds in the field.

If anything needs changing, it's the huge jump from the JH to the SH.
Singles, unsteady, no honor no blinds, no guns, etc. Huge jump to SH. That's why I personally don't run SH's and never will unless I have an issue with a steadiness issue with a dog since you can have a controlled break in the SH and keep playing.

Maybe the AKC needs a stake like UKC-intermediate with super simple blinds if any.

John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,234 Posts
SamLab1 said:
At the last Judges seminar I attended Milton said a JH should be able to run any MH mark as a single except for the cheaty stuff. I agreed with him. What do you think?
At first I agreed, but now I am no so sure.

Is the only marking factor we are going to make any different between the levels is the number of marks? I don't think so. It seems to me that the level of difficulty of the marks should also change between levels. :?

Junior marks should in no way be "gimmes" (simple as can be). But it seems unreasonable to me to ask a Junior dog to do Master marks, be it only one at a time. Just as I think it is unreasonable to try and judge Master dogs doing multiple Junior-level marks.

I guess I disagree. :?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,166 Posts
I'm just trying to say our main goal is to produce retrievers not OB dogs.
I rather doubt that HT will turn out obedience dogs. Requiring more line manners as already written into the standard does not detract from retrieving ability. It enhances it. Ever been to a field trial? I rest my case.

Lisa
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,140 Posts
LVL

I think SAMLAB was trying to say "it's a journey". Sure an obedient dog is always desireable all things equal, but to most that really play this game ( not the OB and conformation people that just visit us briefly) the JH is just a starting point. To many that run FTs the starting point is often the puppy stake at sanctioned or club picnic trials. To my knowledge, they don't need to be steady.


John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,040 Posts
I didn't vote because I haven't seen a junior test in quite a while.

I have seen many, many Master tests. I can say that there aren't very many "master" marks that I would Not expect a junior dog to be able to do as a single.

If the dog has desire and can mark, from junior to senior to master is just a matter of training. I would much rather see new people building a young dog's retrieving desire than working on taking it out with obedience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,228 Posts
Lisa Van Loo said:
we could legitimately put walkups back into the Junior.
Lisa
Although I agree with some of LVL statements, I would be very unhappy entering a young dog in either a walkup OR an unrestrained junior stake. What a way to start out the dog's career with the opportunity to break! I agree with more obedience (so that there are not emergency room visits for dislocated shoulders etc), but I surely do not want to "test" the young dog on steadiness in a hunt test situation.

As far as those comments about the junior stake reflecting a hunting dog abilities (it may) but I believe that all tests whether AKC. UKC, or Nahra actually reflect dog training and testing not hunting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,228 Posts
What unwritten 1 year law???

Apparently , I have missed out on that rule :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
849 Posts
One simple question:
What is the reason for testing a dog at such an early stage of its development.
All I want to see is what God gave the animal, I don't care how much training it has had. But it should demonstrate that it is "trainable"
Is it a dog that I would bother training, or one that should go to a pet home is the real question IMHO

By all means lets expect Master level work out of 6mo puppies,,, think someone got a screw loose :roll:

tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Just a few points of clarification. I feel it is a popular belief that JH title should be achieved by age 1. I didn't say I agreed, just that's my perception. We are talking about an entry level dog for HT. The entry level for FT is a Derby with 300yd plus marks, doubles to boot, and the dog has to be steady. Is it such a foreign concept to expect HT dogs to begin with single marks at less than 100 yards, and expect a reasonable degree of steadiness (with light restraint)? To me the only difference in the marks at this level would be to avoid cheating temptations within reason, probably by avoiding long runs to water before entering, and acute angle entries. Bean
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,234 Posts
RE: 1 year rule

Somebody once said when you stamp people (or dogs?) out of dough with a cookie-cutter, what do you do with all the left-over dough?

My wife's dog had pano for the first year of his life, and couldn't do serious field work until he was almost two.

For the first two years of her life, my current bitch had a nasty habit of coming in season twice a year -- IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SPRING AND FALL HT CIRCUITS! :shock: :roll:

A friend of our's dog had a torn ACL and had to stay off it for a year. He couldn't finish his FC and AFC until he was six.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top