Joined
·
301 Posts
All right folks. Let see the opinions of those here in regard to the fellow from the PNW idea that judges should have 1 placement for each judging assignment at each stake level.
Do you Agree with M Sundstrom's 1:1 ratio for judging
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
G
Guest
·how about all the RJ's and Jam's recvd in all age stakes ? they are important as well.
also, how many dogs did it take to get a good one ? how many does that person go thru to get the ones that are placing ?
there is a lot more to making a person look good than whats actually documented.
i have run under judges that have only won ONE open in 20 years. it was was one of the best trials i have ever run, great tests, fair callbacks and impartial placements.
and not all field trialers are hard core competitors that washout dogs easily just for that blue ribbon. we all want to win or we wouldnt be doing this but there is sometimes more to consider.
what about the person that keeps their dog, loves their dog and runs their dog even though its not the best dog, knowing one day this dog will be gone. a new one will come along that is much more talented but in the meantime this person will enjoy the one they have.
are they less qualified to judge because that dog does not place enough times to warrant the handler some "qualifying points"?????
point for point criteria is ridiculous.
also, how many dogs did it take to get a good one ? how many does that person go thru to get the ones that are placing ?
there is a lot more to making a person look good than whats actually documented.
i have run under judges that have only won ONE open in 20 years. it was was one of the best trials i have ever run, great tests, fair callbacks and impartial placements.
and not all field trialers are hard core competitors that washout dogs easily just for that blue ribbon. we all want to win or we wouldnt be doing this but there is sometimes more to consider.
what about the person that keeps their dog, loves their dog and runs their dog even though its not the best dog, knowing one day this dog will be gone. a new one will come along that is much more talented but in the meantime this person will enjoy the one they have.
are they less qualified to judge because that dog does not place enough times to warrant the handler some "qualifying points"?????
point for point criteria is ridiculous.
Joined
·
301 Posts
Well I don't think the numbers are large enough to be statistically significant, but I think that a trend is starting to emerge. :wink:
Joined
·
768 Posts
Nooooo!!! If anything, it should be the experience of participating in the All Age stakes, not how well you did! A person can understand how trials work without placing to be able to judge for god's sake. Next thing you know he'll say only people with titled dogs should judge! Judges have to start somewhere besides the minors. Isn't that why you put new folks with 8 pointed judges? A person who trains and runs his or her dog consistently should be prerequisite enough. if the club invites that person. Isn't this why clubs have judges committees? Hard enough to get folks to judge without this......sour grapes seems like.
LM
LM
Joined
·
6,607 Posts
Do I believe that judging and places should be allocated on a 1:1 basis? No
However, if I were inclined to engage in some sort of data analysis, placements (and Jams) in All Age Stakes is something I might consider - together with a variety of other factors - in determining whether I wanted to run under a specific individual or recruit that individual to judge for my club.
An observant person who completes a number of stakes is exposed to a wide variety of tests and if diligent, develops a sense of what works (from both a judging and a mechanical perspective) and what does not.
However, in deciding who to run under and who not to run under, I rely primarily on two things:
1) If I have run under them in the past .... my own experience
2) If I have not run under them in the past .... the experience of either pros I know like Eckett, Farmer, or Rorem ... or old time Field Trialers like John Goettl
I don't think I would take the analysis much further in the real world
However, if I were inclined to engage in some sort of data analysis, placements (and Jams) in All Age Stakes is something I might consider - together with a variety of other factors - in determining whether I wanted to run under a specific individual or recruit that individual to judge for my club.
An observant person who completes a number of stakes is exposed to a wide variety of tests and if diligent, develops a sense of what works (from both a judging and a mechanical perspective) and what does not.
However, in deciding who to run under and who not to run under, I rely primarily on two things:
1) If I have run under them in the past .... my own experience
2) If I have not run under them in the past .... the experience of either pros I know like Eckett, Farmer, or Rorem ... or old time Field Trialers like John Goettl
I don't think I would take the analysis much further in the real world
Joined
·
6,607 Posts
Among the things that would factor in my decision are:K G said:
1) Do I know the judges personally, that is, what are they like as competitors
2) How close is the trial to home
3) How good are the grounds
4) How does the trial fit into my overall schedule (when the season is in full swing, I like to run 2 on, 1 off)
Joined
·
5,315 Posts
Does anyone know where, in what archives, the historical data that he posted on that site is located?
john
john
Joined
·
947 Posts
How many judges would this take OUT of the judges pool and what affect would it have on the FT game? I'd like to see the stats on that.
fp
fp
Joined
·
5,356 Posts
It would take out far too many that are good judges, and would leave a few alone that probably should just concentrate on running dogs......IMHO, of course.
I made a phone call to my "former employer" yesterday and asked that very question. I can tell you where it's not coming from..... :wink: I also found some more errors in the judge's points. Sorta makes you wonder what sort of errors could be found in the all-age handling "points" as well, especially if all the data is being collected by hand. :shock:
I think I'm gonna take the tack that was suggested elsewhere. Unless we can reasonably expect to see correct information information on all categories for handling and judging (and even then, it would be best suited for the retriever version of "Trivial Pursuit"), it's just a visible representation of the sourest of grapes. Besides, the more we "hit" the site, the more the proprietor is going to think he has support.
Le caveat emptor regards,
kg
Joined
·
301 Posts
Hopefully this poll will provide him some feedback in that regard.
Joined
·
301 Posts
I don't know him from Adam so can't really say one way or the other on either account, but most computer literate FTers are aware of this site. If he doesn't look at it himself someone will make him aware of the lack of support his ideas are generating.
G
Guest
·nice thought but he has been approached from all angles, all with no luck.
he IS as ridiculous as his proposals and his inaccuracies are just a reflection of his viewpoint.
he IS as ridiculous as his proposals and his inaccuracies are just a reflection of his viewpoint.
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
