[Lisa Van Loo]

The term "dumbed-down" has been applied to the Qual in various contexts. What would you consider a "dumbed-down" Qual?

Lisa

 

[Shayne Mehringer]

Good judges are going to set up good tests, regardless of the above. You may do something different based on number of entries when you have more or less time. But a long or short test (time wise) is not necessarily a reflection of it's difficulty.

Shayne

 

[shootem]

Looks like I voted in the majority, boy does that surprise me!!!

 

[Ken Newcomb]

I have only watched a few FT and never participated <--- My disclaimer

It would appear to me that regardless of entry size that the winner is still probably deserving of the win.

I realize that a larger field would make it tougher to get there, may affect the lower places or jams but the winner still has to be an above average FT dog.

 

[Lisa Van Loo]

Let's look at the question another way.

Suppose you are looking for a puppy, or a stud dog. On the pedigree are listed some dogs as QAA or *** or whatever shorthand the breeder uses. You see one or two that got QAA under one of the conditions listed in the poll.

At what point do you say to yourself "Sure, Dog X is QAA, but..."

For me, it is the super-small Q. I know a couple of dogs in my breed that gained QAA in trials of 12 or 13 entries. They never did accomplish anything in larger Quals, or in AA stakes. Yet they can honestly say they are QAA and "beat all the Labs".

Lisa

 

[Gerard Rozas]

Have judged 6 dog Qs and 65 dog Qs. Big difference.

You are always trying to blend pushing the dogs with being a nice guy in the minors. It is kinda of a art - seeing who is there - how many - what you have to work with. This way you get a gut feel on what to start with and learn from that.

6 dogs - I tried like hell to have everyone back to the watermarks - standup doubles both land and water. Still had one "No Here" as I recall.
But have done a double in a 50+ dog Q. I think Shayne and Mark will remember that one. So there is no fast rule. I for one try to let as many dogs play for as long as possible in the minors if time permits.

 

[achiro]

I know a couple of dogs in my breed that...
Lisa

And which breed would that be now? :lol:

 

[achiro]

Have judged 6 dog Qs and 65 dog Qs. Big difference.

You are always trying to blend pushing the dogs with being a nice guy in the minors. It is kinda of a art - seeing who is there - how many - what you have to work with. This way you get a gut feel on what to start with and learn from that.

6 dogs - I tried like hell to have everyone back to the watermarks - standup doubles both land and water. Still had one "No Here" as I recall.
But have done a double in a 50+ dog Q. I think Shayne and Mark will remember that one. So there is no fast rule. I for one try to let as many dogs play for as long as possible in the minors if time permits.

Doesn't the judge have the option of not giving awards? Could you set up a fair test and if the dogs don't do it, NOT give placements?

 

[Lisa Van Loo]

And which breed would that be now?

Not the breed that leaves black spots in front of my eyes.

Lisa

 

[Gerard Rozas]

achiro wrote:

Doesn't the judge have the option of not giving awards?

Yes they do. But why do that in a game that everyone is supposed to be doing for fun? From Sec 13 in the Supplement to the Standard:

Judges should be reminded of Section 41 in the "Standard" wherein they are encouraged to make a "Judge's Award of Merit" to those dogs which have completed all series, and which show evidence of being well trained and thoroughly qualified retrievers. However, in stakes where a Judge's Award of Merit qualifies a dog for a Limited or Special All-Age stake and, thus, makes him a starter eligible to enter future stakes carrying championship points, such awards should not be given unless the dog's work merits this recognition.

Sec 41 from the Standard:

42. The awarding of a Judges' Award of Merit to dogs which have passed every required test in a stake and have shown themselves to be well trained and qualified retrievers, should be encouraged.

 

[meleagris]

To answer Lisa's question about breeding:

I personally would want to know how the dog has fared in AA competition as well. One qualifying win or second no matter how big the field isn't enough info for me to make a decision. For me, a dog won a 10 dog qual but has placed in AA competition would be chosen over a qual winner of a 70 dog field but no AA placements.

JMHO

John
________
Wendie 99

 

[Shayne Mehringer]

To answer Lisa's question about breeding:

I personally would want to know how the dog has fared in AA competition as well. One qualifying win or second no matter how big the field isn't enough info for me to make a decision. For me, a dog won a 10 dog qual but has placed in AA competition would be chosen over a qual winner of a 70 dog field but no AA placements.

JMHO

John

What about Dog "A" JAMing a 25 dog Alaska AM vs. Dog "B" Winning a 50 dog Texas Qual?

It's all relative.

Shayne

 

[Brian Cockfield]

I'm sure there is such a thing but I've yet to run one or even watch one. I've run some that seemed as hard as the open in the same trial. That's not the norm but I think for the most part the Q is a pretty tough stake these days.

 

[meleagris]

OK Shayne you got me!!!!

But that is what I was getting at. A title is just a title (or in the case of QAA a non-title). When you are looking at the merits of a particular dog as stud/mother(trying not to get filtered) a lot more than a title comes into play(at least for me). I personally want to know as much as possible about those parents and even better previous litters from them. The characteristics of a certain dog come into play. Maybe you like a fast dog, maybe smart is what you are looking for, maybe you are looking to avoid a dog with the potential to be vocal. None of this can be told by a title (although much is assumed).

John
________
MORTGAGE LIFE INSURANCE DICUSSION

 

[Shayne Mehringer]

OK Shayne you got me!!!!

But that is what I was getting at. A title is just a title (or in the case of QAA a non-title). When you are looking at the merits of a particular dog as stud/mother(trying not to get filtered) a lot more than a title comes into play(at least for me). I personally want to know as much as possible about those parents and even better previous litters from them. The characteristics of a certain dog come into play. Maybe you like a fast dog, maybe smart is what you are looking for, maybe you are looking to avoid a dog with the potential to be vocal. None of this can be told by a title (although much is assumed).

John

Now THERE is a post!

Shayne

 

[Arturo]

If having a Owner Handler Qual does not dumb-down the Qual.... Then having a Owner Handler Open would not dumb-down the Open. You are knocking out the toughest competition in both.

By making the Qual O/H you would not have the "quality" or "quantity" of dogs. If it is a "specialty" or "less than 20 dogs", you could still have the "quality".

In some trials a pro will win 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th in the Qual(and Open). Others get JAMs. If that pro was not allowed to run then the people that "only"(JAMs are nice) deserved JAMs would have won all placements. That ain't right. It may be right one day but not now. IMHO

 

[Chris Kingrea]

Now you're just trying to get the THE White Knight back on his horse, ain't ya Art.

 

[Arturo]

Now you're just trying to get the THE White Knight back on his horse, ain't ya Art.

NoWay HoeSay!


WAH

 

[Shayne Mehringer]

If having a Owner Handler Qual does not dumb-down the Qual.... Then having a Owner Handler Open would not dumb-down the Open. You are knocking out the toughest competition in both.

By making the Qual O/H you would not have the "quality" or "quantity" of dogs. If it is a "specialty" or "less than 20 dogs", you could still have the "quality".

In some trials a pro will win 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th in the Qual(and Open). Others get JAMs. If that pro was not allowed to run then the people that "only"(JAMs are nice) deserved JAMs would have won all placements. That ain't right. It may be right one day but not now. IMHO

In most trials, that (Blue vs Green) is the difference between a "very good" job on every mark and blind... and a "perfect job" on every mark and blind. I'm ok with very good winning sometimes.

You can set up anything - and if you throw enough dogs at it, someone is going to hammer it. If you don't have enough dogs that someone hammers it... the one that does a the best job on it wins. Since what it takes to win is relative - so is everything else.

"Sometimes par is good enough to win." Tin Cup.

I could make the same argument that says "if Farmer wasn't running YOUR Open, your ribbon isn't legit." Because if he was there... chances are he would have stole some of your colors. No matter how many dogs ran.

Shayne

 

[Lisa Van Loo]

Then having a Owner Handler Open would not dumb-down the Open. You are knocking out the toughest competition in both.

This already exists. It's called an Am! :lol:

Even O/H Ams are populated by those who can wipe the field with all of us on any average day. I rather doubt they are considered "dumbed-down" Opens by anyone.

Lisa - seen some O/H Ams that made my hair stand on end