[Keith Farmer]

"In any stake other than an All-Age stake, if a dog makes a slight break and is brought immediately under control, the dog need not be eliminated, but shall be penalized for unsteadiness."


The wording "slight break" is rather vague. In most cases the interpretation is "if the dog leaves on his own and has to be stopped it is not a controlled break"...but is that the intent of the rule here?

For example: Triple setup in a Q with a flyer as go-bird. Flyer has to be shot at multiple times while the hen is quacking away. Running dog has all it can take and breaks. Handler stops the dog immediately and the dog promptly returns to heel. Judge releases dog...

Does the dog get disqualified from continuing based upon the rules?


If yes then please give justification based solely upon the rules...




.

 

[FOM]

FT judging is subjective and it really does depend on the rest of the field and how they preformed, also how was the dog's work? Too many factors to say yes or no as to whether or not to carry the dog based solely on a controlled break.

 

[Keith Farmer]

I understand the variables...

In the example case let's say the dog had better marks than perhaps any other dog in the field. Based solely upon the incident of a controlled break as defined so vaguely in the rules should a dog be dropped in a Q or derby? If yes then explain based upon the rules.



.

 

[Keith Farmer]

And remember...the dog was released by the judges after demonstrating he was under control. The handler in the example was not asked to pick up the dog.


.

 

[Zman1001]

From my understanding, in the Q, and Derby, a controlled break is allowed, and should be judged accordingly (lower in trainability, etc). I think it would be just one more thing to add to the overall when considering a drop and / or placements, however, it is not an eliminating offense in the Q or Derby.

 

[Duckquilizer]

Gray spot...judges descretion. How much is enough of anything? Could be, might be, maybe...

 

[Keith Farmer]

I understand it is gray...it is that way because the rule says "slight break"...to some a break is a break.

The points to consider, again, are:

1) The example dog is immediately controlled

2) The example dog is then released to attempt the test by the judges

No faults are incurred by the running dog during the test. On what grounds then do you as a judge drop the dog that was previously allowed to run the test?


.

 

[captainjack]

And remember...the dog was released by the judges after demonstrating he was under control. The handler in the example was not asked to pick up the dog.


.

Not in a position to look it up in the rules, but there was a discussion about breaks s while ago and it is my understanding that once the dog's # is called, by rule there can be no break, controlled or otherwise. The dog is free to retrieve.

 

[Keith Farmer]

That is a different scenario Glen. The dog in the example had a controlled break, was immediately stopped and brought under control. The judges THEN release the dog...

In your scenario I understand if the dog is released he is released...

.

 

[FOM]

Also, in the minor stakes, where “controlled’’ breaks are permissible, the Judges should reach an agreement about the degree they will consider a “controlled’’ break in contrast to one which will eliminate the dog from further competition; also, they should be in agreement about the severity of the penalties

A controlled break is a moderate fault in a minor stake.

So the judges must of agreed the severity of the controlled break was enough to eliminate the dog as compared to the work of the others entered.

 

[Zman1001]

On what grounds then do you as a judge drop the dog that was previously allowed to run the test?


.

No grounds, per the rules, but on the grounds that BOTH judges deemed this fault to be large enough that the felt it should be dropped. Although the rules do not deem it an eliminating fault, the judges certainly can.....

 

[DoubleHaul]

I go with the language section 26 that says something to the effect of 'after the Judges have directed that a dog be ordered to retrieve, that dog is entitled to run in and retrieve and shall not be accused of breaking, or penalized for breaking...'

The end mentions that this is even if the judges didn't hear the handler send the dog, so some folks argue that it doesn't apply, but I think it does--the hypo at the end doesn't limit the beginning. If the judges allow you to send the dog, it is a controlled break and then a moderate fault. Obviously, if you nail the marks and have a moderate fault, you can be called back. Depends on whether the other dogs did enough that the moderate fault doesn't give you a chance.

 

[Keith Farmer]

FOM,

The section you reference is there to guide judges in establishing a predetermined standard as evidenced by the future tense tone...which I am aware of and agree with. I do not believe the section is there to give support for after the fact situations.

The point, again, in my example scenario is that the judges released the dog to compete. If such a predetermined standard had been established in the example given would it not be obvious from the action of the judges to release the dog rather than having the dog picked up that the dog had not in fact crossed that "line"?

.

 

[FOM]

Maybe the judges wanted to allow the dog and handler the opportunity to at least get a set of marks - entry fees aren't cheap? Maybe they wanted to see how the dog performed and how it compared to the rest of the field before deciding whether or not the controlled break was enough to drop the dog?

It sounds like sour grapes to me...the dog had a controlled break, the dog was dropped, the judges made a judgmental call....

 

[Keith Farmer]

No grounds, per the rules, but on the grounds that BOTH judges deemed this fault to be large enough that the felt it should be dropped. Although the rules do not deem it an eliminating fault, the judges certainly can....

So the rules really don't matter?

On what grounds would BOTH judges deem a controlled break "large enough" to drop a dog if they in fact released the dog to attempt their test? In every situation I have witnessed a true break the dog is not allowed to attempt the test.


.

 

[Keith Farmer]

It sounds like sour grapes to me.

You are absolutely wrong there. No axe to grind and this is just an example situation.

If I were judging and were faced with the situation I would either drop the dog immediately for an uncontrolled break or view it as a controlled break and release the dog.


.

 

[Keith Farmer]

I go with the language section 26 that says something to the effect of 'after the Judges have directed that a dog be ordered to retrieve, that dog is entitled to run in and retrieve and shall not be accused of breaking, or penalized for breaking...'

The end mentions that this is even if the judges didn't hear the handler send the dog, so some folks argue that it doesn't apply, but I think it does--the hypo at the end doesn't limit the beginning. If the judges allow you to send the dog, it is a controlled break and then a moderate fault. Obviously, if you nail the marks and have a moderate fault, you can be called back. Depends on whether the other dogs did enough that the moderate fault doesn't give you a chance.

Great perspective...

.

 

[Zman1001]

No grounds, per the rules, but on the grounds that BOTH judges deemed this fault to be large enough that the felt it should be dropped. Although the rules do not deem it an eliminating fault, the judges certainly can....

So the rules really don't matter?

On what grounds would BOTH judges deem a controlled break "large enough" to drop a dog if they in fact released the dog to attempt their test? In every situation I have witnessed a true break the dog is not allowed to attempt the test.


.

Well, obviously on the grounds of the hypothetical FT you have outlined......LOL

Keith, you know that in field trials, the judges have the discretion to judge as they deem necessary, and although we do not like it, there is absolutely no rule that states the dog should be dropped, but there also is no rule that states the dog should not be dropped.

Just like if a dog decides to hunt in an area. One set of judges may deem the hunt to be too long, while a completely different set of judges will not deem it too long......

 

[Criquetpas]

No grounds, per the rules, but on the grounds that BOTH judges deemed this fault to be large enough that the felt it should be dropped. Although the rules do not deem it an eliminating fault, the judges certainly can....

So the rules really don't matter?

On what grounds would BOTH judges deem a controlled break "large enough" to drop a dog if they in fact released the dog to attempt their test? In every situation I have witnessed a true break the dog is not allowed to attempt the test.


.

I haved been both, judge and handler with controlled breaks in minor stakes. As a handler have gone from a good placement to a lower placement and even a JAM. As a judge was there an honor? did the call-back bother the honor dog? was it loud here No etc on the call-back? How far did the dog get before it was stopped? Allowing the dog to continue is? example if you are out on a honor do you honor on lead or off-lead , how would one construe this, honor off-lead are you still
in contention? Thats why field trial judging is an art and thats why there are two judges. My thoughts.

 

[John Robinson]

"In any stake other than an All-Age stake, if a dog makes a slight break and is brought immediately under control, the dog need not be eliminated, but shall be penalized for unsteadiness."


The wording "slight break" is rather vague. In most cases the interpretation is "if the dog leaves on his own and has to be stopped it is not a controlled break"...but is that the intent of the rule here?

For example: Triple setup in a Q with a flyer as go-bird. Flyer has to be shot at multiple times while the hen is quacking away. Running dog has all it can take and breaks. Handler stops the dog immediately and the dog promptly returns to heel. Judge releases dog...

Does the dog get disqualified from continuing based upon the rules?


If yes then please give justification based solely upon the rules...




.

This would typically be called a controlled break, and as such is allowed in a Qual. You seem to be asking about how most judges define "slight" as in a slight break. It has been my experience that most judges would call any break that is immeadiately brought under controll a controlled break, regardless of how hard the dog charged off line to retrieve. Slight seems to be one of those subjective terms that is for the most part not considered at all.

John