RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,931 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Be patient with me folks. I ran dogs with a bunch of friends 30 years ago when FT's were all there was. I am not a hunter. Just somebody that wants to do dogs again.

So I've been to a bunch of HT's now, over the last couple of 3 years, and we've recently graduated to Master tests. There is just no comparison between FT and HT marking. When I see my own dog quarter back and forth and work the wind on a mark, I cringe just a little bit. The pro who's been training her says... A) she's going to get better at this (and she is... she's making big strides) and B) some "hunting" is OK in "Hunt Tests". I'm just uncomfortable with that. Maybe if I were a hunter I'd see it with different eyes.

Anyhow, In HT marks, is the score a simple inverse relationship with regard to time and territory the dog uses? (This is how I imagine the reasoning goes in FT judging.) Or do HT judges want to see the dog establish a hunt and persevere until they find the bird? I've read the rule book, but I'm asking what judges do "for real".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
266 Posts
The big difference here is a competition vs a pass fail standard. If the dog goes direct to the area of the fall and establishes a tight hunt in the aof it does not make any difference how long it takes to retrieve the bird. Now keep in mind I said a tight hunt which depends on which mark (first, second, third) cover and distance. How can you fault a dog if on a water mark the bird is soaked and floats low or just below the surface. or lands in a hole that the dog has to step on the bird to find.

Don't get me wrong a good marking dog is a nice thing to watch but I will take the dog that can dig a bird out every time since I hunt my dogs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,931 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I know the judges gave us a good score once when the memory bird got caught in a current and swept way far down the slew. They judged my dog to where the bird first hit the water, and when (after a big swim and some big casts) she came up with it everyone gave her a big hand.

Basically what you're saying gives me some comfort. My dog will not quit until she comes up with the bird. If she had a last name it would be "indefatigable".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,375 Posts
Judges in HT or FT will judge if the dog MARKED the birds. They don't have to pin them but indicate they have demonstrated some idea of where they are. It's all relative, but if your dog hunts the go bird, large hunt on #2, and larger hunt on #3 expect not to be called back in HT. AKC- Marking is of primary importance. These aren't upland tests. If your dog is 40 yards out of the area and works his nose to the fall, he didn't mark it. In most cases if he does that on two of the three marks you will get dropped. Establishing a hunt in the general area and working it out is find. Hunting 50 yards down wind and working back to the bird will get you dropped.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,355 Posts
I have always believed the DEFINITION of a mark was:

A dog that goes DIRECTLY to the AOF, and establishes a HUNT.

Once that happens, the marking portion of that particular mark is over. The dog MARKED


The SIZE of the AOF changes in proportion to what number bird it is in the triple, and the Factors involved.
Gooser
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Judges in HT or FT will judge if the dog MARKED the birds. They don't have to pin them but indicate they have demonstrated some idea of where they are. It's all relative, but if your dog hunts the go bird, large hunt on #2, and larger hunt on #3 expect not to be called back in HT. AKC- Marking is of primary importance. These aren't upland tests. If your dog is 40 yards out of the area and works his nose to the fall, he didn't mark it. In most cases if he does that on two of the three marks you will get dropped. Establishing a hunt in the general area and working it out is find. Hunting 50 yards down wind and working back to the bird will get you dropped.
This!

Remember, the object of the judging in FTs is to get some "seperation" between performances. That is NOT and should NOT be in the mind of HT judges.

Bert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,355 Posts
I have talked with Ted quite a bit about this Marking, and AOF stuff.

He posted this responce once about questions I was asking about "Proceeding directly to AOF."

He quotes the FT rule bokk quite a bit..

BUT<<<

The more I an learning,, the more I think the following can be applied to ALL venues in the retrieving dog games.

I re read this quite often.. It makes PERFECT sense to me now..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Shih
First, you need to consider what Area of Fall means

SUPPLEMENT

What precisely constitutes the "area of the 'fall' " defies accurate definition; yet, at the outset of every test, each Judge must arbitrarily define its hypothetical boundaries for himself, and for each bird in that test, so that he can judge whether dogs have remained within his own concept of "area of the 'fall,"' as well as how far they have wandered away from "the area" and how much cover they have disturbed unnecessarily. In determining these arbitrary and hypothetical boundaries of the "area of the 'fall,"' due considerations should be given to various factors:

(1) the type, the height and the uniformity of the cover,
(2) light conditions,
(3) direction of the prevailing wind and its intensity,
(4) length of the various falls,
(5) the speed of individual dogs,
(6) whether there is a change in cover (as from stubble to plowed ground, or to ripe alfalfa, or to machine-picked corn, etc.) or whether the "fall" is beyond a hedge, across a road, or over a ditch, etc., and, finally, and most important,
(7) whether one is establishing the "area of the 'fall"' for a single, or for the first bird a dog goes for, in multiple retrieves, or for the second or the third bird, since each of these should differ from the others.

In general, the "area of the 'fall"' for a single should be relatively small; the area for a first retrieve in a "double" should be smaller than for the second bird, and both of these should be larger in a "triple," and larger still for the third bird in it. Also, "the area" for short retrieves should certainly be smaller than for longer retrieves. Since there are so many conditions and variables to be taken into consideration, it is obvious that each Judge, and for every series, must attempt to define for himself a hypothetical "area of the 'fall"' for each bird, and then judge the dogs accordingly. However, the penalties inflicted should vary in their severity, depending on the distance which individual dogs wander out of the area, the frequency of such wanderings, the number of birds mis-marked in a given test, and by the amount of cover disturbed in these meanderings.



Mike

Start with the Rule Book

Ted


Soooo,, From the above,,,, I think AOF, and size of hunts can and does vary depending on circumstances.. or maybe ,, it SHOULD

Please note also,,the Ted included SPEED of the dog as a factor in determining size of AOF.

It only makes sense then,, if your boundry of the AOF has been determined to be quite large,, then I assume,, a hunt could be proportionate to the larger area..

Gooser
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,429 Posts
Good for you, Mike

Always nice to start with the Rule Book

Ted
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,314 Posts
You left out the part about the quick handle being preferable to a big hunt;)

john
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,931 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
OK...

What does the speed of the dog have to do with the amount of "hunt" on a mark? Are you saying that high rollers are allowed to over-run the mark, but pokey dogs have to get straight there and are only allowed a brief hunt?

Doesn't seem right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,355 Posts
Mr Fallon

If your read what my belief is the definition of what constitutes a mark,, then by the time the handler has decided to "Handle,, its prolly not an issue with its marking,,,, The dog may have gone directly,, with purpose,, to the AOF,, and established a hunt...... ( the dog marked) but for what ever reason, cant come up with the bird..

That dog has to bring the bird back to pass,, so NOW,, its a RETRIEVING issue... NOT MARKING ( that has already been established).... Handle to the bird,, get yer arse back in here..

Gooser
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,355 Posts
OK...

What does the speed of the dog have to do with the amount of "hunt" on a mark? Are you saying that high rollers are allowed to over-run the mark, but pokey dogs have to get straight there and are only allowed a brief hunt?

Doesn't seem right.
No,, BUT,,,:p

I think it only fair to consider that the amount of area a fast dog covers before decisions are made has to be taken into account...

A slower deliberate dog Tends to have smaller hunt areas than Fast dogs Natually..
But the key,,, In my opinion,, is if the dog ,either fast or slow, is HUNTING in MY predetermined AOF.. SO,, before I set the test up,, Me and my co judge,, have taken into consideration a fast dog, and a slower dog, to help us quantify the size of our Areas of fall, along WITH the other considerations,,

Its a courtesy thing with the speed. IMHO

Gooser

Gooser
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,355 Posts
Recieved P.M.s

Just to clarify..

I am NOT a judge.

I was hypotheticalistically dreamin, and expressin my opinion..

Member the universal rule... about Gooser universally...

:razz:
Gooser
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,658 Posts
Just an observation from watching both FT and HT.... different venues and different priorities.

In a FT if the dog takes the straight line, and he's able to get to the marks through all the technics and factors associated with the line, the birds are usually laying in an open space, where the dog can see them so the dog shouldn't have to hunt. They wear white, run off elevated hills, and do a lot to ensure the dog sees the mark, and exactly where the mark lands. They want the marking, the memory, the technics and the straight line to said mark, they don't want them to have to actively hunt at the end.

Where-as in HTs, They want them to have to hunt, and set up situations where even an excellent marking dog, who takes the line, will have to put on a hunt at the end to find the bird. They wear camo, hide the gun stations, throw birds into the deepest darkest cover, basically do everything they can to confuse where the mark came from and where it has actually landed. They want the marking, the memory, and the ability to hunt intelligently and come up with the bird at the end.
 
G

·
Just an observation from watching both FT and HT.... different venues and different priorities.

In a FT if the dog takes the straight line, and he's able to get to the marks through all the technics and factors associated with the line, the birds are usually laying in an open space, where the dog can see them so the dog shouldn't have to hunt. They wear white, run off elevated hills, and do a lot to ensure the dog sees the mark, and exactly where the mark lands. They want the marking, the memory, the technics and the straight line to said mark, they don't want them to have to actively hunt at the end.

Where-as in HTs, They want them to have to hunt, and set up situations where even an excellent marking dog, who takes the line, will have to put on a hunt at the end to find the bird. They wear camo, hide the gun stations, throw birds into the deepest darkest cover, basically do everything they can to confuse where the mark came from and where it has actually landed. They want the marking, the memory, and the ability to hunt intelligently and come up with the bird at the end.
First of all, I am not familiar with the term "technics". Second of all, if you think a FT trial dog is not expected to hunt up a bird, you are like crazy insane. I know redundant. So sue me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,442 Posts
Just an observation from watching both FT and HT.... different venues and different priorities.

In a FT if the dog takes the straight line, and he's able to get to the marks through all the technics and factors associated with the line, the birds are usually laying in an open space, where the dog can see them so the dog shouldn't have to hunt. They wear white, run off elevated hills, and do a lot to ensure the dog sees the mark, and exactly where the mark lands. They want the marking, the memory, the technics and the straight line to said mark, they don't want them to have to actively hunt at the end.

Where-as in HTs, They want them to have to hunt, and set up situations where even an excellent marking dog, who takes the line, will have to put on a hunt at the end to find the bird. They wear camo, hide the gun stations, throw birds into the deepest darkest cover, basically do everything they can to confuse where the mark came from and where it has actually landed. They want the marking, the memory, and the ability to hunt intelligently and come up with the bird at the end.
Ummm not from my experience as a handler, judge and flier shooter! Wished that was the case!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,395 Posts
Just an observation from watching both FT and HT.... different venues and different priorities.

In a FT if the dog takes the straight line, and he's able to get to the marks through all the technics and factors associated with the line, the birds are usually laying in an open space, where the dog can see them so the dog shouldn't have to hunt. They wear white, run off elevated hills, and do a lot to ensure the dog sees the mark, and exactly where the mark lands. They want the marking, the memory, the technics and the straight line to said mark, they don't want them to have to actively hunt at the end.

Where-as in HTs, They want them to have to hunt, and set up situations where even an excellent marking dog, who takes the line, will have to put on a hunt at the end to find the bird. They wear camo, hide the gun stations, throw birds into the deepest darkest cover, basically do everything they can to confuse where the mark came from and where it has actually landed. They want the marking, the memory, and the ability to hunt intelligently and come up with the bird at the end.
While I like what you said about a HT, I have to dissagree with the FT analogy.

In either, a well placed mark should not be able to be lined or front footed. So, a dog that is smart, uses the wind and puts on a tight hunt will most times come out on top.

Find my crippled Rooster regards
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,302 Posts
Just an observation from watching both FT and HT.... different venues and different priorities.

In a FT if the dog takes the straight line, and he's able to get to the marks through all the technics and factors associated with the line, the birds are usually laying in an open space, where the dog can see them so the dog shouldn't have to hunt. They wear white, run off elevated hills, and do a lot to ensure the dog sees the mark, and exactly where the mark lands. They want the marking, the memory, the technics and the straight line to said mark, they don't want them to have to actively hunt at the end.

Where-as in HTs, They want them to have to hunt, and set up situations where even an excellent marking dog, who takes the line, will have to put on a hunt at the end to find the bird. They wear camo, hide the gun stations, throw birds into the deepest darkest cover, basically do everything they can to confuse where the mark came from and where it has actually landed. They want the marking, the memory, and the ability to hunt intelligently and come up with the bird at the end.
Seems to me FT's use a LOT of retired guns, in layout blinds and using natural cover...at distances of 300 - 400 yds vs. 100 yds with holding blinds often sitting out in the open where experienced dogs pick them all out by the time they sit on the line in hunt tests.

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,252 Posts
Dennis Voigt wrote an article in Retrievers ONLINE a few issuesback about his observations of the HRC Grand held in Ontario. In it, he noted some differences in FTs and the Grand with regard to hunt. Oneof those differences was that the Grand judges did not want to see an extended hunt, even if in the AOF. The judges would ask the handler to put the dog on the bird.

My own observations in limited running of FTs and HTs is that I've seen more and bigger hunts in FTs than in HTs. Many times you'll see a handler at a FT let a dog put on a BAH and not blow the whistle. IMO, this is because more often than not, a handle in the first series of a FT gets you an early exit. Might as well let the dog roam and hope the judge calls back the dogs with the BAHs. Also, I've had a self proclaimed "tough" Master judge tell me that he will not call back a dog if the handler lets him hunt all over the field. Acted kind of offended that a handler would allow the dog to hunt all over creation. :)

With regard to the original question of how much hunt is "OK", well it depends. In a FT it is less hunt than the dogs that got dropped. In a HT, I am of the opinion that the rule book (at least the AKC book) is very clear with regard to judges needing to establish what in their mind is the AOF for each mark. Once that is done, the judge will have to then decide whether the dog disturbed too much cover. So how much hunt in a HT is ok, in my mind, is more a matter of area than of time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,632 Posts
I want to see the dog hunt the area of the fall ( if necessary ) ...not a quick handle as in the HRC game...If the dog is out of the area why haven't you handled the dog to the fall..? I give the same results for a big out of the area hunt and then a stumble on the bird as I do a handle when the dog didn't mark the fall area...not good...Steve S
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top