RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Should hunt test entries be limited?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
There has been a huge number of Master entries for some time. Just looking over the Nashville Hunt Test List. Just wondering how do we address this situation. It's getting where it ain't much fun....lot of work, not mentioning getting birds, bird boys, other help, grounds shrinking to going away altogether, etc. Just wanted to see what others thought. Bean
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,940 Posts
Yes.
AKC approves the the event but it is the individual clubs that are responsible for the event. Clubs need input into the mechanics of their test. Available resources are best known by the club not the AKC. IMHO the AKC could then concern itself more with their performance standards being upheld.
If AKC/HT advisory wishes to be concerned with the number of dogs running they could allow clubs to restrict their entry but remove or reduce the provision for a competing test by another club in that area.

Tim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Tim, you bring up a good point about standards vs. mechanics. My feeling that it is very difficult to put on a quality test which holds true to situations in hunting and then adequately apply the standards and be fair in doing so. Some will say the splits solve that. To a degree the first split did if you have the grounds, but down the each split has larger numbers as well as there being more splits. Then the club is short of grounds as well as help. I think it is a big issue in the quality of the test. Bean
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,074 Posts
well said Tim :!:

If you have never judged a high entry Master level test, well, it's brutal
for everyone!! :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
How about having a Amatuer only hunt test? Wouldnt that reduce the numbers and increase the quality of the tests?
I mean wasnt the hunt test designed for the average joe and not a lot of field trial wannabe, 2nd rate pro's?

:lol: :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,314 Posts
Gary Wayne Abbott I said:
How about having a Amatuer only hunt test? Wouldnt that reduce the numbers and increase the quality of the tests?
I mean wasnt the hunt test designed for the average joe and not a lot of field trial wannabe, 2nd rate pro's?

:lol: :D
GWA,
What makes one an average Joe ?
What is your definition of a FTWB 2nd rate pro?
What I mean to say is what is the cut off between 1st rate and 2nd rate?
Are there also FTWB 2nd rate amateurs ?
Are there 2nd rate amateurs that are not FTWB's.
Last an most importantly .
Who decides who is who and what is what :?:
john
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,134 Posts
Why not require amateur participant help with the test and if pro is running lots of dogs and cant help have a provision where they have to bring a helper or two?
I never have a problem throwing or shooting birds at test....to me it is just part of my obligation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,064 Posts
I voted no on limiting entries. I can remember back in the days when entries could be limited. And too many times I saw where entries were filled before many people even received their premiums. Certain club members entries always made it in, and many times if you weren't with the "in crowd" your entry never made it in. I don't think limiting entries is the answer.

Andy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,197 Posts
I must say that nearly every HT I attend I see pros helping out. I personally shoot, help setup and tear down and move the tests, loan my 7500.00 4 wheeler for the rebirders to use, run test dogs and pickup dogs,...whatever is needed. I also see many of my pro-trainer friends helping.

What I don't see in many cases is the beginner or casual HT'er volunteering for anything. That statement is not a condemnation rather an observance. The reason why I don't see many amateurs helping may be multi-faceted. Possible the amateur may feel intimidated by the whole scenario to jump in and offer help?

The scathing remarks about pros by some so-called "average joes" do not hold water and should be dismissed as trivial dribble...just my .02 :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
john fallon said:
Gary Wayne Abbott I said:
How about having a Amatuer only hunt test? Wouldnt that reduce the numbers and increase the quality of the tests?
I mean wasnt the hunt test designed for the average joe and not a lot of field trial wannabe, 2nd rate pro's?

:lol: :D
GWA,
What makes one an average Joe ?
What is your definition of a FTWB 2nd rate pro?
What I mean to say is what is the cut off between 1st rate and 2nd rate?
Are there also FTWB 2nd rate amateurs ?
Are there 2nd rate amateurs that are not FTWB's.
Last an most importantly .
Who decides who is who and what is what :?:
john

Sorry John, I guess I dont seriously prescribe to my suggestion as previously stated, it was merely a poor attempt to be ironical.
The posted question just reminded me of the Master National issue, and the MN proposed solution. One of the things that struck me about the MN debate, is if there is a segment of folks that feel pro's arent welcome at the MN, wouldnt the same be very true of weekend tests. I further wondered how long it would be before we heard suggestions like the one I made...I just thought maybe it could get the ball rolling.
As far as FTWB 2nd rate pro's, I guess some might accuse me of bieng one of those myself. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,686 Posts
I personally would like to see the AKC give the clubs the option of a having an owner/handler master. Leave it up to the member clubs if they want the pros are not. Our club here in Tulsa dosent have any problem with large entries because we have the grounds and alot of members but it is an incredable amount of work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,282 Posts
We love the pros. The more the better. Their $$$$ spends just as well as anyone elses, and they KNOW when their dog has failed. Far less whining.

Mt. Rushmore Retriever Club of Rapid City, SD, welcomes you all to our test July 10, 11.

UB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
maybe it is getting big enough that we need an open and amateur master's... of course, if you try and do both, that is just more help and judges.
but you could have a AMH and MH..as well as AMN and MN...
I don't know if there are enough amateur's left running to support a stake.. most of the master's I have gone to have 70% pro run dogs or more.
Personally, I would not be against raising the entry fees to hire help and maybe a stiepend to the judges. Big entries are a mess. If you had 30 dogs per stake you could maybe run it in a day.. start the open on a friday like the field trials..
just brainstorming here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,940 Posts
IMHO adding a stake(AMH) could compound the problems that Steve mentioned in the original post, grounds, judges and workers. A fourth stake means more set-ups, grounds,judges,guns, bird boys etc
A Friday start for a Master can help somewhat with grounds and judges since you will usually decrease your entry due to a "work day" start and you don't have to split until 90 dogs vs 60, but Friday help is the most difficult to get(paid or not).

Tim
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top