[HNTFSH]

Not in an effort to diminish personal pain or situation but from a policy perspective on limits, the following are test dates and entry status. I did not carve out MN clubs so we can assume the data is a little slanted. However, not all need to run under MN clubs to title a MH dog.

Tests open for entry through 09/13 show:

14 Masters with limits not full
5 Masters with limits full

The only full tests have 60 dog limits

The open limited tests have 90 or 180 dog limits

Seems to me the issue is the smaller MN club that has grounds or accommodation issues to begin with.

So is the 'policy' the issue?

 

[HNTFSH]

Did you take into account the 4-5 hour max. travel time limit from Iowa (I'm assuming)? I don't have time to look it up.... That's part of the problem when you don't have deep pockets and not doing it for a living. How is the avgerage joe suppose to play the game when it fills up in 50 minutes by approximately 16 people or so. That's a little over a 5 dog/person avg. Or in this case 5 pros with 72 dogs (~14 dogs/pro). That is getting a little carried away and I could forsee a limit to the # of dogs entered per person but of course that will not limit the pro's helpers/workers entering.

It's gonna cost if you want a custom report, by region. I'm just outlining across the entire country what % of Master Limit tests appear to be a problem. I see Kansas area folks might feel hosed.

 

[HNTFSH]

The policy is never the issue. It's the PEOPLE that are the issue.

Entering dogs that you think might be ready and scratching them at the last minute is a real problem created by people who are too selfish to realize they are blocking other people who have dogs that are truly ready, in the name of making a $$ or chasing a $10 master national plate.

No disagreement there!!

 

[HNTFSH]

Exactly, Darrin. Those who actually bothered to read the OP's post and his friend's post seem to be the only ones to get what the problem is. Too many people here on RTF who don't bother to read before they type.

It's not about bashing pros, it's about bashing insider trading no matter who you are.

Is there/what is the rule regarding sharing the finalized date?

 

[HNTFSH]

I'm not sure there can be a rule. Club members would naturally be informed.

That's what I'm thinking. I've not been a HT Secretary and hopefully never am. Just curious about the 'unscrupulous' talk within the thread regarding midnight secret meetings and insider trading. Easier to address situation in separation of fact and fiction.

 

[HNTFSH]

Is there any chance of having the entry system work as a lottery instead of first entered gets the spot in limited entry tests? Allow all entries to be accepted into the draw for a certain time period (say a week for getting your entry into the draw) before having the lottery drawn. There would have to be a 3rd party do the lottery to make it fair though.

Could there be a way for the AKC or a software program on EE do the lottery draw and post those that are entered into a limited entry test? This same software could also draw the order of dogs on the waiting list for replacing any scratches. This would make it fair for Joe Hunter entering his dog and local pros trying to enter multiple dogs...every dog has the same chance of being entered into the test.

The logistics of running a test with 80% of the dogs being run by 2 or 3 people is a different issue on its own.

Just a thought from someone outside looking in....:2c:

If I am a club member throwing birds most of the day I would like to at least have a guarantee of running my dog in my own test. ;-)

 

[HNTFSH]

There's an easy fix to this. Any time a club limits entries, they should put in their premium when it will open for entries. This can easily be done before finalizing the event, so people have a chance to see it.

There's not a rule requiring it, but if they did, it would put the conspiracy talk to rest (maybe...for a second or two...)

I had thought this was discussed as part of the rule when you limit entries, but I may be mistaken, or it may have gotten edited out of the final version.

Good point. Only question is I think some finalization is based on things unpredictable to a specific date. Like listing judges for stakes.

 

[HNTFSH]

It's a good idea in theory but, many people (myself included) really like to enter their local events. And if those happen to be MN clubs with limited entries and you find yourself in a situation like the OP described, it's kind of a slap in the face (and wallet) to find another test that might be an 8 - 10 hr. drive away, MN member or not, just to run your dog, because certain people had insider info. on date/time an event opened that you weren't privy to.

Not suggesting it's not disappointing but doesn't this issue transfer across different regions of the country each year and only at certain times of the test year, like just ahead of the MN in the region?

 

[HNTFSH]

Sorry to disagree!!! Don't blame the pros...it's not their fault!!! Let's fix the system. Are limits the answer? Maybe so...maybe not! Limits are not the solution! Finding a way to include everyone is!!!!

The issue isn't limited entries. You can't make a club grow more grounds or have more workers and volunteers. The issue is the influx of entries ahead of the MN in a particular part of the country each year. Limits allow a club to be more predictable in what they can host. It is, after all, a club that holds a test...not an AKC conglomerate company.

I don't know if abolishing the 200 mile limit on test date conflict would help or not, it might. But that would only work for clubs willing to add an additional test each year, if they could.

The problem is a limited one each year. It's not the clubs, the HT secretary, or the Pro's. It's the spike created by the MN.

Per my earlier post, through the next 2 months 2/3rds of all Master Tests are still wide open from entry.

 

[HNTFSH]

I think you found the cure. If you don't work ,,,,,you don't play. That should cut the field down considerably. And I think because the amatuer dog enthusiest is making the pro work weekends,,,, ,,that should be punishment enough.

Pete

That would also cure the club of any chance of making money on a test.

 

[HNTFSH]

Ah,,which brings us back to the more the merrier concept. Which means AKC should change the rule on 60 entries being a magic number. When the count reaches 60 ,,and the scratches equal 20 the AKC still makes you split. There lies a major problem. I think clubs should have the latitude to make what they get operate smoothly. There are two many rules set in stone that throw sand in the gears when unusual circumstances arise. No different than our government really. Lets make a law mentality. I'm really starting to feel the effects of being a middle age,bald and fat american white guy. (.

Pete

There's definitely work that can be done on scratches. Only was I can see to fix it is change the penalty. As a test chair the last thing I need is a split 10 days before a test date because I'm 3 dogs over 60 or 90, depending on 2 or 3 day event. Either way - the issue is the MN, certain regions, once a year.

 

[HNTFSH]

Saw this all coming when they announced they were going to be limiting entries. Some clubs here in Texas had tests that well over 100 Master entries on a regular basis. All the sudden those same clubs go to 60-90 entries...One of my dogs is now with a field trial pro and my 9 year old master dog is semi-retired hunting and just running ukc stuff when Time permits. But this may have been what the AKC politicians wanted to happen. Too many Master National entries. Also with less tests being run, won't that decrease the number of judges needed?

2 day master tests split at 60 and 3 day tests split at 90. 100 dog entries would mean another test, 2 more judges, workers, grounds, etc.

It's obvious in this thread how many have never chaired a test.

This close to MN in this region - it would be likely club tests would be forced to splits they couldn't possibly accommodate.

 

[HNTFSH]

That is the way our club feels. Would we rather have a single master? Sure, but 60 more dogs at $75/each is an extra $4500 in revenue. Yes it is a lot more work, but the real expenses are not that much. We figure $400 per judge so $800 and another $600-800 for birds and $500 for paid help for that flight. We are looking at about $2100-2400 in "extra" cost and bring in $4500 leaving a nice profit for the club. Win win. The club is happy, members run their dogs, pros run their dogs and all the club members go home worn out. If you are not worn out after hosting a HT you are not doing it right regardless of the number of flights. I know when I go to my clubs test I am going to work my ass off and don't expect to spend much time sitting around the gallery. Much like hosting a party at your home, to are going t do more work than relaxing.
Granted some clubs just don't have the grounds, but like I said if they managed last year what is the difference this year? We have somewhat limited water and sometimes one flight may have to wait for another to finish, but we always get it done in time for everyone to get home Sunday (well one exception, but that was poor time management by the judges, never a good idea to run a series that takes 20 mins per dog n a Sunday afternoon.).

More dogs doesn't always mean higher profit. or profit, per additional. There is a 'right amount' of dogs per grounds, help, judge cost, banquet facility and raffle.

That said - if i was in that region and as a club had the grounds, wanted to put $$ in the bank, and could manage the resources - it is an ideal opportunity for a 3 day double master either allowing a spit or at minimum, 2 90 dog tests. Or a 3 day master allowing splits and a 2 day with a 60 dog limited entry.

 

[HNTFSH]

You're right, never chaired a test, just thrown birds,carried and set up equipment, marshalled and ran some. Clubs managed before the limits and did alright.

I'm sure plenty of club workers not on the HT committee or chairing the test think that.

 

[HNTFSH]

So we have no verification that the tests in question closed in 50 minutes, but sometime between 0830 and 1700 your time zone?
As to "sitting in front of a computer" all day every day, out east here we have these things called "smart-phones" and "i-pads" and such. Makes it easy to stay in contact with important stuff. And if a handler - pro or not - has all of his/her dogs listed on EE it's 1 click per dog to enter. So entering 10 dogs might take a second longer than a single dog.
Sorry you did not get to enter the test you wanted to but not every chance occurrence is the result of some nefarious conspiracy. Maybe next time you could volunteer to be HT Sec'y. Then you'd have no trouble entering on time.

It is easier to believe the club got caught off-guard than the club Secretary thought screwing its own members for two pro trucks was a good idea.

 

[HNTFSH]

Agreed Zman.

Am I right or wrong in thinking that AKC requires clubs, if holding a HT, to include ALL stakes? Is there a limit to the number of events held in a calendar year?

It sure smells like an entrepreneurial club if able/willing to hold a Master-only event, outside of 'normal events' would make some nice $$ and help resolve the issue in MN regions. As a club member - I'd work a Master only 'extra event' not only for revenue but to also take heat off my club tests serving a larger audience.

 

[HNTFSH]

Then have a double jr & sr - you've already paid for the judges..........we've always had margin on a double jr/sr with as few as 15 dogs. And, BTW, you will attract more jr/sr entrants with a double jr/sr. And you need to have an outlet for newcomers to come in...

Good thoughts but would still argue with many clubs the land, water, worker is the resource issue dealt with. As is the 'banquet or tail gate' anticipation which is nice for the 'general entrants' at a hunt test but likley not important to MN qualification seekers.

A club workforce dedicated to the sole purpose of revenue is far different than the 'typical' hunt test. While margins are smaller on Master, so too would be the cost associated with a test, by design.

 

[HNTFSH]

Or when its pretty clear that a club will have an abundance of riches, milk it for all its worth? 150/entrant for master, only one junior no senior, all club workers, all club judgess, special raffle prizes, accept doantions, "all proceeds to special fund for land purchase.”

i'm sort of kidding, sort of serious.

Pretty much!!! ;-)

Until the 'thing' sorts itself out...carpe diem. A test event to satisfy the demand, nobody loses. In the meantime the bigger brains can figure out the long term solution - I'm just a guy with a dog.

 

[HNTFSH]

Spag - you a member of a MN club and if so have you been on the HT committee or acted as Chair?

 

[HNTFSH]

Ed you have hit the nail on the head!

The way to sort this out is some clubs dropping their membership in the Master National Retriever Club. As Grandaddy pointed out Master tests are a break even proposition at best for most clubs. It's time for a lot of clubs to take a long hard look at whether or not to continue their involvment with the MNRC. Is continued membership in your clubs members best interest or not? The way it sounds for a lot of clubs with limited resources, it isn't.

I'd guess a large number of MN clubs have field trial roots and much of the active, working, contributing membership - have MN dogs.