[rsfavor]

It's not against the rules, but what is are your thoughts about Pro's running under their clients?

 

[Terry A]

I would think that is a conflict of interest but what about the guys who have used several pros over time?

 

[john fallon]

I would think that is a conflict of interest but what about the guys who have used several pros over time?

The litmus test is , does it appear that there could be a conflict.....
The obvious answer jumps off the page.

john

 

[BuddyJ]

It is a rule that a judge can not run under a client if he has had that dog in training in the previous 12 months. Stated in general conditions.

 

[John Gassner]

It is a rule that a judge can not run under a client if he has had that dog in training in the previous 12 months. Stated in general conditions.

This doesn't make sense. Do you mean a judge, if a pro, can't judge someone that has been a client in the last 12 months? I think that's the AKC HT rule.

In FTs pros currently can't judge, although this will change in the not too distant future. Clients, however, can judge their pros. Also OK to judge your training partners as long as you are not judging a dog that you have run in FTs so many times in 12 months.

 

[BuddyJ]

John,
This might be a good discussion point the rule is: A dog is not eligible to be entered in any Hunting Test J,S,M at a licensed or member HT if a Judge of that Test or any member of his family has owned, sold, held under lease, boarded, trained or handled the dog within one year of the starting date of the HT. So I assume if I am a judge (which I am) and I have trained your dog in the past 12 months I can not judge that dog.

Buddy

 

[John Gassner]

John,
This might be a good discussion point the rule is: A dog is not eligible to be entered in any Hunting Test J,S,M at a licensed or member HT if a Judge of that Test or any member of his family has owned, sold, held under lease, boarded, trained or handled the dog within one year of the starting date of the HT. So I assume if I am a judge (which I am) and I have trained your dog in the past 12 months I can not judge that dog.

Buddy

Now you've got it right! However, the client can still judge his pro.

 

[badbullgator]

John,
This might be a good discussion point the rule is: A dog is not eligible to be entered in any Hunting Test J,S,M at a licensed or member HT if a Judge of that Test or any member of his family has owned, sold, held under lease, boarded, trained or handled the dog within one year of the starting date of the HT. So I assume if I am a judge (which I am) and I have trained your dog in the past 12 months I can not judge that dog.

Buddy

This only referes to the dog, not the pro.

 

[Angie B]

Yes,,,, clients can judge their pro not the other way around. It happens in the FT world all the time.

I avoid it at all cost.

Angie

 

[Steve Amrein]

I would think most people who have pro trained dogs that are in the area or circuit they live. I would not send a dog to a pro 5 states away. It also looks like a very large percentage of AA dogs are pro trained. It also goes to reason that a pro comes to a trial with 20 of the 80 open dogs he will likely get some dogs to finish. I also think that most folks judge at least 1/2 the time in the home area. So the likely hood that you will judge your pro is pretty high. I also would think this to be just as high a chance if you are a am trainer you will be judging friends and training partners. Thats the reason why a lot of AA stakes have a local judge and a out of area judge. I dont think that its financially possible or practical to do it different. I also believe since the club members that put on trials generally run them that a person that could not judge all dogs and handlers would not judge very often. I guess the way to insulate yourself from this is to never judge and just make claims about others who do.

 

[Ten]

This doesn't make sense. Do you mean a judge, if a pro, can't judge someone that has been a client in the last 12 months? I think that's the AKC HT rule.

In FTs pros currently can't judge, although this will change in the not too distant future. Clients, however, can judge their pros. Also OK to judge your training partners as long as you are not judging a dog that you have run in FTs so many times in 12 months.

Yeah, how about we get back to judging the DOG as the rules state... not a NAME or a Pro... which would include callbacks! (and it would not make a difference who you know, who's your pro, who's your training partner, your friend, who you owe a payback to, who's a big name).

An HONEST judge with a conscious will judge the DOG!


Barb

 

[Carol]

Totally agree with Barb.

 

[Jacob Hawkes]

I don't have a problem with it. The last time I checked, the dog has a number for that weekend & that number is the number that's judged. The chances are you will run under somebody you know or somebody that you've heard of anyway. What's the difference between somebody you write a check to or your good friend (Yes, they can be both in one but you get my drift.)? You're judging a number. You're not judging a dog's name, the handler, trainer, or owner. It's that number for that weekend. Integrity 1st & the rest will take care of itself.

 

[Goldenboy]

It's not against the rules, but what is are your thoughts about Pro's running under their clients?

My personal opinion is that reasonable measures should be taken to avoid having clients judge their Pro's. In my experience, more to avoid the politics, personality conflicts and prejudices that exist within that pro's clients than necessarily a bias towards their pro. But why not avoid even that perception if you can?

 

[BonMallari]

if pros were not allowed to run under former/current clients then guys like Farmer, Rorem, Pleasant and other A listers would have nowhere to run since they have such a diverse national clientele..I would also like to think that the integrity of those judging would not have to come into play

 

[K G]

Yet another good reason not to judge the circuit where your dog runs....

k g