oh, me bad. you are so right. placed or jammed in the last 12 months. that makes a huge difference. no less qualified as far as i am concerned. good dogs are good dogs.

Well then by all means let's get rid of any qualifying standards whatsoever! :lol: And now you're quoting John Fallon! Need I say more!! :lol: :lol:

To clarify, as far as I am concerned those Jams are important finishes as well and I guess if we are going to continue to run trials judged with excessively difficult test then they ought to be even more important.
When I say "no less qualified" I feel a dog that has Jammed an Open will probably be able to place as some time and should be given the credit due for the finish. Too many people IMHO discount the Jams.

While I don't disagree with your premise, the Jams awarded at the end of any all-age stake, whether it be a 20 dog Am in Alaska or a 109 dog Open in North Dakota, make dogs eligible to run a Limited for the rest of their lives and a Special for the rest of that calendar year and all of the next calendar year. What they "ought" to count for and how we "feel" about them as indications of a dog's ability is entirely subjective. There's no way to tell the difference on paper between the dog that Jams a small AA stake vs. a large AA stake.

Wade put it pretty well: the dog that wins this week doesn't finish next week, ad infinitum.

I particularly liked his assessment of the trial where 68 dogs started and only 13 or 14 finished the test (first series, I'd guess) without a handle. I guess the callbacks as a % of the number of starters didn't stand out as much as the NDRC Open did.... :?

kg

 

I just got off the phone with Steve Blythe. He said that the test was a really tough SOB, but that it was a really good test, and a very fair test. The two dogs he ran came within a hair of doing it but got dropped. He said he had to hand it to the judges for being able to tough out two days of watching 109 dogs try and do it...

Congrats on the Jam Gwen.
Also, congrats to Dennis Mitchell for the Jam in the Am!

 

I agree with Gwen. I am proud of Lilly's JAM. To be one of only seven dogs, out of 109, to finish a tough trial like this one without a handle, is something to be happy with and build on, especially after her trip to the cemetery. If it was a funny in person as it was when Dave told me the story, it must have been quite a sight. I wish I had been there to see it.

Ed Fletcher

 

This Open was a toughie last year. :wink:

In 06, they had 110 dogs entered, 18 call-backs to the water blind.
With that many, looks like the judges did what they thought they had to do.

 

Ok, I am sorry.........but one of you must have the results of the Am and Derby.......please post it!

 

All I can tell you about the AM & Derby are the winners.

Roger Weller won the AM with Max I believe.

Steve Yozamp won the Derby with Seasides Pelican Pete. Owned by Bob Zylla.

Sorry I don't have more for you.

 

Hey Keith,

I would like to see someone on the Forum quote you some time!!!!

:idea: Why don't you say something worth repeating .

Four day OPEN regards

john

 

Being quoted is not always a good thing, John.... :wink: ....especially when it wasn't exactly a thought-provoking phrase........not to mention that it was so obviously unintentional on Kim's part.... :?....and I should have known better than to bring it to your attention...... :lol: :lol:

You're welcome........... 8)

Restricted Open/cut back on the "donations"/110 entries last year/those-who-forget-the-past-are-condemned-to-relive-it regards,

kg

 

I would like to clarify my opinions which I have voiced and then this will be my last comment on this subject.
My frustration is not with the NDRC Open and their judges. Nor actually the test as I was not there to see it. And as for the other trials that were mentioned, I missed those. I only saw this one because I was looking for a friends derby dog info.
My frustration and emotion is and always has been with the responses from almost all of the persons on this forum in regards to a test, any test in any trial that causes such a mortality rate in the first series.

Have you all forgotten there are 4 series provided to deal with these dogs?

You dont have to get all your answers in the first series and then just make some separation the following 3 series.

When 25 dogs are called back from the 1st series and 11 finish, it sounds like the following 3 series were not as tough as the first series.
And these 2 judges are well known and well respected. What they do will influence someone if not someones. They set examples for others whether they know it or like it.

And yes Keith this is just a numbers analyzation but I think probably not far off the mark.

You cannot get the cream to rise to the top and get the best dog of the trial if you do not continue to increase the degree of difficulty in the tests for each series.

The quality of judging is continually declining and much due to this type of scenario. We call this acceptable because of a large entry. The large entry should have nothing to do with it. The judges had 3 days to judge 100+ dogs, NOT an impossible task.
And then of course the next new person puts this scenario in their
"bag of tricks" and WAAALAAA! We have just created one more "educated" judge to add to our list.

A few weeks ago I ran an Amateur. The 1st series was an inverted triple. Nice set of marks. The short middle retired threw first, long flyer left and long go bird right which retired immediately after he threw.
The middle gun was instructed to remain standing until the dog left the line upon which he then "ran" to his chair in the cover, arms above his head trying to get his white coat off quickly.
The running dogs watched him as they were enroute to the go bird, most distracted and some changed direction and picked up the middle bird, others just lost focus on where they were going, got lost and were picked up. Others followed the kid into the cover and hunted in his lap, while the bird was out in the short grass and then either handled, switched to the flyer and some got the bird ok. The judges sure got their answers.
IMHO Good bird placement, very very bad mechanics.
There were several new amateur handlers running dogs that day and the concensus was "Wow, what a hard test. I guess its fair because we all have the same test and its very hard. They are really getting some answers. I will have to remember this. I think I will come back next week and train on this."
Not one recognized why this test was getting the answers, heck maybe the judges didnt either. This test bordered illegal, movement in the field to intentionally distract the dogs, Of course we cannot prove intention but nonetheless, it did the job. These 2 judges are both in excess of 8+
points, one judged a national. Both well respected and as I saw it did a dandy good job of educating some new people in the sport.

I do not know what the test was at NDRC and really dont care as I was not there. All I know is that any test that cuts the field so drastically in the 1st series is inappropriate for the field of dogs that were judged, IMHO.
Maybe if the Open were a Restricted and they had a higher caliber of dog to judge it would be necessary to get separation, but obviously not here. Not when only 18 out of 109 can do it without handling and only 7 can handle to the bird when needed.

We need to better educate the judging population. And it is not going to happen if you all hide under your keyboard and accept what is happening.


Kim Johnston
Suprdogs

 

JAMS

I want to comment about the importance of JAMs in all-age stakes. I agree that they are extremely important.

My rationale for giving out as many JAMs as possible is that we say that a dog that WINS or Places 2nd in a Qualifying is eligible to run a limited or a special all-age stake. In my mind, a dog that gets to the last series of an Open or an Amateur, but handles or has a big hunt on a bird--or even several small dings throughout the trial which keep him out of the placements, definitely deserves the same consideration via a JAM that a 2nd place dog in a Qualifying receives! After all, that dog must have done creditable work up to the last series to keep getting called back! Finishing an all-age stake should be rewarded!

JAMs cost little, but can mean so much.

 

On behalf of the NDRC, I want to thank club members, owners, and handlers for attending our fall trial. This years trial ran as smoothly as any in recent memory. The weather was great, the help was good, and the judges were able to test the dogs fairly and get everything done by late Sunday afternoon. Bad weather and/or poor test set-up/mechanics could have had us running late Sunday or even Monday with a 258 dog trial.

Given that we have now had two back to back fall trial with large entries, the field trial committee (I am not a member) will consider a variety of options for next year. I am told that early discussions have included consideration of the following options.
1) Holding a restricted open. The actual impact of this on our 07 entries is being investigated.
2)option removed to protect the FT committee
3) option removed to protect the FT committee
4) option removed to protect the FT committee
5) option removed to protect the FT committee

It seems that there are currently quite a few options for reducing FT numbers than just holding a restricted open. I am not sure if all these options are "good for the sport" but I guess since they are current legal options that are available to the club they must be better for the sport than an entry cap option which is not allowed.
Oh, and do not worry. Options 4 and 5 will not be chosen because of "tradition".

 

Henry

Option no. 4 is not presently available to clubs. A rule change is required.

Ted

 

Is #3 legal? Just curious....

FOM

 

Oops

My bad, I meant #3

 

This is why I am not on the FT committee. :lol:

In reality, options 2-5 are not likely to be seriously considered. Thus, for now, that only leaves option 1. We do have a number of club members that wonder why we hold a fall field trial instead of a hunt test so, to accommodate the majority of our member's interest, we have added a second hunt test in September this year. Now, if we could cap the MH we would be set for sure.

 

Now, if we could cap the MH we would be set for sure.

Good luck with that Henry. I am still catching up from the 104 Master we had last weekend. Couldn't have done it without the fantastic members we have.

 

Watched NDRC open for approx 1.5 hrs on Sat just to see what all the talk was about. I sat on mound where Marshall was. i looked out on test and thought to myself this is a really aesthetic series that looked tight but not impossible.

Watched one of Rorem's dog's do the test and it was truly a piece of artwork. Watched several dogs almost do the test but got lost in never never land between the two retired marks and tended to drift toward flyer station.. Watched Jim beck tweet tweet the dog to shorter retired quickly and was carried to next series.

I feel the test was fair and there is no way for the judges to know how few dogs would be able to do this particular series even 30-40 dogs into it.

Wish i had one of the dogs that almost did it.

 

Here is a mocked up air photo of the first series in the NDRC open.

Photo removed.

Stations 1 and 2 retired to the tree at "R" after throwing from the right and left of the tree. Station 3 was the flier.
I threw the flyer Saturday. Surprisingly, there were quite a few hunts on the flyer. The biggest trouble was getting the middle bird which was thrown several yards directly in front of a bush. Many dogs ran right up the middle between 1 and 2 and ended up at the road. Once there, that flyer area was attractive. The water did push dogs toward the middle bird. Some did get mark 1 though while others ended up at mark 2, and some others ended up at the flyer. The line was probably a bit further to the left than indicated here so that the line to mark 1 just passed through the edge of the water. Areas of the fall around 1 and 2 were quite distinct from my perspective.