[Mark]

I know that an Owner handler Qualifying event can be held in conjunction with a Hunt Test

an Owner-Handler Qualifying
Stake may be run without a companion Derby Stake
when it is run in conjunction with a Hunting Test event
that includes a Master Hunt Stake.

I was under the impression that when that was done, it is considered to be two events, a Hunt Test, and A Field Trial with separate (but maybe similar) Committees and separate event numbers.


Where are the rules and proceedures of holding these events when held in conjunction to be found, and what does in conjunction really mean.

If they are held as one event whose rule book prevails Hunt Test or Field Trial.


Mark

 

[2tall]

Wow! Does this mean you know someone trying to put one of these together here in the Carolinas????? I sure hope somebody gets you the answers you need quick, I'd sure like to go to one in the next year.

 

[junbe]

BRC is having their third O/H Qualifying at their AKC Hunting Test. This event is the first week in Sept. We have one event committee and we have one event number. This is the way we have done it in the past and everything is agreeable and we pay one fee for this entire event.

Jack

 

[john fallon]

The concept is a capricious, exclusionary one in my estimation Especially when it is held beginning on a Friday.

john

 

[2tall]

John Fallon, how dare you say that when folks like me are really looking for events like this to run??? I don't care if they do it midnite on Wednesday in a lighted arena, if its within a driveable distance I will try to make it.

Who's being excluded? Those folks like me that are home schooling their own good buddy and are total beginners to boot?????

Believe me, if someone puts it together I will be there. Sorry John, not railing on you, I just don't want anyone to get discouraged with the idea

 

[Happy Gilmore]

Is this stating a MH Test can be used as a Q for an open?

Thanks--Paul G.

 

[Angie B]

Is this stating a MH Test can be used as a Q for an open?

Thanks--Paul G.

I'm sorry but that's funny......:razz:

Angie

 

[Henry V]

We just held our 2nd O/H Q with a HT. It is one event. Thanks to BRC members Randy and Lance for judging. 26 dogs entered.

 

[Tim Carrion]

The rules and procedures for this type of event are evolving. If you look at the premium for this past weekend's O/H Q + HT at Lab Club on EE there is 1 AKC event # and 1 Committee.
The Q and the HT can now run simultaneously. Some clubs choose a Friday start for the Master (and Q since they are often the same dogs) so there is less of chance of having a split resulting in a need for 5 or more sets of judges.
Clubs in the past have also dropped a Senior test when holding a HT/Q.

Tim

 

[john fallon]

John Fallon, how dare you say that when folks like me are really looking for events like this to run??? I don't care if they do it midnite on Wednesday in a lighted arena, if its within a driveable distance I will try to make it.

Who's being excluded? Those folks like me that are home schooling their own good buddy and are total beginners to boot?????

Believe me, if someone puts it together I will be there. Sorry John, not railing on you, I just don't want anyone to get discouraged with the idea

Those who have to work when it is an OH on Friday, and those whose dogs are with Pros.

Staying with the Pro trained dogs for a munute....... without them being there is it still the same? Lets say for instance would the compition not be a little stiffer if there were a few pros running?

john

 

[cakaiser]

Lets say for instance would the compition not be a little stiffer if there were a few pros running?

john

Who cares, more fun for the rest of us. Most of the pros I have talked to about an O/H Qual at a regular FT, love the idea, gives them more time to hang at the Open, which is where they want to be, anyway.

 

[Golddogs]

Those who have to work when it is an OH on Friday, and those whose dogs are with Pros.

Staying with the Pro trained dogs for a munute....... without them being there is it still the same? Lets say for instance would the compition not be a little stiffer if there were a few pros running?

john

In our clubs case, if we hold one next year, and I hope we do, there will be at least 9 pros running there very own dogs. As for the Friday start, one decides all of the time how to burn vaccation days. If it is important enough to you, you do it. If not, wait a few weeks and run a Saturday Q.

Hoping for more crossover regards

 

[RF2]

Middle Tennessee is running one in October. That is driving distance from SC.

 

[JusticeDog]

Those who have to work when it is an OH on Friday, and those whose dogs are with Pros.

Staying with the Pro trained dogs for a munute....... without them being there is it still the same? Lets say for instance would the compition not be a little stiffer if there were a few pros running?

john

Nope. I've run both types, and getting QAA'd is just as sweet either way. The test at the owner handler Q I ran was TOUGH.


http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=27316&highlight=Kirby



Don't be surprised if Kirby lifts his leg on you, sometime!

 

[john fallon]

Nope. I've run both types, and getting QAA'd is just as sweet either way. The test at the owner handler Q I ran was TOUGH.


http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=27316&highlight=Kirby



Don't be surprised if Kirby lifts his leg on you, sometime!

The tests may well have been tough, but the judges could only judge the relative merits of the field there that day, which by design had been limited with respect to the talent of both the handlers and the dogs in the field .

I'll take this one step farther and say that in my estimation, qualifying at a Q that is not held in conjunction with a full FT should not count toward running any of the restricted type of Opens.

john

 

[fishduck]

The tests may well have been tough, but the judges could only judge the relative merits of the field there that day, which by design had been limited with respect to the talent of both the handlers and the dogs in the field .

I'll take this one step farther and say that in my estimation, qualifying at a Q that is not held in conjunction with a full FT should not count toward running any of the restricted type of Opens.

john

Lets take your logic one step further and go ahead and stop running the amateur stake. Why have an AFC when by definition it has been "limited with respect to the talent of both the handlers and the dogs in the field."

This simply gives the hunt test people a chance to compete. My dogs may never run in a Q but if they do it will probably be an O/H event. As of now there is not even a title for QAA. A lot of the O/H are never running in the Open anyway. Why the big blow up when this is simply a venue to allow more people/dogs a chance to participate?

If someone does take this dog and runs it in the Open by your logic it isn't getting past the first series. My big question is why do you even care?

Mark L.

 

[greyghost]

We just held our 2nd O/H Q with a HT. It is one event. Thanks to BRC members Randy and Lance for judging. 26 dogs entered.

I'll second that! That was a great test Henry and nice grounds! Randy and Lance really know how to set-up a well defined test with the available factors.

 

[Terry Thomas]

The tests may well have been tough, but the judges could only judge the relative merits of the field there that day, which by design had been limited with respect to the talent of both the handlers and the dogs in the field .

I'll take this one step farther and say that in my estimation, qualifying at a Q that is not held in conjunction with a full FT should not count toward running any of the restricted type of Opens.

john

Ah John, what sour grapes! You don't hear us crying claiming you have an unfair advantage at a Qual because your dog is with a pro. The OHQ I ran last year was pretty much the same dogs I saw in quals at trials and there were some pros with their own dogs. The placements went to dogs that were just as likely to place in a qual. at a trial.

 

[Mark]

Everyone is waffling around the subject a bit. When one gets down to the nuts and bolts of it, what does in conjunction with really mean. The only thing I hear is that the rules are evolving.

Is the Owner Handler Qual in this instance a stake of a field trial, or is it an additional stake of a Hunt Test.

If it is a stake of a field trial I would assume it should have all the trappings of a field trial including an event number and a field trial committee who are familiar with the field trial rules and standard proceedures for retrievers.

Mark

 

[Happy Gilmore]

Everyone is waffling around the subject a bit. When one gets down to the nuts and bolts of it, what does in conjunction with really mean. The only thing I hear is that the rules are evolving.

Is the Owner Handler Qual in this instance a stake of a field trial, or is it an additional stake of a Hunt Test.

If it is a stake of a field trial I would assume it should have all the trappings of a field trial including an event number and a field trial committee who are familiar with the field trial rules and standard proceedures for retrievers.

Mark

Forgive my ignorance, I don't see the clubs in the Northwest supporting both FT and HT. I have never seen a OHQ in my area. I had to read up and ask a few questions about O/H/Q in conjunction with a HT. Our clubs are either HT or FT. Not much intermingling. It would be nice to see one venue supporting the other in our area but, I don't expect to see it anytime soon..Paul