I think it would be a good thing and I will quote Lee here since my opinion is identical....

I would think Lisa that a QAA title would be great. I DO think it would help keep people in the game and would "hopefully" create more workers for the events.

I would also think that you would get a greater percentage of HTers moving to the FT avenue if there were such a title.

I think that the QAA title would go before the name as those are dog vs dog titles and for a dog to be QAA it did in fact "beat" other dogs. Obviously, a Jam in the Open vs the win would have to be designated somehow. But I would think something like QAA-8 would be excellent as it would designate the dog is QAA and has 8 AA pts vs a dog that is QAA but has no points because they won a Q.

WRL

Shayne

 

I voted No!!

I guess the question is: Why?

What is missing form the current structure that warrants a change?

Does the need to give "real amateurs" an opportunity to compete in FT justify the addition of a QAA title?

Joe Miano

 

maybe................

 

Why?....the better question Why NOT?

Besides the points that have already been made. Many people are advertising the dogs as QAA, its good info on the pedigree. SO for breeding purposes, or buying a pup, it could be good to know.

 

I voted yes. What is missing from the current structure is a recognition that virtually all of us refer to a QAA dog as a dog who has met the qualifications necessary to participate in a Limited AA stake.

Also for that reason, I would not change the qualifications.

To me, it is not so much the creation of a new structure as it is the recognition of an informally recognized previous structure.

Ted

 

I voted yes. What is missing from the current structure is a recognition that virtually all of us refer to a QAA dog as a dog who has met the qualifications necessary to participate in a Limited AA stake.

Also for that reason, I would not change the qualifications.

To me, it is not so much the creation of a new structure as it is the recognition of an informally recognized previous structure.

Ted

That's what I said when this whole thing began

And it remains how I feel about the subject

Ted

 

Definately YES. Have had QAA dogs for over 10 years and it's difficult to explain why a JH, SH, and MH have titles and QAA that means something to field trialers and should as a producer, but does not register as a title on a pedigree. Unless you have competed in a qual, you don't realize the competition out there. Not only would it draw more hunt testers and workers to field trials, it would recognize excellence, particularly in non-Black Labs and non-Labs

 

I voted yes!
Correct me I'm wrong(I usually am), but doesn't *** after the name mean QAA. If so, why not make it in front?

 

I think it would be a good thing and I will quote Lee here since my opinion is identical....

I would think Lisa that a QAA title would be great. I DO think it would help keep people in the game and would "hopefully" create more workers for the events.

I would also think that you would get a greater percentage of HTers moving to the FT avenue if there were such a title.

I think that the QAA title would go before the name as those are dog vs dog titles and for a dog to be QAA it did in fact "beat" other dogs. Obviously, a Jam in the Open vs the win would have to be designated somehow. But I would think something like QAA-8 would be excellent as it would designate the dog is QAA and has 8 AA pts vs a dog that is QAA but has no points because they won a Q.

WRL

Shayne

Ditto again.

 

I agree with Ted, we should move toward official recognition of something that has been both "understood" as well as "misunderstood" since the 1940s.

I know of more than one person who, in looking for something beyond the MH, ventured into FT. Several had the luck (or misfortune) to WIN their first two Quals. This automatically knocks them out of ever running in the Qual again. Recognizing that they have neither the time nor the grounds to go after an AA title FTB, they dropped back out of the game as fast as they came up ino it.

Some people aren't even interested in doing much more than putter around in the Q and the Am. Some people aren't interested in getting rid of their current dog to pursue the FC title. Surely there is a place for people like this, many of whom are dedicated workers. I think a QAA title might just keep this type of person involved.

Lee wrote:

But I would think something like QAA-8 would be excellent as it would designate the dog is QAA and has 8 AA pts vs a dog that is QAA but has no points because they won a Q.

This is interesting. Would we want to redefine QAA (the way CKC did), or keep it the same (equal to the definition of "qualified to run Limited")? I vote keep it the same...for now. But there may be a need for a QAA title, AND some kind of a "point dog" title. In my breed, there have been dogs that achieved QAA status by virtue of getting a red ribbon in a 12-dog Qual. Contrast this to the dog that has all his/her points but just needs a win, or the dog with the all-breed win that got injured before it could get the title. Which is more valuable? Under the present, unofficial "system", they are all known as QAA.

In a breed like mine, where the gene pool is SO small, it becomes very important to identify the marginal QAA dogs from the more consistent performers. That's why I posted the FULL QAA records of all QAA dogs from the last 22 years. All QAA dogs are not alike.

Lisa

 

What is missing form the current structure that warrants a change?

The attraction of people like me is missing. HT titled Qual level dog that will never be an all age player. The field trial public's perception of success is a title. If i know i'm not going to title or do anything beyond Q level work, why bother? The possibility of attaining a recognized field trial title with my current dog would likely result in me entering several trials a year... and a huge movement into trials from the "been there done that" hunt test folk.

Qual level title = a LOT of new blood in the sport.

Shayne

 

The attraction of people like me is missing. HT titled Qual level dog that will never be an all age player. The field trial public's perception of success is a title. If i know i'm not going to title or do anything beyond Q level work, why bother? The possibility of attaining a recognized field trial title with my current dog would likely result in me entering several trials a year... and a huge movement into trials from the "been there done that" hunt test folk.

Qual level title = a LOT of new blood in the sport.

Shayne

I agree. I am a HT'er and would consider running the Q if there were a title!

 

I vote YES for the reason Ted mentioned. Making the informal formal.

I need to think more if any tweaking of the current "requirements" would be necessary.

As Lisa said "All QAA dogs are not alike", but couldn't the same be said for any FC, AFC, MH, SH, champion butt sniffer ?

 

A definite YES... it would certainly get my training group's interest.
My only question would be, what would it do to the size of the qual? I would imagine that it would increase significantly.. And that may not be a bad thing.
It is pretty hard for an amatuer trained and handled dog to compete at the open and Am level, regardless of the talent level of the dog. yeah, give us a level to play at too.. it wont detract from the FC and AFC titles in the least.

 

I vote just go for the QAA title and don't muddle it up with a point system. People can look up the points just like they do on all age dogs. The qual is a competition and yet has no real title and the Hunt tests have titles but are judged against the standard. I know what QAA really means but people are title conscious since the hunt tests came into existence, and it's time to recognize it as a title.

 

I vote just go for the QAA title and don't muddle it up with a point system. People can look up the points just like they do on all age dogs. The qual is a competition and yet has no real title and the Hunt tests have titles but are judged against the standard. I know what QAA really means but people are title conscious since the hunt tests came into existence, and it's time to recognize it as a title.

This sounds like a plan...

Joe S.

 

QAA

I would like to see it with a disclaimer.
QAA-Gold Qualified under 25 months of age.
QAA-Silver Qualified under 31 months of age.
QAA-Bronze Qualified under 36 months of age.
QAA-Wood Qualified over 36 months of age.

 

I would like to see it with a disclaimer.
QAA-Gold Qualified under 25 months of age.
QAA-Silver Qualified under 31 months of age.
QAA-Bronze Qualified under 36 months of age.
QAA-Wood Qualified over 36 months of age.

I'm not sure why you'd want to do this. Some people start running qual right out of derby. I'm going to wait till my recently aged out derby dog is ready to run AA stakes (if ever) before she runs any Q's. Why punish me for being smart with my high powered youngster by making it look like she couldn't compete in Q till a later age when she could have likely been competitive at under 24 months?

Sounds too complicated regards...

Edit: wow, just noticed how old this thread is.

 

a QAA title would be a good thing, and doesn't take anything away ffrom the existing structure while identifying dogs that we might want to see in a breeding program.-paul

 

I voted yes. What is missing from the current structure is a recognition that virtually all of us refer to a QAA dog as a dog who has met the qualifications necessary to participate in a Limited AA stake.

Also for that reason, I would not change the qualifications.

To me, it is not so much the creation of a new structure as it is the recognition of an informally recognized previous structure.

Ted

I vote just go for the QAA title and don't muddle it up with a point system. People can look up the points just like they do on all age dogs. The qual is a competition and yet has no real title and the Hunt tests have titles but are judged against the standard. I know what QAA really means but people are title conscious since the hunt tests came into existence, and it's time to recognize it as a title.
_________________
Nancy

Combine these two ideas.I won't have to add anything :!:
John

 

a QAA title .... identifying dogs that we might want to see in a breeding program.-paul

Dang straight ! A QAA female holds a LOT of weight in my eyes. Having a certified record/title to verify legitimacy would be welcomed.

What's it gonna take to get it done ?

 

I'll send Keith a PM and he should have it implented and the new rulebooks on the press by close of business tomorrow.

So tell us Keith, who do we need polariods of to get this off the ground?

Shayne

 

I would assume that AKC already has the info on dogs to verify it or not ,and don't see any reason why it couldn't be included as a suffix.

I have to mark a box on every entry stating that my dog is or is not Qualified for a Limited, etc. Why not just have it as part of the dogs name?

Jerry

 

Qual level title = a LOT of new blood in the sport.

Shayne

Including mine, since I probably won't go on to AA either! :roll: Not enough time or $$


Tracy

 

Most definitely . . . and as a prefix because the dogs are competing against each other and not the standard.

We first got into the field trial game in 1980 and ran 2 lab bitches competitively as amateurs for six years through all four stakes. One was QAA with a Qual 2nd and an Open Jam. The other had an Amat 2nd and 4th. Neither had any *official* designation to recognize these accomplishments which came in competition against such dogs as Watergator Will, Honcho's Harvey Hipockets, and some dog named Trumarc's Zip Code.

Job circumstances kept us out of field trials until 2001. We now have a 3 1/2 year old lab bitch (Derby 1st and 3rd) who is now running in Quals and Amats. She is 100% completely Amateur trained by only myself and my husband and two Bumper Boy Derby Doubles.

Let me tell you that some of the Quals we're seeing today would have made a 1980s Open look like a cakewalk.

She's doing things at her age that our previous dogs couldn't do until they were 5 or 6 years old. It was just incredible to see her complete a recent Qual land series - an indented triple with an out-of-order flyer where the indented bird landed almost in line with the flyer station and where you had to try to get that bird second and leave that tempting flyer until last.

The blinds were equally challenging. She 4-whistled the land blind in fine style with all the correct responses to my handles to bring her back online. Her poor showing on the water blind was probably more my handling than hers but we did hack our way through and get the bird. I didn't see the water series because I wanted to make the 4 1/2 hour back home before dark, but I am sure it was very challenging, too.

Any dog that QAA'ed at that trial should definitely have earned some sort of official recognition for the training and teamwork which was required to complete the stake.

Debbie

 

I would get more envolved in it (once my wife graduates in Dec!!)
but funds and grounds are limited now! It would be cool to have a GRHRCH/MH/QAA dawg around.

 

If you are going to install some sort of QAA title - in part to draw more participation - are you also going to modify the rule that prevents a dog from continuing to run in the Qual once it has reached certain performance standards?

 

If you are going to install some sort of QAA title - in part to draw more participation - are you also going to modify the rule that prevents a dog from continuing to run in the Qual once it has reached certain performance standards?

You pull 100 people who wouldn't normally run trials, but start because of the new title. How many of them will actually win 2 Quals? Lets say 10 for grins. Of those 10... 9 will be hooked and be moving into AA stakes.

Leave the rules as they stand. (cept add the title)

Shayne

 

Ok. so what exactly has to happen for this to become reality? Is it likely that those who can make it happen would support a QAA title?