[provocateur]

A recent Hunt Test divided the Master Stake into two divisions, each having 46 entries. There was a significant disparity in the pass rate for the two divisions.


Master A passed 26 out of 46 entries.

Master B passed 9 out of 46 entries.

Which division would you have preferred?

 

[Shayne Mehringer]

It's all about the ribbon baby!!! I would prefer to run the one where i am most likely to get a ribbon.

Shayne

 

[Miriam Wade]

The one where my dog did good work & got a ribbon.

Honestly-I don't understand the question. Are you asking which is the better test based on the percentage of passing dogs? There is nothing said about test set up, good judging/poor judging, good dog work/poor dog work.

M

 

[AmiableLabs]

It should never be about the numbers.

 

[Shayne Mehringer]

When you have numbers that skewed, "A" was obviously the easier test or had the more lenient judges.

Shayne

 

[Miriam Wade]

It should never be about the numbers.

That's why I didn't vote.

M

 

[nelson]

Shayne

It may not have been an easier test. The flight that passed the most dogs may have had most of the pros. I've seen this happen several times.

Nelson

 

[John Schmidt]

When you have numbers that skewed, "A" was obviously the easier test or had the more lenient judges.

Shayne

Or the better dogs.

John

 

[john fallon]

When you have numbers that skewed, "A" was obviously the easier test or had the more lenient judges.

Shayne

That or the judges for "B" didn't know their AZZ from their Elbow about testing to a standard.
Maybe the dogs in "B" just sucked :roll:
john

 

[K G]

C'mon "provacateur," you can do better than that! :wink: !

Or is this just a coincidence? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm....................

Be careful what you ask for......... 8)

Keith Griffith

 

[Shayne Mehringer]

I'll give it to you that the dogs could be better in one flight, or one flight has all the pros, or anything like that - to some degree. But when they are THAT skewed, there is a difference in judges' standards.

Now. Which is more likely - 1. Some dogs in "A" received ribbons that are undeserving, or 2. Some dogs in "B" are good enough but got screwed.

Shayne

 

[David Walker]

Master

You here about the two different divisions at tests all the time especially after the ribbon ceremony.

Now what is everyones thoughts on the draw - meaning that there are two sets of judges the field had to be split due to the number of entries - so for that there were two sets of judges and two totally different tests - now do those of you that voted feel as though each division should run the same test?

Group A runs water while Group B runs land then they switch, and so forth on the third series- I have seen this done, but hypothetically it is not always possible - just wanted to see what you guys thought.

Then there wouldn't be any problems as far as a division split.

David

 

[Steve Bean]

Didn't cast a vote. I generally like to think my dog will pass about any test, and if some did, we should have. And if not, well, it was just that we didn't do MH work, doesn't mean it's not a MH dog. But the disparity between the two groups happens a lot. Maybe one group had more titled dogs running, and other reasons already pointed out. But you don't just have to compare A and B splits for a club...it's broader than that. You can compare any given week-end to another. In general I tend to believe very low % rates are more of a tight/MN type judging mentality.

 

[Lisa Van Loo]

Maybe all the handlers in Master B wore gloves or said "good dog" or something.

Lisa

 

[Shayne Mehringer]

Maybe all the handlers in Master B wore gloves or said "good dog" or something.

Lisa

HAHAHAHA that's genius!!!

Shayne

 

[AmiableLabs]

Rewrite the poll question to include these caveats --

Same tests, same dogs, same performances, different judges.

 

[Becky Mills]

poll

I did my part to even up the numbers. I failed test A.
Always the cooperative one regards, Becky

 

[Vicky Trainor]

Why is it that someone that doesn't have the ____ to use his/her own name, either as their User ID or by signing their post, starts threads to try to 'stir the pot'?

 

[Pheasanttomeetyou]

Why is it that someone that doesn't have the ____ to use his/her own name, either as their User ID or by signing their post, starts threads to try to 'stir the pot'?

Because he can!! HAHAHAHAHA!

Seriously ... about the post. Lot's of variables to expain the difference which would either validate Judge team B or not.

Given all the posts about how the master should "mean" something or how "too many" master HT's are gimmes, I find it interesting that the vast majority of respondees want to be with the "easy" team.

Why not assume that both tests are equal and reasonable (no tricks); and the field of dog teams are the same? Assume that the dogs under Team B are judged "fairly" -- that Team B are not a couple of annal retentive A-holds, and the discrepency is expained that Team A was afraid to judge to the rigers of test and passed dogs that did not meet the standard. Who would be willing to "go for the gold?".

Another possibility: why not assume that both tests and judges are equal and reasonable, but A Stake has all the Pros? Who would "go for the gold?" and stand up and be counted with the Pros?

 

[Vicky Trainor]

Why is it that someone that doesn't have the ____ to use his/her own name, either as their User ID or by signing their post, starts threads to try to 'stir the pot'?

Because he can!! HAHAHAHAHA!

Just because someone "can" doesn't mean that someone should.

Vicky