Pointing Dog Titles

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:48 am

I know meat hunters don't really look at pedigrees as a general rule, they just want a good hunting dog. Then others who are involved in breeding and such will tend to follow one or at most a few lines or strains of dogs within their particular breed. So for those ofyou that do look at pedigrees and titles what titles do and do not carry weight in the pedigree for you. I mean I know some people see a NSTRA Ch. and it's something they completely disregard. Some people feel the same way about MH or NAVHDA UT or NA title.

I know I'll occasionally come up on a show dog site on accident and they have a long list of show titles such as Am/Can/Mex/Int Ch. Such and Such OBX, AD, TD....then at the very end they'll have a JH title. Because of this title they'll advertise their pups as being dual quality or dual purpose and as having working insticts or breeding for show and field. I TRULY cannot stand this about these people!

So post the different titles and how useful or pointless you feel they are.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 7:29 am

Generally speaking, I'm more impressed with the competitive titles - FC, AFC, NSTRA Ch, etc - than ones achieved against a standard such as MH, NAVHDA UT, etc.
That doesn't mean I think poorly of MH or NAVHDA. Quite the contrary! I put a MH on my dog and it was a real b*tch!

As for NAVHDA - that takes a lot of work and a very good dog to get a UT prize I. It's a title I'd love to put on one of my dogs, but I simply don't have the time to train for it AND run in AKC field trials.

I think a JH is better than nothing and it's a good way to get people out in the field with their dogs, but it holds absolutely no sway over me when it comes to researching dogs.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 9:02 am

When it comes tohunt test titles...SH or MH are the ones to look at

Basically if the venue requires a dog to have the abilities I desire then it is one to look at

AKC and AF those are field work even though many go on about AA only Championship trials are an hour long and an FC can be attained on 1/2 hour stakes even NSTRA requires a dog to run solidly for 30 minuttes and the national level NStra requires a dog to make the cut in a series of elimination which on the final day canrequire a dog to run 2 30 minute braces and then the finalhour should the make it to the top 2 dog for that run off

ANy venue which requires training to attain a title

As for dual dogs...a DC is a dual champion in AKC a Ch before and a JH after the name i give more creedance to SH and MH as that does take a dog to be steady on birds

so as fo what titles that is a personal choice as to what a person enjoys doing but any trial it is breeding and training whether you want a dog to work a field and retrieve birds pointed or train them to run edges skiming outcroppings and stand steady to shot and go on..it all takes dedication and effort

Hotpepper · Post by **Hotpepper** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:58 am

Advanced titles are wonderful for field dogs, FC/AFC/NFC or AF Championship titles lead the way as that is where I run my dogs. Championship points from AKC are great.

Hunt test are very good as well. Some really good dogs come through those. I have never done NAVDHA but there require a lot of work to get them.

Bench titles or show are not where I am at present but it is very notable that a DC is a dual champion that is finished on the bench and in the field. Hard to do.

I love the AKC trials and have been running a lot of the NGSPA hour stuff the last 2 years with lots of scccess, very proud of my dog at this point.

All of this equates to a great perosnal hunting dog for me, a real bird dog that loves to find'em, point'em and have me shoot'em for him.

I am a very strong preponent of line breeding great dogs to other great dogs, you end up with great dogs that may be a little better than the parents were and that is imporvement of the breed and the purpose for breeding.

Pepper

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:47 pm

I may be wrong, but I believe my question may have been misunderstood. Kninebirddog, for example, really seemed to be trying to explain to me the different types and requirements of trials/tests. I'm not looking for a description of them, or even which one is better to look for.

What I was asking is your personal opinion on what YOU look for when examining a pedigree.

Personally, It seems to me that people involved in AF and AKC trials tend to be more focused towards the proper practices needed to improve the breeds. It seems that a dog is scored more on his overall efforts, insticts and desires rather than having the number of points and retrieves on that particular day being the main determining factor as is the case with NSTRA. Every dog has an off day, but even a truly quality dog can do well with these type of trials during more of an off day.

On the other hand I really like like that in NSTRA trials the dogs have less formal training and I believe that in turn is a very positive trait of the organization. My point is that in NSTRA a dog earns his score by being a naturally talented dog where as in AKC or AF alot of the scoring is done based on training. I don't see how a dog being completely steady has anything to do with how good of a bird hunter he is. Don't get me wrong, I ran in a few NSTRA trials with a completely steady dog because I prefer them, but I really like that they're not scored on it.

Hunting tests I believe are usefull, but again the score is very much dependent on the amount of training the dog has had. I am interested in training a dog to attain a MH, but I believe breeding hunt test dogs to beat an unchanging standard doesn't seem to be as effective as breeding to repeatedly beat a large number of ever advancing birddogs in order to attain a trial Ch. title.

I could understand tests more if they gave out "High in trial" ribbons or placements as well as legs toward the title. They do this in other performance events such as Agility, Obedience, and protection type sports.

Boy! I always start writing just a sentence or two then look up and I have several paragraphs.

Just my opinion though,

Rowdy

original mngsp · Post by **original mngsp** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:51 pm

but I believe breeding hunt test dogs to beat an unchanging standard doesn't seem to be as effective as breeding to repeatedly beat a large number of ever advancing birddogs in order to attain a trial Ch. title.

Rowdy, good observation.

lvrgsp · Post by **lvrgsp** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:13 pm

Rowdy, I like birddogs that I have hunted behind or know have been hunted extensively, then if they have a title Ilook at them. Wheteher it is a NC or a NSTRA CH, or a MH, if I have not seen it hunt or you are not willing to show me how it hunts, pedigree kinda goes to the wayside. However known dogs that are consistant producers in any venue are a key for me to look at in pedigrees.

Chip

Karen · Post by **Karen** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:17 pm

When I was shopping for my most recent pup, I looked for NGDC, NFC, NAFC, AF Ch., and HOF titles. I also wanted titled parents who were proven hour horseback dogs and within the breed standard.

I'm not at all interested in hunt test or NSTRA titles as I have no desire to play those games.

lvrgsp · Post by **lvrgsp** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:20 pm

Rowdy, I like birddogs that I have hunted behind or know have been hunted extensively, then if they have a title Ilook at them. Wheteher it is a NC or a NSTRA CH, or a MH, if I have not seen it hunt or you are not willing to show me how it hunts, pedigree kinda goes to the wayside. However known dogs that are consistant producers in any venue and are great natural wild birddogs are a key for me to look at in pedigrees.

Chip

Post by **ezzy333** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:20 pm

I like to see titles on dogs I don't know personally. It gives me a clue at least as to what the dog has done competitively. I like to see some FC titles but if there isn't a DC connected I am not to interested unless again I have seen the dog or some of its offspring. Any dog I have will be in the standard of the breed first and then the more field titles the better. And that includes JH titles or any other NA title. The more advanced titles are ok but those indicate training to me and not natural ability. However, I will admit a lot of the JH and NA titles are tainted because people are training for them. Thats something I refuse to do since it is no longer natural ability when it requires training to attain.

Now the other side of this question is when you start breeding good hunting dogs for common hunters the field titles can be a detriment. The biggest complaint I have heard over the years is the dogs work to big and too fast. And these are valid complaints, as you can see by the interest the DD, DK, and French Brits are getting primarily because they are being sold as close working gun dogs. That is what people want. Over the years I have shied away from AA type dogs and if I used field titled dogs I looked more for the gun dog winners or second generation dogs from field winners. I will admit though I have two dogs now that are direct decendants of NC dogs and a whole bunch of DC and HOF dogs, but they are great little Brits to take hunting if you don't require them to be underfoot all of the time.

I am very satisfied to breed great looking hunting dogs and family pets and if I can do that I am successful in providing great dogs to the average hunter and can help keep our dogs true to what they were bred for many years ago.

Ezzy

stlgsp · Post by **stlgsp** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:31 pm

I like to see the titles in the pedigree but I would want to see for myself how the dogs in the pedigree hunt to see if it fits what I'm looking for. You can tell from the posts on this board that different people want and expect different things from their dogs.
My first wild birdhunt was over a GSP that I fell in love with and at the time I did not know she had titles (DC & MH) until the end of the weekend. When I was looking for my first bird dog I gave them a call and told them what I was looking for and asked what they had coming up. My girl is family dog/hunting partner first and we'll work towards SH & MH (we are learning together) but with a full time job, a family and two son's in college I don't have the time nor the money to get to many trials and I won't send her off with a handler.
My Vizsla's sire has a CD, RN & a JH, her dam a SH, I've hunted over both parents as well as grand parents and really liked what a saw so I didn't need to look further.

There are a lot of really nice dogs with a JH or no titles because the owner didn't decide to take it any further. But it is amazing how many websites advertise dual quality dogs but don't even have a picture of the dog on point or mention hunting at all. Especially when I see a pedigree that has dogs in it that I know couldn't find a bird in a bucket if it were right under it's nose.

WildRose · Post by **WildRose** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 9:11 pm

If I were a complete novice to birddogs, the thing I'd focus on when scanning pedigrees if what I were looking for was a companion hunting dog would be hunt test titles such as AKC SH and MH along with NAVHDA. Those titles are earned by proving that the dogs were trained to a high standard, peformed consistently, and handled very well.

Competitive titles such as are earned in AKC, AF, NBHA and other trialing venues are titles that prove the dogs could beat the best that showed up. In the case of AKC it shows they did it on at least three occasions. Some would argue that the AF titles "mean more" because in order to be awarded the CH they had to beat "the best of the best". That's something that can be argued either way since many dogs will compete in both AF and AKC events.

Having been around a long time though titles mean far less to me than the lines and the people the dogs come from.

I never asked Jerry how many CH's his boy had, or if he's even an FC before I got my pup out of he and VZ's bitch. I know Jerry, and I know VZ I know what they like in a dog and in many respects their desires mirror mine.

With some lines like the "Old Greif dogs" and the "Rusty dogs" I know what type of hunting and companion dogs these lines produce consistently.

Wagonmaster's dog Spot is a dog that I've liked since the first time I saw him, but without ever watching him run, seeing how he behaves around camp etc I "knew" to a fairly high level of certainty what kind of wild bird dog he'd be and what his temperament and personality would be like because I knew how he was bred.

The funny thing is the "best of the best" no matter what the breed cross over from AKC trials and hunt tests to Navhda, AF, NBDCH and can do well in any of them as well as make first class companions and wild bird dogs because they are top quality dogs that with the right training and exposure can succeed in any venue. CR

WildRose · Post by **WildRose** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 9:34 pm

Ted at this age it's hard not to love them all. However Donna and I were talking while I was messing with him this evening and agreed he's really something special. I think he'll be a bit smaller than what I generally like in males but he's extremely intelligent, biddable, loveable, and tough. Conformation wise he really reminds me a lot of Moose's Daddy and Buttons, square, strong, and very stylish!

He'll probably stay around here for at least a couple of years... HA!

I hope she makes you a nice dog. I've been raising puppies for over twenty years and I've never had such a hard time picking the "top dog" out of a litter. Four of those girls would have been the pick in anyone's litter. You have one of them, I have two, and John Sullivan in Oregon has the other. We could throw all four of them back in a box and each grab one blindfolded and take it home and still be convinced we got the best one. CR

Wagonmaster · Post by **Wagonmaster** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 10:47 pm

I agree about the competitive titles, that they are more telling than the hunt test titles normally. But for different reasons than were expressed earlier. To successfully compete over a period of time on a circuit, a dog has to be durable. The training is grueling, and any flaws in the dog's physical make-up will show. And to win repeatedly, a dog has to be good, an honest bird dog. So seeing a number of quality titles over a period of years tells you that the dog has a strong genetic makeup, and can find birds. But even more important, I think, is actually watching the dogs and knowing their strengths and weaknesses. There is no such thing as a perfect dog. Breeding is a matter of finding two quality individuals and then mixing the characteristics the breeder finds most valuable, hoping a couple of pups will come up with just the right mix.

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:19 pm

Ezzy,

The more advanced titles are ok but those indicate training to me and not natural ability.

I agree with this 100%. In a perfect world dog "trainers" would only be used by people who hunt and not trial or test. I believe that the people who handle dogs in these events were mearly "developers" in that they would only develop a dog to his fullest NATURAL potential. A good trainer can cover alot up with tricks of the trade and beat another dog who is naturally a better dog, though has a lesser quality trainer. In this same perfect world the tests and trials would be strictly for measuring dogs on natural qualities, nothing that has been trained into them.

I feel this way because tests and trials were originally created to test a dogs potential in order to continually progress the breed. Now it's become such a "superficial" game in so many ways and has become less dignified and too many people are willing to do whatever they can so they can be in the lime-light.

The biggest complaint I have heard over the years is the dogs work to big and too fast.

Something that I remember very vividly is when I was in the company of a trainer when he recieved the news that his up and comming, all age "secret weapon" Shorthair had come in second to a gun dog ranged Brittany. I have no idea why the all age dog was entered to run with a gundog for, but the trainer started to through a fit. I didn't understand, I mean you can't expect to win them all. I asked him what was the matter and he told me that his all age dog lost to a gun dog, but "everyone" knows that as a general rule you always give a win to an all-age first. I was disgusted.

Rowdy

mm · Post by mm » Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:49 am

Having tried the field trials and hunt tests with my dog and watching what goes on I have to question all of these titles. Now I am just a beginer and I have won and placed in these trials and passed the tests. However I have found them to be very far from the actual hunting we do or that anybody I know does. Also the quality of the birds is so poor it tests the will of the best dogs and I have not encountered many birds while hunting that wont fly or fly 5 feet and flutter around. I see that if I want to continue in these events I must train with these poor flying birds to prepare the dog for what she will see. The other thing I see is the quality of the judging varys from one event to the next. One juge looks for one thing one another. One juge will pass a dog the other wont. This leaves me to question how valid these titles are and I have not touched on the political aspects of these events.
I think a title does show the dog has been out in the field finding birds and has enough ability to keep and work with but should be judged by the person looking for the pup personally. I think titles are a good place to start looking for a pup but personal observation of the dogs would be better.

WildRose · Post by **WildRose** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:48 am

Something that I remember very vividly is when I was in the company of a trainer when he recieved the news that his up and comming, all age "secret weapon" Shorthair had come in second to a gun dog ranged Brittany. I have no idea why the all age dog was entered to run with a gundog for, but the trainer started to through a fit. I didn't understand, I mean you can't expect to win them all. I asked him what was the matter and he told me that his all age dog lost to a gun dog, but "everyone" knows that as a general rule you always give a win to an all-age first. I was disgusted.

Rowdy you must be talking about a derby stake???

While the rules say specifically (judging criteria) that no preference is to be given to AA or GD performances in a derby stake the reality is that a great many people feel the same as the trainer you mentioned. The theory is that when you completely break the dogs you will take a good bit of the steam out of them for a while. If you have a clos handy gun dog prospect, and he shortens to half his prior range etc then you don't even have a good gun dog left. Whereas if you take half the steam out of a nice AA prospect you've still got enough dog left to make a nice gun dog.

MM everyone that's ever trialed or tested dogs can understand your frustrations. You are right in that no trial or testing venue really evaluates all the best attributes of a wild bird hunting dog.

Trials are designed to first evaluate all of the dogs first against a basic standard. That standard is "are they broke" (in adult stakes) from there it's about finding the dog that does the best job that day of showing the total package of speed, style, bird finding ability, ease of handling, and how the dog hunts the course. If the judges feel that in any given stake there was no performance that met the criteria for gun dog/AA dog and demonstrated they were indeed broke to an adult standard they will withold first and second, and sometimes all of the placements. The reasoning there is that you don't give out championship points cheaply or to dogs that aren't worthy of an FC.

There's a lot of room for judgment so no you won't always agree with the judges as what makes that total package does vary somewhat from person to person. More often than not though if you are honest and unbiased and watch every dog in the stake with a critical eye even if you don't agree with the placements you'll usually agree on the top four or so and at least understand why they placed them in the order they did.

Find a dog though that places regularly under a lot of different judges on different grounds and in all likelihood you will agree that it's a fine dog. Find a dog that wins multiple times under the same criteria and you have a very fine dog.

You are also right about the poor penraised birds that do a million things that wild birds would never do. They test the dog's training again and again. Those dogs that get through all those stupid situations without losing their style and intensity show you that you have a dog with a nearly unbreakable will and desire and one that is trainable to an extremely high standard.

Can politics be an issue? Unfortunately yes in some clubs. You can't fix it by staying home.

Nothing evaluates a hunting dog on hunting potential like hunting wild birds. However we don't have enough good wild bird habitat left in much of the country or birds in it for everyone to be able to evaluate dogs by just hunting them.

Whether or not we like the trialing and testing venues we have, they are the best way we have to evaluate dogs from all over the country to set standards which gives people looking at pedigrees at least some idea that the dogs with titles were indeed capable of being trained to a high standard, and showed it repeatedly under different judges and on different grounds to earn those titles.

There are very few one or two time wonders that earn a title. More often than not a dog with an FC is going to have at least ten placements in adult stakes before they get the points needed to be awarded the FC. In venues like the AF before a dog earns that CH they had to first qualify to run in CH events by beating a lot of good dogs, and had to beat a number of very good dogs to get that CH in the championship event.

Remember a MH or SH too takes multiple qualifying performances under different judges to get their title as well.

NAVHDA I believe for both the NA and UT titles/qualifications requires at least two qualifying tests for each which are then averaged together.

Is every dog that earns one or more of these titles of equal quality? Nope because the competition varies from one venue to the next. That's why there's more to the dog than just the titles on the pedigree but they do give you a good place to start looking for quality dogs if you really don't know the dogs and what they produce. CR

TrueBlu Shorthairs · Post by **TrueBlu Shorthairs** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:09 am

In a derby stake, a consistent gun dog derby with style, evenly placed finds, lots of speed and stamina, etc. should beat an inconsistent All Age derby every time. However, typically, a dog that runs big, has one find, somewhat roguey will beat a nice consistent derby with 6 finds. NOT, how it should be judged most times, but reality.

In a GD stake, an AA dog should not place period. Once again, a consistent nice medium hard charging gun dog should beat an inconsistent yo-yoing, hard handling dog that is more between AA and run off.

Your problem stems from clubs getting non-hunters to judge. If a judge is not a trialer AND a hunter, he shouldn't be judging.

On the topic though, a FC AFC MH can be a nice dog or not much. There are counterfeit FCs, AFCs, and MHs. There are MHs who spend their time underfoot, happen on a bird, handle the find with manners, and are given a score. Once again, judges who do not hunt!!! A judge must understand the term "effective hunting companion" or he should not be judging. I have seen many many people at JH tests who believed that just because their dog had a find and pointed, the dog should have been given a score. In all events, if a dog doesn't hunt, the dog is worthless!!

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:54 am

However, typically, a dog that runs big, has one find, somewhat roguey will beat a nice consistent derby with 6 finds. NOT, how it should be judged most times, but reality.

Been there. Placed 2nd once with a friend's dog that really worked the course well and had 5-6 finds. 1st place was a run-off dog that had a single find that wasn't much more than a flashpoint, and also took 30 minutes to collect at the end of the brace. That one still bugs me.

I have seen many many people at JH tests who believed that just because their dog had a find and pointed, the dog should have been given a score. In all events, if a dog doesn't hunt, the dog is worthless!!

Been there, too.

I've had people downright pissed off at me for failing their dog even though it had a point.

CherrystoneWeims · Post by **CherrystoneWeims** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:08 pm

Been there, too. I've had people downright pissed off at me for failing their dog even though it had a point.

Yep I've been there also. Judged a Viszla last year who stayed within 10 feet of the handler. Stumbled on a small covey of birds had a beautiful point. I gave her a 7 for pointing but a 2 for hunting. HT secretary came up to me and questioned me as to whether or not I had made a mistake. :roll:

original mngsp · Post by **original mngsp** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:14 pm

Been there, too. I've had people downright pissed off at me for failing their dog even though it had a point.

It's just as bad in SH and MH I think too. Contrary to what most people I think believe, you actually take less abuse judging trials than you do HT.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:26 pm

original mngsp wrote: It's just as bad in SH and MH I think too. Contrary to what most people I think believe, you actually take less abuse judging trials than you do HT.

I haven't had quite as many issues with SH/MH, to be honest, but most of the SH/MH handlers I've dealt with had a pretty good clue about what the expectations were. With JH, you've simply got a lot more people out there that do almost nothing in the field with their dogs and don't really have a grasp on what the actual standard of performance is.

original mngsp · Post by **original mngsp** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:38 pm

Phermes

I should explain a bit more about the SH/MH thing. While you are correct that most SH/MH handlers understand what is needed that doesn't mean that their perspective of this is correct.

I'm sure there exist some regional distinctions in judging just as there are individual differences between judges. I see too many MH dogs that pass becasue they find a bird, point, STWS, retrieve, go hide in a corner of the bird field until time is called and then get the honor done in a callback. "I've done everything needed I will qualify". Unfotunately this little shame of a MH run will get passed by a fair amount of judges without any regard for bird seeking intelligence, movement, staunchness of point, and the finer qualitites that really make a true Master dog.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 3:14 pm

Gotcha. I definitely see your point.

btw, don't know if you've seen the latest revision to the HT rules, but they're tightening up the judging qualifications and the test requirements substantially. I'm pretty sure that, if you're shooting on course, that you'll know have to shoot every bird on course, not just the first one.

CherrystoneWeims · Post by **CherrystoneWeims** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 3:49 pm

I see too many MH dogs that pass becasue they find a bird, point, STWS, retrieve, go hide in a corner of the bird field until time is called and then get the honor done in a callback.

When I judge I won't allow that. I'll call the handler on that. The dog MUST be out there hunting the WHOLE 30 min. or else I won't pass them. I will allow some exceptions if the weather is really extreme. We just had HT's a little over a week ago and temps were about 90. I had to make Pearl stop to take water breaks while I was running her. I could tell she was needing water because she does this thing where she will snatch at the green grass while she is running (she doesn't want to stop hunting) to get some liquid into her.

BTW one of the things that I really dislike about FT's is the way that judges will penalize a dog for having too many finds. That just doesn't make sense to me. What good is a hunting dog if they don't find birds??? I have seen too many dogs just blow past places where I know there are birds.

We always have loads of finds and birds worked when we run in HT's and FT's. I've been told we have "too many".

Flush · Post by **Flush** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:16 pm

CherrystoneWeims wrote:BTW one of the things that I really dislike about FT's is the way that judges will penalize a dog for having too many finds.

Can you describe an instance of when you have seen this in trials, and why/how the judge penalized a dog for too many finds?

I know some trialers don't want to many finds as it can eat up a bunch take away some of the reaching run the dog may be able to exhibit.

Certainly I know of cases were a dog won that had fewer finds than another dog that had more finds that day, but that hardly means the dog with more finds was penalized. In the cases I am aware of, the dog with fewer finds that won, had a much better overall performance, but didn't happen to have as many finds. Most trials are far from a "the most birds wins" events. Things like run, style, handle, manners on game, etc.. are taken into account. Even NSTRA, which does "count" finds takes into account those other factors and a dog that does it REALLY nice with 4 finds can outscore a dog with 5 finds.

Curious what you have seen though that leads you to your conclusion.

-Flush

WildRose · Post by **WildRose** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:26 pm

Flush wrote:
CherrystoneWeims wrote:BTW one of the things that I really dislike about FT's is the way that judges will penalize a dog for having too many finds.
Can you describe an instance of when you have seen this in trials, and why/how the judge penalized a dog for too many finds?

I know some trialers don't want to many finds as it can eat up a bunch take away some of the reaching run the dog may be able to exhibit.

Certainly I know of cases were a dog won that had fewer finds than another dog that had more finds that day, but that hardly means the dog with more finds was penalized. In the cases I am aware of, the dog with fewer finds that won, had a much better overall performance, but didn't happen to have as many finds. Most trials are far from a "the most birds wins" events. Things like run, style, handle, manners on game, etc.. are taken into account. Even NSTRA, which does "count" finds takes into account those other factors and a dog that does it REALLY nice with 4 finds can outscore a dog with 5 finds.

Curious what you have seen though that leads you to your conclusion.

-Flush

Flush you indirectly touched on it. The dog is not necessarily directly penalized for "too many finds" but for example I had a dog with 8 or 9 finds in a derby this spring. He was fantastic on the ground stood all but one of his finds completely broke including two where his bracemate came in and rooted the birds out with the other handler yelling the whole time at him.

I knew after about the fourth or fifth find that he wasn't going to win and the reason would be "we never really got to see his run, and couldn't evaluate his stamina". While I thought by far he was the best "birddog" of the stake, he didn't even place and I had no problem with the placements.

Same dog a week later running against mostly the same dogs has a big win with two finds and a nice back on a different course on a horribly hot windy day. He was not only the best birddog that day he was the best overall dog in the stake without question. Since we had three of the four of the placements that day with dogs I ran I can say that without it being bragging HA!

When I'm judging I don't care if the dog has one find or six if they are hitting the right places, hunting all around the course and going hard the whole time they are down.

Give me two equal, stellar performances like that with both dogs exhibiting great manners as well and I'll lean toward the one with more finds, reason being he produced more with the same performance and had more opportunity to crash and didn't. But there are a host of other factors that can come into play as well in making a good decision. CR

Flush · Post by **Flush** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:00 pm

Charlie,

yep, I agree with your thoughts and what you have seen. In your first example, I would not interpret that as the judges "penalizing" the dog for too many finds though. If indeed they did not get to see the dog put on an exhibit of what he is capable of in terms of run, reach, endurance etc in relation to the other dogs run that day, I find it hard to fault them.

Did your dog get a raw deal? Possibly, but I think you would have to be there to see it. Also, how many finds did the placing dogs have, I'm guessing a fair number too.
Since you yourself agreed with the placements, I tend to think the overall situation was unfavorable for your dog, but I'm not sure it was a case of the judges penalizing a dog for too many finds. Since it was a derby I assume it was only 30 minutes and your dog found 8 or 9 birds? That sounds like a pretty liberal planting of birds in one area to me.

I have not heard of a dog putting on a fantastic performance (according to unbiased observers) AND finding tons of birds not getting due recognotion. Too many birds could possibly hamper the "wow" factor of a dogs run, but in a planted bird stake I would put more blame on the bird planter than the judges for that happening.

-Flush

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:21 pm

Flush wrote:
CherrystoneWeims wrote:BTW one of the things that I really dislike about FT's is the way that judges will penalize a dog for having too many finds.
Can you describe an instance of when you have seen this in trials, and why/how the judge penalized a dog for too many finds?

I can, and I just did in my earlier post. Judge told me later, "Your dog did a great job, but I just wanted to see him RUN."

Flush · Post by **Flush** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:17 pm

phermes1 wrote: I can, and I just did in my earlier post. Judge told me later, "Your dog did a great job, but I just wanted to see him RUN."

phermes1,
So again it sounds like the judge felt your friends dog did not exhibit the run he expected/wanted to see as opposed to truly being penalized by finding too many birds. I think the real question is whether or not the frequent bird encounters inhibited the run of the dog, or the run was simply lacking that day and the dog happened to have many finds? I think for a judge they can and should only judge what they see and leave speculation out of it.

If the other dog was as bad as you say, it sounds like a bad piece of judging. If however your dog never did exhibit the type of run expected for the stake I can understand not placing him first despite the fact he had quite a few finds. While I don't like to hear stories like yours, trials really aren't a tally of who found the most birds and is why experienced and honest judges are so critical. In general with field trials the dogs with the most finds do win, or at least have a high number of finds relative to the competition, but there certainly are exceptions.

I'm sorry if your friends' dog was deprived of what it deserved, however there are two sides to every story and we don't have the judges (or the winning dog owners') full perspective of the performances, which was obviously different than yours.

-Flush

P.S. As for the topic at hand, for the type of dog I like to hunt behind, I look for wins and most importantly repeat championships in American Field sanctioned events. I do not pay much attention to test titles as most of the lines of dogs I prefer don't compete in those competitions, nor do the tests actually put to the test the attributes I value most in a bird dog, but that is just my personal opinion.

WildRose · Post by **WildRose** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:43 pm

Flush wrote:Charlie,

yep, I agree with your thoughts and what you have seen. In your first example, I would not interpret that as the judges "penalizing" the dog for too many finds though. If indeed they did not get to see the dog put on an exhibit of what he is capable of in terms of run, reach, endurance etc in relation to the other dogs run that day, I find it hard to fault them.

Did your dog get a raw deal? Possibly, but I think you would have to be there to see it. Also, how many finds did the placing dogs have, I'm guessing a fair number too.
Since you yourself agreed with the placements, I tend to think the overall situation was unfavorable for your dog, but I'm not sure it was a case of the judges penalizing a dog for too many finds. Since it was a derby I assume it was only 30 minutes and your dog found 8 or 9 birds? That sounds like a pretty liberal planting of birds in one area to me.

I have not heard of a dog putting on a fantastic performance (according to unbiased observers) AND finding tons of birds not getting due recognotion. Too many birds could possibly hamper the "wow" factor of a dogs run, but in a planted bird stake I would put more blame on the bird planter than the judges for that happening.

-Flush

No I really don't think I got a raw deal. Like I said after about his fourth or fifth find knew what the outcome would be. The dogs that palced had between one and three finds.

Flash did an excellent job and there was nothing to fault him on at all. He just never missed a bird. Unfortunately in a 20 minute stake, you figure even one minute to work each find, and he's standing on point for nearly half the stake. How could you evaluate the dogs stamina? You can't. CR

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:22 pm

Flush wrote: phermes1,
So again it sounds like the judge felt your friends dog did not exhibit the run he expected/wanted to see as opposed to truly being penalized by finding too many birds. I think the real question is whether or not the frequent bird encounters inhibited the run of the dog, or the run was simply lacking that day and the dog happened to have many finds? I think for a judge they can and should only judge what they see and leave speculation out of it.

Actually, in the conversation with the judge, he did specifically state that the dog found too many birds and that's what dropped him.
Incidentally - the judge approached me - I didn't go to him all irate and feeling screwed.

If however your dog never did exhibit the type of run expected for the stake I can understand not placing him first despite the fact he had quite a few finds.

Obviously mine is a biased perspective, but I thought he did spectacular. Very solid range and worked hard from start to finish. Excellent style on point - not that it mattered.

Granted - if we were measuring linear distance from the handler, he was not the biggest running dog in the stake - but the course was through the woods in what I would call a 'target-rich' environment. The run-off dogs quite commonly get lost. The dogs needed to handle.

I'm sorry if your friends' dog was deprived of what it deserved, however there are two sides to every story and we don't have the judges (or the winning dog owners') full perspective of the performances, which was obviously different than yours.

OK, hold on a second - I'm not sharing the story so everybody can chime in and tell me how we got screwed. The judges obviously had a different opinion and I can respect it, even if I disagree with it. I was simply answering your original question, and that was if there was a specific instance where a dog was penalized for having too many finds. And this was one - straight from the judge's mouth. Granted, I suppose you can take his words from more than one point of view and arrive at different conclusions.

As a sidenote - honestly, the one thing that bugged me most was the dog that won. I was braced behind that dog 3 separate times on 3 separate courses that season. Each and every time, that dog joined us on the course halfway through our brace, and took 30-45 minutes to catch. I saw that dog a lot, and the same thing happened nearly every time it was put on the ground. And it wasn't that the dog was a huge runner, (which it was) and it took that long to physically locate it - you could see it running around the course, you could even get fairly close to it - it just flat out refused to actually be caught. I just have no time for the willful disobedience that that dog showed.

Post by **slistoe** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:15 pm

Ah, the good old "too many finds" argument. I have been on the losing side of the "too many finds" judgement a few times, AND NEVER ONCE DID I FEEL THE LEAST BIT SLIGHTED BY THE PLACEMENTS GIVEN! It is a fact that there are a great many things that go into a perfect performance and the dog that wins should be the one that exhibits the best performance of all the criteria. Finding and pointing birds with manners is one of those criteria, but it is not so important that it trumps all other items under consideration. IF BIRD FINDING ALONE IS THE BE ALL, END ALL OF A BIRD DOG PERFORMANCE THEN YOU HAVE A VERY NARROW MINDED VIEW OF WHAT A HUNTING DOG AND COMPANION IS ALL ABOUT.

Post by **slistoe** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:24 pm

phermes1, I know this is a technicality, but it is rather germane to the understanding of judgement practice. It is not a case of the dog being penalized for too many finds, but rather that having too many finds prevented your dog from properly showing other facets of a well rounded performance, namely RUN (as iterated by the judge). Other dogs in the stake had an adequate # of finds to show that they could find birds and handle them with manners as well as showcasing their ability to search, endurance, class etc (whatever else they may have shown that the dog you are referring to did not have the opportunity to show - or in fact did show that it was lacking in).

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:26 pm

Finding and pointing birds with manners is one of those criteria, but it is not so important that it trumps all other items under consideration.

Umm - I don't see where anyone suggested as much.

Flush · Post by **Flush** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:32 pm

phermes1 wrote:
OK, hold on a second - I'm not sharing the story so everybody can chime in and tell me how we got screwed. The judges obviously had a different opinion and I can respect it, even if I disagree with it.

Sorry if my comment came across offensly, that was not the intent. It shows you are a stand-up competitor to respect the judges decision even if you disagree with it. The judges comments seem very odd to me, if that is truly exactly what he meant. I guess I would try to have a more in-depth conversion with that judge in the future, or just avoid events he judges if that is truly his take on bird finds.

-Flush

WildRose · Post by **WildRose** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:32 pm

Phermes was this a broke dog stake or a derby???

Honestly This:

Actually, in the conversation with the judge, he did specifically state that the dog found too many birds and that's what dropped him.

sounds like a judge not doing a good enough job explaining the why. Go back and read my two posts about Flash's runs and maybe it'll put it all in a little better perspective for you.

As long as the dogs total performance is complete and exceptional no reasonable judge is going to say "four finds is just too many, I don't want to see a dog with more than two on this course".

In derby and ALL Age stakes when you have judges looking for extremes of run and stamina indeed too many finds can be the kiss of death, but I've found even there that usually the dog that indeed put on the best overall performance usually wins.

It can get down to some real technicalities and even bias at times. Yes though we don't like to admit it, it's always possible that local club politics can occasionally get involved but I find that to be the exception rather than the rule.

I've had one instance where I absolutely knew I had a stake won and didn't, and I knew exactly why. I still don't feel bad about it, in fact I laughed it off and shook the guys hand. CR

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:52 pm

Phermes was this a broke dog stake or a derby???

Derby

In derby and ALL Age stakes when you have judges looking for extremes of run and stamina indeed too many finds can be the kiss of death

I'm pretty sure that's what the deal was in this case.

I also agree that no sane judge is going to count finds and unilaterally throw out any dog with more than 4 or 5, or whatever their magic # is.

You know, guys - I didn't mean to derail the topic like this. It's not the end of the world, I could see where the judge was coming from, even if I didn't agree with the conclusion, and I've long since moved on. I also understand the points y'all are making - especially since it's not the first time I've heard them

- I just didn't think that was the problem in this case. Obviously the judges did, and since they're the ones that get paid the big bucks, what they think is what matters.

CherrystoneWeims · Post by **CherrystoneWeims** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:59 pm

I've also been told by judges that my dog had "too many finds". She's out there hunting the whole time, seeking out likely objectives, and staying to the front. Heck I have seen dogs who have come in FIRST who have come up from BEHIND the gallery and who have only had ONE find! And the handler has to hack the dog around the course to boot.

OK now folks what exactly ARE these competitions for???? Are they ALL about run?? Or are they supposed to show great bird dogs who can FIND birds?? Aren't they "hunting" dogs?? or are they "running" dogs??? Why not just run a Greyhound or a Whippet???

Phermes, I have seen Raker penalized for "too many finds".

Post by **slistoe** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:09 pm

You see Pam, they are not "all about run", but they are also not bird finding competitions at all costs. You can't win if you can't find a bird - and don't bring up the technicality of the rule in AF because no one ever won a broke dog stake with no finds over a decent performance of a dog with a find. You also can't win if you can't/won't/couldn't/didn't run. Why does it have to be the ridiculous "all or nothing" with some folks?

CherrystoneWeims · Post by **CherrystoneWeims** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:14 pm

no one ever won a broke dog stake with no finds over a decent performance of a dog with a find.

Been there done that also! Saw a dog who found a DEAD bird win Open Gun Dog back in Feb. It was the ONLY bird the dog found. Dog also broke at the shot on the callback.

Flush · Post by **Flush** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:18 pm

CherrystoneWeims wrote:Or are they supposed to show great bird dogs who can FIND birds??

They key thing you said there is "great" I have seen with my own eyes certain instances where average to below average dogs get just in the right spot and point a bunch of birds. Do I want to breed to this dog? Not when it is obvious the dog in question clearly has below average skills but got lucky that day. It not ALL about run, but it's not ALL about counting finds either.

Honestly I think the "they found too many birds" is given by judges as a nice way of saying your dog didn't have enough run that day. It leaves open the door to the fact your dog has nice run but got caught up in too many birds to exhibit it that day.

Overall I think we are really talking about exceptions here though.
A statistic I would love to see is placements given versus number of finds for the event. One event I am fairly familiar with (on paper) is Ames (The "national championship") I know for a fact in that venue historically the dogs that find the most birds clearly have an advantage in winning the event. In modern times there hasn't been a single lopsided winner where a dog with a low number of finds beats dogs with a high number of finds. That is a special case however since all the dogs are qualified with championship wins to be there. I suspect at the amateur level there are more sub-par dogs who do on occassion have more finds than the other dogs, but I still suspect these cases are very much in the minority.

-Flush

Post by **ezzy333** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:23 pm

OK now folks what exactly ARE these competitions for???? Are they ALL about run?? Or are they supposed to show great bird dogs who can FIND birds?? Aren't they "hunting" dogs?? or are they "running" dogs??? Why not just run a Greyhound or a Whippet???

Ah, finally a comment that makes sense to me. When hunting dogs are finding birds and don't have time to run or better put, a need to run it's hard for me to understand the purpose of a field trial.

The other comment that I think needs to be stated is when you enter a competition where a judge makes the decision all you are getting is his opinion. Thats what you paid your money for is an opinion and his opinion may not be right but he has the job to pick what he thinks is the winner. That doesn't mean he is right or that the winner was the best dog. And if you don't agree then you just don't run under that judge again. Each of you know how good your dog is better than the judge ever will so just file the results under "judges opinion" and get on with it.

Ezzy

Karen · Post by **Karen** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:26 pm

I'm really enjoying this thread. Just proves that, like all dogs are not created equal, all judges are also not created equal.

What do you guys think about marking? Lets say you have 2 otherwise identical performances, one dog marks his birds, the other stands like a statue, maintaining his intensity through the flush and shot. Which dog do you use?

Is marking a sign of intensity or is it a delayed chase?

CherrystoneWeims · Post by **CherrystoneWeims** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:35 pm

if you don't agree then you just don't run under that judge again.

I have a couple of judges that I will never run under again. These were in hunt tests. One guy for some reason won't pass a Weimaraner no matter how stellar a performance the dog puts on. Although I am not sure if it was just the Weimaraner or if it is the fact that it is a Weimaraner handled by a woman. I ran under this judge and he didn't even have the courtesy to WATCH my dog in the test. I had NO judge and NO gunner with me in the bird field. Dog found a bird, pointed staunchly, I kept yelling for a judge and a gunner NONE came. bird flushed I blanked it off, heeled the dog off. My bracemate (who was a move-up from JH that day) had bumped up birds but the judges kept him down :roll: and stayed with him. I expected a call back for a retrieve since we had done a back. No call back. I questioned the judge later and he called me "Little Lady" and said my dog didn't find a bird.

A friend had a similar incident with this same judge at a different HT. She also runs Weims.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:37 pm

Karen wrote:I'm really enjoying this thread. Just proves that, like all dogs are not created equal, all judges are also not created equal.

What do you guys think about marking? Lets say you have 2 otherwise identical performances, one dog marks his birds, the other stands like a statue, maintaining his intensity through the flush and shot. Which dog do you use?

Is marking a sign of intensity or is it a delayed chase?

I have no problem with a dog that marks, assuming no forward movement. Since these dogs ARE expected to retrieve at some point, I'd want them to follow and see where the bird went down.

Karen · Post by **Karen** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:39 pm

Ah! I run Brittanys on the east coast....no retrieving

But does that mean you'd choose the dog that marks over the one that doesn't?

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:41 pm

CherrystoneWeims wrote:
I ran under this judge and he didn't even have the courtesy to WATCH my dog in the test. I had NO judge and NO gunner with me in the bird field. Dog found a bird, pointed staunchly, I kept yelling for a judge and a gunner NONE came. bird flushed I blanked it off, heeled the dog off. My bracemate (who was a move-up from JH that day) had bumped up birds but the judges kept him down :roll: and stayed with him. I expected a call back for a retrieve since we had done a back. No call back. I questioned the judge later and he called me "Little Lady" and said my dog didn't find a bird.

Well - if the judge didn't see the find, for all practical purposes it didn't happen.
Although I DO agree that the judge was out of line and should have been with you, and there's no way I'd wast $ running under that judge again.

CherrystoneWeims · Post by **CherrystoneWeims** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:43 pm

Which dog do you use?

I would have to compare the rest of the performance of both dogs. If one dog handled more kindly than the other that's the one I would use. To me marking is not bad. If the dog marks and stays steady that shows me that the dog would probably be good for a retrieve too.

Now if in a FT dogs were not allowed to be collared off after the shot and handlers had to HEEL the dog of like we do in MH it would probably show a lot more of the dog.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:55 pm

Karen wrote:Ah! I run Brittanys on the east coast....no retrieving

But does that mean you'd choose the dog that marks over the one that doesn't?

IMO, marking is not a negative, period. I can't say I've seen a dog that didn't mark to some degree - assuming they know the bird flushed as sometimes they don't.

If things were THAT equal and we simply could NOT decide after much deliberation, I'd do a run-off. Usually, though, if you talk it through enough, you can come up with a winner.