# Cover dog Trials



## lazy8man (Mar 22, 2008)

I know there are a lot of fellas that run in the cover dog trials that frequent this forum. I also know most of you are setter men. With that said could you help me out a bit.

Are you aware of anyone that is running shorthairs in these trials and if so have they had any success? Does anyone have a program to try to produce shorthirs that can perform in that format?

I have attended several of the big trials in Gladwin and saw few dogs besides setters, a few pointers, and a brittany one time I think.

Looking for some honest information, breed loyalties aside.

Chad


----------



## Bobby (Dec 21, 2002)

I have never witnessed a Shorthair run in any Gladwin event other than the Hunting Dog stake. In Hunt Dog a Shorthair took first one summer and 3rd in a Spring trial. Other than setters, pointers and Wambli (brittany) the only other breeds I have seen run in a non Hunting Dog stake is my Gordon and another Gordon in a derby stake about 5 years back. The Derby dog placed. A few red dogs have run. I don't think any have placed in Shooting Dog stakes. 
I can't recall ever reading a draw posting for Cover Stakes in other regions with a Shorthair listed in the running order. I may be wrong, I just can't recall seeing it.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 10, 2006)

Dont recall seeing any either. It would be a very big uphill battle. Not to say GSP are not good dogs, but field trials are more than just being a good meat dog. Must show great class, application, bird finding ability, and range. On top of having a dog that always finds a bird, you would need to have a dog that was nearly perfect in appication and showed great ground speed and gait in order to overcome the long tail fellowed foes. And then, if you had all that, you would probably need to hold your breath and hope that the two people in the saddle were unbiased enough to use a short tailed dog. Not to say it couldnt happen, Wambli bested a field of 42 this fall, but she has been one of very few non pointer/setters to win in open stakes.


----------



## Tecumseh (Aug 13, 2004)

It depends on whether you want to run your dog or compete. I had some free weekends and decided to run one of Vizslas in the puppy stakes there but didn't expect her to win anything. She didn't run well anyways but I still had a good time. 
A good dog is a good dog, I would hope that judges would see that regardless of the breed. A lot of trials are political, meaning you have to pay your dues and show people you plan on sticking around. I think that , and the running style, have more to do with people not placing than anything else. It just so happens that most of the CD guys run ES and EPs. If you have a GSP that hunts/runs just like the CD ES & EPs that compete ... you never know.


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

In speaking with some of the coverdog trialers and watching a few trials, one of things that really surprised me is how strict the judges appear to be on bird handling skills in the open shooting dog stakes. I think that you'd have a good time and learn a lot, but in order to have a chance of winning, I'd research the judging criteria and make sure that the dog clearly demonstrates all of those abilities in spades.

I have a GSP that is a good bird producer but would be a disaster in a trial: too slow, doesn't cover enough ground, bumps birds on occasion, sometimes creeps on point, won't hold point long enough, chases wild flushes, not steady to shot, not stylish enough etc. etc. (despite all that I wouldn't trade her for anything).


----------



## Merimac (Jan 17, 2006)

Ian McTavish, here in MN, runs his GSH's with success.


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

I'd echo what Bobby and the rest have said. 

As far as red dogs, Speedy Edie O'Floin did have shooting dog placements. Sadly she died last year at a young age. Otherwise you'd be hearing from that dog.


----------



## NATTY BUMPO (May 12, 2001)

In a former life, I spent a whole lot of time and effort, securing good judges for our trials (AKC Brittany). We tried to avoid the inbreeding so pervasive in some FT circles and so would often use EP/ES judges. Had many looooong discussions with these men about judging field trials. Most of them had pretty strong opinions in what they liked to see in a bird dog. And what the winners in a field trial needed to do. And to a man, they elevated "class".

So, if I wanted to win in the coverdog game (which I dont), and if 99% of the judges of those stakes were pointer/setter men, then thats what I'd be running too. Judging a field trial is largely subjective. And all thing being equal, judges will use dogs that they like to see run. Simply human nature, and you wont change that.

NB


----------



## BIGSP (Sep 16, 2004)

JGF and Natty hit the nail on the head.

There are many great bird dogs out there but, there are very few world class bird dogs that can find birds and look awesome at doing it. I am a shorthair guy myself but, I can tell you that looking at a classy pointer on point and a classy shorthair on point are not the same.


----------



## shorthair guy (Jan 20, 2006)

The shorthair looks much better anything else is blasphemy :evil:


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

shorthair guy said:


> The shorthair looks much better anything else is blasphemy :evil:


Maybe when they're chasing fur instead of pointing birds. :evilsmile


----------



## Drifter Saver (Sep 13, 2005)

I do think that NB said it pretty good, but I don't agree with the statements made by JGF.

"Not to say GSP are not good dogs, but field trials are more than just being a good meat dog. Must show great class, application, bird finding ability, and range."

Are you implying that GSP's are meat dogs? Have you had the opportunity to see a NGSPA event (e.g. Ionia in Michigan)? Those dogs (trial dogs) generally only hunt to objectives. To that, most (as they should) field trial events should put focus on bird finding ability as that is their primary purpose. Range...some AA dogs would make most other trial venue dogs look like boot-lickers. They generally have to have very nice gates to run the distance and time that they do. I guess the only truly subjective aspect is how much class a dog with a short tail has compared to a very similar dog with a long tail. I have seen GSPs that flip ends at full speed and then stand as tall as they could on a bird 10-20 yards away. Therefore to finish where I started (NB's point), if that is a venue you wish to play, you should get the type of animal that they are specifically looking for (which isn't a GSP). Opposite of that, I don't think that a setter or pointer would have a very strong placement record in a NGSPA trial ...you get my point.

These points in general is why I have chosen historically to participate in NSTRA where the judges can only control a small portion of the outcome as it is based on performance and scores. The dogs truly have the ability to play above the refs! I would say that NSTRA is a pretty fair venue when the weekend and national trial placements are generally split between Pointer, GSPs, Setters and Brits...I even judged a Viszla that placed this past spring in Brown City.

All that despite the demise of the weekend trial...:evil:


----------



## Steelheadfred (May 4, 2004)

Very well put Joe - excellent post.


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

Never having been to a trial or really thought about getting into that world, I have to ask a dumb question....

Is the implication here then that even if a Setter or Pointer is actually an inferior bird finder when compared to a GSP in a given event, the GSP may still lose due to a lack of "class" or due to its lack of a long tail?

Somehow that doesn't sit right with me. Mostly because it implies the best dogs aren't getting recognized if that's what's going on.


----------



## 2ESRGR8 (Dec 16, 2004)

WestCoastHunter said:


> Is the implication here then that even if a Setter or Pointer is actually an inferior bird finder when compared to a GSP in a given event, the GSP may still lose due to a lack of "class" or due to its lack of a long tail?
> 
> Somehow that doesn't sit right with me. Mostly because it implies the best dogs aren't getting recognized if that's what's going on.


The flip side is that some dogs with bird work will place above dogs with better run and hunt.
Pretty sure you don't win unless you have birdwork and some dogs can really, really run but can't dig out a bird to save their life. Those dogs don't win. 

The best dogs are getting recognized.


----------



## critter trapper (Feb 9, 2004)

WestCoastHunter said:


> Never having been to a trial or really thought about getting into that world, I have to ask a dumb question....
> 
> Is the implication here then that even if a Setter or Pointer is actually an inferior bird finder when compared to a GSP in a given event, the GSP may still lose due to a lack of "class" or due to its lack of a long tail?
> 
> Somehow that doesn't sit right with me. Mostly because it implies the best dogs aren't getting recognized if that's what's going on.




Your answer is given in Nattys reply.


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

critter trapper said:


> Your answer is given in Nattys reply.


That's what I'm afraid of. It brings up an interesting question about the money people are spending on champion lines and the trial process as a whole.


----------



## BIGSP (Sep 16, 2004)

Drifter Saver said:


> I do think that NB said it pretty good, but I don't agree with the statements made by JGF.
> 
> "Not to say GSP are not good dogs, but field trials are more than just being a good meat dog. Must show great class, application, bird finding ability, and range."
> 
> ...


 
Well said.

I think going back to what Westcoast Hunter is asking. Do the best dogs really win. I think the answere is yes, most of the time. Just like all sports a bad call here and there may taint an outcome of a certain event but, if you look at champions. Champions don't have just one win next to their name.

Again it goes to the game you are playing. If you want to win coverdog trials get a setter or pointer. They typically are classier looking dogs on point than GSP's etc. It doesn't mean that setters and pointers are always better dogs. Good dogs start with good genetics, the rest is training and exposure.


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

2ESRGR8 said:


> The flip side is that some dogs with bird work will place above dogs with better run and hunt.
> Pretty sure you don't win unless you have birdwork and some dogs can really, really run but can't dig out a bird to save their life. Those dogs don't win.
> 
> The best dogs are getting recognized.


Well said Scott. 

On another point, comparing NSTRA trials and Cover Dog trials can't be done. You're talking about two very different types of trials. I'm not saying one's better than the other. But to try to compare the two is like comparing apples and oranges. 

Dogs competing in CD trials get a fair shake. To imply that the judging is scewed is unfair to say the least. If the dog has what it takes to compete and does well it will be recognized and given placements when they are earned.


----------



## FieldWalker (Oct 21, 2003)

That fact is&#8230; the long tailed dog stereotype does keep a lot of people (and breeds) away from this particular group. Pretty sad really&#8230; at the end of the day it is about a dog that can find and hold birds for the shooter. That fact that the dog is judged by how their tail looks when doing it is an absolutely ridiculous reality in the cover dog trails.

I wish the words _class_ and _intensity_ could be swapped. If you believe that a GSP doesn&#8217;t have the class of a setter or pointer&#8230; you really need to take a second to stop stroking your dogs tail and get you head out of your ass.

Just an opinion of mine&#8230; but all emphasis should be on the dog&#8217;s ability to find and point birds. That simple.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 10, 2006)

Drifter, without having attended a NSTRA trial, how big are the grounds you are on, and approx how many birds are used for the trial or a given brace?


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

Drifter Saver said:


> From what I gather, the CD trialers aren't looking for the nose as much as they are the style and speed. I might be wrong, and if I am, please correct me and support your objection because how can you truly evaluate a dog's nose if it rarely contacts birds and if it rarely is able to be compared against its competitors.


Respectfully that couldn't be further from the truth! A bird dog without a nose for birds is good for nothing more than a pet! I have no idea where the perception that CD trialers care more for speed and style than bird finding ability comes from but it did come from Cd trialers! Personally if I have a dog that is not a good bird finder, I'm shipping it down the road. Cd trialers place a premium on bird finding ability. The myth that a cover dog rarely comes in contact with birds is ridiculous. 

Case in point many CD trials and championships cannot even be won without the dog finding either a grouse or a woodcock during their brace. Second, CD trialers spend countless numbers of hours in the woods, both in season and out of season running and training their dogs on grouse and woodcock. Third, many trialers and trainers in the CD circuit also head west in the winter months to get the dogs on wild birds. Many owners who cannot go send their dogs with the professional handlers to get those bird contacts in order to further refine the dogs manners on game.


----------



## Merimac (Jan 17, 2006)

West Coast Hunter, You are crackin me up. You are absolutely correct. A good dog is a good dog. The trials once again are designed to figure out more than the dog with the most birds. 

ie. You meet three equally pretty women. They all look great until one takes off her scarf. She has a huge hairy and I will add warty mole on her neck that you cant stop staring at. 
In my book she could still be a good kisser but sorry (no offense to those with obvious huge hairy and warty moles) but I would most likely try my luck with one of the other two. 

The point is, you usually don't want to start with one strike against you when the competition is pretty stiff to begin with.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 10, 2006)

c'mon Ben, you'd try it, don't kid us. :lol:


----------



## Drifter Saver (Sep 13, 2005)

[email protected] said:


> Drifter, without having attended a NSTRA trial, how big are the grounds you are on, and approx how many birds are used for the trial or a given brace?


They range, but a single field is usually between 30 and 50 acres (depending on the grounds). The cover varies from 12-15 inch grass fields to 2 foot CRP (again depending on the particular grounds).


----------



## Drifter Saver (Sep 13, 2005)

midwestfisherman said:


> Case in point many CD trials and championships cannot even be won without the dog finding either a grouse or a woodcock during their brace.


I think that you are missing the point. Your quote isn't putting a premium on the caliber of cannon on the front end. A single bird (of any sort) might meet the needs of evaluation in one format, but a single bird in another 30 minute event means that the dog didn't get the job done when bird finding is a premium.

You are taking this personal when you should be observing the facts of what the key measurables are and the priority by which they should be met for a particular game.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 10, 2006)

On average about how many birds are put out. Do they salt the course to begin then restock accordingly or each dog gets so many put out no matter what, or something along these lines?


----------



## Merimac (Jan 17, 2006)

Drift saver, Shoot and retrieve you can use beagles and or GSHs right? 
:evilsmile


----------



## Merimac (Jan 17, 2006)

[email protected] said:


> c'mon Ben, you'd try it, don't kid us. :lol:


I am a betting man.


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

Drifter Saver said:


> I think that you are missing the point. Your quote isn't putting a premium on the caliber of cannon on the front end. A single bird (of any sort) might meet the needs of evaluation in one format, but a single bird in another 30 minute event means that the dog didn't get the job done when bird finding is a premium.
> 
> You are taking this personal when you should be observing the facts of what the key measurables are and the priority by which they should be met for a particular game.



I'm not taking anything personal. I'm simply dispelling the inaccuracies that you're putting forth. As far the caliber of nose, I simply stated that a bird was required to win. In many cases dogs will have multiple finds on a course. 

I'd also challenge the statement that a 30 minute event in which a single bird is pointed by the dog during it's brace isn't showing that the dog has what it takes when bird finding is at a premium. That's simply not true. If you take the time to check into what it really takes for a dog to find a bird at some of these events you'll realized the error of your thinking. 

What you fail to realize is that in many trials the courses being used have routinely been pressured by previous days and even weeks of running. The birds on these courses are wily and very tough for the dogs to find. This fact clearly shows that even a one bird find brace will be a great feat for the dog. These birds have been pressured for many days and are tough to find in even ideal circumstances. We're not talking about courses salted with pen raised birds. Throw in varrying weather conditions, course conditions, etc, a dog who consistently performs well in the CD trials is a quality dog. You can take that to the bank.


----------



## Bobby (Dec 21, 2002)

kek25 said:


> .........Wambli just won the Lake States here,.........


Wambli was Champion at the Michigan Woodcock Championship.
Springfield's Talley Em won the Lake States Grouse Championship.


----------



## kek25 (Jul 9, 2005)

Bobby said:


> Wambli was Champion at the Michigan Woodcock Championship.
> Springfield's Talley Em won the Lake States Grouse Championship.


Doh! I said I read the Field faithfully; I didn't say I retained what I read.


----------



## Induna (Apr 19, 2007)

First off as a judge at CD trials I've placed several Britts. This thing about nose or tail is moot. It's the total package. If you have a dog that bulls through the brush with it's head down looking for foot sent, more grouse are bumped this way, stay home. If you have a pointing dog of ANY breed that seems to float through the woods at top speed appearing not to disturb a single branch with it's head up using it's eyes to locate grouse/woodcock cover and it's nose to locate BODY scent, that stands point solid, high on both ends saying LOOK AT ME! Your dog WILL be under consideration for a placement.
Cover trial dogs that wont point a planted bird as stated earlier is a training fault. Long tailed dogs that carry the tail down and point with a low tail just don't look as pleasing to the eye so in this regard the long tail is a disadvantage over a stub tail that wont stand out and catch the judges eye. My $1.50 worth, 30 years at field trials gives me more than 2 cents.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 10, 2006)

For the gentleman who posted this, find a breeding that both parents excite you, both dogs show broke, and hopefully they run a little cuz if neither has a motor, most likely pup wont. Other than that, get em into lots of wild birds, keep in front, and make handle! For Drifter, is it realistic to expect a dog to have the same amount of finds in native habitat with native game as one might have in a concentrated field with planted game? I am not sure about most but if I am in great cover and have 5 grouse pointed and handled perfectly in a half hour I am on top of the world, let alone somewhere that gets run usually a couple times a day for literally six weeks straight. We put just as much emphasis on birds, however you can't compare bird finding ability equally between the two venues. To each his own!


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

midwestfisherman said:


> What you fail to realize is that in many trials the courses being used have routinely been pressured by previous days and even weeks of running. The birds on these courses are wily and very tough for the dogs to find. This fact clearly shows that even a one bird find brace will be a great feat for the dog. These birds have been pressured for many days and are tough to find in even ideal circumstances. We're not talking about courses salted with pen raised birds. Throw in varrying weather conditions, course conditions, etc, a dog who consistently performs well in the CD trials is a quality dog. You can take that to the bank.


It's really an apples to oranges comparison. You really cannot compare a hand-raised quail find (or a quantity of them for that matter) to a wild grouse find. A planted domestic quail will gladly put up with a lot of sloppy dog work while a pressured grouse simply will not tolerate it.
To me, nothing compares to a dog standing out there in the woods, all by itself, sometimes +150 yards out, holding a wild, cagey grouse like his life depended on it over a perfect point until the handler to gets there--just one man's opinion here, but to me, that's a bird dog.


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> for the gentleman who posted this, find a breeding that both parent excite you, both dogs show broke, and hopefully they run a little cuz if neither has a motor, most likely pup wont. Other than that, get em into wild birds, keep in front, and make handle!


 I agree and best of luck in your endeavor: I hope you wind-up being the pioneer who breaks the ground and makes it happen!


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

I can't believe Dogwhistle didn't have anything to say on this. :chillin:


----------



## Drifter Saver (Sep 13, 2005)

midwestfisherman said:


> I'm not taking anything personal. I'm simply dispelling the inaccuracies that you're putting forth. As far the caliber of nose, I simply stated that a bird was required to win. In many cases dogs will have multiple finds on a course.


But even you have said that finding multiple birds usually isn't a plus and generally a dog moving faster and bigger with one find is what is being looked for versus a tighter and slower dog having multiple finds. How does that work when you are hunting? Do you not shoot any close birds that a dog might find on a road edge or a bird that is sitting tight waiting for you to walk past it?



midwestfisherman said:


> I'd also challenge the statement that a 30 minute event in which a single bird is pointed by the dog during it's brace isn't showing that the dog has what it takes when bird finding is at a premium. That's simply not true. If you take the time to check into what it really takes for a dog to find a bird at some of these events you'll realized the error of your thinking.


This was directed at NSTRA...a single bird run isn't good enough in our game. We want our dogs to find all of the available birds (it takes finding most of them to place).

I have nothing against the CD dogs as they are generally the same dog (breeding) that we play with. NSTRA also prefers a straight tail at 12:00 with a high head. However, a tail at 10:00 and a dog slightly down in the front will still have a good chance to place or win if it can outfind the other dogs.

I as most people would like to have another activity to participate in with my dog (I am closer to Gladwin than I am most of the NSTRA grounds). My issue is with the judging system. It isn't an objective and measurable method. Maybe that is the engineer in me, but I can't imagine basing a decision in my professional world off of gut feeling and/or group discussion when there is definitively a method to evaluate and analyze an outcome for recommendation. I know that traditions are a hard thing to break, but it would be nice to see a truly objective scoring system that eliminates almost all bias (for dog or handler). For example, in NSTRA everyone at the trial gets to see every dogs scores as they are posted on the wall throughout the day. The scoring is relatively cut and dry so if there are differences in opinion, it is usually 2-3 points out of a 100 point system.



FindTheBird said:


> A planted domestic quail will gladly put up with a lot of sloppy dog work while a pressured grouse simply will not tolerate it.


Sloppy dog work in most competition venues aren't rewarded and it isn't any different in NSTRA.

Hopefully some you can visit the Gladwin NSTRA grounds this spring for its first ever trial. My guess is that the placements will be held by GSPs, Setters, Pointers, Brits and maybe even a few other breeds. Heck, $35 gets you 30 minutes in the field with your dog and 5-6 birds...cheaper than a preserve!


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

Drifter Saver said:


> But even you have said that finding multiple birds usually isn't a plus and generally a dog moving faster and bigger with one find is what is being looked for versus a tighter and slower dog having multiple finds. How does that work when you are hunting? Do you not shoot any close birds that a dog might find on a road edge or a bird that is sitting tight waiting for you to walk past it?


Good God what an a-bomb I helped to create out of this issue.

Drifter Saver, I think you're hitting the nail on the head in terms of my concerns about CD trials. I understand what cover dog trials are for and thanks to some clarification here from those who participate in them, why they are the way they are.

Having said this, it really forces me to conclude that when looking for a top notch dog with "champion" lines, those lines really should have competed in a variety of venues. JMO

By the way, none of you have answered my question, what kinds of birds did Bob Wehle work his dogs on in trials? Wild or pen raised or both? Anyone know? I don't.

Good discussion.


----------



## Scott Berg (Feb 24, 2008)

WestCoastHunter said:


> By the way, none of you have answered my question, what kinds of birds did Bob Wehle work his dogs on in trials? Wild or pen raised or both? Anyone know? I don't.
> 
> .


Elhew dogs are common in any trial format. They have probably been most prominent in Horseback Shooting Stakes on the East coast which are more often planted bird trials although there are a few wild bird trials in the south. They have also had considerable success in cover dog trials winning a number of prestigious Championships. We also see a fair number of them in walking shooting dogs stakes which are primarily planted bird trials.

SRB


----------



## Drifter Saver (Sep 13, 2005)

Feather Hunter said:


> Why not make it interesting? Throw in some water work. Like, a duck search, blind retrieve, honoring by blind, steadiness at the blind, retrieve of shackled duck, 150 yard drag of duck plus retrieve, and you might get some NAVHDA handlers show you what their dogs can do on top of the field or cover work.


What's a duck???


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

Drifter Saver said:


> What's a duck???


It might be a German or Dutch word? Should I read it as a noun or a verb? Further, why should we include blind dogs? Wouldn't they run into trees, fence posts and horses? Seems cruel to me...


----------



## Scott Berg (Feb 24, 2008)

My writing style really irritates some people in this type of environment. Making the type of point I made here requires some explanation and supporting logic or facts. It can&#8217;t be done in 50 words or less. Some people take this detailed explanation as an attempt on my part to show off or prove I am smarter than them. Well, that&#8217;s simply not the case. This is an academic conversation for me. 

I might be overly optimistic but I hope these conversations will improve how we evaluate dogs and more importantly improve whatever breed we fancy. Somehow it always turns into a measure of who is the smartest, most experienced or some other measure related to personal pride. Are we trying to learn more or do we really only want to make points that support our choice in breed or competitive venue?

In a discussion with numerous points and counterpoints, not one NSTRA supporter was been willing to address what I have suggested to be a gaping fundamental flaw in this scoring system. Not one person was willing to make a single constructive counter point. If my point is valid we should be asking &#8220;how could we improve&#8221;. I have suggested to some of my NSTRA friends that the retrieve scores should be averaged. Under the current system the dog with 5 finds @ 80 scores 400. If the dog with 4 finds scored at an average of 95 receives 380 points. I am confident most people would say the dog with four finds is the better retriever. However, I can&#8217;t find anyone willing to concede what certainly does appear to be an obvious fundamental flaw. I am all ears if someone would be willing to explain to me why this is not a flaw in the scoring system. I am not trying to be confrontational. I am trying to improve the format. 

I apologize to those who are offended by this content or my writing style. I just don&#8217;t know how to make a case (effectively) on these topics in another way. 

Natty and Induna, thanks for the kind words. 

SRB


----------



## kek25 (Jul 9, 2005)

You do a fine job of keeping the comments non-personal.

Some people just can't help taking things personally, but I think as a person evolves with these forums one gets less and less defensive and realizes more learning can come from civil academic discussion than constant personal (or perceived personal) challenges. Once a person gets beyond just an interest in hearing (reading) what he has to say (post) some good information can be gleaned from these forums.

I would be interested in your thoughts on the standard I posted (in 2 parts) a few pages back. Are you familiar with it; do you incorporate parts of it into your breeding program? I thought it complemented your comments regarding breeding.


----------



## Ugo (Dec 19, 2008)

Gents, I'm new to this forum so let me begin by saying that I've trained bird dogs for over 30 years - all breeds. Before we get too far into CD vc NSTRA we need to recognize that a good bird dog is a good bird dog is a good bird dog and not simply because of the venue we chose to showcase our dog in. Having said that, I have done CD trials and NSTRA, as well as a number of other pointing events. I've also judged most events accept for NSTRA. Further-more, I foot-hunt my horseback trial dogs.
In 1998 I did alot of winning with a Brittany in horseback trials against pointers and setters and won with this Brittany in cover trials too. This same Brittany hunted grouse and woodcock like a dream, retrieved to hand from land or water. Sadly, I lost her to cancer at 7 years of age.
I now own a setter and a pointer - both of which I'm very happy with.
So, in my single experience with NSTRA, I won 2nd with a Britt to a pointer whose owner walked around the unusually restrictive/diminuitive course and actually looked for birds in likely places. Subsequently, he hacked his pointer into the bird and was scored with a find?!?!?!? It's not about the handler - not about the judges that "might" have erred in their final decision. I only went once because I found it didn't serve me personally as a testing ground by any stretch of the imagination. What it is, in my humble opinion, is a place where folk can go see which dog finds the most birds just for fun. It does not challenge a bird dog's base/prime function - to FIND birds. It does not put to test his nose. It does not challenge a bird dog's ability to handle in a typical hunting environment. It does not put to the test a bird dog's stamina, endurance, or bottom end. It does not challenge a bird dog's ability to use it's brain to hunt likely objectives intelligently. In fact, it's really not a test or measure of a bird dog's ability in any remote form. Again, IMHO.
Is it fun? Obviously it is for those that frequent the sport and there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that. Just keep in mind that it isn't about whether you have a comparatively superior bird dog. If you want to test your NSTRA dog's ability, you need to do so in some other trial or hunting-like venue/environment/setting.
I do especially appreciate Mr. Berg's contribution to this thread. He obviously know's his stuff and if NSTRA was interested in transforming itself into a test or measure of sorts, they would do well to solicite Mr. Berg's input. Still, why does NSTRA have to change at all if participants are having fun? Nothing wrong with that.
As for cover trials, you will definitely need a dog with a high level of ability and it WILL be tested to the limit. This is not the only bird dog testing ground however it is none-the-less, a stringent and demanding event on many levels. You can contest or have a preference over the winner however all dogs under consideration will have performed at superior levels.....period. 
In summary, one could say that cover trials, and other similar trials are where bird dogs are developed. The results of these proving grounds are what end up as our superior hunters/NSTRA dogs. 
There's something out there for us all!


----------



## crosswind (Sep 1, 2004)

Scott Berg said:


> My writing style really irritates some people in this type of environment. Making the type of point I made here requires some explanation and supporting logic or facts. It cant be done in 50 words or less. Some people take this detailed explanation as an attempt on my part to show off or prove I am smarter than them. Well, thats simply not the case. This is an academic conversation for me.
> 
> I might be overly optimistic but I hope these conversations will improve how we evaluate dogs and more importantly improve whatever breed we fancy. Somehow it always turns into a measure of who is the smartest, most experienced or some other measure related to personal pride. Are we trying to learn more or do we really only want to make points that support our choice in breed or competitive venue?
> 
> ...


 Scott I will and I take no offence with your opinions. I am all for making anything better.
I enjoy discussing bird dogs with someone that has a lot of experience.
But it will have to be Monday. I have to get ready for a trial this weekend.


----------



## Drifter Saver (Sep 13, 2005)

Scott,

I am just tired of typing 

I have read your posts in detail. Retrieve is a large portion of NSTRA (hence the name). You mentioned earlier that it is weighted too heavily. I don't think that it is weighted any differently than having to run a fully broke dog in other events. Both requirements are required for their respective events and both can be (and usually are) trained. Even though many of the dogs ran are natural retrievers.

I know you ran through this earlier, but NSTRA Scoring (also as an education for those who are interested) is as follows:

*Find (each) scored 0-100 (varies with style, intensity, stands tall, etc.)
*Retrieve (each) scored 0-100 (varies with quick locating, quick pick-up, blind retrieves, soft mouth, etc.)
*Ground Coverage (one score for the 30 minute brace) scored 0-100 (varies with sharp and classy movement along with thorough searching for birds)
*Backing (one (first and only) opportunity for one score) scored 0-75 (varies with immediate stopping at first sight, stays intense with good style)
*Obedience (one score for the 30 minute brace) scored 0-75

I am not going to do the math on here, but the retrieving aspect can have a contribution of 0% (no birds found) up to about 30% of total score achievable in a 5 bird run. If a dog only found one bird, retrieving then represents about 25% of total achievable score. I personally believe that retrieving is properly represented.

Some dogs are fabulous retrievers and some aren't (scores show it). Some dogs don't get the opportunity to retrieve because a missed bird. This certainly makes a difference when a couple of points matter (which is generally what it comes down to). I think that your suggestion would occasionally get someone maybe a 3rd place versus nothing because generally the placing dogs have good scores across the board (and a lot of finds to go with the good scores).

I think that the key item to remember is that the primary objective in a NSTRA trial is # of finds to be scored (which also results in # of retrieves to be scored). Secondarily (but mandatory) then obedience, backing and ground coverage become the place makers as usually the top dogs will have the same number of finds and their scores will be very similar (finds and retrieves)...or maybe not...that is why I like the mathematics of the all-inclusive scoring system. It generally works itself out with minimal, if any, subjectivity. Regarding the lack of responses, I don't think too many people (NSTRA members) are worried about discussing it because most of us like the current system. It has been what it is for a long time, and it is supported with a growing membership (even during these difficult times). As of this upcoming spring, we will have held Michigan trials on 4 different grounds from SW Michigan to the thumb area and up to Gladwin. During these very trials, I have seen Pointers, GSP's, Setters, Brits, Vizslas, and even a Braque de Bor*%^!#@ place. It is a fun, competitive and National venue.

I guess if it isn't broke...don't fix it.

Now I must go put fuel in the tractor as I think my work is about to begin.


----------



## Scott Berg (Feb 24, 2008)

kek25 said:


> I would be interested in your thoughts on the standard I posted (in 2 parts) a few pages back. Are you familiar with it; do you incorporate parts of it into your breeding program? I thought it complemented your comments regarding breeding.


Keith,

I first saw that piece by Brown about 20 years ago and I thought I understood it but I really did not. There is so much wisdom compressed into a couple pages that it boggles my mind. Yes, we do incorporate most of his theory in our program. However, I was not because we recognized his wisdom 20 years ago. It happened by experimentation and evaluation of a bunch of dogs from different lines. I wish I would have understood this 20 years ago. We have a Champion female bred to CH Tekoa Mountain Patriot right now and last week I bought a pup out of CH Hytest Skyhawk and a really exceptional female owned by Sean Derrig. Yes, the pointer guy, Sean Derrig has a really nice Setter. 

We practice a theory that I think would be consistent with Brown with our females. Our Champion or Champion caliber females are used to sustain our program. In other words, produce the next generation of females. However, they also produce offspring that do not possess the independence / run necessary to be Champions but they do inherent the other great traits of Champions, especially when those CH caliber females are bred to the premier stud dogs. It is those females (one generation removed) we use to produce hunting dogs. They are not for someone who wants a pointing dog within shotgun range but they are ideal for the serious foot hunter. We would breed those females to a similar stud or a stud we know produces biddable offspring. 

Browns theories on studs have been proven over the years. I dont know that we have really pushed our selection quite to the ragged edge he suggests. However, We have bred to and bought pups out of most of the prominent AA males in the past 15 years but many of them were known to be physically gifted but handled relatively easily so I am not sure if that is exactly consistent. We also bred to and bought dogs out of the really premier shooting dogs so thats not exactly consistent either although dogs like The Performer, Destinaire, Hamiltons Blue Diamond, Gridiron and Southwin Mike, probably would have been just as successful as AA dogs. Our Jack dog came out of a female by Panovskis Billy Boy who was better known for his bird finding and style. 

SRB


----------



## Flash01 (Jun 12, 2008)

Pointerguy said:


> Lets settle this like men..... I say we have a fun trial this summer and run the NSTRA dogs against the CD dogs...:lol:
> 
> It can be arranged....?


 
I was thinking the same thing. Would have to be a two weekend deal where one was the Nastra format and one was the CD format.

I would come to both... with a flack jacket and a side arm.


----------



## Feather Hunter (Sep 1, 2008)

Drifter Saver said:


> What's a duck???


Good one fellas.


----------



## shorthair guy (Jan 20, 2006)

I dont see that as a flaw at all. Everyone who comes into nstra know 5 beats 4 if everything else is equal.(which normally isnt the case.) Its easy for folks to understand. there is no second guessing, no.. that judge screwed me. it helps keep the bs out IMO.
I have seen dogs with 5 finds but lose to 3 finds...why because other issues happened..dog wouldnt retrieve, obedience was very low, spent alot of time out of bounds. Lots of stuff happens during a brace, but there is no question in the handlers mind of why he/she lost.

I dont know a whole lot about CD trials(just what bobby told me some years ago). Do the judges have any kind of scoring system? Keep notes?
How do the remeber the first runs from the last?
Do CD trials get run in the heat of the summer?
I know we run even when it is a hundred degrees out.

Thanks for the info


In a discussion with numerous points and counterpoints, not one NSTRA supporter was been willing to address what I have suggested to be a gaping fundamental flaw in this scoring system. Not one person was willing to make a single constructive counter point. If my point is valid we should be asking how could we improve. I have suggested to some of my NSTRA friends that the retrieve scores should be averaged. Under the current system the dog with 5 finds @ 80 scores 400. If the dog with 4 finds scored at an average of 95 receives 380 points. I am confident most people would say the dog with four finds is the better retriever. However, I cant find anyone willing to concede what certainly does appear to be an obvious fundamental flaw. I am all ears if someone would be willing to explain to me why this is not a flaw in the scoring system. I am not trying to be confrontational. I am trying to improve the format. 

I apologize to those who are offended by this content or my writing style. I just dont know how to make a case (effectively) on these topics in another way. 

Natty and Induna, thanks for the kind words. 

SRB[/quote]


----------



## Merimac (Jan 17, 2006)

Sounds like a good reason for you all to enter the RGS gun dog trial.

Welcome Ugo. Any snow in Ontario yet?


Ben


----------

