# trial question



## up-hunter (May 19, 2007)

I see that some of the cover dog trials have hunting dog stakes and i was wondering if any breeds besides pointers, setters and britts run with some success in this type of stake.


----------



## 2ESRGR8 (Dec 16, 2004)

Yes.
A shorthair won a couple events ago.
Bobby's Gordon has also placed.


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

Scott's right, and I've seen a number of hunting dogs representing a number of breeds that would be extremely competitive in that type of event.


----------



## 2ESRGR8 (Dec 16, 2004)

Mike didn't you just ribbon with a shorthair?


----------



## GSP Gal (Nov 12, 2005)

Guess there wouldn't be any tail-prejudice there!


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

2ESRGR8 said:


> Mike didn't you just ribbon with a shorthair?


OK, that's it, I'm Googling for prosthetic tail providers right now!:lol::lol::lol:


----------



## up-hunter (May 19, 2007)

what are the rules in hunting dog is it a broke dog stake or study to flush how does it work?


----------



## GSP Gal (Nov 12, 2005)

FindTheBird said:


> OK, that's it, I'm Googling for prosthetic tail providers right now!:lol::lol::lol:


poor Major. :lol:


----------



## Induna (Apr 19, 2007)

up-hunter said:


> what are the rules in hunting dog is it a broke dog stake or study to flush how does it work?


 Judgement stops at the flush no need to have a broke dog. In the hunting dog stake the judges are looking for a dog that they'd like to hunt over. Most judges still want to see a classy running dog but not the extreme range that a trial dog has.


----------



## Worm Dunker (Sep 11, 2000)

The fall Hunting Dog stake the Hunter won Doug the RGS rep. Britt came in second and another Britt placed also. I seen other Britt also place. Grouseman placed his shorthair also.


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

FindTheBird said:


> OK, that's it, I'm Googling for prosthetic tail providers right now!:lol::lol::lol:


:lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

all these placements.. how many short tail dogs have actually won? perhaps they havent won because their tail isnt long enough?? 

From everything i have heard and observed it is a very biased trial.. pointers and setters are the favorable dog to this trial community..

Perhaps my judgement is wrong.. Can someone post list of winners not placements but winners that didnt have long tails.. 

I think they should just change their rules and limit it to pointers and setters and there wouldnt be any doubts.


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

chewy said:


> all these placements.. how many short tail dogs have actually won? perhaps they havent won because their tail isnt long enough??
> 
> From everything i have heard and observed it is a very biased trial.. pointers and setters are the favorable dog to this trial community..
> 
> ...


Once again your ignorance shines forth!


----------



## Induna (Apr 19, 2007)

chewy said:


> all these placements.. how many short tail dogs have actually won? perhaps they havent won because their tail isnt long enough??
> 
> From everything i have heard and observed it is a very biased trial.. pointers and setters are the favorable dog to this trial community..
> 
> ...


 When long tailed dogs entered exceed the short tailed dogs 15 to 1 well yeah long tails are going to win more. That's called the law of averages not bias.


----------



## 2ESRGR8 (Dec 16, 2004)

chewy said:


> all these placements.. how many short tail dogs have actually won?


 The shorthair I wrote about above *won* in 2006.


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

ok if i am ignorant.. educate me... where can i find the judging guidlines? where can i find the rules? Is there a website that defines the rules and judging guidlines? 
Or is it just word of mouth and what that judge feels like what he thinks a good dog is?


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

chewy said:


> ok if i am ignorant.. educate me... where can i find the judging guidlines? where can i find the rules? Is there a website that defines the rules and judging guidlines?
> Or is it just word of mouth and what that judge feels like what he thinks a good dog is?


Read away. 

http://www.fosteraward.com/New_Trialers.html

http://www.aftca.org/by-laws & running rules.html


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

Relax and just go get a setter already!!!!!:lol:

Ganzer


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

well after browsing that page and the documents attached to it. no where do i find the judging guidlines... i dont see anywhere where it is on an official document what is expected of a dog. 

perhaps i skipped over it... but i dont see it.. help me find the judging guidlines.. official ones.


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

You'll need to pay 3.95 for that.

http://www.aftca.org/guide_for_judging.html


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

i found it and have glanced over it.. one thing i noticed that favors setters and pointers is they must have a high head and tail on point.. how many short tail breeds do you see with a high head and high tail on point.. thats not normal for the breed... so i would continue to say its biased towards setters and pointers... 

"there are very few dogs today which can win without possesing a lofty head and tail, no matter how impressive their other qualities are. "

I think that sums the answers up for brittanies and other short tail dogs.. there are some gsps with poker tails but the vast majority do not have 12 o clock tails on point... its normal for a shorthair or other german dogs to have a low head on point... 


I think this answers everything to a tee.. thanks for educating me .


----------



## Steelheadfred (May 4, 2004)

chewy said:


> all these placements.. how many short tail dogs have actually won? perhaps they havent won because their tail isnt long enough??
> 
> From everything i have heard and observed it is a very biased trial.. pointers and setters are the favorable dog to this trial community..
> 
> ...


This just is not true. Hell they had the balls to ask a guy that owns two labradors to judge the hunting dog stake last year, one guy on this board did not like it to much but I was made to feel very very welcome and felt appreciated and made some new friends.


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

Is that a wirehair?????? AHHHHH now I understand. Shouldn't take it out on setters though they didn't do it.

Ganzer


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

yeah thats a wirehair and he is the most god awful grouse hunter i have ever seen.. I have more than one dog.. 

How many all age champions has there been that arent a setter or ppointer.. 

I have nothing against the breeds heck i am thinking of getting a pointer out of elhew explorer.. 

I dont have a problem with cover dog trials. I am just pointing out the answer to the original question of this post... 

Trust me i am not the only person who knows this to be the truth..


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

Steelheadfred said:


> This just is not true. Hell they had the balls to ask a guy that owns two labradors to judge the hunting dog stake last year, one guy on this board did not like it to much but I was made to feel very very welcome and felt appreciated and made some new friends.


 
Read my prior post about lofty head and loftty tail.. That is taken directly from the judging book..


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

MERGANZER said:


> Is that a wirehair?????? AHHHHH now I understand. Shouldn't take it out on setters though they didn't do it.
> 
> Ganzer


 
hahah he is forsale too... hmmm 600.00 one breeding you will have your money back.. prize two natural ability navhda.. some NSTRA points..


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

It is tough to prove one way or the other cause its being "judged". Kind of like the olympic events that are "judged" someone always feel they were screwed. But from what I understand, the vast majority of the entries are setter and pointer which would "favor" a setter winning. Who knows? Take yer dogs up and run in it and judge for yourself by what you observe.

Ganzer


----------



## N M Mechanical (Feb 7, 2008)

*Pointing Style:* Refers to a dogs attitude while on point. Preferred is a high head, straight 12: oclock tail, the dog standing tall, and lots of intensity.

Even though I do not agree with what has been wrote, but from the reading this would go against the natural pointing of the german breeds from my limited knowledge.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 10, 2006)

There are other breeds that are competitive in these events, most of the time they are the exception, not the rule. Even the lowly setter hasn't won at ames NC in over thirty years, so I wouldn't say its prejudice against shorttail dogs, but in events such as horseback trials, a pointer has the upper edge and it is quite obvious when you look at the amount of dogs entered, the endurance it requires, and the ability to maintain or gain momentum in an hour when condtions become unfavorable for the shags. For any quail stake for that matter, if you are competing against 30 or more dogs that finish with birds, you better have done something awfully special if you are running a britt or gsp or whatever, even if your running a pointer or a setter. The playing field becomes a little more fair in wild bird trials, where it is fair to say that about 1/5 of the competition will have bird work, thus giving some of the other breeds a little bigger opening to do something. There is basically one britt that competes on a regular basis in the woods and has done her share of winning. It is easy to not put a dog in and say it wouldnt get used. I know two things, you will never no if you dont enter, and you will never know if you got shafted unless you walk every brace, even at that it is different under every set of judges.


----------



## Bobby (Dec 21, 2002)

chewy said:


> all these placements.. how many short tail dogs have actually won? perhaps they haven't won because their tail isn't long enough??
> 
> From everything i have heard and observed it is a very biased trial.. pointers and setters are the favorable dog to this trial community..
> 
> ...


It's a Hunting Dog stake, unrecognised. That was the question. The Amateur Club is the only club at Gladwin that runs a stake of this nature. The West Michigan Field Trial Club also runs a Hunt dog stake at the Allegan Grounds 2 times per year. Our stake is intended to introduce non trial folks to the Gladwin Field Trial Grounds and Cover Dog trials. Induna spelled it out on the judging. Shorthairs have placed 1st and beyond, Brittany's too. Gordon setter a few times. It's mostly pointers and setters placing because it mostly pointers and setters entered. Same with the American Field events, almost exclusively setters and pointers. Folks talk up their breeds but they never bring them to the line. I've seen a number of shorthairs that have the run for this game but the owners never bring them. It's just the way it is. No need to keep pounding the same drum, the beat is boring.



chewy said:


> From everything i have ..........observed it is a very biased trial.............


Chewy, exactly how many Cover Trials have you observed?


A Brittany won the Michigan Woodcock Championship last fall.


*


----------



## FieldWalker (Oct 21, 2003)

Come to think of it... I don't think I've seen a setter, pointer, gsp, or britt ever win a **** trial. F'ing bias


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

well lets just say that based on what i read in the rule book that a high tail and high head on point doesnt favor a short tail breed.. perhaps biased is no the right word.. i think its better to say the judging guidelines are set up unfavorvably to the pointing dog breeds that dont have a natural high head and high tail on point.

its no big deal all trials serve their purpose.... 

comparing **** dog trials to bird dog trials is like comparing oranges to apples... not the same thing at all..


----------



## ready4pullback (Jun 9, 2008)

FieldWalker said:


> Come to think of it... I don't think I've seen a setter, pointer, gsp, or britt ever win a **** trial. F'ing bias


:lol::lol::lol::lol: Seriously, can we stop beating this horse? Chewy, if you think the trials are biased, then you can start your own GD website or blog about how trials are biased, instead of dragging a good club and stake through the mud everytime it gets mentioned here. 

Time and time again members here have proven your statements false. You talk about a lofty head and tail in the field trial judging guideline book- this is exactly why it is a *"Guideline" *it is supposed to give someone who has never judged before a general idea of what judges are looking for in a dog. Most judges have been running dogs for a long time and know what to look for already. One note in there that I'm sure you missed was that a good judge should build the qualities of a dog, not look for things to deduct from the dog. A good judge will know that a dog of a different breeding moves different and will not deduct from a dog because of that, but actually credit the dogs finer qualities. 

Someone here asked a good question regarding a stake *they're *interested in, and once again the post has been de-railed because of a silly argument that has no base, and is not an issue at all. Ribbing about dogs is part of the game- Setter guys rib Pointer guys and Pointer guys rib Brittany guys and Brittany guys rib Setter guys blah blah blah. Its all part of the fun. Jesus Christ, we even had a guy drive from Kentucky and was tickled pink to run his Pointing Griffons in our trial. And you know what?! Even though his dog didnt run like a setter or a pointer or a brittany for that matter, there were alot of people who were *very* impressed- me included. I'll tell you right now, I'd go hunting with him anyday. More than that, he didn't bitch about anything being biased, he was quite proud to be runnin what he brung! And thats what the Hunting Dog Stake is all about, runnin what ya brung- not runnin your jaw (unless its the only thing ya brung). 

So with that, could you kindly stfu about your opinion regarding hunting dog stakes? I think I can speak for more than myself when I say that we're tired of hearing it. Hell, even the Brittany guys dont agree with you.

Originally Posted by *chewy*  
_Well unfortunetly.. since politics and other breed favoritism play a role in the cover dog trials if your dog doesnt have a long tail you dont have a chance.. that is why you dont see the other breeds..._
"After being there I would not agree with that statement...
I thought my dog had a good run and I plan on coming back for the summer hunting dog stake. I was very impressed with the grounds and the judges."


----------



## Bobby (Dec 21, 2002)

chewy said:


> well lets just say that based on what i read in the rule book that a high tail and high head on point doesnt favor a short tail breed.. perhaps biased is no the right word.. i think its better to say the judging guidelines are set up unfavorvably to the pointing dog breeds that dont have a natural high head and high tail on point.
> 
> its no big deal all trials serve their purpose....
> 
> comparing **** dog trials to bird dog trials is like comparing oranges to apples... not the same thing at all..



No answer in your last post.
Again, it's not a 'rule' book, it's a Guideline.
I'll ask one more time; how many Cover Dog trials have you attended?


*


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

if you think the trials are biased, then you can start your own GD website or blog about how trials are biased, . You talk about a lofty head and tail in the field trial judging guideline book- this is exactly why it is a *"Guideline" *it is supposed to give someone who has never judged before a general idea of what judges are looking for in a dog. 

. Jesus Christ, we even had a guy drive from Kentucky and was tickled pink to run his Pointing Griffons in our trial. And you know what?! ). 

So with that, could you kindly stfu about your opinion regarding hunting dog stakes? I think I can speak for more than myself when I say that we're tired of hearing it. Hell, even the Brittany guys dont agree with you.

Well i asked a simple question to see the judging guideline. is specifically says lofty head and lofty tail. so what you are saying is the judges ignore the guidelines? 

And in regards to your language.. While you may not agree with me you dont have to use inappropriate language. Never once have i used such language.. 
In regards to you sick of hearing it.. DOnt read it.....last time i checked this is a public forum open to discussions and debates... 

I asked a question it was answered in the judging guideline. 

Like i said many times i dont have a problem with the cover dog trials every trial serves a purpose.. I am simply debating why you dont see short tail breeds winning or entered very often... Its not a nock on the trial, its format, the breeds that win, or the people that run their dogs in them..


----------



## Steelheadfred (May 4, 2004)

Chewy,

Are you still talking about the judgement of the non sanctioned non recognized get a pat on the back if you win Hunting Dog Stakes that are run in a similiar fashion to sanctioned cover dog trials?

I was asked to Judge a Hunting Dog Stake, I can promise you we were not biased towards any breed, hell I own flushing dogs. Rich and I judged based on dogs we would want to hunt behind. That meant we wanted to see bird work, handling, obedience, dogs that hunted to birdy cover. It mattered little if they hunted at 30 yards or 100. A point is a point in the hunting dog stake, its all about finding and handling birds that the handler would be able to get a shot at. I dont speak for any other trial then the one I was asked to judge, I am just sharing with you what I looked at in the hunting dog stake.


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

thanks for the clarification.. I guess i was referring to all age type not the hunting stakes. I realize the hunting stakes are set up a little different.. the hunting stakes are more flexible with the judging?


----------



## BradU20 (Jan 17, 2005)

Due to your refusal to answer the question....can we assume you have never been to a cover dog trial?


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

the answer to your question is i havent because i dont own long tailed dogs. hence this whole discussion about educating my ignorance to the trials.. then i read an all age dog must have a lofty head and tail... to me that would eliminate a breed that naturally points with a lower head and not a tail that is straight up and down... 

This is also why i havent run in one of the trials. if i feel i cant win im not going to enter in the trial.. 

all the answers are here and i dont feel i need more info but if i am missing something please point it out.. and maybe i will steady one of my dogs to flush and enter in a trial.. 

or maybe i will wait for the fall so i can run my dog in the woods some more. 

Do they have field type events or are they all in the woods?


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 10, 2006)

Even when they hold their brittany only championship at Gladwin they can hardly fill the quota of 12? dogs to have a stake, and even that is stretching it by bringing in people from out of state, and before last year they had withheld the title for a number of years if I am not mistaken due to lack of a championship performance. I wouldn't say thats biased, it takes hard work to make a competitive dog on wild birds, its not like going out in your back yard and planting a couple of quail. On the same token look at the number of people who run say Britts at Ionia, they practically run the place, having entries near a 100 dogs in their trials. Might be a question worth while to ask why none of them want to compete on wild birds. As far as quail trials, not just weekend trials but Championships, when a very high percentage of the field finish with birds, I wouldn't say its biased, but that you are running two brands of dogs; two performances being equal, what would make you choose a dog with a stump tail vs one with a tail?


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

Scott Berg said:


> Bing,
> 
> My experience is quite different from yours. You did not mention physical conformation and gait specifically where it relates to as dog getting through the woods as proficiently as possible. The continental breeds were developed with very different purposes in mind. The differences in intended applications have developed body types and differences in gait that favor Pointers and Setters in the woods. Part of that purpose also influenced a low head while hunting which is detrimental in handling grouse. The bottom line is that these characteristics favor Pointers and Setters for this particular application just as the characteristics of the continental breeds favor them in NAVDA. The reason very few compete in the woods is that simple.
> 
> ...



Excuse me when did i say dishonest cheaters??? i said i have nothing against the trial format or the people.. you misread...or misunderstood.


----------



## dogwhistle (Oct 31, 2004)

ready4pullback said:


> Absolutely. If you're hunting to fill the bag, a flushing dog would be much more effective. This game isn't about filling the bag... it's 100% about the dogs- or at least it is for me. Whether my dog goes out and shoots the moon or falls apart, its just part of the fun. As cliche as it sounds, it's not all about the winning- thats just an added bonus.


like some others, i didnt always believe that. and i wasnt convinced by the forum arguements. it took my first well bred setter to change my mind, and he cant even type.

however style often has a sound practical reason behind it. for instance, a hound or beagle runs with his nose to the ground because he tracks foot scent. a bird dog winds his scent and should be able to detect it over long distances and therefore needs his nose in the wind most of the time. continental dogs are also referred to as versatile dogs and are bred to foot scent and blood trail game.

a high tail is probably esthetics. i've seen a naturally high tailed dog point birds with a nine oclock tail on a rainy day and do it as effectively as when his tail was 12. but this is the US, it's favored, and when in rome do as the romans.

a slower dog can flush birds effectively and is much more practical for that kind of hunting where the gun must be close. but to poiint birds effectively, not just a short or flash, speed is a necessity. intelligent use of cover might be more generic, however a wider ranging dog can make intelligent use of more cover.

end the end, it's horses for courses. no one in his right mind would try to enter an arab or morgan in a thoroughbred race. or a standardbred in a reining or cutting. the competetion might have been developed to some extent to suit the breeds, but more likely the breeds were developed to suit the competetion.


----------



## Scott Berg (Feb 24, 2008)

chewy said:


> Excuse me when did i say dishonest cheaters??? i said i have nothing against the trial format or the people.. you misread...or misunderstood.


Here is what you said " _*all these placements.. how many short tail dogs have actually won? perhaps they havent won because their tail isnt long enough?? *_

_*From everything i have heard and observed it is a very biased trial.. pointers and setters are the favorable dog to this trial community..*_

_*Perhaps my judgement is wrong.. Can someone post list of winners not placements but winners that didnt have long tails."*_

_*There is no misunderstanding. You implication is very clear that the people judging these trials are biased and will cheat you out of a placement if your dog does not have a long tail."*_

I am really tired of hearing this balogna from people with absolutely no experience. It is damn insulting. Yes, there are a few dishonest people who would do this but you are talking about a very small percentage. Integrity is a prime consideration when picking judges and you are insulting a lot of good men. 

The trials come down to (primarily) application, bird finding, manners around game, handling, and stamina. I have been around every trial format in existence and judged every type of sanctioned event in existence. Very few judges would discriminate based on breed. We judge function and the trials are rarely so close that style impacts placements. Low heads while running, lack of stamina, or poor application will not get it done no matter how stylish running and pointing a dog might be. The tail thing is flat out an excuse. Low heads lead to more bumped birds the other criteria are very obvious.


SRB


----------



## B Peters (Jun 10, 2006)

I have judged derbies, puppies and hunting dogs in cover dog stakes and have run my own dogs in shooting dog stakes. While not being the most experienced handler, trainer or judge on this board I ask many questions.From the more experieniced I have been told that when we judge short tail dogs the standards should be the same prefer a high head a steady tail that is upright be it 10, 11 .or 12 .The standards can be and are the same for all dogs and before any of us suggest bias remember that this is subjective judging and we are all looking for the best dogs on that day as we see it.


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

On a related note, I noticed that pro Vance Butler is handling a brit at this weekend's Beaverton Club (coverdog) trial at the Gladwin Field Trial grounds.


----------



## Bing (Sep 17, 2004)

I can only site my meager experiences and my conclusions developed over 35 years of hunting with both bird and gun dogs of varying ilk predominantly in wooded settings...Toss in NAVHDA testing and observing trials and theres all Ive got..lame I know .
I prefer to avoid debates about religion if I'm able, but don't always follow my own advice. Debates on articles of faith while perhaps entertaining is a waste because it is one of those topics that is impossible to draw to a conclusion due to the fact it is based on belief in something one cannot prove. 

I repeat IME fine examples of continental breeds are as effective to accomplish the task of producing grouse or woodcock for the gun as any setter or pointer I've seen. This has little to do with the breed because it's not the breed, it's the breeding. Dogs are the most genetically malleable and customized animals on the planet. Now if someone would care to put their best trial dog on the ground with the best continental I can muster and let me and any other like minded person judge them by our hunting criteria it's possible I can be convinced I'm mistaken. This includes many things after the shot not evaluated in the trials I've observed but My gut tells me this judgment would most likely be deemed too biased by the loser. You can site cover dog trials as evidence that my conclusions are incorrect till the cows come home but absent proof I'm left with the obligation to agree to disagree.
IMO Competitive trials are only what one makes of them. By the way, nice looking dogs you have there.
Regards


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

Bing said:


> ...IMO Competitive trials are only what one makes of them...


...and whether you are a fan of trials and trial dogs or not, one must realize that trials are the sole means of judging large numbers of hunting dogs against one another for the purpose of determining the best breeding stock.


----------



## Scott Berg (Feb 24, 2008)

Bing said:


> Now if someone would care to put their best trial dog on the ground with the best continental I can muster and let me and any other like minded person judge them by our hunting criteria it's possible I can be convinced I'm mistaken. Regards


I appreciate the civil response and it's just fine we don't agree. It would be pretty boring if we all thought alike. In my opinion, the disagreement stems from the quote above. Field trials are not and should not be judged by "hunting criteria". The purpose of field trials is to identify the best animals for breeding hunting dogs. This is not proven in the context of typical hunting dog traits. Trial dogs are pushed to an extreme to prove the possess exceptional skill and physical traits. The same dog if developed as a hunting dog in almost all cases would develop into an exceptional hunting dog. However, anyone familar with testing practices in a number of environments can tell you it is common practice to test by virtue of extremes to identify superior characteristic. This difference is the basis for the lack of understanding common on this topic.

There are going to be some people who read this and think I have lost my mind. All I can say is call Rick Smith, Bob West or any other nationally recognized expert and guarantee they will say the same thing. As a matter of fact, I heard them respond in this way at the National Pheasants Forever show.

The first trial I went to I said to my brother "well at least I beat one dog", meaning my bracemate. Turns out I was braced with the winner. I did not have a clue and I was measuring by hunting dog standards. 

SRB


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 10, 2006)

Seems as if it would be easier to pay the 40 bucks and give your dog/breed a chance instead of assuming the worst, or letting people know how great it COULD do. You don't win a 100% of the time you don't enter, sort of like saying the Lions could have won the superbowl last year, only they were not in it. A trial doesn't make or break how good a dog is, it is a helpful tool to gauge against other dogs though, but as the saying go, every dog has his day, some more than others, somes less.


----------



## Bing (Sep 17, 2004)

Find the Bird:
If by fan one means fanatic that would be no. I am not against them either.
And if by "best" one means using competition to breed and select for highly competitive animals to be used for the purpose of hunting, that would be no. Not against that either but I dont find competitive animals all that valuable for my purpose which must be different than yours.....

"Best" is far too subjective. Now if someone told me that trials are the sole means of judging large numbers of *trial* dogs against one another for the purpose of determining the best breeding stock for creating better trial dogs I would whole heartedly agree. So if *one* must realize what you claim they must, between the two of us as least, youre that one.

Scott:
Hmmm.where to begin, heres where it falls apart for me.
You wrote: Field trials are not and should not be judged by "hunting criteria". 
Whos hunting criteria?
I think it highly likely mine is different than yours, Are your requirements for hunting performance more or less than mine?

And The purpose of field trials is to identify the best animals for breeding hunting dogs.
Please note above my reply to that statement from find the bird.

And This is not proven in the context of typical hunting dog traits.
Whos typical hunting dog traits, if the implication is this dog is somehow inferior to a proven trial winner it appears a big stretch if the criteria for each is different. Not superior, simply different.

And Trial dogs are pushed to an extreme to prove the possess exceptional skill and physical traits. The same dog if developed as a hunting dog in almost all cases would develop into an exceptional hunting dog.


Im not talking all trial dog in all venues in general only dogs engaged in grouse and woodcock hunting and trials but If I didnt know better Id think *hunting* and everything that takes place surrounding an *individuals* expectations of this endeavor is in your opinion pale in comparison to what is required of a dog in a cover dog trial. This IMO is faithwith a blush of elitism and begs the question, proof? What does an exceptional hunting dog do? Is it the same skill set as a trial dog or are they different?
Interesting that the AA horseback trial folk are thoroughly convinced their style of dog has everything anyone could ever want in a dog times 10, frankly Im shocked anyone who is involved in any lesser competitive dog event would even bother with anything else. Believe me if indeed passed the sanity test any serious competitor would sell his dogs and stand in line to get some and mop the competition in all other events that routinely crown the less extreme animal before everyone else figured out whats what. Genetically customized dogs for particular purposes, IMO the notion the only difference between a trial dog and an excellent hunting dog is training is speculative because your definition of an excellent hunting dog is not the same as mine.
I find competitive dogs to have some worthwhile traits, however its not what they have but what they lack that is problematic for me personally, but hey I dont need anything special I just hunt. I realize nothing will be resolved here, I appreciate our difference and and the opportunity to see many types and breeds of dogs. I think its great we can all get the dog we earn.
Regards


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

Scott Berg said:


> Here is what you said " _*all these placements.. how many short tail dogs have actually won? perhaps they havent won because their tail isnt long enough?? *_
> 
> _*From everything i have heard and observed it is a very biased trial.. pointers and setters are the favorable dog to this trial community..*_
> 
> ...


Ok and everything you have quoted me of saying there isnt one instance of me calling anyone a cheater or a liar or anything else you read into my statements.. I also rephrased my bias statement in a later post after i was educated of my ignorance. to the trials are more geared to a lofty tail and lofty head dog as stated in the gudelines. Which favors a setter or pointer. sure there are shorthairs with high heads and tails but most dont.. 

i also stated i have nothing against the people of the trial, the judges of the trial, the dogs of the trial, or the trial format.. It serves its purpose as do other trial formats.. 

Lets not kid ourselves the all age championships are geared towards a setter or a pointer... Nothing wrong with that, there are other trials that way too.. But IMO to think dogs other than pointers or setters have a chance to win a championship is not realistic. 

You can agree or agree to disagree.


----------



## Merimac (Jan 17, 2006)

Wheres the icon for the beating a dead horse?


----------



## hehibrits (Mar 10, 2007)

Let me say this and exit stage left, and I say this as a person who has handled dogs in AA Horseback stakes years back and just recently ran at Gladwin in the MAFTC stake, FIELD TRIALS ARE GAMES meant to simulate certain hunting situations. If you want to play the game you need to know the tricks of the trade, like the layout of the course so you can turn your dog, or loud bells so the guys in the parking lot can hear what kind of run your dog had, or tracking collars so your scout can pick up your dog when he hasn't shown for 10 minutes. Stuff that has nothing to do with actual killin' birds hunting, but shows that your dog has drive.?. I overheard three different people saying at the trial how if they could get their dog around the course they would have a chance, if not [count the ways] it would be a disaster. Who would want to brag about their hunting dog with, "man when he is on he is lights out, the rest of the time he's a train wreck."? But that dog could make a field champion. 
I will say that cover dog action is a lot more legit with me because of the fact that you run on wild birds, no way to fake that.





FindTheBird said:


> ...and whether you are a fan of trials and trial dogs or not, one must realize that trials are the sole means of judging large numbers of hunting dogs against one another for the purpose of determining the best breeding stock.


 I would disagree with this statement. Hunting dogs is the best way to evaluate hunting dogs, the problem is most people are not objective enough with their own animals to be able to determine breeding stock. Therefore they need someone else to "recognize" talent that should better the breed. While hunting is a large part of "determining the best breeding stock", too often conformation is put on the back burner if considred at all. Genetic integrity should be number one but sadly if a dog becomes a field champion it is more than likely to become breeding stock even if it has degenerative traits. 

Hey, let's talk more about it at the East Bay Lodge the night before the MAFTC summer field trial. Lock It Up Boys!!!


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

i just want to see how many pages we can get this topic going


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

chewy said:


> i just want to see how many pages we can get this topic going


I'm putting the over/under at 12! :evil:


----------



## Induna (Apr 19, 2007)

hehibrits said:


> I overheard three different people saying at the trial how if they could get their dog around the course they would have a chance, if not [count the ways] it would be a disaster. Who would want to brag about their hunting dog with, "man when he is on he is lights out, the rest of the time he's a train wreck."? But that dog could make a field champion.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

hehibrits said:


> ...I would disagree with this statement. Hunting dogs is the best way to evaluate hunting dogs, the problem is most people are not objective enough with their own animals to be able to determine breeding stock.


I don't completely disagree, but let me re-(paraphrase) what I said: over time, field trials are easily the most efficient, accurate and objective way to measure large numbers of dogs against one another for the purpose of determining the best breed stock. Can you find flaws in the system? Taken over a non-representive sample of one or a few trials I'm sure that you can--after all we're talking about human judges (subjectivity cannot be completely ruled-out and is part of human nature) dogs (no explanation necessary) and the vagaries of the field (scenting and weather conditions temperature etc.). I believe this is why you need to look at a given dog's performance over a number of trials to get a really clear picture of what's under the hood.



hehibrits said:


> ...too often conformation is put on the back burner if considred at all. Genetic integrity should be number one but sadly if a dog becomes a field champion it is more than likely to become breeding stock even if it has degenerative traits.


Like almost every topic on this forum (i.e. we're talking about dogs) exceptions and variences happen, but I believe that you're generally going to find far better conformation in field trial dogs, and champions in particular than you will with backyard breedings--dogs with conformation problems get culled very early by competent breeders who supply most of the trial dogs. If they get to a trial, they should be graded down severely for the flaw, regardless of performance so CH's with conformation problems should be exceedingly rare.


hehibrits said:


> Hey, let's talk more about it at the East Bay Lodge the night before the MAFTC summer field trial. Lock It Up Boys!!!


This we can agree on! I'll bring the beer!


----------



## Back woods (Jul 30, 2003)

I got into coverdog trials many years ago. I am a hunter who likes to compete with his dogs. All my dogs must prove to be a very good hunting dog first. Then and only then do they get the chance to trial. I have trained many shorthairs and britt's that meet my criteria as a great hunter. I would have liked to run them but the owners of these dogs had no interest in trials. My best dog to date, while hunting you would have know idea that she could be so competitive in a trial format. She hunts to the gun with very little handling but knows to turn it on in a trial. 

I have said it in the past, I think that a good shorthair could win in a coverdog trial. It may not go out and win a Championship until it makes a believer out of everyone but it's time would come. Just like that nice little Britt winning coverdog trials.

I know many people in this sport who would give any breed a fair look.

Bruce


----------



## FieldWalker (Oct 21, 2003)

dogwhistle said:


> the competetion might have been developed to some extent to suit the breeds, but more likely the breeds were developed to suit the competetion.






:help: It isn't even May yet... :help:


----------



## Steelheadfred (May 4, 2004)

> Originally Posted by *hehibrits*
> _...I would disagree with this statement. Hunting dogs is the best way to evaluate hunting dogs, the problem is most people are not objective enough with their own animals to be able to determine breeding stock._


In the dogs I run I dont disagree completely with the statement above, but then my brother went and bought a pup out of an AFC/FC Stud who siblings from his same litter were all either AFC or FC - bred to a Heavy Hunt Test bitch - and after watching this dog for a year I have changed my mind about some field trial dogs.

The problem is I would love to own Mr. Jones, but at times he is to much dog for me both in the house and while training. But Ric has lots of time to dedicate to him, we got some help from a pro and ran him into a pile of birds last season and when it is all over I expect the best bred dog my family has ever purchased in terms of titles in a pedigree will end up being the best hunting dog my family has ever owned also.


----------



## dogwhistle (Oct 31, 2004)

i'm not a trialer, just a "consumer" of ch. trial bred dogs. i had non trial bred setters for over 20 yrs. they did a good job in the field in many ways. but their trial bred cousins do a much better job in the field, they do it at an earlier age and are far easier to train.

i've been all over the map with horses too and find the same to be true.

i'm sure there are a lot of aspects to trialing, but one of the most important is identifying desireable traits. hunters do that with their individual dogs but trialers do to. the competetion adds another level to that. an individual dog might be good in the field, but is he better than 20-30 other dogs with impartial judges making the call?

competetion is consumer reports testing for animals and without it you tend towards mediocraty.

when i was a boy "birddog" meant setter up here in the north and pointer more often in the south. the continental breeds werent popular or were virtually unknown. and owners of those birddogs pointed to champions in the pedigree with pride. that's changed a lot over the past 50 yrs with the changing demographics of hunters.

but the traits needed in a good birddog havent changed. in fact, with fewer birds, a better dog is needed. and trials are just about evaluating traits, not just good enough, but excellence. and for me the proof is in the pudding.

mike


----------



## Induna (Apr 19, 2007)

Back to the original theme of this thread, lofty head and tail. Most dogs on point in trials have about a 9 oclock head or staight out. Why? The cover they're in, ferns and brush. If they nail a bird in light to open cover the heads are higher. Just like the posed pictures you see of them. There are guidlines and not rules. Each judge has the IDEAL dogs image in his head. NO DOG HAS EVER REACHED THIS IDEAL!!! So you pick the dogs that come closest to YOUR IDEAL.
I've placed the Britt. Wanbli several times includeing 1st. I've seen her point at least a dozen times and not one time did I ever take notice of her stub tail, it is very short. BUT from here on out I will. I was lacking in my judgeing responsibilities. Heck she might have been flagging. A long tail dog that flaggs on point in my opinion isn't worthy of a placement.


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

Back woods said:


> I got into coverdog trials many years ago. I am a hunter who likes to compete with his dogs. All my dogs must prove to be a very good hunting dog first. Then and only then do they get the chance to trial. I have trained many shorthairs and britt's that meet my criteria as a great hunter. I would have liked to run them but the owners of these dogs had no interest in trials. My best dog to date, while hunting you would have know idea that she could be so competitive in a trial format. She hunts to the gun with very little handling but knows to turn it on in a trial.
> 
> I have said it in the past, I think that a good shorthair could win in a coverdog trial. It may not go out and win a Championship until it makes a believer out of everyone but it's time would come. Just like that nice little Britt winning coverdog trials.
> 
> ...


 
i like this answer.... Reasonable and sensible.


----------



## mcanes1 (Jan 22, 2003)

Is it just me or did this thread get seriously "hi jacked"? I must admit though, it did make my time at work fly by.

I've always thought about getting involved with field trials. But after thoroughly thinking out what my goals were, I realized what I wanted to achieve was hunting over a completed finished gun dog. I enjoy watching a bird dog work. So to me, the "big running" style of dog was out of the question. With that I realized certain type trials wouldn't be in my best interest.
So, I did a couple AKC hunt test with my young Weim (this was 12 years ago) just for fun and experience, the first one I did was for a "JH". The test was run by the Michigan Brittney club. And it pretty much soured me on ever doing it again. The prejudice was over whelming. Brit's ran in the early braces, so I was in the last brace of the day. They didn't give you a brace time, so you had to be there in the beginning, so after 8 hours of sitting there in the heat we finally ran. 3 judges on a horseback watched the other bracemate (a GSP owned and ran by a well known trainer in the thumb area) almost exclusively, I guess it was good to know the judges. Anyhow my weim was on point, there was brush between her and the judges. I kept trying to get the judges attention, without any luck. Finally after 5 minutes the bird flushed, I fired my pistol and then the judges kept asking each other if they saw a point. No of them said they saw a point and she didn't pass. I just about gave it up, I decided to run her in the Michigan Weim's hunt test and she passed. She even got some compliments from a couple well known trainers / trialers that I've read about in the breed's national publications. After she passed that leg that day, I never did it again.
I'm just saying there's prejudice on occasion. And that won't change.
Like it's been mentioned before, if your dog isn't bred or capable of running these types of trials, don't complain about it. Find a trial that it is capable of running and give it 100%.


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

midwestfisherman said:


> I'm putting the over/under at 12! :evil:


 so you taking the under or the over? :lol:


----------



## mcanes1 (Jan 22, 2003)

start a seperate thread / poll for that.

My guess it will die on page 8.


----------



## chewy (Mar 27, 2006)

Trying to educate myself on the cover dog stuff here... 

What is more important; 
A) productive bird finds 
B) style, gait and hunting pattern when running the trial

Is it possible that a dog finds a bird or two will not win a championship to a dog that found zero but had better gait , style, and hunting pattern?


----------



## Induna (Apr 19, 2007)

chewy said:


> Trying to educate myself on the cover dog stuff here...
> 
> What is more important;
> A) productive bird finds
> ...


 First part of the question the answer is both. Second part of the question the answer is no. In a championship they must have both A and B. I have seen exceptinal dogs given a second series to have another chance at finding a wild bird. At times when bird numbers are low a bird field with planted quail will be used but we try to avoid this and never in a championship.


----------



## Scott Berg (Feb 24, 2008)

Bing said:


> Scott:
> Hmmm.where to begin, heres where it falls apart for me.
> You wrote: Field trials are not and should not be judged by "hunting criteria".
> Whos hunting criteria?
> ...


Bing,

I dont know and wont assume to know your criteria. There is just one difference I am looking for in a trial dog and a hunting dog and thats range. I want a hunting dog that stays between 10 and 2 and adjusts to the cover at a range that makes them relatively easy to handle. Trial dogs need to push the boundaries. What many hunters do not understand is that pushing the limits identifies exceptional ability in certain traits. Requiring extreme range requires a more cooperative dog not a less cooperative dog. The dogs that win trials are the ones that can be pushed to these extremes and still handle very well. I have seen time and time again hunters who go to a trial and the dog that makes an impression on them is not the best dog, its the worst dog, the renegade is the dog that makes an impression. Guess what  thats not the dog thats going to win. It is a dog that fails this test.

Trials also demand absolutely impeccable manners around game. Is this really necessary for the average hunter. Maybe, maybe not but it does drive a standard that is very beneficial to selection for breeding. The same can be said for drive and stamina.

I think you are probably right that you and I have different definition of the best traits for a hunting dog. This division among pointing dog people has existed for quite some time. Some who hunt pointing dogs are looking for a dog that they basically lead to birds and the other group is looking for a dog that takes them to birds. 

I am not impressed with range in itself. I look at range as an element of application. I am very impressed with application because it is has a very high correlation to bird finding ability . Where range is concerned that means adapting range to the terrain in a manner that maximizes the number of birds contacted. Application is a principal element in judging field trials, FAR more emphasis is put on this element by the vast majority of judges then tail position. 

The other trait I put at the top of the list is bird handling ability. Why, because it is highly functional. Many hunters keep their dogs very close because they dont trust them to handle game. I know many will argue this point but there is absolutely no reason to keep a pointing dog with 75 yards if they are skilled at handling birds.

What am I looking for  A very rare dog. One that adjusts range to fit the terrain and applies himself with absolute precision which means covers as much ground as possible without missing good objectives and handles on their own with as little direction from me as can be expected. I start the season in ND. By the way, at one time I did nothing but grouse hunt and the 1st time I went to ND I realized it was a far better environment to evaluate dogs simply because I could see everything unfold, the dogs abilities around game and intelligence in a number of areas were more apparent. I then go to the grouse woods for about six weeks and finish the season with a couple trips on wild quail. In the spring I hit the woodcock flight. It takes a very intelligent animal with exceptional bird handling skills to adapt their application and handles these various birds to pass our test. I demand superior intelligence, application, bird manners, stamina, style and disposition. I cut more dogs last year (24 were cut, two kept) than most people own in their lifetime. If your criteria is different I say with all sincerity thats just fine. You should hunt over whatever you like. However, where breeding is concerned I am pretty confident in this method and this criterion.

SRB


----------



## drwink (Oct 15, 2003)

Jeez Scott, ya don't have to yell:lol:
But that is a great post, I think ya said it all right there.



Scott Berg said:


> The other trait I put at the top of the list is bird handling ability. Why, because it is highly functional. Many hunters keep their dogs very close because they dont trust them to handle game. I know many will argue this point but there is absolutely no reason to keep a pointing dog with 75 yards if they are skilled at handling birds.
> 
> What am I looking for  A very rare dog. One that adjusts range to fit the terrain and applies himself with absolute precision which means covers as much ground as possible without missing good objectives and handles on their own with as little direction from me as can be expected.


The first paragraph pretty much is what separates the hunters that don't trial from the trialers that hunt.

The second paragraph is the icing on the cake, the dog with superior intelligence, the smarter than average dog. Most people especially hunters that don't go to many trails that may only own a handfull of dogs in their lifetime won't may not be able to recognize it. Heck after a couple years of trailing I didn't even recognize it till I started judging.

Oh and out of those 24 that were cut, I'm sure they made fine hunting dogs.

Good Day

Wally


----------



## Flash01 (Jun 12, 2008)

Induna said:


> First part of the question the answer is both. Second part of the question the answer is no. In a championship they must have both A and B. I have seen exceptinal dogs given a second series to have another chance at finding a wild bird. *At times when bird numbers are low a bird field with planted quail will be used* but we try to avoid this and never in a championship.


 
The bolded section makes all the "dizzied quail" comments I hear/see from "real trialers" a little less credible.


----------



## Steelheadfred (May 4, 2004)

drwink said:


> Jeez Scott, ya don't have to yell:lol:
> But that is a great post, I think ya said it all right there.
> 
> 
> ...


 
There is zero correlation in hunting wild ruffed grouse in the upper great lakes that big running pointing dogs are superior to pointing dogs that work closer. ZERO. So Wally I think I am agreeing with you....

Now with that said, I sure enjoy watching the athleticism, drive, fash, and style of the cover dogs or field trial style dogs. 

But I dont pretend in a hunting situation that they will produce more birds then a continental, dual type setter, or flushing dog that works much closer. In hunting, brains, confirmation, training and most importantly exposure produce far before run. When you get one that can run and has the other components then you have one special dog.


----------



## dogwhistle (Oct 31, 2004)

it's been my personal experience based on owning a number of non trial and trial bred dogs over a number of years, about 30 altogether, that:

the trial dogs will produce far more solidly pointed and held birds than the non trial dogs.

the trial judges could enumerate the different traits evaluated in a trial better than i can. but many of those traits have a practical reason behind them.

if however, the goal is just to find birds and make them flly for the gun, a border collie might do just as well as anything.

i believe that all dogs in a trial will be evaluated on how well they exhibitt the traits/characteristics that are the standard for trialing. so, if a brittany or german shorhair or other breed has those traits to a high degree he stands a good chance of winning.


----------



## Induna (Apr 19, 2007)

Flash01 said:


> The bolded section makes all the "dizzied quail" comments I hear/see from "real trialers" a little less credible.


 You can find it less credible if you wish. The facts are these are wild bird trials. To place in open derby or open shooting dog the dogs have to have exceptible bird work. Lets say in an open shooting dog stake there are 5 dogs with bird contact. 2 handled properly and 3 went with the bird on flush. You now have 2 dogs that you can use and you have 3 choices left. Run a second brace with the next 2 best dogs you saw that didn't have bird work, plant a couple quail in the bird field and look at the same 2 dogs or with hold 3rd place. We have withheld 3rd place before and you then have some unhappy trialers. you have to remember these are wild bird trials and the birds don't allways make things easy, just like hunting.


----------



## Scott Berg (Feb 24, 2008)

drwink said:


> Jeez Scott, ya don't have to yell:lol:
> But that is a great post, I think ya said it all right there.
> 
> 
> ...


Wally,

Sorry about the tone. The writing style is a professional hazard. I recognize the tone is pretty poor but it is really difficult for me to get out of that mode unless I really slow down and make an effort to soften it.

SRB


----------



## midwestfisherman (Apr 19, 2001)

chewy said:


> so you taking the under or the over? :lol:


If the mods stay out of it, I'm going with the over.


----------



## Bing (Sep 17, 2004)

Scott wrote: What many hunters do not understand is that pushing the limits identifies exceptional ability in certain traits. Requiring extreme range requires a more cooperative dog not a less cooperative dog. The dogs that win trials are the ones that can be pushed to these extremes and still handle very well.
Im curious at just how we can equate at what distance a dog will obey trained commands to how cooperative it is. Obedience, at any distance is simply the result of training, any good trainer can bend most dogs to his will. Cooperation on the other side of the coin is a genetically transmitted trait and no amount of training can make a dog a cooperative hunting partner if hes not hardwired that way. It is an all too common mistake for many folk to assume obedience and cooperation are synonymous.
What am I looking for  A very rare dog. One that adjusts range to fit the terrain and applies himself with absolute precision which means covers as much ground as possible without missing good objectives and handles on their own with as little direction from me as can be expected.
A rare dog indeed when searching within lines of dogs specifically bred for completition requiring independence rather than its inverse, cooperation. Good luck.


----------



## Scott Berg (Feb 24, 2008)

Bing said:


> Scott wrote: What many hunters do not understand is that pushing the limits identifies exceptional ability in certain traits. Requiring extreme range requires a more cooperative dog not a less cooperative dog. The dogs that win trials are the ones that can be pushed to these extremes and still handle very well.
> Im curious at just how we can equate at what distance a dog will obey trained commands to how cooperative it is. Obedience, at any distance is simply the result of training, any good trainer can bend most dogs to his will. Cooperation on the other side of the coin is a genetically transmitted trait and no amount of training can make a dog a cooperative hunting partner if hes not hardwired that way. It is an all too common mistake for many folk to assume obedience and cooperation are synonymous.
> What am I looking for  A very rare dog. One that adjusts range to fit the terrain and applies himself with absolute precision which means covers as much ground as possible without missing good objectives and handles on their own with as little direction from me as can be expected.
> A rare dog indeed when searching within lines of dogs specifically bred for completition requiring independence rather than its inverse, cooperation. Good luck.


Bing,

I am tired of arguing with you. Get on the phone and call Rick Smith, Bob West, Dave Hughes, Tom Dokken or any other national respected trainer and have this conversation with them. I Have! They will tell you in a very nice way that you don't understand.

There are two ways to approach information. Pick out the portions you can bend to support any already formed conclusion or you can actually assess all of the information unbiased to draw an informed conclusion. You practice the former. 

SRB


----------



## Bing (Sep 17, 2004)

I hear ya Scott, 
I'm tired of it too, frankly I have given you more of my time than any other salesman I've had to spin up and send down the road this year.
My approach to receiving information is to consider the source and assign it value accordingly, never moreso than when I never asked for it to begin with .


----------

