Red Flag or just getting better?? UKC Nationals

[Big Mike]

I better put a disclaimer up front so i don't get murdered over this post lol. This is not meant to be derogatory toward any Hound , owner , or handlers , or the UKC H&H format. It is only meant to create a discussion.

With that said. Upon review of the final results of the UKC Nationals registered/open class five of the top ten (50%) finishing hounds are listed as one year old dogs. . Does this throw up a red flag for the format, that hounds of that age , inexperience, and not fully matured could finish that high in an entry of about 180 open class dogs? Or does this indicate that hounds are just plain better then they were 10, 20, 30 years ago?

AGAIN this is not meant to be derogatory , congrats to all that placed , job well done.

[WILL LEFEVERS]

I guess it just depends on each individual dog and how much time has been placed on the hound and how they have developed. I asked a similar type question about a month ago but for a different format. I would say that the dogs that won or placed would have to be pretty good. Maybe a little like one and dones in college basketball, some kids come to college and are ready to turn pro after a year while others may need 2 or 3 more years to develop.

[BCBeagles]

I believe it is all in the time put into the hound. These guys are serious when they come to these hunts. They are not bringing fat and out of shape hounds whether 1 or 9. I was there to drop off a female to be bred to a Dual Grand in the UKC. He was run in and looked like a chunk of meat, lean and mean. I did not see a hound on the grounds without hairloss of some body part! LOL. I think that hunt has almost 400 hounds competing!!

I give the guys credit in any format that you have to have a very good hound in top shape to consistantly place let alone win.

By the way I own a littermate to the male that won the Champions portion of the hunt! Congrats to Tom Ingram and Stylish Dakota!!

[sanfordssj]

I better put a disclaimer up front so i don't get murdered over this post lol. This is not meant to be derogatory toward any Hound , owner , or handlers , or the UKC H&H format. It is only meant to create a discussion.

With that said. Upon review of the final results of the UKC Nationals registered/open class five of the top ten (50%) finishing hounds are listed as one year old dogs. . Does this throw up a red flag for the format, that hounds of that age , inexperience, and not fully matured could finish that high in an entry of about 180 open class dogs? Or does this indicate that hounds are just plain better then they were 10, 20, 30 years ago?

AGAIN this is not meant to be derogatory , congrats to all that placed , job well done.

I said this in a post a while back and got hammered! Todays hounds are being breed to be faster, stronger, and smarter! The older bloodlines (Ninja, Ranger Dan, Branko, Turbo, etc....) are all being improved on with quality females. I believe its a direct reflection of great crosses. Guys are doing there homework and putting the time into there hounds to bring these traits out at an earlier age!

[rabbithunter5890]

I was wondering the same. I dont see that in other formats

[Incahoots]

The hunt itself isn't elimination style. There's a huge differance in actually beating 180 dogs to getting to the top 16 and getting a good draw and racking up a lot of points to catapult into the top 16. That isn't meant to take anything in any way from the top 16, it is what it is. Takes a good dog, a good draw, and a good dose of luck to make the top 16. Imo, you will run into much younger hounds at a UKC trial then you will at an AKC trial. I really don't feel they are better then they were years ago at that age, maybe bred better trait wise for the format they are running in. My guess is that would be true in most formats.

[Aaron Bartlett]

In my opinion its a RED FLAG!

[MURL-BEAGLER]

RED FLAG!!!

[Vicious Kennels]

I ran in nationals and tore up all my ukc papers after my cast it's not the dogs they have some nice dogs and some real good people just way to much arguing and belly aching for me. Best time I had was sitting around with the rabbit ridge guys on saturday was a laugh fest.

[bwe007]

huge red flag. winning in ukc is like eating a soft piece of chocolate compared to little pack.

[Big Mike]

A lot of great responses thus far. Again so there are know misunderstanding . My post was not intended to be a swipe at the H&H format, i only used the UKC Nationals as an example because they published the ages of the hounds that finished in the top 10. I have know idea of the age of hounds in the LP world or Progressive Pack US Championship, they may well have had high percentage of one year old hounds in their final 10 as well, but they just don't publish the age of the dogs.

[mike crabtree]

It is very easy to make champion, so most dogs that are worth a nickel champion very fast all you have to do is beat 3 dogs at a WQE and it counts as a win!!! That will leave mostly young dogs and Culls in the Registered class.

[TOUCHSTONE]

Any dog worth a grain of salt will be proficient at jumping, running solo, and packing before it turns 2 yrs old. IMO! EG a 1 yr old.

Many great dogs that are trialed in an area with many hunts may finish their HBCH before they turn 2. HBCH is a stepping stone degree that alows the hound the opportunity to compete with other champions to earn the Grand Hunting Beagle Ch title. If you look at the top 16 grands from the UKC National you will find only 2 grands that are 3 and the rest are older.

My friends pup recently earned a second at a local little pack hunt. He has been in several UKC hunts but is not yet proficient enough to win a cast and make it into a winners pack. At the same event my 3 yr old UKC Grand did not make the cut to get into the winners pack. We were somewhat bewildered by this as we are not certain what the judges are considering in their judging. We enjoyed the hunt and meeting new folks and will give it another try. Our dogs seem to fit the format. Probably not a bad idea to get em use to travelling and running/packing with strange dogs some once they are doing the right stuff. Especially in the case of my friend who has one dog that he usually runs solo. An occasional hunt for the benefit of running with other dogs can't hurt.

I prefer to get em solid before showing them in public (putting them in a trial). Most are ready to run in the small packs of up to 5 dogs before 2 yrs old. Large pack requires more age and experience due to the pressure.

[Dr. Chris]

At first thought I would say that it is a red flag. But I wouldn’t necessarily be shocked after I think about it a while. There are a lot of people that start pups at 3 months old and run them vigorously for 9 months which would bring you up to a year. Also, define “1 year”. Does that include all dogs that are under 2 or are they exactly one year?

But making trials easier to win is good for business “financially” for any field trial organization or format. It’s just not good for the credibility of the quality of dogs that we label “Field Champion”. At every AKC Trial you have 4 winners.

But I wouldn’t single out UKC or ARHA. I mean they do still have to go thru many dogs and many casts to win. The biggest “red flag” I have always preached is the separation of males and females in the AKC. I can see possibly sizes, especially if you have a 12 ½ inch dog and you have to run it with a 15 ½ to 16 inch hound.

For example, there is a 13” male that is an IFC. He placed 1st four times in the SPO and he went north and was entered in 5 trials on hare and took 1st in four of them. Sounds like a Field Champion….right?

This is the problem with credibility that many have with this. The trials that he ran in only consisted of having between 7 and 16 dogs per hunt in his class. The dog did his job by beating the “few” dogs that he ran against, but it is the system at fault. The dog may very well be a great dog, or he may be just an ordinary mediocre dog that happened to have a lot of opportunity in a weak class {by numbers} of hounds that is one half to one third smaller than any other class at the average hunt. And many many many have bred to this dog because of his Field Champion status. Some pups have been good and some not, but the dog is not the point of the “red flag”, it is the system.

Again, making trials easier to win is good for business.

[jdmart]

Dr. Chris, It still takes 120 points to make an AKC FC. If you think they are easy to get just try it. If there are fewer number it really makes it tougher to finish a little male. It takes more wins and a lot more miles of travel to get it done. I own one of the best 13" females I have ever seen run. I have seen plenty in my day. Anyone who know dogs and has seen her run will agree. Could she have competed with males, yes. Can most females, yes but not over all day trial. That is the difference over an 8 hour trial, the male strength will wear a female down. You can argue that but it will happen. As for 1 year old dog being in the finals of the nationals. I am sorry but no way. That is way this format is successful. It allows UKC to make money hand over foot and fool people into thinking 1 year old dogs are that good. Run them all day. You can argue all you want, come and run an Large Pack or SPO trial. Yes I have seen young dogs place but lets be realistic.

If you breed to a dog because it is a FC that might be the "RED FLAG". You breed to improve your kennel and better the "breed". This is what ruins the sport. Instead of people understanding how to improve their pups by matching traits, they breed to the flavor of the month or breed to their favorite blood not matter what the outcome will be. It takes two to tangle and the best I remember most good breeders say it is at least 60% the bitch. I don't own a male, so don't think I am defending one. I just think this is funny!!!!