New judges in Mid-West

[WELLS WOODS]

Dave, I may just go watch them if possible. I hope you are right about the UBGF. We (Mid- West) use the same AKC rulebook. I hope the UBGF are finally changing their hounds to fit the rulebook, instead of trying to change the rulebook to fit their hounds.
I also agree about the Mid-West not looking so great at times. Mostly by what a couple of guys said, by men judging to fit "their likes" & not going by the rulebook. A good winners pack, whether 5 or 9 , isn't going to run smooth without ALL of the hounds having good LINE CONTROL. Pursue with the intent to overtake while maintaining control of the line. We have plenty of foot in the Mid-West, now which hounds are the least faulty & are focused on the line? I think it starts with close, point of loss checkwork.

[madcatter]

personally i dont think a judge should be spending time looking for faulty dogs,they usually disclose themselves,and this would take away from scoring positives.a dog scoring checks but is mouthy needs dealt with and should never make a winners pack.somedays there may not be nine dogs on the ground that belong in a winners pack.
just follow the whole rulebook to the best of your ability judges and i will feel i got a fair look,then i can say-so and so is a good judge.....people will always find an excuse for being unhappy about a decision ---unless they win lmao

[WELLS WOODS]

Right, judges shouldn't start out looking for faults; all hounds have faults, but the extremely faulty hounds will be easy to spot. Sometimes your best hounds are slightly faulty in some way, but their positive contributions to the pack far outweigh their minor miscues. If you start eliminating every dogs that messes up now & then, you'll soon have a pack with no ability. There's enough competition in the Mid-West in my opinion to find nine contenders. Why waste time or make a hasty decision trying to narrow dogs down to a small winners pack just so you'll be able to judge them easier? Should we quit bringing the pink & silver collars? They were used a lot by some great judges in the past for some reason.

[tom summers]

The winners pack number is not relevant other than it be between 6-9. These are the rules that are set for us to follow by akc. What is important is we bring all the dogs that meet the judges and akc standards for a winners pack that day. If akc allowed up to 15 winners pack we would be discussing only bringing 12? Here is what itboils down to it is the judges decision how many to bring back and only theres on that day. I had days when struggled to find 6 and days when you make tough choices to get to 9. If we start pushing for small winners packs we will start eliminating hounds that could come back and do very well. How many times have "bubble dogs " been brought up that have won or placed? Let the judges make the decisions for that day and they as well as us have to live by them. If they are poor choices it should reflect on thier future assignments.
JMO Tom

[mybeagles]

Would rather run another series of 5-5 than run 9 in the winners pack. It gives the dogs with middle of the pack skills the ability to shine amongst the 2-3 hounds doing most of the front end work. That way when you get to winners pack with 6-7 hounds you have the right dogs not just 2-3 leaders and some followers. I have used a 9 dog winners pack from time to time but more times than not there will be another series with smaller packs. I feel more confident that I will get the deserving hounds moving forward. Hard for me to visualize 9 dogs as a Small Pack Option. Not many at home ever run 9 dog packs on cottontail except in trials.

Once I get to that decision point in the trial I have a discussion with my judging partner and we proceed from there. I find some like to jump to winners pack from first series a bit prematurely and go from 18-25 dogs right to 9. The second series gives the hounds a chance to settle in with another pack and every possible opportunity to showcase there skills which is all I ever ask for when I travel several hours to a trial. The 10 minutes and sent to the truck concept needs to be reserved for very faulty hounds.

I can honestly say I have never judged with anyone that was on a witch hunt to find faults. Some are more patient than others but dogs that clearly destroy races need to be picked up sooner rather than later.

I would like to see the Midwest consider letting aspiring judges apprentice (volunteer) as a third judge. I would have jumped at this opportunity when first starting out and it give the two judges another set of eyes to work with. Gets them some valuable experience and doesn't cost the club. Many of these guys are just hanging out in the gallery anyway wishing they could get in there.

[fulcount]

I dont know what this phobia is about a nine dog winners pack
Mybeagles is right go to 3rd series if you have too many good dogs Why would anyone throw away dogs just to come to a NINE dog winners pack?
This going to winners pack with 25 dogs is a crime because for one reason or another
the judges dont want to spend enough time for a second series
What happens there is the judges set a certain number to bring back out of each
pack mostly 3 hounds seems to be the number when they get to their 9 nine dogs
the last pack can have 5 good dogs and they get eliminated because they have their nine dog
quota in a lot of cases
Been there and witnessed such actions
No one can tell me that out of 25 dogs there are only nine that deserve a second look
John O

[WELLS WOODS]

John, no one is saying to cut from 25 or 30 to 9. That would seem impossible to me. You should always take as much of the guess work out of judging as possible in my opinion. As long as judges are giving it a good effort to see the hounds & bring back as many as possible that they think are good quality & with few faults then that's fine with me. I however tried to give every hound a good look & sometimes it meant bringing back a full two pack second series(14) & a full winners pack (9). I never got in a hurry & wanted to know as much about every hound in the whole class that day because when someone asked me what their dog did, I wanted to be able to go into detail. Not just say, he had no score or he just wasn't what we were looking for, etc. Sometimes, there is no need to come back with a 9 hound winners pack, because the talent isn't there, but I don't think judges should cut good hounds out of a winners pack or run a second series pack into the ground just because they "despise a 9 dog winners pack".
The very worst thing that can happen though, is not running the second series hardly at all & still bringing back a small winners pack.

[KanesIrish]

Going back to my original post, I think the day should decide how many dogs are worthy for further consideration.

I watched a class of dogs two weeks ago that over the course of the day the judges looked at 49 dogs, left down 14 dogs and chose 8 of the 14 to go back to a winners pack. People that weren't there will say it was unjust to the other 6 dogs, but people that were there would probably say they called back 1 dog too many. Only 7 dogs over 7 packs could account for the game they ran all the others couldn't tell you where it went after then would move it 100 feet. I think that was justified, but snow trials tend to do that. Judges ran 3 packs down to 1 dog and left those 1 dogs down not knowing what they would come up with. I had a dog in one of those packs, we were given 5 different hare to run and asked to work them on marked lines 12 times...that was more then enough for me to know it wasn't our day.

I've also been apart of trials that had 16 dogs and came back with 11 for second series and then 8 for winners packs. I remember one trial at Pioneer that we had 11 dogs, left 5 down after 1st pack, ran the second pack to 1 dog and ran the 1 dog from the second down to a brace with in winners pack.

Judges should run the dogs LONG ENOUGH to be comfortable that they are making the right decisions.

[WELLS WOODS]

Yeah, there have been a few times that I didn't bring any dogs back from a pack; once was when they all left on a deer & another time, they just couldn't run a freshly jumped rabbit. Scent was fine; they were all just butting heads and none of them even put themselves in position to find the check. We jumped another one; same thing, so we didn't bring any back to the next series. Another time I remember bringing all of the dogs back in a pack. We were having a great run; all of the dogs knew how to work a check the right way & all were getting score; you could tell they were all veteran hounds that just happened to get drawn out together so we brought them all back from that pack. But both scenarios rarely happen to that extreme when judging though.
If I were judging today, with the way the competition looks today that I've seen & most guys having a pretty good hound with a 25 or so entry class, I would run the first series really hard & see as much as I could until myself & the other judge were sure we were bringing back the best 14; yes 14, not 13, 14. Then it's when the fun starts, we have the best 14 in two groups of 7 that we are going to run the pee out of. I know sometimes the talent isn't divided equally, but a good judge should know which dog is hunting, which dog knows how to work a check & which dog continues to look for that check no matter how long the judges want to stay & look for it. Which dogs are staying near the point of loss & which dogs are putting themselves in position to find the check is very important. On the drives, which dog has his nose down concentrating on the line & giving tongue only when he's in contact with the line.
On the negative side, which dog is looking around with their head up in the air in the check area, which dogs are popping their mouth off with out having the check distracting the others from doing their work & taking them farther away from the point of loss & which dogs quit looking after so long & give up. Also which dogs have no clue where the point of loss is & keep swinging wider & wider & you might see them cruise through every once in a while. Should we score the hound that immediately swings wide at the check & finds the line? NO! These are the dogs that are causing the pack to run rough & the pack will never be able to settle in and work the checks & run the rabbit smooth & stay in control of the line until this type of hound is removed from the pack. On the drives, which hounds are not giving enough tongue, which hounds are skirting around the pack trying to pick the line up ahead of the pack, which hounds are so competitive for the front end that they carry the pack way past the point of loss & make it harder to make a recovery.
I know there is a lot to look for & all of our competitive spirited hounds will mess up now & then, but the ones that continue to do these bad habits that disrupt the progress of the pack are faulty hounds that need eliminated (picked up) from the pack. Which hounds can keep their mouth shut unless they are moving the track? The hounds that are keeping the rabbit moving without letting the pressure of the pack make them faulty is what we are looking for.
Back to the question of the number of hounds to bring back to the winners pack. I think it should be left up to the hounds to decide. I've always for the most part have found at least 9 that were worthy of a chance at the ultimate prize. They could run a rabbit to my satisfaction. Sound check work & fast enough as any that ran with control. If I had only found 5 or 6 , I would have been disappointed in the class, but I would not bring any back that didn't deserve it.
Then, I hope the winners pack hounds had eaten their Wheaties, because the placing & winning hounds were going to earn what they got. I don't mean to make it an endurance test, but a normal 3 hour or so run; enough until the judges can easily agree on most of the placements & winner. It's a proud moment for everyone when it's done right.

[gunslinger]

How did a discussion looking for new judges turn in to an argument about how many hounds to bring back in a winners pack.

[WELLS WOODS]

Yes, lets get back to new judges. I see some clubs have already given an assignment or two to the new guys mentioned. A few clubs have requested a list of some that had their license & wanted a chance. If anyone would like to judge in the Mid-West, this would be a good website to post your name & contact information. I will tell you, you better be in really good physical condition because these Mid-West hounds roll at times & you can't judge what you can't see & it is an all day thing. Some clubs have horses, but personally, I've never been able to see enough to judge every pack on a horse. It depends where the rabbit runs & the type of cover the running grounds have. You can be honest & know a dog, but if you can't keep up, you're not going to see enough to make sound decisions.

[Budd]

Some clubs have horses, but personally, I've never been able to see enough to judge every pack on a horse. It depends where the rabbit runs & the type of cover the running grounds have.

Sorry for getting off subject here but since you brought up horses to judge with I have a question. My brother does some UBGF trailing and at one of those the judge was using a horse, Ricks dog had NEVER seen a horse before and completely freaked out, tried hiding behind my brother. Judge said she was doing well and scoring but every time they road the horse into the check area she would freak out and start booger barking at the horse, thus she was picked up for disrupting the pack...Is that fair? The judge seen her doing this before they even started the cast, should have he saw this was going to cause trouble and opted to judge on foot?

[WELLS WOODS]

Yes, I'm sorry, but if they are afraid of the horse so much that they quit running, they'll get picked up. If they get over their shyness & go back in they'll be okay, but would have missed a lot of the running. Try to take them around cattle & horses a few times a week & let them get used to them. Most dogs will overcome this.

[Budd]

I've not gone to enough trials or now anything about the AKC rules, is this actually in the AKC rules that horses may be used and that hounds MUST be accustomed to livestock? Could it have been that the horse was being disruptive to the pack and not the dog? Not trying to pick fights or argue for sake of arguing, just think it's a shame that a dog is picked up because of it's fear of a horse. Have you seen or heard of this before? Was not the case in this instance but maybe some dogs have had bad experiences with horses.

[WELLS WOODS]

Yes, we have had hounds afraid of the horses before & they wouldn't run, but it is very rare. You might call AKC & see what they say about it. Some guys won't run at trials where horses are used; not because their dogs are afraid of horses, but they are afraid a horse might accidently step on their dog. It has happened. I don't like it when judges on a horse takes off after a dog that barks & doesn't watch out for the dogs running under them. I've seen close calls many times.