First, let me say that I find it very disconcerting to hear that a competent judge would only consider looking at one hound in a brace whether it be either the front or back hound. In my estimation If this happened or is happening at the present time then the quilty party should not be judging licensed trails.
A hound can be faulty whether it is be in the front or in the rear and the judge must distinquish the difference. Michigan judge John Islander, Sr. once answered such a question for me, When I first started beagling many years ago I asked John the following question. “What does a hound have to do to establish that it can run the front?” John answered. “It just has to cut out some of the work that the other hound has missed.” Ralph Gillum once told me that he believed the reason many judges had problems with second series was that they were choosing hounds that didn’t cut out any work for them selves.
So my question is the same one I brought up earlier–Why should a man be selected for a judging assignment if he only considers a hound on one end of the run. If this is happening or has happened in the past and the man is just succuming to a trend that is going on at that time then he is doubly quilty. First, for only considering a hound on one end of the run and second for following the current trend in order to get judging assignments.
Please give this subject some objective thought and send in your replies. Lets clear the air!
February 13, 2008 at 1:13 am |
Hello Larry,
Thanks for the new “blog” feature. It will be interesting to see what develops.
I have this to say about front versus rear dogs. I have not seen many judges that use dogs from only one end. I hear that they do but usually the “gossip” is worse than the result.
Both dogs should be running the rabbit and it is a simple matter of who is staying closer to the line giving some leway to the front dog for leading the way – especially if the rabbit is taking long jumps. Also, oftentimes the back dog beats itself by taking too long to follow the line so that it “gets out of the run”.
February 13, 2008 at 1:34 pm |
Hi Larry, there will probably always be a difference of opinion on front versus back, but here are my thoughts. Position in the run does not have anything to do with track accountability. I want my dogs to account for the most tracks progressing as straight & smooth as is possible, sometimes they don’t, but it is still what I want!!!! This is dictated by the route that the rabbit takes, the enviroment they are in (cover * weather conditions), bracemate. I would hope that judges wouldn’t eliminate half the class using the squirrel cage by selecting either front or rear, as we don’t have the choice of front or back. We certainly shouldn’t like a stupid dog that will not progress on either front or back, but sometimes we confuse “getting out of the run” with the run actually being on the back. If two individuals were setting out to walk from Detroit, Michigan to Memphis, Tennessee and the individual that left first went to Chicago, and then to Cleveland, and then Dallas and finally got to Memphis and the other individual left 3 minutes later and went to Indianopolis, and then Louisville and then Nashville and arrived at Memphis 15 minutes after the first individual, which one would you like to walk (or run) with. My point is simply that the run on this trip was on the back, not with the guy that needed a compass, and, the second indivual was never physically on the “front”during this trip. Now, had the first individual taked a more direct route on this trip, the run would have been on the front.
May 8, 2008 at 5:27 pm |
Well if everybody would just stop and think. I’m sure that they have been to a trial where this might has happen. I for one have seen this happen. If we would only stop and think while we are judging dogs. Did the front dog leave anything out for the back dog to fill in? Did the back dog fill in everything that the front dog left out? There has been times when the front dog just didn’t leave anything for the rear dog to fill in and was the winner of the brace. Then there has been times that the rear dog has fill in so much of what the front dog has left out and he was the winner of the brace. Then there has been times when it was about even.Hard choice here isn’t it. Both of the dogs running smoothly. Who is the winner? You see most of our judges today and time have a hard job to do,and they do it the best way they can. If you don’t like the way one of the judges judge. Don’t run under him. I would only hope that the judges would take the best of a brace and then the best of the trial on that given day. Get the best dog. It makes no different where he runs in a brace.
Bill
November 3, 2008 at 10:25 am |
There is truely something wrong. At a recent two day trial two different classes judged by the same two judges not one rear dog was used. The entry was a total of 80 plus hounds. The law of averages would dictate that one of the rear hounds would have scored higher than the lowest scored front dog? This truely can’t be good for our sport. The dogs should determine the winners not the pills.
Jerry Gileot
November 6, 2008 at 6:44 pm |
I read Jerry Gileots blog and have to agree 100% with him but what is the remedy to fix this problem?Did these judges attend the advanced seminars and is this where they came up with the idea that we need more dog?I just heard of another trial held that the same thing happened.You would like to think that common sense would take over when people are judging and they would realize that one position or the other does not determine how a dog is brought back.I would like to hear what the logic of this was from the people doing the judging.They evidently thought they were doing the right thing and if so then we must respect their decision as it all boils down to that judging is only an oppinion and we are all entitled to our opinion right or wrong.
Steve Caldwell
November 22, 2008 at 5:39 am |
I saw the same mistakes as Jerry and Steve mentioned after being at an Advanced Judging Seminar. The next two days the Front dogs, whether deserved or not, won a majority of the braces in 1st and 2nd series. If it hadn’t of been kinda’ sad in a couple of cases I might have found it quite funny as I have known all four of the judges for a couple of decades at least! Granted, I am sure that in light of all Mel Stewart went on about in the Seminar, they thought they were doing right. One of them has had a problem for several years seeing what the back dog is doing and was delighted with Mel’s presentation. Personally, I didn’t find it that interesting. After a phone conversation with Jim Gerard, I understand the reasoning that brought these presentations about, but I truly can’t see where they will be much help unless conducted by well repected Judges. I agree with John Eylander’s reply to Russ. He didn’t mention if it was John or Johnny he talked to but they were both well respected Judges and a pleasure to run under and talk dogs with. After following Field Trial Beagles for 41 years and judging them for 39 years I have found that the good ones win from the front or the back and I feel the biggest failing in judging is to not leave them down long enough to determine who is accounting for the most tracks regardless of position in the run. I do think that you can judge only the front dog if the back dog is faulty or only the back dog if the front dog is faulty. But when 2nd series is called and 75% or more of the hounds were front runners 75% of the time, we are having a problem that is as great or greater than what was happening before the seminars. Yours for Better Beagling, Lynnie