A frequent complaint is “short runs”. The problem is trying to define how long in terms of time or distance is adequate. In my opinion it is not possible to set a specific time limit or distance that a brace should run. One possible answer is that the brace run a sufficient distance or time that both dogs have an opportunity to defeat the other. This would make for a good discussion that we all could benefit from.
Advertisement
March 3, 2008 at 1:04 am |
I am new to brace beagling, have only been in for 3 years.
I don’t think there should be a distance or time limit, they should be ran long
enough to get a winner in that brace. How long would you look at the front
dog after the back dog fell off, how long would you look at the back dog after it walks through the front dog after it is off the track.
i
March 4, 2008 at 7:45 am |
I agree with you that it would be rather difficult to impose time or distance schedules for each brace in a Field Trial.
To answer your questions, I wish to preface the answers with the following: When judging we must keep in mind that there is 2 types of competition in every Brace Field Trial: (1) Direct Competition and (2) Indirect Competition.
Direct Competition is where 2 dogs compete against each other in a brace with one being declared the winner.
Indirect Competition includes the dogs, other than your direct bracemate, that are competing in earlier or later braces.
The above two factors really explains why I have answered your questions as follows:
Q1) Answer: When judging a pair of dogs in a brace, some winners can be determined very quickly and some braces require more time to pick the most deserving hound. The problem with short run winners, especially early in first series, is that you have no idea how well later braces will perform. So, picking a brace winner quickly does not allow you to adequately compare to the Indirect Competiton. In addition, you must always be asking yourself and your judging partner how comfortable are you with a dog before its scored. Has the dog proven its ability to handle more of a challenge than just a straight line in the brush?
Q2) Answer: Again, if the back dog is not contributing to the run, and the front dog is doing a good job, then run the brace until the better dog has proven its ability to be scored and you feel comfortable enough to compare it to the indirect competition in previous braces or upcoming braces.
Q3) Answer: If the back dog goes through the front dog after displaying his/her ability on the back for a while, then I like to see the new leader command the front as if the run just started. Also, I want to see the origional front dog perform on the back. To clarify, I believe that once the origional back dog takes the front, going a few feet and ordering them up doesn’t tell us anything about either dog in that brace except that the origional front dog made a little mistake.
To conclude, keep in mind the 2 types of competition in Brace Trials, test the dogs until you have confidence in their ability to run on pathways and brush, and you are judging to impact the welfare of Brace Beagling!
Regards,
Beaver Creek
February 23, 2009 at 11:42 pm |
I was recently at a trial where short runs prevailed. Results, high brace failed, second brace failed. When I say failed, I mean they couldn’t move a rabbit 30 feet! No reason at all for this. Lots of daylight, lots of rabbits, and a small class. Disgusting.
John Campbell
February 24, 2009 at 6:58 am |
John,
Ironically, I was just talking with a fellow beagler from Pennsylvaina on this very subject today.
I agree, it seems that our sport is fixed in another trend, the “short run & stylist” trend with way too many occurances of this dilemma, especially in second and subsequent series. Proving performance ability is what trials should be about!
That being said, the problem is that there is nobody that everybody will listen to! I suppose that the AKC could send representatives out, but their focus needs to be on assuring the evaluation process is thourough. They will never, never enforce the type or speed of dog that we run in brace beagling! Another point is that we tend to walk away disgusted and blog or complain to friends, etc.. I have decided myself to stop complainning and start approaching judges, professionally, to discuss this type of concern. A Communication forum, versus dismantling judges may help bridge the gap.
The good news is that we do have a lot of honest and knowledgeable people judging. However, the questions remains, why are many trials being judged on short runs? Why are people complainning that there is too much dog tracking? Why are people complainning that they don’t know what to breed to? Why are people complainning that the pups out of a stud dog don’t stay or brace well? Why do people complain that they can’t get a good read on a dog’s offspring? COULD IT BE BECAUSE IN TOO MANY INSTANCES DOGS TODAY DO NOT HAVE TO PROVE MUCH IN A FIELD TRIAL? AFTERALL, THIS IS WHERE MOST DOGS ARE VIEWED.
I’d like to propose a question; Why did Fd. Ch. Wilcliffe Boogie become so popular in his hayday and have such a dominant affect on this sport as we know it today when he was out of an unfinished sire and dam?? The hypothesis that I wish to explore is as follows: Did the dogs in Boogie’s pedigree PROVE to their owners and many others that they could perform because they had ability work out a check efficiently, use their mouth properly, execute from behind other dogs, demonstrate intelligence, stay with the trail, ect..? The key word is did they PROVE IT? Evidently, their Fd. Ch. titles meant nothing with respect to Boogie’s ability to produce, but proven performance did as the rest is obviously history!
Okay John, you’ve found a blogger. Where are all of the others with strong opinions? If you are reading this, don’t sit back and smile or tell your locals that there are no reversable solutions to the trend that is suffocating beagling. Chime in and weather the storm. Don’t be a weak knee authority, but recognize that the bar needs to be raised and it wouldn’t take a lot of effort to overcome this little (very important) hurdle.
I invite your thoughts on this subject. Don’t be afraid.
February 27, 2009 at 3:52 pm |
I agree with Dale. We should let the dogs run until we are truely sure they are faulty. We see so many make a judgement on a brace because they made a mistake early in the chase. Give them a chance to work a hard check!!! Most of the dogs we run today can follow a rabbit in the manner we like. They get picked up before they demonstrate they can get out of trouble. In second series they hit the wall and get dumped,why because they lack the patience or ability to get out of trouble. Nobody is that good of a judge to make a decision on a short run.
Jerry
March 4, 2009 at 8:40 pm |
Jerry,
You are absolutely right! There is nothing more fun when trainning dogs than to watch a pair of hounds work out of a jam or two after doing a great job before it was encountered, then carry on efficiently. This helps identify the keepers
In Field Trials, it seems obvious that this is the only way to measure differences between hounds in a class, which require more ground time inorder to register mistakes vs faultiness.
I often wonder if beaglers would run their older hounds in the big events if performance testing were the main criteria, versus strictly style or mistake judging which seems to be so trendy?
That all being said, I hope that anyone that reads this understands my comments or statements are not intended to come accross as a smart alec or to degrade any judge or this great sport. Rather, its to challenge the dogs to prove it.
Best,
Dale
March 5, 2009 at 4:04 am |
Dale Jerry,
I was just wondering. The judges that are guilty of picking up dogs to quickly. Do you think that after they get dressed, load their dogs in to the truckl, then drive the half hour or hour or even longer to the club, unload their dogs spend a half hour or so finding a rabbit, put the dogs on the line, run them a couple of minutes then go home!!! I don’t think so.
John
March 5, 2009 at 7:58 am |
Yes, some of them do. I have seen it myself, however, they don’t win many trial either.
Dale
March 5, 2009 at 3:28 pm |
I know that the folks at Coraopolis that are successful train,train,train. All kinds of weather and through differant types of cover hence they know when they go to a trial what to expect. It drives me nuts when I hear “I never saw that dog do that before” well they haven’t been in the field with the dog very often. We all make mistakes and so do the dogs. They should be given credit for how they recover after or if they ever do. If we pick them up after a short run straight down a path what does it prove of the metal or inteligence of the dog.
jerry
March 6, 2009 at 1:32 am |
Dale Jerry,
Was running derbies today with a long time friend. We were discussing liscensed trials and the short run thing along with dog tracking etc. Like you say Jerry the dogs all make mistakes what would we have if the dogs never made these mistakes. My buddy said to me,John do you remember 25/30 years ago when you and I would be judjing a sanction trial and the owners would complain we were running them to long. I said yeah but it was mostly because if we had a pair of good ones down we just wanted to watch them. I know liscensed trials are different than those old sanctioned trials. Lots of money involved now, studding a dog is a business for some, but maybe just maybe we should all think back aways and try to remember when we ran the dogs simply because we loved it. I think if we just forget about the competive part of the sport just a little bit we might find ourselves running our dogs a little longer.
John
May 14, 2009 at 2:21 am |
Hey guys. Watched a big male win a trial in Va. by going around it’s bracemate when the bracemate would not move. OK. But believe it or not watched the same 2 dogs in another licensed trial when the back dog went around it’s bracemate in the same manner (front dog not moving) got tossed out. What is it going to be. Oh. I also watched a back dog get under it’s bracemate 4 times and come back HIGH. Need to get on the same page. John