New judges in Mid-West

[tom summers]

I agree Dave , but I was making the point that the rules are guidelines. I am very aware and agree that hounds working checks quickly can be called rough and adversely a hound that hangs in a small check area for along time without working outwardly fast enough could be called "anchoring" when other hounds continue to work out and find the check.

[KanesIrish]

Fulcount,
I apologize that I used I and not "we", since I wasn't talking about a certain partner, I used I, had I been talking about a certain partner I would have used we.

As far as "accompolishment over style", I've been having a hard time finding that in the AKC and the CKC rule book. While I know what you're saying, some people don't and use "accompolishment over style" as an excuse to look at rough dogs because the score more then other dogs, regardless if they account for game. The term accompolishment over style, I would imagine came out during the turn to walkie talkie dogs in brace because judges would be more apt to place dogs that fit the style they were looking for regardless if they accounted for the rabbit that they were running.

What is spelled out in the AKC rule book makes much more sense and should be what's preached: "The slighty fault hound who succeeds should be preferred over the stylist that FAILS". I put FAILS in caps because that means it doesn't account for the rabbit, while I realize "accompolishment over style" was just meant to be a shorter version then that, some judges should familarize themselves what the rulebook actually says.

[tom summers]

Beagle Field Trial Rules
pg. 31 sec. 5-d Credits
paragraph 2
The section mentions crediting a hound for style versus accomplishment

[WELLS WOODS]

Dave, UBGF & Mid-West winners packs should rarely look the same because Mid-West hounds are trying to catch the rabbit & UBGF hounds are content to follow the rabbit. The time they might look similar is on a tough scenting day for Mid-West hounds when they have to slow down to move the line & a good scenting day in UBGF when they go the same speed regardless of conditions.
Tom , the words industriously & thoroughly would imply in a circle since the rabbit either went straight, left, right, or back, if the line is not found in the first round they would be makng a circle around the point of loss trying to locate scent. If a hounds just heads off in one direction from the point of loss that would be called bounding off & would not be a good way to find a lose.

[chris1971]

I am not sure that this will make anyone want to judge after reading all the different opinions on the way it should be done. Just seems counter productive to look for a reason to throw someone under the bus. I was always told you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. I was also told opinions are like a..holes and everyone has one but I always thought opinions are like a..holes, yours probably smells just like mine. If you want new judges, or not, then why not have a rule in place that would require at least one apprentice judge at each trial. the apprentice judge would be paired with the judge with the most experience at the trial. This would allow a novice judge the opportunity to judge with a seasoned judge and also help bring new judges into this sport. Yes I do know that it would require some work to find an apprentice judge but your club asked to be a part of the Federation then they should be willing to do the work to promote the Federation. I believe that there are a lot of good people that would like to judge and can evaluate hounds to bring back and place the best. To me this is nothing more than what is going on today in politics. A lot of good people could run for office and do a wonderful job but do not like the mud slinging that is required to be in office

[KanesIrish]

Greg,
When was the last time you watched UBGF dogs run?

[tom summers]

Greg industriously does not mean circle it is impling energeticly, and i did not say search out in a straight line i said fanning or sweeping. My point is that a hound can work a check in any fashion and do a great job. It cannot imediately head in one direction "gamblimg " on hitting the scent it must start from inside out.

[tom summers]

What i think we are both saying is that hound must work the check from inside out energeticly . I truly believe we are on the same page just aying it different. Hell we judged together all day and got along, and i dont believe either of our expectations of a hound have changed.

[John Way]

Chris 1971. In my area, often times an apprentice will be put with advertised judges at championship and qualifying trials. To place a note with your trial ad " Seeking newer judges to apprentice under our advertised judges , call fts to arrange " or have fts or even one of the judges make an announcement at roll call. " anyone interested in apprenticing today". It could b one pack or all day. Give a complete novice or possibly well versed houndsman a spur of the moment option. I know some judges wouldn't b interested in this action , but believe most seasoned judges would glady accommodate. Also believe some type of posting on sites like this , should list the names of all who recently completed a basic judges seminar. How about a mass emailing to all fts in the region where seminar was presented. Perhaps the club that just hosted the seminar could provide. For the most part , until a newly certified judge completes their first lic assignment, their name does not appear in the AKC judges directory. We need to seek out and embrace these individuals. If they took the step to complete a seminar , chances are they will jump at a judging opportunity. May be a good talking point at my next association or federation meeting.

[WELLS WOODS]

Tom, yes, I'm sure we agree on how a hound should work a check. Just shows how hard it is to understand "computer talk" sometimes. Checkwork should start from the point of loss, then hounds should industriously (hardworking ) & progressivley ( moving closer to success) work a check inside out.
Kanes Irish, I've never personally seen a UBGF trial, but have on TV many times. In my opinion, they are definitely promoting style over accomplishment.
Judging trials isn't rocket science. Any honest man with common sense that has a general knowledge of houndwork & can keep up & actually see enough of the running to make sound decisions, can be a judge.
Jon Way, those are some good ideas about getting new judges involved.

[fulcount]

Robbie
The I thing wasn't aimed specificaly at you but look thru the posts
and pay attention when you talk to some different people that have judged
trials and se e what I'm talking about, I'm sure you have noticed it if not
your not paying attention You will hear I did This and I did That a big percent of the time

John O

[Shady Grove Beagles]

I know this post is about Mid-West judges and it is not my intention to hi-jack it on another subject but......
Kanes Irish,are you indicating by your question to Greg Wells that the U.B.G.F. hounds do not run like he's describing them?
I moved here to Tn. 20 years ago from N.H.and here in Tn. was my first exposure to that type of hound and finding out what the U.B.G.F. was all about.
Unlike Greg who said he's never seen them in person I have seen them a bunch.When I lived in middle Tn. there was a W.M.A. four miles from my house where a U.B.G.F. club held their trials and many of those guys ran on it.Here in east Tn. where I now live I'm 12 miles from a 800 acre W.M.A. that is used by several U.B.G.F. clubs for their trials and again many of those guys run there.I regularly run into them on the running grounds and have taken the time to go out on some series and see what their dogs were all about.
I'd say Greg's desciption of the U.B.G.F. dogs in this state at least is spot on.

[tom summers]

I judge the spo nationals in 2002 and they are as described. I judged when the midwest was first invited.

[mybeagles]

Dave, UBGF & Mid-West winners packs should rarely look the same because Mid-West hounds are trying to catch the rabbit & UBGF hounds are content to follow the rabbit.

Greg, its the same rule book. If judges are selecting dogs that are not running to overcome the game they MAY be in error if they picked up hounds that were;.... and doing it right. I have judged and attended ubgf trials where the winners pack was fast and nearly flawless. 45+ minute race at excellent pace. Seen very similar packs at properly judged midwest trials.

You live in KY, it would be worth your trip to go watch the UBGF nationals. You will see some slower hounds, but I promise you the winners packs in all 4 classes will get up and roll. As Ive heard you say on many occasions, "don't judge it until you attend some trials and see for yourself".

Im pretty sure I could put together some video's of a few midwest trials that would make you think it was a big joke. As you know it takes several trials under different conditions to get the whole picture.

Chris1971, if this discussion which seems to be pretty civil would discourage someone from judging they likely are not cut out for the job. There are some very experienced judges on here that have pointed out some detailed points than any judge would benefit from considering. Ive been judging for 15 years now but these conversations still cause me to reconsider things I may have over looked, took for granted, or just plain forgot.

Tom,
I was not there in 2002, heard some bad reports, but I watched in 2011 and the winners packs were as fast and smooth as anything Ive ever seen. They consistently accounted for their game for long periods of time at fast pace. I think all associations make some adjustments over time and from what I can tell the UBGF nationals is the real deal. Certainly there are judges within their association that demand a flat medium speed dog regardless, but there are certainly midwest judges that demand a fast dog regardless if they can keep in going for 20 yards. I still believe the reason we have two distinct styles within SPO is the desire to be able to keep a slow for no reason dog and win and keep a rougher than heck dog and win.

[chris1971]

Mybeagles, you are correct that some may not be cut out for judging but it just seems that at times some state their opinions as the way it is. I try to learn something from everyone i meet and try to take advice. Successful people in what ever they may be successful at; judging, work, sport, ect work on it day in and day out. The only point i was trying to get across was there are ways of attracting new judges if you try and think outside the box. I by no means have been judging as long as you or anyone for that matter but i can promise one thing if i am lucky enough to be asked to judge again i will give 100% of my ability to do the dogs justice that men have spent their hard earned money to bring and compete. Will i be perfect? No but have not seen anyone that is. This is a great post and i support anyone like Greg that is trying to help improve the sport we all love