103 replies to this topic

[Rebecca, Irena Farm]

Certainly the lower classes aren't for taking dogs out who have no hope of managing the course and will only likely wreck because you see it as a chance to train your dog since you paid your entry fee. And I wasn't implying that I was taking dogs to the post whom I didn't think could make it around the course.

I wanted to re-iterate that I'm not voicing an opposing view to Julie P's here. It has to do with what I can handle through. By "unexpected messes" I'm referring to something like the dog turning the sheep back to me on the drive, sheep running hard for the exhaust, turning the post the wrong way (argh!), sheep that want to split, even something as simple as the dog overreacting and overflanking.

I'm starting to learn how to help a dog in situations like this, but before I go out there with a dog, I need a dog that will give me a moment to think. The trust to allow me to help really only comes from experience ("Okay, she's slow, but she'll pitch in any second and it will help a lot!"), and training ("I've seen this situation before and I know success comes from teamwork.").

[juliepoudrier]

Thanks for posting the class descriptions Mark. My internet connection was being squirrelly this morning, and I'm just getting reconnected.

Laurae,
The main difference between P/N and ranch in this region is that the ranch class has the full open drive and may have the full open outrun, or perhaps just a bit shorter (the nursery class is generally the same as the ranch class). It's a pretty big leap from P/N to ranch (for a young or inexperienced dog), IMO.

J.

[Pipedream Farm]

Julie,

When I saw you were reading the thread and then were gone I figured I'd go ahead and answer the question.

Mark

[Wendy V]

I take one of my open dogs (Breezy) to the post on leash. If I don't, then the "Great Anticipator" will take off to the sheep before I am ready. I've made half-hearted attempts to fix this in the past, but since she takes corrections hard and since the corrections usually produce unintented, undesirous results, I have compromised with the leash. Since the dog is a coming 9 yo, I have no incentive to try and change it now. Poor training? Perhaps; she is one of my first open dogs. Embarassing? Nah, I've built up quite a thick skin to that.

[bcnewe2]

I am so not sure what I want to do with my dogs when walking to the post. My "instincts" tell me that the dog should be walking next to me or close to me. That was pounded into me from way back when. But....I have a pressure sensitive dog that has finally taken me somewhere close to getting to open. For him walking close to me is so much pressure it puts him off his game. Hard when the old me would say just make him stay with me. So many reasons have been given one way or the other that I'm right in the middle of the fence on this. Best I figure for me is, depends on the dog.

The dog that hates being close when walking to the post will stray ahead about 20 ft. then sit and look back at me. The whole time he's looking for his sheep. I think he's looking back at me telling me to hurry. He won't go till I say, once I get there he'll go or stay where ever I say as long as it's not right at my leg. I've come to figure with him it's way to much pressure for the point I'm trying to make so we've learned to compromise with each other. He's beautiful on his outruns so it must be working.
Now I have his young sis just getting started. If I allow her to get to far ahead it becomes a race to sheep or a race for me to control her but she's a sweetie when walking next to me going to sheep. She's not bothered by being that close to me and there's no pressure but if I let her slip to far ahead, game on. So with her it's by my leg. This morning going out to train, I forgot to put a collar on her she raced ahead, no problem cause she couldn't get to sheep. I stopped where I was called her name a few times, when she looked back I asked her to come here she did but, we had to do this 3 times cause it was a far walk to sheep. So by the time she was at the gate with me, we were defiantly working together. Still letting it be her choice to walk with me was what I was after. She choose right cause her first choice wasn't getting her to working sheep.

I used to feel that if I walked a dog out on a leash people might think we're not ready. Now that I've done made a fool of myself numerous times I've realized it's only me who gives a darn what I do so I'm doing what works for us.

As far as using the trial field as a training place, maybe a better word for me would be a refining place or a place where I see what I need to work on at home. If I was to only go if I thought I'd win, I'd not be going yet! Placing is just icing for me. The cake is doing a good job that we can be proud of. One day I hope to be in the camp of planning on placing or winning but till then I'll keep working on having what I consider a good run for us and try not to worry about others thoughts.

Kristen

[C Crocker]

Laura,

In our region the classes are:

Novice-Novice: gather, wear, pen
Pro-Novice: gather, drive, pen
Ranch (or Open-Ranch): gather, drive, cross-drive, pen

Gathers increase in length with each increase in level (as the field permits).
Sometimes PN will have a short cross-drive.



Mark

Mark ,

Thanks for posting the differences in your area. I had not thought about Pro/Novice having a different course in different parts of the country. I am in CA and in the area I trial in , as well as the trials in Oregon my dog has gone to, the Pro/Novice is a gather, drive, cross-drive, pen. It is the same course as the Nursery. Some the of times they will run the P/N and Nursery as the same class and you sign up for which section you want to be judged in , or you can add a bit of money and be judged for both divisions at the same time, assuming your dog is also eligible for the Nursery.

We have Novice/Novice (not very often) , Nursery, Pro/Novice and Open only.

Carolyn

[1sheepdoggal]

I just wanted to point out that I don't think that going to the post on-leash, at any level, is either good or bad, and I apologize if it seemed like a judgmental question. Honestly, I was just curious if it was a regional thing, if handlers were more laid back in some parts than others, and what the thinking for either camp might be.

I dont think that you were being judgmental or anything of the sort. You brough up a good subject, that brought a lot of good information to the table, and I for one enjoyed particapating in it. I not only learned a few new things about training, but about fellow handlers and thier training methods that have helped them to become successful handlers/ trainers as well. It was educational, and enriching to have such an informative and stockdog based subject. Keep em coming! Darci

[1sheepdoggal]

Robin put up a good question on "Ask the Expert" about going to the post on lead, and Mrs. Lambert answered, with what I thought was an interesting answer, given the tone of the thread that initiated the question. Not necessarily coming from a top open handlers point of view, but more over from her perspective as a judge, has it given anyone cause to think about dropping the lead when walking to the post. How I read it, translated to me, that by going to the post off lead, in a relaxed, positive, and confident manner with your dog at your side, ( or close by) what ever the class, was about presentation as well. ( given the comment of waiting for the other shoe to drop) Do you think how we present ourselves and our dogs as we come on the field has any bearing on the judging? Or the judges perspective of the handler or thier handling/ training abilities? Or do you think the judging starts after you send you dog, and its all about the run?

( Mrs. Lambert's comments )
"I know when I'm judging I always look askance at this and am waiting for the other shoe to fall. Having your dog walk around with you and behave properly is elementary for a stock dog. They need to be under control around stock and anything else in life so they are available to work"

"I don't like to see a dog go to the post on a leash. I feel that the handler should at least be able to walk to the post with their dog under control no matter what bad things may happen next"

[1sheepdoggal]

As a foot note, I'd like to ask, for those that judge, or have judged, does a handler bringing a dog on the trial field on lead, tend to sway the way you look more closely ( I dont want to say, to pick it apart, ) at the abilities of the handler and dogs work during thier run? Does it make you look at other parts of a run to see if a handler has more, or less control of the situation? Ive always heard, that first impressions are lasting imperssions. I ask, because I am fairly rigid in my training, ( especially in how we go to the post) and am trying to justify wether it is necessary to have such a regimine to be competitive, (or at least give the impression that we "look" competitive ) Id like to understand, if how we come on the field, and present ourselves from the very begining of a run, has any bearing on how you look at and judge the run as a whole.

[Laurae]

Oh no...I'm sunk!

[juliepoudrier]

You probably already know what I'm going to say, but I'll say it anyway. The judging is supposed to be about how the dog gets the sheep around the course, not how the dog gets to the post. A judge who would let the actions of the handler up to the point of sending the dog (i.e., to have the dog on a leash) affect the judging of that dog's run is not judging properly IMO. That said, I can see where a judge might wonder if the dog is really capable of the work if it can't even go to the post off lead, but I don't think that going to the post on lead can actually be used as a "predictor" of bad things to come, since I've seen some very nice open dogs go to the post on lead and have some very nice runs.

I've judged just once, and it was a lower class (P/N), so I don't have tons of judging experience to draw from. I have, however, gone to judging clinics with some of the best of the best, and I have to say that all jdging concentrated on what happened once the dog left the handler's feet, and no mention was ever made of walking the dog to the post on a leash or even how the handler set the dog up at the post (we've seen and perhaps done the "grab the collar to put the dog in position" thing--should that also be faulted? It gets to be a slippery slope.).

This part of the question:

tend to sway the way you look more closely ( I dont want to say, to pick it apart, ) at the abilities of the handler and dogs work during thier run?

sort of disturbs me. The handler's handling skill/ability or whatever you want to call it isn't really on the plate either (other than how that ability or lack thereof affects the correctness of the way the sheep move around the course). So I don't see how a judge can see a dog on a leash and then decide to "pick apart" or examine more closely the handling. Handling is individualistic, and there would be no way to fairly judge one handler's style against another's. That's why the judge is supposed to be judging the sheep/dog (and even how much the dog can be judged is open to debate). There have been some long discussions on other lists about the most obvious aspect of handling--whistle commands, with the most heated discussions centering around how much whistling is appropriate on the fetch. I don't want to rehash that here, but it is a prime example of handling style, and can a judge really fault a person who whistles nonstop but has a good/near perfect line, say, on the drive away, over the person who sets their dog on a line and gives just a *few* whistles to correct that line? In the end, it's the line that's judged, not the handler.

So in general, I think any judge's perceptions of a handler may be somewhat colored by any number of things (what about the handler who doesn't whistle, but yells over the entire course?), but ultimately the correct judge will judge only what happens on the course.

Just my non-judging opinion of course.

J.

[1sheepdoggal]

Oh no...I'm sunk!

Im not so sure about that Laurae, as Julie said,

The judging is supposed to be about how the dog gets the sheep around the course, not how the dog gets to the post

I feel, that, with all due respect to the judges, that this much should hold true. Judges are , like the rest of us, individuals, and I feel that they have thier own criteria about some things. ( perhaps those things that they can control themselves, that are not in the rule book) Though still being relitivly new to the sport of trialing, in my mind, the judge is the one that you ultimatly have to impress and please, during the run, and perhaps I take alot much to seriously, and expect to be judged from the time my dog and I start to walk to the post, till we walk off. Kinda like a job interview, you are looked at and critiqued from the time you open the door and enter the office, till the interview is over, and you walk out.

Julie, as always, you have given a very well thought out, well worded, and informational post, as well as a lot for me to digest, and sort out and see where this line of thinking could help me better my handling/training, and overall attitude about trialing. I will have to think about it all a little longer, and probably read it a few more times, before I can give any type of response that would do your advise any justice. As my point here, is not to instagate, or argue, but to learn.

[jomur]

Just to reinforce the point that Bev Lambert made re leashes going to the post,(not that she needs support),I too get apprehensive when I see the dog on a leash .I make a point of mentioning it to my scribe when I see it.It gives a somewhat negative impression of control.It does not influence how I judge the run however.But human nature being what it is ,if you have a negative initial feeling ,then unconscientiously more points may be deducted than on another run.

Another point was made above about her dog not wanting to be too close to her at the post.Be warned that there is a limit on distance from the handler/post.Points may be deducted if the distance is greater than 4 yds.Ten yds is also mentioned with greater deductions.This distance is quite often disregarded by even the best open handlers ,again it is difficult to determine if the judge pointed it or not, but maybe that is why some complain about points off on the outrun when they see their dog arrive at the top in what appears to be the correct spot.Sending the dog before the handler arrives at the post is also a common open handler fault.

As for excessive commands,this has been debated many times on Sheepdog-L.If you review the USBCHA judging guidelines ,the subject is mentioned under the Lift,Fetch and Drive.Points are most often deducted on the lift for excessive commands and as stated in the guidelines 1/2 -1 point per command after the first two.Usually though this is not applied unless the dog is definitely slow to lift.The fetch and drive point deductions for excessive commands is 1-4.Of course "excessive commands" is in the judgement of the judge and the circumstances.A handler would probably not be able to determine if he/she was penalized for this except on the lift when it is most obvious.

The above are just some of the things that I have noticed when judging and when just observing runs.Since many on this Board are novice handlers I thought it might be advantageous to point these matters out,as they do apply to points made on this thread.

Jim Murphy

[1sheepdoggal]

The above are just some of the things that I have noticed when judging and when just observing runs.Since many on this Board are novice handlers I thought it might be advantageous to point these matters out,as they do apply to points made on this thread.



Oh, I think they absolutly do apply, as a majority of us handling in the lower classes, do aspire to one day particapate in open.


I too get apprehensive when I see the dog on a leash .I make a point of mentioning it to my scribe when I see it.It gives a somewhat negative impression of control.It does not influence how I judge the run however.But human nature being what it is ,if you have a negative initial feeling ,then unconscientiously more points may be deducted than on another run.


This was what I was wondering, though it doesnt influence how you judge, it could be cause for points off, because of an intitial impression. I tend to be competitive by nature, and hence, my ideas are formed due to my nature. When I go at some thing, I can be rather anal about it, and lean towards perfection (wether I get there is a whole nuther story ) but being competitive by nature, makes me try to complete each phase of the work so that the whole picture flows along from begining to end, ( from one phase to another )hopefully giving it an effortless and perfect ( to the best of my ability )picture. I tend to look at what I expect in the end product from the very begining. I understand that in stockdog training, alot of the "polish" comes later in the training, but I also, for the same token, think that, that is how we leave holes in our training, because we expect things to come later, that we could be working on sooner, instead of finding those holes on the trial field, and getting points off. Again, it is my competitiveness, having the idea of doing well, and getting a decent score, and even perhaps placing, that drives me to these notions. Wether they're right or wrong, I cannot exbound upon, because I havent enough experience to base it on. But I like to know what is expected, more than simply what my dog and I can get by with. Please dont hold that last sentence aginst me, it is not aimed at anyone, just my way of thinking. ( I did say I was rather anal)

[juliepoudrier]

Hey Jim, thanks for the input! As a matter of practicality I have to say that I don't think I've ever seen someone set their dog up four yards away, much less 10 yards away, but I obviously haven't been to every trial there is to see. And I still contend that what's unacceptable in open may be less of an "issue" in the lower classes.

The point with the excessive commands wasn't to actually discuss excessive commands themselves, but rather to point out that handling style isn't something that can be judged (in the sense that if you don't like me bringing my dog to the post on a leash, you still can't penalize me for that in your judging of my run by scrutinizing my "style.") Despite all the hashing out on that subject *and* the fact that the judging guidelines allow points off for excessive commands, I don't think too many top handlers, especially those who whistle *a lot*, have ever wondered if they've had points deducted off the fetch for too much whistling. I'd be willing to bet it's the rare judge who would hit any of the Big Hats for that "fault." So like many things with judging guidelines, what's allowed and what's actually done in practice can be quite different.

I think this is a good point:

It gives a somewhat negative impression of control.It does not influence how I judge the run however.But human nature being what it is ,if you have a negative initial feeling ,then unconscientiously more points may be deducted than on another run.

I guess a handler just needs to realize that if s/he makes a negative impression going to the post, or knows the judge just plain doesn't like him/her, or any of the other little things that *could* influence the judging, then that handler better be prepared to lay down a faultless run, or nearly so, so that the judge can't let those little influences affect (consciously or not) the scoring.

Jim,
Are y'all heading south this winter?

J.

[juliepoudrier]

I understand that in stockdog training, alot of the "polish" comes later in the training, but I also, for the same token, think that, that is how we leave holes in our training, because we expect things to come later, that we could be working on sooner, instead of finding those holes on the trial field, and getting points off.

Darci,
I think a truly competitive person would never just not go back and fix the holes (lack of polish) that appear on the trial field. If you don't fix them, you'll never be competitive in open anyway. Expecting perfection before ever stepping out there is a nice sentiment, but the fact is that no trial field is *exactly* like home, so no matter how well prepared you are, sh** may happen. And you will have to be prepared to deal with it as it happens. I think where we're all getting caught up is in the idea of perfection. It's a nice sentiment, but I just don't think you can achieve it on the trial field any other way than by putting miles on--on the trial field. Some top hands can achieve that much more quickly than the rest of us, but I can assure you not even the best always go out and have a perfect run, and perhaps not even a majority of the time. They just have a better run than everyone else.

When I used to show dressage, we always schooled at a level higher than what we competed at (i.e., if I was showing 3rd level, I was training 4th at home), BUT I still never entered that ring thinking that any amount of perfection we achieved in the home arena was going to guarantee perfection in front of that judge.

And that brings another point to mind. Say you know a judge firmly believes a dog needs to go to 12 o'clock to turn in for the lift. If 12 isn't the right place given the pressure, this judge believes that the dog should still turn in at 12, but *then* adjust its position to cover the draw. So if the dog turns in at a point that covers the draw instead of going to 12 first, the dog will be hit X amount of points by that judge. Normally your dog covers the top without your help and generally you get scores of 20-10. Would you change your method *for that particular judge* or would you do what you think is right and take the hit? Which way of working is "perfection"?

J.

[Shoofly]

I've judged a few times and i don't deduct points for a dog being on leash. That said, I think it's just ugly to go out all the way to the post with a dog on leash. Same as I think it's ugly to be running at the Open or Open Ranch level and screaming your guts out because you don't use a whistle or haven'tput whistles on the dog. Neither looks very good to other handlers, the judge, or the spectators.

I wonder though - it's *possible* a judge could consider a leash (once you've entered the field) a "training aid".....

[juliepoudrier]

Same as I think it's ugly to be running at the Open or Open Ranch level and screaming your guts out because you don't use a whistle or haven'tput whistles on the dog.

I have to agree that yelling because you can't or haven't put whistles on your dog is pretty ugly (this is not to be confused with the handler who uses whistles but occasionally has to yell because that perfect dog is ignoring the whistles! ). I really cringe whenever I hear a handler yelling the dog around a course (in open ranch or open, not so much the two lower classes, largely probably because you don't have to yell so loud when the course is small). Another thing I find odd/ugly at the post is the handler who waves his/her stick to try and get the dog to take a particular flank. While this may make a bit of sense on the fetch when the dog can actually see the waving stick or your moving body, it's completely off the wall to be doing that on the drive when the dog can't possibly see (or be influenced by) that waving stick (unless your dog is constantly looking back at you, which is a whole 'nother problem).

Maybe we should start a discussion of ugly things one should avoid doing when trialing....

J.

[Laurae]

Like forcibly keeping your dog's head under the water in the stock tank?

[1sheepdoggal]

And I still contend that what's unacceptable in open may be less of an "issue" in the lower classes.


Bear with me here Julie, as my first thought to this is,: Old habits die hard. If we think of the little things, as less of an issue, are we not setting ourselves up for a fall later when we progress to more stringent classes only to find that some things are less acceptable by a loss of points for a run? Or do we hope that some where along the way some kind soul will walk up and tell us we'd better not do that on the open course hopefully before we get there, and not as we're walking off.

Expecting perfection before ever stepping out there is a nice sentiment, but the fact is that no trial field is *exactly* like home, so no matter how well prepared you are, sh** may happen. And you will have to be prepared to deal with it as it happens. I think where we're all getting caught up is in the idea of perfection. It's a nice sentiment, but I just don't think you can achieve it on the trial field any other way than by putting miles on--on the trial field. Some top hands can achieve that much more quickly than the rest of us, but I can assure you not even the best always go out and have a perfect run, and perhaps not even a majority of the time. They just have a better run than everyone else.


This makes sence, and really makes me feel a need to try to change some of my points of view, as it is logical, I like and can relate to logical. (some where there must be a vulcan in my family tree) Although perfection really is a nice sentiment, it really isnt as reality based as one would like for it to be. Thank you for reminding me.


And that brings another point to mind. Say you know a judge firmly believes a dog needs to go to 12 o'clock to turn in for the lift. If 12 isn't the right place given the pressure, this judge believes that the dog should still turn in at 12, but *then* adjust its position to cover the draw. So if the dog turns in at a point that covers the draw instead of going to 12 first, the dog will be hit X amount of points by that judge. Normally your dog covers the top without your help and generally you get scores of 20-10. Would you change your method *for that particular judge* or would you do what you think is right and take the hit? Which way of working is "perfection


I guess this would be the point where you would want to know who was judging, before you entered a trial?


I wonder though - it's *possible* a judge could consider a leash (once you've entered the field) a "training aid".....

Robin had this little tid bit of mighty input. I wonder too? I had hoped to hear from more folks that had judged, to hear thier philosophies and ideas. Though those that have up to this point have been appreciated.

I cant find the other statement made that I wanted to comment on, but Ihope this discussion will continue, and I'll find it in here some where along the way. For those that have been reading along, please particapate, as everyones ideas and opinions are of value. Im sure Julie and I seem as if were playing a game of ping pong, but I'll bet we'd both enjoy a game moe like volley ball, where theres more players.