Have Judges Become Too Pedantic?

[DagBoy]

I guess a lot of it comes down to the individual judges and their interpretation of the rules and the dog's behaviour.

At our club's last trial I was helping to steward UD. During the group stand for exam a couple of the dogs moved a leg while being examined.

While the competitors were all out of sight for the drop stay the judge was talking to me and she said that all the dogs had passed the SFE with full marks. The ones that had moved - in her judgement - had only moved because she had put them slightly off balance while examining them and had not moved because they were scared/nervous/aggressive/trying to move etc.

At the trial before last, I was helping steward CCD and the judge was definitely giving the handler/dog teams a bit of leeway to allow for the obvious nervousness some of them showed, but still deducting points fairly across everyone.

Cheers,

DagBoy

[Tapferhund]

"Hard to believe that all judges are out to get people!"

MrsD,

Where do you get this from? Where exactly in all the posts on this topic has this been said or suggested?..........NOWHERE!!! (Although......Judges ARE only human too with human frailties and if you ever p*ss one off , they will getcha..................and that's from personal experience..."TWICE.. )

MOST Judges are great, they are very helpful and always pleasant and a pleasure to compete under........BUT, there are those few who seem to enjoy using their "power" over competitors.

[MrsD]

"Hard to believe that all judges are out to get people!"

MrsD,

Where do you get this from? Where exactly in all the posts on this topic has this been said or suggested?..........NOWHERE!!! (Although......Judges ARE only human too with human frailties and if you ever p*ss one off , they will getcha..................and that's from personal experience..."TWICE.. )

MOST Judges are great, they are very helpful and always pleasant and a pleasure to compete under........BUT, there are those few who seem to enjoy using their "power" over competitors.

Sorry Tapferhund, it was probably this bit that made me think it ...

....but I do think many Judges these days have become or are becoming TOO pedantic in their Judging

[Tapferhund]

MrsD

It says 'many'.....and not "ALL"

[Cala]

I have been told off for various things, usually totally irrelevant to working my dog, you coat is flapping........ Stop and do it up it's distracting me (the judge not the dog!) Stop sniffing, (terribly difficult when you've got a stinking rotten head cold). I think she thought it was a new way of encouraging my dog along!!!!!

Then there was the NSW judge who shall remain nameless......... For the recall are you ready? on saying yes, I was told to leave my dog........... about turn and halt.......... call your dog and with that she promptly turned away to talk to another person that was standing by the ringside..... turning back to me "Oh, I didn't see that so I am goin to have to give you an NQ!!!!! Needless to say she won't get another entry from me again!!!!

Another one was so busy fiddling about with her paperwork when trying to give me a ring run out..... I was NQ'd and so where the next 3 competitors, as she just wasn't prepared......

[Mystiqview]

All I can say is this:

Some judges are good. Some aren't. It is their opinion of what is working and what isnt.

I have had one judge say that my dog was forward because it's shoulder was level with my leg. I have had another judge say my dog was lagging because the head was level with my leg.

I have been told I cannot give a 'wait' command, then pause before throwing dumbell and sending the dog to fetch. I have been told that you can give a wait command as long as there is a definate pause.

I have had an obedience judge lift tail and examine teeth for a stand for exam. (rules definately say this is NOT to be done)

I have been given a NQ for recall for dog automaticaly heeling (fair enough) then for same judge to award 29 for a recall where the person had to physically manhandle the dog to sit prior to leaving.. Comment from judge: "the dog performed the key element of the exercise - recall".

In saying all this, I have watched the new CCD competions here in Qld....with absolute shock horror. Handlers giving double commands, manhandling dogs, and treating the trial ring as a practice ring..When it it obvious to all and sundry that both dog/handler is not ready for the trial ring.

I could have put in a dispute, paid my fee for the time when the judge examined mouth/tail.. the dog did the exercise..qualified..so whats the point?? Mental note made to never trial under that judge again..and a few others.

I have also seen some judges that were very nice to trial under while under "judges in training" but once they were fully fledged.. Trialled once - never again because they are too picky.

One thing I would love to see, is the end of OC/UDX/UD dogs trialling in Open and being eligible for trophy awards at the end of the night.. Would like to see it be the same as in dressage... Higher level horses (dogs) can compete in the lower level, but their scores are not eligble for end of night point scores. I understand the possible need for those dogs to go down a level for proofing.. but that is more lack of incentive for new open people.. You see trophy hunters in your ring.. what chance do you have to end up in award lineups at the end of the night??

[Tapferhund]

Mysticviewbcs,

The things that have happened to you are exactly what I have been talking about.........and what has happend to you is nothing short of disgraceful.

As for UD and UDX dogs trialing in Open........I think the best solution to that is to have a seperate class for Open titled dogs. Manyclubs down here do this when they have a Trial and it works quite well, leaving everyone happy.

[Tapferhund]

For the recall are you ready? on saying yes, I was told to leave my dog........... about turn and halt.......... call your dog and with that she promptly turned away to talk to another person that was standing by the ringside..... turning back to me "Oh, I didn't see that so I am goin to have to give you an NQ!!!!! Needless to say she won't get another entry from me again!!!! confused.gif

Another one was so busy fiddling about with her paperwork when trying to give me a ring run out..... I was NQ'd and so where the next 3 competitors, as she just wasn't prepared."

........Geeez, not good Cala

[PAX]

I was once told that my pants legs made noises while I was heeling and that it could of been a double signal. He then asked me to tuck my pants into my socks, bit hard as I was wearing tennis socks.

It was never mentioned again but these things stay with you.

I was pissed off as I bought these new pants just for the trial.

[stephenb]

In saying all this, I have watched the new CCD competions here in Qld....with absolute shock horror. Handlers giving double commands, manhandling dogs, and treating the trial ring as a practice ring..When it it obvious to all and sundry that both dog/handler is not ready for the trial ring.

With the dwindling number of entries around here, I am prepared to put up with this as long as they do progress and go on to higher levels.

I could have put in a dispute, paid my fee for the time when the judge examined mouth/tail.. the dog did the exercise..qualified..so whats the point?? Mental note made to never trial under that judge again..and a few others.

A short polite note to the obedience comittee of the canine control body possibly would have been in order without stirring up too much fuss.

[Arya]

Wow, okay, after reading some of the things that have happened to people what has happened to me doesn't seem so out of the ordinary! Here is my new resolution... when I'm in a trial from now on I'm going to mark myself. If I'm happy with the performance of me and my dog on each exercise, and feel that the dog has progressed and achieved my goals for the day then I'm going to be happy. If we happen to get a pass and eventually a title, that is going to be an added extra. After all, a title is just a bit of writing on a bit of paper. At least I will be fair and honest with myself and I will be paying attention to what me and my dog are doing during the exercises. I am pretty sad at some of the things I've read here and can see how people get completely disillusioned and chuck it in. Judges have a big responsibility and the people they judge have worked long and hard with their dogs to get their teams up to compete in that ring on that day. They would do well to remember that - but I think a lot do.

In saying this, as some have said, MOST judges are great. Very fair and try to help you. I must admit I have always found this so (one judge who shall remain nameless is not popular at all but he's been great with me the two times I've had him), so when you strike someone who doesn't behave in this way it comes as a big surprise because most are great and you don't expect it.

I'm not trying to judge-bash as they do give their time to do it for us.

[dogdude]

Although I hav'nt trialled recently, most of the old judges are still around in Melbourne, and I cant recall anything negative about their judging.

My first trial was judged by a true gentleman of the sport who always made newbys feel relaxed and was very pleasant (Frank Neeson) who is no longer on the judges list I see.

I can think of far more good judges than bad ones.

[Tarmons]

Mystiqviewbcs

QUOTE:

One thing I would love to see, is the end of OC/UDX/UD dogs trialling in Open and being eligible for trophy awards at the end of the night.. Would like to see it be the same as in dressage... Higher level horses (dogs) can compete in the lower level, but their scores are not eligble for end of night point scores. I understand the possible need for those dogs to go down a level for proofing.. but that is more lack of incentive for new open people.. You see trophy hunters in your ring.. what chance do you have to end up in award lineups at the end of the night??

I couldn't agree more.... At our Club we have made all the Perpetual Trophies and Special trophies ineligible for dogs trialling in a lower class mainly the OC UDX UD dogs whose one and only aim was to have their names on every Club Trophy possible.

It wasn't fair on those Club members who were trialling in these Classes when they came up against these dogs who have had their Open Title for about 7 years and were OC's for about 3 years or more. It has been in place for two years now and everyone is very happy - not the Club Trophy Hunters but who cares? They have truck loads anyway.

I agree that there should be a separate ring for those who wish to trial their dogs in a lower class but these dogs should NOT be included in the Awards line-up for Open or UD Classes at the end of the night if they have had their Open or UD title for at least 12 months.

[wheres my rock]

how many judges in victoria have actively trialled dogs past novice

[Sardog]

DD: Frank Neeson passed away in 2006.

One of the Obedience/Agility/Tracking fraternities true gentlemen.

[MrsD]

how many judges in victoria have actively trialled dogs past novice

Qld judges have to have titled their dogs in at least Open, don't they have to do that in Vic?

Unless special circumstances exist before appointment, the following are minimum requirements:

(d) Have trained a dog to obtain its CDX Title for inclusion on the Novice and/or Open

Panel, or UD Title for inclusion on the UD Panel, and AD Title for inclusion on Agility

Panel.

[MrsD]

After reading this thread I remember now why I would rather spend my time with my dogs .......

[wheres my rock]

http://www.vca.org.au/assets/otec%20judges...me%202006-7.pdf

not in vic they dont have to tiel a dog past one pass in novice

Edited May 15, 2007 by wheres my rock

[dogdude]

WMR

That would only enable them to judge CCD, as well as having to steward 3 Novice trials to be eligable. To Judge UD, you have to pass 3 Open titles, and steward 3 times in UD.

[wheres my rock]

To be eligible to apply for an Open Judges Licence the applicant must have:

9.2.6.1 Judged a minimum of three (3) Novice Classes.

9.2.6.2 Acted as Ring Steward in Victoria for at least three (3) Open Classes at Obedience

Trials.

9.2.6.3 Completed the Practical Training for Open within twelve (12) prior to the Written

Examination.

9.2.6.4 Passed the Written Examination for Open.

9.2.6.5 Passed the Practical Assessment for Open.

where does it say that apparently you only have to steward it was changed last year i think