Thread: Crossing show lines

my dog will hunt just fine,he is a hunting dog that trials also.do you have a pointing dog Ruff ?

If pointer shows up make sure you've got a set of binoculars handy

for him or his dog

Good post Pointer -this is why I like controversial posts as they bring out some great information .
As far as a hunting and trial dogs go they should do the same in the field if the trialists hunts regularly -I have to say over the last several years I have done little with a gun but have often ventured out to my favorite training spot to keep my dogs nose in on birds .
The difference would be between the two dogs at best manners on backing and steady to shot but a hunting dog may back perfectly well and the rest is just drive and skill .

It is said the trial dog will go faster and find more but a good hunting dog should be able to compete "I" believe . The cover we have here in NZ is quite different from an open field where we trial and big hard running does not always suit the grounds so a whistle or control must be used to rein a dog in .
Another thing is dogs are not wind up toys and have good and bad days -it not as though trialist get to train their dogs anymore than other people , either can spend time training if they wish and mold a dogs ability's

I really just wanted to wind you both up... really... the discussion can on infinitely... the point I am really making in all this is actually how trials started.

At the end of the day... one dog running against another is the end of the discussion.

And Jim the answer, is No, not at the moment.

Don't get me wrong El B. Speed, range and drive aren't Spots' issue, anyone thats seen him won't dispute that.... As for pointing and backing, its a working pointer, one that didn't do those things instinctively, usually has a pretty short sojourn on this planet.

I could see where you were going with it Ruff, it goes back to the silverware statement.. Trials were invented as tests for selecting breeding stock. When it becomes dog sport in place of the thing they were designed to emulate, hunting, we are buggered. Look at the way the yanks have gone

Exactly....

to me its a matter of training either way ---pigeon trials , live game trials or general hunting it is practice of skill set and manners taught and if a dog has them or not . If you have been a consistent and frequent trainer chances are you will have a very good dog but there is also that natural animal that no matter what is just great and if your lucky enough to have one -your lucky!

I dont put my dog INTI above other dogs other than we have developed a set of manners which he uses and he has great drive -I do wish now in retrospect I had hunted all those years properly with him to make him great -but alas .

Contest do show a good dog and sometimes a great dog but it is consistent wins which show a consistent dog. Hopefully this translates into the field also on wild game as one cannot profess to have a finnished dog if it cannot work game -feild trial champion or not

I have to disagree... certainly a well trained dog can appear to be a better dog than an untrained one, and a great dog with massive drive untrained is a menace... but the old axiom of "you can kick it out of them, but you can;t kick it into them" holds true. No amount of training makes a poor dog good, although a skilled trainer can create the illusion... this is what buggers up breeding programs.

I have a mate, a great mate, who I think could title a fox terrier... it says nothing of the dog's ability.

Hale's Smut was wildly inconsistent... excitedly so... Earlandson always said whatever he did was SPECTACULAR whether it was smashing cover, flushing birds, running in or whatever... he was exciting... but he was untoward... GREAT breeding stock, poor trial quality.

There are so many variables and it is not a specific written formula... if it were we'd all be producing more champions than you can poke a stick at... (If you train like that).

I sometimes wonder if were just juggling semantics - how many of us are really running and seeing enough animals hunting ,trialing to make proper decisions -I know I have not and dont really know any others that can as they are only seeing what they choose to see -its a great big community of unseen dogs and even a contest of 2 dogs does not answer to many questions

Originally Posted by el borracho

I sometimes wonder if were just juggling semantics - how many of us are really running and seeing enough animals hunting ,trialing to make proper decisions -I know I have not and dont really know any others that can as they are only seeing what they choose to see -its a great big community of unseen dogs and even a contest of 2 dogs does not answer to many questions

How much is enough?

I've owned/trained/trialed/hunted 3 pointing breeds in 2 countries under half a dozen trial formats and 3 testing systems and I currently own dogs from whelped in 4 different countries and have seen and hunted over dogs from several others. I don't claim to be an expert but I think I have a reasonable perspective.

Meybe you need to know a little more about some of us then.... I hunt dogs EVERY DAY!

Im sure being a trainer that hunts everyday you have several FTCH behind your name ?

Trials are the only possibilty to compare dogs in approxomatly the same conditions. The problem arises when the judging puts more importance in trained then in "born" qualities. The only qualities wich go on from parent to pup are the "natural" qualities. Training is human and not inherited. As Ruff says " you can kick it out but ........ " I agree some training is needed, but it should not become more important than the natural qualities.

No NZ dog in pointer and setter trials gets far without both quality's