Can some one please explain how this works ? . It tests a dogs natural ability ? . How is this proven if a dog has been trained or not ? . Thanks Munsey
Printable View
Can some one please explain how this works ? . It tests a dogs natural ability ? . How is this proven if a dog has been trained or not ? . Thanks Munsey
It doesn't... not a terrible test, but if we were honest we'd admit it was a test of a dog that deliberately excludes a handlers training ability.
The VHDTA currently tests at two different levels....the first being Natural Ability, the second being Intermediate.
The NA test is to evaluate the dog's natural ability, not trained. So The test format and evaluation of such is intended to reflect just that. Polish or the refined execution of particular tasks have no bearing on the evaluation as they are considered 'trained' aspects of the dog's performance. Instead, aspects such as Attitude to Work and Co-operation are evaluated in addition to the typical search / point / retrieve qualities.
It would have a lot more merit if it tested to a higher level, someone can explain why this hasn;t happened in NZ...
but testing natural ability without testing handling means the test for biddibility is not really done and yet, given high levels of the other requirements, is one of the essential ingredients. The tests have potential to have use in NZ, but only if they advance, as they stand, they stand for little.
co-operation and biddability are a part of each other. If an owner has not taken a puppy out into the field to gain confidence to search and get keen to find game they reduce the chances of their pup scoring well. An owner who is telling a pup where to hunt and nagging at it will also lower chances of a good score. Natural Ability test is really a puppy test, 12 months is about the ideal age.
Yeah well, I don;t want to argue it, but I do not believe the co-operation element gets close to touching bidability by my definition. ... Overseas there are more advanced tests.. it seems only NZ which doesn't pursue that!Quote:
Originally Posted by GSP
Your point is?
It hasn;t changed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruff
Biddable is desire to please, eagerness to learn, willingness to comply.
Coooperative is willing to work/hunt in cooperation with owner/handler, communicates and coordinates movements and actions with owner/handler, develops social bonds with owner/handler.
There is no way these two concepts can't interact.
Argue with yourself... I'm not playing.. I know what i said, what I meant and didn;t need it explained... even incorrectly, thanks though. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by GSP
Part of the reason the higher tests, after the intermediate test, haven't been run is numbers. The last NA and Intermediate test at Amberly had no enteries in the intermediate test and 5 or 6 from memory in the NA test.
Not the only reason... no one here to judge anything more is the primary reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by stug
About a year or so ago I had a dog I wished to test, asked when the next ones were and got a shrug of the shoulders from more than one person. Didn't bother joining
Trials are still the best way to judge a dog.. realistically, the majority of people who default to these tests do so because they have failed at trials and can't train a budgie to shit in a cage... the defense position is to test natural ability and pretend training doesn;t mean much.
I shall be framing this !!! Bloody well noted =a test without a comp means less --competitions are not just the ego of winning but a tool for measuring whats been trained and retained be it for live game or pigeon --even though only one can win that doesn't mean you haven't performed to a high standard and deserve to take a proud feeling away with you on the dayQuote:
Originally Posted by Ruff
That's fine. You have never been to a test, you have no idea what the tests are about and yet you give an opinion. How typical.
Those who wish to enter tests will do so. Those who like to run things down will continue to do so. Meanwhile the genuine working gundog folk will continue on with whatever they chose to do.
I think the tests are a great thing to do and have my support but to not carry on and measure against others seems half baked to me personally -you may disagree
GSP, to what age is intermediate? I have belonged to the VHDTANZ for a number of years and have never participated usually because of the location...would the association be interested in holding a test in HB if I could find a suitable ground?
I would love to see the French TAN concept here where it is recorded on the dogs registration.
whats involved in the Frech test EB
The test d'aptitude naturale is similar to the lines of the VHDTA tests where the young dog is expected to show natural ability...a dizzied partridge is usually used. The fact that the dog may chase the bird, after it is flushed and the judge has fired a starters pistol is not scorned but shows the drive in the youngster...the TAN is for dogs up to two and a half years old. It is the intensity of the dogs prey drive that is really noted and greatly admired. A degree of control is desirous!!Quote:
Originally Posted by el borracho
To me all testing of training is a good thing! Is the french training just on birds or involves fur -tracking and all the other versatile tests?
The TAN is not a test on training...it is a test on the puppy's/young dog natural aptitude...the judges want to see strength in prey drive, vigour in le chasse etc. The TAN is only on feather, as in partridge. By tracking you are meaning dragging a bird or fur along the ground?...no, this is not part of the TAN.
sounds pretty much like what we would do at a Sunday training day with a young dog with the GSP club if one so desired
I don't agree about the trials vs. tests sentiment, they aim for different things. Tests aim for a standard, trials aim to find the best individual - be it dog or handler.
Trials pretty much test your standard of either handler or dog --you can participate without having to have winning in mind --only one person out of the group can win so take advantage of the pressure
Competitions mean a dog was better than another on the day, which in itself doesn't mean much unless all dogs were preforming to a high standard.
Preforming to a standard tells much more. That is why it's called a standard
Yes Wire that is true but the points or critique will let you know how others went in comparison and or you did .You yourself know though generally as you walk behind and watch your dog make you proud or make you annoyed with how the team performed "on the day "
No matter what field of sport your in it is always an on the day thing for results even if you've trained to the highest standards . Your standard needs to be measured over time to provide a clear picture of progress
Each element of the NA and Intermediate Tests are evaluated and scored (points) and a critique given of each dog's performance on each of the elements assessed.
To do well in both the NA and Intermediate Tests takes considerably more ability on the dog's part and training from the handler than teaching a budgie to shit in a cage.
One thinks most tests are set not to be easy but achievable .Any test system devised by working dog people must have some creditability if run strictly although I dont like the fact that some wont run contest to show the divide between talent --its just to commie for me
From memory, there are only two dogs in the history of the NZVHDTA that have P1 scores in both the NA and Intermediate Tests, and only one within the age limits set. They are not easy, nor set to be 'achievable' by the majority. Each dog's performance is evaluated against the criteria, the Standard. If the dog doesn't measure up to the standard, it's scores reflect that.
There is no first, second or third placings given...or even a fifth placing as I am aware of at a recent Trial. There are no Highly Commended, or Most Improved Player placings given or any other romantic bullshit evaluation about the dog's performance. If the dog is any good, and has had some decent training, then it will do well. If it hasn't, then it will be obvious for all to see.
Good luck trying to encourage more people to Compete at a Trial. Your embarrassing behavior on here and the other forum has done more to put people off ever wanting to Trial that you could possibly comprehend.
if that is directed at me GQHOON you've lost me, Im not against the tests .I believe in competitions to show skill and I support testing systems -if my standard makes you feel embarrassed so be it -we all have our standards
The second paragraph referred to the significance that many seem to put on placings. As if the dog's actual performance is no longer relevant. I believe this to be fundamentally flawed. Take it as you will.
The third paragraph was absolutely directed at you. Your arrogance on the subject of trialling and competition is an embarrassment to anyone who has trialled.
I trial and it isn't embarrassing to me -best speak for yourself on this matter if you feel that way as I respect your opinion but disagree -no biggy !! --some have much more zest for such things GQHOON -nothing more .:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by gqhoon
[QUOTE=gqhoon;89065]The second paragraph referred to the significance that many seem to put on placings. As if the dog's actual performance is no longer relevant. I believe this to be fundamentally flawed. Take it as you will. I cannot see what you mean here GQHOON -Please show me the passage you mean ??
Spot on gq. Spot on.Quote:
Originally Posted by gqhoon
DO TELL -which passage :o
Get a hold of Margaret Cotton via the website posted already KB, she is after somewhere to hold one up north.Quote:
Originally Posted by EeeBees
I am glad some others have jumped in here. I could not believe how arrogant and condesending Ruffs comment was. Also Elboraccho go along and watch a NZVHDTA test someday. There are some bloody good dogs tested, there are also some that need a hell of a lot of work. But people are told how there dog performed and are given helpfull, constructive advice on what to do to improve. No they aren't ranked 1st, 2nd 3rd etc. But they are measured against a standard, by the consensis (sp?) of three judges.
As I have said and you will read back on the pages "I support the test " but I believe in competing dog against dog to see the difference in skill level and performance -thats plainly offends some -I wont go on with why that might be !!!
It is like saying a dart player needs to do several test to show his competency but lets not see how he actually performs against another and see the difference over time with performance .I also mentioned this performance testing over time a page or two back .
Only one can win but that doesn't make others crap -just some you will see come out better more consistently --im always going to look at that dog
Go read about the breed you own el b, go read the STANDARD.