Thread: Versatile hunting dog test

Originally Posted by el borracho

some time ago Ruff -what were his thoughts

It's more about how he set about, because he was truly serious, finding what good stock was really out there... in the end he created the very small scene you guys are all playin g in.. don;t mean that to be as wanky as it sounds... my point really is... in the absence of a way, he invented a way! t was only ever about better dogs.

Originally Posted by Pointer

I couldn't do that, then I'd have to change my name to "Setter"

Or "Tweed wearing tosser"


Oh shivers... i shoudn;t have.. but I did... sorry Brian

For the record, i respect the hell out of how passionate about this you are... wrong as all get out, but passionate LOL

Originally Posted by Pointer

Interesting Ruff, so if it is all rhetoric from both the trials sector and the hunting sector, then how do we find good dogs? People who have the 'eye' or 'dogmanship' weren't born with it, they develop it by exposure to good dogs? Where do we find these good dogs and how can we justifiably say it is a good dog?

Also, if trials are a useful benchmark, then can you say the benchmark today is very different to P&S 25 years ago? And if it isn't, and the benchmark is the same, are the dogs just worse? Interested to know your thoughts

This is where these discussion have huge merit for me... the polarize and define my thinking into a way I can articulate....


P&S Trials 25 years ago were run by, were run with and the results showed hunting people, testing their hunting hounds against each other. The specialist trial dog didn;t exists. Some say the specialist trial dog is bred, this is, of course rubbish, the people that came in board in the intervening 25 years, saw a trial, trained for a trial, only worked for trials and didn;lt hunt... slowly managed to lower all goal posts... rules changed, the way we judged changed... instead of hunters like Bob, Noel, Leon, judging we have [people who don;t hunt judgeing the trial...

Oringinally the trial was testing hunting dogs... now, more so, the trial is set to test trial dogs, judged by people who trial dogs and dpn;t hunt... that is where we lost our way!

I enjoy the banter too Ruff, no politics or bullshit. As in a lot of things in life, emotion clouds reason, and people get defensive. Its though discussion that better ways are found. If you were to change the versatile testing system, or create your own perhaps, what would you do differently?

Yow Keen bean... u driving up on the 3rd to Auckland?

Originally Posted by Petros_mk

Yow Keen bean... u driving up on the 3rd to Auckland?

I has a really interesting conversation with a person today in the shop... one of the more knowledgeable dog people in NZ I would say and always really amicable to offer a balanced opinion whether agreed with by me or not. I mentioned some of what I have offered here in relation to trials in general. I'm not going to say who it was, because i didn't ask in relation to relaying the opinion here on the forum.. however, while not 100% agreeing with my viewpoint it was offered that the dogs winning most all of the P&S trials these days are run by Hunters.. the hobby dogs left in the wake. They also offered that our very Peter or Petros was doing an absolutely kick arse job with his Red Dog and has every reason to be proud of the work he has put into his dog.. the person, hard to impress, was impressed.

Don;t getme wrong... I respect the heck out of people who run their dogs even if they do not hunt... a wonderful thing to do for a dog that is born to hunt is to give it access to that... I do not condemn that IN ANY WAY... i only worry if that faction becomes the dominant force... hunting dogs hunting, wonderful and more power to those who give their hunting breed a chance to run their nose and the wind... but not to start dictating how the trial should run because frankly, if you don;t hunt, you cannot know.

Originally Posted by Ruff

I has a really interesting conversation with a person today in the shop... one of the more knowledgeable dog people in NZ I would say and always really amicable to offer a balanced opinion whether agreed with by me or not. I mentioned some of what I have offered here in relation to trials in general. I'm not going to say who it was, because i didn't ask in relation to relaying the opinion here on the forum.. however, while not 100% agreeing with my viewpoint it was offered that the dogs winning most all of the P&S trials these days are run by Hunters.. the hobby dogs left in the wake. They also offered that our very Peter or Petros was doing an absolutely kick arse job with his Red Dog and has every reason to be proud of the work he has put into his dog.. the person, hard to impress, was impressed.

Don;t getme wrong... I respect the heck out of people who run their dogs even if they do not hunt... a wonderful thing to do for a dog that is born to hunt is to give it access to that... I do not condemn that IN ANY WAY... i only worry if that faction becomes the dominant force... hunting dogs hunting, wonderful and more power to those who give their hunting breed a chance to run their nose and the wind... but not to start dictating how the trial should run because frankly, if you don;t hunt, you cannot know.

Appreciate the comments the nameless person offered.
Hunting I grew up with it, I know little bit about, not lots but enough to get my blood boiling when talking about it.
Trialling, well I learned that when I bought my RED DOG, until then I didn't know they existed, to date that would be about 3 years and 8 months ago that seems like yesterday. Easter was my first ever game trial. Based on this I have no experience, knowledge or intent to challenge or comment on how things should be dictated no matter how obvious the ups and downs of trailing are to me.
As far as who wins the trials I agree with what was offered.