UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- UKC Coonhounds (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=4)
-- What made the big change ? (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=928529294)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Allen / UKC
I still think that old "after the first three minutes of the hunt, dog must be struck in on or before the third bark" rule was the better rule. A babbling dog was much easier to bust and would get busted.

If that rule was put back in place, we'd probably find a lot of dogs being eliminated from entering the hunts. Back then guys worked on a babbling dog. If they couldn't fix the problem, that "faulty" dog wouldn't make the nite hunt grade.

---

__________________
Let's go huntin

Re: Eric DePue

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave Richards
Some of these posts are absolutely hilarious, why anyone would think a dog treeing first on a separate track was better than a dog that tree later on a different coon is beyond reason. A better way would be to award strike points based on dogs treeing different coons, just like we do now with awarding different tree points for different trees. Our point system for strike and tree was based on the pack dog concept and worked just fine when dogs packed up. Now with dogs splitting in different direction, often striking and treeing different coons, the strike points ARE the problem. When dogs tree separate the tree points are adjusted accordingly, WHY can't the strike point be adjusted when it was determined the dog indeed was on a separate track, evidenced by the coon seen in the dogs tree. It does not take rocket science to figure this out, and would equalize the strike advantage. One simply fix for a problem that continues to be discussed over and over. It would negate the babbles advantage, it would negate the silient dogs disadvantage, and in FACT would be no different than awarding separate tree points for separate trees. Strike points SHOULD be treated no different for separate tracks. Dave

---

Re: Eric DePue

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave Richards
Some of these posts are absolutely hilarious, why anyone would think a dog treeing first on a separate track was better than a dog that tree later on a different coon is beyond reason. A better way would be to award strike points based on dogs treeing different coons, just like we do now with awarding different tree points for different trees. Our point system for strike and tree was based on the pack dog concept and worked just fine when dogs packed up. Now with dogs splitting in different direction, often striking and treeing different coons, the strike points ARE the problem. When dogs tree separate the tree points are adjusted accordingly, WHY can't the strike point be adjusted when it was determined the dog indeed was on a separate track, evidenced by the coon seen in the dogs tree. It does not take rocket science to figure this out, and would equalize the strike advantage. One simply fix for a problem that continues to be discussed over and over. It would negate the babbles advantage, it would negate the silient dogs disadvantage, and in FACT would be no different than awarding separate tree points for separate trees. Strike points SHOULD be treated no different for separate tracks. Dave

---

In my opinion it started when the other kc decided the strike should be worth as much as the tree?