UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- UKC Coonhounds (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=4)
-- It’s not the Best dog!!! (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=928541443)

OBVIOUS!!!

Sometimes, what appears obvious, apparently isn't obvious to all others.

I will not explain it.

You either get it, or you don't get it.

NUFF SAID!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Donnie Stevens
Try 11 (d) Recasting. It's an implied scratch.

---

__________________
Ezekiel 23:20

I have been reading this post, about handler and dog being a team.
I do not know whether it was another handler or the judge that questioned the handler of the miney dog,
but, if it was a competing handler, he was showing that he was a team with his dog, using the rules to eliminate the competition

Was it the handler? Was it the judge? Has any official UKC report been given ?

__________________
Ezekiel 23:20

I've noticed an evolution in conversation through the years...

At one time people seemed to ignore the idea that handler and their knowledge of the rules was an important aspect of the competition hunt... really were only focused on the idea that it was about the best dog winning.

Then it seemed there was an open acknowledgement in conversations on here that knowing the rules was a very important factor in doing well at the hunts.

Now for the past few years the idea that the hunt is only partly about the dog, and also partly about who can manipulate the rules seems to be embraced. Comments like, "he was showing that he was a team with his dog, using the rules to eliminate the competition" seem to be the dividing line.

Whereas some feel that is ok, some are offended by it. Personally for me... it makes me not want to do a competition hunt. I fully understand being a good handler means knowing the rules well... but I also want the game to highlight the best hound..... A handler using obscure or implied rulings and technicalities like a chess match with the other handlers isn't a game that appeals to me, and while it has become a normal and accepted "team" aspect... it really cheapens these titles and hunts to me.... as people openly admit now that the quality of dog has 50% at best input into who wins the hunt.

The lack of explanation as to what rule was broke, and where in the world it was an scratch-able offense is telling. I know when you watch a championship football game... they do not call very many incidental holding calls.... they let em' play.

I do not (and I understand some do) view that all rules are black and white in these hunts. Discernment is really important in the application of any rules. When we watch a football game and see a pass interference call that was technically correct... but we know had no impact on the play we call it ticky tacky and understood the rule was technically broke, but applied without discernment. If a police officer pulled you over because you were driving 1 mph over the limit, and took you to jail... you wouldn't say... "he's right, technically I broke the law.... the laws are on the books and for the integrity of humanity we have to follow and enforce them." No... we see it as a huge injustice because while the law was technically applied correctly- we understand discernment in the application of the law is more important than a black and white application of them.

__________________
______________________________
Seeking Soli Deo Gloria through the hounds.

Best dog

I think you either fall on one side of the fence or the other- on one hand you have the people that say if any rule was broken then its right and fair to scratch. On the other hand you have people that wanted to see what the miney dog would have done. Without being scratched for a rule that really gave no advantage would she have continued treeing coon and racked up a big score and dominated the final cast? We will never know and thats what bugs a lot of us. Like the sports references above- sometimes in the big games the "referees" take a back seat and let the players decide the outcome. In this hunt I think the die hard win at all costs bigtime competition hunters see it one way and the casual hunters see it another. We want to see the dogs settle it. Maybe in the future a mistake by a handler should cost him 50 points or have to hold his dog another 10 min instead of being totally removed from the cast???

__________________
Dustin Buchanan

Rule

I was just curious so I have been researching the rule and for the life of me I cannot find where it is covered. I did find where the handler can be warned once for certain types of offenses and scratched later if action continues but nothing on this. If I missed it could someone post it to make it more clear. My example would be this, what if a guy pulls up to a cast for the first turn out and lowers tailgate to get dog out and the door to box flies open and dog hits ground and runs up to the judge and the handler grabs dog and puts his leash on him. I guess he is scratched for casting his hound without permission. Too bad right? Load dog and go home.
How about if a dog chews through his leash at the tree after being instructed to be leashed back while tree is being shined. Is he casted without permission? Or slips out of handlers hand or pulls out of collar and runs 10 feet and is caught...All of these are mistakes by handler that could happen anytime. If I read correctly the judge said no, no, no and the guy immediately caught the female and leashed her. With the info I have read and rules I have been able to find Minnie should have been able to finish. If someone knows different within the letter of the rules please show me. And if it is an implied situation then I would think that INTENT would be really looked at closely. There was obviously no intent to break a rule. Implied rule I might add..

__________________
Roy Jarman

You'd think...

By now UKC would post something official. Then again, it has taken them longer than this to take a world title away so I guess we wait.

__________________
Ezekiel 23:20

Rule

This is what I found..

(d) Recasting. After being scored, dog shall not be
released until another dog struck in on track, or
on tree, opens. If no other dog is declared struck,
scored dog may be released immediately after
scoring tree.

This rule is under Rule 11. Scoring dogs & section D. Recasting. It is not connected to scratch offenses sections... And it does not state that a judge has to tell you to recast.

This would not hold up in court I promise! If a hound opened up on track or tree he was within the rule to recast the hound...

This rule is an attempt to keep the cast together. Just in case while scoring the hound in question the other hounds trail out of hearing or are in danger of hwy or posted land, cross a river or whatever. It has nothing to do with interfering with other hounds. That's why it calls for a hound to open on track or tree before recasting.

__________________
Roy Jarman

Dan&Ann, that's what I read as well.
But... I was messaged by a man telling me the judge has to tell the handler to release so he can apply the stop watch per the babbling rules. Hmmm, I'm sure something official is just around the corner

__________________
Ezekiel 23:20

IMO the cast should of been told by the panel, boys this is the final cast of the world hunt, we aren't over ruling our field judge and scratch a dog for such a petty question, either hunt your dog or go to the house.

Rule

Just wondering if anyone would have cared if she was at 250 minus? I just hate to see something taken away that has been earned. And if that gyp was a true babbler she would not have been in the final three. Its a sad story to me. One that I hate to hear happen to a great hound!

__________________
Roy Jarman

quote:

---

Originally posted by houndsound
I've noticed an evolution in conversation through the years...

At one time people seemed to ignore the idea that handler and their knowledge of the rules was an important aspect of the competition hunt... really were only focused on the idea that it was about the best dog winning.

Then it seemed there was an open acknowledgement in conversations on here that knowing the rules was a very important factor in doing well at the hunts.

Now for the past few years the idea that the hunt is only partly about the dog, and also partly about who can manipulate the rules seems to be embraced. Comments like, "he was showing that he was a team with his dog, using the rules to eliminate the competition" seem to be the dividing line.

Whereas some feel that is ok, some are offended by it. Personally for me... it makes me not want to do a competition hunt. I fully understand being a good handler means knowing the rules well... but I also want the game to highlight the best hound..... A handler using obscure or implied rulings and technicalities like a chess match with the other handlers isn't a game that appeals to me, and while it has become a normal and accepted "team" aspect... it really cheapens these titles and hunts to me.... as people openly admit now that the quality of dog has 50% at best input into who wins the hunt.

The lack of explanation as to what rule was broke, and where in the world it was an scratch-able offense is telling. I know when you watch a championship football game... they do not call very many incidental holding calls.... they let em' play.

I do not (and I understand some do) the view that all rules are black and white in these hunts. Discernment is really important in the application of any rules. When we watch a football game and see a pass interference call that was technically correct... but we know had no impact on the play we call it ticky tacky and understood the rule was technically broke, but applied without discernment. If a police officer pulled you over because you were driving 1 mph over the limit, and took you to jail... you wouldn't say... "he's right, technically I broke the law.... the laws are on the books and for the integrity of humanity we have to follow and enforce them." No... we we see it as a huge injustice because while the law was technically applied correctly- we understand discernment in the application of the law is more important than a black and white application of them.

---

__________________
Training dogs is not so much about quantity, it's more about timing, and the right situations...After that it's up to the dog....A hunting dog is born...

Rule 11 seems plain, obvious and straightforward to me. 2 dogs were struck in and not opening so the 3rd dog could not be recast. The handler of the 3rd dog recast his dog so he was scratched. Seems pretty simple to me. Where does all of the confusion come from?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard Lambert
Rule 11 seems plain, obvious and straightforward to me. 2 dogs were struck in and not opening so the 3rd dog could not be recast. The handler of the 3rd dog recast his dog so he was scratched. Seems pretty simple to me. Where does all of the confusion come from?

---

__________________
______________________________
Seeking Soli Deo Gloria through the hounds.

After reading this post and the other post regarding the situation that occurred, one thing I am sure of. Now I see why so many dogs that are competing in the Truck Hunts, Money Hunts, and such are handled by guys that most of the time don't even own the dog. It is definitely a Team Game with the handler being as crucial as the hound being turned loose. Don't get me wrong I understand most of the dogs being hunted in these hunts are nice dogs... but a good handler is a must! Im not saying the female that was scratched did not have a good handler, obviously she did. Just makes me think that the occasional competition hunter doesn't stand much of a chance against these guys that are out there every weekend running up and down the roads hitting the big hunts and kudos to them for putting in the time. They are there to win and I would be safe to say your odds of getting cheated is 10 fold at the local clubs than at these events. I guess its no surprise that most of the 'Teams" hunting the Pro Hunt circuit are not your newcomers to the game. At least we can watch them and maybe learn a thing or two! BTW.. what was the other two dogs doing at the time of the Scratch? Was either of them treed? Was they together and how far off from the cast were they?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mark Blair
After reading this post and the other post regarding the situation that occurred, one thing I am sure of. Now I see why so many dogs that are competing in the Truck Hunts, Money Hunts, and such are handled by guys that most of the time don't even own the dog. It is definitely a Team Game with the handler being as crucial as the hound being turned loose. Don't get me wrong I understand most of the dogs being hunted in these hunts are nice dogs... but a good handler is a must! Im not saying the female that was scratched did not have a good handler, obviously she did. Just makes me think that the occasional competition hunter doesn't stand much of a chance against these guys that are out there every weekend running up and down the roads hitting the big hunts and kudos to them for putting in the time. They are there to win and I would be safe to say your odds of getting cheated is 10 fold at the local clubs than at these events. I guess its no surprise that most of the 'Teams" hunting the Pro Hunt circuit are not your newcomers to the game. At least we can watch them and maybe learn a thing or two! BTW.. what was the other two dogs doing at the time of the Scratch? Was either of them treed? Was they together and how far off from the cast were they?

---

__________________
Dave Richards Treeing Walkers Reg American Saddlebred and Registered Rocky Mt. Show Horses

These 3 handlers owned the dogs did they not?

__________________
Member of the Keyboard Warrior Mafia

Ricochet

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ricochet17
These 3 handlers owned the dogs did they not?

---

__________________
Dave Richards Treeing Walkers Reg American Saddlebred and Registered Rocky Mt. Show Horses

Dave

QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave Richards
I believe Mark was referring to he other KC and the big money hunts having paid handlers, but all 3 of these dogs showed they were co owned. Dave [/QUOTE] quote

I just wanted to see how long it would take for you to respond.

__________________
Member of the Keyboard Warrior Mafia

Team

So I hear that it the team not just the dog,so if someone wants to breed his r her dog you don't breed to the best dog you breed to the dog that has the best handler

__________________
vb

Re: Team

quote:

---

Originally posted by david kelly
So I hear that it the team not just the dog,so if someone wants to breed his or her dog you don't breed to the best dog you breed to the dog that has the best handler

---

__________________
John Haun

Re: Team

quote:

---

Originally posted by david kelly
So I hear that it the team not just the dog,so if someone wants to breed his r her dog you don't breed to the best dog you breed to the dog that has the best handler

---

Re: Re: Team

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kler Kry
TOTALLY AGREE!

I've spent 50 years trying to breed, raise and train a better dog and I've came to the conclusion the competition hunts are a good starting point for selecting a superior hound, but thats all they are.
I've personally received undeserved minus points and been scratched because the Judge took advantage of loopholes in the rules.

---

__________________
Dave Richards Treeing Walkers Reg American Saddlebred and Registered Rocky Mt. Show Horses

We need consistency. Don’t tell me the panel had no choice that’s bs A few years ago a handler shook some vines looking for a coon which was not allowed under the rules because a dog was trailing. It was questioned. The trailing dog came in to the cast which is an automatic minus and changed the world hunt winner. The panel ruled that they weren’t going to scratch the vinepuller but also were not going to minus the dog for coming in. Ukc stood behind this ruling 100 percent.