UKC Forums - July's Coonhound Advisor

Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]
Show all 66 posts from this thread on one page

UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- UKC Coonhounds (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=4)
-- July's Coonhound Advisor (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=928326354)

Posted by dperry on 07-09-2013 02:49 AM:

I agree, an advisor should be provided to all who participate. More importantly to judges and master of hounds. UKC does a good job of creating a fair to all atmosphere. But it does not seem fair that only a few would have the privilege of having the UKC Bible.

Posted by JiM on 07-09-2013 12:28 PM:

How do you get that it is only available to a privileged few?
https://www.ukcdogs.com/cgi-bin/com...ey=C-BA-4353-CA
https://www.ukcdogs.com/cgi-bin/com...ey=C-RB-4310-CH

__________________
UKC Nite Champion Stylish Harry's Trixie - 2017 World Hunt Qualified - Owners - Sizemore/Martin
PKC CH/UKC GrNtCh Stylish Kate - 9/12/08 to 9/23/2016 R.I.P - Owners Sizemore/Martin
AKC/UKC NtCh Sizemore's Timber Jam Jeff 5/2/2000 to 1/22/2012 R.I.P.
AKC/UKC GrNtCh Sizemore's Timber Jam Jessi 12/21/04 to 1/21/2011 R.I.P.

Posted by groworg1 on 07-09-2013 12:44 PM:

you can buy a rule book its 5 bucks or its on here to read for free ! the advisor is 15 bucks its not on here to read for free and after this tread its outdated already !

Posted by JiM on 07-09-2013 01:17 PM:

All true!
But with that said, it IS available to anyone who wants one.

Posted by Larry Atherton on 07-09-2013 04:17 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by groworg1
its not on here to read for free

The Advisor is simply a collection of Advisor columns from Bloodlines.

What are these?

http://www.ukcdogs.com/Web.nsf/Arti...&article=CA

__________________
Larry Atherton

Aim small miss small

Posted by Allen / UKC on 07-09-2013 04:30 PM:

The monthly Advisor column has always been one of those articles that I take very seriously. It's vital that the writers remain consistent, and I think we've done quite well with that throughout the years. There's likely very few scenarios that we have not covered at one time or another. Most have actually been covered numerous times. So we're always looking for that one unique scenario that has never been covered.

The scenario in the July issue is one that I'm sure has happened on more than one occasion but when it came up I was tickled to have a new one to write about.

Even though Paul wrote the article I take full responsibility when it comes to the ruling published in the column. He and I discussed the situation at length and both concluded that scratching was the right thing to do. However, in hind sight it becomes obvious that "I" absolutely missed the boat on this one. We did not consider the "broader" perspective.

In this case, we're talking about one dog who has his head stuck in a hole baying a possum. Bad dog! No question. PERIOD. The dog is obviously doing something he "should" be discredited for. At least that's what common sense suggests.

Unfortunately, such a ruling becomes a problem in situations where you have more than one dog involved. Example: There's only enough room for one dog to get their head in the hole. Now you have dogs taking turns in the hole while the other three are treeing on the tree until the hole opens. The dog that just happens to be the one with their head in the hole when the judge arrives is the unlucky sucker? Don't think so. In any event it's unacceptable to minus/scratch part of the cast for off game and plus others on the same tree in such a situation.

For that reason, it is in the best interest of the UKC and the sport to retract that ruling and eliminate variables that might be included. Sure... a dog(s) might be getting a big break when you plus points in such a scenario but it is, without question, the lesser evil. The Advisor Column published in the upcoming September Issue will have that same question and answer followed by a bolded retraction on the original ruling.

Finally, if anyone's credibility should be questioned direct it towards me. I allowed that original decision without giving it enough foresight. Lesson learned.

Posted by ed esposti on 07-09-2013 06:38 PM:

I personally would like to applaud Paul and Allen for all they do, They took alot of heat from the Advisor Column in the July Issue but lets not forget all the Hardwork they put into the Coonhound Program to make it better for all of us and for that i thank both of you. Keep up the great work

__________________
Timberjack English Kennels
Home of
WCH GRFCH GRNITECH GRCH2 'PR' Timberjack Hardtime Bell (PKC CH)
CH GRNITECH 'PR' Timberjack Hardtime Duke (PKC CH)
WCH FCH CH 'PR' Timberjack Hardtime Hank

Posted by Robert Johnson on 07-09-2013 06:43 PM:

Re: Adviser Books

quote:
Originally posted by Plott55
COME ON GUYS;; SHOW ME WHERE YOU ARE SUPPOSE TO JUDGE A CAST BY AN ADVISOR BOOK INSTEAD OF THE RULES ON THE BACK OF THE SCORE CARD.

A RULES COMMITTEE MEETS ONCE A YEAR AND WHEN THE MEETING IS OVER A SET OF RULES HAVE BEEN FINALIZED FOR THE HUNTS UNTIL THE NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING.

UKC PUTS OUT AN ADVISOR TO MAKE 1000'S OF DOLLARS. IT REALLY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RULES; ITS THEIR OPINION OF COURSE; BUT THE PRIMARY REASON= MONEY=MONEY=MONEY.

MANSFORD CRAVER STARTED RULES CORNER AND DIFFERENT ONES FOLLOWED UNTIL UKC CAME UP WITH THE BRAINSTORM "lets put it in book form and sell it. W'll make tons of money" SO NOW THE ORIGINAL RULES CORNER IS THE ADVISOR AND IT SEEMS MOST COMPETITION HUNTERS THINK IT'S A BIBLE.

THE RULES ARE NOT THAT HARD TO UNDERSTAND; SOME JUST DON'T WANT TO GO BY THEM

The Swamp Guide

How can you say the advisor book has nothing to do with the rules? It has nothing to do with anything but the rules. wake up, and read it. You probably don't even own one do you?

Thank you for standing up and retracting a decision that was questionable Allen. You and Paul both do an excellent job, and this retraction just shows how serious you both are about such. Look forward to seeing you and Paul soon.

__________________
Robert " Rock" Johnson

Johnson Creek Kennels
home of:
UKC Grand Nite Champion "PR" Yadkin River Addkis. Deceased 12/11/2016 RIP

2009/2010/2011/2012 AKC GA. State Leader and Supreme Grand Nite Champion Yadkin River Addkis

2010 ACHA Georgia State Champion Grand Nite Champion Yadkin River Addkis

PKC Champion Yadkin River Addkis

Bright Eye Lights

Treeing Walkers

912-663-5287 cell (perfered)

Posted by H. L. Meyer on 07-09-2013 07:03 PM:

Guys

When a person does all he can do that is all he CAN do and Allen did that. This book should be closed. A sport grows from mistakes a man grows from mistakes and U K C will become better because of this article. Keep up the good work we need more people like Allen & Paul in this sport. See you down the road. H L . O yea throw Todd in also he aint to shabby either.

__________________
SHAWNEE HILL'S BLACK AND TANS

Posted by H. L. Meyer on 07-09-2013 08:54 PM:

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHEWWWWWW !!!!!!!!

Where U been

__________________
SHAWNEE HILL'S BLACK AND TANS

Posted by blackflagginit on 07-09-2013 08:59 PM:

I totally agree with jim. if for no other reason than to stay consistant with past rulings,,,,and streamline similar situations....

its true most will never see it happen..but I know of twice in the last 25yrs or so it HAS happened in local hunts in this area. once in Clinton mo, the other in girard ks.

Posted by Plott55 on 07-09-2013 09:41 PM:

Re: Re: Adviser Books

quote:
Originally posted by Robert Johnson
How can you say the advisor book has nothing to do with the rules? It has nothing to do with anything but the rules. wake up, and read it. You probably don't even own one do you?

Thank you for standing up and retracting a decision that was questionable Allen. You and Paul both do an excellent job, and this retraction just shows how serious you both are about such. Look forward to seeing you and Paul soon.

You are so right!!! I DO NOT have an advisor book;; and have NEVER read one; AND don't intend to. I have read the advisor column from time to time and say it's just a modern verson of the older Rules Corner columns from the past. I would say without doing research that Steve Fielder wrote the first advisor type column for UKC. In later years is when the decison was made to print a book and make money

Different ones admit the books are just an interpretation of the rules; and not the actual rules. I'm sorry about thinking the Rules Committee still met each year; BUT; I was not wrong about the purpose of the meeting. They do set the Rules, and those Rules are the the law until the next meeting

In essence; when one has to use the ADVISOR to judge a cast they are admitting, to not knowing the rules; and that creates arguments on the cast. To follow the real rules there is nothing left to disagree over.

The Okefenokee Swamp Stomper

Posted by Oak Ridge on 07-09-2013 11:29 PM:

Re: Re: Re: Adviser Books

quote:
Originally posted by Plott55
You are so right!!! I DO NOT have an advisor book;; and have NEVER read one; AND don't intend to. I have read the advisor column from time to time and say it's just a modern verson of the older Rules Corner columns from the past. I would say without doing research that Steve Fielder wrote the first advisor type column for UKC. In later years is when the decison was made to print a book and make money

Different ones admit the books are just an interpretation of the rules; and not the actual rules. I'm sorry about thinking the Rules Committee still met each year; BUT; I was not wrong about the purpose of the meeting. They do set the Rules, and those Rules are the the law until the next meeting

In essence; when one has to use the ADVISOR to judge a cast they are admitting, to not knowing the rules; and that creates arguments on the cast. To follow the real rules there is nothing left to disagree over.

The Okefenokee Swamp Stomper

As a proud owner of The Advisor, I will freely state that I have indeed read it.

Now I certainly don't need it to judge a cast, and have never used it in order to judge a cast...but what I have done is use it to help those folks that show up at a hunt and believe in their heart of hearts that they "KNOW" the rules.

Sure, they read them once, maybe read them more than once, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they understand how to apply those rules. To you and I...those rules are as plain as the nose on our face....but every once in a while you manage to draw someone that just doesn't "get it"

On a couple of occasions I have been able to reference The Advisor, and show them the "official interpretation" of a disagreement on how or when a rule should be applied. Reading the advisor made me a better judge, and a better handler....

Not sure how you can say it is of no real value if you freely admit you only occasionally read the articles and don't own one!

__________________
Joe Newlin
UKC Cur Advocate
Home of Oak Ridge Kennels

Posted by Robert Johnson on 07-10-2013 06:38 PM:

Plott you are so sadly mistaken in your view that it is almost pitiful. The advisor is a workbook of sorts to continue the education of the judges and hunters alike. Schools of higher education use such booklets all the time, and in fact, now that you know the truth, and choose not use such.....well you know the rest, and you don't need a workbook to figure that out!

Posted by kayapellijed390 on 07-10-2013 08:29 PM:

Plott55

Eventually you will run into a situation in the woods that is not laid out in black and white on the back of the scorecard. When that happens is when it is nice to know ahead of time what UKC's official interpretation of that rule is, and how they say it should be applied in different situations. I have seen several questions brought back that even the MOH answered incorrrectly. So in that kind of situation wouldn' t you like to know what UKC's official interpretation is going to be? That way you will know whether or not it is worth it to file a formal complaint if you think the MOH is wrong. Or better yet if you have a copy of the advisor in your truck you can just pull it out and show everyone what UKC has to say about it. No MOH I know if would dream if making a ruling that directly contradicts what is written in the advisor. It is kind of like getting a speeding ticket. You know that the speed limit is 55 mph, the law is pretty plain about that. But what happens when you buy a new truck and you are driving down the road with the cruise set at 55mph and you get pulled over and the officer says you where doing 62mph. You tell him that is impossible because you had your cruise set at 55mph and he says tough and hands you a ticket. Well you know the cruise was set right so you take your truck to a mechanic to get the speedometer checked out. Well the mechanic discovers that somebody changed the gear ratio in the rear end of your truck and the speedometer is off by several mph's. Do you know the fine print and ins and outs of the laws regarding that specific situation? I actually had this happen to me before and I took it to court along with the mechanics repair bill and his statement saying how far off the speedometer actually was. Guess what I still got the ticket, because and I quote the judge "speeding is a strict liability infraction, meaning it does not matter if you "know" you are speeding or not. If you speed you get a ticket. End of story no ifs, ands, or buts about it. But that part of the law isn't written on the sign or even in the average drivers education manual is it? Nope you got to dig deeper and pull out a more detailed book (kind of like the Advisor) and find out the states official interpretation of the definition of speeding.

__________________
Lonetree Kennels "Where dogs are made one tree at a time."
Home of-
David and Jessica Smith 605-270-2674
GRNITECH 'PR' DERBY CITY SANDY
GRNITECH GRCH CASH'S CAMO JUG OF SHINE
--2012 National Grand Nite Champion American Leopard Hound
--High Scoring Leopard 2012 Autumn Oaks
--High scoring Leopard Saturday night at Leopard days 2011
--Qualified for the 2011 UKC World Hunt.
--High Scoring Leopard of the 2011 UKC World Hunt
--Breed Winner for the 2011 Purina Race Hunt
--2011 South Dakota State Hunt Champion
CH RYLEIGH'S GRIM REAPER
--Tri-State Coonhunters Association 2010 Bench show dog of the year

And the Redbone--
2013 Tri-State Overall Bench Show Dog of the Year:
'PR' CH RAGGED RIDGE CJ (Willie) co-owned with Bob Julson

Posted by pigsit on 07-10-2013 09:26 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Allen / UKC
The monthly Advisor column has always been one of those articles that I take very seriously. It's vital that the writers remain consistent, and I think we've done quite well with that throughout the years. There's likely very few scenarios that we have not covered at one time or another. Most have actually been covered numerous times. So we're always looking for that one unique scenario that has never been covered.

The scenario in the July issue is one that I'm sure has happened on more than one occasion but when it came up I was tickled to have a new one to write about.

Even though Paul wrote the article I take full responsibility when it comes to the ruling published in the column. He and I discussed the situation at length and both concluded that scratching was the right thing to do. However, in hind sight it becomes obvious that "I" absolutely missed the boat on this one. We did not consider the "broader" perspective. I am very glad that you reconsidered your previous decision on this issue. Tom

In this case, we're talking about one dog who has his head stuck in a hole baying a possum. Bad dog! No question. PERIOD. The dog is obviously doing something he "should" be discredited for. At least that's what common sense suggests.

Unfortunately, such a ruling becomes a problem in situations where you have more than one dog involved. Example: There's only enough room for one dog to get their head in the hole. Now you have dogs taking turns in the hole while the other three are treeing on the tree until the hole opens. The dog that just happens to be the one with their head in the hole when the judge arrives is the unlucky sucker? Don't think so. In any event it's unacceptable to minus/scratch part of the cast for off game and plus others on the same tree in such a situation.

For that reason, it is in the best interest of the UKC and the sport to retract that ruling and eliminate variables that might be included. Sure... a dog(s) might be getting a big break when you plus points in such a scenario but it is, without question, the lesser evil. The Advisor Column published in the upcoming September Issue will have that same question and answer followed by a bolded retraction on the original ruling.

Finally, if anyone's credibility should be questioned direct it towards me. I allowed that original decision without giving it enough foresight. Lesson learned.

__________________
Home of:
NTCH Honky Tonk Joe
GRNTCH The Duke
Dual GRNTCH Wendy
GRNTCH Cola
GrNtCH Honky Tonk Rock and Roll
Dual GRCH Bumper
Dual CH June
Dual CH Jill

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:09 AM.

Pages (3): « 1 2 [3]
Show all 66 posts from this thread on one page