UKC Forums - How would you score?

Pages (4): « First ... « 2 3 [4]
Show all 94 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)
-- How would you score? (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=928506567)

Posted by Pat Bizich on 07-14-2018 07:28 PM:

No one seems to agree what a constitutes a babbler.

bab·ble
[ˈbabəl]

VERB
talk rapidly and continuously in a foolish, excited, or incomprehensible way.

So opening once or twice and shutting up by definition is not babbling.
Real easy remedy ….DO AWAY WITH THE RULE!!!

Change the time to 5 or 6 minutes of silence and the minus rule will take care opening to long between barks.

__________________
IT SEEMS THAT EVERYTIME A BREED OR LINE OF DOGS GET POPULAR IT EVENTUALLY LEADS TO ITS RUINATION BY UNINFORMED PEOPLE BREEDING WITHOUT DOING THEIR RESEARCH FIRST.

Gone but never forgotten:
NtChGrCh Dryfork Punkin
NtChGrCh Dryfork Little Blue Baby Doll
2009 Pa Show Dog Of The Year
GrCh Dryfork Little Black Book
Gr.Ch. Make My Day Sunny
Gone too soon RIP my baby girl
Gr.Ch. Black Dog Black Cherry
GrCh Dryfork Black Dog Raine
One of kind and would make a believer out of you when you thought there were no coon left
Home of:
2009,2013,2018 Pa. State
Show Handler Of The Year
CH. Power Pack Pepper
2018 Pa. Show Dog Of Year
Gr.Ch. Batman's Poison Ivy
2011&2013 WTDA Pa State Champion
2011&2013 Overall Hunt For The Cure
Ch. Jay's Greenridge Heidi
In memory of my best friend "Jay"

Posted by Rip on 07-14-2018 08:19 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Pat Bizich
No one seems to agree what a constitutes a babbler.

bab·ble
[ˈbabəl]

VERB
talk rapidly and continuously in a foolish, excited, or incomprehensible way.

So opening once or twice and shutting up by definition is not babbling.
Real easy remedy ….DO AWAY WITH THE RULE!!!

Change the time to 5 or 6 minutes of silence and the minus rule will take care opening to long between barks.

It's UKC rules so you use the official UKC definition which everyone should know by heart.

Opening where no track is evident

nothing about how much time, now many times, just if they are struck while opening with no track evident.

__________________
Let's go huntin

Posted by yadkintar on 07-14-2018 08:29 PM:

Can you smell coon scent pilgrim ?

If so get out that onen you're hands and knee bumps and checks um.

Getting better by the minute !!

Tar

Posted by Rip on 07-14-2018 08:35 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yadkintar
Can you smell coon scent pilgrim ?

If so get out that onen you're hands and knee bumps and checks um.

Getting better by the minute !!

Tar

Nope but I can tell you when a dog is babbling and I can minus it with a clear conscious.

I don't even want a minute at all. I want it to be like it was before, that makes it much easier to know if they are babbling or not.

__________________
Let's go huntin

Posted by sleepy head on 07-14-2018 08:57 PM:

On a judgment call like this when the majority has already voted to overturn the judge, can a moh overturn the majority?

Posted by sleepy head on 07-14-2018 09:09 PM:

If moh did overturn the majority on this exact situation and i was one of the two, this club would never see my face again

Posted by Rip on 07-14-2018 09:12 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by sleepy head
On a judgment call like this when the majority has already voted to overturn the judge, can a moh overturn the majority?

He COULD but I don't think any MOH that I know WOULD.

The only way I could think of they would be justified in overturning the vote is if the ones voting didn't understand the application of the rule and that was demonstrated in discussion or he/she had knowledge they were intentionally voting in a way as to cheat. That would be extremely rare IMO.

__________________
Let's go huntin

Posted by ov_blues on 07-14-2018 10:05 PM:

The question to me is, if a person completely disregarded the minute rule, and a dog barked twice at 50 yards, went two hundred yards in a minute or two and started barking again, would anyone who was pleasure hunting think that their dog(s) were loose barking where there wasn't a track?

__________________
John Smith
Ohio Valley Bluetick Kennel

Posted by Richard Lambert on 07-14-2018 10:17 PM:

If the MOH overturns the majority vote then you just ask for a panel and they can overturn the MOH.

Posted by yadkintar on 07-14-2018 10:46 PM:

As a moh if it is a majority vote and it was said first two drops there was no babbling then the last drop the judge says he minused them for barking 2 times at 50 yards and was struck under the minute moved out 200 yards and opened again and the majority voted not to minus I am going with the majority. Do I feel for the guys when they are out voted yes same thing you go to a 5 ft slick 3 guys say here he is one guy says there is no coon you either stay in and keep banging or go home but there is nothing a moh can do about it your out voted simple as that I don't like it but that's the way it is.

Tar

Posted by Richard Lambert on 07-15-2018 01:04 AM:

Tar, you have a third choice now. You can get on the internet on Monday and tell the whole world that the 3 guys plussed a slick tree. You can even take a picture of the tree and post it also.

Posted by yadkintar on 07-15-2018 01:14 AM:

Brother Richard I might pick and have fun but I can be serious if I have to. But I am old school I take care of my own business I have cheated I have been cheated I have been all out took a hosen but the way I look at it no matter for what reason if you didn't get the win slip at the end ................ You just got beat simple as that. And when I moh I try and have my business took care of when we go home because I don't want Allen on Monday morning saying tar you big dummy why did you do it like that lol.

Tar

Posted by honalieh on 07-15-2018 07:09 AM:

Lets look at the obvious.

Three dogs. End of hunt.

Is this a babbling issue??? Or is this a "how can I win the cast" issue?

We all know what this appears to be.

If you are the judge of a 3 dog cast, and scratch the other 2 dogs, you win by default.

Could this have factored into the judges call of babbling???

How many of you have seen not one, but two dogs, be clean and honest all through the hunt, then on the last turnout have not one, but two dogs decide to babble. I can't recall ever seeing this. But, I've only hunted for about 45 years.

Without evidence to the contrary, I'd have to consider the obvious as being most likely. And, I admit I could be wrong (it's happened before).

Most of you probably think the exact same thing.

Posted by Richard Lambert on 07-15-2018 04:31 PM:

Re: Lets look at the obvious.

quote:
Originally posted by honalieh
Most of you probably think the exact same thing.

Oh my goodness, this would have been great for one of those Polls. We could all vote how we would have ruled if MOH said minus and it was questioned and we were on the panel.

Posted by joey on 07-15-2018 09:40 PM:

Is it possible that they did babble but were not struck because they didn't need it?

Regardless all it takes is one running to get ahead to mouth off to get the others started, even if it had not happened all night. The guy ask for our opinion on a situation and the rules. Instead the first thing that comes to everyone's mind is because it was the end of the night he was deciding to cheat to win. No wander everyone thinks they are getting cheated all the time.

In the top 16 of AO I minus two dogs for babbling on the last drop. They had not struck them on a babble all night because they did not need to. The second place guy struck his and the leader struck right behind him so that guy couldn't get ahead. I minuse them so was I cheating? I didn't care who one the cast as long as it was done right. Don't get mad at a judge for doing their job.

__________________
Michael Rosamond
Sunspot Lights
936-827-6309
http://www.sunspotlights.com/
When brightness matters!!

Home Of:
PKC Ch, Grch Grnch 2008 Tx state champion They call me Crazy Betty

PKC SCh CH Grnch They call me Howler too

Posted by Blaze2014 on 07-15-2018 10:18 PM:

People make it to hard. Babbling is easy to tell.

__________________
Jacob Miller

Posted by Pat Bizich on 07-15-2018 11:49 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Rip
It's UKC rules so you use the official UKC definition which everyone should know by heart.

Opening where no track is evident

nothing about how much time, now many times, just if they are struck while opening with no track evident.

You have made my point.I beg to differ.
Allen does indeed mention time in a definition he posted clarifying babbling.
[QUOTE]"Allen / UKC
Administrator
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 8084

That's not what the first advisor said !

It said the judge had to make the decision at the time of the call.
The article in the Advisor addresses a specific question. The questions suggests that whenever dogs are declared struck in the first minute of having been turned loose, the judges in their part of the country are saying that the dog must open again within 15 or 20 seconds. Otherwise, the judges are minusing them for babbling.

The first scenario in the response references a dog that leaves babbling and continues to babble at the one minute mark when the handler has no choice but to declare the dog struck. The Advisor goes on to suggest that "if it is determined that the dog is still babbling (opening where no track is evident) at the time it is declared struck" then the judge should make the call immediately. In this case, we're talking about something that has been determined. Once determined, minus immediately. In other words don't wait for another minute or two after it has already determined it.

The second scenario references a dog that opened once or twice after having been cut loose and is declared struck. Again, the Advisor says to minus the dog immediately regardless of any time frame. The time frame it's referring to is: the need for the dog to bark again within 15 or 20 seconds or during the one minute grace period that is also mentioned in the article. Again, "if" it is already determined.

Sometimes it takes a little bit for the judge to make the determination. Once determined, make the call immediately (at that point). There's no time period spelled out in the rules as a measurement or criteria to determine babbling. It's a judgement call that is determined by the judge.

I hear this misconception a lot..... If a dog is declared struck within the one-minute grace period it must carry the track on out OR it is considered to be babbling! That's not necessarily true. The rule simply defines babbling as a dog that is declared struck where no track is evident. Nothing more, nothing less. It has nothing to do with any time frame, time period, or grace period. Yes, it might take the judge a little bit of time to make the determination or to come to that conclusion, based on the dogs actions or otherwise.

That said; I understand that the article you referred to might be easily misunderstood because of the way the term immediately is used. I'll admit, the Advisor is sometimes the toughest article to write. Not because of not having a good understanding of most any specific rule but rather to write it in a way that is easily understood and as intended. The words used and how you use them can be huge. I'll be the first to admit, my writing skills are not nearly as good as many. But I think, or at least hope, it gets better with experience. The other side of that coin is; at my age I might not be able to learn many more new tricks"[UNQUOTE]

No wonder there is so much discussion and difference of opinions on whether a dog is/is not babbling.
Ukc's definition of what a babbler is says where no track is evident'
They go on to say babbling is a dog that leaves babbling and continues to babble at one minute mark.
Diametrically he then states a dog can be minus for only opening once or twice. UKC's interpretation.(Inconsistent with the definition of babble.)

Darn it,you can get minus at the will of a judge if he thinks your dog is opening too much or he can minus your dog if he is drifting a track and not opening enough to suit the judge.(Incidentally trying to find a way to beat you.)

This why I continue to debate that this rule needs eliminated.

There is too much ambiguity when attempting to enforce a possible babbler.

When a dog trees a opossum, runs a deer, strikes a track. quits a track, leaves a tree. These are all pretty much physically able to be seen , heard, and scored accordingly.
Not a babbling dog though.Because you do not know for certain. I know,I know you don't have to be certain. If I intend to minus a dog for doing wrong I want to be sure it is guilty first.

Posted by joey on 07-16-2018 01:23 AM:

They are not giving a definition of how a dog has to bark (all the way through the minute or just a couple of times) or any time frame, so there is no inconsistency. He is just using those two as examples. They only have one definition. The judge has to make the call as soon as he makes the determination. Be that immediately or a minute after, that's up to the judge. As I said before taking a track out is no where in the rules but if that's how the judge determines they were babbling then he can do that.

This is the problem doing it that way. A lot of dogs will mouth off on a cold track and quickly drop it and go on. They can do that without getting minused, it isn't against the rules. So as a judge I want to either see the dog or for it to have never shut up when I could see they were babbling. That's just how I choose to do it. That being said, I've played this game a longtime and I am not going to minus a dog when I know full well I'm going to be overturned on a cast vote. It just sets you up to have problems later in the cast.

Posted by Rip on 07-16-2018 01:37 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by joey
They are not giving a definition of how a dog has to bark (all the way through the minute or just a couple of times) or any time frame, so there is no inconsistency. He is just using those two as examples. They only have one definition. The judge has to make the call as soon as he makes the determination. Be that immediately or a minute after, that's up to the judge. As I said before taking a track out is no where in the rules but if that's how the judge determines they were babbling then he can do that.

This is the problem doing it that way. A lot of dogs will mouth off on a cold track and quickly drop it and go on. They can do that without getting minused, it isn't against the rules. So as a judge I want to either see the dog or for it to have never shut up when I could see they were babbling. That's just how I choose to do it. That being said, I've played this game a longtime and I am not going to minus a dog when I know full well I'm going to be overturned on a cast vote. It just sets you up to have problems later in the cast.

Exactly, even in the above he clearly stated UKC's definition of "opening where no track is evident nothing more nothing less". It is very simple and easy. Does the judge think the dog is struck in on a babble or not. If he does, minus the dog at any time, in the minute past the minute whenever just minus the dog at the time that you are convinced as a judge the dog was babbling. If the cast doesn't like it they can question it.

It's not complicated really

__________________
Let's go huntin

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:10 AM.

Pages (4): « First ... « 2 3 [4]
Show all 94 posts from this thread on one page