Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9282

The following scenario has recently resurfaced and has become the hot topic of the day actually. Certain scenarios along the same lines can become almost impossible to score. Or to score without question to say the least. Regardless, it is important to have a consistent way to score these types of situations should they arise. Here's the question posted on another thread by Mr. Hagood. He always seems to come up with some good ones!


Question: I've been out of the loop for a while, so if this has been discussed, just cut straight to the chase and give me the "official' ruling. I thought it had been settled, but a buddy of mine talked to someone at the World who gave him a different interpretation that what I thought was givin a while back.

Dogs A, B, and C are struck and treed in that order. Upon arriving it is found dog B is gone, and A & C are split. How are they scored?


Advisor: An important factor to keep in mind is that dogs are never declared "split" unless it is obvious or not until at the point when it does become obvious. Also, we never move dogs up on tree positions if one of the dogs has left when we get to the tree. That theory is essential when it comes to scenarios such as the one described above.

It was never obvious that any dogs were split until the cast arrived. Therefore, all dogs should be considered to have been treed with dog A with the exception of dog C who we “see” is split.

Dog A = 125
Dog B = 75-
Dog C = 125

There are plenty of other scenarios that do happen on occasion that make this situation look rather easy actually. However, using the rule of thumb or theory described above then it becomes a "consistent" way of scoring difficult "split trees and dogs off running again" situations. Yes, plenty "what if" arguments still exist and there are the "breaks" involved. But - it is a consistent way and probably as fair as one can possibly get to scoring "don't know" situations.

The pads are in and the helmet's on my head - fire away!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Willard Oh.
Posts: 1255

There you have it!!! Thanks!! I knew I was right all along!!! No wonder I am one of the best MOH's around our area!!!!

__________________
no doubt!!
Nt.Ch. 2010 World Hunt Finalist Tug River Stylish PJ, Pkc Ch. Nt.Ch. Stylish Polly, Pkc Ch. Nt.Ch. Stylish Cheyenne, Gr.Nt.Ch. Frieds Thunder Crank, Gr.Nt.Ch. Major Dan , Nt.Ch. Lil Red Rat, Stylish Tanks Style

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Columbus, Ks
Posts: 5398

End of Story!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Allen, you are contradicting yourself. You state "we never move dogs up on tree positions if one of the dogs has left when we get to the tree." Then you turn around and tell us to move dog C up to 125 when we discover that dog is split. The dogs were treed in order to start with so you are telling us to move dog C up to 125 even tho the dog tree ahead of him (dog B) has left. Which is it?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Dog House
Posts: 4112

suits me .

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2006
Location: SE Ohio
Posts: 231

Im glad to see this post because Sat night my son was hunting his dog in a UKC hunt and this exact scenario happened except he was victim of the buddy system and he had the dog that was split 50 feet away from the other and he didnt get the 1st tree he got minused but hell know more next time.

__________________
It is better to keep your mouth shut and let people think your an idiot than to open it and remove all doubt.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Cutler, Il.
Posts: 1631

for VIOLATING Rule 6 g, LOL. Just kidding Jim.

I think what Allen meant was, that you don't move a dog up when they are treed on the same tree, but you do in case a lower called dog has a split tree to itself.

__________________
John

CUTLER, AMERICA

Good judgement, is something that you get from using bad judgement.--Will Rogers

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2006
Location: Southwest Virginia
Posts: 360

I believe allen is referring to like dog a b c are treed you get there and if b is gone and a and c where on the same tree you dont move dog c up. Split trees have seperate tree points thats in the rules one set of strike points and incase of split trees seperate tree points.

__________________
Wildcountry English Kennels
Mike Stevens (276) 496 7085
Kris 'Kricket' Stevens (276) 780 4050

Last edited by Wildcountry on 02-12-2008 at 10:47 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2006
Location: Platteville, Wi
Posts: 5676

sure glad thats over

__________________
Home of:
- Gr. Nite Ch. Iowa County Crybabe
- Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan
- Gr. CH Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan II
- CH. Gr. Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan III 2008 Performance Sire
- CH. Gr.Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan IV 2004 ukc world hunt finalist
- Ch. Gr.Nite Ch. Mounds Creek Sassy II
- Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Bucky HTX 3 wins towards grnite
- GrCh.GrNtCh Hickory Nut Bawlie HTX
-Nite ch. PR Iowa County CryBaby II 2013 Badger State Hunt Champion
qualified for 2013 UKC World Hunt
CH Nitech She Hate Me (scar) HTX Iowa County Kennels

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2006
Location: Petersburg, Tn. aka Redneck USA
Posts: 1184

Jim is exactly right. Allen is contradicting himself. AGAIN.
John,
Allen clearly states that dog B is gone and minused, A and C are split. The following paragraph, Allen clearly states that dog C cant be moved up. So it's plain to see that he has told us you cant move the dog up.
Cheyenne,
you must live in a very small area!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Washington, NC
Posts: 3315

How many of you are defence lawyers?

In UKC hunts there is ONLY ONE coon in the woods until proven otherwise. You can not move dog C up when dog B leaves the tree as we all know. It is one tree until it is proven to be split, at this point dog C is moved up to 125.

__________________
Bill Harper
Washington, NC
252-944-5592

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Columbus, Ks
Posts: 5398

Rules are made to be broken and some will continue to break them. It's there way or the highway.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 1652

Aaah, the joys of "new" advisors. I'm pretty sure Todd ruled nobody moves up, which was bolstered by the opinions of some others on here I respect to have kept up with the rules. At any rate, that's how I'll score it from now on.

I just don't see how to keep from letting someone argue the fact that their dog, whom was treed last but is now alone with the other dogs gone, wasn't split treed all along and gets to move up to 125...

__________________
Home of
Grand Nite Ch PKC Ch 'PR' Hagood's Iron Mountain Drum
11/24/2002-1/4/2012

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Exactly!
Every last tree dog that can clear the other 3 out of there will be bucking for first tree points now.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2005
Location: CAMPBELLSVILLE KY
Posts: 1428

They can't move up. Because we don't know were dog b was, he could have been on either tree

__________________
PKC.PRIDE #84822
1-270-699-1037
CH GrNitech Triple Creek Lock S.S and performance sire R.I.P 12-31-12
Ch Nitech Tar Scream'n ThunderStorm

Come on people drop you're ego and admitt you just got beat, made a bad call, dog made a mistake, what ever.You can't get cheated that much

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2006
Location: Platteville, Wi
Posts: 5676

quote:

---

Originally posted by JiM
Exactly!
Every last tree dog that can clear the other 3 out of there will be bucking for first tree points now.

---

__________________
Home of:
- Gr. Nite Ch. Iowa County Crybabe
- Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan
- Gr. CH Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan II
- CH. Gr. Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan III 2008 Performance Sire
- CH. Gr.Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan IV 2004 ukc world hunt finalist
- Ch. Gr.Nite Ch. Mounds Creek Sassy II
- Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Bucky HTX 3 wins towards grnite
- GrCh.GrNtCh Hickory Nut Bawlie HTX
-Nite ch. PR Iowa County CryBaby II 2013 Badger State Hunt Champion
qualified for 2013 UKC World Hunt
CH Nitech She Hate Me (scar) HTX Iowa County Kennels

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Oh boy.........here we go again...............

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2007
Location: Greeneville, Tn
Posts: 495

It's ruled upon GAME OVER ,go to the next trivia!

__________________
A small vein of treeinblues

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Central Arkansas
Posts: 1652

I can definitely appreciate the "rule of thumb". I actually have no preference, just want to know the correct way to score, and know my decision will be backed up by UKC. However, I'm pretty confident that previous to today, my decision to not move anything up would have been correct (according to Garp, or Todd), but I would have looked like an idiot had I contested it. That is my problem. You advisors should consult with each other and previous interpretations. I have no problem moving the dog up in that situation, but there can always be an argument made. If everyone had not had "split trees move up" indoctrinated into their heads, an argument could be made not to move that dog that is treed last up to first tree, even though he is split, since the dog that actually treed a coon FIRST (which last I checked is the essence of the game), never had a chance to compete on that coon and is leash locked until it is scored...

Then again, I digress...

__________________
Home of
Grand Nite Ch PKC Ch 'PR' Hagood's Iron Mountain Drum
11/24/2002-1/4/2012

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Morrison TN
Posts: 4927

Well since Alan is the new dude and he has over ruled and went in the 180 degrees exact opposite of UKC's former rulings we need to go by his new ruling. Up until this ruling those saying to leave all dogs as scored and not move any up above the dog that left were correct. Of that there is no doubt as UKC has ruled that way many times in the past.

However, I respect Alans position and from now on I will score it by moving the dog up.

He is the new official interpreter, and now we have a new official interpretation.

If we follow the rules then we have to abide by this new interpretation end of story.

__________________
Let's go huntin

Last edited by Rip on 02-13-2008 at 01:27 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: May 2006
Location: KENTUCKY
Posts: 407

quote:

---

Originally posted by Allen / UKC
The following scenario has recently resurfaced and has become the hot topic of the day actually. Certain scenarios along the same lines can become almost impossible to score. Or to score without question to say the least. Regardless, it is important to have a consistent way to score these types of situations should they arise. Here's the question posted on another thread by Mr. Hagood. He always seems to come up with some good ones!


Question: I've been out of the loop for a while, so if this has been discussed, just cut straight to the chase and give me the "official' ruling. I thought it had been settled, but a buddy of mine talked to someone at the World who gave him a different interpretation that what I thought was givin a while back.

Dogs A, B, and C are struck and treed in that order. Upon arriving it is found dog B is gone, and A & C are split. How are they scored?


Advisor: An important factor to keep in mind is that dogs are never declared "split" unless it is obvious or not until at the point when it does become obvious. Also, we never move dogs up on tree positions if one of the dogs has left when we get to the tree. That theory is essential when it comes to scenarios such as the one described above.

It was never obvious that any dogs were split until the cast arrived. Therefore, all dogs should be considered to have been treed with dog A with the exception of dog C who we “see” is split.

Dog A = 125
Dog B = 75-
Dog C = 125

There are plenty of other scenarios that do happen on occasion that make this situation look rather easy actually. However, using the rule of thumb or theory described above then it becomes a "consistent" way of scoring difficult "split trees and dogs off running again" situations. Yes, plenty "what if" arguments still exist and there are the "breaks" involved. But - it is a consistent way and probably as fair as one can possibly get to scoring "don't know" situations.

The pads are in and the helmet's on my head - fire away!

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Morrison TN
Posts: 4927

Until Alan just changed it the way you did it was wrong.

Now it is right.

But if you did it that way last week you were wrong LOL.

__________________
Let's go huntin

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: May 2006
Location: KENTUCKY
Posts: 407

quote:

---

Originally posted by Allen / UKC
The following scenario has recently resurfaced and has become the hot topic of the day actually. Certain scenarios along the same lines can become almost impossible to score. Or to score without question to say the least. Regardless, it is important to have a consistent way to score these types of situations should they arise. Here's the question posted on another thread by Mr. Hagood. He always seems to come up with some good ones!


Question: I've been out of the loop for a while, so if this has been discussed, just cut straight to the chase and give me the "official' ruling. I thought it had been settled, but a buddy of mine talked to someone at the World who gave him a different interpretation that what I thought was givin a while back.

Dogs A, B, and C are struck and treed in that order. Upon arriving it is found dog B is gone, and A & C are split. How are they scored?


Advisor: An important factor to keep in mind is that dogs are never declared "split" unless it is obvious or not until at the point when it does become obvious. Also, we never move dogs up on tree positions if one of the dogs has left when we get to the tree. That theory is essential when it comes to scenarios such as the one described above.

It was never obvious that any dogs were split until the cast arrived. Therefore, all dogs should be considered to have been treed with dog A with the exception of dog C who we “see” is split.

Dog A = 125
Dog B = 75-
Dog C = 125

There are plenty of other scenarios that do happen on occasion that make this situation look rather easy actually. However, using the rule of thumb or theory described above then it becomes a "consistent" way of scoring difficult "split trees and dogs off running again" situations. Yes, plenty "what if" arguments still exist and there are the "breaks" involved. But - it is a consistent way and probably as fair as one can possibly get to scoring "don't know" situations.

The pads are in and the helmet's on my head - fire away!

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Troy Iowa
Posts: 2159

The way Allen explained it, is exactly how it has always been. Start with Dog B was second on somebody's tree, so he would get moved up to 75. Since he is gone, it doesn't really matter which one he was on, whether he was second on Dog A's tree or Dog C's tree. Like mentioned earlier, if all three dogs were treed on the same tree and Dog B blew out, Dog C would still be sitting at 50. The reason the judge is not to take a split tree call, is in the case when the cast gets to the tree and all dogs are in fact on the same tree, a heck of an argument will be sure to rerupt when they try to decide which dog pulled to which dog. What Allen is saying is no different than the interpretations that have been outlined in the past. Some are thinking way too hard and sometimes the rules may seem difficult, simple thinking is still the best.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2003
Location: Willard Oh.
Posts: 1255

gfults, its sure must pain you to see I am RIGHT!!! Sorry about that, we all can't be right all the time! To further let you know about my MOH skills, after all the hunts I have done I am proud to say that there has never been a ? brought to me because I know the rules and hunters around here know that I have seen about everything there is to see at a hunt! I also pride myself on selecting knowledgable hunters to do the judging who are honest!!! If you doubt it come up our way for a hunt and see what a clean hunt I run!!!!!

__________________
no doubt!!
Nt.Ch. 2010 World Hunt Finalist Tug River Stylish PJ, Pkc Ch. Nt.Ch. Stylish Polly, Pkc Ch. Nt.Ch. Stylish Cheyenne, Gr.Nt.Ch. Frieds Thunder Crank, Gr.Nt.Ch. Major Dan , Nt.Ch. Lil Red Rat, Stylish Tanks Style

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged