Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Morrison TN
Posts: 4927

No Tim, this happens to be the exact opposite of what has been ruled in the past.

Todd had a case exactly as above with 4 dogs, dog B left and A was split from C and D. C and D stayed the same in Todds advisor.

I will score it in the future the way Alan has said because he's the boss now.

That doesn't mean it's not 180 degrees from the correct way to score it last week.

It doesn't matter to me either way as long as everybody abides by the official way to score it.

Alan will likely need to officially publish another Advisor column though outlining this change for the benifit of those of us that have kept up with previous advisor columns.

__________________
Let's go huntin

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: North GA
Posts: 14388

So now if a and b are struck and treed. In that order..Other dogs are running dillers I guess! We get to tree and A is gone. now we move B up to 125???? Heck B could have been treed alone the whole time....Looks to me like you either move em or dont. One way or the other. I dont see any difference myself..

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Morrison TN
Posts: 4927

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cheyenne
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!!!!!

---

__________________
Let's go huntin

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

Alot of people are missing the point! No dog to be declared split unless its obvious, dogs split treed on arriving to be moved up to 125! Its plain and simple!!! No one knows dogs are split alot of times until arriving. I guess the only thing left to do would be to put movie camaras on each and every dog collar!!! Better yet would be to get everyone a garmin tracker and when we get to a tree look at each system and see where each and every dog has been!!! I know one thing for sure if I split tree all night long and have to take 50 tree points because one dog can not stay treed I would quit!! Some people I think need to get a PACK dog so everyone would be HAPPY!!!! NOT ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

__________________
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: Aug 2004
Location: NE/MO
Posts: 579

And this ruling makes about as much sense as deleting strike points when a dog quits its track and comes to stand at the feet of its handler who is scoring a tree-as long as a coon isn't seen.....perfect. I've said it many times, throw the "official" rulings out the window and burn all the copies of the advisor. UKC can't even keep it straight what they've said or what they are saying anymore. Let MOH's make those decisions on a situation by situation basis or better yet, pull a panel of fellow hunters. It can't be any worse than this junk. And like I've told somebody before when they start talking about the advisor, I've yet to carry a score card with dogs named A, B, and C. :-)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2006
Location: bronaugh,MO
Posts: 2595

I cant see where this "new" ruleing is any different than its been scored for over 20 years that I know of.

[quote]
Any time a dog is seen on a tree of its own it moves up to 1st tree, regardless of what position it was treed in at.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.
[quote]

__________________
GRNTCH GRCH ROBINSONS ENGLISH LOOSER

RIP Loose

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

Amen to Larry!!!!!!!!!!!! guess their is some who can READ. This has been this way for awhile!!

__________________
A small vein of treeinblues

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Dog House
Posts: 4112

the last time this was discussed, tk ruled completey opposite from allen. therefore that is how ive scored it.
today allen changed it, so as of today i score it differently.
not a problem.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

are trying to tell us, is if dogs a,b,& c are called treed in that order & you get to the tree where dog a is treeing & dog b is no telling where, & dog c, (in which is your dog) is treeing a little further on with a coon. You will leash him up & say give me 50 plus pts. & lets go hunting.

I was born at night, but it darn sure wasn't last night.

Look at Rule 3 c.

__________________
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: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

My question is what do you do when someone walks in with their Advisor book and opens it to page 99? Do we ignore the part that says the Advisor is the official rule interpretation or do we just ignore page 99?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

it that way, you sure have IGNORED Rule 3 c.

__________________
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: Jan 2006
Location: bronaugh,MO
Posts: 2595

quote:

---

Originally posted by JiM
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?

---

__________________
GRNTCH GRCH ROBINSONS ENGLISH LOOSER

RIP Loose

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Troy Iowa
Posts: 2159

A, B, & C are struck and treed in that order. This time, all dogs are still treed on arrival. B is fifty feet on past on a tree in a fence row. Now, don't we all agree that C would move up to 75????? It is the same difference. I don't consider this a change in the ruling. I'll say it again, some are trying to read too much into the wording without reading the whole sentence.

Jim: I had to go get my advisor to see what you were referring to. You are missing the point. In that case, A and B leave tree and C is there still treeing. Since 125 and 75 are minused, it doesn't open the score for C to bump up. In the deal ALLEN put on here, the tree is split and therefore second tree is opened up for C. The thing to remember, you can not move up over a dog.

After reading this thread, I can see why ALLEN tells me not to call him on Mondays. lol Poor Guy

Last edited by Tim MACHA on 02-13-2008 at 04:49 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Dog House
Posts: 4112

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Wittenborn
it that way, you sure have IGNORED Rule 3 c.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

The problem with this is if and when UKC decides to replace Allen, what will the ruling be then? It should not change just cause a new man is doing the interpreting. UKC should have it written in stone regardless of who is on the payroll.

Cheyenne,
The reason a ? has never been brought in to you to handle is obviously because the hunters in ur area know ur way of thinking and dont have enough confidence to let you decide their fate. If you've never had a ? brought in to u, what makes u think u have the experience to handle a ?

Larry Poe,
Why would dog B be assumed to be treed with dogA? Or with any dog? Or even really treed at all? It was assumed by the cast members obviously that all dogs were treed together. If the cast thought dog B was treed with dog A, then they would have put dog C in at 125 when dog C was treed.

If ya'll will read everything Allen wrote you will see that he also plainly states that dog C cant be moved up. Read the 3rd and 4th paragraph of his post.

Last edited by gfults on 02-13-2008 at 05:51 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Twin Lake Mi
Posts: 383

Here is the deal I don't understand with UKC

1 Todd Kellum is the Bird Dog man
2 Todd Morgan is the Beagle man
3 Allen is the Coonhound man

How come if you call down there all 3 give you a different personal view on the rules? These rules are honor rules correct. That is what I was told. The grey areas in these rules is unreal and one rule may contradict another so lets just see if we might be able to get some rules that say this is what we do and that is that not well Allen said this and the 2 Todd's said something completely different from each other plus different than Alan.

__________________
Home of

West Lake Annie

West Lake Inky

GRNTCH Diamond Point Ransom (RIP)
NTCH Ransoms Diamond Point Sky (RIP)
NTCH Sackett Jrs Patches (RIP)
GRNTCH Carps Sin Cidy (RIP)

Jeff Eaken
Home 231-578-6960

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Twin Lake Mi
Posts: 383

Now to gfults

Come on man dogs were treed in the order of

A B C correct lets say your dog is C

you think because dog B is not treed and your dog is SPLIT that your dog is only suppose to be credited for 50 man that makes no sense but you score it that way and good luck on your win.

__________________
Home of

West Lake Annie

West Lake Inky

GRNTCH Diamond Point Ransom (RIP)
NTCH Ransoms Diamond Point Sky (RIP)
NTCH Sackett Jrs Patches (RIP)
GRNTCH Carps Sin Cidy (RIP)

Jeff Eaken
Home 231-578-6960

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

This is the point that has been missed thruout this whole thread. You say dog C was SPLIT. He may have been on a seperate tree than dog A. But that dont mean he was split. When a dog is truly SPLIT, that means the dog MADE a seperate tree from one that has already been made. We dont know dog C split treed because dog B was running and it is unclear which tree dog B left. Ya'll are saying move dog C up because he is treed seperate from dog A. Well in that case since dog B has left and is now running he is also in a seperate place. Should we ASSUME that dog B was split also?? If so, we can award dog B 125 for being SPLIT and minus him. We cant ASSUME dog C was split treed.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

you are saying if all dogs are treed together (I assume you mean on the same tree) & one leaves you can not move another dogs pts. up. It's always been that way as far back as I can remember. But in this case, when the cast got to dog a's tree, two of the dogs were split treed & one dog was gone. Rule 3 c says "ONE SET OF STRIKE POINTS IN CASE OF SPLIT TREE, & EACH WILL BE COUNTED AS SEPERATE TREES FOR TREE POINTS". I don't see how it can be any more straightforward then that.

I'll leave the ADVISOR'S interpretation's out of it for now. But I will say that I think that some person/persons were a little confused.

In this case, you have to go on what you see when you get to dog a's tree, & not all of the possibilities that could have taken place.

If you & JJ were dog c, in the World Hunt Finals, would you have accepted 50 plus pts. & said lets go hunting??????????????

__________________
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: Mar 2007
Location: Twin Lake Mi
Posts: 383

gfults If when the judge arrives and dogs are not on the same tree then there is obviously a SPLIT tree I don't care where dog B is because when the judge arrives dog B is trailing or whatever he is doing and dogs A and C are TREEING on SPLIT trees. So dog A gets 125 and dog C gets 125 unless trees touch. And dog B gets 75-

__________________
Home of

West Lake Annie

West Lake Inky

GRNTCH Diamond Point Ransom (RIP)
NTCH Ransoms Diamond Point Sky (RIP)
NTCH Sackett Jrs Patches (RIP)
GRNTCH Carps Sin Cidy (RIP)

Jeff Eaken
Home 231-578-6960

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Twin Lake Mi
Posts: 383

On the original post it clearly states that when cast arrives that dog B is gone and dogs A and C are SPLIT treed so that opens up 2 sets of TREE POINTS and dog that makes dog C move up to 125 and dog B stays at 75 and gets minused.

__________________
Home of

West Lake Annie

West Lake Inky

GRNTCH Diamond Point Ransom (RIP)
NTCH Ransoms Diamond Point Sky (RIP)
NTCH Sackett Jrs Patches (RIP)
GRNTCH Carps Sin Cidy (RIP)

Jeff Eaken
Home 231-578-6960

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: North GA
Posts: 14388

Now I gotta print this off and keep it in my wallet with my shut out on strike rule lol.....

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

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

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: Dec 2003
Location: Willard Oh.
Posts: 1255

No use in arguing with ignorance!!!!

__________________
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: Nov 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9282

quote:

---

Originally posted by JiM
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