Time to Enforce the Rules for the USA Sieger Show - Page 15

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by eichenluft on 07 May 2008 - 14:05

It's not even a Schh1 protection routine they must do - it's a breed survey pattern.  VERY easy (or should be) - two grips, two outs, two drives, two stick  hits, and 10 steps or so of heeling.  Simple for dogs that are supposed to be titled Schh3 (or even Schh1) to accomplish (or should be).

molly

 


uvw

by uvw on 07 May 2008 - 15:05

signed.....


Avorow

by Avorow on 07 May 2008 - 15:05

Okay, here goes... The BAC is not interested in lowering the bar, far from it. And we are not really reinventing the wheel, BUT... (those of you that can remember this please correct me if I am wrong); In the beginning the Seiger Show bitework was considered too hard for the dogs. So the judges were directed to look with a kinder eye. Why? I just do not know. As the years passed, the bar got lower and lower, with the focus shifting from working ability to "the look". And I think that this has happened all over the world. Now things have reached a point where we can now longer convince ourselves that it is okay to have a dog that not only will not but is not able at all to do the work. We didn't get here overnight and we will not get back that way either. While we don't need to cater to a few large breeders, we don't want to alienate them either. So the question still is... what are the short term goals that will get us to the long term goal of structurally correct dogs that can do the work? And here is the other problem. One set of rules, many interpretations. The rules are subjective to the judge that is present. There is a great deal of work in front of the BAC and we are fully aware that we need to serve all of the membership, not just the commercial breeders. We need to find the path that will bring the most members along. The helperwork has been looked at, what other benchmarks should there be? The progression of "P" and a closer evaluation of the grip is a start, when we have that implemented we can move on, perhaps to the heeling. I think that we need to make sure that the VA 1 is a dog that at the least we are not completely ashamed of. The other thing that I want to point out is that writing nasty e-mails to the judges and helpers is not going to make anybody more willing to rethink anything. I know that we all have a certain amount of ego wrapped up in our dogs...but aggression is not going to make anybody more willing to find solutions, quite the contrary. Will all the grownups in the room please stand up? Sorry if this is a bit of a ramble, I have been up all night and the brain cells are getting a bit tired. Lorri

by eichenluft on 07 May 2008 - 15:05

Thanks Lorri - as Lorri says, the BAC is aware of everything being said, talked about and we are talking about all of it.  The BAC had a meeting last night and we had an excellent discussion - I think the steps are being taken to get things done for the benefit of everyone and especially our breed.  There is no under-carpet-sweeping being done, this time.

 

molly (Northeast Regional Breed Warden, member of BAC)


DeesWolf

by DeesWolf on 07 May 2008 - 15:05

Lorri and Molly,

Thank you for the update. Nice to know that there are steps being taken to correct the situation. I look forward to hearing more about how this will be accomplished. I assume we will be seeing more information on this in the near future?

 


mnm

by mnm on 07 May 2008 - 16:05

Lorri and Molly,

Also, thanks for the update.

Now, my opinion....lets keep this black and white.  The dog does everything correctly as it should be, then the dog earns pronounced.  If the dog does the routine, but does it poorly, then it is sufficient.  The dog doesn't do the routine correctly, it is insufficient.  Again, the rules are already in place.  The rules just need to be followed.  If we water down the P, S and I, then we've not any progress.  I know it took many years to get so bad and to this point, but if you demand excellence, then you have a better chance of getting it. 

Molly, I think that you would agree with my last point, since you have competed at the National level.  I know that in order to compete at that level, you must be prepared to do your very best, so you put a lot of time into training.  I think that the same thing can and should be said of the protection routine at a Sieger Show.  The dogs already should know the routine and they should be capable of performing it.

I will alway be one of the first to admit that a dog can have a bad day, just like people.  But, if it has a bad day, then thats too bad, and please try again the next time.  I would much rather see a dramatic improvement next year, than spending the next several years thinking that it was a little bit better than the year before.  That's the only way it should be done and all of the members of USA should want this to happen.  Otherwise, IMO, they are only concerned about breeding and selling puppies, and not concerned about the breed itself.

Marsha Seck


by hodie on 07 May 2008 - 16:05

 Lorri,

One fixes the excesses of the past by stating purely and simply that the RULES as written will be ENFORCED. Then, as I suggested repeatedly, put some examples of proper work on the USA web site. Block out the faces of the helpers in the videos if you must. Disguise the body of the dog in the video if you must. Show proper and IMPROPER work.

But the coddling is a bunch of baloney. My experience in life is that when one sets standards, people live up to them. When there are consequences and one knows there are, people tend to do what is required. When they know they can fudge, all too often people will fudge. There is no reason to take more than overnight to fix this. And, if you think for one moment you will alienate the big boys, that is bunk as well. IF they want to play, and I think they do, they will meet the standard IF the standard is clear and enforced. And yes, someday there will be a sable VA in this country as well their should be. But it is not about sable or red/black or whatever. It should be about the drives of the dog, the correct performance of a task which every SchH1 dog should be able to do, and the Judge enforcing the rules. If the judge cannot see, he/she needs to move so he/she can. The absolute BEST helpers we have to offer in this country should be doing these national events and there should be some financial incentive to help more try out. There are lots of ways to encourage more to try out, even if done by video initially and then some chosen to come try out and flown to the venue to do so. There are a lot of things that could be changed other than screwing with the rules.

Rather than screw around with the rules part of the equation, the BAC and the organization as a whole should be figuring out how they can help those who really do want to participate find quality helpers all year round. Further, there needs to be much more in the way of the organization demonstrating to people various methods to train so that the handlers and trainers actually become better. This is not simply about the dogs, but a generalized failure of the system. Many who want to show probably need some help learning to be a better trainer. Those who want to compete will find a way to do so, IF given the right type of assistance to train the dogs. 

In my opinion, messing around with the system is just that and will lead to prolonged discussion, inadequate understanding and worse yet, uneven enforcement. The system exists and in Germany change has been made and now the players have to step up if they want to continue. It should be that simple here too.



by screwedinct on 08 May 2008 - 13:05

 

Bump

 

Today would be a perfect opportunity to sigh the petition


by Louise M. Penery on 09 May 2008 - 05:05

Bump





 

Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top