I am game - may I start with a few suggestions?

[hcornelius]

I take the view that Restricted should not be too easy. When you get your RRD title you are supposedly ready to face All Age. And no matter how hard Restricted seems to a recent Novice graduate AA is a whole lot harder than Restricted.
I liked the fact that my dog could practice the trickier concepts, bomb out if necessary but attempt all the runs (time permitting) and get the necessary trialling experience under its belt without being "put up" too much before ready.
Rushing through Resticted, often accelerated by the fact that there are not a lot of dogs in the stake, is bad news! It happened to me with my first dog. At that stage, if I wanted to keep on trialling I had to go to All age with him and had years of going out on the first run, quite often on the first bird, and no opportunity to getting any trialling experience in the day, because once you're out you not supposed to do that in All Age.

Some judges taking pity on me and a couple of other competitors in the same agony would occasionally, if the field was small, let us have a go at the the second run, even though we were out on the first. This was a humane act of kindness, and you certainly can't count on it happening often.
Do everything you can to stay in Restricted as long as you can. It is the best place to be until your dog can really do All age work. It helps if the Restricted trials are not particularly easy. Better by far to bomb than to go up too soon.

[Gareth Tawton]

Kirsty,

I have trialled for over 20 years now. In that time I do not believe the standards of restricted and novice stakes have changed much at all. Certainly All Age is becoming harder and harder. Triples are now the order of the day. Relocations common and chanel swims the norm. Across the country the average standard of AA dog is also rising. More dogs can do chanel swims than ever before. More dogs sit to the whistle and handle well. Our dogs are running straighter and tighter lines.

The fact that the standard has not changed in Restricted and Novice suggested we have these things prettty right. Dogs must have the basic before advancing to the elite level. Novice allows for basic marking skills. While restricted introduces many but not all of the basic requirements of AA. In an ideal world one may argue that we need another stepping stone somewhere in between. Reality steps in and some states have trouble getting a restricted field without splitting them in half.

Perhaps those that are struggling in Restricted are doing so for a couple of reasons.
1. They are entering when their dog is not ready. Assuming because you can win a novice does not mean by definition your dog is ready for restricted.
2. They are not training the dog to a high enough standard. I mean this with the utmost of respect but perhaps some people are trying to lower the standard of trialing instead of raising the standard of their dog.

Historically we seem to have lost most of our "new" trialers because they either can't do well in novice and more time than not this was from hard mouth. Or those that got through novice win in restricted to quickly and end up in all age, flounder and lose interest when they bomb first run every trial. Very few leave our sport because they find restricted to difficult.

I think the answer to this is in two parts. More clubs running training days to show people what the standard is they need to achieve and how to get their. Secondly, allow competitors to remain in Restricted longer. I have already suggested we should allow dogs to stay in Restricted for 10 wins should they so desire. This will stop dogs winning to quickly but still allows thoas wanting to proceed to AA rapidly do sa as they see fit. The trophy hunters will eventually be forced to AA after 10 wins.

At the end of the day. As Glenice said. It take a lot of bloody hard work to compete with a quality dog and so it should!!!

There is no sport in the world that the standard is not continually rising. Golf balls are hit further, man runs quicker, batsmen score more runs, cars go faster. Why wouldn't Retrievers get better. There is more training info out in the world now than ever before. Our dogs should be better and standards higher.

Gareth

[Julie Cramond]

The bottom line I suppose, is that a dog cannot mark what it did not see.

I still have the view that the same coloured birds for every dog needs to be addressed, never more so on the longest mark. In my humble opinion there is a huge difference between grey, white and black birds.

We all love excellent "marking" dogs. In a few instances even those great dogs have been given the raw deal.

I often wonder with all the knowledge available nowadays, are many of our trials going to won by the well trained lining dogs instead of the true markers, especially when our dogs can often be placed in the worse possible place to see a mark ie down an incline, that only the handlers would possibly see. Many times the taller dogs have even THAT advantage.

I personally would like the luck factor taken more out of our trials.
I still think the door is open for the best dog on the day instead of trick runs. Just look at our championships. We sometimes can end up with only a small line of finishes. May be some tests are just too conceptally difficult.

Our dogs are improving, our handling is improving, let our dogs show us how good they can be.

[Kirsty Blair]

Hi Gareth,

I take all your comments on board and agree with alot of them. I know I am beating a dead horse with most of what I'm saying. I feel I'm being misunderstood when I say that boundaries need to be set for the Restricted stakes. I don't want the stake to be made easier than it is or has been in the past. I don't want my below standard, disobedient dog to get through Restricted more readily. If I was in trialling to title my dog quickly I would have quit 3 years ago. I train hard and consistently and have never just wanted a "picnic in the park with my mate."

As you know I train my dog with a number of experienced handlers, one of whom is John Hyde. John trained and trialled long before I was ever introduced to retrieving and has given me some idea of what runs used to be like in the past. It is John's belief that rarely, if ever, were blinds picked up before marks in Restricted. And this is common practice now. The angles between double marks and marks and blinds were also much greater.

I agree that we should strive to develop and improve the sport of retrieving but believe that this should be in consultation with all triallers and judges. Yes, there is an improvement in skill evident over time in all sports but cricketers don't rock up to a game to be told that the perimeter of the field has been shifted out 50m so they'll have to hit that much farther if they want to hit a 4. And no-one would think of increasing the height of the hurdles on the day of the 100m Hurdles at the State Athletics Finals. I love the dynamic nature of our sport - the fact that the differences in terrain and geography can give judges hundreds of run combinations to test our dogs. However, I still firmly believe that testing runs can be set within a reasonable framework for Restricted runs ie significant angles between falls. And I don't believe that you should have to have your dog trained to All Age level in order to be confident you can get through the Restricted trial coming up.

This is my last word on this subject lest I be thought any more whining. I do hope to see you all at trials this year.

Kind Regards
Kirsty

[Kate Eltringham]

'evening all,

A thought has been going through my mind and I offer it only as a thought that may generate some discussion.

Prior to the last rule change dogs with two Novice wins were awarded an NRD title, moved onto Restricted and we all had very healthy numbers in Restricted. Last rule change 3 wins came into Novice, Restricted numbers have fallen in all states. We have dogs staying in Novice for years (yes it does happen). How many times can a Novice dog do a single mark retrieve? Yes, you can enter your dog into Restricted if you feel up to it but many trialers (less experienced) don't believe they should be in Restricted unless they've got their NRD.

It would be interesting to know how many dogs there are around the country sitting on those two novice wins waiting on the third. I've heard many experienced trialers say how much they enjoy running in Restricted, let's see how we can get the inexperienced trialers at the same level. We have Picnic tests, Beginners tests, Restricted Derby's (in some states) why not develop the Restricted Derby's into something that Novice handlers can be encouraged to enter, rather than enter a Restricted and if you bomb the first run to wait on the Judge to see if there's time to run non competing at the end of the field. Everyone get's to do every run and the judges can offer advice through the day!

Just a few thoughts - had a good night training we have finally found some cover

Cheers

Kate

[hcornelius]

Lets explore further what a restricted Derby would entail. I'm basically in favour.
Cheers
Helena

[Jason Ferris]

Hi Kate and Helena

Personally I don't think it is practical (in ACT/NSW anyway) to have a derby-style marking stake between novice and restricted. There aren't enough competitors, judges, and helpers to run extra stakes.

I think most restricted trials are a fair test of intermediate level dogs as they are. They could be fine tuned by removal of the relocation concept and making a blind mandatory (currently it is optional). As Kirsty suggests, there is also some scope for discussion about what is expected of restricted dogs in the judges guide.

I maintain that the place introduce multiple marks is in novice with the judges guide specifying lots of separation, good timing between birds, manageable distances and clearly visible birds all the way to the ground.

Cheers, Jason.

[Kate Eltringham]

Hi Jason,

My thought's are to have a Restricted "Derby" independent of trials, there's enough pressure on everyone on trialling days to steward and compete. Club's organise picnic tests, it would be more practical to have the "Derby" on days like that when experienced handlers would be readily available to assist the "new" restricted handlers, stewards wouldn't be a problem. Trial conditions could be replicated but the pressure removed from the handlers, nobody would "bomb" but everyone would get the opportunity to run over three legs, combining the elements of retrieving required for Restricted but have experienced handlers there as coaches, and the judge explaining where and how the dogs have been judged and the errors they have made.

The Flatcoat Club of Victoria have and are managing their Beginners Tests in a similar manner. We have a training day on a Saturday and on the Sunday we have a Beginners and Novice trial. Entries for the Beginners close at the completion of the training day on Saturday. We organise all our stewards and arrange for all Beginner handlers to have the option to have the gun steward fire for them. Two legs are judged and the past couple of years time has allowed the judge to have a third run (not marked) that the handlers can run their dog. This concept is working as we have managed to pick up new triallers every year.

Ciao

Kate

[Gareth Tawton]

Kate,

I would agree that numbers in Rest have fallen since we allowed 3 wins in Novice before you have to move on. I don't believe any state has the scope (man power, trial sites, enough competitors, birds etc) to add any other form of stake.

I think the best thing would be let people stay in Rest longer. This reduce AA fields a little bit but smaller AA fields does give the judge more time to test water work.

I think 3 wins in Rest for RRD and a further 5 to 7 before you must go to AA would work well across the country. What does everyone else think??

Certainly club training days would fill the idea of a derby stake and help everyone not just restricted triallers. Obviously that a local club issue not a rule review issue.

Gareth

[Kate Eltringham]

Hi Gareth,

Thanks for your comments, sometimes IMHO clubs try too hard to cater for all trialers which is why we are stretched so far with stewards etc. Restricted "Derbys" certainly could be run by clubs as part of training days etc.

As I have previously said I believe if individual states wish to have it in their regulations, codes. policies and procedures that trialers may continue to run in a stake for X amount of times before proceeding to the higher stake it should be encouraged but the rules should stay as they are. If we are still to have 3 wins for an RRD leave it as simple as that but allow the states to determine time frames for advancement.

Cheers

Kate

p.s. love the name of the new pup

[Gareth Tawton]

Kate,

I think we need a National approach to these issues. Having varying entry requirements for each state makes it very difficult to keep track of who can and can't run in various stakes. It also encourages greater diversity in standards for each stake in various states. In order to have our titles meaningful I think it is vitaly important we maintain some form of National standard.

Time and again all over the country we hear of people for a variety of reasons wishing to stay in Restricted a little longer. How long that should be is certainly a matter for debate. Personally I don't care but finshing a certain number of restricteds after 3wins or another couple of wins seem logical methods.

If you coupled the idea of completing 10 Restricteds to force advancement with completing 10 all ages for and All Age Retriever Dog title may be another way of keeping things some what standardised.

Having said that I am a bit neutral on the idea of an AARD title as I can see both its benefits and down sides.

I am open to suggestions but think not listening to those competitors prepared to voice an opinion is not in our sports best interest.

Gareth

[Prue Winkfield]

Gareth - as I have said before - I am dead against being allowed to win 10 restricted - it is hard enough to win three with dogs that have been placed in AA still competing! Only way I would suport it,as mentioned before, for people to run as non competing for a highest scoring award. Most people who are not die hard AA triallers tend to drop out in in Vic once they have their RRD and have bombed the first run or two in AA for several trials in a row - myself included. If you were up against an unlimited field who had their RRD and been placed in AA - it would hardly be worth trying!

As others have said, we are suposed to have a 'standard' to judge to for Restricted, Novice and I assume AA. The standard in everything does keep going up but in the sports mentioned, the people playing them harder and harder are usually professional. Are we getting to the stage where the only people capable of training their dogs up to winning AA are the professionals in everyway except receiving money? In all sports there are the 'amateur' groups where people who want a hobby play - should we be having a stake beyond our curent AA to cater for these 'professional' trainers? One in which only RtChs can compete? Otherwise I fear in another ten years, the sport will consist of a dozen or so people competing amongst themselves !

[Gareth Tawton]

Prue,

I agree. So why not include any placing in AA as another method of being excluded from Resticted. I also think those handlers who are super competitive would be striving to win in AA. They wouldn't hang around Rest for 10 wins or what ever the new measure is. As soon as they thought the dog would be ready for AA they would head straight there. I know I would!!! Those type of competitors are more interested in RT CH than regularly winning Restricted.

We need to find a way of satisfying everyone, from the competitor who isn't s so serious. Who enjoys there dog no matter how they perorm, to the super competitive semi professional as you would call it. They all make up the retrieving fraternity.

It seems we have a lot of competitors who aren't looking to compete at that elite level and with their first or second dog may never be super competitve at the top level. Hopefully they will, but if not we need to give them the opportunity to learn in a trialling competitive environment.

Gareth

[Graeme Parkinson]

Dear All

Isn't this a great forum having these ideas being floated and discussed prior to our RAFT meetings, I hope our RAFT members are observing.

Personnally I think a competitor should be able run in whatever stake he or she likes. Get rid of the need to qualify before you can run in restricted or all age. Once you have placed in a higher stake you can no longer compete in the lower stake. Run in and win as many Novice and Restricted as you like. The only stake you should have to qualify for should be championship and the requirement should be a placing in all age. The only stake you be thrown out of for winning is beginners.

Now I realise that is not going to get support, so Gareths suggestion of 10 restricted wins seems a good comprimise to me, still be a eligible for an RRD after three wins and once you have placed in an all age stake you can't go back. Lets vote for it.

Graeme P

[Peter Betteridge]

I believe both gareth and graeme are right on the money with their suggestions.Personally I like Graeme's idea to deregulate all stakes but I cannot see this idea getting up and accept that Gareth's compromise is a good one.Having dogs disqualify themselves by placing in a higher stake will self regulate the sport and allow everyone to find a level in which they can feel comfortable.I look forward to the day when both Gareth and graeme are VOTED onto the national RAFT