This Article is Reprinted with permission of RETRIEVER FIELD TRIAL NEWS
From the April 1996 issue of RETRIEVER FIELD TRIAL NEWS
THE JUDGES CORNER
Edited by Bob Wolfe
SUBJECT: Judges & Judging
One of the most common topics of conversation at a field trial relates to the judges & the judging. Judges
are fair game for the expressed opinion of just about everyone. Unfortunately, most of these expressed
opinions are severely critical & uncomplimentary. This negative attitude toward many judges applies to
the judges knowledge of, & conformity with the "book"; qualifying experience with dogs & trials; personal
concepts & habits; and even fairness & integrity. It's been said that " as the years pass, the dogs & their
training get better & the judges & their judging get worse".
One day our amateur training group had just completed its last training exercise. It was time for a beer &
some dog talk. We happened to be discussing a friend of mine who is very active in the game. I made the
statement that I considered him to be a very fine Judge, in fact one of the best. One of the training
partners said, "Why?, What is there about him, or his conduct, or his practices, or his qualifications that
makes him, in your opinion, a good judge?" I didn't try to respond at the time, but the more I thought about
it the more I felt that here is a matter that deserves some attention. I contacted a person who is not only a
highly respected judge, but has many years of experience in all phases of field trial activity. I asked her to
respond to the question. Her answer follows:
One of the favorite activities of field trialers is criticizing judges &/or their tests. Sometimes this is
deserved & sometimes it isn't, but the question often asked is how do you get good judges? If you
personally pick judges for a field trial or are on a judges selection committee for a trial what qualities
do you look for?
1) Someone who studies & understands the rule book. Someone who doesn't have a particular axe to
grind on a certain phase regardless of what the rule book says.
2) Someone who attempts to make the test fair for all the dogs, i.e. the running dog & the rest of the
contestants.
3) Someone who is congenial & works well with his co-judge & the workers putting on the trial.
Definitely not someone on an ego trip.
4) Someone who is very cognizant of dangers to the dogs. Ditches, running toward roads, etc.
5) A good judge has a knack for setting up tests that are both demanding & fair. They are lenient on
call backs whenever possible.
6) An honest person who is impartial.
7) A person who will continue testing until he has adequately separated the dogs. My least favorite
type of trial is one with several finalists, all of whom think they have won.
8) With a few notable exceptions, the best judges are people who train their own dogs. Sometimes
people who work only with pros have a tendency to set up "training tests" rather than using terrain
to separate dogs.
9) A good judge keeps things moving. Even if you have a small entry it is a good idea not to waste
time. You can never tell when the weather or some other factor (such as having to scrap a test)
might make you wish you had taken better advantage of your time.
As you know, our usual JUDGES CORNER format is to respond to questions with the opinion of one
person. For this subject, we are extending an invitation to all of you readers to get involved by sending in
your comments & recommendations that apply to our Judges & judging. Some subjects that you may
have thoughts on follow:
1. Character, integrity, favoritism
2. Qualifications -- Experience with dogs & trials
3. Knowledge of, & conformity to, the Standard Procedure
4. Relations with co-judge, workers & contestants
5. Personal conduct or habits (good or bad)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
COMMENTS
The above article speaks for itself. There is something that everyone can relate to their experiences
handling dogs. It condenses what is the usual conversation topic in handlers spare time at a field trial.
ftretrieverjudge.net speaks only to (item 2), the known qualifications of individuals with dogs & trials. All
other items that you consider important will have to be dealt with from your inputs. When you have had a
bad experience caused by what you felt was a poor judging decision think of a way to deal with that
decision in a manner that will benefit all future participants, including yourself. Conversely, don't hold back
when you see a good judging decision happen at a trial. The trial where no one notices the judges usually
has a lot of good judging decisions made, both on setup day & during the trial. The idea of not running
under a poor judge is sometimes not an option as your dog is at a point in their competitive life that they
need to be exhibited, dogs do not have an unlimited shelf life. Poor judges should be removed from
judging until they exhibit better tendencies, which means an educational process needs to happen or they
should not judge again. Throughout this website I have advanced ideas that deserve discussion, the
numbers support that position. When you come home from a trial where you had a good &/or bad
experience look at the APPROVED page on this site. It will be changed Tuesday late or Wednesday AM
when I am not on the road. Generally you will find the individuals making bad decisions do so because
they have limited experience & those making good decisions are generally more experienced -
sometimes both with dogs & their chosen vocation. My experience with co-judges who were difficult was
those individuals lacked successful dog experience &/or general life experience.
.
END of Comments
The STATUS of a JUDGE of LICENSED FIELD TRIALS
by the American Kennel Club
Printed in Retriever Field Trial News
February-March, 1967
The judges on the day of a licensed trial do not merely represent themselves as individuals. They
represent the entire sport of field trialing, & particularly The American Kennel Club.
They & they alone decide what shall be entered in the permanent records of the American Kennel Club.
And the entries which are made there form the basis for the breeding plans of other field trialers in the
years ahead. Thus, it might be said that a judge, by his decisions, influences breeding trends & the
course of the breed's development in future years.
Seen in that way, it is realized that no judge who has the future of his breed at heart can afford to give a
moment's thought to personalities -- to the effect of his decisions on some particular owner or handler; &
he cannot afford to close his eyes to faults which may be passed on to future generations of dogs.
If one keeps in mind his high duty to the sport & to his breed, he will have little difficulty developing a state
of mind which is the prime qualification of any judge -- that is, he must be absolutely impartial.
It is easy for one to assume such an approach to the responsibility of judging if he is equipped with two
other qualities. It should go without saying that the judge must be of high personal character & integrity.
Without that, he is not even desirable material.
But integrity & a proper approach to his responsibility still are not enough. The judge must be well
grounded in knowledge. He must know so much through personal experience with dogs in the field, &
through familiarity with the rules & procedures, that he feels confident at all times. A judge who lacks
confidence because of a lack of knowledge & experience will be baffled & hesitant when close decisions
are called for. He can never bluff his way through to acceptance by the field trial public as a first rate
judge. They are too discerning.
It is only the judge who is not well equipped & in possession of these qualities who finds himself
attempting the impossible task of pleasing everybody. This is the fellow who feels called upon to do a
favor or give in to a plea for special treatment, perhaps without even realizing that his first consideration
must be given to all the other owners & handlers who comply with the requirements, ask no favors, &
accept the decisions of the judges without question.
The competent judge will never be to proud to refer to the book for the exact wording of some rule or
procedure, but only the man who is well acquainted with its contents will know what he is looking for.
The men who are not equipped as they should be for this important work are usually the ones who
encounter difficulties with disappointed owners or handlers. It is true that occasionally a judge of top
qualifications will be bullied or abused by one who has had some success in these methods with less
qualified judges. They never attempt such treatment a second time because they discover they have met
a man who is in command of his responsibility.
When incidents of this sort occur, or when anything happens at a trial which comes within the notice of the
judges & which would make a bad impression on a newcomer to the sport who saw it, the judge should
immediately report the incident to the Field Trial Committee so that they can deal with it on the spot. The
dignified judge will not attempt to treat the incident as a personal matter. What's more, he has no authority
to accept an apology from one who has attacked the dignity of his position -- because such an attack is
damaging not only to the judge, but to the interests of everyone else connected with the sport. It has to be
dealt with by the Field Trial Committee whose duty it is to protect the sport.
There are some judges who do not measure up to all the necessary qualifications, & it is the duty of every
club to see that such men are not selected to judge any licensed trial. Those who have the basic qualities
but need more experience should be allowed to gain it by judging sanctioned trials.
In rare cases, a judge himself may actually violate the rules or procedures or otherwise conduct himself in
a manner prejudicial to the best interests of the sport. When this happens, it is the duty of any field trialer
to report the occurrence to the Field Trial Committee, & the Committee is required to investigate the
matter & either deal with it in accordance with the rules or to report in detail to The American Kennel Club.
The future of the sport is going to depend on the extent to which its judges really know good work in the
field; know the rules & procedures, & judge strictly in accord with them; demonstrate complete impartiality
in their decisions; & act in a manner fitting the dignity of their position.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From the April 1996 issue of RETRIEVER FIELD TRIAL NEWS
THE JUDGES CORNER
Edited by Bob Wolfe
SUBJECT: Judges & Judging
One of the most common topics of conversation at a field trial relates to the judges & the judging. Judges
are fair game for the expressed opinion of just about everyone. Unfortunately, most of these expressed
opinions are severely critical & uncomplimentary. This negative attitude toward many judges applies to
the judges knowledge of, & conformity with the "book"; qualifying experience with dogs & trials; personal
concepts & habits; and even fairness & integrity. It's been said that " as the years pass, the dogs & their
training get better & the judges & their judging get worse".
One day our amateur training group had just completed its last training exercise. It was time for a beer &
some dog talk. We happened to be discussing a friend of mine who is very active in the game. I made the
statement that I considered him to be a very fine Judge, in fact one of the best. One of the training
partners said, "Why?, What is there about him, or his conduct, or his practices, or his qualifications that
makes him, in your opinion, a good judge?" I didn't try to respond at the time, but the more I thought about
it the more I felt that here is a matter that deserves some attention. I contacted a person who is not only a
highly respected judge, but has many years of experience in all phases of field trial activity. I asked her to
respond to the question. Her answer follows:
One of the favorite activities of field trialers is criticizing judges &/or their tests. Sometimes this is
deserved & sometimes it isn't, but the question often asked is how do you get good judges? If you
personally pick judges for a field trial or are on a judges selection committee for a trial what qualities
do you look for?
1) Someone who studies & understands the rule book. Someone who doesn't have a particular axe to
grind on a certain phase regardless of what the rule book says.
2) Someone who attempts to make the test fair for all the dogs, i.e. the running dog & the rest of the
contestants.
3) Someone who is congenial & works well with his co-judge & the workers putting on the trial.
Definitely not someone on an ego trip.
4) Someone who is very cognizant of dangers to the dogs. Ditches, running toward roads, etc.
5) A good judge has a knack for setting up tests that are both demanding & fair. They are lenient on
call backs whenever possible.
6) An honest person who is impartial.
7) A person who will continue testing until he has adequately separated the dogs. My least favorite
type of trial is one with several finalists, all of whom think they have won.
8) With a few notable exceptions, the best judges are people who train their own dogs. Sometimes
people who work only with pros have a tendency to set up "training tests" rather than using terrain
to separate dogs.
9) A good judge keeps things moving. Even if you have a small entry it is a good idea not to waste
time. You can never tell when the weather or some other factor (such as having to scrap a test)
might make you wish you had taken better advantage of your time.
As you know, our usual JUDGES CORNER format is to respond to questions with the opinion of one
person. For this subject, we are extending an invitation to all of you readers to get involved by sending in
your comments & recommendations that apply to our Judges & judging. Some subjects that you may
have thoughts on follow:
1. Character, integrity, favoritism
2. Qualifications -- Experience with dogs & trials
3. Knowledge of, & conformity to, the Standard Procedure
4. Relations with co-judge, workers & contestants
5. Personal conduct or habits (good or bad)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
COMMENTS
The above article speaks for itself. There is something that everyone can relate to their experiences
handling dogs. It condenses what is the usual conversation topic in handlers spare time at a field trial.
ftretrieverjudge.net speaks only to (item 2), the known qualifications of individuals with dogs & trials. All
other items that you consider important will have to be dealt with from your inputs. When you have had a
bad experience caused by what you felt was a poor judging decision think of a way to deal with that
decision in a manner that will benefit all future participants, including yourself. Conversely, don't hold back
when you see a good judging decision happen at a trial. The trial where no one notices the judges usually
has a lot of good judging decisions made, both on setup day & during the trial. The idea of not running
under a poor judge is sometimes not an option as your dog is at a point in their competitive life that they
need to be exhibited, dogs do not have an unlimited shelf life. Poor judges should be removed from
judging until they exhibit better tendencies, which means an educational process needs to happen or they
should not judge again. Throughout this website I have advanced ideas that deserve discussion, the
numbers support that position. When you come home from a trial where you had a good &/or bad
experience look at the APPROVED page on this site. It will be changed Tuesday late or Wednesday AM
when I am not on the road. Generally you will find the individuals making bad decisions do so because
they have limited experience & those making good decisions are generally more experienced -
sometimes both with dogs & their chosen vocation. My experience with co-judges who were difficult was
those individuals lacked successful dog experience &/or general life experience.
.
END of Comments
The STATUS of a JUDGE of LICENSED FIELD TRIALS
by the American Kennel Club
Printed in Retriever Field Trial News
February-March, 1967
The judges on the day of a licensed trial do not merely represent themselves as individuals. They
represent the entire sport of field trialing, & particularly The American Kennel Club.
They & they alone decide what shall be entered in the permanent records of the American Kennel Club.
And the entries which are made there form the basis for the breeding plans of other field trialers in the
years ahead. Thus, it might be said that a judge, by his decisions, influences breeding trends & the
course of the breed's development in future years.
Seen in that way, it is realized that no judge who has the future of his breed at heart can afford to give a
moment's thought to personalities -- to the effect of his decisions on some particular owner or handler; &
he cannot afford to close his eyes to faults which may be passed on to future generations of dogs.
If one keeps in mind his high duty to the sport & to his breed, he will have little difficulty developing a state
of mind which is the prime qualification of any judge -- that is, he must be absolutely impartial.
It is easy for one to assume such an approach to the responsibility of judging if he is equipped with two
other qualities. It should go without saying that the judge must be of high personal character & integrity.
Without that, he is not even desirable material.
But integrity & a proper approach to his responsibility still are not enough. The judge must be well
grounded in knowledge. He must know so much through personal experience with dogs in the field, &
through familiarity with the rules & procedures, that he feels confident at all times. A judge who lacks
confidence because of a lack of knowledge & experience will be baffled & hesitant when close decisions
are called for. He can never bluff his way through to acceptance by the field trial public as a first rate
judge. They are too discerning.
It is only the judge who is not well equipped & in possession of these qualities who finds himself
attempting the impossible task of pleasing everybody. This is the fellow who feels called upon to do a
favor or give in to a plea for special treatment, perhaps without even realizing that his first consideration
must be given to all the other owners & handlers who comply with the requirements, ask no favors, &
accept the decisions of the judges without question.
The competent judge will never be to proud to refer to the book for the exact wording of some rule or
procedure, but only the man who is well acquainted with its contents will know what he is looking for.
The men who are not equipped as they should be for this important work are usually the ones who
encounter difficulties with disappointed owners or handlers. It is true that occasionally a judge of top
qualifications will be bullied or abused by one who has had some success in these methods with less
qualified judges. They never attempt such treatment a second time because they discover they have met
a man who is in command of his responsibility.
When incidents of this sort occur, or when anything happens at a trial which comes within the notice of the
judges & which would make a bad impression on a newcomer to the sport who saw it, the judge should
immediately report the incident to the Field Trial Committee so that they can deal with it on the spot. The
dignified judge will not attempt to treat the incident as a personal matter. What's more, he has no authority
to accept an apology from one who has attacked the dignity of his position -- because such an attack is
damaging not only to the judge, but to the interests of everyone else connected with the sport. It has to be
dealt with by the Field Trial Committee whose duty it is to protect the sport.
There are some judges who do not measure up to all the necessary qualifications, & it is the duty of every
club to see that such men are not selected to judge any licensed trial. Those who have the basic qualities
but need more experience should be allowed to gain it by judging sanctioned trials.
In rare cases, a judge himself may actually violate the rules or procedures or otherwise conduct himself in
a manner prejudicial to the best interests of the sport. When this happens, it is the duty of any field trialer
to report the occurrence to the Field Trial Committee, & the Committee is required to investigate the
matter & either deal with it in accordance with the rules or to report in detail to The American Kennel Club.
The future of the sport is going to depend on the extent to which its judges really know good work in the
field; know the rules & procedures, & judge strictly in accord with them; demonstrate complete impartiality
in their decisions; & act in a manner fitting the dignity of their position.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 |
 |