Asking Pros to judge.

[captainjack]

In Ontario, we are fortunate or unfortunate (depending on your point of few) of having a 1/2 dozen experienced pros running our circuit. Has your club considered asking a pro to judge? Are we missing the opportunity of drawing on their experience and knowledge? Dave and Jane do judge, Chuck did minor stakes as has Sandie and Lorne is a qualified all-age judge. I do not believe that Dan or Kevin have judged and I believe Long Point is getting Ray to do a minor stake.
What is your opinion of increasing our judging pool in Ontario by getting pros more active in judging?

Peter.

[Greener Acres]

We have just received approval from the CKC for the change over of LRCCO.

The trial will be in Brighton May, 6, 7, and 8th.

We will have 2 Amateurs and 1 Open.

Chuck will be judging the Amateur on Friday with Jackie Pepper.

If you would like more info, just email me.

sgreener@ymail.com

Shirley

[TK'S]

One problem with using Pro's is you will lose that pro's entry's for your trial and if he has done work on the client's dog then they can't run under the pro as well. That happened to me when I sold Bella and Danny had her over at Mich. when I was Judging the Qual. He had to scratch her. Terry

[Jock River]

As Terry has said, the downside to asking pro's to judge, is losing there entries. However, if they have enough advance notice of when they are judging, they can make sure they have not trained or handled the dogs that there clients will want to run. I believe that is the rule, 30 days. If I am wrong please correct me.
I have judged with pro's and they offer a wealth of knowledge and believe it or not, I find they can be more forgiving or "Generous" with their evaluation of dogwork, hence more callbacks. This is a resource basically only available to us here in Ontario and we should make use of it.
The pro,s as well will learn from us as to the problems in doing call backs, time constraints, poor mechanics and some of the other things that drive them crazy when competing and drive us nuts when judging. In other words, they can walk in our shoes for a weekend or two.
To me, it is a win win situation.
Merry Christmas to everyone
Trevor

[Misty Marsh]

One problem with using Pro's is you will lose that pro's entry's for your trial and if he has done work on the client's dog then they can't run under the pro as well. That happened to me when I sold Bella and Danny had her over at Mich. when I was Judging the Qual. He had to scratch her. Terry This the biggest probem especialy in the areas outside Ontario that do not have strong entry numbers. Outside of that issue I think pro's are a great resource for judging assignments.

[Jojoe]

While I don't view it as an overwhelming problem in Canadian Field trials, most aged handlers that I have talked to have at least one story of a judge playing politics with their decisions. This may only be the individual's personal perception of the event(s) but it still gets discussed in our small community. Why then would a pro WANT to judge? Saying no to a committee's request may be viewed by some as a refusal by that pro to 'help'. So, saying no to the invite would be bad business. Saying yes to the invite and being subjected to the perceptions of those handlers that feel politics has/will/may play a role in their decisions, also bad for business. Lose/lose.

Considering the earning of AA points, the pressures associated with judging a Junior or Qualifying stake would be MUCH less than judging an AA stake. That is, the perception of impropriety is less likely to happen in a minor stake. So 'in my opinion' asking a pro to judge an AA stake is being unfair to the pro. These men and women must make their living in this game the rest of us play for fun. Putting them in a position to have to say no does not need to happen.

Many pros, given their experience, would bring to the table a wealth of knowledge but I see it as a potential great disadvantage to them.

I'm not a pro, I've never placed a dog with a pro, in fact I've never handled a dog in an AA stake so take this post with a grain of salt.

Cheers,
Ron

[Misty Marsh]

Unfortunatly agendas, politics, ego, friendships, past conflicts, all play a part in the game especially when it comes to judging, I've been there. :frusty: I understand that some pro's may not want to put themselves in a position that may reflect poorly on them, and thus thier livelihood, but it's sure a waste of a great resource. I for one think that you have nothing to worry about if you leave all the other crap out of it and just place the best dogs, and be able to stand behiend those placings. It's not a FT but I have judged HT's and not finished a dog, period. I'm sure it pissed people off BUT I could stand behiend the choice and defend our decisions. It only hurts the sport long term when the other stuff filters in.