Caution: Very Sensitive Bench Show Topic and Other Coonhound News

Coonhound Advisor

March 15, 2017

Source: Allen Gingerich

As published in Coonhound Bloodlines February 2017.

Judge Refusing to Try to be at Tree Within Five Minutes
Q: Last weekend, we had a little issue that we, the handlers, did not know how to handle very well. It wasnt a huge deal, but more frustrating than anything because we were basically at the mercy of the judges decision. Questioning it and taking it back to the Master of Hounds wasnt worth the time and hassle. In any case, Im wondering if it might not do some good to use it as a topic in the Advisor as I dont remember ever seeing it covered.

Whenever a handler declared a dog treed, the judge would not allow anyone to move from that very spot. In other words, he would not allow the cast to head towards the treed dog(s) until the five minutes was up or unless all dogs were declared treed. Rule 11 (a) states that the handlers should be at the tree within five minutes, if possible. We tried to tell our judge that, but he wouldnt hear it or allow it. I can understand not heading in the direction of a treed dog if there is concern of the dog not treeing solid or something. At the end of the night, its a little frustrating to know how much hunt time was wasted waiting to head towards dogs treed until the five was up, not to mention being stuck with a judge that had no problem ignoring a written rule.

A: I think youre right, this is one we havent covered in the Advisor. At least I havent in the last 12 years. When the rule so clearly states that the cast should try to be at the tree within five minutes, it does in fact make it frustrating when a judge wont allow it, without an acceptable reason. From personal experience, I agree, its one that isnt worth arguing over if thats what it results in if it is brought up. Nonetheless, it is a rule and judges have no options but to try to be at the tree within five minutes. Im fully aware that sometimes they do have situations where they need to focus on the dog that is called treed when they are concerned that the dog is not treeing right, etc. Even then, you can usually ease that way and stop periodically if needed. You do that anyway in the case of allowing other handlers to listen for their dogs and things like that.

Im not sure that I have a good resolution or suggestions on how handlers should deal with such an issue other than question the judge on it or ask for a cast vote. In doing so, handlers need to be considerate of the judges responsibility to judge dogs and not get in the way of allowing that to happen. If a cast vote doesnt resolve the issue, then all youre left with is asking for a question to be placed on the scorecard. Even with a question on the card for the Master of Hounds, it wont resolve much in terms of your hunt. However, it would bring it to light and allow the official to address it with the judge. Then, if the judge still insists on ignoring it, we have a list alongside this very column that might get the point across.

Online Points Checks
Q: Ive seen where UKC announced that we can now go online to check championship points on our dogs. I tried that the other day, but I dont have an email address to receive the information. Is there any other way to get that information?

A: Yes, that is a very cool feature and a quick way to check your dogs championship points. In order to use the online feature, you would, in fact, need an email address for the information to be sent to. Theres no way around it. However, theres still the traditional process available of calling the UKC office and asking for a points check.

Here are some interesting notables as they relate to this new online feature. In the first hour alone, after UKC made the announcement, we had 186 online applications for points checks. Considering the average time of two minutes that it generally requires for a customer service representative to look up and give that information to the customer over the phone, that equates to a little over six human-hours. Thats huge!

The application is quite simple, even for tech challenged folks. There are six fields that need to be completed. 1) Owner name. 2) Dog Name. 3) Event type. This would be for Nite Hunt, Bench Show, Hunt Test. 4) The dogs UKC number. 5) Your email address. 6) Confirm your email address again.
The three most important items that require absolute accuracy are numbers 4, 5 and 6. Misspelled dog and owner names do not result in the process getting kicked back. Try it with your dogs information. If you get no response within ten minutes, its likely that your dogs number is not correct or the email address you provided is not accurate. Or it could also be that your email recognizes the results as junk mail so be sure to check your Junk, Spam or Clutter folders.

From the Archives
After writing this monthly column for well over a decade, I find myself digging through the archives for something that hasnt already been written. Considering every Rules Corner written since the early days by the late Dale Brandenburger to Steve Fielder, Todd Kellam and a couple others for a brief stint in later years, what topics have not been covered? Very few, if any. Its like my nephew told me when he was around seven or eight years old after he learned to transition between about three or four chords on the guitar. He said, Uncle; Im afraid that by the time I get old enough to record my songs, all the good songs will already be taken.

Rarely do those searches result in what I set out to do and end up with me getting buried with interest and forgetting what I was actually looking for to begin with. Im always amazed at how most of those topics and answers still apply today, even after years and years. The following article, although it might not qualify as a golden oldie, is one that caught my attention that is worthy of a re-run. Its one that has good merit to round out this months column. The penman even chose an appropriate title for it. Hopefully, the editor will allow the extra space this month.

Caution: Very Sensitive Bench Show Topic!
Give me a good old rule question that contains the order in which Dogs A, B, C and D struck and treed, the unique circumstance that came up, and your question regarding points, and Im right at home. Stir the pot with a question regarding whether or not a Bench Show Judge has the authority to move a dogs foot on the bench and I can feel myself start to lose it. I dislike bench show questions and it has nothing to do with the fact that I would rather hunt dogs than show dogs. The reason I do not prefer bench show questions is because the application of the rules is so subjective.

A Bench Show topic came up recently where, quite honestly, the opinions of fellow houndsmen (many of whom were licensed Judges) really frustrated me. The initial question was in regards to whether or not a Bench Show Judge has the authority to reposition a dog on the bench. It evolved into a discussion of showmanship versus conformation. Lets start by reviewing some of the comments made recently regarding Bench Show Judge authority and responsibility and conformation versus showmanship.

I saw where some thought it Okay for the Judge to position a dogs legs so that he/she could better see the dogs conformation, thus giving the Judge the ability to choose the BEST hound not the BEST handler. I disagree. It (showing hounds) is a team effort in the same respect as a handler/hound in a nite hunt. A Judge in a cast does not have the authority to say, Hey, your dog located the tree quicker, you just didnt say tree quick enough. Therefore, I am giving you first tree points, in hopes that the better dog won. How many cast have you been on, where the handler makes a mistake and the better hound loses? Same principle. It is the handlers job to make sure his hound is presented in the best possible manner, be it feet placement, holding its head up, or standing still and not moving. If the dog does not look the best it should not win.

I am a licensed Bench Show Judge. Practice, practice, practice and sometimes even that will not correct bad faults in dogs. I would like to see a requirement that if the dog is a Champion, the handler sets him/her up and then steps back one step with no hands on the dog. That would eliminate some of the Champions that are not Champion material.

Once conformation to breed standard is determined, showmanship takes over.

If both (two dogs in a class) have met standards equally, I would award to the dog that presents better on the bench. That would be my tie breaker. Why? Well, both dogs cannot win and that is an easy tie breaker.

A dog that has no attention span to stand still on the bench should not become a Champion!

The one thing that all of the above statements have in common, and the thing that bothers me the most, is that there are those who believe that factors other than the breed standards should be taken into consideration by Bench Show Judges. This is wrong. It is totally against the very basic reason for awarding conformation degrees in the first place.

At the same time, I am not nave and I do understand that the better you are able to present your dog, the better chance you will have to win. After all, if there is a dog that will not gait and will not stand on the bench, how is the Judge supposed to evaluate it? I understand that reasoning, but rarely is that the case. Ultimately, showmanship and a dogs ability to stand perfectly still as posed by the handler only helps if the Judge missed something during the course of judging a class that a good handler was able to cover up, a weakness that the handler is able to hide. Honest mistakes do happen, that doesnt bother me. Good handlers are skilled at presenting a certain dogs strong points and hiding its weak points. That doesnt bother me either. What bothers me is that we have Judges and handlers who believe that we should change the Judges responsibility from selecting the best dog to selecting the dog which looks the best as presented by the handler. It bothers me that there are a significant number of handlers and Judges who are suggesting that a Bench Show Judge should, in essence, simply look on from a distance as to the picture presented by each handler-and-hound team.

If there is enough interest in that sort of an event, lets discuss it and maybe we can put something together. Showmanship is a very popular class at the horse shows, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the conformation of the horse. Its judged on the exhibitors ability and the skill of the animal. Sound familiar? It might be kind of fun to see who has the best trained bench dog in the world. The one that could stand totally stacked without moving its head, and without handler assistance, for the longest time period. I can respect that amount of time and training put into a dog. But that is not what judging conformation is about.

In selecting the best dog in a class, the Judge has a very serious obligation to thoroughly examine each and every hound to determine to what degree that individual meets the breed standard, a standard set forth by the Chartered Breed Association and enforced by UKC. A Judge is obligated to do whatever is necessary to make an honest evaluation of a dog, including moving it around on the bench, taking it off the bench, moving it to another bench, asking that the dog be gaited again, asking that the dog be turned over to the Judge to check whatever it is that is concerning that Judge.

Dont view it as if a Judge is helping a handler to stack his dog; that the Judge is helping another handler present his dog but not helping you present yours. If a Judge moves a dog or sets one differently than it is being presented, they are only doing so to answer a question in their own mind. If you dont like the way the Judge repositioned your dog, move it back to the way you had him after the Judge moves on. Ive heard handlers complain that they got beat because the Judge incorrectly set their dog and Ive heard handlers complain that they got beat because the Judge helped someone else set a dog. When you are dealing with a capable and honest Judge, both excuses are just that. Rather than worrying about whether or not the Judge is helping another handler, you should worry about whether or not you have a better dog than that handler.

If two dogs are, in your opinion, tied after your initial evaluation, is it acceptable to reward the one that stands the best? I mean if you only use it as a tie breaker, can showmanship be taken into consideration? Absolutely not. Find something, even the smallest thing that in your mind separates the two dogs in question. Dont use showmanship just because it may be easier. Judging hounds isnt about being easy. Its about picking the best dog. Make them gait again. Look them over on the ground again. Do something that helps you place one dog over the other strictly on the degree to which it conforms to the breed standard.

Picking a dog that shows well has always been a crutch for Judges who lack the knowledge to properly evaluate a class of dogs. Insisting that a Judge doesnt have the authority to move dogs around on the bench is an excuse for not having a better dog than the competition. If I have come across as being harsh regarding this topic, its only because I have a hard time with the idea of awarding conformation titles and then not basing them strictly on conformation. We have to be concerned about whats best for the future of our hounds.

Lets leave on a good note with some of the positive statements that I have heard along these same lines.

Dogs are judged way too much on how good the handler stacked his or her dog. Dogs should be judged more on conformation than how good they are set up.

Showmanship is NEVER a tie breaker! No two dogs are ever exactly the same. One will always be better than the other under a good Judge that knows their stuff.

Lack of showmanship does not reproduce unsound genetics. Picking dogs just because they can show does.