 |
|
|
|
|
Callbacks - from the February - March 2005 Judges Corner article... by Tim Gibson One of the bedrock principles of HRC
is all participants can run all hunt tests regardless of whether or not their
dog failed an earlier test (the Grand hunt of course being the exception).
Some of the reps reported on hunts where clubs and/or judges were for
various reasons coming up with creative work a-rounds to our rulebook’s
established callback procedures. In some cases they were flat out violating them
by generating “preferred” running order lists between tests that were on
schedule and where getting through the dogs was not in question.
I’m going to apologize in advance for some of the blunt language I find
myself unable to avoid using in the discussion that follows as I give you my
thoughts on this subject and the consensus opinion of the reps on the call. To be perfectly fair, our rulebook
does not define the word callback, ergo some of the confusion.
Some think it’s a list of only those dogs selected to run again.
They believe a running order with dogs who can still get a pass running
before the others (who they will still allow to run) is not a callback list.
There’s an old saying that must have come from a hunt test game steward
somewhere that goes; “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks
like a duck…” well, you know the rest.
Always one to be as helpful as possible, I’m going to give you a solid
definition of a callback vis-à-vis our HRC hunt test program, and tell you how
to recognize a callback list when you see one.
But first, I think it apropos to look at this issue from the perspective
of a handler, judge, and a club. Handlers enter our hunt tests with the
expectation that they can run both series, regardless of their dog’s
performance. For the purposes of
this discussion, let’s set aside disqualification issues such as gun safety or
dog fighting for the moment. Many
of us understand that it can be very detrimental to a training and testing
regime to let a dog continue to run after a failing performance, especially
where control issues were involved. What
we need to remember is this decision is the handlers to make!
Some handlers will choose not to run any dog they know has failed in an
earlier test regardless of the reason, and this too is their choice to make. Judges can find themselves in the
awkward position of not getting their dogs run, or not knowing if they’ll get
them all run before dark. Sometimes
it’s their fault, and sometimes it’s not.
Upon being asked to judge, experienced judges ask a club questions such
as; 1) How many dogs are you wanting to take per flight? 2) Do you have enough
wingers and equipment so it’s not necessary to move this stuff between tests?
3) Do you have experienced throwers? and 4) Do you have swimming or running
water available? If a judge does
not get the correct answers to these questions, it might be wise to decline the
judging invitation. HRC neither
desires nor expects judges to modify or water down tests in order to get through
the dogs without a callback! By the
same token, judges should be expected to get their tests started on time and
keep them running unless circumstances beyond their control cause otherwise.
The callback work a-rounds I mentioned earlier should not be used as a
crutch for tests that are running behind schedule. Clubs can lower the number of entries
per flight below the maximum given in our rulebook on page 6.
They must provide the judge the help, grounds, and equipment to handle
the entries taken. Our rulebook does not define a callback, but HRC has a document that does and I’m going to tell you where to find it and what it says. When clubs are first chartered they receive a packet of information about conducting their preliminary hunt test. This overview of our testing procedures contains the following sentence about the use of callbacks: “The practice of using callbacks (defined as running dogs in contention ahead of dogs not in contention) is not allowed. It’s clear to me that any list generated by a judge, marshal, or other hunt official that orders the dogs according to performance, i.e. those that are in contention versus those who are not, no matter what you call it is a callback list. I realize marshals must organize the flight for maximum efficiency but the running order should be based on criteria such as multiple dog handlers, honor situations, perhaps travel considerations, etc., and not on performance. HRC understands that some delays and problems at hunt tests are inevitable. Item 34 on page 52 of our rulebook, Guidelines for Judges and Conducting Tests provides information and a formal procedure for dealing with these unavoidable situations by telling us when and how callbacks can be implemented. To implement some form of a callback in the absence of weather or other circumstances beyond the control of the judges or club is not in keeping with HRC’s philosophy and rules. |
|
The Judges Corner - copyright
2006 All Rights Reserved Last modified: February 18, 2008 |