Posted By FJR on 02 Jun 2010 10:25 PM
Doc Fried
Have you read anything I wrote....I don't think so...but if you have, you don't understand..

I am speaking for several guys here...
Our situation is..
1. WE are 500 miles from a test. If we travel every year to the said test, (500 miles away)and pass every test(if)(and (IF THE TEST IS NOT CANCELLED) we are looking at 4 years to get to 4xGM. Thats FOUR 4 YEARS. We would rather train at home four two year, and fail a master test out of the box, than we would travel 500 miles AND PASS a CPR test. For the love of god. you have one of the top trainers in the APLA who is questioning the CPR.
2. If a guy is willing to pay and has a dog he thinks is capable of passing the MPR, WHY not let him try, instead or requiring the CPR?

After all the BS from this thread, I doubt either of us would go to (ANOTHER TEST ) (YES WE HAVE SAW THE TEST) regardless. Truth will always be truth, regardless of lack of understanding, disbelief or ignorance. ...



it sounds to me like you have said that you would be willing to pass the MPR 2 times to get the MPR title if you didn't have to pass the CPR test.  That is two MPR passes for an MPR title.  

Travel will always be required to get a title in a small organization......

The rules are as they are if the board changes them in the future so be it, would you rather they made it so that you had to pass 2 to get an MPR and four for a G etc?????  

Host a test and you won't have to travel, AND you would have two within 500 miles.....

Other venues that DO not require the entry level passes, require more passes at the higher level to ge tthe higher title.  As I have said your origainl question as to WHY IS CPR REQUIRED is a valid, but to not require it, there should be some other changes so that a dog has to demonstrate point more then one time/day.   In you responses you have implied that you would rather run more higher level tests for the same title, you have implied that APLA judges can be bought, and in doing so offended a lot of people that volunteer a lot of work.  Therefore distracting from the ORIGINAL VALD QUESTION....

Posted By Doc_E on 03 Jun 2010 07:06 AM

Posted By TC on 01 Jun 2010 09:32 AM

1. As to video needed to verify anything?  That's an insult and a direct shot at this organization and its judges and volunteers. 

2. Doc, you don't really want to bring up the WA test again, do you?  Especially in this context?

1. Do you think that the "Instant Replays" in professional sports is an insult to the referees ?

2. Just sayin'



the PAID officials do, they only accepted it as part of the bargaining process.  The volunteer judges would likely feel rather offended if (anotehr volunteer judge) watched a video that can't show everything and overturned there judgement.  Goodluck gettin gthat pair to judge again.......

HUGE DIFFERENCE in a video replay of ONE SPLIT SECOND with SEVERAL CAMARA ANGLES OF A SPORT THAT NO ONE CAN BE IN PERFECT POSITION ALL THE TIME, vs a video replay of a whole days events in which the judges have hopefully picked the best place to see everything and there is no way to have camara angles to see everything, much less better then the judges see it.  What are we going to have six extra volunteers with each stake to man the camaras from each station and the blind pole and the handlers view point, maybe a doggie cam to see what the dog saw.....

Doc you are off base here pretty bad IMO



.

DocE, I know you've run NAHRA, AKC, and HRC and you judge NAHRA. None of those organizations use replay for the same reasons that the APLA doesn't use replay.  You can't be serious when comparing it to professional sports where you have million dollar payrolls, national broadcasts, 20 different camera angles, high-def, and super slow motion.

I'm all for people shooting video at tests.  It's been done in the past, and I've seen some pretty cool video from tests.  I go to about 3 or 4 APLA tests every year, and while not everyone agrees with every decision made, I've yet to see a pass/fail decision that wasn't a fair assessment.  I've certainly never seen anything that would be overturned by somebody watching a video.  When I've heard complaints in the gallery, it's usually a case of the person in the gallery not understanding the rule book.  If a dog is incredibly borderline on passing or failing so that replay would make a difference, then I'd argue that the dog probably needs a little more training.

Adding replay review would be a logistical nightmare for the following reasons:

Ribbons: Do you have to mail out all ribbons after a "replay committee" has reviewed every test?  Or maybe you hand out ribbons, but then ask somebody to mail a ribbon back to the APLA after the "replay committee" has decided a dog didn't deserve a ribbon?

What happens if the dog is dropped after the first series... say it's the land series.  Now the dog doesn't run the water series or upland.  If after replay, it's decided that the dog should have carried the first series, how do you determine the dog's score for water and upland?

Who does the filming?  Does the APLA supply the cameras and people to run them?  Do we need multiple angles?  We're already strapped for volunteers at most tests, and it's sometimes hard to get equipment to tests.  This certainly wouldn't help the situation.

Who reviews the tests?  I've seen several Master tests that lasted 10+ hours each day (sometimes multiple flights taking 12 hours each).  For somebody to review every series of even one weekend event could take weeks.  Yuk.

Two judges near the dog or at the line can see a lot more than what anybody can see on video.  LOTS of weird things can happen (especially in the upland) that can't be seen from the gallery.  Judges who are watching up-close can think on their feet and make much better decisions than somebody watching on video. 

The reason given for replay had something to do with "when we have judges in every state".  The place where a judge lives shouldn't affect anything.  We already have judges from many different states.  Our judges are already required to apprentice and attend judges' seminars.  After judging with and running under many different judges, I've never disagreed with my co-judge at the end of the day about whether a dog passes or not, and I've never disagreed with any judge's assessment of my dog (in either APLA or NAHRA).

We have a wonderful group of judges who give up a lot of their time and do an incredible job.  The recent South Dakota test was a great example of excellent judging.  I saw top-notch test setups both days, and the judges did a great job of thinking on their feet and making adjustments as needed.

Some very successful Master-level APLA trainers have responded to this thread, all strongly in support of the CPR requirement, and all knowing how difficult it is to pass a dog at MPR.  Still don't know who FJR is referring to as "one of the top trainers in the APLA who is questioning the CPR"?

NOWHERE did I say that Tests should be video'd.
My comment was in response to the post that said that videoing a test would be a "slap in the face" (or something similar) to the judges etc.
I was merely pointing out that "instant replay" is NOT considered a slap in the face of professional officials.



.

Posted By Liv2Hnt on 03 Jun 2010 08:58 AM
Doc, 
......................................... then make your case that you didnt think the certified pass added anything to the organization or the testing.

Did I really say that it didn't ? If so, please direct me to the quote.

I said that ONE or TWO passes to get a "big dog" title was snickered at by most of the rest of the dog world.

Do you know how organizations like HRC & NAHRA use a "number of passes & points system" to grant titles ? Something like that would make APLA titles much more respected by the rest of the dog world........... Or do we only need respect from "our own" ?

Does one "little dog" pass and one "big dog" pass make a dog a Master ?
Not in any book that I've read except the APLA book.

If Casey had passed one Started Level Retriever Test and one Master Level Retriever Test, would he be referred to as having a Master level title in any other organization ?


.

The person who brought up replay said that replay was somehow needed to "verify" results:  "you never know what a person/breeder might do to get a judge to let some things slide.  Every thing in this country boils down to politics sooner or later".  That quote is why I'm saying it would be a direct "slap in the face" to our judges and organization, and I stand by my reasoning.

I'm a big fan of the 4XGMPR was for 2 reasons:  1)  It's possible for a dog to demonstrate it can consistently and repeatedly pass at the Master level.  2)  Master level dogs have the opportunity to travel the country running in more tests, enabling more spectators to see some of the "big dogs" that would have otherwise finished their Master career in a single weekend.  I'm thankful for the opportunity I've had to see some pretty special dogs run AFTER they've attained their GMPR title.  I also continue to have a blast running my dog who would otherwise be retired from the APLA.

A 4XGMPR is directly comparable to a AKC MH or top-level title in another organization. In fact, I think it's even more difficult, with very low pass rates and only about 10 test opportunities per year across the country.  I've driven 10+ hours several times to run APLA tests, but I've never driven more than 4 hours for a NAHRA test.  AKC is easier yet - I have a test within a 2 hour drive almost every weekend.  Requiring multiple passes for all titles would be great, but just not possible at this time with our limited testing opportunities. 

SOME in the "rest of the dog world" snicker at a standalone APLA title.  If we required multiple passes for a title, they'd still find some reason do discredit PL's.  That's why I'm a huge proponent of running APLA dogs in multiple venues.  I've never heard anyone snicker at a dog with a GMHR, HRCH, MH (or even FC/AFC/CFC/CAFC/MHR in one case) in addition to the GMPR title.

Bruce, I think you're on to something:  "the other site is no more"

Posted By TC on 04 Jun 2010 09:41 AM
Bruce, I think you're on to something:  "the other site is no more"

The person who brought up replay said that replay was somehow needed to "verify" results: "you never know what a person/breeder might do to get a judge to let some things slide. Every thing in this country boils down to politics sooner or later". That quote is why I'm saying it would be a direct "slap in the face" to our judges and organization, and I stand by my reasoning.

Posted By tigerliberty on 03 Jun 2010 10:52 AM
Ii also would like to add all the retriever titles in the world do nothing to help you get thru APLA upland and that series tends to be the humiliator. Don't underestimate the cpr title run and all it can do for you.