schutzhund integrity - Page 1

the sport of schutzhund is severely compromised by the lack of integrity of the judges. Too much politics. Too many free points for the big name competitors. A system needs to be put in place to make judging national events fair and based on the merits of the performance.

I had a conversation a while back with a well known international competitor about this and the scoring in general. He suggested that it would be good for there to be two, maybe three judges, judging the same phase. Of course the scores should be similar, and the final score could be the average. I thought it sounded like a very good idea.

At various horse related national type shows, there are multiple judges, 3 or 5. Not doing different diciplines, but seperated from each other and still each judging the same dog at the same time. When you have a three or five judge panel it's very difficult to play favorites or give (or take) extra points. I always appreciated those shows, each competitor had a fair chance.

schjudge, what nationals are you referring to or is this just a general comment? Multiple judges are impractical in a low dollar sport such as schutzhund. There is much more money in horses.

"Low dollar" sport? I guess compared to horses, maybe so, but considering some working line pups are selling for $2500 and some show line pups are selling for $5000 I never considered our sport to be low rent. I haven't been in the sport that long, but even I can remember when it was possible to get a decent working pup from Germany for $500. Those days are looooong over. There is so much money wrapped up dogs these days, we're pricing ourselves out of range of the average Joe, especially at the level of national competitors and their dogs! Zahnburg makes a good point - 2 or 3 judges at National events is not a bad idea. I think it would be helpful to keep the scores on par.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea, just impractical.

I think the comment about the "low dollar sport" had more to do with the COST of putting on a trial, the COST of having the judges. Some trials barely break even if they are lucky, having more judges would be cost prohibitive. Having a different judge for each phase already gives some measure of protection, as each judge can only account for 1/3 of the total score. That's not to say a National level trial couldn't have a panel of judges, it is a good idea and would make things more fair. But at the trials I have attended, the judging DID seem fair. I have not been to trials in Germany, but it is from people who have come back from there that have the most to say about "politics" and dogs earning their titles around the beer keg instead of on the field. There will always be someone disappointed at a trial, IMHO. Overall I have found dog sports to have excellent integrity and I'm proud to be a part of the community. For instance, I have been a vendor at both cat and dog shows. If I needed to leave my booth for a call of nature, I didn't worry about my goods walking away. Can I imagine the same scenario anywhere else? No, I would want someone watching my goods at all times. Do I worry about leaving my van open at the dog show parking lot? No, so far nothing has EVER come up missing. Maybe I am being naive. But so far, so good.

I have to agree with spook. Compared to the high end, and even medium end, horse world, Sch is low end cost wise. I'm still thrilled when I write a check for dog equipment versus horse equipment. I still think a multi judgeing concept at larger regionals, nationals, and especially world events would improve the sport. Another concept I think may help people out is more information on where the title was earned. In the horse show world, there are "A system", "B system" and "Zone" shows. "A system" being the top, and so forth. Saying you won X number of classes, or achieved X number of points, in an "A system" had much more impact then in a "zone". People could easily undertand how advanced the horse, and handler, really is. Maybe soemthing like that for the dog world?

Animules, The zoning system could potentially be viewed as "Unfair" to those who are in more rural areas versus urban. of course volume has something to do with Zoneing (I presume) and therefore those who are in the sticks would be in say a "D" zone therefore not viewed for what the dog is which might be a SchH3 but in a D zone versus an A zone, would have some people wondering if the D Zone dog is as good. I personally would not like to see that type of questioning coming into play just because of where you do or do not live. Unless I've misinterpreted your post, in that case then disregard the above. However I would support a multi judge presidence. at small events or large events. SchH3 under 1,2 or 5 judges as example. with the average score as the posted score.

guess compared to horses, maybe so, but considering some working line pups are selling for $2500 and some show line pups are selling for $5000 I never considered our sport to be low rent.>> Yikes.$5k for showline pups is a thing of the past. A buyers market. Good import from top lines 800-1000 Euros.