Qualification trial - Page 16

I don't know how you can say the 2012 scores were more uniform or tracked very well when the scores for Mke Conley's dog was 18 or 19 points different between the judges and Chico's was 8 or 9 points different. When you start approaching double digit point differentials something is wrong. I was in Wisconsin and saw things that should not happen. As I stated before track layers knew whose track they were laying. I know because i was standing there when one of them said whose track he had as he was heading off to lay it. That dog scored 99pts. I'm not saying anything under handed went on but when you don't follow the rules you leave yourself open to speculation. Almost a 20pt difference in the judging is ridiculous. That was 2012.

Rick rote
snip

>I see no reason why everyone on the PDB just doesn't use their real name all the time like the WDF


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un6j3fXYNUc        

>nice catch
>nobody said that Marcus couldn't catch a fast dog just that he might have turned early with
>Ebor. Even in the video above he was on the edge of losing it IMO

    

As for Diehl and Meverden this argument is asinine. As mentioned before, there is no trophy or anything. So whether Mike is first or Chris is first they are both on the world team. That doesn't even make for a good argument.

>It makes a good argument when you look back to how this thread started with a " I hope the team is all  UScA and all the anti
>WDA rhetoric that the PDB is famous for. The fact is even with questionable scoring Chris still tied for 1st place in overall score.
>It will be interesting to see how all six team members do against the rest of the world

By the way I just  watched Mike's/Irmus video Wallace posted. At :46 when Irmus rounds the blind, I'm the guy in the bottom right of the screen in the gray t-shirt/cammo hat, Just to the right of the fellow in the red ball cap leaning on the fence about 6 feet behind the call out spot. Now where were you that you can make these statements on how the judging should have went?????

>both judges agreed that was a 98 point performance. Are you trying to tell me that with the -5 to -18 points less for all the WDA
>competitors from the UScA judge and < 1  point average difference from the WDA judge for all the UScA  competitors.  That the 
>judging was fair and impartial?


Thomas Barriano
 

Ejax .. Chicos score was 11 points in Ob and Protection and even if he got only West's scores he would have a 279 max and out of the money .. but correct scoring is important and I would prefer nuetral judges always.  From what I hear about Groh he is a fair guy and I see no pattern of dishonest scoring as I do in Caputo's protection score which are always worse for the WDA and by a lot in most cases.  Groh did not continuously favor the WDA or the USCA but was more random while Caputo was blatant in protection favoring the USCA entirely.  Conley's scores in 2012 were inexplicable and he got knocked out by Groh's low scores but look at Krista Wade and McKnight .. Caputo knocked them out and ruined any chance of them winning a tiebreaker by low balling protection which is the tie breaker leg used. Also pretty demoralizing to know after the first day you have almost no chance and it wasn't your performance but judge's bias.

Bubbabooboo have you watched any of the video Wallace posted.  Some of the scores look like they came from a club trial, not a world team qualifier.  

Show me where Jacob lost 23 points. 

Keith

Paul,

I'm not a judge and I can't tell the difference between a 92 and a 96 performance or how intense a silent guard has to be.
I do know when one judge scores EVERY member of the home team (host GSDCA/WDA) an average of 11 points lower then the second judge and the second judge is within ONE point of the scores on the visiting (UScA) team. There is obvious bias :-(

Thomas Barriano

Just for shits and giggles, How many who are arm chair quarter backing here have competed at this level, spent the time and went thru the judges clinics and have judged this level or have attained this level of competition as to have a good perspective of the work being done here? It,s hard to keep this clown tent straight with all the cutie pie names. I sure haven't. 

BooBoo?
Doobie?
Anyone else ?

There are a couple here who have and i,ll take there word for it instead of a couple of never was,s !

The question is the qualifier trial and judges bias and/or cheating.  What any of the performances (and that is what they are a fake re-enactment of violence in the case of protection) looked like is irrelevant but what is relevant is the scoring based on the IPO standard.  The justification of cheating and allowing cheating by the USCA is that the USCA is above all other GSD owners, the SV, AKC, GSDCA, GSDCA-WDA, and WUSV.  Since even with heavy use of cheating by Caputo the USCA failed in their stated goal of "sweeping" the qualifier that supremecy is shown to be nothing more than self love by folks like you McKown.  The USCA needs to cheat just to be relevant and looking at the 2012 qualifier when Craig Groh was the USCA judge shows just how bad Caputo cheated the WDA members in 2013.  There were plenty of performances that should have been better but the majority were from USCA participants.  Without Caputo's fake protection scoring the 2013 USA WUSV team would have been 3 WDA and two USCA with the alternate from the USCA.  Since the WDA only sent 7 to the USCA's 10 it seems the USCA was the loser and not the winner.  Cheating is a way of life for the USCA but thankfully it is usually just between people like you McKown and the rest of your USCA cheating buddies.

BooBoo, you just proved my point! Do you own dogs? work dogs? pet dogs? compete with dogs ?. Have you ever walked a dog on a leash?