Clarification: Proposals to revise qualifying standards for MN

Answers from Tammy Adsitt, Western New York RC, author of the proposal to Revise Qualifying Standards for the Master National Event.

Two questions have been cropping up in conversations about the proposal and Tammy answers them here.

1.     If passing the MN event equals 2 passes then does failing count as 2 failures?

Our intention with this proposal is clear….qualifying dogs to enter the MN that are consistent.

That being said, if a dog qualified to run the previous year’s event, then it was running consistent – meeting the qualification requirements – and subsequently running the MN.  If the dog fails at that MN, for whatever reason, that does NOT count as a fail for the next year’s event.

It’s a “perk” to pass the MN and get credited for 2 passes….there is no penalty for having failed a MN – that dog needs 6 out of 8 passes – so it has to prove it’s consistency again.

2.     Does the “medical reasons…may only be used ONCE” pertain to bitches in season?  Some bitches may cone in season twice during the qualifying year.

As for the bitches coming into season twice in a qualifying year, at the(weekend)event, after the (weekend)event has started, is one of those “what if’s” that the chances of it happening are slim to none.

This entry was posted in MNRC Board News & Updates, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Clarification: Proposals to revise qualifying standards for MN

  1. Chris Nagy says:

    Has the requirement for 6 passes out of 8 attempts been implemented for this year? Had not heard and thought that this was only a proposal and had not been voted.

  2. Mia DiBenedetto says:

    You are correct Chris. This is just a proposal that clubs will vote on. This post just clarifies from the author a few points.

  3. Susan Hartsoe says:

    I’m also interested to know whether the 6 out of 8 “passes” proposal has been implemented and if it will affect eligibility for the 2015 MN. I realize that the MNRC and its member clubs must address the pressures of holding an annual MN event, but I believe that “6 out of 8” is a bit stringent, given that the qualifying period spans 12 months. For instance, if a dog passes 6 out of 10 tests, who’s to say that the dog (and handler) hasn’t exhibited CONSISTENCY (and training development) if a young dog passes his/her first 2 of 3 tests, fails 3, then passes 4 of 4? Would you have handlers/trainers put dogs “up for the season” once the dog “fails” 3 tests early on in the qualifying period? This proposed provision does not encourage continued training throughout the year for younger, very talented dogs. Planned, thoughtful TESTING throughout the year is an important component of a dog’s development/training.

    I believe that the proposed provision for scratching a dog after the published starting time of the event may cause handlers of multiple dogs in an event undue hardship if there is not a vet, either on-site or easily available, to issue a vet certificate so that it may be received by the test secretary by the end of the event. I agree that vet certificates are the best way to ensure that a “scratch” for medical reasons is truly a “scratch” that should be “counted” as such, but sometimes this is not feasible. Judges (in conference with test committee members) can often make the determination that an injured or ill dog is unfit to run/continue. The same goes for a bitch that comes in season DURING an event. Handlers that report this condition should be willing to present the bitch to a judge or a committee member to confirm the condition.

    • Mia DiBenedetto says:

      No Susan, this is a PROPOSAL put forth by the New York club, and these clarifications are just a response to some questions that were asked. IF the proposal does pass it would NOT affect the 2015 year.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s