# Getting more FC or AFC Golden Retrievers?



## Alaska7133

How do we get more golden retrievers with FC or AFC titles?

For those that don't know, FC means Field Trial Champion. AFC means Amateur Field Trial Champion. Both FC and AFC are US titles. FTCH and AFTCH are the Canadian field trial champion titles. I put the Canadians on a separate list farther down.

Those dogs achieving either US title that were born after 1999 are:

2000 AFC Emberain Good Will Hunting FDHF
2000 FC-AFC Emberain Beau Geste OS FDHF
2000 FC-AFC Topbrass Band On The Run FDHF
2000 FC Porjay’s Crackerjack Surpriz WCX FDHF
2000 FC-AFC Steeple Hill Ranger OS FDHF
2001 FC-AFC OTCH; Can FTCH-AFTCH MOTCH TNT’s Stanley Steamer UDX WCX OS OBHF FDHF Can MH
2001 FC-AFC LaCrosse Max Q Jake JH OS FDHF
2001 AFC Ida Red’s Atalanta Challenge MH
2003 FC Bro’s Counterfeit Folly
2003 AFC OTCH Topbrass Caleb UDX OM3
2004 FC-AFC Firemark’s Elusive One WCX
2005 AFC Goldbrier’s Copper Bullet
2006 FC Ruby Redfish Mo’s Mountain Gem WCX OD
2006 AFC; FTCH-AFTCH Heads Up Fire in the Hole SH WCX
2007 FC Topbrass Linekin’s Riptide
2007 FC Firemark Rackem And Stackem Casey
2007 FC Topbrass No Time to Paws SH CCA FDHF
2007 FC-AFC Port Costas Chantilly Lace
2008 AFC Special Touchs Satchcrazy Bailey Mae MH
2008 AFC The Sunday Swimmer

Dogs holding Canadian only titles by year of birth, born after 1999:

2000 AFTCH Firemark's Turn Up the Heat Am *** OD
2001 Can. Triple CH FTCH AFTCH OTCH Firemark's Push Comes to Shove Can. WCX Am. *** OS
2001 AFTCH Ram River Spring Fever ***
2001 FTCH AFTCH Erinhills Rupert
2002 FTCH AFTCH MOTCH; Am OTCH Tanbark's Orange Crush Am *** UDX OM1 OBHF Can MH OBHF FDHF 
2002 FTCH AFTCH Topbrass Smooth As Silk Can/Am MH WCX
2003 FTCH AFTCH Ram River Spice Girl ***
2003 AFTCH Mist Elberta's Decision Am **
2003 FTCH AFTCH Lulu's The Bases Are Loaded
2003 FTCH AFTCH Bulrush Shelby
2004 FTCH Glenelm's Glowing Ember WC
2004 FTCH AFTCH Bulrush Yellow Bud US ***
2004 FTCH Ambertrail's Canadian Rocket 
2006 FTCH Tanjin Fergus
2006 FTCH AFTCH Millpond Mulligan
2007 FTCH AFTCH Heads Up Tracks in the Taiga MH QA2 WCX *** OS Can WCI JFTR QFTR
2007 FTCH Adirondac Tea for Two WC **
2008 FTCH AFTCH Ram River Khaki Kayla

Please let me know if I need to adjust this list. I apologize in advance of any dogs I may have missed.


----------



## Megora

Get more people doing stuff with their dogs.


----------



## SwimDog

Where did you get your list? I saw a few more when looking on K9data (I didn't go through all the entries, but some are within your date range).

Edited: Okay - I read birth dates wrong, maybe you aren't missing many/any!


----------



## Alaska7133

I got the U.S. List from a golden person that keeps track. The Canadian list I made myself from k9data.


----------



## goodog

*Field Champs--more goldens should be!*

Stacey--nice work getting the list together. Its unfortunate that few golden ppl run FTs. 

Numerically, Labs own the game. Look at 1 FT in VA in March. 
'
*141 dogs in a "full service" event. Derby, Q, Open -Ama, Pro*

_*A total of only 5 goldens ran*_!! The vast majority of the dogs were labs.

Nothing about golden's should make them less competitive

Many view FTs as a game for pros. Possibly a few true amateurs BUT.... 

What are we going to do about this imbalance?


----------



## FTGoldens

I have a bunch of thoughts about this ... here's a start. 

But first, a couple of points: 
(i) These represent my opinion, so they may irritate some folks. 
(ii) I've seen a bunch of dogs that just didn't have the ability or didn't have the right owner and/or trainer to make it as a FC or AFC. The point is that very few dogs have the ability and the dogs that actually do have the ability, must be in the right hands to get the titles.

> More people need to get into the field with their Goldens.
> To get an FC and/or AFC, that must be your goal from the beginning. Very, very few dogs start out as something other than a field trial prospect and turn into a FC or AFC.
> There should be more (almost exclusive) focus on field trial ability when picking parents. It's a limiting factor to get hung up on certain attributes, such as the size of the dog, or the dog's tail set, or the dog's color, or no white, or not a carrier of any genetic issue, or etc.
> More should be trained by pros. Across the nation, there's probably not 20 all-age Goldens on pros' trucks at this moment. And the odds of making an FC are NOT in the favor of the amateur trainer.
> If the dog doesn't seem to have amazing marking ability by 18 months - 2 years, get another one for field trials and stop the agony (for you and for the dog) ... it can be a great hunting companion or pet. 
> If the dog doesn't train with enthusiasm in the water ... see the immediately preceding point.

That's it for now.

FTGoldens


----------



## gdgli

FT

I happen to agree with you 100%.


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

FT- LOL about the pro. Um, yeah, I think I'd need to start a gofundme for Proof to get him on the local derby trainer's truck. its 1200 dollars a month. that is almost my mortgage payment. I can go to his day training sessions for a lot less....

Something his assistant said was that for every dog on the truck, there are four or more right behind it (he's talking labs) so if that dog has one tiny inclination that he can't pull his weight, he's outta there. As for goldens, the pro said there are so few that are capable that he rarely trains them. I think he's trained one or two, maybe more I could be wrong. You know who I'm talking about too, he's seen a lot of dogs.


----------



## Alaska7133

FT,
Last week I took a Bill Hillmann seminar and I asked that question. He said golden owners need to quit owner training and find capable pros and pros need to learn how to train goldens. A flat coat person asked the same question, they are even worse off than goldens. He said golden owners are notorious as owner trainers, whereas lab field trial people are more than happy to hand off a FT prospect to a pro. I thought it was interesting that Bill thinks goldens train differently than labs.

I do see very few field trial breeders too. Then a breeder has to find a puppy buyer to be willing to spend the time and money on FT training, which is far and away more than any other training a dog could go through. I look at FT breeding sometimes and wonder what actually happens to the pups? Do they actually go through a good training program, or become pets?


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

why are golden owners poorer than lab owners, ha ha, that is the question


----------



## FTGoldens

MillionsofPeaches said:


> FT- LOL about the pro. Um, yeah, I think I'd need to start a gofundme for Proof to get him on the local derby trainer's truck. its 1200 dollars a month. that is almost my mortgage payment. I can go to his day training sessions for a lot less....
> 
> Something his assistant said was that for every dog on the truck, there are four or more right behind it (he's talking labs) so if that dog has one tiny inclination that he can't pull his weight, he's outta there. As for goldens, the pro said there are so few that are capable that he rarely trains them. I think he's trained one or two, maybe more I could be wrong. You know who I'm talking about too, he's seen a lot of dogs.


HAH! Yep, playing the game with a pro is expensive!!! To win, however, you have to be willing and able to invest either lots of money or lots of time to both training and trialing. 

As for the assistant, I believe that the "four or more" comment is a bit of an exaggeration, but the pro that the assistant works for is very good. Nonetheless, to the best of my recollection, that particular pro hasn't put an FC on a Golden. There are others, such a Karl Gunzer and Bill Sargenti, who have put FCs on Goldens. I believe that Bill Eckett and Bobby George have also had a hand in putting FCs on more than one Golden. There are probably others whom I cannot recall at the moment.

FTGoldens


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

FT-perhaps I can use that as bait for the pro to help me, ha ha...never titled a golden, well, here is an awesome one!


----------



## goldlover68

I have had 4 Golden's that I have started with pro trainers. When I started doing this all I wanted was a great hunting companion, but once I saw a field trial and hunt test, I really did considered both. I had a job that required a lot of travel, so my time to train was frequently interrupted. I traveled international so weekends were often shot. Therefore, using a pro became mandatory. 

By the time we got our second field bred Golden I had decided to run hunt tests and/or field trials, depending on if my pro felt she had potential. He also explained the concept of a campaign, in that once you decide to go down that road, you have to 'go down that road' until you know they either make it to AFC or not. Although our trainer felt our first girl had potential I decided to only use her for hunt testing and hunting (I will explain more below). She has been a great dog and was only limited by my ability to train and my early decisions not to take her further. 

I came to the conclusion that I have dogs because I love to have them around. Giving them to a trainer and letting them campaign with her, just was contrary to why I have dogs, only being with her for some brief local training and some trials, when I was around, just was not what I wanted from my dog. The real joy I have is during hunting season working with her and watching her work, I just love it!

That became my firm belief after this first field dog, if you run trails you have to either have a local, down the street trainer which allows you to be part of the training, or you give up large blocks of time that you are not with that dog. I couldn't find a set up close to a trainer I liked, so Field trial were not of further consideration. 

My latest girl, is now 26 months and has spent over 12 months, in total, with our trainer. I call her my $10k pup! She is well trained and well on her way in hunt tests. I will not spend more time away from her, so running field trials is out, even though she has a deep level of training, from a very well known and talented Golden trainer, it was not focused on Field Trials.


So for me, the motivation to have a pup, is not to have a champion field trial dog. I honor those who do it and think they have amazing dogs and trainers, it is just not my thing!

Just offering a different perspective....maybe had I been 25 when I started in the game, I would have felt different....but I was 50 when I started...!


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

Goldlover, can I ask why you train your dog with a trainer? Is it because you don't have the time? If that is the reason why do titles mean anything to you? I train my dogs all by myself with the occasionally friend or club mixed in. I do it for hobby but I don't know if I would care if my dog had titles or not if I wasn't the one doing it as I don't breed them so the titles mean nothing except to represent my hard work and my dogs' hard work. I hope I don't come across snide, I really just wonder why people send their dogs to pros if they aren't breeders.


----------



## goldlover68

MillionsofPeaches said:


> Goldlover, can I ask why you train your dog with a trainer? Is it because you don't have the time? If that is the reason why do titles mean anything to you? I train my dogs all by myself with the occasionally friend or club mixed in. I do it for hobby but I don't know if I would care if my dog had titles or not if I wasn't the one doing it as I don't breed them so the titles mean nothing except to represent my hard work and my dogs' hard work. I hope I don't come across snide, I really just wonder why people send their dogs to pros if they aren't breeders.


Up until this recent pup, I did not have time, I traveled international, which even messed up weekends. I am not interested in titles, but I do enjoy running hunt test for the challenge of handling them and fun of watching these amazing dogs work. But, if you have a dog that can run a SH level test, you have a fully finished retriever, ready for waterfowl, pheasants, and quail...and that for me is what it is all about. If they get a title fine, but it really is about having a 'finished gun dog'.

I understand folks who enjoy the training and running all types of competitive events and tests, but at this point in my life that all is secondary to enjoying the dogs. If I had tried to train her on my own, with little actual training experience, she would have taken much longer....so I used a pro...and now she is ready....I also use tests to keep them sharp and in shape.....I will even run my old girl in a JH test, which she just loves to do. I like that better than training groups...and my wife and I run her where we live...we have good areas and water near our home...and I have a couple of bumper boys, so it all seems to work out fine. 

To each his/her own!


----------



## Claudia M

Stacey, I think FTgoldens hit it on the nail. 

I have been asking the same question and got many answers (will post only two) - some that I agree and some that I am not so sure I agree.

1. If you want an FC AFC golden, you should make sure both parents are FC AFC. (I personally think this is a bit of a stretch). Easier to get those pups in the labs as you have way more FC AFC labs out there both males and females. 

2. Not all dogs will make it to FC AFC. When you have 10,000 labs bred for FT you will get maybe 50 to make to the title. But when you have only 100 goldens bred for FT you will be lucky to get one to make it. And here is where comes in "the right dog in the right hands" to actually make it?


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

oh okay so you use the title to gauge how well the dog is trained for you personal hunting enjoyment? I really was just wondering, I don't care either way, I know a lot of people that do this and I've always wondered why.


----------



## FTGoldens

Claudia M said:


> 1. If you want an FC AFC golden, you should make sure both parents are FC AFC. (I personally think this is a bit of a stretch). Easier to get those pups in the labs as you have way more FC AFC labs out there both males and females.
> 
> 2. Not all dogs will make it to FC AFC. When you have 10,000 labs bred for FT you will get maybe 50 to make to the title. But when you have only 100 goldens bred for FT you will be lucky to get one to make it. And here is where comes in "the right dog in the right hands" to actually make it?


#1. This one is pretty tough ... actually, it's nearly impossible considering the fact that there have only been 2 female Goldens which have achieved both FC and AFC titles in the last 24 YEARS ... and one of them is no longer of breeding age. To pick a litter for my next FC AFC , I will find out all that I can with regard to the abilities of the parents, grandparents, and great grand parents by looking at their progeny and titles, AND talking with tenured breeders and trialers ... and hope that I make a good choice.

#2. Yep.


----------



## Alaska7133

FT,
Could you list the names of the pros that have trained a golden to an FC and/or AFC title? I know it's a short list.


----------



## TrailDogs

goldlover68 said:


> I came to the conclusion that I have dogs because I love to have them around. Giving them to a trainer and letting them campaign with her, just was contrary to why I have dogs, only being with her for some brief local training and some trials, when I was around, just was not what I wanted from my dog. The real joy I have is during hunting season working with her and watching her work, I just love it!
> 
> So for me, the motivation to have a pup, is not to have a champion field trial dog. I honor those who do it and think they have amazing dogs and trainers, it is just not my thing!


This is me exactly. I love the games, love the training even more, am limited by a full time job and no readily available grounds but the main reason I have the dogs is to be companions and house dogs. 
I have no interest in sending my dogs off with anybody.
Most of my golden field training friends feel the same way. There are probably many talented, well bred goldens out there that will never see a field trial or a pro truck.


----------



## Alaska7133

And that's exactly what Bill Hillmann said to me the other day. Golden retriever owners don't want to see their dogs on pro trucks!


----------



## FTGoldens

Alaska7133 said:


> FT,
> Could you list the names of the pros that have trained a golden to an FC and/or AFC title? I know it's a short list.


The list is fairly recent and consists of predominantly the pros that had the dogs when the FC was put on them ... but importantly, many of the dogs had their puppy training and early work (basics and transition work) done by a "young-dog" pro. 
I'll miss some ... plus, some of the dogs went to more than one pro before titling, but I don't know/recall all the detail. I'll list the ones off the top of my head:

Karl Gunzer (Ranger, Beau, maybe Will and Ranger)
Bill Sargenti (Lulu and Jester)
Rob Erhardt (Ruby)
Mark Mosher (Rip)
Patti Kiernan (Casey); Carol Kackelmeyer(sp?) did the young-dog work for Casey
Bill Eckett and Bobby George (Flash)

As for the other FC titled dogs on your list, either I don't know who trained them or an AMATEUR trained them. 

Amateur trained dogs are:
Stanley
Jake
Dash
Lucy
Copper?
Lacey
Bailey
Wyatt

Again, this is to the best of my knowledge and recollection, so some of them could be wrong.

FTGoldens


----------



## Alaska7133

So if Stanley was amateur trained by Janice, did she also train Boomer her other FC-AFC dog?

Do you know who trained Push?

If you were an amateur wanting to train to the FC level, how many dogs do you think you would have to train first, before you could get that FC dog? I ask because it seems when I watch people with their second or third dog to train, they do a much better job. Experience does wonders.


----------



## FTGoldens

Alaska7133 said:


> So if Stanley was amateur trained by Janice, did she also train Boomer her other FC-AFC dog?
> 
> Do you know who trained Push?
> 
> If you were an amateur wanting to train to the FC level, how many dogs do you think you would have to train first, before you could get that FC dog? I ask because it seems when I watch people with their second or third dog to train, they do a much better job. Experience does wonders.


I believe that John did more of the field trial training than Janice, but I could be wrong. I know that John did the pre-national training for the 2007 National Amateur Retriever Championship. I suspect that John trained Boomer as well.

I believe that Mike did all of Push's field trial training, but that's more of a guess than anything (note that Push achieved the Cdn field titles, not the U.S. field titles).

There's no way to answer your question about how many dogs before an FC. As mentioned earlier, just getting a dog that has the physicality and brains to become an FC necessitates a lot of work and a bit of luck. So, there may be trainers who could train an FC with their first dog (they would, however, need some strong support via a training group). On the other hand, there are people who will NEVER figure out how to train an FC, regardless of the number of dogs they run through their kennel; in addition to the dog needing certain attributes, the trainer needs certain attributes as well, and that's not even considering the stuff like time, a little money, training group, grounds, water, and understanding family members.

FTGoldens


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

I think grounds and water are the most limiting factors. 
Understanding family members is the understatement here, lol.


----------



## Alaska7133

Water water water is what everyone's weakness is isn't it? Either too hot or too cold, not often enough, not long enough, not the right vegetation, not the right location. Water is where everyone fails isn't it?


----------



## Claudia M

Stacey, I guess water is a factor with the goldens. 

What I have noticed with Rose is that the more water to swim in at long distances (over 160 yrds) the more her marking is affected. The land obstacles does not bother her as much as the water obstacles. Also, one can work land marks all year round but you cannot work water marks all year round. Maybe some do, I will certainly not do it. Once the water is warm enough (and that depends on the dog, what was warm enough for Rose was definitely not warm enough for Belle) the vegetation is always welcomed. Mud, lily pads, crappy tangling things. haha until the last JH I had no clue Rose loved to swim between the lily pads, liked it so much she took a nice swim around her mark, she wasn't even hunting for her duck, just taking a break, once she saw me she remembered she had to pick up her duck. :doh: Thinking back it is funny, she knew where her bird was; at the time I was sweating. 
Belle at the moment still needs confidence in water, The water seems to her as the "Atlantic Ocean" (stealing the phrase from someone else), once she feels like she swam too far she turns around. But considering that she has not been in the water but for only one month (one to two days a week) that is not bad.


----------



## FTGoldens

Alaska7133 said:


> Water water water is what everyone's weakness is isn't it? Either too hot or too cold, not often enough, not long enough, not the right vegetation, not the right location. Water is where everyone fails isn't it?


Yep. Training on water is a huge issue for trainers of all retriever breeds, not just Goldens. 
That's why (i) most of the pros, as well as many retired, competitive amateurs go south for the winter and (ii) why the folks who can afford it, build technical ponds on their property.

FTGoldens


----------



## Swampcollie

The simple fact is that to go much beyond a SH on a dog, you've got to have access to land and water designed for training retrievers on advanced concepts. That means working with a Pro who has the grounds or joining one of the larger clubs that owns or leases such training land and water for the use of their members. (Unless of course you're independently wealthy and can build your own.)

Without access to the necessary facilities you can't get there.


----------



## K9-Design

I don't think the issues is resources. Beyond the dog (which obviously is a huge part of the equation) -- the biggest hurdle is KNOW HOW. I DO have many resources at my fingertips -- and even if I had all the training partners, time and equipment in the world, and a dog who did it all, I still wouldn't know what to do to take my training to the next level from Master to Qual to Open. And I'm not a rank newbie in field training. You need experienced mentors to guide you, and it's not just their track record, your personalities and training theories must mesh with both the handler and the dog. 

Would I like to see more goldens in FTs? I guess. It doesn't make me sad that there are fewer of them. FTs are so difficult and amazing that it really doesn't matter what sort of dog comes to the line when I watch : any dog who can make it through a major stake is a rare animal regardless of breed. Number of goldens in FTs doesn't really say anything negative about our breed, it just is what it is.


----------



## FTGoldens

K9-Design said:


> I don't think the issues is resources. Beyond the dog (which obviously is a huge part of the equation) -- the biggest hurdle is KNOW HOW.


In what I've seen and experienced, there are no "ors" in the equation, they are all "ands."


----------



## hotel4dogs

A couple of pros were discussing training Goldens, and they were agreeing with each other that a lot of the Golden people do many different things with their dogs, whereas the lab people tend to stick to field. 
(That's because we have dogs who CAN do everything  )
It's pretty hard to show your dog in the breed ring, and obedience, and agility, if they're out with a field trainer!



Alaska7133 said:


> And that's exactly what Bill Hillmann said to me the other day. Golden retriever owners don't want to see their dogs on pro trucks!


----------



## Alaska7133

Barb,
You're right. My show lab friends are only interested in a JH or WC, then they are done. They want to show "instinct". I only know one show lab person up here that is interested in going to a SH. That's it. All the rest are happy with running a JH show dog around the ring. The field lab people do not care about showing at all. Such a huge split! I can say that the show labs are capable of more than just a JH. Many are quite birdy and have good drive (not great, but good). It is too bad that show labs aren't given a chance to go farther.

In the golden world, we expect our dogs to do it all don't we? And when they can't we look at not the dog's ability but our own as trainers unable to train our dogs to the level they should be capable of achieving. I do believe you could push as hard as you want as a trainer and still not produce a field trial dog even if you have all the knowledge, access to land/water, and great dogs. FC dogs are rare in any breed.


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

A friend of mine runs her show labs and keeps them trim and they are both SH and she is working towards Master but she works on her own and works full time so it takes her awhile. She is also fairly novice. AT the hunt tests there was another lab show BREEDER running her dog on her last two legs for SH too. She is a breeder and wants to get her dog to Master as well. 
I find the biggest difference between the labs and the goldens are their personalities. Labs are less sensitive than goldens and can tolerate way more straightforward pressure. Its like comparing India and China. India progresses slowly because of democratic process while China can go faster because the government pretty much decides everything. Does that make sense? 

And if you look at this even further, labs would be easier to train for a novice than a golden that takes a bit more effort to find the effective method that works for the golden. That might take more experience as well. That is probably why many lower end pros don't have a lot of goldens on their truck. IF the dog doesn't fit its program which is pushing out dogs in a certain time frame then the dog is outta of there. I've seen this first hand by more than one pro. And also that says a lot about the first statement I made. It doesn't take a genius to train a lab, perhaps that is what makes the difference with some pros that advance and become famous and those that stagnate in their little local area training just labs???


----------



## Claudia M

Well, from what I have seen and heard it takes quite more to make it to FC AFC. The more you "spread" the dog into doing "everything" the less you actually accomplish in the field. No matter how many pros one hires for field, show, agility and ob. 

The lab people are happy with a JH or WC because it is a requirement to complete the CH. At least those people do get in the field and see what the dogs were actually bred to do (to some degree). 

I was completely amazed watching the qual this past weekend. I was lucky to also have someone explain each step of it from the handler point of view and what could lure the dog straight into an elimination or the handler into a panic thus eliminating the dog thru no fault on the dog's part. The difficulty was not in the lenght it was in the terrain and obstacles put in front of the dogs by the judges.


----------



## Claudia M

MillionsofPeaches said:


> .............
> And if you look at this even further, *labs would be easier to train for a novice* than a golden that takes a bit more effort to find the effective method that works for the golden. That might take more experience as well. That is probably why many *lower end pros* don't have a lot of goldens on their truck. IF the dog doesn't fit its program which is pushing out dogs in a certain time frame then the dog is outta of there. I've seen this first hand by more than one pro. And also that says a lot about the first statement I made. *It doesn't take a genius to train a lab*, perhaps that is what makes the difference with some pros that advance and become famous and those that stagnate in their little local area training just labs???


WOW - I am sure that those pros did not really think they were lower end local pros to make it into the Open AA and AM. Well bred field labs mature faster than goldens, have more drive and are more resilient in higher and lower temperatures as well as in taking the pressure of the training. And such well bred lab would certainly be too much for a novice trainer. 

Those "lower end" pros have the dogs that can take the training on their trucks. "For every dog that doesn't make it on the truck there are dozens on the waiting list". I put quotation marks because that is not my statement, it is the statement of a person on such a waiting line.


----------



## hotel4dogs

So true. It's one of the things that I love about this breed, they are so versatile. While the majority of them (or any breed) are not FC capable dogs, a well bred Golden will do whatever we ask of them, happily, to the best of their ability. Who could ask for more?



Alaska7133 said:


> Barb,
> You're right. My show lab friends are only interested in a JH or WC, then they are done. They want to show "instinct". I only know one show lab person up here that is interested in going to a SH. That's it. All the rest are happy with running a JH show dog around the ring. The field lab people do not care about showing at all. Such a huge split! I can say that the show labs are capable of more than just a JH. Many are quite birdy and have good drive (not great, but good). It is too bad that show labs aren't given a chance to go farther.
> 
> * In the golden world, we expect our dogs to do it all don't we? And when they can't we look at not the dog's ability but our own as trainers unable to train our dogs to the level they should be capable of achieving.* I do believe you could push as hard as you want as a trainer and still not produce a field trial dog even if you have all the knowledge, access to land/water, and great dogs. FC dogs are rare in any breed.


----------



## Claudia M

Stacey, I think it also depends on the person. Sunday I was training with a lady who has field labs. She was not interested at all in FT and she does not show labs; we adjusted the line for her and her dogs. She is happy if she can make it to SH or MH with her dogs. Reason: time. 

It is like FTGoldens stated, in order to make it to FC AFC you have to set it as a goal. You cannot say I will maybe try it and expect to get it. 

I am doing FT marks with Rose not because I am going to enter her in an FT trial. She has awesome marking abilities (when she wants to). At her height and weight I do not think it is healthy for her to train towards FT and not even sure about higher levels hunt tests. Maybe if I move with her to Alaska


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

Claudia let me clarify your WOW comment to me. I'm not talking about field trial pros I'm talking about local pros that get a few dogs to Master but the majority stagnate at senior. Shoot a lot only obtain a JH and some don't train anything but hunting dogs that don't run them in tests. These pros don't even attempt field trials. They are local lower end pros in my opinion. You took a lot of offense about that statement, I don't know why. Perhaps you have a local pro helping you that you thought I was bashing on? I was not. I don't even know your pro. And just because a person is a pro does not make him a good trainer, it means he takes money for training dogs. 

I don't know where you live but we have about ten local pros in a two hour radius from my house and I can think of four that are less than ten miles from my house. There are about three that are super high end around here, and they are NOT who I was speaking of. One of which is so expensive I can't even think of putting my dog on his truck but he really produces champions and deserves the reputation he has. 

The average lab tolerates a lot more than the average golden as far as pressure around here. Therefore some of the pros that are screaming and yelling and kicking these labs can still produce a titled lab dog in a short amount of time compared to titling a golden using these same methods. Shoot, I've seen great goldens get shut down completely using these methods. These pros think they are a good trainers using these methods and that the goldens are the worthless dogs because they don't respond to these methods. To me that makes the difference between high end trainers to low end trainers. A good trainer is one that works with the dog and has a pocket full of methods to pull from.


----------



## TheZ's

FTGoldens said:


> . . . in addition to* the dog needing certain attributes*, the *trainer needs certain attributes* as well, and that's not even considering the stuff like* time*, a little *money*, *training group*,* grounds*, *water*, and* understanding family member*s. FTGoldens


 (emphasis added)

Doesn't the above pretty much summarize why there are so few FC or AFC Goldens. How often do all those factors come together? I would guess very rarely to the extent that each is required to be successful.

I guess if you have the right dog and a lot of money you can turn the dog over to the right pro and make up for the shortage of the other things but is it really your dog anymore when you do that?


----------



## K9-Design

MoP I agree COMPLETELY and understand what you mean.
The average labrador can take a LOT of REALLY STUPID TRAINING and come back for more or brush it off. Your average golden would say screw you and give up if treated like that. I've seen PLENTY of "pros" that are AWFUL dog trainers. I've seen very accomplished pro trainers who can only train a specific kind of dog. Their dogs are just really resilient and naturally have so much drive it gets them through. And you're right -- these trainers are the first to put down goldens, ironic as they couldn't train a golden if their life depended on it. It's them that is the problem.


----------



## Claudia M

MillionsofPeaches said:


> Claudia let me clarify your WOW comment to me. I'm not talking about field trial pros I'm talking about local pros that get a few dogs to Master but the majority stagnate at senior. Shoot a lot only obtain a JH and some don't train anything but hunting dogs that don't run them in tests. These pros don't even attempt field trials. They are local lower end pros in my opinion. You took a lot of offense about that statement, I don't know why. Perhaps you have a local pro helping you that you thought I was bashing on? I was not. I don't even know your pro. And just because a person is a pro does not make him a good trainer, it means he takes money for training dogs.
> 
> I don't know where you live but we have about ten local pros in a two hour radius from my house and I can think of four that are less than ten miles from my house. There are about three that are super high end around here, and they are NOT who I was speaking of. One of which is so expensive I can't even think of putting my dog on his truck but he really produces champions and deserves the reputation he has.
> 
> The average lab tolerates a lot more than the average golden as far as pressure around here. Therefore some of the pros that are screaming and yelling and kicking these labs can still produce a titled lab dog in a short amount of time compared to titling a golden using these same methods. Shoot, I've seen great goldens get shut down completely using these methods. These pros think they are a good trainers using these methods and that the goldens are the worthless dogs because they don't respond to these methods. To me that makes the difference between high end trainers to low end trainers. A good trainer is one that works with the dog and has a pocket full of methods to pull from.


Shelby, you did not specify in your previous post which pros that do not have goldens on their trucks are worth of respect and which would be categorized as local novice trainers. It really "sounded" as all trainers who prefer labs over goldens could not train a golden if their life depended on it. And that is not true. 

Those trainers went to what worked in the time they had to produce a FT AFC level dog. Why? Because those are the expectations of their clients. If they train 28 dogs each day and the 1 who cannot keep up will fall behind. Would you keep on paying that pro to train your dog while all the others are onto higher and bigger things? I would not. I would prefer a pro that is honest with me; will I be hurt that my dog does not have what I think it has? Yes, but I would certainly not take that against the pro or the dog for that matter. It is just the way things are.

ETA - in the last year I have been fortunate to meet and train with several lab people who in my view are pros (some take dogs on the truck for training and some who do not but they are very advanced in training their own dogs and have taken them all the way up in FT). Not only they have been kind and helpful in their suggestions they wanted my dogs (goldens and flatcoats) to succeed at whatever they do.


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

Claudia I promise you that was a general statement about some pros I've personally seen. I have nothing against lab trainers or owners. I don't have any local golden trainers that I train with and all my groups are mostly lab groups. I LOVE them, I have nothing but great things to say about my lab owner friends and they often have so much valuable information I can learn from. I almost ended up with a lab myself because so many people tried to convince me how much easier and faster I could train a lab. 

My point is that you might see more labs in ANY hunting venue because they are easier to train for most pros as well as novices. It doesn't mean that all pros that train all labs are bad trainers but it also doesn't mean that all labs are better than goldens because pros don't have time or in some cases the training expertise to train them. 

I think that you are finding faults in my statement just for the sake to argue or find wrong in what I say. I am not putting down ALL of anything. I'm actually a pretty grey area person. It was just a thought that I had.


----------



## Claudia M

MillionsofPeaches said:


> .........think that you are finding faults in my statement just for the sake to argue or find wrong in what I say. I am not putting down ALL of anything. I'm actually a pretty grey area person. It was just a thought that I had.


Well, you can act offended that was not my intention. However your statement was quite general to the pros who have only labs on their trucks. It was quite general in regards to training labs. And again we are discussing FC AFC levels, not MH, SH, JH levels, which probably made me believe you are talking about serious trainers and not some Joe down the street. 

Hey, all power to you if you can train a high drive lab quicker and easier and better. I know I could not handle such a dog. And if I had such a dog more than likely I would sit in line to go on a pro truck. I can only imagine a dog who in seconds is 100 yrds away just to realize I had to stop it on a blind and I missed that nano-second to do so. OOPS

You talked about the trainers who went on and became famous. Most of those trainers videos and demonstrations are with what breed other than labs? Very few include goldens in their training videos. I may dare say most have moved from goldens onto labs. I would love for them to move back to the goldens and flatcoats but I do not see that happening any time soon and definitely not in the proportions of the labs on their trucks.

I am happy to see goldens in FT tests and the more we see the better for the breed.


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

Okay I'm so confused by everything you write. The whole point is that even in Field if a lab is easier and faster to train and that pro (no matter how good he is) needs to crank out product FAST and within a certain way he knows how to do it then OF COURSE he is going to go with a lab. You even said you don't fault a pro for that. 

That was my point. Perhaps, like anything in our country, we want it now and we want if fast. So maybe goldens have gotten the shaft NOT because they are not as good as labs, but because they have not been conditioned by the best pros because they don't work as fast as labs. And over time this has weakened the goldens' pedigrees in this area. 

Anyway, I really think that you are agreeing with me in a way and you don't even realize it.


----------



## Claudia M

No Shelby, what I said is that labs can take the high pressure of work, and that is work an entire day. I have never said they are easier to train and any Jo down the street can train them. Go hunting all day during the week and run tests all weekend long. That is the kind of pressure I am talking about. Not yelling and screaming and kicking, which is not training for a lab, golden, flattie, chessie or any other dog. Precise and timed training and correction. 

I have seen people who have trained dogs and qualified and ran master nationals but cannot handle a high drive lab in a senior hunt. This person who is more than capable of training a dog has a dog that is too much to handle therefore needs a pro. When this dog runs on a mark it is like fire under it's feet.


----------



## krazybronco2

Claudia M said:


> No Shelby, what I said is that labs can take the high pressure of work, and that is work an entire day. I have never said they are easier to train and any Jo down the street can train them. Go hunting all day during the week and run tests all weekend long. That is the kind of pressure I am talking about. Not yelling and screaming and kicking, which is not training for a lab, golden, flattie, chessie or any other dog. Precise and timed training and correction.
> 
> I have seen people who have trained dogs and qualified and ran master nationals but cannot handle a high drive lab in a senior hunt. This person who is more than capable of training a dog has a dog that is too much to handle therefore needs a pro. When this dog runs on a mark it is like fire under it's feet.


one alot of labs cant do that either not that they dont want to work everyday but the metal pressure of training hard everyday is takes a toll on a dog i know the local FT pros train M-F and take the weekends off unless it is a trial weekend, second there are alot of goldens that are working and training hard 6 days a week had a friend down for the winter that i know was training 6days a week and have quite a few goldens on the truck, also know a very well know photographer that has 2 goldens signed up for a Q next weekend and his dogs are with one of the top HT and SRS trainers in the country, 

also to your last point just because you can train a dog doesnt mean you are a good handler and vise versa i know pro trainers that can pull a dog off any truck and run them better than the other pro because they are good handlers then there are the pro that knows how to train a dog and have a dog doing amazing things in a very short amount of time because they can read a dog but when the get to a trial and just put it all together for the win.


----------



## Claudia M

Krazybronco, yes, goldens can do it too, many of them. I have seen some and followed some on their quest by watching their progress. I was simply pointing to the statement made that any moron can train a lab and could not train a golden. 

And the last "point" was not about "just because you can train a dog doesnt mean you are a good handler", was again referring to a pro as opposed to another person training a high drive dog. A high drive dog (lab or golden) can be too much to handle for a novice person such as myself. 

I am simply tired of the people who bash labs or pros who take the labs on their trucks to FC AFC to excuse the goldens. That is not the way to get more FC AFC goldens. Goldens have and can do it and many of those same pros are more than happy to see goldens making it and succeeding in FT. It is up to the golden owners to breed and prove the dogs they have as high as the dog can go. And the more goldens we will have in the MH and FTs. But the more "versatile" the dog the less chances to make it to a FC AFC.


----------



## krazybronco2

Claudia M said:


> Krazybronco, yes, goldens can do it too, many of them. I have seen some and followed some on their quest by watching their progress. I was simply pointing to the statement made that any moron can train a lab and could not train a golden.
> 
> And the last "point" was not about "just because you can train a dog doesnt mean you are a good handler", was again referring to a pro as opposed to another person training a high drive dog. A high drive dog (lab or golden) can be too much to handle for a novice person such as myself.
> 
> I am simply tired of the people who bash labs or pros who take the labs on their trucks to FC AFC to excuse the goldens. That is not the way to get more FC AFC goldens. Goldens have and can do it and many of those same pros are more than happy to see goldens making it and succeeding in FT. It is up to the golden owners to breed and prove the dogs they have as high as the dog can go. And the more goldens we will have in the MH and FTs. But the more "versatile" the dog the less chances to make it to a FC AFC.


to be honest just about any moron can train a retriever, it takes a special kind of moron to put an FC or an AFC on a dog, both require time and patients. which is one reason alot of your FT pros dont normally take in goldens because they are going to require alot of time and patients which they dont have when you are trying to put a blue ribbon on every dog on the truck all year long. Their name and kennel live off of how many blue ribbons you bring home.

actually i think being an am with a good am training group has it better off because you can focus on one thing, take for example 2 down the shore is a very hard concept you as an am can go run down the shore marks all week if you want where the pro may have some older dogs that know the drill and younger dogs that just starting to get the concept he has to keep pushing the older dogs and the younger dogs just have to pick it up over time. if the group uses their time wisely they can get alot more done in a couple of hours than a pro can in one day. the disadvantage of the am is grounds and bird boys i say those becuase if you are getting into the HT and FT world you are not hurting for money that bad and if you like it enough you will find the time to train.


----------



## Claudia M

I do not know if any moron could actually train a retriever. 

But yes, time, patience and resources (grounds, helpers, money, BIRDS) are necessary. Above all, I think comes understanding dogs and knowing each dog and set steps of training - I just do not see any moron having those qualities. But of course that is just my opinion.


----------



## MillionsofPeaches

I NEVER said any moron could train a field lab or any lab for that matter. I said it doesn't take a genius to train a lab. And it is an average lab at that. Not some crazy FC lab. I stand by that too. I don't think it takes an expert to train the average lab. Shoot, I really don't think it takes an expert to train the average retriever. Sure of course in the higher end competitions that is something different. I never thought that had to be spelled out, it is a given. Geez.


----------



## Alaska7133

Isn't it amazing how passionate we get about training dogs? 

Let's all go back to something easy like, how can we become more knowledgeable about field trials and what goes into training for field trials? I enjoy marshaling and shooting for field trials. I love seeing the dogs run both in the field from a gunners station and from the line as the marshal. Nothing like seeing a handler connect on a long complex blind or seeing a dog pick up a running flier. So what can we all do to support goldens running field trials? Right now I'm in the process of reading the field trial judge test and the judge review handout (I've forgotten the name of it). I don't propose becoming a judge anytime soon, but knowing and understanding the field trial rules is my personal goal. Anyone else?


----------



## Claudia M

Alaska7133 said:


> Isn't it amazing how passionate we get about training dogs?
> 
> Let's all go back to something easy like, how can we become more knowledgeable about field trials and what goes into training for field trials? I enjoy marshaling and shooting for field trials. I love seeing the dogs run both in the field from a gunners station and from the line as the marshal. Nothing like seeing a handler connect on a long complex blind or seeing a dog pick up a running flier. So what can we all do to support goldens running field trials? Right now I'm in the process of reading the field trial judge test and the judge review handout (I've forgotten the name of it). I don't propose becoming a judge anytime soon, but knowing and understanding the field trial rules is my personal goal. Anyone else?


Stacey, I think involvement in the field trials would be the first step, Either thru help (like you do) observing (as I have finally started doing) and what I have found the most important is being able to discuss the marks, blinds, set ups etc. Training with people who have knowledge of field trials and have either competed or judged FT is the most important.


----------

