Should the VC be a separate event?

[ckirsch]

You're not making much sense, Dump.

Just let us know when your dog sails through the Invitational. I'll be the first to congratulate you.

[ForestDump]

You're not making much sense, Dump.

Just let us know when your dog sails through the Invitational. I'll be the first to congratulate you.

Thanks for your input good luck

[Meridiandave]

I members of our chapter have been somewhat critical of only having on Invitational and having it back east every year. One of these people has prized nearly 50 dogs. Only having Eastern tests is a source of frustration for many western breeders.

We even had one person almost lose his dog on the way back to the test as it got into bad water. As Orhunter has said, breeders out here are primarily focused on producing hunting dogs. As Bob Farris said in our meeting, "We have the wild birds."

All that being said, when you look at the number of dogs that are within an 8 hour drive it would be stupid to have an invitational west of the Mississippi in place of the invitational held back east.

However, holding a second invitational in the west would be very beneficial in my opinion. Look at the registrations and the number of people testing. NAVHDA is now big enough to have two invitational. It is hurting participation in the West with not having a reasonable testing option.

[ckirsch]

I guess I never thought of Iowa as being "eastern". I'll admit I'm spoiled as it is only an eleven hour drive for us. I've always had to drive at least five or six hours to run an NA or UT test so that seemed reasonable to me. I'd have made the Ohio drive, without complaint, if the cards had unfolded that way. Probably also worth mentioning that, if travel is an issue, one can time their UT tests to precede the more favorable Invitational location.

As has been mentioned earlier, the ground, water, and manpower requirements for the Invitational make it all but impossible to incorporate into a chapter test, as well as making it very difficult to pull off in two locations each fall. My guess is that even if that were to happen, many of those from remote areas who would still be less than enthusiastic about the travel required.

Finally, the OP's initial comments went far beyond the concerns regarding travel. The argument that a VC is not really a "champion" and "every dog can technically pass" surface here every now and then, typically from someone with no NAVHDA experience, sometimes from someone with a negative NAVHDA experience, and once in a while from field trialers who fail to see any value in a hunt test. It wold be unlikely to hear those remarks uttered by anyone familiar with the amount of time, energy, ability, and luck required to get a dog all the way through.

At the end of the day, no one is forced to participate in NAVHDA, and there are several other games available, all with their own agendas and shortcomings. Seems like it'd be easier to find one that appeals to you and jump in, rather than expend energy denigrating those that don't.

[orhunter]

Look at our local tests and see how they’re heavily dominated by NA testing. Good breeders require testing of their pups as a condition of sale and it were not for this, NAVHDA would hardly exist out west. Many tests simply don’t offer UT for lack of interest, imagine how much interest there’d be in holding an invite. Not much. Hard to assess how having a western Invite would affect UT. Probably something we’ll never know. Don’t think NAVHDA hasn’t tossed around the idea because they certainly have but doubtful it would ever happen for the reasons I already mentioned. That is where they took a stand and simply said, no.

If several chapters got together with a plan and petitioned NAVHDA, maybe....... Don’t hold your breath.

[ForestDump]

The invite is structured much differently than local tests. Every facet of the test is being run concurrently, not one at a time. Need a crew at every location plus the behind the scenes support people. Just the acreage needed to run the field search is much greater than you may imagine. The blind retrieve requires quite a bit of water, much more than your average duck search pond. There is only one way to describe the invitational, BIG. It takes the same amount of land and number of people to run the event no matter where it’s held or the number of dogs.

There are plenty of grounds out west with enough for the field portion of the test I have never seen the water in Iowa or Ohio but I would think that the west could accommodate as well. Also don’t you think the structure of the invitational is a result of the size and format needed to complete it. With the entries spread out there would be less needed to run everything at once and a crew at every location. Bigger tests need more man power

[ryanr]

The notion that the Invitational is "only held in the East" is simply false. Iowa is not in the East (yup, it's West of the Mississippi River) and never has been under any interpretation (I'll give you Ohio as "back East" but even that's officially considered a Midwest state) Putting on two separate Invitationals each year is near impossible from a planning and volunteer standpoint although I know some people just don't want to believe that.

And now that an Invitational is being held out West, I've still read posts here of Western members already serving up complaints and excuses of why there might be that many Western participants.

[GRIFF MAN]

I've been in Navhda for many years held office at the local chapter for along time, ran UT dogs and have had dogs of mine run in the Invite. So I have seen a thing or two...

This thread has good points on both sides. I agree the invite is getting to big, this year they ran one of the largest tests that they have ever held. It is getting to be a burden on host chapters and many chapters dont want to endure a test of this magnitude. We can discuss later what some solutions are about the current test, but back to the thread.
FDump your right to a certain degree it would be "easier" to run mini invitationals instead of one large invite, but that would cause more problems! The issue with mini invites would be that it would not give every dog entered a equal opportunity on the same running grounds.Yes, you still have dogs run on different days and different fields but it is all held the same general area and the same weekend. If you ran a mini test and lets say SD had a test and every one new the water at SD was easier than Iowa everyone would go to run at SD to have a better chance to pass. Yes, there are standards but you can have sights easier than others and that would dilute the importance of the VC.

I think the executive council needs to sit down and get creative for the future and come up with solutions to current invite problems.

ckirsch, I dont think fdump was attacking the invite. He was just not educated on it.

Good conversation.

GriffMan

[JONOV]

As I dig deeper into the NAVHDA world and learn about the highest level of testing this question keeps coming back to me. Does the Invitational really need to be a thing? I get that it’s the most difficult test in NAVHDA but the time, money, and travel to go to one location in America seems excessive. Not to mention giving a Champion prefix in a testing format. I can’t help but wonder if it would be more beneficial to allow the clubs to hold a VC test giving more dogs a chance to participate. At the end of the day it’s simply an evaluation that everyone can technically “win”.

Am I alone here? I get people may enjoy the exclusivity of the way it’s run now I just think it can be more average joe friendly.

That time, and money to travel to the test pales in comparison to what folks spend in time but also money to train for it.

I think that part of it is also that there’s no question that the dogs are judged on a level playing field as much as possible. Same grounds, as much the same weather as possible, as much the same judges as you can, same water, etc, etc...

[JTracyII]

If you ran a mini test and lets say SD had a test and every one new the water at SD was easier than Iowa everyone would go to run at SD to have a better chance to pass.


GriffMan

I haven't read the entire thread, but this may not be the case if the US were split into 4 Regions (NW, NE, SW, SE), each hosting an Invitational. Any person who qualifies, no matter where they qualify, could be forced to do the invitational in the Region in which they reside. May not be feasible, but this would prevent the issue you raised. This could also be done with 2 Regions of East and West, of course.

[orhunter]

With the problem of the test sites being equally challenging, there is also the judging that can be more challenging. The necessary level of fairness to everyone is over rated.

[JONOV]

Finally, the OP's initial comments went far beyond the concerns regarding travel. The argument that a VC is not really a "champion" and "every dog can technically pass" surface here every now and then, typically from someone with no NAVHDA experience, sometimes from someone with a negative NAVHDA experience, and once in a while from field trialers who fail to see any value in a hunt test. It wold be unlikely to hear those remarks uttered by anyone familiar with the amount of time, energy, ability, and luck required to get a dog all the way through.

At the end of the day, no one is forced to participate in NAVHDA, and there are several other games available, all with their own agendas and shortcomings. Seems like it'd be easier to find one that appeals to you and jump in, rather than expend energy denigrating those that don't.

That’s a good point. An AKC Hunt rest requires multiple legs but people run multiple legs in a weekend.

Nothing is without drawbacks, and most venues have built in barriers to avoid diluting the term Champion. In the show ring, the dogs earn points by the size of their field, and then have to win against another champion. Guess what? People coordinate to make sure that there are enough GWP’s at the show, and a Champion to make it worthwhile. I was once asked to enter my (black) Wirehair in a conformation show...looking back it would have meant another leap in points for the winner to have another dog. An AKC Field Trial Champion has similar requirements. In the FDSB, the dog has to place before being allowed to enter a Championship stake, then win the Championship trial. All the same, a regional walking trial is different than a National All Age, and once you have that one pass you can continue to enter CH stakes.

In NAVHDA, every dog entered could theoretically pass. But, there’s one bite a year at the apple and you have to qualify again. A dog will theoretically could have maybe 10 bites at the apple in its lifetime, but that’s unlikely. The higher barriers insure that the term means something.

[GRIFF MAN]

If you ran a mini test and lets say SD had a test and every one new the water at SD was easier than Iowa everyone would go to run at SD to have a better chance to pass.


GriffMan

I haven't read the entire thread, but this may not be the case if the US were split into 4 Regions (NW, NE, SW, SE), each hosting an Invitational. Any person who qualifies, no matter where they qualify, could be forced to do the invitational in the Region in which they reside. May not be feasible, but this would prevent the issue you raised. This could also be done with 2 Regions of East and West, of course.

Thats not what the OP was discussing. Sure there are ways to change the invitational. The OP was discussing every local chapter could host an invitaitonal like hosting a NA or UT test. This would be a huge problem.
But getting to your idea. What if a member in western MN wanted to go to your regional invite. There is a test in SD which is a 4 hour drive but he is in the eastern region and has to go to Ohio a 20hr drive, because that is is region....hard to swallow!
There are NO perfect answers. If you want to experience a Invite test you will go anywhere to do so.

GriffMan

[Fun Dog]

The invitational is special and any dog that passes has earned the title of VC. Many chapters have one test a year. Maybe one or two dogs pass with a UT 1. Would it be practical to have that chapter run an invitational for those one or two dogs? By the time you brought in judges and everything else needed for invitational it would have cost less for the club to just pay for their UT 1 handlers to go to the invitational. The invitational is an experience and I encourage anyone that qualifies to make the trip. And if you can pass....it’s a heady feeling and your dog will insist that you add those two letters to their name.

[JTracyII]

If you ran a mini test and lets say SD had a test and every one new the water at SD was easier than Iowa everyone would go to run at SD to have a better chance to pass.


GriffMan

I haven't read the entire thread, but this may not be the case if the US were split into 4 Regions (NW, NE, SW, SE), each hosting an Invitational. Any person who qualifies, no matter where they qualify, could be forced to do the invitational in the Region in which they reside. May not be feasible, but this would prevent the issue you raised. This could also be done with 2 Regions of East and West, of course.

Thats not what the OP was discussing. Sure there are ways to change the invitational. The OP was discussing every local chapter could host an invitaitonal like hosting a NA or UT test. This would be a huge problem.
But getting to your idea. What if a member in western MN wanted to go to your regional invite. There is a test in SD which is a 4 hour drive but he is in the eastern region and has to go to Ohio a 20hr drive, because that is is region....hard to swallow!
There are NO perfect answers. If you want to experience a Invite test you will go anywhere to do so.

GriffMan

m

Griffman,

You make a good point.