Good points and it seems to be the prevailing thoughts in all the Tuff dog trials today. If it was preferable to have the decoy expose the dogs weaknesses, do we really need judges? After all the judges score not only tells what the dog did right, but also what was wrong.
With experienced judges you don't need to take the chance the decoy will push someones dog too far. That is why K9PS is the only dog sport I'm aware of where all the current judges have actual street experience. They have the experience to draw a picture of the dog that will accurately reflect the training level at that point. Along with this in K9PS they have a written score sheet that indiates with specific symbols if the dog has a shallow bite, forging heel, etc. As well all judges are encouraged to note anything they see at the moment, that will help the owner in training.
The big reason you cant allow the decoy to "test" each dog and "find the weak spots" is the very competition. As most certifications are done in a competitive, trial setting, where every one has paid to have the judges pick the best, every one must have the same work from the decoys, to get a fair shake.
Also read back where I said "every one has paid to have the judges pick the best," if the decoys choose how to work each dog you have essentially taken the judges opinion out of the game. I prefer qualified judges with a good view of everything that is going on, consistantly with each dog.
In my opinion you need qualified judges and a well laid out score sheet and decoys that are athletic and clear headed enough to follow judges instructions to find out what your dog is really worth.
|
