NASS Results??? - Page 7

I will not give any lists.
If any want to chime in, they will.
If they don't, and I dont blame them, they wont.

I attended the GSDCA Show. Did not nor would I have gone to NASS.  Will never show again before I ever support another NASS.  I will support local clubs regardless of which national organization they belong to but I will not support a national organization that puts their board members ahead of the breed.

Well, since were asking for lists...

Dog1

As far as your list of those that won't be going back to the GSDCA. Let's see. It's a small number to begin with.

How small a number? Who's on it?  How do you know?

Hmmmmm. The people that went partially

How do you go partially?  Which part?  Left? Right?....Upper?  maybe lower????

to the NASS but didn't want to jeopardize their GSDCA VA rating by exposing their dog to the politics of the WDA are probably not on that list.

Which people are those?  Where's the list for them??  Which Politics?   Which Judge are you saying is crooked?  Since the judge and not the organization places the dogs. This is actually the question I most want answered.  Which judge are you calling out as crooked?  The list for this is short so should be easy.  There's only two.  Or are we to assume your calling both judges crooked since each could have awarded/taken away a VA. (which is all bull anyway.  You don't take away a VA and judges are notorious for respecting the VA's given by other judges, esp SV judges) but hey, they're all cheats over there which must mean the judges since they make the determination.

Those that came with a VA and high V that went away with much less than they came with probably aren't on the list either.

Who is on this list?  Which dogs lost their VA status at the show? Which dogs lost their high V and went SG?

Looks like your going to be busy making your own lists Dog1. 

Looks like the list of people in love with the NASS and won't be going back to the GSDCA sieger show doesn't exist either. Glad we have that settled.

Mklevin,

Sorry you're not up to speed on what's happened or is happening. I can do lists. Better yet, I can show you how to make the list yourself. Here's the scoop. What you asked I have in pink:

As far as your list of those that won't be going back to the GSDCA. Let's see. It's a small number to begin with.

How small a number? Who's on it?  How do you know?

The number is two teams and two individuals. You can find the names by looking at the GSDCA catalog on line and the results from the NASS on line. When you see the same at each event, those are the few in the group in question claimed to be potentially not going back to the GSDCA. It's a very limited number. It's that simple and it's 100% accurate. I know this because I was there and I know where to find the information. Now you can too.

Hmmmmm. The people that went partially

How do you go partially?  Which part?  Left? Right?....Upper?  maybe lower????

You go partially by having a group of dogs you show at one show. Some of these dogs placed well at the world level. Much higher than the competition at the NASS. Everyone that has a computer has access to the NASS results over the past few years. It's no secret who is going to place where. Just go back and look at the results and you'll see the pattern repeated. Since you know the outcome. You don't risk what you have by exposing it to the inevitable. Retain your top place and standing by holding some back from your group. You show some but not all of what you have.

to the NASS but didn't want to jeopardize their GSDCA VA rating by exposing their dog to the politics of the WDA are probably not on that list.

Which people are those?  Where's the list for them??  Which Politics?   Which Judge are you saying is crooked?  Since the judge and not the organization places the dogs. This is actually the question I most want answered.  Which judge are you calling out as crooked?  The list for this is short so should be easy.  There's only two.  Or are we to assume your calling both judges crooked since each could have awarded/taken away a VA. (which is all bull anyway.  You don't take away a VA and judges are notorious for respecting the VA's given by other judges, esp SV judges) but hey, they're all cheats over there which must mean the judges since they make the determination.

These would be the unfortunate people that didn't do a partial entry. They had a beautiful competition and presentation at the GSDCA sieger show and lost it at the NASS. You have a VA contender. It's a small class and a limited number of VA can be given, only 50% of the class or so. Oops, the dog failed the bitework, too bad. That's so unfortunate. It passed fine last week,,, but this week it had bad luck and failed. One VA contender out of the race. The judge doesn't have to be crooked. The dog doesn't make it to the ring.

Those that came with a VA and high V that went away with much less than they came with probably aren't on the list either.

Who is on this list?  Which dogs lost their VA status at the show? Which dogs lost their high V and went SG?

This list is simple. Check out the results while you have them open on both websites. Compare them and you can answer your own question.

So now the helpers are crooked.  Which helper?  of course you ignored that the same judge judges the protection as the show. AH doesn't matter they are ALL crooked anyway.  Let's see all the GSDCA helpers came from WDA.  So are all helpers crooked or did the honest ones flock to GSDCA and only the crooked ones stayed behind? 

Still haven't heard how a dog lost a VA anywhere.  Don't they have to be earned at each show or in your world do they just walk in and are entitled to it? Hmmm even some working dogs flunk protection but a VA never does.  Good to know. 

And I don't see any lists or knowledge.  Just rampant speculation to push your agenda.

That's what get's tiresome.  You have an obvious axe to grind and are hard at.

Keep grinding long enough and you'll have nothing left.

Well since you brought it up. There was only one helper. He's a fine talented helper. I watched him work the front half at the Universal and he's as good as it gets. Unfortunately he's also related to one of the board members who happens to be a participant in the event. Do you think it's appropriate for a relative to be in this position considering it's a competition? Is it appropriate for the WDA to have the appearance of a conflict of interest? Does the WDA need that exposure? Is it fair to the people that entered and participated to be put in this position? Were the results affected? Nobody knows. The problem is; the WDA should not put themselves in the position to be asked it. It's a perception of a conflict of interest if nothing else.

Is there anything else you don't know about this show that everyone else does?

If you cared enough to open your eyes and see what the results, facts, history, other people are saying you may learn something. If you don't care enough to apply yourself and see for yourself, no use wasting time trying to convince you. Your mind's made up. Why confuse you with the facts?

GSD Events Online has been updated with the 2014 NASS Resutls.  You can find them under the Events tab at www.gsdeventsonline.com

I have also created a special table which lists the results of all 3 of the 2014 Sieger Shows.  This includes the UScA, GSDCA and NASS.  You can sort and filter on all columns in the table.  This is a simple way to see who entered and how they placed in all of the events.  Hope you enjoy it.  You can view the table at http://gsdeventsonline.com/Events/2014_Sieger_Shows.php

Uh, first off, your wrong again.  It's not a competition.  The protection work is a pass/fail exercise.  No placings and as long as you pass with a pronounced it has NO effect on your placing in the ring.

So now it's the big conspiracy that Rory was out there cheating for Henkels dogs?  That he made the dog flunk bite work and carried all of John's dogs through? Couldn't possibly be that a dog just didn't pass on it's own.  I see from your words that a dog must be entitled to a VA.  He just shows up and he/she should just be given it because they have before.  Silly me, I thought you had to go to a show and EARN your rating every time.  It's supposed to be a challenge, not a given.  Even working dogs flunk protection sometimes. 

Of course in your world your too busy throwing innuendos and consipracy theories around to actually watch and see what happened,.

No, I don't pretend to know secret behind the scenes stuff that you constantly allude that you know.  I just keep hearing you throw everyone under the bus to justify your own preconceived agenda.  The judges are crooked, the helper is compromised, the dogs are all placed by what position the owner has on the board. 

It'd be a nice breath of fresh air if you would actually use some facts instead of deciding that everyone has ulterior motives to cheat one way or the other witth absolutely nothing to back any of it up.

Thank you for reinforcing most of my points. You don't have to admit you're silly, those that have read what you wrote already know that. Since you admit you don't know what's going on behind the scenes, take a step back and learn about the event, the history of the event and see if you can bring about some positive changes to bring some people back. The proof to my testimony is participation. Where did all the people go? Where are the people that used to enter this event? Why are there only 127 dogs in the ring?

Try to realize this event has a cancer. It's loosing entries each year. If you are so convinced this event is the premier event, maybe you can do something to convince those that no longer participate it is.

LOL,

Nice try, next time try putting words in someone elses mouth.  Won't work here.

Didn't say or allude to anything you stated in your post.  Clear sign you've already made up your mind about everything with no facts to back up anything.

See when you actually discuss something, you comment on the relevant points that the other party brings up.  You however just keep rotating to a different topic and an attack on a different person.  Deflect rather than discuss.  Yep someones looking silly here.

When I worked the Sieger Show as back half helper, each time there were over 60 working class females entered.  Show me any show with that entry level anymore.

There's a fact for you.  Thought I would show you what a fact looks like because it appears that you don't know what they look like.