You know, it's been a month of Tuesdays since I've seen a good argument/discussion on Masters rule changes.
Everyone is up to date, up to speed and probably bored stiff. So, how about this.....

It's always seemed to me, one of the unfairest factors in field trialing is that my dog can get hooked up in a corner of the pen with a nice little three-hound pack while yours is butting heads with 53 fire eaters looping the pen.
Mine gets a comfortable 25 points for simply showing up, every time they pass a judge. Yours has to beat out 49 others to get the same score. Meanwhile old Joe, who's learned he can't compete with either group is off by himself strolling along to the tune of 20-points per sighting. If other hounds show up, he'll drop this coyote and find one of the 247 others in the pen.
Can we make the system fairer to hounds that are really front-enders?
Just a thought -- what about a 5,4,3,2,1 point-system for packs of five or less. First hound in a four-hound race gets four points, three for three hounds etc. A hound running alone scores one point per crossing.
For 5-10 hounds, start the scoring at the appropriate number -- ten points for a ten-hound pack; seven points for first dog in a seven-hound pack.
For 10-20 hound groups award the first hound in a 20-hound packs 20 pts; second hound gets 19 points; third gets 18 etc. For a 14-hound pack, start at 14 points and work down.
For packs of thirty and over, start the scoring at 30 points. You can't really go higher Counting 30 hounds will be tough enough.
Can it be done? I'm not sure, but I think if you write down or tape record the first five, six, three hounds -- whatever you score on that crossing; write down the numbers and time, you can then start counting at one for the first hound you don't score and continue up to 30. Add the number of hounds you've scored and you'll have the category to award points.
Is it a bit tricky? Yes. Is it fairer to hounds really competing? I think so.
What are your thoughts?

Holy crap!!!!!!!!!!!!! I've been thinking the same way for years. I actually mentioned that same exact statement to a group of hunters at a puppy hunt recently and they laughed in my face as if it didn't make any sense to them. My feelings are perfectly in line with yours. Once you get past the first few dogs in a large pack the scoring becomes equal. This makes no sense to me. 5th place cross will receive a pack score just like the 9th dog to cross when he's actually ahead. Then when the judge gets tired of giving pack scores he just quits and the other 30 dogs get nothing for their efforts. It's easy, you score every dog. Then you count how many crossed and start giving them the appropriate number going backwards by ones. The dog running by himself gets 1. The dog leading a 3 dog pack gets 3. Simple Math!!!!!!! You will crown a true deserving winner this way 😉

Sounds like you would be taking points away from a smarter dog. I thought we were trying to achieve the all around best dog not just the fastest. If a dog is smart enough to know when he can't hang or get a lot of attention in a big pack, don't fault him for stepping back and getting in something he is better suited for. I don't know if a dog that is leading the pack really knows how many dogs are running with him either. can't really fault him for that. what if the other 49 dogs aren't in the same race as those 3 because the other 49 were too slow and said yall can have it. Just my 2 cents

It is a good idea but there is no way possible to accurately count the number of dogs in a big pack. Most of the time after the first 5 or 6 the are coming from every direction. So if a dog is in a 50 dog pack and only 7 hounds get scored that hound will only get 7 pts. I would not call that exactly fair. It will never work.

Just a thought. Fox hunting originated outside of the wire. I believe this scoring system is closer to what would happen if scored on the outside. Dogs that hark to races instead of piddling and getting left behind and then lost all together. If it wasn't for coyotes all over these enclosures a lot of these field trial hounds wouldn't get in a race, yet they continue to score points. Really sad 😕

Brian I understand your thoughts exactly. Once you get to the point where to many dogs are running in a tied position you have to stop scoring, but I'd take that 7 points at this crossing and hopefully 12 at the next and possibly 20 at the next. It beats the hell out of a dog dominating a 3 dog pack and getting 3 points.

Tight mouthing would be a thing of the past. Dogs use to be breed because they had exceptional mouths and could be heard during night time running. A dog is suppose to call other dogs to the race. If he does this well he would earn more points, therefor getting commended for his ability to be heard. Just another reason why I love this idea.

Only problem I see with that proposal.....

Eric can't count that high or that fast!!

Neither can I, nor a bunch of the other "old timers" judging. As we get older the brain gets slower!!

Now, maybe all you young bucks can count that high & that fast!

Eh.....maybe I hit on something...a reason we need more young judges!!

Well Eric...it is a thought!!

Hope to see you in a few weeks....if they will let me & Miss Marilyn across the border, one more time!!

Allan Bishop
(Jabber Jaw)

With Speed and drive, over 3 days of good running the consistantly good hounds will rise to the top. If said hound has 3 harking to him or 30, he needs to be running the front or fighting for it. The good hounds will consistantly do that. With good running and adequate judges I personally feel the rules in place pick the best dog.

WHAT'S YALLS OPINION ON SCORING DOGS THAT ARE RUNNING BACK IN THE PACK?WHAT I'M ASKING IS WHAT'S YOUR OPINIONS ON HOW FAR BACK TO SCORE EM.1-5,1-10,OR 1- WHAT EVER?

SEEMS TO ME THAT ABOUT ONLY SO MANY CAN BE RUNNING THE GAME & SOME SO FAR BACK IS RUNNING COVERED TRACK.

JUST WONDERING HOW YALL'S OPINION VARIES FROM MINE.IT'S A DOUBLE EDGE SWORD I GUESS.

I gave my opinion, but really I have no say in the situation seeing as how I'm selling out and starting a new chapter of my life. I do love the sport of fox hunting and hope to see it has improved when I find my way back to it. Tight mouthing, sight running, smart dogs will destroy it. Hopefully someday the older generation of hunters along with the young, will put their heads together and preserve this great pastime, by doing what is just for the Fox Hound. Matter of fact, very soon I will not have a dog in the race, and doubt very seriously there are very many judges out there with my athleticism. If a new scoring system was developed and required younger eyes and faster feet I would love to help whenever I'm available.

A good dog will win if the judges do their job. If a dog is piddling scratch him for loafing. If he's avoiding the pack scratch him for failing too hark. And quit scoring for hunting and trailing that's what knocks out good dogs. Now befor you attack. A dog in a pen with a piece of game for every dog needs to be running not hunting. I,m just a dumb ole country boy but it doesn't seem so hard.

Here is a similar conversation from 2009. It is in the archive section so I had to copy and paste rather than BTT.


Eric Emerson
Jun 28, 2009 - 9:25PM
I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
.... it needs to be addressed.
Loved the discussion on GTP. To me, the pros far out-weigh the cons and things like 5-minute intervals, more frequent time intervals for hunting scores, scoring only seven hounds and such are only making things better.
Will it produce the best hound as CH every time? Nope, but it will come at lot closer than anything we've seen yet.
There is only one other major change, I'd like to see implemented.
One of the biggest injustices in scoring hounds that I see regularly is this: You have a three-dog race going steadily around the pen, hounds switching positions occasionally, coyote not being pushed too hard, everybody's happy. Hounds are scored 35,30,25 every time they lope by a judge.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the pen, you have 40 hounds knocking heads in a screaming race. The first three score 35,30,25 every time they zoom by a judge.
The third-place hound in the first race is getting 25 points for being LAST in a three-dog race. The third-place hound in the second race has to beat 37 other hounds to get HIS 25 points.
Something's wrong.
I've thought a lot about how to address this, without making it so complicated it can't work.
What about this? For packs of seven or more hounds, score 35-5 points in five-point increments for as many hounds as you feel are contributing to the chase.
In packs of less than seven hounds, rate them accordingly. In a six-hound race the hounds would get 30,25,20,15,10,5; in a five-hound race, it would be 25,20,15,10,5.
Since a hound running alone gets 20 pts -- the only exception you would have to make is that a first-place hound cannot score less than 20 pts.
A four-dog race would be scored 20,15,10,5; a three-dog race 20,10,5; a two-dog race 20,5 and a hound running alone 20 pts.
When you finish scoring the three, four or five hounds you are able to get -- just count the rest until you reach seven. If it's less than that, score accordingly.
I know, I know -- you can make changes til the cows come home, BUT I just hate to see a hound running last in a three-dog pack getting the same score as one busting his butt to beat dozens of other hounds in a big pack.
Is there a better way to accomplish this? Lay it on me.

Heath Howell
Jun 28, 2009 - 11:42PM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
Eric, this topic has been skimmed over before but we never get very deep with it. The only thing I ever came up with is to rate the overall size of the race as you score it. For instance, a judge would make a note on his pad that a crossing was part of a "major" race if there were a good number of hounds (say 10 or over) and he would note that a crossing was part of a "minor" race if there were only a few hounds involved. Then you would have to decide how much more credit to give for major vs minor races.

I like your idea much better. It would be a little tougher on the computer operator to not be able to just enter the crossing and have the values fill in automatically.

Eric, I think this is one of those ideas that will not gather a lot of support in the field trial world but if a hunter cares about evaluating wolfhounds he is taking what you have said into consideration. If you could implement a system like you have outlined it would help us select better running hounds at field trials, that I'm sure of.

DAVID"SPANKY"MESSINA
Jun 29, 2009 - 1:13AM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
MR ERIC, THOUGH I UNDERSTAND YOUR THINKING, I DONT AGREE WITH IT. THIS IS MY REASON SAY THE RACE BREAKS DOWN FOR SEVERAL MINUTES. IT WAS A RACE OF SAY THIRTY HOUNDS , THEY ALL HIT THE ROAD BUT THREE .WHILE THOSE 27 ARE RAMBLING DOWN THE ROAD THOSE THREE HUNTING AND JUMP THE COYOTE ONE OF THOSE 27 THREW AWAY . SO THEY CROSS A ROAD AND GET SCORED I BELIEVE THEY DESERVE THAT CROSSING AND THERE RESPECTED POSITIONS 35-30-25 . GUESS WHAT BEFORE LONG THOSE 27 WILL BE BACK AND THE RACE IS ALL ON AGAIN TILL ONE THROWS IT AWAY. GOD BLESS AND HAPPY HUNTING/RUNNING


Eric Emerson
Jun 29, 2009 - 5:04AM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
Heath, You're right, it probably is a tough sell. People want some stability and familiarity in field trial rules. I'd just like to see us get it as close as we can before it stabilizes.
Good point about the computer operator. Hadn't thought of that.
Spanky, there are so many variables in trialing we can't nail down each one or we'd have a rule book as thick as the New York City phone book. In what you describe, the three hounds running the game would get full points as soon as four more of the 27 that drifted away harked back.

Hipshot (Preston Howard)
Jun 29, 2009 - 6:31AM
Re:Eric
For a retired man, you are up mighty early on a Monday morning. I guess you don't have Jane's deck finished yet!

Email
Eric Emerson
Jun 29, 2009 - 6:35AM
Re: Re:Eric
Preston, I didn't think you legislative-types were up before noon. I am impressed!
They're calling for rainy and cool most of this week. Very poor deck-building weather but great hound-running weather. I may sneak away a time or two.

C. Hardy
Jun 29, 2009 - 7:54AM
Re: Re:Eric
Mr. Eric Emerson

Drar Sir:

I have worked security for 33 years for a large corporation. A number of you have worked dillengently to develop great ideas for the sport of field trialing. Please do not let the resistance to these ideas detour from the aim that you take.
I have interpeted through the years the job I hold with out doubt becomes extremely interesting when some parties rebel against any change in a given routine most noteably when it tightens security. Consequintly there is usually underlying circumstances that account for this logic.
Good luck in your future endeavors of improving the sport. Your undying drive and unflapable desire to prevail will without doubt improve and stabelize this sport. Beware Mr. Emerson still water runs deep!

Hipshot (Preston Howard)
Jun 29, 2009 - 7:56AM
Re: Re:Eric
Eric,
We're in the 90's this week with only a slight chance of rain on Friday. Lousy hound running weather (well, truth is the hounds could probably handle it, but the owner can't!). Wish I had time to ride up to enjoy some of that cooler weather and listen to some hounds run with you.


Eric Emerson
Jun 29, 2009 - 10:38AM
Re: Re:Eric
I wish you could too, Preston. Like to have you hear the young Hammer dog run. He laid it on everything I had last Thursday. Of course, that's not a REAL tough chore, right now.
Along about mid-January, I'll start wishing I could go on down to NC and run with my buddy Hipshot.

Ted Steele
Jun 29, 2009 - 3:06PM
Re: Re:Eric
Eric--trouble is you will have to interview all judges to make sure they can count to seven

Eric Emerson
Jun 29, 2009 - 5:05PM
Re: Re:Eric
Ted, That's why I didn't suggest ll hounds as the cut-off. Don't want to force any of us judges to remove our boots in the midst of the action, particularly in this cold Canadian climate.

Rodney Sweat
Jun 30, 2009 - 12:44PM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
I have one day with a little time on my hands, and alis, this is what I find???
Hello Eric, I'm glad to see you brain is still functioning at top speed .
But It's obvious that you still have not been running with any July's. Three hounds running together were July's that had run out from under that Walker dog pack, and walkers were fortunate to find a slow coyote to follow. , Now Please Re-think your plan,now that you know there are three JULY's in the pen
Have a nice day dream!!!

Eric Emerson
Jun 30, 2009 - 1:57PM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
Rodney, This was the third day, so we know they're weren't three Julys LEFT in the pen. Good to hear from you, although I can't for the life of me figure why. Where you been?

Rodney Sweat
Jun 30, 2009 - 4:46PM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
I've been experiencing "GLOBAL WARMING", or maybe summertime in south texas ???? at 103* at 9:00 at night it hardly makes for good coyote running weather. Although I turn them out and let the sweat run down my elbows while I listen to some of the worst running that you can imagine. but IT's life in the fast lane. . just Agood thing that I own July's or else I may not get to hear any running!!!!

MARTY GILLESPIE/SLOW N EASY
Jun 30, 2009 - 8:59PM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
BEST TOPIC FOR THE BETTERMENT OF FOXHUNTING IVE EVER HEARD, IN MY OPPINION. IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE FOR A DOG TO QUIT A RACE AND GO TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PEN AND WIN THE HUNT. NOT ONLY SHOULD A DOG RECEIVE LESS POINTS IN A SMALL RACE, HE SHOULD BE SCRATCHED FOR LEAVING A BIG RACE IF OBSERVED.

Roger Geieger
Jun 30, 2009 - 9:52PM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
Let's assume the three dogs in the race are the fastest dogs in the pen and nothing else can or wants to get in this race . Then you are penalizing the fast hounds because slower dogs are unable to get in the race .... I mean we can nit pick at everything and any part of the rules if you really get technical ... Just my opinion !!!!! I think we trying to get to technical ???? If your hound is first and not running alone ... I think it should get the 35 points ...


Eric Emerson
Jul 1, 2009 - 5:15AM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
Roger, There is a possibility that the fastest three hounds out of two or three hundred would all wind up in the same race and simply run it away from hounds so badly that they couldn't even straggle through a hundred yards behind and be counted in the chase (although NOT scored).
There is also a chance that you or I might win the state lottery for 30 million bucks.
The numerical odds are so strongly against either happening that, for practical purposes, we'd probably be better off to ignore the possibility of either and get on with life.
It's much more likely that one hound will run out from under the pack and get 20 pts. for running alone, but that can happen now under the systems we have.
You are right though, we don't want to get so technical that the average hunter or judge can't figure things out. We also want to be as accurate as we can in trying to put a numerical value on the best hounds in a trial. It's like speed vs. endurance -- a delicate balance sometimes.
Right now, with our endurance charts, weighted categories etc. we are 'technical'.
GTP would make some changes in how we score, but simply adding up the points total to determine position is a lot less 'technical' than what we have now in either HGA system.

Roger Geiger
Jul 3, 2009 - 9:23PM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
Don't get me wrong i do believe a hound that can hold the front end with 30 or 40 hounds deserves the 35 points more ... But i just think we are trying to give the judges more than they can handle //// Whats the chances that 3 or 4 hounds are gonna run together that long in a pen full of about 200 hounds long enough to justify making a change /// Hounds should be getting with these hounds very quickly . I am sure it happens alot in a matter of 5 hours but i imagine its not the same hounds all the time either....


Roger Geiger
Jul 3, 2009 - 9:35PM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
If a dog running alone still deserves 20 points ... Than a dog leading in a 4 dog race still deserves 35 points ...Because the next crossing they will be 40 dogs with them .... just my opinion


Eric Emerson
Jul 4, 2009 - 6:00AM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
If you get a three-dog pack off in a corner of the pen and a judge willing to stand there and score them continually, they can rack up a LOT of points. Again, that third-place hound is getting 25 pts. a pop for running last in a three-dog pack.
If there are a few big races going on while this is happening, hounds that are looking for a race often get drawn to the big packs, leaving the three hounds circling in five acres to continue to win the lottery.
It would make things a bit more complicated for scoring s&d, but any proficient judge would handle it easily. Counting to seven isn't a great challenge. It's getting used to the change that's the big block.
Your point about the hound running alone vs. the first dog in a four-hound pack is well taken. I was trying to give extra credit for the hound running the front in smaller packs.
Maybe a better system would be 20-15-10-5 for packs of four; 15-10-5 for three; 10-5 for two and five points for alone. It would simplify the system. You would simply multiply the number of hounds in the pack by five to get the point value of the first hound and work down from there.
Would the increased accuracy be worth the slightly higher degree of difficulty? I say yes. You say no. What does everyone else say?

M. Jones
Jul 4, 2009 - 6:47AM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
No matter how well you fix the rules one ill placed hunting score can destroy 3 days of hard work with good hounds and good judges one hunting score can destroy the outcome of intense judging unless we go to GTP

HILLBILLY INC
Jul 4, 2009 - 7:01AM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
EMERSON SINCE YOU HAVE BECOME A RETIRED YANKEE YOU HAVE A WAY TO MUCH TIME ON YOUR HANDS...YOU NEED TO COME TO JULIESVILLE FOR A COUPLE WEEKS AND EVERYTHING WILL BE ALRIGHT......

Eric Emerson
Jul 4, 2009 - 10:36AM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
Hillbilly, I've got some real classy-looking young black and tans. They just need a few more hours in em and howl occasionally.
Once I get those small problems rectified, I'm ready to take Juliesville by storm. Any suggestions?

Eric Emerson
Jul 4, 2009 - 10:50AM
Re: I kind of hate to bring this up, but......
Mr. Jones, it's not simply one ill-placed hunting score than can re-arrange three days of good work. A good, legitimate, well-scored one can do the same thing on occasion.
When a judge makes exactly the right call in scoring what's going on and it distorts the results, I believe the rules need to be re-visited.
Again, GTP isn't perfect. Don't believe anybody's saying it is. In my opinion, we need to increase the frequency and possibly the weight of hunting in GTP. However, I truly believe it's a big step up from HGA.

Eric, I thought we had squared away every conceivable topic on this board but you have found one that might actually deserve another look.
I doubt any rules get changed but it is an interesting idea to try to award more points in S&D to the hounds outrunning the most competition. I had the "major" race vs "minor" race idea several years ago to try to sort them out a little but what you have here is very similar to the "bottom fill the classes" movement we had years ago where some wanted to start the HGA points in each class at the bottom and increase the points for each hound scored in the class until you filled the entire class of 10 hounds.
If we could bottom fill the S&D crossings so a single dog race got minimum points and a race with 10+ hounds got maximum points, I think we would be better off.
Of the several difficulties your kind of system presents I think the issue of keeping track of how many hounds were in the race is probably the stickiest and then the strain you would put on the computer operator would be next.

You might have a crossing where 3 hounds are scored but 8 hounds were actually in the race but the judge missed the 4th hound in the crossing and had to stop scoring. So now each crossing that gets turned in becomes a little bit of a puzzle to figure out where the points should start. As it now stands, the data entry is a mindless job where a good operator can roll through a stack of score sheets in a hurry because the computer assigns all the points except in the case of RA. this system would be considerably slower but that isn't enough of a reason not to pursue it.

I would recommend setting the maximum somewhere closer to 10 or 15 hounds instead of 30 hounds to reach maximum S&D points. That would make it easier on the judges to keep track of a "full" race rather than having to count all the way up to 30 and turn in those numbers with each crossing.

It is hard to count the number of dogs in a crossing heck when they are really hooking its hard enough to call all the numbers out period but I don't agree with all dogs running alone being too slow and that's why they are by themselves. A few years ago I was honored to judge the international at Jena and it was one of the best hunts I've ever attended and was able to really watch some top hounds perform under pressure. Webb's red gal won the hunt and she left no doubt in anyone's mind there that she wasn't the real deal has one of the best noses I've ever seen on a dog and can run a track wide open without missing the game at all and at times she was so far ahead of the pack that she would only be eligible for a running alone score and she wasn't getting there by swinging either. Then on the third day I watched Christi.
'S Lincoln run a good bit the dog had caught my attention the first two days with his speed class and mouth but the third day he was making dogs look stupid I scored him 9 times running alone but the thing that amazed me is dogs would hit his game ahead of him and you could hear that big chop mouth just over take them and the pack would quit him and he would continue driving his game and he did this all day long. Almost all his scores the last day were 20 point crossings if he could of got with just one other dog that could of hung with him there is no doubt in my mind he would have won the speed and drive the last day and probably won the hunt. But I do know one thing about it red gal and Lincoln are both top hounds and rose to the top with top hounds and both at times were running alone but when they should of been getting rewarded for running out from under dogs they were getting penalized for it by getting 20 points instead of 35

Mr. Newell----I did not think there was anyone else in this big old world that had the same thoughts as my friend Eric!!

It is tough. Maybe impossible. Maybe not. There may be some compromise that would be more workable and still advance the cause of that hound pulling the long train
Maybe it evens out over the long haul, but I've judged hunts where hounds racked up big scores in small packs while there is the steady roar of big packs in other parts of the pen. I just hate to see that hound laying it on 30 hounds getting the same score as the one laying it on three and I REALLY hate to see the hound running third in a three-dog race getting the same score as one running third with 30 others.
I don't think there's any system in field trial scoring that's completely accurate all the time. Maybe making the cut off at ten, like I suggested years ago would be more workable. Maybe 20. Maybe I should just shut up.

every one of us has had one of those once in a life time hounds whether it was ole trickze or ole jake we have enjoyed them who can ever say that the best dog won a field trial cause one thing its in a pen who knows who jumped it who knows what poor ole hound got it going after a loose u know its along shot from where it started 100 years ago would a dog have ate if all it could do was take a race over or if it run fast down a road no thats what field trialing has got to mine can run faster it dont stop no it came from a few ole houndmen that had real dogs but im afraid its has gone the wrong way thats why i dont do it and never will im proud of a dog that goes and trys when i turn it lose no matter how fast but gives the heart did u see that HEART thats what makes a hound run till u cant then daddy pick u up thats a good hound who cares hows fast all im trying to say is look around we all have hounds we are proud of but please lets all try to stay together i have a 4 month old son that i want to share this with no this is not the big shot sport that it once was but its a big one to my family lets stick together and hope it stays going god bless

OK. One more thought, then I'll shut up. Maybe.
Make your cut off at ten, 15, 20 -- whatever's feasible. Say ten. Ten hounds in the race, first hound gets ten points. Nine hounds in the race, first hound gets nine points BUT put a 5-point buffer between first and second.
The first hound in the race occupies a unique position. He is driving the bus. He is the only one in the pack running the game. In a sense, all the rest are running him. I know that's not completely true, but it is, in a sense.
If you're not the first dog in the race, the view never changes. That is completely true.
SO, first hound in a ten-dog race gets ten points. Second hound gets five; third hound gets four, fifth gets three, etc. First hound in a twenty-dog race gets ten points; second gets five, and so on.
Where this evens the field is in smaller packs. In a seven-hound race -- the first hound gets seven points; second hounds gets two points. Third hound gets one point. Nothing else scores.
In five, four, three, two and one-dog races -- only first hound scores. Five, four, three, two or one-point, depending on how many dogs.
This prevents the ridiculous practice of giving relatively big scores to hounds running last in a four, three, two-dog race.
Thoughts?

Eric, you had it right the first time! Don't over think yourself. As the score keeper it's definitely less confusing to write the dogs' numbers down as they cross for as long as possible, then when the race passes turn to your score sheet and give a "1" to last place, and then simply work your way up to first. 1st place lead changes happen often in every race, and you know as we'll as I do that it's hard to have enough judges. Don't give a dog 5 extra points for getting scored at a lucky time for him. The 2nd place dog could have had it the longest, but got cut off prior to crossing the road. 1 point differences will eventually iron itself out, but that 5 may not. Just a thought....plus it requires more figuring and better chance for human error. Score all dogs equally in a 1 the point format, and the biggest pack's lead dog will when the hunt, and deserves to.

I don't know how long you fella's have ran dogs or judged but a lot of crossings that you get are hard enough to score the dogs much less count how many dogs were in the pack or crossing! Every crossing that takes place is not a clean cut crossing where a piece of game crosses, then 5, 7, 10, or 15 dogs cross in exact line order. In saying that, I don't believe in scoring a bunch of pack scores. Score 5 dogs in the crossing if you have that many and be done with it. Just my take>>

Its hard enough to get judges now so if we keep making it more difficult they are going to say the heck with it and it will be like some of the recent hunts with only a few judges for hundreds or even thousands of acres.
I know that I have been in the pens and saw crossings that were hard to determine first to fifth much less how many are in the pack especially when they are ten wide site running a yote.

Mr. Really, that makes no sense either. If a dog runs middle to front of a pack basically 6th place to say...10th place she could run all day long and not score a single point. A dog that's trying should always receive something. My grandfather taught me that the most important muscle on a dog was its heart. By the way you don't have to count how many dogs are in the race, you just call them out as fast as possible until their gone, and then count up from the last dog by ones on your score sheet. What in the hell is so hard about that....Really??????