This is an interesting article on the NOHS
Owner Handler Series by the AKC. Many of our friends show in the NOHS. We haven’t much but we did plan on it.
I’ll be talking with some friends about the points in the article.
Original found at Show Sight Magazine

NOHS and the Dreaded (or Welcomed) Asterisk (*)
October 19, 2015
Written by Caroline Coile

I can’t believe I am writing a column about an asterisk. Or that one tiny “*” can cause so much debate. But if you’re a judge, steward or exhibitor in the NOHS series, you probably have an opinion on the AKC’s new policy:

“Effective January 1, 2016, exhibits that entered as eligible for NOHS will be marked in the judges book with an asterisk (*). Indicating NOHS eligible dogs in the judges book will enable the judge to verify that only eligible dogs are being considered as well as ensuring that all eligible dogs are in the ring. It will enable the judge and ring steward to work corroboratively to provide a positive experience for the NOHS exhibitors. Results from the most recent survey revealed that NOHS exhibitors are in favor of this change.”

From the monthly column “Thoughts I Had Driving Home From The Dog Show”. ShowSight, October 2015 Issue. CLICK TO SUBSCRIBE.

I took that survey. I voted “no” as did every other NOHS exhibitor I knew of. So it came as a surprise to see this new policy. Judging from the following responses, it came as a disappointment to even more. Here’s a sample, not only of the responses against the asterisk, but also including the few in favor of it:

• This is exactly what we DON’T want. My perception has always been that the AKC’s creation of the NOHS was in response to growing frustration among owner-handlers that they were not getting a fair look from judges when competing with pros.

In my personal experience, I have had a judge ask her final “line up” whether she had any owner-handlers and being VERY surprised when I raised my hand. There is absolutely no reason for the judge to have this information prior to judging. It eliminates the anonymity that has allowed for fairer judging. How do we get this
change reversed?

• I am done competing in OH. AKC is slowly trying to have two shows: one for paid handlers and one for non-paid handlers. Maybe they don’t even realize it, but that is what is happening. When I have a special in the ring, I want the breed points. But now, with the asterisk, it looks like all I am there for is the OH BOB. Wrong! All too often I have heard the judges grumble when they have to judge the OH group and even have heard the groups called “real” groups, as if the OH are not. From now on, my dog won’t be eligible. Wonder how many others will stop checking the box?

• I disagree with the change because of the discrimination factor. I completed that survey and said no. Absolutely not. The judges don’t need to know who is an owner handler until they have placed the Breed class. Very disappointed.

• I am fine with the change and the reason judges have given me that they are happy with the change, make a lot of sense. They want and need to know before the steward does or does not tell them to work off those who have qualified for the O/H ribbon. It is still their ring and so often if the steward forgets or does not get it right as to how it should work, the judge is ultimately still responsible for his or her ring. They literally stand there not knowing they still have some work to do. Works for me…

• It stinks. And I don’t believe the survey results. And even if it’s true they apparently now are really singling out us owner handlers.

• I am so sorry to hear this… They will now know from the moment they check your armband off walking into the ring that you’re an OH. Very disappointing. I may very well elect not to check the box in the future.

• The steward can tell the judge after placements have been made every dog that is eligible and let the judge take it from there. There are lots of other solutions to let the judges have control over their ring than adding the info to their book. I am
a frequent ring steward and it isn’t that hard to figure out. This is extremely disappointing.

• I certainly won’t be checking that OH eligible box. This is very disappointing.

• If you don’t like it, don’t play. I enjoy going toe-to-toe with the good handlers in BOB…

• …It isn’t fair to specifically designate who is the non-professional handler. How would it be to designate who is the pro handler in the judge’s book for the judges to see?