The Numbers Behind the Runs
Walk up to any herding trial and you will hear spectators asking the same question: “What is the score?” But scoring in sheepdog trials is not like scoring in football. The numbers require context, and that context varies depending on who is judging, what organization sanctioned the trial, and sometimes what happened in the run before yours.
I have watched judges score hundreds of runs. I have interviewed judges about their philosophy, their pet peeves, and their honest assessments of the sport’s subjective elements. What follows is my attempt to make sense of a system that experienced handlers still argue about.
The Basic Framework
Most American trials follow a point deduction system. Handlers start with a perfect score, typically 100 or 110 points depending on the trial, and lose points for errors. The dog that loses the fewest points wins.
Points are allocated across several phases of work:
Outrun (20 points typical) The dog leaves the handler and runs to the far end of the field to get behind the sheep. Judges watch for the dog’s path, which should be a smooth arc that does not disturb the sheep before the dog arrives behind them.
Lift (10 points) The moment the dog initiates contact with the sheep and begins moving them toward the handler. This should be smooth and controlled, not a sudden charge that scatters the flock.
Fetch (20 points) Bringing the sheep to the handler in as straight a line as possible. Every deviation from that ideal line costs points.
Drive (30 points) After the fetch, the handler sends dog and sheep away on a triangular pattern around the field. This phase tests the dog’s ability to work at distance while the handler directs from the post.
Pen (10 points) Getting the sheep into a small pen within the time limit. This requires precision and patience.
Shed (10 points) Separating specific sheep from the group, typically marked sheep that must be cut away from unmarked ones. Not all trials include this element.
What Judges Actually Watch
The point allocations tell you how much each phase matters mathematically. But judges evaluate on criteria that go beyond the obvious. The handler-dog partnership that operates smoothly catches a judge’s eye differently than a team fighting through each phase.
“I am watching the conversation,” explained judge Robert Ingle at a clinic I attended in Colorado. “The handler gives a command. The dog responds. The sheep react. That whole sequence tells me whether this team knows what they are doing.”
Ingle has judged trials across three countries and trained dogs that won at the national level before he moved to the judge’s stand. His perspective reflects what I have heard from other experienced judges: they are not just counting mistakes.
Pace and Rhythm
A dog that rushes creates tension in the sheep. A dog that works too slowly allows sheep to make bad decisions. Judges recognize when a dog finds the right pace, that sustainable rhythm where sheep move steadily without stress.
I watched a run at the 2024 California State Trial where the dog never appeared to do anything remarkable. The outrun was adequate, the lines were straight enough, the pen happened without drama. But the judge gave it a 98. When I asked afterward, he said, “That dog never made those sheep think about anything except going where he wanted them. That is skill people do not always see.”
Handler Intervention
Judges notice how often handlers whistle. A dog that requires constant direction is working differently than a dog that reads situations and adjusts independently.
“I am not counting whistles,” another judge told me. “But if a handler is blowing the whistle every five seconds, I know that dog is not thinking. It is just following orders.”
This creates an interesting tension in the sport. Some handlers over-command because they cannot trust their dogs. Others under-command because they trust dogs that should not be trusted. Finding the balance is part of what makes a winning team.
Sheep Behavior
Experienced judges read sheep behavior as closely as they watch dogs. When sheep settle and walk calmly, the judge sees that. When sheep bolt or bunch defensively, the judge knows something went wrong in the pressure the dog applied.
The Subjective Elements
Any honest judge will acknowledge that scoring involves judgment calls. Two qualified judges watching the same run might score it differently by 3-5 points.
“There is some subjectivity, sure,” admitted judge Patricia MacPherson at a post-trial discussion I attended. “But it is not arbitrary. If you understand what we are evaluating, the scores make sense. Handlers who complain about judging usually have not done the work to understand judging.”
She has a point, but so do the handlers who note that certain judges seem to favor certain running styles. There are what I would call “technical” judges who penalize harshly for line deviations and “working” judges who prioritize practical sheep handling over geometric precision.
Knowing which type of judge you are running for can legitimately affect how you handle your dog. This is not gaming the system. It is adapting to the evaluation criteria in play.
Time Limits and Disqualifications
Every trial runs under a time limit, typically 10-15 minutes depending on course complexity. Running out of time is not merely a penalty; it usually means disqualification for that run.
Other disqualifying offenses include:
- Dog biting sheep (causing visible injury)
- Handler physically touching sheep or dog during the run
- Dog going completely off course and refusing to return to work
- Handler abuse of the dog during the run
I have seen handlers disqualified for reasons they considered unfair. At a trial in Oregon, a handler was DQ’d when his dog nipped a ewe that had cornered and was kicking at the dog. The handler argued the dog was defending itself. The judge ruled otherwise. These decisions are final at the trial level, though they fuel discussions for months afterward.
Comparing Scores Across Trials
A score of 90 at one trial does not equal a score of 90 at another. Different courses, different sheep, different judges produce different scoring ranges.
At some trials, a winning score might be 85. At others, the winner posts 105. What matters is your score relative to others running the same course under the same judge.
For this reason, handlers competing on the trial circuit develop calibrated expectations for specific events. “That is a Meeker 80” means something different than “that is an Ohio 80.”
Reading the Score Sheets
After completing your run, most trials post detailed score sheets breaking down points lost in each phase. These sheets are educational tools, not just rankings.
If you consistently lose points on your outrun, you know what to work on. If your drive scores are strong but your pen scores suffer, that tells you something too.
Smart handlers study score sheets across multiple trials to identify patterns. Sometimes the pattern reveals a training gap. Sometimes it reveals a particular dog’s limitations. Either way, the information is there for those willing to look at it honestly.
The View from the Post
Scoring makes more sense once you understand what judges cannot see that handlers feel.
At the handler’s post, you feel the sheep’s energy through your dog’s responses. You sense when your dog is confident and when doubt creeps in. You know whether that wobble in the drive line was a mistake or an adjustment to something the sheep did that the judge might not have noticed.
Judges do their best, but they cannot feel what handlers feel. This gap between experience and observation is part of what makes the sport endlessly debatable.
For those advancing through the trial class levels, learning to interpret scores becomes increasingly important. What earns points at the Started level will not necessarily earn them in Open.
Final Thoughts on Fairness
For newcomers still learning how trials work, our guide on getting started at your first trial provides essential context for understanding what you will see.
The question I hear most often from newcomers: “Is scoring fair?”
My answer: it is as fair as any judged sport can be. The criteria are clear. The judges are generally experienced and well-intentioned. The randomness of sheep behavior affects everyone.
But fair does not mean perfect. There will be runs that deserved better scores and scores that deserved better runs. The handlers who last in this sport accept that reality and focus on what they can control: the training they put in and the decisions they make at the post.
The score at the end of the day is just a number. What you learn from that number is up to you.