Is this fast for agility?

[CptJack]

I am sincerely grateful that we have a titling system instead of that.

 

You never have to "win" over anyone to progress through the levels in most of the US Agility venues.

 

Suits me much better. I have never been one to want to "win" over anyone else. Even hated board games as a kid for that reason!!

 

This is a much more concise and better way of saying what I wanted to.

 

I don't want to *beat* someone else, I want to do the best I can with the dog I have, and I want to be recognized for that. Titles give me that, without having to 'win' , and certainly without having to have someone else lose to me.

 

Having to be in direct competition with other agility people would be profoundly unpleasant for me. I like how supportive we are of each other, and I like that we can ALL succeed without taking anything away from anyone else. That's a BIG appeal of the sport for me. There's recognition and challenge, but the only competition I'm in is against the course - or myself.

 

ETA: Didn't see the explanation above about other countries. That's really interesting and I appreciate the detailed response!

 

And I'm glad I'm not there

[Blackdawgs]

Well, in America, we like to be all-inclusive and want all of our children (and adults) to be "winners".

 

In America, the titling system and the extremely generous course times in some venues creates a group of dogs/handlers that are just getting by and are being allowed to "win" by virtue being awarded titles and giant championship ribbons. This encourages people to run dogs with physical and mental issues that really ought to be retired...and these people keep running these dogs because they are being rewarded by Q's, titles, and ribbons. I see a lot of this in one venue in particular, less so in another venue--people begging dogs that look absolutely miserable to negotiate courses....and the times are so generous that these dogs actually qualify

[CptJack]

Well, in America, we like to be all-inclusive and want all of our children (and adults) to be "winners".

 

In America, the titling system and the extremely generous course times in some venues creates a group of dogs/handlers that are just getting by and are being allowed to "win" by virtue being awarded titles and giant championship ribbons. This encourages people to run dogs with physical and mental issues that really ought to be retired...and these people keep running these dogs because they are being rewarded by Q's, titles, and ribbons. I see a lot of this in one venue in particular, less so in another venue--people begging dogs that look absolutely miserable to negotiate courses....and the times are so generous that these dogs actually qualify

 

...well, you know.

 

If you want to insult an entire country and agility system that works for a lot of people and dogs, I guess that's okay, too. I mean, as long as it's good for your ego and makes you feel good about yourself and like you and your dog are 'special' and 'better than others'.

 

That's the whole point of agility, right? Being the best of the best, beating other people? Nothing to do with fun with your dog, or personal success, or bonding or training, or having a successful run and personal accomplishment. MUST BEAT OTHER PEOPLE!!!! And results in a lot of dogs being run into the ground, injured, discarded for not being a special enough special snow flake and subjected to insane amounts of pressure.

 

See? I can do that, too. Be a jerk, I mean. Without knowing what the snot I'm talking about and making a lot of snide assumptions and sweeping generalizations about people and their dogs and entire VENUES based on limited personal experience.

 

Not okay - I mean unless you like being an asshole, I suppose.

 

(PS. Course times in NADAC are not 'extremely generous'. You can gripe about a lot of things with NADAC agility, but you're not making time with a dog who isn't happy to be there - not after Novice anyway. I don't know about anywhere else)

[Blackdawgs]

A tad sensitive, are you?

 

People do agility for many reasons and that is fine. However, running a physically or mentally challenged dog (eg a dog that looks and acts miserable, is lame, etc) because one can be successful is not fine.

[Root Beer]

Well, in America, we like to be all-inclusive and want all of our children (and adults) to be "winners".

 

That is an interesting assertion in this context. (And no, I am not being "sensitive" in choosing to engage you on this point).

 

I hear this said quite a lot by highly competitive Obedience people who object to the fact that many people are choosing to participate in other dog sports.

 

"People just want to do that because everybody gets a ribbon".

 

I disagree with them (because many of those sports where everyone is supposed to "get a ribbon" are actually quite difficult once you get beyond novice and many people work very hard to succeed and don't make it in the end), and I disagree with you on the point that the American titling system makes everyone a "winner". Plenty of teams wash out along the way in all of the dog sports that I know of.

 

I don't know what venue you are familiar with that gives Q's to all, no matter what, but I haven't seen it. There isn't a sport or a venue that I participate in that I don't have NQ's in. I even NQ'ed once on a video Rally course because there was an error that I didn't recognize and it NQ'ed the entire run, and supposedly "everyone Q's all the time" according to some. I have evidence that proves otherwise.

 

Now, it is true that there are venues that make things extremely easy at the lowest levels so that people who are just coming into the sport can be successful at the "entry level".

 

There are some who object to that. Personally, I am in favor of it. Yes, there are those who will wash out when things get more difficult as they move up the ranks. But, really . . . so what? For some, things will get harder, they will work harder, and improve at the higher levels. And others will decide, "this isn't for me".

 

Rather than making "everyone a winner", I think this arrangement gives everyone something of a level playing field for getting a foot in the door of the sport.

 

I realize that for those who are highly competitive (against other people), that is often met with disapproval. But, it bears keeping in mind that not everyone is highly competitive in that way. There really are many people, in dog sports and in other disciplines that require the development of specific skills, who prefer to be tested against a set standard than against the performance of other people.

 

That's not "everyone's a winner". That is simply measuring by a different yardstick.

 

 

In America, the titling system and the extremely generous course times in some venues creates a group of dogs/handlers that are just getting by and are being allowed to "win" by virtue being awarded titles and giant championship ribbons.

 

I haven't run into this.

 

Which venue is this? Not all venues have times that are NADAC tight, but I have yet to witness an Agility competition where teams that are "just getting by" can qualify in every class at every level, especially as they move up into the higher levels.

 

 

This encourages people to run dogs with physical and mental issues that really ought to be retired...and these people keep running these dogs because they are being rewarded by Q's, titles, and ribbons.

 

Hmmmmmm . . . so people in the highly competitive venues never run dogs with physical issues (in particular) who ought not be run on a given day, or at all? They never . . . oh, let's say, give a bunch of pain meds so the dog can run when the dog ought to be rested, or not running at all?

 

Actually, I know it happens. In AKC (where it is against the rules). In USDAA. It happens. And people know it happens.

 

 

I see a lot of this in one venue in particular, less so in another venue--people begging dogs that look absolutely miserable to negotiate courses....and the times are so generous that these dogs actually qualify

 

Which one? I haven't seen this.

 

I run in a venue that I have heard people say this about. But my personal experience has actually proven the assertion to be false time and time again. I run a moderate paced dog - she is not slow. And she runs eagerly, without being begged. And we NQ - sometimes for faults, sometimes on time. And I watch other dogs NQ - on faults, on time - routinely. The reputation that ribbons and titles are just being handed out for showing up and taking some equipment on course is completely false in the case of that particular venue.

 

So . . . I'm wondering which venue you know of that actually does hand out ribbons just for getting through, no matter how long it takes. I am extremely interested.

[mum24dog]

We have people who do agility for all sorts of reasons here too, from people who just like to pootle around the course hoping for the occasional rosette to those for whom places and even wins mean nothing except as a means to reaching the level where they can compete against the best to achieve their ultimate goals.

 

It's all fine. Room for everyone.

 

There's no rule to say that everyone has to care about winning; it's up to the individual what they want to get out of taking part and they should stop worrying about what others are doing or thinking.

 

I've been in the pootling camp where I would have been very pleased with a clear round but even so I would have felt patronised to be told we were amazing. I don't need external reinforcement, I'm realistic.

 

We've also got a dog that will be competing against the best at the weekend. A place would be nice but a respectable performance at that level would be enough, and that's where we want to be with our youngster.

 

KC have the most prestigious qualifiers and finals but other smaller organisations offer different progression systems to suit all approaches.

 

I'd be more likely to lose interest if I felt that rewards were too easily gained, but that's just me.

[Blackdawgs]

Don't put words in my mouth for the sake of being argumentative

Read for clarity: "extremely generous course times".

No, one doesn't qualify if it takes an hour to get around a course.

No, one doesn't qualify 100% of the time no matter what. But, even qualifying sometimes provides enough motivation to continue the behavior.

 

I hate watching people squeezing every last run out of their old, lame, stressed, etc dogs so they can finish titles/ championships.

[Root Beer]

 

 

I'd be more likely to lose interest if I felt that rewards were too easily gained, but that's just me.

 

That's the thing, though. What might seem to be "easily gained" to one person might actually be the accomplishment of a lifetime to another person. (Not saying you implied this - just flowing with the conversation here! )

 

Take NADAC Tunnelers, for instance. Some would say it is the "easiest" class in any venue in all of Agility. (Others would disagree - I am not saying it is because my dogs have NQ'ed in Tunnelers, but some people do say this).

 

OK, when I first got Tessa, she was terrified to go into anything. Couldn't get her in a crate. It was serious work to get her into a car (at first she would only go in if one of my other dogs were with her). So, teaching her to go through a tunnel was a long labor of love.

 

It took two 8 week sessions (this was in Basic class where the dogs did tunnels "for fun") to even get her to go all the way through short barrel, after all those weeks of planting treats in the barrel, and her popping in and popping out. I never pushed her, I let her make the choices ever step of the way. And when she mastered the tunnel and could be sent into one normally, it was a moment to rejoice.

 

So . . . her two NADAC Tunnelers Q's were among her first Agility Q's, and it was a HUGE accomplishment.

 

I am just using that as an example - I am not insulted or anything here.

 

But my point is this - you never know what went into a dog and handler team achieving a given accomplishment.

 

Like you, I don't like for things to be too easy. Often when we play the Colors game, there is a super easy option, and then one with a bit of a challenge. I almost always choose the course with the challenge. I don't like for things to be too easy (unless we have struggled all day and then an easy option comes up - sometimes I will take that as a "yahoo").

 

Tessa and I are 4 Q's away from her C-ATCH. The only other dog sport related endeavor I have put this much work into was Speedy's Freestyle (since that required helping him learn not to be overstimulated by his own motion and that took a lot of work!). We have struggled to make time and I have had to learn new handling skills so we can make time more comfortably. We struggled with discrims. I got good help and now we do them much more easily. Right now we are working our tails off on distance gambles (that is one thing I would not complain about them making easier!!). We have worked, and trained, and practiced, and taken online classes, and sought the help of more instructors than I care to admit, and we have earned 116 Q's in Standard and six games (each of which require a distinct skill set).

 

There are those (not you) who look at the venue from the outside and say, "it's too easy". Walk a mile . . . wait, no run 116 Q's (and all the NQ's - I haven't counted those) in my shoes with my dog.

 

Then tell me it's easy. I promise - you won't.

 

But you might see the titling system from a different perspective. One that doesn't make it easy . . . just possible if one is willing to put in the work . . . with the right dog. (Oh yeah - she's my third try. My first dog died when she was 40 Q's away from it and my second couldn't get far because of mental . . . and then later physical issues, because of which I retired him).

[CptJack]

I guess that's really the thing, mum24dog -

 

First of all, I agree - this isn't an argument - it's that in extension of what people feel they gain from agility, why they participate and what they want - there is also a matter of individual challenges and what constitutes them.

 

NADAC has an Intro level that has no weaves, no discriminations, and is only about 8-10 obstacles long. There are generous times, and they're just... not hard. You also don't have to do that level. So when I started I skipped it - no challenge, and I knew I was past it. Getting that ribbon would have felt patronizing.

 

(Other people do run it. They use it to practice distance, to get ring experience for green dogs, or to play with older dogs. I will probably do a run or two a weekend with my old deaf dog, because she likes to come and likes to play agility, too! This isn't me being criticial of the level just me talking about me)

But the titles don't. Okay, yeah, some of those titles came more easily than others at lower levels, but I still had to bust my butt to get a single Q in others, and the ones that came easily in lower levels (once I got my crap together) aren't proving anything like at higher, with more challenges and tighter times. The challenge is still there for me - it's just that the challenge is the COURSE.

 

I might, maybe, someday qualify for our champs - that would make me happy. I really, really think I'm going to be able to finish our NATCH and that will probably have me over the moon. Because it won't be easy to have that many fault-less, fast enough runs, at least not for us, and, heck, even having finally qualified on an elite course makes me proud. Because it was hard enough to mean something and took work.

It just... didn't involve beating anyone else, you know?

[Root Beer]

Don't put words in my mouth for the sake of being argumentative

Read for clarity: "extremely generous course times".

No, one doesn't qualify if it takes an hour to get around a course.

No, one doesn't qualify 100% of the time no matter what. But, even qualifying sometimes provides enough motivation to continue the behavior.

 

And please don't presume that I am being argumentative. Yes, I am debating you on the point that the motivation behind the American titling system is to "make everyone winners". That is not being argumentative. It's discussion. Let's talk about the subject at hand, shall we?

 

"Extremely generous times" is relative.

 

What is "extremely generous" to a world team level Border Collie or Sheltie may be a perfectly reasonable time allowance for a sound, but naturally moderate paced, Lab.

 

 

I hate watching people squeezing every last run out of their old, lame, stressed, etc dogs so they can finish titles/ championships.

 

I don't like to see that either. But I do like to see it when people show up with their healthy, comfortable, and even older dogs, who enjoy the game, and can play it happily and safely. Even when those dogs may not be running like a bat-out-of-you-know-where.

 

That is actually something that I enjoy about a venue that puts less emphasis on placement. I see a lot of people out enjoying themselves with healthy dogs who are enjoying themselves, but who would not have a place in venues with NADAC-tight times or USDAA high jumps. I do appreciate that type of inclusivity (not sure that's a word, but you know what I mean!)

 

ETA: I am not putting down NADAC or USDAA. Those venues absolutely have an important place in the US Agility scene. That is kind of my point - there actually is a legitimate place for all who wish to play (with due regard for the dog's health and well being - always).

[mum24dog]

On the subject of encouragement, I'm the one who decides how many places to give at our large show (enormous by US standards I believe). I absolutely do believe that those who are not at the top in their grade need occasional reinforcement in the form of something tangible to show for their work and persistence so I am more generous than many shows that place to a conventional 10% of the entry.

 

And we give clear round rosettes to everyone who has an unpacked clear, which a lot of shows do.

 

But in most cases if you want to move up the grades to the top you have to do considerably better than average.

[CptJack]

Tunnelers kills me.

I suck at tunnelers.

 

I cannot handle a tunnelers course to save my life - and there just isn't room for mistakes in the course time. Tunnelers will be the death of me. I keep running it because the dog loves it, but Jesus that game murders me/my dog. Easily my lowest Q rate in NADAC games.

 

And that includes Chances.

 

More random perspective I guess.

 

And proof that not everyone is going to get every title/award, because if I ever get anything beyond Novice re: Versatility, it will be a miracle. Because *TUNNELERS* LOL.

[Root Beer]

Tunnelers kills me.

 

I suck at tunnelers.

 

I cannot handle a tunnelers course to save my life - and there just isn't room for mistakes in the course time. Tunnelers will be the death of me. I keep running it because the dog loves it, but Jesus that game murders me/my dog. Easily my lowest Q rate in NADAC games.

 

And that includes Chances.

 

More random perspective I guess.

 

And proof that not everyone is going to get every title/award, because if I ever get anything beyond Novice re: Versatility, it will be a miracle. Because *TUNNELERS* LOL.

 

HA!! I found Tunnelers to be a challenge, as well. Dean got Novice title, but never Q'ed beyond Novice.

 

He was a trip. He would see a tunnel (that I didn't send him to), go take it, and come out with this expression on his face like, "did you SEE what I found?!!?" I couldn't help but laugh.

 

I am eager to see how Tessa runs in Tunnelers now that we have run so much Agility together. She just needs one more Q for the title, so I want to go finish it at some point.

 

I'd never take her beyond Novice, though. She doesn't have the speed for NADAC, beyond Novice.

[Root Beer]

 

But in most cases if you want to move up the grades to the top you have to do considerably better than average.

 

Personally, I don't think that one system is objectively better than the other.

 

It's just that different people are suited to different structures.

 

I am really grateful for what I have access to. I think that's a good thing. You seem to like the system that you participate under, and that's a good thing, too.

 

This is one area where I believe "to each his own" really does apply.

[CptJack]

HA!! I found Tunnelers to be a challenge, as well. Dean got Novice title, but never Q'ed beyond Novice.

 

He was a trip. He would see a tunnel (that I didn't send him to), go take it, and come out with this expression on his face like, "did you SEE what I found?!!?" I couldn't help but laugh.

 

I am eager to see how Tessa runs in Tunnelers now that we have run so much Agility together. She just needs one more Q for the title, so I want to go finish it at some point.

 

I'd never take her beyond Novice, though. She doesn't have the speed for NADAC, beyond Novice.

 

Kylie finished her novice tunneler's title and hasn't Qed since. If she Q's again there, it will be an accident. I moved her up entirely because Open walks and runs before novice and tunnelers is always huge and the last course on the last day (and the same course at all levels, just different times).

 

For me that's the run that's purely for the dog - she likes contacts most and always has fun but she gets a shot of adrenaline and happy when she runs all tunnels and it means _every_ trial ends on a really high note.

 

Of WHEE for her and OMGWTFLOL for me.

[alligande]

I will fully own up to being competitive, I love the thrill of a good run coming together, picking the best line, handling it right, getting the turns tight, winning says I got it right. It does not happen often as we are as likely to flame out as we are to have a clean run, but I feel if we play safe I am not challenging myself.

 

My primary criticism of Q system in the US is that it rewards people who can afford both the time and money to compete often, this particiularly seems true in AKC where I have seen a lot of dogs with championships who in other venues look average. The two venues I know best USDAA and NADAC both have a special challenge, with USDAA it's the super Q in Snooker, and in NADAC it's chances. I know AKC has the double Qs but that rewards consistency and carefull handling over pushing to get the best out of your dog and your self. I have actually never found NADACS times really tight, even with my slow border collie, if we stayed connected we made course time. With my current dog, I had all the time in the world.

 

On the other hand the UK winning out method to move up, seems hard when you run a dog who is not a speed specialist. But when a dog in the UK has an agility championship it is something special.

 

In FCI in Spain, moving to grade 2 is your standard 3 clean runs, but moving from 2 to 3 I think currently requires 9 Qs in the same year. A lot of dogs get stuck in 2. I friend of mine here has a border collie who came from the States with a MACH, it has taken over a year for them to connect, but she is not the same dog in the videos from her American career, she was always fast, but a focused missile would describe her now.

 

I have no idea what the answer is, but I have always felt something with the title of champion should reflect something special.

 

Like Airbear course time means nothing to me, even with my slower dog, as I know if I have a clean run we will Q. I do casually pay attention to the yards/meters per second, I think it helps to compare how you handled the course compared to completly different one, did those lines you took work, did you shave of a little time with working those wraps in practise. Or it might be a reflection of the amount of coaching I have had in the last couple of years from world team members where it's all about shaving 100s of seconds of.

[mum24dog]

Personally, I don't think that one system is objectively better than the other.

 

It's just that different people are suited to different structures.

 

I am really grateful for what I have access to. I think that's a good thing. You seem to like the system that you participate under, and that's a good thing, too.

 

This is one area where I believe "to each his own" really does apply.

I haven't said any different.

[PSmitty]

I don't see agility as a 'win/lose' game. I just don't. I'm not competing with other people. Whether they Q or not, whether they are faster than me or not, does not in ANY WAY impact my progression in the sport - particularly not in my venue. The ONLY thing you get for being super crazy fast is an extra award (again: in my venue, which most people here dislike) Doesn't even get me into champs or higher levels or - ANYTHING. Like, literally, you can get a speed star, but... that's it.

 

Being faster than someone else gets me... precisely nothing. Getting first place gains me (or anyone else on a regular weekend)... nothing. Fastest clean run wins WHAT? It's the same 10 point Q/leg toward a title as the slowest clean run under standard course time. There's... nothing in that first ribbon, in fact placement ribbons are the ones I take LEAST often because they mean NOTHING. You can get a first place and not even have a clean run. As long as you have any score, you can get a blue ribbon. Blah.

 

Clean run under SCT? That matters. The rest makes absolutely zero difference to me at all because it makes no difference what I run, how far I go in the sport, which titles I get, whether I can go to nationals/champs, or - well, anything, really, though it matters where I place if I DO get to champs, I suppose.

 

It also has the (pleasant, for me) side effect of almost entirely eliminating competition between people who are playing the game/dogs.

 

And for me, anything else, rips the heart out of agility and would make it a game I would not care to play.

 

This is all great, and I'm glad you kept repeating "for me". The thing about agility is that there is something for everyone, pretty much. If you and Kristine don't enjoy the competitive aspect of agility, that's cool. But a lot of people do. And it doesn't make them cut-throat or people who do agility for the wrong reasons. It doesn't "lessen" what agility is. Competitive people love their dogs just as much, get as much joy out of running with them, enjoy the journey, etc... But maybe they also enjoy the aspect of running as hard as they can to shave tenths of a second off their time in Steeplechase finals, or national finals, to try to win. Why the heck not? It's fun! (for them)

 

I will stop harping on it after this, but the OP asked if this dog was fast for agility, and the thread took a turn towards saying speed doesn't matter in agility. People may play the game for a variety of reasons, but that doesn't change the fact that in every venue, agility trials are a competition, and speed does play a factor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CptJack]

What NADAC times require, in most cases, are that there be a tight line, a good connection, and the dog run. For dogs who are medium or larger. Unfortunately the 20% time break for small dogs is sometimes something that seriously catches dogs out. CAN dogs hit the times? Yes, but where a large dog can occasionally have a wide turn, or drop in speed, the smaller dogs can't afford that, particularly on the smaller end of small.

 

I don't find the times in regular bad at all, actually, or even most of the games, but Jumpers and Tunnelers I don't know many people who don't occasionally miss Qs based on time, at least at upper levels, even if the dog isn't lagging.

Which is mostly why I mentioned NADAC times at all. They're set to be possible, but you're not going to 'drag a miserable dog' around them and make time, which was basically the issue I was responding to. You're not going to make a mistake, have a wide run, foible something, and make time outside novice - at least not with a dog smaller than medium, and even then elite gets touchy.

 

That said, I don't think there actually needs to be an answer. It seems like there are a lot of options out there and most people can ultimately find what they want and works for them and come on, guys, at the end of the day no matter how competitive you're playing a game with your dog. It SHOULD be fun, and I think assessible in various ways for people who want to play.

 

The variations give us that and most of us seem pretty happy where we are. Criticizing people who do it differently accomplishes nothing. Which was why I was so snotty in my earlier reply - and made a POINT of pointing out I was demonstrating the inappropriateness of it, admittedly via example.

 

You (general) don't have to play where I am, I don't have to play where you are, and disparaging each other is just... dumb.

[CptJack]

Well, no, the OP asked if a particular YPS was fast. The original answer was 'on what course, what venue, and with what handling mistakes/not'. After THAT things veered off, but yes, I think I have been pretty danged clear that I do what I like and play where I want and only got shirty and snotty after some fairly nasty, disparaging, and outright snide remarks.

 

Or posts by people confused by how speed can not matter, ever, because fastest clear run wins.

Sometimes! Depends on venue! Sometimes that's a 'wins what?'

 

One size doesn't fit all, which is, again, the point.

[PSmitty]

I will fully own up to being competitive, I love the thrill of a good run coming together, picking the best line, handling it right, getting the turns tight, winning says I got it right. It does not happen often as we are as likely to flame out as we are to have a clean run, but I feel if we play safe I am not challenging myself.

 

My primary criticism of Q system in the US is that it rewards people who can afford both the time and money to compete often, this particiularly seems true in AKC where I have seen a lot of dogs with championships who in other venues look average. The two venues I know best USDAA and NADAC both have a special challenge, with USDAA it's the super Q in Snooker, and in NADAC it's chances. I know AKC has the double Qs but that rewards consistency and carefull handling over pushing to get the best out of your dog and your self.

 

<snip>

 

I have no idea what the answer is, but I have always felt something with the title of champion should reflect something special.

 

 

 

Yes, yes, and yes!

[Root Beer]

The thing about agility is that there is something for everyone, pretty much. If you and Kristine don't enjoy the competitive aspect of agility, that's cool.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Actually, I consider myself highly competitive. Against the course, and against the standard at our level, and in light of my dog's training, strengths, limitations, and individual abilities.

 

I love nothing more than to go out there with my dog and accomplish something that we have worked very hard for, and where certain odds are stacked against us.

 

Just . . . not against other people.

 

 

But a lot of people do. And it doesn't make them cut-throat or people who do agility for the wrong reasons. It doesn't "lessen" what agility is. Competitive people love their dogs just as much, get as much joy out of running with them, enjoy the journey, etc... But maybe they also enjoy the aspect of running as hard as they can to shave tenths of a second off their time in Steeplechase finals, or national finals, to try to win. Why the heck not? It's fun! (for them)

 

I agree wholeheartedly but with two caveats . . .

 

1. As long as they give due consideration to their dogs. Some dogs can really handle - and even thrive with - a handler who is highly competitive against other people. Others don't have the temperament for it. So, as long as the dog is suited to that situation, and the handler doesn't get nasty with the dog for . . . being a dog, I have no issue with it.

 

2. As long as they are respectful to other people who do not share their personal view on being competitive. One of my best friends in dog training is as competitive as they come. She wants to be the best. But . . . I have never known anyone who shows more appreciation for the efforts put in by those who are just starting, working with special needs dogs, or are just not in it for the same reasons she is. I have the most respect for her because of this.

 

Not all competitive people are cut-throat. But I will admit that I have no use for those who are (cut-throat). I'd say that in life, as well as in dog sports.

 

But those who maintain respect for the goals and situations of others . . . go for it! I'll even be just as supportive in return.

[Root Beer]

. . . and only got shirty and snotty after some fairly nasty, disparaging, and outright snide remarks.

 

Shirty . . . LOLOOOOOOOOOLOLOL!!!!!

 

[CptJack]

Actually, I consider myself highly competitive. Against the course, and against the standard at our level, and in light of my dog's training, strengths, limitations, and individual abilities.

 

I love nothing more than to go out there with my dog and accomplish something that we have worked very hard for, and where certain odds are stacked against us.

 

Just . . . not against other people.

 

Yeah, this. I work my butt off. I'm fairly new at the game but if you think I'm not running my butt off to shave a tenth of a second off my dog's time or training or trying to find the best way to handle to get the fastest time I can, you're wrong. I am. Not always successfully, but I am!

 

I just don't particularly care if that's faster than anyone else.

[CptJack]

Shirty . . . LOLOOOOOOOOOLOLOL!!!!!

 

 

I LIKE SHIRTY DARN IT. >.>