91 replies to this topic

[SecretBC]

That's because there are very rarely any opportunities to handle a sequence differently on NADAC courses. Ooooooh, you can do a front cross here or a rear cross there. Yippee skippy.

Although, that really WOULD be a challenge to many of the people I see at NADAC trials. I think there are some people who have honest to god never done a front cross in their life. When I throw in blind crosses I get all sorts of ooohs & ahhs.

[rufftie]

i used to play competitive pool. often after a match i would think "boy, i wish i had that shot over!" of course you never do. and i'm not sure i'd want to. i practice the skills, the shots i missed, shots that might happen and the basics. when i step in to compete i know no 2 games will ever be the same and only what happens on the table that day counts. no do-overs. you're right, that's called practice.
i loved watching people do the distance skills in nadac. i'm sorry that all that talent will be squandered in a venue that will soon only be used by the sharon faithful, who i often thought were sychophants. i have also had some of my emails to the nadac board squashed. shame.

[gcv-border]

Wow!

I am not an agility expert, but I did think that NADAC was a bit 'dumbed down'. --- no dogwalk, no tire, etc. Even so, I would go and play NADAC with my dog once a year (he is novice/open in ACK) for a change of pace and to get to play TUNNELERS. Yippee!

EGC seemed like an interesting change of pace. VT points really irked me. The barrels - well, I guess that is another wrinkle, but not a particularly challenging one, although to think that tunnels are not safe??? So are they going to remove the tunnelers class??

The new rule requiring dogs over 7 years old to move into Veterans is absolutely RIDICULOUS. That is the straw that broke the camel's back.

Jovi

[mum24dog]

And last, but not least... starting 1/14 with NADAC, any dog 7 years or older has to run in Veteran's class. Now, I have no issues with running a dog in Veteran when it's time, but having someone dictate when that is just pisses me off.

One of mine will be 12 in August and a couple of weeks ago got a 4th place in a class of 63 Grades 5-7 (7 being the top which she is) and at a Champ show where a lot of the best dogs were competing. She actually beat the dog that won the Champ class.

We ran her in Vets a few times last year as she'd gone a bit flat but she's picked up again over the winter.

Has this Sharon ever done real agility (at least to any competent level) or even owned a dog?

[alligande]

Yesterday i spent the day on trains and planes coming home from England but guessed that this topic would be here When I saw Sharon had posted on the NADAC list about this, my first thought was here we go again.... I am not as vested in NADAC as SecretBC but I started in that venue 4 years ago as there where lots of trials locally and the people were really nice, truthfully not having a tire/seesaw/table did not bother me, but the hoops started their appearance and have continued to grow in number in every class and that annoys me and now we have barrels. I compete in NADAC because there are lots of trials locally in a great facility, I would do USDAA if it was more accessible, but like Secret I am starting to switch over, I could do AKC locally at the same great facility but choose not to. I would like to be able to support my friends with my limited agility budget, but I will be attending their trials less and less.

It is too many changes to fast, this year the NADAC list has seen One controversy over another, having corresponded with Sharon I do not think she really cares about customer feed back, in my opinion she feels she is the expert and the innovator and we should all fall in line, it is her business and she can run it how she likes BUT there are a lot of clubs who have invested heavily in NADAC equipment and they are the ones who will end up struggling.

In defense of NADAC it is really not true that only those that can not do other venues do NADAC, I have watched people who have an ADCH and MACH struggle to get their NATCH, it is a different handling style due to the wide open nature of the courses, at the moment my partner and I struggle with them as we do not have distance skills, I have been spending my training time learning how to handle my fast dog for USDAA/AKC style courses as I love the physicality of that style of agility. Watching a great team run a NADAC type course is just as thrilling as any other venue.

[Rave]

Oh Sharon likes feedback, but only of the positive variety. Anything negative is usually stopped before it gets to the list.

[Root Beer]

In defense of NADAC it is really not true that only those that can not do other venues do NADAC,

I concur.

I know quite a few AKC folks, handlers with multiple MACHs, who also participate in NADAC, to varying degrees. And they don't go out there and have an easy time of it in every single run, either. They seem to enjoy NADAC, and some have even said (in my presence) that they find NADAC to be more enjoyable. That's not universal, of course.

Watching a great team run a NADAC type course is just as thrilling as any other venue.

I concur with that, as well. It is impressive to watch some of the excellent distance handling. I have never found myself watching someone run a perfect course while maintaining a significant distance from their dog and found myself thinking, "but . . . there was no teeter in the course" or "oh, but there were hoops in the course".

I actually think the barrel idea is cool, not as a replacement for the tunnel, but as a new Agility exercise.

That said, I can see why it is frustrating and upsetting to those who have been invested in NADAC to see changes that do change the overall nature of the venue. I would be pretty upset if CPE removed all of the jumps from Jumpers, or removed points from Fullhouse, or made a whole course made up of teeters or tables (give me a hoop or a barrel over a teeter any day, and I've always thought the table was just plain stupid). Especially if those changes were made suddenly, and there were a lot of changes within a short time period.

[mum24dog]

We have our own "Sharon" here, but not as extreme - yet.

You know the sort - she's the only one who cares about the welfare of the dogs and believes she is being plotted against by the establishment, and she has a contingency of acolytes who hang on her every word. Sees one mishap and extrapolates it into a major problem.

We generally find the best thing is to ignore her. Her very minor organisation clearly occupies a small niche in the sport and if people want to take part in what she has to offer where's the harm?

The only time she gets mainstream competitors riled is when she whips her followers into a frenzy of outrage because we don't want to change our agility according to her personal ideas.

I'm all in favour of free market forces in the sport, but only on a live and let live basis.

Interesting to discuss weird ideas though. I don't find barrels a particularly strange idea in themselves, but the rationale given doesn't bear close scrutiny and they aren't what I would call a challenge.

[mum24dog]

I know I watched an hour of video of an international competition
recently and was shocked that every single handler handled from the same
position, the same turns, the same everything............... and yes, the winners
were separated by 100ths of a second.... but there was no change from
handler to handler........... so it did come down to minute degrees of
difference from the dogs....... and the course designs didn't really offer many
options for "different".... the size and color of the dogs changed, but
nothing else really did............. other than some missed contacts and knocked
bars. I am not criticizing I am just saying that I was disappointed in the
absolute consistency of "norm".....

This from Sharon suggests to me that she really doesn't understand Agility or what she is seeing.

All courses offer "options for different" for a start.

[Rave]

This from Sharon suggests to me that she really doesn't understand Agility or what she is seeing.

I thought the exact same thing when I read that.

[SecretBC]

Hi, group.
I will try to make a post without unintentionally hurting someone's
feelings or putting people on the defensive... here's to hoping!!

As I go through emails and posts and people's "emotions" about a
barrel or a hoop or whatever it might be..........

The biggest "issue" that I find is that NADAC is not "obstacle"
focused. We have always been about focusing on the teamwork between dog and
handler and not necessarily about the physical performances of "obstacles". A
barrel or a hoop just becomes "natural" to us because that type of
"obstacle" cannot just "be performed"... a dog is not going to just naturally "go"
to a hoop or barrel.... they will "need" information from the handler on
"how" to do those obstacles...... and that is "forever".... you can't just
"teach" it one week and then use unclear handling the next week and just
expect them to "do" them.... if the handling is weak, then the dog will not
just give you a "freebie"... if you stop giving clear body language, then the
dog doesn't even consider going to the hoop or around the barrel.

Jean posted a video showing my weave training methods and is doing
great after 6 lessons!! Then because of the discussions on the list, she
replaced her "C" shaped tunnel with a barrel just to see how her young dog
would react.......... a perfect video! Jean handles beautiful and he
"performs" it great......... then Jean kinda expects him to just go around it on his
own and he turns in front of it and follows her body language to
perfection......... Jean did not indicate a path around the barrel and he follows
the path that she does draw perfectly! Of course Jean laughs and goes on
with it, as she "feels" how well he follows her......

I am preparing some video of Busi........ and how interesting!!! I
placed her in front of a couple jumps with a "C" shaped tunnel at the end and
no issue.......... from the head cam, she stares at that tunnel and I can
make all kinds of "incorrect" body language and she flies to that tunnel
with ease............ but then I put a barrel at the end and she will still
go right to the barrel because of my body language and her "focus" has a
"side" look to it as she always has me and my body language in view..... with
the tunnel, as long as I verbally say "go tunnel" I could do hand stands
and she is going to that tunnel! But I can verbally say "go around" and she
commits to the barrel, but she also will turn off that barrel with the
smallest of "new" information from my body language.......... so with the
barrel she stays committed to the "path" being indicated and with the tunnel she
is committed to the "obstacle".

And that is what upsets so many people when they come to seminars and
such.... if they are going to be very successful with EGC or hoops or
barrels, they must handle with "perfection" or the courses are next to
impossible. EGC is all about "path" and the ability for a handler to clearly
communicate "where" they are to go and has nothing to do with "what obstacles"
are to be performed......... and people either hate it or love it........

NADAC and it's courses have always been about "path" and not about
"obstacles" but we have failed some of our "ideal" tests since it is so easy
to teach "obstacle focus" on a course of pure obstacles and the dog is
allowed to zig-zag between obstacles and still get to an obstacle and perform
it.... and then hoops added a much higher degree of "handler" into the
picture... because the dogs didn't just "go do them".... they were easy for a dog
to perform as long as the "handler" was giving clear information to "where"
they wanted their dog to go and not "point and shoot" towards an obstacle.
When people point and shoot at a barrel or hoop, then the dogs go on the
"path" of "where" the handler pointed........... and that doesn't always
include a pathway to a hoop or a pathway around a barrel.

I do understand how difficult it is for people to promote NADAC when
people do not understand the difference between "obstacle focused" courses
and "pathway focused" courses. For so many handlers, doing pathwork is just
"natural"..... they just naturally see "where" they want their dogs to go,
but for some it is more difficult... and they see "what obstacle" they
want their dog to do....

When we talk about a "C" shaped tunnel the "obstacle" forces a path
for the dog and with a barrel, the handler "creates" a pathway for the
dogs........ or not.... but the test for "teamwork" between the dog and handler
is highly tested. The dog will run on the pathway "created" by the handler
instead of having the tunnel forcing the pathway for the dog.

I have had emails saying that some people don't want to do NADAC
because it is "too different" from the other venues.......... and I do
agree..... if people want to do agility within NADAC that is the same as other
venues, then they are going to be very disappointed and will eventually leave.
But if they grasp the "flow between dog and handler" that is not created by
obstacles, but is created by the information from the handler and the
dog's ability to respond to that information to run the "pathway" that puts
obstacles in the dog's pathway for the dog to perform.... they will then enjoy
NADAC ...the pathway puts the obstacles in front of the dog.... and if a
dog is willing to follow a path put before them by a handler, then
performing the obstacle is the lessor of the challenge!

NADAC has always focused on the "20 feet between the obstacles" and
not the "one inch" over a jump or through a hoop, or the distance inside a
tunnel or over a contact. The dog must learn how to correctly perform each
obstacle and then it becomes all about making the pathway perfect between
those obstacles!

We could go back and put in "obstacles" to make NADAC more appealing
to those that want "obstacle based" agility.......... but we are very happy
with our current format and that we are a "pathway based" agility......

Watching the videos with Busi's headcam confirms that "she" gets it!
With the hoops and barrels she wants "pathway" information, but with the
tunnel, she doesn't need me nearly as much.... and she switches back and
forth with ease! When I first got her, she was totally "obstacle" focused....
to an extreme that I had not met in 20 years! Of course, being "obstacle"
focused did not include any yellow during contact performance or the
correct end of a tunnel, or a full set of weave poles!! I never fixed any of her
"obstacle" issues......... and they all left as she gained "pathway"
focus, which can't happen without a desire to accept information from the
handler!

I don't believe that any venue is perfect and all venues are
different........ but the biggest difference is that "obstacle based" training
doesn't work so well in a "pathway based" set of courses....... and that makes
many people very angry and emotional if they don't have the necessary
"pathway" skills.......

For those that do "pathway" based training, they do have a tendency to
feel "what is the big deal, just let them know where to go.......... a
hoop is easy .... a barrel is easy"... but they aren't easy if a dog is purely
obstacle focused...... they are next to impossible to "perform" because
there isn't any "obstacle performance"... there are "pathway" skills and if
the team hasn't worked on pathway skills then hoops and barrels are
incredibly difficult to "perform".

So we need to accept that NADAC is different. We aren't going to
change what we do and people will come (our new registrations are higher than
they have been in five years!) and people with leave. That is not unique to
NADAC, it happens in every venue, and always has and always will. People
want to have fun with their dogs and they will select what creates that fun!

If handlers are extremely obstacle focused, they will get frustrated
with NADAC and leave. If handlers are pathway focused, they will love NADAC
and stay with it. And many, many handlers can do both and excel at
multiple venues and love them all!

But it is tough to talk apples and oranges and that they MUST taste
the same. They don't... and people will always prefer one over the other,
and enjoy that they are very distinct and many people can enjoy both.......
but they must be willing to accept that they are different and that is
okay......

If you want to embrace NADAC, then work on those pathway skills!

It is like the recent topic of speeding up the slower dog... and how
to do the barrel faster......... and what I was trying to say in my response
is that it isn't about doing the "barrel" faster, but to build the
enthusiasm for the dog to hear and respond to the handler's voice and not just to
an obstacle or a toy. Build up that "response" between dog and it
dramatically lessens the time issues on course!

If a team is and only wants to be obstacle focused then they will be
or will become very frustrated with NADAC, because NADAC is not about
obstacle focus, it is about doing everything it can to test that teamwork between
dog and handler. I have always loved Amanda's signoff which says
"Teamwork............ without it, it is just obstacles" and that kinda says it
all!!!

I guess what I am trying to say is that I DO understand the
frustration that people express with the "changes" with NADAC and that a barrel is
"stupid" for many... and that others love the concept because it tests their
teamwork and pathways skills to an even higher degree...

Will NADAC return to being an "obstacle" focused venue, no. We will
do everything we can so that people can cross venue without total failure.
But there will be "some" issues with the pathway obstacles such as a hoop
or barrel on a team that is purely obstacle focused. But even those issues
are not impossible for those that want to compete within NADAC and just
work a little bit harder for those obstacles and love the rest of them! No
different than a NADAC team learning to perform a teeter, tire or other
"obstacles" if they want to multi-venue.... each venue has their own set of
skills needed and a team must be willing to teach themselves and their dogs
those skills to truly enjoy that venue!

Just play agility and HAVE FUN with your choices!!

Sharon

Again, I love the implication that if you don't like it, you must just suck!

I wrote a reply, we'll see if it goes through.

I hope you aren't implying that because I am against barrels being used in NADAC agility that I don't have "pathway skills." I am all about drawing the path for my dogs and all three have great distance skills.

I am not frustrated because I am "extremely obstacle focused," I'm frustrated because I don't feel challenged by the "path" presented to me on courses. And now I'm offended after a recent e-mail that proclaims that it's not the course's responsibility to challenge me. If that was truly the case, why do we have Novice, Open & Elite divisions? Shouldn't we all be overjoyed to run the same exact courses each weekend? My brain doesn't work that way. I like to be pushed out of my comfort zone and have my handling skills challenged. It's why I train at home, to go to trials and be tested.

I'm sure it feels a lot different to those running dogs at 8-9 yps and that you folks get quite the rush from it, but to those of us with dogs of average speed it's just... well, average. At least an "obstacle focused" course gives me something to do and feel like a real member of the team with my dog more so than running along on sweeping, bending lines.

My frustrations are based on the fact that NADAC is moving further and further away from "agility" every year and is now becoming more "flatwork" than anything. EGC is a wonderful option for people who want nothing but "pathway" work because that's all it is. I was very happy to keep the two separate -- NADAC agility was still there for those of us who appreciated fast flowing courses that still fit the definition of "agility." It's been discussed on various lists lately that NADAC will soon have to stop calling itself "agility" by the worldly definition and I can't say I disagree.

And that, in a nutshell, is what I'm so upset about. I have enjoyed NADAC agility a great deal over the years, as have my dogs. But over the last year or so everything has just felt so repetitive, and it's because there's only so much variety one can offer in a course designed for "path work" with limited obstacles within the confines of an arena. And I also can't help that feel that one day in the not so terribly distant future, NADAC will be synonymous with EGC and gone will be all jumps, weaves & contacts. If that's what makes people happy then that is great, but it's also very disappointing to those of us who have appreciated NADAC for what it was.

Karissa
V-NATCH2/NATCH3 Luke -- Superior Elite Versatility, O-HP-E, 2500+ Lifetime
Kaiser (UWP GRCH'PR' Alasco's Kvichak) -- Elite Vers., O-EAC, S-EJC, O-ECC, TN-E, TG-E, O-WV-E, HP-N, 1000+ Lifetime, TIAD, TG2, UKC Total Dog (3!)
Secret -- Elite Vers., O-EAC, O-EJC, ECC, TG-E, TN-E, WV-E, HP-N, 1000+ Lifetime
http://secretbc.blogspot.com/

[Rave]

Nice response. Even if it doesn't go through, hopefully she'll read it.

I'd like to see her tell anyone who just ran IFCS World Champs that they're not creating a path. Ever try to get a dog to the backside of the jump withOUT creating the correct path? lol

[PSmitty]

First of all, Sharon, lay off the quotation marks. Here:
http://www.unnecessaryquotes.com/

Ok, got that out of my system...

Good response, Karissa. I don't expect it'll make it through to the list, but you tried, at least.

Also, are there still weaves in NADAC? If so, I'm surprised.

[SecretBC]

Yes -- An Elite Regular course can technically have one performance of 12 poles and one performance of six poles (you'll see that when weaves are used to replace the teeter on recycled courses). Then of course there is weavers, where in Elite you perform three sets of twelve poles.

The vast majority of NADAC clubs went to 24" weaves as soon as they were allowed. With all the talk of safety and avoiding injuries to dogs, though, I can just see those going away eventually as well! Like I said, eventually EGC will just replace NADAC.

[Rave]

My response...

I don't think anyone will disagree that NADAC is different. UKC is different too and I believe still has a following.

An obstacle is a point of reference for the dog, whether they go over, under, through or around it, and yes barrels fall into this category. Once the dog understands what the handler wants in relation to the barrel, over time dogs will start treating it as an obstacle and focusing on it like they would a tunnel. I use trees and poles to teach my dogs to go out early in training and as a warm-up routine during trials. My dogs certainly understand this game and can focus on a tree from rather far away.

All agility is about creating a path for the dog, whether that path is a simple circle or a more complex manuever. I wouldn't tell anyone who just ran IFCS World Champs that they're not creating paths for their dogs. Ever try to get a dog to the backside of the jump or wrapping between two jumps without creating the correct path? ;-)

I find this discussion interesting because ever since I started playing in agility 16 years ago, NADAC was very attractive to dogs who were obstacle-focused. Other than discriminations, handler focus was not really needed. To read Sharon's philosophy is rather interesting because it hasn't been my take on the organization at all (and I don't mean that with any negativity). It almost sounds like NADAC is headed toward the flatwork training many of us do early on to teach the dogs to follow our movements, i.e. shadow handling w/o obstacles. Is that the ultimate goal here?

Laura (who finds teamwork, fun and safety in ALL agility org's)

[SecretBC]

Great points! And I agree with your comment that NADAC has always leaned towards being beneficial for those who have obstacle focused dogs. Where else could you get away with pointing your dog down a line and expecting them to just keep going until you say otherwise? I call that obstacle focus more than following the path. It's one reason why Luke is so good at distance -- he just keeps going until I tell him otherwise. Kaiser to a lesser extent -- but Secret has always been more prone to look to me for direction, which is why she seems to enjoy more technical courses -- because mom is doing more than running a straight boring line.

[SecretBC]

Well, your e-mail was just posted to the list.

[mickif]

In defense of NADAC it is really not true that only those that can not do other venues do NADAC, I have watched people who have an ADCH and MACH struggle to get their NATCH, it is a different handling style due to the wide open nature of the courses, at the moment my partner and I struggle with them as we do not have distance skills, I have been spending my training time learning how to handle my fast dog for USDAA/AKC style courses as I love the physicality of that style of agility. Watching a great team run a NADAC type course is just as thrilling as any other venue.

I agree with you regarding only those who do NADAC do it because they can not do other venues, but not sure I think this in defense of NADAC, more to acknowledgement good team work and training in general. I agree that distance requirements for NADAC can be very challenging and it is awesome to watch good distance work, but for the majority of "standard runs" and such, I rarely find little challenge other than to run as fast as I can to keep up with my dogs

I have yet to figure out how to attach multiple quotes to my one post...

[Rave]

Well, your e-mail was just posted to the list.

I is SPAY-SHULL!!

[alligande]

I rarely find little challenge other than to run as fast as I can to keep up with my dogs

That sums it up for me as well.... The only problem is I am never going to keep up