91 replies to this topic

[alligande]

I think Sharon just likes barrels, she comes from a barrel racing background as far as I can tell from messages on the email list. I see no problem with a barrel, I am sure most of us have trained our dogs to go round things especially in the early training. I just do not think it belongs on a regular agility course, but then I do not think hoops should be there either.

For me it really is just about the divergence from "normal" agility and the self righteous attitude that it is all about safety and the NADAC way is the best..... and everyone has just not got with the program. One of my pet peves is jump height, I respect peoples decision to jump low, in USDAA I jump Rievs at 26" and the NADAC folk think I am insane, many think you should only jump at skilled height which would be 16" for my lanky 23" border collie, he can step over that! If 26" was not easy for him I would drop his height to 22" I do not care about which program, I think you just choose what works well for your dog.

I am sure I will continue to go to some NADAC trials for basic selfish reasons... close by and I can enter a couple of days before, which with my work can be very helpful in my busy season. But I do not think I will be setting my goals towards a NATCH we will be aiming towards an ADCH ...... and NADAC will remain a place to train in a trial enviroment, keeping those start lines tight, and the contacts stopped. This honestly is a decision that makes me sad but seems the only obvious solution.

And yes I have recently written to Sharon, not about barrels but the rise in hoops and NADACs march away from "normal" agility.

[mum24dog]

The sense I'm getting is that Agility is a religion - NADAC is a cult.

(Just been watching a TV discussion programme on what defines the two.)

[Jumpin Boots]

One of my pet peves is jump height, I respect peoples decision to jump low, in USDAA I jump Rievs at 26" and the NADAC folk think I am insane, many think you should only jump at skilled height which would be 16" for my lanky 23" border collie, he can step over that! If 26" was not easy for him I would drop his height to 22" I do not care about which program, I think you just choose what works well for your dog.

It wasn't until we recently went on a 2 week road trip attending a dog show in Montana and Reno that I experienced almost everyone jumping their dogs 16 or under; it was odd to me. The trials I attend have what I would consider a normal distribution of dogs jumping all heights. I did get a couple looks about jumping Renoir at 20, but no one said anything; maybe b/c I was out of state and they were being polite I don't know. We were the only team jumping 20 at the elite level at either trials; I don't remember about the other levels, but I don't think there were any 20 jumpers there either. I had no idea that there would be such a huge difference regarding jump height choices.

When I was starting competition agility in '05, jump height was part of what helped me choose NADAC vs. USDAA. Boots would have had to jump 26 (or 22) in USDAA; Boots has nice jumping form, but he is heavy shouldered and I felt that jumping higher would not have been a good choice for him in the long run so it was natural to choose NADAC. Renoir who still jumps 20, does not jump as nicely at 16 and would probably do better at 22.

Interesting though to see different trends in different parts of the country.

[mum24dog]

Renoir who still jumps 20, does not jump as nicely at 16 and would probably do better at 22.

Not wishing to offend anyone, but watching some video clips it doesn't look to me like some dogs are jumping well at all over lower heights. They seem rather hesitant and to have difficulty getting into their stride properly. Perhaps the adrenaline rush of flying is lacking. Of course there may be other issues going on that I'm not aware of and I know that speed isn't necessarily as essential as it is here where Qs don't come into it.

Seeing big dogs hopping over little jumps looks weird to me because it isn't what I'm used to seeing.

The little ginger dog here (for size comparison with the lanky BC) started her agility career swapping between 20 and 30 in jumps with ease. She will be 12 in August and is still competing against the best in normal classes, although regulation height jumps for her have been reduced to just under 18in.



This is what 30in looks like - the BC x in the pic retired at 12 because her hearing and eyesight were failing, not because she couldn't make the height, which had gone down to 26in by the time she packed it in.



The BC in the top pic jumps regulation Large dog height which is 26in, matching FCI height. There was a great fuss here when it was reduced from 30in (for political reasons) because many people thought it was dumbing down what should be a sport requiring athleticism. I hate to think what the same people (many of whom had been in Agility for many years and competed with numerous dogs without breaking them) would think of NADAC.

Jumping flat puts different strains on a dog's body than jumping rounder and higher - not less, different. Slamming into the A frame with forelegs extended is the action most likely to cause trauma. Despite what the likes of Chris Zink may say there is no conclusive evidence so far that higher or lower is better, and it's interesting to hear people say that most injuries their dogs suffer are not Agility related.

Repetition is the danger whatever height you choose for your dog. Compare the number of jumps your dog may do in a training session with what it is called upon to do in competition, then multiply the result by how many more times you train than compete. Competition jump height is pretty irrelevant as long as a dog is adaptable enough to understand that everything isn't always the same.

I keep an eye on current research (such as it is), I have discussed the subject with an orthopaedic consultant and the physio he uses, and I listen to the views of people who have been in the sport for 20+ years. I don't pay a lot of attention to people with an axe to grind. I will change my mind as to what I think is acceptable if presented with clear evidence that what I am now doing has a good chance of harming my dogs.

I have seen many freak accidents happen, but they tend to be just that - freaks. Our BC has been training on a rubber coated seesaw recently and banged his head and nearly flipped over when presented with a sanded one. I don't know if it was a coincidence but whatever caused it I'm not going to start a campaign to remove seesaws just because our dog might have got hurt.

[JLGauntt]

Getting away from the NADAC bashing (see note below), I don't think the barrels are necessarily a bad idea -- for training anyway. Use of barrels or cones or trees or just jump wings by themselves have been a staple of handling and handler/dog teamwork training in central Europe for many many years if not decades. I use them a lot myself both for initial training and for teaching gamble (distance/directional) skills.

Here's an example of two of the top trainers in Europe (Janita Leinonen and Jaakko Suoknuuti) challenging one another in a training session to negotiate a course composed of trees that have to be taken in order in a precise clockwise/counterclockwise direction using very specific handling techniques:



If this type of thing were extended to become an actual competition, it's not even absurd to think of it as something that could be extremely competitive. Barrel racing in horses for example, is taken quite seriously and is a well governed sport with some serious money behind it and some truly serious prize payouts.

However... I'll definitely take issue with the NADAC'ers about the barrels being safer than tunnels though. On slick or sliding footing, a high-drive dog with a tight barrel turn would be far far more likely to slip and overextend a leg resulting in temporary muscle or permanent ligament injuries than with the more gentle curvature that even a tightly curled semi-rigid pipe tunnel enforces. The injury potential is quite well-known/understood in horse barrel racing -- see the section on Common Problems in the following paper:

http://www.ivis.org/...97/Strickli.pdf

So in summary, I'm not too sure that it makes NADAC any safer (and most probably less so) to substitute barrels for tunnels and encourage people to train dogs to go faster and faster around them.

--- janet

Note: I been doing dog agility since 1998 and have never been interested in doing NADAC; I've always appreciated USDAA holding the line on international standards and am quite comfortable with its safety record. I do have several friends who do NADAC though and I can see that they (1) enjoy the trials a lot and that (2) it really has mutated into an interesting game of its own particularly in the last few years when it has experimented with some out of the box ideas rather than simply becoming an ever more watered down version of agility. I do think it would gain much more respect as the separate sport it is if Sharon would just simply just call the sport something else since there is no remaining component of actual "agility" in it anymore.

[JLGauntt]

ACtually - I mistyped. I've been doing dog agility since 1988.

[SecretBC]

Okay, that video is one of the coolest things I've watched in a while. I loved the little smoothie who came in third.

The difference between what that video showcases and what NADAC presumes to do with the addition of barrels is that the above video is an example of incredible handling skills. With the use of a barrel in NADAC, the dog will be running on a straight path, encounter a barrel to go around and continue running on a straight path. Um, boring?

And I do agree with you regarding the statements of safety. And someone did bring it up on the list that dogs could easily be injured by slipping around barrels on less than ideal footing. Of course, Sharon never, ever runs her dogs on anything other than dirt or grass, so it stands to reason that her dogs are able to dig in and push well around barrels.

The rest of us schmucks, especially those who live in the upper midwest, typically are forced to trial mainly indoors on synthetic surfaces. My dogs have face-planted and wiped out on the landing side of a jump with a NADAC-style turn (ie: not sharp). I imagine they would be pretty hesitant about going skittering around a tight barrel turn because they know they'd lose their hind end.

But again, there is no reasoning once Sharon has made up her mind that something is safer. When it was brought up, she simply said that you needed to take facilities into consideration and not trial where it isn't "safe." Well that's nice, I just won't trial anymore, I guess.

[PSmitty]

Okay, that video is one of the coolest things I've watched in a while. I loved the little smoothie who came in third.

Me, too!

And ummm, without numbers, I'd be lost in the trees.

[Rave]

Not a fan of tree agility since my dog ran into a tree last summer.

[gcv-border]

And I do agree with you regarding the statements of safety. And someone did bring it up on the list that dogs could easily be injured by slipping around barrels on less than ideal footing. Of course, Sharon never, ever runs her dogs on anything other than dirt or grass, so it stands to reason that her dogs are able to dig in and push well around barrels.

The rest of us schmucks, especially those who live in the upper midwest, typically are forced to trial mainly indoors on synthetic surfaces. My dogs have face-planted and wiped out on the landing side of a jump with a NADAC-style turn (ie: not sharp). I imagine they would be pretty hesitant about going skittering around a tight barrel turn because they know they'd lose their hind end.

AWESOOMME video. Thanks for the link. I would need numbers also.

Of course, two of those dogs would have to run Veterans in NADAC.

I have a long-strided, and headstrong dog who does not like to collect. I know he would/could wipe out going around a barrel (i.e. lose his hind end), but IMHO, it is my responsibility to teach him to collect for upcoming tight turns. I have been trying to do so, and I have seen some improvement, but we still have a ways to go. This ForestAgility would be an excellent training tool. I have to find a nice forest with well-spaced trees. (I live on the side of a hill with a bit of grass around the house and a nasty pine forest (quite steep and no open spaces between the trees due to the deadfall.)

Jovi

[terrecar]

The outdoor video looks like a lot of fun for the dogs as well as the handlers.

[alligande]

Tree agility looks fun, shame that here in Rhode Island the evil pricker bushes would not allow us to play games like that, I use traffic cones in the garden instead.