Agility comparisons

[MrSnappy]

I have been to a couple of trials where a "consolation" award was given for those familiar with USDAA and the DAM team tournaments a couple of clubs give out on a regular basis the "Loki" award for the team that finishes dead last.

 

Yeah but that's not part of the competitive system in its normal state. I think it's great though, when you can have fun with competitors like that. I have entered Jumpers runs (we already have that title) for the sole purpose of trying to best someone else's time, and 5 or 6 of us will do that. It's just for fun. At one of the last trials I was at, several people had a bet going to see who could do the Steeplechase run the fastest .... without running. They had to stand in one spot and send the dog around the course. These things are fun, even if they are not part of the competitive process.

 

In AAC, if you are Qing and moving up by getting your clean runs in your class, chances are you are also kicking the arses of the people you are competing against. If Tweed gets a Q it's usually 1st or 2nd place in his height class, because not very many people in that (any) height class tend to Q. They do not, as is being suggested, make the courses so easy that everyone can Q and go home feeling like a "winner." A Q in AAC means you excelled in your efforts on the course, as WELL as in your efforts against other people doing the same thing as you.

 

RDM

[mum24dog]

What you don't seem to "get" is that the "system" is set up differently. Our venues don't award consolation prizes for effort - they award those who achieve the standard that has been set according to the rules of the venue.

 

The fact that we earn legs for qualifying runs, for instance, instead of placements only (I gather that's what you mean by "win") is not a "consolation prize". It is the standard that has been set.

 

The fact that we move up levels by earning a certain number of qualifying runs instead of placements is not a "consolation prize" or "less serious attitude". That is the way the game is played in the United States.

 

I get that fine. It's just a question of perception based on what one is used to as the standard that has to be achieved.

 

As for a less serious attitude - I'm not sure that our win out system doesn't make it easier to relax and go with the flow without worrying about places.

If you know that you have to beat a couple of hundred dogs or more to get anything, for the majority who don't have super fast and accurate dogs, what is there left but just to have fun?

If there is always something at stake, it ups the pressure.

Our system is competitive for a few, decidedly uncompetitive for many more if considered in terms of likelihood of having something to show for it.

I think we must also understand what we each mean by "competitive", and I can see why it seems that we are at cross purposes. Under our system it means competitive against other handlers and dogs. I do appreciate that, under your system, the competition is against the standard.

under my individual system, I am only competing against myself and my expectations. Competition is what you think it is.

 

I wonder why it is that the systems should have developed so differently in the Old and New World (or whatever the PC terms may be now).

The US picked up on agility pretty quickly but has gone for a very different system from ours (at least at lower levels) - Australia and the like too.

The European countries followed later and generally operate something like FCI rules which much more closely relate to our style than yours.

 

Anyone care to speculate why that should be?

 

And a different question - does the reluctance to allow dogs to jump higher than they do currently result at least in part from the sort of surfaces you train and compete on?

Here we use grass and soft sand based indoor school surfaces. If we used harder surfaces I guess I wouldn't be so keen on asking my dog to absorb too much impact either. What do you use? I'm sure it varies, but what is most common?

 

Pam

[mum24dog]

The fact that different venues (I mean organizations that sanction Agility trials, not places where they are held) have different rules concerning jump heights, times, what equipment is used, etc., is not a "consolation prize". It's free enterprise. The organizations exist because folks started them up. They survive because the competitors enter them. Your criticisms that stem from the fact that different venues have different rules in our country is kind of moot. Someone built them and the people came (ref. "Field of Dreams"). That is what it is. Personally, I like it that way. Having more than one game in town has a lot of perks which I appreciate.

 

We have the same here and it's a state of affairs I've always supported, even when the KC diehards were predicting doom and gloom at the advent of free enterprise and assumed resulting competition.

The reason I only concentrated on KC competition is that it is the major player but the others, although much smaller and regional, do play an important part for those who don't fit into the KC box.

I'm not sure if any have a Q progression system but they do have more jump heights and rules to suit their market.

I'm a great believer in market forces.

 

I'll stick this in here, although not specifucally addressed to you - a similar thread has been going on on a UK board with contributors from overseas. A US poster is of the opinion that it is too easy to Q under some organisations at lower levels.

He tells us that under NADAC you can Q with knocked bars and under AKC at lower levels you can Q with faults.

In AKC Novice weaves are not marked and in Excellent, although you have to run clear, you may go over the time by a few seconds?

 

Is this true?

 

Which of the organisations is most demanding in terms of Q standards?

 

Pam

[Shetlander]

I do applaud those who overcome difficulties, as does everyone else I know.

 

However, I don't want the system to award me consolation prizes for effort. You may disagree and that's fine. Any sense of achievement I may have comes from within and I personally do not need any tangible recognition for it.

 

 

I don't think we are being "defensive." You shared how your system works and in doing so placed significant emphasis the competitive aspect. That set some of us to thinking about our systems and our perceptions of what the sport means to us.

 

Honestly, I have a hard time figuring out exactly what you're saying in these posts. Maybe because you're saying a couple different things? On the one hand you say you "applaud" those who overcome difficulties but then immediately mention consolation prizes. I agree with Kristine that I never thought our agility venues were providing unmerited awards simply because our dogs (or we handlers) weren't ideal candidates physically or mentally for the game. When my dog won HIT's in one of the smaller venues, I never thought we were on par with Nancy Geyes or Terry Smorch. I was just proud of my dog and excited our run had gone so well. And those HIT ribbons hang over my computer to this day, not because I need "tangible recognition" -- who cares but me, anyway?-- but because the ribbons makes me think of some wonderful moments I had with my handsome, dignified, incredibly brave in his own way boy.

 

The system you describe doesn't sound like one I'd want to be in -- simply due to the numbers, lack of games and jump heights. But obviously many, many Brits like it just fine. And you make a good case about how the fact your system is so competitive results in most people simply being there for fun since they have no hope to win. One of my favorite things about agility is that it offers something for everyone -- at least the 5 US venues I'm familiar with do.

[mum24dog]

you could not pay me enough money to go to a week-long agility trial. That sounds horrible.

 

A week away from the rat race doing fun things with your best friends (human and canine) plus making new friends you would never otherwise have met? What's not to like?

 

I do get the impression that trials over there are more rigid in the way they are run than ours, so maybe they aren't as relaxing as ours? Or am I wrong again?

 

Just to give you an idea:-

Our club runs a 3 day show, then there is a day off, then a charity day with training and fun classes run jointly between us and another local club. (We were able to give $4000 to our local rescue mainly because of this last year and the other club did similar with their rescue charity.)

Another day off then the other club has a 3 day show.

All this at a great venue and we have a marquee and bar with entertainment some evenings.

People bring the family for a 10 day holiday.

Other long shows are similar, although not a joint effort and without the charity day, although one long show is run entirely to raise funds for charities.

 

Pam

[mum24dog]

On the one hand you say you "applaud" those who overcome difficulties but then immediately mention consolation prizes.

 

I'm looking at it from different perspectives.

As an individual I don't want "consolation prizes" but I also understand that other people may well appreciate the boost that an award that I personally may not value gives them. I am in the position of being able to make sure that I can do that for some of them, so I do, irrespective of how I feel about them myself.

 

I'll give you an example - some shows give rosettes for unplaced clear rounds. Some limit the classes they give them in. I give them in all classes - from Grade 1 to Grade 7 and for special classes. Handlers can collect them or not - their choice - (I never do). I actually get a real buzz from seeing the look of delight on some their faces, and some of those people I wouldn't expect to bother, such as top class handlers who have a new/old/recovering from injury never expected to compete again dog.

 

It all comes down to wanting to put smiles on faces. Within the same KC system there are a very few penny pinching shows where the prime object is to make as much profit as possible and hang the customers. We are at the generous end - most are somewhere in between, either because of financial or other constraints or general attitude of the organisers.

 

We also have a lot of flexibility in how we schedule classes. We can make it easier or harder for people to win out.

I try to make it as easy as I think reasonable.

 

Another example - at our last show there were twice as many Grade 3 dogs as any other grade. The number wasn't too high and most shows would have left it as one class. I split it in two so two people won and they only had to beat the same number of dogs as the other grades to do it. I firmly believe in creating a level playing field within the system as far as I can.

 

I like power and try to use it fairly.

 

Pam

[mum24dog]

More questions -

 

Who supplies the equipment for your shows? Do you have hire companies or do the hosts normally provide their own?

If it's their own, is the standard usually good or does it vary.

I thought I'd ask as someone has just mentioned that the standard in Europe can vary a lot.

Here we use one of the major suppliers. Only to be expected as not many clubs would be able to come up with enough sets of equipment to furnish all the rings.

 

And how much do you folks pay for training? If it's expensive that could affect what people want to get out of it.

 

A club I would really like to join is just too far to go to. They just pay $70 a year and training (from 2 top level handlers) is free - paid for from the profits from their show. Results are extremely good. (Really like it because I'm friends with quite a few members and the people who run it.)

 

Our own club is $6 a year and $6 each time you go.

 

If you go private it's obviously more expensive. The nearest good (actually excellent) private school is 65 miles away. An hour in a class of up to 8 dogs is about $10. An hour's private training is between $50 and $60 (more than 1 dog and handler allowed).

 

There's another nearby private school that charges $10 per dog in class but the standard of training is nowhere near as good.

 

We can get an internationally respected trainer to come and give our club a day's training for $600 - $800. Other pretty much as good but not such high profile trainers come in at around $400 a day.

 

Pam

[Root Beer]

As for a less serious attitude - I'm not sure that our win out system doesn't make it easier to relax and go with the flow without worrying about places.

 

If you know that you have to beat a couple of hundred dogs or more to get anything, for the majority who don't have super fast and accurate dogs, what is there left but just to have fun?

 

If there is always something at stake, it ups the pressure.

 

This strikes me as a highly individual thing. Honestly, when I trial with Maddie in Agility, I don't experience pressure. If we Q, fine. If we place, fine. If not, that's fine, too. Personally, I'm not really trying to wallpaper every inch of my dog wall with ribbons.

 

I have trialed Dean twice now and he has not qulaified. That is in CPE - a venue that is reputed to be "easy". He hasn't qualified because we, as a team, aren't ready to qualify. I'm not worried about qualifying with him right now. I'm looking to enjoy our runs, see Dean enjoy our runs, and build our skills together.

 

Technically Q's and placements are "at stake" when Dean and I run, but I'm not concerned with it.

 

There are those who would not think of trialing before the team is prepared to qualify - I'm not "wrong" and they aren't "wrong", we're just different.

 

I look forward to the day when Dean is ready to qualify, but right now I am truly enjoying our "building" years together. I will treasure these memories when he does start to qualify.

 

The people that I know who are feeling pressure and like something is 'at stake" are the high level folks who are working toward the "BIG" titles.

 

I think we must also understand what we each mean by "competitive", and I can see why it seems that we are at cross purposes. Under our system it means competitive against other handlers and dogs. I do appreciate that, under your system, the competition is against the standard.

 

Actually, this depends on the individual, too. I am definitely a "work to achieve competency at a given level" sort. I don't need to place, although I have and I do appreciate placements. But sometimes the Q that didn't place means a heck of a lot more.

 

Speedy's one and only blue ribbon in Rally is very special to me, but what means even more to me is his Q from the time when a dog charged out of the ring right before his turn. He managed to pull himself together enough to earn a 170 (the bare minimum score to qualify in APDT Rally) He accomplished more with that 170 than anyone could ever tell on the surface and we both worked harder for that Q than we did for the blue ribbon one!

 

I wonder why it is that the systems should have developed so differently in the Old and New World (or whatever the PC terms may be now).

 

The US picked up on agility pretty quickly but has gone for a very different system from ours (at least at lower levels) - Australia and the like too.

 

The European countries followed later and generally operate something like FCI rules which much more closely relate to our style than yours.

 

Anyone care to speculate why that should be?

 

Why do we drive on the left side of the road and you guys drive on the right? Why do we call them "fries" and you call them "chips"? Why do most American's prefer American football and most of you prefer Soccer (which you also call, "football", I believe)?

 

Different culture, different way of looking at things. I don't know that there is really a quantifiable reason for it. There may have been early influences that came from the structure of Obedience, which has similar awards for legs and titles. It might have just developed that way based on competitor response.

 

P.S. Are we supposed to be PC? Seems that UK and US would work fine as a designation.

[Root Beer]

I'll stick this in here, although not specifucally addressed to you - a similar thread has been going on on a UK board with contributors from overseas. A US poster is of the opinion that it is too easy to Q under some organisations at lower levels.

 

Too easy for whom?

 

Seasoned competitors who are trialing with their 3rd or 4th dog?

 

Newbie handlers with brand new dogs?

 

Handlers with dogs who have emotional or mental "issues" that make even being at a trial a major challenge?

 

Handlers with dogs who are noise phobic?

 

Handlers with "Pigs Fly" dogs?

 

Handlers who have dogs with a MACH and are starting out again in a venue like CPE or Docna?

 

Naturally talented folks with really biddable dogs?

 

For whom does this person think the lower levels of certain venues are "too easy"? Perhaps that person ought to find a venue that he or she finds sufficiently challenging and leave the others to their own preferences.

 

He tells us that under NADAC you can Q with knocked bars and under AKC at lower levels you can Q with faults.

 

Why would this matter at the low levels? I'm not sure of the exact rules for those venues, but low levels are low levels. If you're that good, go compete at the higher levels. People who fuss because the low levels are "too easy" rank right up there in my opinion with the people who constantly whine because there are "too many Border Collies" in Agility. (ETA: I am not referring to those who are concerned with the amount of Border Collies in Agility due to sport breedings, but Agility competitors who don't have Border Collies and constantly complain about them)

 

In AKC Novice weaves are not marked and in Excellent, although you have to run clear, you may go over the time by a few seconds?

 

Is this true?

 

I have no idea. I'm in CPE Level 1/2/3 and technically NADAC Novice, although I know virtually nothing about NADAC except that it's supposedly set up so that "only Border Collies can do it", but my Border Collie didn't qualify and dogs of other breeds did! Go figure!

 

Which of the organisations is most demanding in terms of Q standards?

 

They really do differ so much that I don't know that one or another is most demanding overall. AKC has "refusals". That's pretty demanding. USDAA has the highest jump heights I've heard of in the US. That's demanding. In NADAC the times are super demanding. CPE is not really demanding, but it's no cake walk, either. I've been challenged to a surprising degree in CPE. In UKC you can't call your dog over an obstacle to you and they have a few different pieces of equipment. I don't know anything about Docna or ASCA.

 

I can't compare the "super titles" in any of the venues since they are not something I've ever considered.

[Root Beer]

Who supplies the equipment for your shows? Do you have hire companies or do the hosts normally provide their own?

 

If it's their own, is the standard usually good or does it vary.

 

As far as I know, most clubs supply their own equipment, although I would imagine there are places that one can rent from if need be.

 

When our new club does our trial, we will use all of our own equipment.

 

The standard is set by the venue that is sanctioning the trial. The venue stipulates the heights, widths, particulars, etc. If the club doesn't have a particular piece, I guess it could be borrowed, or perhaps rented.

 

The only one I know of that has a "use what you have" policy is Docna. There could be others, though.

 

And how much do you folks pay for training? If it's expensive that could affect what people want to get out of it.

 

A club I would really like to join is just too far to go to. They just pay $70 a year and training (from 2 top level handlers) is free - paid for from the profits from their show. Results are extremely good. (Really like it because I'm friends with quite a few members and the people who run it.)

 

Our own club is $6 a year and $6 each time you go.

 

If you go private it's obviously more expensive. The nearest good (actually excellent) private school is 65 miles away. An hour in a class of up to 8 dogs is about $10. An hour's private training is between $50 and $60 (more than 1 dog and handler allowed).

 

There's another nearby private school that charges $10 per dog in class but the standard of training is nowhere near as good.

 

It totally varies. I like private training centers. In my experience, the quality of instruction has been much higher at private training centers than at the club that I used to be a member of. I'm sure in some places the opposite is true!

 

The club was less expensive. There were dues (don't remember how much) and then classes were $25.00 per session. That was dirt cheap, but the classes are tough to get into there. Very vew people get in and you have to fight your way in every session. Ugh. Instructors were hit or miss quality-wise.

 

I pay $80.00 for 8 weeks of class where I train most of my Agility and that's the least expensive private training I've ever heard of in my area! (It's a bargain, though - I have a fantastic instructor!)

 

Quality of instructors and instruction varies from place to place and situation to situation. Prices vary, too.

[SoloRiver]

I like the variety of agility organizations we have in the US, and that there is enough room to be able to set your own goals for you and your dogs, whether those goals involve beating the crap out of all your competitors, or not.

 

I don't think it's too terribly Harrison Bergeron to allow different criteria for different teams at different levels, or to recognize teams for doing the best they can. This is not the same thing as recognizing mediocrity. Teams that are sloppy, poorly prepared, don't care, whatever, they don't Q. The system does reward effort and it works in that better performances get better scores and more consistent Qs than poorer performances. Let's face it, both dogs and people come in all different shapes and sizes (both by design and by accident). Even if I had the fastest Basset Hound in the world, we would NEVER win our class, ever, unless we poisoned all the other dogs or handlers in the class before we ran. I don't think there's much point in comparing apples to oranges, and I don't see a problem in recognizing accomplishments that don't involve beating the crap out of everyone else. Besides, even if you operate within a system that allows Basset Hounds to Q, generally you do not have a problem recognizing greatness when you see it. The cream rises to the top no matter what, and everyone knows the teams who beat the crap out of all their competitors on a regular basis, and I respect those people, even if beating the crap out of everyone else isn't among my personal goals.

 

My agility dog (since retired) is a dog whose greatest accomplishment was being able to step out onto an agility course at a hectic, crowded trial without totally losing his shit. I was able to choose classes and venues that suited our needs and our goals. We spent a lot of time in NADAC games classes because we could take advantage of training in the ring, and compete in classes where the judge does not follow you around and stare hard at your dog the entire way around the course. After my first couple of experiences in USDAA I avoided that venue because the jump heights were too high (although, given that Solo was running mostly against Labs and GSDs, he had excellent chances of winning his class a lot of the time) because they don't allow TIR and because I found the fellow competitors to be, well, rather bitchy. So, Solo's only title is a NADAC Novice Tunnelers title, which may very well be the Lamest Title Possible in Agility (I think it might be kind of like being voted Miss Congeniality at the Miss Universe Pageant) but I'm still proud of it. That said, our finest moment was his first run ever at an agility trial, partly because he Qed first time out (Qing in Novice Tunnelers is not a given; the course times are very tight and it's easy to screw up the course when the obstacles are all the same) but mostly because he was utterly unremarkable on the course and no one watching except the folks who had trained with us had any idea that Solo was "behaviorally challenged" and that we had gone through a LOT of training and preparation to get to that point.

 

Here's the story of Solo's first trial.

 

I don't know about this whole "consolation prize" business. I don't think it's fun to get ribbons, per se. They get dusty and present storage problems. I think it's about camaraderie and feeling like you're part of a community that is pulling for you. That's what makes agility fun and keeps people coming back.

[MrSnappy]

I don't think it's fun to get ribbons, per se. They get dusty and present storage problems.

 

^^ Christmas Tree decorations.

 

RDM (<-- ribbon slut)

[Root Beer]

So, Solo's only title is a NADAC Novice Tunnelers title, which may very well be the Lamest Title Possible in Agility (I think it might be kind of like being voted Miss Congeniality at the Miss Universe Pageant)

 

OK, now one of my dogs simply MUST earn one of those! I like that, "Lamest Title Possible"!! :D

[mum24dog]

Just going back to the other thread and whoever it was with a 24in BC weighing 54lbs who thought 26in jumps were too high - I've found the dog I was referring to here :-

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuFDC0D-4SQ...feature=related

 

This was a while ago at a small match and his contacts are a lot better now. He fits the height/weight description.

 

Pam

[mum24dog]

I think it's about camaraderie and feeling like you're part of a community that is pulling for you. That's what makes agility fun and keeps people coming back.

 

Ah - common ground.

 

Pam

[mum24dog]

Too easy for whom?

 

Why would this matter at the low levels?

 

I guess he considers it not unreasonable for a dog to be able to do it right to be able to progress and I would agree.

 

Here you have top go clear to progress. Even a win with faults doesn't coun't to move up.

 

The idea that you have to win is so entrenched that even though it is now possible to opt to move up as far as Grade 5 on points alone, very few people do. Maybe they fear being accused of taking the easy route. Or it could be that they suspect that they aren't good enough for the next grade without a win.

 

It's early days yet, though. Less than 2 years and I expect it will become more common, even if not the norm.

 

Pam

[mum24dog]

Seems that UK and US would work fine as a designation.

 

I was spreading the net rather wider to encompass Europe on the one hand and the former colonies on the other. (Is that insulting? If so, sorry.)

 

Pam

[mum24dog]

There may have been early influences that came from the structure of Obedience, which has similar awards for legs and titles.

 

You may have something there, although I don't know whether it would apply in Europe. Certainly our own progression rules originally paralled (as far as possible) the rules in obedience here.

 

(A question of etiquette here - am I allowed to post a link to a Youtube clip of someone I don't know?)

 

Pam

[Pat W.]

Cheap and accessible encourages a less serious attitude, Why? Since when does less expensive mean not as good/devoted in this sport? I have at times spent over $800.00 a year to train, now to some thats not much but to alot including me that substantial amount, now times that by 2 now that my daughter started training seriously within the last couple years so 1600.00 for training/club membership while training under a 2x Cynosport world team member. Now add in trial entries, roughly 120.00 per dog for 10 trials estimated a year x2 dogs = 2400.00. Travel New York 3x yearly RT = 1365mi Virginia 2x yearly RT= 1200mi Local trials 5 = 200mi Ttl traveled - 2600 mi Gas at 3.50/gal/23mi/gal =70.00 a fillup with say 10 fill ups for trial travel 700.00 - if my math is right and its probably not ) (a pittance for Europeans but for Americans rediculous) = Camping 3 x yearly 180.00, Hotel 2x yearly 2nights per stay 2 rms =600.00, Misc 300.00 Ttl for 1 year training and trialing roughly = 5800.00 a frightening amount. This doesn't include the two trips to nationals Philadelphia to Dallas RT = or the one trip to nationals Philadephia Pa - Scottsdale AZ RT = 5000mi plus RV rental for 13 days. Now if I can forgo the membership fees and training costs with the club with the world team member and replace it with a NADAC Judge and her husband who both have multiple NATCH's, and do extremely well in USDAA with no club fee and pay as you go training in 8 or 10 week sessions with at total of 8 sessions a year divided between two dogs at 100.00 ave per session I save 800.00. Now the cost is also reduced for trialing because we only have 1 dog running at this time so trial cost - 1200.00 plus for 3 of those trials we get a dedicated workers discount because I, my husband and son work our butts for for our friends in NY deduct 400.00 so that brings it down to 900.00 trial cost. So for "Cheap" I am saving around 1200.00 and we, in my opinion get as much if not more out of our classes because my instructor is there each and every class vs the WTM who also gives seminars and trials so may be gone up to 1/3 of the time I have paid for in advance. The classes are also smaller and therefore more productive. Accessability? for training the WTM is 10 min o/w from my home, my current trainer 25 min one way. As for trials well accessability is a whole nother kettle of fish its not unusal for me to travel anywhere from 45 min o/w to 5 hr o/w on my regular trials and for nationals anywhere from 28 hrs o/w to 3 day o/w. Due to the large number of trials in the various venues accessibility is not a real problem.

[Shetlander]

Ttl for 1 year training and trialing roughly = 5800.00 a frightening amount. This doesn't include the two trips to nationals Philadelphia to Dallas RT = or the one trip to nationals Philadephia Pa - Scottsdale AZ RT = 5000mi plus RV rental for 13 days.

 

Pat, you are very brave to do all that math. I never had the nerve myself. I did stop taking trips to Europe after I started doing agility in a big way with two dogs. I might not wanna know how much money I'm blowing on dogs, but at least I notice the impact in my checking account.

[capnree]

Do you use the word 'bar' in the same sense that we do --as in, selling alcoholic beverages? Because we definitely don't have that.

 

So that (with the entertainment and day for charity...and the lessons) definitely is not the same atmosphere here. It differs. Some people wrote they didn't like the people in USDAA, but USDAA and CPE I have found the nicest people so far. At others I have been snapped at for my dog glancing at their snarky dog, all while they are stuffing their dog's face with cheese *within* 10 feet of the ring as we are waiting to go in. (No food/toys within 10 feet of the ring...I don't care if you break the rules, but don't snap at me when you do.) I'm not sure how I can even begin to describe the difference -kind of like a swim meet? Ready, go...wait, ready go...wait. You make your own entertainment, and avoid the stressed people.

 

Pat W., I can't find the post, but I think she was referring to "cheap and accessible" as to being in the UK, not here?

 

As far as the "too easy to Q" bit, I guess it just depends on you and your dog. NADAC really had a different feel to it than the other organizations. I hesitate to say it is easy to Q in NADAC, because I don't want to get lambasted by those in NADAC, but I think some organizations are definitely harder to Q in than others. It's hard to say for sure which is the hardest, because each not only has their own rules, but their own 'style' of course designed. For instance -AKC jumpers at the higher levels are tight courses. NADAC tends to be open, a lot of straight lines, and die-hard NADACers are all about distance. So if you train your dog to be tight and with you (what I like), you might have a bit of a problem doing a high-level gamble in NADAC. Likewise, if you are all about moving as little as possible, it might be harder to Q (or win, at least) in a higher level AKC jumpers course. It all comes back to the individual again.

 

Ack! Too much thinking about agility!

[SoloRiver]

I was spreading the net rather wider to encompass Europe on the one hand and the former colonies on the other. (Is that insulting? If so, sorry.)

 

Nah, I'm not insulted by being called a "former colony," given that we now own everything and could buy and sell you several dozen times over, even with the dollar in the crapper as it is these days. (Sorry, was that insulting?)

[Root Beer]

I was spreading the net rather wider to encompass Europe on the one hand and the former colonies on the other. (Is that insulting? If so, sorry.)

 

No, you did not succeed in insulting me with this line. The Marxist comment was insulting. The condescending "consolation prize" comments bordered on insulting. "Former colonies" just strikes me as silly.

 

We could settle this the American way. My dog against yours. Your rules, my turf. The game is Agility. Come on over anytime and we'll settle this like gentlemen. Even though I'm female. It's just a phrase. No insult intended. :D

[Shetlander]

No, you did not succeed in insulting me with this line. The Marxist comment was insulting. The condescending "consolation prize" comments bordered on insulting. "Former colonies" just strikes me as silly.

 

Well, technically we are former colonies though the Revolutionary War was fought and won quite a long time ago. Heck, none of my ancestors were even here at the time. Too busy being oppressed in Ireland and the Balkans. Not sure what was happening with the Bavarians back then.

 

I agree with you on the Marxism and consolation prize comments as not coming across as anything flattering.

 

This kind of strikes me like the debate that will spring up from time to time between Brits and Americans over the use of crates. Probably no sense in trying to have the conversation.

[mjk05]

I thought the "former colonies" comment was referring more to Australia? I don't find it insulting, we're generally proud of our colonial past.