agility venues???

[mum24dog]

I'm not saying that either is objectively better than the other. In fact, it is entirely a matter of personal preference.

 

.......

 

Some of that may well have to do with the way one is first introduced to the concept of a particular sport, but I think a lot of it has to do with one's personal goals, and what is appropriate for one's dog, as well.

 

I totally agree.

 

It's impossible to escape cultural indoctrination entirely.

 

When you bear in mind that when Agility was invented here in 1978 the jumps were set at 36in and only large dogs took part it's not surprising that it is expected by most handlers here that it shouldn't be made too easy for the dog. Jumps soon went down to 30in and if the owner of a small dog wanted to take part it had to jump that high - and some did very successfully, reinforcing the view that dogs don't need jumps to be low. My own 16in mongrel competed originally over that height and was competitive against collies (and suffered no damage in the process, at 11 still competing and arthritis free as far as the chiro can tell.) Gradually concessions were made for mini and midi dogs lowering the jumps for them to 15 and 20in in respectively to increase the numbers taking part and finally politics took over and jumps were lowered further in line with FCI heights to roughly 13.75, 17 and 26in. We've got used to it but I don't think a further reduction would gain majority support - it was a close call last time.

 

There are options for those who want lower jumps for their dogs but they are very much in the minority. I think it's a good thing that there are choices, even if I stick to the majority version. I've no idea which I'd go for if I lived in the US but possibly USDAA if my impression is correct.

 

(Can you start a new thread comparing US and UK Freestyle please? It's not something that interests me and at Crufts for me it's time for a break when it comes on, but I am interested in the difference you see.)

[Root Beer]

There are options for those who want lower jumps for their dogs but they are very much in the minority. I think it's a good thing that there are choices, even if I stick to the majority version. I've no idea which I'd go for if I lived in the US but possibly USDAA if my impression is correct.

 

Yes, USDAA is the venue that has the super high jump heights. I think UKI might have the high jump heights, too. I'm not sure. It's so new.

 

(Can you start a new thread comparing US and UK Freestyle please? It's not something that interests me and at Crufts for me it's time for a break when it comes on, but I am interested in the difference you see.)

 

Yes, but I'll have to hunt up some good examples of US style Freestyle. It's tough to find excellent performances on Youtube because of the video rules, but I will see what I can find.

[mum24dog]

Yes, USDAA is the venue that has the super high jump heights.

 

It's all relative to expectation. Under USDAA heights a lot of our dogs would be jumping lower so they don't look high at all to me.

[Root Beer]

It's all relative to expectation. Under USDAA heights a lot of our dogs would be jumping lower so they don't look high at all to me.

 

And also to what one personally considers reasonable from a safety perspective. I know - this is debated. There are arguments, some valid, for higher heights. There are also arguments, equally valid, for lower heights. Ultimately, it comes down to the judgment of the individual handler.

 

I don't really consider the matter primarily "cultural indoctrination" or expectation, although that certainly is part of it. Handlers make deliberate judgments on this. As we watch our dogs jump, we can tell when they are comfortable jumping at a particular height. Yes, sometimes lack of comfort level stems from not enough training, but once the training and conditioning has been done, it's not too difficult to tell if the dog is eagerly and readily jumping at a certain height, with good form, and keeping bars up, or if the dog is jumping reluctantly, or throwing his or herself over awkwardly, or if the dog is jumping in a less than optimal manner. Sometimes lowering height is simply for the best.

 

And I appreciate having venue options that make it possible for one to work with just about any jumping need. Even dogs that should not jump at all have options of some classes without jumps in NADAC (Tunnelers, Weavers, Touch and Go). In CPE you can go down two heights if you need to, in the specialist class.

 

There is so much more to Agility than jumping and jump height. Generally speaking, I am a person who loves having as many options as possible, and in the US, Agility does not disappoint in that regard.

[mum24dog]

And also to what one personally considers reasonable from a safety perspective. I know - this is debated. There are arguments, some valid, for higher heights. There are also arguments, equally valid, for lower heights. Ultimately, it comes down to the judgment of the individual handler.

 

Based on information and one's own experience and the experiences of others across the whole spectrum rather than hearsay and what seems at first sight to be "common sense", I would hope. (Not aimed at you or anyone on here in particular.) I've been doing agility for 13 years now but some of my friends have been in it for twice as long and have worked numerous different dogs in that time under ever changing rules and I respect their views (well most of them).

 

I don't really consider the matter primarily "cultural indoctrination" or expectation, although that certainly is part of it.

 

A large part IMO. If you come from a community where you are constantly being told that jumping high is bad for your dogs it is very difficult to get away from that idea. Similarly, if, as in my case, the consensus for 30 years has been that as a sport it should involve considerable physical effort and my personal experience is that it isn't generally detrimental to the dog's wellbeing, it's going to take some very strong evidence to convince me otherwise.

 

It applies to attitude as well. If you (generic "you")come from a club where complaining is the norm then you are likely to be one of those PIAs who whinge about everything that isn't tailor made for their particular needs at a show (can you tell I'm a Show Secretary?), but if you come from a club where moaners are told just to get on with whatever is put before them you are not being reinforced for such negative behaviour and are less likely to indulge in it.

 

What bothers me more than jump heights is too much repetitive training, and training that is started too young. I believe in moderation in all things, which is probably why we've never broken a dog yet and ours are all in good nick for their ages. We just don't wear them out prematurely and we don't overdo tight turns. Competition is such a small part of the whole deal.

 

Handlers make deliberate judgments on this.

 

Some do, but IME the Milgram effect is extremely prevalent.

 

As we watch our dogs jump, we can tell when they are comfortable jumping at a particular height. Yes, sometimes lack of comfort level stems from not enough training, but once the training and conditioning has been done, it's not too difficult to tell if the dog is eagerly and readily jumping at a certain height, with good form, and keeping bars up, or if the dog is jumping reluctantly, or throwing his or herself over awkwardly, or if the dog is jumping in a less than optimal manner. Sometimes lowering height is simply for the best.

 

Of all the dogs currently in our club I can only think of 2 non geriatric dogs that would benefit long term from lower jump heights because of their poor height to weight ratio - a massive Rottweiler and a huge GSD.

We've had dogs that have jumped badly despite training and we have sent the owners off to get a physical check up for their dog. I can't recall any that didn't reveal a problem - often HD.

Some breeds often just jump badly - like labs and GRs, although sometimes you get an exception that will stretch out. They can do the height, they just don't jump efficiently.

We've had dogs that lack confidence and take longer than most to get up to competition height but are fine when they get there.

Also unconfident dogs whose owners baby them and make excuses. Nothing much can be done about that if the handlers aren't going to brighten up and show a bit of enthusiasm.

We've had big and small dogs that knock poles that a change in handling and/or training has fixed.

And we've had dogs that just don't like Agility and would rather be doing anything but.

We do have a number of 13-14 year old dogs that are semi-retired that work over Medium height and one younger dog that has had 2 cruciate repairs whose owners are keeping his jumps lower despite their physio's advice that he would be less likely to come to harm if he jumped 26in.

I guess what I'm saying is that we would only come to the conclusion that a dog just isn't built or have the stamina for normal(to us)height when all other possibilities have been investigated because our experience is that it is probably the least likely explanation of poor performance. Obviously it's higher up your list and maybe that's because it's easier for you to find a different height amongst the multitude on offer so there is less incentive to rule everything else out first.

For us a dog that cannot do regulation height jumps is out of mainstream (KC) competition except for a few classes if included by show organisers.

It's not because we don't care - it's just a matter of logistics. In June we are holding 6 days of competition and my estimate would be that we could have entries of around 3k runs in 9-10 rings each day. Multiple choice of jump heights for a minority of dogs isn't really an option for most shows.

 

Still, it must suit the majority otherwise the alternative organisations with more and different jump heights would have grown a lot more than they have.

 

Sorry to ramble on - we're a bit far away for the OP to consider and I bet she'd be thinking "Never in a million years" anyway.

[SS Cressa]

My only concern in higher hights is how the dog is performing at the higher height.

 

I prefer higher jumps to lower jumps. But maybe that is contradictory since cressa jumps 16in. She is able to jump the bigger jumps...but 22,24&26 I don't like how she performs.

 

Troy on the other hand I prefer him on the bigger jumps. They seem to help him jump nicer. The lower jumps he puts no effort into it and will just fling himself over it.

 

I don't remember where all I read about the jump style. I know I was reading it in a Linda mickinberg(hope I spelled that right!) book about teaching your dog how to jump. But that wasn't the only spot.

[alligande]

I think it all boils down to what is agility for you: in the UK it started as a competive sport modeled on show jumping, and not every horse can even attempt to show jump let alone be competive. So you have the same attitude carried over into dogs. I would say in the States USDAA is the closest having been the original venue.

The other venues have evolved to accommodate different dogs, different handlers, I do a lot of NADAC, not my first choice of venue but they have the most trials close (AKC has as many but I choose not to play) and it fits my budget. But I feel the difference between NADAC and USDAA/AKC can be summed up by a conversation I had regarding a clinic put on by my club. The clinician is a top AKC/USDAA handler and she was talking about saving 10ths of seconds, handling the course better etc etc, one of the other attendees is a NADAC judge and he just could not see the point, his feeling is that he makes time, often Qs and has fun, there was no reason to push to save the extra time. To the clinician there was every reason she had lost first place at the AKC nationals by an absurdly small margin. As they say each to their own, it is great that here we have lots of choice to accommodate many people, but personally I would be happy to compete in KC style agility I would love the challenge.

[SS Cressa]

True alligande.

 

While I agree it is about fun and games... that hundredth of a second counts(or at least, it matters to me!)! It does make a difference in placing or not at the higher levels(national levels)!

[mum24dog]

But I feel the difference between NADAC and USDAA/AKC can be summed up by a conversation I had regarding a clinic put on by my club. The clinician is a top AKC/USDAA handler and she was talking about saving 10ths of seconds, handling the course better etc etc, one of the other attendees is a NADAC judge and he just could not see the point, his feeling is that he makes time, often Qs and has fun, there was no reason to push to save the extra time. To the clinician there was every reason she had lost first place at the AKC nationals by an absurdly small margin.

 

100ths of a sec, not just 10ths here. When you get to the top grades here you can find the top 10 places all within half a second and everyone knows where they lost time.

 

TBH that's why I'll never be successful - I simply don't care enough to put the effort in to fine tune. My daughter is very different, which is why she has been competing with the one good dog I've had for the last few years.

 

But there are plenty like me in KC Agility here and you can be as competitive minded as you like (or not) and still enjoy it. The choice is to accept one's situation and take everything as it comes or work hard to improve (or go elsewhere of course). We can afford to be laid back about it as Agility here is relatively cheap - mostly under £3 a run. We benefit from economy of scale and volunteer judges - plus living in a small country helps as we don't have to spend too much time travelling.

 

Some of the independent organisations here take the attitude of your NADAC judge, but you don't have to go there to have fun. Some do and find their niche.

 

not every horse can even attempt to show jump let alone be competive. So you have the same attitude carried over into dogs.

 

Sort of, yes.

All sorts of dogs can and do compete in agility here but if someone sticks to a breed that isn't really going to set the Agility world alight then they shouldn't complain if they get beaten on a regular basis as they move up the grades, or want the rules changed to suit them. That view is common but not universal.

Despite the fact that I'm not competitive minded, personally I don't want to see the sport changed to suit people like me.

 

In truth though, KC Agility nowadays is very flexible and there are ways of accommodating the needs of a wide range of competitors if show organisers are so minded and if they feel there is the demand. Nothing will change the fact that a dog and handler team have to be the best to get to the top but if a bit of creative thinking is applied it can include everyone to some extent. And it's set to give even more options in the near future. It's not perfect but it's ours and what most of us are used to.

 

I suppose the major difference in the history of the sport in our respective countries is that when it began here the KC was the only game in town dogwise and they had the sense to pick Agility up and run with it, thereby perpetuating its monopoly which has only been broken in recent years.

 

By the time it arrived in the US there were people there who already had ideas of what they thought worked and what they wanted to do differently so I guess it was inevitable that groups would form with their own versions and that some would flourish more than others.

[alligande]

100ths of a sec, not just 10ths here.

that is what I should have said....

Agility here is relatively cheap - mostly under £3 a run.

WOW.... maybe it is time to go back to England, although shipping stuff plus dogs plus husband might account for a lot agility trials

[mum24dog]

WOW.... maybe it is time to go back to England, although shipping stuff plus dogs plus husband might account for a lot agility trials

 

Cheap when you only have 1 dog and only do local shows but it gets somewhat more expensive by the time you are so hooked that you have multiple dogs, a 4x4 or van, caravan, and travel all over the country every weekend to compete.

[Rave]

Cheap when you only have 1 dog and only do local shows but it gets somewhat more expensive by the time you are so hooked that you have multiple dogs, a 4x4 or van, caravan, and travel all over the country every weekend to compete.

 

Well considering many of us in the US do this same thing but pay $12-20 per run with around 5 runs a day, it IS considerably cheaper over there! And prices have been going up about $1 a year for the past few years.

[mum24dog]

Well considering many of us in the US do this same thing but pay $12-20 per run with around 5 runs a day, it IS considerably cheaper over there! And prices have been going up about $1 a year for the past few years.

 

Is that 5 runs per dog?

Here the average is 3-4 if you take the country as a whole. A few shows as low as 2 or as many as 6, but you can enter as many or as few classes as you like.

In the last 12 years our own show entry fees have gone up by about 50%, but 50% of not very much is still not very much. Part of the increase is as a result of higher competitor expectations in the way of facilities etc.

The problem with being cheap is that there isn't much disincentive to acquire more and more dogs, which only serves to overload the system.

Fuel prices here are way higher than you pay but I suppose it is offset by not having to cover huge distances to get to shows. Most we go to are within 90mins drive, with a few 3-4 hours away.

[alligande]

Depends on the venue: I pay $12/ $13 a run for NADAC the higher price is for the indoor soccer facility, you can do up to 6 classes entering as few as you want. USDAA costs $15.00 a run depending on the trial you can do up to 5 classes, plus you can enter the 2 tournament classes that are over $20 but you can win prize money. Many clubs offer discounts if you enter the whole weekend or multiple classes. The cost of petrol often balances out by the more fuel efficient cars Brits drive, my mothers Renault costs a lot less to feed even in England than my SUV I would be terrified to pull my Isuzu up to a forecourt in England.

 

The higher prices do not discourage multiple dogs, as a guess I would say most people are running at least 2 dogs, some 4 or more.

[MrSnappy]

We seem to average about $14 a run. I am running Dex and Tweed in an upcoming trial this month ... I think it cost me $115 or so, Dex is entered in 5 runs, Tweed is running 4. We have an extremely limited number of venues available here to hold trials in, and those venues are not cheap to rent. Happily however, the most popular/utilized venue is a 5 minute drive from my house

 

RDM

[Frogs & Dogs]

Wow, these prices are higher than I'm used to. I pay up to $10/run in NADAC, but often only $8/run because of weekend discounts (enter every run for a weekend and get them cheaper). My club also offers a 10% discount for all club members, which is a great deal considering club membership is only $20/year. And recently I've been taking on bigger organizational jobs at trials, which earns me free entries all weekend. Agility still isn't cheap, but I manage to continue (albeit with one dog).

[alligande]

Most of the trials I attend are in the same facility, which is a pretty new indoor soccer center with field turf. I do not know the exact amount of the rental fee but it is high. The NADAC trials have moved almost exclusively from outside to here. New England being unreliable the organizers prefer this venue for set up and the amount of work involved. Hence the price ........

[mum24dog]

Most of the trials I attend are in the same facility, which is a pretty new indoor soccer center with field turf. I do not know the exact amount of the rental fee but it is high. The NADAC trials have moved almost exclusively from outside to here. New England being unreliable the organizers prefer this venue for set up and the amount of work involved. Hence the price ........

 

"Facility" = "venue" to us, just so I don't confuse people.

Suitable indoor venues (only for the winter) are few and far between here - most just aren't big enough.

We are lucky in having a super equestrian arena that is the only one I'm aware of that can fit 6 rings only 30 mins away from home, but that costs a lot to hire. There's one 90 mins away that can fit 5 rings but it's freezing and muddy.

It's a fine balancing act between entry numbers and cost. We can't realistically increase entry fees because fewer people would come and income wouldn't increase. And we can't put on more classes because we might get more entries than will fit in 6 rings. At present we aren't allowed to cap entries by the KC. It make it a bit difficult for those of us who organise shows but is fairer and simpler for the competitor.

[mum24dog]

We have an extremely limited number of venues available here to hold trials in, and those venues are not cheap to rent. Happily however, the most popular/utilized venue is a 5 minute drive from my house

 

RDM

 

Just noticed that you use "venue" the way we do. Maybe not too surprising in BC.

[Rave]

Most local trials in the US are 1-2 rings max. The bigger regional events or those associated with other events (like conformation, obedience, etc), might be 3-4 rings. The only 5-6 ring trials here (that I'm aware of) are national events.

 

All USDAA trials here are unlimited (to my knowledge). I believe the rules of the other organizations (AKC, CPE, NADAC, etc..) allow a maximum number of runs per judge and that determines the size of trial and if limiting is needed. Whether to limit a trial or get additional judges is left up to the hosting clubs. Certain regions tend to favor one org, for example a CPE trial might fill (reach max runs) on the first day but an AKC might not fill at all.

 

Do UK trials typically earn money?

[mum24dog]

Do UK trials typically earn money?

 

Sorry - missed your question.

 

I can't speak for anything other than KC shows but yes, they normally make money or noone could afford to hold them. Profits are ploughed back into running the host club and, in our case, subsidising training and other activities.

 

A few shows are unlucky and experience an unexpected drop in entries, and a tiny number just aren't popular, but most would want to see some financial reward for all the hard work it takes.

 

Our own main show is in the summer and outdoor shows are much more profitable than one day indoor shows where the capacity is very limited. It was one day winter shows I was talking about above.

 

Outdoor shows means camping and that brings in revenue. And I would guess most outdoor venues work out cheaper per day to hire than indoor ones. And we have the economy of scale. The smallest show I go to is 5 rings with very limited camping.They are very generous with awards and still make a small profit.

 

It's not all about money, of course, but if we can put on an enjoyable show with decent facilities and provide trophies and rosettes over and above the % expected then we feel we've earned any money we make. Speaking for my own club, we aren't greedy and cut corners to screw as much profit out of the competitors as we can.

We give them what we, as fellow competitors, would like to get at other shows. And we still only charge £2-75 for a single run.

 

---

 

We have a limit per judge per day - 450 dogs - but ideally we like to have no more than 400.

 

Some shows manipulate entries by reducing the amount of camping available as many people will only enter if they can camp on site.