Speak up. Stop mumbling...
 Whether
it is a little niggle or a burning issue, here is your chance to stand up and say something.
There's only one way to get things done, and you might get some unexpected support. So don't
just sit there, do something. Send your moans and groans - big or small - to
Agilitynet.
Out of courtesy, please ensure that any club,
organisation or individual you mention is notified so they can reply. That way we can have a
real dialogue, and together we may be able to get something done about it.
Are Mediums and Smalls Getting a Raw Deal?
From Gemma Brunt
 After
attending Easington show last weekend with both my Medium and my Large dog, I have been asking
myself the question whether my Medium dog is getting a raw deal at some of my favourite shows.
Easington was one of the best I have attended with her this year as, not only did they
encourage the Large dogs with lovely trophies to 3rd in every class and plenty of rosettes,
they also gave trophies to 3rd and rosettes to 5th in all Medium classes. It makes me wonder
that if a relatively small club like Easington can encourage Mediums like this why some of the
other clubs stick to a strict 10 percent when giving out rosettes.
It is heart
breaking to come 2nd with a Medium dog who has taken just as much effort to train and work and
who has paid the same amount to enter a show, only to be told at the presentation that rosettes
go to 1st. This has happened to me on many occasions and, as I am attempting to get my dog
Lexie to Cruft's I have been most upset to discover despite her coming 2nd or 3rd in her class
she receives nothing so, therefore, misses out not only on her award but also on her points,
too.
I would just
like to send my praise and thanks to Easington show for rewarding my efforts and all the Small
and Medium handlers there. Despite there only being 20 or so dogs in the classes, it was a
pleasure to compete at your show and I will definitely be coming back next year. I think I
speak on behalf of all Small and Medium handlers that other big clubs should follow Easington's
example and stop being so strict on your 10 percent rule. After all, the little dogs deserve a
break. They take just as much training as a Large dog, so deserve to be rewarded for their
efforts. After all, how much can a rosette cost compared to how much it means to those who
receive them.
In reply from Gemma Brunt...
My
comments were meant to be praise for Easington as they supported non-Large dog handlers which
is something most shows don't do. I wanted to praise how they gave more rosettes out than the
usual 10 percent in Medium classes. If they had stuck to it there would have just been two
rosettes meaning most of my fellow medium handlers going home without.
It was not
aimed at the large dog classes, Yes, there was less than 10 percent in those classes but that
was not the point I wanted to make. I handle Large dogs as well as my Medium dog, one of
which stands little chance of getting a place because of his lack of speed but, at least. at
most shows he stands some chance as there are more rosettes up for grabs in the Large
classes. But overall my point was to praise them for doing something different and trying to
encourage other sizes. It wasn't about Large dogs. (17/10/07)
From Katarina Ullsten
I didn't go to Easington but if they stuck to what was published in
their schedule then I can't see a problem. If you did enter the show you knew what you would
get and if you don't like it, don't enter. Yes, it doesn't seem completely fair but then
there are many other inequalities in our sport that are of more importance and, as long as
you know what you will get when entering a show, then you have a choice. You will never
please everybody, but you are more likely to have happy customer if they know what they will
get. We all have different reasons for choosing one show over an other and those choices will
also always be different for different people.
(24/09/07)
From Pam Ellwood
In reply to Gemma's comments it would actually have been nice if
Easington had gone anywhere near 10% in some classes. Proportions of places were erratic, to
say the least. Just a few examples:-
Obviously Grade 7 dogs of all sizes came out of it
extremely well.
They stuck to exactly what was published in the
schedule, which is why it is never wise to make guesses. 'At least 10%" is the safest way to
go and then you can be flexible on the side of generosity.'
(23/09/07)
Adjust the Size of the Contact to the Size of the
Dog
From
Alan Score
If jumps are variable according to size of dog, why are
contacts the same for all dogs. Is it just for convenience if so, why not make jumps the same
height for all dogs. If not for convenience, then some consideration should be made for varying
size of dog.
Contacts were brought in with the safety of the dogs in
mind, basically to stop them leaping off the A-frame or dog walk etc. At the moment, it is more
likely that a Small dog would get a contact much easier than a large, long striding dog who
will miss the contacts on pure stride alone, without having to leap off. We obviously want to
keep safety in mind, but a Large dog could suffer Injury if trying to break its stride if it
has to then scrabble up with the possible consequence of losing balance and possibly falling
off, or over a period of time causing injury in its shoulders. All sizes of dogs are running
much faster now than a few years ago, due to improved training methods, so consequently any
injuries that might occur could be more severe.
We all want to run our dogs with their safety and future
health in mind. So I think that someone with KC connections could possibly raise this subject
as a discussion point for possible adjustments to lengths of contacts for Large dogs, i am not
talking or making a point about reducing contact lengths for small dogs. Besides, why should
really big dogs be penalised for just having a normal stride that overrides the contact.
(12/06/07)
 From
Brenda Tenten...
And so, in making 'progress' we take the
retrograde step of all Small or Medium or Super-Large dog classes having to run in the same
ring in order to accommodate different sizes of weave poles/distances and contact equipment.
Or, we could go backwards with the weave suggestion and return to the stick in the ground
sort so that they can be set at different distances for different sizes of dogs. Those of us
with long agility memories also remember how they couldn't be properly replaced after they
had been hit by multiple dogs, especially in soft ground. And then there is the danger of
poles flying out when hit. Those spikes could be lethal!
Then consider the problems when training too. At the
moment, we only have to lift the hurdle poles up and down to accommodate different sizes of
dog in the class. What a nightmare it would be if weave poles and contacts had to be adjusted
as well! No, leave things alone. (06/07/07)
From Karen Parker...
If you were looking at this from all angles,
you would also have to look at the size of the rings. The Small classes are just as spread
out as the Large classes. The equipment isn't moved in closer so the small dogs have
less to run. Surely, you would also make the rings smaller for the small dogs so that they
don't have as far to run? Or make the large dogs rings larger so that both sizes cover the
same amount of ground / space?
I do not agree with changing the weave size for the
smaller dogs. I think that there is a safe distance between the weaves for all dogs and that
it could become dangerous if changed. (03/07/07)
 From
Patsy Liversage & Pandy
Regarding changing the size of contacts for Large/Small dogs, I think it is a
great idea and maybe then we should look at changing the size of the weave poles also. A
Small dog can take two or three steps inside the weaves whereas a Large dog can sometimes
only get his head and shoulders in there. I think the weave spacing should be made smaller
for Small dogs to give the smaller dogs the same challenge that the larger dogs have. I, too,
have a very large Border Collie that has a very long stride but does manage to stop on his
contacts. (18/06/07)
What's Wrong with the Measuring Survey
From
Nicole Fisher
I think the Measuring Survey on
Agilitynet misses out one very important aspect. It’s not how many times you need to get the
dog measured - after all it take no time at all - but the hassle of finding not one or two
people to do it but a third individual after all the agro you have already had!
When I needed my dogs measuring, I had
terrible trouble trying to get them measured before they could compete as I don’t compete
anywhere that takes more than 90 minutes to get to so could not have it done at a show. There
is only one measurer in my area who is an hour away. I had to wait three months until
they had enough dogs to hold a session. Had it, therefore, have been my third measuring, I
would have missed the two month time scale.
I can understand why you would need to
have dog measuring confirmed i.e. a third time and don’t think people should be exempt just
because they started agility earlier, but I do think measuring needs to be accessible .(13/05/07)
From Dawn Davies...
I have two large dogs. I was
competing before the new - and if you ask me daft - rule about measuring came into force, the
rule that someone on this page said we asked and voted for. I don't remember being
given a choice or a ballot paper.
My
new rescue will start competing next season and I have been told I will have to get him
measured even though he is bigger than the other dog I run. So now, on top of the rising show
entry/camping/travelling fees, I have now got to pay someone to tell me that he is a Large
dog. I can see, though not understand, why some people want to slip their border line dogs
into the wrong jump height to cheat, but why do the rest of us have to pay for this problem?
Most
handlers with dogs of debatable size are honest, decent people. The way I see it is it is the
Kennel Club's place to enforce and control the other people who don't want to follow the
rules.
(30/06/07)
A Veteran's View
From Skye Wilson
 I
am a 10 year old Weimaraner. Come to think of it I am now
nearer 11 years old! For health and safety reasons, I have recently had to retire from standard
agility classes as I am struggling with full height jumps now. However, I do still love to have
a go! There's nothing more heart breaking at a show than to see my stable mates enjoying
themselves on the courses and I don't get to join in. There are usually dozens of classes for
all the different heights of dogs, but sometimes us oldies can get overlooked and don't get
catered for.
There are quite
a few shows coming up where I have been able to enter either a Veteran class or Anysize Jumping
class. These shows are Nottingham, PADS, Wirral, Derbyshire and Scunthorpe and I'm really
looking forward to being able to join in the fun. Us veterans may be getting on a bit, but we
are still young at heart!
On behalf of all
us 'agile geriatrics' I would like to take this opportunity to say a big thank you to these
Clubs and all the other Clubs throughout the UK that host these classes. And if any Show
Secretaries read this letter and your club doesn't host a Veteran or Anysize class, can I just
prompt you to ask your committee to consider it in the future?
From Mitzi
Schick...
I would like to agree with A Veteran's View from Skye Wilson. I am a border
collie only just turned 10 in March, but I suddenly find that full height jumps are just too
much. I can't stay home by myself so will have to travel with the rest of the family to all
shows. I still love Agility and would like to see more shows that I can do. Surely it
wouldn't be too much for a show to put on just one class that I can do.
(05/10/07)
Suggested Revision to New Grading System
From
Jenny Willis
 It
seems to me that there are too many grades (levels) now and this makes it difficult for shows
to put on one grade classes, as, for the three heights this means 21 different classes. Would
it not be sensible to reduce the number of grades? I would suggest something along the lines
of:
|
Current Grade |
Revised Grade |
| 1 |
1 |
| 2 |
1 |
| 3 |
2 |
| 4 |
2 |
| 5 |
3 |
| 6 |
4 |
| 7 |
5 |
This would have
the effect of combining Grades 1 and 2 (equivalent to Elementary and Starters). It was very
rare to have an Elementary class at a show and in the old days the difference between
Elementary and Starters was the jumps. In Elementary, they were normally 6 inches lower.
Grades 3 and 4 would be combined, which would have
the effect of splitting the old Novice class into two rather than three. This would speed up
the progression of new Novice dogs into Senior (new Grade 4).
New grades
Grade 1 would be open to any dog, handler or owner who has not won 2 classes (one of which must
be agility) at an Open KC show. Grade 2 would be for any dog not eligible for grade 1.
Progression to grade 3 would require 2 wins at grade 2 (one of which must be agility). Grade 3,
progression to grade 4 would require 2 wins at grade 3 (one of which must be agility). Grade 4,
progression to grade 5 would require 4 wins at grade 4, (two of which must be agility).
Transition from old grades to new
-
Grades 1 and 2 would become Grade 1
-
Grades 3 and 4 would become Grade 2
-
Grade 5 would become Grade 3
-
Grade 6 would become Grade 4
-
Grade 7 would become Grade 5
This would encourage shows to put on more graded classes as the numbers of classes required
would be less. This would apply even more for small and medium dogs as the new grades would be
slightly larger in number.
What do people think?
From Dawn
Davies...
I would also like to comment on the new grading system that has been introduced. I can
see the nightmare it is going to cause the clubs running shows and the people competing. How
are we supposed to enter a Elementary/Starter dog in a show and pit it against novice dogs
let alone a new one starting out the courses will become harder. I'm not complaining about
that but if my dog was capable of completing a Novice course she would be a Novice dog. I
have noticed that this year a lot of shows are combining Grades 1-6. How is that going to
affect people like me who won't run my dog on a course she is not capable of handling. All
that will do is demoralise the likes of me and my dog and, to be honest, drive us away from
KC shows. I wish there were more shows for us 'just for fun' runners as there are very fewer
and fewer KC shows I am now able or willing to enter.
(30/06/07)
To Weave or Not
From
Andrew Everett
During last season, I came across quite a few shows where
an NBC Jumping round excluded weaves, yet the corresponding ABC Jumping round included weaves!
Come on judges let’s have a fair/level playing field here!! Why are there weaves in a
jumping course anyway?
(09/05/07)
From Jill Spur
In response to Andrew Everett's comments
regarding ABC/NBC classes... for a start there are very rarely 'corresponding' NBC classes
when shows schedule an ABC, whether qualifier or not, so it can hardly be called a level
playing field anyway.
As for should weaves be in a jumping course? Why ever
not? Agility courses are not just made up of contact pieces, and jumping courses do not just
need to be made up of jumps. Weaves are one of the basic elements of agility, so why on
earth leave them out? I don't understand why you think its not fair to have weaves in the ABC
and not the collie class - they aren't competing against each other, so what is the problem?
(10/05/07)
Docked Tails at the Worlds
From
Gert Danckaers (Belgium)
 The
FCI has given the organisation of their World Championship to the city of Hamar. Since
1/01/2000 it is forbidden to crop the puppies ears and tails, which is a very good decision.
Most countries have similar laws, but the applicable date is different. A new Norwegian rule
with application date 25/04/2003 forbids the participation of dogs with docked ears and tails
at shows and every other dog competition. Even if the tail has been cropped by medical reason,
or when the dog is born before 1/01/2000.
So all cropped dogs are banned to our favorite sports. It
means that a lot of excellent teams cannot participate the 2007 World Agility Championship in
Hamar. It is a stupid rule, and the responsible organisation have made a giant mistake! The
breed standards of the FCI have (till some years) advised to crop the tail of certain
breeds. Now they exclude the same dogs to the World Agility Championship. Where is the logic?
I would love to compete in Norway but this 'stupid' law
is standing in my way. In my deepest dream, I hope the Government of Norway could give
dispensation to the cropped dogs for this event. (17/04/07)
From Dawn Davies...
Yes, I know we sound like a stuck
record but I started this sport with my now departed Clyde for the fun and social life. I now
feel that our fun weekends are being pushed out of the sport by those who are in it for the
glory. I have nothing against them as they do work hard and deserve to make it to the top but
the only pedigree dogs in the worlds is outrageous.
Okay, my dogs are highly unlikely to
ever make the grade, but there are some amazing dogs out there without a pedigree heritage
who deserve to represent their country as much as the next dog.
(30/06/07)
| 
.jpg)
To
contact Agilitynet 