# AKC Agility Advisor Committee Recommendations



## Jersey's Mom (Nov 25, 2007)

There is a great thread going discussing the recommendations made for obedience rule changes and I thought it would be nice to get one going about agility as well. Here is a link to the advisory committee's recommendations: http://images.akc.org/pdf/events/agility/2013AgilityAdvisoryCommittee.pdf 

I'll start things off with one: I like the idea of eliminating the four paw safety rule. Whenever I have seen a dog slip and fall off the dog walk (for example), I always hate that the owner has to choose between getting their dog back up there to build confidence (then being excused which I'm sure feels like punishment to the dog who has to stop running) or continuing on with the course (and not getting a chance to address the issue right then and there, possibly allowing an issue with the dog walk to arise or fester). Some personal examples: when Jersey was in novice, one time he sprinted up the teeter without stopping for the pivot as he had always done in practice, at home, and in previous trials. I'm fully convinced he thought it was the dog walk (I believe I used the command teeter, but this long later who knows). It moved, he panicked and bailed. It took a little doing at home and class to rebuild his confidence with it. I'm lucky that he is pretty resilient, but even so we did have a little issue to deal with. Would that have been easier if we could have gone right back and tried again? I think so. One day in the excellent or masters ring he hit the teeter at an odd angle... Didn't bail but essentially ran right off the side of it before the pivot point... really tried to change course but was too late. He knew he'd missed the obstacle and took to staring at me through the rest of the run in the way he does when he's feeling less confident (he so rarely does that anymore that it's very obvious). How much better for him would it have been to get a second chance and be successful? I think it will take honesty and common sense from competitors to know when it is right to redo (the dog in some way slipped, hit it wrong, was spooked by something in the next ring, etc) and when it's not (dog just missed the contact with a long stride or a chronic contact jumper predictably jumped the contact) as well as possibly a limited number of retries (say, 3 tries like one gets on the weaves) but big-picture-wise I think this will be a good thing for the dogs. 

Would love to hear others' thoughts about this idea and the other proposed changes. They are not as sweeping as what has been proposed in obedience, but any changes made will affect this sport possibly forever... and that is always worth taking the time to discuss! 

Julie, Jersey and Oz


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Lucky Penny (Nov 13, 2011)

With the four paw rule, does that mean dogs longer have to have paws in the contact zone of the contacts?


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

The 4 Paw Rule states that if your dog has all 4 paws on a contact zone but then bails, falls or dismounts, you must either 1) continue with the next obstacle or 2) allow your dog to retry the contact obstacle but them immediately leave the course.

This is a very good proposed change


----------



## Lucky Penny (Nov 13, 2011)

So your dog would be allowed to re-due the contact and still possibly Q?


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

No Q, but you would be allowed to redo the contact obstacle AND continue the course  Similar to continuing the course after a knocked bar


----------



## Lucky Penny (Nov 13, 2011)

I think that is great.


----------



## Selli-Belle (Jan 28, 2009)

I like the change to not require a number sticker. I was at a trial a few weeks ago and it was a VERY humid day, about a minute after I went outside to potty Selli my sticker fell off my shirt! It literally fell off. I went in and asked the trial sec if they had some tape to make it stay on me. The judge was at the table working on sheets and she told me not to worry, she doubted she would notice missing stickers due to the humidity.


----------



## Maxs Mom (Mar 22, 2008)

While it would require more changes I like the table rule recommendation. The recommendation is 4-8" dogs, get an 8" table, 12" to 12", 16" to 16", and 20-26" dogs have a 20" table. It would mean new equipment since a 20" table does not exist in AKC. Could keep the 20" dogs at their current 16" table but I really don't care. I do not like the 24" table it us way too unsteady. So I like this rule. 

I would like to see it one step farther, I'd like master level dogs to not have a table at all. At Invitational and Agility National there is no table. I understand the need to training control you need for proper table behavior but once past excellent, you shouldn't need it. Of course I do like the momentary break while Gabby is on the table, but is still rather see it go. 

I also do not like the no judging of the up contact on the teeter. That is the one obstacle that really needs a proper mount. I think eliminating the contact judging is a injury waiting to happen. Too many dogs fly off now not having a proper mount will exacerbate that problem in my book. 

I also think leave the color of the contacts alone. Some clubs here have different color contacts (like purple with light green) it's nice to see something different and since dogs are supposed to be color blind....leave that rule alone. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## sammydog (Aug 23, 2008)

Most of the the new rules I don't feel strongly about either way.

I like changes to the four paw safety rule! Right now the rule reads: _"Four Paw Rule. If a dog commits all four feet on any ascent portion of a contact obstacle and fails to negotiate the ascent side of that obstacle, the judge shall instruct the handler to move the dog on to the next obstacle. If the dog re-engages the obstacle with one or more paws, the dog shall be excused."_ I think it is great that if you have a bumble getting onto a contact you can try again. It sounds like it will just be a refusal as well, so I believe you would still be able to qualify in the lower levels.

I LOVE the rules that fix/update some safety concerns, like padding around the chute entrance and non-slip on the inside. I have seen pretty wicked scratches on dogs faces from the chute. I would be thrilled to get rid of those one piece metal jumps, with the direction that course design going these days they are just dangerous!

I have to disagee with Maxs Mom regarding the teeter rule, I think it is a great change! I have seen dogs called for missing the up contact in their natural stride when performing the obstacle in a manner that I would consider safe and proper. I think that is what they are addressing, similar to getting rid of the dogwalk up contact years ago.

I don't like changing the table to 20" for 20" dogs, I think we have been just fine with the 16" table. I have always heard 12" people grumble about the little 8" table, but I don't think you need to mess with the rest of them! I would also agree, just get rid of the table all together, haha!

I would still like to see a rule that keeps dogs in their own jump height, similar to the way the rules are at the National events. Basically because I think the 24" class should be reserved for 24" dogs...


----------

