# AKC Agility Advisory Committee Recommendations - Part 1



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

I went through the recommendations last night - and I'm a bit on the fence about some of them...

I love the lower a-frame height for the little dogs- LOVE it.

I don't think the table is an issue - but I don't like the "no behavior required" part - either keep it the way it is or get rid of it altogether. However, I see this "X equipment is too hard to train so lets get rid of it" aspects of some venues and it bothers me - a lot. 

I don't like the tire answer - lowering the tire 4" in all jump heights does not make a safer performance. I'm OK with a 24 (or 26" tire) - but one that broke away would be nice.

24" weaves - never had my dogs on them - I don't think it's an issue for big dogs - I'd be worried if I had little dogs though....

Changes in YPS - not really sure why...

I do like the proposed change for removing MACH multipliers - Most breed clubs do rankings by points - which favors people who live and trial in places that aren't ultra competitive. As a for instance, this weekend 1st and 2nd placements were 34 seconds under course time in EX Std - we have several elite professional trainers running BC's in the 24" group - my goldens (no matter how talented) are never going to put in a 24 second STD course - nor would I ask them to do that to their bodies...In other places that same course would have been won with a 15 second under SCT run - removing the multipliers puts people all over the country on a more level playing field (and I'll omit the bit about some places having trials that are "local" 50 weeks out of the year)..

The new PACH - now we're asking preferred dogs to run for CH points? Preferred dogs get extra time already - how are you going to balance that out? I like that PAX didn't require points - but held to the 20 QQ's. I'll be curious to see how that plays out with the board - ditto on the bronze, silver and century awards from the excellent B class....

I do like the proposal that secretaries will be able to pull from waiting list after closings - it gives clubs a chance to fill if bitches come into seasons or in a couple of cases the trial secretary goofs and enters someone in the wrong trial the club doesn't have to pay for that mistake...

E


----------



## Maxs Mom (Mar 22, 2008)

First I have to remind myself these are PROPOSALS however I am not on board with the PACH idea. I run a dog preferred in part because she can't make time. She would NEVER get 750 points. I sent an email to the advisory board today to make sure they are talking replacing the PAX, and if so I plan to draft an email stating why I think the PACH is a bad idea. Keeping my personal feelings out. If that rule passes Belle will NEVER get that title. 

Some of the others I LOVE (the Q awards) and others are wierd (positionless table) I do think they should be reviewed and if people have opinions send them to the board before the date they recommend. If we don't state our opinions they will never be heard may or may not work but it won't if they are not stated.


----------



## kgiff (Jul 21, 2008)

MurphyTeller said:


> Changes in YPS - not really sure why...


From someone running a 24 inch dog that has missed qualifying by under a second multiple times, I'm thrilled that this is a consideration. I know for most people it's probably not an issue, but I've spent this last year trying decide whether or not I need to move him down to preferred. I'd love to get at least an AX on him -- we have no excellent standard Qs, but would be half way to our MX if we had just a second or two more.

The table I don't like the no criteria other than 4 paws being on the table, but then again I know numerous people who have had such issues on the table -- that's apparently a change to help speed up trials?


----------



## Maxs Mom (Mar 22, 2008)

The table for me would improve my time. Belle likes to stand...period. HOWEVER I don't want no position. Agility is about "training" your dog. If we can't train our dogs to sit or lay down should we be running them? Yes my dog is a slower dog to drop, she HATES the down command. However doing away with commands is not the table. Just does not make any sense to me. 

I also like the lower A frame for little dogs. That should be safer. As for the 24" weaves I LOVE THAT!!! Most little dogs I see when they are used at trials have difficulty at first with their timing but my trainers sheltie who jumps 12" FLIES through them now she has even more room. It will definitely be an adjustment and clubs will have to buy new equipment. It will help dogs bodies. 

I did just a cursory read except for the PACH since that directly applies to me.


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

Maxs Mom said:


> First I have to remind myself these are PROPOSALS however I am not on board with the PACH idea. I run a dog preferred in part because she can't make time. She would NEVER get 750 points. I sent an email to the advisory board today to make sure they are talking replacing the PAX, and if so I plan to draft an email stating why I think the PACH is a bad idea. Keeping my personal feelings out. If that rule passes Belle will NEVER get that title.


My guess is that they will keep the suffix PAX title and ADD the prefix PACH title

I don't think they (the board) can (would) remove a title...however, it could mean that dogs PAX and PACH on the same day...(it's possible)

Erica


----------



## Maxs Mom (Mar 22, 2008)

MurphyTeller said:


> My guess is that they will keep the suffix PAX title and ADD the prefix PACH title
> 
> I don't think they (the board) can (would) remove a title...however, it could mean that dogs PAX and PACH on the same day...(it's possible)
> 
> Erica


I sent an email to the advisory council already asking if this is a replacement or in addition to title. If it is a replacement I have passionate feelings, and I will properly address them in an email to the advisory council. It may not do any good, but it really won't if I don't say it.


----------



## Maxs Mom (Mar 22, 2008)

One more thing just my "opinion" IF the PACH is the new goal title for preferred dogs, I certainly hope it goes in front of their name since the requirements are the same for MACH and PACH. Ok I will step off my soap box so I don't annoy you guys. Can you tell I have thought about this ALL day?

:doh: :no:


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

I really want to know if it'll be pronounced "PA'T- CH" or "Paw-k" - 

Not to be confused with "Mawk"...


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

Maxs Mom said:


> One more thing just my "opinion" IF the PACH is the new goal title for preferred dogs, I certainly hope it goes in front of their name since the requirements are the same for MACH and PACH. Ok I will step off my soap box so I don't annoy you guys. Can you tell I have thought about this ALL day?
> 
> :doh: :no:


Any AKC CH title goes in front of the name...MACH, CT, OTCH, CH...I wouldn't imagine that PACH would be any different...but then again, this is AKC afterall...
Erica


----------



## katieanddusty (Feb 9, 2006)

No position on the table is consistent with the rules in most other places (at the FCI championships they have an electronic table that just senses when the dog gets on, then beeps after 5 seconds, which is probably where AKC will go in a few years). It'll speed trials up and remove a LOT of ambiguity where everyone thinks the dog is down but the judge isn't counting, everyone including the handler knows the dog isn't down but the judge isn't in a good spot so is counting, etc.

24" weave poles is also making it consistent with international organizations, but will be a lot more annoying than the table thing. Most people I know train on 20" spacing. Good for the agility obstacle companies, good for the big dogs who get really badly tangled up in 20" poles, not good for everyone else.

REALLY don't like the lowered tire heights (4" lower than the rest of the jumps). I think that's going to cause more injuries rather than less. My 22" tall dog looks at a 16" tire, it seems like going completely over it is going to be a pretty reasonable option. Some sort of breakaway tire would be a much better idea.

Yay for getting rid of multipliers! I see way too many people entering their slower, non-athletic dogs in 26" for the multipliers, and that height should really be left for the World Team prospects whose dogs are athletic enough to handle it. Plus it messes a lot with rankings for the Invitational, because it's a lot harder to get a multiplier in certain areas, so you end up with a decent dog from Kentucky getting more points than a faster dog who just happens to live near a bunch of really top-notch competitors.

Having both PAX and PACH is redundant. I'm guessing they'll probably get rid of PAX, unless they're planning to add a MAX or something for the regular classes? I think that almost all dogs are physically capable of running several seconds under the current course times, so dogs that are properly motivated, decently athletic and not way too old to do agility will be finishing them both on the same run. Speed is an important part of agility and I don't think they should leave a title built into the system just for dogs that can't get the points for PACH.


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

Has AKC (historically) ever eliminated a title? They've added several over the years - but I can't find any indication that they've ever eliminated a title.
E


----------



## hawtee (Nov 1, 2006)

Hmm. just got thru reading the advisory committee's proposals..Looks like quie a fe changes coming..
I hope they don't get rid of the PAX title, I think they are asking a little much for the older dog if they do.
Table, can't understand why it would just be 4 on the board. I guess a lot of people just don't take the time to train it, I personally will continue with a down lol..
Tire jump, I do not like dropping down to 16. I to think it can cause problems.
24" poles, works for me, Lilli has hung up on the 20" at times. I don't know what it will do for the smaller dogs.
Times, I agree on this. I have seen to many dogs not have the speed but have awesome runs and miss by a second.
Multipliers, we have gotten a few of them however I really don't like them. I have started seeing a couple of people who run mulitple dogs starting to leave one in the 20 and put the other in 24 just to get those multipliers so they don't have to compete against theirself in the same class...these are the pros mind you..


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

hawtee said:


> I have started seeing a couple of people who run mulitple dogs starting to leave one in the 20 and put the other in 24 just to get those multipliers so they don't have to compete against theirself in the same class...these are the pros mind you..


Wait, can you clarify? Are you seeing people run their 20" dogs (under 22" at the wither) jumping 24" in a run at multipliers? We see a couple folks running their 24" dogs at 26" for multipliers, but I don't think I've seen the 20/24 thing - then again I'm not measuring dogs ringside either...

Erica


----------



## hawtee (Nov 1, 2006)

Yes, they are 20 inch dogs whom I have competed against.


----------



## Selli-Belle (Jan 28, 2009)

I don't like the positionless table, due to the fact that Selli is very good at either the sit or the down on the table. 

I am also a little miffed that they are increasing the time allowed for 24" dogs, but they are keeping the same times for 20" dogs. My Selli and I struggle to make time now in 20" but because we are competing against the faster dogs, we are penalized, or rather not aided by the change. I guess we could move up to 24," but I don't want to make Selli jump a higher jump in exchange for a little bit of time.


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

Selli-Belle said:


> I don't like the positionless table, due to the fact that Selli is very good at either the sit or the down on the table.
> 
> I am also a little miffed that they are increasing the time allowed for 24" dogs, but they are keeping the same times for 20" dogs. My Selli and I struggle to make time now in 20" but because we are competing against the faster dogs, we are penalized, or rather not aided by the change. I guess we could move up to 24," but I don't want to make Selli jump a higher jump in exchange for a little bit of time.


Remember that these are recommendations only - nothing is set in stone...The other thing to consider is that a lot of our current agility dogs will probably be retired before any of these changes (if they are approved) actually take effect - My guess is 2011/2012 at the earliest.

Erica


----------



## Selli-Belle (Jan 28, 2009)

Erica,

You are right. I need to keep that in mind.


----------



## sammydog (Aug 23, 2008)

Wow, so many recommendations! Anyone know a history on how many usually make it to the rule book?

Been hearing about the weaves. I practice on 20" weaves at home, they are currently 22" at trials here. I can see a difference in their weaving between the two, when the moved to 22"... So I would be buying a new set of weavepoles if that change goes through. Anyone want to buy a nice 20" set?!

I had also heard about the 26" going away and the multipliers going away. I don't care much either way on that one. 

I had not heard about the table. It would help me, Barley likes to bark at me a few times before he will sit. Loves to down, hates to sit. I would still be asking for a sit though. Guess they just want to speed up trials.

I don't like the tire change... I think the big dogs would be running a risk of hitting their backs on the top of the tire... I have had it happen once when the height was not changed... Going to be emailing my thoughts on that one.

I would personally rather not see a chute in the JWW ring, just seems a little funky.

That is about all that jumps out at me.


----------



## katieanddusty (Feb 9, 2006)

I'm not sure many of those are going to make it. They've been promising to remove multipliers for several years so that will probably go through, and I've also heard reps/important-people talking about the table at trials so I'd guess that's near the top of the list to go through as well. But stuff like lower tire, chutes in JWW, etc just seem weird.


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

sammydog said:


> I would personally rather not see a chute in the JWW ring, just seems a little funky.


Agreed...not to mention the labor that goes into the chute - can you imagine having three more classes (in the northeast that's usually 5 or 6 more worker groups) that have a chute fluffer? No thank you.


----------



## sammydog (Aug 23, 2008)

MurphyTeller said:


> Agreed...not to mention the labor that goes into the chute - can you imagine having three more classes (in the northeast that's usually 5 or 6 more worker groups) that have a chute fluffer? No thank you.


Oh man, I did not even think about that :yuck: Chute fluffing is the worst job! Hopefully they don't add that one!


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

sammydog said:


> Oh man, I did not even think about that :yuck: Chute fluffing is the worst job! Hopefully they don't add that one!


Hate to say it, but that's the #1 reason I don't volunteer to ring crew...build, time, scribe, gate, score run...no problem - just don't ask me to ring crew.


----------



## sammydog (Aug 23, 2008)

MurphyTeller said:


> Hate to say it, but that's the #1 reason I don't volunteer to ring crew...build, time, scribe, gate, score run...no problem - just don't ask me to ring crew.


I don't mind ring crew, gate and scribe are too much pressure! But I don't like to chute fluff, ug  I like jump setting, so since most people hate it, I usually do that. Good gates are nice to have!


----------



## Maxs Mom (Mar 22, 2008)

sammydog said:


> I don't like the tire change... I think the big dogs would be running a risk of hitting their backs on the top of the tire... I have had it happen once when the height was not changed... Going to be emailing my thoughts on that one.


Just this past weekend my dog bumped her head on the top of the tire. I looked back just in time to see her hit and close her eyes in reaction. Poor Belle : It made me think lowering may not be a good idea! I had been ambivalent to that change before. Go to a break away tire.


----------

