kelpiechick

I agree that there is no rush to get on equipment but there is a lot of foundation training that 'babies' can do that prepares them for learning the obstacles later on. The beauty of foundation training is that you can work on it at home, with minimal eqipment. Plus you can start developing your handling skills at the same time. I am located in the same area as you ShellyBeggs. PM me if you want any further information.

ShellyBeggs I'm not sure from your email if you are training in a class/at a club or not? I agree with t(AD)pole - I wouldn't be attempting any sequencing until I had done a lot of foundation work first and I would not be jumping (even low heights) on lead. Jump work also needs a good foundation taught first - it may be natural for kelpies to jump, but not always correctly. No foundation work and you will most likely end up with a dog that consistently bar knocks or even worse, has the potential for injury. As for attempting a dogwalk, again I would make sure I had done all the foundation work first - rear end awareness exercises, perch work, plank running, etc. See if you can find a club with a foundation class where a good instructor will explain all this to you.

Good Luck Silvawilow Won't be there to watch u - I still need a few more weeks to dry out after Warrnambool !

Try this Despite the lack of the 'au' in the address, it is an Australian site.

How true - and dog looking back before entering tunnel , even just for the briefest moment, gets called as a refusal on an otherwise clear Masters Jumping course !

Correct. This is not what I would define as a turn away from handler so I guess we are talking about different things. Turn away from handler I am referring to is also known as a 'flip.'

Not always - a flick or flip occurs any time you turn your dog away from you on course (which does not include a rear cross by that terminology as in a rear cross your body movement, driving the shoulder across the line behind the dog, indicates the turn and you are coming in the same direction as your dog) Many people do use the opposite arm to indicate a turn away (think of how serpentines are commonly handled, plus rear cross on landing side) which is why SG and GD refer to that as the 'motherflicker arm' , but you can also use the same arm to turn dog away - clean run had a foundation exercise a few yrs ago teaching the dog to turn away at handler's side where the same arm was used - it is this movement I am referring to. From my experience - taught it, sorry I taught it and won't be teaching it in future. How many places can you think of on a course where your dog actually needs to turn away from you? Serpentines, threadles (use threadle arm) rear cross on landing side (don't do them) The only time I would turn my dog away from me on course would be when I was totally out of position for the cross I wanted to do, in which case, shame on me/bad handler!) Have seen it on a masters gamblers course that was given to SG to look at at her seminar earlier in the year and she still came up with an alternative to handle it without turning the dog away. So for me it is not an alternative. (providing you don't have a problem with moving around a course, then directionals become a issue for sure) Also not suggesting that people don't teach it if you think it will be of more benefit than not, go for it. Just to me it is an unnecessary move- more time I can devote to teaching something else.

Thanks Ness

This is one command I taught my kelpie that I really regret and won't be teaching it to the younger one. Susan Garrett and Greg Derrett call it the 'motherflicker' Imagine a straight line of jumps with another jump at a right angle let's say to the left of jumps 2 and 3. You want dog to take 3 jumps in a straight line but as the dog clears 2, you happen to raise your arm ever so slightly without meaning to and dog turns away from you and takes the jump to the side. How many times do you see this in a trial? They are all dogs who have been taught to turn away from handler. (including mine) Under GD and SG handling system it would not happen as dog learns turning away is not an option. In this system dog either turns with handler or a 'threadle arm/serpentine arm' is presented to get dog to change their line. Watch SG perform the 5 jump serpentine exercise at start of 'One Jump' DVD and you will see what I mean.

Can anyone confirm whether the trial scheduled for Gawler on December 31st is still going ahead? If so, does anyone know where I can find the schedule? SA agility site only has trials listed up to December 1st and I would love to combine holiday with a trial if I get the chance.

It's not the leaving of toys or food outside the ring that would get you DQ'd - providing you were responsible about the position you left it in, which I'm sure you are. You mentioned your dog actually leaving the ring and then bringing the toy back into the ring to you - this would be more likely to get you DQ'd - no food or toys in ring whether before, during or after your run. You can't reward your dog in the ring with any physical objects (only yourself, I guess) Also placing the food/toy at exit and encouraging dog to 'target' it at end of run by deliberately continuing out of ring could also be interpreted as a training aid. I could name at least 3 judges who would DQ you for it if they noticed, for sure, especially at higher levels than novice. I like to put my food and toys a fair way back from the ring exit, but close enough to run to it - used to leave it closer but one day in the middle of a run he left the ring to 'tell off' a dog who happened to walk too close to it - then came back and continued on clear ! (and of course I did get DQ'd) Do agree tho' on the lack of consistency in judging - especially in the interpretation of the rules. You've really got me thinking now - would you mind if I forwarded this scenario on to a couple of judges to get their take on it ? And loads of apologies for hijacking the 'brags' thread.

Uh no, It's actually up to the judge's discretion re: dogs leaving ring in Vic. Dog needs to be considered 'under control' by judge - eg: dog leaves ring and returns when handler calls would be under control. Dog leaves ring and runs around, picks up toy outside ring, then comes back may not. Have seen a DQ for this. I would be very careful about the routine you describe, especially about the dog bringing the toy back into the ring, that could be considered a 'training aid' (no food or toys in the ring) as could the dog leaving the ring to deliberately target the toy. I have seen people DQ'd for less.

Well done t(AD)pole Even though technically 'them's the rules' I also think it was very harsh at Novice level, and some judges will just turn a 'blind eye' or give you a warning. (Bet I could name the one who DQ'd you!) All that's been taken off you is a bit of ribbon and a bit of cardboard really - yeah I know we all love those bits of cardboard - but no one can rob you of the feeling that you get when it all comes together and that's the biggest buzz of agility. Hopefully you are still proud of yourself and Abbie, now you've done it once you can do it again and all that hard work is paying off. (And this is way better than a 'mindless brag'.)

This is the link to all agility trials held in Victoria. Click on events and then the individual months (once they are highlighted) for that month's schedules.

Main reasons for adding a nose touch on 2o2o - 1. Dogs need very clear criteria for consistent contact performance and this makes the end position very clear as they have a 'job' to do rather than just standing there. (working breeds love having a job!) 2. It forces the dog to lower its head as it drives into position, making it easier for the dog to rock its weight back, considered a safer position with less stress on the shoulders. 3. When training the position initially it gives the opportunity for multiple reinforcement of the position. My young dog has been taught to nose touch over and over again until I release him. Obviously I will release him after the first touch in a trial situation - if he ever gets there! 4. It is common for contact behaviour to deteriorate at some stage over a dog's career. When this happens it is generally the last part of the behaviour that disappears first, in this case that would be the nose touch. OK, at this stage I would be wasting lots of time at a trial waiting for my dog to add the nose touch (or I might let my criteria slip and just release him anyway - bad trainer - but at least he hasn't jumped off the contact and risked injury. Not sure how long Brock has been doing agility for, but his speed may increase once he understands what he is doing. Speed comes with clarity of learning. Having said that, it is not the ideal method for all dogs. Maybe you should discuss your questions with your instructor.

Hi JulesP, I am assuming you are talking about dogs performing the contact obstacles (dogwalk, AFrame and seesaw) who stop in what is called a '2 on 2 off' position- where the dog's front paws are on the ground and the dog's back paws are on the wood and the dog then waits to be released by their handler before continuing on to the next obstacle. Firstly, it is not mandatory for dogs to assume this position. The ones you have seen doing this would be because the handler has chosen to train the dog to stop in this way. As others mentioned, the rules state that the dog must make contact with the 'coloured area' before leaving the obstacle. Technically the dog only needs to get one paw on this coloured area for a legal performance and there is no requirement to stop. (although a judge could still choose to penalise you if they thought your dog got off the obstacle in an unsafe manner) If you go to a trial you will most likely see contact obstacles performed in 3 different ways (generalisation as there are many more methods !) 1. 2 on 2 off, the position I think you are referring to. Good method for fast dogs as it creates a very clear 'picture' for the dog about what its job is. As feralpup said, getting the dog to stop in this position is generally considered to be the clearest or easiest stop for the dog to understand. Some people do train their dogs to stop with all 4 feet on the contact and there is no reason why you can't do that, however it is very difficult to teach your dog to stop in the same position every time, especially now the slats have been removed. (same for stopping with all 4 feet just off the contact) Some trainers link other criteria with 2on 2 off method, such as teaching the dog to touch its nose to the ground - the current agility 'gurus' believe this position makes it easier to teach the dog to rock its weight back, which is considered a safer postion, less strain on the shoulders. 2. Running contact, where the dog does not stop at all but is trained to run to the end of the obstacle and continue on immediately. This method creates fast contact performance but some handlers then need to train a way to teach the dog what obstacle to take next if they are unable to beat their dog to the end of the obstacle - eg: train directionals ( left and right) A true running contact (dog coming down with extended stride, not slowing or gathering) is probably the most difficult method to train to 100% reliability) *These 2 methods are what is known as an 'independent contact'. Your dog understands what to do without you by its side which gives you the freedom to move anywhere you want on the course and set yourself up for the next obstacle. 3. Handler dependent contacts. Dog does the contact at the same speed as the handler , often following the handler's finger like a lure. Or the handler may move in front of the dog and 'block' it at the end to prevent jumping off. Not something that I would want to have as my contact performance but you will see plenty do it as it takes relatively little training and appears to give more 'instant results'. Getting your dog to slow down on the down ramp would also fall into this category. Nothing to say you are not allowed to do it, but the point of agility is to try to get around the course clear in the fastest time possible and if you choose to train this 'method' then you will lose a lot of time on contacts. So to sum up, there is no uniform way that every dog has to perform its contacts, some stop, some don't. Different methods suit different dogs and every trainer has their own 'personal favourite' I'm sure. There is a trial at Ballarat next Sunday- probably a bit far- but I think there is also Westernport at KCC park on Sat. so you could go along a watch for a better idea. Hope this helps.

My first 'grown up' dog - who is now 13, didn't do anything in regard to training until he was 6. Started obedience with my husband at 6, although he never trialled due to lack of interest on the hubby's part, he did get to class 5 at our local club, which is equivalent to novice trialling standard. When he was 7and a half, I 'borrowed' him to have a go at agility training, as obedience didn't really interest me. I always thought he was a bit of a 'dud jumper' too, especially as I knew nothing about actually training dogs how to jump then, but he did manage to get his novice titles in ANKC at almost 9 years of age and then ran fairly successfully in NADAC veterans for a couple of years after that. So from experience, I would say give it a go!

True, but I still think there is also confusion among trainers in regard to how we 'label' ourselves and this plays a big part in these debates becoming 'inflamed'. eg: what is considered 'purely positive' by one person is not the same as how another sees it. what is seen as a 'correction' by one person is not seen as a correction by another. Maybe labelling ourselves as a particular type of trainer creates a stereotyped image in the eyes of another. Not sure as to how there can ever be 'no consequences' with positive training? Does that mean if you were giving no consequences, then everything would be rewarded whether it was the behaviour you were shaping or not? Wouldn't withholding the reward for incorrect performance be considered a consequence? (Based on the premise that behaviour that is rewarded continues, behaviour not rewarded extinguishes)

Yes, sadly there are lots of people out there with no idea how to treat dogs, with disastrous results. BUT..... this example would surely be the exception rather than the rule. I hope you're not assuming this is how all trainers using food rewards treat their dogs? Positive is NOT permissive !

Leopuppy, I think that is exactly what many people think - and not just in the UK. Apologies for going slightly OT now but it drives me crazy when those of us who actually have working kelpies or BC's as our 'heart breed' have others think/say 'she only got that type of dog to compete in agility, etc.' Working kelpies come with their own set of training 'challenges' believe me! as I am sure do BC's, especially those high drive dogs who do well in agility.

I don't want to take part in a training debate - I believe there is not a 'one size fits all' approach to dog training. (and we all know the only thing 2 dog trainers can agree on is what a 3rd trainer is doing wrong) I do believe that we all bring our own interpretation to the comments posted tho' - I actually find this forum the other way round Dogdude. Often feel that the positive trainers get flamed a lot by people defending aversives. So my point is, not that one of us is 'right' and the other 'wrong' but that we are approaching the issue with different viewpoints. I think we take the comments that we disagree with to heart sometimes and gloss over the others. Hopefully there is room for all views here.

The very best breed for agility is any breed you can love !

I have actually heard of a trainer using a ball point pen and clicking the top up and down with a really sound sensitive dog. You can also take a 'traditional clicker', drill a hole in the back and insert a screw - needs to fit fairly tight. By turning the screw around and putting varied degrees of pressure on the 'clicker plate' you can control the volume of the resulting click. (hope that makes sense) Whatever you decide to use, make sure that you use something that your dog is absolutely crazy about to pair as a reward, especially when introducing it. Good Luck!

Sprung ! It's the teacher in me that I try to keep contained. As I also have a dog who flies around when he can work away but has a total meltdown when asked to work close and slows right down, I can relate. After watching other handlers yesterday, my suspicion is that I am giving very clear (almost exaggerated) signals when he is working away but I am becoming lazy when he is in close and not signalling as clearly or as early as I am from a distance. Laffi, you might want to try Susan Garrett's website : she has a really detailed article about how to get a dog interested in playing with a toy.

I enjoyed auditing the agility sessions - from the viewpoints of both an instructor and a handler. It was great to see how the body cues from participants in the 'high drive' session improved over that jumping sequence, in both timing and position. Can't wait to try that one out! Gina was also easy to listen to and appeared very approachable. I also liked the way that she obviously doesn't use a 'one size fits all' approach to training as some others do.