Jump to content

Agility Training Talk Thread


 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

At the moment here in Masters classes the vast majority are 500, followed by 300, 600, 400, 200

300 & 600 are very close in numbers and can swap on the day depending on who is entered.

Wow that many in 300, I would never have guessed. I guess most of your herding/working type breeds seen in agility would fall into the 500 class. My previous dog was 600 but they were all together way back then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Intersting that you had more 200 & 600 dogs than the 300's! After 500 height dogs, 300 would be our biggest class usually.

Our last trial had in JDM:

0 x 200

7 x 300

5 x 400 (1 bc)

25 x 500 (12 bc's)

2 x 600

The above seems pretty representative of our local trials this year, maybe a bit above average on the 400 dogs? 500 height dogs definitely make up the majority of our entries, with a large percent being bc's. We only have a couple of 200 height dogs locally and we used to have a good 600 contingent but I find myself a bit lonely in 600 these days!! Oh, and not a single sheltie in the above numbers!

Edited by FHRP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the trial on the weekend we had the following numbers in Masters Jumping:

600 - 3 (one BC)

500 - 23 (17 BCs, 2 BC Xs)

400 - 6 (2 BCs, 2 Shelties)

300 - 9 (5 Shelties)

200 - 1 (Papillon)

In the open classes there were less 300s and more 600s, it was an expensive trial ($10 per entry) so less entries than normal (ETA - all 300 dogs in Open classes were Shelties except one Corgi)

Edited by amypie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer the old system of gaining AgCh - it is much harder.

I like the new system. Problem with the old system is that it means a different thing depending on the state you're in. If you have 4-5 very fast consistent dogs who are at every trial, it can be damned near impossible for anyone else to ever place even though they may be awesome agility dogs.

Bummer is that we just did our last agility runs for the year. Trim only needs a few 4? agility places, but now all her first places will only count for 10 points :cry: so we're miles away now :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have had a few here who have got it under the new post July rules. Couple of the oldies who were in there day competitive enough to place but one being a sheltie she just couldn't match it with the bigger dogs now since she has unfortunately past her prime. A lovely reliable little dog, certainly well deserving of the title :).

Edited by ness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer the old system of gaining AgCh - it is much harder.

I like the new system. Problem with the old system is that it means a different thing depending on the state you're in. If you have 4-5 very fast consistent dogs who are at every trial, it can be damned near impossible for anyone else to ever place even though they may be awesome agility dogs.

Bummer is that we just did our last agility runs for the year. Trim only needs a few 4? agility places, but now all her first places will only count for 10 points :cry: so we're miles away now :(

Yes, I agree - we have the same issue here. But I think Trim deserves the title under the old rules and it's a real shame she won't have the chance to round out her title :( One of our club members got her last pass a few weeks ago with only a few trials left for the year and is understandably over the moon. Perhaps if they kept the old AgCh title and had introduced the new rules under a different title I would be happier. I think those very fast, consistent dogs and handlers deserve the special recognition - and I say that knowing that Ziggy would never come close under the old rules (although Em might going by her speed) but may well under the new rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is really sad that Trim didn't quite get her Ag Ch before the cut off :cry: She very much deserves it!

Not sure how I feel about the new Ag Ch rules, I liked how for the most part the old Ag Ch's were fairly rare and earnt by some amazing dogs. However the new system makes it more attainable for dogs who may not be competitive across all heights but are great for their height catogory and fairer for people who don't want to travel far and wide to find seperate height trials.

we used to have a good 600 contingent but I find myself a bit lonely in 600 these days!!

Hi FHRP! Raffy needs to come visit the ACT again so poor Rogan isn't lonely :( hopefully next year we will get a few ACT trials in! :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps if they kept the old AgCh title and had introduced the new rules under a different title I would be happier.

They kind of have done that. Under the new rules the height class is added to the title, so you can differentiate between dogs that got the title under the old rules and under the new. So, if my boy had have got his title under the new rules he'd be AgCh 600 not just AgCh, regardless if the points were gained at all height or seperate height trials.

There are a couple of things I don't like about the new AgCh title, but I did think the old system needed to be changed. The new system still requires a lot from a team, it's not easy to qualify that consistently at Masters level! I have already had said to me that under the new rules some people don't consider anything other than an AgCh 500 to be much of a title which I think is very sad :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...