Follow On From Rule Changes

[Agility Dogs]

For those who are concerned about angles etc in novice (and I'm one of them - although I run a Masters Standard ADAA dog in novice at present), what is the solution? Is it more effective judges training? A stricter criteria on who can or can't become a judge? Vetting of courses by 'senior' judges?

Where do you draw the line between fair challenges and judges trying to prove a point? Just interested in people's opinions on where the rules should stop and common sense take over. I can design a course that no one will get around and it will be within the rules, but it's not necessarily a fair test.

What is an appropriate standard of judging? For example - I was called for a missed contact at our recent state trials and missed the final in that event. To be fair I thought we'd missed it, but when the photos from the official photographer it was clear that we had actually got the contact. Fair enough - all judges make mistakes, BUT.....the judge was in the pic and could not possibly have seen whether we missed or got it. (My big fat butt was between the judge and the obstacle - the judge was at least 7 or 8m from the contact they were judging.) How/Should this sort of thing be managed?

Just interested in competitors perspective.

FTR - I judge and am not bagging judges, rather I'm wondering if all judges are created equal and whether there should be minimum standards.

[dragonwoman]

For those who are concerned about angles etc in novice (and I'm one of them - although I run a Masters Standard ADAA dog in novice at present), what is the solution? Is it more effective judges training? A stricter criteria on who can or can't become a judge? Vetting of courses by 'senior' judges?

Where do you draw the line between fair challenges and judges trying to prove a point? Just interested in people's opinions on where the rules should stop and common sense take over. I can design a course that no one will get around and it will be within the rules, but it's not necessarily a fair test.

What is an appropriate standard of judging? For example - I was called for a missed contact at our recent state trials and missed the final in that event. To be fair I thought we'd missed it, but when the photos from the official photographer it was clear that we had actually got the contact. Fair enough - all judges make mistakes, BUT.....the judge was in the pic and could not possibly have seen whether we missed or got it. (My big fat butt was between the judge and the obstacle - the judge was at least 7 or 8m from the contact they were judging.) How/Should this sort of thing be managed?

Just interested in competitors perspective.

FTR - I judge and am not bagging judges, rather I'm wondering if all judges are created equal and whether there should be minimum standards.

Maybe take a leaf out of horse races and video the run, call for the camera if there is a dispute :)

[sheena]

Personally, I would like to see all courses set with the fun & safety of the dog in mind with just a couple of challenges. I like to see my dogs have fun, not get shut down because I have to make too many call offs or sharp turns. As far as the missed contact goes....I think really the missed contact calls probably are evened out in the long run with given calls when really the dog had missed the contact. You win some..you lose some :)

[Kavik]

I have only been to one trial where I thought the angles were really dangerous, and only a couple of courses over the years where nobody qualified. For the angles, I think judges training should help with that, more education :) For the courses where nobody qualified, one was at the trial with dangerous angles, the others I think the challenges were too difficult. Some of those were Games, and most likely judges don't get as much practice at designing games courses, and people don't get as much practice running them lol

[J...]

I had this is the wrong thread, so this is probably part of my answer...

I don't think there is one easy answer. Safer equipment will absolutely help, in every case the new doggy jump wings would've been a solution to the issue - easier to see, far less dangerous if the dog collects them by mistake.

Education is hit and miss, despite the push from our agility committee. Often we now have wing jumps available, but sadly very common to see them sitting outside the ring unused until the judges are setting up JDM courses. Some judges are hit and miss, one course I had some significant doubts over running due to the position of a jump vs a tunnel and all metal jump uprights, the next day we had the most beautiful and fun super fast JD course from the same judge - complete with a full set of wing jumps.

Often the awful funky angles are there to add challenges to novice courses, sometimes they are there from nested courses and left unchanged. Often there is very little handling in a JD course, so I think some learning on how to add handling to a novice course would be a winner. One judge has gone from a "do not enter" to one I seek out because their courses are so much improved on previous years. I make a point of complimenting any judge who puts down a nice course, and I had heaps of fun on some judges training courses recently - so I'm really looking forward to seeing what our up and coming judges put down in future. :D

My biggest frustration with JD is that I spent so much time working on a good solid foundation with my youngster, only to have to go back and teach him to blast straight lines that we will never see again in his agility career because JD is nothing like JDM or even JDX. I guess I could've heeled him around the course to get out of JD, but to me that's against the whole idea of the sport and not the way I want to play it.

[J...]

For those who are concerned about angles etc in novice (and I'm one of them - although I run a Masters Standard ADAA dog in novice at present), what is the solution? Is it more effective judges training? A stricter criteria on who can or can't become a judge? Vetting of courses by 'senior' judges?

Where do you draw the line between fair challenges and judges trying to prove a point? Just interested in people's opinions on where the rules should stop and common sense take over. I can design a course that no one will get around and it will be within the rules, but it's not necessarily a fair test.

What is an appropriate standard of judging? For example - I was called for a missed contact at our recent state trials and missed the final in that event. To be fair I thought we'd missed it, but when the photos from the official photographer it was clear that we had actually got the contact. Fair enough - all judges make mistakes, BUT.....the judge was in the pic and could not possibly have seen whether we missed or got it. (My big fat butt was between the judge and the obstacle - the judge was at least 7 or 8m from the contact they were judging.) How/Should this sort of thing be managed?

Just interested in competitors perspective.

FTR - I judge and am not bagging judges, rather I'm wondering if all judges are created equal and whether there should be minimum standards.

I'm not sure what the rest of the states do in regards to judges training. I know the 40 hours of prac work required here in Vic is a significant impediment to anyone not based at a club with ready access to current judges, and as a rural based trialler I would have no hope unless I gave up a year of trialling. There is no RPL, so some judges will already be incredibly proficient thanks to their own years of experience from instructing, travelling etc - others will need every hour of that 40 hours because they are still quite green in the sport. I am very conscious that here in Vic we are quite short of new blood in our judges, there was only three who came through the last lot of judges training and two of them don't judge much at all - sad because they "get it" and are quite up with modern coursework and training.

I would like to see some kind of encouragement for judges keep up with training and handling and safety in particular, but once again are we in a position to make it harder when our pool of judges is not that big? Some of the Vic judges have recently been doing some further learning and you can clearly see it in their courses. I think putting any kind of requirement on judges is not going to go well. In the end they are largely volunteers, I don't know anyone in agility who makes a living from judging, mostly it covers their costs so they are not out of pocket on travel.

Not sure that vetting by senior judges is the answer. I actively avoid entering under some of our senior judges Some of them are dead against using the jump wings, and will go as far as to remove them from a ring when they've nested courses with another judge. To me, wings are one of the biggest safety progresses in the sport next to rubber contacts.

Wrong calls on contacts - from what I seen at the WAO online recently, Australia is not alone on bodgy calls. My own personal standard for contacts is "don't make the judge think"

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

It is possible to train contacts so it makes it easy for the judge to get the decision right. Running or stopped.

If you have a dog that is prone to leaping off the contact - it's much harder for a judge to get that right. And they're only human.

As for angles - it's also possible to train a dog to make good approaches ie work it out for itself - but I don't think this is something a novice handler would be good at. And that's where things get a bit interesting ie a novice dog with an experienced trainer / handler may make this look easy.

But I've seen a judge when asked by the competitors about angles - change them to make them safer, more flowing - especially in the novice sections. If nobody speaks up - judges are not telepathic.

And there's a few judges that just set horrible courses week after week - and you can choose not to enter when those judges are listed for that event. However, given that there is a big gap between novice and excellent standard at the moment - I like when judges set something that complies but is a bit more challenging... it lets you know what you need to work on. And if you don't work on it - sooner or later - some other judge somewhere is going to put that challenge in.

Judges are human. They're usually consistent in the way they do their courses - so you can choose whether or not to enter.

I've butchered some lovely flowing courses, and done much better at some I thought there is no way my dog will do that. I can't blame the judge for that.