Scoring Finals at Champs

[Vicki Storrs]

One of the difficulties in being a “leader.” There is no way you are going to please everyone. You have a “status quo” that a Few? Some? Many? People would like to see changed. That in and of itself is not reason enough to change. The leader needs to have a vision, be open to hearing people out but willing to make the call. And there will Always be people unhappy with every decision, every change, every Lack of change. So I am hopeful that this is the way NADAC is being lead, bravely and confidently and with vision for what NADAC is or is going to be.

That being said, I, for one, like the way things are.  I like the reward for the consistency and yes, in my limited experience (3 Champs), I have had friends climb AND fall into and out of the three final placements. And not ALL the groups are so huge either in my experience, as someone who runs two very different sized dogs. Plus just in my short time, since 2013, the number of groups have grown, making some actual group sizes shrink. 
My opinion—if a team, in their seven runs, has built up an insurmountable lead, then KUDOS to them and I think they DESERVE to win overall!
And with apologies to anyone offended, because this is NOT directed at any person, it is merely MY gut reaction to comments—IF I wanted to run AKC, CPE, USDAA, etc, that is what I would do. I CHOOSE to run only in NADAC, so an argument that begins “Well in THIS OTHER venue this is how they do it, so why don’t we?” just makes me see red. Give me a Reason for making the change that shows why you think it works better (as most everyone is doing) but leave the comparisons out of it. And those who like the way it is, say why, too. Being different is not synonymous with being bad, or incorrect. Some of us embrace the difference.
With a Big Sigh, because it all makes me so tired...
Vicki Storrs

[Amy McGovern]

I would budge on doing it for this year.

But if it blows up and makes Sunday more stressful then it needs to be for the people running the event,  it’ll be canned for another 20 years

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You rock.  Let the handlers know how we can help!  There were multiple people volunteering to help out.

[knittingdog]

I’m split either way.    I want the best dog to win, the best dog who was ‘there’ all week long.   

But I also want to keep it exciting.

So there needs to be a balance


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seems to me that you could keep it like it is, but add the award for the winning Finals run in each category - as you already suggested - and create that balance!  The same person might win both and kudos to them if they do! 

What I do like is that it makes the Regional more valuable while making it more sporting at the same time.

Robin

[KellyDittmar]

I agree, Ribbons are expensive. And so is champs.

In terms of "why is it a problem now", I guess you could say the same thing about any idea that comes up that is different from the status quo... For example - Why is it a problem now to have 7 rounds + finals at champs? The story I am telling myself is that you want a shorter day on Sunday. What I wonder is if people (especially those who live closer with jobs to get back to) will leave on Saturday if they don't make finals.  Which would be a bummer... but if they aren't running and have a life putting pressure on them to get back... We all make our own choices. Of course, others are probably thrilled with this change - so it's all just different strokes for different folks! Not right or wrong, just different.

Change happens with growth. Or maybe growth happens with change. Or maybe both. Personally, I think why this (or anything) came up now is someone was brave and had an idea they wanted to share.

Kelly

[Chris Nelson]

7 rounds was born out of necessity because we’ve never had 336 dogs before and we never want Sunday to last as long as it did in 2018.

So that one has a pretty easy to find and pin point reason.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Amy McGovern]

I agree, Ribbons are expensive. And so is champs.

Change happens with growth. Or maybe growth happens with change. Or maybe both. Personally, I think why this (or anything) came up now is someone was brave and had an idea they wanted to share.

Kelly

Since I'm the one who asked about the ribbons, I'll say "why now" for myself.  I have only been to champs twice (but we loved it this last round and intend to be back this year!).  The first time I didn't make finals so I didn't *know* that finals runs didn't get placed.  Last year I made finals and made 2nd place in that finals run but I was still 5th overall for exactly the same reasons mentioned in this thread (I had one bad run and was just too many points behind to catch up to the next dog).  But I was so excited to be 2nd in that run and then rather disappointed that there wasn't a ribbon.  I got ribbons in other runs but it was really meaningful to have gotten 2nd in that really hard run!  So that's why I asked!  And others have agreed,  I'm sure for similar reasons.   I'm sorry if it seems "out of the blue" but not everyone goes to champs every year for 20 years.  Just getting to go 2 years in a row is a big deal for us.  It's a lot of time off work, it's a long drive (it's going to be 2 days for us no matter if  it is east or west), and a big expense.  So I'm delighted we can go again!  And while I don't make any assumptions about being in finals (especially since I'm moving to elite from pre-elite), I just want anyone else who experiences what I did to get that ribbon.  Just seems nice for that extra-special run.  Finals really is the most stressful run I've ever done!  I've never had that many people watching me run and wanted so much to be clean (and we were!  We Qd!).

[Chris Nelson]

One of the difficulties in being a “leader.” There is no way you are going to please everyone. You have a “status quo” that a Few? Some? Many? People would like to see changed. That in and of itself is not reason enough to change. The leader needs to have a vision, be open to hearing people out but willing to make the call. And there will Always be people unhappy with every decision, every change, every Lack of change. So I am hopeful that this is the way NADAC is being lead, bravely and confidently and with vision for what NADAC is or is going to be.

That being said, I, for one, like the way things are.  I like the reward for the consistency and yes, in my limited experience (3 Champs), I have had friends climb AND fall into and out of the three final placements. And not ALL the groups are so huge either in my experience, as someone who runs two very different sized dogs. Plus just in my short time, since 2013, the number of groups have grown, making some actual group sizes shrink. 
My opinion—if a team, in their seven runs, has built up an insurmountable lead, then KUDOS to them and I think they DESERVE to win overall!
And with apologies to anyone offended, because this is NOT directed at any person, it is merely MY gut reaction to comments—IF I wanted to run AKC, CPE, USDAA, etc, that is what I would do. I CHOOSE to run only in NADAC, so an argument that begins “Well in THIS OTHER venue this is how they do it, so why don’t we?” just makes me see red. Give me a Reason for making the change that shows why you think it works better (as most everyone is doing) but leave the comparisons out of it. And those who like the way it is, say why, too. Being different is not synonymous with being bad, or incorrect. Some of us embrace the difference.
With a Big Sigh, because it all makes me so tired...
Vicki Storrs

I can promise there is no lack of direction happening here.

Part of that direction is listening to the people who compete with us.   

[agilityaddict2]

I think it is interesting that a lot of people are talking about consistency being the important factor here. I always perceived speed being the important piece of the puzzle when scoring is based on time plus faults. When a super fast dog (and there are tons of them) can have a fault and still be placed higher than the slower no fault dog, isn't that favoring speed over consistency? Should the Champion be a dog that made a mistake but was speedy over the dog that was perfect but a bit slower? I dont even know the answer for sure.
Kudos to Chris and NADAC for even opening this up for discussion. This is one of the things that makes NADAC so different from other venues.

[Vicki Storrs]

One of the difficulties in being a “leader.” There is no way you are going to please everyone. You have a “status quo” that a Few? Some? Many? People would like to see changed. That in and of itself is not reason enough to change. The leader needs to have a vision, be open to hearing people out but willing to make the call. And there will Always be people unhappy with every decision, every change, every Lack of change. So I am hopeful that this is the way NADAC is being lead, bravely and confidently and with vision for what NADAC is or is going to be.

That being said, I, for one, like the way things are.  I like the reward for the consistency and yes, in my limited experience (3 Champs), I have had friends climb AND fall into and out of the three final placements. And not ALL the groups are so huge either in my experience, as someone who runs two very different sized dogs. Plus just in my short time, since 2013, the number of groups have grown, making some actual group sizes shrink. 
My opinion—if a team, in their seven runs, has built up an insurmountable lead, then KUDOS to them and I think they DESERVE to win overall!
And with apologies to anyone offended, because this is NOT directed at any person, it is merely MY gut reaction to comments—IF I wanted to run AKC, CPE, USDAA, etc, that is what I would do. I CHOOSE to run only in NADAC, so an argument that begins “Well in THIS OTHER venue this is how they do it, so why don’t we?” just makes me see red. Give me a Reason for making the change that shows why you think it works better (as most everyone is doing) but leave the comparisons out of it. And those who like the way it is, say why, too. Being different is not synonymous with being bad, or incorrect. Some of us embrace the difference.
With a Big Sigh, because it all makes me so tired...
Vicki Storrs

I can promise there is no lack of direction happening here.

Part of that direction is listening to the people who compete with us.   

Thanks Chris. The first paragraph was Not intended as criticism but more as my expounding on the difficulty of what you guys are are doing. There are (sometimes/often/usually) reasons for the way things are done but I totally agree that it doesn’t hurt to question Why they are done a certain way. But as we see here So Very Often, multiple opinions on if it should change or how it should change and which can sometimes be quite “forcefully” shared and as equally forcefully disagreed with. And I can only imagine how frustrating, and yes sometimes enlightening (when a totally new thought or idea
is expressed that hasn’t been considered before) it must be to the people who have to make the decision if and how to implement change. I just was trying to show understanding for the challenges you and Amanda face. And that every competitor out here has opinions, there is No Way to make everyone happy. So that can’t be how we expect you guys to make the call, the overall vision has to come from you.
Vicki


[/quote]

[ricbonner]

I think it is interesting that a lot of people are talking about consistency being the important factor here. I always perceived speed being the important piece of the puzzle when scoring is based on time plus faults. When a super fast dog (and there are tons of them) can have a fault and still be placed higher than the slower no fault dog, isn't that favoring speed over consistency? Should the Champion be a dog that made a mistake but was speedy over the dog that was perfect but a bit slower? I dont even know the answer for sure.
Kudos to Chris and NADAC for even opening this up for discussion. This is one of the things that makes NADAC so different from other venues.

" isn't that favoring speed over consistency?"  -- I don't think so.  It comes down to a matter of degree.  How much slower?  How many fault points?

Last year at the Regional event, my boy Cody was competing with a superfast dog.  Cody was clean and solid and reasonably quick.  The other dog was superfast but had trouble with the DW contact and staying on course.  They were in a dead heat after 3 runs.  Sadly, Cody went off course in round 4 and fell behind.  The point is the consistent correct performance had value just like the super speed.

[Sharon Nelson]

The finals will be great no matter how it is scored!  The best have gotten there through consistency and they will rock it when they run the finals round!  They always do!  It will be great to watch those teams, regardless of scoring!

Kudos to Chris for even considering the option of looking at both scoring possibilities.

[Audri, Cee Cee, Lily, Toto, and Calypso]

Several people have said it takes consistency to get into finals. Not true! Regional winners are in the finals. They could have a bad week and, if all that mattered was the last run they could be the Champion.

Pat Daggett

But you still have to be pretty consistent to win the regional.  It is cumulative over 4 rounds for the weekend and winning regionals isn't all that easy.  Not on the level of Champs, but still not a cake walk in most regionals.  And with only 4 regionals, it is only 4 extra dogs, if a dog that wins regionals doesn't make it into finals anyway.

[Carole & Pat Daggett]

I've never been to a regional but from what I've heard it's a normal agility weekend. My point is, at Championships all the competitors there run the same courses for the three days. Do all the regionals run the same set of courses? That was my issue with "wiping the slate clean" for finals. It's not a level playing field.

Pat Daggett

[MoabDiane]

First, I greatly appreciate the "discussion" - ability to express opinions and thoughts without repercussions!  Thanks to Chris, Amanda and NADAC for "listening!"

And then....having been to a bunch o' Champs, and having won a few, I rather like the overall awards being cumulative.  One of the things that makes Champs different from other venues is that it does reward consistency - the only other one I've been to is USDAA, where there are quarter finals, semi-finals (which one can enter with a bye, bypassing quarters), and overall, in three different events.  Two of those are definitely a "one run" win.  (Team is a little different, in that several courses are run by all 2 or 3 members of a team.)  While I can see the rationale of not liking that a fast dog with faults can beat a slower dog without faults, it still takes speed AND consistency.  One of the "tests" of Champs is the ability to hang in there over several days. 

That said, I did rather like the "specialty" courses a bit more than the "usual" ones.  I think it evens out the playing field a bit more - the fastest weaving dog may not be the fastest contact dog, etc. etc.  That idea makes the cumulative scoring much more exciting!

I actually hope this doesn't come down to a vote.  While I value the idea that the top dogs (said with affection!) listen to their competitors, I think this is a management decision that should simply take various viewpoints into account, vs. a number of voters.

No matter what, Champs will be exciting and fun!
diane

[KellyDittmar]

But you still have to be pretty consistent to win the regional.

The hard thing for me about this is that in some groups there is only one dog running at the regional event - thereby giving us a default winner. I am not saying that the dog isn't fantastic! I am not saying that they don't  deserve to win. I am only making an observation about the size of some groups.

I believe at champs that you must have X number if dogs in a group or the group gets combined with another group. If regionals is going to continue to be a focus of NADAC, perhaps group combinations should also be considered for regionals?

Kelly