Author Topic: A "tax" for running Proficient?  (Read 2204 times)

fbrazeil

  • *****
  • Posts: 13
Re: A "tax" for running Proficient?
« Reply #15 on: November 13, 2013, 06:41:21 PM »
Can a Trial Secretary keep a copy of a fully signed measurement sheet, thus eliminating the need to show it every time you trial with that Trial Secretary? (Which is what I was trying to say previously.)
Fred Brazeil

Sharon Nelson

  • Mother NADAC
  • **
  • Posts: 5856
Re: A "tax" for running Proficient?
« Reply #16 on: November 13, 2013, 09:02:01 PM »
Can a Trial Secretary keep a copy of a fully signed measurement sheet, thus eliminating the need to show it every time you trial with that Trial Secretary? (Which is what I was trying to say previously.)

Yes, they could!!

Sharon
Sharon
In-Sync-Agility

TSacks

  • Trial Secretary
  • *****
  • Posts: 28
Re: A "tax" for running Proficient?
« Reply #17 on: November 14, 2013, 11:12:35 AM »
Question regarding measuring, as a Trial Secretary.  Now that so many folks have started new dogs in Skilled rather than Proficient, many dogs in our database have never been measured.  Some folks seem to pick the height they want to rump and then estimate their dogs height to correspond with that category.  Given that without a real measurement, it can be hard for many folks to come within an inch on just a guess, and if that particular inch happens to be at a cutoff point, I think that by not having skilled dogs measured if they hadn't previously been measured in profiecent, there is no longer a valid system to accurately separate dogs into the correct jump categries.
I'm not saying that there has to be one, but I don't understand why a profiecent dog has to be measured to prove it is eligible to jump in a certain height, but a skilled dog doesn't and can easily be entered in 16" when it should be 12" etc.
Any thought to doing away with manditory measurements for everyone??

Regards,
Tanya
Tanya Sacks

Sharon Nelson

  • Mother NADAC
  • **
  • Posts: 5856
Re: A "tax" for running Proficient?
« Reply #18 on: November 14, 2013, 05:53:21 PM »
Question regarding measuring, as a Trial Secretary.  Now that so many folks have started new dogs in Skilled rather than Proficient, many dogs in our database have never been measured.  Some folks seem to pick the height they want to rump and then estimate their dogs height to correspond with that category.  Given that without a real measurement, it can be hard for many folks to come within an inch on just a guess, and if that particular inch happens to be at a cutoff point, I think that by not having skilled dogs measured if they hadn't previously been measured in profiecent, there is no longer a valid system to accurately separate dogs into the correct jump categries.
I'm not saying that there has to be one, but I don't understand why a profiecent dog has to be measured to prove it is eligible to jump in a certain height, but a skilled dog doesn't and can easily be entered in 16" when it should be 12" etc.
Any thought to doing away with manditory measurements for everyone??

Regards,
Tanya

It is time to review those guidelines.  When those were put into place "Skilled" was NOT the common choice!  There were so few in Skilled that there weren't any concerns.  They were all obviously large dogs jumping 16" instead of 20".   As more and more people saw the benefits of running Skilled and let go of some of the misconception that dogs must jump the same height in all venues, then more and more and more switched to Skilled.

Now it is very common for the majority of entries to be Skilled.    The Championships are very heavy on the Skilled end of entries, in fact, there are few Proficient entries.

Now we see all heights of dogs entering Skilled, not just big dogs.  So, yes, in 2014 when we get the website and such caught up, we will review the measuring requirements.

What a great problem!  So many dogs in Skilled that we need to review the guidelines!  That is an awesome problem to have.

Sharon
Sharon
In-Sync-Agility

MichelleWhall

  • Trial Secretary
  • *****
  • Posts: 68
Re: A "tax" for running Proficient?
« Reply #19 on: November 14, 2013, 07:18:36 PM »
I personally as a trial secretary have MANY height cards on file!  That being said I also would like to see the Skilled dogs have to be measured. 

Michelle

Amy McGovern

  • **
  • Posts: 343
Re: A "tax" for running Proficient?
« Reply #20 on: November 15, 2013, 07:43:58 AM »
There is nothing stopping skilled dogs from being measured, if the owners are unsure of the right height.  I have done it for mine, just to be sure I was jumping correctly (especially for the one who is about 1mm under the wicket!).  I wanted to be honest in my entries and the judges who measured never minded me checking.  We did it twice (two different judges), just to be sure (since the one is so close).

-Amy and the schnauzer pack
Amy and the schnauzers

Sharon Nelson

  • Mother NADAC
  • **
  • Posts: 5856
Re: A "tax" for running Proficient?
« Reply #21 on: November 15, 2013, 10:59:58 AM »
There is nothing stopping skilled dogs from being measured, if the owners are unsure of the right height.  I have done it for mine, just to be sure I was jumping correctly (especially for the one who is about 1mm under the wicket!).  I wanted to be honest in my entries and the judges who measured never minded me checking.  We did it twice (two different judges), just to be sure (since the one is so close).

-Amy and the schnauzer pack

That is correct, Amy!  And in many cases, a judge will ask to measure a dog that appears to be at an incorrect height.  I have measured many a dog through the years when I questioned why they were at the height they were.

Sharon
Sharon
In-Sync-Agility