General input on Intro to Agility

[sportk9s]

I would like to suggest that if the Intro class were added, that clubs be given the option of having a qualified person judge it rather than an 'official' judge. This way it could be set up in a separate ring, (if there were space/equipment available) and so would not add to the length of a trial. Right now, with EGC available to be run in a 'regular' trial, some clubs are already at 8 classes a day.

I also like the option of running Intro as a VT.

Would the Intro class be similar to how Pre-Novice was? Why did Pre-Novice go away?

[Sharon Nelson]

I would like to suggest that if the Intro class were added, that clubs be given the option of having a qualified person judge it rather than an 'official' judge. This way it could be set up in a separate ring, (if there were space/equipment available) and so would not add to the length of a trial. Right now, with EGC available to be run in a 'regular' trial, some clubs are already at 8 classes a day.

I also like the option of running Intro as a VT.

Would the Intro class be similar to how Pre-Novice was? Why did Pre-Novice go away?

We want to be sure to stress that "Intro" is not a "class"........... it would be a level.  Levels in NADAC right now are Novice, Open, and Elite.  If Intro were added, then the levels would be Intro, Novice, Open, Elite.  There would be no separate class.

For instance if Novice Regular had 14 obstacles, at the end of Novice Regular, Intro would be set off that same course which would be 7-10 obstacles with no weave poles and no tunnel/contact discriminations.  So Intro would run right before or right after Novice in each class.  The only class with weave poles would be Intro Weavers with one set of six poles.  Intro would run right after Novice and would be 5-6 obstacles.

So Intro is not an additional class, it is an additional level of a class.

Sharon

[Sharon Nelson]

Would the Intro class be similar to how Pre-Novice was? Why did Pre-Novice go away?

Pre-Novice went away because it was always run as a separate "class" which took too much time.

Sharon

[Lisa Schmit In The Zone Agility]

Would clubs be able to offer intro level class in whatever class they want?    I would want to offer it for Regular only.    I don't mind adding a little bit more course building for 1 class ( 2 rounds of Regular) but don't want to do it for every class.

[Sharon Nelson]

Would clubs be able to offer intro level class in whatever class they want?    I would want to offer it for Regular only.    I don't mind adding a little bit more course building for 1 class ( 2 rounds of Regular) but don't want to do it for every class.

Yes, club's choice.   Once you try, your exhibitors might convince you to have more!!  Jumpers would be another great option to start with!

Sharon

[sportk9s]

We want to be sure to stress that "Intro" is not a "class"........... it would be a level.  Levels in NADAC right now are Novice, Open, and Elite.  If Intro were added, then the levels would be Intro, Novice, Open, Elite.  There would be no separate class.

Sharon

Makes more sense now. So would you have an "Intro" in the special skills classes, since they're special skills? I can see how you could change Weavers to 1 set of weaves, and Hoopers to less hoops, but would you change Tunnelers and TNG? EGC?

Would a dog be required to title in Intro before moving up to Novice, or would that be an option?

Sounds more interesting as an added level than as an added class 

Anne

[Vicki Storrs]

A friend of mine just ran 3 classes in her first very trial, so I talked to her last night about the Intro option.  She said she would have JUMPED at the chance to run something shorter and a bit easier!  Not that she didn't think her dog was ready--the dog did its part great--but that the nerves got her big time and she got lost and lost Her focus on course.  She felt it would be a great way to introduce newbies to trialing, and helping them learn how to walk and remember a course.
Vicki

[Laurel Manning]

I like the idea of Intro courses as useful and needed.  I hope BA is not going to be required before entering Intro or Novice.  It would not possible for many competitors to accomplish a BA requirement, and it would be a huge turn off, even for agility junkies like me, who have new dogs.  Laurel Manning

[agilityjunkie]

Agility Junkies would do it. It sounds like a nice bridge from the BA test, which is incredibly successful at our club. After one full year of BA testing, including both of my dogs earning the BA titles, I have found that the majority of our beginners complete BA-1 and BA-2 but I have had very little interest in BA-3. We hold a lot of NADAC trials at our facility and off campus. The majority of our students skip the BA-3 and attempt the "Big Leagues" through low stress classes like Tunnelers and Jumpers. An Intro to Agility would be the perfect solution. Question: would the competition age of the dog requirement be reduced for Intro?

[LeeAnne McAdam]

I think the Intro level would be popular in our area.  I know with one of my dogs, I sort of made my own "Intro" courses when I first started trialing him...looked for easy ways in and out...for the first several trials that we entered.  That said, I guess I would be hard pressed not to like the idea!

[Laurel Manning]

Not everyone has access to BA.  Laurel Manning

[Sharon Nelson]

BA would not be required for Intro.  That was mentioned to me, but I would not want to see BA as a requirement.

Sharon

[Sharon Nelson]

A friend of mine just ran 3 classes in her first very trial, so I talked to her last night about the Intro option.  She said she would have JUMPED at the chance to run something shorter and a bit easier!  Not that she didn't think her dog was ready--the dog did its part great--but that the nerves got her big time and she got lost and lost Her focus on course.  She felt it would be a great way to introduce newbies to trialing, and helping them learn how to walk and remember a course.
Vicki

Nice!  Encouraging input!

Sharon

[Sharon Nelson]

Agility Junkies would do it. It sounds like a nice bridge from the BA test, which is incredibly successful at our club. After one full year of BA testing, including both of my dogs earning the BA titles, I have found that the majority of our beginners complete BA-1 and BA-2 but I have had very little interest in BA-3. We hold a lot of NADAC trials at our facility and off campus. The majority of our students skip the BA-3 and attempt the "Big Leagues" through low stress classes like Tunnelers and Jumpers. An Intro to Agility would be the perfect solution. Question: would the competition age of the dog requirement be reduced for Intro?

No, the age limit would not be changed for Intro.

Sharon

[StefanElvstad]

I think an intro level would be very helpful. It allows the beginner to work in a situation with less pressure and will be very helpful in easing the dog into trialling. The prospect of a Q encourages too many beginning handlers to ease their criteria for their dog's performance in order to qualify.

The same benefits could probably be achieved by in fun matches, but at least around here, those are few and far between, and I do believe that the incremental effort of offering an intro level is much less than setting up a fun match. So - we would be all for it here.