Difficulty of AKC Invitational Courses

[HopeShelties]

My thought though is that a whole mach isn't made up of ugly runs. Maybe one but a whole mach shouldn't be called dirty based on one bad run out of 40 needed runs. I doubt anyone with a mach can truly say all 40 runs were perfect.
There is one place threadles are allowed- isc courses. Both years I've run isc at the cluster there have been threadles.

 

[corbinam]

My thought though is that a whole mach isn't made up of ugly runs. Maybe one but a whole mach shouldn't be called dirty based on one bad run out of 40 needed runs. I doubt anyone with a mach can truly say all 40 runs were perfect.
There is one place threadles are allowed- isc courses. Both years I've run isc at the cluster there have been threadles.

Both great points!

 

[k9kreationz]

A couple things, one, threadles aren't a legal course set up in AKC. You guys might be aware of that--but I thought I'd point it out just in case. I always thought that was interesting.

Um, I never knew that. Duh!!! So that would explain why I never see them. Okay, thanks for pointing that out. I should read up on what is allowed and what isn't. Maybe it'll make me see AKC in a whole new light.

Here is my definition of an ugly Q (or if we want to use the term "dirty"). I even named the video "Q (ugly)! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5NYiQzddgA

Yikes. I miss having refusals. Was nice at ASCA the other weekend. I would have to agree (sorry), it was ugly, but look at those lovely 2o2o contacts.

I think the problem that people are having is the connotation of the word "dirty". Dirty seems like it might be sullied, or undeserved. In that example of DH and Lexi, it wasn't a beautiful run. In some venues it wouldn't even be considered a Q. But, it was deserved because it was a Q based on the rules of that venue and that event.

ITA!

I'm guessing (and Cheryl, please correct me if I'm wrong) is that Cheryl is saying that she would rather train than trial and avoid having a run like that. It's a little hard to envision because in Masters (again, I'm speaking from a USDAA perspective) it's hard to not be clean and Q, but I'm thinking that most people would rather have a MACH built on runs where you're totally in sync the whole time, rather than Qs that exhibit certain mistakes that just don't cause an NQ.

That's what I'm saying. How can I explain this. I doubt there are many people in this world who can say they had perfect runs to get their top titles. We all have bad days, may Q, and we'll take them gladly. Does this mean it's less of a title, not in anyway. My first two Q's that earned me MACH points were from what I'd call dirty runs (in my definition - which I'm learning may be totally wrong since everyone else believes otherwise). I'm not proud of those runs as being my first MACH points, but yes, I'll gladly take them.

Here's one of the runs. You can clearly see me screw up at least 4 times if not more: http://youtu.be/Jclq_ituR1Y
That's not the course I planned to run, but because of me not being where I needed to be, its the course that got run.

Would I want a MACH built on runs like that? No. Would I say don't give it to me? No. Would I feel I really deserved it? No. But that's how I feel about it. I wouldn't expect anyone else to feel the same nor would I discount anyone's titles. And surprisingly, I run like this a lot and that's why I wouldn't want a MACH built on those runs and it's why I'm working on my handling and retraining.

 

[k9kreationz]

My thought though is that a whole mach isn't made up of ugly runs. Maybe one but a whole mach shouldn't be called dirty based on one bad run out of 40 needed runs. I doubt anyone with a mach can truly say all 40 runs were perfect.

There is one place threadles are allowed- isc courses. Both years I've run isc at the cluster there have been threadles.

Okay, here's what I'm thinking...........

I have seen MACH level people (not many, just a handful) have consistently "ugly" runs. I have had consistently ugly runs (and Q'd). So, I should say I have seen MACHs come from a lot of ugly runs and don't want that to be me, because I see how that can easily become me. I honestly believe, if I don't better myself, I will eventually get a MACH with a ton of ugly runs and "luck". I would say that's what has gotten me here so far and I'm kinda sick of it (hence the re/training). I think many of you would agree with me. Especially if you've seen my runs this past year. I hope that made sense.

Do you have to qualify for ISC runs? Or just enter them? I wonder where and how often they have ISC runs. Need to check it out. If you can just enter them, I'd love to just to drive myself crazy.

 

[HopeShelties]

Anyone who is at least in excellent A can enter isc courses. ISC is usually a real challenge. Anyone qing on the jww one at the cluster this past year truly deserved it. It was probably the ugliest course I've run while trialing. The ending was interesting with no way to reach the jump you had to take. The standard course two years back was wild as well. A tunnel running straight under the dw. The dog had to take the tunnel with you remaining at the start end, get your dog coming back to you the right way and take a jump before coming back to you under the dw. It was interesting. I will have to ask a friend for a copy of it.
My question to you would be are these ugly runs qqs and were both runs resulting in a qq ugly? It is unlikely ugly runs are regularly earning qqs.

 

[ClantyreSheltie]

Here's one of the runs. You can clearly see me screw up at least 4 times if not more: http://youtu.be/Jclq_ituR1Y
That's not the course I planned to run, but because of me not being where I needed to be, its the course that got run.

OK, now I know you're deranged.

There was nothing wrong with that run. It's ok to not have things go as planned. Who says every foot has to be where you planned it to go? I walk sections of courses several different ways, so that I am prepared when my original plan doesn't work, for whatever reason.

Whoever put the idea in your head that it's not perfect if it's not run how you planned should be smacked. This is not billiards where you have to call your shots and then make them. This is agility, where the goal is to get the dog to go over the jumps in the right order, and from the right direction. If you do that, you get a pretty ribbon. If you don't, you get to try again the next day.

 

[k9kreationz]

Anyone who is at least in excellent A can enter isc courses. ISC is usually a real challenge. Anyone qing on the jww one at the cluster this past year truly deserved it. It was probably the ugliest course I've run while trialing. The ending was interesting with no way to reach the jump you had to take. The standard course two years back was wild as well. A tunnel running straight under the dw. The dog had to take the tunnel with you remaining at the start end, get your dog coming back to you the right way and take a jump before coming back to you under the dw. It was interesting. I will have to ask a friend for a copy of it.

If you can get a copy, I'd love to see it. I have a feeling there aren't really ISC courses here. Guess I'll have to plan for the Cluster one year.
And who would put a tunnel straight under the DW? Can I go under the DW too?

My question to you would be are these ugly runs qqs and were both runs resulting in a qq ugly? It is unlikely ugly runs are regularly earning qqs.

I know it's unlikely, but yes, I have seen people who consistently run like me (or like I have been lately). Where things are a mess, but they Q or QQ in their case. I haven't officially QQ'd since I'm not in ExB Standard. Now, I have Q'd both my JWW and STD runs on ugly runs all weekend.

 

[HopeShelties]

Putting the tunnel under the dw and not getting to go around was part of what made it isc and what made it fun It should be a challenge.
I was thrilled with kais run. In isc jww this past year. Her time was the best of the 18" class while she was the smallest of the dogs in her class at 14". Shame she popped a pole and nqd us to beat the other challenges on that course and to have the best time was an accomplishment. I think being a smaller tighter turning dog on a tight twisty isc course was a real advantage

 

[k9kreationz]

OK, now I know you're deranged.

There was nothing wrong with that run. It's ok to not have things go as planned. Who says every foot has to be where you planned it to go? I walk sections of courses several different ways, so that I am prepared when my original plan doesn't work, for whatever reason.

Whoever put the idea in your head that it's not perfect if it's not run how you planned should be smacked. This is not billiards where you have to call your shots and then make them. This is agility, where the goal is to get the dog to go over the jumps in the right order, and from the right direction. If you do that, you get a pretty ribbon. If you don't, you get to try again the next day.

You don't think that's an ugly and bad run? Huh. Maybe my idea of "clean" is whacked. I guess once I feel like I'm in "survival" mode, it's bad.

But in that run, there were a lot of spots where I was soooo out of place and had to RC versus FC. You can tell when Koji is WAY behind me and I'm RC.

Really? That's not bad? Yikes. Maybe I'm way too hard on myself. I know I'm not great by any means and Sealtainn hit the head on the nail. No one told me it should be perfect, but I feel if it doesn't go according to plan, then I didn't do a good job (or Koji didn't).

 

[Sealtainn]

Do you have to qualify for ISC runs? Or just enter them? I wonder where and how often they have ISC runs. Need to check it out. If you can just enter them, I'd love to just to drive myself crazy.

You would have to get Koji to measure 16 7/8" or less to avoid him having to jump 26" jumps in ISC.
If Koji is taller than that I'm afraid AKC's rules for jump heights will discourage you from entering.
If Koji comes in at or under 16 7/8" then he will have to jump 18" which is still higher than what you are currently.

I've never seen a club in your area offer ISC.

Unlike USDAA which does offer a Performance equivalent option for their IHC courses, I don't think AKC ISC offers a preferred option to run at the next lower height.
Also, AKC does require your dog to already be in EXC for both STD & JWW whereas in USDAA you can have a starters/novice dog compete & possibly win in IHC.