ClantyreSheltie
Forums Sage
Not really. LOTS of rules were suspended for this event. That just wasn't one of them, I guess : )
Westminster Agility
- Thread starter Sharon
- Start date
Not really. LOTS of rules were suspended for this event. That just wasn't one of them, I guess : )
I am rarely sure what we can and can't post a link to here, so I'll try to explain what I found. On the page of the WKC where they show a picture of Kelso, the BC that won overall champ (I think) there are 3 links at the bottom of the page. I think that the "Championship" link may be what you are looking for. Hope this is helpful.
BTW, I would be interesting in hearing what some of you Agility knowledgeable folks thought of the Championship program. I have my own impressions, but I am not an Agility knowledgeable individual. I'd love to hear impressions on things other than the methods used to qualify the specific competitors. I already get the impression that who/how many competitors were selected was less than well received.
Yes, go to Fast Times Agility and click on the link for Westminster /Results.
I was shopping today and ran into on of our local agility guru's who runs with John and has qualifed for national herself...she we of course got talking about it and we both felt the same way, it was geared towards J Q Public to get them interested and we feel they've done a great job on it. I mean lets face if by entering and showing who they did the public goes ohh cool I can try that with my dog. If they had shown people who are on the world team people would have watched and gone ohhh yeahh i'll never be that good..instead it gave those of us who may be less apt to try it incentive to give it a go. Also they had a pretty diverse group of dogs too, I mean usually at trials there is what Shelties, and BC or atleast around here thats the majority of trials. I think the AKC did good for PR with the show.
Lightplum:
Thanks for your response. Much of what you say makes sense to me, but I came away with a slightly different impression of how I would assess their success (overall). Perhaps it's because I tend to be a bit too detail oriented for my own good. I was a bit put off by some of what seemed to be the less talented competitors ( in a National Championship) but your explanation of the "Yeah I can try that" point of view makes really good sense in explaining that disparity. I'm not being negative about what seemed to be surprising skill levels, only that I did not expect some of the performances in the TOP National competition. But I enjoyed watching all of the dogs run, so that part was (in total) great for me.
What I found the least satisfying were two things: 1) they totally botched the final trophy presentation process. The trophy presenters looked at each other several times and mumbled, "What are we doing? Are we ready?" The WKC has been presenting trophies for decades! How could they botch that on camera? 2) If their aim was to attract newbies to the sport (makes sense), then they did a poor job of presenting the winners data to those of us who are trying to figure out how things fit together. Again, I admit that I can be very detail oriented, but a simple key at the bottom of the PDF pages explaining what the heck "YPS", "R", "W", "F", "E" and "T" (and other stuff) stand for couldn't possibly take too long to add. I can't be the only doofus in the world that didn't grow up competing in Dog Agility. Hopefully by next year's competition, I'll either know more, or the WKC will realize that some of us are really trying to follow along.
danisgoat
Moderator
Excellent point!
HopeShelties
Forums Enthusiast
I really disliked the selection process for the final. There were a few really nice dogs in the final, but the majority of the class was just below average. I compete mostly in Tennessee and the percentage of quality dogs being run is much higher than the percentage that was allowed to make it through at westminster. I don't think the way they did it allowed for the best dogs to be displayed. In most areas, you will find more quality dogs than what the selection process allowed to be shown. I was also disappointed to see my sport represented so poorly. Again, there were a few great dogs, but the rest made agility look foolish. I want to see us agility competitors well represented, and the way it was done did not allow that to happen.
We were discussing it at the agility seminar today, and no one was really happy with it. Besides that, the course was not an international style course. Back side of jumps are a common occurence on akc excellent/masters courses now, and the majority of these handlers were not prepared to handle this. If you are going to be in a final for a championship, you should be capable of handling common sequences seen. I don't mean a person has to be able to q every time. People and dogs make mistakes, but there were a lot of really sad mistakes that probably wouldn't have been made had more competent dogs been allowed to move on. It also dumbed it down for some of the other breeds and certain mutts. The dogs in the final should've moved on because they earned it (and they would have!). Not because they were given a freebie just because they had a certain breed. It also makes it seem like we have to give the mutts a spot because they certainly couldn't have made it that far on their own (sarcasm). The chips should've fallen where they landed. The 16" mutt as well as Roo! would've made it to finals on their own merits. They wouldn't have been there just because they were given a freebie. So would the Rottie, Pyr Shep, and Miniature Schnauzer. They would've easily made it into the top ten without a hand out. In the future, it would be nice if they would allow the top ten to move on based on merit.
Others at the seminar felt there needs to be more requirements to qualify. Make no mistake, there were a huge number of people trying to enter. They weren't going to be hurting for entries. Someone I know suggested they do something like require the dog to have a MACH or PACH to attend. I wouldn't mind requiring that and a certain yps at each height as a base line. There shouldn't be course trotting dogs in a final for a championship. A championship implies quality, especially when in conjunction with westminster.
Honestly, would you appreciate your sport dumbed down to make it more approachable for the public? Should people bring their ungroomed pet dogs to westminster to compete and be granted the right to go through just so we can make the public feel good? Should we add in a mutt class to be PC? No, it's westminster. When you think of it, you think of the best. It's a show with top quality, beautifully presented dogs with skilled handlers. That is not what they did for agility. They made a mockery of this 'championship' by putting mediocre dogs ahead of quality dogs with speed and skill so we can be all feel good for the public. We had a few great handlers... Patti Gagnon, Andrea Samuels, Ashley Deacon, Soshana Dos, etc, but by and large the large majority were not the best dogs there. The 8", 12", and 24" class were downright embarrassing to watch with the exception of a few dogs.
I'm sorry, but with the exception of a few, had you shown me this as a person who hadn't competed in agility yet, I wouldn't have been impressed. We don't go to middle school basketball or football games (unless they are someones own child or friend) to watch. We go to big NBA or NFL games. We want excitement, to watch the best. It's why we pay money to go see sports. It's the same thing here. What person is going to be impressed when they hear championship and come to see what they assume is our best and instead are given dogs who can't even do the course? I would be much more impressed seeing a dog like Ashley Deacon's Pyr run than some of them that trotted, or were making what felt like novice mistakes. There were classes where only 1-2 dogs even qualified. That is a sad, sad percentage. The only good thing I can say is that an impressive dog eventually did win in every height class.
We were discussing it at the agility seminar today, and no one was really happy with it. Besides that, the course was not an international style course. Back side of jumps are a common occurence on akc excellent/masters courses now, and the majority of these handlers were not prepared to handle this. If you are going to be in a final for a championship, you should be capable of handling common sequences seen. I don't mean a person has to be able to q every time. People and dogs make mistakes, but there were a lot of really sad mistakes that probably wouldn't have been made had more competent dogs been allowed to move on. It also dumbed it down for some of the other breeds and certain mutts. The dogs in the final should've moved on because they earned it (and they would have!). Not because they were given a freebie just because they had a certain breed. It also makes it seem like we have to give the mutts a spot because they certainly couldn't have made it that far on their own (sarcasm). The chips should've fallen where they landed. The 16" mutt as well as Roo! would've made it to finals on their own merits. They wouldn't have been there just because they were given a freebie. So would the Rottie, Pyr Shep, and Miniature Schnauzer. They would've easily made it into the top ten without a hand out. In the future, it would be nice if they would allow the top ten to move on based on merit.
Others at the seminar felt there needs to be more requirements to qualify. Make no mistake, there were a huge number of people trying to enter. They weren't going to be hurting for entries. Someone I know suggested they do something like require the dog to have a MACH or PACH to attend. I wouldn't mind requiring that and a certain yps at each height as a base line. There shouldn't be course trotting dogs in a final for a championship. A championship implies quality, especially when in conjunction with westminster.
Honestly, would you appreciate your sport dumbed down to make it more approachable for the public? Should people bring their ungroomed pet dogs to westminster to compete and be granted the right to go through just so we can make the public feel good? Should we add in a mutt class to be PC? No, it's westminster. When you think of it, you think of the best. It's a show with top quality, beautifully presented dogs with skilled handlers. That is not what they did for agility. They made a mockery of this 'championship' by putting mediocre dogs ahead of quality dogs with speed and skill so we can be all feel good for the public. We had a few great handlers... Patti Gagnon, Andrea Samuels, Ashley Deacon, Soshana Dos, etc, but by and large the large majority were not the best dogs there. The 8", 12", and 24" class were downright embarrassing to watch with the exception of a few dogs.
I'm sorry, but with the exception of a few, had you shown me this as a person who hadn't competed in agility yet, I wouldn't have been impressed. We don't go to middle school basketball or football games (unless they are someones own child or friend) to watch. We go to big NBA or NFL games. We want excitement, to watch the best. It's why we pay money to go see sports. It's the same thing here. What person is going to be impressed when they hear championship and come to see what they assume is our best and instead are given dogs who can't even do the course? I would be much more impressed seeing a dog like Ashley Deacon's Pyr run than some of them that trotted, or were making what felt like novice mistakes. There were classes where only 1-2 dogs even qualified. That is a sad, sad percentage. The only good thing I can say is that an impressive dog eventually did win in every height class.
Last edited:
I agree, imho, the sport was misrepresented to the public as if it were a Championship - being attached to the Westminster Dog Show that's what the public were led to believe (and what those in attendance paid for).
But we know this was anything but a championship. It would seem that anyone with an above average dog that did get invited had a much greater chance of winning their class height than they likely would have at their own local trial given the lack of competition on display.
Am I the only one who was surprised at how few shelties were entered?