Qualifying for the Nationals - Page 2

Dean used to say "If you equal your qualifying score in the Nationals, your performance has improved." I agree, because the judging is more stringent at the higher levels of competition, as well  it should be. Not everybody enters national events expecting to win. I'd asy roughly 1/3- 1/2 the entrants do it for the experience and the love of the sport,  agood way to spend their hard-warned vacation. As long as our national events are not even drawing as many entrants as there is time for, why make it tougher to qualify?

this is all wrong you can't give people easy marks at the lower level competion and then suddenly expect them to work hard to earn real marks ever heard of foundation,you have to start hard work at the foundation to become a good competitor.your foundation has to be right the judges should be judging properly at the basic level if you really in to it to compete if you just there for experience big trails are not the place to practice.don't set people to fail.it is very simple just like when you putting a foundation in a young dog you do not put shitty foundation and then say we will put better foundation later.this is basic shit not rocket science.have a nice one.

We all have to start somewhere...

SS

I agree taht everyone has to start somewhere....I just dont think the Nationals is it.

 Couple thoughts if I may. The reality is we have to grow USCA IF we wish it to continue.  An organization will NOT exist to serve 5 or 6 people ( tho USCA makes a good attempt at that since they seem to primarily focus on servicing those people who go to the worlds and not offer a lot to everyone else). As Shelley pointed out I can not see anyone being willing to go into a financial hole just to serve the egos of those 5 people. As noted above when and IF we every get to the enviable position of having a full dance card then maybe a discussion would be in order tho I personally would rather see us extend the days and time and have the biggest most wonderful spectacular national we could - that's how you market to new people to get them interested in the sport.

Note that I am not advocating a lowering of standards at all by saying that we have to grow  - how people learn is  to do and experience.  If you did not deserve your qualifying score - you will learn.   Besides which you have to keep in mind these are living breathing things we compete with. Dogs AND humans have good days and bad days. I have known several dogs who well deserved to go to the nationals but on ONE day (the day of regional) they did not get the 270 despite having gotten far better( and deserved on the day) scores on other days.  Why eliminate these dogs and handlers from the national? I'd rather have dogs there who have repeatedly shown their stuff than a dog that had one time and one day only done good. Which is another topic for discussion elsewhere - should we instead of deciding on one moment in time(the nationals) look at a method of team choosing that averaged scores from a number of events including the national?

Shawn stated "That is supposed to be the best our country has to offer for a WUSV selection. "  And it is regardless how many dogs compete. Why would the good handlers be afraid of competition? They know the good will float to the top. Besides which if we keep in mind the original purpose of Schutzhund it was a breed worthiness test. When I go to the nationals I want to see AS MANY DOGS AS I CAN so I can evaluate not only the dog but his bloodlines and what they are producing.

Also I do not know how many of you followed the last WUSV competition. The hosts had a great site with a lot of information about each participant. You would be amazed by the low qualifying scores from a number of countries ( and not just the 3rd world ones), And for those who are concerned about the difference between the qualifying club score and the national score they should look at the difference between the qualifying score and the WUSV score for team members. See http://wusv2007.kynologia.com/index.php?module=teams    The vast majority could NOT match or come close to their qualifying score. In addition some countries appear to qualify based on the good old boy system inviting back nationals living in other countries to compete under their flag. At least we have a qualifying system.

Also as Shelley noted, people enter the national for a variety of reasons. many know they have no shot of going to the worlds but they enter because they and their dog love the sport, because they want to support the sport, because they are proud of their dog, because they like the camadrie(sp) of the event etc etc.  These are not bad things and only bode good for the sport and the organization.

I have put a Sch1 and 2 on my service dog Remy and we are working towards our 3. Remy is an extremely powerful and clearheaded bitch that impresses every time she works ( as people from Northern Cal will attest).  http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/gsd/pedigree/485683.html 

Unfortunately for her she is stuck with a handler who 1. is a rotten dog trainer with no timing to speak of and 2. has a mobility disorder.  Now I am not one that asks for or receives any accomodation re the mobility other than in tracking being further away from the dog than is common so the reality that we live with in competing is that we will never have top scores. For example in obedience I simply can not move fast enough to allow her a flashy performance and I get dinged because my change of pace is not percived as sufficient. She's a big girl and it is tough for her to be as slow as I am. I'm still trying to work out how I get down the field for all six blinds.  The point to this is not poor me. The point is if I ever got a 270 and had any way to afford to go to the nationals - I'd go in a heart beat. I'd know going in that we would be trounced BECAUSE I would be competing against the best. But I'd go because my dog deserved to go even tho her handler might not and because I'm proud of her and I would want people to see her capabilities . And since she has an "alternative bloodline" people could get to see what it brings to the table. Finally I would go to show people that a dog can be sound enough to be a service dog and at the same time powerful enough to be a good sport dog. All these I think are very valid reasons for exhibiting at a national even knowing that you have no shot in hell.

TIG, you bring up some very valid points.  I just have to disagree.  I know of several people who do not compete anymore because of the watered down Judging and competing against dogs that do not deserve to be on the same field.  I look at the Nationals as a goal.  I do not want to go just to say "hey I went to the Nationals"  I want to go to win.  If you just want to compete for the fun of it that is what the Club Trials are for.  I have owned a  few GSD's and have never trained past a SchII, but I am still striving for an appearance at the Nationals.  Dont get me wrong I am not expecting to go in and win my first time there.  But I sure as hell will not go if I know there is no chance in hell of me winning.

When I hear people talk about a dog being at the BSP it is for the most part (not always) considered a good dog because they earned it.  Not always the case, but probably is more times than not.  That does not apply here (USA).  To me going to the Nationals with an incompetent dog that cant compete at that level is no different than the people that show up at the Sieger Show with a dog that runs away and wont bite.

Our Nationals should be an event of prestige, Not just an open free for all so someone can say that they have been there.  I also  understand that it would be hard for a Club to want to host the Event if the entries were limited, but it is just a  cycle it will pick back up.  Or here is an idea, the Parent Organization can host it and pay for it.  Its there National, If they wanted to make some changes that would really be in the best interest of the breed and improving it I think that is a good start.

I think there are a lot of people who chose not to compete for some of these very reasons.  I could be wrong but that is just my opinion.  I do think something should be done, even if it is not along my way of  thinking.

Shawn

First of all the question of inconsistent judging and/or gifting whether it be at a club trial the nationals or the sieger show is a separate issue  from qualifying for the nationals and needs to be dealt with as a separate issue. What Dee has started in her petition re the Sieger show needs to be carried over to all trials. In this day of videos it would be very easy to establish on videotape some performances that rate V, SG, G, I etc so there is a known visible benchmark . There will always be differences between judges - as there should be - they all bring their own world experiences and perspective with them but there should NOT be questions about what it a pronouced TSB vs a sufficient or insufficient. I was recently at a club trial and the Sch1 and 2 dogs were deserving of the title but were minimally sufficient. Yet they got pronouced and got scored in the high 80s for their protection work. The1 probably should have scored in the  70s and the 2 at best 80. The sad part is competing for Sch3 were several very nice dogs who did excellent work but looking at the scores there was no way to distinguish them from the merely sufficient performance of the other dogs. The 3s also were prounced with C scores in the high 80s yet we were talking apples and oranges.

I have two issues with your statement "To me going to the Nationals with an incompetent dog that cant compete at that level is no different than the people that show up at the Sieger Show with a dog that runs away and wont bite". First of all I do not know many people who would spend the money and time to take a truly incompetent dog to the nationals. There is reason for scoring - not everyone will be first which means someone will be last.  That is not always an indication of incompetency. In the example I gave above of wanting to take my dog to the nationals even knowing that we could not win is not an example of taking an incompetent dog at all. It is just being pragmatic that because of certain things in our partnership I know that we will not be first.

Secondly I do not believe your analogy to the Sieger show holds up. How the Sieger show is supposed to work is there is a basic bar to be met - the work test. Even when judged correctly it is not a terribly difficult bar - two very simple exercises. Once that bar is met the dog then competes in the working dog class where based on his structure, performance that day , progeny etc, he can get a rating anyway from insufficient to VA. In the early days of the Sieger show you saw ratings thru all those groups. Today in part due to the same "grade inflation" you see in the TSB, dogs apparently only go V or VA UNLESS you happen to be a working dog and then it's ok to give it a lower rating.  The bar for the nationals is a score of 270 - actually a much tougher bar than that for the Sieger working dog class. The dog is then judged on his performance on the day of the National under its conditions and its judges. Depending on all those factors the dog once again can receive a  score/rating anywhere between insufficient ( or DQ in some cases) to V or excellent. When done correctly both systems are very similar and as I noted I think the more difficult entry qualification to meet is the working dog's 270. Also as I noted above dogs and their humans are not always perfect machines so yes you will get scores over quite a range. It's the nature of the beast.- it does not necessarily mean the dogs are incompetent.

Re your quote "I know of several people who do not compete anymore because of the watered down Judging and competing against dogs that do not deserve to be on the same field.  "  Ok been there done that in many dog sports where another competitor for whatever reason is "given" a mysterious 10 point head start or finish and/or the judging is so incompetent the judge truly does not know a good dog when he sees one.  Frustrating - you're right. But this again is a judging issue and needs to be addressed there. Requiring a 270 at a Regional does not change this issue - either at the regional or later at the national.

Re "  I look at the Nationals as a goal.  I do not want to go just to say "hey I went to the Nationals"  I want to go to win. " This I think we just have to agree to disagree, If I ever got to the Nationals you can bet your booties that I would want to win and would do all I could towards that goal. But as I noted I'm pragmatic given my circumstances. Also I would be going for all those other reasons noted above not just to win.  I  personally have a problem with many people who compete "only to win" because all too often it leads to less than desirable behavior re the dog.  There was a famous AKC obedience competitor who was known for his top OTCH dogs(obedience champion very very difficult to get) and his perfect 200 scores. How did he get them - by literally tossing away dozens of dogs until he got the one that would get him there.  In the schutzhund world you see the same and in both worlds you also can see highly inappropriate training all in the name of winning. There is also the very legitimate way of achieving the winning which is to buy a highly trained dog from someone else. To each his own.  Me - I would rather celebrate those HOT and especially the HOT BRED dogs. I like to celebrate the owners that take their dog for what it is and do the absolute best they can with them. Owners who are unwilling to toss aside a dog "just so they can win". Owners that have a relationship with their dog outside the schutzhund field. Now I'm not saying that they also don't go to win. I'm sure they do - it's just they define differently what they are willing to do to win. I'm pretty sure most of them are very proud of their dog and what they have accomplished together. I think they have a right to be proud of their accomplishments and I hope we always have a place at our nationals for them. ( and please note as of next year we no longer have a separate HOT event yet again another example if USCA ignoring what its membership is doing).

Finally even tho I am new to competing in Schutzhund, I've been around the GSD world for a long time and remember the early days of Schuthund judging where the focus was on what the dog did right while notating the areas that needed improvement. As we have become more sport driven and point driven the focus has shifted to fault judging and nitpicking - counting the # of barks in a B&H etc etc. because it is easier to distinguish scores if you do this. I personally do not think it has been a change for the better. It drives us towards very robotic dogs and judges who do not have a true understanding of heart and courage - which brings us right back to the judging of TSB which for me is where the real issue is.

Each region is different and their strength can vary from year to year. This is the same for say for example High School Sports. West Texas is not known for strong Basket ball teams and usually most teams get eliminated once they play the teams from areas such as Dallas or Houston. Yet from time to time they produce teams such as a few years back when Midland High was the 5A State Champion. This came because they keep working and trying to be the best. This does not prevent them from getting a good beating some years.

IMO this should be the same for everyone making the Nationals. Some years you might be in a weaker area with a weaker dog and still qualify. This only serves to give people experience and the opportunity to learn and get better as they compete against the best in the USA. Now if they perform at a lower lever their score should reflect that level. I am totally against  a weaker team getting an inflated score. But competative people from weaker areas will try to keep improving each year until they can win.

Anyway..JMO....