The current state of British Agility
 Over
the past few months Greg Derrett, international competitor and trainer, has been looking at
Agility at the highest level in Great Britain with an ever-increasing feeling of
disillusionment. It seems he is not alone. He has spoken to several top handlers who also feel
the same, so he decided it was time to put on record just how he feels about our sport in the
country that created it.
I'll begin by
debunking the popular myth that I started UK Agility just to make money. I actually started the
organisation because I love the sport of agility – I've been competing since I was 12 - and I
wanted to offer other agility competitors a different approach and more choice than was
available at the time.
For me, as it is for
many people, agility is a true addiction. As a competitor, spectator, show organiser and a true
enthusiast, I have always wanted to see it run well, promoted, and above all, developed. I'm
truly passionate about seeing British agility where it belongs – beating the rest of the
world. By the way, I did try to become a member of the KC Agility Liaison Council but, at the
age of 25, apparently I was far too young!
If you too are
passionate about agility and, in particular, seeing the quality of competition in this country
improve, then this article is for you. If you are striving to be – or already are – a top
handler/trainer and will settle for nothing less than being a world-class competitor, then I
hope these words and UKA's plans may inspire you to join us.
British Agility – The Poor Man of Europe?
So this is where
I get to the crux of this article. In my opinion British agility is being left behind the rest
of the world.
To explain how I
came to this conclusion, I should justify my experience in the sport. I have been involved in
agility for 20 years, working my way to Advanced with all five of my dogs. The sport was just
beginning to take off when I came into it, and the improvement and advancement over time has
been tremendous. Two on/two off contacts was not heard of in those early days. Running on the
left was still one of the most common handling systems. Analysing top handlers was an addiction
of mine as a Junior and is a must for me now as I aim to compete and train at the highest
level. During my career, I have won many major finals at least once and many twice!
I have been involved
with international teams in 1996 and 2000 and have competed at or been a spectator at seven out
of the nine FCI World Cup teams GB has attended. I have been on both GB EO teams and have been
team manager for two IFCS World Cup teams. I continue to hold seminars in four continents of
the world, seeing a huge variety of skills and ideas about how agility is run. Running UKA, I
talk with people from all levels and get a very different perspective from their side of the
fence.
 Agility
Since 1989 (at least)
When GB went to the
World Championships in 2001, we were considered by many - and unfortunately ourselves - to be
the best. I honestly believe that, at that time, in the Large dogs category, we were. We were,
however, terribly unprepared for what we were about to face, and results were not what they
should have been. However, the overwhelming response from the rest of the world and the seminar
invitations to travel the world for several team members showed us how great team GB really
looked. Since that time, however, the rest of the world has started to leave us behind, and
that is something I have struggled to understand until I really started looking back at our
past performance.
One problem we have
is the large turnover of people at the top. We also have people with short memories. Mention
the names of past agility greats - Hurst, Blackshaw, Bell, Cooper, Graham, Davies, and Rhodes -
to today's competitors and many wouldn't recognise the names. Imagine in football if we didn't
remember and learn from Hurst, Charlton, Pele, Best, Maradona, and if the top names did not go
on to be huge influences in their sport after their playing days!
Every run was as important as a National Final
In the 90's anyone who
was anyone - in my opinion - vied for the prestigious title of The Agility Club Agility Dog of
the Year. It was the ultimate in many people's eyes. The
list of winners during the late
80's to the start of this century was truly a list of the best dogs in the country each year.
At that time you
needed a top three place to gain points, which meant that every time you stepped in the ring
you were trying to win. From my own self analysis, I know this is why I was so successful at
Finals during this period because every run I did with Jaycee and Fern at a normal show was
just as important. Each run could give me those extra points to win the Agility Club Dog and
Handler of the Year so running hard and fast to win was second nature to me.
In those days
agility was great because we had so many different Finals to go for and, of course, all the big
names at the time wanted to win them - Royal Canin, Tex Chunks, Barbour, Spillers, Crufts and
Olympia, Gamblers, Power and Speed and the Pairs and Team finals to name a few. We all wanted
to win SupaDogs and DIN finals. Qualifying was not top 10 for several of these finals. It was
top three so every week we constantly practiced running hard to qualify, and we had many
opportunities to run in big finals honing these skills.
Dog of the Year lost
its appeal to many of the top names as people began to travel from Scotland to Cornwall in a
weekend chasing points, making the competition very different. The change to awarding points
for top 10 placements rather than top three transformed this into a tactical event with
handlers no longer trying to win but aiming for 4th or 5th in every run
rather than the s**t or bust to win runs. I think I am the only handler to have won Dog &
Handler of the Year under both systems, which hopefully allows me to state this opinion.
 What
has the CC taught our top names?
At the turn of the century [circa] the Challenge Certificate (CC) was introduced and it
was also, unfortunately, a time when many of the sponsors pulled out, the finals disappearing
with them. With no one really in charge of the sport and/or other influential people
employed/looked after by another major sponsor, no new sponsors were sought.
CCs were a good
introduction, and I was thrilled to win the first ever one with Jaycee. However, she was nine
years old at the time and that should have made me realise what this event was all about. In my
opinion, the CC teaches GB handlers to run slowly and conservatively. Here's why. I've won six
CCs with three different dogs at two different heights and made one of them, GT, an Agility
Champ. In all six wins I know that I went for clears in the Jumping and Agility rounds in order
to qualify for the Final. In three of the Finals, I also went for a clear rather than a s**t or
bust run. Once you have your three CCs and get that title of Ag.Ch. are you really motivated to
get another?
CCs help you to
practice for running in Teams. Having been part of the winning Crufts team Final four or five
times, I would cite the CC as being a great help - running for a clear, under pressure with
people watching. Unfortunately that style of running is very different to running and winning
as an individual in a World Championship event.
We then have the heats for Olympia and Crufts
Small and Medium dogs only have to qualify for one Semi. That says enough about not
practicing lots of fast competitive runs. If you really are one of GB's top Large dog handlers,
then you run for a top 10 place - not the win - to make sure you get to the Semi-final.
Once you qualify for the Semi, you train the next heat. If you are lucky enough - and again if
you are one of GB's top dogs - you qualify at the first few Semis. At the Semi, you very rarely
see the top names running flat out, but you definitely see them running for a clear.
This year will be my
16th Olympia with my 5th dog. I got there, undeservedly, with five faults
this year. When that pole fell at number 11, it was the first time I went s**t or bust in a
Semi and then qualified. The fact my time was also two seconds (don't quote me) faster than the
winner shows that the other four who qualified were going clear rather than pushing. If you
qualify for Olympia at the first four Semis, then you then won't be trying for the last few
heats.
 At
the morning Semi final at Olympia most top names go for the top 10 but at the evening final,
yes, we do go for it and it's the run I love most. The crowd and the journey to get there etc.
, all lead to great adrenalin highs. However, does that course prepare us for international
competition? Far, far from it.
Crufts Senior class
is a points system. I've missed Crufts two years since 1994. I would guess I have qualified for
this Final more than anyone else. Again, as a points system, it's better to get two 4th
places, obtaining 14 points, than it is to try to win one of these classes. As soon as you have
14 points, you know you are in so do we really care about the remaining heats?
More recently I've
also heard top handlers suggesting they weren't that bothered about qualifying for Olympia or
Crufts. These comments were seeds of my current disillusionment. My fellow top competitors were
saying they didn't care about the Final I was striving to win. How is that going to help my ego
develop! My first thought was How could that be? Then I put the rose tinted specs on and
remembered the days when our national Finals were not for all dogs but for the elite. Yes,
agility is for all - so is soccer - but the Premiership boys get the extra special help to make
them elite.
The 'fun run' has
gone from Olympia where you really went for it. The Crufts Singles was a day when the top 16
dogs and handlers in the country went head to head in not only the agility but two types of
knockout. These extra runs were all about running flat out to win and are sadly missed.
The importance
of training runs
As the knowledge of dog
training increases, the importance of training rounds has come to the fore. I feel they are a
good thing, and we introduced them at UKA to encourage better dog training. So isn't it
out-dated and old-fashioned to frown on training our dogs where it counts?
Those of you who do
not come to UKA may be surprised to know how many of our top dog trainers do! While you can,
in theory, do a training round at a KC show, without the ability to reward in the ring
what are you actually achieving? It could be argued that this lack of reward is a form of
negative punishment and punishment leads to slower dogs….. Oh no I've just come up with another
reason why we are c**p!
Once you get to
Grade 7 - which is not hard with a good dog let alone a world class dog these days - a normal
Grade 7 Agility class is now considered by many to be a training round. Have you recently
watched Grade 7 Agility when it's not a qualifier? The poor judge watches training round after
training round. This would never have happened when Agility Dog of the Year meant something to
the top handlers.
 Picking
international teams
I'm not going to get into the debate about how to pick a team for the World Cup (WC) or the
European Open (EO). If you want my opinion, see how we pick the IFCS team. In our selection
process for the IFCS World Agility Championships 2010, we
required handlers to submit their fastest five Agility and five Jumping clear rounds. Two of
these had to occur on the same day. Several handlers struggled to gain these double clear days
which brought home a lot of the above points. It was obvious most handlers had to go slower to
achieve double clears.
The 2009 qualifying
system for the team going to the FCI Worlds and EO again taught us to go clear, not to win. I
will use my dog GT as the example. She is nine years old. She is a Withersfarm. She has very
poor hips and throughout this year she has shown that her top agility days are over. Yet she
finished in the top three at the EO qualifier! In any other year, when GB took six Large dogs,
she would have made the FCI World team as well. If I had been focused on her at the qualifier
instead of my youngster I know we would have made the team. Thankfully we didn't because a week
later at the EO she ran her last competitive agility. For those of you who don't know, she
broke down there and was subsequently diagnosed with a severe heart defect. My point is that a
dog with poor hips and a severely inefficient heart could plod round at these events and make
the GB team is a sad reflection of GB agility.
The price of winning
Our sport is a very cheap and there's little or no prize money. Win Olympia,
Crufts and a CC and you get a rosette and trophy that sit in boxes collecting dust. I'm
competitive, but, even if a prize of £5K was awarded to the Olympia winner, it wouldn't make me
want to win it more. However. put £5K on a CC and it would certainly make me want to keep me
winning the CCs once my dog became an Agility Champion.
I can already hear
people saying prize money will be detrimental to the dogs and people will go back to our
punishment days, etc. etc., but I disagree. I believe most handlers at top level have such a
huge will to win that money would not increase their desire. I want to win Olympia and FCI
every year for no financial gain. Coming 2nd three times at Olympia and winning
Individual Silver - or you could say, loosing Gold - at the World Championships, I can honestly
say these have been the lowest moments in my agility life. That was back in 1996 & 1999 when
the ego was larger and the life experience was a lot less, but they were devastating moments. I
could not have been more down.
People get rid of
dogs now regardless of the money. It is also a misconception that a high desire to win means
training methods will deteriorate and dogs will suffer. I personally use positive reinforcement
methods because I believe they get the best results. The handlers who have stayed at the top
for a period of time again tend to be handlers who also use reward-based methods.
Those handlers who
get rid of dogs due to their own inability to train them, their inability to comprehend and
understand learning theory, and generally fail to acknowledge their inadequacies but blame the
dogs, very rarely get to the top. These people get rid of dogs now, just the same as they would
if prize money was involved.
Another problem is
that we are so obsessed with competing that we'd rather go to a show - any show - than learn a
new training method, improve our performance, learn about coaching or how to develop skills in
preparation for competitions. I've also observed international handlers working closer
together, supporting each other and sharing course experiences more than we do.
 Is
agility in the UK really that bad?
After all, Tasha Wise just won Individual Gold and Bernadette Bay was 5th
in the Medium at FCI 2009? In my view, Tasha is so far ahead of the field. I'm sure she won't
mind me saying that she made sure her agility run at the Worlds was clear, and she did a
brilliant job of it, rather than running balls out. Talking to the person who helped her
prepare (her sister, Lorna), I was told that all year she has run the CCs with the goal to win
by five seconds. She, therefore, had the foresight 12 months ago to know that she had to
motivate herself rather than our system helping her.
Bernadette and her
Sheltie Zen got 5th and I was impressed with her, too. She really attacked the
courses. It was the most aggressive I have seen her run. It occurred to me that, after
competing all year against Tasha's Medium, perhaps Bernadette had benefitted indirectly from
the competition. It might have taught Bernadette to run more aggressively. I'm hoping Tasha and
Bernadette read this as a compliment. I was proud to watch you from the stands and you brought
respect back to British agility which we haven't had since Team Gold in 2003.
I've analysed a lot
of the runs at international events and, time after time, we either perform very badly or seem
to be really unlucky. We rarely run under pressure so when we do, we seem to have bad luck or
just make school boy errors. How many great GB dogs try out each year for International events
and don't make the team? Why is this? Poor selection criteria or lack of experience under
pressure makes it luck? What's the saying? Practice makes perfect...
What I keep coming
back to is my observation that, generally speaking, top handlers in the UK run for clear
rounds. When we go to international events and we have to really go for it under increased
pressure, we're just not skilled or practiced enough. Yes, the course design is different but
dogs coming out of tunnels the wrong way, dogs running into handlers, missing contacts, running
under jumps, dogs spinning between obstacles, handlers making fundamental errors. This isn't
down to course design, it's due to the poor preparation.
Finally, driving
back from the EO as part of another team that did not achieve its full potential, you start to
think about things. I would like to make it very clear that I think the Team Manager and Coach
did a great job of organising the trip and are in no way to blame for our poor performance.
What would have helped me and my team-mates here achieve more?
How about a competition where I have to run hard and fast regularly, where there is
an incentive to really win it. What if I can do this several times a year? I have the CCs to
help me practice running for the team medal but if I can then add an event where I can practice
winning an individual, then...
I'm not one to sit
around and blame others. I take my failings in the agility ring to heart and always blame my
poor dog training, my poor handling or my poor mental ability. I know I am not going to get the
help I need to prepare better so I can sit around and bitch or I can do something about it.
So here goes...
In 2010 UK Agility is
introducing the Masters Series. This is an event designed to encourage top handlers to run flat
out over a Jumping and an Agility course. To prevent handlers going for a double clear and
running conservatively, we are going to convert faults into seconds. To add to the pressure,
we are going to put prize money on the line. There will be £100 for the winner of each height,
and cash prizes for the top four. The entry cost for event will be slightly higher than CCs
(£15) but the big difference is that the money will be going back to the competitor. If entries
do not cover the prize fund, then UK Agility or a sponsor will pay. Yes, it is likely that it
will cost UKA money to run this event if I do not find a sponsor. If the prize fund is bigger
than this then the prize money will increase. The idea is to improve the elite, not make money.
We want to run these events at shows where the ground conditions are good and they do not clash
with other qualifiers.
The top two overall
and the individual winner of the Agility and Jumping section will qualify for a Masters Final.
Long term, we would really like to take this Final to a top event. Judges will be selected by
UK Agility for their judging and/or international experience. They will be given recent courses
from IFCS, FCI and EO to encourage them to design courses such as we see abroad. We would also
like these judges to go on to help less experienced judges with course design and advice at
their first few appointments. We ultimately would like to create an elite list of judges that
people can work their way on to but can also be removed from if course design and ability is
not up to a high standard.
The standard of dog
eligible will increase as the event progresses over time. This will mean only the best are
running in the Masters which also gives handlers an incentive to run to win in normal UK
Agility Champion classes. Therefore, we are running to win on a regular basis.
 At
this point, I would also like to reassure the lower level competitors that we have not
forgotten about you and nothing will change in your progression path. The Beginners
Steeplechase Final will still occur in 2010. We are introducing the new Tug-e-Nuff Performance
Challenge, open to all Beginners and Novice dogs, which will combine the results from their
agility and jumping classes on a particular day.
I put the challenge out to our top names in the sport
Come and see if you can win the money and beat others
with similar aims. Come and see if this might make the difference from driving home again from
Europe disappointed to driving home with medals around our necks, year in year out. What have
you as a competitor got to lose? You might even get the satisfaction of taking my money at the
same time as beating me and, in the long term, dramatically improve your chances of winning
medals at the IFCS, FCI world cups and the EO.
If anyone wishes to
email me regarding the ideas concerning this event I am more than happy to hear your point of
view.
greg@ukagility.com
Feedback
From Fran
Walton...
I have just read Greg’s article about Grade 7 Elite Handlers and the knock on effect
to World Class competitions, and I would like make a few comments as a Grade 7 handler of
reasonable, but non-elite status.
I have been competing in agility since
1993. Grade 6 since 2001, and more recently Grade 7. My little Grade 7 girl is all of 17.6
inches high and is VERY strong willed. She has no recall, and she & I have had to ‘agree’ quite
a few compromises on how I handle her in order to get the best out of her! Needless to say I
have learned a lot working her – not the least being how to handle difficult starts from behind
her!
When she was 1 she was thrown out of
her puppy class for not having a wait, but this only made me more determined to do well with
her – I’d show them! She was quick, she turned well and she enjoyed herself. What more could I
ask for?
It took longer than a lot of dogs, but
she went up to Grade 7, thus achieving my goal. I have no illusions that we could win a Champ
Class or a Qualifier, with her being so small, but I do always go for the best round I can on a
course, because any round just we do could be one of our rare clears, and she could get a good
place. Basically, I am competing against myself every time I take her in the ring, trying to do
better than the last time. Training rounds are not in my little pocket rocket’s handbook.
I will never be an ‘elite handler’ as
Greg defines them (I am too inconsistent), but I am addicted to the sport. I can see his point
about people doing so many training rounds that they could forget how to be competitive, and
his comments make sense. However, there are still quite a few Grade 7 handlers out there who
just want to do well, who don’t always hold back, who don’t have World level ambitions, and are
very happy to go all out for an excellent round on a tricky course in a high quality field. So
let us hope that the elite few who persist in doing training rounds don’t discourage show
organisers from scheduling G7 classes or judges from agreeing to judge them.
I have no answers to the problems Greg
highlights, not least because I have no overseas experience, but I just felt that I ought to
say a few words on behalf of the less ambitious G7 handler! Mind you, my G6 youngster is
taller, faster and easier to handle, so who knows... (30/11/09)
First published 23 November 2009
| 