Sanctioned Arena Trials

[jdarling]

I'd like to hear some opinions about sanctioned arena trials -- particularly sheep. I knew there were sanctioned time and points cattle trials, but recently I've heard of a couple of these arena trials being on sheep. Like in the thread under trial announcements, there is a "time only" sactioned trial in an indoor arena measuring 300' by 150'. So the maximum outrun possible is 100 yards. The maximum crossdrive is 50 yards. But scoring in the top 20% of one of these trials in nursery or open will still make you eligible for the same finals where other handlers qualified by scoring in the top 20% from field trials with outruns of 300+ yards. Am I understanding this correctly? What would be the difference between one of these arena trials and say an AHBA trial in the same size arena?

[juliepoudrier]

Jodi,

Nursery aside, it takes more than scoring well in one such trial to get you to the finals, and I honestly believe anyone who garners enough points to go to the finals based solely on points from arena trials (if there are even enough such trials to make that possible) doesn't stand much of a chance running on a large field (unless the dog somehow has vast experience with that and is just doing arena trials because that's somehow all that's available), which is where the finals will be held for either sheep or cattle.

 

That doesn't mean someone won't delude themselves into thinking they can do it despite any real evidence to support that theory, but then those folks will just be tossing away their own money and time, and it's theirs to waste I guess.

 

J.

[jdarling]

Thanks Julie. I re-read my post ... oops ... I didn't mean to make that sound singular. What I meant was that the points had the same bearing. I am just surprised that the USBCHA sanctions these trials for sheep at all, especially considering that the finals is never held in an arena setting. I guess I'm at a loss for understanding it. It gives a whole new meaning to the advertising blurb, "The pup's sire has qualified for the National Finals in [insert years here]."

 

J

[juliepoudrier]

Jodi,

The only arena trial in this area that is USBCHA sanctioned is one that has been in existence for quite a few years (around 20, maybe a little less) and in conjunction with the VA State Fair, so it was basically grandfathered in. I couldn't speak for other arena trials though.

 

I know there has been some discussion in the past about weighting the points in some way--I think the most popular idea is to weight based on length of outrun and maybe drive (the idea was that it would make up for the fewer available trials in the west by giving them a greater number of points for trials with bigger outruns, etc.). I don't know if that idea has ever gotten beyond the talking stage, and I don't know how necessary it is anyway, since, except when the finals are in the east, you don't need a boatload of points to qualify anyway.

 

And people who are going to make claims like the one you mention are going to do so no matter what. It's like the claims made all the time about nursery dogs. You need just two top 20 percent finishes in nursery to qualify and there are certainly plenty of dogs that can do that without really being finals material. In fact, I'd guess it's much more common for people to take underqualified nursery dogs to the finals than it is for people to take underqualified open dogs.

 

J.

[Smokjbc]

To play devil's advocate (with no dog in this hunt as I am only recently a USBCHA member and not planning on attending any Nationals soon...)

 

I think part of the argument for sanctioning arena trials is that in some areas of the country (not mine!) there is a weather related limit on running field trials and one region (say.. California) may have an advantage over the Mid-West and places that are basically snow-bound right now in terms of qualifying. I agree that qualifying on the basis of arena trials only would not bring the best dogs to the Nationals, but since open field trials are the vast majority of sanctioned trials, a dog that qualified only by going to arena trials will most probably not be a contender at the nationals.

[juliepoudrier]

Jaime,

I think you're right about the weather isse, and I nearly speculated that reason in one of my responses. I think arena trials could be useful in snow- and icebound areas to keep the dogs working vs. basically putting them up for a few months each year.

 

J.

[stockdogranch]

Jodi--this is an argument that has been hashed out here and elsewhere a number of times. The usual argument goes something like this: If dogs qualify at these trails (only), then are they not taking some available slots for "real" dogs at the finals? I don't know the answer to that one. My biggest question is: are there really the numbers of dogs qualifying at *arena trials ONLY* to really be concerned all that much about it? I certainly don't know. I think that if a dog is good enough to go to the Finals, then it should gather points elsewhere, since it takes quite a few points to go to the Sheep Finals, but that's merely speculation.

 

Julie--I think you are right in that if a dog qualifies *only* in such trials, that dog is probably in deep doo-doo at the Finals. In fact, since we do have a number of cattle trials that are arena only, there are some dogs who have gone to the Finals (Cattle) who were completely out of their league, probably for this very reason; however, I speculate that that may also be due to the nature of the cattle used at those particular arena trials (perhaps pretty dog-broke?) vs. what we usually get at Finals. But, cattle trials are a whole 'nother issue. I agree with Jamie, that for some, due to weather, field availability, etc., it may be the only option at least some of the time. I guess the question is: how many of these trials are there, and how many points might a dog earn from only arena trials?

 

And as for :

What would be the difference between one of these arena trials and say an AHBA trial in the same size arena?

 

The level of the work done, and probably the stock used,

 

A

[Lana]

I had somebody take a swing because a group of us is going to the Denver Stock show arena trials. If you look at some of the folks going( Meeker finalist and Soldier Hollow type handlers, as well as winners of huge range ewe trials out west, and a few ladies who have put on numerous national finals) I feel safe in saying that most of these trials are for F U N, and the work,dogs,stock and handlers can be as good, or as bad as you find at most any field trial.

 

I find it interesting that an arena trial on fresh range lambs is criticized while many field trials have dead broke hair sheep, and some how are hyped as more "real" Given i choice i will take a big field and wild sheep, but some times a dog trial is just a dog trial.

 

Lana

[Amelia]

Hello all, this is not a new topic and, unfortunately, there are quite a few sanctioned arena trials around the country and Canada. They even exist here in California where there are no weather issues. I have heard arguments that there are dogs deserving of the finals that couldn't get enough points to go without arena trials because of the weather issue. And I've read arguments that it doesn't matter whether the HA sanctions them, because there are no dogs that qualify solely on arena points and they wouldn't be a threat at the finals anyway, so who cares? Also that it's difficult to find big fields in some areas of the country, so arena trials are the only option.

 

I don't think the HA should sanction arena trials because they promote poor work and poor dogs, which is not what we should be about. In it's first year, Meeker was an arena trial. In it's infancy, dog trialing in California did not include a drive because it was assumed that the dogs could not drive sheep away. There's still a CA trial named The Fall Driving Trial to highlight the fact that it has a drive. In the beginning, our national finals did not culminate in a double lift, and even though it was advertised as such, apparently many were furious when they realized it after they showed up.

 

We've evolved and become better right along with our dogs. To sanction a "dumbed down" version of stockdog trialing, to me, is going backwards. And, I think this is true for both cattle and sheep. I don't have a problem with time and points on cattle, but even those trials should include an outrun with a minimum distance.

 

Their ability to gather is the very thing that sets border collies apart from all other stockdog breeds, and it's what makes them the best. If you're not promoting distance, you're promoting something other than the working border collie.

[Amelia]

Hello all. I had to add another thought. I have no problem with arena trials. I have competed at them and they are lots of fun. I just don't think the HA should sanction them. Cheers all

[Lana]

I guess i don't see is at black and white. An arena trial with top competitors and fresh range lambs, is much more worthy than the very popular dogged to death sheep in a small field. Maybe the HA should only sanction big, 500 yards and over, and fresh stock. That sounds great, but not very real world. A "field trial" is no stamp of good dog work.

 

Lana

[stockdogranch]

I agree with Lana--there are trials and then there are trials. Just because you might have a huge outrun and a long drive and crossdrive does not necessarily make the trial "tougher" or any more "worthy" (of sanctioning) or a better test of a dog's abilities than a smaller field or arena or whatever, particularly depending on the stock used. I think there are good reasons for all types of work. Certainly a decent dog should have a pretty darn big outrun, but that's not all there is to it. I would love to see a lot of different types of work done at trials--not just big outruns and drives, but also some practical work, like loading into trailer or moving mommas with young 'uns, or what have you to demonstrate the range of abilities of good dogs, and the tasks a good dog can accomplish; but of course, that's just not practicable. So we do the best we can, given the various constraints we have.

 

A

[jdarling]

Thank you all for entertaining an obviously hashed and rehashed issue. You've given me food for thought, and a better understanding of it.

 

Jodi

[workindogs]

To lend my support to contributions of Julie, Anna, Lana, et al...

 

There are some pretty hokey field trials out there...small fields, dead broke sheep (heck, trained even)...and there are arena trials.

 

There are alot of arena trials offered at community fair (Scottish Games, County Fairs) or in conjunction with Big Events (Cow Palace, Calgary, Denver Stock Show) or it is the only venue available in inclement weather. These sheep arena trials held at these events are geared to entertain and educate crowds as well as showcase the working stockdog in a spectator friendly venue.

 

Handlers have a variety of reasons to attend.....because there is a larger hosting event going on, some of these trials have significant added money (like Calgary) that "ups the ante". There are some hands that are near experts at negotiating an arena course....some who also are dangerous on the field. Generally, there is a spirit of revelry and a heck of alot of fun to be had. I'm not sure if there are more arena trials in the West than the East....but I do know that points are harder to earn in the West due to fewer trials, smaller trials and long distances to travel....so if the only thing that can be put together is an arena trial and a handler needs to pad their points in order to get to the Finals, then goody for them.

 

Should these events be sanctioned??? I don't really care....if you delude yourself that success in the arena (or hokey field trials on broke hair sheep) makes you a Big Hat and contender to win the National Finals then you need meds. Or, go ahead and show up and the Finals and be prepared to eat humble pie.....I have seen it that type of person at the Finals before...typically with a Nursery dog.

[Amelia]

Hello all. My objection to the HA sanctioning arena trials has nothing to do with them being easier, or whether or not hands qualify for the finals based on those points. i don't care either. and, I don't think that a field trial should have to have a 500 yard outrun to qualify for sanctioning. I just think it should have to have one! even at the "hokey" field trials with dog broke sheep, the dog still has to run out and gather them, and that's what i think the HA should be promoting. again, the outrun, the ability to gather, is what sets our dogs apart from all others. it's the reason you don't see a kelpie, german shepherd, heeler or an aussie at the Bluegrass. to promote and support the working border collie, we have to support the gather.

 

my objection is not to arena trials themselves. i've competed at Calgary...twice, and I had a blast each time. It's fun in a "let it roll" kind of way and there's 10,000 Canadian split between 1st and 2nd. but, Calgary is a really good example of why we should not sanction arena trials. Calgary promotes itself as the "world sheepdog championship", which of course it's not, so why are we supporting that? the event director told me personally that the reason Calgary obtained sanctioning was to increase entries, which were dwindling. the first year i went, it was run on fresh range ewes and it was tough to get around. my second year they used Zoerb's school sheep to speed things up and make it more exciting for the spectators. the winner, Carl something, would have been at least a second faster if he could have moved out of the pen gate faster and not blocked the sheep from running in. his dog was no where in sight at the pen, it became a "world sheepdog champion" .... and the crowd went wild.

 

would Meeker have the panache it has if it was still held in an arena? would thousands of spectators return year after year? and as far as entertaining and educating spectators, yes arena trials do that. but they give people the wrong idea, which promotes "herding with my BC" and that is just plain bad for our dogs, and the very heart of my objection.

[mjk05]

the outrun, the ability to gather, is what sets our dogs apart from all others. it's the reason you don't see a kelpie, german shepherd, heeler or an aussie at the Bluegrass.

Off topic, but I think that's incorrect. Kelpies in their original form were developed to gather just as much as the border collie, and depending on the lines, can still be a magnificent natural casting and gathering dog.

 

There are a number of reasons I can think of to explain why kelpies haven't yet run at the Bluegrass, including the relatively small number in the US, the apparent selection in US kelpies of more cattle or yard work oriented lines (probably because the paddock sheepdog niche is already filled), the relatively small chance that any handlers of a high calibre will go to the effort of finding and training a suitable kelpie, and yes, some aspects of their working traits (natural driving ability on a few heavy sheep, for example). But lack of gathering ability- I don't think anyone can lump kelpies with German Shepherds or ACDs in that department.

[Pearse]

. It gives a whole new meaning to the advertising blurb, "The pup's sire has qualified for the National Finals in [insert years here]."

 

I wasn't aware that such a boast actually had any meaning. If the pup's sire had actually won the National Finals, it might be something worth mentioning.

 

Pearse

[D Strickland]

I wasn't aware that such a boast actually had any meaning. If the pup's sire had actually won the National Finals, it might be something worth mentioning.

 

Pearse

 

I was happy to keep quiet but this "brag" really bugs me. There are handlers around here that ONLY compete at arena trials, accumulate Open points, and use it to sell puppies. Oklahoma is FULL of arena trials ( which are no better than an AKC course ), points and time cattle trials which I know nothing about, and the latest -- POINTS AND TIME GOAT TRIAL ... this was sanctioned by the HA this year and had no Outrun, left, or fetch ... you could move anywhere and do anything as long as your dog got the stock thru the course.

 

I will agree that those trials are FUN ... and that's how I take them. I will continue to attend them for that reason.....but .... there are many handlers that use this to sell pups and promote their kennels.

 

I have run at arena trials that were challenging ... but ... the reason for the long drive and cross-drive is to show that your dog has the "strength" to drive stock for that distance. My present dog does not ...... but if I run in arena trials I can make it look like she does. This is why I don't think arena trials should NOT be sanctioned.

 

Just my 2 cents ....

[D Strickland]

.... she does. This is why I don't think arena trials should NOT be sanctioned.

 

Just my 2 cents ....

 

You'd think that English was a foreign language to me !!!!! .... I meant to say: "This is why I think arena trials should NOT be sanctioned."

 

..... going back to my Hooked On Phonics CDs ... !!!! LOL

[Sue R]

I wasn't aware that such a boast actually had any meaning. If the pup's sire had actually won the National Finals, it might be something worth mentioning.

 

Pearse

You know that, experienced handlers know that, but the vast majority of people don't know that - especially those that are novices and/or just getting involved with dogs and stockwork (or dogs and AKC "herding", etc.). So, that boast does have a great deal of "meaning" to people who don't know any better and does serve as a selling point for numerous litters that are the product of poor breeding choices.

[Sue R]

I was happy to keep quiet but this "brag" really bugs me. There are handlers around here that ONLY compete at arena trials, accumulate Open points, and use it to sell puppies. Oklahoma is FULL of arena trials ( which are no better than an AKC course ), points and time cattle trials which I know nothing about, and the latest -- POINTS AND TIME GOAT TRIAL ... this was sanctioned by the HA this year and had no Outrun, left, or fetch ... you could move anywhere and do anything as long as your dog got the stock thru the course.

 

I will agree that those trials are FUN ... and that's how I take them. I will continue to attend them for that reason.....but .... there are many handlers that use this to sell pups and promote their kennels.

 

I have run at arena trials that were challenging ... but ... the reason for the long drive and cross-drive is to show that your dog has the "strength" to drive stock for that distance. My present dog does not ...... but if I run in arena trials I can make it look like she does. This is why I think arena trials should NOT be sanctioned.

 

Just my 2 cents ....

Absolutely! Arena trial classes (sanctioned, Open sheep) have been won by dogs such as Shelties and Aussies. In one case, the dog was entered by a competent USBCHA Open handler and won two days of Open Sheep in an arena. Why was the dog entered? According to the owner/handler, "for the bragging rights" of gaining qualifying points. It certainly was not with any goal of seriously considering competing in the Finals as the dog was totally unqualified for that.

 

I believe that arena trials are fun and can, when the courses are challenging and not mundane, and the dogs are well-trained and well-handled, demonstrate some excellent stock-working abilities - even though they do not include some of the essential Border Collie traits and abilities (a significant gather, in particular). I have participated in and seen both time/points and judged arena trials (like the VA State Fair SDT, mentioned above).

 

In my very limited experience, the arena classes (Open level) I have seen have all been won by the handler/dog team that did the best work - and that good work was reflected in getting all animals through each obstacle in a quiet, low-stress manner that also resulted in the best time (in time/points trials). These trials have involved thoughtful and challenging obstacles that required calm, steady, obedient, and instinctive teamwork, not simple gates, chutes, and pens. I can see that this would not necessarily be the case in arena trials of other formats, that might well reward hard, fast work with a winning score.

 

I do not believe that trials that do not truly demonstrate at least some reasonable degree of "qualification" for National Finals should be sanctioned, and so I do not agree with the sanctioning of sheepdog trials held in arenas. However, as pointed out, there are numerous field trials that do not demonstrate any greater level of "qualification" than some arena trials.

 

Sadly, I think that if only truly "qualifying" trials were to be sanctioned, many trials would disappear as I think much of the reason for entries is the chance to gain points (as well as to run dogs for the experience and mileage, including lower-level dogs). If sanctioning, and therefore points, was to be lost, then entries would also be lost, and therefore many trials would vanish and so handlers' opportunities to trial would be severely curtailed in many areas.

 

This is all from a pretty novice level, less-experienced point of view...

[SoloRiver]

You know that, experienced handlers know that, but the vast majority of people don't know that - especially those that are novices and/or just getting involved with dogs and stockwork (or dogs and AKC "herding", etc.). So, that boast does have a great deal of "meaning" to people who don't know any better and does serve as a selling point for numerous litters that are the product of poor breeding choices.

 

Well, someone recently told me that a puppy a friend of hers was looking at (for sports) was from "legit working lines" in an effort to validate the breeding in my eyes. So, for some people the bar is apparently set pretty low.

 

Having competed in time/points and scored arena trials I cannot see how anyone can make a good argument for sanctioning the former. I mean, you can do the obstacles backwards before you do them forwards (which I did, by accident) and not suffer any penalties for it if you keep the speed up.

[Sue R]

In addition, an arena trial is only as good as the planning and rules that go into it. I have seen some terrific courses that took excellent stockmanship and dog work, and that resulted in disaster without a good combination of both. But, I have seen some classes where the obstacles and the "rules" (or lack thereof) made for runs that were anything but low-stress stock handling.

 

Field trials, arena trials, etc., are only as good as they are set up to be. Nevertheless, in general, arena trials are not a good evaluator of the special abilities of the working Border Collie, IMO.