Early Takeoff Syndrome?

[gcv-border]

For those of you who do agility, do you train the dog to slow/collect before the jump (sort of a pre-contact)? It's not evident from the videos I've seen, but maybe I'm missing something subtle in that split second moment before the jump.

 

What comes to mind is steeplechasers, who often jump *through* the brush at the top of a jump. These horses are jumping flatter because they're jumping at speed, as opposed to Tea's example of the cross country horse that is asked for a bit of collection before each jump. Because the jumps in this case are generally solid, correct jumping form is critically important (a mistake could mean severe injury or death), whereas it's not as important for the steeplechasers....

 

It seems that agility dogs are being asked to jump at speed like a steeplechaser and yet clear the jumps carefully like a stadium or cross country jumper, without the benefit of help collecting themselves before each jump. In the case of a horse, the rider is right there to help the horse collect properly. There's no equivalent for the dog that I can figure. And so even if a dog normally jumps correctly, I can see a situation where the speed wills out and the dog misjudges takeoff point and drops bars. In this sense, I wouldn't really consider it a training issue, because the dog can't ever really understand *why* it should collect itself before a jump in order to jump correctly (in the case of the horse, the human is able to remind the horse to collect and can physically enforce that idea).

 

J.

FWIW, a lot of the agility videos (taken at trials) are pretty awful, and it is very hard to see some of the less obvious aspects of relative speed, handling cues, positioning, etc. (at least in my opinion). Add that to the fact that the team may not be the best skillwise, and I can understand why it is hard to determine if the dog is collecting over a jump - it may or may not be collecting.

 

IMO, the good agility dogs (trained by a handler who understands what she is doing) do collect before going over a jump at which the course takes a turn. They have been trained to collect. This is one of the things I have been working on with my dog for a while. It can be really hard to get a super speedy dog who runs and jumps as fast as he can to think about collecting. If I had known more when I started agility, I would have started training him to collect right from the beginning. (Yes, it can be done during the groundwork or flatwork stage when they are young.)

 

The benefits of collecting are:

Less stress on the shoulders - many courses today require turns and tighter turns (180 degree wraps are becoming more common). It is really hard on a dog who flys straight and fast over a jump to suddenly crank it in a tight turn. When I see dogs doing that on a course, it makes me cringe. As one would expect, the faster and longer-legged dogs are at a disadvantage on twisty courses, and benefit from collecting before a jump.

 

Faster times: yes, it is faster to collect (slow up - a lot) before a jump requiring a turn, than to rocket over it and then run a long arc after the jump in order to achieve the turn (slower, tight turn vs. faster, wide turn). This is shown very clearly on Sylvia Trkman's Cik/Cap video. She taped accomplished agility dogs that ran the 2 types of turns. She not only timed them, but also measured the distrance traveled. Most often, the dogs with the tight turns (her own dogs) were 1-2 seconds faster. If you add up the # of tight turns on an agility course (the # varies depending on the course, but usually there are several), it becomes obvious that teaching tight, controlled turns are a competitive advantage (and it is less stressful on your dog). Until I watched that video a couple of years ago, I was more impressed with the speedy dogs over the course even if they did take wide turns. I did not understand the time those turns were eating up.

 

So yes, the dogs are asked to run as fast as possible between jumps, etc., but there are training techniques which teach the dog to collect when necessary - usually when a tight turn is required after a jump. Body movement (or lack thereof) can signal an upcoming turn, but verbals can also be very useful.

 

Of course, there can be other reasons (besides not collecting) why a jump bar is dropped, such as speaking to your dog over the jump (which causes him to do a split-second adjustment, often dropping a bar), but I don't know anyone who does THAT.

 

Julie, not sure if I cleared up your questions, but I hope this helps a little.

 

Jovi

[Blackdawgs]

For those of you who do agility, do you train the dog to slow/collect before the jump (sort of a pre-contact)? It's not evident from the videos I've seen, but maybe I'm missing something subtle in that split second moment before the jump.

 

I've trained 2 agility dogs, albeit not to a very high level. They were running "excellent" type courses in practice, but for various reasons they did not compete at that level. I'll admit that I never paid much attention to jumping beyond setting up grids when I felt that the dog was falling on its forehand. I don't give much conscious thought to cueing extension and collection, although I think that I probably cue it naturally by decelerating at an a appropriate time, sometimes I'll give a verbal "easy" but I think that agility dogs tend to respond more to visual cues than verbal cues.

 

My now retired pitbull mix was a fabulous, natural jumper. She was scarey atheletic in her day, so athletic that she get get herself out of all sorts of messes. I used to refer to her as the open jumper that I could not afford. She was very fast. If I had been a better trainer and more ambituous, she could have been top notch

 

My rescue Border Collie has terrible "structure", her rehab vet says that she is surprised that the dog can ambulate with falling down. Her style is more like a hunter, a steady, consistant stride beteewn fences and then up and over.

 

Both dogs seldom pull(ed) rails, so I must be doing something right. I trusted that the dog would eventually figure it out. Now, that I think about it, I never really pushed for speed and let the dog figure out the speed and rythmn that worked for it. Maybe that is why my dogs seldom pull(ed) bars.

 

Both of dogs have a tremendous amount of heart and courage. After they wrecked (mostly on the contacts), they'd get up and get right back on. I really look for this in a dog, although it bit my pitbull in the butt as she was apparently running with very signifcant orthopedic problems for a long time prior to complaining. There is a person in my agility class who still can not get her dog back on the dog walk after a wreck. This dog has good "structure", I believe it was very successful in the breed conformation circuit. I'd take heart over good "structure" any day

[Mark Billadeau]

Many pages ago someone asked why flyball folks are not seeing ETS; perhaps it has something to do with the structure of the jump used in flyball as compared to a hurdle jump in agility (solid vs. a bar).

 

Or focusing on the handler for direction vs. looking down the line of jumps.

[Smalahundur]

 

I know this about the dogs, I still would only want them bred for work.

 

 

I wish the icelandic horse was still bred for stockwork. It hardly is anymore as the money is in the sportbred tölthorses.

Nowadays they are few real "gönguhorses" left, that combine endurance, surefootedness, reliability, and sheep sense. Our Máni really likes to work sheep, but as a sporthorse he would not be very interesting, his gaits aren´t good enough, I wouldn´t trade him for any great tölter though...

As I understand in the US cow sense is a selecting factor in certain horsebreeding, that´s great.

[Mark Billadeau]

Mark has stated, very succinctly, that the only motivations for which people compete is for breeding and ego. I have explained, numerous times now, why I disagree with his viewpoint on the matter.

Because you do not agree with the defintion of ego as given by philosphophy and psychology.

 

Ego is what is inside us that drives us to set goals and successfully complete them.

 

Dog's don't care if they take down bars or do not cross a teeter the way we want them to; ego drives us to help them cleanly jump hurdles and not get scared crossing teeters. Ego drives us to evaluate, at home and especially in competition, where we are in meeting these goals. Dogs would be content to never jump bars or cross teeters; they only do it because they want to please us.

[Root Beer]

Because you do not agree with the defintion of ego as given by philosphophy and psychology.

 

Ego is what is inside us that drives us to set goals and successfully complete them.

 

Dog's don't care if they take down bars or do not cross a teeter the way we want them to; ego drives us to help them cleanly jump hurdles and not get scared crossing teeters. Ego drives us to evaluate, at home and especially in competition, where we are in meeting these goals. Dogs would be content to never jump bars or cross teeters; they only do it because they want to please us.

 

So, let's clarify, and let's leave formal definitions out of it. I would like to delve further into what you meant by your own statement. We all know that there are shades of meaning in what we say and that the vast majority of people do not strictly adhere to formal definitions at all times. Even those that will adhere to a formal definition may, at one time or another, use different aspects of a formal definition, so clarification is most appropriate, especially when a disagreement is in play. Basically I'd like to know what you meant by your own use of the word.

 

By "ego", are you, in fact, saying the following? (My intent here is not to put words in your mouth, but to clarify your meaning - if this is not exactly what you mean by "ego", please just say so. This is a question for clarification):

 

"The only reasons why one would choose to compete in Agility are for breeding, or "ego". "Ego" referring to: work toward achieving personal goals that could a desire to win, a simple desire to enjoy time with one's dog in a competition setting (aka. the sheer enjoyment of working with the dog as a team), as something that both dog and handler mutually enjoy (yes, there are dogs that thoroughly enjoy competition settings, just as there are dogs that are afraid of those situations, are stressed by them, or simply dislike them), use of competition as a means of overcoming obstacles together that will enhance the quality of the dog's life overall, to take advantage of the opportunity for learning, etc (pretty much any and all reasons why various individuals could choose to participate in competition, many of which have nothing to do with "winning" in the most obvious sense)"

 

This would basically translate your statement to: The only reason a person would compete in Agility is for breeding or some other reason that the person has for competing.

 

Is this, Mark, precisely what you meant by "ego"?

 

And I really am only interested in Mark's response, not in anyone else's interpretation of what others think he must have meant. Thanks!!

 

And Mark, I thank you for taking the time to answer and clarify.

[Mark Billadeau]

Most of the things you talk about can be accomplished outside the competition. For example "the sheer enjoyment of working with the dog as a team" can be accomplished at home with no one else watching; this is strictly between you and your dogs.

 

The environment created by competition that dogs may be enjoying is created by peoples' egos; the stresses and nerves we put on ourselves to be successful in front of others is created by our ego. These changes in our behavior are being read and felt by our dogs; they are then reacting to our changes (relative to the way we behave when no one is watching). We are no longer doing this for the sheer enjoyment of working with the dog as a team; we are now doing this with the goal to overcome the impact of our behavioral changes and the impact on our and our dog's performance. The success (or goal) we are looking for may be winning, or it may simply be performing better than previous runs, or simply completing a run; but we are still there to fulfill our need to meet these goals (ego). If we were simply doing these activities for the sheer enjoyment of working with the dog as a team we would not need an audience, the approval or praise of others, another team to compare to, etc.

 

This would basically translate your statement to: The only reason a person would compete in Agility is for breeding or some other reason that the person has for competing.

The other reason here is ego.

[Pearse]

Most of the things you talk about can be accomplished outside the competition. For example "the sheer enjoyment of working with the dog as a team" can be accomplished at home with no one else watching; this is strictly between you and your dogs.

 

I think that is true for the part of competition that has to do with recognition, prizes, awards, praise from one's peers.

 

However, there is another reason to participate in competition. It's to measure oneself against the best in the field and thereby improve. So, if my goal is to produce the best working stockdogs I can, how do I know if I'm accomplishing it? I can stay at home and delude myself that my dogs are better than everyone else's and I'm a better trainer than everyone else, or I could compete and compare myself and my training techniques to the best of the best and, by observing the best of the best working their dogs, improve my training and my understanding of what makes a good stockdog.

 

I could do that by going to clinics and lessons too, but there's a lot to be learned watching 40 or 50 dogs work the same group of sheep over the same course and watching how the strengths and weaknesses of each dog come into play, and how good handlers use the strengths and handle around the weaknesses.

 

I'm not sure that is quite as applicable to Agility or Flyball, but if the motivation on the part of the handler is to excel rather than simply to seek attention from and validation by others, then I don't see a qualitative difference.

 

The problem is that most of us are easily seduced by the attention and validation and lose sight of the "pursuit of excellence" ideal, and that's where all of the shenanigans begin.

 

Pearse

[Mark Billadeau]

So, if my goal is to produce the best working stockdogs I can, how do I know if I'm accomplishing it?

Wouldn't this fall under breeding selection?

 

"Two reasons to enter a competition breeding selection or ego."

 

It's to measure oneself against the best in the field and thereby improve.

If you and your dogs can proficiently accomplish all the tasks necessary at home; wouldn't any improvement be driven by ego?

 

 

I'm not saying ego driven goals are bad; just that it is our egos that drive these goals.

[Smalahundur]

Wouldn't this fall under breeding selection?

 

"Two reasons to enter a competition breeding selection or ego."

I wonder, I have not trialled yet, but my main reason (for now) would be to see how my dog compares to others handled by more experienced trainers. A touch stone of my progression in learning to train these dogs.

(of course my ego would like to win, but we just laugh at him... ).

[Root Beer]

So, Mark, your answer to the question that I posed above is clearly "no".

 

You do not define "ego" as:

 

". . . work toward achieving personal goals that could a desire to win, a simple desire to enjoy time with one's dog in a competition setting (aka. the sheer enjoyment of working with the dog as a team), as something that both dog and handler mutually enjoy (yes, there are dogs that thoroughly enjoy competition settings, just as there are dogs that are afraid of those situations, are stressed by them, or simply dislike them), use of competition as a means of overcoming obstacles together that will enhance the quality of the dog's life overall, to take advantage of the opportunity for learning, etc (pretty much any and all reasons why various individuals could choose to participate in competition, many of which have nothing to do with "winning" in the most obvious sense)"

 

Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but, based on your last response, it appears to be very clear that was not the meaning that you intended by use of the word "ego".

 

Therefore, I stand by my position that there are reasons, beyond ego (as you are using the word) and breeding, why people choose to compete in Agility.

 

Most of the things you talk about can be accomplished outside the competition.

 

That really is neither here nor there. If an individual and/or the dog happen to thoroughly enjoy competition, ego need not be the driving force to be there. (I have given examples in earlier posts)

 

I realize that you do not believe that. However, I know it to be true.

 

So, there we are.

 

We could continue to go back and forth on this, but neither of us are likely to change our minds about it.

 

And, although I do not have an ETS dog, those who are looking for answers have my full support. Sometimes even the smallest piece of information can bring a person who is struggling with a seemingly unsolvable problem some measure of peace, confidence, or simply understanding. Occasionally there are even solutions, but even when there are not, the truth is always more helpful than guesses.

 

On that, I understand, we will also continue to disagree.

 

ETA: This horse won't be jumping anytime soon. It is thoroughly and positively dead. :lol:

[Mark Billadeau]

Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but, based on your last response, it appears to be very clear that was not the meaning that you intended by use of the word "ego".

Since you gave mixed examples, I could not give you a simple yes or no answer. So let me make it very simple for you.

 

If you're doing it in front of an audience (in person or recorded) or you are comparing your performance against someone else, it is being driven by ego. If you're only doing it for the sheer enjoyment, there is no need for an audience, other competitors, judges, scores, Qs, placings, etc.; and I have serious doubts that adding these elements does not alter ones motivation (whether they acknowledge it or not).

 

And, although I do not have an ETS dog, those who are looking for answers have my full support. Sometimes even the smallest piece of information can bring a person who is struggling with a seemingly unsolvable problem some measure of peace, confidence, or simply understanding.

Unless any future test for ETS is only available for spayed/neutered dogs, I am unwilling to support it and the additional risks to the breed by the majority use of a test for ETS just to satisfy a few handler/owners who want to understand why their dogs cannot play a game well.

[mum24dog]

Just one question - how come you guys have so much time on your hands?

 

Don't you have stock to tend, dogs to work, chores to do, lives to live?

 

FWIW I'm involved in agility because I like to facilitate the success of others. I go to shows for the social aspect and to help out - same reason I help run shows. I don't currently have any dogs to run that it would be worth being competitive about but that doesn't stop me running them sometimes with no expectation of a place. Running a dog and "competing" are not automatically the same thing. Seems there are people on here who don't understand that attitude but it's of no concern to me whether they think I'm competitive/egotistical or not.

 

And I only posted that because I wanted to show Kristine that she isn't alone.

[Root Beer]

Since you gave mixed examples, I could not give you a simple yes or no answer. So let me make it very simple for you.

 

I gave mixed examples on purpose. The point was exactly that - people's motives are mixed. Pull aside 10 different people at a competition, and you could easily find 10 different motivations that have led them to that place. Sometimes, one person's own motivations are going to be mixed.

 

If the point is going to be made that all possible motivations, other than breeding, must fall under "ego", then all of those things that I listed, as only the tip of a much larger iceberg, must be included.

 

If all of those items listed do not fall under your use of the word "ego" in this thread, then I maintain that there are those who have motivations other than "ego" and breeding.

 

The mixture of examples was exactly the point.

 

If you're doing it in front of an audience (in person or recorded) or you are comparing your performance against someone else, it is being driven by ego.

 

Not necessarily.

 

If you're only doing it for the sheer enjoyment, there is no need for an audience, other competitors, judges, scores, Qs, placings, etc.;

 

There may not be a need, but those very things may create the atmosphere that certain teams truly do enjoy most - for reasons that go beyond those things.

 

Unless any future test for ETS is only available for spayed/neutered dogs, I am unwilling to support it and the additional risks to the breed by the majority use of a test for ETS just to satisfy a few handler/owners who want to understand why their dogs cannot play a game well.

 

And on that we will continue to differ.

[Mark Billadeau]

....let's leave formal definitions out of it.

Until you choose to get past this you will never understand.

[juliepoudrier]

If you, or anyone else, would like to discuss my motives for citing the examples that I have used in my posts on this subject further (referring back to your quote above), I am going to request now that we take that to PM, so that this thread can get back to the original topic of ETS.

Um....

 

Or is ego keeping the discussion here, because by golly someone's gotta win!

 

J.

[Root Beer]

Until you choose to get past this you will never understand.

 

And until you choose to get past limiting what may drive a person to only that which has been formally defined by a science that has barely scratched the surface of all there is to know about ourselves, you will never understand.

[katenjim]

Wouldn't this fall under breeding selection?

 

If you and your dogs can proficiently accomplish all the tasks necessary at home; wouldn't any improvement be driven by ego?

 

 

I'm not saying ego driven goals are bad; just that it is our egos that drive these goals.

 

Why is so important to you to keep calling people out on ego? What does it really matter to you?

I don't have the time to post, usually. But I do a quick read weekly.

 

I didn't compete for "my" ego.

 

My dogs loved being away from home, spending time with me, whether it be at sheep dog trial,

or other competitions. They loved the companionship with other dogs, people, getting some junk food,

traveling to a new place, just the excitement of the day, and enjoying an activity. My last old gal, wasn't ever going to put on a sparkling performance,

but "she" loved it. Because of all the reasons above, not going to get that at home. Maybe you are

driven by ego, but many of us are not.

[Mark Billadeau]

People, people, people ego is not the same thing as egotism. Ego is that internal drive to set and then meet goals. Without ego, we would be content the way we are and the way things are. If you are striving to improve, get more, go faster, place better, figure out how to complete a complicated set of tasks; the drive to do that is your ego. If you're striving to figure out how to get your dogs to complete a particular set of tasks; you are being driving by your ego.

 

If you understood the formal definition of ego, you would know this.

 

If you are only going to socialize, there would be no need to compete.

 

 

[Mark Billadeau]

Why is so important to you to keep calling people out on ego? What does it really matter to you?

Because Kristine claims that having a test for ETS will have more benifit than for breeding a better agility dog and she does not see that knowing why a dog cannot play a game as well as other dogs has nothing to do with the dog and is all about the owner and their desire/drive/ego to improve the team's performance.

 

It is my desire/drive/goal for everyone to understand that a test for ETS has no benefit for and will do harm to the breed of Border Collie as defined by this forum.

[Mark Billadeau]

Now that my lab work has finished "cooking" Kristine can have her thread back.

[Root Beer]

Because Kristine claims that having a test for ETS will have more benifit than for breeding a better agility dog and she does not see that knowing why a dog cannot play a game as well as other dogs has nothing to do with the dog and is all about the owner and their desire/drive/ego to improve the team's performance.

 

And what Mark cannot see is that there is more to the picture than he personally knows, and that there is potential benefit to handlers of ETS dogs if further testing and study is done and more answers are found.

 

Testing and study, I might add, that is being done, and will continue to be done, and taken seriously by those who are studying the matter, regardless of whether anyone objects to it or not.

[Laurae]

And what Mark cannot see is that there is more to the picture than he personally knows, and that there is potential benefit to handlers of ETS dogs if further testing and study is done and more answers are found.

 

So the benefit is for the handlers, not the dogs.

 

 

And what benefit, exactly? Agility handlers not blaming themselves for their dogs missing jumps or perhaps not getting pissy at their dogs for taking jumps incorrectly? And that is worth risking a fundamentally change to the genetics of the breed you claim to love for all that it is? Ah, but no--this test can improve the breed!

 

If that ain't ego, I don't know what is.

 

 

 

 

 

[Root Beer]

Now that my lab work has finished "cooking" Kristine can have her thread back.

 

Not "my" thread, Mark, and I'm not sure how such comments add anything to an objective discussion of differing points of view.

 

As a general rule of thumb, I do reply to any discussion that is addressed to me directly, either through use of a quote of one of my posts, or when I am addressed by name.

 

So, if you don't particularly care for my participation (as this comment indicates) in this discussion, might I suggest you stop quoting me, and bringing my name into it, and making comments about what you personally guess that I do or do not understand.

 

Unless I have broken one of the rules of the board by expressing a point of view that is different from yours, the fact that we disagree really just is what it is. I don't expect you to agree. I do expect, at some point, that you will let it go (as it is pretty well established that we do not, and are not going to agree). Until that point, I will continue to respond when addressed directly.

 

If anyone would like to discuss the matter of what I reply to further, please feel free to PM. It really does not belong here.

[Root Beer]

So the benefit is for the handlers, not the dogs.

 

The potential is there, as I said earlier, to be for both.

 

And what benefit, exactly?

 

I have discussed this already - several times - and am not going to repeat myself yet again. If you really want to know, please go back through my earlier posts.