Safety absolutely should be our priority! Can someone explain for me how current sizing was determined? And - beyond the cost to replace current dog walks- what is the down side to doing so?
Yes, for the safety of our dogs, please! We no longer do Standard runs (CPE) because it is just too narrow for him. He is about 10 years old and we can't risk a fall. Thankfully he is a Specialist which allows him to skip up to two classes.
I run large dogs, a fall off the dog walk is career ending, why not make this sport safer for all. Obedience did it with on-leash stays, it doesn't take out the technical skill, just makes it safer for all involved. Agreed, we can do better!
Is there information on which DW each dog ran first and second in this test? (I am assuming the early videos are from the test and not from regular runs. (I love the idea of a lower wider DW but also love having good data that has been looked at carefully.)
There is certainly some validity here but it is minimal. Think about sports like football. They continue to improve the safety equipment but significant injuries are still regular and consistent. The more protection you have the harder you hit and the more risk you are willing to take. A twelve inch dogwalk width may be to narrow but how wide should it really be? At what width or height does the dog and/or handler take more risk not adjusting for a bad approach (the dog's, the course design, or handler error) and how much harder are they willing to run? If the dogwalk width and/or height causes the dog to take more risk and/or run faster your net result is the same. In the example of the approach to each width the handler is behaving differently. When handling for the 12" width the handler is closer to the dogwalk, swings his close arm out sideways further, and is moving slower. All of these things factor into the dog's motion when engaging with the dogwalk (natural cues). A comprehensive study about paw placement for a wide variety of breeds on a "flat, ground level, and consistent" surface at various speeds would be my first step in assessing any appropriate dogwalk changes. My first step to minimizing my dog's risk on the dogwalk is teaching to correct their approach to load safely and, while speed is a factor in the game, they should only be moving as fast as the can safely. I've seen countless dogs run with reckless abandon which isn't safe regardless of any other factors. Just some food for thought. mindexcursion.wordpress.com/2016/08/29/agility-obstacles-and-safety-concerns/
Of course it is easier for the dog to run with little or no proper training. But why dumb down the training for the proper approach to the dog walk? Agility is a competition course, is it not?
I get what you are😮 trying to do here. But I don't think your science is quite up to snuff for a reasonable conclusion. I'm sorry. First of all you should separate the width from the height. If you really want to know the true change, if any, you need to separate out each aspect and test each aspect alone. Second, I don't think your sample size is good enough for a conclusion of any kind. Also in some of the runs the dogs were coming from a sideways entrance and in other ones it was a straight on entrance. You keep changing the criteria and therefore cannot make a conclusion. I get the point you are trying to make. But what do you have presented is not science and no rational conclusion can be made (other than the conclusion I think you started with). That is not particularly good scientific method. If you would like to design a better test I can help you with that.
Sally, I agree a full factorial design would be preferable, isolating height, width, angle of approach based on distance from previous "obstacle" and IMO classification/control for dog size e.g., stride length. I do not know what the criteria for a "successful" run are, that is, what are the "skills" the event is supposed to evaluate, but interestingly on the wider ramp several dogs did not touch down on the yellow touch down area of the up-ramp; this seems to be a function of the angle or approach (so a secondary effect of stride length) as well as stride length as a direct effect. I would think this is something that is beyond a control l variable adn is something that should require adjustment based on breed. I am also happy to help redesign a test that may have more rigorous results, although I am totally ignorant of AKC standards and willingness to adjust based on safety!
Yes, there are lots of variables not controlled for here. Another one would be to looknat, over time as the dogs become more comfortable and used to this wider plank, do they ante up as it were and push the risk level further? I do think this could be a great advance and further work is merited!
@@bishopbookworm Excellent point! Is this something the AKC would fund? I did a quick look for canine research funding, it could be difficult to find funding as this is not tied to a specific health system or condition, but I don't think there would be enormous material costs to design an execute study data collection efforts. I am a research scientist and would be happy to donate my time to this, is there anyone who is embed within the AKC world who is willing to do same? And at minimum, results could be published as a white paper if not a journal publication.
Safety absolutely should be our priority! Can someone explain for me how current sizing was determined? And - beyond the cost to replace current dog walks- what is the down side to doing so?
After watching those videos there is no doubt that that wider plank makes a huge difference. Wow!!!!
Yes, for the safety of our dogs, please! We no longer do Standard runs (CPE) because it is just too narrow for him. He is about 10 years old and we can't risk a fall. Thankfully he is a Specialist which allows him to skip up to two classes.
Thank you!
YES!!! This would be great!! Can we buy wider dog walks yet? I want one!
I run large dogs, a fall off the dog walk is career ending, why not make this sport safer for all. Obedience did it with on-leash stays, it doesn't take out the technical skill, just makes it safer for all involved. Agreed, we can do better!
Perhaps it is enough to make the height lower, and the judges to take into account the better approach when drawing up the course?
Is there information on which DW each dog ran first and second in this test? (I am assuming the early videos are from the test and not from regular runs. (I love the idea of a lower wider DW but also love having good data that has been looked at carefully.)
Absolutely! That's not enough dogs for a trial.
There is certainly some validity here but it is minimal. Think about sports like football. They continue to improve the safety equipment but significant injuries are still regular and consistent. The more protection you have the harder you hit and the more risk you are willing to take. A twelve inch dogwalk width may be to narrow but how wide should it really be? At what width or height does the dog and/or handler take more risk not adjusting for a bad approach (the dog's, the course design, or handler error) and how much harder are they willing to run? If the dogwalk width and/or height causes the dog to take more risk and/or run faster your net result is the same. In the example of the approach to each width the handler is behaving differently. When handling for the 12" width the handler is closer to the dogwalk, swings his close arm out sideways further, and is moving slower. All of these things factor into the dog's motion when engaging with the dogwalk (natural cues). A comprehensive study about paw placement for a wide variety of breeds on a "flat, ground level, and consistent" surface at various speeds would be my first step in assessing any appropriate dogwalk changes. My first step to minimizing my dog's risk on the dogwalk is teaching to correct their approach to load safely and, while speed is a factor in the game, they should only be moving as fast as the can safely. I've seen countless dogs run with reckless abandon which isn't safe regardless of any other factors.
Just some food for thought.
mindexcursion.wordpress.com/2016/08/29/agility-obstacles-and-safety-concerns/
Of course it is easier for the dog to run with little or no proper training. But why dumb down the training for the proper approach to the dog walk? Agility is a competition course, is it not?
I get what you are😮 trying to do here. But I don't think your science is quite up to snuff for a reasonable conclusion. I'm sorry. First of all you should separate the width from the height. If you really want to know the true change, if any, you need to separate out each aspect and test each aspect alone. Second, I don't think your sample size is good enough for a conclusion of any kind. Also in some of the runs the dogs were coming from a sideways entrance and in other ones it was a straight on entrance. You keep changing the criteria and therefore cannot make a conclusion.
I get the point you are trying to make. But what do you have presented is not science and no rational conclusion can be made (other than the conclusion I think you started with). That is not particularly good scientific method.
If you would like to design a better test I can help you with that.
Sally, I agree a full factorial design would be preferable, isolating height, width, angle of approach based on distance from previous "obstacle" and IMO classification/control for dog size e.g., stride length. I do not know what the criteria for a "successful" run are, that is, what are the "skills" the event is supposed to evaluate, but interestingly on the wider ramp several dogs did not touch down on the yellow touch down area of the up-ramp; this seems to be a function of the angle or approach (so a secondary effect of stride length) as well as stride length as a direct effect. I would think this is something that is beyond a control l variable adn is something that should require adjustment based on breed. I am also happy to help redesign a test that may have more rigorous results, although I am totally ignorant of AKC standards and willingness to adjust based on safety!
Yes, there are lots of variables not controlled for here. Another one would be to looknat, over time as the dogs become more comfortable and used to this wider plank, do they ante up as it were and push the risk level further?
I do think this could be a great advance and further work is merited!
@@bishopbookworm Excellent point! Is this something the AKC would fund? I did a quick look for canine research funding, it could be difficult to find funding as this is not tied to a specific health system or condition, but I don't think there would be enormous material costs to design an execute study data collection efforts. I am a research scientist and would be happy to donate my time to this, is there anyone who is embed within the AKC world who is willing to do same? And at minimum, results could be published as a white paper if not a journal publication.