I was going to take some time off to rejuvenate and get my thoughts together. Well, I slept since then. I’ve been asked privately, “What’s ‘your’ agenda? “ My answer is to; vigorously and sometimes aggressively expose stupidity. This is my blog I can do with it what I want and you can choose to read it or not. I know people are looking at it but most of the time I can’t tell what they are thinking.
I have also read the candidate chat transcripts and I think these chats are a waste of time. Sure, it lets people see where the candidates stand on the issues but the people running are no different than the people already on the board, so what difference does it make?
Analogy
NAFA - Somewhat of a Saint Barnard, usually friendly, gentle, and tolerant, this dog is slow moving, patient, and very obedient. It makes a great watchdog, key word watch, and tends to drool a lot and can be found to snore often.
U-FLI - Mostly a Border Collie, intelligent, with an instinctive tendency to work and is readily responsive, keen, alert, and eager. Are obsessed with stalking, chasing, and are “anticipators” who keep you guessing as to what’s coming next.
Pluses and Minuses
Measuring:
Plus: U-LFI - has the best measuring system which takes all the guess work out of measuring. You don’t need to measure in U-FLI but the default jump height is 12 inches. Most measure and the measurement is recorded and entered in the U-FLI database and there is no need to measure your dog ever again.
Minus: NAFA - would like to find a better way but is stuck in the past and doesn’t want to copy a working model. Still uses height cards and even though measuring is such a controversial subject in NAFA there is no willingness to change it. Here is an excellent quote and the way most feel about changes:
What about the desire to “brand” NAFA? Can we do that and copy U-FLI ideas/ concepts/ rules/ language?
Pickup Team/Open Class:
Plus: U-FLI - Pickup Teams run in the same division as Regular Teams which makes for a more competitive environment. Even if the Pickup team can’t earn a placement in the division, the dogs don’t know this.
Minus: NAFA - Open Class runs in there own division or with Veterans Class. Slower teams are pitted against faster teams and seeding isn’t a factor. No willingness to change and uses the same argument as Measuring about copying U-FLI.
Exhibition Teams/Performance Teams
Plus: U-FLI - Exhibition Teams are created after racing starts when Regular or Pickup Teams have had a loss of one or more of their team dogs that prevents them from competing further in the tournament.
Minus: NAFA - With the permission of the Tournament Director for cause shown, a team entered in a regular or non-regular class may be converted from its original status to a Performance Team entry prior to the start of the tournament. Doesn’t address what happens during the tournament. If your team loses a dog during the tournament and there is no backup, your team is out of luck.
Champion System
Plus: U-FLI - Places more emphasis on divisional placement in their Champion system. Even the slower teams can now feel good about themselves.
Minus: NAFA - Places more emphasis on division 1 and the fastest team in the region. Even their Champion system places the most emphasis on the fastest teams.
Jump Heights
Tie - If it wasn’t for U-FLI the NAFA jump heights would have never changed. However, NAFA still is worried about the “lessing need for a height dog” even though U-FLI has lower jump heights and everyone that plays in U-FLI still uses height dogs.
NAFA Candidate Chat
What follows are just a few quotes from the last two NAFA Candidate Chat transcripts that I thought were interesting and enhance my analogy. You can and should read the complete transcript and I have provided the links below.
Question: This was in response to a question about implementing changes such as the Open Class. There was much discussion about this and what follows are two of the last responses at the end of this discussion.
Christine VanWert - Actually, I favor change the s-l-o-w way. It takes time to fully develop ideas and to institute change. Don’t want to get run over or ignored by somebody else’s “good idea”.
Zachary Chernik -I disagree with taking the s-l-o-w route….a good thought process and analysis can be done in a short period of time…..I would hate for NAFA to be like some of the American businesses that are slow to change only to be looking at the competition flying past us and wonder….what happened!
Question: Do any of the candidates feel NAFA flyballers would be better served by having all dogs issued a height card by a single measurement or a three-measurement effort?
Christine VanWert - First, I support keeping measuring “optional”. Optional or going to a “mandatory” system is a question I would like to see the delegates answer. Second, I think the three matching measurements is fair. Not everyone agrees with this so, again….this needs delegate input.
Alisa Romaine - I know that others feel the same way as you do and, if NAFA is going to have height cards, they need to mean something. Finding a way to ensure they are done correctly may take looking at how the judges are trained rather than changing more rules about measuring. It is definitely not an easy subject in anyone’s mind.
Scott Stein - Regardless of whether everyone gets height cards, a system of check and balances is needed. No height card should be forever without a system to challenge it. Checks and balances ensure the credibility of the system
Zachary Chernik - Measuring is a hot topic and stressful for judges. I think that NAFA should ask the delegates to vote yes or no to look at changing how measuring is done. If the majority think that we should look into other options, then we can start to focus in that direction. I would also poll the judges to get their take on measuring.
Dale Smith - I would agree that requiring a height card under a one measure system or the current system could go to delegate vote. I believe there are some dogs out there running at a height and hoping they don’t get challenged. In the lower divisions, challenges are pretty rare - at least in my experience. Really in all divisions they’re pretty rare. Again, I think this should be a delegate decision. The key to delegate decisions is putting out a concise question that can be clearly answered by the delegates whenever possible.
Conclusion
This seems like an appropriate quote from a comment made on this blog:
I live in a region where we continue to lose traditional NAFA tournaments to U-FLI ones. This is not a good thing for us because we are not getting any additional tournaments that way. NAFA needs to be open (pun intended) to the flyball community’s reception of these new classes or they will begin to lose ground in other regions because clubs find the U-FLI rules more amenable. And if that happens in other regions the way it is here, it is not really a win for flyballers if the number of tournaments available does not increase, and we have fewer opportunities to play.
This is just my opinion but NAFA is loosing ground and after preparing this post, I can graphically see why U-FLI has gained so much ground in such a short time in certain parts of the country. The unresponsiveness of NAFA in the areas that I’ve highlighted and their stubbornness to change will ultimately hurt them if this trend is not reversed. The saving grace for NAFA is its loyal followers. I have considered myself a loyal follower but my favoritism is waning.
Larry
Related Post:
- No related posts
26 comments ↓
Thanks Larry!
But, now I am glad you decided to be true to yourself and continued to post!
Go Larry! I was sad when you said you were taking time
off
I am all new to this so I am just learning. Your blogs are educational.
I have only been to one NAFA tournament in 7/07 and two U-FLI. So, I in no way claim to know anything or can form an opinion concerning the two (but reading your blog I am leaning towards one over the other
)
I am still waiting for my dogs three NAFA title certificates (3 months later). In U-FLI he recieved his pins the evening of the tournament. This may be trival to some, but to me it’s not - LOL I really like the fact that in U-FLI you receive you pins right then and there.
I guess NAFA can’t print the certificates right then and there so maybe that is a reason they don’t award them on the spot ( but maybe they could have a printer to do so). And i am sure the long time is also because of the thousands of dogs racing in NAFA each weekend.
Anywho, just wanted to say I am glad you did not take a break Larry. I really enjoy the blog.
Thank you Ann! You have no idea how much this helps. Sometime I think I am just talking to myself.
Measuring;
“Plus: U-LFI - has the best measuring system which takes all the guess work out of measuring. ”
Respectfully, I disagree. “Best” is a value judgment based on your opinion. It is not a fact.
If it is the “best” system (which would represent many people’s value judgment and opinion), then why is it the ONLY measuring system of it’s kind in the world of Flyball Organizations? The British Flyball Association, the Australian Flyball Association, The Belgian Flyball Association and many others, ALL use the wicket (NAFA’s “working model”) for the same application as NAFA does. NONE of them report the kinds of “controversies” that North America has. None of them are considering changing their system, either.
Maybe, it’s not the system. Maybe, it’s the people using it.
The real problem you have with NAFA is that you can’t convince it to go where you think it should, Larry. Do you think that because NAFA loyalists don’t agree with you, that they don’t listen to you? “Listening” is not the same thing as “agreeing”. Listening is the willingness to be persuaded. I listen to you. I hear you. I am not persuaded yet, but I will continue to listen.
I agree that the U-FLI measuring system is easier to use. Easier does not make it better. “Better” is a personal opinion, not a fact. It’s only as accurate as the judge who is applying it. “There is no need to measure your dog ever again” in U-FLI but, the rules permit and the U-FLI shareholders encourage participants to re-measure as many times (10-50?) as it may take to get the measure they want.
” I think these chats are a waste of time. Sure, it lets people see where the candidates stand on the issues but the people running are no different than the people already on the board, so what difference does it make?”
Maybe not to you in this election cycle. What about others? What about future election cycles?
I know that I am not everybody’s “candidate” because of my personal stance on certain issues. But, as a delegate, I don’t vote for Board members based on specific issues. I vote based on my belief in their ability to lead. Leading is accepting that you cannot make everybody happy. But, YOU HAVE TO GIVE EVERYBODY A FAIR CHANCE TO BE HEARD.
There are two sides to most issues. Some may have three or more sides. A good Board member listens to all sides of an issue and considers all evidence before coming to a conclusion and taking action.
My question to you is, why didn’t you nominate a candidate that fit your idea of who should go to the Board? Someone you could support? Activism isn’t just complaining about what’s “wrong”. It’s about working to make things better.
Chris VanWert,
Candidate for the NAFA Board
Chris, I am not going to debate you on any of these issues, for your blood runs NAFA so if you are elected to the board I know that nothing will change for the better within NAFA. It will be the same old NAFA. You are just a carbon copy of most of the people currently on the board, old ideas and moving ever so s-l-o-w-l-y to change anything. You will be one of the ones standing there asking … what happened?
Out of the current list of candidates, the only one I find that I could half way support is Zachary Chernik and he has that “training in the ring box.” Or, maybe he’s been reading my blog… hmm… I wonder? It sure sounds like he has been doing his homework.
“…why didn’t you nominate a candidate that fit your idea of who should go to the Board?”
The one person I would have supported for the NAFA board is now a U-FLI judge. I think that NAFA has lost one of its most ardent supporters, me.
Larry, it appears to me that you are advocating for NAFA to become more like the fledgling U-FLI in all ways, touting that U-FLI has a better system. From my experience, I prefer to have choices that are clearly different from each other. It’s not whether I prefer the red apple or the yellow apple - I want a choice of apples or oranges! I definitely do not want either venue to change to become more like the other - whether it’s NAFA changing or U-FLI changing. The differences, I believe, are significant and the strength of each venue. The more the two become like each other, the more I look at other sports which offer me actual choices and not similarities masquerading as choices.
I guess that no one sees the problem the way I do or maybe you don’t want to see it. I’m sitting here in the southeast and watching tournaments that were once traditionally NAFA go to U-FLI and I’m asking myself why? Could the answer be that people are starting to prefer U-FLI?
You say you want choices but what happens when the only choice there is is U-FLI. Where is the choice then? U-FLI may not be in your area yet but when it is, will the people start preferring it to NAFA just as they are here.
Are PJStaffy and Alisa Romaine the same?
Meet Alisa Romaine one of the NAFA Candidates for the BOD. I think maybe the “fledgling U-FLI” comment tipped me off and I had to go back and look at the other time you posted about Jump Heights.
You envisioned multiple flyball venues “… three or even four flyball venues for people to choose from - each different from the other and yet basically the same game.” For some reason I don’t think that flyball will evolve as agility has but I suppose I could be wrong. Being that flyball is a team sport, it’s often difficult for 5, 6, or more people to agree on anything, and choosing a flyball venue to support is even more difficult. Agility is so much different that flyball, for it’s more of an individual preference.
If you look at what I am advocating, they are all things that would make it more enjoyable for the flyball community. Even current board members and some candidates see that measuring is a problem but no one knows how to fix it. Granted, the Open Class was a way for NAFA to be different, but being different hinders enjoyment and competition. The Performance Team rule really helps no one during a tournament only before, and is something that will rarely be used. The championship system that NAFA uses only recognizes the division 1 teams and excludes all other divisions. The jump height issue has already been addressed and I see no problem with the way NAFA address it. If you look back at my post about jump heights I even said that “NAFA has this one right.”
I’ve only raced for a year and after one u-fli tourn I’d have to say I liked it much better. Allthough the new height dog challenge rule in NAFA has caused all of the suspect dogs in our region to retire. I’m not really sure how u-fli handles divisional placement in a region, but I’m all for recognizing people for doing well within their division.
From a hosting standpoint U-fli rocks, they handle seeding and send you the racing schedule. There is a very small minority in our club who says their dogs will never race in u-fli, but they are also old and cranky.
We currently have only 1-2 u-fli tourn a year in our region, but I look forward to more.
ps. I’m also happy to see a new post. Thanks Larry for stimulating conversation.
Larry, I am also glad you *slept on it* — I look forward to your challenges and the reponses .
I am personally in favor of *one measure* by someone competent to get a GOOD measure — not someone who measures an inch of hair — and then no more !! I would LOVE for that measure to be offered at the END of a day of racing and not first thing Saturday morning, (BG) but….
I also like the proposal of the *honor system*.
Let the captain write in the dogs’ heights. IF someone is bent to challenge, measuring would have to find the dog taller by TWO inches. One is not enough, given the variances that can be shown in one inch increments. TWO inches brings the usual losses and penalties… ONE allows things to stand as is.
Some flyballers do this anyway…. put the dog in at what they believe the dog would measure under a competent measurement, and hope no one challenges with a judge that measures *hair*.
I think most do not care so much about *height* out of division one(s) but the cheaters gave the topic so much stress and anguish that everyone seems stuck in the *old ways* as the only way to keep everyone honest.
I do not like SLOW. It irritates me in whatever venue it shows up. Make a choice and change if you are wrong but quit trying to look at it from every angle. By the time you make the decision, many people have left for something else !! Months and years of patience is not in many dog sports people’s list of attributes….. they want progress and they want results. They are willing to work for it, but they want to see something back.
BRAVO Larry.
I had some of the same thoughts regarding the NAFA BOD chat. How do you really get to know that candidate from a on line chat? How do these candidates get to know you and what your (flyball) needs and wants are? How many of them have been to other regions and raced? I don’t mean just next door region but regions outside of their norm? How are they going to represent the people in flyball from across the country if you have never been out of your own region? How are you going to get input from other flyballers? I am not sure that one of the candidates will bring anything new to the bod as she is always on line supporting everything that the current bod is doing so what makes us think that she will be there for all of us and not just what the current bod thinks? Thinking outside of the box and not moving SLOWLY is what NAFA needs at this time.
Also it was to sad that no one choose to run for the ED position other then the current person. Mind you I am not saying that the current person isn’t doing a good job but competition is healthy and might make a person look harder at things.
I want to thank everyone for your comments. Even though you may not agree with me, I hope that I have sparked some thought. My goal is to make flyball better for everyone no matter which venue you choose to support.
Judy, you are so right about NAFA and thinking outside the box. Thinking outside the box has never been a NAFA trait and from reading about the candidates and their views, it doesn’t look like this will change any time soon. Pride, holding on to old views, and thinking loyalty will save you is not the answer in today’s environment. Will NAFA be the sleeping giant that wakes up too late?
Just look at General Motors and how it was on the top of the world in the auto industry and now Toyota is nipping at their heels and will probably surpass them in car sales in the not too distance future. Will NAFA be the sleeping giant of the flyball world? Only time will tell.
…and he came back full of stuff to talk about.
Good!
Too many points to comment on, so I’ll take the last one.
U-FLI has almost doubled the number of events each year since inception. (browsing tournament results on their site) Is this reflected in the number of new U-FLI flyball clubs? Or are existing clubs hosting U-FLI over NAFA?
One of the candidate chat questions asked candidate’s intentions regarding promoting flyball. None of the answers reflected targeting the demographic that finds U-FLI more attractive. hmm…
THANKS LARRY! I was a little sad when you posted you were haning up the keyboard for a bit…YEAH!
What a post! Now, I am not going to comment, because everyone who thinks they know me, thinks I am only pro-U-FLI. I am pro FLYBALL - btw.
But, Chris Van Wert just keeps cracking me up with her “U-FLI owners encourage you to measure as many times as you want” WHERE does she get this? I am personal friends with quite a few of the owners, and communicate with most of the others on a regular basis - and have NEVER heard that? NEVER?
The agrument of height dogs become irrelevent also makes me laugh, as people will always get what breeds they like. If you like small dogs - you will get small dogs. And being to the amount of U-FLI tourneys that I have been to, I see MORE height dogs(small dogs) racing together on the same team. Running against big dogs, and rockin’!
Ok, but back to the topic, I have to agree that NAFA has sat on it druthers, not doing much, until the competition is breezing by. I have been playing flyball for almost 16 years now - I started when I was 25 and just turned 40 - had two kids and ALOT of dogs. MEASURING has always been an issue! Why, WHY, WHY can this group of persons can not think of on innovative way to measure- just because “everyone else in all the other dogs org do it” does not mean squat. We - flyballers- are the ones that are having issues. I can guarantee that if USDAA was having problems - Ken T. would change it FAST.
You know, I have to laugh at the comment about how the British, Australian, and Belgian flyball groups don’t use the U-Fli measurement system. Americans invented this sport, so it would make sense that we take the lead in changes and innovations. It was only a fews years ago that I remember seeing British flyball at Crufts using those crazy old flyball boxes that toss the ball out over the front of the box from behind. The wicketing system used by NAFA has been under criticism from the flyball community since at least 2000, and probably sooner.
I was at a lure coursing event a few weeks ago and was watching a young dog getting a practice wicket. The wickets used for Whippets in lure coursing are basically a square-topped upside down U made of metal. One for minimum acceptable height, one for maximum acceptable height. They place both of these over the whippets whiters. The big wicket should always touch the ground, otherwise the dog is too large. If it is a small whippet, it’s whithers much touch the top of the small wicket. What struck me about watching this young dog, was I saw none of the fear of that arm coming down and swinging over him that I have witnessed so often in flyball height dogs. We had never schooled our whippets in this type of wicketing, and they had absolutely no problem with it. Whippets are wicketed until they achieve Field Champion, after that, they are just checked for soundness and bitches in heat.
So, right there is another sport that measures differently from NAFA. Now, you may say that what they are measuring for is different, and you would be right. However, I could easily see this system work for flyball. You have set of 7 of these wickets. The judge or the handler first tries a wicket for one particular jump height. If it is too small, go up, if too big go down.
Am I proposing this system to NAFA? Not really. I just wanted to point out that, as Judy said in her comment, “you have to think outside the box.” Just because agility and obedience use the same wicket as NAFA, doesn’t mean that is the only way. The think I like best about both the U-Fli measuring and the ASFA one I described for whippets, is that the dogs seem perfectly comfortable with the process. That to me is the most important thing. You can deal with the controversy second.
Clearly, from the comments I’ve seen here and in the chat transcript, the majority of the BOD candidates are not open to creative thinking, but rather business as usual. Larry made this point in an earlier comment, but I think it can not be emphasized enough. S-L-O-W change just doesn’t cut it these days. Look how many businesses have lost significant ground or gone under because they could not adjust to the new global and electronic marketplace fast enough. And yes, the business model is appropriate because the flyball community are NAFA’s customers. It is the club, CRN, and tournament fees we pay, that pay NAFA’s bills.
Again, I’d like to point out as I did in a comment on another of Larry’s blog entries, I am not on U-FLI’s soapbox here. Someone made a comment on how great and easy it is to host a U-Fli tournament. My personal experience with it was the biggest nightmare of my flyball career. NAFA wins hands down in my opinion when it comes to hosting a tournament. U-Fli needs to give the clubs some freedom, cut way down on the paperwork, and not expect tournament fees for clubs that never showed up. Which is why we need two flyball orgainzations, so I hope NAFA survives.
Thanks for sticking with the blog, Larry.
… and before we get too far into British, Belgian, and Australian flyball rules, the BFA recently struck “…flyball as instituted by NAFA…” from their rule book.
The British have updated their rules, addressing things like training in the ring, and corporate structure, among others. While the rule still shows its NAFA roots, the changes are considerable.
Danie,
I have heard about the horrors of hosting a U-FLI tournament from one other person. If you or anyone reading this has hosted both NAFA and U-FLI tournaments and can give an honestly assessment of this please contact me. I have not hosted a U-FLI event so I have no firsthand knowledge.
Hi Larry,
I have hosted both a NAFA (in California) and U-FLI and have not had any problems. The benefit of U-FLi is they do the race schedule and scoring for you. In NAFA - it was a nightmare to get an approved seeding/format and race schedule - constant tweaking.
I don’t know if Danie’s problems arose because they had such a HUGE turnout…but, I found the process quite simple (and I had two back to back - Wags for Wishes being one of them) I would be interested to know what specifically she had problems/issues with. (as I am sure the U-FLI owners would to rectify).
Larry,
I would be curious to know what horrors you have heard? My team has hosted both U-Fli and NAFA and we will continue to do so. In fact this year we did 2 NAFA and 1 U-Fli and next year it will be 1 NAFA and 2 U-Fli and then back to the previous way (yah I know we are making a NAFA one into a U-Fli tourney). U-Fli provided us with a racing schedule (which we were able to do some tweeking of our own and then got resubmitted for approval just like NAFA). They also generate labels for you.
I guess maybe what Danie is talking about might be the entry forms that U-Fli has. NAFA also has tournament entry forms but none of the clubs seem to require them anymore. Or maybe there is something else that I am not thinking of. I think one thing that was different for me to adjust to was singles and pairs and day of entries which can be trying. But now I have an idea on how to handle them next time around.
Judy,
We did not get the entry forms for most teams…I don’t think it is a requirement? I will have to find out. I just filled out the tourney sheet with race numbers and had the teams sign those. I did not hear anything about it.
Like I said I don’t have any first hand knowledge of the problem but this is the second person that I have heard this from. I don’t know the specifics. I have a real problem with posting something or even commenting on something which is basically hearsay. I too, would like to know the real problem if there is one.
(Chris Van Wert just keeps cracking me up with her “U-FLI owners encourage you to measure as many times as you want” WHERE does she get this? I am personal friends with quite a few of the owners, and communicate with most of the others on a regular basis - and have NEVER heard that? NEVER? )
I went to a Ufli tournament and asked them to measure my dog. But, I didn’t think the judge did it quite right so I asked the Ufli owner that was there (I go to open flyball night at her training facility) if I could do it again. She said I could. Then she told me that I could remeasure my dog as many times as I wanted. I didn’t think that sounded right as everybody keeps saying you only measure once. She explained that the rules say you only need one measure to get put in the database but the rules allow you to measure as much as you want. So, she said, “If you don’t think the judge got the right measure for your dog, you can go back and remeasure. In fact, you could remeasure at every turnament if you want.” Thats what she said to me.
I don’t want to get anybody into trouble here but thats what she (ufli owner) said to me.
Yes, I agree with your statement, but the way CVW was wording it, made it seem like “keep trying you might get it lower”. You worded it differently than she did, and specifically asked as you felt it was not a good measurement. I could measure each and every time if I choose, but, I don’t choose. If I had a dog that was right on the line, maybe I would. Maybe one day is different than the next, maybe my dog is tensing causing a bulge in the muscle in the leg - just speculating….A judge would be more qualified to answer on any variations they may/might have encountered. Only one of my dogs is on the line - of going up, so I have never felt the need to re-measure any of my dogs.
Like you said, Jackie, if the dog is right on the line you may want to re-measure, but for all of my dogs it was a no brainer. The judge didn’t even need to tell me what the measurement was because I could see it myself. I could have them re-measured a thousand times and it wouldn’t make a difference. It’s just not that likely that their leg is going to get longer or shorter. I had 5 of my dogs measured in a matter of minutes and there was no question what the measurements were for each of them
I recently measured (U-FLI) a dog that was very close to “on the line”. I remeasured a couple of times “for the benifit of the dog” but still continued to get the higher measurement. The dog was a bit over weight and quite furry. I mentioned that after a time period of dieting and excercise and a good grooming, they might try again at measuring.
Larry: “I have also read the candidate chat transcripts and I think these chats are a waste of time. Sure, it lets people see where the candidates stand on the issues but the people running are no different than the people already on the board, so what difference does it make?”
Do any of the candidates feel NAFA flyballers would be better served by having all dogs issued a height card by a single measurement or a three-measurement effort?
Chris: “…I think the three matching measurements is fair. Not everyone agrees with this so, again….this needs delegate input…”
Jackie: (on the Ufli system of one ‘measure’) “…one of my dogs is on the line - of going up, so I have never felt the need to re-measure any of my dogs.”
I clearly would prefer to debate these issues with someone who is a candidate for the NAFA Board and not with members of the flyball public who feel:
1) That they have NO representation on the Board.
2) That they have NO candidate to vote for and
3) ..a deep and sincere belief that NAFA is going the “wrong” way and that they have (untried) ideas that would improve NAFA.
It is an interesting admission that (because) you have a dog that “is on the line” and may re-measure at a higher jump height, you choose not to re-measure. I do not fault you at all for taking that “one” measure and keeping it because the rules (ufli) permit it. I would, too. …but, I wonder how your competitors feel racing against your team if that dog is the “height dog” and thinking/knowing that it should be jumping higher?
The chat questioner was asking what would be “fair” to NAFA flyballers? …a single measurement or a three-measurement effort? My answer has been quoted above in an effort to illustrate that my “candidacy” will ultimately hurt NAFA in some fashion should I be elected because it is not innovative or creative. Three measurements is “traditional” NAFA and not “forward thinking”. ….but, I don’t take it personal since NONE of the other candidates are judged to be any better.
I was simply “asked” and I simply “answered” my opinion as to “what” would serve NAFA’s competitors the best. I don’t want to “hinder” the future success of NAFA at all but, I want to be honest with folks who ask for my vision of “fair” and not give an answer that would earn me “points” with the questioner.
To Larry and Jackie and ALL who feel that there is no candidate in this year’s NAFA elections that is worthy of their vote, I have a suggestion: When NAFA mails you your ballots, take those paper ballots and write on them clearly “NONE OF THE ABOVE” and return them as paper ballots. Why?
1) There is no electronic capability of writing something on the ballot if you return your vote by electronic means.
2) Returning a paper ballot means that the envelope will be opened and somebody will actually read the words: “NONE OF THE ABOVE”
3) Returned ballots, even if spoiled, will be accounted for. If you return a ballot without marking a choice, it cannot be mistaken for “apathy” (throwing it away)
4) However many ballots are returned this way, it will send a clear message to the candidates who will be successfully elected. 10 ballots or 100 ballots with NONE OF THE ABOVE written on them clearly says, “You do not represent US.”
That way, no NAFA Board member elected in this year’s cycle can take “for granted” their tenure on the NAFA Board.
Sincerely,
Chris VanWert,
Candidate for the NAFA Board of Directors
Chris, I never said that their was not candidate…those were not my words. I do think, with the exception of Zac and maybe Dale - yourself and others are more of the same. For NAFA to thrive (I did not say survive as I know it will, but THRIVE), it needs a new approach to measuring, and some other things that have been mentioned on this blog.
I really don’t think anyone in U-FLI is really paying attention to what other dogs are jumping. It is a completely different atmosphere than NAFA tourneys. Shock is tiny - jumps 9 in NAFA…but, he leg bone is longer - and leg bone is deceiving as my Border Jack Vogue is the same height as Shock, but will jump 8 in U-FLI.
My team is FULL of height dogs, so usually our Short Fuse team is all 7 inch jumping dogs with a token big dog.
Leave a Comment