Measuring is definitely a hot button issue in Flyball. Over the last couple of years, this one issue has caused more turmoil within the Flyball community than any other issue. I have searched around and found the following information about early jump heights and measuring on the Flyball History page. The article was written by Ron English and titled, Some Early Rules and can be read in its entirety on the Flyball History page. Copyright ©, 1996 Jim Sova
Jump height:
All four jumps shall be set according to the HEIGHT AT THE WITHERS FOR THE SMALLEST DOG RUNNING (not the stand-by, if the stand-by is brought in, heights are readjusted if necessary). The judges are to check the jump height before racing begins. An easy way to measure is to take one upright away and stand the dog alongside the jump, using a ruler or something similar as a horizontal measure from the jump to the withers. A dog standing 13 1/2″, for example, is allowed to jump 13″ - the nearest whole number on the low side (13 3/4 jumps 14).
Minimum jump height: 10″
Maximum jump height: 18″These rules were in effect up until October 1984.
NAFA® Method
This early jump height and measuring information is very interesting and telling. From this information we can see that from the very start of Flyball the withers were used for measuring. Maybe someone that knows for sure can comment on this but I assumed that the North American Flyball Association (NAFA®) measuring method was adapted from the Agility measuring method. I guess for this discussion it doesn’t really matter because in my opinion a withers measure is not an accurate measuring method for the sport of Flyball. It is too subjective and leaves too much room for questions and speculation. Granted this is only my opinion and I welcome other comments. The reason I believe this is simple. Less than a quarter of an inch can mean the difference between jumping 1 inch higher or 1 inch lower. Obviously, NAFA® knew this when the height card rule was first implemented. For example the following information was taken from the NAFA® Official Rules of Racing dated October 1, 2006:
Chapter 2 (i) (vi) Prospective judges must have excellent measuring skills since his or her measurement is the deciding factor for any height cards.
Chapter 7 Section 7.1 (a) . . . Applications must be presented to the measuring recorder before the dog is measured and the Measuring Head Judge must be notified that the height is being recorded for a height card prior to measuring the dog. All dogs will need three (3) matching measurements from three (3) different approved NAFA® judges. At least one (1) of the three (3) judges must be a NAFA® designated Supervising Head Judge. Only one height card measurement may be attained per tournament. Apprentice and Provisional Judges shall not measure for Height Card Application Forms (C.10)
C.13 NAFA World Record Report Form Instructions
What to do when a possible world record has been achieved:
Checklist portion:
B. Verify the height dog measurement:
1. Refer to the height dog measurement sheet.
a. If the dog has a height card, which can be presented to the judge for verification, no action is necessary.
b. If the dog was measured prior to racing, no action is necessary.
c. If the dog was not measured prior to racing, it is mandatory that it be measured at this time.
The Chapter 7 rule about the requirement for obtaining a height card tells me that even NAFA® knows that this form of measuring is not always accurate or they wouldn’t require 3 matching measurements. The NAFA® Board of Directors knows how important it is for accurate measurements yet they continue using an inaccurate and subjective measuring method.
As you can see from the following illustration from Chapter 4, NAFA® describes the proper stance for measuring. This is the most subjective part of the whole measuring method. Judges need to be taught what to look for but one judge can still get a totally different measurement than another judge with the same training.
U-FLI Method
So what is the answer? There is a more accurate method of measuring in use by United Flyball League International (U-FLI). This method is so accurate that the dog only needs to be measured once. This measurement is then recorded in the U-FLI database and the dog never has to be measured again, and there is no need for a height card.
This method uses the dogs bone structure which is something not ![clip_image004[1]](http://www.i-flyball.com/Blogger/Measuring_D0B6/clip_image0041.jpg)
likely to change once the dogs reaches racing age. The U-FLI Judge uses a measuring device that measures the distance between the dogs elbow and Accessory Carpal bone of the dog’s front leg.
As you can see from the illustration this is a far superior method of measurement. The dog can even be held while the judge measures the dog which is a lot less stressful for the dog and owner. Additionally, this method doesn’t penalize dogs with larger chest and short legs so that the dog’s jump height is more proportional to their legs rather than their overall height.
Conclusion
Measuring done by the U-FLI method is much less stressful on the dog and owner and it leads to a more accurate measurement. Measuring done this way takes a lot less time than at a NAFA® tournament. When using a wicket for measurement, there is a tendency to teach a dog to stand in a way to minimize the dog’s height. The leg measuring method takes the owner out of the equation and there is no need to have a height card.
This discussion only covered measuring. The jump height issue will be discussed at a later time. I welcome your comments.
- Larry
4 comments ↓
>There is a more accurate method of measuring in use by United Flyball League International (U-FLI). This method is so accurate that the dog only needs to be measured once. This measurement is then recorded in the U-FLI database and the dog never has to be measured again, and there is no need for a height card.
I have one question that I would really like to have an “objective” answer for. If it is true that this method is so “objective” and “accurate”, Why? is it that a friend of mine was encouraged by a U-FLI shareholder to have her dog measured at each and every U-FLI tournament she participates in until she could get the one lowest possible measurement that she wants? In other words, she could measure 5, 10 or even 100 times and if only one judge measures her dog so that it jumps lower than it ever has before, THAT ONE MEASURE now becomes that dog’s jump height forever. If that can happen, just how “accurate” can you claim the U-FLI method to be?
….and, the second thing I’m curious about is this: If the judge that measures a dog in U-FLI and finds that dog should be jumping shorter than it did previously by other judges, if that judge is not applying that method correctly according to U-FLI’s rules, what recourse do U-FLI competitors have to make that judge follow U-FLI’s rules? Can U-FLI revoke that dog’s “inaccurate” measure?
Your first question sounds like a hypothetical question to me since you don’t have firsthand knowledge of this. Have you ever been to a U-FLI tournament? Has your dog ever been measured for a U-FLI tournament? I can’t answer your second question since I am in no way affiliated with either U-FLI or NAFA.
I tried to look at this as objectively as I could and I’m not going to get into the habit of defending my post but in this case I thought that I should. I have attended both NAFA and U-FLI tournaments. My dogs have been measured for both NAFA and U-FLI tournaments. To me it doesn’t take a genius to figure out which is a more accurate method of measurement.
Larry
No matter how accurate the measuring system is, you are always going to have some dogs who are right on the bubble. By that i mean they are so close to the cutoff that 1/16th one way and they jump one height, and 1/16th the other they jump a different height. Why not try for the lower height if the rules allow it. I think the important point is that it seems highly unlikely that there would ever be more than a one inch height jump difference in U-FLI (why does U-FLI have an apostrophe?), differences of 2 and even 3 inches have been seen using the NAFA system.
My team plays exclusively in NAFA - this is not a personal choice, there simply are no U-Fli teams in our area so if we want to play, we have to play with NAFA.
I can tell you first hand that we were at a NAFA tournament recently and while there were a total of 30 teams racing… only 7 dogs TOTAL were measured! Why??? Because the NAFA measuring system is not very accurate. Once a team gets a low measurement on a dog… they just never measure that dog again and jump that height. The vast majority of these dogs also do NOT have height cards. *Trust me… I checked.
It then is up to the opposing team to ‘call’ that team on its height dog. I’ve played NAFA flyball for 3 years now and I have yet to EVER see a team call another one on their height dog. Why???? Because most of us are ‘friends’ and that wouldn’t be the neighborly thing to do. Yet when you truly look at it… isn’t it cheating? And is it very neighborly for the opposing team to cheat its way to victory? Not if you ask me.
For me personally… I’d love to see NAFA implement the U-Fli method of measuring. The current method is just too subjective. If a dog is spooked by a particulr judge (say a male judge or a louder voiced judge, etc.) and stands on its ‘toes’ during measuring… the height could easily be 2 to 3 inches HIGHER than a tournament 2 weeks prior where the dog was relaxed during measuring. Is this truly fair to the dog, the team, the other dogs on the team that have been practicing week in and week out at the jump height their height dog has been measuring right along? Not if you ask me. Asking ANY dog to jump 10″ instead of 8″ after they’ve spent countless hours practicing at 8″ is a recipe for disaster and injury to any dog on that team.
The NAFA method is simply too inaccurate in my personal opinion.
Leave a Comment