Open Plans

[BeeJay]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

Interestingly Mark I was talking to someone who has straight running dogs and that person feels that seeding will disadvantage their dogs.

Their point being that a dog who crosses isn't as good a racer as one who runs straight. So that by seeding the crossing dog where it needs to be it is overcoming this flaw and thus giving it an unfair advantage.

They don't feel that their dogs have been injured by a crossing dog in the years that they have been racing.

My new understanding of how the seeding will work is that only dogs that are proven to be dangerous will be seeded. ie not just a dog that will cross to a certain side to avoid trouble or a dog that sometimes crosses or a dog that 'just' hampers others and spoils their chances. It seems to me that it isn't going to apply to many dogs.

 

[June Jonigk]

In reply to Paul Melia - consolation racing is just as much fun - we did it for years, and were pleased as punch when one of ours won a consolation. Also the dogs we raced were show bred, and certainly not open class, but we went for the enjoyment of the day, and the social side of racing. It was just as much fun then, as it is now we have open class dogs. I don't think the majority of pedigree racers are that serious as to only run dogs if they are open class.

I agree Mark - it is part of racing. Ray Brion will not mind me saying that his Eyes Dandy runs as left as you could (straight from the traps). This is probably because the lure comes from the left. :thumbsup: This doesn't happen at the Champs, as the lure is in front of the traps. Our dog that races with Eyes Dandy has many times been "in his way", and been bumped, and we dreaded being drawn on his left - but that doesn't change our view that to "pick" where you put dogs in a race is cheating - it will be open to abuse. Who doesn't want the red trap on a bend?!!!!! :- "

 

[Mark Roberts]

Hi June ~ I think you'll find that it's not up to the owner that a dog gets seeded, I think you'll find very few dogs well ever get on the seeded list even if it is decided to continue with it after the inicial trial period.

but I agree with you, some owners will try and seed left if especially on a bend.

and you have made a valid point many of the left runners only run left in hcps where the lure comes from the left (or right at Maidstone) in level breaks those same dogs very rearly favour 1 side or the other due to the lure leaving from the middle. you see the same thing in greyhound racing with level breaks dogs often move off on the run up to try and get behind the hare, you used to get a lot more bunching when greyhounds ran to the inside hare.

BJ ~ from what I understand you are 100% correct in who will get seeded, i'd be suprised if more than 5 ever got on the list from the hundreds currently running at Opens/Champs.

 

[June Jonigk]

My new understanding of how the seeding will work is that only dogs that are proven to be dangerous will be seeded

Ah yes Beejay - but who will decide??? :unsure:

 

[BeeJay]

>Ah yes Beejay - but who will decide???

I believe that it will be up to the club racing manager and one other to flag up a dangerous crossing dog and then the WCRA will provide reps who'll make the final decision. This process will be carried out yearly.

But what will then happen at an open when a dog crosses hitting another one hard. Are people going to be getting upset that that crossing dog hasn't been seeded? What concerns me most about seeding is that it will be another cause for bad feeling.

We already have a situation where people differ on what is fighting or not? Seems to me whether a dog should be seeded or not could cause the same upset. ie what is a dangerous dog? How many times does a dog have to really hit another dog to be deemed dangerous? What happens if most of the time it doesn't do it?

 

[Mark Roberts]

I descussed several of your concerns during the conversation BJ, I raised the 1 about who decided as I feel it must be the WCRA that decide, as if it's left to club officials you could get the mates network doing favours again which is what we don't need.

if seeding needs to be used at all then there must be safe gaurds in places to stop dogs being seeded just because it gives that dog a better chance, "WHAT NEXT RUNNING IN LANES"

 

[Darcia]

Just a few observations:

* In my short time as secretary at Glos (3 years), the number of club members and the number of dogs running each week either increased or stayed the same - definantly did not decline, yes there were some lean weeks - usually during November, but there are also some mad busy weeks, one week in March last year we had over 20 dogs trialling as well as nearly 30 in racing (this is a large number for Glos)

* Many clubs (including Glos) rely on the money gained from opens to support the club meetings in leaner times of the year and club racing is geared at helping owners train and bring on pups - for example an extra club meeting has been scheduled this week as nowhere else in the area is running just to trial (mainly) puppies

* Two years ago all Glos members were asked there opinion on the number of opens held (following on I think from a letter sent from another club secretary) and the majority were clearly in favour of keeing the number of opens as they were.

I am all for promoting whippet racing (at all levels) and think that we should all be concentrating on this, if people genuinly think that club racing is in decline - try to think about ways of activly promoting it better.

I don't go to opens for the points, I go to opens to run my dogs against the best dogs in the country (in the mains or cons!), see friends and most importantly have fun. I will not be checking to see whether the open is running for Superstars points before I decide whether to enter.

 

[Mark Roberts]

I don't go to opens for the points, I go to opens to run my dogs against the best dogs in the country (in the mains or cons!), see friends and most importantly have fun. I will not be checking to see whether the open is running for Superstars points before I decide whether to enter.

Well said Darcia, I endorse your comments !00%.

 

[June Jonigk]

I second that Mark! Well said Darc - I think you have the views of he majority.

It seems some people know what is happening as regards seeding, and some don't. It's a shame the WCRA don't use this board as a way of getting the correct story out to the public, before all the bad feeling starts.

I do believe the WCRA are trying to do what people want, but all this "seeding" and "Superstars points withdrawal" just make the committee look bad. The "old" committee were guilty of making up rules for rules sake, and power going to their heads - we don't want that again. Whilst I don't believe this is their intention, they need to learn from old mistakes. Why not have a talk-in where people can have their vote - then these silly ideas wouldn't come up in the first place.

[SIZE=14pt]WE LIKE RACING AS IT IS - PEOPLE ARE HAPPY! [/SIZE]

Perhaps we don't show enough, that we are happy. Lets all make an effort to go around with really big cheesy grins this year. (w00t) (w00t)

But what will then happen at an open when a dog crosses hitting another one hard. Are people going to be getting upset that that crossing dog hasn't been seeded? What concerns me most about seeding is that it will be another cause for bad feeling.

Exactly right Beejay - I say forget it, and get on with proper racing.

 

[BeeJay]

To be fair to the WCRA. Both seeding and the removal of points from opens were voted on at the meeting at Morton. Both were voted for. From what I can remember re the views offered from the WCRA committee members on the day not all of them agreed with the result of the voting.

So it can be said that the WCRA has listened to it's members (the clubs) and are trying to do what they want.

However whether the club reps voted according to what they believe or what their members want is another matter. How representative of racers viewpoints were those votes?

From talking to other racers most of them aren't in favour of seeding and certainly not what they see as a blant attempt to impose restrictions upon the open season in general AND more importantly the choices that we as individuals make. People want to make the choice themselves NOT have the choice removed. So that's a different view to the ones expressed in that meeting.

I think like you June that there needs to be a different way to canvas racers views on these matters.

I know that Gloucester do ask their members what their views are and I know that Darcia voted according to the members views and truly represented those views. But how many other club reps do that?

 

[Judy]

The trouble with that is that if there was no consolation racing, then 50% of dogs would only get one run. Owners wouldn't be getting much value for their money would they?

Isn't open racing about open class dogs competing as opposed to giving moderate dogs a day out?

Its not just about Open class dogs. It's about owners and dogs having a fun day out. There is a big social side to Open racing.

If all the dogs that were likely to go out in the first round were not entered then 50% of the Open class dogs would go out instead. They would then become the dogs not entered and 50 % of the remaining dogs would go out and ad infinitum untill there would be only the best 4 in each group left and they would have nobody to race against.

 

[Mark Roberts]

To be fair to the WCRA. Both seeding and the removal of points from opens were voted on at the meeting at Morton. Both were voted for. From what I can remember re the views offered from the WCRA committee members on the day not all of them agreed with the result of the voting

BJ that was my point in starting this thread,

somebody put these things forward and then they were voted on by those at the meeting?(the majority must have voted for change) so it now needs for the rest of racing who think these new changes rediculess to get them put back to how they were.

Dropping Superstar points ect will definatly not push racers back to club racing they will either run at opens counting just for W/N points or worse still have a week off instead.

so we all need to let the powers that be know (in a nice way) that like June said earlyer "if it aint broke don't fix it!"

 

[June Jonigk]

That's a good way of putting it Judy

Beejay, I think you're right - the WCRA probably don't agree with these things - it is their attempt to give racers what they want. The thing we want mostly though, is to all be able to have an input. Two representatives from each club is not the way to go about it. Every owner with a dog having a current passport should be able to vote - they are the people it affects.

It seems fairly unanimous on this board that club racing isn't dying at all - far from it!

 

[Judy]

My new understanding of how the seeding will work is that if an owner wants their dog to be seeded, it will have to have 2 (?) trials in front of the Secretary and the Race Manager. It must cross within the first 6 strides both times. Both the Secretary and the Race Manager must agree that the dog is dangerous and likely to cause injury (as opposed to a dog which just crosses and could win more races if it got it's preferred trap). If they do agree, then the Secretary will forward the dogs name to the WCRA and the dog must then be seen by 2 WCRA committee members who will make the final decision. I believe the emphasis will be on "dangerous" and "likely to cause injury." I think the dogs will have to be re-trailed in for seeding every year as it is recognised that some dogs stop crossing.

Dogs will not be seeded on the bend.

Anyway, that is what I have understood it to be although I haven't seen the official wording yet.

If it all works right, then there should only be a handful of dogs that get seeded.

 

[BeeJay]

>The thing we want mostly though, is to all be able to have an input. Two representatives from each club is not the way to go about it. Every owner with a dog having a current passport should be able to vote - they are the people it affects.

I agree.

 

[Darcia]

Hi June,

I do think that the WCRA were trying to address the issue of lack of communication by putting the items for the talk-in into the fourth Championship programme. I then guess that it is down to us as individuals to let our thoughts be known. Anyone that had a strong opinion on a item could have gone to the talk-in if they chose to and/or passed on their thoughts to the club reps, I know that at least one club rep read out the contents of a letter from a club member who couldn't make it to the meeting. I am not saying that this is the best way of finding out what racers want, but I do think that the WCRA are trying to be more accessible in this way. The only real way to find out would be to ballot all members - maybe another questionnaire like what was given out at the first champs last year??

 

[June Jonigk]

That's what I was getting at Darc, ballot all racers. I read the items for discussion, and to be honest, I didn't think for one minute the seeding would be considered. I didn't attend the talk-in, as I wouldn't have been able to vote for what I believe in. I could have been a Gloucester rep, but what's the point of voting on behalf of others?

The WCRA sent a questionnaire around to ask racers where they thought the Champs should be held - Moreton was by far the most voted for - we have the Champs there now, and I don't think there is a better venue. Everyone is happy. Unless they ask what the majority want, you will always get bad feeling. I still say racing is ok as it is, why change anything?

Does anyone actually know of a "dangerous" dog running at opens. Reading what the dog would have to do to qualify as being dangerous, it seems we are all talking about this for no reason at all. I have never seen a dog that "dangerous" running at opens!

If (by any minute chance!) there is a dangerous dog out there - would it not be better to tackle that issue with the owner when it happens?!!

I think I know where this ridiculous topic started, and it should have been swept under the carpet, where most of the other comments this person makes goes! :- "

Whoops! Now I'm asking for trouble :wacko:

 

[Nigel]

Reading what the dog would have to do to qualify as being dangerous, it seems we are all talking about this for no reason at all.  I have never seen a dog that "dangerous" running at opens!

If a dog is deemed to be dangerous it shouldn't be running. To make a rule that allows a dangerous dog to run is madness

 

[Mark Roberts]

I think I know where this ridiculous topic started, and it should have been swept under the carpet, where most of the other comments this person makes goes!

I agree fully June, I was booked to go but then was lucky enough to get a place in a coursing stake so went there instead but I like you expected this to have been dismissed rather than implemented (that'll teach us not to go and say our peice won't it)
i've got Gypsy that takes the odd knock or two from other (always bigger due to her size) dogs, I take that as just part and parcel of racing.

like I say what next Running them in lanes (fenced off) or running solos and giving trophys just on their solo times.

i'm sure in the end common sense will prevail over this whole matter.

and I agree with whats been said regarding decission making, send out a questionar to each Secretary they can then print out how ever many they need to so that every member got a copy and then they could print their name on and answer as they feel nessersary then send it back to the WCRA, surely that would be a democratic way.

 

[Robin Sweet]

The rules for seeding seem to be very elaborate. If a dog has to be seen by two WCRA officials, when is this supposed to take place? How is this all going to take place before the first champs? I read that a dog would have to cross within the first six strides, not seven or eight? If a dog crosses dangerously within six strides on a straight, then would it not still cross within six strides on a bend?

I think we will see dozens of owners trying to get their dogs seeded in order to improve their dogs chances. How easy will it be for racing managers to tell their friends that they are not going to recommend their dogs to be seeded? This will cause a lot of arguments about which dogs should and shouldn't be seeded. I wonder if the WCRA realize what they are taking on.