Open Plans

[John E Greenwood]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

YYYAAAWWWWNNNNN......rules are rules......whatever they make up, we'll have to comply, if we want to race, I suppose. Sounds as if this is another one which is so complex as to be unenforcable, and therefore irrelevent. :wacko:

I think dogs can be trained to run straight to some extent (obviously, they are all different and there will be exeptions).......make sure their experience is as varied as possible early on, front trap, back trap , left, right, etc..and if they seem to favour one run them from the least favoured a few times....j.m.h.o...That's why I find it usefull to go to Gin Pit as well as the Northern with pups, different dogs, different conditions......let them learn their trade. :thumbsup:

 

[IanGerman]

Well let me stand up and be shot at then :b

Regarding seeding - and from what Judy has posted it seems that due care is going to be taken to ensure that the "fiddling" is kept to a minimum - I for one would welcome it. Everyone here seems to be worried about other people getting an "unfair advantage" but no one seems to be placing too high an emphasis on safety. To suggest that dogs can be trained to run straight is utterly naive, as is the suggestion that they are somehow bad or dangerous dogs. We the racers don't actually train our dogs - we get them fit and encourage them to run, and when they do something they shouldn't - like nobble or turn in the traps etc we try various means to get them out of it. Not always successfully But a dog which runs to a prefered side does it for it's OWN reasons, and one thing's for sure - it is NEVER gonna tell YOU why! My own Hatt Outta Belle was one of the most genuine racers of her generation with a heart as big as a lions, but she ALWAYS ran to left, straight from the traps, bend or straight made no difference and being that she weighed 17.5 lbs wringing wet I was ALWAYS worried that she would get hurt or cause someone elses's dog a problem. Well sorry - but if seeding was around when she was racing I'd have black hair now instead of grey - and as for the suggestion that she shouldn't have been allowed to race ..... B.S. :angry:

So seeding? Bring it on I say - lets all try to behave responsibly about it and try NOT to throw our toys out of the pram when a seeded runner beats our dog.

I will agree though that implimenting this will cause the WCRA a BIG problem but that's something they will have to overcome, if you accept the power, you accept the responsibility that goes with it.

Opens: I agree for the most part with what most of the other posts say, but I would just add this. Once the season is in full swing the smaller clubs DO find it hard to run a half decent meeting, and yet without clubs there would not BE any opens. And whether it is acknowledged or not - memberships are getting smaller not larger. There are many reasons for this, and I wouldn't suggest that too many opens are one of them, but the facts are that any newcomers attracted to the sport will almost certainly be racing a slowish and/or show bred dog where club racing will be their pinnacle (and not every week at that!)

I have deleted a large part of the next bit ... but let me put up this suggestion instead. Do away with points competitions. Or if thats a bit drastic, restrict the number of points counting ones to say 8 opens. Flame away

 

[June Jonigk]

Hi Ian

I respect your opinions but

and from what Judy has posted it seems that due care is going to be taken to ensure that the "fiddling" is kept to a minimum

Every effort may be made, but it is open to abuse. Why introduce something that will have the odd few trying to "fiddle it", and cause bad feeling with others. Many people including myself have the opinion that there's not a dog running at opens at the moment that you could describe as dangerous. In an ideal world it would be a non contact sport, but the very nature of whippets means that they will bump and barge, and it's all part of the sport.

There's every effort made to stop oversize dogs running, but there's plenty of them out there!!

Just another point - if you had a dog running in the Champs that won after being seeded - would you class it as a winner? I wouldn't, and many others would think that too. There's been more than enough bad feeling in racing, and that is why I think the WCRA should be very careful before they open this can of worms.

If there was a questionnaire given to all racers at the 1st and 2nd Champs (should cover the majority of racers), and the result was that people really wanted this ridiculous rule, I would accept it, and accept that mine was a view of the minority. At the moment it is fairly obvious that it is not.

It has always been said that items voted on at the talk-in were just for the WCRA to get an idea of what people want, and it would then be discussed by the committee, to see if they wanted to bring the change - hopefully they will decide to shelve this one. Lots of people voted to have varying distances at Champs, and that never happened. I expect the WCRA feel that they must do something about this one, as it was brought up as a safety issue, and they probably feel they would be maligned if they ignored it. I think they would gain respect from asking all racers.

 

[Mark Roberts]

I think they would gain respect from asking all racers

I agree with you June anyone with a Passport (Valid) should have the right to vote on racing matters.
I had an interesting conversation with a racer from the non ped world and they where shocked at the way the peds do things.

 

[Nigel]

And whether it is acknowledged or not - memberships are getting smaller not larger. There are many reasons for this, and I wouldn't suggest that too many opens are one of them, but the facts are that any newcomers attracted to the sport will almost certainly be racing a slowish and/or show bred dog where club racing will be their pinnacle (and not every week at that!)
I have deleted a large part of the next bit ... but let me put up this suggestion instead. Do away with points competitions. Or if thats a bit drastic, restrict the number of points counting ones to say 8 opens.  Flame away 

Not a flame - a reasoned discussion

I'd like to see the facts that memberships are getting smaller not larger. Opens are generally bigger than they ever have been and personally I have seen no evidence that club membership has reduced. I'm not aware of membership reducing at any of the clubs we've run at over the years.

You are right in saying that without clubs there would be no opens But what needs to be done is to promote and advertise Whippet racing so that it's always attracting new people into the sport - it's these newcomers that always have (and should) make up the club numbers.

As you suggest this idea that reducing the number of opens is going to force people to go club racing is wrong and in my opinion an extremely naive view. The way to get more people club racing is to get more people into Whippet racing and you don't do that by reducing the number of opens and reducing the visibility of the sport.

Reducing the number of opens counting for points seems an entirely pointless exercise. Most agree that reducing the number of opens isn’t going to help club racing, far from it, reducing the number of opens will benefit no one. Clubs rely on revenue from their opens to maintain the club. A reduction in the number of opens may see some clubs close because they are no longer financially viable.

Some people seem fixated with the opinion that people run for points – what a load of rubbish. People go to opens because they enjoy them, reducing the number of opens that count for points will have zero affect other than reduce the significance of that competition.

 

[June Jonigk]

Couldn't agree more Nigel

 

[IanGerman]

Ok then .... *gets out a different soapbox*

How can a "racing club" with no track and no club racing, be allowed to hold an open on another clubs track?

Surely this is just a back door method of getting around the 1 bend and 1 straight open per club rule?

I have no axe to grind about East Sussex except that "their" open - being run at Maidstone - falls on a week when Harvel SHOULD be holding a race meeting. Needless to say its a fair bet that there won't be sufficient members around on that day and we will have to cancel, yet if it was being held in East Sussex there's a better chance we would have enough entries to make up a card.

Harvel has a reciprocal agreement with Maidstone to run on alternate weekends, yet East Sussex's open has been shoehorned in on a "Harvel" Sunday. You may say that it's Maidstone at fault for not honouring our agreement, and to a degree it is, but I still don't see how it should be allowed in the first place.

Hey - it's good this debating stuff .... can't wait until we get to the bit about oversized dogs

 

[Paul Melia]

Ian, oversized dogs? What is one of those?

 

[Gary]

Hi Ian Just to answer your question re East Sussex open , as far as i'm aware the only requirement for holding an open to count for superstar points is that it is a club affiliated to the WCRA . Maidstone were approached by E.S and asked if we could assist them in using our ground which we were happy to oblige, as we would assist any club who requires assistance and we are able to help ~

The agreement between MWC and HWC is between the two clubs only so i dont feel we have dishonoured it at all

 

[June Jonigk]

Yes Ian, I can see your frustration there, as I believe Harvel and Maidstone run on alternate weekends. I always think it's strange for a non existant club to run an open - the club exists in membership only, and as there aren't enough people willing to run it, they're not even looking for a ground or to start up again. I suppose it's the same as the Sporting though - that's just a committee of 3 people!

I also note there's an interclub at West Somerset the same weekend as East Sussex, so I don't know how that will affect things.

Looking at it from Maidstone's point of view though - they are doing East Sussex a favour, so I suppose they would think they shouldn't miss out on a weeks racing either.

Strange Ian - no one seemed to pick up on the "oversize dogs" I mentioned!!!

Mark Roberts has gone quiet - he normally has something to say :- "

 

[Robin Sweet]

With regard to seeding, I don't really have a problem with the idea in principle but, just with the way it would be implemented. I think the WCRA racing manager would cop a load of flak. Many people wouldn't understand how it works, and I think we would see delays at the traps while owners question and argue about what trap their dog should be in. And what would happen if a race went and then someone realized that the dogs were in the wrong traps? Re-runs, thats what. We still see this in veteran racing because a surprisingly high number of people don't know how veteran handicaps are calculated, and the half yard a pound/ yard a year system has been in place for years. Yet for many people it still remains a great mystery.

I think it is possible that seeding could work but, most people are afraid of change. Why not give every owner the chance to state on their entry form whether they would like their dog seeded left(L), middle(M) or right®. This could then be printed on the race programme next to the dogs name, and then this would be fairly easy to follow through subsequent rounds. This would alleviate any arguing about some dogs having had "special treatment" and would mean a level playing field for all. If you weren't bothered about your dog being seeded, then you need not choose a seeding and could just let your dog take it's chance as I'm sure most people would. Bends would be a different thing as the vast majority would want the red box but, some dogs prefer a wider box as in greyhound racing.

Who would want to be on the WCRA? :wacko:

 

[Mark Roberts]

ME QUIET NEVER!

I have to agree with Ian on the bit about non running clubs running opens, as you know last year the Northern was double booked to run it's open on the same day as East Sussex, this cost the Northern many runners for the Bend Open due to the Southern racers choosing a short drive rather than the long haul North.

I found it at the time daft and annoying that a club that didn't run weekly race meetings their own ground and so didn't have over heads and running cost was allowed to take much needed money away from a club that runs regular weekly meetings and has the expenses for paying for the running ground ect.

and all on a date that had traditionally always been The Northerns date (this has always been an accepted thing like the cornwall date is)

in now way did I feel Maidstone was out of order as had the East Sussex not been held there it would of been someware else. (and Maidstone is a nice venue)

As always these are just my opinions on things and in no way reflect the views of the management (is that ok for you June :thumbsup: )

Oversized dogs? now that 1 could keep things going a while couldn't it, it gets me how owners are blaimed/slagged off for running over sized dogs? of course owners are going to run them if they can get a passport for them.

The problem lies with the 2nders who because they are freinds with A person they let an oversized dog through (that and they would rather let it through than have a falling out over it and have bad feelings between them and the owner)

What gets me though is how racers sit at track side moaning about certain dogs being oversized? the only way to stop them is to get in touch with the WCRA and get them remeasured but then no one wants to do that and cause bad feeling? :- "

Well i'm sure i've said enough to make myself very popular with the new season not far away, and it's all Junes fault as I was quiet till she brought my name up!

 

[Judy]

I also note there's an interclub at West Somerset the same weekend as East Sussex, so I don't know how that will affect things.

West Somerset are looking at changing their date for the inter-club.

 

[conway]

I also note there's an interclub at West Somerset the same weekend as East Sussex, so I don't know how that will affect things.

West Somerset are looking at changing their date for the inter-club.

do you know when judy as the last one was great fun

 

[June Jonigk]

You should know by now Mark - everything is my fault :wacko: But do I care?!! -_- Shame of it is though, I have only ever got into trouble for speaking out about what everyone else is thinking, but doesn't say. I've been fairly quiet of late, as I really just want to get on with racing, and leave those who want to argue to fight their own battles. If these silly rules come in, you won't find me campaigning against them - I can't be bothered! But, I still will have my say, no matter what anyone thinks.

We live in a country of free speech - and well done to Judy and Nigel for running this site, so we can all have our say. It would be a poor do if we couldn't have discussions wouldn't it? :angry:

I don't think we will be in trouble with anyone Mark - I'm sure everyone (including the WCRA) realises that we state our own opinions, and respect those who don't agree - we can't all be the same can we?!

I think the oversize dog issue is a valid one, but rather than blame the seconders, you need to look at the club representative who re-measures. Some dogs are getting away with applying for passports early, and then growing on. I really can't see any of the seconders letting through some of the big ones running today - but I have seen the re-measuring taking place - normally by a friend at the club - owner squashing down the shoulders, and pulling out the back legs so they stand a bit shorter!! Not my arguement either - it doesn't affect me - so I'll have my say, and let those who it affects sort that one out!!

Fancy another natter with a cup of tea Mark?

 

[Mark Roberts]

June we've (yourself & Me) been there regarding the re-measiring of a dog very close to the 21" limit (you will obviously remember) but I think we dealt with the presure placed on us by the owner and I think we all left the field friends.

The WCRA unfortunatly ends up getting the blaim for everything that happens which is unfortunate when they are only trying to carry out the wishes of racers, even daft rules like seeding.

 

[June Jonigk]

Yes Mark - having just read the WCRA letter informing clubs of the pilot scheme for seeding - I doubt whether there are any dogs that are that dangerous. It's probably more trouble than it's worth, but you have to admire them for trying. I was surprised that it was voted for at the talk in, but there are always a few there who want to make trouble and see this committee fail. I doubt it will ever get to more than that - a pilot scheme. It is my opinion though that any pilot scheme should not be tried out at a Championship. Can you imagine trying to keep up a programme when they're swapping dogs about in traps?!! (Oh yes - they will change them for each round of racing!!) Who will ever know which colour jacket to put their dogs in? and will those wearing the wrong jacket through no fault of their own, be disqualified - oh I can just hear the swearing and arguements already!!!!!

 

[June Jonigk]

[SIZE=14pt]OH MY GOD!!![/SIZE][/size]

I've just read the WCRA letter again, and it only mentions that the dogs have to be seeded by the Secretary and Racing Manager - originally I was told that two WCRA members would have to check the dog too. If it is left to Secretary and Racing Manager there will be favours done for mates/people with dogs of their breeding etc. This is ridiculous!!!

 

[Judy]

Can you imagine trying to keep up a programme when they're swapping dogs about in traps?!!  (Oh yes - they will change them for each round of racing!!)  Who will ever know which colour jacket to put their dogs in? and will those wearing the wrong jacket through no fault of their own, be disqualified - oh I can just hear the swearing and arguements already!!!!!

I imagine that dogs will have to stay in the colour jacket they are programmed for and just swap traps or it would get too confusing.

 

[BeeJay]

Hey June you've not used the :rant: button. :lol: :huggles: