Universal Sieger---Again/ Best Wishes to Karen & Ule - Page 2

 WDA used to hold a specific show with a trial that it called the Universal Sieger--that was discontinued some years ago.  

Canada hs a smaller schutzhund community and much smaller entry for both its Sieger and Championship.  That is the ONLY reason that both can be held on the same weekend.  It simply is totally impracticable for USA to hold a Sieger Show with 300+ entries and a Championship with 75-120 entries on the same weekend.  Even holding the two events a weekd apart proved (as we with commonsense said) impracticable, as it still required working people to take time off from work, pay for hotels for 10+ days instead of 5, and ditto with car rentals. 

John's idea of taking the Championship first is a good one.  Obviously, though, it would have to take effect a year from now, with the 2010 Universal Sieger being decided based on points from the 2009 Championship and the 2010 Sieger Show. 

  My fear would be that the same crap would happen--2009 Sieger entries would "declare," then not to a single blessed thing to enter the 2009 Championship to be in the running for the 2010 Universal Sieger title.  They would simply cause/add to/take advantage of the confusion...and use it for marketing for another year.

 Regarding costs, you need to remember that not only the actual competitors and exhibitors are paying to support these events.  It has generally cost me $1500 to attend the North American, National Championship,  Sieger Show, etc. anytime that is was not in "my backyard."  That is as a spectator!  Add to that the trophies I generally sponsor for national events, and I often wonder why I bother.  I can get the results on-line (eventuarlly) and order a copy of the catalogue, all while not dealing with airport security.

I still beg to differ with the notion that a dog gets breedings and sells puppies by simply declaring for ANYTHING: U/S, WUSV team, whatever... Even if you won U/S, unless the training towards that end was free, and all 3-4 (or more, should one fail to qualify first/second time out) of the events necessary were held in your own backyard, and you trained mostly in your front yard with a top helper, you'd still be upside down.

Therefore, I offer that pursuit of the Universal Sieger title is done much more for pride, the love of the sport and the breed, than any dreams of economic enhancement. If that were not the case, there would be a lot more handlers declaring/competing in qualifying events with their dogs EVERY year, both here and abroad.

SS

 WHY, then, Shelley, was Ronaldo, for example, DECLARED, then not one, single thing done to bring it to even a semblance of fruition?  That began right at the outset, when queries were made about trialing and regional participation.  Those question were met with cynical, some would say dishonest, SILENCE.  

Yes, we will continue to differ on the marketing aspect.   Those declarations, phoney as most turned out to be, were and remain valuable advertising.  Period.  Any claims to the contrary are simply disingenuous.

"Pride, love of the sport" are reasons to lie about plans for a VA dog?  I fail to see what there is in that to have any pride in and I fail to see  any type of sportsmanship in it, either.   Frankly, it is precisely the type of behavior that undermines  the perception of the working ability of showline dogs.  Making phoney declarations certainly do nothing to dispel the perception that the imported VA dogs in particular have phoney titles...and even phonier claims of working ability.  But, whatever.  It's not "my" ox, so I shouldn't care about what burden it has to pull.  Unfortunately, I do have good, close friends with show line dogs the put a LOT of effort into training and trialing.  I feel for them for the crap they sometimes have to deal with while working a show dog, as a direct result of this type of cynical (to put it charitably) behavior from other show folks.

Hopefully, a motion at the GBM will reduce, if not eliminate, the disingenousness next year.  Whether that is John's suggestion, or some other suggestion,  this must change.

not one, single thing done

Not true.  Our intentions were sincere and we trained hard for weeks, but "life" came up, got in the way. (human life) Nobody's business why he was pulled from the program. Not my dog, but a great dog IMO. Maybe next year? Or... maybe one of his progeny! Or... who knows? Maybe BOTH!

So you say, NOW.    The sincerity was very transparent from the beginnging SILENCE.  "Pulled?"  He was never in!  Bunk. 

  The claims that there was an attempt at the Canadian Universal Sieger is even more disingenuous--the dog would have had to have been ENTERED in the Championship, as well as the show, both of which are held on the same weekend.  BTW-- the dog must be co-owned by a Canadian, too.  So, again, Bunk. People need to remember that those event entries  ARE posted.

I stand by my previous statement. I realize that you have a vested interest, Shelley. So, why don't we just leave it at agreeing to disagree.

I do not have a vested interest in Ronaldo. I only had the pleasure of working with him for awhile. He is a wonderful dog, very good in the work. I only wish he were mine. :-D  I should live so long!

BTW-- the dog must be co-owned by a Canadian, too  WRONG.

Mystere,

If you check the rules for the Universal title in Canada, one has to qualify prior to the event to enter. Our participation did not result in a qualifying or even passing score as none of the 6 dogs entered in the trial passed. I decided after this event that the pursuit of the Universal title in the US was no longer my desire.

Why? Couple of reasons and a few others.

Cost: We sat down and ran the numbers as to what it would cost to participate. I came up with $8,000 minimum and committed half that to initiate the program and see where we stood when the money ran out. When the money ran out it looked like the original estimate was a tad low and the decision was made to retire from the competition.

Rules: The rules of the event favor the American Bred entry. How does this shake out?

Consider this. US bred dog in the sieger show gets V21. The dog qualifies and goes on to the Nationals and receives a 240 pronounced score. Another dog born outside the US goes to the sieger show and places VA2, this fantastic dog qualifies and goes to the Nationals and scores 269 pronounced.

Which is the better dog?

Which dog is the Universal Siger?

I'm not sure what silence has to do with anything. You don't see many of the participants responding on the internet. The Universal Title is a personal quest. They probably have better things to do with their time.

The status of some of the participants is known by many as they have progressed through the season. Sorry you haven't taken the time to keep yourself informed. Perhaps if you took the time to know a little about the subject you wrote about you would have some accurate information to base your opinions on.

<<>>

WHERE did you try for a "a qualifying or even passing score"?  Randy, the dog was NOT even entered in the Canadian Championship, a REQUIREMENT for Canadian Uninversal Sieger and he was not entered in any USA regional.  So, WHAT event are you trying to use as dazzling bovine excrement?  I am happy to be enlightened, if I am incorrect on this, as one thing I would dearly love to see is a VA dog trialing in a USA trial.  If indeed I missed this Earth-shattering event, please enlighten me as to when and where this occurred with Ronaldo.

<>

Randy, you act as if you think this is a new rule.   It is not.  It has been that same rule for YEARS, and you knew that when you declared, didn't you? That five point "favor" is the same as the difference between VA and V, isn't it?  That would seem to balance in the case of a VA dog.  How many VA American-bred dogs have there been, after all?  And of those very few, how many to pursue Universal Sieger? 

   Don't even try the inaccurate information crap with me, Randy.    YOU declared a dog, knowing full well what the rules were, and what would need to be done to actually BECOME a true Universal Sieger candidate, other than merely declaring.  I won't dispute your claim of $8,000 to actually try for the title.  After all, this is a dog that trialed in this hemisphere, when?   Hiring a trainer and handler, boarding fees,  etc. all cost money.   You knew that at the outset, too.  They are all things that the dogs that are "regularly" trained and trialed don't have to incur.   When this "Quest" is made with the need for a trainer and handler, it would become a bit spendy.  Again, something you presumably knew from the outset, as I have no reason to believe that you are intellectually challenged such  that you would not have known.    You just didn't know that anyone would call you on it.

  I have taken the time to keep up with the progress of the "declarents."  That is why the disingenuousness is so very obvious.   So, inform, us, Randy--WHICH USA-sanctioned trial did Ronaldo enter and trial in for a qualifying score?  Which regional was Ronaldo entered in to satisfy the "regional participation" requirment?  If you cannot or will not answer those questions, don't bother to respond at all.

I do give you credit, though, for finally stepping up and taking some of the onus off Shelley.

You are correct, Shelley.  The rule changed for this year, so anyone could obtain the Universal Sieger title in Canada, based on the scores/ratings in the Sieger Show and Championship, without regard to nationality.   Hope they keep it that way for a few years, so some Americans can swoop in!

Mystere,

If you know as much as you say you do you should know the answer. If I tell you will you finally shut up?