The Growth (or decline) of Flyball - The Numbers

Previously in my post on this subject, see 9/13/12, I wondered what flyballers thought about a flyball promotion article that mentioned 'thick-skin' and 'rampant' team splits being part of the success and growth of flyball.  I decided to put the numbers to the test and see if they prove anything one way or the other. 

I was able to find some statistics on the NAFA website.  Kudos to their website which contains lots of fun facts and interesting statistics.  Thus far, I have not discovered similar statistics for U-FLI.  I wish I could compare total combined numbers for both organizations and get the entire big-picture.  

Based on the Growth Trend chart found on NAFA's website along with published BoD and/or AGM meeting minutes from 2006-2011, I believe the numbers do, in fact, prove something.  Here's the stats I used from the last six(6) years: 

2006 - 2011

- Tournaments:  varied from 325-352 per year; trending downward last 3 years

- Racing Clubs:  varied from 347 to 372; trending upward  

- Hosting Clubs:  varied from 134 to 148; trending downward last 4 years

- Newly registered dogs: varied from 1,266 to 1,081; trending around 1,100 last 3 years

- Newly retired dogs:  trending around 1,200 (2006-2009)
  > 2010 & 2011 data not available

- Racing dogs:  trending each year around 5,700 dogs
  > 2011 data not available

Looking at these stats, overall for the past six years, the trend has been stagnation to downward.  The retired dogs to newly registered is a wash; slightly less new registered dogs per year, so no growth there.  Total racing dogs has remained consistent each year; again, no real growth overall.  Tournaments are trending down as are number of hosting clubs.  The only upward tick is in number of clubs; but, the rest of the numbers reveal having more clubs has not meant having more participants/dogs nor more tournaments.            

 
Even if the numbers proved something different, I still do not believe the 'thick-skinned-club-split-up-method' is a good way to go.  I believe the fallout in morale is too high a price to pay. 

I still prefer the opposite method of forming new clubs and getting more people and dogs involved in flyball as I mentioned in my earlier post on this topic.  Perhaps if you agree, we can start a new trend together toward increased growth by providing a better flyball experience from the ground up through a more supportive and happier way of creating more clubs, people and dogs.

Sincerely,
I Like Flyball!

Footnotes:
- NAFA website chart contained a few possible errors in the numbers when I compared them to the meeting minutes.
- Information for years 2010 and 2011 are currently found in minutes; not in the chart yet.
- I passed along the potential errors/corrections to NAFA.
- I chose to start with year 2006 because going back to 2000 was too much and because '06 was a few years after U-FLI formed (and perhaps as someone said to me, the dust had settled by then).
- I wish I had stats for U-FLI.  I apologize to you, the readers of this post, that I am unable to provide a comparison of NAFA and U-FLI, nor a combined total picture of all of flyball.
- I hope the U-FLI generation and the next generation NAFA has adopted/will adopt a different growth strategy than has been done in the past; I'm thinking positive :o).

  

700 Views, The Top 4, My Favorite Flyball Posts

In comparison to the flyball list and other popular flyball blogs that have been around for years, I'm pretty new to the blog world.  I haven't publicized other than to my friends on Facebook.  Today I was pretty surprised to see there have been over 700 views so far.  I do not have that many Facebook friends so I have no idea where all these views have come from.

I began roughly 6 months ago and I'm surprised I'm still blogging about flyball.  I thought I'd be done with it by now.  For me, it's been fun but the blog is lacking a little 'something'...I had hoped/still hope to see some comments from readers every now and then.  I've been told it is a difficult process to post a comment here.  I admit I haven't tried it myself.  I also don't know what to do to fix the problem.  If anyone reading this knows how to fix it, consider yourself wonderful and hired for the job!  

Anyway, in honor of 6 months' blogging, here are the top 4 posts read by flyballers May - October, 2012: 

1) Going Around the Rules for Points & Regional Champ, 9/21/12

2) Chapter Four -  Championships, 7/23/12

3) The Growth (or decline) of Flyball, 9/13/12

4) Chapter Three - Competition, Recognition and Speed, 7/16/12

Based on being 'fun to write' and not based on actual content (that's a different list), my top 4 fun-to-write-posts are:

1) Cowboys and Flyball, 8/20/12 

2) Getting to the Heart of Flyball, 5/1/12

3) The Flyball Social Network & Media, 5/29/12

4) Shenanigans is my new favorite word, 9/27/12  

If you're reading this post, do you have a favorite?

With Appreciation,
I Like Flyball! 
----------------------
Flyball Can Be Fun! blog powered by K.I.S.S. (keep it simple sweetie)  

 

      

I've Got Your (Run) Back - A New Type Of Judge

I recently sent the following idea to one of the flyball organizations:

"Hello,

I am not sure who to send this email to, perhaps the Rules Committee or Judges Committee? I have a suggestion for a new 'judge' position based on 3 occurrences at a tournament a few weeks ago. The idea is not mine, but I am forwarding you my related thoughts, observations and others' observations.

The idea: there is a need for a 'runback judge'. This is someone who observes what goes on in the runback area while racing is going on. The head judge does not and cannot see back there many times.

Three instances happened at the tourney I mentioned above where a runback judge would have been helpful.

1) a dog in the right lane crossed into and stayed in the left lane after its own run and prevented the left lane from re-running a dog in order to complete the heat. The crossing dog's handler did not have control of their dog. This created a safety issue as well as interference. The judge did not see it.

2) A dog bit another dog and drew blood during racing in the runback area; both dogs were on the same team. The judge did not see it.

3) A large dog crossed into the opposing lane in the runback area and chased down and grabbed a very small dog around the neck. The small dog was not bitten but there was lots of slobber which indicates a lot of mouthing by the large dog. If the small dog was bitten it could have been a disaster. The handler of the larger dog did not have control of their dog. The judge did not see it to even issue a warning.

In all 3 of the above instances, I believe a runback judge (similar to box judge or line judge) could have helped the head judge tremendously and overall having a runback judge would add to safety.

Thank you for considering this idea and I look forward to hearing back.

Sincerely,"

I don't know if this idea has ever been discussed officially by either NAFA or U-FLI.  I (do) know that the topic of identifying the 'racing lane' has been and I believe NAFA has said the runback area is not an official part of racing.  I'm not sure what U-FLI says about it.

But, I wonder if maybe the runback should be defined as part of the racing lane.   Maybe there should be a judge back there (who helps the head judge) to call out the rare instances of dog bites, interferences, warnings to handlers who don't have control of their dog and warnings to help prevent potentially aggressive dog behavior. 

I also thought of something else that happens in the runback area for which it is obviously called out as a penalty and a loss for the offending side even if the head judge does not see it...fouling in the ring.  Kind of hard to miss seeing that one even without a runback judge.

I don't know if this is a good idea for flyball(or not).   I don't know if it is needed and I don't know if other flyballers like the idea.  But, I hope I hear back from the organization no matter what their answer is.




Sincerely,
I Like Flyball!

 

Curiosity killed the....no, wait...good thing I'm a dog person and good thing it doesn't actually 'kill' anything!

Before beginning this post I did a little research and analysis on the subjects of my recent curiosity; dual-region tournaments and Regional Champions.  I looked at the NAFA Database for 2012 racing year before it got wiped clean a few days ago and I checked the website with reference to past and present Regional Champions.  

At first, I was curious whether or not all regions have champions in both Regular and Multibreed.  My analysis revealed some interesting tidbits.  The most interesting was the variety and difference in how regions actually make a Regional Champion.  Based on a few of the regions I looked at in more depth, my curiosity also made me wonder about the meaning behind the word champion, does it still hold the same level of respect and desire, has anything changed among flyballers, and if so, why has it changed.

I used to think that becoming Regional Champ would more or less happen spontaneously because a club happens to have a really fast team who wins a lot of races and enters a lot of tournaments.  But, three of the examples I looked at were very different than this expectation.  Something has changed.        

Examples

1) In a small area with 2 clubs in the region, their tournaments always lumped all teams into Division 1 regardless of team times.  For obvious reasons this makes sense in order to be able to even have tournaments in a small area.  Most of the time tournaments had less than 4 teams; sometimes they even split up between Regular and Open.  This racing year, they ended up needing 1 more tournament to qualify so they could 'cement' their championship.  They went after it and did.  In a previous racing year, the same thing happened where they needed 1 more tourney.  Both clubs at that time chose not to pursue the additional tournament to get their Regional Champ.  One club said they were tired of hosting and the other club said it was not worth the financial burden given the regional points both clubs had already earned and how the Regional Standings were.

Knowing what I do about the clubs in this region, nothing has changed for the host club always being the host club, so why were they no longer tired of hosting this year?
  
2) In a fairly large region, this year's Regional Champion in Regular was not a close competition.  The region has many clubs and teams, but in 2012 barely enough tournaments to qualify.  They managed to have 7 tournaments but less than half the region's clubs attended all 7 and even less than that raced in the minimum of 4 required for a champion.  One club hosted a year-end tournament in a different region.  I think it was intended as additional 'insurance' but I don't believe the outcome was as they expected.  It seems the majority of clubs in the region were simply not interested in having a champion.

I don't know their exact reasons although I know there is political tension in the region.  Did this play a factor or are there other reasons for some clubs' backing away?

3) In a tri-region area of the country, there have been a number of dual-region tourneys being held throughout the year in 2012.  One of the regions does not appear to have changed strategies and they will have their champion(s) as in the past years.  Another region was unsuccessful in qualifying for Regional Champions this year even though they have many clubs and have had champions in the past.  The third region in this area also used to have lots of tournaments and has qualified for champions before, but this year one of their clubs was only able to attend 3 in-region tourneys for Multibreed.  In order to qualify, one club in the region chose to host a tournament outside their own region.  2012 is the first year this strategy was allowable in the Rules.  It is different than the well-known 'preferred region' rule and can be used one tournament at a time,  whenever desired and as often as desired in a racing year.

Similar to the first example, the club was able to cement  their regional champ by hosting the tournament themselves.

And, similar to the second example, their region did not fully participate in the regional champ program and it appears some clubs are choosing to back away.

Summary

To me, none of the three examples are bad things; they are just different and they indicate a change.  The examples cause me to wonder why the one club is no longer tired of hosting tournaments.  Why are some clubs in previously popular areas backing away.  Why are some clubs choosing to host a tournament out of region to get a champion.  And I wonder if the regional champ program is as popular and as respected as it used to be.    

I am curious by nature and I am analytical.  Always have been; always will be.  Sharing is also in my nature; and there you have it.  I hope it has enlightened you, or, at least entertained you.  To me, either and both of which are good things in flyball! 

Sincerely,
I Like Flyball!  
       

U-FLI is simply more fun.  One could say it is overall a simpler and more pure flyball experience.  No strings; no fuss.  Some flyballers have even said...no stress.  It is simply flyball.  I know it is easier to become involved in.  Recent experience tells me it is easier to stay involved in, too.  Over the years and for many reasons I believe things just go smoother and are more fun in U-FLI than in NAFA.

I know I'm not alone in this belief either.

In previous years, my club played in both NAFA and U-FLI (this year being an exception).  I've had many good experiences in both.  However, a case in point just arose this racing year, 2012, where hands-down U-FLI was way easier, way more simple and way more fun to be involved with.

The scenario:  Our Club Owner, Team Captain and all our club's dogs moved from one Region into a different Region.

In U-FLI the change was as simple as going on-line and replacing the old address with the new one.  Done in a matter of seconds and we were off playing in well over half a dozen tourneys for the rest of the year.  Sweet!

In NAFA, the change has been in process since February.  I am hopeful it will become official today, but the Database still shows the old Region.  To me, a 7+ month process is not fun.  It is definitely not simple nor has it been easy for myself and I suspect not for the NAFA contact person either.

And, as a result, our club has been prevented from playing NAFA flyball and competing in our home Region.

Would it be fair of me to think it is 'their loss' and NAFA has missed out on all the great fun of having another club racing?  I doubt they will even think twice about it. 

Sincerely,
I Like Flyball!