Ultimate Dog Champion 2009

I am thinking without Googling but what if we looked at how triathalons and decathalons are scored?

You can still do air only and earn titles to compete at Ultimate Air Games in September. Milt came up with the idea of "The Ultimate Dog" as something else for the dogs who compete in several events to attain achievement in. Obviously it takes a lot of stamina for those dogs who compete in 3 different events in a weekend to rank in all 3 events and I think it was cool of Milt to acknowledge that. UV takes a lot out of them and it looks like Fetch It may too. When Milt talked about it in Cleveland it sounded like it was a title that was only going to be given to one dog "the top dog" but it sounds like that is now changing to divisions based on what I read above?????

I don't see that this will in any way affect those who only choose to do big air. Not everyone wants to do 3 events. I hope this helps

Yes, it helps!! Thank You. At some point my dogs may want to compete in 3 events too.

Milt stated in his first post in this thread (and has mentioned it elsewhere) that an "Ultimate Dog Champion" would be crowned for each division (excluding Novice). So, that's always been the plan, it seems. I think that dividing it by division also goes more along the lines of what UAD tries to always promote... allowing every dog the chance to excel and shine.

The points system still favors dogs who can make it to more events (whether it be more financially or geographically allowed)... no matter what way you set it up... which is why I suggested the Top 3 or 5 or whatever at the season's end. So, whether or not it would be the best way to run it, I don't know... but it is one option.

The only way to avoid all that and really base it on consistency, without points due more to high event attendance or whatever, is to average all the dogs' scores through the whole season. An easier way to do that, maybe, would be to average only the dog's top jumps per event.

I like Matt's idea of scoring it similar to Triathlons, etc. I'll have to chat with Justin on that idea... since he's much more familiar with them than I am. Or maybe someone else can detail it out and think up a comparable method/strategy.

I also think it should likely be a requirement that you choose the three events which will count for your dog at the beginning of the season. Otherwise, you'll likely just have people picking their dog's best three, if they do all four. Special allowances could be made for those whose dog might have to stop doing one event or another for whatever reason though.

Also, since it seems Novice may not be included, I would like to volunteer to donate an Ultimate Dog Champion award for the Novice division dogs, if needed, and to also keep track of the points/rankings/whatever for said dogs (again, if needed). I know there are not many Novice dogs who do events outside of UA though, so this may not even apply in this case.

Nice conversation going here! Novice dogs usually don't jump in any events except Ultimate Air. For your dog to be considered for Ultimate Dog you would have to compete in at least 3 of the 4 events that we provide.

I guess maybe I am way off track here but why can't you take averages of the dogs and whomever has the highest average is the "winner" for that division.

Example:
Rajah
Meadow
Champ

In this example all three dogs will be Master Jumpers.

Here are the example results

Ultimate Air:
Rajah : 22'2" / 21'5"/ 20'10" Average: 21'4"
Meadow: 22'/22'1"/21'6" Average: 21'9"
Champ: 21'5:/22'5"/21'9" Average: 21'9"

Catch It:
Rajah: 41'/36'/40' Average: 39
Meadow: 40/35/40 Average: 38.3
Champ: 30/35/36 Average: 33.6

Fetch It

Rajah 17/18/19 :Average 18
Meadow 16/17/19 Average 17.3
Champ 15/17/19: 17

Then take all three scores for each dog:

Rajah 21.4+39+18=78.4 and divide by 3=26.13
Meadow: 21.9+38.3+17.3= 77.5 divide by 3=25.83
Champ:21.9+33.6+17= 72.5 divide by 3=24.16

So in this instance winner would be Rajah ( I honestly didn't mean to make it that way I was just throwing random numbers out :-) )

Maybe what we need to do is have each person who wants to compete let Milt or someone know and then also let them know what 3 events they are going to count toward their title chase?

There would have to be some kind of point value for UV hights as if Meadow did UV and not Catch it for example her 7' verticales on an average would not make for a higher number than say the 40 foot catch it jumps. Maybe there is a way we could calculate how many feet in distance equals an inch in height so that it is more even?

Just throwing some random thoughts out there to mull over. And of course there is going to be more than 3 scores for the year but this was just a fast example.

Reason I don't like points awarded for dogs beaten is when those senior jumpers don't make finals there may not have been many dogs beeten but they may still have only jumped a few inches shorter than the ones who did make finals. I think an average would depict in a much more accurate way what dog really is jumping the furthest or highest overall through out the year.

But I guess also doing an average one dog could come to one event and be FENOMINAL at that event and then still take the prize at the end of the year which doesn't seem right to those who are working all year toward the title so to speak......

Once again just some rambling thoughts :-)

I think no matter how the scoring I think that haveing the dogs compete at the air cames which I stated in the early post may not work because not everyone can make it, and why penalize the dog in that cant make it to that one event.

Again just thinking out loud .

Milt wrote:Simple is good! How's the weather down there Marty!

Hey Milt,

The weather is warming up a bit...it was too cold to wear shorts for a while there!!

I think the first thing to do is determine what you want the end result to be.

Is it to qualify for the UAG's and have the top dogs compete?? A Champion for each division (If so are you going to have to set up new "Ultimate Dog" divisions or go by Ultimate Air divisions??).

Or maybe the pupose is to use the whole season and crown a champion based on that.

Another consideration is do you want scoring to be based on dog vs dog or dog vs some standard??

Lots to think about !! Puppies and work are running me ragged right now

Merry Christmas to everyone !!

What about the little guys (feather weights) It is hard for them to be able to keep up with the big guys. I know I don't normally chime in with this but it is so much harder for them. Look at UV for instance, it takes Gumpy everything he has just to get close to the 5' mark. A feather weight is actually jumping higher to make the grap because they are shorter. Even Fetch it can be more difficult.
Right now as far as I know Gumpy is the only featherweight to do more than just catch it and BA.

I agree with Aimee on the Featherweights... but I think Gumpy is also the only one we have doing two or more events.

I think that averaging a dog's scores would work best as far as fairness is concerned... but, lets face it, that are a LOT of scores to average in the case of some dogs and I think Milt is trying to keep this fairly simple. I'd have no problem doing it... but I know those already doing score-related stuff have plenty on their plates as is. So, I think it would have to be a choice for them to make.

One option to rule out a dog who only attends one event vs teams who make an effort to support UAD throughout the season would be to set a minimum event attendance count. You could set this at something high enough to rule out "one show wonders," but still low enough to give those outside of high-density event areas a break since not everyone can travel super long distances for several events. Maybe around five or so.

I would be more than willing to tabulate averages if this is the way that is best. With an excel spreadsheet it wouldn't take too long over the course of the season.

You could average the top 2 or 3 scores in each event. That would require going to 2 or 3 events and give people incentive to get as many scores as possible.

The only probelm I see with the average system is it does not assign equal value to each event.

I'm not sure how it wouldn't assign equal value to each event... since, from what I can see being proposed, you would be getting an average from each event, and then a combined total/average for the three.

If you wanted to make it a bit more intricate though, you could throw in some bonus points for UV and FI, for the dogs doing multiple grabs. Say, find an average of the top distances/heights per event and then also average the number of grabs per event... then add the two averages together. Then you would be rewarding for stamina/endurance and consistency as well, rather than just high grabs alone.

I do like the idea of having to compete in atleast a certain # of events. 5 seems like a good # of events for dog and handler to have to attend to be considered for the title of ultimate champion. I only attened 3 last year but do plan on trying on making it to atleast 6 this year but who knows.


How ever it is decided it will make for a fun time. With Ginger I will be entering her in every splash anyway, because she loves this sport so much.Plus a tired puppy is a good puppy. SO I cant wait to see how it will work.

The only problem is when you have a dog jumping in diferent divisions IE:
Masters in distance, junior in UV, and not sure how Catch it is being divided, how do you decide what division they would land in for the ultimate air dog?

My guess is it is to go by their top division in UA. As of now, we don't really have any divisions for CI or FI, and only two for UV. If order of finish or pts per dog beat were to be used, I don't think you would run into any issues, since dogs could still earn pts in Supreme vs Radical UV, for example. If we were to only award pts to the top jumpers per event, for example, you would likely only see the upper division dogs getting pts. As of now, CI and FI groups seem to run fairly tight. So, we'd likely be fine with just two divisions for each of those, as well.

I think to keep it fair all 4 events have to carry an equal weight. Any thoughts on that?? Maybe use a base number for each event and award points accordingly. That could be more work than Milt wants to do though. I finally got my computer back up to speed and Excel reloaded and will play with some ideas tomorrow while I am trying to O.D. on shrimp and college football

I agree... I think for fairness and ease of computing, keeping each event on an equal weight each would likely be best. While I think UV takes a lot more out of dogs generally than UA, for example... the only way to offset that without giving more weight to it overall would be bonus pts for the # of heights grabbed (or for the # of distances grabbed for FI). So, the dogs who start lower and make several grabs may have chance at more pts than, say, those who only make a couple grabs per event.

*Shrugs.* Lots of ways it could go, really. Will look forward to the Excel examples.

Should we base it on a standard (23' UA, 8' UV, 30' Catch it and ?? for Fetch it) or base it off of the top score for the year??

If we base it on a standard Milt has to do it as I am not touching that one

Pro's and Con's of each. A standard keeps all dogs equal. Using the top score rewards a dog with a big score (ex Seven jumping 26' + or Pepper or Ares grabbing 7' 4" in UV). It might help tham in that event, but they will more than likely fall behind in the other 2.

Time to get at it...2009 starts in about 2 hours

So, basing it on a standard would run similar to Milt's handicap system?

Sorry, brain hasn't woken up yet.

I'm not familiar with the handicap system, so I can't really answer that one. Take an example of UA. Let's say we use 5 pts as a "goal" score. Make it a jump not every dog can make 24'. Then take another value that every dog should be able to make 20' and assign that as a 4 pt jump. so 22' would be worth 4.5 pts and so on. The trick would be to find numbers that would reward events in an equal manner. If we had all the jumps from last year we could build a data base.

Dog vs Dog would use a system based off the best jump of the year at any time. Example again of UA. Let's say my puppy Dusty (yes a shamless plug for my little girl ) comes out for her first event and jumps 26' That's worth 5 pts..the top score. Molly comes along and jumps 22' so her score would be (22/26)*5 or 4.23.

I just got up and need to eat before doing any EXCEL examples, but can plug in the made up results earlier in the message to see how it would work out.

Interesting... to go by division, you could assign pts within each... that way, you'd be keeping with the Divisional Champion idea Milt originally proposed. I think it would also be easiest to just use a dog's top jump per event for the pt values assigned for each sport. I also think there should likely be a sign up sheet for those wishing to participate... so that whoever ends up tabulating everything for this doesn't need to check EVERY dog who competes in UAD, nor go through tons of records trying to figure out what dogs have done three or more of the sports. So, if you want to be in the running for it, you need to sign up.

So, some possible pt breakdowns...

Junior (1' increments)
1pt: 10'-10'11"
2pts: 11'-11'11"
3pts: 12'-12'11"
4pts: 13'-13'11"
5 pts: 14'-14'11"

Senior (1' increments)
1pt: 15'-15'11"
2pts: 16'-16'11"
3pts: 17'-17'11"
4pts: 18'-18'11"
5 pts: 19'-19'11"

Master (6" increments)
1pt: 20'-20'5"
2pts: 20'6"-20'11"
3pts: 21'-21'5"
4pts: 21'6"-21'11"
5pts: 22'-22'5"

Ultimate (6" increments)
1pt: 22'6"-22'11"
2pts: 23'-23'5"
3pts: 23'6"-23'11"
4pts: 24'-24'5"
5pts: 24'6" and over

You would also need to figure in short dock distances... or just restrict it to full dock events only (with an exception for UV, perhaps). I think with the number of full dock events seeming to increase, restricting it to those shouldn't be an issue.

For CI...
1pt: 1"-14'11"
2pts: 15'-24'11"
3pts: 25'-34'11"
4pts: 35'-44'11"
5pts: 45' and over

For FI... (might need to be adjusted later on due to it being so new and average distances still being figured out)
1pt: 10'-12'
2pts: 13'-14'
3pts: 15'-17'
4pts: 18'-19'
5pts: 20' and over

You could divide CI and FI into 10pt breakdowns to spread them scores out more, but I figured 5pts would be better to keep things equal and consistent from sport to sport (and easier to compute).

For UV...
Supreme
1pt: 4'8"
2pts: 4'10"-5'
3pts: 5'2"-5'4"
4pts: 5'6"-5'8"
5pts: 5'10"

Radical
1pt: 6'-6'2"
2pts: 6'4"-6'6"
3pts: 6'8"-6'10"
4pts: 7'-7'2"
5pts: 7'4" and over

Then what about consistent Supreme dogs who finish an event with a Radical jump? Should they earn the 5pts for Supreme plus an additional 1 or 2 or whatever based on where they finish within the Radical jumps? Or should they just get the 5pts alone?

There's also the possibility (though I don't see it as too likely) that someone might choose CI, UV, and FI as their three sports, leaving out UA. So, in that case, their ranking division would need to be based off of their CI division, rather than UA. Or, will the rules state that the sports chosen must be UA plus two others of your choice, in order to avoid matching up the UA and CI divisions somehow?

If not, then here's an option for pts based on the CI divisions...

Novice (3' incremements)
1pt: 1"-3'11"
2pts: 4'-7'11"
3pts: 8'-11'11"
4pts: 12'-15'11"
5pts: 16'-19'11"

Junior (2' increments)
1pt: 20'-21'11"
2pts: 22'-23'11"
3pts: 24'-25'11"
4pts: 26-27'11"
5pts: 28'-29'11"

Senior (2' increments)
1pt: 30'-31'11"
2pts: 32'-33'11"
3pts: 34'-35'11"
4pts: 36-37'11"
5pts: 38'-39'11"

Master (2' incremements)
1pt: 40'-40'11"
2pts: 41'-41'11"
3pts: 42'-42'11"
4pts: 43'-43'11"
5pts: 44'-44'11"

Ultimate (6" incremements)
1pt: 45'-45'5"
2pts: 45'6"-45'11"
3pts: 46'-46'5"
4pts: 46'6-46'11"
5pts: 47' and over

Okay now to go get some chores done...

If we used a point system there is one already in place. We could use the same point system for UA and UV as UKC has in place when earning championship points for tiltles. It would then just need to calculate the points for Catch It and Fetch It.

I think for uv you would have to consider something with a little higher point scale. because for instance you have two master ua jumpers and for instance 2 close jumpers in catch it but when it comes to uv you have a dog who averages 7' and the other only averages 5'10 the scoring could not represent there prefomance. But i do like the scoring idea. I cant wait till the first event we can make it to.

Just a thought.

Some good ideas here....I like the simplicity of Kel's idea, but would have to take a good look at the increments again. I think Milt has to decide if this is going to be one overall champion, or one for each division and set points up from there. I think there should be 1 scale for all the dogs though...it would be easier that way.