NAFA's Open Class - Pros & Cons and Why I Like It

On Monday, October 1, a new racing year for NAFA began and many new Rules of Racing took effect as of that date. One of these "new" Rules was Appendix B added to the back of the book creating NAFA's version of the pick-up team concept spearheaded by U-FLI, Inc.

One of these changes was the creation of a new class. The Open Class allows dogs to run for points and titles outside of the 87 day waiting period rules concerning dogs switching clubs.

I have received from a competitor a list of concerns about the new Open Class and I will draw upon that list for my "cons". I will comment from my own perspective and my attempt to see both sides of the Open Class issues.

Con: It has no value that is different from Regular/Multi

"1) Most teams do not run for Regional Points or World Records - they run for individual dog points and tournament placings.

2) As an example, a team running in Regular Division 4 has no more benefit to a team running in Open. "


My view on this goes to the heart of the pick up team concept. Teams in Open are allowed dogs outside of their club without being subject to the 87 day rule. That automatically changes the dynamic of a team by adding just one dog this way. The fact that Open Class does not "earn" Regional Points and cannot set World Records is an acknowledgement of the purpose for having the 87 day rule. That purpose is to protect Clubs who are working and training to be "Regional Champions" are not taken unfair advantage of by two or more competing clubs that might work together and form a "Dream Team".


My challenge to this concern is this: If it is not your Club's goal to run for Regional Points or World Records, why? does it matter that Open Class is ineligible for Regional Points or World Records? The "benefit" is the ability to form teams irregardless of the 87 day waiting period.

Con: It negates the 87 day rule

"A person can move from one club to another and start running immediately with the new club. The new club can just enter the new dogs team in Open instead of Regular/Multi. This eliminates all penalties or waiting periods."

The 87 day rule was never intended to serve as "punishment" for those who wished to leave a club. In the beginning of NAFA's creation, the source for teams were clubs that were organized for the purpose of training and competing in AKC/CKC Obedience Trials. The "Club" focus was training and competing for individual dog/human teams.

NAFA was organized by representatives from these pioneer Obedience Clubs, hence the "Club" concept for teams. When NAFA had grown to the point of desiring to offer "championships" to its competitors, it needed to protect clubs that were working towards a championship goal from individuals who might organize a Super "Dream Team".

NAFA has been organized for 20+ years. In the beginning, it was not visualized that there would be clubs organized for the sole purpose of competing in flyball - and nothing else. It also didn't visualize that there would be clubs who would not desire to work towards a "championship". Individual flyball titles were developed much later and, even after adopting flyball titles, it was still thought that it was preferable to work towards flyball titles within the structure of a "Club".
Finally, the time has come when NAFA recognizes that control and ownership of individual dogs rests with their individual "owner" and not the "Club" that owner is affiliated with.

Con: Open Class reduces the need or desire to train Multi breeds

"A club can now enter a complete team in Regular and double into Open without having to develop any other breeds This eliminates the necessity to develop a slower learning breed and can over time reduce the desire for unusual breeds all together."

In the very beginning of NAFA, there was concern that flyball was becoming a sport that was almost exclusive for Border Collies. Other breeds need not apply. In fact, there was a significant number of people who were against the 4 Breed Class because they did not want to restrict flyball in any fashion whatsoever. They wanted flyball to run as fast as it could possibly go and creating a Class that required 1 each of 4 different breeds was perceived as "hindering" flyball.

Thank goodness that this anti-4 breed group was defeated by people who saw the value in spreading flyball to every breed that was physically and mentally capable of learning the flyball course. ....but, now the Open Class calls into question whether or not the incentive still exists to train and develop other breeds for flyball. I believe it does.

4 Breed exists solely to showcase many breeds in flyball. It was not intended to be a second class for those desiring to double team their dog. In fact, there are a few Regions where 4 Breed is not offered in enough Tournaments to qualify any club competing within that Region to be named a 4 Breed Regional Champion. I think that is sad but, Tournament Directors are going to offer the classes that attract entries. It is my understanding that the areas that do not offer 4 Breed as a class do not have enough clubs with multiple breeds to attract enough entries to make 4 Breed viable.

So, the question becomes, "Will the Open Class supersede 4 Breed in popularity?" I'm not sure if it will or not. There are no Regional points in Open and thus, would be a hindrance for a Club that is working towards a 4 Breed Regional Championship. On the other hand, there will always be an incentive for some people to train and showcase the less popular breeds for flyball simply because they love that breed and they love that challenge. There are four breeds that make up over 50% of all flyball dogs. Border Collies, Mixed breed (mutts), Jack / Parson Russell Terriers and Labrador Retrievers represent 53% of all dogs who possess a CRN from NAFA. The choice to train and develop a dog not of these breeds is a personal challenge that probably cannot be "discouraged".

Con: Allows the "non team player" personality a way to play the sport without having to work it out on a team

"One of the things that sets flyball apart from all other dog sports is the team aspect. Not every human can play in a team environment. For many people, it is much easier to not participate in a club. The Open Class will open the door for people to train their dogs at home and come to a tournament and run as an independent (not part of any club). This can eventually change the entire culture of the sport."

Flyball is truly "unique" in the world of Dog sport competitions in that it is the only dog sport that requires a team of "humans" in order to compete. Even dog sled competitions only require one musher to compete.

I can see this as a viable concern. However, I wonder just how successful a trainer can be without proofing their dogs at least occasionally to perform in the "dog team" environment of flyball. You have to teach "passing" and running left lane or right lane with a dog in the other lane. This is nearly impossible without proofing somewhere in practice sessions. My Captain would not allow a dog that had not been team proofed to participate on a team. Is there a Club Owner/Team Captain anywhere that would risk an unproofed/independently trained dog in their line-up?

On the other hand, what about the "marketing" aspect of this question? How do we keep people in this sport if they are having difficulty staying with their current club? There may be more reasons staying with a particular club may be difficult than just being a "non team player". There may be financial reasons. (My club doesn't enter enough tournaments or, my club doesn't travel to tournaments). There may be practice/training issues. (My club doesn't schedule practices. My dog isn't getting trained).

....and, another aspect of marketing flyball is, "How do we introduce flyball into geographic areas where it currently does not exist?" Wouldn't it (Open Class) help to continue growing flyball if a trainer lived too far away to be a permanent member of a club? What about the Obedience Club that is geographically separated from experienced flyballers? It could help them to know that they could rendezvous with a seasoned player and their dog(s) at a long distance tournament. Opportunities to "grow" flyball increase when we expand the options for participation.

Con: Reduces need/desire to develop height dogs

"If a team is short a height dog - under the prior rules a club would have need/desire to find or develop one. Under "Open Class", all a club would need to do is find someone with a height dog that wants to double and enter their team in Open instead of Regular/Multi."

This is only partially true. No club can survive for very long without a resident "height dog". I firmly believe that you can never have too many height dogs. I also believe that it is a mistake to assume that someone wants to "double" their height dog in Open. Maybe, this is an event their Club decided not to go but, they want to attend. Should the fact that their club decides to stay home force somebody to not participate if they are able and willing to attend?

Several years ago, my club was impacted by "insufficient" HDs to accommodate all the dogs that were trained and wanted to participate on a team. The one dog that suffered most for it was an aging Australian Shepherd that was working towards her "Onyx" award. Ouzo was slow but reliable. ...but, what was frustrating and heartbreaking was that everybody on our club was working to help get Ouzo the Onyx. It wasn't happening because the only height dog on our club that was fast enough to earn a 25 point run had shut down. Pretty soon, Ouzo would have to retire.

As a club, we made the heartbreaking decision to allow Ouzo to run with another club that had sufficient HDs. We had always intended to move Ouzo back to our club roster after achieving the Onyx. By the time she was eligible to return, Ouzo was unable to run on any team and now rests permanently with the club she ran with to achieve the Onyx. If Open Class or Vets had existed in her time, we could've found speed dogs (Vets) or HDs (Open) and finished her Onyx title while remaining always a Wooferine. So, due to the memory of this challenge, my club is always "in the hunt" to add height dogs to our roster. I'd rather have too many HDs and be willing to lend them out then to be "short" and beg teams to allow us to borrow a dog.

Remember, Open Class is optional. Unless the TD offers Open Class in their tournament, there is no Open Class to participate in. ...and, unless it is offered, there's no opportunity to "double" your dog. It's that simple.

Con: It is not just a pick-up team but, a completely new class with no restrictions

"The fact that a club can enter an entire team without having to actually pick up a dog from another club seems unfair."

This is a "loophole" that was apparently overlooked when the Open Class rules were drafted. If a club enters a team without including at least one dog from another, that circumvents the purpose of creating "Open Class". This is an example of the reasoning behind having "sunset" clauses for new rules. We don't always "see" the loopholes when developing a new concept within our rules.

Whether or not a club actually takes (unfair) advantage of this oversight, I would be in favor (in principle) of closing this loophole for one reason. To clearly demonstrate that the purpose of this class is to allow clubs to enter teams while including dogs that are outside of their roster. Since you can list as many as 6 dogs for one team, I can visualize the day when a team might enter with all 6 dogs coming from 6 different clubs. ....but, I am against a club entering a team in Open for the sole purpose of being able to "double" run their dogs and not invite a dog outside their club to participate with them.

Con: Reduces / Eliminates a lot of the strategy of the sport

"One of the fun aspects of this sport is the strategy, most of which incorporates making and developing teams. Say a club has 10 dogs wanting to go to an event. Without Open Class, that club would need to develop a strategy of either doubling dogs to establish three teams or rotating dogs through two teams, etc. Now, all a club would have to do is enter two and place the two "extra" dogs on an Open team. No more strategy"

.....aaaaaaaahhhhhhhh! Your regional bias shows just a little. There are Regions that do not normally offer Multi-breed class so, no opportunity for "doubling" dogs exists in these events. Would a TD offer the "Open" class and not offer Multi-breed first? I don't know. It is a Regional difference in some areas. It depends heavily on the reasons that Multi-breed is not offered in the first place. I suspect the new restrictions that have been placed on the number of potential heats scheduled per day per team, that will have an impact on this practice. Only time will tell us what people will exercise as their "option".

This is a "concern" that I would rely heavily on feedback from many people in different regions before I form any permanent judgment of my own.

Con: Open Class significantly "cheapens" the value of titles

"Now it is possible for every dog that would ever want to double the opportunity to do so. Some of the internal restrictions that have kept dogs from doubling, like a club not having enough height dogs, or multi breeds to field additional teams are now gone. So, you will see a lot more dogs running double entered. This will make the amount of points they earn at a tournament significantly increase, which will make titles MUCH easier to obtain."

I understand the concern that is voiced here but, I also see three "offsetting" facts. One, there is the new restrictions concerning the total number of heats that may be scheduled for one team per day. NAFA's Corporate Policies and Procedures, Section 6.3(b)(iv), p 29 states: "The Race Schedule shall not call for more than a total of 35 possible heats per day per team" Never before has NAFA limited the number of heats a team could run. Maybe, this restriction will cause some people to "double-run" their dogs because, before this restriction was adopted, there was no limit. ...but, that could happen at any event that would offer Multi-Breed as well. Your concern is that the "club" could not restrict these individuals. I see other factors "outside" of the club that have the potential for restricting "double-running".

The second offsetter is that someone who wishes to "double-enter" will have to find an event w/Open Class AND a club willing to enter an Open Class team. What if they can't find a "willing" club?

The third "offsetter" is that Open Class is optional. Unless a TD offers the Open Class in their tournament, the possibility of "double running" does not exist. There are, in fact, a significant number of events that only offer the Regular Class. I seriously doubt that Open Class will impact these restricted events. ....but, I've learned to "never say 'never' " so, I will be watching this over the next year to see what impact on individual dog points this will have.

Con: Will over time reduce the need/desire for a Club

"As the Open Class gains popularity and entries - the need to be part of a club will be diminished, thus, changing the culture of the sport."

I agree, the possibility exists it might diminish the need to be part of a club. .....but, the basic definition of the sport will not. What makes it flyball? Flyball is a relay race for 4 dogs over 4 jumps for a ball. If it doesn't have 4 dogs - if it doesn't have two lanes - if it doesn't have 4 jumps to retrieve a ball ......then, I don't know what it is but, it isn't flyball. I don't know about anybody else but, I can't train/teach my dogs to play nice with other dogs (both, on their team and their opposing team) without the other members of my club pitching in.

I support widening the door of opportunity for growth. Traditional dog obedience clubs have "grown" in number since the AKC adopted the Dog Obedience classes at dog shows and separate Dog Obedience Trials. Agility has far outstripped flyball in growth both, for Agility trials being offered and Agility classes taught and Agility Clubs organized. Do you think maybe it's possible that when we (NAFA) offer more choices and more "options" to participate in flyball, we open the door to more people who want to try flyball? If more people want to participate in the sport of flyball, then doesn't that "increase" the need for more clubs to organize?

Con: Will soon become the largest class at tournaments - because it is easiest and least restrictive to enter

" For all the reasons stated above - it is likely that the Open Class will soon become larger than Multi at most tournaments and could even become a larger class at some tournaments than Regular - which will completely change this sport again - for all the reasons stated above."

I don't have a crystal ball. I can't predict the future but, I don't fear it either. If Open Class surpasses Multi and Regular Classes in popularity, it will be due to marketplace demands. Is it a "bad" thing? I don't know. ...but, I do know that flyball grew because of popular demand. Multi-breed Class grew because of popular demand. Whatever the outcome for the future of Open Class, it will be a result of "free" competition within the "marketplace". Translation: increased entries at tournaments.

I have observed the evolution of this sport since BN (Before NAFA). NAFA itself was an "innovation" by enthusiasts who wanted to standardize flyball. The moment the first "rulebook" was published, the original organizers were inundated by requests for copies of the rulebook and an interest in "joining" NAFA. That significantly changed this sport. The invention of the wedge-shaped box significantly changed it again. The two-hole box and introduction of the "swimmers turn" changed things yet again. Introducing the EJS totally revolutionized the game.

Were any of these changes detrimental to the sport? I don't think so. What might've happened if Multi-breed (4 breed) had never been adopted? I don't even want to imagine!

Since 90% of flyball doesn't compete for Regional Championships or Regional points, that is the sector that will drive the growth of the Open Class. The possibility of further widening the gap between the fastest 10% and the rest of flyball because of the Open Class certainly exists. I will be watching this and listening to both supporters of Open and its detractors. Whether or not I am elected to the NAFA BoD, the Board will be receiving "feedback" from me on this class when it comes up for review next year. I urge everyone who has an opinion to contact NAFA and give them your input. Likely, the pilot program will continue as a "pilot" for one more year before permanent adoption. I urge everyone to keep an "open" mind (pun intended) during this trial and give it a fair chance to evolve. Use your imagination and see the "possibilities" that the Open Class will promote flyball and NAFA. Keep in mind the reasons this class was considered by the NAFA BoD - that there were numerous requests of the Board to find a way/means of competing in flyball on teams that were outside of participants regular clubs and that these people wanted a "vacation pass" so to speak. If possible, enter the Open Class with a team of your own -- or, find a club with an Open Class team that needs a solid dog.

It's possible that "Open Class" will actually help clubs to stay together. That the reasons for leaving a team will be less important if you can enter a tournament and run on another club without having to leave your club to do so. It will also give us the opportunity to become flyball ambassadors if we can enter tournaments on long distance trips. We would be able to meet and get to know flyball enthusiasts in places far removed from our home regions. Let's give the Open Class a fair chance to win your approval. Flyball is changing -- NAFA is changing -- we are only afraid of change because of the "unknown". A year of evaluation will tell us more than we know now.

Good Luck and Good Racing!