Showing Age Limit?

NickelbackLuver · April 2010

There are personal breeds now, and all those reward breeds that have an unfair advantage over the 'normal' breeds. The loyalty limit is nice - it gives everyone a fair chance because grooming forever doesn't increase performance. However, the long life spans do effect fame points in an unfair way. The regular breeds that were here before anything else lived 25 years tops (hyenas) I personally don't think ages should be over that. Now, for people eventing actual dog breeds, there is no possibility to make it anywhere as far as the most fame points go or anything, because other dogs get such a long eventing life time that it limits other breeds from having a fair shot. Yes, I do say this for myself, but also for the rest of the eventing world that feels forced to use long life spanned dogs to be successful. I think all breeds should have a fair opportunity to be the best. It should be based on breeding, dedication, and proper entering of events. Not because a dog lives forever. So, dogs can't show until a certain age, so perhaps they shouldn't be allowed to show once they get to a certain age either?

tarnish · April 2010

I totally agree.

With age it stops dogs with more wins to be higher on the list because the breeds that live longer get a chance to accumulate more points. I've seen some with a terrible score but are higher on the top dogs list than the better scores. Doesnt really make sense. Age shouldn't be a factor

Meeko1 · April 2010

I agree with this. It would make sense since we've added the loyalty cap to help even out the playing field

CORY · April 2010

Yes all the way

NickelbackLuver · April 2010

^^ thanks for the support xD

BuffyBoarding · April 2010

I agree with this to an extent, but... The playing field has never technically been even, Hyenas live to be 25 with dingos up there in years as well. So now people use reward/personal breeds which live longer, just as hyenas lived longer than other breeds. I know its late and im rambling, but maybe you understand what im saying? All breeds with longer lifespans have a better chance than other breeds, So for everything to be exactly equal, all breeds would have to live to the same age.

NickelbackLuver · April 2010

Not living to the same age ;P Just put a showing cap on dogs. You can't show the dog till its so many months old, so why not auto retire the dog from showing? The dog hits 15 years, for example, and when you try to enter it in an event it could tell you the dog is too old and needs to retire from showing. *this does not mean the dog goes to K9 Heaven or anything... they just sit in your kennel, but can no longer be shown after a certain age* Could count up whichever group of ages is the largest *I would imagine its 14-16 years* and set that as the limit. That would allow a huge chunk of dogs to show their whole life, but may still limit some breeds (English Foxhounds, for example, with a 9 year lifespan) But, that wouldn't make it so people are forced to use 'fake' breeds anymore, and it'd level out the whole hyena and dingo thing as well *not that they do much good in the world of trophypups* It's fair in my opinion. It would open up the ability to show dogs a lot more. I would love to show my sporting breeds, but what's the point in trying for high fame when a dog who has a horrid showing record, but lives a long time, is going to be better anyway?

Goldy · April 2010

Okay I agree, it's really annoying. I hate that my Novas never have a chance to make it anywhere except National with a large amount of winnings. The first thing about putting a cap is people with personal breeds would be very very upset. They paid almost a hundred dollars and now their dogs are "useless" after a certain age. I use the term useless loosely. I personally don't see the point in having a dog that's too old to breed, show... ect. Especially if that's what they were for is to show. Now, I do decently in a few sporting events because I have a few dogs with 750+ adapt and courage, however I'd never get as far as a TrophyPup even if it places 29th in the same events I enter my dog, who would take second even rarely. It's just a matter of having an the advantage of age. There's a lot wrong with showing in my opinion, I own a 10x4 Basenji and it places behind 2x4s and imports in every event I've put it in. WTH? I don't think they're should be a cap on age. I don't even think there should be a cap on anything (especially aggression... I miss the angry Tervs) just for the simple fact that eventing isn't suppose to be fair. Obvivously or it would have more basis to who wins and whatnot.

tarnish · April 2010

As far as personal breeds, so whoever has more cash in real life gets to dominate the events? I don't like how personal breeds are allowed to live to 70yrs etc. When Ahkahna had her breed live to 70, she had to agree to certain things. So now that doesn't matter and we can get dogs to live to ridiculous ages? I don't think its right that they get such an advantage because they can wave a wad of cash around. The point of showing is to show off the best dogs but how can we do that when some can just live and live and live and live? There are people that work really hard on good event dogs but they dont stand a chance with the bad dogs that live so long.

NickelbackLuver · April 2010

Eventing should be fair. The caps are in place so that people who breed for certain stats can have better dogs. Greyhounds and speed, for example. Someone can toss in a trophypup with horrid speed, and it will have more fame than a Greyhound with 120 birth speed if they both show in only racing events. So, that trophypup gets to, overall, have a better fame rate than a Greyhound who got 1st place every time while it was toward the bottom? It's not fair at all. People work hard for stats. Anyone can go out and buy a trophypup and get incredibly far without any work. Personal breeds - the huge ages aren't fair at all. Most personal breeds were under the 25 year mark even. So, now people who were fair and put their personal breeds at a reasonable age don't get to have a fair chance at eventing against the people who had to have their breeds live forever? They paid a lot of money too, they just didn't go overboard with it. And like tarn said, not everyone has the money to buy a personal breed. I know I surely dont. I'm lucky I get to keep accounts upgraded. I'll be lucky if I get to keep all of them upgraded this year. Upgrades giving an advantage makes sense... people who can spend money for a personal breed being able to totally rule out any other dog having a chance? Not right. There are alternatives, I suppose. Make getting 1-3rd place worth a lot more fame points so a younger dog can surpass an older one regardless so long as its placing top. This doesnt have to give the trainer more fame points, just giving the dog a huge amount for first would be good. I think that dogs with a higher W/P/S percentage should be having way more fame points. Or, make events so the event creator can have an age limit. Or both. :P

TwlohasGSDs · April 2010

I agree with this idea. >.< There are a few breeds that live up to 30, and take over events. It's not exactly fair a fake breed should rule over dogs that should do well. Just my opinion. xD

Meeko1 · April 2010

We could also simply change the way that the top dogs are calculated. We could make it so it's like the highest w/p/s percentage (like 400 w/p/s out of 1000 events entered would be 40%)

TwlohasGSDs · April 2010

That would help a lot, as that doesn't have as much to do with age as score does. ^^

NickelbackLuver · April 2010

Meeko wrote:

We could also simply change the way that the top dogs are calculated. We could make it so it's like the highest w/p/s percentage (like 400 w/p/s out of 1000 events entered would be 40%)

Except, then a dog who only entered one event would get to the top if they got first place. That would be hard to work out since you'd have to figure number of events and all that out xD I thought of that too, but I could see it being complicated.

Meeko1 · April 2010

Nickelback__Luver wrote:

Meeko wrote:

We could also simply change the way that the top dogs are calculated. We could make it so it's like the highest w/p/s percentage (like 400 w/p/s out of 1000 events entered would be 40%)

 Except, then a dog who only entered one event would get to the top if they got first place. That would be hard to work out since you'd have to figure number of events and all that out xD I thought of that too, but I could see it being complicated.

I didn't think about that, we could make it so that you need to have a minimum number of events entered

NickelbackLuver · April 2010

Another good point - If age limits were put on showing, then loyalty caps could be taken off. People would still have a reason to groom farther/have better ages (for breeding purposes) and it'd give better stat loyalty dogs their loyalty bonuses ;D

Meeko1 · April 2010

We could make it so that the dog only gets fame if it gets top 3 (1st place would be 3 points, 2nd 2 points, 3rd 1 point) but the handler still gets the same amount of fame. That way age wouldn't affect it in any way (unless the dog placed top 3 in shows for it's entire life)

NickelbackLuver · April 2010

Yeah. But, if it places in top three all the time, then it deserves it ^^

Meeko1 · April 2010

Exactly my point

Goldy · April 2010

See I totally agree with what you're saying here. I don't think it's age or anything like that we should be worried about. Just how it's all scored. I think that is what is messed up. Perhaps Nef should fix that and everything else could be left alone?

NickelbackLuver · April 2010

Yeah. I believe VHR runs with age restrictions on events (if the event holder wishes) but I may be wrong... it's been a while since I've been on there xD But, along with that, I definitely think first-third needs to have higher points earned so that it counts for enough that a dog getting all first shouldn't have to worry about someone scoring on the lower end, with more age to push them ahead. The age restriction was the first thing that came to my mind, but, there are def. alternatives ;D I just think something needs to be done about eventing still, to even things out more.

DogAlley · July 2010

I know it is kinda late to reply but

I agree, mostly. Since most of the breeds that live the long lifespans are private, the player had to pay real money to get them, so they should definitely be able to have that advantage, in my opinion, haha : ) The other breeds that live long lifes seem to cost more VPC, and can easily be beaten by dogs with high courage or adaptability.

lilly waters · July 2010

I agree to some extent, it is kinda unfair. But they did pay the money and they deserve benfeits. What are the dogs then used for after they are past breeding age, and cant show anymore. They just sit around and do nothing. Also the price for these certain pbs would go down as there would be nothing to do with them after 15 or so years? Also if they were to put a limitation on the showing age, we most def need our loalty capp off. I mean thats the only way that would make people happy, and make it fair in the end. Maybe they should have something like, people could say in the events, the limit on age of that event. Give them a option, and then if eventers feel they dont want to compete against 70 + years dog, then they have the choice not to. Then its us to them, and people can make events specifically for that if they feel its nessasary. I think the third option would be the best by for, and would give both people what they want.

Celia_1234321 · July 2010

if you can't breed them after a certain age, and you can't event them after a certain age, they why make them live so long? i think that the older they get they minus points in events

lilly waters · July 2010

Celia_1234321 wrote:

if you can't breed them after a certain age, and you can't event them after a certain age, they why make them live so long? i think that the older they get they minus points in events

At this time, eventing is the only thing you can really do after 12 something years. So you take that away and the dog is worthless. The older they get they minus points? Are you saying that is what is happening now, or as a suggestion for something to be implemnted? As for right now, no being old doesnt make any points minus.

Celia_1234321 · July 2010

i'm saying if we make an eventing capp then those dogs are worthless so they should minus points for age, that way the have a point but they cant really dominate anymore. (they would have to minus alot though xD)

lilly waters · July 2010

Celia_1234321 wrote:

i'm saying if we make an eventing capp then those dogs are worthless so they should minus points for age, that way the have a point but they cant really dominate anymore. (they would have to minus alot though xD)

The dogs are still practically useless if you have points taken off. People wont want to even like that, because even if their dog is supposed to dominate, its not gonna get a 20th place and the person is going to lose money. People wont want to event dogs then anyway, it would be the same as a age capp.

Celia_1234321 · July 2010

not exactly i mean maybe between 15-20 years they minis 10 points so now they get third or fourth, 20-25 minus 15 ect ect

lilly waters · July 2010

Celia_1234321 wrote:

not exactly i mean maybe between 15-20 years they minis 10 points so now they get third or fourth, 20-25 minus 15 ect ect

You are still losing money, in time especially with you loseing points and other dogs being way better then normal. You arent gonna get anything, because you wont place very good. Do the math, with more and more good dogs, taking away points will make people not event.

Celia_1234321 · July 2010

they could get fame points. its just a suggestion.

HerdingTrainSellResc · July 2010

I totally agree, seeing i mainly show borders, aussie and german shepherds...

Howdy, Stranger!

Showing Age Limit?

Comments