# World's Cutest A-frame!!!



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

It's here - it's here! Our A-frame is finally here!

We went with the 6' A-frame and I think it has to be the world's cutest A-frame. Here's how it looks with the world's cutest dog . . . 










And here's how it looks in the training building . . . 









Isn't it cute? :wild:


----------



## kbella999 (Jan 6, 2012)

Where did you get the A-frame from?


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

Wow- what a nice training facility!!


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

With such a big indoor facility, I am curious why you chose to go with a short frame though. Is it just for movability?


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

Looks great!


----------



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

Thanks guys! We purchased this A-frame from Mark's Agility Equipment. They built some full-size equipment for our club about a year ago and we love it! 

We went with a 6' frame for a few different reasons. We have a group of people that come out for training a few times a month. We usually set up either an "Alphabet Drill" or a "Backyard Dogs" exercise with some equipment on the side. That way we're working those important handling skills, but also get some time on the teeter, table, or now the A-frame. (yay!) I was worried a full size A-frame would have too large of a footprint to be used along with a short handling exercise. I also wanted something I could maneuver by myself when training alone. Height is also an issue in our building and I didn't want anyone's dog crashing into the lights. 

I think this size will be good for teaching pups and young dogs about the A-frame. You can be there to physically support/encourage them along without that awkward "Ack! I can't reach!" moment. I'm also thinking this size might be good for maintaining contacts without the physical impacts of a larger frame.


----------



## Pattycakes (Sep 8, 2010)

Looks great! I like it.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

Thanks for the explanation! I agree with you on most all points. (Not that I have the experience yet to say so, but I would think that if you were maintaining a running a-frame, you wouldn't want to do so on a smaller-than-normal frame. But for 2o2o- I totally agree with you.) Very nice!

Side note- is that Alphabet book any good? I've thought about picking it up...


----------



## nmlvaio101 (Apr 28, 2011)

that is really an interesting piece you have there! I wanted to purchase an A frame, but I don't want to intimidate my pup and having a smaller one makes it easier to movie around/ storage. How much this run you? if I may ask...


----------



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

Intriguing idea . . . to be honest, I'm not sure if running contacts will be impacted or not. How much of the dog's action is muscle memory? How much is related to the handler's motion? Will be interesting to see how a variety of different dogs react to a smaller A-frame and how this behavior will translate to a larger frame.

I really like the "Alphabet Drills" book. We set up a "letter" each week (you can probably see "H" in the photo above.) The drills vary in length and complexity with a variety of different handling strategies. I think working on short drills is really helpful for learning how to handle the individual components of a full course. We're also forced to try handling a different way, always a good thing. 

We spent $470 on the A-frame . . . we're in the boonies so shipping was expOnsive.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

Guardyan said:


> Intriguing idea . . . to be honest, I'm not sure if running contacts will be impacted or not. *How much of the dog's action is muscle memory? How much is related to the handler's motion?* Will be interesting to see how a variety of different dogs react to a smaller A-frame and how this behavior will translate to a larger frame.


I think the answers to those questions will be based on how the dog was trained. If trained by muscle memory via repetition, I would guess it will be impacted. If trained by criteria management under low repetition (not sure that's possible) then I wouldn't think there would be an impact. Maybe in a couple months you can fill us in on your findings here. I'll be very curious indeed!

Thanks for the info on the book, I think I'll add it to my queue!


----------



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

Ok, so this brings up additional questions . . . do we want our dogs to perform the A-frame by muscle memory alone? Or do we want them thinking about the size of the A-frame and adjusting their stride length, etc.? Or is all of this irrelevant and getting that pesky contact is key? Curious what everyone thinks . . .


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

My opinion is that muscle memory alone is without question unacceptable. I think that would be a very poor way to train. First of all, it would require SO MANY repetitions, all of which are stressing the dog's joints. Secondly, it doesn't allow the dog to make choices on their own, which is what real training is all about in my opinion.

I think the key to training _anything_ is in setting proper criteria and allowing the dog to figure out how to meet that criteria in a rewarding, positive way. This is one reason I do really like the way Rachel Sanders trains a running a-frame (with the PVC box). Sure, there is some repetition there, but there is also clearly defined criteria that is outlined and learned away from the equipment. It is then back-chained to the equipment.

I think that if one used the Sanders box to define a-frame contact zone criteria, and simultaneously was training stride regulation/adjustment/awareness via Susan Salo's jump grids- then getting a running a-frame should really be VERY natural to the dog! The dog should know that they need to jump in the box (which is put on the contact zone of the a-frame) and they should know how to adjust their stride quickly on the fly due to jump grid training. So the dog should have the skills for stride regulation and understand the criteria for the contact zone. It shouldn't take long at that point for the dog to understand the a-frame requirements.

Now if that's all true or not... Well, I'll tell you in a few months. This is my plan.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

Guardyan said:


> Ok, so this brings up additional questions . . . do we want our dogs to perform the A-frame by muscle memory alone? Or do we want them thinking about the size of the A-frame and adjusting their stride length, etc.? Or is all of this irrelevant and getting that pesky contact is key? Curious what everyone thinks . . .


 UKC has an option for smaller contacts in agility. The first time Whim saw one of these small a-frames was at a UKC trial and I think that was her only ever fly-off at a trial. She has a 2o2o but I don't think she was expecting the frame to be so short. UKC allows you to fix a fly-off, so I went back and did it again with a reminder for her contact behavior. She was fine for the 3 runs after that and it was her very first trial ever. 

I am not sure that training on smaller equipment is an issue for stopped contacts, as long as the dogs also sees full sized equipment often enough. IME Sometimes dogs who are accustomed to doing a low aframe have fly off issues with a standard sized one, I think due to the difference in angle. For running contacts, I do think dogs who are well trained for them should (in theory anyway) be able to adjust to different board lengths but I'm not sure how it would work in a training setting. The issue with the a-frame could be the same - due to the difference in angle, the dog is more prone to jumping rather than running. 

But at any rate - your aframe is pretty cute


----------



## LuvourGSDs (Jan 14, 2007)

SWEEEEET, my hubby just finished my aluminum A-frame last spring. It's std 9' & love it! I can scoot it pretty easy across the grass myself. I can change the pitch ok, kind of tricky there, but can do it.

NOW, I SOOOOOO want a building like you!  
My poor frame & dogwalk are all tarped up at the moment.


----------



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

You guys have raised some very interesting points. Thank you for your feedback!

Jen, any hubby that can build aluminum agility equipment is a KEEPER! 

Willy, I really love the Susan Salo jump grids for teaching stride regulation and foundation jumping skills. I haven't ever utilized the Sanders box to train contacts, so I will be curious how it works for you. I know people who have gone to running contacts for speed, but I also know people who are switching back to 2o/2o for consistency. I think the dog's structural qualities/speed tend to have a big impact on the effectiveness of a particular method.

Agile, we've only trialed in AKC and I didn't know that UKC had smaller contacts. I also hadn't considered the angle factor, but I could see how that would be super relevant. We have a schutzhund A-frame in our training field, as well as a full size agility frame at club practices . . . so we will still train on full size equipment. 

So I've been turning these ideas over and over in my mind, and I have another question . . . 

For proper obstacle performance, what (if anything) do we want our dogs to think at the top of the A-frame?


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

Guardyan said:


> For proper obstacle performance, what (if anything) do we want our dogs to think at the top of the A-frame?


About driving up and over to get into her 2on/2off!

I will always teach a 2on/2off for my dogs. We have no plans to make the World Teams so the time I may (or may not save) between a running contact vs a quick release on a 2on/2off don't matter. And since the vast majority of my contact training is with the contact obstacles low, the factor of injury from the high impact also isn't a consideration.

I also don't deal with the up and over cause they need to learn to figure that out in a manner that will allow them to get into the 2on/2off! Cause that's where the rewards are. That's where I am waiting for them. And they aren't able to move on until they are 'in the position'. 

The 'Teeter Game' is at 2:30, and early teaching on the dogwalk is 4:13 (though she's been on the obstacles LOW for months) and getting help fixing our issues at 7:27. You can see some of the aframe at 8:23





 
Just a month later


----------



## Guardyan (Aug 29, 2005)

MRL, kudos! I think there is a ton of clarity in your methodology!


----------

