Sunday, February 12, 2012

Weekend Update

SUMMARY: Title chase and summary.


OK, about those possible titles that we could've earned this weekend:
  • Tika's Gold Standard (2 chances to get 2 needed Qs)
    Ooops, I miscounted, we still need several more--but we did Q in both Standards; 4th of 9 on Saturday and 2nd of 7 on Sunday.
  • Boost's Masters Jumpers title (2 chances to get 2 needed Qs)
    Saturday's Jumpers was a mess, but Sunday's was so close--really, JUST TAKE JUMPS IN FRONT OF YOU. Kept up all her bars both days, I believe.
  • Boost's Masters Snooker title (2 chances to get 2 SuperQs)
    I am so discouraged--at least (again) she kept all her bars up, had a lovely opening, started a lovely closing, getting my hopes up, but Saturday didn't take the #6 jump in the closing that was right in front of her, and Sunday on what I thought was a super-simple weave entry at #5 in the closing, she entered at the second pole instead.
  • Boost's Bronze Gamblers title (2 chances to get 2 needed Qs)
    She Qed Sunday's gamble and got almost enough points to be 2nd of 36 dogs, but we were 2 weave poles short when the whistle blew, so ended in 8th. Saturday's she did everything I asked, which included when I said "right" just a moment *before* she took an important jump instead of *after*, sigh.
  • Boost's Silver Tournament title (2 chances to get 2 needed Qs)
    Steeplechase had some nice moments, but nooo; Grand Prix was spot on lovely except for two jumps right in the middle, upon which I think we Eed on runouts and refusals.
Overall:

  • Boost Qed 3 of 11: in Relay with Moxie (2nd of 23 teams ), Snooker (11th of 38), and Gamblers (6th of 36).
  • Tika Qed 5 of 11: in Relay with Chaps  (2nd of 11 teams), both Standards (as noted), Sunday Jumpers (1st of 11 and a good enough score that we'd have placed 2nd even in Championship 26", so when we're on, she still has it), and Grand Prix (2nd of 9).
  • Disappointed in all the seemingly simple ways in which I or the dogs messed up. 
  • Sad that Tika Qed less than 50% again, but it could've been worse, of course, and at least she picked up some placement ribbons this time to salve my wounded hopes.
  • Disappointed that Boost's weaves seem to be broke again--missed a whole slew of entries and popped out once, but oddly the missed entries all seemed to be the "easy" ones and she got several hard entries that many other dogs had trouble with, go figure. 
  • Glad that most of Boost's runs looked 90% nice and that she hardly knocked any bars. 
  • Delighted that Tika seemed healthy and happy and ready to run most of the weekend--3 or 4 runs seemed slow, but others were lovely and she didn't manifest the stiff shoulders/neck that she had last weekend.
  • Glad that my pulled hamstring hardly bothered me at all and seems to be pretty much recovered, and that the ankle I twisted while walking the dogs Sunday morning is only a slight ache and not a real mess (what great shape I'm in :-/ ).
  • Fun that the trial this weekend featured two of Boost's littermates (Bette and Beck), one full sister from a repeat breeding (TCam), and several half-sisters and brothers (Roulette, Quik, Quas, Rowdy)...did I forget anyone? I lose track of litters and which dad was whose, but they all share Tala as their mom, and most are blue merles (in this list, only Beck and Quik are black & white).
I'm not sure that I (or Tika) have the fortitude, time, money, or even, really, that strong a desire to try to get 75 more Qs for her Platinum LAA. This might become an abandoned part of my Campaign.

There was something really important I wanted to say, but I am, as usual, tired tired tired and I can't remember it--and the dogs are crashed out completely on their little doggie beds nearby--so I think it's bedtime for all the bonzos on this bus. 

    4 comments:

    1. Wow. I'm amazed you can keep any of that straight! I'm glad some of it went well...wish more of it had. Next time.

      ReplyDelete
    2. I take copious notes at the trial, mark up course maps before and after our runs, and put it all into a database afterwards. :-)

      ReplyDelete
    3. LOL....you SURE you're not an engineer? That's exactly what my dad would have done!

      ReplyDelete
    4. You mean, as in my degree in computer science? :-) It came through the department of mathematics rather than through the engineering department, so *technically* I'm not an engineer.

      ReplyDelete