Monday, November 21, 2005
Co-ops
Please do not quote this post in part. Only taken together does it represent my views on co-ops.
Before this summer, co-ops were totally irrelevant to me. They were either something that had happened before I even started in bunnies or they were operating across the country and didn’t really affect my hopes to one day rise to number one in my district and place competitively nationally.
Then a co-op formed in my backyard. All of a sudden, I had an opinion. I didn’t like it. Not at all. The bar I was trying to reach – the one that seemed pretty far out of reach as it was - suddenly moved even further away. It was very discouraging.
Let me state for the record that I believe there is nothing wrong with being competitive. We all like to produce good rabbits and have them win. Otherwise, we’d hold rabbit shows like fashion shows and just parade them around without having them judged. No, we like to compete. Let’s just face it.
It’s the way we sometimes go about being competitive that makes it problematic or just plain wrong.
Forming a co-op is one technique that can be employed to help an exhibitor be more competitive. If you are just working together for fun, you don’t have to merge your points. So let’s just be honest. Co-oping is about gaining a competitive advantage. (And I’m sure it is fun, too, when the match works well between those in the co-op.)
After all, what is a co-op? It is two or more people who get to add their points together. They fill out their rabbits’ registrations with both (or all) names listed as owners, and they enter shows under both (or all) names. But it’s just a matter of paperwork.
Almost every breeder I know works with other breeders and friends in some fashion. We all have the option of lending rabbits, doing joint breedings, giving first choice in purchases, and so forth, with our friends. And we should always celebrate each other’s wins and be supportive of other breeders. So that’s not the part that makes it a co-op. It just comes down to adding points together and not having to compete against each other.
When I compete, I like to play on an even playing field. I don’t mind losing as much as never having had a fair chance to begin with. Let me amend that – I don’t mind losing to people who are good sports about winning.
Being one person, there is no way I can go to two different shows in two different locations, but a co-op can. Sure, domestic couples and family members can, too, but they must at least start from the same household to do it. A co-op can divide the territory and cover twice as much of the country, even winning Best Of Breeds and Best In Shows on the same day in two different locations. It just doesn’t seem fair somehow.
But reality is, there exists no even playing field in rabbits. Some breeders are wealthier than others. Some have large families who share responsibilities while others have to do it all themselves. Some have education or experience in animals that aids them in getting started and doing better sooner. Some people do not work outside the home. Some Holland breeders had experience in other breeds or were able to leverage their success with those breeds to get a leg up from the beginning. Some people are smarter, stronger, more patient, or more flexible than others. Some people had great mentors when they got started. There are all kinds of advantages.
There is no level playing field in rabbits.
Here’s what a level playing field would look like. Everyone starts with let’s say 24 genetically identical rabbits. They each have the same amount of money, access to the same knowledge, and the same number of months to produce results. Whether and how they buy, sell, breed, or show would make the difference in their success.
You see, what we do in reality is nothing at all like a level playing field.
So if there is no way to make things equal and there are all kinds of advantages that some people will have over others, why be concerned about co-ops? The main reason I can think of is that it is one huge thing that we can do something about.
We can never even out personal wealth or physical strength or any of those other factors. But we can make a rule that states that only people living in the same household (the same ones who qualify for a family membership) and have a single barn can show together and combine their points.
I would hate to see our breed get to the point that breeders feel they must co-op to be competitive. And if two in a co-op together no longer makes you competitive (once almost everyone has paired up), will we see groups of three, four, or more? Will we become a team sport? Where does it stop?
Look at the top 10 to 15 breeders in open sweepstakes last year. How many of them are in co-ops now? Where will the non-co-op top breeders land at the end of this sweepstakes year? Just add up the points of the co-op partners and you will see what the new landscape might look like.
I would like to think that if I breed intelligently, learn all that I can, and work hard, I might be able to make up for the fact that I’m not wealthy or didn’t have much experience with animals before I started, and so forth. But I can’t think of anything that might make two against one seem like a fair match.
Rather than talk about this issue endlessly, potentially dividing our club, I would love to see a constitutional amendment voted upon by the entire membership that would ban co-ops. The amendment should make the rule effective January 1, 2007, when the next sweepstakes year starts. Then everyone should vote. If the majority want no co-cops, then they would just be a thing of the past.
And if the majority wants to allow them, then we’ll all just have to get over it – I’ve gotten over the one that formed near me. Co-ops of the future, just like co-ops of today, would just be utilizing one of the legal options available to them to be more competitive and they should not have to experience any hard feelings over their choice. After all, they are just playing by the established rules.
One way or another, I don’t want to spend any more time talking about it or thinking about co-ops. I just want to get back to bunnies.
Laurie Stroupe
The Nature Trail Rabbitry
Holland Lops Of Distinction
Precious Pet Rabbits
Pet Rabbit Care Information, Quality Pet Rabbit Breeders, and Rabbit Fun
¶ 8:46 AM
Before this summer, co-ops were totally irrelevant to me. They were either something that had happened before I even started in bunnies or they were operating across the country and didn’t really affect my hopes to one day rise to number one in my district and place competitively nationally.
Then a co-op formed in my backyard. All of a sudden, I had an opinion. I didn’t like it. Not at all. The bar I was trying to reach – the one that seemed pretty far out of reach as it was - suddenly moved even further away. It was very discouraging.
Let me state for the record that I believe there is nothing wrong with being competitive. We all like to produce good rabbits and have them win. Otherwise, we’d hold rabbit shows like fashion shows and just parade them around without having them judged. No, we like to compete. Let’s just face it.
It’s the way we sometimes go about being competitive that makes it problematic or just plain wrong.
Forming a co-op is one technique that can be employed to help an exhibitor be more competitive. If you are just working together for fun, you don’t have to merge your points. So let’s just be honest. Co-oping is about gaining a competitive advantage. (And I’m sure it is fun, too, when the match works well between those in the co-op.)
After all, what is a co-op? It is two or more people who get to add their points together. They fill out their rabbits’ registrations with both (or all) names listed as owners, and they enter shows under both (or all) names. But it’s just a matter of paperwork.
Almost every breeder I know works with other breeders and friends in some fashion. We all have the option of lending rabbits, doing joint breedings, giving first choice in purchases, and so forth, with our friends. And we should always celebrate each other’s wins and be supportive of other breeders. So that’s not the part that makes it a co-op. It just comes down to adding points together and not having to compete against each other.
When I compete, I like to play on an even playing field. I don’t mind losing as much as never having had a fair chance to begin with. Let me amend that – I don’t mind losing to people who are good sports about winning.
Being one person, there is no way I can go to two different shows in two different locations, but a co-op can. Sure, domestic couples and family members can, too, but they must at least start from the same household to do it. A co-op can divide the territory and cover twice as much of the country, even winning Best Of Breeds and Best In Shows on the same day in two different locations. It just doesn’t seem fair somehow.
But reality is, there exists no even playing field in rabbits. Some breeders are wealthier than others. Some have large families who share responsibilities while others have to do it all themselves. Some have education or experience in animals that aids them in getting started and doing better sooner. Some people do not work outside the home. Some Holland breeders had experience in other breeds or were able to leverage their success with those breeds to get a leg up from the beginning. Some people are smarter, stronger, more patient, or more flexible than others. Some people had great mentors when they got started. There are all kinds of advantages.
There is no level playing field in rabbits.
Here’s what a level playing field would look like. Everyone starts with let’s say 24 genetically identical rabbits. They each have the same amount of money, access to the same knowledge, and the same number of months to produce results. Whether and how they buy, sell, breed, or show would make the difference in their success.
You see, what we do in reality is nothing at all like a level playing field.
So if there is no way to make things equal and there are all kinds of advantages that some people will have over others, why be concerned about co-ops? The main reason I can think of is that it is one huge thing that we can do something about.
We can never even out personal wealth or physical strength or any of those other factors. But we can make a rule that states that only people living in the same household (the same ones who qualify for a family membership) and have a single barn can show together and combine their points.
I would hate to see our breed get to the point that breeders feel they must co-op to be competitive. And if two in a co-op together no longer makes you competitive (once almost everyone has paired up), will we see groups of three, four, or more? Will we become a team sport? Where does it stop?
Look at the top 10 to 15 breeders in open sweepstakes last year. How many of them are in co-ops now? Where will the non-co-op top breeders land at the end of this sweepstakes year? Just add up the points of the co-op partners and you will see what the new landscape might look like.
I would like to think that if I breed intelligently, learn all that I can, and work hard, I might be able to make up for the fact that I’m not wealthy or didn’t have much experience with animals before I started, and so forth. But I can’t think of anything that might make two against one seem like a fair match.
Rather than talk about this issue endlessly, potentially dividing our club, I would love to see a constitutional amendment voted upon by the entire membership that would ban co-ops. The amendment should make the rule effective January 1, 2007, when the next sweepstakes year starts. Then everyone should vote. If the majority want no co-cops, then they would just be a thing of the past.
And if the majority wants to allow them, then we’ll all just have to get over it – I’ve gotten over the one that formed near me. Co-ops of the future, just like co-ops of today, would just be utilizing one of the legal options available to them to be more competitive and they should not have to experience any hard feelings over their choice. After all, they are just playing by the established rules.
One way or another, I don’t want to spend any more time talking about it or thinking about co-ops. I just want to get back to bunnies.
Laurie Stroupe
The Nature Trail Rabbitry
Holland Lops Of Distinction
Precious Pet Rabbits
Pet Rabbit Care Information, Quality Pet Rabbit Breeders, and Rabbit Fun
¶ 8:46 AM
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
I agree that co-ops create an unfair advantage in the points sweepstakes. I think it is a great idea to pose the question to the specialty club, and put it to the members as to whether to continue allowing them, to discontinue them, or allow them with rules. It really does not seem fair to be able to show rabbits at two different shows on the same day. Just my opinion. Others may feel differently, but a vote would determine the feelings of the majority. My worry is where this will end. What if 8 or 9 people in a couple of states decide to form a co-op. Does that mean they can show at several different shows on one day and accumulate points? Think about it.
# posted by 
: 10:12 AM
: 10:12 AM
Truthfully when Brenda and I formed our co-op, points were at the top of our list. That focus quickly changed after our first show. Now it is about fun, there is no competitive edge between us, we can really enjoy each others wins. We are advancing each other rather than taking away form each other. There will no hurt feelings when that ONE rabbits comes along and it isn't "my" turn to pick from the litter. Every rabbit born now from combined breedings is "ours" not mine, not Brenda's. Why shouldn't that rabbit be entered in both names so that we both get credit?? With Brenda being a judge, sometimes we go to different shows, that has happened once, she judged/showed in KY I had show 20 min from home. To make up for that, sometimes she goes to shows and I stay home or vice versa. For the most part we have our own rabbits, we don't meet up the night before and "load up" if only 1 of us will be showing. I had a show yesterday without Brenda and only took 7 rabbits, all my own and still came home with BOV solid, BOV and BOSV Broken and Best of Breed. Our focus is on improving our breed-I thought that was a good thing. Think about it, this year's Conv. BOB came to be from a co-op, that rabbit may not have existed otherwise. There have always been co-ops, they didn't always win points or 1st in their zone for that matter, but now some of the more prominent breeders are doing it, so that makes it an issue?? those of us in co-ops have been around a long time. We were able to do it on our own. We have just decided to try something different. I can almost guarantee that when the new sweeps year starts in Jan '07 there will be more co-ops that have formed, and it will be all the same people who are complaining now. I wonder how they would vote then?? Remember that after all the dust settles on the show table the winner will be the winner, no matter whose name it is under. Anyone who wants to respond can email me privately. Littlelops@hotmail.com
# posted by : 4:53 PM
: 4:53 PM
Can we keep Co-Op & Individual sweepstake points in separate categories? Like how we keep Youth & Open separated?
Wouldn't that settle a lot of the argument? That way we are comparing apples with apples.
It would be fair if races between teams and individuals are separated. Yes, just like sports. Exibitors will have the choice on how they want to participate.
Keat
http://www.geocities.com/pondhor
Wouldn't that settle a lot of the argument? That way we are comparing apples with apples.
It would be fair if races between teams and individuals are separated. Yes, just like sports. Exibitors will have the choice on how they want to participate.
Keat
http://www.geocities.com/pondhor
Hi
I riase netherland dwarfs. There r coops in every breed. I thought the same thing u do. But then after all arguments, it came down to one thing. we're all doing the same thing. we are trying to better the breed. take your best to the show, if they aren't winning, work a little harder.
Thanx
Sarah
I riase netherland dwarfs. There r coops in every breed. I thought the same thing u do. But then after all arguments, it came down to one thing. we're all doing the same thing. we are trying to better the breed. take your best to the show, if they aren't winning, work a little harder.
Thanx
Sarah
# posted by : 6:52 PM
: 6:52 PM
oh and i forgot to mention.. don't let your mind get wrapped up in points bc the main focus for breeding is winning with a good rabbit...not a so-so rabbit. some people show ugly rabbits and take them to shows everywhere where there is no competition. some even send them with friends so they cna show in 2 places (they don't have to b coops). If they dont compete well in the national standings and go to a bunch of shows where theres no competition i would start to wonder what their main focus is. so stay focused!! take care
Thanx!
sarah :)
Thanx!
sarah :)
# posted by : 6:59 PM
: 6:59 PM
Hi All,
I have been raising Hollands for about 25 years and have seen it all. I also have had a winning herd and a losing herd, as well as won my share of conventions,
national shows, and sweepstakes over the years.
I have been a part of a co-op twice since raising Holland Lops. The first time was about 23 years ago when Shannon Byrom and myself formed a partnership. Good rabbits were at least $300 to $500 and we couldn't afford to buy many. So we each bought two and shared. This way we had the access to four nice breeding animals. It helped us both. This
partnership ended after about nine months when we both had produced what we needed for breeding.
I recently formed a partnership with Christine Feld. I was working a lot at the time and really had decided to sell all the bunnies. I wasn't breeding and just didn't have the time. Christine came up and bred my
does on several occasions. She really got me going again. We formed a partnership as the rabbits in my barn are as much hers as mine. Many are out of her
bucks. In return, I help her cull through her rabbits and loan her my bucks.
We travel to shows together and, honestly, it has renewed my interest in the rabbits. Without this partnership, I would be long gone. For us the partnership served a purpose. My herd needed stronger bodies and her herd needed stronger heads and bone.
Our herds complimented each other, so by working together we are able to build some better bunnies.
This is what raising rabbits is all about.
As for those of you hung up on points. They are just points and really don't mean a lot. If you live in California, we have large shows, so if you have nice rabbits it is easy to garner a lot of points. Does that mean we have the best rabbits - absolutely not!
It just means that the winners have beaten a bunch of other breeders. National shows and ARBA conventions are playing fields for the best of the best.
As for me, I am showing less these days. Sweepstakes really doesn't mean a lot to me. Making better
bunnies does. As a judge when I walk the rows at convention, I am disappointed at what I see. The
uniformity of the breed is lacking. The Pitney's did
a lot to help with that, and hopefully Christine and I
will continue this tradition.
For those of you up in arms about co-ops, get over it. They have been around for at least 25 years. The ARBA allows them, as do other specialty clubs. If you
vote to ban them, you could also dissolve some husband and wife partnerships (like Waddel and Hartwig - who have done a great job working together) as well as
family rabbitries.
You actually would have trouble getting rid of co-ops, as all they would have to do is to show under a single rabbitry name (allowed by the ARBA.)
I do believe that partners, co-ops and families should not show at different shows on the same day. I know there are same family teams doing this now. This problem of showing at different shows on the same day goes far beyond the co-op issue.
All this debate about co-ops sounds like "sour grapes." Why do you raise rabbits? Yes the
competition is important but the bottom line is to make better Hollands. Let's not lose sight of this. Why not find a partner and work together? It doubles the number of your cages. It also makes it a lot of fun. Two sets of eyes will keep you honest in your culling.
I for one enjoy being a part of a co-op. Honestly without Christine, I would not be here writing this email. I owe her a lot!!
Chris Zemny
I have been raising Hollands for about 25 years and have seen it all. I also have had a winning herd and a losing herd, as well as won my share of conventions,
national shows, and sweepstakes over the years.
I have been a part of a co-op twice since raising Holland Lops. The first time was about 23 years ago when Shannon Byrom and myself formed a partnership. Good rabbits were at least $300 to $500 and we couldn't afford to buy many. So we each bought two and shared. This way we had the access to four nice breeding animals. It helped us both. This
partnership ended after about nine months when we both had produced what we needed for breeding.
I recently formed a partnership with Christine Feld. I was working a lot at the time and really had decided to sell all the bunnies. I wasn't breeding and just didn't have the time. Christine came up and bred my
does on several occasions. She really got me going again. We formed a partnership as the rabbits in my barn are as much hers as mine. Many are out of her
bucks. In return, I help her cull through her rabbits and loan her my bucks.
We travel to shows together and, honestly, it has renewed my interest in the rabbits. Without this partnership, I would be long gone. For us the partnership served a purpose. My herd needed stronger bodies and her herd needed stronger heads and bone.
Our herds complimented each other, so by working together we are able to build some better bunnies.
This is what raising rabbits is all about.
As for those of you hung up on points. They are just points and really don't mean a lot. If you live in California, we have large shows, so if you have nice rabbits it is easy to garner a lot of points. Does that mean we have the best rabbits - absolutely not!
It just means that the winners have beaten a bunch of other breeders. National shows and ARBA conventions are playing fields for the best of the best.
As for me, I am showing less these days. Sweepstakes really doesn't mean a lot to me. Making better
bunnies does. As a judge when I walk the rows at convention, I am disappointed at what I see. The
uniformity of the breed is lacking. The Pitney's did
a lot to help with that, and hopefully Christine and I
will continue this tradition.
For those of you up in arms about co-ops, get over it. They have been around for at least 25 years. The ARBA allows them, as do other specialty clubs. If you
vote to ban them, you could also dissolve some husband and wife partnerships (like Waddel and Hartwig - who have done a great job working together) as well as
family rabbitries.
You actually would have trouble getting rid of co-ops, as all they would have to do is to show under a single rabbitry name (allowed by the ARBA.)
I do believe that partners, co-ops and families should not show at different shows on the same day. I know there are same family teams doing this now. This problem of showing at different shows on the same day goes far beyond the co-op issue.
All this debate about co-ops sounds like "sour grapes." Why do you raise rabbits? Yes the
competition is important but the bottom line is to make better Hollands. Let's not lose sight of this. Why not find a partner and work together? It doubles the number of your cages. It also makes it a lot of fun. Two sets of eyes will keep you honest in your culling.
I for one enjoy being a part of a co-op. Honestly without Christine, I would not be here writing this email. I owe her a lot!!
Chris Zemny
I love what Chris said about raising Hollands to better the breed! That has always been my main goal in my rabbitry. I would hate to think about you selling out of bunnies Chris! You have the most awesome Hollands! :)
I have to start by saying I have very mixed emotions regarding co-op. When I first saw the results of the ARBA National Convention, and all the co-op’s placing in the Open Show, I thought to myself that this was creating a disparity that will make it difficult for many to compete.
However, I thought about my own situation. We have a 28 hole rabbitry. We have 3 rescued rabbits, that leaves us with 25 holes for my three daughters. As a result they each have 8 holes in which to do all of their raising and breeding. That puts them at what we perceive to be a disadvantage in competition, and as a result they will compete together this year.
I will honestly say the only reason they are competing together is for points. They have had a co-op since they first started raising rabbits three years ago. They have often lent out their bucks to each other for breeding, and similar type of things. This has allowed each of them to enhance their herd, and improve their competitive level without showing as a co-op.
What I perceived as leveling the playing field by combining my daughters into one group, may actually be perceived by others as an unfair advantage. What about the person that only has eight holes? Now they must compete with someone that has twenty-four. Is the playing field level for them?
We are quick to look at the points from last year and on the surface it would appear that those forming co-ops have gained a distinct advantage. I think co-ops could be used to help smaller breeders be more competitive. Image a rabbitry of say 15 holes competing with those of 100 or more holes. How could they level the playing field? They could form a co-op with another breeder to increase the number of holes, and potentially lift their competitive level.
I don’t ever see co-ops getting into 7 or 8 rabbitries. Why? What is the purpose of the points? Sweepstakes money! The payout isn’t so big that it would really be worth having 7 or 8 people co-op together and then have to split the money. The other factor is pride. Those that win can take great pride in their accomplishment. I don’t think that would really be diminished by having a two member co-op, but what satisfaction would anyone get out of a 7 or 8 person co-op?
I’ll bring my thoughts to a conclusion. I think that co-ops are unfair. Wait… I think co-ops can level the playing field and improve the breed. Well then on the other hand…..
We’ve posted a pole on this very subject at Holland Lops by Three Little Ladies Rabbitry. Stop buy and place your vote! Oh, and we are trying to keep the playing field somewhat level by allowing only one vote.
However, I thought about my own situation. We have a 28 hole rabbitry. We have 3 rescued rabbits, that leaves us with 25 holes for my three daughters. As a result they each have 8 holes in which to do all of their raising and breeding. That puts them at what we perceive to be a disadvantage in competition, and as a result they will compete together this year.
I will honestly say the only reason they are competing together is for points. They have had a co-op since they first started raising rabbits three years ago. They have often lent out their bucks to each other for breeding, and similar type of things. This has allowed each of them to enhance their herd, and improve their competitive level without showing as a co-op.
What I perceived as leveling the playing field by combining my daughters into one group, may actually be perceived by others as an unfair advantage. What about the person that only has eight holes? Now they must compete with someone that has twenty-four. Is the playing field level for them?
We are quick to look at the points from last year and on the surface it would appear that those forming co-ops have gained a distinct advantage. I think co-ops could be used to help smaller breeders be more competitive. Image a rabbitry of say 15 holes competing with those of 100 or more holes. How could they level the playing field? They could form a co-op with another breeder to increase the number of holes, and potentially lift their competitive level.
I don’t ever see co-ops getting into 7 or 8 rabbitries. Why? What is the purpose of the points? Sweepstakes money! The payout isn’t so big that it would really be worth having 7 or 8 people co-op together and then have to split the money. The other factor is pride. Those that win can take great pride in their accomplishment. I don’t think that would really be diminished by having a two member co-op, but what satisfaction would anyone get out of a 7 or 8 person co-op?
I’ll bring my thoughts to a conclusion. I think that co-ops are unfair. Wait… I think co-ops can level the playing field and improve the breed. Well then on the other hand…..
We’ve posted a pole on this very subject at Holland Lops by Three Little Ladies Rabbitry. Stop buy and place your vote! Oh, and we are trying to keep the playing field somewhat level by allowing only one vote.
Co-ops IMO are great. I think it speaks to the great people we have in this hobby that they are working together to better the breed.
The points thing, I can see why it would bother people as it does appear that the co-ops are at an advantage. But as Laurie and some others pointed out there are many advantages that people have based on the size of their rabbitry, money to spend on stock and show expenses, and the area they live in.
I have a 30 hole rabbitry and last year the province I live in and the two next to me had a total of six shows, the biggest having less than 250 rabbits and most having fewer then 200 rabbits in total. So even if I were to win BIS at all six shows I would still be lucky to make the top hundred in sweep points. I certainly will never be able to compete with people who live in areas where they can do 40+ shows a year or have 100+ rabbits at the breed level alone.
I guess I always felt that points really don't matter. Winning points really doesn't prove anything. I know when I look to see who is doing well with rabbits I seldom look at sweep points and if I do I look at the number of shows and do the math in my head to see who is doing well. Last year second place averaged over 1000 points per show and first averaged 536 points per show. Who had a better year? For that matter eighth and tenth place both averaged over 700 points per show and nine-teenth place averaged 574 points per show, again who had the better year? What did the points, as they are now, show?
So to me, why think about eliminating co-ops or putting them in another category? Do they have an advantage in sweep points, yes, but so do a lot of people. There is really nothing we can do to level the playing field so why single out co-ops when they can also do good. Co-ops can help improve the breed and motivate breeders, such as Chris Zemny who shared in her comments how her new co-op kept her in the hobby. I definitely think the good outweighs the bad when it comes to co-ops.
Then again that is just my two cents for what it is worth.
Post a Comment
The points thing, I can see why it would bother people as it does appear that the co-ops are at an advantage. But as Laurie and some others pointed out there are many advantages that people have based on the size of their rabbitry, money to spend on stock and show expenses, and the area they live in.
I have a 30 hole rabbitry and last year the province I live in and the two next to me had a total of six shows, the biggest having less than 250 rabbits and most having fewer then 200 rabbits in total. So even if I were to win BIS at all six shows I would still be lucky to make the top hundred in sweep points. I certainly will never be able to compete with people who live in areas where they can do 40+ shows a year or have 100+ rabbits at the breed level alone.
I guess I always felt that points really don't matter. Winning points really doesn't prove anything. I know when I look to see who is doing well with rabbits I seldom look at sweep points and if I do I look at the number of shows and do the math in my head to see who is doing well. Last year second place averaged over 1000 points per show and first averaged 536 points per show. Who had a better year? For that matter eighth and tenth place both averaged over 700 points per show and nine-teenth place averaged 574 points per show, again who had the better year? What did the points, as they are now, show?
So to me, why think about eliminating co-ops or putting them in another category? Do they have an advantage in sweep points, yes, but so do a lot of people. There is really nothing we can do to level the playing field so why single out co-ops when they can also do good. Co-ops can help improve the breed and motivate breeders, such as Chris Zemny who shared in her comments how her new co-op kept her in the hobby. I definitely think the good outweighs the bad when it comes to co-ops.
Then again that is just my two cents for what it is worth.
# posted by : 3:39 PM
: 3:39 PMLinks to this post:
<< Home
