I guess I just don't really understand what makes it different from other obstacles. I know I'm approaching the topic as someone who has never had table issues with a dog (want to talk about taking out the teeter, you come find me
), so I'm genuinely looking for answers.
For example, similar to your post Ado, I have a friend who ran a dog who Could Not hit contacts in the ring. This is one of the trainers I know who I am most impressed with. Incredibly hard worker, fantastic timing, cheerfully drove 3 hours each way to weekly lessons so she could work with a top trainer, etc. The dog with the issues could and did regularly win steeplechase classes despite being called on 2 contacts, because the rest of her run was so outstanding she could still be 10 seconds faster. Her other dog made it to the Steeplechase finals at Cynosport. She went to every trainer (other than the one who said "leave your dog with me for the weekend and I will fix her contacts" but wouldn't say how and wouldn't let her be there), seminars, ran in NADAC where you can train in the ring, ran Gamblers where she could 'school' the contacts...nothing fixed them. It was practically heartbreaking to watch.
So where is the difference (or is there not)? Should contacts not be called because some dogs simply can not perform them in a trial setting? Perhaps change it to a "dog performed the obstacle safely" call, but not require hitting the yellow? I think that is probably the other obstacle I'd consider similar to some of the table issues I've heard/seen. Some people, no matter how hard they work, simply can't get them in a trial.
I apologize for phrasing my thoughts the way I did; I have a lot of respect for many of the people in this thread and the work they've done with their dogs. I absolutely get the "sometimes it doesn't matter what you do, it isn't going to happen" thing; what I don't understand is why the table is different from other obstacles in regards to that argument. Enlighten me!