Obedience vs. Rally

[Aleron]

Thats weird CARO has no extra fees for intact dogs. That would make me stop trailing that venue for sure! Praise is only valuable if your dog finds it so though. Its not a huge advantage if you are working with terriers lol.

I wish APDT didn't. I actually emailed them about it and they sent me a lengthy reply saying that it's because their focus is on pet dogs and their feeling is that pet dogs should be S/N. Which I understand their org is about promoting pet dog training instead of competition training but at the same time, they are offering competitions and titles.

That is true about the praise for sure. The biggest thing I see is people get so in the habit of talking to their dogs, giving extra cues, nagging, etc that they get into the ring and are silent and...their dogs get stressed and don't perform well.

LOL this is why I have said my dogs and I find obed easiest. They do great for short bursts like obedience and agility. The long focus of a long and tight rally course is harder for us. Not too hard obviously. But harder than teaching a good heel. I didn't mean to imply you didn't have a good heel, just saying that you shouldnt' need a food or praise to do a very simple heel pattern. The ability to talk to my dog doesn't make rally easier, I don't talk to them when working anyway.

I don't like to use a lot of talking and the such from the beginning on for the same reason. But it is very hard to get people away from that habit! I do think a lot of people trial too soon too, which creates a lot of issues as well. And of course, all dogs are different and some have sort of unique struggles that you have to work through.

 

[Dekka]

Its been year, but once I trained with chatter and praise....I had a very stressy JRT who did find praise rewarding (it meant nothing bad was coming). I kid you not when I started training her I did it in my kitchen with a swiffer handy.

Me: Sit
Ferret: Sits, then looks worried, hovers..pees then runs and hides. Sometimes she would take the treat before she ran sometimes not.

It was like that for EVERY cue for at least a month.

When we got to obed classes I was told to chat to her to keep her 'up'. So I did. Then we hit our first trial. The on leash heeling went ok.. The off leash heeling looked like I beat her. Slinking, lagging it was sad. We passed, but that was my lowest score ever.

I went home, trained no talking and she ended up my best obed dog to date. My friend fell in love and took her home (to a much less stressful house) so she only got her CD, but she got a HIT. Not bad from a dog that peed all the time.

Never again will I make that mistake. My JRTs wouldn't care if I talked, though the whippets would.

 

[Emily]

I wish APDT didn't. I actually emailed them about it and they sent me a lengthy reply saying that it's because their focus is on pet dogs and their feeling is that pet dogs should be S/N. Which I understand their org is about promoting pet dog training instead of competition training but at the same time, they are offering competitions and titles.

Wow, that's grade A BS on their part. I can think of several people I know who trial and JUDGE APDT that are breeders and the like. And I would go as far as to say that the vast majority of dogs that I see at APDT trials are sport dogs in some sense. Yes, they're pets, kept for companionship, but the people showing them aren't average pet owners.

And why do I feel like I could summarize their response into, "Because we want to be PC."...?

 

[elegy]

I've played both and I love both for different reasons. I've done AKC Rally and Traditional Obedience, CDSP traditional obedience, and APDT rally.

A lot if what you take into it. AKC Rally is easy and the judging is too-frequently lazy and a lot of the competitors are lazy and kind of pathetic. (Apparently they just released new rules today, some of which are addressing this, though I haven't read them yet, just heard about them). AKC Rally has, I think, turned into a bit of a joke. An easy "gimme" title. Not for everyone- there are people out there putting in beautiful performances with their dogs- but for too many people.

I personally *don't* think APDT rally is easy, at least in the upper level. You've got a drop on recall, you've got a retrieve, you've got a pseudo-directed jumping exercise and a pseudo-signals exercise. It's not the utility ring, no, but it's not "easy". Yes you can talk to your dog, but you do get docked for double commands (wish they'd do that in AKC). I dunno, Luce and I had a ton of fun with it. She liked it way more than Novice obedience, but, well, Novice obedience is boring as heck

You get out of it what you put into it. I do expect energetic, correct, attentive heeling, straight sits, straight fronts, the whole nine yards. And yeah, it does kind of annoy me when slow, painful performances score nearly as well as my dogs' clean, much prettier performances, but I try to not get hung up on that. I know that my dogs are going in there and doing a bang-up job, and we have a lot of fun playing the game, so that's what I try to focus on

ETA: I didn't have any trouble transitioning to the "no talking" of the AKC Novice ring. I do talk quit a bit during rally courses, but it's primarily to give information to my dogs, not to cheerlead. You need a whole lot less information when you're doing a novice heeling pattern. Luce doesn't care about cheerleading, and Steve gets wound if I cheer him on so less is always better with him.

 

[Aleron]

Wow, that's grade A BS on their part. I can think of several people I know who trial and JUDGE APDT that are breeders and the like. And I would go as far as to say that the vast majority of dogs that I see at APDT trials are sport dogs in some sense. Yes, they're pets, kept for companionship, but the people showing them aren't average pet owners.

And why do I feel like I could summarize their response into, "Because we want to be PC."...?

I felt the same way about it. They are the only organization I can think of that has different fees for intact vs. altered dogs, although AKC has the S/N rule on ILP/PALS/Canine Partners.

I think all competitions are what you put into them. I have seen hard to watch performances in Rally, Obedience and Agility too many times to count. Some of them ended up being qualifying. And really, for some people that is their goal and possibly all they are capable of at that point in their training. Everyone starts some where. My first dogs weren't perfect for sure. But each one was progressively better and I don't aim to just qualify but to get a good score too.

My biggest issue with Rally (AKC is all I've done) is that I think the scoring is not always consistent. I understand and can accept that perfect or near perfect runs will be judged much more critically than the rather iffy runs. However, it seems the iffy runs should be scoring in the 70s, not in the 90s or upper 80s but that isn't always the case. AKC seems to be having a hard time getting a handle on just what to do with the judging of Rally. They have had rule changes because initially, too many 100s were given out. They've tried to make judging stricter but still keep it "easier" and intimidating for newcomers but IME there is a lot of inconsistency with some of the judges. Then people see really, really poor performances Qing (and sometimes iffy performances placing or scoring within a few points of really great performances) and feel that Rally titles don't really mean anything. There was hope that the addition of Rally would generate interest in competition Obedience, which entries have been dwindling for. So far, that hasn't really been the case though. Now they've started Beginner Novice which is sort of a bridge between Rally and Obedience but I'm not sure that will work to get more people into Competition Obedience either.

 

[Saeleofu]

The problem with starting in Rally is that things that are acceptable in Rally are NQ's in OB. Talking to your dog, multiple commands (if you do AKC Rally), excessive body language, ect.

This. Doing Rally first makes for bad handling when you try to get into obedience. If you know this ahead of time you can attempt to set rules for yourself to help prevent the bad habits from forming, but once they're there, they're hard to break. I have not done obedience with Logan yet because I'm a sloppy handler. I need to work on MY skills more than I need to work on his skills (eventually we will do obedience). This is where Basic Novice in AKC comes in - it's supposed to be a transition from Rally to Obedience - you can give praise/encouragement in some exercises.

I prefer rally so far because it's more relaxed. It IS a good way to get into dog sports - if my options were only agility and obedience I can't say if I'd actually be into dog sports, because both require more time and money commitment than rally does. I trained Gavroche basics myself, took a 6 week rally course, and then got two qualifying scores on our first two trials (and blew it on the third trial by missing a sign). Some people have trouble remembering what signs are what though, so for some people rally might be harder from a handler's perspective than obedience.

For the dog, rally is easier to train for because it requires less precision. If the dog is not in a perfect heel, it doesn't matter. If they don't sit completely straight, it doesn't matter. You can actually get by on a LOT of luring/whatever in the ring - if you take a dog that has its CGC, you can probably lure it through a novice course and get a qualifying score (possibly a pretty decent qualifying score). That being said, if you train for obedience, and then do rally, your dog will look fantastic in the ring (a proper heel looks better than a LLW regardless of whether it's required or not) and it *should* be a breeze.

My biggest issue with Rally (AKC is all I've done) is that I think the scoring is not always consistent.

Too true. Not consistent from one run to the next under the same judge, but ESPECIALLY not consistent from one judge to the next. Last year in a 3-day trial I had equally crappy performances all three days. My scores ranged from low 70s to high 90s. NONE of those performances were worth 90s in my opinion, and some of they probably shouldn't have even been Qs.

 

[Emily]

That being said, if you train for obedience, and then do rally, your dog will look fantastic in the ring (a proper heel looks better than a LLW regardless of whether it's required or not) and it *should* be a breeze.

This is what I did, and it WAS a breeze, lol. We blew through our RN and RA in six runs and scored a 99/100/99, and 99/100/100. And I'm not saying that because I'm trying to toot my own horn, just trying to show that training for precision really does pay off in the Rally ring.

And like I said earlier, the Rally ring was a great place for us since I could remind her to "watch" and "get in". You definitely can use Rally to your benefit in the OB ring if you do it wisely!

 

[Dekka]

For the dog, rally is easier to train for because it requires less precision. I

Respectfully I have to disagree. You can qualify just fine in obed with sloppy sits and not a fantastic heel.

Why on earth would one train their dog for less precision. Precision isn't hard for the dog, its hard for the trainer. Doing a perfect sit isn't hard on a dog (baring medical issues) if that is what they know. If the criteria is loose and a what ever sit has been rewarded then that is what the dog will do.

and in the end the dog has no idea what is going on in terms of scoring.

The only way you could say its easier for dogs is that the owner can chat up the dog and depending on venue use the occasional treat. IME my dogs find obedience easier because of the long amount of time they need to focus for a rally run. An open obedience run takes less minutes of dedicated focus than an advanced rally run. That is for my dogs and me. Not saying it would be for all dogs.

Rally is fairly easy, but obedience isn't as hard as most people make it out to be. Agility IME is by far the hardest thing I have tried.

 

[Saeleofu]

Why on earth would one train their dog for less precision. Precision isn't hard for the dog, its hard for the trainer.

I did word that wrong. I agree that it is easier to train for, not easier for the dog to actually do (what's easiest for them is whatever they were trained to do). I can see where I screwed that up in that paragraph lol.

 

[Danefied]

This. Doing Rally first makes for bad handling when you try to get into obedience. If you know this ahead of time you can attempt to set rules for yourself to help prevent the bad habits from forming, but once they're there, they're hard to break.

I wouldn't make this an absolute statement though.
If you're working with someone who does know what they're doing, I don't think this is necessarily true.
I work with a really good trainer (IMO ), and she doesn't let us get away with things even if they're permissible in the rally ring.
I've noticed that a lot of people who train on their own come out and try out AKC rally and you can tell they're not working with a trainer. Yeah, they get qualifying scores, but they're not going to be in the ribbons unless its a really small show.

AKC judging bugs me a lot too. I find the judges way too easy and then sometimes you get the ones who judge the clearly better dogs harsher than the ones who are struggling. Its really inconsistent.
I've seen a lot of runs qualify that I didn't think should, but I've also heard its just another AKC $$$ thing - they want a lot of entries so they want the judges to make it easy to get a Q run.

I wish we had more APDT stuff around here. I'm pretty much stuck with AKC if I want to show locally.

 

[Saeleofu]

I'm looking forward to my first UKC trial. From what I've heard, UKC is all around a much nicer venue to compete in ANYTHING than AKC is. I just wish their shows/trials were more common around here.

 

[Linds]

I wish APDT didn't. I actually emailed them about it and they sent me a lengthy reply saying that it's because their focus is on pet dogs and their feeling is that pet dogs should be S/N. Which I understand their org is about promoting pet dog training instead of competition training but at the same time, they are offering competitions and titles.

Oh come ON! That's absolutely ridiculous. How about training organizations keep their noses out of my dogs balls? That would be nice.

I will continue to compete with them because at this point I can't really afford to drop another venue and they are fun. God I hate that I can't compete AKC at all. Stupid AKC with their stupid rules that "mutts" have to be altered to compete.

But, back on topic: you know, at first I was completely astounded and slightly disappointed that you could use food in the ring at points in APDT rally. BUT once you do it you find out you really dont' use it. The biggest bonus it brings is that you can keep your food on you. But I think most I did was feed at the start line. It throws you off your game trying to give them treats and to be honest, if you want to place in anything other than Level 1 A then you can't feed in the ring because you seriously do not have time.

 

[AliciaD]

This whole thread is inspiring me to work more with Cameron. Love it.

 

[release the hounds]

How about training organizations keep their noses out of my dogs balls?

:rofl1:

 

[elegy]

Have you guys seen the new AKC rally regulations that were put up a couple days ago? They have a bunch of new signs (lots borrowed from APDT) and look to be putting new emphasis on teamwork, briskness, etc in the ring.

It makes me laugh and laugh that "pleading" is to be penalized as a major deduction

 

[Shai]

It makes me laugh and laugh that "pleading" is to be penalized as a major deduction

They actually used the word "pleading"????? :rofl1:

 

[Shai]

God I hate that I can't compete AKC at all. Stupid AKC with their stupid rules that "mutts" have to be altered to compete.

+2
And a reason I'm hesitant to go the Koolie route :s AKC is pretty much all we have here with anything approaching regularity...

 

[Aleron]

+2
And a reason I'm hesitant to go the Koolie route :s AKC is pretty much all we have here with anything approaching regularity...

I wish they'd start a separate program for rare breeds that aren't FSS to be able to compete. Just give the dogs numbers like Pal/LIP or Canine Partners, no registration, pedigree or anything but allow them to remain intact. Or just allow Canine Partners to be left intact. They need entries and they are potentially missing out on a segment of dog owners who want to do stuff with their dogs - namely people with rare breeds and sport mixes but also people who just don't want to alter their dog. I suspect what doesn't sit well with them about that is mixed breeds or non-AKC registered purebreds possibly being bred with AKC titles for generations. Also, it gives breeders less incentive to stick it out with them and play by their rules. We've talked about the need to outcross in some breeds, that some people support and others oppose. This would pretty much give performance breeders the go ahead to do that, all they'd really be giving up is conformation showing. Registered or not, their dogs can compete in performance events.

They actually used the word "pleading"????? :rofl1:

Have you seen some of the attempts at Rally? I'm thinking that pleading is the most appropriate word to use

 

[AdrianneIsabel]

I don't blame AKC for not allowing intact unrecognized breeds to compete. It would be hideous to argue which breed is valid and which is not. On the flipside I am pretty sure the Koolie breed doesn't want to be AKC anyways, right? It's a struggle and compromise running a registry I assume.

 

[Linds]

I don't blame AKC for not allowing intact unrecognized breeds to compete. It would be hideous to argue which breed is valid and which is not. On the flipside I am pretty sure the Koolie breed doesn't want to be AKC anyways, right? It's a struggle and compromise running a registry I assume.

I just think that whether or not the dogs are intact should be irrelevent. I think that the "mutts" should be allowed to compete whole. I don't care then if my dog is lableled a mixed breed.

To be honest, I get why they do it and I don't expect anything else from them. Can you imagine the uprising that would happen if mixed breeds and non AKC rec. breeds could compete intact? But at the same time I find it incredibly backwards and think they opened the door with allowing mixes to compete and that making them be altered is a PC move and something to pacify the AKC confromation crowd.

And yes, I would cry if Koolies became AKC recognized.