whiskedaway Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 I prefer agility. It's more fun for both me and my dog, and it doesn't matter how fun I try to make obedience, Akira just doesn't enjoy it. Funnily enough, though, since starting agility and getting the hang of it, Akira has really started to put more effort into obedience. She has to be obedient to participate in agility (ie, running off in class means that she doesn't get to play and has to sit out as punishment) and as a result she no longer runs off during stays in obedience either, and her drops have improved a lot. Halo on the other hand loves obedience, and because of that she's fun to train and makes me enjoy obedience more. She'd happily sit, stay, drop, stand until the cows come home as long as I'm the one telling her to do it. However she's just as much of a joy to train in agility (though we've only done foundation work such as walking over a pole on the ground and running through a tunnel because she's too young) due to the fact that she just wants to please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSoSwift Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 hmmm well I would probably say obedience, but that would have something to do with the fact I have done a lot more obedience than agility. My dogs love obedience, Lewis's favourite thing is heeling because it's loads of fun and spontaneous. Paddock bashing does not make obedience fun. When my dogs were 7 months old they probably did maybe 4 or 5 short bursts of maybe a minute to maybe 4 minutes at a time, some days less. Obedience can be fun, stimulating and exciting if it is made that way. Agility I like, but am still learning myself so I can get a little frustrated or confused, so I guess the dogs love it - I am getting there!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huski Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 I also don't like the way obedience is heading. Can you be more specific PF? It's so much fun when it is fun! :D Totally agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inevitablue Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Without getting people offside, cause I don't mean to, just making an observation from my own experience and of those around me. It's human nature to enjoy tasks more that we gain success at. I think traditionally it has been easier to train a dog to get it's JD title than it is to get a CD. I think people get more success quicker with agility. Not taking away from those who win at agility, as that requires tactical training to win events, but as agility training is high energy, and the individual tasks broken down more (ie get your body over the jump) more dogs seem to enjoy it because it's seen as FUN. Take that high energy, fun aspect and transfer that to obedience and suddenly it is no longer a chore, the dog is super attentive and success happens quicker. Im yet to get back into the competition ring ( dog is still underage ) but I think obedience training is coming ahead in leaps and bounds. What I experienced 10 years ago (heel, check, heel, check) changing to training-in-drive being used by more people outside the working GSD, Malinois & co society is only beneficial for the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kavik Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 (edited) I think with agility you can make it very technical or not. Handling and obstacle performance at the top level is very complicated and training them properly takes time and lots of knowledge especially weaves and contacts, but also complicated handling. However people can and do train and compete without making it as technical too, just giving it a go and running with their dog. I am finding I really like the technical parts, proofing my weave entries, working on independent contacts, conplicated handling manouvres. And the speed is a buzz! :D I like the variety - the different obstacles, the different courses and challenges. ETA: The Susan Garrett seminar I went to was amazing in showing the large number of pocesses and criteria she has for her 2o2o contact training, much of it before you even get to the equipment and of course her 2x2 weave training. They are both very complicated and require knowledge and skill to do correctly. Edited June 14, 2011 by Kavik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inevitablue Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 Totally agree with you Kavik, agility training to win requires commitment, skills and processes, but for the average 'there to have a nice day with my dog' competitor then agility is easier to title in and often presents less disappointments. Quite a lot of people say they tried obedience but it was boring, me being one of them 6 or so years ago. I titled my previous dogs in agility but gave up in obedience. Now that I'm doing the high energy style of obedience with my new dog it is sooooo addictive for both of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggy Posted June 14, 2011 Share Posted June 14, 2011 I like them both. I can't decide which one I like more. I keep changing my vote. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agility Dogs Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I think with agility you can make it very technical or not. Handling and obstacle performance at the top level is very complicated and training them properly takes time and lots of knowledge especially weaves and contacts, but also complicated handling. However people can and do train and compete without making it as technical too, just giving it a go and running with their dog. I am finding I really like the technical parts, proofing my weave entries, working on independent contacts, conplicated handling manouvres. And the speed is a buzz! :D I like the variety - the different obstacles, the different courses and challenges. ETA: The Susan Garrett seminar I went to was amazing in showing the large number of pocesses and criteria she has for her 2o2o contact training, much of it before you even get to the equipment and of course her 2x2 weave training. They are both very complicated and require knowledge and skill to do correctly. I (obviously) like agility more. Initially we started out doing obedience, but what turned me off was the old school methods and the attitude of people at clubs. I know this is changing, but for obedience to continue to be relevant to all dog owners the people running clubs are going to have to move more quickly. Kavik, I think you've hit the nail on the head. Competition agility is more accessible than competition obedience and as a result more fun. I think this is simply because of the lack of technical criteria in agility and the potential to succeed more quickly as a result. (I initially got sucked in by this.) The problem is that you quickly stall once you have passed through the initial stages and need to go back and 'fix' a whole host of performance issues that crop up once you understand how to run courses more efficiently. (My 14 month old puppy has almost as many skills as my 5 year old Advanced level dog - simply because I have set out to train more effectively from the beginning. FTR - I'm talking about body awareness and handling cues, NOT equipment skills.) BUT, IMO at the higher levels of the sport there is just as much technical skill required to be successful and consistent in agility. It's not just directed jumping...... All that said, I do enjoy both and can really appreciate the skill involved in Obedience. My 'Agility Dogs' are all trained to a standard where they could compete (and pass) in the obedience ring at up to probably CDX standard, its just that until I can't run any more I will find agility more rewarding and as a result so do they. At the end of the day thought as long as the dogs are getting out of their yard and doing something it is a good thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuffles Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Just putting this out there, hope this isn't too off topic. Is it mainly the heelwork that people find boring with obedience? The reason I ask is, that I think most of the other exercises are either really useful for everyday life (SFE, recall, stays), or 'fun' for the handler and dog (mainly higher level exercises like retrieves, sendaways, scent work). Do you think that different heeling rules like shorter patterns (like AKC), being able to talk to the dog, etc, would make a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RubyStar Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 (edited) The problem is that you quickly stall once you have passed through the initial stages and need to go back and 'fix' a whole host of performance issues that crop up once you understand how to run courses more efficiently. That's the nature of training, though. You have to make mistakes to know what to do better next time, and the only way for that to happen is to just get out there and give it a shot. We all start out gung-ho for our first dogs desperate to trial, not really knowing what it is we should be training but we do our best, get out there and trial, get bitten by the trialling bug, then know for our next dog what we can do better from the start to get us to a better position than we're currently in. If people want a quick taste of success and get through the lower classes in agility and obedience, so be it, it might just spur them on to do things better for the next dog if they find it so much fun and gives them the motivation to go further! I know for me, I don't aspire to do great things in the agility ring. I'm one who is happy with mediocre runs but I am out there and having a ball with my dogs and my dogs show me how much fun they're having with me! One day I might aspire to do better and handle a super fast dog in masters and do well, but for now I am happy with my average speed Labs and my crappy handling skills With obedience, I made plenty of mistakes with my first trialling dog, Ruby. As a result, we are paying the price in the ring. She can do all her exercises with her eyes closed in training, but get into the ring, it's another story..... thing is you will never know how great your dog really is until you test it out in the ring. Going into training Millie, I had a bit of a better idea of what to do differently, and she outshines Ruby in some aspects (attention for one). My next dog, I hope to do even greater things with with the knowledge my current two have taught me, and better still with all future dogs. Obedience is the thing I aspire to get better and better with Edited June 15, 2011 by RubyStar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RubyStar Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Just putting this out there, hope this isn't too off topic. Is it mainly the heelwork that people find boring with obedience? The reason I ask is, that I think most of the other exercises are either really useful for everyday life (SFE, recall, stays), or 'fun' for the handler and dog (mainly higher level exercises like retrieves, sendaways, scent work). Do you think that different heeling rules like shorter patterns (like AKC), being able to talk to the dog, etc, would make a difference? I love to watch a dog who can heel beautifully, and it's a great feeling when your dog can do it, but I could personally live without long heel routines. It shouldn't all be about heelwork, as the other exercises are so much fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kavik Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I also get nervous when I trial (getting better than I was though!) and was too terrified to enter Diesel in an obedience trial. I probably should have, just to see how we went before his health problems ruled it out. The fact that the scoring is quite precise in obedience and someone is carefully watching every move and positioning really terrifies me. In agility, results are what count. If you are serious, then of course you pay a lot of attention to your handling and runs where you don't qualify can feel better than ones that you do but were 'crunchy'. But it doesn't matter if you do a front cross or a rear cross or even (gasp!) a blind cross or if you have to baby the weaves and contacts, the scoring is not as minute, if the dog gets clear under time you qualify, they are not so much looking at your handling. So once you are out there and running you don't feel as scrutinised and can concentrate on having fun :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agility Dogs Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Just putting this out there, hope this isn't too off topic. Is it mainly the heelwork that people find boring with obedience? The reason I ask is, that I think most of the other exercises are either really useful for everyday life (SFE, recall, stays), or 'fun' for the handler and dog (mainly higher level exercises like retrieves, sendaways, scent work). Do you think that different heeling rules like shorter patterns (like AKC), being able to talk to the dog, etc, would make a difference? For me it is not any of that (because my dogs can do it). It is purely that I find agility as an activity more physically challenging/rewarding for me. I get more enjoyment out of the physical performance that is required in the agility ring than I do in obedience - much of the training I do for agility is not that different from what I do for obedience any way. It's kind of the same reason I prefer agility to flyball or frisbee - I have to physically push myself harder in agility and that is part of the buzz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ness Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 (edited) Wuffles I love heelwork - hmm maybe I am just weird. Doesn't matter how long the routine is to me (well ok when I am working Kenz, if its Ness lets just get rid of it entirely). Edited June 15, 2011 by ness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSoSwift Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 I LOVE it when you and your dog are completely in sync and moving as one in heeling, a floating happy dog, and an ecstatic handler. That is what keeps me going back, I chase the feeling I get when it is all perfect, even if that perfect is only a couple of strides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staranais Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 (edited) Kavik, I think you've hit the nail on the head. Competition agility is more accessible than competition obedience and as a result more fun. I think this is simply because of the lack of technical criteria in agility and the potential to succeed more quickly as a result. (I initially got sucked in by this.) I think you have made a great point, too. In a similar vein, I'd say that at least over here, it's incredibly hard to title in obedience. I'd say less than 1% of dogs that compete in Ob will ever achieve any Ob title over here. Whereas from what I'd seen the average fit dog and dedicated owner can usually achieve at least some agility or jumpers titles - not because agility itself is easier, just because the award system is different. So there's perhaps more motivation for the average owner to do Agility, since their hard work is more likely to be recognised in the form of a title? I also think that's one reason that Rally-O and the CGC system are gaining ground over here, as they too give the average owner a chance to earn a title. Edited June 15, 2011 by Staranais Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agility Dogs Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 The problem is that you quickly stall once you have passed through the initial stages and need to go back and 'fix' a whole host of performance issues that crop up once you understand how to run courses more efficiently. That's the nature of training, though. You have to make mistakes to know what to do better next time, and the only way for that to happen is to just get out there and give it a shot. That's my point exactly. The standard of entry for agility is, for better or for worse, lower than what it is for obedience IMO. That is why people can quickly get into agility and have some fun in the trialling ring and exactly why it becomes frustrating more quickly. (Quick sucess that stalls.) If you move onto the next level in any discipline you'll discover things you've done wrong. My point was more about the ease of entry and the subsequent ease at which you reach a point where you can't progress any further because of the (lack of) training you have done. I think ADAA's advanced ring is probably the most obvious example of this. It is possible to run around with a dog and title at Open level, but when you move into the advanced rings these dogs struggle to make time because they don't have the skill to work independently. (Rates of travel are 3.5m/s to 4.0m/s for agility or jumping). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussielover Posted June 15, 2011 Author Share Posted June 15, 2011 Yes, the long heeling sessions put me off obedience. I think Rally-O (which I just found out about) sounds a lot more fun. Mainly because I have no idea how to teach a motivated heel, and my dog has been trained and heavily reinforced for looking ahead and thinking for herself. In obedience i believe it is ideal for you to guide the dog, not for the dog to guide you (as mindy has been trained) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RubyStar Posted June 15, 2011 Share Posted June 15, 2011 Yes, the long heeling sessions put me off obedience. I think Rally-O (which I just found out about) sounds a lot more fun. Mainly because I have no idea how to teach a motivated heel, and my dog has been trained and heavily reinforced for looking ahead and thinking for herself. In obedience i believe it is ideal for you to guide the dog, not for the dog to guide you (as mindy has been trained) You still need the dog paying attention to you (not necessarily looking up at you) for Rally-O. Judging is quite strict, it's not to be considered a poor man's obedience. You lose points for any sign of tight lead, crooked sits, etc! But the fun part about it is you can talk to your dog, there are no such things as double commands so you can give a command as many times as you need, and in the lower classes, you can give pats of encouragement. I'm looking forward to Rally-O to complement my traditional obedience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussielover Posted June 15, 2011 Author Share Posted June 15, 2011 One of the big advatnages for me is that you start off lead work very quickly in agility. Where as in some obedience classes you can be stuck for months, even years doing on lead heel work. I also feel in agility that you always recive feedback on how you can improve etc whereas in obedience if you doing basically the right thing, the instructors tend to ignore you. The people with "naughty" dogs get more attention. I think is is mainly because in agility the instructor watches each person seperately as only one dog can run at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now