# positive/ clicker clarification



## Nick Hrycaj

I understand the high value clicker training can provide in complex tasks like those seen in service work and advocate for verbal markers for consistent communication especially on obedience. What I need clarified is how the purely positive advocates control their dogs off lead or in situations that surpass what the dog is used to? Is there still a component that attatches punishment to a word like no ? How far will those trainers go as far as corrections? Not looking for feedback as to which is the best training mentality, just curious on the correction bit.


----------



## Dave Colborn

Nick,

Negative punishment markers such as "no" is then followed by no reward. After a period of time the dog recognizes it should try something else. So, "no", in essence means try something else, not just stop what you are doing. I believe this to be very effective and is more important in the scheme of any training/learning than positive reinforcement, positive punishment, or negative reinforcement with most dogs. When they get it, it clears up things when training a behavior positively. For example, a dog doing a long down may need to hold a down for two minutes and he would still be correct and get a reward. He knows this. But if you say sit, and the dog downs, you don't want him to wait two minutes to realize that he isn't getting a reward. 

Also on the topic:

If the dog ever had a leash on, it has gotten positive punishment or negative reinforcement. That is why there is no such thing as a "purely positive" trainer. they just don't exist except in their own minds. I am glad they think they exist, because although they are generally an angry bunch that can't control their emotions in a discussion about dogs or when meting out correction to a dog, they have advanced my training as much as they have hurt the dog and world with their lack of consequences. 

Most of the good trainers that I have seen use both are as subtle as a dog correcting itself on a leash when using punishment.








Nick Hrycaj said:


> I understand the high value clicker training can provide in complex tasks like those seen in service work and advocate for verbal markers for consistent communication especially on obedience. What I need clarified is how the purely positive advocates control their dogs off lead or in situations that surpass what the dog is used to? Is there still a component that attatches punishment to a word like no ? How far will those trainers go as far as corrections? Not looking for feedback as to which is the best training mentality, just curious on the correction bit.


----------



## Brian Anderson

"how the purely positive advocates control their dogs off lead or in situations that surpass what the dog is used to? "

in many cases they cant control the dog... its the fallacy of so many versions of the "purely positive" movement. The dog will never be capable of any real duty.


----------



## Nick Hrycaj

Thank you both for putting into words what I was trying to tip toe around with those that are purely positive. I never advocate abuse obviously but stand firm that there need to be consequences to certain actions and those firm corrections do nothing to reduce a digs ability or happiness


----------



## Bob Scott

I've put a number of titles on one of my dogs with no leash corrections but to call it Purely Positive is a misnomer. You need an excellent connection with your dog to have any control with an off leash dog.
Without being in control of your dog (management) it's nothing more then circus tricks. 
The people that I've seen fail miserably with markers and motivational training had no real connection with their dogs other then being treat dispensers.


----------



## Jay Quinn

what sort of titles but Bob? there is a difference to a dog learning a routine in a controlled environment and that dog walking off-leash in the real world where there are a boatload of distractions and stuff that smells good and runs fast and squeaks and crunches when you grab it... 

Nick, the few "purely positive" trainers that i've seen have not been able to control their dogs around distractions... could never let them off-leash and when fido did start to muck-up on leash would leave the dog straining at the end of the leash while they tried to call them back and lure them with treats, which never worked... so fido was allowed to continue being a butthead until the distraction had gone away...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

The failure to control isn't due to purely positive and lack of corrections. Consider failure to train for those conditions. You don't train a dog in a sterile environment and then take him out into a different environment and expect that he is trained for that.


----------



## Dave Colborn

Jay, you could take a dog trained with compulsion and reward that passes an IPO routine into "the real world" and it would fail at walking in a heel if never exposed to distraction. I am sure Bob knows his dogs and how to prepare it for not only a trial but the "real world". Terrasita said it well, not blaming the type of training, but the lack of proper training. 


The reason Ecollars work so well in the "real world" is that you have access to a correction or stimulation, depending on how you look at it and use it, all the time when it's on. The dog knows a correction is there, and it can also be used to let them know reward is present too, even when the handler is a hundred yards away.



Jay Quinn said:


> what sort of titles but Bob? there is a difference to a dog learning a routine in a controlled environment and that dog walking off-leash in the real world where there are a boatload of distractions and stuff that smells good and runs fast and squeaks and crunches when you grab it...
> 
> Nick, the few "purely positive" trainers that i've seen have not been able to control their dogs around distractions... could never let them off-leash and when fido did start to muck-up on leash would leave the dog straining at the end of the leash while they tried to call them back and lure them with treats, which never worked... so fido was allowed to continue being a butthead until the distraction had gone away...


----------



## Chris McDonald

Nick Hrycaj said:


> I uWhat I need clarified is how the purely positive advocates control their dogs off lead or in situations that surpass what the dog is used to?
> 
> I never seen anyone who thinks they are “purely positive” have any real control. Never mind control needed in stress situations… to me it’s a world full of hypocrites. Like politics. Im not a democrat or republican I am where I am supposed to be right in the middle. My middle might be different than yours but mine I the right middle yours aint.
> Like Bob said after many years of experience he is able to get a dog to get a title with no leash corrections. But it don’t sound as if he is considering himself purely positive. To many a title means that he got is dog to do pre rehearsed routine. Still it was a complement to his experience.
> What is your definition for purely positive? Everyone’s is different…
> I have to pop a 100 times less on my 50th dog than I did on my first and I get better results quicker… I TRAIN PURELY POSITIVE!!


----------



## Chris McDonald

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> The failure to control isn't due to purely positive and lack of corrections. Consider failure to train for those conditions. You don't train a dog in a sterile environment and then take him out into a different environment and expect that he is trained for that.


So you are saying your purely positive (whatever that is) methods will give the same level of control as a dog who has been corrected? Without ever seeing them I believe your dogs will fall apart under stress at the first sign of confusion and chaos… this is not a problem though if the vast majority of your dog’s life it does not have to experience this. So it might fall into the good enough category.. and that is.. good enough.


----------



## Nick Hrycaj

It comes down to open mindedness. I want my dogs to be capable of real world use and the ability to work through any number of real world distractions. I try hard to train with those distractions but know there will always be something I have not thought of. That's why e collars and a dependence on a variety of techniques works for me. On the same token, none of my dogs are trained in the myriad of impressive tasks a clicker trained service dog would be


----------



## Brian Anderson

"I want my dogs to be capable of real world use and the ability to work through any number of real world distractions. I try hard to train with those distractions but know there will always be something I have not thought of.

Immerse them in the real world and "practice" what your goal is with them. The dog working from a distance is a conditioned thing as much as anything else. However you have to communicate with the dog to teach him what you expect from him. The one thing we all have to accept is that dogs are not robots and there are times, no matter the training, they will fail. So a backup plan is always good. Some dogs I will work without an ecollar (in public etc) and some I wont. The really high drive dogs you have to decide what the cutoff is for control on them and how much can they take before they start to wilt. There is always going to be weird shit happen you didnt think of in training.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Chris McDonald said:


> So you are saying your purely positive (whatever that is) methods will give the same level of control as a dog who has been corrected? Without ever seeing them I believe your dogs will fall apart under stress at the first sign of confusion and chaos… this is not a problem though if the vast majority of your dog’s life it does not have to experience this. So it might fall into the good enough category.. and that is.. good enough.


I said what I said. Unfortunately, you want to imply that something else is said. If you have a theory, try letting it stand on its own. You have no idea how I train a dog and you don't really care. You just want to rant.


----------



## Jay Quinn

i was not trying to shit on Bob... i can't remember what discipline he trains his dogs in... i seem to remember game/retrieving stuff but i could be wrong... 

i am well aware there are SchH and other sport dogs who fall apart in the real world... there are people who put a SchH3 on their dog without ever leaving their home field or working the dog on an unfamiliar helper... the dogs are so pattern trained they could probably go run the whole thing without needing the handler because they train the same way every time over and over again... 

putting any title on a dog is an achievement of sorts but IMO it doesn't mean shit if your stellar in the ring or on the field dog can't be walked down the street because it's either out of control or crumbles from being overwhelmed by all the unfamiliar stimuli......


"There is always going to be weird shit happen you didnt think of in training." <<-- This, x100.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

What real world are you talking about? Besides method of training, consider the dog's temperament, nerves, relationship to the handler. Bob's dog is stable. It doesn't matter where he is in the real world, he has the stable nerves to deal.


----------



## Jay Quinn

yes, i'm also sure Bob's dog is fine... perhaps i should have re-phrased my post... i do a lot of posting after work without any caffiene... i was curious as to what he trains his dogs in because as i said in my earlier post, i can't remember, and i am too lazy to go through his older posts to work it out right now... 

does this make more sense?


Jay Quinn said:


> what sort of titles Bob?
> 
> 
> (NOT directed at Bob) there is a difference to a dog learning a routine in a controlled environment and that dog walking off-leash in the real world where there are a boatload of distractions and stuff that smells good and runs fast and squeaks and crunches when you grab it....




as for "real world", a park full of people and other dogs and probably critturs (squirrels, foxes, possums, stray cats etc depending on location), or a busy supermarket sidewalk/carpark area... any public area with distractions that the dog is not used to, really... as i said the "purely positive" trainers that i have seen could not control their dogs outside of their comfortable low stimuli environments...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

My point on this is probably best stated by quoting someone else: there are trainers and those that train dogs. Don't assume that because they are purely positive, they actually know how to train. I train my dogs in the real world--always have. I have had a dog for a for 4 months. Before I got her, she had only been for a couple of car rides. Within the first 10 minutes of having her, I took her to an Orschelins. Nerves were solid so I kept her. She's been everywhere I dare to walk in with a dog--video store, feed store, music store, home depot--whatever. Generally, I have a leash and my food treats. I do my training session and then we leave. Some time soon, its time for lunch at a restaurant with outdoor seating. They learn to chill while I sit there for a couple if hours. Environmentally she is stable. People-wise she is stable. I think she can be dog dominant and reactive but the more I work her with my marker training, the less that is. Couple if weeks ago, worked her outside the fence of dogs running in a doggie park. True to her training she focused on me and the work. I've also worked her on livestock. She is a work in progress for the next couple of years.


----------



## Bob Scott

SAR trained in HRD on land and boat, Trained in article search, CDX, SCH III, HT, TT and CGC.

What is MUCH more important TO ME is having a good "truck dog". That means I can take my dogs anywhere, anytime and have complete control over them with my voice. That comes from being consistent in what you want from the pup/dog. 
In that sense our dogs are no different then our kids. You can't tell them to stay out of the cookie jar and then ignore the sound of the cookie jar lid being removed. Be consistent!

I think Dave said it well about any dog can fall apart in the real world in spite of how they were trained. 
For the record, the term Purely Positive gags me. 
Operant Conditioning would be more correct. Even then you can't take bits and pieces of OP and claim that's how you train. A negative for my dogs in training would be loss of reward. It's a negative! Any clear headed dog can figure that out. I don't care how serious or tough it is. 
I also believe that any high value reward can be "programed" for lack of a better word, into the dog to make it seem the best thing on the planet.
Example
When I was learning herding with my dog Thunder and T she wanted me to use the tug as a reward. I was pretty much following the Balibanov method at the time. I said it wouldn't work simply because stock brought out more drive then any sleeve, person, bunny, deer, etc that my dog had ever seen.
T said "trust me and do it" :lol: IT WORKED! 
I know in my heart that the tug wasn't really as valuable to my dog as the stock but he had been programed that it was a gift from heaven. IT WORKED! Besides, when T put a staff in front of Thunder to block him his attitude change..fast. :lol: They DID become the best of buds eventually. :-D:-D:wink:
I have no problem scruffing a pup that wants to chew on me. Yet another no, no to many folks bite training their dog. FOR ME, I don't see that it has any connection to the bite field. It's simple basic manners. 

If my dog makes a mistake then "I" need the correction for not building a better foundation for the behavior I'm teaching. :wink:


----------



## Jay Quinn

thankyou for the explanation Bob, and yes, i'm with you, it's important to have a dog you can take out and about... in my case it's a little harder because i need my dogs to be civil, and if i have to compromise and have a more neutral dog that i have to be a little more careful with but that dog is excellent at work, then so be it... i definitely don't ever want a dog i can't have in public at all... been there, done that, still got the scars... was young and dumb and completely inexperienced... 

i put "purely positive" in quotes like i do because i think it's a load of bunk too, but the people i refer to are the sort who refuse to give any kind of negative (in their mind) to the dog... don't want to say no, etc... i know that withholding reward is a negative... but people don't get the whole positive and negative thing and seem to think that it's only punishment if it's positive punishment... and just keep throwing cookies down the dog's throat... yes i realise these people are not true 'trainers', but they've gotten it into their little heads that they're god's gift to dogs etc... the people i have seen who call themselves "purely positive" trainers generally can't control their dogs under distraction because a snack is not a high enough level reward for the dog and they won't use a toy... 

i can see that Bob is clearly NOT a "purely positive" trainer... : )


i'd be interested to hear how you train for SchH with a highly driven dog without using leash corrections? especially bark and hold etc where the dog really wants to grab the sleeve and has to learn not to? this is genuine curiosity here because i've only ever seen it done with a pinch or martingale correction collar...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Bob Scott said:


> SAR trained in HRD on land and boat, Trained in article search, CDX, SCH III, HT, TT and CGC.
> 
> What is MUCH more important TO ME is having a good "truck dog". That means I can take my dogs anywhere, anytime and have complete control over them with my voice. That comes from being consistent in what you want from the pup/dog.
> In that sense our dogs are no different then our kids. You can't tell them to stay out of the cookie jar and then ignore the sound of the cookie jar lid being removed. Be consistent!
> 
> I think Dave said it well about any dog can fall apart in the real world in spite of how they were trained.
> For the record, the term Purely Positive gags me.
> Operant Conditioning would be more correct. Even then you can't take bits and pieces of OP and claim that's how you train. A negative for my dogs in training would be loss of reward. It's a negative! Any clear headed dog can figure that out. I don't care how serious or tough it is.
> I also believe that any high value reward can be "programed" for lack of a better word, into the dog to make it seem the best thing on the planet.
> Example
> When I was learning herding with my dog Thunder and T she wanted me to use the tug as a reward. I was pretty much following the Balibanov method at the time. I said it wouldn't work simply because stock brought out more drive then any sleeve, person, bunny, deer, etc that my dog had ever seen.
> T said "trust me and do it" :lol: IT WORKED!
> I know in my heart that the tug wasn't really as valuable to my dog as the stock but he had been programed that it was a gift from heaven. IT WORKED! Besides, when T put a staff in front of Thunder to block him his attitude change..fast. :lol: They DID become the best of buds eventually. :-D:-D:wink:
> I have no problem scruffing a pup that wants to chew on me. Yet another no, no to many folks bite training their dog. FOR ME, I don't see that it has any connection to the bite field. It's simple basic manners.
> 
> If my dog makes a mistake then "I" need the correction for not building a better foundation for the behavior I'm teaching. :wink:


I had to prove to you what effect that would have. I was comfortable with that because I knew he would warn first. The dog was conditioned to working for Bob for the tug. While his stock drive is high, his relationship and conditioning is higher. Anya hit the end of the line yanking it out of my hand at the sight of the ducks. I say here, and she whips around coming to me. I worked weeks conditioning her recall while she was focused on something else. As Bob says, its the conditioning that is the key--not to be underestimated.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Dave Colborn said:


> Nick,
> 
> 
> If the dog ever had a leash on, it has gotten positive punishment or negative reinforcement. That is why there is no such thing as a "purely positive" trainer. they just don't exist except in their own minds. I am glad they think they exist, because although they are generally an angry bunch that can't control their emotions in a discussion about dogs or when meting out correction to a dog, they have advanced my training as much as they have hurt the dog and world with their lack of consequences.
> 
> Most of the good trainers that I have seen use both are as subtle as a dog correcting itself on a leash when using punishment.


I think that was very eloquently said!


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Now I'm not quite with you Dave. In IPO, the dog has to work whilst another dog is grounded and watching from the sidelines.

I know it is possible to train "immunity" but dogs come in all temperaments. I would like to know how this can be done with all dogs from young until it sits.

I am not saying it is not possible to do just positively. I would just like to know how you do it.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Jay Quinn said:


> i was not trying to shit on Bob... i can't remember what discipline he trains his dogs in... i seem to remember game/retrieving stuff but i could be wrong...
> 
> i am well aware there are SchH and other sport dogs who fall apart in the real world... there are people who put a SchH3 on their dog without ever leaving their home field or working the dog on an unfamiliar helper... the dogs are so pattern trained they could probably go run the whole thing without needing the handler because they train the same way every time over and over again...
> 
> putting any title on a dog is an achievement of sorts but IMO it doesn't mean shit if your stellar in the ring or on the field dog can't be walked down the street because it's either out of control or crumbles from being overwhelmed by all the unfamiliar stimuli......
> 
> 
> "There is always going to be weird shit happen you didnt think of in training." <<-- This, x100.


Well said. I do know that dogs that never left the kennel but passed their temperament test. This was especially the test with the Schutzdientshelper!


----------



## Gillian Schuler

I've made a lot of mistakes in dog training. I do not train purely positively. I trained my Briard to heel with a piece of kibble in my hand. My friend, and breeder, said "it Looks fantastic", whereupon I said "what's he learning?"

It wasn't so long afterwards that I went with another friend to a well known dog trainer (2xEuropean Champion at the same trial). I started off with obedience but the dog ran towards the forest. He came back quickly but that was IT for me. 

I used corrections for this dog in heeling (quick and as quickly rewarded) and achieved many a time a high obedience result. He loved to work - he loved to heel but was a bit "over the top" so on the long 50 steps out at the beginning of IPO I whispered to him that I would take his "guts for garters" in a menacing tone. By the time we had to turn, he was down a peg or two and manageable. He scored 92 to 94 even in IPO3.


----------



## Dave Colborn

Did you mean Bob?



Gillian Schuler said:


> Now I'm not quite with you Dave. In IPO, the dog has to work whilst another dog is grounded and watching from the sidelines.
> 
> I know it is possible to train "immunity" but dogs come in all temperaments. I would like to know how this can be done with all dogs from young until it sits.
> 
> I am not saying it is not possible to do just positively. I would just like to know how you do it.


----------



## Geoff Empey

Nick Hrycaj said:


> I understand the high value clicker training can provide in complex tasks like those seen in service work and advocate for verbal markers for consistent communication especially on obedience. What I need clarified is how the purely positive advocates control their dogs off lead or in situations that surpass what the dog is used to? Is there still a component that attatches punishment to a word like no ? How far will those trainers go as far as corrections? Not looking for feedback as to which is the best training mentality, just curious on the correction bit.


There really isn't a black and white definite answer here Nick. There is as many styles of high value clicker training as there is with positive punishment trainers and all the points in between. 



Dave Colborn said:


> Negative punishment markers such as "no" is then followed by no reward. After a period of time the dog recognizes it should try something else. So, "no", in essence means try something else, not just stop what you are doing. I believe this to be very effective and is more important in the scheme of any training/learning than positive reinforcement, positive punishment, or negative reinforcement with most dogs. When they get it, it clears up things when training a behavior positively. For example, a dog doing a long down may need to hold a down for two minutes and he would still be correct and get a reward. He knows this. But if you say sit, and the dog downs, you don't want him to wait two minutes to realize that he isn't getting a reward.
> 
> Also on the topic:
> 
> If the dog ever had a leash on, it has gotten positive punishment or negative reinforcement. That is why there is no such thing as a "purely positive" trainer. they just don't exist except in their own minds. I am glad they think they exist, because although they are generally an angry bunch that can't control their emotions in a discussion about dogs or when meting out correction to a dog, they have advanced my training as much as they have hurt the dog and world with their lack of consequences.
> 
> Most of the good trainers that I have seen use both are as subtle as a dog correcting itself on a leash when using punishment.


I agree with Dave here. To touch on my own experiences I am heavily involved in Ringsport being a training director with my club, we also dabble with IPO. So in the 8 years I have been involved in these sports I have had the pleasure of working with and attending many seminars with many different 'clicker' (marker) trainers as well as 'Balanced Trainers' who use both and others who rely solely on 'punishment'. 

The one thing that stands out above all else with any of these mindsets is not the methods themselves but the 'timing' of said methodology. That is where people/dogs and whole teams *fail*! *TIMING!!!

*As well people need to know what they are working with. A big thing now a days is reading dogs is becoming a lost art. Everybody has excuses for their dog's and training failures, yet they don't understand what the dog needs in the first place. It's like the Keystone cops running around with prong collars or a clicker and cookies! No direction, no focus just a belief in a methodology with crappy timing. 

I know a few dogs who have gone to great things IPO3 etc with a clicker, then others who 4 years later still haven't gotten a BH. Same can be said for the trainers at the other end who use positive punishment. It's funny the disparaging differences in performance bottom line with the same mindset. What does one trainer have over the other within their mindsets of how they train? Plus why is there this difference?


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Dave Colborn said:


> Did you mean Bob?


 
If I only knew? It's oppresively hot here and probably melting my brain.


----------



## Dave Colborn

Jay. You made one statement that is wrong and the real value people who train using reward, well. If you understand what I am about to say, it should either kick a light bulb on because you do it, or it can be life altering for your training.

*"a snack is not a high enough level reward for the dog" *

This is not true. What is actually true is that a dog finds something ELSE more rewarding and the handler doesn't control it. A competing motivation. IE a squirrel, a passing car, a walker or jogger, another dog, etc. That in and of itself is important to know, but not that big of a deal in the context of squirrels and cars. It tells us to control the dog at a distance from the competing motivation until the dog does well with the motivator at a distance then move closer, a few feet at a time. 

Where I think it is super important is in understanding what the dog finds rewarding and how to apply it in bite work when a dog learns not to bite a sleeve, suit, person to get the reward it wants. The reward we have to control here is actually the decoy's movement and action which is actually higher value than a dead suit or sleeve. Most dogs that bite well want to be on the suit or sleeve biting with a fighting moving active decoy. So if you consider that just the bite isn't as rewarding as a bite with a fighting decoy, you can actually condition a dog to let go on his own, when the helper isn't fighting him. They will let go, because they want the helper to fight and be active, so they can tug and bite and push and pull something more enjoyable vs. a dead sleeve.

The truth in my mind is that it all goes faster using a mix of all four quadrants based on the dog.





Jay Quinn said:


> i put "purely positive" in quotes like i do because i think it's a load of bunk too, but the people i refer to are the sort who refuse to give any kind of negative (in their mind) to the dog... don't want to say no, etc... i know that withholding reward is a negative... but people don't get the whole positive and negative thing and seem to think that it's only punishment if it's positive punishment... and just keep throwing cookies down the dog's throat... yes i realise these people are not true 'trainers', but they've gotten it into their little heads that they're god's gift to dogs etc... the people i have seen who call themselves "purely positive" trainers generally can't control their dogs under distraction because a snack is not a high enough level reward for the dog and they won't use a toy...
> 
> i can see that Bob is clearly NOT a "purely positive" trainer... : )
> 
> 
> i'd be interested to hear how you train for SchH with a highly driven dog without using leash corrections? especially bark and hold etc where the dog really wants to grab the sleeve and has to learn not to? this is genuine curiosity here because i've only ever seen it done with a pinch or martingale correction collar...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Dogs hitting the end of the leash aren't necessarily viewing that as positive punishment. I've yet to see it have any effect on mine in terms of it stopping them from trying to drag me somewhere. The PP crowd I think you are referring to like different restraint-- front clip, no pull harness.

But really, you can condition a dog to where he thinks working for you for that reinforcer trumps anything in the environment. If you do the opposite first, then it will be an up hill battle.


----------



## Dave Colborn

It is either positive punishment, negative reinforcement, or negative punishment depending on what happens before and after. If their desire is significant, it could be a part of positive reinforcement as well. 




Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Dogs hitting the end of the leash aren't necessarily viewing that as positive punishment. I've yet to see it have any effect on mine in terms of it stopping them from trying to drag me somewhere. The PP crowd I think you are referring to like different restraint-- front clip, no pull harness.
> 
> But really, you can condition a dog to where he thinks working for you for that reinforcer trumps anything in the environment. If you do the opposite first, then it will be an up hill battle.


----------



## Dave Colborn

I agree with this.




Terrasita Cuffie said:


> But really, you can condition a dog to where he thinks working for you for that reinforcer trumps anything in the environment. If you do the opposite first, then it will be an up hill battle.


----------



## Nick Hrycaj

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Dogs hitting the end of the leash aren't necessarily viewing that as positive punishment. I've yet to see it have any effect on mine in terms of it stopping them from trying to drag me somewhere. The PP crowd I think you are referring to like different restraint-- front clip, no pull harness.


Ms. Cuffie, perhaps I am misreading but the way I understand what you wrote is your dogs pull you along. That's what made me pose my initial question: I may be inheriting a gsd with several behavior issues I feel were caused by lack of structure and firmness. The dog has had a mostly positive approach until now. I see benefit in corrections showing him rules and expectations so that he won't pull on a leash, won't bark at all passers by and won't be sporadiclly aggressive. I can and will fine tune those improvements with what you're saying with making what I have higher value than the environment


----------



## Jay Quinn

Dave Colborn said:


> *"a snack is not a high enough level reward for the dog" *
> 
> This is not true. What is actually true is that a dog finds something ELSE more rewarding and the handler doesn't control it. A competing motivation. IE a squirrel, a passing car, a walker or jogger, another dog, etc. That in and of itself is important to know, but not that big of a deal in the context of squirrels and cars. It tells us to control the dog at a distance from the competing motivation until the dog does well with the motivator at a distance then move closer, a few feet at a time.


Yes, that is what I was trying to say... The snack does not trump the distraction... You can condition as much as you like and build up slowly but what are you going to do when the feral cat dashes past a foot away from your dogs' nose and the dog takes off after it - a very self-satisfying activity... Do you continue to wave cookies at the dog or do you apply some sort of correction to pull it back into line?




Dave Colborn said:


> Where I think it is super important is in understanding what the dog finds rewarding and how to apply it in bite work when a dog learns not to bite a sleeve, suit, person to get the reward it wants. The reward we have to control here is actually the decoy's movement and action which is actually higher value than a dead suit or sleeve. Most dogs that bite well want to be on the suit or sleeve biting with a fighting moving active decoy. So if you consider that just the bite isn't as rewarding as a bite with a fighting decoy, you can actually condition a dog to let go on his own, when the helper isn't fighting him. They will let go, because they want the helper to fight and be active, so they can tug and bite and push and pull something more enjoyable vs. a dead sleeve.


I have a dog who will thrash the everloving shit out of a completely passive, non-reactive decoy, and thoroughly enjoy every second of it, to the point of giving up from sheer exhaustion... I have another dog who will tug and tug and tug and you can lift him right off the ground and he will just hang there, spring pole style... And if you happen to lose your footing with him on a bite he will faceplant you and then pull you as far as he can across the ground.... ALL of my dogs will happily chew up and completely destroy a 'dead' sleeve... Getting chops on any bite equipment whether it contains a decoy or not is a self-rewarding activity and is far more fun than not biting at all.... 




Dave Colborn said:


> The truth in my mind is that it all goes faster using a mix of all four quadrants based on the dog.


Yep!


----------



## Brian Anderson

"You can condition as much as you like and build up slowly but what are you going to do when the feral cat dashes past a foot away from your dogs' nose"

Im going to say "STOP" (probably a few other unsavory words) and he knows he better stop. Do lots of calls offs when you are playing with the dog. Just doing them in fun leads to the conditioned "stop" and see what he wants response. Then work off that to tighten it up however you want. Its doable for sure ...


----------



## Dave Colborn

Jay Quinn said:


> I have a dog who will thrash the everloving shit out of a completely passive, non-reactive decoy, and thoroughly enjoy every second of it, to the point of giving up from sheer exhaustion... I have another dog who will tug and tug and tug and you can lift him right off the ground and he will just hang there, spring pole style... And if you happen to lose your footing with him on a bite he will faceplant you and then pull you as far as he can across the ground.... ALL of my dogs will happily chew up and completely destroy a 'dead' sleeve... Getting chops on any bite equipment whether it contains a decoy or not is a self-rewarding activity and is far more fun than not biting at all....


This is learned behavior. Taught and encouraged. Of course good genetics weigh in too but you let the dog do it.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

For the feral cat person, I used to go out at night and work off of feral stray cats. I adopted a cat that lives to frolic about while I'm training including in with the livestock. My neighbor's barn cats are great training fodder. Gillian my seven now 11 month old came with no manners or training whatsoever. She's also highly independent and her response to restraint or corrections was to pull harder or turn around and try to body slam the crap out of me. It has been strict NILIF. I plan at least an hour every time I deal with her. She has decent food drive and goes apeshit at feeding time. Well she has to work for it. I start out in my field. 
A paw step out of position and I turn around and go back. Keep in mind she is amped and would probably rather fight me for it. But pretty soon she gets left leg orientation. At the door she must down or I don't open it. It's then heel through two rooms and down before I release her to her food. I mark and reward throughout. Now if sh wants something, she slams into heel position.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Jay what type if training with reward through you did you do before the biting?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

When I first started working with Anya, I thought great, another cocky independent dog that is in it for herself. I worried that she was too far gone to really run my system. But decided to run my system and not try to out fight a fight drive dog that obviously isn't bonded. Through the marker work and controlling access to the resources, she is choosing to accept leadership. Praise and pets are now becoming reinforcers.


----------



## leslie cassian

Is a dog trained with strong aversives less likely to chase the feral cat than the clicker trained dog? 

Too free/out of control is the argument against the all positive camp, but shut down and overly submissive is the down side to the yank and crank camp, so somewhere in between is where the good trainers find a balance point. I'm still working on it.


----------



## Chris McDonald

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> I said what I said. Unfortunately, you want to imply that something else is said. If you have a theory, try letting it stand on its own. You have no idea how I train a dog and you don't really care. You just want to rant.


 
I didn’t think I was implying something you didn’t say? Granted my questions and statements were not very clear, this left them open for interoperation  
Can you tell me what your definition of purely positive is? 
What did I imply that you did not say?
Are you saying that you can train a dog purely positive to be able to handle very high stress situations? 
And do you believe that you can train dogs to be as reliable with all positive as can be trained corrections? 
As far as a theory it is that dogs cannot be trained to be as reliable in stressful unfamiliar stressful situations with all positive than you can with some form of corrections . I may be wrong and Id love to be shown I am wrong. Until I’m shown other I believe dogs trained under all positive will fall apart with stress. I did not necessarily mean just your dog’s when I said “your dogs”. I was referring to anyone who trains all positive or thinks they do.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Chris McDonald said:


> I didn’t think I was implying something you didn’t say? Granted my questions and statements were not very clear, this left them open for interoperation
> Can you tell me what your definition of purely positive is?
> What did I imply that you did not say?
> Are you saying that you can train a dog purely positive to be able to handle very high stress situations?
> And do you believe that you can train dogs to be as reliable with all positive as can be trained corrections?
> As far as a theory it is that dogs cannot be trained to be as reliable in stressful unfamiliar stressful situations with all positive than you can with some form of corrections . I may be wrong and Id love to be shown I am wrong. Until I’m shown other I believe dogs trained under all positive will fall apart with stress. I did not necessarily mean just your dog’s when I said “your dogs”. I was referring to anyone who trains all positive or thinks they do.


I don't have a definition of PP. I don't worry about it. My dogs have a "no.". I don't use collar corrections. 
I don't train behaviors with corrections. What to me makes them fall apart is nerves. The solid nerved dog doesn't really feel those stresses. They do what they are trained to do. Now can you make the corrections severe enough that they disregard their nerves. Yes. I know people that do that and they are successful at it. Its not my choice though. I so far with a solid nerved dog can train with my markers and they perform what
They are trained to do. It doesn't matter where they are. Working in my kitchen is the same as working in Pet smart or Home Depot. The nervy dog I have to work with extensively in different locations and try to simulate trial conditions--all marker work still. I have one that's nervy with someone on the field. I train her with multiple people on the field. I entered her in a series of trials to deal with that issue in different trial settings. Slowly but surely she is working past it. I don't see where she would benefit from corrections. I build the stressors in training and work with conditioning with markers. The other nervy dog that stresses with environmental changes resulting in sensory overload tends to deal with it by working for me for her reward.


----------



## Bob Scott

As T said, my dog Thunder has the nerve strength to put up with anything he's had in front of him. Great genetics obviously but I thing I had a little piece of the reason for that also.
T has also see Thunder with cats.
During one of our training sessions we were taking a break and sitting at a picnic table. One of the barn cats that made a habit of punking dogs jumped up on the table and stared at Thunder. He's never been aggressive to them and he calmly streatched his nose to the cat for a sniff. He got a slash across the nose for that and yes, I had to stop him from going back in. 
Later on the same cat ran across the yard and Thunder took off after him. A simple "AHHH" stopped him in his tracks.
I've done the same with deer, rabbits, etc with him and most all of the dogs I've had. 
I had the only working earth dog (JRT) I've seen that could be called out of the ground in the middle of a "confrontation" with the quarry underground. I've also stopped him with the same "AHHHH" when he was six inches off a bunny's ass on a dead run. 
I don't thing I do anything different then many other trainers so I can't say any success I may have had is because I do this or that. I DO believe I've alwasy had very strong connections with all my dogs. That and consistency in what I expect from them. 
Again, being a good "truck dog" is first and foremost with me. The games are fun but not the end all to me and my dogs. 
I think John Wayne's movie Hondo had a big influence on me. He didn't put any real effort in training the dog but "Sam" was always there. It just happens sometime.
BTW Sam was played by Lassie in that movie. How could they do wrong with that?! :lol: :lol: :wink:


----------



## Jay Quinn

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Jay what type if training with reward through you did you do before the biting?


probably not enough, but then none of my previous dogs and only one of my current dogs came to me as a puppy, so i already had issues created by other people by the time i got them... i don't train for sport - the only established bite sport here is SchH and i am not allowed to participate because i work a street dog - and i need a dog who will work on the street and i can't afford to bugger about putting 6mths, 12mths, (more?) worth of training into an adult dog before i am able to take it to work... it's either capable of doing the work at a basic level as soon as i get it, or shortly after, or it doesn't stay... 

i try to use a balanaced approach to my training but from what i have seen it takes a much longer time to train things without using corrections... i am genuinely interested in the methods but i don't seem to be getting any definite answers, or the answers i do get will take months worth of work when i could get the same result reliably in a week or two with a correction here and there... and i am not just referring to this thread, i talk to and ask questions of a lot of people both in person and online...


edit to add: for me it is also a safety concern... most sport dogs either won't bite a person or haven't had the desire to do so brought out... you can spend 6mths letting the dog work through an issue in its head because the only thing in any danger is a sleeve... i have dogs that WILL bite people and i can't afford to have them decide that they don't feel like doing what i ask of them....


----------



## Bob Scott

Jay, I will say that dog will fall back on it's foundation training under stress. IF a dog has been trained with compulsion and then switched to marker training it could very well require the "compulsion" in a stressful situation. Of course the dog's individual temperament has to be take into consideration either way. 
That may very well go both ways. I just don't know.
All JMHO of course!

I believe it was you that asked about how the BH is taught.

The dog is on lead. Yes, a negative but no corrections from the handler. They just hold the dog as the helper moves in and out towards the dog. sooner or later the dog will stop pulling yet still barking and that gets the YES marker and the bite for reward. It doesn't take the dog long to figure out it's the not pulling or trying to make contact with the helper that gets the reward. 
If the dog goes quiet or looks away the it may get the stick from the helper. 
They learn quicky if they have a good foundation in marker training. The helper is the bad guy so, other then the negative of being held by the handler the dog only get "corrections" from the helper in the form of a fight. 
No need for pinch collars, e-collars, etc. 
Have I seen these methods fail? Of course but failure with any method is 99% because the handler doesn't get it and or has no basic command over their dog. That's a management issue from puppy on.
Some are naturals at dog training. Some can learn. Some can only do as they are told and never understand why. Some will forever remain clueless.


----------



## Sarah Platts

Bob Scott said:


> Some are naturals at dog training. Some can learn. Some can only do as they are told and never understand why. Some will forever remain clueless.


+100


----------



## Brian Anderson

" The solid nerved dog doesn't really feel those stresses."


sure he does. But they are below his threshold of reaction therefore they aren't seen outwardly in the dog.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

"They are *below* his threshold"?

A high pain threshold means the dog does not feel pain

A low threshold means that he does

The same would apply to stress. A dog with a high stress threshold is immune to stress. A dog with a low stress threshold crumples.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Gillian Schuler said:


> "They are *below* his threshold"?
> 
> A high pain threshold means the dog does not feel pain
> 
> A low threshold means that he does
> 
> The same would apply to stress. A dog with a high stress threshold is immune to stress. A dog with a low stress threshold crumples.




all dogs feel pain and all dogs are prone to stress... some will show it before others ...


----------



## Brian Anderson

Gillian Schuler said:


> "They are *below* his threshold"?
> 
> A high pain threshold means the dog does not feel pain
> 
> A low threshold means that he does
> 
> The same would apply to stress. A dog with a high stress threshold is immune to stress. A dog with a low stress threshold crumples.


please note I said "below his threshold of REACTION" fancy way of saying he wont say anything until it REALLY REALLY HURTS lol


----------



## Nick Hrycaj

Jay Quinn said:


> i try to use a balanaced approach to my training but from what i have seen it takes a much longer time to train things without using corrections... i am genuinely interested in the methods but i don't seem to be getting any definite answers, or the answers i do get will take months worth of work when i could get the same result reliably in a week or two with a correction here and there... and i am not just referring to this thread, i talk to and ask questions of a lot of people both in person and online...
> 
> 
> edit to add: for me it is also a safety concern... most sport dogs either won't bite a person or haven't had the desire to do so brought out... you can spend 6mths letting the dog work through an issue in its head because the only thing in any danger is a sleeve... i have dogs that WILL bite people and i can't afford to have them decide that they don't feel like doing what i ask of them....


Exactly where I find myself. Training methods tailored to dog's use and general demeanor. For the working dual purpose police dog with limited training time, purely positive is not an option


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Brian Anderson said:


> please note I said "below his threshold of REACTION" fancy way of saying he wont say anything until it REALLY REALLY HURTS lol


 
??


----------



## susan tuck

I used to think one of the reasons it was important as a handler to train with corrections was because it was important to know the dog was hard and could handle stress.......recently it dawned on me that the stress doesn't necessarily have to come from the handler in order to determine whether or not a dog is hard or for a dog to learn to handle stress. 

I still train with corrections, but I use a lot more positive methods than I used to, and as I go forward, I hope to learn even more...I even bought a clicker! 

Never say an old dog can't learn new tricks...I'm proof!


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

susan tuck said:


> I used to think one of the reasons it was important as a handler to train with corrections was because it was important to know the dog was hard and could handle stress.......recently it dawned on me that the stress doesn't necessarily have to come from the handler in order to determine whether or not a dog is hard or for a dog to learn to handle stress.
> 
> I still train with corrections, but I use a lot more positive methods than I used to, and as I go forward, I hope to learn even more...I even bought a clicker!
> 
> Never say an old dog can't learn new tricks...I'm proof!


Welcome to the dark side.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

We have a LE person here on the forum [Guy Williams and David Winners] that I think can expound on the topic of marker training and LE work. I can be in some tricky livestock situations where wrong move on the part of the dog and either I or we both could get seriously hurt. I have competition dogs and then I have dogs that I rely on to do it right and keep me safe in high stakes situations. Its not just a matter of command compliance. Its complex in that I need them to read the situation and respond with the right action that will facilitate the overall job yet make sure I don't get hurt.

T


----------



## Brian Anderson

susan tuck said:


> I used to think one of the reasons it was important as a handler to train with corrections was because it was important to know the dog was hard and could handle stress.......recently it dawned on me that the stress doesn't necessarily have to come from the handler in order to determine whether or not a dog is hard or for a dog to learn to handle stress.
> 
> I still train with corrections, but I use a lot more positive methods than I used to, and as I go forward, I hope to learn even more...I even bought a clicker!
> 
> Never say an old dog can't learn new tricks...I'm proof!


Imagine the idot I felt like when I started to realize how well marker training worked when I had been using only compulsion for quite a few years. Even worse I scoffed at it as being for those people with the little yappers doing cute tricks ... the guys that trained with us were even more old school. forced retrieves (gotta love those NOT) *you cant teach a dog a solid retrieve unless its forced" theyd say lol... compulsion and if that didnt work more compulsion. The modern way is so much better lol


----------



## susan tuck

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Welcome to the dark side.


Thanks!


----------



## Bob Scott

Susan said;

"Never say an old dog can't learn new tricks...I'm proof!" 


You've seen my sub line on another forum huh?! :lol:



Brian

I had 40 +yrs of yank and crank before I started marker training about 10-11 yrs ago. 
I'll use it forever but that doesn't mean that corrections wont be available if needed.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Bob Scott said:


> Susan said;
> 
> "Never say an old dog can't learn new tricks...I'm proof!"
> 
> 
> You've seen my sub line on another forum huh?! :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> Brian
> 
> I had 40 +yrs of yank and crank before I started marker training about 10-11 yrs ago.
> I'll use it forever but that doesn't mean that corrections wont be available if needed.


glad to know im not the only one LOL ... my favorite part about marker training is its a lot less stressful on me LOL ,,,


----------



## Christopher Smith

Dave Colborn said:


> Jay, you could take a dog trained with compulsion and reward that passes an IPO routine into "the real world" and it would fail at walking in a heel if never exposed to distraction.


You can't even walk on the IPO field if the dog can't walk beside handler under distraction. 

Dave you really should train a dog for IPO. I think you will love it when you understand it.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Christopher Smith said:


> You can't even walk on the IPO field if the dog can't walk beside handler under distraction.
> 
> Dave you really should train a dog for IPO. I think you will love it when you understand it.


*disclaimer* I am not an IPO trainer..
But it occurs to me that a training field with distractions is completely different than jumping out in the driving rain on a busy street filled with people, animals traffic etc. I have had dogs slide into the "training field" mentality due to the fact I was working them on the same field largely with the same people and I noted a marked difference than when working them in random areas with random people. What say you?


----------



## Christopher Smith

Brian Anderson said:


> *disclaimer* I am not an IPO trainer..
> But it occurs to me that a training field with distractions is completely different than jumping out in the driving rain on a busy street filled with people, animals traffic etc. I have had dogs slide into the "training field" mentality due to the fact I was working them on the same field largely with the same people and I noted a marked difference than when working them in random areas with random people. What say you?


Brian, in order to participate in IPO the dog must have a BH. The whole second portion of the BH consists of the things you asked about: traffic, animals, people. Unfortunately the average IPO club can't conyro the weather so it may or may not be held in the rain.

You should check out the IPO regulations for more info. When you look at the regulations as a whole the IPO program is pretty through training program.


----------



## rick smith

I think there is some truth to what Brian was saying....
i've worked with 4-5 dogs whose owner showed me their BH. I was not present to see how they passed it
- but they were NOT safe in public ... period

which probably means all "BH's" are not created equal, and I was assuming one reason was that the BH was done on or very near a trial field with club members posing as "public people" and members dog's were the "animals"


----------



## susan tuck

Brian Anderson said:


> Imagine the idot I felt like when I started to realize how well marker training worked when I had been using only compulsion for quite a few years. Even worse I scoffed at it as being for those people with the little yappers doing cute tricks ... the guys that trained with us were even more old school. forced retrieves (gotta love those NOT) *you cant teach a dog a solid retrieve unless its forced" theyd say lol... compulsion and if that didnt work more compulsion. The modern way is so much better lol


I'm not saying I'm such a convert that from here on out I only use markers and/or positive methods. I'm saying marker training has a very valid place in training, just as other methods have a valid place, including corrections and force. Force methods have even evolved and are not always the brutal training methods that were common in days gone by. 

I believe the more tools in your toolbox, the better. I don't believe there is any one style that fits or is best for all dogs and all trainers.

That said, I'm having a blast learning about marker training!


----------



## Christopher Smith

rick smith said:


> I think there is some truth to what Brian was saying....
> i've worked with 4-5 dogs whose owner showed me their BH. I was not present to see how they passed it
> - but they were NOT safe in public ... period
> 
> which probably means all "BH's" are not created equal, and I was assuming one reason was that the BH was done on or very near a trial field with club members posing as "public people" and members dog's were the "animals"


Oh ...OK....so we are supposed to invalidate everything because you saw some people cheat once. OK. Cool. Thanks for that slice of insight.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Oh I think its more than once. I've seen groups composed of the right people for a dog known to try to bite someone
I wouldn't assume certain character traits based on trial titles and conditioning.


----------



## susan tuck

Let's back up a little:

Bob said:


Bob Scott said:


> I've put a number of titles on one of my dogs with no leash corrections but to call it Purely Positive is a misnomer. You need an excellent connection with your dog to have any control with an off leash dog.
> Without being in control of your dog (management) it's nothing more then circus tricks.
> The people that I've seen fail miserably with markers and motivational training had no real connection with their dogs other then being treat dispensers.


to which Jay said:


Jay Quinn said:


> what sort of titles but Bob? there is a difference to a dog learning a routine in a controlled environment and that dog walking off-leash in the real world where there are a boatload of distractions and stuff that smells good and runs fast and squeaks and crunches when you grab it...
> 
> Nick, the few "purely positive" trainers that i've seen have not been able to control their dogs around distractions... could never let them off-leash and when fido did start to muck-up on leash would leave the dog straining at the end of the leash while they tried to call them back and lure them with treats, which never worked... so fido was allowed to continue being a butthead until the distraction had gone away...


[/QUOTE]

To which Dave said:


Dave Colborn said:


> Jay, you could take a dog trained with compulsion and reward that passes an IPO routine into "the real world" and it would fail at walking in a heel if never exposed to distraction. I am sure Bob knows his dogs and how to prepare it for not only a trial but the "real world". Terrasita said it well, not blaming the type of training, but the lack of proper training.
> 
> 
> The reason Ecollars work so well in the "real world" is that you have access to a correction or stimulation, depending on how you look at it and use it, all the time when it's on. The dog knows a correction is there, and it can also be used to let them know reward is present too, even when the handler is a hundred yards away.


Remember this is in the context of positive vs corrections.

I believe Jay's opinion is that a dog trained with purely positive methods could function on a trial field but would not hold up in the real world, with real world, unplanned stress/distractions.

I believe Dave's point was just because a dog is trained with compulsion does not mean he will be handle distractions/stress in real world. In other words, compulsion is not the thing that makes the difference. 

Do I have this right?

As far as temperment tests, I think we should move on from that discussion. Pretty much any dog can be conditioned to pass BH, the AKC Canine Good Citizen Test, and the ATTS. Really, all those tests are just a PR moment in time, what happens beyond the test is completely another story.


----------



## Brian Anderson

susan tuck said:


> I'm not saying I'm such a convert that from here on out I only use markers and/or positive methods. I'm saying marker training has a very valid place in training, just as other methods have a valid place, including corrections and force. Force methods have even evolved and are not always the brutal training methods that were common in days gone by.
> 
> I believe the more tools in your toolbox, the better. I don't believe there is any one style that fits or is best for all dogs and all trainers.
> 
> That said, I'm having a blast learning about marker training!


I agree.. I get to look at quite a few dogs. When going from dog to dog you realize you have to change mindsets and methods and equipment with almost all of them. Because they are all individuals and work and interact differently. Im always trying to push my own boundries of understanding and applying it. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesnt work out so well. But I try to not do the stuff that doesnt work but once. So if you ask something and I say "hey dont do that" ... means I did it already LOL!! Yep marker training is a blast and anymore I seldom use a leash ,,,, thats a long ways from yankin and crankin but show me a better way and Im there!


----------



## Brian Anderson

Christopher Smith said:


> Brian, in order to participate in IPO the dog must have a BH. The whole second portion of the BH consists of the things you asked about: traffic, animals, people. Unfortunately the average IPO club can't conyro the weather so it may or may not be held in the rain.
> 
> You should check out the IPO regulations for more info. When you look at the regulations as a whole the IPO program is pretty through training program.


I am quite familiar with IPO from a distance. I have trained at a number of clubs as well but saying I was a weekend warrior would be generous. I try to listen more than speak when its an area outside of my actual experience. Honestly I have never sat down and studied the rules mainly because I wasnt interested in the sport myself. But no slight do I have for any dog sport. If a person is out there training a dog to do things .. especially things that help people. Got my attention lol The level of control in some of the sports is really impressive by any standards and they all offer something interesting. I just wanted to throw that out there as being something I have experienced ..


----------



## Christopher Smith

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Oh I think its more than once. I've seen groups composed of the right people for a dog known to try to bite someone
> I wouldn't assume certain character traits based on trial titles and conditioning.


Please stop being silly. Here is a picture of a dog with a hat. I can see it with my own eyes. But if someone were to ask if dogs wear hats I would still say that dogs don't wear hats. You on the other hand will fight to the death insisting that dogs wear hats. Silly.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Christopher Smith said:


> Please stop being silly. Here is a picture of a dog with a hat. I can see it with my own eyes. But if someone were to ask if dogs wear hats I would still say that dogs don't wear hats. You on the other hand will fight to the death insisting that dogs wear hats. Silly.


Typical, typical. I think the only one wearing a hat here is you. But agree with Brian and Susan regarding the REALITY of what sports can and cannot tell us about the dog, and regardless, kudos to the handlers who work with their dogs.


----------

