# Importance of the evolution of training



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

Evolution and advancement is important in every thing we do. I'm interested who here thinks we should just train the way the last generation trained because "that's the way we've always done it", or "It's always worked that way before", or any other cliche you want to add in between these " ". If there were no one pushing the envelope we wouldn't have a lot of the methods some of us utilize today. What are your thoughts? 

"The only thing two trainers can agree on, is what the third one is doing wrong."


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

I agree . There is always something new to learn or something that can be added to the tool box and a good way to do that is by trainers sharing there experiances and knowledge with others .


----------



## Guest (Dec 1, 2008)

Ron Davidson said:


> Evolution and advancement is important in every thing we do. I'm interested who here thinks we should just train the way the last generation trained because "that's the way we've always done it", or "It's always worked that way before", or any other cliche you want to add in between these " ". If there were no one pushing the envelope we wouldn't have a lot of the methods some of us utilize today. What are your thoughts?
> 
> "The only thing two trainers can agree on, is what the third one is doing wrong."


I agree! For the most part.....If it isn't broke, don't fix it.....on another note just because someone has been training that way for 10yrs doesn't make it the right or best way how to do it.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Define evolution and advancement. What you were doing to that pup was neither evolution, or advancement. Which are basically the same thing by the way.


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

There is really nothing new in dog training in the last 50 years. The application of this is what changing.


----------



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Define evolution and advancement. What you were doing to that pup was neither evolution, or advancement. Which are basically the same thing by the way.


Thanks for the vocabulary lesson. I just wanted it to be clear what I was asking. Either way your opinion. If you wanna do things your way, when someone says lets do it this way. It's not advancement, its ****in up the dog. That's how it is with everything new. Not just with dog training.

Oh yeah and you keep saying you. I wasn't in that video. I just posted it. I use electric and I never used it that way, but that doesn't mean it can't be used that way.


----------



## James Lechernich (Oct 20, 2009)

Anne Vaini said:


> There is really nothing new in dog training in the last 50 years. The application of this is what changing.


Stole it right off my keyboard. Infidel! :twisted:




But seriously, I've read a lot of dog books and the basic concepts/theories are unchanged. Just different ways of doing the same thing. I think it was David Frost who said something about clicker training. Same stuff, new names.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Quote: If you wanna do things your way, when someone says lets do it this way. It's not advancement, its ****in up the dog.

Since when ? By the way, do you train dogs ?


----------



## will fernandez (May 17, 2006)

push the envelope just dont shove it down anybody's throat


----------



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

James Lechernich said:


> Stole it right off my keyboard. Infidel! :twisted:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No old guy writing a book on dog training is gonna give you new concepts. He is going to give you old school. Then it's being published so it's going to be as PC as possible. No new new school 20 something is writing books on dog training, and just because someone has been doing it 20 years and another 5 doesnt mean he can do it better.


----------



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: If you wanna do things your way, when someone says lets do it this way. It's not advancement, its ****in up the dog.
> 
> Since when ? By the way, do you train dogs ?


Nope. I just get on the internet and talk about it. 

I think everybody hears trains at least a little bit. Me probably more than most.


----------



## James Lechernich (Oct 20, 2009)

Ron Davidson said:


> No old guy writing a book on dog training is gonna give you new concepts. He is going to give you old school. Then it's being published so it's going to be as PC as possible. No new new school 20 something is writing books on dog training, and just because someone has been doing it 20 years and another 5 doesnt mean he can do it better.


Perhaps. But I was thinking more of how things progress. I've got stuff dating back from 1910-1920 up to modern authors on the seminar circuit. Each author adds their sticker to the dog training steamer trunk, but inside, at its core, the concepts are the same.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

So the first question was to tough ??


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

I think no matter what Evolution is always happening. The only constent thing is change. The trainers today are getting better and better. I think if you want to be relevant and able to keep running with the dogs is to be progressive in your training. 

I would say 90% of the people I have trained with are just fine with having someone else direct thier training. They will do as told.....Sheep, following the herder. These people seem to get titles and always are able to show well enough to be be given credit....but they are not really dog trainers. They are sheep. We all need help for time to time. But I am talking about the folks that seem to be in ept at thinking for themselves. 

Even if I fail or am wrong with my theories. I prefer to be a free thinker. I like to test those theories. Which for me can only be done by trialing. I use to fear failing or having people think I am not a good trainer. The most liberating experience I had training was with the two mentors I had, whom refused to train my dog for me. I am grateful for that. They asked questions that stimulated my brain to come up with an answer.

I take risks in training. Like last year, I removed every correction collar from my dog for an entire year. You want to see how good your at problem solving and make yourself think.....try it. At first it sucked, but by the end of the year....I did not win any trials. But my bite work was more controlled and more reliable. 

This also lead me to some theories about complusion training. After seeing my dog be much more free without the discpline of collars. I could see where my faults lied with using them, and now this summer when I go back to using collars. I have a plan, and some thoughts on how they are going to work. Though they may not work, or they may....the bottom line is. My training is better, and I forced myself to evolve. instead of going out this summer and doing what I did the year before, and the year before that. I will have a whole new outlook and goal on my training. 

And just for crediablity here is one of my theories about complusion. It's about the big picture, not anyone behavior. But the overall outlook the dog has with complusion. In the past, I would teach the dog how to avoid correction or learn to shut it off. I did this with one behavior. Let's say for the recall, I taught the dog when I call it, starting at a short distance. the faster the dog returned the faster the e-collar would turn off. this worked great. I then used it for the call out...same idea. then the back transport...again similar idea. stay by me and the collar shuts off. Then I would teach the dog to stay in a long down, Again if they got up collar would turn on, I would manually put the dog back down....the collar would shut off. 

Now we are up to 4 behaviors I use the collar for.

By taking the collar away, and using motivational techiniques to proof the behaviors I want. I noticed the dog was much more animated. Why? I thought about it....when I first started with the collar it seemed to have little or no effect on animation or mood. But as I added behaviors the dog started to diminish a bit in animation and additude. it was subtle and I did not notice it till I went no collars. 

So my conclusion is that in short term, I can use E collar training. But I most not get enamored with the idea that it's a cure all. That there are ill effects that can come with it. Specifically, that when using avoidance training. The dog may respond well when using with it one or even two behaviors. But to keep adding behaviors. The dog may start to think avoidance over the long term is impossible. Just when they get one behavior down and are avoiding the stim, it's employed somewhere else....thus making avoidance virtually impossible for the dog. Then the dog starts to worry a bit, getting more hectic, or simmering down in drive in order to think so they do not get shocked.


----------



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> So the first question was to tough ??


Sorry I thought that was rhetorical. Since forever. I'm not saying you specifically. That's the way it is when people disagree on a way to train something generally.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

I guess I don't see the point then. I don't give two shits about how you train, I show up, you say "I need you to do this and this and this" to start, and so I do "this and this and this".

When I say "I want you to do this, as I want it to look like this" then I expect you to do the same.

However, I am not going to agree with what I saw in that video ever. If we are training together, then you do that, and I don't.

I also don't see that as evolution or advancement in training. Maybe you could tell me how it is going to advance training, as I don't remember anyone explaining that. Could be my early alzheimers.


----------



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

James Downey said:


> I think no matter what Evolution is always happening. The only constent thing is change. The trainers today are getting better and better. I think if you want to be relevant and able to keep running with the dogs is to be progressive in your training.
> 
> I would say 90% of the people I have trained with are just fine with having someone else direct thier training. They will do as told.....Sheep, following the herder. These people seem to get titles and always are able to show well enough to be be given credit....but they are not really dog trainers. They are sheep. We all need help for time to time. But I am talking about the folks that seem to be in ept at thinking for themselves.
> 
> ...


This was a really good post. I totally agree with the sheep comment. You can take ideas from other people you train with, but add your own ideas and reasoning to it. Don't just do everything the way they tell you, and regurgitate to everyone like it's gospel. And above all else you absolutely must keep progressing. 

As far as the animation with the collar. No different that with the prong. Keep him in drive. Sometimes it doesn't even take toys. Sometimes the dog just sees you and expects fun.


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Anne Vaini said:


> There is really nothing new in dog training in the last 50 years. The application of this is what changing.


 
So there is something new in dog training...

There is nothing new about how planes fly since the Wright brothers first took off at kitty hawk.


----------



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I guess I don't see the point then. I don't give two shits about how you train, I show up, you say "I need you to do this and this and this" to start, and so I do "this and this and this".
> 
> When I say "I want you to do this, as I want it to look like this" then I expect you to do the same.
> 
> ...


How does clicker training advance training? It was just a video showing a different way to use another training tool. Just gives you longer range and more filter for distractions. Above all else these training tools we use are all about the same thing, keeping the dogs attention so we can learn him something.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

I use motivation for the sendaway, and it screws me most of the time. The dog knows to run down the field, but chooses not to. You use the collar to get the correct behavior, then before a trial, you use the motivation to make it faster or whatever. This is just finishing.

You will always see where you have made mistakes, you just have to figure out how MUCH of a mistake it is, or if it is just the dog not handling the stress of HAVING to do it. Just part of figuring shit out.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Clicker training allows the dog to figure out what you are asking on it's own. That is why it is an advancement.

Quote: Just gives you longer range and more filter for distractions

Longer than a clicker ? How far away are you using it ? And describe for me what a "filter for distractions" is, would ya ?


----------



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> I use motivation for the sendaway, and it screws me most of the time. The dog knows to run down the field, but chooses not to. You use the collar to get the correct behavior, then before a trial, you use the motivation to make it faster or whatever. This is just finishing.
> 
> You will always see where you have made mistakes, you just have to figure out how MUCH of a mistake it is, or if it is just the dog not handling the stress of HAVING to do it. Just part of figuring shit out.


I use the motivation while I'm using the collar. That way he only learns to do it fast. Sneaky, sneaky.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Quote: I use the motivation while I'm using the collar. That way he only learns to do it fast. Sneaky, sneaky.

What is the difference ? Suddenly you have no time before the trial ??


----------



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: I use the motivation while I'm using the collar. That way he only learns to do it fast. Sneaky, sneaky.
> 
> What is the difference ? Suddenly you have no time before the trial ??


It's not that. I want him to do things fast then I can cut him back before trial not motivate him before trial. A slow dog get hit for everything. A fast looks flashy so he gets away with alot more. IMO


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Most training methods past, present and future have a use. The problem lies in the application and lack of understanding by the "trainer".
Our quick fix/need it now society just adds to the mix/confusion.


----------



## Ron Davidson (Mar 5, 2009)

Bob Scott said:


> Most training methods past, present and future have a use. The problem lies in the application and lack of understanding by the "trainer".
> Our quick fix/need it now society just adds to the mix/confusion.


Training doesn't have to take a long time to be taught right. Often it's not in the teaching. It's in the shaping after the teaching.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Learninig or shaping is still dependent on the teacher.
That teacher may be nothing more then life's expieriences OR it may be a human trainer. Neither is good or bad in itself. 
There are many, many examples "called single event learning". Happens fast and can be good or bad. 
I would look at shaping as a series of events that can create learning.


----------



## Anne Pridemore (Mar 20, 2010)

Bob Scott said:


> Most training methods past, present and future have a use. The problem lies in the application and lack of understanding by the "trainer".
> Our quick fix/need it now society just adds to the mix/confusion.


=D> YES.

My thought is this. There is a method for every dog/handler team out there. Any method can have it's place and give solid results with proper application, consistancy, and time. The failing is never the method but the human behind it. I can give lists of reasons why any training method will fail and it all comes down to the human. This is beacuse they were never taught correctly, or they don't understand how to read their dogs reaction, or they have some moral hang up about scolding.

Let me share with you a little tragic story. A perfectly good trainable dog died needlessly. A woman with a 1yr old puggle (God help us) calls ready to give up on her uncontrolable dog. The trainer arrives and notes the dog has no collar or lead. So using a slip lead he trys to show the woman how to get the dog to sit using non-forceful methods. (read luring/baiting) The puggle, having never had a thing around its neck, panics and pulls away. The woman then starts screaming franticly, "YOUR CHOKEING HER YOUR GOING TO KILL HER!" So to apease the woman the trainer removes the slip lead and shows her how to keep the dog focused and motivated off all equipment. Durring the session it comes out that the woman had been abused, and often choked by her father. So she trancefered this fear of hers to the dog. After the first session the dog was proving she would follow sit and down and even heel for hotdogs. The lady called the trainer a few days later... She canceled further lessons, the dog was put down as uncontrolable.

So the true moral of the story is what ever training method it takes to keep your dog safe is the right one. For my personal dogs I have used what ever method fits the dog. As a result I have everything from clicker and cookie trained dogs to prong collar and Koheler trained dogs. But they are all alive, happy, healthy and very well loved. Keep in mind that with the right words and applications ANY METHOD can be seen as inhumane or abuseive. So many things in the dog training world that are seen as Evolution have slimply been the addition of human morals and feelings, as dogs become more "family" than animal. People seek validation though God or science, it is easier to back learning theroy with science- so that is what we do to validate training methods.


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

I remember an exercise we used to do out on the field years ago. We all stood there with our dogs and one by one we were asked to go in front a bit and play with our dog, no lead, no ball, no tug, no nothing!

There were quite a number of handlers that just stood there dumbfounded and the dog even more so. It's not something that can be taught.

I also see a lack of conviction when applying a method. Either it's not been thought out sufficiently to ensure it's practically foolproof or it's been copied without the handler being able to apply it convincingly.

We also had a number of seminars that really were seminars in the sense that we learned about how a dog reacts and learns. The seminars (not all) today are very often given with the not so transparent idea of presenting a new motivation toy or tool and to make everyone go "ooh, awesome".

It can't all be good yesterday and bad today. I have the feeling that a lot of handlers are "hiding" behind the sophisticated tools and not getting through to their dogs properly. There's nothing wrong with any tool - but, as said by someone previously, the effect it has on the dog has to be realised and understood.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Gillian said
"I remember an exercise we used to do out on the field years ago. We all stood there with our dogs and one by one we were asked to go in front a bit and play with our dog, no lead, no ball, no tug, no nothing!"


Not to mention the people that couldn't walk a dog without a leash to saver their life if it wasn't on a training or competition field.


----------



## Olga Sukonnikova (Apr 16, 2009)

Ron Davidson said:


> Training doesn't have to take a long time to be taught right. Often it's not in the teaching. It's in the shaping after the teaching.


I think there's no universal recipe. As for me - I prefer shaping+teaching+training as an intergrated process (that's why I like training with clicker so much) and I like&want it to take a long time - I want to give my dog a good opportunity for development, and myself - an opportunity to study my dog well enough to try to avoid surprises during the trial. And in everyday real life as well.

Maybe my English is...er... foggy - sorry, I'm a foreigner...


----------



## Craig Wood (Dec 9, 2008)

James Downey said:


> So there is something new in dog training...
> 
> There is nothing new about how planes fly since the Wright brothers first took off at kitty hawk.


">


----------

