# Leerburg Training Methods



## Carlo Hernandez

Hi guys,

New to the site and been lurking for awhile. I just wanted to get your guys opinions on Leerburg's training methods. You guys agree with them and/or tried them out? 

We just bought a new GSD puppy, litter is 3 weeks old right now and we get first pick. I just wanted to get some feedback on his methonds. We have 4 of his DVDs already. We are going to try to get our dog into Shutzhund. 

Thanks Guys!

- CEH


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Carlo Hernandez said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> New to the site and been lurking for awhile. I just wanted to get your guys opinions on Leerburg's training methods. You guys agree with them and/or tried them out?
> 
> We just bought a new GSD puppy, litter is 3 weeks old right now and we get first pick. I just wanted to get some feedback on his methonds. We have 4 of his DVDs already. We are going to try to get our dog into Shutzhund.
> 
> Thanks Guys!
> 
> - CEH


What DVDs do you have? If you don't yet have The Power of Training with Markers, I recommend it enthusiastically. 


Also the newer Basic Ob (post 1980s; just saying because there are some of the old ones floating around on eBay), Dominant & Aggressive Dogs, and Pack Structure..... I have many of the LB videos and I like all the ones I have, but I don't train SchH and can't address that.

I'm sure the SchH folks will comment too, on those videos as well as Raising a Working Puppy.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Welcome to the forum!


----------



## Alyssa Myracle

Something to keep in mind is that there really are no "Leerburg" methods.

Ed (and Cindy) are constantly evolving their approach to training and managing dogs as they encounter new methods, different trainers, etc. 

Years ago, Ed completely scoffed at Marker training.
Now, he's produced his own DVD on the method (and I second Connie's recommendation!)


I really enjoyed the Building Drive and Focus with my Schutzhund dog. Between that, and Markers, I feel like I'm lightyears ahead of the methods I've used with previous dogs.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Alyssa Myracle said:


> Something to keep in mind is that there really are no "Leerburg" methods.
> 
> Ed (and Cindy) are constantly evolving their approach to training and managing dogs as they encounter new methods, different trainers, etc.


EXCELLENT point. Fits in with my recommendation for the more recent version of Ed's Basic Ob video.

"Evolving" is a very good point!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Kinda late to be hoping he doesn't suck after getting 4 of his training videos.

There is plenty that I do not agree with in most of the tapes that I have seen, but that is just me, I am not just starting out.

I absolutly hate his idea that your dog should not be on a decoy, and that the owner should be building drive. Most people are about as interesting as doormats, and it shows months later when they bring the dog to training. LOL

Go to a local club, quit with the video stuff, and have a lot of fun with your pup.


----------



## Carlo Hernandez

Thanks everyone. I currently have the DVDs Pack Sturture, Raising Working Dog, Baisc Obedience, and 8weeks to 8 months. We are going to base our training off his methods, it looks like a good foundation to start off on. I do understand about how training evolves over time, and we think we may mix in some other methods we have seen.


----------



## Alyssa Myracle

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Kinda late to be hoping he doesn't suck after getting 4 of his training videos.
> 
> There is plenty that I do not agree with in most of the tapes that I have seen, but that is just me, I am not just starting out.
> 
> I absolutly hate his idea that your dog should not be on a decoy, and that the owner should be building drive. Most people are about as interesting as doormats, and it shows months later when they bring the dog to training. LOL
> 
> Go to a local club, quit with the video stuff, and have a lot of fun with your pup.


Jeff, you big bully.

But I have to agree with at least part of what you said.
I disagree with the belief that a dog is "too young" to start working on the helper. I don't think a dog is ever too young to work with a good helper who knows how to do puppywork.


----------



## Edward Egan

If you are looking for a good method for a first timers starting out with a puppy, consider Ivan Balabanov's DVD's. Put's a great foundation on the dog and helps with the new, borring, doormat style, mentioned above. I was one of those. :wink:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

We should have a video contest, and have everyone video themselves doing that stupid "drive building" and have a good laugh at how bad most people are at it.

At least people would figure out what they were doing wrong.


----------



## Konnie Hein

Can we have video of the dogs who bite their handler's while playing Ivan's game??? That would be cool.

(I am not volunteering)


----------



## Lou Castle

Not a fan of anything to do with Leerburg or Mr. Frawley. 

I wonder if he's going to put this on a video? 

Mr. Frawley writes,


> Removed by Admin


Look here. It's a little over halfway down the page.


----------



## Mike Jones

Edward Egan said:


> If you are looking for a good method for a first timers starting out with a puppy, consider Ivan Balabanov's DVD's. Put's a great foundation on the dog and helps with the new, borring, doormat style, mentioned above. I was one of those. :wink:


Hey Ed, this is off topic but your dog in your avator looks like a human with fur, scarry. LOL:grin:


----------



## Emilio Rodriguez

Some Leerburg videos are excellent, B&H for PSD, muzzle training, Tracking with the RCMP comes to mind. Some are OK like training personal protection dogs. And some are crap like the building focus and drive with Mr. Flanks.

The problem with Frawley's videos is that everything is absolute and doesn't allow for another approach at the time of the production of the video. If you've followed his productions from the beginning you can see how he learns new stuff and changes his mind. But the old vids with the outdated info are sold right along the new ones. The one's that are really bad like the Flanks vid I can't even bear to watch. Other ones I like to watch and define in my mind the counter argument to what he's saying. If obedience is the objective I wouldn't buy his obedience video.

I also learned a lot from his table training vid.


----------



## Jason Sidener

Lou Castle said:


> Not a fan of anything to do with Leerburg or Mr. Frawley.
> 
> I wonder if he's going to put this on a video?
> 
> Mr. Frawley writes,
> 
> Look here. It's a little over halfway down the page.


You had absolutly no problem with what you quoted from his site until you and him had issues/disagreement over e-collar methods. At one time you was very active poster on his forum. 

You also fail to mention how long ago this was and how he said he would handle it now.

I could realy care the **** less about your issues with anyone let alone Frawley but people that listen to your opinion on anything to do with Frawley should know about the history between you and him.


----------



## Lou Castle

I really hate to go into this but Jason leaves me no choice. 



Jason Sidener said:


> You had absolutly no problem with what you quoted from his site until you and him had issues/disagreement over e-collar methods. At one time you was very active poster on his forum.


Sorry Jason but you're wrong. I've quoted this bit of nonsense from him since I first found it quite a few years ago. I've told the truth about his brutality and abuse for years, long before Ed went off the deep end. 

I was one of the first members of his forum, #31 (I think it was, and now they're up to around 7,000 – I haven't looked for quite some time). His Ecollar video is one of the worst dog training videos OF ANY KIND that I've ever seen and it shows some of the abuse that's STILL typical of his work. He stims a puppy at a level he acknowledges that is too high repeatedly. And he does this for no apparent reason! 

He banned me from his board because he was trying to sell this POS video and I'd been giving away Ecollar information for free for years. I had nearly 700 posts on his site, most of them about Ecollars. SUDDENLY when his Ecollar video was near release he decided that after many years of my postings on his forum, my use of an Ecollar was "abusive." Odd but he never mentioned it once in all the years that I'd been there until that point. It was ONLY when he was trying to sell his video that he began to claim that my work was abusive. 

To give you some idea of this true personality, after he banned me he removed my signature line, which as here, contained a link to my website, from all my posts and replaced them with something like "Lou Castle is an old school trainer with nothing to offer." 



Jason Sidener said:


> You also fail to mention how long ago this was and how he said he would handle it now.


I gave the link and anyone is free to look it up. I have no idea how he'd handle it now. Since you think that he'd handle it differently and you seem to be defending him now, why don't you tell us what he'd do? 

Please feel free to invite him to respond in person to my post here. Really, though, don't bother, because he never ventures away from his own board where he can control everything that anyone says. He won't take part on a neutral board. He knows that his lack of K-9 training knowledge will soon be exposed if he can't stop others from commenting on his theories and methods. 

Ed and I were engaged in an argument when he banned me. He said that I was using "escape training" and that it was "abusive." He so lacks dog training knowledge that he fails to realize that escape training is at play anytime any form of correction is used. The dog performs to escape the correction. When this obvious bit of fact was pointed out to him he denied it. He lacks VERY basic dog training knowledge. 



Ryan said:


> I could realy care the **** less about your issues with anyone let alone Frawley


And yet here you are pointing it out. For someone who claims that they don't care, you seem to be "Johnny on the spot!" 



Jason Sidener said:


> but people that listen to your opinion on anything to do with Frawley should know about the history between you and him.


I'm not shy about telling about it. You haven't revealed some big secret. Ed is an equipment salesman, a breeder and someone who makes videos. Perhaps you can tell us of his extensive trialing work or the hundreds of police dogs he's personally trained. While you're at it, please include the seminars he's done where HE'S the head speaker. Of the 42 seminars I've done I was the head instructor for about half of them. 

Also since you seem to be in a "revelation mode," perhaps you can help Ed out. Here's what he's written, (talking about choke chains)


> Removed by Admin


I replied


> Removed by Admin


As Ed does when he's shown to be wrong, he got angry and refused to provide the study. Perhaps you can find it for him since you seem to be his champion here.


----------



## James Downey

Dogdom seems to be filled with trainers whom have not had much success beyond titling dogs whom give seminars, make videos, and offer other services for money. Anyone can research Mr. Frawley and find if he is in this Category...Furthermore, thier are People whom have had enormous success in dogs giving seminars, making vids, writing books...whom are selling are training method. I have found often this is the not the training method the trainer even uses themselves. I am always skeptical when a trainer bases his lively hood upon selling training. Remember when you by a book...it never says "Best Author" it may say "Best SELLING author" the Key word is Selling...

With anything else it's buyer beware. And I do attend seminars, read books and watch videos. I started in dogs idiolizing trainers and hanging on every word. As I continue to grow as a trainer I found this type of blind faith has limited me. I was more of a sheep just following the herd. I seem many, many people whom do the same thing ...many would rather have Joe trainer just train thier dog for them. I have seen people change thier ethics in order to conform to an idols training. You have to follow the herd somewhat in order to get the basics. But now I take advice and question it, Ponder it, and come to my own conclusions.

The one thing I believe great trainers have, is they have made this transition and can think for themselves. This princpal...thinking for myself is now what I work on. Just as I want my dog to think, I must think. 

All advice is valuable...but the value is not whether it's correct or not. It's whether I can think about it, critically think...and make a choice if it's worth doing. 

As for Ed in particular he is a phenom in dog sport. He has a huge succesful buisness. I have never seen Ed on a trial field. I have never heard his named hoisted as a great dog trainer. But people from all walks of life want his videos. When I talk to "normal" dog people. They all know about Leerburg.com but none have ever heard of Ivan Balabanov. Now, hands down Ivan maybe one of the greatest dog trainers ever...Ed? I think Hands down, Ed is probably one of the best buisnessmen in Working dogs ever.


----------



## Bob Scott

We don't allow criticism of another forum, form owner, or form member on the WDF. Also NO posting of materials from another forum without their permission. 
It stops NOW!

Thank you!


----------



## Jason Sidener

Lou,

I an not going to answer your stupid questions about Frawley. I could care less about your fued with him. I posted so others that read your opinion know that there is a history between you and him and should take that into consideration before listening to your advice or opinion on Frawley.


----------



## Carlo Hernandez

Thanks guys for your input...didnt really mean for this to blow up. I will look into the other recommend trainers methods, Ivan Balabanov, and check him out as well. I think I will gather as much info from everyone's recommendations and see what works best and is fun!


----------



## Anne Vaini

Right NOW, I think Ed and Cindy train similar to Balabanov. I hear they moved on from Flinks are with Mike Ellis - who I believe trains much the same way as Balabanov. Correct?

The older DVD's don't reflect this, of course.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood

This is the crappy thing about the internet. Things you say and do haunt you 20 years later. Nobody's allowed to change their mind without being called on it. I'd rather change my mind and take flack for it than continue doing something poorly out of pride.


----------



## James Downey

Anne Vaini said:


> Right NOW, I think Ed and Cindy train similar to Balabanov. I hear they moved on from Flinks are with Mike Ellis - who I believe trains much the same way as Balabanov. Correct?
> 
> The older DVD's don't reflect this, of course.


 
I am not so sure Micheal Ellis trains just like Ivan....But even if they all are training just Ivan...Why would you not just go to Ivan? Especially if Ivan is the only one having success.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

What is all this censorship crap ??? I didn't get to read it, and half in the bag from lack of sleep was looking for removed by admin on Ed's site

WTF Over ????


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood

Lou is more than welcome to post links to the threads he referred to (which he did in one instance), but I've temporarily banned people for posting content from WDF on other forums, I can't allow people to post other forums content on here either. Fair is fair.


----------



## Lou Castle

Bob Scott said:


> We don't allow criticism of another forum, form owner, or form member on the WDA. Also NO posting of materials from another forum without their permission.
> It stops NOW!
> 
> Thank you!


As I said, I hated going there but I didn't feel that Jason left me any choice. 

But I’m a bit confused and looking for clarification. Is this "criticism" limited only to "other forums, forum owners or forum members" as you've said? I ask because just about a month ago here Bernhard Flinks was taking quite a beating, including personal attack by way of name calling, and you even participated in that thread, making a light comment referring to something that he'd done that others had criticized! To my knowledge he's not a forum member or forum owner so it seems that this protection is limited to just those folks. Is this the case? A trainer is fair game unless he's a FM here or owns another Forum? This hardly seems fair. 

If someone asks about a trainer who is either a forum member or owns another forum and some think he walks on water, are not others with different opinions, allowed to participate? Is criticism limited to those only who are not FM's or forum owners?


----------



## Lou Castle

Jason Sidener said:


> I an not going to answer your stupid questions about Frawley.


Of course not! Here, have some more Kool–aid. ROFL. 



Jason Sidener said:


> I could care less about your fued with him. I posted so others that read your opinion know that there is a history between you and him and should take that into consideration before listening to your advice or opinion on Frawley.


As I so plainly said, I've never hidden my issues with him. All you had to do was ask. Instead you tried to make it appear as if I was hiding something. I wasn't, never have. I've disagreed with MUCH of what he writes. And much of it on his own site where he was free to respond. When he did his lack of training knowledge became EVEN MORE obvious.


----------



## Lou Castle

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> This is the crappy thing about the internet. Things you say and do haunt you 20 years later.


THIS is the GREAT thing about the Internet! Otherwise things that people "say and do" just disappear, and it's easy for them deny that they ever said or did them, or just hope that no one remembers them. The Internet ensures that history is not revised! 



Mike Schoonbrood said:


> Nobody's allowed to change their mind without being called on it.


Anyone is free to change their mind at anytime and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. There's also nothing wrong with "being called on it." But even if someone was called on it, what's wrong with saying "Yes, I've learned more since I wrote that?" I'm quite sure that ALL of us who have been around for any significant time, do things differently than we did 5, 10 or 20 years ago. 

If I learn a better way of doing something I change immediately and make no secret of it. In fact quite the opposite is the case. My website tells of updates of my methods quite clearly as can be see on THIS PAGE.  I updated seven articles last year and one so far, this year. 

Back to the topic. As far as Leerburg's videos are concerned, most of them that feature the work of others are good but they're dated and there's no indication of when they were made at time of purchase. Some are well over a decade old and we've moved far beyond many methods shown in them. They may be interesting from a historical viewpoint but not very useful for seeing today's methods

I'd avoid any that feature Mr. Frawley as the trainer in them.


----------



## Lou Castle

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> … I've temporarily banned people for posting content from WDF on other forums, I can't allow people to post other forums content on here either. Fair is fair.


Mike why is this? I'm certainly not arguing with you over how you run your forum, just wondering why you don't allow this? Never run into it before. Often things that are said here (or elsewhere) are pertinent to discussions elsewhere (or here). As long as the rules of copyright are followed (fair comment and giving credit to the other site) why not permit it? 

You permit posting of the link but not the quoting of the material? This requires readers who wish to follow the link to go through an entire webpage, which may be thousands of words, to find one paragraph that's being referred to and that may not even be clear. It seems similar to allowing the posting of a book title but not the quoting of the paragraph from that book that is referred to. In other media, this is how it's done. Why not here?


----------



## Randy Allen

There's only one thing you can get two out of any three trainers in the world to agree on.....and that's that the third one is wrong.


To bad this thread turned into a pissing contest.

Randy


----------



## Lou Castle

Randy Allen said:


> To bad this thread turned into a pissing contest.


One man's pissing contest is another's spirited debate.


----------



## Courtney Guthrie

Well, I'm a woman and can obviously see that this thread is a pissing contest, there is no spirited debate about it. Too bad it turned into this, I was getting a lot from reading this. 

Courtney


----------



## Edward Egan

Mike Jones said:


> Hey Ed, this is off topic but your dog in your avator looks like a human with fur, scarry. LOL:grin:


I've heard lion, wolf, etc. never human. I'll and that to my list. He is very serious looking at times, at night even more so.


----------



## Edward Egan

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> We should have a video contest, and have everyone video themselves doing that stupid "drive building" and have a good laugh at how bad most people are at it.
> 
> At least people would figure out what they were doing wrong.


Maybe so, but I was even worse before Ivan's methods, I often wonder if I would have the drive I have today without it.

Sure I've gone thru a box of bandaids, but he doesn't hit or bite at the hand anymore. He knows this will end the game. It wasn't that hard to teach.


----------



## Randy Allen

Debate??????
That is what passes for debate? Who are you debating Lou?

Are you debating Jason? He rightly pointed out you didn't qualify your initail post for the rest of us. Why is that wrong? He sounds pretty neutral to me.

The moderators? Are you debating that you should be able to pull things out context to support slamming someone not present?

So far I think your DEBATE reads more like a hissy fit.

Randy


----------



## James Downey

Edward Egan said:


> Maybe so, but I was even worse before Ivan's methods, I often wonder if I would have the drive I have today without it.
> 
> Sure I've gone thru a box of bandaids, but he doesn't hit or bite at the hand anymore. He knows this will end the game. It wasn't that hard to teach.


 
We all forget Jeff was born a pro at this stuff.


----------



## Carol Boche

Okay....now this thread has turned into something that I can't even learn from. 

Who cares what Ed and Lou have to say about each other (although I think it was right that Jason called out for the actual story behind Lou's post...that confused the hell out of me before that was brought to light)....it was the right decision by Mike to remove the quotes. I firmly believe that if you want to post what someone else said, then your ass better get permission. I made that mistake ONE time. 

Both Ed and Lou have things that people can benefit from as well as things people don't like. 

Whatever, this is everywhere. It should not have been a factor in someone asking for an opinion on LB training methods. 

I am not championing LB here at all, but the information that they post is well written and WORKS.....albeit it is not NEW and has been around, but it is broken down to where a five year old could do it......and that is a GREAT thing since owners and dogs alike will have much better relationships because of it. 

As for the old and new DVD's.....who cares if some are old and some are new....it's great to see first hand that what someone originally started with and then went on to new things that work is great. 

SO, can we get back on the original subject which is: 

*New to the site and been lurking for awhile. I just wanted to get your guys opinions on Leerburg's training methods. You guys agree with them and/or tried them out?
*

Nowhere in that question is "how do you feel about ED?" they are asking about TRAINING METHODS that are used........

Not trying to piss anyone off, but the OP asked for specific advice and so far has received 4 pages of banter......regardless of personal feelings, this member deserves some advice that is not filled with crap. 

*Carlo, I have learned a lot from reading that site as well as buying the DVD's. Depending on what you want to do.....you could do very well by what LB offers. *

Mods, feel free to moderate me if needed......I am not trying to be bitchy, but I am sure it came out that way.....


----------



## Steve Strom

Hey Carlo, I don't think any of the videos is really meant to be an absolute, only this way works type of thing. Like people have mentioned your training evolves and there are parts of the training you'll see on Leerburg DVD's that you'll use forever and parts you may never use.

I always look back at Building Drive and Focus,Competition Heeling with Tom Rose,and the Motivational Retrieve and to me they were worth buying.


----------



## James Downey

Carol Boche said:


> Okay....now this thread has turned into something that I can't even learn from.
> 
> Who cares what Ed and Lou have to say about each other (although I think it was right that Jason called out for the actual story behind Lou's post...that confused the hell out of me before that was brought to light)....it was the right decision by Mike to remove the quotes. I firmly believe that if you want to post what someone else said, then your ass better get permission. I made that mistake ONE time.
> 
> Both Ed and Lou have things that people can benefit from as well as things people don't like.
> 
> Whatever, this is everywhere. It should not have been a factor in someone asking for an opinion on LB training methods.
> 
> I am not championing LB here at all, but the information that they post is well written and WORKS.....albeit it is not NEW and has been around, but it is broken down to where a five year old could do it......and that is a GREAT thing since owners and dogs alike will have much better relationships because of it.
> 
> As for the old and new DVD's.....who cares if some are old and some are new....it's great to see first hand that what someone originally started with and then went on to new things that work is great.
> 
> SO, can we get back on the original subject which is:
> 
> *New to the site and been lurking for awhile. I just wanted to get your guys opinions on Leerburg's training methods. You guys agree with them and/or tried them out?*
> 
> 
> Nowhere in that question is "how do you feel about ED?" they are asking about TRAINING METHODS that are used........
> 
> Not trying to piss anyone off, but the OP asked for specific advice and so far has received 4 pages of banter......regardless of personal feelings, this member deserves some advice that is not filled with crap.
> 
> *Carlo, I have learned a lot from reading that site as well as buying the DVD's. Depending on what you want to do.....you could do very well by what LB offers. *
> 
> Mods, feel free to moderate me if needed......I am not trying to be bitchy, but I am sure it came out that way.....


The only answer the OP can recieve is the videos and methods are good. Otherwise we would be critical of ED and LB. 

I can do this for the OP go research Ed and his training...see how successful he has been at dog training...then you be the judge.


----------



## Carol Boche

James Downey said:


> The only answer the OP can recieve is the videos and methods are good. Otherwise we would be critical of ED and LB.


Mmmm...maybe so, but if there is something we don't like about anything, there are better ways to explain it. There are things I don't like about LB, but it has nothing to do with the dvd's or training so there is no place for it here. 




James Downey said:


> I can do this for the OP go research Ed and his training...see how successful he has been at dog training...then you be the judge.


I agree, if you want to find out about anyone......all ya gotta do is Google. :wink:


----------



## susan tuck

Carlo Hernandez said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> New to the site and been lurking for awhile. I just wanted to get your guys opinions on Leerburg's training methods. You guys agree with them and/or tried them out?
> 
> We just bought a new GSD puppy, litter is 3 weeks old right now and we get first pick. I just wanted to get some feedback on his methonds. We have 4 of his DVDs already. We are going to try to get our dog into Shutzhund.
> 
> Thanks Guys!
> 
> - CEH


I have issues with a newbie trying out any methods observed over a video with their first puppy bringing up for any grip sport. There are too many variables in the equation that dictate how each puppy is raised and a person who is new might not be able to recognize what will work and what won't with that particular puppy. It's not as simple as A + B = C or "Connect The Dots" . 

In my opinion, rather than spending time watching videos, go see the various clubs around you, find one you like and start going out all the time, even before you get the puppy you can learn a lot more from watching the training director and other experienced members with their dogs than from a video. Also these people will be able to help you understand what (if anything) is useful in your videos and why or why not.


----------



## Randy Allen

Tsk tsk Carol,
Who are you to break up a good pissing contest!!!??? Hahahahaha

Uh yeah, the op.
The best I can offer is that each famous (or infamous) trainer employs what works for them. Each trainer (dog owner) needs to find what works for them and the dog they're working with. 
As a beginner, a person could do a lot worse then any of the people mentioned in this thread.
And Jeff is right, there is nothing like the hands on experience at a club, but as a caution it should be noted, not all clubs are equal, if you don't like how your dog is reacting..... don't be afraid to walk.
Which bring the point up of reading the dog. I think this is where beginners have the most problems. Going with the dog. 
It's not so much a matter of training as such as it's more of a matter of forming. ie, this isn't working, lets try this thing from Ellias. Nope let's try this from Ivan, let's try that and so on until you can find something that works for you and the dog. But one has to be able to read the dog, and that only comes with an accumulated knowledge. 
Leerburg is one of those places, as well as here, one can start amassing ' reading the dog'.
Personally I glean something from each source be it dvd's, books, open forums, good clubs, bad clubs, good trainers, bad trainers. But in the end the individual dog is the one that dictates how we progress.

If my dog isn't learning, I doing something wrong.
Randy


----------



## Alyssa Myracle

I think I've learned more from bad trainers, than good trainers, in all truthfulness.

In evaluating WHY I don't like a method or a trainer, I end up gaining understanding of the dog and the training.

Kind of like reverse psychology.


Not that I'm recommending people seek out bad trainers... 

I guess if I could recommend anything, it would be to seek out as many sources of information as possible, and then sift through it for what rings true to you. Trust your gut and see what works.


----------



## Emilio Rodriguez

I'm surprised no one mentioned going to a professional trainer and doing an obedience course. A lot will be learned from watching other dogs and handlers if it's a group class. A club is not always available and there can be inexperienced people running and participating in a club.

There are many different dogs requiring different approaches. If you're into it then by all means start learning all that, a lot of dogs get messed up in the process though. A professional trainer has been through all that and will know what your dog needs. I'm not talking about Petsmart here.

Reading all these posts one might get the idea it's essential to expose oneself to a hundred theories to be able to obedience train a dog. The truth of the matter is that for obedience training a professional trainer doesn't need all that. If someone is seriously interested in dogs and starts going through numbers, the dogs will teach them. There's only a couple of fundamental principles at work with obedience training, the rest is shortcuts. For someone who doesn't know the shortcuts common sense and patience will suffice. I don't think the LB obedience video provides that common sense. If anything it's like what Lou Castle said, most of it is escape training.


----------



## Steve Strom

Emilio Rodriguez said:


> If anything it's like what Lou Castle said, most of it is escape training.


Emilio, re-read the posts By Lou Castle. I believe you have this backwards.


----------



## susan tuck

Emilio Rodriguez said:


> I'm surprised no one mentioned going to a professional trainer and doing an obedience course. A lot will be learned from watching other dogs and handlers if it's a group class. A club is not always available and there can be inexperienced people running and participating in a club.
> 
> There are many different dogs requiring different approaches. If you're into it then by all means start learning all that, a lot of dogs get messed up in the process though. A professional trainer has been through all that and will know what your dog needs. I'm not talking about Petsmart here.
> 
> Reading all these posts one might get the idea it's essential to expose oneself to a hundred theories to be able to obedience train a dog. The truth of the matter is that for obedience training a professional trainer doesn't need all that. If someone is seriously interested in dogs and starts going through numbers, the dogs will teach them. There's only a couple of fundamental principles at work with obedience training, the rest is shortcuts. For someone who doesn't know the shortcuts common sense and patience will suffice. I don't think the LB obedience video provides that common sense. If anything it's like what Lou Castle said, most of it is escape training.


???
The original poster is planning on training this pup for schutzhund, of course we would recommend he join a good schutzhund club.


----------



## Emilio Rodriguez

I stand corrected then, somehow I missed the main point with all the general discussion of training methodology. Since it's SCH then it's all arbitrary anyways, by all means Leerburg vids should fit the bill.


Steve Strom said:


> Emilio, re-read the posts By Lou Castle. I believe you have this backwards.





Lou Castle said:


> Ed and I were engaged in an argument when he banned me. He said that I was using "escape training" and that it was "abusive." He so lacks dog training knowledge that he fails to realize that escape training is at play anytime any form of correction is used. The dog performs to escape the correction. When this obvious bit of fact was pointed out to him he denied it. He lacks VERY basic dog training knowledge.


That's what I was referring to. Corrections are an integral part of training. Used properly escape training can be an integral part of the learning phase in obedience as well.


----------



## Lou Castle

Randy Allen said:


> Debate?????? That is what passes for debate? Who are you debating Lou? Are you debating Jason?


Lucky guess? lol



Randy Allen said:


> He rightly pointed out you didn't qualify your initail post for the rest of us. Why is that wrong? He sounds pretty neutral to me.


There's no secret about my feelings towards Mr. Frawley or his towards me. He's the one who turned our discussion personal merely because I dared to disagree with him. I'm pretty sure it's been discussed here before. Do you think I need to give a disclaimer each and every time I comment on him. I don't. And I don't see people who favor him giving their CV every time they comment either. 

My opinion regarding his skills as a trainer have nothing to do with our Ecollar argument or anything else except what I've read from him and what I've seen and heard on some of his DVD's. I was making the same sort of comments for years before he turned a professional disagreement into a personal attack on me. I'm sorry that you're too new around here to know that. Jason could have asked about this instead of insinuating that I was trying to hide something. He'd have gotten the same response without the challenges. My feelings about Mr. Frawley have nothing to do with my advice about his training information. 



Randy Allen said:


> The moderators? Are you debating that you should be able to pull things out context to support slamming someone not present?


This is nonsense. I gave a link each time I quoted him. Nothing was "pulled out of context" that wasn't provided by the links.


----------



## Lou Castle

Carol Boche said:


> it was the right decision by Mike to remove the quotes. I firmly believe that if you want to post what someone else said, then your ass better get permission. I made that mistake ONE time.


I disagree. People get quoted all the time. No one asks them for permission and except for the rules of this forum, there's no need to. Many people have quotations from "experts" in their signature lines and they've not asked for permission. In any kind of debate, except here, experts are quoted and credit is given. Studies are quoted and links are provided to show the source and the accuracy of the quotation. 



Carol Boche said:


> Whatever, this is everywhere. It should not have been a factor in someone asking for an opinion on LB training methods.


Disagree again. The OP asked about Leerburg videos and "training methods" and some people responded that they liked them. I gave another opinion in a roundabout way, referring to advice that Mr. Frawley has given out as an example of why one should pay no attention to him. When the moderators removed that quotation the meaning was lost. 



Carol Boche said:


> I am not championing LB here at all, but the information that they post is well written and WORKS.....albeit it is not NEW and has been around, but it is broken down to where a five year old could do it......and that is a GREAT thing since owners and dogs alike will have much better relationships because of it.


There's far more important criteria than "it works." Smashing a dog on the head with a shovel three times got it to stop barking at another dog. "it worked," but it's abuse and no one should EVER be doing it. 



Carol Boche said:


> As for the old and new DVD's.....who cares if some are old and some are new....


Unless someone is looking from a historical standpoint, anyone purchasing a video should care; as should someone recommending a video. It does little good for someone to try and use decades old, outmoded methods when there are much better, more modern, more efficient ones available. 



Carol Boche said:


> SO, can we get back on the original subject which is:
> 
> *New to the site and been lurking for awhile. I just wanted to get your guys opinions on Leerburg's training methods. You guys agree with them and/or tried them out?
> *
> 
> Nowhere in that question is "how do you feel about ED?" they are asking about TRAINING METHODS that are used........


I commented on the value of Mr. Frawley's training advice. JASON was the one who turned the conversation to my personal feelings about him. 

That's why removing what I quoted from him was wrong. Mr. Frawley was talking about a training method where a dog was fence fighting and Mr. Frawley hit him in the head three times with a shovel. I was responding to the question about his methods. When the quotation was removed so was the information that I was discussing. The readers were left with a link where he's answering questions asked with no specific reference. 



Carol Boche said:


> Not trying to piss anyone off, but the OP asked for specific advice and so far has received 4 pages of banter......regardless of personal feelings, this member deserves some advice that is not filled with crap.


Everyone deserves that. But it's a simple fact that threads wander. 



Carol Boche said:


> *Carlo, I have learned a lot from reading that site as well as buying the DVD's. Depending on what you want to do.....you could do very well by what LB offers. *


If you're talking about videos from Leerburg, they may have some value. But I think that anything that comes from Mr. Frawley is close to worthless. He's not a trainer. As has been said, he makes and sells videos and sells K-9 related equipment and he's a breeder, with mixed results, I might add. As for his training advice, I find little value in much of anything he has to say. 


In any case. A beginner should NOT be trying to learn from videos. Experienced trainers can pick and choose what they want and leave the rest. Beginners do not have the experience to know what's good and what's not. They should be going to local clubs to see which one is the best "fit" for them and then sticking there until at least, they learn the basics.


----------



## Randy Allen

Jesus H Christ,
I come back from the evening dog walk and what do I find? More whinning from Lou.
Okay everybody, all together now. AAAAAAAAAaHHHHHHH Poor baby so put upon.
Really it's not you Lou, it's the rest of the world!

I promise never again to even think about anything Ed Frawley ever said or says in the future again.
Now will you come out of that echo chamber you're in and join the world?

Randy


----------



## Connie Sutherland

When this board started (three years ago!  ) there were very few rules. One of them, however, was that in light of the fact that we had some members who had had run-ins with Ed Frawley, admin wanted to make it clear that this was not a "bash LB" site.

Ed can be abrasive. 

Also, there have been situations where members of this forum have lifted posts and partial posts from here and posted them elsewhere, where they were discussed and even answered without the original poster being able to respond. This is not OK with the WDF admin. It makes perfect sense that the inverse is also not OK.

*Back to the O.P.*


----------



## Steve Strom

That's what I was referring to. Corrections are an integral part of training. Used properly escape training can be an integral part of the learning phase in obedience as well.

My mistake, I mis-read your post Emilio.


----------



## Yuko Blum

Um, Lou, was it really necessary to dissect Carol's reply into *7 parts* and argue it pretty much line for line? Really?

Also not sure how you equate corrections in obedience with escape training. For people like me who do correct our dogs when needed, but who are completely opposed to escape training - due to it being unfair to the dog and not making sense in any way - a correction is not AUTOMATICALLY given with the command.
The correction only comes if the dog willfully ignores the command, which hardly ever happens anyway since motivation is used and the dog is eager to work for the reward.

If I understand escape training correctly (I might not, in which case I'm sure you'll correct me ), the dog receives a continuous correction every time a command is given and the correction only stops when he complies. Yeah, real fair. Start correcting the dog before he even gets a chance to do what you asked.

You can pick apart my post and argue it word for word (please don't though, it gets tedious), it still won't convince me that escape training isn't a moronic way to train a dog.

As for the "beginners shouldn't learn from videos, experienced trainers are necessary" statement, I disagree. Of course if you have an excellent trainer with you the whole time, it's ideal, but using DVDs to figure out training concepts is a much cheaper, time-saving and more available tool for most people.

There's nothing so mysteriously complicated about dog training that a beginner can't figure it out for themselves using videos and reading websites. Take me, I was completely new to schutzhund training when I got my male. I watched videos of national & international sch competitions to see what the finished product was supposed to look like, then watched a bunch of Leerburg DVDs, read the website and soaked up info from the discussion boards to figure out how to train it.

Not saying I agree with everything I saw & read. Some of the older videos, as you pointed out, are outdated and I agree that Ed should remove them. Kinda confusing to keep selling them alongside the updated materials. I also made some changes to the methods as I went along. I got a lot of great inspiration from the LB discussion boards too, talking to others who had successfully trained the exercises, or who were struggling with the same issues.

It worked. I got my dog to look just as good in most of the sch obedience exercises as a lot of those competing dogs I saw. And not once did I ever work directly with a trainer. Talked to a few (online and in person) to get ideas, but I did the hands on work myself. Doing the same with my pup and it's working just fine without a trainer.

Of course I realize that it's different in protection work, especially the more advanced stuff. Still, there's plenty that can be done in foundation work and grip work on your own if you don't happen to have access to a club or a trainer.

As for whining about how successful Ed is despite any major trialing "accomplishments" (I'll take your word for it, really don't care either way), sure, there are plenty of highly accomplished trainers out there. I think Flinks, Ellis, Balabanov etc. came up.
That's why their seminars are so in demand. But do they have websites with thousands of pages detailing every possible area of dog training that everyone can access for FREE? Do they have discussion boards where people can get their questions answered and learn from others' responses, again for free? Do they answer e-mails from dog owners with questions? Are they selling training DVDs covering all these training areas?
Balabanov is selling a few, but otherwise, no they aren't.

If Flinks or Ellis were also selling DVDs on say, building drive, dealing with aggressive dogs, basic obedience, e-collar training, tracking, bite training, basic leadership, marker training etc. etc. etc., then sure, maybe I would be buying from them instead of LB due to their superior accomplishments/reputations. But they aren't.
Dog owners obviously want DVDs to learn from (which is clearly not what you want to hear) and Ed is providing them when few others are. As long as no one else comes up with a better product, people will keep going to LB. How complicated is that??


----------



## Lisa Geller

=D> 



James Downey said:


> . I started in dogs idiolizing trainers and hanging on every word. As I continue to grow as a trainer I found this type of blind faith has limited me. I was more of a sheep just following the herd. I seem many, many people whom do the same thing ...many would rather have Joe trainer just train thier dog for them. I have seen people change thier ethics in order to conform to an idols training. You have to follow the herd somewhat in order to get the basics. But now I take advice and question it, Ponder it, and come to my own conclusions.
> 
> The one thing I believe great trainers have, is they have made this transition and can think for themselves. This princpal...thinking for myself is now what I work on. Just as I want my dog to think, I must think.
> 
> All advice is valuable...but the value is not whether it's correct or not. It's whether I can think about it, critically think...and make a choice if it's worth doing.


----------



## Steve Strom

Lou Castle said:


> In any case. A beginner should NOT be trying to learn from videos. Experienced trainers can pick and choose what they want and leave the rest. Beginners do not have the experience to know what's good and what's not. They should be going to local clubs to see which one is the best "fit" for them and then sticking there until at least, they learn the basics.


If the video's are of no use to a beginner why do you think the articles on your web page are of any value?


----------



## Yuko Blum

Steve Strom said:


> If the video's are of no use to a beginner why do you think the articles on your web page are of any value?


Great point Steve... so what do you think Lou? Are you saying that articles and videos are useful for trainers but only as long as they aren't from Ed Frawley?


----------



## Alyssa Myracle

If someone lacks the ability to discern bad idea from good when it comes in DVD format, why would they suddenly have the ability to do it at a club?

Common sense is common sense... apply liberally, lather, rinse, repeat.


----------



## Emilio Rodriguez

Yuko Blum said:


> If I understand escape training correctly (I might not, in which case I'm sure you'll correct me )


When you take your pups collar in your hand and you drag him into the crate the first few times, whether you first enticed him with a treat or not, that's escape training. When there's another dog passing close to you and you reel in the leash so your dog won't come in contact with the other dog, that's escape training. When you tell your dog "sit" and push on his rump to assume the sit position, that's escape training. When you tell your dog "hold still" while you check its ears or toes, that's escape training. You can't escape it


----------



## Lou Castle

Randy Allen said:


> Jesus H Christ,


Charming, quite charming. 



Randy Allen said:


> I come back from the evening dog walk and what do I find? More whinning from Lou.


That's the echo of your own voice you're hearing Randy. Or it could be the ringing in your head. The bells! The bells. LOL. 



Randy Allen said:


> Okay everybody, all together now. AAAAAAAAAaHHHHHHH Poor baby so put upon.


Ya think so? I don't. 



Randy Allen said:


> Really it's not you Lou, it's the rest of the world!


Right now it's just you. ROFL. 



Randy Allen said:


> I promise never again to even think about anything Ed Frawley ever said or says in the future again.


OK. 



Randy Allen said:


> Now will you come out of that echo chamber you're in and join the world?


Just as soon as you stop the crybaby act. I suggest that since reading my posts seem to upset you so badly that you not do so any more. My feelings won't be hurt. I don't know if this forum has an "ignore feature" or not but if not, try to find some will power.


----------



## Lou Castle

Connie Sutherland said:


> _"Mr. Frawley was talking about a training method where a dog was fence fighting and Mr. Frawley hit him in the head three times with a shovel. "_
> 
> I have read both the original text and the threads about it. It wasn't a "training method."


It wasn't? What would you call it? 

Mr. Frawley was answering a question from a reader who asked if it was possible to choose a puppy that would be unlikely to show male dominance and still not be timid. 

Mr. Frawley put the question and his response on a page he entitled "Aggressive Dogs." He uses this story as an illustration of how necessary it is to be firm with an aggressive dog and make him think that if he's aggressive he's going to get it back with interest. He says that this is the way to let the dog know that aggression isn't going to be tolerated. He thinks that aggression is mostly because handlers don't take a firm enough stand with their dogs. Then he describes hitting the dog three times with the shovel because it was fence fighting. It's clearly his method for handling this and one that he clearly suggests to the person asking the question. So what would you call that if it wasn't *a training method *to stop fence fighting? 



Connie Sutherland said:


> When this board started (three years ago! there were very few rules. One of them, however, was that in light of the fact that we had some members who had had run-ins with Ed Frawley, admin wanted to make it clear that this was not a "bash LB" site.


This isn't a "bash LB" thread. Some people have praised Mr. Frawley and I've given a contrary opinion as have a few others. Is that not allowed or are we only allowed to say good things about him? If that's the case, just let me know let me know. 

Is there some reason that people can't speak of their personal experiences with him when it's pertinent? 

Is there some reason that a contrary opinion can't be given when others have opened the door by praising him? 



Connie Sutherland said:


> Ed can be abrasive.


No … You really think so? ROFL. 



Connie Sutherland said:


> Also, there have been situations where members of this forum have lifted posts and partial posts from here and posted them elsewhere, where they were discussed and even answered without the original poster being able to respond. This is not OK with the WDF admin. It makes perfect sense that the inverse is also not OK.


Are we not permitted to quote article from books? In that case, the author can't respond unless he joins the forum. How about scientific studies? How about case histories? I'm not arguing, just trying to figure out the rules. If we can quote from those sources, why not from other forums? 

Legally the authors of posts (books, articles, studies) have copyrights on them. But in copyright law "fair comment" is allowed as long as the source is identified. That's commonly done on the Net by giving links. Is this not permitted here? How is one supposed to discuss a point that has to do with a scientific study if not by quoting it?


----------



## Lou Castle

Yuko Blum said:


> Um, Lou, was it really necessary to dissect Carol's reply into *7 parts* and argue it pretty much line for line? Really?


I think so or I would not have done it. Do you have some problem with it. It's not against the forum rules and I think it makes my arguments clearer. If you don't like doing it then don't. I have and always will. 



Yuko Blum said:


> Also not sure how you equate corrections in obedience with escape training. For people like me who do correct our dogs when needed, but who are completely opposed to escape training - due to it being unfair to the dog and not making sense in any way - a correction is not AUTOMATICALLY given with the command.
> The correction only comes if the dog willfully ignores the command, which hardly ever happens anyway since motivation is used and the dog is eager to work for the reward.


Escape training has nothing to do with corrections being "automatic." It makes no difference when the correction comes, it has to do with the fact that the dog performs because he wants to *escape *the correction. 

Here are a few working definitions of *escape *training as the term is applied in a couple of dog training systems. In Ecollar work the dog is performing to *escape *the stim, to shut it off. In training where corrections are used the dog is performing to *escape *a repetition of the correction. It training where treats etc., are used the dog is performing to *escape *the discomfort of NOT having the treat. 



Yuko Blum said:


> If I understand escape training correctly (I might not, in which case I'm sure you'll correct me ), the dog receives a continuous correction every time a command is given and the correction only stops when he complies. Yeah, real fair. Start correcting the dog before he even gets a chance to do what you asked.


This is what's done at the start of training only. We're talking about the level of discomfort that's about equivalent to a flea bite so I really don't have a problem with it. Some do. Of course you use a leash with some type of correction collar that I can guarantee causes a great deal more discomfort. I happen to think THAT'S unfair. 



Yuko Blum said:


> it still won't convince me that escape training isn't a moronic way to train a dog.


Perhaps it is. But you're using it too if you're using corrections. Sorry but facts are facts no matter how hard you try to deny them. Why do you think that a dog trained with leash corrections obeys commands? He's hoping to *escape *the discomfort of a correction. Notice the word *ESCAPE *in there? 



Yuko Blum said:


> As for the "beginners shouldn't learn from videos, experienced trainers are necessary" statement, I disagree.


I've never said any such thing. If you disagree, please direct us to that post. Please don't try to put words into my mouth. (Now do you get some idea of why I break posts down into small parts to respond to them. I almost never get such facts wrong, as you've just done)! 



Yuko Blum said:


> Of course if you have an excellent trainer with you the whole time, it's ideal, but using DVDs to figure out training concepts is a much cheaper, time-saving and more available tool for most people.


Unless you're using old videos showing archaic, brutal, ineffective, outmoded techniques. And since the average new pet owner has no idea of what's going on, they're liable to think that whatever is shown is appropriate. "After all it must be the right thing to it wouldn't be on the DVD." Decades ago it might have been. Today it might not be. It is "cheaper and time-saving" until the owner applies something that he thinks is proper only it turns out not to be appropriate for his dog. Then the expense of going to a trainer and the time wasted makes it quite something else again. 



Yuko Blum said:


> There's nothing so mysteriously complicated about dog training that a beginner can't figure it out for themselves using videos and reading websites.


It depends a lot on the videos and the websites and a lot on the beginner. Some people can and some can't. Some people need a trainer at their elbow. I know people who choke under that situation and can't perform at all. Some people can learn from videos. Some can't. Some can learn from the written word. Some can't. Since dog training is more art than science there's quite a bit that's beyond most beginners. Take a walk thorugh just about any off leash dog park and you'll see FAR MORE dogs with problems than dogs that are obedient. 



Yuko Blum said:


> Take me, I was completely new to schutzhund training when I got my male. I watched videos of national & international sch competitions to see what the finished product was supposed to look like, then watched a bunch of Leerburg DVDs, read the website and soaked up info from the discussion boards to figure out how to train it.


Yuko your profile says that you train in "basic OB." It says nothing of SchH. Is it outdated? I looked at the link to your photos and saw lots of cute pix of dogs romping in the snow, at the beach, on a field. I saw some photos of one dog playing a tug game with a puppy sleeve. I didn't see any photos of your dogs training or competing in SchH which you say you've "soaked up" from the videos and the discussion boards. Do you compete? If so, what titles have you achieved? Or is this one of those "I could do it if I really wanted to" situations? 

I know of NO ONE who's ever achieved anything significant in either the sport world, the SAR world, the PPD (personal protection dog) world, or the PSD (police service dog) world by doing only as you say, watching videos and "soaking up info from the discussion boards to figure out how to train it." Has anyone here achieved, let's say a SchH II in this fashion? Anyone certified a SAR or police dog this way? 



Yuko Blum said:


> Not saying I agree with everything I saw & read. Some of the older videos, as you pointed out, are outdated and I agree that Ed should remove them.


But he has not. There's no way for a newbie to know how old the video is. Some of them are converted from VHS to DVD to keep pace with the times but if it's decades old, and that's how long he's been making videos, the newbie won't be getting the latest and greatest information. 



Yuko Blum said:


> It worked. I got my dog to look just as good in most of the sch obedience exercises as a lot of those competing dogs I saw. And not once did I ever work directly with a trainer. Talked to a few (online and in person) to get ideas, but I did the hands on work myself. Doing the same with my pup and it's working just fine without a trainer.


I’m sorry but until and unless you compete alongside them in front of a judge we have no idea of how good your dog's OB really is. And OB is just one part of SchH. 



Yuko Blum said:


> Of course I realize that it's different in protection work, especially the more advanced stuff. Still, there's plenty that can be done in foundation work and grip work on your own if you don't happen to have access to a club or a trainer.


There's also much damage to the training that can be done if something that's done is not appropriate for a given dog at a given moment in time. People can easily set themselves back years by not going to a trainer if they intend to compete. 



Yuko Blum said:


> As for whining about how successful Ed is despite any major trialing "accomplishments" (I'll take your word for it, really don't care either way), sure, there are plenty of highly accomplished trainers out there. I think Flinks, Ellis, Balabanov etc. came up.
> That's why their seminars are so in demand. But do they have websites with thousands of pages detailing every possible area of dog training that everyone can access for FREE? Do they have discussion boards where people can get their questions answered and learn from others' responses, again for free? Do they answer e-mails from dog owners with questions? Are they selling training DVDs covering all these training areas?
> Balabanov is selling a few, but otherwise, no they aren't.


Try to remember the OP's question. It was NOT about what a great guy Mr. Frawley is for running his forum, rather he asked about the training quality of Mr. Frawley's DVD's and his training methods. Your question is irrelevant. 



Yuko Blum said:


> If Flinks or Ellis were also selling DVDs on say, building drive, dealing with aggressive dogs, basic obedience, e-collar training, tracking, bite training, basic leadership, marker training etc. etc. etc., then sure, maybe I would be buying from them instead of LB due to their superior accomplishments/reputations. But they aren't.
> Dog owners obviously want DVDs to learn from (which is clearly not what you want to hear) and Ed is providing them when few others are. As long as no one else comes up with a better product, people will keep going to LB. How complicated is that??


I've not denied the obvious. This discussion is about THE QUALITY of the instruction one gets from his videos and his methods. Little of the valuable advice that's on his board comes from him. Most of it comes, instead from his board members.


----------



## Lou Castle

Steve Strom said:


> If the video's are of no use to a beginner why do you think the articles on your web page are of any value?


EXCELLENT question Steve, thanks for asking it! But first let me ask you to point out where I said that Mr. Frawley's videos "are of no use to a beginner." Get right back to me on that OK? You won't find it, I've never said it. It's just an attempt to put words into my mouth. Please don't do that OK? It makes you look bad when I point it out. 

My website (which is free BTW – some say it's worth what you pay for it – lol) was put up to help people train their dogs with Ecollars. It's specifically addressed to the beginner who just wants an obedient dog. It's not meant to enable anyone to train to any sport or for any competition. It's mostly basic stuff, mostly for pet owners. There are some exceptions. But nothing very complicated. Ecollar training is quite easy if my methods are used. 

Many of the articles were posted on the Leerburg Forum long before I put up the site. Sometimes they were in answer to "how to" questions by forum members. They were very well received there. NOT ONE PERSON in years, ever told me that he thought they were "abusive" as happened when Mr. Frawley was about to release his Ecollar training video. Hmmm. 

How do I know they're "of any value?" There's a page of testimonials from people who put them to use telling me so. Feel free to peruse them at your leisure. Look here. Just try the first few and you'll get the idea.


----------



## Lou Castle

Yuko Blum said:


> Great point Steve... so what do you think Lou? Are you saying that articles and videos are useful for trainers but only as long as they aren't from Ed Frawley?


It's always entertaining when people try to put words into my mouth. If you can find anyplace that I've said such a thing, please direct us to it. I've NEVER come close to saying anything like this.


----------



## Lou Castle

Alyssa Myracle said:


> If someone lacks the ability to discern bad idea from good when it comes in DVD format, why would they suddenly have the ability to do it at a club?


In a club scene one can ask a question as to why something is being done. DVD's don't respond. 

Work being done is a club scene is not likely to be methods that are decades old. A DVD may be. 

Work being done in a club scene can be adapted to the dog, his level of training, his level and balance of drives and what he needs at any given moment. You really can't do that with a DVD. 



Alyssa Myracle said:


> Common sense is common sense... apply liberally, lather, rinse, repeat.


The term "common sense" is really a misnomer. It really isn't "common." Is it "common sense" to hit a dog in the head with a shovel because he's fence fighting? Don't think so. Yet that's the sort of advice that's on Mr. Frawley's site. He doesn’t say, "Do this." But he uses it as an illustration of how to handle the fence fighting issue.


----------



## Alyssa Myracle

Lou Castle said:


> In a club scene one can ask a question as to why something is being done. DVD's don't respond.
> 
> Work being done is a club scene is not likely to be methods that are decades old. A DVD may be.
> 
> Work being done in a club scene can be adapted to the dog, his level of training, his level and balance of drives and what he needs at any given moment. You really can't do that with a DVD.
> 
> 
> 
> The term "common sense" is really a misnomer. It really isn't "common." Is it "common sense" to hit a dog in the head with a shovel because he's fence fighting? Don't think so. Yet that's the sort of advice that's on Mr. Frawley's site. He doesn’t say, "Do this." But he uses it as an illustration of how to handle the fence fighting issue.


All quite true... and yet, we have a person on this very forum who allowed a helper to choke her dog to teach the "out" command. 

Decades old approach? Yep.

Did she have the chance to ask questions? Nope. The helper apparently did it to the dog, without asking or telling her anything. It was too late to undo. Unfortunately, this sort of thing happens in plenty of clubs.

People allow all sorts of awful things to be done to their dogs, because they are enamoured with the trainer. 

I've heard trainers brush off questions of "why" and "how" with demeaning comments, and pointing out that "hey, you're new to the sport."

A DVD can't harm a dog in the least, unless perhaps you throw it at him, or maybe he ingests it.
It's up to the owner to apply the methods, or not.

I've seen a dogs abused by bad helpers or bad training directors, or handlers encouraged to abuse their dogs at the behest of the same...

Hell, I LEFT Search and Rescue because of the unbelievable level of dog aggression in the organization closest to me. No way was I going to let my dog be attacked by someone's out of control mutt.

Dogs in a DVD can't rush out and attack mine.


*NOW*, does that mean I'm opposed to a person going and checking out clubs and finding one that works for them, BEFORE they bring their dog out? Hell no. That's exactly what I'd recommend they do.
Visit a few times, WITHOUT your dog, and watch the work they do.

The same goes double for DVDs, online articles or forum advice. Read it (or watch it), discuss it and decide if it makes any sense.

If you lack common sense, your dog is doomed no matter who you train with, what DVD you watch or which collar you buy. Common sense is necessary to train a dog. I think we can ALL agree on that.

I wasn't talking just about Ed's videos, so the Ed specific stuff is really irrelevant. I was just talking about the value of training DVDs in general.


----------



## Yuko Blum

Lou,
Just because you twist and distort terminology to describe every possible training scenario with the word "escape" doesn't even come close to making the different methods equivalent.

Are you seriously trying to convince me that a dog attempting to turn off a continuous electric shock is just as happy and carefree as a dog working to get a reward with no anticipation of a correction? You're kidding right? So if someone asked you to do a job, immediately turned on a continuous electric shock and informs you that the shock will cease once the job is completed (no matter how much effort you put into the work), you'll find it no more stressful than being asked to perform the same job but for a valuable reward?

I stand by my statement that it's a completely moronic way to train a dog. Interesting how none of the top most accomplished trainers mentioned use that method. Your dogs must hate obedience work if that's how they're trained! I'm not saying that pure compulsion doesn't work, I'm saying that it's a cruel and unfair way to train that results in slow unhappy dogs with painful-to-watch obedience. What the hell is the point of training if you're making the dog miserable?

No, I have no sch titles to my name. I'm a beginner to the sport, as I said (of course I'm not selling anything so I don't see why my credentials are important). I put "basic ob" in my profile because that's all I've achieved with my dog for now... I don't have access to a club or a protection sport trainer so I kinda have to stick to doing obedience work on my own.
The point I was trying to make is that I managed to figure out how to train the obedience in sch without the help of a trainer.
I don't need a judge to know what a decent retrieve or heel or send away looks like. I'm not sure how you can judge someone's training by looking at pictures. If you must see training evidence of my dogs, check under "Videos" in the album you looked at - few short clips there, newest one is a few days old, titled march 2009 or something like that 
Not saying I can't improve - I certainly don't consider my dog "finished". However I am proud of how obviously happy and driven he is in the work. Don't tell me that my dog "escaping" from the "discomfort" of a withheld reward looks miserable like those compulsion and escape-trained dogs. Can't believe you have the nerve to compare the two methods!
I've seen sch 3 titled dogs competing at a national or world level that crawl, ears pinned back, are slow and hesitant in the work, reluctant when returning to their handler and have obviously been trained in heavy compulsion. Frankly I would be ashamed if I had done that to my dog - titles or no titles!

Oh and when I say "correction" in my training, 99% of the time it's a simple "no" to remind the dog to settle down and focus. That's it. Prong corrections are reserved for more behavioural type issues, such as unwarranted aggression or out-of-control prey drive in non training situations (chasing wildlife etc.). Can't remember the last time I delivered a prong correction in obedience work. Weird isn't it? Could it be that these dogs actually *want* to get it right even though there isn't a physical correction hanging over their heads?

Believe it or not, there are dogs that are extremely eager to please and will work for hours on end for a simple orbee ball and handler praise. If you'd just give the poor dog the benefit of the doubt, you might find that you don't need your damn corrections, compulsion and moronic escape training. Why correct an animal that's obviously trying hard to please you and earn his reward?

I feel for your dogs. They're paying the price for your escape-training obsession and whatever e-collar product/service you're sellling. If you'd just put your pride and ego aside for a while and TRY motivation-based training, you might be surprised by how effective it is.


----------



## Alyssa Myracle

Hmm... I am reminded of a popular saying in my line of work:

The beatings will continue until morale improves.


That's the basic principle of continuous stim, right?


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Lou,

1. Because we do not want WDF posts lifted and quoted out of context for discussion elsewhere. Of course, unless the person doing so is a member here,we can't do much about it. But unless the person is a member, s/he can't really get into many threads anyway. Anyway, if we don't want it done, then we won't do it either.

and

2. Because this junk is the result.





Sorry, Yuko, but the thread is over.

P.S. "Junk" meant a looooooong thread having very little to do with the O.P. and lots to do with personality conflicts among lots o' folks.


----------

