# Allowing the decoy to correct...



## Howard Gaines III

How do you feel about allowing the decoy/helper to correct a dog's bad behavior in or out of the blind? I see folks aren't very happy about the vet doing it and I understand it 100%. In another direction, what about* praise* by the decoy rather than from the handler? =;


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Howard Gaines III said:


> How do you feel about allowing the decoy/helper to correct a dog's bad behavior in or out of the blind? I see folks aren't very happy about the vet doing it and I understand it 100%. In another direction, what about* praise* by the decoy rather than from the handler? =;


Never did understand this. Why would you train a dog with the idea that he should obey the bad guy? I don't want anyone controlling my dog except me. The dog should be working for his handler--IMO. I wonder how many French Ring people train where the decoy isn't the source of praise/correction/command to the dog. Recently watched some French Ring training videos of a dog from puppyhood to adulthood. In all the scenarios, watching the dog, the handler was basically non-existent. Everything--praise, correction, interaction was coming through the decoy.


T


----------



## susan tuck

Howard Gaines III said:


> How do you feel about allowing the decoy/helper to correct a dog's bad behavior in or out of the blind? I see folks aren't very happy about the vet doing it and I understand it 100%. In another direction, what about* praise* by the decoy rather than from the handler? =;


Absolutely, my training helper can correct my dog, no problem, it takes a village. By the way, this has no bearing on how dogs act with people other than helpers, because first off, dogs don't see helpers as the "bad guy", unless of course the dog has nerve issues or has a screw loose or is just plain dumb, because the dog has seen his training helper many times, there is a relationship developed between the two, and conversely dogs don't think or recognize every other person as a helper. Apples and oranges.


----------



## john simmons

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Never did understand this. Why would you train a dog with the idea that he should obey the bad guy? I don't want anyone controlling my dog except me. The dog should be working for his handler--IMO. I wonder how many French Ring people train where the decoy isn't the source of praise/correction/command to the dog. Recently watched some French Ring training videos of a dog from puppyhood to adulthood. In all the scenarios, watching the dog, the handler was basically non-existent. Everything--praise, correction, interaction was coming through the decoy.
> 
> 
> T


The OP said correct or praise not control... A training helper is always correcting and praising a dog by pushing and giving to the dog's efforts and behavior. I feel it would be a small piece of the training missing if sometimes, when needed, it also wasn't vocalized.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

john simmons said:


> The OP said correct or praise not control... A training helper is always correcting and praising a dog by pushing and giving to the dog's efforts and behavior. I feel it would be a small piece of the training missing if sometimes, when needed, it also wasn't vocalized.


If the correction and praise is coming through the helper, then he is controlling the dog--for me. Sure the helper controls the mechanics that builds the dog but I still would want the dog that he is in the frame of mind of working for his handler in all respects--not just about him and the decoy interaction. Understand the high the helper feels when the dog gets it right and the almost innate response of "good dog." Does the dog care about the voice praise or the feel of the win through the decoy's actions?

T


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

Howard Gaines III said:


> How do you feel about allowing the decoy/helper to correct a dog's bad behavior in or out of the blind? I see folks aren't very happy about the vet doing it and I understand it 100%. In another direction, what about* praise* by the decoy rather than from the handler? =;


 
There are ways for a Helper to make corrections without the dog associating the correction is coming from the Helper.

It takes team work and intentionally setting the dog up for failure, after the Handler has given a specific command, so that you can correct the unwanted behaviour, and make the dog think it's coming from the handler....this process is a lot easier if the foundation of the dog is correct, otherwise you may have a battle on your hands, and may inadvertantly teach the dog to listen to the Helper and ignore the Handler; indeed even teach the dog to work against the Handler if the Helper and Handler is out of sync with each other. 

Cheers,
Chello..


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

susan tuck said:


> .... dogs don't see helpers as the "bad guy", unless of course the dog has nerve issues or has a screw loose or is just plain dumb, because the dog has seen his training helper many times, there is a relationship developed between the two, and conversely dogs don't think or recognize every other person as a helper. Apples and oranges.


To better understand the inference of “bad guy,” how is the dog supposed to see the Helper if not as a "bad guy?"

Better yet...what do you mean by "bad guy?"

Can/should the dog show real aggression towards the Helper? Indeed even show aggression to the Helper without equipment on when given the command by the Handler?


Cheers,
Chello...


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

john simmons said:


> The OP said correct or praise not control... A training helper is always correcting and praising a dog by pushing and giving to the dog's efforts and behavior.


To better understand your meaning...can you provide a specific example, during a training scenario where a Helper would correct and praise a dogs' efforts and behaviour? 

Do you see a training Helper trying to elevate a dogs aggression as correcting, for improper behaviour?




john simmons said:


> ....I feel it would be a small piece of the training missing if sometimes, when needed, it also wasn't vocalized.


Can you give me an example of what you mean by "vocalized," and where would a Helper "vocalize" in terms of correction or praise?

Cheers,
Chello...


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Chello,

For me there is a training helper, that trains my dogs and spars with my dogs and prepares them for the bad guy they'll meet on the trial field. 




Marcelo Villanueva said:


> To better understand the inference of “bad guy,” how is the dog supposed to see the Helper if not as a "bad guy?"
> 
> Better yet...what do you mean by "bad guy?"
> 
> Can/should the dog show real aggression towards the Helper? Indeed even show aggression to the Helper without equipment on when given the command by the Handler?
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Chello...


----------



## john simmons

Marcelo Villanueva said:


> To better understand your meaning...can you provide a specific example, during a training scenario where a Helper would correct and praise a dogs' efforts and behaviour?
> 
> Do you see a training Helper trying to elevate a dogs aggression as correcting, for improper behaviour?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you give me an example of what you mean by "vocalized," and where would a Helper "vocalize" in terms of correction or praise?
> 
> Cheers,
> Chello...


Chello, as a training director, I am sure you can come up with a few of your own examples. Thanks!


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

john simmons said:


> Chello, as a training director, I am sure you can come up with a few of your own examples. Thanks!


 
Thanks for your answer (i think)?

People toss a lot of words in describing things; words i myself use, only to realize that the meaning, even the intent of the word is different.

I recognize a lot of this is difficult to explain, that's why i was trying to identify specifics.

I'm just trying to understand your perception, where you are coming from...the methodology, principles behind your statements.

The quickest way for training to get stagnant, and destroy personal training growth is to train with a closed mind; worst to train without being able to support through explanations a training methodology.

I am here to learn, as well.

Good luck with your training.

Cheers,
Chello...


----------



## john simmons

Marcelo Villanueva said:


> Thanks for your answer (i think)?
> 
> People toss a lot of words in describing things; words i myself use, only to realize that the meaning, even the intent of the word is different.
> 
> I recognize a lot of this is difficult to explain, that's why i was trying to identify specifics.
> 
> I'm just trying to understand your perception, where you are coming from...the methodology, principles behind your statements.
> 
> 
> 
> The quickest way for training to get stagnant, and destroy personal training growth is to train with a closed mind; worst to train without being able to support through explanations a training methodology.
> 
> 
> I am here to learn, as well.
> 
> Good luck with your training.
> 
> Cheers,
> Chello...


Hey C- I agree 100% with you! You know how things go sometimes around here- post an example or a general idea/ philosophy and it gets picked apart under the guise of "just want to learn" to the point that the original thread subject is gone... 

I'll stay a humble Student of Dog Training!!


----------



## Jason Davis

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Never did understand this. Why would you train a dog with the idea that he should obey the bad guy? I don't want anyone controlling my dog except me. The dog should be working for his handler--IMO. I wonder how many French Ring people train where the decoy isn't the source of praise/correction/command to the dog. Recently watched some French Ring training videos of a dog from puppyhood to adulthood. In all the scenarios, watching the dog, the handler was basically non-existent. Everything--praise, correction, interaction was coming through the decoy.
> 
> 
> T


 I train FR. I correct, praise, etc to all the dogs in my club. If there's no respect for the decoy, you will struggle on the field.


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

Thomas Barriano said:


> Chello,
> 
> For me there is a training helper, that trains my dogs and spars with my dogs and prepares them for the bad guy they'll meet on the trial field.


Thomas, 

As you know, this is a HUGE subject that touches on so many aspects of dog training: drives, relationships, threshold, Handler and Helper experience, etc.

I should of never ventured down this road...

I should of just simply answered the questions with yes & no…would have been a lot simpler.




Howard Gaines III said:


> How do you feel about allowing the decoy/helper to correct a dog's bad behavior in or out of the blind?


Chello’s answer: I’m ok with it. As long as the dog thinks the correction is happening from the Handler.




Howard Gaines III said:


> … another direction, what about* praise* by the decoy rather than from the handler?


Chello’s answer: No i am against Helper "praise."

Cheers,
Chello...


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

john simmons said:


> Hey C- I agree 100% with you! You know how things go sometimes around here- post an example or a general idea/ philosophy and it gets picked apart under the guise of "just want to learn" to the point that the original thread subject is gone...
> 
> I'll stay a humble Student of Dog Training!!


 
No problem...

Have a good night John, and enjoy your dog(s).

Cheers,
Chello...


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Marcelo Villanueva said:


> Thomas,
> 
> As you know, this is a HUGE subject that touches on so many aspects of dog training: drives, relationships, threshold, Handler and Helper experience, etc.
> 
> I should of never ventured down this road...
> 
> I should of just simply answered the questions with yes & no…*would have been a lot simpler*.


But not nearly as informative. Always great to consider different view points and the reasoning behind them.

T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Jason Davis said:


> I train FR. I correct, praise, etc to all the dogs in my club. If there's no respect for the decoy, you will struggle on the field.


Just asking. . .Can't the handler instill the rules of engagement in the dog without the praise/correct from the decoy in your sport?

T


----------



## Faisal Khan

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Just asking. . .Can't the handler instill the rules of engagement in the dog without the praise/correct from the decoy in your sport?
> 
> T


T, just curious what avenue do you train in?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Faisal Khan said:


> T, just curious what avenue do you train in?


Herding, mostly. What's your training avenue?


T


----------



## Geoff Empey

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Never did understand this. Why would you train a dog with the idea that he should obey the bad guy? I don't want anyone controlling my dog except me. The dog should be working for his handler--IMO. I wonder how many French Ring people train where the decoy isn't the source of praise/correction/command to the dog. Recently watched some French Ring training videos of a dog from puppyhood to adulthood. In all the scenarios, watching the dog, the handler was basically non-existent. Everything--praise, correction, interaction was coming through the decoy.
> 
> 
> T


I don't get this dinosaur thinking. "obey the bad guy" I guess that is why it takes some people 4 years+ to put a BH on a dog let alone any higher levels. Even in IPO the dog needs to learn so why wouldn't the training decoy help the dog learn? A training decoy can still present trial pictures to the dog and still help the dog be correct. 



> I wonder how many French Ring people train where the decoy isn't the source of praise/correction/command to the dog.


I do Ring and the training decoy/helper is just that. He helps the dog learn. In training it is a triangle .. dog, Helper, and handler. Sometimes you need a lot more help than that too. The decoy only in rare circumstances (the way I train) would command a dog. It is always the handler the cues the dog with a command and the decoy will either correct for an infraction or an e-collar taking both out of the equation. Both the decoy and the handler's job is to praise the dog when it is correct. In our club others on the field may throw a ball for a successful jump or a successful send away. We just do what we think will help the dog progress. 

Basically the decoy knows when the dog has a good grip, the decoy knows when the dog is dirty, the decoy knows many things that we as handlers do not. So why wouldn't the decoy praise, or correct the dog if needed? Face it as handlers all we look at is the one eyed cyclops of the dog winking at us. Many instances we are not in a position to praise or correct and the charging of that all important mark is lost.


----------



## Mario Fernandez

I have no problems with helpers or other correcting my dog. I also don't mind if the helper/decoy praises the dog, if the dog is doing something right or wrong it need to be renforced. We have a good trust factor, we are their for the dogs and the betterment of your training group. If people don't want me to correct their dog no problem, I am ok with that, but they better be on point as a handler.

With the dogs I regularly do helper work for or work the long line for ....I have an advantage over many of the handler/owners when working their dogs...I can see the subtle things that handlers can't see , the dogs eyes, their body posture, feeling their bite and can anticipate when the dog is going to be dirty or communicate with the handler not to be so eager to push that button they are holding. The handler is constantly behind and can't see this all the time. 

Just because a helper gives a dog a correction it is not always for a negative ...but could be use as a stimulus...


----------



## Faisal Khan

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Herding, mostly. What's your training avenue?
> T


Cool, I'm new just checking out some bite sports.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Faisal Khan said:


> Cool, I'm new just checking out some bite sports.


Darn, then my assumption was incorrect. Its a good thing I asked.:wink:

T


----------



## Peter Cho

susan tuck said:


> Absolutely, my training helper can correct my dog, no problem, it takes a village. By the way, this has no bearing on how dogs act with people other than helpers, because first off, dogs don't see helpers as the "bad guy", unless of course the dog has nerve issues or has a screw loose or is just plain dumb, because the dog has seen his training helper many times, there is a relationship developed between the two, and conversely dogs don't think or recognize every other person as a helper. Apples and oranges.


Yes, there is a relationship. Mistrust and possible danger. Without it, you don't get explosive power and meaningful barking. You get, "lets play" bark. now, that is not good.

As a helper, I would find it offensive if a dog did not find me dangerous. Now, don't get me wrong, this is slowly developed. Slowly.


----------



## Bob Scott

Peter Cho said:


> Yes, there is a relationship. Mistrust and possible danger. Without it, you don't get explosive power and meaningful barking. You get, "lets play" bark. now, that is not good.
> 
> As a helper, I would find it offensive if a dog did not find me dangerous. Now, don't get me wrong, this is slowly developed. Slowly.



I agree that you should be the bad guy to the dog but wouldn't finding you dangerous be a big jump from the dog being corrected by the helper? If the helper corrects the dog then it controlling the dog. JMO.


----------



## susan tuck

deleted, never mind.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Faisal Khan said:


> Cool, I'm new just checking out some bite sports.


You're c(f)ooling me :lol:


----------



## Jason Davis

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Just asking. . .Can't the handler instill the rules of engagement in the dog without the praise/correct from the decoy in your sport?
> 
> T


Instilling the rules is one thing. Maintaining the rules is another.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Why shouldn't a helper correct a dog? The aggression or lack of aggression with which especially young dogs face the helper can better be assessed by him and corrected or encouraged than by most handlers.

I watched our helper correct a dog with bare hands that came into the blind. He was waiting for him! When you send the dog to the blind, you are at least 20 yards away and cannot see what is happening for one thing. A lot of handlers cannot read their dogs sufficiently enough and quite honestly, the aggression that the dogs show to the helper, they shouldn't show to the handler.

I can't comment on praise - mostly the helper can raise his eyebrows so that the handler can effect this but even so, the praise (reward) for the dog is that the "work" carries on if he "obeys" the rules. I hardly think that the dog is obeying the helper - I see him "adjusting" more than obeying.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

All very interesting...

In the early stages, I don't see an issue with the helper making minor corrections or positive remarks to the animal. As the dog matures, I think the helper SHOULD be viewed as a fighting partner; respect and learn. 

Depending upon the venue, the bad guy should NEVER be trusted and any dog should never turn its back to them, often seen with a sleeve in the dog's mouth. For PPD training I want NO praise from the helper/decoy, only from the handler since the handler IS the source of everything good and safe! :mrgreen:


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Marcelo Villanueva said:


> As you know, this is a HUGE subject that touches on so many aspects of dog training: drives, relationships, threshold, Handler and Helper experience, etc. I should of never ventured down this road...


Chello

I pretty much agree. I just like to keep it simple. My training decoys are sparring partners and the trial decoys are the bad guys.
My dogs don't understand drive theories and all the discussion about drives and thresholds etc is just time away from training
for me.


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

Peter Cho said:


> Yes, there is a relationship. Mistrust and possible danger. Without it, you don't get explosive power and meaningful barking. You get, "lets play" bark. now, that is not good.


I agree. 

Cheers,
Chello...


----------



## Marcelo Villanueva

Thomas Barriano said:


> My dogs don't understand drive theories and all the discussion about drives and thresholds etc is just time away from training
> for me.


 
Very good point.

Cheers,
Chello..


----------



## Geoff Empey

Howard Gaines III said:


> All very interesting...
> 
> In the early stages, I don't see an issue with the helper making minor corrections or positive remarks to the animal. As the dog matures, I think the helper SHOULD be viewed as a fighting partner; respect and learn.
> 
> Depending upon the venue, the bad guy should NEVER be trusted and any dog should never turn its back to them, often seen with a sleeve in the dog's mouth. For PPD training I want NO praise from the helper/decoy, only from the handler since the handler IS the source of everything good and safe! :mrgreen:


You are correct Howard. It is all in the venue and in the stage of training. It is also if the dog is close to being finished in its trainign vs a greener dog too in how much decoy dependign on venue is involved. It is one thing to have a dog that is an IPO dog where there is isn't a lot of targeting outside dead center of the sleeve. In my sport there is way to many targets and bite scenarios that we have to prepare the dog for. So in Ring the training decoy needs to be more proactive in the dog's learning at higher levels than an IPO training decoy for instance. 

As with Terrasita's question and Jason's answer .. 



Jason Davis said:


> *Re: Allowing the decoy to correct...*
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Terrasita Cuffie*
> _Just asking. . .Can't the handler instill the rules of engagement in the dog without the praise/correct from the decoy in your sport?
> 
> T_
> 
> Instilling the rules is one thing. Maintaining the rules is another.


Rules of engagement need to be instilled by both as well as maintaining those said rules of engagement. I've found with my dogs it is a fine line between control and chaos and it is all about the presence of the training decoy that keeps my dogs walking that tightrope, never me. When I have to get involved ... it is always always way to late. Usually that happens when working with a green decoy whose timing for correction is off. Then the dog learns that what he/she has just done is repeatable. Face it dogs can't really differentiate between black or white in training. They will learn undesirable behaviours just as quickly as desirable ones. When trainers can swallow that pill then the dogs can actually learn, instead of just building conflict with it's handler. To me it is pretty simple concept.


----------



## Daniel Lybbert

> Rules of engagement need to be instilled by both as well as maintaining those said rules of engagement. I've found with my dogs it is a fine line between control and chaos and it is all about the presence of the training decoy that keeps my dogs walking that tightrope, never me. *When I have to get involved ... it is always always way to late.*


This is the biggest reason decoys correct the dogs. (Or VETS for that matter)lol. If the handler is on the ball the decoys shouldnt really have to do much. In theroy dogs should be obedient before they get sent down the field free. (in theroy) Unfourtanatly that isnt alway the case and the decoys must do something or nothing when something goes wrong. I also think it depends on if the dog is defensive or preyed out. A prey dog is easily corrected. Not to sure of a defensive dog though.
There are some dogs that need to learn respect for the person in the suit and the rules also. 
I would say depending on what venues you are training decides if said decoy is a training asset or a threat.


----------



## Dave Colborn

http://www.policeone.com/police-pro...he-crucial-role-of-the-decoy-in-K-9-training/

Decoy is the delivery vehicle for reward and in some cases Punishment. Stage of the dogs training and venue are important. You get what you get with a dog from finding what they value as a reward and correction. The helper/decoy really makes or breaks the dog in bitework.


----------



## Geoff Empey

Daniel Lybbert said:


> This is the biggest reason decoys correct the dogs. (Or VETS for that matter)lol. If the handler is on the ball the decoys shouldnt really have to do much. In theroy dogs should be obedient before they get sent down the field free. (in theroy) Unfourtanatly that isnt alway the case and the decoys must do something or nothing when something goes wrong. I also think it depends on if the dog is defensive or preyed out. A prey dog is easily corrected. Not to sure of a defensive dog though.
> There are some dogs that need to learn respect for the person in the suit and the rules also.
> I would say depending on what venues you are training decides if said decoy is a training asset or a threat.


I wouldn't say of the handlers are on the ball that the decoys may have to correct less. It's also proximity and opportunity. There is another thing you mentioned.


> _In theroy dogs should be obedient before they get sent down the field free. (in theroy) Unfourtanatly that isnt alway the case and the decoys must do something or nothing when something goes wrong._


 Problem is once the decoy does nothing the dog learns that it is ok to recommit that incorrect behaviour, and then it is 3 steps forward and 10 steps backwards. 

So to me if a dog is insane for a ball or a tug or even a sleeve and loses focus and concentration you are right it shouldn't be 'free' on the field with a decoy ever. To many skip this step as all are in a rush to get on the 'man' it never is good for longevity of a dogs career. 

A defensive dog or a dog that has been trained in defense is not a dog that IMO should be corrected by a decoy. As that would usually bring out more defense and fight. I've seen it multiple times it is more of a genetic thing from what I've seen. As well a prey dog can 'look' strong but in reality some can be really sensitive to correction so the corrections have to tempered. That's the thing every dog is just totally different and bring different challenges to everyone involved in its training.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Dave Colborn said:


> . The helper/decoy really makes or breaks the dog in bitework.


 I have seen this one and the statement rings true!


----------



## Howard Gaines III

I might be way off the mark here... handlers NEED to have some working knowledge of what the decoy is trying to do. If they are just standing around with their thumb in their "ear" then not much will ever get done that is REWARDING. 

The reason I watch my decoy and my dog. When its over, the simple question: What did you see from the front end that I couldn't from the back? 

Things like blinking, chewing the sleeve, vocals showcasing excess pressure. I trust my decoy/helper and stay on top of all training...=D>


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Howard Gaines III said:


> I might be way off the mark here... handlers NEED to have some working knowledge of what the decoy is trying to do. If they are just standing around with their thumb in their "ear" then not much will ever get done that is REWARDING.
> 
> The reason I watch my decoy and my dog. When its over, the simple question: What did you see from the front end that I couldn't from the back?
> 
> Things like blinking, chewing the sleeve, vocals showcasing excess pressure. I trust my decoy/helper and stay on top of all training...=D>


This is what I wonder about. My goal is to understand the process and be able to read the dog so that I can HANDLE. However, I do think that there are things that eye to eye contact and feel of the grip that the helper can only be aware of. Seems like in that instance there are decoy actions [as in what Chello was indicating] that can take place besides praise and corrections that can either reward the dog or be sort of a non-reward indication?

T


----------



## Geoff Empey

Howard Gaines III said:


> I might be way off the mark here... handlers NEED to have some working knowledge of what the decoy is trying to do. If they are just standing around with their thumb in their "ear" then not much will ever get done that is REWARDING.
> 
> The reason I watch my decoy and my dog. When its over, the simple question: What did you see from the front end that I couldn't from the back?


This is why I like to use the term training triangle. You need at least 2 in the triangle to have effective training. Experienced decoy and handler with green dog, or green decoy with experienced dog and handler. 

The things that can really screw things up is a green handler that is where the training director needs to step up and educate educate educate!!!


----------



## Ted Summers

I've always been under the impression that most decoys are the best trainers too... I frequently do decoy work with an e-collar and I have the remote. The dog thinks the correction is coming form the handler.... not me but im in a position to see and correct the problem while the handler is not or not able.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Ted Summers said:


> I've always been under the impression that most decoys are the best trainers too... QUOTE]
> 
> Only NOOB's and decoys think that ;-)


----------



## Daniel Lybbert

> I frequently do decoy work with an e-collar and I have the remote.


no one wants to give me their remote.lol


----------



## Howard Gaines III

We use a DRIVE TRIANGLE in dog training. It requires all three pieces to work together for the advancement of the DOG. Thanks Geoff!


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Ted Summers said:


> I've always been under the impression that most decoys are the best trainers too... I frequently do decoy work with an e-collar and I have the remote. The dog thinks the correction is coming form the handler.... not me but im in a position to see and correct the problem while the handler is not or not able.


 Ted take the same thing in education, many principals are worthless as teachers, no control or function. As school leaders, some are very good and others remain useless even in this venue...off the box.


----------



## Steve Estrada

Thomas Barriano said:


> Ted Summers said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've always been under the impression that most decoys are the best trainers too... QUOTE]
> 
> Only NOOB's and decoys think that ;-)
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I'm with you on that for sure even having been a decoy myself! A consensus & pre planning whether it being a triangle, quadrangle, a circle whatever the latest label....planning #-o
Click to expand...


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Why plan when you can wing it???????????


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Howard Gaines III said:


> Why plan when you can wing it???????????


Because PPPPPP

Prior planning prevents piss poor performance


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Thomas Barriano said:


> Because PPPPPP
> 
> Prior planning prevents piss poor performance


 Yes it does...and everyone better be on the same page when the sleeve is on!


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Howard Gaines III said:


> Yes it does...and everyone better be on the same page when the sleeve is on!


+1

I've got no problem with decoy corrections, in fact there's a lot of stuff that only the decoy can see and correct. We just have to be clear what I want corrected and what I want ignored. Decoy corrections can't be something done without prior consultation with the owner and sometimes the TD


----------

