# Session Frequency



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

I am curious about training session frequency as opposed to repetition. Have you found a timeline that seems to condition the dog better? I have experimented with all kinds of timelines and training frequency. Of course I know all dogs are different in how fast and how they accept training. But I have noticed certain frequency (spans of time) of training have conditioned the dog quicker. What in your opinion have you found to be the most productive? I'm referring in general to obedience training for this discussion. I do realize that there are a lot of variable's here such as age, individuals, complexity of exercise etc. But the overall approach you have found works best for you?

I am especially interested to hear from you guys/gals who have and do train to a high level with lots of control in the work.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

The old rule of thumb, less is more...providing the less is also QUALITY!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Howard with his high level of control. Thanks for responding. HA HA

I work how I feel. Some days it is short, some days it is long. Your question is impossible to answer with any accuracy, like you said, they are all different. 

The important thing is that the dog is progressing. 

Quote: Have you found a timeline that seems to condition the dog better?

You mean other than the 6 to 8 months it takes to condition a response ? There is a difference between learning and conditioning. People will type your ****ing ear off on that shit, but they just are regurgitating what they read in a book, and maybe some little bit they have done at home. 

Good luck with your training, whatever you do.


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

Howard Gaines III said:


> The old rule of thumb, less is more...providing the less is also QUALITY!


Howard after re-reading my post I wasn't very clear in my question. Sorry!

Frequency Example: work dog in obedience 7:00 am 
rest dog....get him back out and work at 10:00 am
rest dog....get him back out and work at 1:00 pm etc etc

as opposed to training when you get off work then waiting till the next day and doing it or whatever could be considered random at best. 

I agree with the quality of the time spend training. I always make it quick and pointed and never work a dog when I see signs he is checking out on me. That's pissing in the wind from my experience. In fact it can make the dog go backwards if it's done TO much. I always try to end on a high note and let them win at the end then wind it down quickly. I have also found that the dog responds better if immediately following a training session I socialize and chill with the dog some before putting him up. Rather than ending a training session and going right to the kennel, house or whatever.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Similar to Jeff. Good days, bad days. I try to keep it short and motivated but hard headedness grabs me occasionally. 8-[
It also depends on the dog. I worked my best competition dog, one of my KBTs, only 15 or so mins, 2-3 times a week. My brother also had a Kerry that he drilled an hour in the am and an hour in the pm, daily. Both consistently scored in the mid to high 90s in AKC OB competition. I was first in my class quite often. My brother had a HIT the first time in the ring from the novice class.
If I put all that time into my kerry I would have crushed him. If my brother put in the short time with his dog that I did with mine his dog would have been an out of control monster. 
You just have to figure out what works best for you and your dog.


----------



## Alice Bezemer (Aug 4, 2010)

training has nothing to do with frequency and everything with being consistent...you can train 24/7/365 and not get anywhere if you are not consistent in your way of training...

my personal view is that there is no such thing as a session frequency, when it comes to a working dog you are training every second of every day and not only when you happen to hit the trainingfield.


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Howard with his high level of control. Thanks for responding. HA HA
> 
> I work how I feel. Some days it is short, some days it is long. Your question is impossible to answer with any accuracy, like you said, they are all different.
> 
> ...


Your points Jeff are always well taken (and colorful) since you actually train a dog to a high level and I was hoping to hear from you on it. As well as a few others who actually train a freakin dog. 

If the dog is not progressing I realize and make adjustments to my training. I am the problem if the dog can't seem to move forward. I am fortunate to have a few strong dogs/pups that can handle my experimentations in training without falling apart LOL. When I want to learn anything. Instead of beating my head against the proverbial wall and screwing the damn dog up I go to who knows more than I do. I am always trying to improve and get better. 

By conditioning I mean classical conditioned response pavlov's drooling at the sound of the bell. A response the dog cannot help.

By learning I mean a dog putting together the pcs and understanding what I am asking for. 

By "timeline" I mean frequency of training sessions. 

My best results have always come from just having the dog with me a lot in different places and environments and "training" them by default. 

I am always open to a better way!!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Well what are you training the dog to do ?


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

Alice Bezemer said:


> training has nothing to do with frequency and everything with being consistent...you can train 24/7/365 and not get anywhere if you are not consistent in your way of training...
> 
> my personal view is that there is no such thing as a session frequency, when it comes to a working dog you are training every second of every day and not only when you happen to hit the trainingfield.


Alice your point is well taken and I appreciate your weighing in. I did note in my commentary : "My best results have always come from just having the dog with me a lot in different places and environments and "training" them by default. " I think that is what your referring to and yes I agree 100%


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Well what are you training the dog to do ?


Jeff right now I have a couple of 4-6 month old puppies. Not really "training" them other than to show them we are together and what I expect. Any training that I am doing with them now is just teaching them focus and control through play and having fun. Outside of the basics not a lot just letting them be puppies for the most part teaching them I am the source of all good things. That part has worked well for me in the past and I will stay with that. I am just fishing for idea's of how to improve from you guys who train heavily in control work. I would like to do Mondio or Ring. Again as I have said in the past I get stuck in this rut due to the lack of decoys.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

What are decoys ?? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

Exactly ... ](*,)


----------



## Anna Kasho (Jan 16, 2008)

The better I get, the less time it takes to train a dog to do something. 
Even better with the right pup that clicks with my personality and training style.


----------



## Alison Grubb (Nov 18, 2009)

Depends on the dog. The dogs I have now are real green and everything is kept fun and short so they are left wanting more. I don't train with them everyday but they seem to hold on to what they have learned quite well between sessions. I've also had dogs that I did an OB session with every day. So it really kinda depends on my mood and how the dog is reacting to things. 

You can jostle around the frequency of your own training and adjust as you see the dog's reaction. If one pup responds better to doing some obedience several times a day then do that with him.

As for decoys, I was talking with a decoy in France several weeks ago and I told him that I felt I was being held back by the lack of decoys in my area. His response was that everyone in the US is lacking good decoys and that I ought to go to the pub and pay someone to get bitten by my dog. Still seems like that could be fun. lol


----------



## Faisal Khan (Apr 16, 2009)

The best metric is progress towards training goals while tightening criteria and reducing help. So if the picture remains the same for a long period of time then need to make adjustments to let the dog think more.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

It seems to me that in about the past month or so many of the disussions has used verbage to make dog training seem more safisticated and difficult . When I start seeing this type of talk IMO they are focused more on their ability as a trainer (ego boosting )then working together with a dog to get the most out of what that particular dog has . How a dog learns hasn't changed over the years it's still dog training . I think some folks here , especially some of the newer members I've seen come on to this forum lately need to ask themselves if they are training dogs more to feel good about themselves then training to work with their dogs and be a good team . Sorry just my opinion . I tend to want to puke reading some of these overly comlicated discussions lately .


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

I love the terminology bullshit as well. This thread is not bad, but holy shit, when you see some of the goofy ****ing terminology that is out there, no wonder people are coming on here confused as **** about how to train.

I make fun of the Mike Ellis video where he talks about layering compulsion into his tug work. WTF does that mean ? Frawly used to do the same sort of terminology crap with his videos. You buy the video, and it is nothing new, and you tend to get a bit pissed when they could have said it much more simply.

I guess having your own makes you cooler. LOL

In reality, if you have to explain something several hundred times, you are going to come up with different terms. Good fodder for making fun of them.


----------



## Jim Nash (Mar 30, 2006)

The terminology does drive me nuts, for instance , one person's version of fight or one person's version of a dog protecting them may be totally different then another and we have long discussions and arguements between people who aren't even talking about the same thing . But the other thing is it seems like being able to realistically see the potential in a particular dog isn't an important part of training . Now it's about how I can train a dog and how I can train or make a dog be something it is not and more importantly doesn't want to be . I see a lot of talk lately about taking dogs that are telling them they have no interest or desire in doing certain things (not talking about obediance or manners , but things like sports , personal protection , PSD , herding , etc. ) and making them do it anyways . To me that's all about the trainer and has little to do with the dog or how they do the job because if it was about the dog they would pick one that tells them they enjoy that type of job and more then likely will do a better job at performing it .


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

I am a country boy in Louisiana. The terminology thing has always baffled me LOL. The dog either has drive or not. He has nerve or not. I subscribe to the K.I.S.S method LOL.


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

Jim Nash said:


> It seems to me that in about the past month or so many of the disussions has used verbage to make dog training seem more safisticated and difficult . When I start seeing this type of talk IMO they are focused more on their ability as a trainer (ego boosting )then working together with a dog to get the most out of what that particular dog has . How a dog learns hasn't changed over the years it's still dog training . I think some folks here , especially some of the newer members I've seen come on to this forum lately need to ask themselves if they are training dogs more to feel good about themselves then training to work with their dogs and be a good team . Sorry just my opinion . I tend to want to puke reading some of these overly comlicated discussions lately .


Jim I hear ya!! I am 50 years old and the ego thing never has been my strong point LOL. I figure dog training to be like any other discipline. It's a continuing education kind of thing. I have been playing with them for years. An internet forum can be a wonderful thing but can be a pain in the ass at the same time.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Brian Anderson said:


> I agree with the quality of the time spend training. I always make it quick and pointed and never work a dog when I see signs he is checking out on me. That's pissing in the wind from my experience. In fact it can make the dog go backwards if it's done TO much. I always try to end on a high note and let them win at the end then wind it down quickly...


Brian this is the way I like to do it and agree about the wind...
I also think that with short sessions, the mixing of verbals AND physical rewards is important. Dishing out food as the only reward sends the message that it's lunch time...if the session is short and productive, then the use of verbals/food/toy helps to keep the dog and me more focused. I agree with you here that ending on a high note make the dog want more. Who would want to train with someone that yells and cranks on you just b/c they can?:-k


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> What are decoys ?? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA


 jeff you put them in water to pull waterfowl into gunning range...](*,)


----------

