# Bitesports without corrections



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Aside from the issue of corrections used when dog is "out of drive" having a "possible" influence of training for sports, when dog is "in drive", one more opinion poll about the use of corrections in the biting dogsports or even other areas, such as police work or whatever.

I have heard people say something that I pretty much agree with in principle I think, but cannot find a way to "prove it", when discussing the training in bitework or dogsports.

People have said that training a dog in a manner that will require NO physical corrections or punishments, "may" be hindering some of the dogs potential in the work, in essence "leaving parts of the dog untapped", or "not using all of what is in the tank", so to speak...implying that there will be something missing from the dog possibly, or something that is not brought out to its full potential, such as drive, character traits, aggression, whatever...

The poll question is, do you think by training a dog for certain things, by training it in a way that requires NO corrections or punishments, that one could "possibly" leave something "in the tank" (for lack of a better term) that is not being developed or utilized to its potential in, such as drive, or some other character trait perhaps, in some dogs in some activities?


----------



## Adam Swilling (Feb 12, 2009)

I voted "yes" on this, Joby. I've always referred to it as proper corrections can uncover things, good and bad. I know there are folks on here that will disagree, which is fine, but I've never believed, and doubt I ever will, that a dog used for bite sport, etc. can realize it's full potential or be trained to a high level without any correction whatsoever. If nothing else a hard, high drive dog at some point will need to learn respect for the handler. I don't think you get every desired behavior *consistently* by feeding them cookies or just telling them "NO".


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

I voted no. 

I am not sure what the correction can induce that a good decoy cannot. 

Plus, There is some hypocrisy here. In one moment. The correction clan, states a properly applied correction done fairly should not induce stress. But yet it somehow should induce "aggression?" 

Also my guess a correction that the dog is taking out on the decoy, is somehow associated with the decoy. This is not a correction, corrections correct behavior. Not cause fury in a dog. It's not a correction anymore, now it's just a device to cause pain induced aggression.

And corrections, destroy behavior they do not cause it. if you use negative r to keep a dog heeling, it's creating heeling, it's destroying the stopping. 

Also, a collar that causes pain, to induce aggression and that is directed on to entity that maybe out physical reach....that in my mind is a nuerosis. A problem. 

And You cannot "train" a dog to have anymore aggression than it naturally has. You cannot install anything in a dog. All you can do, is keep the bullshit out of the way, and allow the dog to grow. 

And even if you do evoke a heightened aggression with a collar. I am sure the only time you see it, is when the collar is used. It's creating a dog that reacts to stimulus. Not a dog that is the stimulus the enviorment reacts to. 

Like A boxer in a fight, he's at his normal aggression level. Punch him in the nuts...and his aggression comes up for a bit. But then falls back down....do you think in his next fight he's coming out in the "I just got punched in the nuts" aggression?


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Adam Swilling said:


> I voted "yes" on this, Joby. I've always referred to it as proper corrections can uncover things, good and bad. I know there are folks on here that will disagree, which is fine, but I've never believed, and doubt I ever will, that a dog used for bite sport, etc. can realize it's full potential or be trained to a high level without any correction whatsoever. If nothing else a hard, high drive dog at some point will need to learn respect for the handler. I don't think you get every desired behavior *consistently* by feeding them cookies or just telling them "NO".


I think you do. And the higher the drive the dog has for cookies....the better using cookies should work.


----------



## Anita Griffing (Aug 8, 2009)

The saddest part of this thread are that SOME of the people out there that scream
the loudest about 'motivational only' training, aren't actually telling the truth or
behind the barn use the ecollar or prong. Fact. Gosh, some have written books on it. 

This person is considered by many 'motivational only' but you can see during the interview
she talks, albeit carefully, about correction. I think it is good interview.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUNg-Vmdme4

Leash pressure sure sounds better than correction... (I have no problem with the training)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayKD9taWBFM&feature=related

I think Bart's training is good, AND towards the end as he is doing more the dog's ears are
flat against the head...still over all is great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSsE4Xbt02A

Look at his dog's ears at :28 to :47 it still looks great in my opinion....some would hate this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dv51iAmBqiw 

They use politically coded words like "obligation training" or "compulsion" or
my favorite, "I am just using the choke for the gag reflex it is not a correction".
Is there abuse, yes. Is it wrong, yes. Should some people never be allowed to
used any form of correction because they have no clue, yes. I just wish people
would be more honest, but then that would make them less money or they would
have to defend themselves from dumbies on lists like this. 

Anita


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Anita Griffing said:


> The saddest part of this thread are that SOME of the people out there that scream
> the loudest about 'motivational only' training, aren't actually telling the truth or
> behind the barn use the ecollar or prong. Fact. Gosh, some have written books on it.
> 
> ...


 
Really behind the barn with an e-collar?


----------



## Marta Wajngarten (Jul 30, 2006)

Anita Griffing said:


> This person is considered by many 'motivational only' but you can see during the interview
> she talks, albeit carefully, about correction. I think it is good interview.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUNg-Vmdme4
> 
> Anita


I have never heard of any one refer to Joanne as being motivational only trainer, she doesn't either. Visit her club, I certainly haven't seen her run off behind a building to correct a dog.

Teaching foundations motivationally and then proofing with corrections is NOT being a motivational only trainer.


----------



## Alison Grubb (Nov 18, 2009)

IMO, there are two things that are left undiscovered when corrections are not used in training. First (and most importantly in my eyes) is that you leave blind spots in what you allow yourself to learn about your dog. For example, how the dog responds to physical corrections and stress from the handler. Is the dog overly handler sensitive? If the dog is sensitive to the handler, what is his recovery like? What extent does the handler need to go to in order to facilitate that recovery? Does the dog accept the correction without missing a beat? What is the dog's level of drive after a correction compared to before? Does the correction create a level of handler dependency, conflict, or consciousness? If it does, how long does it last? I think you can tell a lot about a dog by watching him in training with corrections. I'll even go so far as to say that it can sometimes tell you more about a dog than watching him trial.

Secondly, I do think that you can "build" a dog through correction. For some dogs, the exposure to correction and learning that they can get through a stressful situation can build confidence. And their ability to deal with the correction and other stressful situations improves because of what they have learned about themselves. The act of overcoming adversity builds character - in dogs as in people.

ETA: Joanne Plumb doesn't claim to be a 100% motivational trainer. In fact, attending one of her seminars was the first thing I did when I started to get involved in working dogs. The foundation is very motivational and I think she does a great job with that, but there was also no lack of corrections for the more advanced dogs and no one was going behind barns or trying to hide.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

I've never written a book and I'm certainly not famous. I have said however for well over 40 years; Positive reinforcement, is without question the best training technique on the market. A good correction lets the dog know there is an option. 

DFrost


----------



## Adam Swilling (Feb 12, 2009)

David Frost said:


> I've never written a book and I'm certainly not famous. I have said however for well over 40 years; Positive reinforcement, is without question the best training technique on the market. A good correction lets the dog know there is an option.
> 
> DFrost


 Well said, David.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

David Frost said:


> I've never written a book and I'm certainly not famous. I have said however for well over 40 years; Positive reinforcement, is without question the best training technique on the market. A good correction lets the dog know there is an option.
> 
> DFrost


David

Doesn't
A good correction lets the dog know there is NOT an option.
Make more sense ? Like you understand the exercise now, so now you "have to do it when I tell you"?


----------



## Peter Cho (Apr 21, 2010)

corrections are not punishment if it increases a desired action.
correction and punishment are not the same, becasue mainly they are totally independant of eachother.

there is postitive or negative punishment (punishment decreases behavior)
and positive or - reward (increases behavior)

so what is a correction? hmmmmmm depends on how you have imprinited your dog, now does it not?
If you have done your homework with the e collar, does it not JACK your dog up in low stim? absolutely. In protection, when you pop him with the pinch, or stim with e collar, does it not make him SUPER pissed off at the helper, with better barking? absolutely with precise timing, of course.

so, has my corrections decreased the desired behavior? obviously not. it has become a positive reward. stimulus INCREASED desired behaviour.

 damm!!!!!! I have to stop listening to Gabi Hoffman (doctorate in animal behaviour) and L Collins. Pretty cool listening to their conversations, though. After a day of training, going over the day with a pop or beer......gold!

Now, I do have a giant clicker in my hand I can bop him over the head with. I just don't want to train my dog for 10 years and then trial.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro (Dec 1, 2010)

Oh no dont tell me they electrocute dogs to make them pissed at the helper. Faaaaaaark , thats more than my tolerance level could stand, hitler himself could have dreamt that one up.


----------



## Marta Wajngarten (Jul 30, 2006)

Thomas Barriano said:


> David
> 
> Doesn't
> A good correction lets the dog know there is NOT an option.
> Make more sense ? Like you understand the exercise now, so now you "have to do it when I tell you"?


No, his comment makes perfect sense. A correction only happens once the dog has already made a choice. The fact that this occurred lets the dog know that there is a choice, the severity of the correction then dictates if the dog will decide if the choice is worth it (which may change depending on circumstances), but it now knows that choice exists.
A large part of positive only based training is not just rewarding the right choices but ensuring that bad choices don't happen and if they do they are not reinforced in any way. Majority of that is done through controlling the environment around the dog instead of the dog and manipulating the choices the dog has the option to take.


----------



## Chris McDonald (May 29, 2008)

James Downey said:


> I voted no.
> 
> I am not sure what the correction can induce that a good decoy cannot.
> 
> ...


 
A boxers aggression might go up after a low blow but his aggression might go down after a low blow too? It all depends. But what it can teach a fighter is that if he completely overwhelms his opponent he can make it much more difficult for his opponent to even fight back. 
Im not really a believer in comparing dogs to people such as this “boxer” thing you have going. im no expert But I would think this “boxer” and nuts thing can go many ways. Do you think its possible that a trainer may use the right sparring partners as tools to build the fighter he is working on? Not necessarily just the physical fighting skills but the mental skills as well? A sparring partner may give the fighter in training a lot of ups and downs and end things on different notes, to build confidence or to take it away. What is used is whatever the trainer thinks is needed at that time to help get the fighter to the next level? Sometimes its letting the fighter get the best of the partner to build confidence or the partner giving the fighter in training a beat down to go think about that night. 
I guess you can compare some of this to dogs? 
And if using a collar to cause pain causes a dog fight harder in hopes of getting things over with how is that not training a dog to be more aggressive? I don’t get it? What makes you so sure that the only time you will see the heightened aggression in a dog is when it has a collar on? How do you know this? 
And yes it is possible to train a fighter to come out with “I just got punched in the nuts aggression “ in his next fight. If a fighter is trained that fighting more aggressively reduces the likely hood of him getting punched in the nuts he will come out fighting this way. Not saying he wont get punched in the nuts but a person can be trained to come out more aggressive or less aggressive. 
For what it is worth I don’t believe in using collars to increase aggression is necessary in bite work and don’t do it myself. 
Some of the stuff you come up with makes me shake my head. Maybe your gods gift to dogs and training and are just so advanced that I just simply can’t comprehend.. It is possible that I just can’t comprehend it, im really not to bright.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

First of all I have to understand how the handler's correction will bring out the dog's untapped aggressions. :-k
That's the helper's/decoy's (bad guys) job.
If the handler has to crank up the dog for a bite then it might be the wrong dog. 
Comparing it to a boxer I would think the corner men would be similar to the Handler. They are guiding the fighter with pep talks and instructions. Getting hit by the other fighter (helper/decoy/bad guy) should most certainly bring out more fight. If not then you've got the wrong fighter.


----------



## Daniel Lybbert (Nov 23, 2010)

Bob when your Icon tells you "Hey your shitting the bed today. Get with the program or bugger off!"
Do you bugger off or Get on the job?
I see this as a correction. As a trainer and handler I tell my dogs hey get with the program. Some times a good kick in the ass is the best pep talk

I voted yes because if you havent corrected your dog you havent pushed him hard enough or fast enough


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Daniel Lybbert said:


> Bob when your Icon tells you "Hey your shitting the bed today. Get with the program or bugger off!"
> Do you bugger off or Get on the job?
> I see this as a correction. As a trainer and handler I tell my dogs hey get with the program. Some times a good kick in the ass is the best pep talk
> 
> I voted yes because if you havent corrected your dog you havent pushed him hard enough or fast enough



All about choices isn't it!
I haven't had to give a dog of mine a "good kick in the ass" to get with the program in a few years and I was pretty good at that at one time! :grin:


----------

