# In reply to Skip



## Don Turnipseed

Skip said


> Don- I just find it sad how much you have changed your tune about your dogs since they were tested. You were humbled after that, but at least you admitted your dogs' "natural" inabilities after they were tested, and I think more than a few people were glad to see your honesty back then, but now your stories have changed and reverted back to the old BS. You have lost a lot of street cred again. People that "flip" like that tend to lose quite a bit of respect from others.


Skip, sadly I haven't changed at all. I was going to make up a New Years resolution to share things I have learned over the years, but, there is light at the end of the tunnel. I don't mention my dogs here because of why??? The weak dogs would be on that like a cripple walking down the street. I know what I got. Let's look at things as they really are for a moment.

Ariel said


> Wouldn't escape you Don if you actually read anything I posted with an open mind. I've explained the
> significance many times. You're just ignorant and stubborn and don't really care to understand.


It is obvious that Ariel would just love for me to learn something from her regardless of how many times I tell her she has nothing to offer. Ariel just doesn't really understand my meaning maybe. What I mean is....I have heard it all before because EVERYONE here reads the same books, watches the same videos, goes to the same seminars. They all recommend the same books, videos and seminars right here on this board. They all know the same thing. I have heard it . Some may have more experience in applying what they know, some are better at it than others. That is about as far as it goes. How many times have you seen me post about how similar many behaviors of dogs is to human behavior. I have done it for years going back to before my blowout with Susan T where I was told I was a Troglodyte and a massagenist and the behaviour of dogs and humans couldn't be compared. :grin: Every time I have compared behavior of animals, any animal, with people, I have been told how stupid I am yadda, yadda, yadda. So, why do I persevere? Go to the link below.

Keep in mind all this original thought came shortly after I referred to Ariel as being in defense. Really orignal thought for a topic isn't it. 

http://www.workingdogforum.com/vBulletin/f8/human-canine-similarities-22824/

What Areil is doing here is the same things little dogs rely on and she doesn't even know it. Aside from falling back on what I have been saying for years, she is implementing another dog behavior little dogs use with the big dogs all the time.....the best defense is often a good offence. Nice thing is, she learned something from me.....she is just reiterating what I have been preaching since 2006. LOL And a lot of people are in agreement as long as I didn't say it.
What is funny is this has happened on more than a few boards. I am always stupid and everything else the little dogs can think of to throw at me.....but some of it slowly sinks in and eventually they end up reiterating pretty mush what they so vehemently disagreed with. 

Go back to a thread on prey drive I started not long ago. I was just the dumbest guy, not a trainer, never trained a dog in my life yadda, yadda, yadda and hunt has nothing to do with prey drive period. Went on for pages. Someone else starts a thread on prey drive and it was quickly decided that hunt is indeed a sub action of prey drive. Yes, I sit back quetly and grin because these same people told me I was anything but right! The sad part is, these same people, the Ariels, Chistophers, Downey's, and Thomases, don't even realize what they have done. Years ago on this board I said people have lost the ability to think for themselves. It is true, like it or not.



I could name a few other things but you get the idea and I got things to do. Recently it has been said that my opinions are unigue.....of course they are.....they didn't come from the same videos, books, and seminars that turned everyone else into overnight experts. They have to be because everyone elses come from the same source. I never read a dog book, my opinions actually come from years of being around countless dogs and pups and spending countless hours watching how they react in situations rather than trying to change them with a lot of training. Thank god my opinions are unique. Most of those still posting on this board now are wannabees that spend most of their time packing on me. Big deal. My posts are really no different than they ever were, but, just like you did, whoever wants to perceive it was because of my dogs being tested they can. Still tickles me, when after time, these wannabee's throw stuff I have been saying out there like they had an epiphany.....and everyone agrees......as long as someone else says it.

OH and I started a new thread so the same people mentioned, plus some not mentioned will have room to go into more defence. Watch the names as they roll up. Predictable behavior!


----------



## Chris McDonald

As much as we all hate to admit it I think there is truth to a lot of this stuff he posted. Many people in dogs are really all caught up in being puppets. I really agree with the whole thing about people learning from the same books videos etc. What I find funny about this is the people who think they are keeping an open mind are the ones that have been made into cookie cutter trainers producing cookie cutter dogs for cookie cutter tests. I rarely see anyone training a the whole dog, all I see are dogs natural abilities being handicapped in the name of hoping to get a high score in a cookie cutter test. Even the sports that think they are not cookie cutter really are from the little I have seen. I actually feel bad for the people who spend many years training in SCH and for how little they actually learn and grow. Id be impressed by the person who just works with their dog to have the ultimate communication and understanding with their dog. To me a good dog and handler team should just be able to walk on to a SCH field without ever seeing anything that is going to be asked of them and perform a SHC trial. Now I would not expect them to do certain things, like when the dog jumps over the fence to get the dumbbell the dog may place its feet on the fence. Big deal. But I think all these stupid little rules were placed in there so some trainer could make an extra buck or he just did not understand on how to bring out the whole dog. So a bunch of corny little things were placed in the rules like the whole deep full pushing bite thing. These people have no idea of what a dog is really capable of in a bigger picture so they made little things up to base their judging on. I mean would you rather be bit by a dog with a deep bite that pushes or a dog that uses its fangs and pulls and tears? Its like asking if you would rather be shot in the left or right knee, does it really matter? No. 
Another thing I don’t really understand is teaching a dog to track? Do you people really think you can teach a dog to track better than evolution? No you just need to be able to communicate to the dog when you want it to track and for what odor. Does anyone really think that a dog taught to track footstep to foot steep has a better chance or a higher likely hood of finding its target than one that was not? Ill admit have less time in than many on here. But in some cases I think I have a lot more knowledge than many who have a lot more time inn than me. Just go watch a SCH club for an afternoon and see how little is accomplished. Last time I did this in one corner there were two people trying to get a two year old GS to bite and hold a rag, two people in the other corner trying to teach a dog to make a left hand turn when tracking? I mean come on really? At the end of the day nobody really got much out of the day. Bla bla bla. 

As far as a bunch of the other stuff Don just posted, oh boy this might get good! Maybe Mike will threaten to beat him up again!:razz:


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Did anyone else notice that you never see Chris and Cath Amodeo post at the same time? Just sayin LMAO


----------



## Doug Zaga

Thomas Barriano said:


> Did anyone else notice that you never see Chris and Cath Amodeo post at the same time? Just sayin LMAO


Tom...Chris is a chick?


----------



## Chris McDonald

Thomas Barriano said:


> Did anyone else notice that you never see Chris and Cath Amodeo post at the same time? Just sayin LMAO


That is funny, I’ll give you that. I am pretty sure she gave up online. Must be smarter than me. If she really even is real


----------



## Chris McDonald

Chris McDonald said:


> That is funny, I’ll give you that. I am pretty sure she gave up online. Must be smarter than me. If she really even is real. Can you show us the leg bite again?


----------



## Doug Zaga

Don Turnipseed said:


> What Areil is doing here is the same things little dogs rely on and she doesn't even know it. Aside from falling back on what I have been saying for years, she is implementing another dog behavior little dogs use with the big dogs all the time.....the best defense is often a good offence. Nice thing is, she learned something from me.....she is just reiterating what I have been preaching since 2006. LOL And a lot of people are in agreement as long as I didn't say it.


 
I do not agree with you Don. I believe Ariel is trying to share with you her knowledge, experience and training philosophy to help you with your dogs. From what I have heard she is well respected in the dog training world, and No, I have never met her. 

I think it was you who began this with stating your dogs would defend you and agreeing to the test. Since your dogs didn't (which I said from the beginning) you have been trying to prove your point as to why your breeding practices and your dog training philosophy is the right way and the only way. 

If you want your dogs to have protective skills I would gather I would want to speak with knowledgable dog training people, look at my breeding program, train pups differently, and hope and pray several generations down the road it becomes part genetically ingrained. I don't know... like I said I am just a greenhorn when it comes to dog training and especially breeding.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Chris,

There's a video of Cath doing a leg bite?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Doug Zaga said:


> Tom...Chris is a chick?


I don't ask and don't tell


----------



## Chris McDonald

Id actually like to hear a few serious answerers regarding the OP


----------



## Chris McDonald

Thomas Barriano said:


> Chris,
> 
> There's a video of Cath doing a leg bite?


And its better than any dog you ever worked


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Chris McDonald said:


> Id actually like to hear a few serious answerers regarding the OP


There is one Chris. Doug doesn't agree with me!!!


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

Chris McDonald said:


> Id actually like to hear a few serious answerers regarding the OP


I find it funny that you would call others in the dog training world "puppets". You have likely spent more money on dog training than many on this board combined. The others are free to talk about what they have learned and share the knowledge with others, yet someone else controls your strings.

The idea that that everyone is going to the same seminars and reading the same books is an interesting one, with some validity. For sure there is some danger about jumping on the proverbial bandwagon. However it is not that simple.

I am quite sure that someone like Ariel for example has been exposed to a variety of training methods, from Koehler to clicker. Her training and problem solving abilities would likely reflect this. Just because she has been to the latest Randy Hare seminar (not saying she has, just an example) does not mean that she could not teach a dog to walk on a ladder, or carry it over her shoulders...the way it was done in the good ol days. I bet she could even train a dog with no ball drive!

All of this is a moot point when speaking about Don. He has repeatedly admitted that he doesn't train dogs.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Doug Zaga said:


> I do not agree with you Don. I believe Ariel is trying to share with you her knowledge, experience and training philosophy to help you with your dogs. From what I have heard she is well respected in the dog training world, and No, I have never met her.
> 
> I think it was you who began this with stating your dogs would defend you and agreeing to the test. Since your dogs didn't (which I said from the beginning) you have been trying to prove your point as to why your breeding practices and your dog training philosophy is the right way and the only way.
> 
> If you want your dogs to have protective skills I would gather I would want to speak with knowledgable dog training people, look at my breeding program, train pups differently, and hope and pray several generations down the road it becomes part genetically ingrained. I don't know... like I said I am just a greenhorn when it comes to dog training and especially breeding.


What Areil knows is the same stuff I have heard for the last 6 years here Doug. Everybody knows, basically, the same thing and I have heard it. I don't doubt Areil knows how to train a dog. So does Thomas, Christopher, Downey. Everyone here is accomplished. Never critisized her "training ability". I get into discussions on dogs much more than training because I know dogs. Discussions like prey drive, breeding and I know all about behaviors. Doesn't matter what the subject, the first question is always...."how many dogs have you trained?". I read really stupid question stating my dog tracks downwind!!! Forgot the experts name on that one but he always has something to say thinking he is an expert. All dogs tend to "trail" downwind....some expert. As far as wanting sport dogs....never going to happen. Serious dog work OK. It really isn't I am against sport work, it is the mentality of the ones that are in it that put me off more than anything.

Ariel looks at old dogs that kill or get killed and want to see them chase a rag??? Well, I put up a video for laughs with the dogs doing what she likes to see....6 week olds. Damn ask Thomas, the expert that has done this for thirty years, I even did that wrong. The boy wouldn't know a really serious dog it it bit him in the ass. I am going to get them back on that rag and throw a fresh squirrel down by them and we will see what prey drive really is. All that rag test is is to see if they are trainable for bitework. Start em as puppies on a rag, accentuate the behavior, graduate to tugs, puppy sleeves and so one. At one point what they are being worked on is being hand held "BY A PERSON" gets the dog used to biting up close to the person. All it is is a conditioning tool. It is a gradual progression of getting the dog fixated and comfortable. The rag doesn't show high prey. Just a conditioned compulsive behavior that can be used to more easily train the dog, even a fairly week dog. If it showed prey drive all the hunters would be throwing rags at their dogs and proudly display videos of them saying "you bet, that dog is going to make one hell of a bear dog....just look at him tear that rag up." Ain't ever going to happen, Doug. I don't even have to claim to be a trainer for that. 

At any rate, Doug, go ahead and disagree, but. never said she couldn't train a dog.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

If a picture is worth a thousand words?
What's a video worth? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxTCRmaauE4

Keep typing Don


----------



## Chris McDonald

Jennifer Coulter said:


> I find it funny that you would call others in the dog training world "puppets". You have likely spent more money on dog training than many on this board combined. The others are free to talk about what they have learned and share the knowledge with others, yet someone else controls your strings.
> 
> The idea that that everyone is going to the same seminars and reading the same books is an interesting one, with some validity. For sure there is some danger about jumping on the proverbial bandwagon. However it is not that simple.
> 
> I am quite sure that someone like Ariel for example has been exposed to a variety of training methods, from Koehler to clicker. Her training and problem solving abilities would likely reflect this. Just because she has been to the latest Randy Hare seminar (not saying she has, just an example) does not mean that she could not teach a dog to walk on a ladder, or carry it over her shoulders...the way it was done in the good ol days. I bet she could even train a dog with no ball drive!
> 
> All of this is a moot point when speaking about Don. He has repeatedly admitted that he doesn't train dogs.


So whats your point =D>
Ha, I see your point and can even agree with it, it goes both ways. Don’t know anything about Ariel, don’t know why you bought her up. I will say from the little I have seen regarding dog training there are less people training that I would consider self thinkers and problem solvers. Hence the cookie cutter comments. 
I don’t remember if I called any one “puppets” like you say and my post is to long and boring for me to read and look. 
Because I consciously made a decision I don’t feel as if there are any strings attached. Its an internet chat room it don’t get much lower than this as far as gaining information so I don’t feel to guilty about not sharing. Anyone can post as much or as little as they like. I would venture to guess many on here don’t tell all and there are a whole lot smart enough to not be on here at all. I work with a few guys in my area that use a different training approaches and we share opinions freely, I just don’t feel the need to type them out. 
And other than travel I probably spent less than you think. 

whats a moot?


----------



## Thomas Barriano

[QUOTEwhats a moot?[/QUOTE]


It's water surrounding a castle? ;-)


----------



## Chris McDonald

Thomas Barriano said:


> [QUOTEwhats a moot?


 
It's water surrounding a castle? ;-)[/QUOTE]

Hope you weren’t serious


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

Chris McDonald said:


> As much as* we all hate to admit it I think there is truth to a lot of this stuff he posted. Many people in dogs are really all caught up in being puppets.* I really agree with the whole thing about people learning from the same books videos etc. What I find funny about this is the people who think they are keeping an open mind are the ones that have been made into cookie cutter trainers producing cookie cutter dogs for cookie cutter tests.






Chris McDonald said:


> whats a moot?


A "moot point" is a point that has been rendered irrelevant.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

Chris McDonald said:


> Don’t know anything about Ariel, don’t know why you bought her up.


I brought up Ariel because she was featured quite heavily in the OP.



Chris McDonald said:


> Id actually like to hear a few serious answerers regarding the OP


----------



## Tyree Johnson

Chris McDonald said:


> As much as we all hate to admit it I think there is truth to a lot of this stuff he posted. Many people in dogs are really all caught up in being puppets. I really agree with the whole thing about people learning from the same books videos etc. What I find funny about this is the people who think they are keeping an open mind are the ones that have been made into cookie cutter trainers producing cookie cutter dogs for cookie cutter tests. I rarely see anyone training a the whole dog, all I see are dogs natural abilities being handicapped in the name of hoping to get a high score in a cookie cutter test. Even the sports that think they are not cookie cutter really are from the little I have seen. I actually feel bad for the people who spend many years training in SCH and for how little they actually learn and grow. Id be impressed by the person who just works with their dog to have the ultimate communication and understanding with their dog. To me a good dog and handler team should just be able to walk on to a SCH field without ever seeing anything that is going to be asked of them and perform a SHC trial. Now I would not expect them to do certain things, like when the dog jumps over the fence to get the dumbbell the dog may place its feet on the fence. Big deal. But I think all these stupid little rules were placed in there so some trainer could make an extra buck or he just did not understand on how to bring out the whole dog. So a bunch of corny little things were placed in the rules like the whole deep full pushing bite thing. These people have no idea of what a dog is really capable of in a bigger picture so they made little things up to base their judging on. I mean would you rather be bit by a dog with a deep bite that pushes or a dog that uses its fangs and pulls and tears? Its like asking if you would rather be shot in the left or right knee, does it really matter? No.
> Another thing I don’t really understand is teaching a dog to track? Do you people really think you can teach a dog to track better than evolution? No you just need to be able to communicate to the dog when you want it to track and for what odor. Does anyone really think that a dog taught to track footstep to foot steep has a better chance or a higher likely hood of finding its target than one that was not? Ill admit have less time in than many on here. But in some cases I think I have a lot more knowledge than many who have a lot more time inn than me. Just go watch a SCH club for an afternoon and see how little is accomplished. Last time I did this in one corner there were two people trying to get a two year old GS to bite and hold a rag, two people in the other corner trying to teach a dog to make a left hand turn when tracking? I mean come on really? At the end of the day nobody really got much out of the day. Bla bla bla.
> 
> As far as a bunch of the other stuff Don just posted, oh boy this might get good! Maybe Mike will threaten to beat him up again!:razz:


Say it to my face .....


----------



## brad robert

Chris McDonald said:


> Id actually like to hear a few serious answerers regarding the OP


 Hey Chris tell me do you train for competition im curious about it because i only ever see you on here saying how you train with some group and you cant share what you learn which on a sharing community like a forum makes no sense to me??That is you who says this right??

I think protection sports are cool of all sorts but you seem to have a lot of thoughts on schutzhund and im curious what you base them on??


----------



## Christopher Smith

Chris McDonald said:


> As much as we all hate to admit it I think there is truth to a lot of this stuff he posted. Many people in dogs are really all caught up in being puppets. I really agree with the whole thing about people learning from the same books videos etc. What I find funny about this is the people who think they are keeping an open mind are the ones that have been made into cookie cutter trainers producing cookie cutter dogs for cookie cutter tests. I rarely see anyone training a the whole dog, all I see are dogs natural abilities being handicapped in the name of hoping to get a high score in a cookie cutter test. Even the sports that think they are not cookie cutter really are from the little I have seen. I actually feel bad for the people who spend many years training in SCH and for how little they actually learn and grow. Id be impressed by the person who just works with their dog to have the ultimate communication and understanding with their dog. To me a good dog and handler team should just be able to walk on to a SCH field without ever seeing anything that is going to be asked of them and perform a SHC trial. Now I would not expect them to do certain things, like when the dog jumps over the fence to get the dumbbell the dog may place its feet on the fence. Big deal. But I think all these stupid little rules were placed in there so some trainer could make an extra buck or he just did not understand on how to bring out the whole dog. So a bunch of corny little things were placed in the rules like the whole deep full pushing bite thing. These people have no idea of what a dog is really capable of in a bigger picture so they made little things up to base their judging on. I mean would you rather be bit by a dog with a deep bite that pushes or a dog that uses its fangs and pulls and tears? Its like asking if you would rather be shot in the left or right knee, does it really matter? No.
> Another thing I don’t really understand is teaching a dog to track? Do you people really think you can teach a dog to track better than evolution? No you just need to be able to communicate to the dog when you want it to track and for what odor. Does anyone really think that a dog taught to track footstep to foot steep has a better chance or a higher likely hood of finding its target than one that was not? Ill admit have less time in than many on here. But in some cases I think I have a lot more knowledge than many who have a lot more time inn than me. Just go watch a SCH club for an afternoon and see how little is accomplished. Last time I did this in one corner there were two people trying to get a two year old GS to bite and hold a rag, two people in the other corner trying to teach a dog to make a left hand turn when tracking? I mean come on really? At the end of the day nobody really got much out of the day. Bla bla bla.
> 
> As far as a bunch of the other stuff Don just posted, oh boy this might get good! Maybe Mike will threaten to beat him up again!:razz:


Chris don't fall down the same vortex of ignorance as The Seed. You speak about cookie cutter training for sport, but what else does everyone do? Do you really think that that every bit of knowledge has been gleaned from sport dog training? Even within the sport world there is no such thing as cookie cutter training. Are you so stupid as to think that we all sat down watched a video then went out and started training the same? 

But the fact is that you and The Seed don't know shit about sport, the training or the dogs. :razz:

Oh and if you ever want to test my sport dogs tracking against your dogs tracking let me know. We can film it and put it right next to The Seeds epic video.


----------



## James Downey

Chris McDonald said:


> As much as we all hate to admit it I think there is truth to a lot of this stuff he posted. Many people in dogs are really all caught up in being puppets. I really agree with the whole thing about people learning from the same books videos etc. What I find funny about this is the people who think they are keeping an open mind are the ones that have been made into cookie cutter trainers producing cookie cutter dogs for cookie cutter tests. I rarely see anyone training a the whole dog, all I see are dogs natural abilities being handicapped in the name of hoping to get a high score in a cookie cutter test. Even the sports that think they are not cookie cutter really are from the little I have seen. I actually feel bad for the people who spend many years training in SCH and for how little they actually learn and grow. Id be impressed by the person who just works with their dog to have the ultimate communication and understanding with their dog. To me a good dog and handler team should just be able to walk on to a SCH field without ever seeing anything that is going to be asked of them and perform a SHC trial. Now I would not expect them to do certain things, like when the dog jumps over the fence to get the dumbbell the dog may place its feet on the fence. Big deal. But I think all these stupid little rules were placed in there so some trainer could make an extra buck or he just did not understand on how to bring out the whole dog. So a bunch of corny little things were placed in the rules like the whole deep full pushing bite thing. These people have no idea of what a dog is really capable of in a bigger picture so they made little things up to base their judging on. I mean would you rather be bit by a dog with a deep bite that pushes or a dog that uses its fangs and pulls and tears? Its like asking if you would rather be shot in the left or right knee, does it really matter? No.
> Another thing I don’t really understand is teaching a dog to track? Do you people really think you can teach a dog to track better than evolution? No you just need to be able to communicate to the dog when you want it to track and for what odor. Does anyone really think that a dog taught to track footstep to foot steep has a better chance or a higher likely hood of finding its target than one that was not? Ill admit have less time in than many on here. But in some cases I think I have a lot more knowledge than many who have a lot more time inn than me. Just go watch a SCH club for an afternoon and see how little is accomplished. Last time I did this in one corner there were two people trying to get a two year old GS to bite and hold a rag, two people in the other corner trying to teach a dog to make a left hand turn when tracking? I mean come on really? At the end of the day nobody really got much out of the day. Bla bla bla.
> 
> As far as a bunch of the other stuff Don just posted, oh boy this might get good! Maybe Mike will threaten to beat him up again!:razz:


 
Ill admit have less time in than many on here. But in some cases I think I have a lot more knowledge than many who have a lot more time inn than me.

And that's just bullshit talk. You can ask some members of this board that knew me when I started training 8 years ago. I said the same bullshit, but I had not done shit. I thought I was smarter and better than all the other trainers. And my reference was what I thought I could do. You have no idea what the **** your talking about until you have stepped on a field. Your frame of reference about the level of diffculty you think you could compete at in Sch is what you think and has very little to do with any type of experience. And frankly what you think is bullshit...the only thing that proves anything is putting points in the scorebook. But I suggest first you understand the rules first. It's not rule that a dog have pushing bite. The dog can pull. Also, You kind of show your ass a little bit about what you know because there is specific reason the grip should be full and it has everything to do with the dog charcter and nothing to do with what type of damage would be done. I doubt anyone in the history of Sch has ever made a dime...again one part of the experience that you do not have that would shut that big ****ing mouth of yours up. Training and titling a dog ain't cheap. Here's another a little piece of the puzzle your alternate reality in your head failed to account for. The rules about the 1 meter jump (the fence) and the dog not touching was placed there because the training started to get so good, that it was becoming very diffcult for judges to seperate which dog was the winner...and yes, the difference between first and second at world championship maybe what dog touched the jump...something that petty. So if you think you can train with that kind of detail and make it all come together for one trial...saddle up there big mouth. There's a ton of cash to be made?,,,shit if anyone can make some money at Sch. I hope they pave the way for the rest of us. Also, I cannot believe your nieve enough to believe there is one guy writing the rules for the entire sport of Sch. And go to Sch club? I am calling Bullshit on that too. First Tracking in one corner, and rag work in another? I think if you ever actually have been to a Sch club you would not have told a lie that easy to spot. 

This was my favorite part right here _"Another thing I don’t really understand is teaching a dog to track? Do you people really think you can teach a dog to track better than evolution? No you just need to be able to communicate to the dog when you want it to track and for what odor. Does anyone really think that a dog taught to track footstep to foot steep has a better chance or a higher likely hood of finding its target than one that was not?"_

I think now that you have given us the magic secret of tracking...we can all go home now. Are you that arrogant to think your the first person in history to understand what needs to be commuicated in a tracking dog. And your last question again shows your ass and what you think you know. Sch Tracking objective is not about finding a target. the efficientcy of f2f tracking is not relevant. The purpose of Sch tracking is to see how well a dog use it's nose in terms of accuracy, how careful they are in the work, problem solving skills. So it's all a little deeper than you think.

And here's what really baffling is how much energy you put into complaining about an activity you do not care much about. I do not like the NBA, There are lot of things wrong with it in my mind. But I do not go around to basketball lovers and try to piss them off by telling them how screwed up it is. I simply change the channel when it's on T.V.

And Chris you have stated you refuse to let us in on what you do in any aspect of your life with your dog(s). Well first off don't show up the party without anything to contribute. And if you are going to be that guy . Sit your grumpy ass in the corner and be miserable by yourself, do not constantly try to ruin the atmosphere.

You could start by teaching us all on how to train the whole dog? Sounds like an idea that may have something to it. Or it maybe one of those bullshit ideas like the fruit loops who believe the dog should juat work for the handeler because thier a really cool guy.

Hey you keep up the bullshitting yourself that your so much further ahead. That's the type of thinking that makes people teachable. It really shows! your understanding of Schutzhund is about as accurate those people who see it and say we are training attack dogs!


----------



## Chris McDonald

Tyree Johnson said:


> Say it to my face .....


:razz:
Nice pup!


----------



## Chris McDonald

James Downey said:


> Also, You kind of show your ass a little bit about what you know because there is specific reason the grip should be full and it has everything to do with the dog charcter and nothing to do with what type of damage would be done.
> 
> Does it really or have you just been taught to think this? So a dog that bites with fangs has poor character?
> 
> Here's another a little piece of the puzzle your alternate reality in your head failed to account for. The rules about the 1 meter jump (the fence) and the dog not touching was placed there because the training started to get so good, that it was becoming very diffcult for judges to seperate which dog was the winner...and yes, the difference between first and second at world championship maybe what dog touched the jump...something that petty.
> 
> Thanks for educating me, this is perfect, exactly what I mean. So now is the “world champion” really the best dog to breed? It’s the “world champion” its got to be the best dog, right? Am I missing something here?


----------



## Stephanie Johnson

I dislike the implication that one does not "know" about dogs because one does not know how to condition a dog for a particular disciple.

Mr. Turnipseed, having reviewed two videos of your dogs (the one with Mr. Colburn and the recent of the six week old puppies) I have the following thoughts. Please forgive me if I am veering off topic.

Re the test: Your dogs were conditioned to fail this test due to the way you handle and raise them. Additionally, there are very few dogs who would have passed this test on raw genetics. I find it interesting that there was no follow up video showing dogs capable of passing this type of testing without being conditioned for it.

Re your puppies: As long as they are environmentally sound, there is no reason one of them could not be raised for sport competition. If that is a goal for you, here is how I would raise them:
Separate them NOW.
Take them off your property and around people often.
Do not in anyway try to inhibit dominant social behaviors toward you, ie. jumping, mouthing, resource guarding, with physical correction. Yell all you want - just don't associate it with any consequences.
Let them beg for food and reward that behavior with food.
Don't introduce them to game.

It would be an interesting experiment.


----------



## James Downey

Chris McDonald said:


> James Downey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, You kind of show your ass a little bit about what you know because there is specific reason the grip should be full and it has everything to do with the dog charcter and nothing to do with what type of damage would be done.
> 
> Does it really or have you just been taught to think this? So a dog that bites with fangs has poor character?
> 
> Here's another a little piece of the puzzle your alternate reality in your head failed to account for. The rules about the 1 meter jump (the fence) and the dog not touching was placed there because the training started to get so good, that it was becoming very diffcult for judges to seperate which dog was the winner...and yes, the difference between first and second at world championship maybe what dog touched the jump...something that petty.
> 
> Thanks for educating me, this is perfect, exactly what I mean. So now is the “world champion” really the best dog to breed? It’s the “world champion” its got to be the best dog, right? Am I missing something here?
> 
> 
> 
> Why would he be the best dog to breed? I do not think anyone believes that. He may still be a good to breed. I am not sure why you try to project thinking on sport dog folks. I am no fool that Sch defintly tests the training far more than it does the dog. But agian, I cannot speak for the world level competetion, cause I have never been that far.
Click to expand...


----------



## Edward Egan

Stephanie Johnson said:


> I dislike the implication that one does not "know" about dogs because one does not know how to condition a dog for a particular disciple.
> 
> Mr. Turnipseed, having reviewed two videos of your dogs (the one with Mr. Colburn and the recent of the six week old puppies) I have the following thoughts. Please forgive me if I am veering off topic.
> 
> Re the test: Your dogs were conditioned to fail this test due to the way you handle and raise them. Additionally, there are very few dogs who would have passed this test on raw genetics. I find it interesting that there was no follow up video showing dogs capable of passing this type of testing without being conditioned for it.
> 
> Re your puppies: As long as they are environmentally sound, there is no reason one of them could not be raised for sport competition. If that is a goal for you, here is how I would raise them:
> Separate them NOW.
> Take them off your property and around people often.
> Do not in anyway try to inhibit dominant social behaviors toward you, ie. jumping, mouthing, resource guarding, with physical correction. Yell all you want - just don't associate it with any consequences.
> Let them beg for food and reward that behavior with food.
> Don't introduce them to game.
> 
> It would be an interesting experiment.


There you go Don, you've been schooled!


----------



## James Downey

Stephanie Johnson said:


> I dislike the implication that one does not "know" about dogs because one does not know how to condition a dog for a particular disciple.
> 
> Mr. Turnipseed, having reviewed two videos of your dogs (the one with Mr. Colburn and the recent of the six week old puppies) I have the following thoughts. Please forgive me if I am veering off topic.
> 
> Re the test: Your dogs were conditioned to fail this test due to the way you handle and raise them. Additionally, there are very few dogs who would have passed this test on raw genetics. I find it interesting that there was no follow up video showing dogs capable of passing this type of testing without being conditioned for it.
> 
> Re your puppies: As long as they are environmentally sound, there is no reason one of them could not be raised for sport competition. If that is a goal for you, here is how I would raise them:
> Separate them NOW.
> Take them off your property and around people often.
> Do not in anyway try to inhibit dominant social behaviors toward you, ie. jumping, mouthing, resource guarding, with physical correction. Yell all you want - just don't associate it with any consequences.
> Let them beg for food and reward that behavior with food.
> Don't introduce them to game.
> 
> It would be an interesting experiment.


Stephanie,

I just have to ask about this statement.

" Additionally, there are very few dogs who would have passed this test on raw genetics." 

What's the bank of dogs your comparing too....All dogs worldwide, or dogs from protection lines? I am not sure it's that few of dogs from protection lines at Malinois I know... I will say that test is perfect for a raw Malinois. Act a little weird or riled up... And I think a Malinois going to be coming for you. JMO. I cannot speak for the shepherds or other breeds, seeing I do not know too much about em'


----------



## James Downey

Chris McDonald said:


> James Downey said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, You kind of show your ass a little bit about what you know because there is specific reason the grip should be full and it has everything to do with the dog charcter and nothing to do with what type of damage would be done.
> 
> Does it really or have you just been taught to think this? So a dog that bites with fangs has poor character?
> 
> Here's another a little piece of the puzzle your alternate reality in your head failed to account for. The rules about the 1 meter jump (the fence) and the dog not touching was placed there because the training started to get so good, that it was becoming very diffcult for judges to seperate which dog was the winner...and yes, the difference between first and second at world championship maybe what dog touched the jump...something that petty.
> 
> Thanks for educating me, this is perfect, exactly what I mean. So now is the “world champion” really the best dog to breed? It’s the “world champion” its got to be the best dog, right? Am I missing something here?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for the bite. I think well you know just like all people in dogs I was not born with what knowledge I do have. So, yes I was taught a thing or two about what the quality of a grip says about a dogs charcter. But I also am capable of doing this really neat trick called thinking for myself. I also am a person that is very skeptical, And I do question what people tell me, I do investigate it for myself. And my experience is a dog that does want to fill it's mouth has a thicker nerve base than a dog that does not. The dog that wants to bite the fangs is literally trying to have as little to do with the bite as possible now in between a full biting dog and a fang biter, is a 3/4 gripping dog. A lot of harderst biters are in this class. I believe it's because they have just have enough trepidation about what they are doing when biting that they bite harder in an effort to deal with the stress. They most likely are the most reluctant dogs to adjust thier grip for the same reason. and of course this exceptions to every rule. But it's what the grips do tell me. a fang biter...man Just a couple of nerves away from from getting run. Most likely if it gets hairy enough, they are letting go.
Click to expand...


----------



## James Downey

Chris McDonald said:


> Thanks for educating me, this is perfect, exactly what I mean. So now is the “world champion” really the best dog to breed? It’s the “world champion” its got to be the best dog, right? Am I missing something here?


I think what you are missing is that I do not believe anyone said that or made the insinuation that the world champion also accpets the title of best stud dog.

You also have taken the liberty of having the idea we believe we install tracking abilities in the dog? Rules are made for finacial gain? That we try to encourage a specific style of biting because we believe it's more effective at stopping someone.

I get the feeling you make very general assuptions how sport dog, specifically Sch/IPO people think? And that there is some resentment to the sport or the handlers based on that preconcieved notion. 

And generally people do not harbor resentment unless they have been offended and then they look to reltaliate. I am sure you just did not pull this stuff out of your ass. I would like to know what happened in your past that left such a bad taste in your mouth? 

And if these are just drummed up based on what you "think" is going on in IPO. That's a bit near sighted. And you should drop the chip and go and make sure what your getting all spun up about is actually valid. Because I am sure you will find people with views that vary greatly.


----------



## manny rose

I must say you sound more like a dumb sob with this silly [email protected]&t! Lol must people agree topping the podium alone isnt enough for breeding.... But your saying the dog that takes first over the other one because its feet touch the jump is nonesense. There are many other exercises to complete in trial and thats assuming there performances are the same everywhere else except dog #2 touches jump....and in that hyperthetical scenerio of course dog #1 should place first you fool! Let me write this simple so ONLY A FOOL CAN ARGUE...if two football teams have all the same rushing,passing, everything is the same and a tie score..... And team 1 throws a touchdown with time running out....they win right! Your propably the type that would say..if we got the ball back we would have tied it right back up! Lol. Please make a better point if you can find one.


----------



## Chris McDonald

James Downey;318598
And generally people do not harbor resentment unless they have been offended and then they look to reltaliate. I am sure you just did not pull this stuff out of your ass. I would like to know what happened in your past that left such a bad taste in your mouth?
[SIZE=3 said:


> I think your right, I do, I used to like bowling when I was young but I was never good at it and SCH reminds me of bowling. :-&[/SIZE]
> Were beating a dead hoarse


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

James Downey said:


> Chris McDonald said:
> 
> 
> 
> As for the bite. I think well you know just like all people in dogs I was not born with what knowledge I do have. So, yes I was taught a thing or two about what the quality of a grip says about a dogs charcter. But I also am capable of doing this really neat trick called thinking for myself. I also am a person that is very skeptical, And I do question what people tell me, I do investigate it for myself. And my experience is a dog that does want to fill it's mouth has a thicker nerve base than a dog that does not. The dog that wants to bite the fangs is literally trying to have as little to do with the bite as possible now in between a full biting dog and a fang biter, is a 3/4 gripping dog. A lot of harderst biters are in this class. I believe it's because they have just have enough trepidation about what they are doing when biting that they bite harder in an effort to deal with the stress. They most likely are the most reluctant dogs to adjust thier grip for the same reason. and of course this exceptions to every rule. But it's what the grips do tell me. a fang biter...man Just a couple of nerves away from from getting run. Most likely if it gets hairy enough, they are letting go.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm trying to post the applauding smiley, but it's not working. So, I'll just tell you I'm giving your post applause. And you're the one who doesn't understand dog behavior?
Click to expand...


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Stephanie Johnson said:


> Re the test: Your dogs were conditioned to fail this test due to the way you handle and raise them. Additionally, there are very few dogs who would have passed this test on raw genetics. I find it interesting that there was no follow up video showing dogs capable of passing this type of testing without being conditioned for it.


There was no follow-up because I believe most people had enough experience with dogs to realize exactly what you said ...there are very few dogs with natural protective instinct high enough to pass that test. Don honestly believed that all the training we do to train and prepare dogs for protection work is unnecessary and really thought his dogs would bite. If I'm not mistaken, he still believes they would really protect him if they didn't think the situation was a game ...as they did when we flew to CA.


----------



## Joby Becker

you people need to take time to PREVIEW your posts, especially when quoting, and get it right LOL..

I am SO F'ing confused as to who said what, I had to go back and read the whole thread again...and that was an inconvenience to me....


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Chris McDonald said:


> As much as we all hate to admit it I think there is truth to a lot of this stuff he posted. Many people in dogs are really all caught up in being puppets. I really agree with the whole thing about people learning from the same books videos etc. What I find funny about this is the people who think they are keeping an open mind are the ones that have been made into cookie cutter trainers producing cookie cutter dogs for cookie cutter tests. I rarely see anyone training a the whole dog, all I see are dogs natural abilities being handicapped in the name of hoping to get a high score in a cookie cutter test. Even the sports that think they are not cookie cutter really are from the little I have seen. I actually feel bad for the people who spend many years training in SCH and for how little they actually learn and grow. Id be impressed by the person who just works with their dog to have the ultimate communication and understanding with their dog. To me a good dog and handler team should just be able to walk on to a SCH field without ever seeing anything that is going to be asked of them and perform a SHC trial. Now I would not expect them to do certain things, like when the dog jumps over the fence to get the dumbbell the dog may place its feet on the fence. Big deal. But I think all these stupid little rules were placed in there so some trainer could make an extra buck or he just did not understand on how to bring out the whole dog. So a bunch of corny little things were placed in the rules like the whole deep full pushing bite thing. These people have no idea of what a dog is really capable of in a bigger picture so they made little things up to base their judging on. I mean would you rather be bit by a dog with a deep bite that pushes or a dog that uses its fangs and pulls and tears? Its like asking if you would rather be shot in the left or right knee, does it really matter? No.
> Another thing I don’t really understand is teaching a dog to track? Do you people really think you can teach a dog to track better than evolution? No you just need to be able to communicate to the dog when you want it to track and for what odor. Does anyone really think that a dog taught to track footstep to foot steep has a better chance or a higher likely hood of finding its target than one that was not? Ill admit have less time in than many on here. But in some cases I think I have a lot more knowledge than many who have a lot more time inn than me. Just go watch a SCH club for an afternoon and see how little is accomplished. Last time I did this in one corner there were two people trying to get a two year old GS to bite and hold a rag, two people in the other corner trying to teach a dog to make a left hand turn when tracking? I mean come on really? At the end of the day nobody really got much out of the day. Bla bla bla.
> 
> As far as a bunch of the other stuff Don just posted, oh boy this might get good! Maybe Mike will threaten to beat him up again!:razz:


Do you really believe you're any less of a puppet than anyone else? Both you and Don seem to be unable to provide any real insight or suggestions. He just comes on here and tells everyone how wrong they are and how right he is without really ever saying anything noteworthy. He understands dog behavior better than all of us, but he didn't know his dogs weren't going to protect him when threatened by Dave. And you just seem to be ready to pat Don on the back every chance you get and parrot the things he's said or that someone else has told you. It seems to me, you're just regurgitating what's been spoon fed to you by your buddies in Canada. Your way is so much better, yet you're not at liberty to share any of it. You have to defend what you know and how your dog has been trained, so you do so by knocking what the rest of us do. 

Both you and Don can tell everyone how much better you are and how much more you know, but you've not produced any proof of that. Don proved himself wrong and he's been back pedaling ever since. You have been smart enough not to stick your foot in your mouth too far. You did post a couple videos of your dogs. I mentioned your dutchie had nice agility (which I've heard most Baden dogs do) and your greyhound looked good running the track. However, nothing I saw made me think your dogs were better, more motivated or had a better relationship with their handler than any of my dogs. I'd like to see some examples of why the way you do things is better or why you know more ...but you can't provide that because it's top secret. Unfortunately, the only thing you have to back up why your way is better are your words and that paints a pretty clear picture of how much you don't know and understand. 

If it was really of any interest to either you or Don to help share what you know with people, learn something new or defend your opinion, you would do something more than insult people and discredit them, the things they do and how they learn. I don't think people ever get better at anything by thinking they know it all already and being close-minded.


----------



## Edward Egan

Ariel, they don't have a standing applause icon, so I give you what I can =D>
Oh well Icon doesn't work, = applause.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Ariel said


> Do you really believe you're any less of a puppet than anyone else? Both you and Don seem to be unable to provide any real insight or suggestions. He just comes on here and tells everyone how wrong they are and how right he is without really ever saying anything noteworthy.


That is grasping at staws if I ever saw it Ariel. People have tried to provide real insight here countless times....the group that is on this thread, outside of Chris, do not have the capabilty to recognize real insight because you know it all already. Jim Engle's article comes to mind. Not one comment except by you and you just picked up an inconsequential comment out of several pages of noteworthy info. Why? Because wasn't what you wanted to hear. It is virtually impossible to tell this group anything. Good thing I started a new thread for your defensiveness and Downeys potificating about his feelings and what he has learned in 8 years. Here is a point of interest. Since I referred to Downey as sweet cheeks, he has felt it necessary to say how happily married he is and how he would probably been in jail if it wasn't for his marriage. Weak behavior is very predictable. Same reason the same people always respond defending what they "think" they know. People that do know don't find it necessary. They are secure in what they know. You and Downey will just post your hearts out thinking the more dribble you post, the more people will think you know. The floor is yours darlin.


----------



## Edward Weiss

What I don't know about dog/protection training despite being involved for along time..

Last October on the way to Ohio with my two dogs in crates in the back of an SUV pulled off the road in Indiana in a driving rain at 10 PM and parked in the first Motel we could find. Pottied the dogs, checked in and was in the sea of Morpheus in 5 minutes.
Now my male is a Sch 3 dog with serious side if bothered does not like whips or animate things covered with fur left the truck with me in the AM after morning water and a snack.Seemed oblivious to where we were except looking to find which dog had precededed him on various trees.

The female that I only hunt train about 15 months old at the time left with my wife for the morning walk.

Looking around I realized this place is a dump, with litter mainly booze bottles and beer can lining the alley in back of the joint.Some strange peiople seemed about,and didnt seem to be from the motel.
While pondering all this I heard hellacious barking.
My wife turned a corner at the edge of the building dragging Kasbah who was facing backward while being pulled and still raising hell. And i saw a guy hot footing away from them with a pronounced limp.

Now this is usually a silent girl, can't even get to bark a racoon in a Have a Heart but she will grab the cage and try to get at what is inside but nary a sound. i was really hoping he had the limp before saying hello to my dog.

Kasbah went off on a limping guy in an over coat as he came up to my wife. She told me,he stepped in front of them from behind a parked truck and just said" Hey uh hey......" The dog exploded lunging and barking.
Now I have fooled around with Kas using tug toys and there is a picture of this on the HWA site.
To this day don't know if it was the limp, the voice or the smell but something reall pi**ed her off and she was in pure defense. never saw this behavior before or since.


----------



## James Downey

Don Turnipseed said:


> Ariel said
> 
> 
> That is grasping at staws if I ever saw it Ariel. People have tried to provide real insight here countless times....the group that is on this thread, outside of Chris, do not have the capabilty to recognize real insight because you know it all already. Jim Engle's article comes to mind. Not one comment except by you and you just picked up an inconsequential comment out of several pages of noteworthy info. Why? Because wasn't what you wanted to hear. It is virtually impossible to tell this group anything. Good thing I started a new thread for your defensiveness and Downeys potificating about his feelings and what he has learned in 8 years. Here is a point of interest. Since I referred to Downey as sweet cheeks, he has felt it necessary to say how happily married he is and how he would probably been in jail if it wasn't for his marriage. Weak behavior is very predictable. Same reason the same people always respond defending what they "think" they know. People that do know don't find it necessary. They are secure in what they know. You and Downey will just post your hearts out thinking the more dribble you post, the more people will think you know. The floor is yours darlin.


Your sure can't get anything by Don. =D>


----------



## James Downey

manny rose said:


> I must say you sound more like a dumb sob with this silly [email protected]&t! Lol must people agree topping the podium alone isnt enough for breeding.... But your saying the dog that takes first over the other one because its feet touch the jump is nonesense. There are many other exercises to complete in trial and thats assuming there performances are the same everywhere else except dog #2 touches jump....and in that hyperthetical scenerio of course dog #1 should place first you fool! Let me write this simple so ONLY A FOOL CAN ARGUE...if two football teams have all the same rushing,passing, everything is the same and a tie score..... And team 1 throws a touchdown with time running out....they win right! Your propably the type that would say..if we got the ball back we would have tied it right back up! Lol. Please make a better point if you can find one.


 
I am not even sure what this means, or who you are talking too. But one thing is for sure...I can feel the passion.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Don Turnipseed said:


> Ariel said
> 
> 
> That is grasping at staws if I ever saw it Ariel. People have tried to provide real insight here countless times....the group that is on this thread, outside of Chris, do not have the capabilty to recognize real insight because you know it all already. Jim Engle's article comes to mind. Not one comment except by you and you just picked up an inconsequential comment out of several pages of noteworthy info. Why? Because wasn't what you wanted to hear. It is virtually impossible to tell this group anything. Good thing I started a new thread for your defensiveness and Downeys potificating about his feelings and what he has learned in 8 years. Here is a point of interest. Since I referred to Downey as sweet cheeks, he has felt it necessary to say how happily married he is and how he would probably been in jail if it wasn't for his marriage. Weak behavior is very predictable. Same reason the same people always respond defending what they "think" they know. People that do know don't find it necessary. They are secure in what they know. You and Downey will just post your hearts out thinking the more dribble you post, the more people will think you know. The floor is yours darlin.


Although I realize trying to reason with you is pointless, I guess I just enjoy the debate and can't help but reply (yes, I am predictable ...you're such a great judge of humans and dogs, Don). I know you will never admit you consider or agree with anything I say, but I really believe, deep down, most people know when they are full of it and can't help but realize when someone else notices too. 

There are plenty of people on the forum who have plenty of valuable insight. I read Jim's article and thought it had a lot of good information. It read like a reference book or a compilation of research and experience and I agreed with most of what he said. For whatever reason, you think there was something in there that I didn't want to hear, which makes me wonder if you even read the article. I notice a trend. It seems you see words that mimic things that you say or believe and automatically assume the person who wrote or said those words shares your opinion. Tracey Hughes says "a dog is a dog" and you take as if it's something ground breaking. What about everything else Tracey said about training a dog according to character traits and what motivates them best or about dogs having the proper genetics to complete a task? I believe you did the same thing with Jim's article. You pick and choose what information you find relevant and then use it to support your position. What I've yet to see from you is some solid anecdotal evidence or independent thought supported by more than guesses and tradition. 

If your input on the forum was about how your dogs interact with you or each other (or even game, for that matter, even thought there seems to be little proof that your dogs actually work game anymore), I think your insight and opinions would be valuable. But you want to make claims about how you understand how dogs interact with people and threats and the best way to prepare dogs for tasks outside of what they are instinctively inclined to do when you have no experience in that realm and obviously failed miserably at predicting your own dogs' behavior. And then, when someone questions you or calls your bluff, your only defense is to insult and demean them. I just wonder, what makes you think we should all bow down and subscribe to your expertise? 

Thanks for your permission to speak, darlin'. :mrgreen:


----------



## Stephanie Johnson

James Downey said:


> Stephanie,
> 
> I just have to ask about this statement.
> 
> " Additionally, there are very few dogs who would have passed this test on raw genetics."
> 
> What's the bank of dogs your comparing too....All dogs worldwide, or dogs from protection lines? I am not sure it's that few of dogs from protection lines at Malinois I know... I will say that test is perfect for a raw Malinois. Act a little weird or riled up... And I think a Malinois going to be coming for you. JMO. I cannot speak for the shepherds or other breeds, seeing I do not know too much about em'


Hello Mr. Downey,

You overestimate the capabilities of the Malinois breed as a whole - lots of nervy junk being excused as "re-active". But I also believe that the gene pool of dogs most likely to pass this test on raw genetics dwells within the NVBK dogs. There are still some West German leistung line monster GSDs who would, but they are an increasingly rare animal.

But them again, who really needs and can handle a dog of this calliper in our increasingly pc society? My little Derringer in my purse carries much less liability with its use.


----------



## Skip Morgart

Don Turnipseed said:


> ....
> 
> Skip, sadly I haven't changed at all. ..........



yes, you absolutely, positively have. I won't bother to post all the remarks you made shortly after your dogs were tested. I'm sure everybody read them. I'm also pretty sure everybody has read the "180" flip you've done now. You had a chance to gain some respect if you would have stayed on your previous course with the reality of what happened.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Skip Morgart said:


> yes, you absolutely, positively have. I won't bother to post all the remarks you made shortly after your dogs were tested. I'm sure everybody read them. I'm also pretty sure everybody has read the "180" flip you've done now. You had a chance to gain some respect if you would have stayed on your previous course with the reality of what happened.


Skip, it only appears that way because, even though I admitted the dogs didn't do what I wanted them to do, I had the audacity to say what I saw happening? I know what I saw and I really don't care if it strokes decoy's ego's to think dogs are fearfull of them or not. I know what I saw. I have seen dogs in real fear and they don't stop a short distance away and watch. I will give you this, I will agree with everyone that a dog would have to be trained to bite for those scenario's. Feel better? That was my mistake in that challenge. No different than the vast majority sport dogs will behave totally different off the field. No one has to respond because there is no point in a rehash of what I see and you see.


----------



## Steve Strom

Don Turnipseed said:


> Skip, it only appears that way because, even though I admitted the dogs didn't do what I wanted them to do, I had the audacity to say what I saw happening? I know what I saw and I really don't care if it strokes decoy's ego's to think dogs are fearfull of them or not. I know what I saw. I have seen dogs in real fear and they don't stop a short distance away and watch. I will give you this, I will agree with everyone that a dog would have to be trained to bite for those scenario's. Feel better? That was my mistake in that challenge. No different than the vast majority sport dogs will behave totally different off the field. No one has to respond because there is no point in a rehash of what I see and you see.


I know what I saw too Don. Thats a pretty minor league dunlap you've got going on there. You're so friggin svelte, I'll bet they're laughing all the way to So. Fork. Hell, it looks like if you bend over, you could probably see your own knees. 

If you want to earn that all important back woods man card, you better start fillin out them suspenders a little bit more so your steering wheel buffer keeps the dog from being able to jump out the driver side window of your pickem up truck, or am I way off and that how you use balls in training?

(Hows that for thinking for myself Don. I don't think thats anything covered on a dvd)


----------



## Skip Morgart

Don Turnipseed said:


> I will give you this, I will agree with everyone that a dog would have to be trained to bite for those scenario's. Feel better? That was my mistake in that challenge. No different than the vast majority sport dogs will behave totally different off the field. No one has to respond because there is no point in a rehash of what I see and you see.



I don't believe everyone said that. Most just didn't believe YOUR dogs could do it. I've seen a few dogs that were never trained to bite that would have held their ground and bit for real in those scenario's, just like you claimed yours would. I don't feel this is an area where you can really add much to the conversation. Sharing your opinion is one thing, but you tend to have this need to put down other people's opinions on the subject, when it's clear you don't have a pot to piss in on the subject.


----------



## James Downey

Stephanie Johnson said:


> Hello Mr. Downey,
> 
> You overestimate the capabilities of the Malinois breed as a whole - lots of nervy junk being excused as "re-active". But I also believe that the gene pool of dogs most likely to pass this test on raw genetics dwells within the NVBK dogs. There are still some West German leistung line monster GSDs who would, but they are an increasingly rare animal.
> 
> But them again, who really needs and can handle a dog of this calliper in our increasingly pc society? My little Derringer in my purse carries much less liability with its use.


 
Holy Shizzle

That seems like a completely emotionally free, non-biased opinion of the malinois you have formed there. I am glad, cause it would have been a total shame if you had resentments for the Malinois that you allowed to dominate your rational thinking.

Even though you did not answer my question directly, I can see that with such a grace in detracting only the facts, sans any personal preferences from influencing what you observe. I can tell the answer is not really needed, because of the purity of your first.

*Toodles*


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I am going to take this once in a lifetime opportunity. Since Ariel managed to validate that behaviors of people and dogs are so similar, and so many here were were kind enough to agree with, I will explain it. Has to do with very unusual behavior.

You step off a hotel elevator and the is an obvious whack job beating the heck out of a vending machines next to the elevator. The reaction this will incite is for any normal to quickly move from the immediate area of the vending machines to a safe distance and they will stop and watch. Very normal and predictable reaction. More curiosity of unusual behavior than fear.
Take the same scenario, but, as you step off the elevator, you realize the whacko has a gun and is shooting up the lobby. Any normal person is going to run for their life and there will be no stopping to watch. That is real fear. Works the same with people or dogs. I know this example will be ignored by most, but, you will never learn this stuff watching a video. As Nicole said, both sides might learn something. I did learn my dogs won't bite for this kind of stuff, you folks learned nothing....but I did try. :wink:



Now same scenario


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Don Turnipseed said:


> I am going to take this once in a lifetime opportunity. Since Ariel managed to validate that behaviors of people and dogs are so similar, and so many here were were kind enough to agree with, I will explain it. Has to do with very unusual behavior.
> 
> You step off a hotel elevator and the is an obvious whack job beating the heck out of a vending machines next to the elevator. The reaction this will incite is for any normal to quickly move from the immediate area of the vending machines to a safe distance and they will stop and watch. Very normal and predictable reaction. More curiosity of unusual behavior than fear.
> Take the same scenario, but, as you step off the elevator, you realize the whacko has a gun and is shooting up the lobby. Any normal person is going to run for their life and there will be no stopping to watch. That is real fear. Works the same with people or dogs. I know this example will be ignored by most, but, you will never learn this stuff watching a video. As Nicole said, both sides might learn something. I did learn my dogs won't bite for this kind of stuff, you folks learned nothing....but I did try. :wink:
> 
> 
> 
> Now same scenario


Can't fault your reasoning on this on Don ...but if that whack job was beating up my vending machine ...and that vending machine was my only source of food, water, sustenance ...I'd probably have a decision to make about my reaction. Do I allow that whack job to threaten something I hold dear or do I run far enough away to be safe, yelling over my shoulder for him to stop and hope everything turns out okay?


----------



## Stephanie Johnson

James Downey said:


> Holy Shizzle
> 
> That seems like a completely emotionally free, non-biased opinion of the malinois you have formed there. I am glad, cause it would have been a total shame if you had resentments for the Malinois that you allowed to dominate your rational thinking.
> 
> Even though you did not answer my question directly, I can see that with such a grace in detracting only the facts, sans any personal preferences from influencing what you observe. I can tell the answer is not really needed, because of the purity of your first.
> 
> *Toodles*


Say what?


----------



## Charles Guyer

Stephanie Johnson said:


> Hello Mr. Downey,
> 
> You overestimate the capabilities of the Malinois breed as a whole - lots of nervy junk being excused as "re-active". But I also believe that the gene pool of dogs most likely to pass this test on raw genetics dwells within the NVBK dogs. There are still some West German leistung line monster GSDs who would, but they are an increasingly rare animal.
> 
> But them again, who really needs and can handle a dog of this calliper in our increasingly pc society? My little Derringer in my purse carries much less liability with its use.


Are you saying the malinois genepool is inferior to the gsd for working animals? How do you define reactive? Do you find less of this trait in nvbk line mals?


----------



## Chris McDonald

Ariel Peldunas said:


> Both you and Don can tell everyone how much better you are and how much more you know, but you've not produced any proof of that. Don proved himself wrong and he's been back pedaling ever since. You have been smart enough not to stick your foot in your mouth too far. You did post a couple videos of your dogs. I mentioned your dutchie had nice agility (which I've heard most Baden dogs do) and your greyhound looked good running the track. However, nothing I saw made me think your dogs were better, more motivated or had a better relationship with their handler than any of my dogs. I'd like to see some examples of why the way you do things is better or why you know more ...but you can't provide that because it's top secret. Unfortunately, the only thing you have to back up why your way is better are your words and that paints a pretty clear picture of how much you don't know and understand.
> 
> If it was really of any interest to either you or Don to help share what you know with people, learn something new or defend your opinion, you would do something more than insult people and discredit them, the things they do and how they learn. I don't think people ever get better at anything by thinking they know it all already and being close-minded.


 I don’t know where I ever said that I am better than anyone or know more? I doubt you will even find many threads with me handing out advice. One I don’t feel qualified and two my advice would not fit or work with any methods I see being talked about here. I never said the method I am learning is superior although the more I learn about each the more I think it is. And for the first few years I was really questioning it. 
I agree, what my dogs did in the video was really nothing much. What I do think is cool or shows a bit different relationship than others is the dogs did what they did because I asked them to. To me that is showing something different in the relationship. All others I meet in the dog world (except for hunters) from what I have seen need to resort to bribery. 
I’ll keep doing what I am doing because I enjoy learning to how to and I enjoy working my dogs with nothing but a lead. If you like working a dog with a weiner in each hand, two balls under your chin, a kong full of peanut butter between your legs and a clicker in your mouth that’s fine too. Whatever works for each of us. 

All you guys can have your last words, im done beating a dead horse


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Chris McDonald said:


> I don’t know where I ever said that I am better than anyone or know more? I doubt you will even find many threads with me handing out advice. One I don’t feel qualified and two my advice would not fit or work with any methods I see being talked about here. I never said the method I am learning is superior although the more I learn about each the more I think it is. And for the first few years I was really questioning it.
> I agree, what my dogs did in the video was really nothing much. What I do think is cool or shows a bit different relationship than others is the dogs did what they did because I asked them to. To me that is showing something different in the relationship. All others I meet in the dog world (except for hunters) from what I have seen need to resort to bribery.
> I’ll keep doing what I am doing because I enjoy learning to how to and I enjoy working my dogs with nothing but a lead. If you like working a dog with a weiner in each hand, two balls under your chin, a kong full of peanut butter between your legs and a clicker in your mouth that’s fine too. Whatever works for each of us.
> 
> All you guys can have your last words, im done beating a dead horse


Being totally serious here and not trying to be confrontational ...this is where I feel there is a disconnect. You say your dogs do what they did because you asked them to and not because of bribery. Unless the dog is doing something it's instinctively bred to do (hunting game, tracking, etc.), what is the motivation for the dog to comply? If you're asking the dog to do something unnatural, there must be some motivation or consequence associated with doing (or not doing) the behavior. You can bribe the dog, reward the dog, force the dog ...but there has to be something that makes the dog want to do what you're asking. 

Let's take something you're familiar with ...training/encouraging your dog to climb a ladder. Most dogs don't naturally want to climb a ladder ...although I have seen some that do. But, let's just assume that people who have dogs that climb ladders aren't selecting puppies or breeding specifically for that trait. So, given a dog that really does not want to climb that ladder, how do we get the dog to do it? 

Chris, I'm going to assume you'll say it's based upon your relationship with the dog and the dog just does it because you ask. But, if you can, go back to a time when you had no relationship with the dog and the dog was just a blank slate. Did the dog just like you from the get go? Was the dog just willing to do what you asked from day one?

Here's what I think ...we build relationships with our dogs by being their providers. We provide food, water, affection, exercise, what have you. When you start with a pup or young dog, you have two ways of making yourself important to them and encouraging them to do what you ask. You can provide rewards for good behavior or you can make doing the wrong thing uncomfortable. I doubt I could get my puppies to climb a ladder without one or the other. I could slap a leash on and use gentle pressure and negative reinforcement to convince them that climbing the ladder was better than staying on the ground. Or I could climb the ladder myself and offer enticement for their efforts to follow me. 

It gets more convoluted the longer you own a dog. I believe they appear to do things out of love or the desire to please, but I think that's anthropomorphizing. I think they just become conditioned to expect either reinforcement or punishment and also begin to value their human because the human is a resource. They want to stay close and please because it produces good things or keeps bad things from happening. 

I just think your way of thinking doesn't lend itself well to working dog trainers. Perhaps if you don't need to rely on your dog to perform, a dog that works because it likes its handler is enough. But in the situations I've been in with my working dogs, I need to know my dog is motivated to perform, whether he/she believes I can enforce the behavior or not. Training that doesn't incorporate motivation and bribery, as you call it, doesn't work well for many working dog applications ...and I'm not just talking about sport. I'd also like to understand how you believe an effective bomb dog could be trained utilizing the techniques you adhere to.

If my dogs were just pets, I guess it wouldn't matter so much. But I utilize my dogs for certain tasks (ones which they clearly enjoy), so I like to know I don't have to question their drive or motivation.

Chris, I really hope my tone doesn't discourage you from responding. I'm really interested in what you have to say.


----------



## Chris McDonald

Right many ways to get a dog to climb a ladder, but not many that I know of to get him to do it because he wants to. Its a bit of a process


----------



## Christopher Jones

I dont shit can Baden because I have never seen them train nor spoken to them. Chances are I never will. But lets be honest, they will be using the same drives in their dogs as everyone else knows about and uses. Wether they like to admit it or they call it something different, doesnt change the fact they will be using prey, defence and fight, depending on the genetics of the dogs. There is a saying in the sales and marketing world, "Try to be different than better than everyone else".


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Chris McDonald said:


> Right many ways to get a dog to climb a ladder, but not many that I know of to get him to do it because he wants to. Its a bit of a process


Well that was a useful response. So, he crawled out of the womb wanting to climb a ladder?


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Chris McDonald said:
Another thing I don’t really understand is teaching a dog to track? 

Of course this is correct. A dog can track from instinct but we have to teach him to track in the manner we require. It can be done, no problem, but this "Footstep" tracking is something that is done, sometimes at the beginning to keep the dog motivated on the right track.

Some dogs don't need this. They will follow a track whatever.

Schutzhund decrees that (unfortunately) the dog follow the track with his nose down deeply and only using his nose to suss out the corners!!

Why people feel they have to start the dog off at such a point, I don't know. The pup/dog needs numerous simple tracks to begin with. To motivate it, food can be placed intermittently (Footstep tracking with a piece of sausge in each footprint) is difficult to do - it leaves a very unnatural track for the pup/dog to follow, especially as a lot of people stop and drop the "food", thereby leaving an even greater impression on the ground.

The objective of tracking is to be able to follow your dog blindfold through the track to the end. The only way to do this is to place your trust in the dog and let him lead you.

At some point, the footstepping tracking must continue in intermittent food on the track so that the dog never knows where he will find food.

I have never heard this word outside of the USA "FST" tracking.

The main thing for the dog is to allow him to work out as many tracks as possible, over various terrains, in all kinds of weather. This will give him the opportunity to gain experience.

Your job is to follow!!


----------



## Chris McDonald

Whats your guys guess on how this guy trained this dog? Treats, balls, what? And how did he get to this level of communicating with this dog? Was he or is he considered a dog trainer? 
Just wondering 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2BfzUIBy9A&feature=fvwrel


----------



## Anita Griffing

As far as teaching a dog to track in SchH; it is a test for breeding. So can a dog
keep a deep nose foot-step-to-foot-step, and down on found articles quickly
and correctly, and still maintain drive for the track. If a dog can do this with
strength and drive and persistence and work-ethic it can give you an idea
into the nature of the dog. 
Anita


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Chris McDonald said:


> Whats your guys guess on how this guy trained this dog? Treats, balls, what? And how did he get to this level of communicating with this dog? Was he or is he considered a dog trainer?
> Just wondering
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2BfzUIBy9A&feature=fvwrel



Horseshoer and horsetrainer David Hartwig (Skidboot's owner/trainer) says that Skidboot was motivated by his favorite toys (especially knotted socks with balls inside) much more than by food rewards.

He credits Skidboot's intelligence for his amazing success.


----------



## will fernandez

I might of just burned a 60 bucks by ordering a video from Baden...I will do my best to keep a open mind.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

will fernandez said:


> I might of just burned a 60 bucks by ordering a video from Baden...I will do my best to keep a open mind.


Which one are you getting?


----------



## Chris McDonald

Connie Sutherland said:


> Horseshoer and horsetrainer David Hartwig (Skidboot's owner/trainer) says that Skidboot was motivated by his favorite toys (especially knotted socks with balls inside) much more than by food rewards.
> 
> He credits Skidboot's intelligence for his amazing success.


Ya, I saw a lot of soft cloth balls and sticks. Anyway you look at it they had some communication going on there. I think very few people can reach that even with balls and sticks.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Chris McDonald said:


> Ya, I saw a lot of soft cloth balls and sticks. Anyway you look at it they had some communication going on there. I think very few people can reach that even with balls and sticks.


Do you understand that once you train/condition a behavior you can use a variable reward system or pair a primary reward with a secondary reward (praise)? Just because you didn't see balls and sticks doesn't mean the dog didn't learn by being rewarded with something tangible by doing it correctly. Dogs go out and perform long routines/chains of behavior without being rewarded because they have been conditioned to work for longer and longer periods of time to produce a reward. And after a while of pairing a primary reward (food, toys, etc.) with a secondary reward (praise), the secondary reward begin to have the same meaning as the primary reward ...you know that crazy thing called classical conditioning.

It seems to me, you believe that dogs will work just out of love or respect for the owners and it's all about relationship and communication. But to build that relationship and communication, there's no need for toy or food rewards. If that were the case, you should be able to take a dog that needs nothing from you (food, water, attention) and get him to perform with no leash or collar in hand. Go find an independent dog, set up an automatic feeder/waterer and see what you can accomplish by just loving the dog ...and without resorting to physical force.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Ariel Peldunas said:


> If that were the case, you should be able to take a dog that needs nothing from you (food, water, attention) and get him to perform with no leash or collar in hand. Go find an independent dog, set up an automatic feeder/waterer and see what you can accomplish by just loving the dog ...and without resorting to physical force.


Works pretty well if you ask me. Mine are on auto feed and water plus they are in big yards where you have little control over them and they know it. Couldn't catch them if they didn't want to be caught and they have all their wants readily accessible 24/7. They come in even when out hunting in the woods where I have no control at all. The real difference is respect. The problem with reward is it isn't respect, it is reward and the dogs work for and are not really trained unless you are right there. No different than spoiled kids that only work for a reward.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Don Turnipseed said:


> Works pretty well if you ask me. Mine are on auto feed and water plus they are in big yards where you have little control over them and they know it. Couldn't catch them if they didn't want to be caught and they have all their wants readily accessible 24/7. They come in even when out hunting in the woods where I have no control at all. The real difference is respect. The problem with reward is it isn't respect, it is reward and the dogs work for and are not really trained unless you are right there. No different than spoiled kids that only work for a reward.


And respect is based on compulsion and punishment. I guess I would prefer my dogs enjoy their work but also understand it's not option. You know, balance or something like that?


----------



## Chris McDonald

Ariel Peldunas said:


> Do you understand that once you train/condition a behavior you can use a variable reward system or pair a primary reward with a secondary reward (praise)? Just because you didn't see balls and sticks doesn't mean the dog didn't learn by being rewarded with something tangible by doing it correctly.
> 
> Dogs go out and perform long routines/chains of behavior without being rewarded because they have been conditioned to work for longer and longer periods of time to produce a reward. And after a while of pairing a primary reward (food, toys, etc.) with a secondary reward (praise), the secondary reward begin to have the same meaning as the primary reward ...you know that crazy thing called classical conditioning.
> 
> It seems to me, you believe that dogs will work just out of love or respect for the owners and it's all about relationship and communication. But to build that relationship and communication, there's no need for toy or food rewards. If that were the case, you should be able to take a dog that needs nothing from you (food, water, attention) and get him to perform with no leash or collar in hand. Go find an independent dog, set up an automatic feeder/waterer and see what you can accomplish by just loving the dog ...and without resorting to physical force.


Understood, Ill simplify it so I think I can understand it better, I am a bit slow. If you get a dog to sit for a hot dog a million times it will sit for you thinking its going to get a hotdog or in hopes of getting one? I said I did see balls and sticks



Im not talking about a routine. Im talking about performing when asked for long periods of time not expecting a reward day in and day out for nothing more than a smile from the handler and a occasional pat on the chest 

I don’t know if love is the word but for the most part I don’t think I necessarily need to be the one to feed and water the dog but with a dog of the right genetics all I need is time to get him to accomplish a lot of things willingly. I do think a lot of it is genetics its picking a dog many others might not. 
I know men that are in the 70s and 80s have enough wealth to retire many times over but are still in their offices 25 days a month working. They been working since 13, it’s just in there genetics. They just feel as if they need to work. There reward is getting things done. Yes they are a bit rare but they are out there. If you don’t know one of these people its because of that whole birds of a feather flock together thing. Not saying you don’t, just saying 
I also know people who cant seem to find a job for the past 20 years….even after I give them one it just don’t seem to work out. You know having a job does suck! Genetics has to be partially to blame here. These people constantly need to see the quick reward. Years ago I think these people would have just starved and died, but now we keep them alive and let them breed. 
Could it be possible that the dogs we would have not used we found could be used if we spun them up with balls. THEN we started breeding this dogs? 
I forgot are we allowed to compare people to dogs or not?


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Your preaching to the choir there Chris. The dog has nothing to do with it. It is all in the training. Ask Ariel. She keeps saying I am not willing to learn. LOL She will not learn a thing....except that dogs and people are a lot alike ....but that was just for her own convenience for a very short time. This is another area where dogs and people are so much alike. If they respect you, they will work for you and force has not much to do with it. If they won't work out of respect, then you have to give them treats. Doesn't really surprise me that Ariel thinks dogs raised being free fed and watered won't work. I have said this before, but it is worth repeating. If you start a dog off with treats, there is no going back. You have to do it forever or they won't work. Pretty simple concept....kids are the same way.


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Don Turnipseed said:


> Your preaching to the choir there Chris. The dog has nothing to do with it. It is all in the training. Ask Ariel. She keeps saying I am not willing to learn. LOL She will not learn a thing....except that dogs and people are a lot alike ....but that was just for her own convenience for a very short time. This is another area where dogs and people are so much alike. If they respect you, they will work for you and force has not much to do with it. If they won't work out of respect, then you have to give them treats. Doesn't really surprise me that Ariel thinks dogs raised being free fed and watered won't work. I have said this before, but it is worth repeating. If you start a dog off with treats, there is no going back. You have to do it forever or they won't work. Pretty simple concept....kids are the same way.


And how do you earn your dogs' respect, Don?


----------



## Connie Sutherland

_"This is another area where dogs and people are so much alike. If they respect you, they will work for you"_


Not me. I want to be paid, no matter how much I may respect the employer.


----------



## Chris McDonald

Connie Sutherland said:


> _"This is another area where dogs and people are so much alike. If they respect you, they will work for you"_
> 
> 
> Not me. I want to be paid, no matter how much I may respect the employer.


Your kinda pushing the point here


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Don Turnipseed said:


> If they respect you, they will work for you and force has not much to do with it. If they won't work out of respect, then you have to give them treats. Doesn't really surprise me that Ariel thinks dogs raised being free fed and watered won't work. I have said this before, but it is worth repeating. If you start a dog off with treats, there is no going back. You have to do it forever or they won't work. Pretty simple concept....kids are the same way.


You prove exactly why you're not a trainer, Don, and why you never will be. And why your dogs don't really work for you. They do what their instincts motivate them to do and what you can force them to do and that's about it ...unless of course someone else takes them and, God forbid, trains them. They work game. What else do they do that can't be accomplished through force, which is clearly how you enforce other behaviors? And force doesn't have to be brutal, but it's still compulsion. What happens when those pups get off the pillow? What happens if the dog doesn't come when called? 

What you don't get is that when you expect a dog to go above and beyond and perform something that they aren't naturally inclined to do or may not feel like doing at the moment, some sort of consequence is required to motivate them to continue performing that behavior. You admitted your own dog was out of control and almost bit you over a pack rat that ran up your pants. Did your dog respect you then? For me, respect or obedience or whatever you want to call it is most important when I'm asking the dog to do something when there is something way more important going on in the dog's world. Any dog will do what you ask if they feel like it or if they have no other option. But is that really respect?

You say if you start training with treats you have to train that way forever. Really? So, all those service dogs function? How do I go out and do a ten minute obedience routine with no collar or leash on my dog and no treat or toys anywhere on me or in sight? It's a process, Don. You start with motivation and reward and then you enforce the commands and teach the dog that obedience and respect, as you call it, is not optional. The end result is the same and I even use some of the same techniques I'm sure you use, but the difference is I don't mind if my dog enjoys the work as well. I'm not a tyrant. But, I could see from the way your dogs interacted with you that they probably think you are. We'll listen if we have to, but he can save his own ass when the chips are down.


----------



## Joby Becker

Don Turnipseed said:


> If you start a dog off with treats, there is no going back. You have to do it forever or they won't work. Pretty simple concept....kids are the same way.


Don. 

Food is used to TEACH behaviors...not for requiring compliance..or proofing behaviors? 

How do you teach behaviors?


----------



## Chris McDonald

I would think most people would work harder, go an extra mile and maybe even hanging there a bit longer for less pay if they respect who they are working for? There is typically a bit more involved than pay. Don’t get me wrong that pay thing is important.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Joby Becker said:


> Don.
> 
> Food is used to TEACH behaviors...not for requiring compliance..or proofing behaviors?
> 
> How do you teach behaviors?



The difference between rewards and bribes has been explained a couple dozen times (at least) in threads here to answer posts that make that claim about food used in teaching behaviors, and how "you have to do it forever or they won't work." 

It presupposes that all of us who use food rewards when teaching behaviors forevermore carry them around with us or our dogs don't work.

Like all those bait bags strapped onto the handlers on the trial field. :lol:

Or anyone whose dogs were marker trained, in fact. No, we are not packing a treat baggy when we head out with our trained dogs.

It's so weird that it comes up over and over, despite all the sport dogs, PSDs, service dogs, and more who were marker trained and who, guess what?!, now get their jobs done without a "treat" in sight. :lol:


----------



## Connie Sutherland

_"How do I go out and do a ten minute obedience routine with no collar or leash on my dog and no treat or toys anywhere on me or in sight?"_


Obviously some kind of magic trick. Probably that ol' "pretty face" distraction. :lol:


----------



## Edward Egan

Connie Sutherland said:


> _"How do I go out and do a ten minute obedience routine with no collar or leash on my dog and no treat or toys anywhere on me or in sight?"_
> 
> 
> Obviously some kind of magic trick. Probably that ol' "pretty face" distraction.


But, but I don't have a pretty face! How will I ever get it done? :lol:


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Edward Egan said:


> But, but I don't have a pretty face! How will I ever get it done? :lol:



I guess you're in trouble. :lol:


----------



## Ariel Peldunas

Connie Sutherland said:


> _"How do I go out and do a ten minute obedience routine with no collar or leash on my dog and no treat or toys anywhere on me or in sight?"_
> 
> 
> Obviously some kind of magic trick. Probably that ol' "pretty face" distraction. :lol:


Damn! I thought everyone had forgotten about that!


----------



## Bob Scott

Ariel Peldunas said:


> Do you understand that once you train/condition a behavior you can use a variable reward system or pair a primary reward with a secondary reward (praise)? Just because you didn't see balls and sticks doesn't mean the dog didn't learn by being rewarded with something tangible by doing it correctly. Dogs go out and perform long routines/chains of behavior without being rewarded because they have been conditioned to work for longer and longer periods of time to produce a reward. And after a while of pairing a primary reward (food, toys, etc.) with a secondary reward (praise), the secondary reward begin to have the same meaning as the primary reward ...you know that crazy thing called classical conditioning.
> 
> It seems to me, you believe that dogs will work just out of love or respect for the owners and it's all about relationship and communication. But to build that relationship and communication, there's no need for toy or food rewards. If that were the case, you should be able to take a dog that needs nothing from you (food, water, attention) and get him to perform with no leash or collar in hand. Go find an independent dog, set up an automatic feeder/waterer and see what you can accomplish by just loving the dog ...and without resorting to physical force.



The slot machine principal! 
Win a nickle every now and then. If that nickle is see as a great reward (primary) you'll pull the handler damn near forever. The glitz and glimmer of the casino are secondary reward. :wink:


----------



## James Downey

Chris McDonald said:


> I would think most people would work harder, go an extra mile and maybe even hanging there a bit longer for less pay if they respect who they are working for? There is typically a bit more involved than pay. Don’t get me wrong that pay thing is important.


No doubt. That money cannot but everything I myself have sacrificed more for a boss I respect. Generally though I think that I work even harder for a boss that respects me. So, This why I believe you cannot get respect without giving it. Relationship is extremely important. There are social implications to training as there are operant implications to training. If you believe one is more important that the other your missing a great deal in training. 

Because at some point, if I am not getting paid enough...no amount of respect for my boss will make show up to work. 

And the flip side, I could make six figures a year but if my boss treats me without respect, I will probably go looking else where for employment.


----------



## maggie fraser

James Downey said:


> This why I believe you cannot get respect without giving it. Relationship is extremely important. There are social implications to training as there are operant implications to training. If you believe one is more important that the other your missing a great deal in training.


Respect.... 

Respect commands itself and it can neither be given nor withheld when it is due. *Eldridge Cleaver* 

I'm into quotes right now,,,, thought I'd throw that in here :smile:.


----------



## Skip Morgart

maggie fraser said:


> Respect....
> 
> Respect commands itself and it can neither be given nor withheld when it is due. *Eldridge Cleaver*
> 
> I'm into quotes right now,,,, thought I'd throw that in here :smile:.


Ya know, I've seen some pretty ridiculous things stated by some supposedly intelligent/important people. Many times it's stuff that's not even related to their field of study (lots of stuff from Albert Einstein). Many times it makes me wonder if the person actually ever said it, or if they did, did it make any sense, and even if it made sense, did that person actually believe it, or was it just said to gain supporters? Me, I enjoy a lot of the quotes from Grouch Marx.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Skip Morgart said:


> Me, I enjoy a lot of the quotes from Grouch[o] Marx.


And WC Fields. _A rich man is nothing but a poor man with money; a woman drove me to drink and I didn't even have the decency to thank her; always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite and furthermore always carry a small snake._ :lol:


----------



## Skip Morgart

Connie Sutherland said:


> And WC Fields. _A rich man is nothing but a poor man with money; a woman drove me to drink and I didn't even have the decency to thank her; always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite and furthermore always carry a small snake._ :lol:



...compliments of Groucho: "Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend....inside of a dog it's too dark to read"; "I refuse to be part of any club/organization who's standards are so low that they would let me be a member".


----------



## maggie fraser

Skip Morgart said:


> Ya know, I've seen some pretty ridiculous things stated by some supposedly intelligent/important people. Many times it's stuff that's not even related to their field of study (lots of stuff from Albert Einstein). Many times it makes me wonder if the person actually ever said it, or if they did, did it make any sense, and even if it made sense, did that person actually believe it, or was it just said to gain supporters? Me, I enjoy a lot of the quotes from Grouch Marx.


:lol::lol:

Can I take it that quote had no profound meaning for you then ? Personally, I can relate to it, and also agree with it. I also enjoy quotes from Groucho Marx, I particularly like that one one from French philosopher Voltaire ! :smile:


----------



## Skip Morgart

maggie fraser said:


> :lol::lol:
> 
> Can I take it that quote had no profound meaning for you then ? Personally, I can relate to it, and also agree with it. I also ejoy quotes from Groucho Marx ! :smile:


Yes Maggie, I see too many holes in that quote...sounds a bit too "lofty" to me...unless that person is wearing a certain uniform, which should automatically demand/be given a certain level of respect.


----------



## maggie fraser

Skip Morgart said:


> ...sounds a bit too "lofty" to me...unless that person is wearing a certain uniform, which should automatically demand/be given a certain level of respect.


Absolutely disagree.....respect is earned,,, not demanded !

eta; You really haven't understood that quote Skip, have you ??


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

maggie fraser said:


> :lol::lol:
> 
> Can I take it that quote had no profound meaning for you then ? Personally, I can relate to it, and also agree with it. I also enjoy quotes from Groucho Marx, I particularly like that one one from French philosopher Voltaire ! :smile:


Three Stooges - "Niagara Falls, Slowly I Turned, Step By Step"\\/


----------



## Skip Morgart

maggie fraser said:


> Absolutely disagree.....respect is earned,,, not demanded !
> 
> eta; You really haven't understood that quote Skip, have you ??


I haven't been drinking for awhile, so I understand MY interpretation of it quite well. "Respect commands itself" is open to subjectivity. Something/someone that fits that in your eyes might not be seen the same by me, hence the statement cannot hold true for me. Your quote says nothing about it being earned, just when it "is due", which is also subjective. Many people have different views on how respect is "earned" also. Like I said, one of my exceptions is the automatic (at a certain level of) respect that should be given to people in uniform (military, LE).


----------



## Skip Morgart

Lee H Sternberg said:


> Three Stooges - "Niagara Falls, Slowly I Turned, Step By Step"\\/


Curly: "I shoot an arrow into the air, where it lands I do not care....I get my arrows wholesale!".


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

Laurel and Hardy - "This Is Another Fine Mess You've Gotten Us Into".\\/


----------



## David Frost

This is more messed up than a three-peckered billy goat. Uncle Herchel


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

David Frost said:


> This is more messed up than a three-peckered billy goat. Uncle Herchel



This thread??


----------



## Skip Morgart

A and C: "Who's on first". A real classic. Another great A and C (on Youtube) is where Abbot is "teaching" Costello how to play craps.


----------



## Joby Becker

"Yer drunker than Cooter Brown!"


----------



## maggie fraser

Skip Morgart said:


> I haven't been drinking for awhile, so I understand MY interpretation of it quite well. "Respect commands itself" is open to subjectivity. Something/someone that fits that in your eyes might not be seen the same by me, hence the statement cannot hold true for me. Your quote says nothing about it being earned, just when it "is due", which is also subjective. Many people have different views on how respect is "earned" also. Like I said, one of my exceptions is the automatic (at a certain level of) respect that should be given to people in uniform (military, LE).


 
That's called 'beating around the bushes' ! How about you explain YOUR interpretation of respect and how it is subjective ? Ahh, you mean, stick a uniform on someone and pay them respect because, well,, that is the respectful thing to do ??

You're right,,,, different mentality perhaps, and maybe that is one of the reasons why Voltaire said what he did perhaps ?


----------



## maggie fraser

Lee H Sternberg said:


> Three Stooges - "Niagara Falls, Slowly I Turned, Step By Step"\\/


That's the spirit \\/


----------



## maggie fraser

Joby Becker said:


> "Yer drunker than Cooter Brown!"


Who ?? Skip ?? :grin:


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Skip Morgart said:


> Curly: "I shoot an arrow into the air, where it lands I do not care....I get my arrows wholesale!".



:lol: :lol: :lol:

I hadn't heard that one before.


----------



## Skip Morgart

maggie fraser said:


> Who ?? Skip ?? :grin:



http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080521073550AANY6eK


----------



## maggie fraser

Skip Morgart said:


> http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080521073550AANY6eK


 
Thankyou, was that an affirmative  :smile:


----------



## Skip Morgart

maggie fraser said:


> Thankyou, was that an affirmative  :smile:


Me "drunker than Cooter Brown"? No...more like "F*cked up like _Hogan's Goat_"


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Joby Becker said:


> Don.
> 
> Food is used to TEACH behaviors...not for requiring compliance..or proofing behaviors?
> 
> How do you teach behaviors?


You are correct on that oine Joby and I am well aware of that. You can't correct a dog with reward. Thgat is why I call it trick training. Pure and simple.


----------



## Guest

Don Turnipseed said:


> You are correct on that oine Joby and I am well aware of that. You can't correct a dog with reward. Thgat is why I call it trick training. Pure and simple.


 
market it, you may be on to something...."Trick Training"


----------



## Joby Becker

Don Turnipseed said:


> You are correct on that oine Joby and I am well aware of that. You can't correct a dog with reward. Thgat is why I call it trick training. Pure and simple.


I think you misread..OR I did not explain it fully, 

The treats are used to TEACH the behaviors....

THEN AFTER THEY LEARN THE BEHAVIORS....What most of us do here is use corrective devices to get compliance and to proof....which is separate from teaching a behavior, usually...

Would you call what a working police dog does trick training?


----------

